Ahmaud Arbery – Known, Unknown, and Thoughts

By

-

May 8, 2020

The video of the death of Ahmaud Arbery has sparked national interest in a way that only a story that has vigilantism, racial tensions, guns, law enforcement nepotism, and being in the southern United States could… seriously, it’s a perfect storm of controversy.

The narrative, depending on where you look, ranges from ‘Unarmed 25 year old black man, suspected of being inside a house under construction, pursued by former/retired LEO and his son in their pickup truck, confronted, a fight ensued, shot and killed.’ to ‘Jogging black 25 year old killed by white father and son caught on video.’

Also, depending upon where you look, the obvious overt racial aspect of this is played higher or lower in the motive que. I’ve heard and read all the explanations from either side of the story I could find. Read both 911 transcripts prior to the shooting. Read a story where a relative of Arbery was said to have ID’d him in surveillance video around the property under construction or maybe another property, it wasn’t clear. Been told that Arbery was in boots, not running shoes and shown grainy screen captures that purport to show an unlaced boot. Read that Arbery was a fitness type and ran regularly. Read a couple things that state Arbery had a record, but I haven’t seen it produced. Read that the local investigators marked this as a “clear case of self-defense” but that has since become highly questionable.

I’ve been told Arbery ‘shouldn’t have rushed two guys with guns’ from people who emphatically state that if two guys with guns corned them it would be game on because they, “always carry.” Having a conversation with someone who says they would take out two gun toters John Wick style after advocating Arbery “just comply” with the hostile commands of two gun toters (with no authority over him) is an interesting perspective…

The video, which gives us a 36 second window of information including the three fired shots, seems to indicate one thing above all else…

This was entirely avoidable.

As of this writing both Travis and Gregory McMichael have been arrested for murder and they, at best for themselves, must hope they have enough evidence to end up in a similar situation to George Zimmerman. Zimmerman, who shot and killed Trayvon Martin in self defense, was able to prove with witness testimony and injury reports that Martin had been trying to crack his skull open… This after Zimmerman chased Martin with no legal authority, other than being the neighborhood watch captain or some such, and provoked a confrontation.

Provoking.

A.

Confrontation.

Is.

Stupid.

The reason Zimmerman is a free man is that he was not the person to escalate the confrontation to lethal, and he could prove it. What he did was still stupid.

The McMichael’s are going to have a damn hard time framing this in the same light. Jumping into the bed of a pickup truck with a .357 and having your son chase the man, who you said you think you saw trespassing in a residential construction site, down with a shotgun riding shotgun is epic degrees more aggressive than Zimmerman’s actions were chasing Martin.

If you were in the situation, as a concealed carrier from Arbery’s perspective, and had drawn and shot the two armed men who chased you down in a pickup truck while you were on foot, your defense attorney would have an absolute field day getting you acquitted. Any attorney with a pulse would be able to articulate that Arbery’s life was in danger as two unknown armed men cut him off in a pickup truck and then the driver got out and threatened him with a shotgun.

The video doesn’t show the first fired shot, we hear it happen out of frame. But whatever happened in front of the McMichael’s truck caused a shot to be fired, the next we see is a physical struggle between Arbery and Travis McMichael over the shotgun. During that struggle two more shots are fired and Arbery is hit. Arbery then collapses in front of the McMichael’s truck in the road, where he would die.

Known

We know, from the video, the 911 transcripts, and the McMichael’s own admissions that a call was placed to 911 to report a trespass in a home construction site and alleged that the individual they currently saw, Arbery, had been seen on surveillance camera prior to this. We know that a second call was placed to 911 that said the individual, Arbery, was running down the road. During both calls the dispatcher attempts to ascertain what was observed that was criminal and is not really given an answer beyond the alleged observed trespass of the construction site.

We know that the McMichael’s decided to pursue the running individual, Arbery, to make a “citizen’s arrest” as they claim. They decided to do so armed overtly and openly. We know that they drove down Arbery and cut him off with their truck as he is running down the road at a pace consistent with exercise.

We know Travis McMichael, who was driving, got out of the truck with the shotgun. Travis McMichael can be seen on the driver’s side of the pickup as Arbery runs around the truck on the passenger side. The camera follows Arbery.

We know a shot was fired, out of camera frame, and that when Arbery and Travis McMichael come back into frame Travis and Arbery are struggling for the shotgun in front of the truck. It isn’t known if the first shot was fired at Arbery or if it was the result of the struggle over the shotgun. At the point where they both come back into frame they are struggling in front of the truck. Travis, out of frame, had to have moved in front of the truck while Arbery ran around the passenger side. Gregory McMichael was riding in the truck bed.

We do not see the specific circumstances that led to the first shot being fired. We don’t know if Travis fired in an attempt to make Arbery pause, to injure him, or in response to Arbery grabbing or attempting to grab the shotgun after they had both come around the front of the truck. We do not hear what, if any, words were exchanged during the confrontation. We do not know if the first shot was deliberate, accidental, or negligent.

We do know that of the string of burglaries alleged to have been motivation for this confrontational “citizen’s arrest” the one actually on record was the theft of a 9mm handgun from out of one of the McMichael’s unlocked vehicles and in front of their house.

We also know there is a history between Gregory McMichael and the local law community, as he is a retired investigator. We know two people recused themselves from the case due to prior connections to the McMichael family and after an information request by an Air Force MP acquaintance of Arbery led to questions about the investigation. This began the line of inquiry into whether or not Gregory McMichael’s prior connections as an investigator led to favoritism or other misconduct on the part of investigators so as not jail one of their own retirees and/or his son.

Unknown

We don’t know what Arbery was doing prior to the video, if he was trespassing or not. There might be evidence to that effect out there but I have not seen footage to indicate Arbery was caught anywhere else on camera as has been alleged. We also do not know if any property or any other evidence of any kind of misconduct on Arbery’s part has been presented in direct connection with this incident. I’ve seen a couple blurry screenshots that allege to show a hammer Arbery dropped while running in an attempt to call into question the ‘just jogging’ narrative.

[Newsflash: The ‘Just Jogging’ Narrative, doesn’t matter. Arbery could have left the construction site with a sawhorse over each shoulder and pushing a rolling tool chest full of power tools and the actions of the McMichaels would still be lining them up to catch their murder charges.]

We do not know what, if anything, was said between Arbery and the McMichaels.

We do not know the exact circumstances of the first shot fired. We do know the shooter, Travis, and his father have a vested interest in claiming self defense as the motive for the shot(s) that killed Arbery. If they cannot claim that then.. well, murder charges. Manslaughter if they’re lucky.

Thoughts

What a stupid and entirely avoidable way to end or ruin the lives of three people…

Didn’t we learn this lesson? Wasn’t this type of vigilantism proven to be roughly as intelligent as playing with a live high-voltage line while drenched in flammable liquids? Do we need to have a Paul Blart: Mall Cop remake where he actually makes a “citizen’s arrest” but ends up in prison because he misread a set of circumstances and assumed outcomes he couldn’t possibly know for certain?

It’s a sad state to have put yourselves in when your best outcome is a jury believing you were idiotic, overzealous, but sincerely altruistic vigilanties just trying to help their neighborhood

When you make something ‘your problem’ that didn’t need to be.. you inherit the whole damn mess. Every detail that you know and don’t know. And every mistake you make within that situation is yours to own, and yours only, because you stuck yourself into it.

Instead, always assume you don’t know what is going on and make all of your conscious decisions about cautiously becoming involved at all from that point of view. Your lawyer will thank you.

The thought process that would have changed this entire scenario, resulting in one less dead man, two less murder charges, and one less racially charged police scandal – “Huh, I think that man is trespassing on my neighbor’s housing construction. I will call the police and tell them I believe someone is trespassing on the construction project and give them his physical description. I might even call my neighbor and ask first, or wait until I see him next time and ask, instead of making dangerous and potentially life altering assumptions.” The End.

9-Hole and the Razor Gen III

By

Keith Finch

-

May 8, 2020

Mine hasn’t arrived yet… You can see my review of Steve’s here. In short, these things are awesome and still fall on the middle end of the price spectrum for high-end LPVO optics.

I just found out today I have a couple more SIG optics on the way, so I will keep you up to date on those. More than anything else though Josh and Henry’s footage shows off a lot of what the Razor has that I couldn’t show with a freehand phone camera.

The Razor Gen III cracked the code on a great many elusive features on LPVO optics. Front Focal Plane illumination was one. Battery life is another and I have a theory on how. The third ties into the other two. A reticle system that is useable without being in the way at high magnification setting.

So how did they do it?

THEORY: They used RDS lens coating as part of the etched reticle, which solved the three problems.

Problem One: Thick reticle on maximum zoom. An RDS coating is translucent, using it on the etched reticle you can see through it even if the reticle is overtop of the target. The target is visible through the reticle which is pretty much the ultimate way to solve this problem. We have a way to see past the reticle that does not rely on the reticle being thin (and therefore nearly useless at low power and hard to illuminate).

Problem Two: Illumination brightness. This was also a problem that has been solved in red dots by a combination of coated lenses and high efficiency LEDs. But unlike in an RDS, the whole lens in a magnified optic cannot be coated to catch the LED without significantly affecting light transmission. Each light transmission medium you add makes keeping a useable image that much harder to maintain and a magnified optic uses far more parts than a red dot sight that affect that image. Luckily we don’t need to the whole system to illuminate, we need the center reticle to illuminate. Using the dark translucent lens coating as the reticle itself is brilliant (see what I did there). It would be far too dark if it were the whole lens, but it isn’t the whole lens. The dark coating also takes advantage of reacting to the LED at much lower power settings than other illumination systems, just like current generation red dots, which brings us to problem three

Problem Three: Battery life. LPVOs are battery hogs on a level that even older EOTech models would look at with disdain, if they didn’t have the benefit of variable magnification. This was always due, especially in FFP reticle systems, to the LED having to burn absurdly bright against very small portions of a lens to produce a useable contrast. The reticle is an absurdly small portion of the overall lens surface area that needs to react to the LED while also not flooding the optical housing with extraneous light that will obscure the sight picture. It’s a delicate balance and the compromise, until now, has always been battery life gets sacrificed and/or the reticle illumination isn’t bright enough. Vortex seems to have solved both life and brightness by using the coating or whatever equivalent has produced the translucent reticle.

“Laws are only words on paper.”

By

Keith Finch

-

May 7, 2020

Wendy Cukier, a Ryerson University Professor and president for the Canadian Coalition for Gun Control has hit the nail on the head. She just doesn’t seem to realize it with her other statements.

“If you don’t have the resources and the knowledge to actually implement them, the won’t work, and we have seen evidence in recent years that the provisions that are in the law are simply not being applied.”

Wendy, you are soooo close! So close to that mental leap, that final step into understanding that law does not and cannot dictate behavior if someone does not voluntarily comply with its edicts and that enforcement of any law is a challenge that must be quantified in the law’s crafting. You’re so close to realizing that gun control doesn’t work on the threats you are trying to control… But you won’t get there.

Cukier praised Trudeau’s move to ban 1,500 firearms by name (including AR15.com) but said there were significant gaps and that there could be problems enforcing the law. Her solution to this sounds like making it even harder by giving Canadian Law Enforcement even more things to enforce unjustly on folks who haven’t harmed anyone.

Trudeau has stated Canadians have rightful need for things like hunting rifles and shotguns but not for weapons designed to kill as many people as possible in as short a time as possible. Mr. Trudeau, you clearly have a knowledge gap that you are quite likely to refuse to correct as you have clearly never heard of HME.

This is a fundamental and willful misunderstanding of technology and the purpose of a firearm. There is no “safe” rifle or shotgun to be shot with. There autoloading and ergonomic firearms developed in the past century plus, starting during the WWI era, are all about as bad to be shot with is anything else.

The myth of the “reloading bad guy” is just that, a myth. Ammunition capacity limitations have never curbed casualty counts, look at Virginia Tech and University of Texas, that has always been dictated by the actions and counteractions of those directly involved in the incident.

I get it. I understand. You see no need for arms in private hand and do not have enough personal, social, and technological awareness to understand the glaring problems in plans like this but you are willing to praise them as “steps in the right direction” because they include the buzzwords ban and assault weapon.

It doesn’t matter how this gets done, or doesn’t because it cannot be effectively enforced, it had the buzzwords so it must be good. Like the SAFE Act in NY. Buzzwords = Good! Actual logistical practicality or encroachment on the free exercise of your citizens? Meh, don’t look too hard at that.

“Laws are only words on paper.”

Yes! Exactly correct! But your direct follow up to that statement is ‘more law’ will get the thing we want done, less homicide. Gaps in enforcement are always part of law. Inefficiencies are always a part of law. The law already prohibits killing, now it prohibits some methods of killing and leaves others untouched. It shows a fundamental misunderstanding or a willful deception of the public trust in promising these measures will work when you’ve already said, “Law are only words on paper.”

Gun controllers continue to be blissfully ignorant well meaning folks, or deliberately deceitful to leverage power. I am convinced most folks fall into the first category. I don’t think we have a large crop of power grabbers right now, they are waiting for the well meaning morons to do the hard work for them with that genuine misguided altruistic fervor. Then they, those who will leverage the power advantages put into place by the well meaning morons, will just slide into place and have the additional advantage of not being the ones who established the policy, it is just so convenient that it is there.

The ones fighting hardest against us out front do not understand. The ones quietly supporting behind them, do.

The 2nd Rule of Gun Safety

By

Caleb Giddings

-

May 7, 2020

The 2nd Rule of Gun Safety is one we hear a lot: keep your finger off the trigger until your sights are on the target. It’s sometimes obnoxiously phrased by internet dorks as “keep your booger hook off the bang switch.” Regardless, it seems like the 2nd rule would be one we can say is a hard and fast rule, never to be broken.

Not so fast, chief. Like the first rule, the 2nd rule of gun safety is more like a guideline. It’s an opportunity to get you to think about how and why you interact with the trigger. Obviously, for new gun owners we can treat the 2nd rule like it’s a firm go/no-go. Don’t touch the trigger until you’re aimed in helps build good safety habits. But what if you’re not a new shooter?

Experienced competition and combat shooters often get on the trigger earlier during the draw. Once the gun’s muzzle is level they’re on the trigger starting to press it as the gun moves towards extension. This is part of a technique called the Press-Out Draw, where the majority of the slack is taken out of the trigger during its movement. The sights aren’t on the target, but we’re touching the trigger.

That’s the best example of touching the trigger without sights being on target. A thoughtful consideration of this leads us to a new interpretation of the 2nd Rule of Gun Safety: Don’t touch the trigger until you’ve made a conscious decision to shoot. This allows us to get on the trigger early during the press out, and it allows us to fire the gun with a gross aiming index instead of always having to have perfect height and perfect light sight pictures. Should we teach newbies strict trigger discipline? Of course. But the point of these articles is to get you thinking about the 4 Rules in a new way.

Tank Guns – The Bulge

By

Keith Finch

-

May 7, 2020

Among things I didn’t know but kind of suspected was, ‘what purpose does the funny bulge in tank barrels serve?’

I figured it had to do something with the gases during firing but I didn’t know if it was some sort of “accelerator” that created a back pressure the recoil system needed or if it wasn’t gas related at all and had something to do with barrel harmonics, ease of maintenance, or some other such item.

Turns out guess one, gas system, was right on the mark. But my meandering thoughts that it was an accelerator that helped the recoil mechanism in some way was far more complicated a thought than the actual purpose.

Bore Evacuator

Cool title. What does it do?

Creates a pocket of slightly lower pressure behind the gun’s round so that it pulls the gases out of the barrel instead of dumping them into the turret. I’m sure some of you reading this have been ‘gassed’ by rapid firing a rifle or machine gun where the air wasn’t taking the expelled gases away quick enough and you got a facefull, especially on a suppressed gun that doesn’t use a flow through system like an OSS. Now imagine that with a round the size of a tank and the chamber is in the enclosed with you just scant inches from the chamber…

Yep, lovely. So in turrets where the gas would harm personnel or machinery they add the bore evacuator which creates that slightly lower pressure behind the round and helps pull the gases out instead of having them linger in the barrel and clear equally at the muzzle and into the turret.

Guns like the M777 155mm field artillery piece have no need for it because they’re an open air system. The gases have plenty of space to vent and not choke their personnel. On mobile systems that don’t have them, the turrets are either unmanned or the pressure generated by the cannon doesn’t expel into the compartment in enough volume to matter. On any system that you can avoid using them, it is best to do so. Just like adding a suppressor to the end of a rifle barrel increases and alters maintenance requirements, adding a bore evacuator makes the gun barrels more complex and maintenance intensive.

And now that we’re down the tank rabbit hole.

Big thanks to Scottish Koala for producing content to entertain us while we’re still in quarantine and avoiding murder hornets.

The Pittsburg Preemption Battle Continues

By

Keith Finch

-

May 6, 2020

Gun Control Advocates are upset that a judge overturned the city of Pittsburgh’s rules they attempted to implement concerning the AR-15, carrying of firearms in certain public spaces, and Red Flag laws.

Attorneys for the city of Pittsburgh are asking a state court to overturn a judge’s order striking down firearm restrictions approved after a 2018 mass shooting at a synagogue.

The three ordinances were approved in April 2019 following the October 2018 mass shooting at Pittsburgh’s Tree of Life Synagogue that killed 11 worshippers. Gun rights advocates fought the ordinances, and a judge struck down the measures in October, saying Pennsylvania law forbids municipalities from regulating firearms and the ordinances were “void and unenforceable.”

This is what preemption laws are meant to do. They make it so a smaller municipal government cannot make a more restrictive rule than the state implements and you avoid a patchwork of confusing laws. Pennsylvania has 67 Counties, 56 cities, 958 boroughs, 93 first-class townships, 1,454 second-class townships, and one town (Bloomsburg) making for 2,629 municipalities or other sub-state level governmental divisions. Imagine if every one of them restricted the 2nd Amendment in a different manner, that just by leaving your township you became a felon, how fair is that to a citizen exercising a constitutionally enshrined right?

City lawyers argue in briefs filed late last week that neither lawmakers nor the state’s highest court had ever “expressly said or held that cities are completely powerless to act in this area.” They said local governments’ authority to regulate firearms to protect citizens “may be limited, but it is not extinguished.”

Ah, so it depends on what your definition of ‘is’ is. ‘Is’ the restriction or any restriction that Pittsburgh would try to enact in violation of the 2nd Amendment and the laws of Pennsylvania? Oh, almost certainly yes. And with the state having preemption in place, similar to my home state of Michigan, the smaller governmental units cannot slice and dice the state into patchwork legal pizza.

But that didn’t stop Pittsburgh from trying to ride the moral outrage train from the 2018 Tree of Life attack to do just that, even if none of the proposed laws could have altered the attack or the outcome. That seems to be the recurring theme. Tragedy occurs, implement rules that wouldn’t have prevented the tragedy but are in line with your political leanings and repeat on the next tragedy. Be certain to ignore objective analysis of the event that show the vulnerabilities of society to violent outliers no matter what is done in the legal realm.

Laws, ultimately, require voluntary compliance. People choose to obey them. The penalties are there as incentive to obey them. But every example of a mass casualty attack has come from a violent societal (not necessarily socially) outlier for which the penalty of breaking the law holds no sway. These outlier individuals, sometimes groups, will always exist and putting pressure, blame, and penalty on the much larger population as a whole won’t impede them. You cannot leverage someone with something they do not care about, including their freedom or survival.

The rules and societal directives put in place, especially for safety, need to have this rationale in mind during their crafting. Pittsburgh’s is pure political security theater.

A Glock for Many Games

By

Scott Smith

-

May 6, 2020

A few years ago Glock introduced the G41 MOS. This is their Gen4 frame with inserts to adapt the fit for professional basketball players. I found the standard frame fit me well, no slip on backstraps required.

You can see the barrel/slide length difference between a G21 and G41MOS. That extra 0.71″ gives you about 10fps more velocity, while the just over 2 ozs lighter weight of the G41MOS (from the port in the slide) reduces felt recoil.

I already owned a G21SF, so I didn’t really need another 45ACP Glock. What intrigued me about the 5” G41 was the MOS system that allows you to mount a mini-red dot (mrds) to the slide. Glock includes four plates that fit most popular mini red dots. It was good to see one of the plates fit a Burris Fast-Fire that I have used for a good many years. Adding a mrds to the G41 would allow me to use this pistol for Limited Class, Limited 10 and Carry Optics in USPSA as well as shoot CDP and Carry Optics in IDPA. One pistol with many uses, sounded like sound fiscal logic to me.

Trijicon’s fiber optic sights are clear and crisp. They deliver fast accurate shots. The TacRack, makes loading or clearing jams much easier under stress.

Before the G41 was ready for competition, it needed a few modifications. First I would stipple the grip for a better purchase on the pistol when it is wet. Next a Tac Rack would replace the striker cover. The Tac Rack is a low profile slide racker that makes clearing jams easier and racking the slide much easier with cold wet hands. Because this was a multi-use pistol I installed a set of Trijicon fiber optic sights for a G21 I had in the parts box. Lastly, I added an Overwatch Precision DAT Trigger. I did not want a “lighter” pull weight so I used the factory trigger spring. The DAT Trigger gives you a smooth flat trigger and a consistent trigger pull.

This is my lightly customized G41MOS with Tac Rack, DAT Trigger, Trijicon fiber optic sights. I leave the MRD plate mounted to switch between configurations. Some folks will bristle at my texturing, but it works well for me even in the wettest conditions.

With the enhancements made, I shot the G41 in several local USPSA and IDPA matches. Like all the Glocks I have owned, it ran flawlessly. In competition a reliable pistol that is modestly accurate, is far better than a tack driver that has feeding issues, but is a tack driver. Odds are you will not need a Bullseye accurate pistol in action pistol. You do however need a pistol that shoots every time.

OEM barrel top, LWD threaded barrel with dried purple LocTite..

Since the G41 could already be used for multiple divisions, I wondered is there a barrel/compensator system that could turn the G41 into an Open Class pistol. A quick serve of a few suppliers of Glock parts led me to Lone Wolf Distributors. LWD is virtually a one stop shop for all things Glock. A few emails and an AlphaWolf barrel with a three port AlphaWolf compensator were on the way.

LWD’s Alpha Wolf compensator tames hot loads like BHA’s +P 230 gr. JHPs. You can see how it mates with the slide contour.

Make sure you apply purple LocTite to the set screw or it will disappear and the comp will work itself loose.

Having used many other Lone Wolf Distributor’s parts for many years, I was not surprised the barrel fit perfectly and the compensator looked like a part of the slide. There was no binding or hesitation when the slide was racked. Once I lubricated the barrel/slide assembly it was smooth as ice going in and out of battery.

Before going any further, I will answer the question; why a 45 with a compensator? Don’t comps work best with fast high pressure calibers like 38 Super or 9X21? Yes they do. However back when I started shooting a cutting edge “open gun” was an iron sighted single stack 45 with a single or dual port comp. As little as I shoot in Open Class, this set-up would be just fine. It would also be fun to just plink with.

Prior to installing the barrel, I chamber checked several rounds of homemade reloads and every round dropped into the chamber. Hand feeding the same rounds yielded the same results, all cartridges fed perfectly. Those two tests are generally good signs that your ammunition will feed reliably.

Installing the Alpha Wolf barrel was as easy as field stripping the pistol. Drop the magazine, rack the slide to ensure the pistol is clear, drop the striker and slightly retract the slide. At this point use the locking lever above the trigger to unlock the slide and remove it. Now remove the recoil spring and barrel. At this point install the Alpha Wolf Barrel, recoils spring and put the assembly back on the frame.

Next install the compensator and set screw; I suggest using purple Loctite, 222MS. This way you will be able to return the G41 Race Glock to its original barrel configuration. During testing I found 222MS performed as advertised and kept the parts secure. One side note, the compensator is aluminum, do not over tighten it or you will strip the threads.

With the Alpha Wolf compensated barrel and FastFire MRD installed, you have an accurate reliable Race Glock.

The real test would be shooting the “race Glock” for accuracy and reliability. I gathered test ammunition from Black Hills, Federal, Hornady, Sig Sauer and reloads from my Lee Pro1000. Bullet weights ranged from 185 grain hollow points to 230 grain full metal jacket as well as some 230 grain +P hollow points. While I would primarily be testing the Alpha Wolf/ Burris set-up, I also wanted to see how much Point of Aim/Point of Impact variance there was between the compensated and non-compensated barrel.

The multi-purpose G41 in all configurations shot tight groups with very little POA/POI shift. This is the Carry Optics G41. The loose ammunition are loaded with bullets from Ibjiheads, they are some of the best coated bullets I have shot in 25+ years.

To test the function I loaded a couple of magazines with 200 grain semi-wadcutters and 230 grain round nose Ibejiheads. From previous experience I knew the stock G41 liked these loads and shoots them well. With the AlphaWolf system installed, the G41 was nearly a tack driver and there were no reliability issues. I also verified zero at 25 yards with the 200 grain loads because they are a happy medium between 185 and 230 grain options. During this initial testing I found there was minimal Point of Aim/Point of Impact shift between the Alpha Wolf and OEM barrel. If I were shooting bullseye, I would have spent time getting it dead on. At 25 yards, I was still hitting a 6” target every shot which is good enough for me.

When I sat down and bench rested the G41/Alpha Wolf with factory loads the first thing I noticed was the reduced muzzle rise. The compensator made the +P loads feel like a hot 40 S&W. When shooting the 185 grain loads recoil virtually disappeared, 230 grain loads felt like a “match load” 200 grain SWC. While it might seem like this is no big deal, but hundredths of seconds add up in USPSA matches.

Accuracy wise, the full race G41 shot amazingly well. At 25 yards all of the 5 shot groups were under 2 ½”. There was no preference of bullet weight, ojive design or manufacture. The Alpha Wolf barrel was just wicked accurate in the G41 with Burris Fast-Fire. For a shooter traveling around the country to shoot this is a big deal. This means if you run out of ammunition you should able to use most any duty or full metal jacket load and be on target.

With the rising cost of specialized pistols for action pistol shooting it is nice to see you can still put together an affordable, reliable and accurate pistol reasonably inexpensively. The base Glock 41 will set you back about $775, the LWD AlphaWolf Barrel/Comp $200ish and a Fast-Fire $150-175, roughly $1250; add another $100 for the OP DAT Trigger. Compare that to $4000 or more for a full house custom open pistol, this multiple use Glock is a deal. The pricing would be comparable if you decide to use other Glock models so you have the caliber of your choice. No matter what you choose you will be able to get out to the range to shoot fast, shoot accurately and have FUN.

3D Printed AK – Brandon vs Plastikov

By

Keith Finch

-

May 5, 2020

Brandon Herrara (aka AK Guy) takes on the 3D printed AK receiver project. Is a 3D printable AK rifle possible?

Kinda?

The video is another one where they deep dive into some of the engineering that goes into firearms that doesn’t always make it to the attention of the end user. Nor does it need to necessarily. But when you go from user to builder that engineering become critical need to know knowledge.

So… the Plastikov. An AK receiver group assembled from an online printable CAD file. The AK itself uses stamped steel and has heat treated parts for strength, elasticity, and overall durability. The plastics used in printing a receiver do not possess the same tolerance makeup that steel stampings do, it’s one of the reasons that most plastic AR receivers also failed. Plastic is neither aluminum, nor steel, and cannot be easily substituted as such for parts under operating stresses.

For ARs that usually manifested by the receiver snapping next to the buffer tube/receiver extension as the reciprocating mass of the carrier and buffer wore through the plastic until it snapped. For the AK… well, just watch.

In short, we can do a lot and I do mean A LOT of cool things with 3D printing. Prototyping is high on that list of achievable ends. But in the end when you pick a material based, at least partially, on its ability to withstand a certain level of stress it cannot easily be replaced unless the new material can take the stresses in the some way. The reason polymer receivers work in guns that were designed from the ground up with polymer parts in mind, like the G36 or the X95, is that the designs accounted for that material. The reason AKs and ARs have a hard time switching is because they accounted for the material.

Radically departing from a design is always going to run into its problems but that isn’t to say it is an unworthy goal. Finding new ways to do things is how we’ve gotten where we are and we need to keep trying them. But it will always be a trial and error process. Learning from those errors and finding weaknesses in designs is how better ones emerge.

The final point is material cost and effort. With material availability as it stands using wild methods to produce an item like an AK is often more expensive and time consuming than using far more readily available material.

SKS vs 9-Hole… plus Phuc Long.

By

Keith Finch

-

May 4, 2020

The SKS was the prepper carbine for decades. It, during the mil-surp years, was the budget friendly way to get into a “fighting” rifle. Yes, budget friendly compared to $200-$300 dollar AK rifles. You could leave a store with an SKS and a tin of ammo (but probably not the can opener) for under $200.

The SKS was the first non rimfire rifle I ever fired, probably about the age of seven. I missed mildly and immediately put it down. I don’t believe I’ve fired one since. Thanks to the practical and comedic machinations of Phuc Long, Josh, and Henry I can probably continue that streak as long as I wish.

The SKS is the semi-short lived middle child the Soviet Union spawned between the completion of WWII, where a variety of weapons were in use by the Red Army, and the AK47 beginning the era of the infantry assault rifle in full. The SKS, the Type 56, was one of a family of weapon based around the 7.62×39 intermediate cartridge.

One caliber, many weapon systems, simplified logistics.

We saw early iterations of this doctrinal thinking with the M1/M1 in US Service. The M1 Garand was the fighting rifle while the M1 carbine was the support soldier’s service weapon, or a specialized item for Airborne Paratroopers and similar mission profiles who need a way to bring as much rifle and ammo as lightly as possible.

This was taken a step further by the Comm-Bloc states and Chinese who went to one caliber for several platforms. Where the M1/M1 shared a caliber diameter (.30/7.62/.308) which did simplify logistics to a degree, the 7.62×39 gave a single round to produce and supply for all troops. AKs, RPD, and later RPK machine guns would be used by combat troops and SKS rifles could be supplied to support echelons if AKs where in short supply. Those rear working soldiers needed something simple and effective but not the select fire capable hi-cap AKs necessarily.

We are actually seeing a reemergence of this trend in both the Marine Corps’ M27 and the Army’s NGSW. Neither rifle is slated for full service adoption at this juncture, they are assigned to combined arms troops who require and can utilize the more capable systems. Logistically this also makes sense, especially in the Marine Corps case where M4’s and M16’s still use the common round.

I suspect that the Army, and the Marines, have a plan for a phased implementation of the NGSW service wide too, but the focus of the full technology systems and improvements is going to remain on the combat arms troops first. We are likely to see various components cannibalized, especially optics, by non-frontline forces to round out their rifles even as they get the opportunity to switch and 5.56 will remain for a decade at the least.

This is because a rifle phase-out does not happen overnight. As an example, the Army had largely gone to the M4 over the M16A2 for forward deploying forces by 2005 but M16’s were still in Reserve and National Guard armories until 2019 (and may still be in a few). Being purchased in lots of 100,000-120,000 and implementing the A1 upgrades, the M4/M4A1 has been in a fluid state.

The Marine Corps uses a mix of the M4 and M27 for its ~17,000-19,000 infantry personnel and has a plan to equip the full force with M27 IAR/SDO setups in the immediate future as purchases are completed from Trijicon and H&K. The Marines, being a smaller force, are able to implement changes quickly and with smaller purchase orders. An order of 120,000 units would equip 2/3 of the FMF while only covering about 10% of the combined US Army Personnel.

All that said tangent aside, the SKS holds an interesting niche in both military and civilian arms history… as well as being the unfortunate subject of memery and fuddsmithing galore.

RCMP still won’t release firearm models in N.S. rampage.

By

Keith Finch

-

May 4, 2020

rcmp — Image via Hallifax Today, RCMP conference announcing the Nova Scotia killings including the death of an RCMP officer.

“What I can say is that there was what could be considered a weapon that could be described that way,” Campbell said, adding that further ballistics testing was being conducted.

The confused mess that is the Canadian response to the Nova Scotia shooting continues apace. With the ban-by-decree of 1,500 firearms the powers on high assure the public that the two rifles recovered were both on the list. AR-15.com was on the list too. A website was listed as a firearm. That just fills me with confidence that all of these measures have been thoroughly researched…

Why should this matter in the US? Gun controllers like the action moms and Bloombergian mayoral minions want this to occur here.

Public Safety Minister Bill Blair tossed the buck back to the Royal Canadian Mounted Police so they could again use the ‘ongoing investigation’ line to not answer the question on what firearms were used or their sources if known. The claims that both, or one, or a few, or it depends on who is saying what noncommittal half response at the time, firearms are on the new ban list or were smuggled from the U.S. all seem to get rather fuzzy when we look at any other official statement.

From Campbell’s quote above it would seem only one of the firearms may have been banned, illegal, or modified in some manner. From Blair’s statement both had to be outlined in the new ban laid out by Trudeau… so which is it? This would be so easy to figure out if we just knew the models involved. But RCMP Superintendent Campbell and Public Safety Minister Blair are too busy pointing at each other to give information to be bothered with something so trivial.

They conveniently gloss over the fact that the offending denturist didn’t have a license to possess any firearm, making all of his actions with any firearm he owned illegal.

Now it’s extra extra extra illegal. Or will be. In two years. I’m sure they just needed that extra extra to make it all stick and now evil has been vanquished from the land, deprived of its tools of destruction.

Except fire… and the RCMP handgun that was stolen from the murdered officer. And… wait literally nothing Wortman did was remotely allowed. What will this ban accomplish for the next incident? More helpless Canadians who can’t do a legal thing to defend their lives when a man, ostensibly an RCMP officer by his dress, comes and shoots them or burns their homes down?

The Trudeau government response to this is to say that every Canadian gun owner is just a mass murderer who hasn’t yet. When you point out that this is essentially their response they deny it and cite their support for legitimate ‘sporting’ and *harrumph harrumph* but it amounts to nothing. The powers in charge are just speaking around the issue, ignoring inconvenient truths, and plowing ahead with the ban agenda they always wanted.

The RCMP will likely release the model data at a time when it won’t matter anymore, if we haven’t already passed that point. A juncture where even if someone wanted to go back and check the legality of any models in question if Wortman hadn’t already broken the law, the ban already essentially retconned the whole thing and is now the new normal.

There is still a lot of ‘grace period’ in this legal shift for Canadians for now, who knows if they’ll declare and emergency and shut down the time window. It will be interesting to see if civil noncompliance mirrors New Zealand. The biggest whole in the scheme is the one that everyone from annoyed civil persons to hardened organized criminals already exploit for every law they break, deliberate non-compliance.

So, will the RCMP hold onto this information until it no longer matters? Until it cannot be used to attack the gun ban scheme as ridiculous, even though Wortman’s lack of a PAL already makes it so? The upper echelons of the Trudeau administration already has a track record of pushing the inconvenient aside for expediency so… no bet.

And now a word from our Canadian

By

Keith Finch

-

May 2, 2020

justintrudeaubbc — Pictured, NOT our Canadian. Image of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau announcing the ban, via BBC.

“There is no such thing as innocence, only degrees of guilt”
-Warhammer 40,000
–Also, Justin Trudeau, more or less

As you may have heard, Prime Dictator Justin Trudeau just banned an enormous list of guns here in Canada. Toronto, and points east, elected the Liberals to a Minority government in 2019, and the former Chief of Police for Toronto was right there, banging the gun control drum.

Toronto has a guns and gangs problem. Not compared to, say, Chicago, Los Angeles, St. Louis, or any of those other notorious spots with inner city violence. Toronto is a city of 3 Million people, and in the last fifteen years, 2005 and 2018 were the only two years where they had more than 50 people killed by gunfire.

[Editor’s Note: For reference, Chicago beat that in April… just April]

Well! (Hear that in an ‘aghast, offended Oxford British’ accent for maximum effect) That simply won’t do.

Toronto’s stats are strange. For the ten years Bill Blair was their Chief, Toronto saw between 250 and 350 shootings, between 20 and 52 people killed. In the years since Blair retired, shootings went from 242 to 429 to 581 to 594 to 604. So yes, they are worse since he retired than they’ve ever been.

(Minor side rant about civil rights activists pushing back against proactive street checks by Toronto police deleted here by author. Google “Toronto Police Carding” for more.)

Clearly, the answer is to punish law-abiding Canadians for whatever went wrong after Blair left. (Hear that in Justin Trudeau’s smarmy, condescending tone for maximum effect, but make sure you insert half a dozen “ums” and “ahs” to get it right)

The latest tragedy the Liberals are going to wring for all its worth, is the scumbag who went on a rampage in rural Nova Scotia. (I firmly subscribe to the Some Asshole protocol, so I won’t be naming him here). In case your social-distancing includes not watching the news, like, ever, Some Asshole in a quiet, rural part of Canada’s Maritimes had a fight with his girlfriend at a beach party, attacked her, lit his house on fire, went back to the party, killed seven people there and shot a bunch more. He attacked more people, burned more homes, and evaded capture by using an imitation police car and imitation uniform. He shot one responding police officer, rammed Constable Heidi Stevenson, murdered her, took her weapons, and continued his rampage. Eventually, after a twelve hour shitshow of arson and murder, he was shot by an RCMP ERT member (SWAT).

Do you know what these firearms prohibitions the Prime Dictator has dictated would do to prevent such a massacre?

Sweet Fuck All. (Hear that in a ‘Fuck You Shoresey/Letterkenny’ accent, at maximum volume, for maximum effect)

People who go on murderous rampages, don’t care about licencing. They don’t care about storage laws, they don’t care about magazine capacities, they don’t care about classification and they don’t care about jail. We Know people who go on murderous rampages plan to die at the end. They are hateful, spiteful, and murderous, and they just want to set the new high score before getting zapped.

The Prime Dictator and his minions want to paint law-abiding Canadians with the same brush.

Canadian gun control means passing a safety course and a criminal background check to get your licence to purchase and own. Canadian gun control means Firearms Officers at CFP review every violent offense reported to the police to see whether the suspect is licenced, and suspending it until the allegations are resolved in court. Anathema to Americans, I know, but that’s how our system works.

Canadian gun control means, when Prime Dictator Trudeau says “there is no need in Canada for guns designed to kill the largest amount of people in the shortest amount of time”, you know he’s full of shit because we already have five-round rifle mag limits, machineguns and actual assault rifles are prohibited, and none of the murders in Toronto are being committed with rifles in the first place.

Canadian gun control means, when Prime Dictator Trudeau says, “you don’t need an AR-15 to bring down a deer”, you know he’s full of shit because AR-15s are Restricted and therefore cannot be used for hunting. (Not to mention, .223 is too puny a round for proper deer hunting anyways, which he would know if he’d ever hunted instead of being a part-time Point Grey Drama teacher with a trust fund and a penchant for playing dressup and blackface.)

Deputy Prime Dictator Chrystia Freeland said “This was one of our key planks in our election campaign, and we received a strong mandate from Canadians to act on gun control” at a time where the Liberal Party has minority status in Parliament. The Liberals lost their house majority status, so they have to work with their political opponents to get anything done, and that’s a terribly gauche thing for the Natural Ruling Party (their words, not fuckin’ mine) to have to do. Rather than pass legislation to criminalize a whole demographic of Canadians, they bypassed Parliament entirely, by just issuing an order. The order was not read in the house, voted upon, passed on to the Senate, reviewed, and then sent on to the Governor General to make it law. Not in the slightest. They just said, “Make it so” and so they did.

Prime Dictator Trudeau was famously asked in 2013 what other country he admired. The Dictator In Chief replied, “There’s a level of admiration I actually have for China because their basic dictatorship is allowing them to actually turn their economy around on a dime and say, ‘We need to go green … we need to start investing in solar.”

In this case, he’s dictating that peaceful, law-abiding Canadians will be criminalized for the sins of murderous assholes. Perhaps that Evil Twin goatee he’s sporting these days isn’t just a fashion statement, it’s a policy statement.

–Frozen Hoser

Man Attacks Cuban Embassy in D.C.

By

Keith Finch

-

May 1, 2020

A 42 year old man, currently a Texas resident, has been apprehended and charged with firing an AK rifle at the Cuban Embassy in Washington D.C.

Alexander Alazo is said to have fired about 30 rounds, a magazine, at the embassy at around 2am. The incident is being investigated as a hate crime, although it is unknown what type of hate crime. This may more accurately be terrorism by technicality if Alazo’s attack was directed at the Cuban government and was not racially motivated. The fact that the target was an embassy speaks to this being terrorism, not a hate crime.

Should it be punished? Yes. But we murky the waters with enough already to let this incident slip by mislabeled, if it is. Again, I say this looks politically motivated and if Alazo has any familial tie to Cuba it may well be. He also just might hate communists or the Castros and got it in his head to go do something stupid about it. He also might genuinely be a racist, but attacking an embassy is a strange manifestation of that when Caribbean Islanders and Hispanics can be found much closer to Texas than the Cuban Embassy in D.C. Or Florida, where he lived too.

This just smells like terrorism to me, an embassy is a representation of a foreign government. Poorly planned lone wolf terrorism, the equivalent of gangster style drive by on a house where you aren’t even sure who is home or what the objective of it really is so you’re just gonna dump the magazine at the place and drive on having delivered your ‘message’ of whatever it was.

Maybe Alazo will be forthcoming with a motive. If this was political that is more likely since the attack is then a statement of protest in some way.

UPDATE: BAN of 1,500 Firearms Effective Immediately…Canada to Ban 11 “Assault Firearms” by Name

By

Keith Finch

-

May 1, 2020

candianflag — Image via Google Search... couldn't see across Huron today so...

UPDATE:

Ontario, CANADA – Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau announced Friday that he was banning all “military-grade assault weapons” from his country.

“These weapons were designed for one purpose and one purpose only: to kill the largest number of people in the shortest amount of time. There is no use and no place for such weapons in Canada,” Trudeau announced, according to ABC News.

The Prime Minister said the ban went into effect right away and applied to 1,500 models of various guns.

“Effective immediately, it is no longer permitted to buy, sell, transport, import or use military-grade assault weapons in this country,” Trudeau said. –Defense Maven

But none of the firearms were acquired legally. None, according to latest reports. Every single thing the Nova Scotia assailant did was illegal already. Which makes this next bit from iPolitics Canada even more rich to read. Hold on, this piece of Mensa level observation is going to blow your minds.

The RCMP is still investing how the Nova Scotia shooter acquired the guns that he used, but had the pending amendments of Bill C-71 been in place AND he had applied for a PAL, a past assault charge would have been flagged and prevented him from being able to buy a gun legally. – iPolitics CA [emphasis added]

OMG! You mean if the RCMP obsessed lunatic who dressed up as an RCMP officer with a car to match, murdered a real RCMP officer and took her sidearm, illegally acquired all his weapons for this rampage and killing 13, and set fire to multiple structures burning another 9 people alive had instead followed the law and applied for a permit and this new rule had been in place from C-71 that he would have been denied the permit to purchase a gun!? And literally nothing else. Not jailed. Not charged with a crime. Just told he can’t buy a gun at the store.

I’m sure that means a whole hell of a lot to somebody somewhere.. but to anyone sitting here with a brain, the mental gymnastics on this particular stretch are just… impressive.

This is an earth shattering level of stupid on display. If Wortman had just followed the laws against not murdering people, C-71 wouldn’t even be necessary in the first place now would it?

Original Post Below

Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has announced plans to put forward a ban on several firearms he and his administration consider “assault firearms” and he is using the Nova Scotia massacre to help do it. This resumes a campaign promise he ran on.

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau says the government will share details within days of its plan to ban what it has been describing since the fall election as “assault-style” firearms. – GN Ca

Still no clear details on what firearms were actually used in Nova Scotia, it is known that the RCMP officer who was murdered had her sidearm and ammunition stolen and that nine of the twenty two victims were killed by arson, not gunfire. Reports I can currently find say that RCMP isn’t releasing details or that it was two “semi-auto rifles and two or ‘several’ handguns” during the 13 hours. The assailant, a middle aged denturist, had also gone to great lengths to impersonate and model his appearance as that of an RCMP officer.

Most recently, the gunman behind a horrific shooting spree in rural Nova Scotia used two semi-automatic rifles and several semi-automatic handguns.

And fire. Nearly half his victims were killed by fire. We must ban assault fire! Fire with dangerous features that allow it to kill so many people so quickly!

According to the linked CNN report Wortman, the killer/arsonist, may have illegally acquired firearms within the United States with one of them being described as “Military Style”, no word on whether that one or the stolen handgun from the murdered RCMP officer or any of the other non-military style firearms were responsible for the majority of the remaining 13 deaths. But I would be surprised if any other single source got to 9 like arson did.

Call me crazy, but I feel like a lot of that data matters if you’re basing a prohibition upon it. Was any firearm particularly deadlier than any other when wielded by a disguised unopposed lunatic? Especially in a society that opposes the notion of armed defense so much that it is an imprisonable offense if you use the wrong gun to save your life?

Some say the Prime Minister’s proposal has serious holes in it. It does, but we probably aren’t talking about the same thing..

A.J. Somerset, a former gunnery instructor with the Canadian Forces and gun policy expert, said he’s concerned the approach the government appears to be taking won’t be the most effective route.

Rather than adding certain types of guns to the list of banned firearms, Somerset says the government should amend the Firearms Act to prohibit guns based on their features — a move he says would prevent new models of guns similar to those banned from entering the market to take their place.

Elements are advocating for a New Zealand style ban on firearm types, not specific models that can be gotten around by name. This worked so well in New Zealand that they estimate about 56,000 guns (~30% of the estimated banned weapons in the country) were taken ‘off the streets’ and New Zealand is safe from all bad things ever. Unless someone hears about arson over there, I suppose.

“I don’t think it’s a very effective approach where if you contrast that with what’s been done in for example, in New Zealand. In New Zealand, they said any centrefire semiautomatic firearm with a detachable magazine will be banned,” he said.

“They made a very expansive definition. People might argue it was too expansive, but at least they defined the weapons to be banned in terms of their function rather than the approach that we’re taking, which is to ban specific guns.”

Somerset isn’t wrong there, for a rule to be effective at all it must have a definitive, clear, and enforceable context to work off of. What New Zealand won’t do is admit the total ineffectuality of the move because of the unenforceability of their design. Unless they are willing to conduct house to house confiscations, turn neighbor against neighbor, and risk all the hazards involved with that type of action, then there are still over 100,000 ‘assault firearms’ in New Zealand.

Imagine running a campaign and saying that you must eliminate venomous snakes, especially rattlesnakes and vipers, and you killed 56,000 snakes. You then declared your region safer from snakes because of your efforts, knowing full well 100,000 venomous snakes (at least) were still in the wild. Way. To. Go.

“But, Keith!,” you say. “That is no comparison at all! Snakes are a vibrant part of the ecosystem and have many positive benefits, you just have to be careful around them.”

Well if they can ignore every positive aspect of firearms ownership I can ignore every positive aspect of snakes.

New Zealand and anyone with similar legislation are relying on voluntary compliance, fractional voluntary compliance to be specific, to move the needle on their citizens safety. Maybe they can ask the criminals to just “take a break” too while they are at it.

Illinois Mandates Masks… But there is a problem

By

Keith Finch

-

May 1, 2020

Chicago Police Dept Barrier — Retro Style Photo Of A Police Riot Barrier In Chicago, Illinois

Illinois Governor Pritzker signed an order mandating residents wear masks in public to help combat COVID-19 infections. This, from a purely medical standpoint, is a prudent move to curb infections. If you aren’t infected with COVID-19 or another URI type illness a mask will only provide a mild increase in infection resistance. However if you are infected, even asymptomatically, the mask protects very well against transmission.

It was one of the reasons you would occasionally see someone wearing a mask prior to it becoming the most desirable fashion accessory of 2020. It drastically curbs transmission probability.

Mandating masks for everyone going out means everyone uninfected, infected asymptomatic, infected mild symptomatic, and anywhere in between will reduce transmission. It’s good advice in this regard.

The problem…

Carrying a firearm in public while wearing a mask is a felony.

All of the licensed concealed carriers in Illinois are effectively prohibited from carrying, starting today. It’s a no win scenario at the moment. Carry your firearm and skip the mask, risk citation penalty and possible confiscation of your firearm because you were violating the Governor’s order which could be viewed as committing a crime (or at the least a civil infraction) while in possession of a firearm. Illinois never errs on the side of its citizens’ firearm rights so.. Or wear the mask and be prevented from carrying your firearm, your lawful constitutional right, and risk increased vulnerability during a charged and chaotic period in our national history.

Be denied a right you already had to buy-back with a permit, because of a technicality in the law that would make you a felon instantly if you obeyed the order and exercised your licensed right under Illinois law. The final option is risk the felony charge to comply with the Governor’s order and protect yourself as is your right and license allows. It’s a defacto carry ban by mixing two rules.

It’s the same kind of crap that making it illegal to have a firearm store within X00ft of a school or place of worship is. After your officials carefully measured out the whole jurisdiction and there is no spot within the jurisdiction that is X00ft away from any of those prohibited proximity locations. Looking at you on this one Cook County (IIRC)…

In short, I smell a lawsuit FPC style.

Vortex Switchview Throw Lever: The Mistake You May be Making During Install

By

Anna Martinez

-

April 30, 2020

Vortex is known to make a durable product that works well and uses quality parts. Recently a post came up on the internet about someone who installed a Vortex Switchview Throw Lever. During installation the screw to close up the lever snapped in two. Of course, the customer immediately went to calling the product cheap. Also immediately, a Vortex employee commented that he would replace it. The employee didn’t ask for reasoning or explanation, just immediately went to helping that customer out. Kudos to that employee, because this certain kind of break is often a user error during install.

The Mistake

The user often tightens the screw too tightly thinking that they need to close the gap on the lever. This causes the screw to be over stressed and snap. Tighter is always better right?

Wrong. Overtorque is a thing, and easier than people think.

Proper Install

The proper way to install the lever is to first, use the right allen wrench. The lever comes with a 2mm wrench. Tighten the screw just until the lever no longer slips on the ring, then a bit tighter for security. THERE SHOULD BE A GAP LEFT.

Placement for Efficiency

There are a couple of things you want to think about when indexing the lever.

If running a bolt gun, ensure that on your optics full magnification, all the way to the right, the lever does not hinder running the bolt.

If wearing any sort of gear on your body and the rifle being slung, ensure that nothing is pushing the lever when slung tightly causing it to go to a different setting of magnification.

Many often index it on the 9 to 3 o clock. Some the 10-4 o clock. Lay or stand on your gun (however you run it) and do some dry firing and adjusting of the magnification. Operate the gun as you would normally and feel what’s right. Try every magnification setting, as some have issues reaching to push the lever to the lowest setting.

The Product Promise

Vortex throw levers are made in the great USA and are designed to break if too much force is applied, instead of your thousand dollar optic.

I have personally seen the testing and quality checks in house that go into checking EVERY piece of equipment. It is streamlined and literally every piece is inspected with care.

Vortex stands by their products and will replace items no questions asked. However, this does not mean you shouldn’t be taking care to install your products correctly.

So reach out to customer service. Companies like this deserve a good reputation. One “insignificant comment” can turn into a large group of people now having their mind set about a certain product. Especially if those people ignore the positive follow up.