The Battle is in the Senate – AWB Passed the House

By

-

July 30, 2022

In a not unexpected but certainly unwelcome turn, the House passed their Assault Weapons Ban of 2022.

The fight now turns to the Senate, where it was always going to.

As soon as the rumors of dusting off the AWB started to circulate, the tactic was clear. Remember folks, this bill was introduced in March of 2021. It’s been sitting under Pelosi’s oh-so-caring care for 16 months. This was always expected to pass the house. Always could have. Five Democrats even voted no, knowing they could ‘conscious’ vote safely without actually disturbing the outcome.

It’s sad really. This is all for midterms, not safety. If it were safety, Pelosi had the power to kick it to the Senate 16 months ago. Look at what they did with the BSCA, they could have sent this over same time. They didn’t.

Why?

It’s all politics.

But we need to play the game too. And the game is now in the Senate, where it was always going to end up. We needed to play defense in the house, and it looks like that was more effective than I expected (I was assuming a full sweep on all the Democrats and 5 voted no).

So good on these 5,

Now it goes to the Senate, where it will likely die the death they plan. They will martyr this bill at the next available opportunity (read: mass shooting that fits the narrative) and use it for campaigning.

We need to help it on its way, even knowing the likely fate of the AWB in the Senate, we must make our thoughts on this type of time waste on Pelosi’s part known. We need to be on the record, firmly. Write your Senators and tell them to light this on fire and toss it in the dumpster, because we aren’t having it just so Pelosi and the idiot Cicilline (braces are bumpstocks!) can drum up some extra dollars in this abysmal looking election cycle.

They are going to try and say, “Look, we tried! Please give money?” we need to respond, “Yeah, you really shouldn’t have. Goodbye.” and give these clowns walking papers back to the private sector.

So fire up those emails.

To the Senate.

Making Do During The Great Primer Shortage of 2020

By

P.E. Fitch

-

July 30, 2022

Well, even if we’re not back in the clear to pre 2020 primer and ammunition availability, we are doing better now. Prices may not be what they once were but at least we can find product on shelves in my part of the country easily.

But during the darkest days of this pandemic induced shortage, I decided to experiment with small rifle primers in my 9mm Luger and .38 Special handloads. As with any other piece of writing concerning ammunition handloading, I am solely writing about my experiences alone and one should always exercise good judgment when it comes to replicating handloading data or techniques they see on the Internet.

For a number of years now, I’ve had a pet 9mm go-to load that I use for general purposes and works across my 9mm handguns. This load is as follows: A 115 grain coated lead or plated bullet sitting on top of 4.5 grains of Hodgdon HP-38 (or Winchester W231 powder because they’re literally the same thing). My Dillon machine is set up to seat the bullet at 1.150” cartridge overall length, which is something that I started to emulate from Speer Lawman factory ammo. I don’t have a preference between the coated lead and plated bullet, so I just typically use whatever is cheapest and/or available. I will use whatever brass I can pick up and process that is still suitable to be reloaded. I will typically use whatever small pistols primers I have on hand.

If it wasn’t clear by now, this pet load of mine is all about economic efficiency. For ignition purposes, certain shooters have different primer preferences for their specific needs, but all I cared about was that Beretta 92 hammers with D-spring tension or stock Gen 5 Glock strikers could set them off.

Checking overall length for my 9mm handloads. I wouldn’t loose sleep over this cartridge that is 0.006″ off my goal length of 1.150″. Notice the peculiar coke bottle shape from the Dillon resizing die.

So far I’ve sent rounds into berms using CCI, Sellier and Bellot, Wolf, Winchester, and Federal small pistol primers. To that list I can now add the Remington 6 ½ and the Federal 205 small rifle primers. For reference, the Remington 6 ½ primer is intended for the mildest centerfire rifle cartridges and isn’t even appropriate for 5.56mm ammo reloads with ARs. It’s actually not safe due to the cup hardness being too soft and the AR’s floating firing pin presenting a risk. However, I felt comfortable loading all one thousand of these and had no problems in the handguns I used them with. If memory serves correct, not only did I use these 6 ½s for my standard load, but also for a 147gr 9mm load using only 3.3 grains of HP-38 powder. I had no issues with full size Beretta 92s, Glocks 45 and 48, and even a Beretta APX Carry. The reason I even made a decision to use these primers in the first place was because I met up with a guy in a parking lot and bought them off him when store shelves were bare. I recall him being a precision rifle shooter and saying that those didn’t afford the level of consistency he needed. On the other hand, A-Zones and B-8 bulls aren’t that small, so I just wanted them to go bang!

I came across the Federal 205 small rifle primers by chance on a day my local Scheel’s store had primers in stock and of course I took them feeling a little confident after my experience with those Remington primers. I used these Federal primers to load about 600 rounds of my pet 115 grain 9mm load and another 400 rounds of .38 Special handloads using a Berry’s 158 grain plated flat point bullet and 4 grains of HP38. I just wanted a “standard” load that I could use in my vintage K and J frame Smith and Wesson revolvers. Naturally, I wasn’t worried one bit about those heavy revolver hammers igniting these primers. As for those 600 rounds of 9mm Luger I loaded? They’re all in another berm after I used them up for a Citizen’s Defense Research “Tests and Standards” class last October. My heavy Beretta 92 X Performance gobbled them all up like skittles. The next time I see any Remington 6 ½ or Federal 205 primers available, I’m getting them.

But again, use caution when experimenting with your ammunition variations.

Six Rounds of my .38 Special handloads referenced above next to a vintage Smith and Wesson Model 19-6 revolver.

Two Things Traveling Writers Need

By

Anna Martinez

-

July 30, 2022

A Transportable Mouse

When it comes to consistently being on the go and needing to get some writing in, ease of transportation of equipment is very important such as your laptop and other accessories. Using a laptop without a mouse over time can be hard on the wrist yet carrying a mouse around can be bulky and annoying. The bluetooth linked Microsoft Arc Mouse takes care of those issues.

The Arc Mouse goes completely flat when not in use. To use simply curve it until it clicks. This curve is very comfortable on the wrist. The entirety of the mouse is simply an oval with no extra protruding buttons or scrolling wheel. To scroll simply drag your finger along the front of the mouse. Left click? Simply click the left side, same goes for the right click.

Compatible with both Windows and mac, to connect your Arc Mouse to your computer it is a one minute process. Just go onto your computer into your bluetooth settings, press the small button on the underside of the mouse, and the computer will find it and pair after one click of the mouse. The feeling of the mouse is almost the same feeling of your laptop track pad. Not slippery but smooth.

This is the shape of the Microsoft Arc Mouse when fully clicked in place.

Options for Buying

Amazon Prime: $51.99
Best Buy: $59.99
Microsoft: $79.99

Colors: Lilac, Burgundy, Light Gray, Black, Sage, Poppy Red, Blue, Light Pink

Blue Light Blocking Glasses

Between our phone, TV, and laptops our eyes are consistently being stressed by blue light emission which can lead to suppression of melatonin production and stimulation of cortisone, an alertness drug. Both of these issues will effect falling sleep. After doing a very professional poll on Instagram..the consensus was that the favored blue light blocking glasses out there at the moment are RA Optics.

From the Creator..
“When things started to pick up, I needed a name for my new brand! I remembered learning about Ra, the Egyptian god of sunlight. The sun god was the most powerful of all the ancient gods in every society, because the sun was the most powerful and relevant force for life on earth, and still is today. According to Merriam Webster Dictionary, optics is “a science that deals with the genesis and propagation of light, the changes that it undergoes and produces, and other phenomena closely associated with it”. So, I decided to name my new endeavor “Ra Optics”. A tribute to the sun; a nod to the ancient wisdom that is the foundation for all modern knowledge, a mission firmly rooted in advanced modern science in everything that we do, and bringing the two together in ways that have never been done before.”

https://raoptics.com/pages/blue-light-its-impact-on-our-health

RA Optics offers both daylight and nighttime lenses, kids lenses, and comes in many different stylish options. It also comes with an easy sizing chart that will help you find the right fit/style of glasses for you. Often we are looking down when typing on a laptop during travel so ensuring that they are tight on your head but comfortable is important.

The Yellow Daylight lens is meant to be worn in the daytime to block from LED lights and screens. This will help relieve eye strain, headaches, and keep you more focused and energized throughout the day. The reddish Sunset Lens is meant to be worn at night. Both the Daylight lens and Sunset Lens come with the same frame options.

An option for both daylight and sunset lens. This is the Clyde Sunset Lens.

“In addition to creating the world’s first and only premium Sleep Glasses, I decided to create a superior alternative to traditional computer glasses, called Screen Lenses, which block 30x more harmful blue light from LED’s than most clear computer lenses available today.”– RA Optics Creator

The package comes with a slim carrying case, lens wipe, and the glasses. Super easy to transport and very comfortable and stylish to wear.

Currently wearing the “Nate Daylight” frames and lens. It closest matched up to my sizing and I liked the leopard print frames.

Options for Buying

Each frame is a different price, however both daylight and sunset are the same price.

Popp: $164.00
Maxwell: $164.00
Nate: $164.00
Clyde: $164.00
Fritz: $164.00
JC: $224.00
Yogananda: $224.00

The Death of The Gentleman’s Pocket Knife

By

The Suited Shootist

-

July 30, 2022

What image pops into your head when you hear the words “pocket knife”?

In the gun world these days, it’s likely:

A folding knife with:
A liner lock (or maybe an axis lock or lock-back),
A thumb stud, hole, or disc for easy one-handed opening,
G10 or Micarta scales in black, green, tan, or grey,
A Tanto, drop-point, or (if you’re lucky) Wharncliffe-style blade 3-4 inches long,
With a pocket clip.

The “Tactical Folder”.

In the 20 years I’ve been regularly carrying a knife this has been my default choice, from my afterschool jobs working at a butcher shop to my foray into blades as defensive tools.

And why not? It makes perfect sense that if you’re going to carry a general-purpose knife you’d want something rugged that you don’t have to baby. Life goes on and needs change. My job no longer requires manual labor, and the cutting tasks I normally encounter are either opening Amazon packages or trimming an errant thread.

Enter knives of a bygone era that deserve more attention:

I’m talking about the gentleman’s pocket knife. If your dad didn’t carry one of these, your granddad almost certainly did. These are the smaller, slimmer 2-3 in bladed knives from Buck, Case, and Great Eastern Cutlery.

Most of the folks from Gen-Z forward will likely be most familiar with this knife format once I say “Swiss Army Knife”

These are far from tactical. You need both hands to open the knife, there’s no pocket clip, the blades are relatively thin, and the knife doesn’t lock open. But they carry a lot of advantages as well.

Firstly, one of the biggest benefits is the fact that they’re not tactical. Pulling out one of these in mixed company is more likely to spark a conversation than it is to make someone uncomfortable. And to those hard-charging warriors out there that think etiquette doesn’t matter, I’ll remind you that even the Samurai would remove their katana before entering someone’s home.

Another advantage is that these small-format slip joint knives are not only incredibly useful for most of our daily needs, but they also offer an opportunity for personal expression.

For most men, the accessories are pretty limited. Wallet, maybe a watch, possibly a lighter, and the ubiquitous pocket knife. There is a cornucopia of blade steels, profiles, scales, and liners to choose from. You see much more exotic materials like horn, bone, and various hardwoods.

While there are certainly artisans in both arenas, there seems to be a greater appreciation for craftsmanship when it comes to slip joint knives. Nowhere is this more evident than the fascination with the “Walk & Talk” of the blade (how solidly it locks and audibly clicks into its different open positions).

Now if your daily life requires that you’re carving through carpet, drywall, or metal than these definitely are not the right tool for the job. But for most of us weekend warriors who take time off from our office jobs to go to gun school, I think it’s definitely time to bring back the slip joint. In a world where so many consumer goods have become so homogenized, it’s worth injecting a little beauty into our day-to-day lives.

If you want to get more exposure to these gems I’d highly recommend checking out 3 Finger Mac on Facebook, even if it’s just to oggle some very classy knife porn.

The House May Vote on Assault Weapon Ban and Repeal of POLCIAA Today

By

Keith Finch

-

July 29, 2022

nancy-pelosi-march-31-2022 — Image via The Hill, Google.

The NSSF, FPC, and many more have been pushing citizen communication with the House of Representatives and urging all of us, as I am joining them now, into making certain our reps know one thing.

We.

Don’t.

Want.

This.

Law.

Period.

H.R. 1808, the 2022 Assault Weapon Ban may be taken up today under House rules to force the issue as it sits in the Union Calendar (the main location for pending legislation).

The committee testimony on this bill was laughable and full of the general lukewarm hot takes and blatant errors we have come to expect from anti-gun politicos who will just make it up if they don’t know it. The ‘Brace is a Bumpstock‘ from Rep. Cicilline has been made legend.

But because the House is pushing this, probably to place themselves better for midterm, we need to continue to push back.

Contact the House here and voice your opposition.

We need to stop the new AWB cold and retain the Protection in Lawful Commerce in Arms Act to continue to codify the protections granted other manufacturers on their goods to the firearm industry against liability for actions beyond their control. We are fighting people who will only continue to grant the barest possible lip service to ‘honoring’ the 2nd Amendment, these people do not acknowledge or accept it as an actual right and they do not care what the Constitution or the Supreme Court has to say on the issue. But they are your representatives which obligates them to take your contacts seriously.

Write them now.

Call them now.

Make certain you are on the record in opposition to this nonsense that isn’t even remotely understood by those championing its passage. They don’t care about you, your safety, or anything other than your vote for them if they can win it cheap.

Red Flag Laws Threaten Gun Culture

By

The Suited Shootist

-

July 29, 2022

pexels-sasith-mawananehewa-6173374 — Photo by Sasith Mawananehewa: https://www.pexels.com/photo/man-people-dark-face-6173374/

There has been a lot of discussion lately on Red Flag laws. Most of the conversation surrounding the support or opposition has been around the Constitutional Rights issues, but there’s another problematic implication to these laws that I find concerning as well.

People have rightfully expressed the fear that if these proposed laws go into effect, they can be weaponized against innocent gun owners, targeting them for harassment, doxing, or SWATing.

Think about the ramifications of that. If these laws go through, then the topic of guns will become even more taboo in mixed company than it already is, and have a serious cooling effect on gun culture at large.

If someone can be targeted merely for being a gun owner, how guarded do you think they’ll be with that information? Any attempts to normalize gun ownership or make it more accessible will be suppressed because people don’t want to risk drawing the ire of someone with an axe to grind.

Professor David Yamane has been doing excellent work exploring Gun Culture 2.0 and advancing the idea that “Guns are normal, and normal people own guns”. With as much of a subculture as the gun world already is, think about how much harder it’s going to be to gain new supporters if we’re driven underground and fear having any firearms-related discussions in mixed company, outside the safety of the range, or other 2A friendly settings.

The problems with Red Flag Laws are many and varied, but I feel I would be remiss if I didn’t address the social aspects of it since that’s been my primary focus so far.

When you hear the term “Second Amendment Ambassador” it usually conjures up the image of someone with a rifle slung across their back (or chest) wandering into a fast-casual dining establishment at the local strip mall, carrying their gun at people. The truth is that we are all 2A Ambassadors, and have the ability to make gun culture accessible and welcoming. At least for now.

If we suddenly have to concern ourselves with who is listening and how that information could be leveraged against us (even more than we do now) how eager do you think folks are going to be to share their passion and make themselves vulnerable to strangers?

We need to fight these Red Flag Laws tooth and nail not only to protect our constitutional rights but to ensure the longevity of Gun Culture as a whole.

The Greenwood Mall Shooting Shows Averages Don’t Matter

By

Travis Pike

-

July 28, 2022

The Greenwood Mall Shooting tragically ended the lives of three innocent people on July 17th, 2022. A gunman entered armed with two AR-15s and a handgun and fired 24 rounds before he was put down by a local armed civilian. The Good Samaritan, as he’s been called, is named Elisjsha Dicken. We don’t know a lot regarding the shooting, but we know it defies what most people proclaim to be the average.

What we do know is that the shooter left a bathroom and started shooting. Within 15 seconds, he was dead on the ground at the hands of an armed citizen. Initial reports stated that the concealed carrier, Elisjsha Dicken, was carrying a firearm illegally. This was determined not to be true. The Greenwood mall has a no guns policy, but breaking mall policy is not illegal.

We know that Elisjsha Dicken engaged the shooter at a rather long distance. According to police, he engaged at a range between 40 and 50 yards. For a handgun, that’s significant. He fired approximately ten rounds and killed the gunman. The concealed carrier’s weapon has been tentatively identified as a 9mm Glock, but beyond that, we have no other information. After taking the man down, he approached the downed shooter and ensured he stayed down.

We do know the concealed carrier has no military or police training. I bring that up because a rallying cry of most gun grabbers is that only police and military are trained and qualified enough to carry firearms.

The Greenwood Shooting – Averages Don’t Matter

The number of times I’ve seen someone throw out the old Rule of 3’s to justify training at seven yards is absurd. It’s often an older type of shooter stuck in a certain mindset. The rule of 3’s being: 3 shots, at 3 yards, in 3 seconds. To be fair, part of that rule has some merit and comes from the FBI Uniform Crime Reports.

The problem is that averages are a lie. If I have had five gunfights with three at three yards and two at 50 yards, then the average is 21.8 feet which aren’t close to either range you fought at. Second, the statistics only offer the range at which the officer was shot and killed, not where the gunfight started.

The three shots in three seconds seem to be pulled out of thin air, and I can’t seem to find any statistics to back those numbers up. The Greenwood mall shooting show they don’t matter anyway.

While training at close range with your EDC is important, it’s also important to step outside of your comfort zone. Work to a standard and increase your effective range. It cements my decision to carry an optic-equipped firearm even more and to train at various ranges to ensure I can protect myself, my family, and my community.

The Greenwood Drill

If you want to practice your long-range shooting abilities, try the Greenwood drill. You’ll need a target that represents the torso and head of a human, preferably the upper thoracic cavity where the heart and lungs sit. Set the target up, grab a timer and march back to 50 yards with at least ten rounds of ammo loaded in your carry gun. Holster and conceal the firearm.

Set your par time to 5 seconds. At the beep, draw and engage the target with two rounds. Step forward two yards and repeat the drill. By the time you fire the final two rounds, you’ll be at the forty-yard line.

Accuracy is more important than speed, and it’s better to land shots accurately than get a fast time but still aim to come in at under than seconds per run.

Stay Ready

It’s easy to get complacent, and I know I’m guilty of it. Sometimes it’s a lot easier to slip a .380 LCP in the pocket than a P320 on the hip. It’s also easy to get caught in a training loop of doing what you’re good at versus what you suck at. Break the complacency and take no effort in the averages.

An early version of this article used an image of firearms instructor Darryl Bolke. GAT Daily did not mean to imply that Bolke teaches in that manner. That image is one of him teaching a free course on accuracy and efficiency. We apologize to anyone who took this as as an aspersion at Bolke or his curriculum, which are top tier. He is a premier firearm’s instructor, and he can be found here. We have apologized to Darryl directly.

Carbine Drill: Fight to Your Feet

By

Anna Martinez

-

July 28, 2022

During a Green Ops Defensive Carbine Course a drill often drilled and taught by instructor Luke D was the “Fight to Your Feet Drill.” This drill trains the shooter on shooting while supine, sitting, kneeling, and then on their feet. It is a great drill to learn truly how to fight to your feet when in an engagement and there are some tips that will really help in each position.

The Drill

The drill is simple

Distance: As high as the berm will allow. It is best to verify that when in Supine the distance you put the shooters at they aren’t shooting over the berm. 25m and in..

Supine: 5 rounds move to..
Sitting: 5 rounds move to..
Kneeling: 5 rounds move to..
Standing: 5 rounds

In a practical sense, Tom Cruise showing us how to Fight to Your Feet in the Movie Collateral

The Positions and Tips

Supine

http://blog.olegvolk.net/2011/06/24/this-week-at-the-roman-encampment-the-legionnaires-trained-for-battle/

The big takeaway from this position was that sling work will help you A LOT. The stock won’t be in the shoulder as normal so there won’t be anything to help control that recoil. Keeping your sling on (not necklacing it) and tightening it while in the position will really help keep that gun stable during firing.

Also, watch those feet. If your legs are flat to the ground shooters have a tendency to poke their toes into the air which can be right in the way of the muzzle. Focus on flat feet to the ground while shooting. This goes for both Prone and Supine.

Sitting

Sitting is really dealers choice. Just get your back all the way up and start to shoulder the gun again. If you lean into the gun you won’t need to put elbow to your leg for support, however if you do just make sure it isn’t bone on bone and that your elbow is on the meaty portion of your propped up leg.

Kneeling

Going from sitting to kneeling should be a simple movement with no hands coming off the gun. To do this simply tuck whichever leg is comfortable for you, most do their strong side leg, under your butt and push up. If you cannot do this without using your hands take your support hand off the gun while being aware of your muzzle and use it to get into that kneeling position.

Sling work will also help in this position a lot. Keep it tight.

Standing

Going from kneeling to standing should be one movement without the use of hands as well. Again, if you can’t do this just watch the muzzle and use your support hand to get you up.

Overall, this is a great drill to work on “being athletic with a firearm”.

Is “Some Gun” Always “Better Than No Gun?”

By

The Suited Shootist

-

July 27, 2022

Whenever people start justifying their equipment selection for everyday carry, it’s not uncommon to hear the phrase “some gun is better than no gun”. Alternatively, you’ll hear “Rule 1” invoked. Not Cooper’s “Rule 1” mind you, but the first of the apocryphal “Rules of Gunfighting”: Carry a gun.

As with many quips and tropes it’s rooted in truth, but it’s become so overused as to dilute its original meaning.

Yes, it’s true you can’t get into a gunfight if you don’t have a gun. The best you can manage is to be on the receiving end of a shooting, which we can all agree is less than ideal.

The track record of Rangemaster alumni supports this idea. Tom Givens’ students that were involved in defensive encounters have never lost; there have unfortunately been several “forfeits” where the victim was unarmed at the time of their assault.

All of this certainly seems to reinforce the idea that some gun is better than no gun, doesn’t it? And yet, personally, I’m not a fan of the expression, and I think there are decidedly instances where no gun is better than some gun.

Now before you start breaking out the torches and pitchforks, let me explain what I mean.

The thought, expressed on its own without any explanation or context, can be highly detrimental to those folks new to a defensive-oriented lifestyle. It’s not a big leap from “some gun is better than no gun” to the talismanic thinking that the gun is the be-all, end-all solution. Once they’ve got the gun, then they’re suddenly protected.

Especially for novices who are still learning all the facets of victim selection, situational awareness, and so on, it can give a false sense of accomplishment, having the gun.

Let me use this analogy: Most drivers will be more cautious in heavy rain or icy conditions, expressly because they understand that they are at greater risk of crashing or losing control than on a dry sunny day. If someone thinks that the presence of a firearm somehow reduces their risk of violent assault, then they may not be as diligent with all the pre-assault variables.

I’ve said in the past that I think a lot of folks would be far better off with a can of OC (pepper spray) and a copy of Gavin de Becker’s The Gift of Fear, than a concealed carry pistol that they think is the magic wand that wards off evil. If they recognize that they’re less equipped, it’ll force them to pay more attention and exercise more caution.

Now don’t misconstrue this. I’m not suggesting that anyone be prohibited or discouraged from carrying a firearm if they so choose. Just that we need to be careful in the language we use to ensure that we’re setting the correct expectations, especially with the influx of new gun owners and gun carriers that aren’t already familiar with all the things we take for granted as obvious and par for the course.

New York Times Misses One Critical Fact in Their Critique of Greenwood

By

Keith Finch

-

July 26, 2022

Concealment Educational Meme, FromTheGunCounter

But Mr. Dicken’s act, though heroic, was also a statistical unicorn. An examination of 433 active shooter attacks in the United States between 2000 and 2021 showed that only 22 ended with a bystander shooting an attacker, according to data from the Advanced Law Enforcement Rapid Response Training Center at Texas State University. In 10 of those cases, the armed bystander was a security guard or off-duty law enforcement officer. In other encounters, civilians attempting to step in and stop an assailant were themselves shot to death by the police. – New York Times

Yes… and how many of those happened in “Gun Free Zones” where people were supposed to be disarmed, either by policy or force of law? That is part of your “statistical unicorn” too, NYT.

Allow me to answer that.

80% to 90%

Using the GunFacts.info MPS Database, which contains the 71 MPS (using the FBI definition) documented in the U.S. between 1988 and August 4, 2019, more than 85 percent of MPS have been perpetrated in gun-free zones. – USCCA

I know USCCA isn’t the most unbiased voice on this issue, so let’s look and see if there are factors in favor of Gun Free Zones.

We found no qualifying studies showing inconclusive evidence about gun-free zones. – RAND

There is debate over the extent to which perpetrators target gun-free zones. One analysis of 133 mass shooting events between 2009 and 2016 found that 10 percent of incidents occurred in designated gun-free zones (Everytown for Gun Safety Support Fund, 2017b). However, another analysis focused on mass public shootings between 1998 and 2018 and reported that 97.8 percent of incidents took place in gun-free zones (Crime Prevention Research Center, 2018a). While the discrepancy in these estimates is partially due to differences in how mass shootings are defined—the latter study restricts analysis to mass public shootings—there also appears to be some disagreement about how gun-free zones are classified. – RAND

So the study that restricted itself to public incidents, the thing that GFZ’s allegedly influence, found that 97.8% of incidents happened where the policy was in place to stop that from happening.

“It is exceedingly rare, the exception rather than the rule,” Adam Skaggs, chief counsel and policy director at the Giffords Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence, said of scenarios like the one in Indiana. “The reality is that more people carrying guns means more conflicts escalating into deadly violence and more people being shot and killed.”

That’s not born out in any statistical evidence, as states have gone to shall issue or constitutional carry. Restricted regions are not curbing violence, 88.8% of federal gun charges are against already prohibited persons. The prohibition fails overwhelmingly, but when we see prohibitions removed we don’t see crime spike. Conclusion, the criminals were always going to crime and the responsible people were always going to act responsibly. The rules about magazine capacity or Pistol Free Zones were a non-influential factor.

So let’s use those 433 events and take the 22 that were stopped out. Leaving us 411, 94.9% of incidents.

If we take the most optimistic number, that 80% happen in GFZ’s by policy or law, it means there was no legal or property permitted way to stop the shooter in 346 of those 411 incidents. The property prevented ‘good guys’ with guns from being on premises because any token ‘good guy’ chose to respect the property right, despite in increase in their risk.

If we take the CPRC number than it is highly likely that every single one of those incidents took place where protective carry was prohibited by law or by the property, making the only armed persons on premise those who ignored the law for good or ill. This greatly reduces the likelihood that a defender and an attacker will come into contact as defenders will, with much greater frequency, respect the property rights or gun free zone law. The attacker, for obvious reasons, does not give a damn. It works in their favor.

What I expect after Greenwood is that more concealed carriers will disregard posted GFZs, even legally penalizing ones, in favor of their safety since the majority of the places very poorly enforce the policy and provide no staffed means of safeguarding the visitors in place of allowing them to carry.

Contextualizing Military Experience in the Gun World

By

Travis Pike

-

July 26, 2022

The military is a huge, diverse organization that’s built around the conducting war. War is a complicated subject, but somewhere in there sits small arms and their contributions to combat. Although small arms are only a small part of modern warfare, they are extremely overrepresented in the general mindset of the civilian population and often in the minds of service members who think their military experience makes them small arms experts. The military even tells them they are and gives them a badge.

Today I want to contextualize military expertise and how it ties to civilian firearm ownership.

In the firearms world, veterans sit on two sides. Most tend to be pro-gun, but a sizeable chunk is anti-gun. Both sides use their military experience to pose as gun experts. We see a lot of people justify their opinions on gear, guns, and tactics with their military experience. There is an admin Marine on Twitter who tries to convince the world that the AR-15 is way too dangerous for the average gun owner.

So the question is, is the average veteran or servicemember a firearm expert?

Nope, not at all.

Military Expertise – Not All Experiences Are Equal

First, what makes someone a firearm expert? Tough to say because expertise is so spread out in the gun world. Let’s simplify it and just bring it to the world of modern firearms, gear, and tactics that apply to the civilian world. Most people in the military will have some degree of firearm experience.

To someone who has absolutely zero experience, a veteran’s military experience seems like it makes them an automatic expert. I hate to burst your bubble, but there are plenty of people in the military who know nothing about firearms in the grand scheme of things. They were handed a rifle and just followed step-by-step directions.

Combat arms are a very small part of our military force. In the Army, only 15% of troops are CA. When we dive in deeper, we see that an even smaller percentage are special operations, somewhere around 3% or so, and that likely includes support troops.

Of all of the military, only about 10% saw combat during the GWOT. Even that phrase can be contentious. Having mortars land 100s of yards away can be considered seeing combat or even being in a single small arms engagement. I’m not trying to downplay the danger involved in either event, but seeing any kind of combat doesn’t make you a small arms, gear, or tactics expert.

If someone has verifiably served in a special operations capacity, that person likely knows his guns and gear well, the ones they used, or at least more than your average person and average servicemember.

What Their Experience Means

Military experience varies greatly. If the service member didn’t serve in combat arms, they likely have extremely limited experience with firearms, tactics, and gear. It’s not their job, so they might qual once a year and might’ve done some training in boot camp. My wife was a medical officer in the Air Force. In her service, she received 0 firearm training and never even touched a firearm. Not her job.

The training combat arms troops receive does focus on individual skills. Marksmanship is important, as is the ability to reload, shoot under pressure, and even clear rooms. Most of their training is focused on working offensively within a squad and team. Some of those skills and tactics translate, but what civilian defensive shooting has a guy with a medium machine gun laying down cover fire?

I’m not trying to say our troops lack training, but their training isn’t always, or even mostly, relevant to civilian self-defense. Additionally, most soldiers and Marines are only exposed to what’s issued to them when it comes to gear. When I was in, I couldn’t afford an OWL or modlite. I wasn’t allowed to choose my plate carrier. I even caught hell for adding my own vertical grip to my issued M16A4.

Nothing in my infantry training made me an expert in firearms or defensive shooting. I became an expert in how to rock and roll with an M240. I was a pro at maneuvering on the enemy, and how to call for fire. Some of that M16 training certainly makes me comfy with an AR. It was the training I sought separate from the service that made me ready to deal with self-defense scenarios.

Military Experience and Firearms Training

Believe it or not, plenty of vets like guns. That leads them down the path to learning and shooting well beyond their in-service experience. If you look at most of the tactical trainers on the market, they likely have some military experience. Dudes who join the military tend to be dudes who like shooting guns. It’s not a big surprise to see the jump.

That military experience can be valuable, but if it’s the only experience someone has with guns, then they have a very limited scope of experience and training. It’s certainly not enough to make them qualified to be an expert on concealed carry, gear, or even modern rifle handling. The guy who touched his rifle four times his entire enlistment isn’t qualified to make sweeping gun control proclamations either.

Whenever someone uses their military experience to justify an opinion, it’s wise to contextualize that. If a grunt says I find PMAGs to be more reliable than XYZ mag, then he might know what he’s talking about. If that same grunt proclaims an IWB rig best and uses his military experience to back up his selection, well, he’s likely full of it.

Keep that in mind, and remember not all opinions are equal. Even when they are coming from the mouths of veterans, for not all veteran experience is created equal.

USPSA Club Level Matches As Experimental Labs

By

P.E. Fitch

-

July 26, 2022

Put Your Gear To The Test!

If you are fortunate to be conveniently located near any shooting range or venue that hosts Club Level 1 USPSA matches, attending them can be a very fun way to try out new gun and gear combinations and see how they pan out in place of going to more serious (read: more expensive and involved) specialized courses. (Courses are good too, FYI. But you get more out of them if your gear is ready right off the bat.)

Since USPSA has loosened its rules concerning AIWB (appendix inside the waistband) holsters, WMLs (weapon mounted lights), and magazine pouch placement on the body, among other things, it has never been more convenient to “play around” with guns and gear sets in a safer and controlled environment. Furthermore, most of the USPSA divisions cater to a wide variety of handguns, and there is always “Open” division for those that do not fit neatly into any other division.

Putting my Wilson Combat Beretta 92 Brigadier Tactical through its paces using a PHLSter Floodlight AIWB holster with a Surefire X-300U

Besides the typical gamut of tests and standards or drills, taking carry guns and gear to a match is part of my personal checklist to evaluate them. Again, this affords me a simple and direct way to put that gun/holster/etc through its paces. The different stages of a club match are not grueling evaluations where guns will be fired until their metal turns cherry red, or get run over by all 18 wheels from a big rig, after being set into concrete, while being dropped from a Huey. However, given the nature of USPSA stages where you need to shoot and manipulate the pistol efficiently while also moving and thinking with that gun in your hand under time pressure—this has a way of making issues, no matter how subtle or obvious, come up to the surface to reveal themselves.

By taking the guns I typically carry or want to carry to matches, so far I’ve learned:

• That the tritium lamp front sight on my Beretta Brigadier Tactical ought to be replaced with a front fiber optic sight.
• That I actually prefer a full size grip on a Beretta 92 as opposed to the Vertec style grip.
• That the stainless steel finish on my Beretta 92X Performance is not that stainless.
• That the half moon cut out at the bottom of the front strap on older Gen 5 Glock frames will impede mag reloads at inopportune moments.
• That having a super heavy gun to soak up recoil is not the edge I expected it to be and lighter guns are quicker to draw and move around with.

I found out this Beretta 92 mag has a spring that’s on its way out after picking it up when I was done with a stage. It has since been marked as a range mag only.

Besides having all of these observations and revelations about my gear, the urgency and stress imposed by the clock has definitely made a better shooter. Regardless of what they say about competition shooting, it really does fill in gaps and blanks that are not covered by formal square range instruction. And it really is a great way to gain confidence with your gear on the easy side.

Shooting a stock Glock 48 from concealment using a PHLster Enigma Express

Can you Suppress a Revolver?

By

Travis Pike

-

July 25, 2022

Who doesn’t love a good wheel gun? They might not be the most efficient firearms these days, but they are still a blast to shoot. Revolvers are interesting weapons, and due to their simple design, they are typically easily accessorized. Tossing optics and lights on a gun doesn’t create an issue, and theoretically, attaching a suppressor could be easy since the barrel doesn’t move. This leads us to a question, can you suppress a revolver?

Yes, you can suppress a revolver, but most revolvers cannot be silenced. That answer is about as clear as mud, so let’s explore the idea of trying to suppress a revolver. I’m using the term suppress in regards to attaching a suppressor or silencer.

The Main Problem With Trying To Suppress a Revolver

The big problem with suppressing a revolver is the gap between the cylinder and the bore. This gap allows burning gas to escape and blast outwards, which creates its own noise. That noise is just like the noise coming from the barrel’s end.

Tossing a supressor at the end of the barrel does nothing when you have that gas and explosion escaping from the space between the cylinder and the barrel. This eliminates about 99% of the revolvers out there. The solution is something known as a gas seal revolver.

Gas Seal Revolvers

A gas seal revolver is a weapon where the cylinder connects to the barrel and eliminates the space between the barrel and cylinder. There are several ways this works, and typically the cylinder moves slightly forward as the trigger is pulled.

The most popular variant of these guns is the famed Nagant revolver. This oddball Russian revolver uses an oddball round combined with a cylinder that seals between the barrel and eliminates the space. It’s famously one of the easiest revolvers to suppress. While the Nagant is the most famous, it’s far from the first.

Savage produced the Savage Navy revolver during the American Civil War era, and this featured a gas seal system. Of course, weapons weren’t suppressed these days, but the revolver is notable for the gas seal and numerous other odd innovations.

More Than One Way To Suppress a Revolver

The gas seal method is one way to suppress a revolver, but it’s not the only way. There were a few experiments in Vietnam to create a suppressed revolver for tunnel rats. This wasn’t to create a sneaky tunnel rat but to try and preserve their hearing in extremely close quarters. The result was not a revolver with a suppressor attached to the end but a suppressed cartridge.

This weird cartridge design used a captive piston that was held inside the cartridge. When fired, burning gun powder propelled the piston, propelling a small load of ‘shot.’ These loads were reportedly much quieter than a standard firearm.

This same captive piston design extended to a Russian revolver known as the OTs-38 Stetchkin. Although this variant fired a single .30 caliber projectile, the barrel aligns with the bottom cylinder much like the Chiappa Rhino.

The same piston technology would be seen in the Knight’s Silenced Revolver rifle, an experimental platform developed for special operations. Sadly, the revolver seemed to never leave the prototype stage.

Other solutions involve encapsulating the entire cylinder with a large suppressor system. This was the solution dreamed up for Germany’s SEK teams. The designer, Joe Peters, built a crazy suppressor design for S&W Model 625 revolvers that looked like it walked out of Star Wars.

What I’d Like to See

Yes, you can suppress a revolver, but it’s not always simple. I wouldn’t mind seeing a modern suppressed revolver. I’d love to see an integrally suppressed, gas-sealed .22LR revolver. It would probably be expensive and complicated but neat. Integral suppression allows for a short weapon with a long sight radius. The famed rimfire .22LR is easy to suppress, and the rimfire reliability would be less of a problem in a revolver.

It doesn’t seem like suppressed revolvers will ever be a mainstream concept. The best way to have one would be to buy a surplus Nagant, thread the barrel, and suppress it. Until S&W starts answering my emails, that’s about all we can hope for.

Warning Shots – Are They A Smart Move For Concealed Carry?

By

Travis Pike

-

July 25, 2022

The classic warning shot. It’s nothing new and has been around since we’ve had firearms to shoot. It’s a long-held naval tradition to fire a warning shot or shot across the bow to ensure compliance. Most of us aren’t naval ships enforcing tradition, so what does all this have to do with you?

Well, today, we are going to talk about firing warning shots and the tactical use of your loud noisemaker. A small-arms warning shot is a shot fired from a firearm to enforce compliance without the need for lethal force. We are primarily talking about concealed carry, and here’s the bottom line up front. Warning shots are a bad idea.

(U.S. Marine Corps photo by Cpl. Karis Mattingly)

I’m not saying they are all bad. I’m sure there is at least a single situation where the proper application of a loud noise can be used effectively. What I’m saying is that they are a stupid and risky idea in 99.99% of domestic situations. This is coming from someone who benefitted from warning shots. In Afghanistan, we used the occasional warning shot when we believed an unarmed male was spotting us during firefights. A wartime situation is a fair bit different than a concealed carry situation.

Be Wary of Warning Shots

There are both legal and tactical considerations when it comes down to warning shots. From a tactical and safety perspective, they seem like a very bad idea. In our wartime situation, we put those tactically applied warning shots into a proper backstop. Even in a gunfight, we had the time to take a well-aimed shot to ensure the projectile couldn’t harm another person unintentionally.

I don’t see that being all that possible in a concealed carry situation. In the time it takes a violent situation to occur, I don’t see how you’ll have the time to draw, find a proper backstop, and fire a warning shot. If you randomly fire a round into the air or ground, you are still creating a risk. Bullets travel a long way and can ricochet off the ground.

I’m not a lawyer by any means. That being said, firing a warning shot seems to be capable of putting you into a very precarious legal situation. The biggest threat is your shot harming an innocent person. The second being property damage, and the third being justifying that warning shot.

In most states, firing a firearm in a defensive situation is using deadly force, even if it’s a warning shot. That means you must already be justified in using deadly force to have ever fired the warning shot. Warning shots do not act like an in-between for non-lethal and deadly force.

If you are in a nonviolent, verbal argument don’t fire a warning shot. It will be considered the same level of force as trying to shoot someone. If someone is attacking you and you fire a warning shot, then it’s justified. It’s still likely not the best option for dealing with the threat however since if you are justified in the warning shot you are justified shooting the threat directly.

Too Many Downsides

There are too many downsides to the average concealed carrier firing a warning shot. If it’s at the point where lethal force is required, it’s required. By then, you probably need to shoot your attacker. I’m not one for absolutes. If I war-gamed, I could come up with a specific situation where it’s the smart thing to do. As a general rule, I put it up there with leg shots.

Sure, I might need to make a leg shot. I’m not considering that a valid tactic for 99% of engagements. In a situation where you need to stop a threat but for whatever reason you can’t shoot the threat, like, for example, maybe they have a baby strapped to the torso in a Baby Bjorn, you’d still likely be better served with a dedicated non-lethal or less-lethal tool like pepper spray than a warning shot.

On the other end of the spectrum, trying to use a warning shot to dissuade someone from non-violent behavior is likely illegal. Even if you believe that person might become violent. Until they actually do, you might find yourself in a legal area you don’t want to be in. A gun should never be used as the tool that falls between a shout and a shoot.

My advice is don’t have warning shots as part of your plan. Know your state and local laws, and as always, avoid stupid people, at stupid places, at stupid times.

A Svelte 15rds: Shield Arms Magazine Catch and Magazines for Slim Glocks

By

V. Caldwell

-

July 25, 2022

When it comes to personal defense my primary concern is accurate shot placement, control, and wound potential. Most of my personal defense firearms have an eight to fifteen round capacity. A compact handgun that holds ten rounds of 9mm Luger but has a small footprint and is easy to conceal is attractive.

The Glock 43 was a long waited slimline 9mm, Glock’s first. Glock more recently introduced the Glock 43X and Glock 48. Each features ten round magazines. This is possible as the 43X has a longer grip frame than the Glock 43. These are typical Glock magazines in design with a polymer shield covering a steel inner structure. The Glock 43 is a very reliable handgun. On that basis I am reluctant to modify the Glock or any other reliable handgun with aftermarket parts.

After a considerable test and evaluation I find the Shield Arms conversion magazines a viable upgrade for those wishing to have greater magazine capacity. Magazine capacity isn’t everything but in this case it seems well worthwhile to upgrade the pistol. Shieldarms.com

The Shield 15 round magazines are well designed and executed. The magazines are steel magazines with a modest base pad. These magazines are designed to hold fifteen rounds of 9mm Luger ammunition. This makes for a 50% greater reserve of ammunition. This capacity really adds up. A pistol and a spare magazine now means thirty rounds of ammunition rather than twenty. If two spares are carried the total load is forty five rounds rather than thirty.

This is a considerable boost in reserve. I don’t foresee needing that much ammunition but it is better to have it and not need it than the opposite, and I always carry a spare magazine. The Shield magazine fits the Glock 43X or the Glock 48 grip frame. Function is good. However Shield Arms recommends that the standard polymer magazine catch be replaced with a metal magazine catch. A steel magazine rubbing against a polymer magazine catch isn’t ideal. The magazine catch is properly designed and dimensioned and is a straight up drop in modification to the Glock 43X. By measurement the steel magazines are about .005 wider than Glock magazines.

To install the magazine catch first clear the pistol and be certain it isn’t loaded. Field strip the pistol normally. Lay the slide aside. Looking toward the magazine catch in the frame, looking from above, it is best to use a light.

There is a tensioned spring in the magazine well that holds the magazine catch and provides power for the magazine catch to return to position after pressing the magazine catch to release the magazine. A long hooked tool works well to move the spring aside. The spring is picked up and out of its notch in the magazine catch. Then you roll the catch out- or wriggle it out to one side. The Shield Arms magazine catch is aluminum rather than polymer. The fit is exact. The magazine catch easily fits into the Glock frame. Replacing the wire spring is simple enough however sometimes takes a bit of play to get the spring locked back in place. You may actually pull the wire spring out of place and later replace it. I think that with the small frame gun removing the spring is easiest. The new metal latch isn’t an extended type, all to the good when wearing a pistol concealed and close to the body. The Shield Arms magazine catch is well designed and positive in operation.

I had on hand several Shield Arms magazines. Some high capacity magazines are difficult to load to full capacity. It is good to have a strong spring but not good to have difficulty loading the last few rounds. All magazines were loaded without difficulty, just a firm push to finish up loading. I did find that when loaded to full capacity a firm slap is needed to fully seat them if the slide is at rest, not unusual.

My recommendation is to load the magazines to fifteen rounds and then lock the slide back before loading the pistol. Insert the magazine firmly home then drop the magazine. I loaded and unloaded the magazines in the pistol and found that all locked in place in a positive manner. Original Glock ten round magazines still function but require more effort to remove they do not drop free. This isn’t a important as the shooter will be deploying fifteen round steel magazines.

I have test fired the Shield Arms magazines with a variety of ammunition. I was careful to be certain the feed angle is still good for jacketed hollow point ammunition. It is important to be certain the magazines are firmly seated. I find the Shield Arms magazines and magazine catch reliable and a viable upgrade to the Glock 43 X pistol.