[Ed: Dr. Wheeler originally published this on American Greatness June 11.]
The failures of the same old gun control laws should warn us away from the easy route of penalizing virtually all American gun owners who will never commit a crime with their guns.
“Do something!” begged the crowd gathered before Joe Biden last week in Uvalde, Texas. And who could blame them? Racked with sorrow and fury at the massacre of 19 elementary school children and two of their teachers, they were desperate for answers. Do something! “We will,” promised Biden. But what?
The standard nostrums—more background checks, bans on scary-looking black rifles, bans on so-called “high-capacity” magazines—are always proffered hastily and in the fog of overwhelming emotion. Such laws passed in anger have burdened only innocent people and sometimes resulted in their deaths by depriving them of a life-saving self-defense tool.
Now the House reflexively brings forth the Protecting Our Kids Act, presumably intended to mitigate mass shootings. Each of its six bills is a recycled version of old and failed proposals. One aims to raise the age for legal ownership of semiautomatic rifles and shotguns from 18 to 21. It would surely face immediate legal challenges, a California version of this law having just been declared unconstitutional by a federal appellate court.
The second title tweaks well-established statutory law prohibiting so-called straw purchases, or covert gun purchases for third parties. Nothing new here except more ways for innocent people to run afoul of already complicated legal traps. Career criminals, the supposed targets of straw purchase bans, routinely circumvent the law anyway, acquiring the tools of their trade from family or business associates.
The final section of the Protecting Our Kids Act targets a perennial bogeyman of gun prohibitionists: firearm magazines that hold more than 10 rounds of ammunition. A magazine is the removable container (often erroneously called a “clip”) of ammunition. Although the bill exempts—for now—the tens of millions of such magazines currently owned by American gun owners as normal parts of their guns, a version of this law has already served as the first step down a slippery slope to a total ban on ownership. We have a real-life example of how it happened in California, which in a 2016 ballot initiative finally banned ownership of magazines holding more than 10 cartridges.
Most of the voters who overwhelmingly approved California’s Proposition 63 were likely unaware that magazines holding 15 or more rounds have been standard parts of America’s most popular handguns for over 30 years now. They remain unremarkable and legal parts of handguns in most of America today, with no evidence that they somehow cause mass murders. But the lives of Californians who own these pistols and similar perfectly legal firearms changed overnight with the passage of Proposition 63.
In a 2017 federal court decision striking down the California ban, Judge Roger Benitez noted, “On July 1, 2017 [the effective date of Prop. 63], any previously law-abiding person in California who still possesses a firearm magazine capable of holding more than 10 rounds will begin their new life of crime.”
Benitez further observed that “at the preliminary injunction hearing, the attorney for the Attorney General, although well prepared, was not able to describe all of the various exceptions to the dispossession and criminalization components of [California’s law regulating magazines] . . . the California matrix of gun control laws is among the harshest in the nation and are filled with criminal law traps for people of common intelligence who desire to obey the law.”
If even the government’s own law enforcement experts can’t parse this web of laws, how can the average citizen stay out of legal danger? Nevertheless, the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals en banc ultimately reversed that decision, putting millions of Californians back in legal peril.
The lesson here is an old one. The founders gave us a system of government with carefully crafted controls on destructive human passions. When the wrath of mobs becomes the law of the land, innocent people always suffer. The failures of the same old gun control laws should warn us away from the easy route of penalizing virtually all American gun owners who will never commit a crime with their guns. Justice requires us to focus our efforts instead on deterring those very few flawed individuals who commit such evil.
.
.
— Timothy Wheeler, MD is the founder and former director of Doctors for Responsible Gun Ownership, and a retired head and neck surgeon.
I have to give full credit to a reader for this one, as an infantry Marine it never occured to me because my Geneva classification was combatant. As gun controllers cry about weapons of war on our streets, and in our homes, and assailing our classrooms, the actual written and recognized laws of war have something relevant to say on this issue.
The Hague and Geneva Contentions, along with other international agreements on the proper conduct of warfare, recognize certain weapons that can be issued to types of non-combatants for their personal protection and those under their care. The laws of war recognize certain personal weapons as having a defensive use only.
The individual rifle is considered a defensive weapon under the international articles, rules, and treaties that govern the conduct of war. That is the reason that non-combatant uniformed personnel are allowed to be armed with certain weapons, including a service rifle. You will not see them issued a grenade launcher, rockets, or a belt-fed to support fire and maneuver, only a personal weapon to protect them and those other non-combatants under their charge.
Medical personnel are the largest group of uniformed personnel covered under this, extending to medics, nurses, surgeons, and Corpsman. Certain clergical associated non-combats also carry weapons, although chaplains do not themselves.
Lawfully armed non-combatants.
Personnel who are uniformed and issued a personal weapon for protection. They are not involved in, nor or they legally allowed to participate in, direct offensive operations and the bearing of offensive arms to achieve combat objectives. That is the job of someone like myself, an infantry Marine and legal combatant.
The Corpsman attached to my squad is not there as another rifle for me to use, he or she is there for when someone gets hurt and their rifle is there to protect them and those hurt and under their care. As an infantry squad leader, my rifle, my squad’s rifles, explosives, and machine guns, and my available support from air assets and indirect fire like mortars and artillery, are all my offensive weapons to achieve my mission.
The Corpsman is legally not on my list of assets, they’re essentially just following me around in case of injuries in my squad. They’re right there to begin care should care be needed.
Should they violate the rules regarding the armament and conduct of non-combatants, they lose their protected status under international law and become a combatant.
A Medic or Corpsman carrying and using M249, or a new XM250, in the role that weapon is normally employed would violate the rules since that weapon is for offensive use. That same Medic or Corpsman using their issued personal rifle, or a soldier under their cares issued weapon to protect that soldier or soldiers from harm in their injured status, would not violate those rules. The use of the issued weapon or the use of weapons from a troop under their care in a specific manner would not make them a combatant.
In short, the personal rifle is recognized as a defensive weapon under international law. Even if it is an “assault rifle” by definition. Grenade launchers, belt-fed machine guns, man portable rockets, and crew served weapons all fall under offensively recognized weapons, but sidearms and personal rifles are defensive.
Federal and State law enforcement use the AR as a defensive weapon. International military law protects the personally issued rifles, including fully automatic ones, and sidearms of non-combatants as defensive weapons. So if we are to believe the actual laws of war, the rifle is a completely legitimate weapon of defense for non-combatants.
The Golden State of gun owner infringements is showing that their ‘oops’ with the personal identity information of concealed licensees keeps getting worse as the investigation is ongoing. The California DoJ has now confirmed that not only were all current permits shown with name, address, date of birth, driver’s license number, and criminal history, but they exposed everyone who applied in the last decade too.
Records from 2011 to 2021 of all applicants, whether they were granted a permit or not, were confirmed to be part of the exposed data by Attorney General Rob Bonta’s office. Other dashboards backend data was also launched as viewable to the public, but it is unknown at this time how much protected data was part of those other systems.
All of this stems from California DoJ’s launch of their Firearms Dashboard Portal, which it is clear now was not properly checked for security from the front end. This wasn’t a hack or a “leak” in the traditional sense so it seems. This was a website that was put live to the public with accessible searchable pathways that anyone could use to look up protected information. Whatever authentication scheme was supposed to be in place so that sensitive information could not be found in the open was not in place.
Deliberately done?
The timing of this egregious data breach has led to speculation in many parts of the internet that this was done deliberately. If it was, by a lone or small group of employees more than likely, that would be a far more devastating breach of the public trust than the negligence of publishing all the data in a forward facing manner was.
For the record, I do not believe this was deliberately done on the part of the government of California.
I am less convinced that it wasn’t a deliberate action by an employee angry at the result and new directives, but I consider it overall unlikely. I’m sure DoJ in CA would love if it was right now just so they could publicly throw someone to the wolves for the information breach instead of having to eat the incompetence line over and over again.
Being reported by the National Foundation for Gun Rights, the Supreme Court has allegedly given notice to the lower courts that several recent rulings of theirs must be redone under the standard affirmed by Bruen. Several lower courts have very predictably upheld rather absurdly anti-2A rulings under spurious logic.
‘It depends on what your definition of ‘Infringe’ infringes’ seems to have been the thought of the various lower courts who very predictably, by region, upheld items like magazine bans and ‘Assault Weapon’ bans, as well as shall issue carry in Hawaii.
The Supreme Court just struck down four anti-gun lower court rulings:
SCOTUS granted cert in all four of these decisions, and told the lower courts “You got it wrong in all of these. We’re striking down your opinions. Go do it again, and do it based on the actual text of the Second Amendment and the history/tradition of the right to keep and bear arms.”
Essentially, those courts have to review those state laws in light of Bruen and issue new rulings using the new “text, history, and tradition” framework.
They may try to wriggle out of it (they almost certainly will) but if they obey the Supreme Court, there’s no way any of these state laws can withstand actual Second Amendment scrutiny.
This spells doom for mag bans, assault weapons bans, and public carry bans.
-NFGR
We knew Bruen was big, but I expected much slower movement and far more lawsuits to be required under the Bruen standard before we saw the rulings begin to fall. Now, with the Supreme Court saying to the lower courts ‘go back and do it right’, we may see exceptional progress on the 2nd Amendment restoration around the nation.
9-Hole and Brandon Herrera discuss perhaps the saddest chapter in the AK’s history… the modern one.
The AK-12 is just a colossal colostomy bag of disappointment and takes everything that had been done so well with the Kalashnikov rifle series and undoes so much of it. The AK-100 and AK-200 series were excellent examples of keeping the rifle modern and companies have long since figured out how to run modern equipment on the rifle.
And then the AK-12 happened.
And then the Russian brought the AK-12’s to Ukraine…
And then the captured guns kinda… sucked. They didn’t even have optics on them despite that being almost entirely the point of modernizing the guns. Much fail.
Meanwhile companies like RS Regulate, SLR Rifleworks, and full on manufacturers like IWI have succeeded in modernizing the AK in various and highly competitive ways and the things are awesome! The additions, most very cost effective, bring the rifles into alignment with modern standards set by the AR-15, being plenty accurate for their respective calibers and able to work with suppression, lights, lasers, and optic suites.
It is puzzling why Russia would so short change themselves on a rifle when they were going to war. Budget cuts are a real thing but rifles aren’t that expensive.
My first automatic shotgun was the then new Remington 11-87. Introduced in 1987, no surprise there, the 11-87 isn’t a cut down Remington 1100, but a shotgun designed to be more reliable than the original 1100. The 11-87 was designed to get the measure of steel shot. The 1100 is among the most reliable shotguns in the world, proven in many field tests. The 11-87 just may be a tic better.
The 11-87, like myself, looks its age. It is just a little older than my two boys. The 11-87 has never failed and had fired several thousand shells in training, and a few in the field. The 11-87 has not been abused but it certainly has not been babied. The gas system has been cleaned and the bore swabbed out and the chamber given attention. That’s about the scope of maintenance.
The 11-87 features a self regulating gas operation. You may use field grade birdshot, turkey loads, full power and reduced power buckshot, and other loads without changing the gas setting or installing a different gas ring. It just always works. Only the lightest loads, such as the RWS frangible may not operate the action. There is a gas cylinder mounted on the barrel. The gas collar is separate, there is a gas piston and barrel seal with the Remington 0 ring. These ride on the magazine tube.
The 11-87 features checkered American walnut stocks and a matte finish. The 21 inch barrel feature rifle type sights in this Special Purpose version.
The barrel, interesting enough, isn’t a buck special or a slug barrel. The barrel features choke tubes. This is a handy outfit. I have a choke tube that is rifled for slug use, a neat trick, and the standard full choke tube for buckshot. The majority of 11-87 shotguns are sporting guns with twin beads and ventilated ribs and the like.
The only maintenance required is the occasional scrubbing of the gas cylinder collar and seal assembly. The shotgun weighs about eight pounds, a bit more than the Remington 870 pump on hand for comparison. Coupled with the gas action, this weight results in a light recoiling combination.
The magazine holds four shells. The trigger is clean and crisp, breaking at 4.4 pounds even. The 21 inch Special Purpose barrel is heavy enough for the strongest loads and patterns as well as any other with the choke tubes installed. Handling is fast. It swings quickly on targets and offers a stable platform. The hands line up one behind the other when using this shotgun. Natural feel and point are far faster than with the AR or AK type shotguns. For me that is what a shotgun is about, fast work and getting hits on a moving target.
I have fired the 11-87 quite a bit over the years with whatever load was available. Among the most useful loads have been Hornady’s buckshot loads. The Critical Defense load is ideal for home defense. This #00 buckshot load produces a tight pattern to 20 yards. An interesting load is the Hornady Varmint Express. Using #4 buckshot this load features a wide cloud of 27 pellets. With a full choke tube in place this loading should be murder on coyotes.
I have been interested in slug accuracy and fired the 11-87 with a number of loads. The Hornady American Whitetail slug breaks 1522 fps in the 11-87. That is a lot of power with a 438 grain slug. Accuracy averages a 3.9 inch group for five shots at 50 yards. For woods hunting at close range that is acceptable. Deer sized animals hit by slugs crumple and expire quickly. The 11-87 makes for a versatile, reliable and useful shotgun for all around hunting and defense use. It is a long serving and trusted shotgun.
NEWINGTON, N.H. – SIG SAUER, in partnership with world champion 3-Gun competitor and Team SIG Shooter Daniel Horner, is pleased to introduce the M400-DH3 SDI rifle. This is the inaugural release under Daniel Horner’s DH3 brand in conjunction with SIG SAUER; the M400-DH3 has been designed by Horner in collaboration with the SIG SAUER research and development team and is the rifle used by Horner in 3-Gun and multi-gun competition.
“Since Daniel Horner joined Team SIG, he has methodically been researching, designing, and testing the products he will be introducing through the DH3 brand from SIG SAUER. These are not just products that bear his name, but are the products that have been tried, tested and used by him personally. Daniel puts the full force of his name and his distinguished career in the shooting sports behind this new rifle,” said Tom Taylor, Chief Marketing Officer and Executive Vice President Commercial Sales, SIG SAUER, Inc. “The M400-DH3 is the first product in this DH3 product line-up and achieves both the performance and precision that he is known for as one of the world’s most dominant world championship shooters.”
Team SIG’s Daniel Horner is regarded as the top multi-gun and 3-gun shooter in the world. Daniel began his professional shooting career as a member of the elite U.S. Army Marksmanship Until rising to become the Coach of the USAMU Action Shooting Team and during his career was twice selected as the Military Marksmanship Association Soldier of the Year. He has captured over 125 championship titles at the world, national, regional, and state level, including 16 Multi-Gun / 3-Gun Championships, 8 Sniper Championships, 2 IDPA National Championships, an IPSC Shotgun National Championship, an NRA World Shooting Championship, and hundreds of additional national and major title wins throughout his career.
“For the past two years I have been shooting in competition with the M400-DH3 rifle and what you get right out of the box is my set-up. We took our time to release this gun because I wanted all the elements to be my competition set-up from my trigger to the stock,” added Horner. “I’ve won multiple titles with this exact build and even if you’re not taking it into competition, you are sure to enjoy the custom features that we have put into the M400-DH3.”
The M400-DH3 Rifle is a SIG Direct Impingement (SDI) aluminum frame rifle with a Cerakote Elite Titanium finish with the DH3 fully adjustable competition stock and a 2-stage adjustable Timney™ Daniel Horner signature trigger. This competition platform features a 16” fluted stainless 223 WYLDE barrel for optimal 223REM or 5.56 performance with a three-chamber compensator for recoil mitigation, low-profile 3-gun handguard with M-LOK™ mounts for easy accessory attachment, ambidextrous controls including bolt catch/release, and ships with one 30-round magazine.
SIG SAUER M400 DH3:
Caliber: 223REM or 5.56 (223 WYLDE barrel)
Overall length: 34.5 inches
Overall height: 7.5 inches
Overall width: 2.5 inches
Barrel length: 16 inches
Barrel twist: 1:8
Weight (w/magazine): 7lbs.
The SIG SAUER M400-DH3 rifle is now shipping and available at retailers. To learn more about the SIG SAUER M400-DH3 rifle competition rifle from Daniel Horner or watch the product video visit sigsauer.com.
About SIG SAUER, Inc. SIG SAUER, Inc. is a leading provider and manufacturer of firearms, electro-optics, ammunition, suppressors, airguns, and training. For over 250 years SIG SAUER, Inc. has evolved by blending American ingenuity, German engineering, and Swiss precision. Today, SIG SAUER is synonymous with industry-leading quality and innovation which has made it the brand of choice amongst the U.S. Military, the global defense community, law enforcement, competitive shooters, hunters and responsible citizens. Additionally, SIG SAUER is the premier provider of tactical training and elite firearms instruction at the SIG SAUER Academy. Headquartered in Newington, New Hampshire, SIG SAUER has over 2,900 employees across eleven locations. For more information abo ut the company and product line visit: sigsauer.com.
This is not my shocked face. This is why we can’t have nice things in government hands alone. If you haven’t heard by now, the state of California, gun controllers’ wet dream of rules and regulation, the supposed model of efficiency that the nation should base its practices on, couldn’t even launch a website without exposing everysinglelicensee’s personal information for the world to find.
Not as egregious as the New York FOIA request from The Journal News, where the journalists then published a whole interactive map of gun owners’ personal addresses, this is nonetheless a serious privacy violation on the part of of the California government. The only major difference is that California didn’t do this on purpose, small comfort there. The Journal News absolutely did publish with hostile intent or an idiotic disregard of unintended consequences.
It was done because of incompetence and a failure on the part of California’s DOJ to properly protect personal information that is within their custody. California DOJ insists they need this information in order to prevent crime, ensure community safety, and promote the general welfare of California and yet they couldn’t be bothered to launch their website without checking to make certain that access guards were properly in place to prevent very current concealed carry licensee’s address and information from being searchable as an a Amazon shopping list.
Yep, really inspiring confidence aren’t we Newsom.
The breach occurred as part of the state Department of Justice’s launch of its “2022 Firearms Dashboard Portal,” officials said.
Breach is a very dramatic word that seems to indicate a hack took place, when in reality this is more like California in a Zoom meeting and screen sharing their “incognito” window to the world.
“This public site allows access to certain information, however, personal information of Concealed Carry Weapon (CCW) permit holders is not supposed to be visible,” the agency said.
But, it was.
The personal information included, but was not limited to, a person’s name, age, address, Criminal Identification Index number and license type, according to the sheriff’s office. The state DOJ pulled down the dashboard site along with all related links after learning of the breach, the sheriff’s office said.
But, the internet is forever. With very little effort and just a pinch of knowhow those screens are probably findable in archive now. Or anyone who took notice of the data and saved it could simply keep publishing it again for whatever motivation they so choose.
There is a silver lining though, all the new CCW permits that are in process and going to be issued under the California DOJs mandated update to shall issue are unlikely to have been in the system so new applicants and future applicants are unlikely to have had their information leaked.
This assumes that CA DOJ gets the portal launch right next time, of course.
It’s going to be one of those posts readers… here we go. Fisking another LTTE.
In a recent CBS – YouGov poll, 44% of the Republicans agreed that mass shootings are “unfortunately something we have to accept” in a free country.
It is. Freedom is not safe. We don’t have ‘accept’ it in the sense of doing nothing and letting people destroy at will, but accepting in the realistic facet that there is a hard limit to what we can do that will have any positive effect without a severe negative effect.
In other words, our politicians on the right “think that gun carnage is acceptable “
In your words, you mean. Accepting that the free will of mankind also allows them to, on rare occasion thankfully, act in horrific manners is accepting reality. They do not endorse it, but they do not futilely and erroneously promise over and over to “solve” the gun violence epidemic or whichever favorite panic buzzword is in use at the moment.
– even when as of recently , more than 240 “mass shootings” involving four or more victims have occurred in just (roughly) 155 days of 2022. Are they delusional? I think so.
Are you?
Delusional that is. What obvious solution do we not have in place that would make 330 million people suddenly behave harmoniously to each other?
The Republican Party – pretending to be “the Party of law and order,” has become so radicalized that they cannot acknowledge any circumstance in which, perhaps, weapons only designed for human carnage should be restricted.
That is all weapons. Literally all of them. Weapons in all of human history were designed to inflict casualties either on game for food or other humans to impose a will and desire upon them. That desire might be leave me alone and get out of my house, it might be ‘Not today, Third Reich.’, and it might be Putin f*cking around in Ukraine and doing a whole lot of finding out. The weapon gets no say in its use, it simply works or it does not.
It has become a refuge for absolutists who would rather tolerate mass murder,
There’s the implication again. Tolerate, as if murder is legal and unpunished. That we tolerate it because it exists as an action, and always has, and people (including governments) keep doing it, so therefore we somehow encourage it.
including the massacre of children, than even consider “reasonable” measures
I’m glad you put reasonable in quotes, it helps acknowledge that reasonable requires agreement, and we do not agree.
like waiting periods,
A right delayed is a right denied. Imagine a waiting period after registering to vote, or a waiting period on attending a religious service you wish to attend or a petition to the government required a waiting period before being processed. Justice Thomas was right, we do actively treat the 2nd Amendment like a 2nd Class right… oof.
background checks,
We have those.
permits,
Like voter IDs?
gun training,
Actively encouraged by the 2A community with a whole vibrant niche in our culture.
a ban on assault-style weapons.
Why? How many deaths do rifles account for?
FBI UCR 2010-2020
Ah, gotcha. Handguns are used to kill people at better than 20:1 over rifles according to the FBI but let’s ban some rifles.
Cool.
Continue.
Are we nuts by allowing this to continue;
There it is again. Are mass murder and terrorism being capitalcrimes not disallowal enough? I don’t think we can disallow more than, ‘If you do this we will kill you.’ We don’t ‘allow’ anything. Inability to prevent is not allowing. Allow implies we have the realistic power to stop. We can’t stop speeding. We do not allow earthquakes, tornadoes, or hurricanes, they are forces beyond our ability to control.
The thoughts and actions of an individual who is outside our total physical control is also something we do not allow, it is something we cannot control. We may influence, but we cannot control. It is impossible. When we are talking about gun control, we are talking about influencing the actions of the most non-influenceable and radicalized members of society by attempting to compel the actions of the reasonable members of society to a variable degree of success.
Again, I repeat, we cannot stop speeding.
or are they nuts when supposedly persons in positions of responsibility (our legislators at all levels) continue to act so shamelessly, so irresponsibly, and so hypocritically? These people are unfit for high office, low office , or any office at all – considering we have succumbed to becoming a “gun loving country,” in which there are way more guns than people.
Are we also a car loving country?
There are also more registered cars than there are drivers in the United States, by almost 50 million.
Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, “a true Conservative’s conservative,” wrote that “the Second Amendment right is not unlimited.
Which doesn’t mean you get to pick what it means. It isn’t unlimited, but it isn’t limited to your preferred and nonsensical limits just because you think they’re “reasonable” and I do not. I have data and evidence on why they aren’t reasonable in a free society, you have thoughts and prayers wishing bad things wouldn’t happen.
It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose.” During his tenure as Chief Justice, Warren Burger (a Conservative appointment to the Court) stated in an interview that as currently interpreted, the Second Amendment “is a fraud.”
And in perhaps the defining 2nd Amendment case of our time, Justice Samuel Alito wrote in his concurrence,
Heller correctly recognized that the Second Amendment codifies the right of ordinary law-abiding Americans to protect themselves from lethal violence by possessing and, if necessary, using a gun. In 1791, when the Second Amendment was adopted, there were no police departments, and many families lived alone on isolated farms or on the frontiers. If these people were attacked, they were on their own. It is hard to imagine the furor that would have erupted if the Federal Government and the States had tried to take away the guns that these people needed for protection.
Today, unfortunately, many Americans have good reason to fear that they will be victimized if they are unable to protect themselves. And today, no less than in 1791, the Second Amendment guarantees their right to do so.
So what’s your point? Burger got quoted in an interview but I just quoted a concurring Justice in the actual opinion of the court. Which carries the weight? Which is in concurrence with such terms as “keep and bear” and “shall not be infringed.”
You act as if the government is being solicited to subsidize privately held nuclear weapons instead of common single person portable and usable firearms eminently useful in defense of themselves or, if called to, their communities. Ukraine might be able to give us some relevant viewpoints upon both of those subjects from a modern perspective.
Keeping these thoughts in mind, how has “American Exceptionalism” become the realization that we are the most heavily armed nation on earth – with by far the most deaths by guns – in our allegedly civilized status as “the leader of the free world?”
Ranked by total firearm deathsRanked by homicide firearm deathsRanked by total homicides and with their homicide per 100,000 rate cited with most recent year for data.
The United States ranks 59th in the world for homicide rate. We are the 3rd largest country in the world but only the 5th in total homicides with only India ranking higher in both total murders and population above us. Don’t give me any crap about the “civilized” world either, that’s a garbage lazy excuse that we somehow can only expect civilized behavior from ‘westernized’ societies of wealth. Pathetic viewpoint. Like they don’t know murder is bad so it’s just “allowed” there, huh?
Michael Gerson stated it unequivocally in a column last week – “It is past time for Republican politicians to embrace some risk in the cause of life – and end their dance with death.”
Very poetic. Utterly meaningless but very poetic.
So yeah, ban assault weapons for all of these easily debunked and poorly substantiated opinions posing as reasons.
A few years ago Colt re-introduced the Colt Python. There was some resistance to the revolver as there are many fans of the original. The new gun is affordable, but certainly not cheap, and an improvement over the original in my opinion. I have owned and fired four and six inch barrel examples with excellent results and I am pleased to use them beside my original 1969 Python. The new Colt .357 Magnum Pythons are well made, nicely finished stainless steel. The grips are excellent and the revolver has been beefed up from the original. These are not collector guns but shooters made for shooters.
The original run of Colt Python revolvers included a two and one half inch barrel revolver. It is well balanced and a good shooter. The newest Python is a short barrel revolver on the same theme. This revolver features a three inch barrel. The ejector rod is longer than the two and one half inch revolver in the original line up, making for more positive ejection of spent cartridge cases. While .38 Special ammunition was usually ejected smartly with the original short barrel Python the longer Magnum cartridge cases were not as easily kicked out of the chambers.
As I said the new guns are shooters for shooters. The three inch Colt Python .357 Magnum balances well at 38 ounces. The double action trigger breaks at a smooth ten pounds. The single action press is a crisp four pounds single action break. Learn to run the trigger properly. The Colt revolver V spring powers both the hammer and trigger. If you are not used to the Colt action you may tie the gun up. This occurs when the trigger is pressed through the action cycle but the trigger is not allowed to completely reset. Simply release the action to unlock the gun. If the Colt trigger is not allowed to fully reset and the trigger is pressed hard in the locked position you may even warp the hand, the part which rotates the cylinder. So, do your dry fire with a triple checked unloaded Colt against a backstop. You will be rewarded with fine accuracy in the double action mode once you master the Colt action.
The mid size frame makes for an optimum size for handling, speed, shooting, concealed carry and handling Magnum recoil. The Colt Python features a trademark ventilated barrel rib and superb fully adjustable rear sights. The Python is fast from concealed carry and gets on target quickly. Aim and press the trigger smoothly to the rear. The Python was fired at typical combat targets from 7 to 20 yards with good results. The weight, balance, sights and trigger add up to good results.
Firing the Python is enjoyable. The .357 Magnum revolver also functions well with the shorter .38 Special cartridge. Firing the .38 Special in this revolver is pleasant. Among the loads tested was the Federal 148 grain wadcutter. This .38 breaks about 700 fps in the three inch Python.
In single action fire from a solid rest this was the single most accurate load tested with a five shot 1.5 inch 25 yard group. I also used several other loads including the Federal 125 grain JHP .357 Magnum at a sizzling 1407 fps. All Magnum loads do not live up to the promise. As an example the PMC 158 grain JSP is an ok practice load but only breaks 1050 fps in the three inch barrel .357 Magnum. Another good load, the Winchester 145 grain Silvertip, breaks over 1150 fps. The short barrel Python is a good shooter with a bit of class of and style. It isn’t for everyone and I am not certain other revolvers such as the Ruger GP100 wont do most of what the Python does. With the Python you have easily the most accurate production revolver in America.
I’m a flannel guy, believe it or not. Sure, I live in hot as hell Florida, but I still respect a good flannel. In fact, if my wife tells me to dress nice, I pop one of my flannels on. My favorite brand has long been Dixxon, but I was more than willing to try out the All Skill No Luck flannel. Their claim to fame is taking flannels, making them fit like modern BDUs.
They call it the Ntchwaidumela, and no, I can’t help you pronounce that. Oddly enough, I recognized the word for some reason. I read on, and All Skill No Luck translates it to He who greets with fire, and it clicked.
It’s the shared name of a lion from a Nat Geo documentary I watched as a teenager. It’s called Eternal Enemies, and the lion, Ntchwaidumela, kills tons of hyenas. I can talk about that all day, but let’s be more practical and talk more about the shirt. When I say modern BDU, what do I mean? Well, it’s all about the pockets.
The pocket locations, in particular, are an interesting choice. The front pockets are slanted inward, much like the Marine Corp’s uniform. Also, across the sleeves are two smaller pockets perfect for pens, at least that’s what I always used them for. While the designs novel, does the All Skill No Luck hold up?
Deconstructing the All Skills No Luck Flannel
All Skill No Luck uses Cordura brand combat wool to make a darn tough shirt. Combat wool is made to be 10X more abrasion resistant than standard wool. Cordura’s combat wool also implements merino wool into its design to help get that wicking style comfort and antimicrobial properties.
The XL fit is perfect for me. It’s contoured for an even fit and works kind of like a push-up bra for bros. The All Skill No Luck Flannel is tight around the chest, emphasizing the pecs, but loose around the stomach letting your little beer gut hide naturally. I also appreciate that XL also takes arm length into account. Most XL long-sleeve shirts are still too short, but All Skill No Luck nails it.
It’s also a soft material, but don’t get me wrong, it is wool. It’s a little itchy and poking at first, but with subsequent washings, it gets a little more comfortable bit by bit until it’s well worn and perfectly soft. Also, the color hasn’t faded in the months I’ve rocked it. It still looks brand new but feels worn in.
The buttons are hidden under a flap for a sleek appearance and to prevent the big buttons from catching on and eventually breaking. Those buttons are fairly large and easy to manipulate, even with gloved hands.
A Carry Perspective
I tend to like clothes that make it easier to conceal and carry. That fit style of the All Skill No Luck flannel is perfect for carrying. It’s a little baggier around the belly. Therefore baggier around your gun makes it easier to hide. I can drop my favorite CZ P09 with a Streamlight TLR-1 equipped into a Phlster Floodlight and make it disappear under my flannel.
Flannel patterns also tend to hide lumps, and big guns tend to be lumpy, so flannels are a natural cure to those lumps. Maybe that’s why I’ve always liked flannels. They hide my lumps. Concealing weapons, specifically, handguns is fairly easy with the All Skill No Luck flannel. Hell, it’s fairly easy to conceal a small or compact pistol in an OWB holster with this shirt.
Beyond just carrying the flared bottom makes it easy to grip, rip and draw. When I grab my shirt to draw my gun, I grab it near the sternum and rip it upward. This isn’t challenging with the shirt and revealing the gun for a clean and easy draw is simple and effective.
Day To Day
The overall appearance of the All Skills No Luck flannel is fantastic. It’s dyed well, and the reds are deep and eye-catching. The pattern is perfect and attractive. The orientation of the pockets makes the shirt stand out in a subtle way. At SHOT, someone straight-up name-checked it, which was pretty neat. If you know, you know. If not, the shirt still looks fantastic and feels fantastic as well.
Sure give it a few washes to get the most out of it, but once it’s worn in and washed, the shirt becomes an awesome option for daily wear. Weight-wise it’s a little heavier than your average shirt but lighter than most dedicated flannels. It’s not a summer afternoon shirt by any means. If you want a high-quality, well-made, American flannel from a small, veteran-owned company, click here.
GAT Daily, putting rifles in snow for pictures because winter isn't done with us yet.
The following was a letter to the editor to The Columbian, referencing, I assume, another letter.
James Ault’s letter in the June 15 Columbian is typical of right-wing gun nuts’ “nothing up my sleeve” verbal sleight of hand (“AR-15 is natural evolution,” Our Readers’ Views). In outlining why the AR-15 is not really a military-style assault rifle and insinuating it gets a bad rap because of its misunderstood appearance, he leaves out the most relevant fact: It’s designed to kill a whole bunch of people in a short period of time, and has no other purpose.
It’s what is colloquially known as a ‘Hot Take’, a quick sentence or paragraph that summarizes the feeling on an event or topic. Twitter, in essence. The limitation with that is there is no room, none, for nuance, but all the room in the world for hyperbole.
With SCOTUS delivering a ruling on each of, arguably, the most hot button issues of our time this weekend, we have been treated to an absolute master class in hyperbole, metaphor, and exaggeration in pursuit of various points of view and goals. To no one’s surprise the point of view and the goal are not always the same from the same person.
I didn’t know how I wanted to approach writing down my thoughts, I am still figuring it out because the two are connected on several levels and those levels I feel are being missed by the masses.
Then this short piece above hit my inbox and I decided that I may not know where my thought will finalize, but I can begin here.
We must, as a nation, start more responsibly using our literary tools when we are discussing matters of civil rights and law. We must, even if our ire is up, remain as dispassionately calculating as we can when things go our way and when things do not. I know I vent my spleen here often, but even in my disquiet I attempt to discourage my disappointments in a rational and concise way that will arm a reader to move this conversation and policy forward.
In short, we must use nuance where nuance is needed, and it is universally need in the application of law. Each application of the law is a unique circumstance with an individual or multiple individuals involved.
We make progress through discussion.
Not all conversations or arguments are discussions. A discussion, even a heated one, necessitates respectful acknowledgement of the viewpoints and the assignment of validity based on correlative data both supporting and opposing a concept. We are living in an age where an opinion shouted loud enough is supposed to be a fact, and it gets bonus points based on the how politically ‘in’ or politically contrarian it is. What we additionally mistake for facts are supported opinions, opinions backed by facts but they are opinions based on the data the facts give. The facts themselves, such as an individual’s action or inaction, an observed trend of events, or a law of physics may support your opinion and thus be a supported opinion, but do not mistake an opinion for the facts.
Remember too, that the concepts of ‘Freedom’ and ‘Personal Autonomy’, are opinions. They are beliefs, concepts of how someone should be allowed to make determinations on their own, while the facts are the real world results of each instance. The facts, as an example, show that not everybody is capable of independent action and decision making that is not harmful to themselves or others. Sometimes this is their deliberate acts contrary to the good and order of the remainder, sometimes this is beyond their conscious rational control because their particular example of the human experience is outside the ordered parameters of those around them. They could be disabled, criminal, or insane, and the result facts of their actions or choices make for an less than desirable result.
Give people the choice to do as they wish and some of them are going to OD and take crap on a sidewalk, others will insist the earth is flat and that gravity is a result of constant acceleration and not mass. The human experience has a lot of facts and even more opinions.
So now let us return to this “Fact” *opinion* that the AR-15 has a limited purpose, as written above.
James Ault’s letter in the June 15 Columbian is typical of right-wing gun nuts’ “nothing up my sleeve” verbal sleight of hand (“AR-15 is natural evolution,” Our Readers’ Views).
Opening with an ad-hominem attack is rarely a good start, but doesn’t necessarily invalidate the commentary that comes after it. These are opinions and believing that I and my ilk are “gun nuts” is what they believe. Whatever, I’m having wrong fun and believe in my sacrosanct ability to fight for my life with an effective tool and ‘you’ believe that is nuts… for reasons… Okay, we understand each other. At least, I understand ‘you’ on this point.
The “nothing up my sleeve” seems to mean that the ‘natural evolution’ letter either didn’t resonate, or it is plausible the writer here is deliberately misunderstanding to push their opinion as fact.
Speaking of,
In outlining why the AR-15 is not really a military-style assault rifle and insinuating it gets a bad rap because of its misunderstood appearance, he leaves out the most relevant fact:
We’ll get to the ‘relevant fact’ in a moment. First lets address why the AR-15 isn’t a traditional military assault rifle.
It isn’t select-fire.
That covers it. The definition of assault rifle includes select-fire, the ability to fire in a burst and/or fully automatic. The AR-15 may be the same shape, color, size, weight, and fire the same caliber ammunition as the military rifle, but unless it is a machine gun (by the legal definition) it is not an assault rifle. It is merely an intermediate caliber semi-automatic rifle.
The well worn FN “M16A5-I” of the author. One of those AR-15’s in circulation.
If you want to call that a technicality, fine. I agree. The M16A4 ‘Clone’ that is a semi-auto only, but otherwise built with the same parts as an M16A4 that would’ve been shipped to me in the Marines, firing M855 ammunition would have the same shot to shot lethality as an actual military assault rifle. I’ve gotten into fights a plenty online with veterans on the pro-gun side of things who insist the AR-15 is completely and totally different than an AR-15… and that’s fundamentally not true. They are nearly identical. They are functionally identical if used in semi-automatic.
But the “weapons of war” analogy falls into utter ruin the minute you analyze it, because combined arms doctrine is how you win a war and not an AR-15. The rifle and the pistol of any given military force are arguably among the least important weapon selections, provided that they function. How the manage the high explosives, armor, indirect fire, air support, and ground force day and night movements are the true weapons of war. The service rifle is mostly a logistic note.
The rifle gets its ‘bad reputation’ from both ignorant and deliberate misunderstandings. People deliberately misunderstand the rifle all the time because they are not looking to understand it, they are looking to be mad. They have made up their mind. That reputation is centered among a certain group of people, ones who do not like firearms and are unlikely to hold any firearm in good repute. So it’s reputation is can be determined based upon nothing of the rifle itself, but purely on the prevailing attitude of the crowd you are interacting with. That isn’t a reputation, that is a bias.
It’s like people who hate pitbulls, it doesn’t matter how many times you point out the millions of good dogs, the prevalence of pit mixes compared to the other large dog breeds (Rotts and German Shepherds for example), or anything else. Their minds are set, they hate the dogs, and they want them destroyed in many instances.
Now, the “fact” …
It’s designed to kill a whole bunch of people in a short period of time, and has no other purpose.
*Sigh* This isn’t a fact, it is an opinion, and it isn’t a very well backed up one as, again, the rifle of any sort is ahead of only the pistol in its ability to cause casualties as a weapon of war. Explosives are king of the battlefield.
Yes, the AR-15 was designed as a fighting rifle. In fact it was designed as one that was lighter and easier to handle, doing so by using a much less powerful round than the previous fighting rifles. Yes, it is lethal. Yes, it can be fired quickly and accurately. That descriptor covers just about every single rifle produced since 1928.
There is no rifle that is good for fighting, and thus defending yourself and your community, but not good fighting if you are bad. It doesn’t exist. It cannot exist. A rifle is not designed to “kill” it is designed to function. Ammunition may be designed to kill, and physics and biology says that it can. But a rifle is designed to work.
Firearms do one of two things, they work or they don’t.
Can be used to and designed to are not the same. Because in reality, the AR-15 was designed to protect. It was designed to be an efficient individual fighting rifle so that a soldier, an officer, or citizen can bring an effective force against something threatening their life. That ability necessitates and cannot be divorced from the ability of a rifle to be used harmfully. It is force made of metal and polymer.
A rifle, especially an assault rifle, is designed to be ‘force’ for whoever holds it. That is the fact. How someone employs that force is entirely in their own care. Your opinion based upon that fact may vary. But it does not make your opinion fact.
This is, without a doubt, one of the best 70 second spots I’ve seen in a long time from a company bringing the focus back from start to finish on their pride in providing for you.
Smith & Wesson makes some of the most competitive handgun lines in the nation and their premium lines of rifles are well regarded also. Their foray into shotguns is certainly a foray, but I will give them credit for a solid attempt. Nothing is ceasing the absolutely solid foundation of their M&P and revolver lines, the Shield Plus, and the service pistols.
This is one of those instances where I just want to point out, as was pointed out to me, a quality thing done.
Might have to up my acquisition of that 10mm. Which is among the point of creations like this in the first place. Good job S&W, it worked.
I love battle belts. It’s really my favorite way to carry gear. I think it’s because I naturally run hot and live in Florida. This combination results in me seeking out the lightest load-bearing gear that’s less likely to wear like a sweater and make me sweat. Minimalist battle belts have become the new hotness, and today I am diving in with the 5.11 Tactical Maverick Battle Belt.
This is a fairly new design from 5.11. They throw you a ton of sizes and colors, giving tactical beanpoles a small option and man tanks up to 2Xl. Beyond that, you get all the colors you could want, including Ranger Green, Black, Coyote, and Multicam. Sadly no M81 for our consumption…yet. The belt retails for 145 dollars with the inner and outer belt.
The Maverick – The Most Minimalist Belt
Does it get more minimalist than a 1.75-inch wide belt? Prior to this, the Sentry Gunnar belt leads the minimalist charge, but the Maverick might take that crown. It’s small and also light at about 12 ounces total, and that’s with the Cobra buckle.
For such a small belt, it’s not a big surprise that you don’t get fields of webbing. You get a single row, so this won’t be great for someone rocking a belt-fed. However, for the modern loadout from a rifle or subgun, then you’d be served well by the Maverick. Stacking on pistol mags, a few rifle mags, an IFAK, and some admin gear is just the right amount of stuff to be successful.
The belt uses an inner and out belt combination. If you’ve never used one, what you have is an inner belt that goes through your belt loops. The outer belt is then wrapped around the inner belt and secured via hook and loop. This provides support and ensures the belt remains in place when moving and grooving.
A stationary belt provides a more comfortable experience as well as ensures all your gear remains in the same spot. This allows that proper muscle memory to take over when things get violent and quick moving. You don’t want your magazine shifted 2 inches when you reach for it.
Getting the Maverick Ready
Sizing the belt is fairly easy, and you typically want a nice tight fit. I squeezed the Maverick on with ease and adjusted it just a little. With the inner belt in place, the outer belt clips on without issue. It’s very stable and honestly a pain to remove. I guess that’s a good thing.
The belt is purposefully stiff, but 5.11 wisely contoured it to wrap around the body. This improves comfort and reduces the bulky, awkward nature of these belts. Most have a break-in period to get that good fit around the waist, but the Maverick does not.
When it comes to attaching pouches, you have to be diligent and make sure you don’t get lazy out on the molle. The 5.11 flex pouches work best with their uber-thin straps. However, MALICE clips, as well as traditional MOLLE, will work but prepared to work those thumbs.
Putting together tactical gear is probably my favorite thing to do while watching TV, so I enjoy this kind of setup and tweaking. Once tweaked just right, I had my minimalist battel belt set up and ready for my AR 15.
Time to Train
With the belt properly set up, I took it out for a little training, both live and dry fire. With the proper outer belt equipped, the belt stays right where I need it to. The belt locks in the pouches and makes them easy to access. The belt doesn’t fight the out belt or shift when I try to draw mags, and the Cobra belt buckle locks it down tight.
The Maverick belt is incredibly comfy. The compact design makes it easy to bend in all manner of directions, to grab gear, and move up and down different obstacles. The minimalist belt has become such an endearing piece of gear because it allows for such freedom of movement.
While I’ve taken the Maverick belt, the more tactical wanna-be sling route, it could serve very well in a variety of tasks, and you could general adventure with it, use it for hikes, wildland firefighting, search and rescue, and any task where you need a belt full of gear to thrive. The Maverick belt from 5.11 offers a versatile battle belt that does a fantastic job of emphasizing small but useful.
I still believe the VZ-58 was of the most entertaining departures from traditional Soviet ‘Nyet, is fine’ness that exists. It had to be 7.62x39mm but they gave the rifle several rather nice features the AK didn’t get, like a last round bolt lock.
The VZ is very same-same-but-different, different mouse trap to solve the same series of problems and integrate with militaries running the AK and SKS. The action, striker fired. Neat!
Brandon hits on the fact that magazines and muzzle threads are the same, but different and incompatible. I suspect that this was done so that the wide variety of AK parts couldn’t be added and mess up anything with a wildly out of spec part. Nothing would almost fit and then grenade the gun in a classic ‘but if not supposed to go together, why fit?’ type methodology.
That is merely my off the cuff thought process and it may be that the VZ-58 engineers were a group of contrarians who wanted to bug the Soviet Union’s logistic system on everything except the ammunition.
Anyway, I like the VZ-58. I wouldn’t choose it first, or second, or probably even fifth for a rifle in a fight if given a choice. Key phrase there, if given a choice. But I wouldn’t feel under gunned with it and a couple of its available upgrades to put a dot and a light on it any more than if I were handed an MP5 in an “I need a gun” situation. It is a very functional .
Plus
Strike Back was a really awesome show where they were rocking.
