I always like it when James gets to geek out on H&K Teutonic goodness and this time is no different.
H&K delved deep into the PDW, SMG, and PSD type weapons early and developed products and prototypes galore. They were largely victims of their own success with the MP5 though as in 2021 it it still considered the essential 9mm submachine gun, PCC, etc.
Sure, competition shooters will use a tricked out recoil comped AR of some sort but they have not penetrated the group consciousness of what a 9mm subgun should be. That remains the MP5’s domain. Even excellent modern takes like the Scorpion EVO and MPX aren’t taking over the place in gun culture’s mind.
Iconic is hard to beat. When the product still works so damn well it doubles down too.
[Ed: Tom Reynolds first published this piece in SCOPE-NY’s Frontlines September 8.]
Recently, there have been some interesting articles about our rights. A bit legalistic but still interesting thoughts.
One article asked why owning a firearm and healthcare are both being defined as “rights”? What if the traditional “right” to own a gun was changed and redefined in the same way as the new “right” to healthcare?
Healthcare as a “right” was a selling point for Obamacare, which mandated that everyone must have health insurance and if you can’t afford it the government will pay for it. If owning a gun is a “right” in the same way that the Left defined Obamacare, then the government should mandate that everyone has to have a gun and if you can’t afford one the government will pay for it. The right to keep and bear arms would mean that you have the right to have someone (the government) provide you with a firearm.
Let’s flip it and define the “right” to health care in the same way that the 2nd Amendment is traditionally defined. The 2nd Amendment traditionally means that you are allowed to own and carry any firearm you can legally acquire. You can buy one, receive it as a gift, or build one yourself. And once you acquire it, it is like any other property, it cannot be taken from you without the due process of law. (At least that’s how it is supposed to work, according to the Constitution.)
Applying this to Healthcare, it would mean that we have the right to see a doctor and pay for his services. It would give you the right to contract with anyone who might provide you with health care. Someone else might voluntarily pay for it out of charity or you might contract with an insurance company to pay for it. If you can obtain health care by any such legal means, government may not stop you or take it away from you.
A right means you have the freedom to act, not that anyone, particularly the government at the expense of taxpayers, will provide you with the means. Does the 1st Amendment right to free speech mean the government has to provide you with the means of speaking or writing?
Under either definition of a “right”, the Left loses the debate when both “rights” are defined in the same way. But consistency was never a goal of the left.
In another attack on 2A rights, some gun grabbing organizations are again trying to chip away at “Heller and McDonald” by trying to turn Constitutional Originalism back on itself. Originalism generally implies that the common meaning of words at the time of the Revolution is how the Constitution should be interpreted. The left argues that the “right to…bear arms” outside the home was only used in a military sense when the Constitution was written, therefore, only the military could “bear arms” outside the home. Civilians could “keep” arms in their homes but they could not “bear arms” outside the home. (I wonder what Daniel Boone would have said about that interpretation?)
The 2nd Amendment was definitely aimed at civilians having the right to “keep and bear arms”. Why would the founders have added a phrase that only applied to the military in the middle of an amendment that only applied to civilians? “Keep” and “bear” are only 2 words apart in one sentence. Is it likely that they would two opposite meanings?
Words could – and still do – have different common use meanings. Does a law forbidding carrying a firearm in a bank also prohibit carrying a firearm by a river? What prevents “bear arms” from applying to both the military and civilians?
One article argued that the primary responsibility of the federal government is to protect our liberty and our individual rights as guaranteed by our Constitution; its primary responsibility is NOT to keep us safe. The oath that Presidents and other government officials take would seem to give some support to that idea since the oath requires them to preserve and protect the Constitution and says nothing about keeping us safe.
Also, courts have ruled that police do not have an obligation to protect us. So, if the government’s job is to keep our rights safe, and not keep us safe, there is no basis for taking away our guns since to “keep and bear arms” is one of our rights that the government must protect.
However, the preamble to the Constitution says it was established to “provide for the common defence”, so there is a basis for saying that the Constitution is both to protect our rights and keep us safe. And on such questions, lawyers make a living.
Every. Single. Time. Someone buys a new gun, often their first gun, and then looks at the price of a box of defensive ammo. The next thing they do is run to whatever gun forum told them to buy said gun in the first place, and ask if FMJ is effective or if they could carry FMJ or Lead Round Nose (LRN) instead of JHP. Well today we’re going to specifically look at revolver ammo, and answer the burning question: is it okay to carry FMJ or LRN in my defensive ammo? Yes. That’s it. That’s the whole post. Well not actually, because you’d probably like to know WHY it’s okay, wouldn’t you? Great, let’s do this.
How handguns wound
Alright, now before we do this, we have to understand one important fact, and that namely is handgun wounding mechanics. Service caliber handguns calibers all wound the same way: they crush tissue. That’s it. A handgun, whether it’s a 357 Magnum, a 9mm, or a 45 ACP, can only damage tissue that the projectile physically touches on its way through the body. This was the whole reason hollowpoint ammo was invented – the increase the size of a handgun projectile so it would crush more stuff. Simple as that. There is no hydrostatic shock, there is no energy dump/transfer. When you’re looking at handgun ballistic tests the only part that matters is the permanent wound cavity, because that represents destroyed tissue.
Only hits matter
Great, now that we’ve got that sorted out, we can get into why, although not ideal, FMJ and LRN can be acceptable in a defensive revolver. Let’s start with sights. If your defensive revolver has fixed sights, you need to find the bullet grain weight that matches with your sights. This is job #1, because since we know that pistol bullets can only damage tissue they touch, we have to get good hits. Job #2 is that round has to be controllable, which is why so many revolver experts frequently recommend 148 grain full wadcutters for small frame revolvers. Remember, only hits count, and they need to be really good hits in order to count if you’re using a handgun. So if your choice is between a 130 grain +P+ JHP that has so much blast and recoil that you can’t control it out of your LCR, or a 130 grain FMJ that you can drop in the x-ring on command, the best choice is the FMJ.
Handgun history lesson
To help make sense of this, let’s go back in time to the period where revolvers dominated the landscape, 1860-1980. For over a hundred years we were shooting people with wheelguns, and most of the time we weren’t using expanding ammo. There are entire graveyards full of people that have been killed with lead round nose projectiles from 32s, 38s, 44s, and 45s in those time frames. But let’s focus in on one round that has been particularly maligned over the years, the 158 grain 38 Special LRN. A casual google search will unearth references to this round as “the Widowmaker”, not because it dropped badguys, but its reputation at the time was so bad that cops believed badguys would just keep coming if you shot them with it. But was the problem really the round, or was it a marksmanship issue? As it turns out, it was probably a marksmanship issue. Legendary cop Pat Rogers said of the 158 grain that it worked well when the shooter did their job, and in the time period that it was their standard issue round, none of the badguys LAPD shot with it magically came back to life. Sure, it sucked at defeating intermediate barriers like heavy gauge steel or car windshields, but that’s a problem all pure lead rounds have.
So, what conclusion can we draw from all of this? With a small compact revolver, the most important thing you can do is get a round that hits to the sights and is easy to shoot. If that means you’re packing LRN, FMJ, or a full wadcutter, so be it. As the revolver goes up in size and barrel length, you can start to use modern JHPs at high pressures to get the benefitof expansion, but remember: the most important thing to do with a wheelgun is get your hits.
Let’s begin this report with a little caveat – take the results with a grain of salt.
It is almost certain that the results will be similar in your shotgun as far as pattern size, in that each load will probably pattern at the tightest or the widest, as it did in our test. In other words the ranking will probably remain the same.
Buckshot loads should be chosen over lighter shot.
But the exact pattern size will differ. Shotguns are individuals. This means you must pattern your shotgun to have an understanding of the potential effect on target. Sometimes shotguns fire high or low. This is important for home defense and personal defense. The reason is that the shotgun isn’t really all encompassing at close range. The shotgun must be aimed as carefully as a rifle at close range.
This brought about some interesting thoughts on which load is best. First, forget the small shot. Birdshot is sometimes recommended for home defense. This is a bad error. Birdshot in gelatin testing varies from three to six inches penetration, with only a very few pellets making it to six inches. Birdshot may be stopped in heavy clothing or very light cover. It is designed to kill a small fowl weighing a few ounces. Buckshot is designed to take deer at moderate range, an animal about the size and weight of an average human male. Buckshot has greater recoil to contend with but the trade off is excellent wound potential. 18 to 22 inches penetration in gelatin is the norm.
For home defense #00 buckshot seems the best choice.
I tested a total of eight loads. That is a lot of shooting, a lot of recoil, and a few bruises. The test gun is a Remington 870 with 18.5 inch barrel, the archetypical ‘riot gun’ and a handy self defense shotgun. The loads were each fired for pattern at 10 yards. The goal was to determine which load may have the tightest average pattern.
This is important when overall use is concerned. If you fire at greater range, in the outdoors, protecting a camp or area, or taking out feral dogs or coyote, you want a tighter pattern. On the other hand for home defense inside the home load selection is much less important.
All of the full power buckshot loads are very effective. There is even some argument that the wider pattern is better. The thought runs this way – if you are using smaller shot such as #4 the pattern is much larger. But on the other hand the center of the pattern is pretty dense- say twelve of the twenty seven buck shot balls are pretty tight. This makes for an effective center. The pattern isn’t a spherical ball but more like a string flying through the air. The outlying buckshot then will snag a moving target or is more forgiving in getting some shots into the target. A small bird need only be hit by a few shots of birdshot. A man sized threat needs a full load of buckshot centered. Authorities such as Denny Hansen, former editor of SWAT magazine, recommend a cohesive pattern to long range. Hansen is a double Kevlar survivor and a very experienced individual. I agree with him and prefer a tighter pattern. Just the same a load of #4 or #1 at seven yards is predictably accurate.
Here are my results. Don’t forget that even though the small shot are buckshot they are not very large compared to double ought. Number four buck weights but 21 grains or less on average at .24 caliber. Double Ought is .34 caliber and 54 grains.
Loading Velocity Pattern, ten yards
Federal Flite Wad 1252 fps 4 x 3 inches
(9 pellets )
Remington Managed Recoil 1123 fps 2 x 2 inches
Remington #1 buckshot 1099 fps 9 x 8 inches
(12 pellets) A good compromise load.
Remington #4 buckshot 1160 fps 11 x 11 inches
(21 pellets)
Hornady Black 00 1260 fps 3 x 6 inches
(Eight pellets)
Hornady Critical Defense 1270 fps 4 x 4 inches
(Eight Pellets)
Sellier and Bellot 1090 fps 9 x 9 inches
(9 pellets)
Remington 00 Express 1280 fps 6.5 x 7 inches
(9 pellets)
Slugs
Shotgun range is neatly divided into three standard ranges of usefulness. The first range is the shorter range where the shotgun must be aimed as carefully as a rifle. The next range- ten to fifteen yards- is the range at which the natural handling of the shotgun and its pattern make hits on moving targets easier. The final range is the range at which the shotgun pattern is no longer effective.
This is 20 yards with most guns, a little longer with some. A full choke doesn’t always guarantee tighter patterns with buckshot. The choke may deform the buckshot and make the pattern larger! Shotguns are individuals. Longer range is solid shot or slug range. It should be noted that some professionals prefer slugs for all shotgun use. Slug accuracy should be tested. Most slugs fire high just above the simple front bead of the Remington. In general a slug will pattern five shots into four to six inches at a long 50 yards, plenty for emergency use. The slug is very effective against large targets. At the other end of the spectrum you have the Ithaca Deerslayer III, guaranteed to group five shots into four inches with slugs at 200 yards. Way beyond a home defense gun the Deerslayer III is an awesome hunting shotgun!
The following results were fired with an Ithaca Deerslayer. This is one of the earlier shotguns with a tight chamber but a smooth bore. The results are interesting to say the least. All are one ounce loads. That is a huge chunk of lead. The Ithaca features rifle sights but certainly an optical sight would increase accuracy potential.
Load Velocity 50 yard group
Federal TruBall 1344 fps 5 in.
Winchester 1356 fps 4.6 in.
Remington Slugger 1210 fps 3.6 in
Fiocchi Exacta reduced recoil 1100 fps 4.0in
Fiocchi Exacta 1312 fps 3.75in
Fiocchi Exacta 12s 1434 fps 3.5 in.
Which load do I recommend? For home defense the buckshot load with manageable recoil. A Magnum load is just too much for most of us, especially in a lightweight shotgun. The Remington Managed Recoil load looks very good. So does Hornady Critical Defense. For outdoors use or when you may need a long shot Federal Flite Wad looks very good. Familiarize yourself with slugs and keep them handy just in case. The shotgun is often under utilized today. It should not be. This is the most reliable shoulder fired stopper we have.
World War 2 changed general infantry tactics, especially in the field of infantry small arms. Vietnam changed the world of special operations and special operations weaponry. It’s an interesting parallel. We saw units like the SEALs, the Green Berets, and even Marine Recon made quite the splash against guerilla forces in Vietnam. Lots of specialized weapons were born, including many suppressed weapons. One of the most interesting was the Hush Puppy modification of the famed S&W 39 pistol.
The S&W 39 was put together initially due to Army interest in a smaller, lighter 9mm pistol. The Army ditched the 9mm pistol idea for the time being. S&W still charged full steam ahead with the model 39. The Model 39 provided an attractive platform for customization. The famed ASP pistol was a highly modified S&W 39, and the SEALs even used a custom model that accommodated a 14 round magazine.
Of course, today, we are talking about the Mk 22 Mod 0 variant, also named the Hush Puppy. Silencers became more mainstream during Vietnam, and the value of fighting guerillas with stealth rather than full-on force became an effective method for Spec-Ops teams. They often operated far from backup, and maintaining stealth allowed them to operate behind enemy lines without being immediately mercked.
The Need For Silence
Silence is golden, and brass kind of looks like gold. It was brass and the S&W 39 that members of the Navy Special Warfare Units saw potential in. These units could infiltrate deeply, commit recon, and eliminate high-value targets with relative impunity if they could do so quietly. Sometimes even the stealthiest of Secret Squirrels needed a backup plan.
The SEALs wanted a weapon that could quietly eliminate sentries, kill bad guys who got a little too close during recon, and something that could kill guard dogs quietly. If necessary, they could shoot and escape without worry about being followed or detected for quite some time.
Suppressed weapons were around. M14s and M21s had cans, as did M16s at the time. They worked, but they were still quite loud. When you break a gun down by its noisy points, you have three problems.
Fortunate Son intensifies
First, the noise at the muzzle as hot gas escapes the barrel, and we get a big bang. Second, we have the supersonic crack that rifle rounds at the time carried. Lastly, in semi-auto or automatic weapons, we have the loud clack of the action as it operates. The Hush Puppy aimed to solve all three of those problems.
The Hush Puppy Was Born
SEALs were already using the Model 39, and it proved to be an excellent pistol by all accounts. With a gun already in inventory, the Dwarven armorers at the Naval Ordnance Laboratory developed the S&W Model 39 into the Mk 22 Mod 0.
The newest pistol earned the Hush Puppy name because it was quiet, could eliminate dogs silently, and, well, it’s a catchy name that comes from an awesome southern fried snack. The Mk 22 Mod 0 utilized the double-stack magazine that SEALs were already using in their Model 39s. The barrel was extended by an inch and threaded to attach the Mark 3 suppressor.
As suppressors do, it blocked the sights, so they raised them and gave the Hush Puppy suppressor height sights. The little pistol could also mount a stock to increase accuracy. I could see why making sure your silent shot was an accurate one. The Hush Puppy also utilized 158-grain ammunition to ensure it would be subsonic and even more silent.
Finally, one of the defining features of the Hush Puppy was the slide lock. Users could manually lock the slide to keep it from cycling when the weapon fired. This prevented the noisy clack of the action from raming back and forth and creating excess noise at the cost of a very slow follow-up shot.
The Mk 22 Mod 0 addressed all of the issues with the noises weapons generate and produced a very effective little weapon. It was never a mass-produced tool but reportedly remained in armories until the famed HK MK 23 took its place in the 1990s.
The New Generation of the Hush Puppy
A small American company called Super Vel is aiming to bring the Hush Puppy back. They’ve produced suppressor-ready modern pistols, modern suppressors, and modern ammunition. Sadly, the NFA prevents stocked pistols from being a thing, but the Hush Puppy Project has seemingly produced the most modern variant possible.
The Hush Puppy Project has produced numerous variants. This includes a Glock 19 and Glock 43X option Each gun is outfitted with a slide lock device to reduce sound signature and optimize the suppressed experiment. Mix it with Super Vel’s own Hush Puppy ammo, and you might have one of the best options for factory-ready suppressed pistols.
The Hush Puppy is a unique part of American small arms history and is a fascinating part of weapon development. I’m glad someone has decided to bring it back and modernize it.
Today we’re taking a look at my current favorite carry gun, and one of the best small revolvers on the market. That’s right, this is the Ruger LCR 327 Federal Review.
Is it like other Ruger LCRs?
I have reviewed other Ruger LCRs before, notably the 3-inch 38 Special model, and I genuinely liked that gun as a defensive revolver. One of my knocks on the 38 Special and 357 Magnum models is a lack of capacity. When we’re in a world of 10 shot micro-compact 9mm pistols like the Glock 48, a five-shot revolver just doesn’t make sense (unless of course you understand the U-shaped utility curve). The Ruger LCR in 327 Federal Magnum solves that issue by changing the caliber from 38/357 down to a 32 cal, which allows enough extra room in the cylinder to squeeze one more round in there. Other than the caliber, the 327 Federal LCR shares all the other features of the LCR line-up: double-action onlyoperation, a good trigger, and decent fixed sights with a white front ramp.
Why 327 Federal Magnum?
The reason that 327 Federal Magnum is such an awesome chambering for a carry gun is two-fold, and interestingly has nothing to do with the 327 Federal Magnum cartridge. The first reason we’ve mentioned above: 6 shots. It may not seem like much, but it expands the “bad guy shootin’ capacity” of a small revolver by 20%. The second reason is that revolvers chambered in 327 Federal Magnum can also fire: 32 S&W, 32 S&W Long, and 32 HR Magnum. This is really important, because as it turns out, 327 Federal is kind of unpleasant to shoot. In order to accomplish its mission to replicate 357 Magnum ballistics in a compact package, most commercial 327 Fed Mag loads bring all the problems of 357 Magnumalong with them. Pronounced muzzle flash and blast make them difficult for shooters with limited skill or hand strength to master. But the second you ditch those 327 Federal Magnums in favor of a 32 Magnum, the Ruger LCR starts to shine. With 32 Magnum it’s easy to control, easy to get good hits on target, and dare I say the most pleasant little revolver to shoot. When tested alongside 38 Special defensive rounds, 32 Magnum performed just as well as 38 Special, and in some cases out-performed the “larger” cartridge. It’s the hidden gem of defensive revolver rounds.
Living with the LCR
To review the Ruger LCR in 327 Federal, I performed several important tests. First, I shot it a bunch with my carry ammo, the Federal 32 Magnum 85 grain JHP. I also shot it for accuracy with Fiocchi 32 S&W Wadcutters, and once I was satisfied it was accurate and reliable, I carried it. I carried it on walks, hikes, runs, to the park, while roughousing with my son, I carried it everywhere. And the absolute best thing about it is that I hardly noticed that I was carrying it. That’s reallywhat you want with a lightweight carry revolver like this – you want it to be unobtrusive, something that you can slip on/off like a Croc and go about your life. It doesn’t require me to make major adjustments to my life, to my clothes, or anything. It’s just there if you need it, with the minimal amount of fuss possible.
By now everyone knows what the LCR is about, and this one is the same. The trigger is good, the sights are usable, and the Hogue grip is comfortable for most shooters. I have done exactly zero modifications to my 327 Federal Magnum Ruger LCR, and for good reason. It doesn’t need them. Would it be nice if Crimson Trace still offere their compact green laser grip for this gun? Yes. But does it need it? No. It’s accurate, reliable, easy to shoot, and most importantly: it’s a 32. One more round!
Shotguns are not fickle creatures. Ever since the earliest shotguns, people had long figured out that a smooth pipe can handle a variety of shot sizes and shapes. Modern shotguns utilize a variety of different-sized shells to hold all that shot. The typical shell size sits between 2.75 inches to 3.5 inches. With that being said, short shells have gained some ground and popularity as of late. In fact, it seems like every time I see someone review a shotgun, the question gets asked.
“DoEs iT wOrK wItH sHoRtSHeLlS?” It’s become the “Does it take Glock mags?” of the shotgun world. As much I hate hearing people asking that and lacking common sense, I still think short shells are lots of fun. With that in mind, I’m going to break short shells down, explain where they are useful and where they fail.
What’s a Short Shell?
Short shell is a term that can apply to nearly any shell below 2.75 inches in length. I apply the term short shell to any 1.75-inch shell. 2.25-inch shells exist, but they barely qualify as short shells. 2.5-inch shells are not the subject of today’s article, and my analysis only covers 1.75-inch shells. The 2.25-inch shells work very well, cycle reliably in most repeaters, including semi-autos, and pack six pellets of 00 buckshot. They are a different subject for a different day.
What Types of Short Shells Exist?
Federal, Champion, and Aguila all make short shells, as do numerous smaller companies loading their own exotic ammunition. Most of my experience comes down to the Federal and Aguila loads. Within those three loads, we have the usual suspects, including buckshot, slugs, and birdshot.
Each company does it a bit differently. Federal does Number 8 birdshot, No. 4 Buckshot, and 1-ounce slugs. Aguila does a 7.5, 8, and 9 for birdshot loads, a mix of No. 4 and No. 1 buckshot loads, and ⅞ ounce slug.
Through shooting, I’ve found the Federal buckshot to pattern much more consistently and the Aguila to be all over the place. Both spread very wide, very quickly over short ranges. The Federal slugs were also much more accurate than the Aguila slugs.
Birdshot is birdshot, so I don’t have much to say about those loads. They both do what birdshot is supposed to do.
Are They Useful?
Useful is a relative term, and any kind of projectile can be useful. The first issue we have to address is reliability. These shells are too short to function reliably in most repeating shotguns. In Mossbergs, an adapter exists that’s called the Opsol 2.0, and it makes the short shells run perfectly in a Mossberg series pump-action firearm.
In semi-autos, they are a silly idea overall. The only semi-auto I know of that can handle these shells is the SRM 1228, and it can only fire mini shells. In single and double barrel guns, they shine. Obviously, they have zero reliability issues in shotguns that require the manual removal of ammunition.
Now that we know that they can suck in terms of reliability, let’s break down where they are and aren’t useful.
For Self-Defense? Ehh
I see short shells touted a lot on social media as being useful for home defense because they expand capacity. There is a lot wrong with that. What a shotgun does best is deliver a massive load of lead with each trigger pull. If you reduce that payload per shot, you are dismissing the purpose of a firearm for home defense.
If you want a higher capacity, may I suggest a rifle? A good rifle can hold 30 to 100 rounds and will perform admirably. Additionally, standard No. 4 buckshot often fails to penetrate with 2.75-inch loads, and I wouldn’t trust it for home defense over 00. Don’t forget that the spread is massive, even at ten yards.
The slugs over performance well beyond that of a 44 Magnum, and if I had to use mini shells for home defense, it would be slugs. However, if I wanted to fire one projectile per trigger pull, I’d point you back to the rifle.
Birdshot is for birds.
What About Hunting?
For anything larger than a squirrel? Probably not. Maybe slugs for deer or coyotes, but there are better slugs out there for deer and coyote hunting. The buckshot spreads too fast and too wide to be super useful for hunting.
I do like the birdshot for hunting small game. You don’t need a full 12 gauge game load to kill squirrels, and the reduced recoil and lightweight nature of short shells make them well suited for ground-based small game.
The Survival Shotgun
Ooh, I do think the really small size and lightweight of these shells make them perfect for a single barrel survival shotgun design. You can pack a lot of shells in very little room with very little weight penalty. In a survival scenario, I would use these slugs to take a deer, the buckshot for larger pest control, and the birdshot for small game, snakes, and the like. A small folding single barrel shotgun is perfect for a boat or brush plane gun.
Training Young Shooters
Here is where short shells shine. The low recoil nature makes them perfect for training new shooters with shotguns if smaller calibers aren’t available. Sadly, if it’s a repeating shotgun, you better stick to Mossbergs with an adapter.
Plinking With Unusual Shotguns
Do you know what’s fun to shoot? A Mossberg Shockwave. Even more fun than that is those silly PGO AOWs. They are fun to shoot, but even more, fun when no pain’s involved and recoil isn’t an issue. Loading up one of those small 12 gauges with mini shells makes them an absolute blast. Short shells rock in these guns and make them a fair bit more fun to shoot.
My Shorties
Short Shells are fun and show the versatility of shotguns in general. These little shells are fun but are largely a novelty. They aren’t superbly useful but have a place. Ultimately they are a fun option for plinking, and it’s fun to fit like 12 of them into a 590A1 and rapid-fire them with barely any recoil. It’s like a 22LR but with a 12 gauge. I would never suggest them for home defense or sport hunting, but for fun? Heck yea.
[Ed: New CDC Director, infectious disease specialist Rochelle Walensky, MD says “I’m not here about gun control. I’m here about preventing gun violence and gun death.” She wants gun owners to “Join us in the conversation. . . I want you to teach me what you have done to make your gun safe, and then I want you to teach everybody else.” However, none of the major gun rights organizations say they have heard from her. While Drs. Wheeler & Faria’s editorial in The Washington Examiner took her & the CDC to task, Dr. Schwam decided to take her up on her offer.]
.
Rochelle P. Walensky MD, MPH
Director, Center for Disease Control and Prevention
395 E Street, SW Suite 9100
Washington DC 20201
.
Dear Dr. Walensky,
My daughter, who doesn’t like guns, informed me that you wanted to hear from “Ordinary Gun Owners” as you formulate CDC policy. As one of the qualified, I’m writing you this letter.
To begin with, I’m a retired, senior Physician, who has been a gun owner for some seventy years. My first gun was a daisy air rifle which I acquired at the age of 10. In the years that followed WWII, almost every boy had one. All of us had watched fathers and older brothers called up to defend our nation. Therefore, good gun handling and fine marksmanship were skills we wanted to acquire. Along with most of my friends, I acquired a .22 rifle age 15 and a .38 caliber revolver at age 17. I needed no one’s approval for these acquisitions! Surely, you’d think, with such laxity, the firearms crime rate would go up. On the contrary, school shootings were completely unknown in the Los Angeles of those years. In fact, the high school I attended (Hollywood High), we had an indoor shooting range where students could be instructed in safe handling techniques and competitive shooting. Also, in a view area adjoining our auditorium, there was a display of U.S. infantry weapons to remind us carefree kids what it took to win the war and preserve our freedom. Because of my prior experience, when I was inducted into the army, I was able qualify as an “Expert” with all the basic infantry weapons. I served during the “Cold War”, which fortunately remained cold. Unlike others, I was never forced to test my skill. However, my generation was ready should the need have arisen. It was this early familiarity with guns that gave me a healthy respect for their power. Later in life, I would teach my son and grandchildren how to shoot, emphasizing safety first.
Here, I would like to emphasize a point. It’s familiarization, not alienation, that makes young people good stewards of firearms that they will own in the future. It’s education, not Hollywood fiction, which teaches teenagers the usefulness of and the destructive power of firearms. If I had to draw a parallel, I would point to the problem of teen age pregnancy. For years, the subject was treated with dire warnings and withheld information. However, fear did not, and does not, work. It was only sex education beginning in elementary school that drove down the numbers of this mostly undesirable condition. Similarly, I can think of no better way to instruct the youth in firearms safety than to introduce the subject early in the school curriculum. And here’s one area where you can make an ally of the NRA. They have a very good program to teach young children not to play with guns. It’s called Eddy the Eagle. Be sure to check it out.
In Addition, here are some other tips that will help you formulate good policy:
1. Do not make a rule that already exists but has been improperly enforced. Example: in both
the Lackland High School and the Texas Baptist Church shootings the attackers were not intercepted because agencies failed to enforce a law already in existence
2. Don’t try to dilute the second amendment. In foreign lands, defenseless people brutalized by terrorists only wish it applied to them.
3. Don’t think that firearm confiscation will lessen the murder rate. Mexico, which forbids all citizens (except police and military) from owning guns, has four times the murder rate of the United States. Their politicians and reporters, unable to protect themselves, are high on the hit list.
4. If you have not already done so, take a firearms instruction course yourself. To be taken seriously by gun owners, you must have some personal experience with weapons. If called upon, I can help you in this department. A brilliant move would be taking instruction from the NRA. You’ll gain their respect and open a fruitful dialogue.
5. Do something about inner city shootings. It makes no sense to mourn the shooting death of one individual and ignore the carnage that takes place every weekend in some of our most violent cities.
6. Don’t make things harder for the law-abiding gun owner. We are not the problem!
I hope that all of my suggestions will be useful to you. Please feel free to contact me if I can be any further assistance.
Sincerely,
.
Wallace J. Schwam MD
Pismo Beach, CA
.
.
— Wallace Schwam, MD is a retired internist with interests in geriatrics and pharmacology who trained at Duke University. He rated expert in marksmanship in the Army and continues to enjoy hunting and tactical training with handgun, rifle and shotgun.
Keith and Caleb try to decide what the dumbest caliber is and why they’d get rid of it. Keith predictably takes the rifle route, and Caleb goes completely off the rails and has some unhinged rant that involves the words “357”
SIG SAUER Introduces the Next Generation of Suppressor Technology with SLX and SLH Series of Suppressors
NEWINGTON, N.H., (September 17, 2021) – Born out of the current military requirements to deliver cutting-edge performance, SIG SAUER is proud to introduce the SLX and SLH series of suppressors. The advancement of the SLX and SLH series of suppressors was realized through the wholesale transition of the SIG SAUER product line to Direct Metal Laser Sintering (DMLS) resulting in the most innovative suppressor technology to date – the next generation of suppressors has arrived.
“The commercial launch of the SLX and SLH suppressors has been highly anticipated due to the fact that these are the suppressors we developed exclusively for our Next Generation Squad Weapons program submission,” said Tom Taylor, Chief Marketing Officer and Executive Vice President, Commercial Sales, SIG SAUER, Inc. “The DMLS manufacturing process of the SLX and SLH suppressors eliminates the drawbacks of welded baffles that historically presents design limitations for sound, flash, and the reduction of toxic fumes. Alternatively, the SLX and SLH suppressors are designed to not only withstand the rigors of the battlefield through its innovative monolithic design, but they are each optimized to dramatically reduce harmful toxic fumes and sound because of patented design features that can only be achieved through the non-traditional manufacturing processes.”
The SIG SAUER SLX Series of suppressors are designed to drastically reduce toxic fume inhalation by the end-user and sound reduction and are available for 5.56 or 7.62 NATO calibers. The SLX suppressors feature a monolithic core construction in Inconel, an internal multi-flow path to exhaust gases at a higher rate resulting in lower toxic fume inhalation, a sound reducing baffle design, a flash reducing end cap, and are available with either the new Clutch-Lock QD mounting system for easy install and removal that offers an intuitive tactile locking ring with infinite radial locking positions, or direct thread.
The SIG SAUER SLH Series of suppressors are designed to provide the highest degree of sound reduction in both supersonic and subsonic ammunitions and available for 7.62 NATO and 300BLK calibers. The SLH suppressors feature a monolithic core construction in either Inconel or Titanium, an internal multi-flow path to exhaust gases at a higher rate resulting in lower toxic fume inhalation, a sound reducing baffle design, a flash reducing end cap, and are available with either the new Clutch-Lock QD mounting system for easy install and removal that offers an intuitive tactile locking ring with infinite radial locking positions, or direct thread.
SLX Suppressor Specs:
Caliber(s): 5.56 or 7.62 NATO Finish: High Temp Cerakote Core Material: Inconel Diameter: 1.67in. Overall Length: 5.24in./7.49in. Weight: 8.8oz -19.4oz. Attachment Type: Clutch-Lock QD™ or Direct Thread
SLH Suppressor Specs:
Caliber(s): 7.62 NATO or 300BLK Finish: High Temp Cerakote Core Material: Inconel or Titanium Diameter: 1.67in. Overall Length: 5.24in./7.49in. Weight: 12.6oz – 19.4oz. Attachment Type: Clutch-Lock QD™ or Direct Thread
The SIG SAUER SLX and SLH Series Suppressors are now shipping and available for purchase at retail stores. For more information about the SIG SAUER SLX, and SLH Series Suppressors, or the full product line of SIG SAUER Suppressors including the MODX Series visit sigsauer.com.
About SIG SAUER, Inc. SIG SAUER, Inc. is a leading provider and manufacturer of firearms, electro-optics, ammunition, airguns, suppressors, and training. For over 250 years SIG SAUER, Inc. has evolved, and thrived, 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 elite firearms instruction and tactical training at the SIG SAUER Academy. Headquartered in Newington, New Hampshire, SIG SAUER has over 2,300 employees across nine locations. For more information about the company and product line visit: sigsauer.com.
[Ed: Dr. Mauser first published this at Ammoland August 31. Norming is a powerful tool used by anti-gun activists to change culture, leading to changes in politics and policy, just as dangerous to Americans as to Canadians.]
Canadians are involved in a culture war. Traditional Canadian values such as self-reliance, personal responsibility, and patriotism are under attack. One tactic our opponents use is “norming.”
Norming is part of a deliberate strategy designed to transform culture by changing society’s expectations about what is proper and what is expected.
Norming may sound like academic bafflegab, but it is a powerful tool when marshaled by the cultural elite, who dominate the mainstream media, the entertainment industry, Silicon Valley, the K-12 education establishment, and the universities. Hearing the same “progressive” values echoed in the media every day has power. Since the cultural elite reject traditional values, it is no accident that Canada has been transformed and will continue to be unless more people decide to stand up.
Generations of Canadians grew up with firearms. As recent as the early 1990s, surveys found around one-third of homes reporting they owned a firearm. Almost all gun owners report owning their guns for hunting or sport shooting. After decades of demonizing guns and gun owners, epitomized by firearms licensing and long-gun registration, firearms ownership has continuously declined.
Currently, just one-sixth of homes hold a licensed firearms owner. The actual numbers of firearms owners may be higher, but, given negative public norms, firearms owners are understandably discreet. Ownership numbers will continue to decline as firearms owners age out and are not replaced by younger hunters and sport shooters. In Canada, it’s often just too much trouble to go through the hoops of legal ownership for a sport that has been stigmatized.
Continued civilian ownership of weapons requires a strong personal self-defense norm, not a sport norm.
Yet the problem is that in Canada, self-defense has effectively been demonized by progressives.
Carrying a weapon for self-defense is illegal across the country – only handfuls of people are allowed to carry weapons (concealed or open) besides police. If guns can’t be used for protecting oneself or one’s family, why own it? It becomes an affectation, even a hindrance.
If ownership isn’t crucial and valued, it becomes easy for the government to disarm civilians by banning guns.
The Prime Minister considers it a vote-winning strategy to prohibit hundreds of thousands of “military-style” firearms held by responsible men and women. The progressive ‘norm’ of civilian disarmament surrounds Canadians and is undermining traditional rights and freedoms. Canadians have long owned firearms for hunting, sport shooting, pest control, and defending ourselves and our families, but the traditional values that support our lives have been steadily undermined by a decadent progressive culture that undermines self-reliance and honors victimhood.
Self-Defense
The outcome of this culture clash is still unknown as the new progressive norm will not allow for self-defense. Progressives prefer promises of government protection to personal responsibility. In contrast, all major world religions consider defense of oneself or one’s family against violent attack morally permissible, even obligatory.
Early in the 20th Century, when restrictive firearms laws were first introduced in both the UK and Canada, politicians felt it necessary to insist in Parliament that the laws would not interfere with the right to self-defense. Later, the politicians abandoned their promises.
In Canada, it is technically still legal to use deadly force in self-defense. However, the police and courts strongly discourage its use by setting a variety of legal and financial roadblocks making this option realistically out of reach for most people. Firearms become useless, even an encumbrance so that citizens are easily disarmed.
In jurisdictions that respect individual rights, authorities can often decide quite quickly if a case involves legitimate armed self-defense. If so, the firearm is quickly returned to the owner, who is not charged. This situation of uneven treatment of self-defenders by authorities is now occurring in various American jurisdictions governed by progressives, but in a more vicious manner that is creating backlash and organized resistance.
Self-defense and the Courts
In Canada, authorities push the new norm of passivity in the face of aggression. Individuals who use violent force to stop a criminal attack in Canada are arrested and charged with serious crimes, their firearms are confiscated and they are jailed. This may not cause problems for gangbangers, but it does for law-abiding citizens.
Frequently, law-abiding firearm owners face charges worse than those of the criminals who attacked them. An effective legal defense costs tens of thousands of dollars, takes multiple years, and very likely may not succeed.
The cases of Ian Thomson and Gerald Stanley illustrate the challenges faced by Canadians who legitimately use firearms to defend themselves or their families. After three men tried to burn down his home while he was inside it, Ian Thomson shot at them with a legally owned gun.
The government even charged him with “unsafe” storage because it was possible for him to retrieve his legally stored firearm in time to shoot at his attackers!
Thomson required more than 2-1/2 years to win his freedom. Similarly, with Gerald Stanley, who faced a murder charge in 2016 for defending himself against a carload of drunks. Stanley managed to convince the jury in 2018 that his gun went off ‘accidentally’ while attempting to discourage the aggressive drunks on his remote property. The government forced these law-abiding citizens to fight years of expensive court battles to finally vindicate their actions.
The Canadian Supreme Court is currently considering an interesting case of defensive gun use. Peter Khill shot and killed an intruder in self-defense in 2016. After he was found “not guilty,” his acquittal was overturned by the Ontario Court of Appeal after the government appealed the decision. In response, Mr. Khill appealed his case to the Supreme Court and it heard his case early in 2020. The court has reserved its decision.
The basic facts of the case are straightforward. Mr. Khill, was asleep at about 3:00 a.m. when he was awakened due to a loud banging. From the window, he could see his pickup truck parked in the driveway. Believing that somebody might be in the truck, Mr. Khill perceived a potential threat to himself and his wife and went outside with his loaded shotgun to investigate the noise.
Mr. Khill said in a loud voice, “Hey, hands up.” The intruder began to rise and turn toward Mr. Khill. As he turned, Mr. Khill fired a shot. He immediately racked the shotgun and fired a second shot. Both shots hit the intruder in the chest and he died almost immediately. Mr. Khill believed the intruder’s hand and arm movements indicated that he had a gun and was turning to shoot Mr. Khill. Mr. Khill believed that he had no choice but to shoot.
Now What?
Will the Court support defensive firearm use or will it conform to the progressive norm that discourages private firearm ownership and use? Will this be another step along the slippery slope to total firearms confiscation in Canada? Whatever the court decides, Canadians have long ago given up the fight. Firearms owners are a demonized minority opposed by the government and the elites. Over the past one hundred years, Canadians have gradually compromised away the right to defend themselves against violent attacks.
Americans have watched as the Canadians lost the battle. Canadians have been snookered with lies and deceit to abandon their rights. Do not compromise with the statists. Doing so means losing your freedom.
.
.
— Gary Mauser, PhD is professor emeritus in the Institute for Canadian Urban Research Studies and the Beedie School of Business, Simon Fraser University, British Columbia. He specializes in criminology and economics, has published extensively on firearms legislation, firearms and violence, and has provided expert testimony on criminal justice issues to the Canadian government.
NEW YORK, NEW YORK - SEPTEMBER 13: Grimes attends The 2021 Met Gala Celebrating In America: A Lexicon Of Fashion at Metropolitan Museum of Art on September 13, 2021 in New York City. (Photo by Theo Wargo/Getty Images)
“Grimes”, who I had no idea existed until this came across the gunternet for the random minor virtue signaling, was at Met Gala with a big shiny sword that was made from a ‘Melted Down Colt AR-15A3’. Because take your range weapons and turn them into melee ones… or something.
Grimes, since you probably don’t know either, is a Canadian musician/influencer of some manner. Cool.
Her outfit? Dune.
Not some metacommentary on violence and guns or anything like that (actually the opposite, Dune encompasses literal galactic jihad). The whole look wasn’t anything to do with gun control and the sword seems to have been an add-on afterthought and is simply a shiny accessory.
Frank Herbert’s, Dune. The book series, 1984 movie, Sci-Fi series, and soon to be released movie (that looks very well done).
As to the viability of melting down CMV steel, 7075-T6 aluminum, and… plastic? into a sword…
TL;DR – casting is a valid but very expensive and impractical way to get nice steel to start forging, but forging results in a stronger end-product anyway. So there’s no point to casting a sword blank, and you don’t even need cast steel as a starting ingredient to make a good sword, so why bother.
So, that’s not how a useable sword works.
As to making an AR-15, a useful modern firearm often used for home defense, hunting, recreation, and any number of useful things, into a sword with a questionable metallurgical makeup, really shiny, and that is vaguely 15th century because it’s kind of a cool prop? Your money, I suppose.
Ultimately, she just thought it was neat. I can respect that. I can think it is a ridiculous way to go about it and doesn’t really convey a clear message. I can believe it instead just turns a useful tool into a shiny prop, but okay. People buy weirder and more useless things.
So before the internet tries to make this a big deal. This was literally Grimes saying, ‘ooh, shiny’ and then a typical celebrity ‘Oh, a melted AR-15? Yay, peace.’ but the point was entirely on the fact it was shiny, put eyes on the Dune dress, and that was the goal. Influencer marketing, ladies and gentlemen.
NEWINGTON, N.H., (September 15, 2021) – SIG SAUER Academy, the leading provider of the highest quality firearms instruction and tactical training in the world, is pleased to announce the successful completion and results of the 2021 Adaptive Defensive Shooting Summit held at the SIG SAUER Academy in Epping, New Hampshire September 10-11.
The Adaptive Defensive Shooting Summit (ADSS) is an accessible shooting event for people with disabilities of all skill levels and knowledge of firearms. This is an IDPA style match featuring eight scenario-based stages testing all skill levels and disciplines, with 27 competitors that competed in a Carry-Optics or Stock Service Pistol Divisions. The results from the match are as follows:
Overall Match Champion: Greg Washburn Carry Optics Division: Greg Washburn Stock Service Pistol Division: Chris Fleming High-Lady: Brooke King
“The Adaptive Shooting Summit is a fantastic event that brings together industry manufacturers and organizations across the firearms industry to host the premier competition for competitive shooters with disabilities. The match continues to grow and has proved to be a success in attracting new shooters to the sport,” said Tom Taylor, Chief Marketing Officer and Executive Vice President, Commercial Sales, SIG SAUER, Inc. “This year’s competition was fierce, and the challenging course of
The 2021 Adaptive Shooting Summit was sponsored by: ANR Designs, Canik, Colt, Camp Freedom, GLOCK, Honored American Veterans Afield (H.A.V.A), Hunters Gold, ICARUS Precision, IDPA, The Independence Fund, Mossberg, Mobis Mobility, National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF), Ruger, SIG SAUER, SIG SAUER Academy, SIRT Next Level Training, Smith & Wesson, SCCY, and Tandemkross. fire tested the marksmanship skills of every competitor in low light, close quarter, and concealed carry scenarios, that was great to watch as they progressed from stage to stage. Congratulations to all the competitors and top finishers at this year’s match.”
About SIG SAUER, Inc. SIG SAUER, Inc. is a leading provider and manufacturer of firearms, electro-optics, ammunition, airguns, suppressors, and training. For over 250 years SIG SAUER, Inc. has evolved, and thrived, 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 elite firearms instruction and tactical training at the SIG SAUER Academy. Headquartered in Newington, New Hampshire, SIG SAUER has over 2,300 employees across nine locations. For more information about the company and product line visit: sigsauer.com.
A good sling goes a long way. I remember relying on my sling for a number of patrols, and it also kept my rifle tucked to my body when hitting the dirt. A good one just makes life better when it comes to wielding a long gun. We’ve written a lot about good slings, but today we are going to write all about how to optimize your sling experience with five simple things you can do today.
Get a Good Sling
What makes a good sling? Well, design is the first thing. Get a good two-point tactical sling from well-known manufacturers like Blue Force Gear, Magpul, Viking Tactics, Arbor Arms, and the other half dozen different options.
A well-made sling will last for decades. I have a Blue Force Gear Sling from 2011ish, and it’s still going strong. I personally use an Arbor Arms Dual Adjust Weapon Sling because I like the pull tab and overtighten cam combination.
At the least, you’ll want an adjustable two-point sling with a quick pull tab to make rapid adjustments. 3-Point and 1-Point slings have fallen out of favor for reasons. 3-Point slings are giant gangly messes that are a huge hassle to deal with.
Single points offer lots of mobility but very little support. If you really like a single point for those situations, check out the Magpul convertible sling. It’s a two-point that converts to a one point. Single points suck if you have to go hands-free to climb ladders, carry wounded, or just exist with a rifle banging into your nuts.
Size It Right
Sizing that nylon strap to work with both your body type and your rifle is the most obvious concern, but what about warming layers or plate carriers? Yep, you’ll need to factor those in as you adjust your sling to fit your body and your weapon. Different slings have different points of adjustment, so it’s tough to give universal instructions.
Another big reason I like the Arbor Arms Dual Adjust Weapon Sling is the rear LOP adjustment is quick and easy to change on the fly. This way, I can deal with plate carriers and layers on the fly.
When sizing a sling, ensure you have properly adjusted it to provide consistent performance between both the loose setting and the tight setting. When fully loose, you should have maximum mobility, and when tightened down, you’ll likely want it hands-free. Somewhere between the two, you should be able to use tension to help stabilize your shot.
Lockback Your Triglides
After adjusting or attaching the sling to your rifle, it’s time to lockback your triglides. When you run the tail through the triglide, it seems nice and tight, right? Well, you can secure them a fair bit more by taking the tail and going in one more time to finish locking down your triglide.
This adds another layer of security to your sling and will prevent it from slipping and sliding. There is no chance for it to get stuck or caught on your gear and become slowly loosened over time. Locking back costs zero dollars and takes roughly 15 seconds to do if you spend ten seconds opening a beer and munching on a taco.
Attach the Rear Point at the Dominant Side
When you begin to attach your slings, the nondominant side will sit against your body. It feels natural to attach the rear point of the sling to the nondominant side of the sling. However, if you go over the top of the stock and attach the sling to the dominant side, you’ll open up your mobility.
Doing so will provide you a little slack that allows you to easily switch shoulders when necessary. Attaching your rear sling point to the nondominant side means you’ll need to unsling or have your neck jerked at when you try to switch shoulders.
As a righty, I attach the front point to the left side of the gun and then attach the rear sling point to the dominant side. I use a BCM stock with multiple QD points to accomplish my goal. QD points are the easiest for me, but you can also wrap the sling through webbing slots as well.
Clean the Dang Thing
I cleaned a lot of things in the Marine Corps. I pressured washed 50 caliber machine guns, scrubbed M16s until the finish wore off, and scrubbed Humvees I’d never ever seen used before. Sadly, I never cleaned my sling, I took off, tossed it in my locker, and that was it.
If I had been smart enough to clean it, I could’ve avoided that annoying period where it got stiff. Slings that get exposed to water, dirt, and dust will often harden over time. They are still useable but will be harder to adjust, hard to use the pull tab for rapid adjustments, and generally be less useable.
Spraying them with a little water and giving them a soak and a scrub can help prevent the dreaded stiff sling from setting in.
Sling It Up
We all love our slings. If you don’t love a sling, you’ve never patrolled until your legs wanted to fall off. A good one goes a long way, and we often depend on slings for support and weapon retention. If you can optimize your experience, then why not? Hopefully, the five tips above will help optimize that experience.
