Brownell’s has relaunched the AR-180 with the much lauded BRN-180 line of products. But where did this niche Armalite originate?
Initially launched as complete uppers that would fit on AR-15 standard lowers, the line expanded to include AR-180 “inspired” lower receivers too.
Image via Brownells
These are AR-18/AR-180 receivers cosmetically only. The stamped metal of the inexpensive Armalite ventures have been replaced with forged or billet aluminum that take advantage of a myriad of modern products like those of the Sig Sauer MCX, the folding adapters for stocks being the most obvious additions.
The lowers themselves use AR-15 internal and fire control groups for ease of access but the aesthetic is maintained, and let’s all be honest… It’s the aesthetic and the gas piston system that we like, we couldn’t care less about it being a stamped lower.
I would love to see Brownell’s put a few of these together as machine guns with SSF triggers but maybe that’s just me.
Now, if you’re sitting there saying to yourself, “That sure does look like an MCX or a…” you’re probably right. It’s one of those situations where there is nothing ‘new’ in the gun industry, just certain things done better.
Most short-stroke piston, multi-lug rotating bolt rifles in service today have features that relate back to the AR-18/AR-180 because, while the rifle itself never picked up in popularity, design elements of it certainly did.
Operating group parts all in the receiver? Folding stocks? Short-stroke adjustable gas piston? It’s describing a standard suite of modern service rifle features, and nearly every one that isn’t an AR-15 or AK is an AR-18 derivative.
Ian goes over many of them in the video, as well as who built the AR-18/180 and during which time period. All fun and games as I watch a school bus get hauled out of a ditch through my window.
HB 961, one of the most ambitious gun control efforts we have seen, has passed the Commonwealth of Virginia’s House to be sent to the Senate. Despite vocal and vehement opposition, like the sanctuary movement, it is now one step closer to the Governor’s desk where Northram will almost certainly sign it…
The bill further states that any person who legally owns an assault firearm on July 1, 2020, may retain possession of such assault firearm after January 1, 2021, if such person has obtained a permit from the Department of State Police to possess an assault firearm in accordance with procedures established in the bill. A person issued such permit may possess an assault firearm only under the following conditions: (a) while in his home or on his property or while on the property of another who has provided prior permission, provided that the person has the landowner’s written permission on his person while on such property; (b) while at a shooting range, shooting gallery, or other area designated for the purpose of target shooting or the target range of a public or private club or organization whose members have organized for the purpose of practicing shooting targets or competing in target shooting matches; (c) while engaged in lawful hunting; or (d) while surrendering the assault firearm to a state or local law-enforcement agency. A person issued such permit may also transport an assault firearm between any of those locations, provided that such assault firearm is unloaded and secured within a closed container while being transported. The bill also provides that failure to display the permit and a photo identification upon demand by a law-enforcement officer shall be punishable by a $25 civil penalty, which shall be paid into the state treasury. The bill also requires the Department of State Police to enter the name and description of a person issued a permit in the Virginia Criminal Information Network (VCIN) so that the permit’s existence and current status will be made known to the law-enforcement personnel accessing VCIN for investigative purposes.
“Assault firearm” means: 1. A semi-automatic center-fire rifle that expels single or multiple projectiles by action of an explosion of a combustible material with a fixed magazine capacity in excess of 10 rounds;
2. A semi-automatic center-fire rifle that expels single or multiple projectiles by action of an explosion of a combustible material that has the ability to accept a detachable magazine and has one of the following characteristics: (i) a folding or telescoping stock; (ii) a pistol grip that protrudes conspicuously beneath the action of the rifle; (iii) a thumbhole stock; (iv) a second handgrip or a protruding grip that can be held by the non-trigger hand; (v) a bayonet mount; (vi) a grenade launcher; (vii) a flare launcher; (viii) a silencer; (ix) a flash suppressor; (x) a muzzle brake; (xi) a muzzle compensator; (xii) a threaded barrel capable of accepting (a) a silencer, (b) a flash suppressor, (c) a muzzle brake, or (d) a muzzle compensator; or (xiii) any characteristic of like kind as enumerated in clauses (i) through (xii);
3. A semi-automatic center-fire pistol that expels single or multiple projectiles by action of an explosion of a combustible material with a fixed magazine capacity in excess of 10 rounds;
4. A semi-automatic center-fire pistol that expels single or multiple projectiles by action of an explosion of a combustible material that has the ability to accept a detachable magazine and has one of the following characteristics: (i) a folding or telescoping stock; (ii) a thumbhole stock; (iii) a second handgrip or a protruding grip that can be held by the non-trigger hand; (iv) the capacity to accept a magazine that attaches to the pistol outside of the pistol grip; (v) a shroud that is attached to, or partially or completely encircles, the barrel and that permits the shooter to hold the pistol with the non-trigger hand without being burned; (vi) a manufactured weight of 50 ounces or more when the pistol is unloaded; (vii) a threaded barrel capable of accepting (a) a silencer, (b) a flash suppressor, (c) a barrel extender, or (d) a forward handgrip; or (viii) any characteristic of like kind as enumerated in clauses (i) through (vii);
5. A shotgun with a revolving cylinder that expels single or multiple projectiles by action of an explosion of a combustible material; or
6. A semi-automatic shotgun that expels single or multiple projectiles by action of an explosion of a combustible material that has one of the following characteristics: (i) a folding or telescoping stock, (ii) a thumbhole stock, (iii) a pistol grip that protrudes conspicuously beneath the action of the shotgun, (iv) the ability to accept a detachable magazine, (v) a fixed magazine capacity in excess of seven rounds, or (vi) any characteristic of like kind as enumerated in clauses (i) through (v).
“Assault firearm” includes any part or combination of parts designed or intended to convert, modify, or otherwise alter a firearm into an assault firearm, or any combination of parts that may be readily assembled into an assault firearm. “Assault firearm” does not include (i) a firearm that has been rendered permanently inoperable, (ii) an antique firearm as defined in § 18.2-308.2:2, or (iii) a curio or relic as defined in § 18.2-308.2:2.
Question: If your cousin is driving across Missouri at 35 mph, and the International Space Station is orbiting over Russia, how many llamas would it take to paddle across Lake Michigan if the only thing on TV was the Oscars?
Answer: Purple – because Armadillos can’t use snorkels.
If none of that made any sense to you, rest assured that it still makes way more sense than when Joe Biden tries to talk about firearms.
Yes, Creepy Uncle Joe is at it again. He’s in New Hampshire blabbering about having 50 clips in your gun and gibbering about F-15’s and Hellfire Missiles against your AK-47. That’s on top of calling an erstwhile supporter a “Lying dog-faced pony soldier” the other day. Ummmm, what?
For a supposed major presidential candidate Biden seems to have the self-awareness of a rutabaga. Seriously, he’s acting like some demented old guy yelling at the clouds. Yeaaaahhh, I’m going to hand over my guns to THIS clown? Ummmmm, no.
In case anyone has forgotten, Biden is the one who in previous years brought us home defense gems like shooting a double barrel shotgun in the air off your back deck to scare burglars away. Mr 2A he’s not – but it’s getting to the point where he’s just gabbling word salad. And that is rather insulting.
Put another way – the guy doesn’t even care enough about your rights to understand what he himself is saying – let alone what the Constitution says. He apparently doesn’t feel that he owes you even an attempt at a logical argument. Any old Whargarrbal will do to keep the proles in their place.
So, are semiautomatic rifles “weapons of war” as the left seem to hysterically label them? If so, why are they now being called “useless” in a war against the government? Seems to me that Creepy Joe is already fantasizing about becoming a tyrant and telling us it’s useless to resist.
It’s kind of the equivalent of “Hey little lady, what do you want that Big Gun for? You’re just going to get yourself hurt with that. You better give it to me while I’m busy sniffing your hair.”
Talk about insulting.
It’s not just Creepy Joe either. Who was the guy that threatened gun owners with nukes a few months ago? Oh yeah – Eric Swalwell. No secondhand subtle aggression there or anything.
Like Dorothy’s ruby slippers in the Wizard of Oz, firearms seem to generate an awful lot of grabbiness and secondhand aggression for something that supposedly won’t do us a damn bit of good against the government in a war.
To paraphrase Glinda the Good Witch , “Their magic must be very powerful, or Biden wouldn’t want them so badly”.
Maybe Biden would have better luck speaking armadillo. At least it would be more entertaining than the gibberish we’re getting from him currently.
HB 916, the Virginia House of Delegates’ version of Governor Northam’s scary gun ban bill, was heard by the Public Safety Committee Friday February 7. This bill would ban the sale of “assault weapons”, including AR-15 and AK-47 platform rifles, and makes the possession of suppressors and magazines greater than 12 rounds a felony. (Why 12?)
Despite the bill’s wide-ranging ramifications, commentary was limited to six minutes per side. Only industry representatives and lobbyists were able to speak, forcing the vast majority of the audience to remain silent.
After the bill passed 12 to 9, several audience members yelled out. Although no threats were made, the Committee Chairman motioned to the Capitol Police, who assembled in front of the audience and told all of us that we had to leave the room or be arrested for trespass.
Trespassing in the peoples’ forum? The cowardice and ineptitude of these delegates were beyond the pale. So I wrote to tell them we will not back down:
Dear Chairman Delegate Hope and Vice Chairman Delegate Bourne,
I attended last Friday’s House Public Safety Committee hearing on HB 961, Governor Northam’s scary gun, magazine, and accessories ban, and I was disgusted by your management of the hearing in your capacities as Chair and Vice Chair.
In the audience with me were people who had travelled several hours to attend the hearing. One gentleman was a business owner from a rural county who knew all too well that reliance on law enforcement to protect him in time is impossible. Another was a retired officer of the Inspector General who told me that law enforcement recognizes the best deterrence to crime isn’t law enforcement, but an armed population. As a forensic psychiatrist, I know that psychiatrists are the medical specialists most likely to become homicide victims. We each have unique reasons to be armed, and because of that, will exert our time, talents, and treasure to preserve our rights.
Even with its current amendments, HB 916 will turn us three into felons overnight for possession of standard-capacity magazines and already heavily federally regulated suppressors purchased lawfully for lawful purposes. It shouldn’t surprise either of you that your proposing this bill is morally repugnant to us, especially when your party voted down both Project Ceasefire and bills calling for increased penalties for criminals who commit rape at gunpoint. Your party is giving criminals a free pass, is insulting victims, and is targeting all of us.
Adding to our outrage were the incredible lies told during that hearing. One needn’t be a lawyer to understand that the Heller decision protects our right to keep “weapons in common use.” The items this bill bans are all in common use.
Vice Chairman Bourne, as a former member of the Attorney General’s staff, why were you unable to correct Delegate Levine when he said that the Supreme Court of the United States upheld these bans? What stopped you from pointing out that only federal Circuit Courts have ignored Heller, and that the Supreme Court has not yet ruled on these bans that it already outlawed? You allowed Delegate Levine to continue demonstrating ignorance and buffoonery when he pantomimed his laughably mistaken ideas about what constitutes an “assault weapon”.
Furthermore, Vice Chairman, when you said that these weapons and magazines were made for the military and should only be present on battlefields, were you aware that the Capitol Police present at the hearing carry Sig Sauer P320 pistols with 16 round magazines? Are the Capitol Police there to wage war? Are they planning to turn the Capitol grounds into a battlefield? Now that your party has made the Pocahontas Building a gun free zone, even for those of us with concealed handgun permits, why do they continue to need “military-grade” firepower to keep the peace? If these magazines are so intrinsically dangerous why should Capitol Police have them at all?
Chairman Hope, given the historic significance of this bill, it is shocking that it wasn’t first heard in a sub-committee, and it is completely unacceptable that only six minutes were allotted for public input. It was perfectly obvious that dissenters outnumbered supporters many times over. The just and decent thing to do, prior to turning those dissenters into felons, would be to let them speak.
We came to change hearts and minds, but most of the committee members apparently arrived with orders from the Governor, who in turn appears to be taking orders from an out-of-state billionaire. We came to participate in government as our Founders intended. You presided over a deliberate affront to the four hundred years of the history of our Assembly. As our representatives, you should have been willing to listen as long as necessary to ensure that every voice was heard.
How great is the urgency to eliminate our rights that you couldn’t be bothered to listen to us? Had the two of you allowed those in attendance to speak, there would have been no “disruption” at the end. By refusing to hear them formally, you essentially baited them into speaking out when they could.
This monstrous bill is in for the fight of its life. You rushed HB 961 through to get this to the Senate before next week’s crossover. It is unlikely to pass the full Senate as is, so it will have to survive the wrangling of a conference committee. At each juncture, the few sane liberals in your party will have the opportunity to listen to their constituents and kill this bill.
Even though you wouldn’t let us speak in committee, we won’t stop exercising our rights. Background checks for gun purchases doubled in the Commonwealth last month, and ammunition sales even in deep-blue Arlington are up 339% compared to one year ago. Do you think Virginians are only filling ten round magazines?
This bill, and its progenitor SB 16, gave birth to the Second Amendment Sanctuary movement in Virginia. These bills mobilized thousands of citizens who could not stand politics to become involved because, to their amazement, rather than focusing on criminals, you chose to focus on them and their rights.
I can assure you and every member of the Assembly that we will not back down and that we have the support of gun owners throughout the United States. The Second Amendment, our Commonwealth’s Constitution, the positive facts of civilian gun usage, and the Heller decision are all on our side, not yours.
When Secretary Moran greeted Philip Van Cleave (President of Virginia Citizens Defense League) and I at the NRA’s January 13th lobby day, he said he’d see us on the floor of the Assembly. I replied that we’d see him in court.
The highest court in the nation appears ready to restore the rights that have been wrongfully infringed upon by those of you who target the law-abiding and give aid to criminals. There is no shortage of your constituents who would happily become plaintiffs in [N.] v Commonwealth of Virginia to set this right.
.
.
–Dennis Petrocelli, MD is a clinical and forensic psychiatrist who has practiced for nearly 20 years in Virginia. He took up shooting in 2019 for mind-body training and self-defense, and is in the fight for Virginians’ gun rights.
In the deep, dark hallways of gun history, there are several guns worthy of their own highlighting article. Unfortunately for you, I didn’t choose any of these decent guns to write about. Instead, I went with the TEC 9.
The history of the TEC 9 is quite convoluted. The TEC 9 has lived and died by many names. These names include the original Interdynamics MP-9, which was a submachine gun designed for military forces. The simple blowback SMG found no military buyers and was soon marketed to the American populace as a rather sizeable 9mm pistol. George Kellgren, the man behind Kel-Tec, originally designed the gun and teamed up with Carlos Garcia of Miami, Florida, to form Interdynamic USA and market the weapon to the American civilian market.
The first model was called the KG-9 and was an open bolt pistol. KG stood for Kellgren and Garcia. The open bolt design was effortless to modify to a full-auto configuration, and this drew the ire of the Federal Government.
If you’ve ever heard the gun store gossip or the bubba lore that all you have to do is “file down the disconnector” to make a gun full auto. It came from the KG-9, because it was true. A little file work, and you could quickly turn a KG-9 into a full auto weapon. The ATF wasn’t pleased about this and demanded Intratec to convert the weapon to a closed bolt configuration. This became the KG-99.
The KG-99 was even advertised with a forward “assault” grip for a period of time before the ATF eventually came in and said ‘stop that’ once more. A KG-99 equipped with a forward grip would be an AOW and subject to the same NFA provisions as a machine gun.
What’s in a Name
George Kellgren eventually left the company, and Interdynamics USA became Intratec, and the KG-99 became the TEC 9. Along the way, the company became Navegar but still did business as Intratec. Outside of the TEC 9, Intratec produced a TEC-22, a derringer, and a series of cheap automatic handguns in more traditional variations.
The TEC-9 had already become famous in and out of the gun world. Your traditional hobby or professional shoot dismissed the weapon quickly. They were cheaply made, not very reliable, and ammunition picky. Plus, they were huge and rather useless as far as guns go. They offered no practical advantage over something like a Glock 17 with an extended magazine.
In pop culture, the gun was quite famous. It appeared in tons of television shows. It has an intimidating appearance, made it stand out as a bad guy gun. Miami Vice, in particular, loved to arm the villains with legally converted KG-9 machine guns. Numerous TEC 9 models showed up the famed Walker Texas Ranger television series too. The TEC 9 also showed up in two of my favorite movies, Big Trouble in Little China and Falling Down.
TEC 9’s popped up in dozens of rap songs over the years, and a rapper even took the mantle Tech N9ne. The gun’s appearance in rap songs, and being wielded by bad guys in movies and television shows gave the gun a shining criminal appeal.
Something similar has happened with Draco’s too.
The Criminal Controversy
The TEC 9 had long been a target for gun control efforts. Not for any real reason beyond the gun looked scary. The SMG style design, with the aggressive barrel shroud, and the long forward of the trigger magazines made it quite distinctive. Washington D.C. passed a law stating firearms manufacturer’s can be held liable for the use of their weapons, and specifically named the TEC 9.
Intratec merely laughed off the idea that you can be sued for how their guns are used by name and just renamed it. They also moved the sling keeper to the rear of the gun. That’s all they changed and the TEC 9 became the TEC-DC9. There is some speculation over what DC stands for. Some claim it stands for Designed for California. Others claim it’s the DC from Washington DC and was poking the federal bear. Mr. Garcia claimed DC stood for defensive carry when he testified in front of a Connecticut court when he challenged their assault weapon’s ban.
The firearm remained controversial due to its appearance in several high profile crimes.
Miami Vice Loved It
Life impersonating art is nothing new, but criminals using the same gun in movies and TV as in real life is a bit of an odd one. The TEC 9 became infamous in real life for its use in several high profile shootings. In these shootings, the TEC 9 proved to be quite unreliable. In several of these shootings, the guns were found jammed, with very few rounds dispensed. This included the Columbine shooting and the 101 California Street shootings.
The primary reason the gun was popular with criminals is simple. It was cheap. Roughly 250 bucks a pop. Second, it had an intimidating appearance. Criminals are just as vain as the rest of us, and a criminal looking gun wouldn’t certainly appeal to them. The thing is, I’d much rather a criminal be armed with a TEC-9 than a Glock, or any other traditional firearm. At least I know the gun is unreliable, unwieldy, and the sights blow.
The Advertisements
One major controversial element of the TEC 9 was its advertising. Supposedly one advertisement claimed that TEC-KOTE that covered the weapon was ‘resistant to fingerprints.’ I can find lots of TEC 9 advertisements but I can’t find any that make this claim.
Others include the TEC 9 advertised as,” As tough as your toughest customer,” Again this is another advertisement I can’t seem to find. I can find others showing a variety of TEC 9s with different finishes and options as well as some other Intratec pistols. I can’t seem to find any of the controversial advertisements. It would seem these would be preserved, but alas they are not.
I can find advertisements from esoteric guns from the 1950s, but nothing on these 1980s and 1990s advertisements. Even anti-gun websites that look like they were created in the 90s seem to have documented these advertisements. I’m wary that they ever existed, and if any of our readers know where to find them please let me know.
Oddly enough, in the 2003 film Runaway Jury, the fingerprint resistance of a firearm is mentioned in the film during a court case against a firearm manufacturer.
The Clinton AWB Kills the TEC 9 (Not really.)
If you ever read the Clinton Assault Weapon’s Ban you’ll see a section on pistols. It was written in such a way that it appeared as if the TEC 9 was the basis for most of the language banning “assault pistols.”
The TEC 9 simply became the AB-10. AB stands for After Ban and complied with the AWB. Like many times before the TEC 9 continued to thrive. It seemed like Carlos Garcia was an astute businessman who wasn’t afraid to take advantage of the controversy to further market his pistol. His marketing director told a New York Times reporter, “I’m kind of flattered. It just has that advertising tingle to it. Hey, it’s talked about, it’s read about, the media write about it. That generates more sales for me. It might sound cold and cruel, but I’m sales oriented.”
At least one good guy used the TEC 9
They also took advantage of the politician’s dismay for their weapon. They created a sense of urgency in their marketing by constantly detailing the weapon’s numerous bans across the United States. In a story as old as gun laws the more the gun was banned the more they were capable of selling. Reportedly up to a quarter-million of the various TEC 9s were produced and sold.
The TEC 9 – Behind the music
I actually just found a TEC 9 for sale at my local gun store. Technically it’s a TEC-DC9 mini. The mini variant has a very short barrel and comes with a barrel shroud that attaches or detaches with ease. It was on consignment and rather cheap so I jumped on it just for fun.
I took it out to the range and fired a few rounds. Not a few hundred, or a few dozen, just a few because it’s horribly unreliable. It jams, fails to extract, and only eats 124-grain FMJs. The gun is just as bad as I had always heard. The sights suck, the ergonomics suck, the guns massive bolt and blowback design creates a lot of recoil. It’s a crummy gun overall.
Luckily, I bought it as a collectible item since Intratec and Navegar shut their doors in 2001. It may never be worth a dime, but it’s an interesting gun with a fascinating history.
I didn’t realize how convoluted and controversial the gun was in its time. Even now I’m not sure what’s fact and what’s speculation. I did my best to derive the truth, but when it comes to the TEC 9 the truth might be a bit relative.
The American Pharmacists Association Board of Trustees is issuing the following public statement calling for more proactive steps to address this important public health and safety issue. CDC data indicate that nearly 40,000 Americans in 2017 died from firearm related incidents — more than the number who died in traffic accidents but fewer than deaths related to opioid use. In 2018 and 2019, the use of firearms against healthcare professionals and community members led to discussions by APhA leadership, as well as by other healthcare organizations. The safety and well-being of pharmacists, student pharmacists, pharmacy personnel, and patients is of paramount importance to APhA. The U.S. public policy debates surrounding firearm related injuries and safety have wide‐ranging implications for pharmacy practice and the services pharmacists offer.
So, our legal drug dealers are calling to weigh in on firearm policy. They acknowledge that guns (not their lane of expertise) are less lethal than opioid abuse (their lane of expertise) but surpassed traffic related deaths (not their lane of expertise) so they have decided to make a statement on opioids… I’m sorry, they’ve decided to make a statement on firearms.
Because I guess they have a plan for the larger opioid problem already… or something.
APhA recognizes firearms related injury and death as a public health crisis. As such, the Association:
recommends a public health approach to the prevention of firearm injuries and deaths.
calls for the funding of research related to firearm injuries and injury prevention, including use of personalized gun technology, to better understand the problem and to implement effective firearm injury prevention strategies.
supports the engagement of pharmacists in the development of public policy to address firearm related violence and the prevention of firearm injuries and deaths.
supports strengthening and enforcing state and federal laws to prohibit individuals convicted of crimes of violence from purchasing or possessing firearms.
supports the classification of pharmacies as healthcare entities included within state and local laws which address “gun-free” or “concealed weapon” zones.
supports the inclusion of pharmacists, student pharmacists, and pharmacy personnel as healthcare workers protected under state and local laws related to assault of a healthcare worker.
supports the availability of education and information for pharmacy personnel regarding firearm violence prevention.
encourages pharmacists and other health care professionals to have information accessible to patients and caregivers regarding the risks of having unsecured firearms in the home, and ways to mitigate the risks associated with having a firearm in the home.
recommends pharmacists and other health professionals be trained to recognize and respond to individuals in crisis who might be at risk of injuring themselves or others.
supports the enactment of extreme risk protection order (ERPO) laws which allow family members and law enforcement officers to petition a court to temporarily remove firearms from individuals who are determined to be at imminent risk of harming themselves or others while providing due process protections.
supports training requirements on proper handling and use of firearms for anyone owning or operating a firearm.
supports efforts to improve firearms to make them as safe as possible, including the incorporation of built-in safety devices (such as trigger locks and signals that indicate a gun is loaded).
Hmm, let’s go through these since, unlike the Pharmacists, this is my lane.
recommends a public health approach to the prevention of firearm injuries and deaths.
Vague and unsubstantive rhetoric trying to relate suicide, crime, and negligence all under one banner of public health.
calls for the funding of research related to firearm injuries and injury prevention, including use of personalized gun technology, to better understand the problem and to implement effective firearm injury prevention strategies.
A vague appeal to valueless “smart gun” technology that has proven a non-starter time and time again. I’m all for research, however ignoring the giant pile of it we have already that suggests upping our whole cultural familiarity with firearms would contribute to their safe use seems to mean that the pharmacists want a certain type of research with certain recommendations already picked.
No thank you.
supports the engagement of pharmacists in the development of public policy to address firearm related violence and the prevention of firearm injuries and deaths.
With what expertise?
I would trust a pharmacist’s opinion on pharmaceuticals. I would believe them if they handed down recommendations on what drugs can and cannot be mixed. I would listen to which emerging drugs get them excited about new treatments and preventative medicine. I won’t put stock in their equal understanding of weapons and a weapon’s legitimate role in society. That isn’t their lane.
supports strengthening and enforcing state and federal laws to prohibit individuals convicted of crimes of violence from purchasing or possessing firearms.
Specifics, please. “Strengthen” is one of those broad and nebulous buzzwords that doesn’t mean anything. Enforcing would be nice, keeping enforced by not releasing convicts of those crimes would be a great step also. But what do I know? This is my lane.
Go on, oh wise drug dealers.
supports the classification of pharmacies as healthcare entities included within state and local laws which address “gun-free” or “concealed weapon” zones.
Because “Gun Free Zones” have proven so effective? You’re counting on one of the most repeatedly failed policy systems in history to protect pharmacies from robberies and violence when you have high value substances in your inventories?
I question your reasoning and problem solving skills, APhA… I question them deeply.
supports the inclusion of pharmacists, student pharmacists, and pharmacy personnel as healthcare workers protected under state and local laws related to assault of a healthcare worker.
Hey! Look at that, one we can agree on.
I have no problem legally identifying pharmacists as healthcare personnel for legal protections. Pharmacists are, by the nature of their employment, at greater specific risk for assault/robbery than other professions because they deal in valuable, regulated, and addictive substances. They can be targeted for illicit financial gain or to satisfy a personal addiction, both are possibilities that someone like an accountant does not face as a threat.
supports the availability of education and information for pharmacy personnel regarding firearm violence prevention.
Does that information include building security practices and the option to carry while at work should the pharmacist so desire? If not you are doing a disservice to those you are trying to help by denying options that are effective, you just don’t like those options.
encourages pharmacists and other health care professionals to have information accessible to patients and caregivers regarding the risks of having unsecured firearms in the home, and ways to mitigate the risks associated with having a firearm in the home.
Basic firearm safety practices are always good information, but do the pharmacy personnel have any greater understanding to help patients and caregivers make informed decisions on this topic? On safes, locks, education of other household members, strategies for children, etc. This isn’t a topic for a pamphlet, it requires a foundation of basic understanding to be of value.
recommends pharmacists and other health professionals be trained to recognize and respond to individuals in crisis who might be at risk of injuring themselves or others.
Especially being in the medical field, the likelihood of a pharmacist coming into contact with someone in crisis is much greater than average. Knowing methods of helping these individuals and the paths to get them the help they need are valuable tools.
But I suspect what AphA wants is just a ‘Red Flag’ easy button without liability. Because, like doctors, pharmacists do not want to be held responsible (liable) for infringing upon someone’s rights without cause or understanding while under the auspices of ‘helping’. What should be a gravely regarded topic, someone’s rights as a free person, is given none of that attention.
supports the enactment of extreme risk protection order (ERPO) laws which allow family members and law enforcement officers to petition a court to temporarily remove firearms from individuals who are determined to be at imminent risk of harming themselves or others while providing due process protections.
There we go. There’s the easy button. I’m glad they at least give written lip service to due process being observed, despite the fact that ERPO’s are largely extrajudicial exercises that are subject to no active due process.
supports training requirements on proper handling and use of firearms for anyone owning or operating a firearm.
Requirements is that nasty word which makes it a government obligation to provide it’s access. Which the government will not. When you make a right require a significant and difficult financial and time output for indeterminate gain it is no longer a right.
This could have instead been written as ‘supports holding negligent individuals liable for the damages caused by their irresponsible actions’ and it could have wide support. Negligence is a due process standard that must be established.
supports efforts to improve firearms to make them as safe as possible, including the incorporation of built-in safety devices (such as trigger locks and signals that indicate a gun is loaded).
Firearms are, already, very safely built devices. The problem is that you are trying to merge safe operation with the idea that firearms are weapons and weapons are by their very nature, dangerous. We need firearms to be dangerous, we need them to be effective at projecting force at sudden emergency need, that is their purpose as sure as an opioid painkiller’s is to make an agony more sufferable.
You cannot legislate a purposefully dangerous implement into safety. We cannot legislate unpurposefully dangerous implements into safety. Vehicles are not safe. Opioids aren’t safe.
The Bren 805 was the result of a slow slooow roll by the Czech Republic updating their weapons to NATO standard. The project started before the fall of the Soviet Union and slow boiled its way through the 90’s and into the 21st Century looking to finally update from the Vz. 58.
In 2010 it was publically announced that the Project 805 had been chosen over the FN SCAR 16 because it was a domestically produced rifle system. The 805 has always been closely associated with the Belgian FN SCAR and usually seen as a less costly alternative for a lot of good rifle, which in turn describes the CZ brand with many of its products.
The rifle marked the Czech Republic’s modernization and, with adopting 5.56, standardization into NATO. A few years later, after field feedback was received the Bren 2 (806) was adopted too, with a series of included improvements. The 805 was and still is a capable rifle. The Bren 2 has seen commercial success abroad too, including adoption by French GIGN, and a commercial variant quickly added for the US Market.
NEWINGTON, N.H., (February 10, 2020) – SIG SAUER, Inc. continues to expand its line of premium-grade Elite Copper Hunting ammunition with the addition of 6mm Creedmoor. Featuring an 80gr all-copper bullet that delivers deep penetration and consistent 1.8x diameter expansion with maximum terminal ballistic performance, the 6mm Creedmoor Elite Copper Hunting ammunition is a highly accurate load for hunting numerous species of medium-size game.
This fast, flat-shooting cartridge has a high ballistic coefficient allowing it to push through wind with less drag and drift, increasing accuracy at longer ranges. Muzzle velocity is 3,300 fps and muzzle energy is 1,935 ft-lbs.
“6mm Creedmoor ammunition is in high demand as is the 6.5 Creedmoor load,” said Brad Criner, Senior Director, Brand Management and Business Development, SIG SAUER Ammunition. “Our customers have been asking for both and we are happy to now offer these two hot hunting cartridges in our Elite Copper Hunting line.”
SIG SAUER Elite Copper Hunting Ammunition is currently available in the following calibers: 223 Rem, 243 Win, 300BLK, 308 Win, 30-06 Springfield, 300 Win Mag, 6mm Creedmoor and 6.5 Creedmoor.
All are available for purchase at commercial retailers and online at sigsauer.com.
SIG SAUER Elite Ammunition is manufactured by SIG SAUER at its state-of-the-art ammunition manufacturing facility in Jacksonville, Arkansas to the same exacting standards as the company’s premium pistols and rifles. For more information, visit www.sigsauer.com/ammunition.
Get Social: follow SIG SAUER on Facebook,Twitter,Instagram, and YouTube for the latest news, product announcements, events, and updates.
About SIG SAUER, Inc.
SIG SAUER, Inc. is a leading provider and manufacturer of firearms, electro-optics, ammunition, airguns, suppressors, and training. For over 100 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 – a world class, state-of-the-art, 140-acre training facility. SIG SAUER is
headquartered in Newington, New Hampshire, and has more than 1,700 employees across eight locations, and is the largest member of a worldwide business group that includes SIG SAUER GmbH & Co. KG in Germany. For more information about the company and product line visit: sigsauer.com.
During my stumbles through the Sands Expo Center a few weeks ago, I found a different company than the usual pre-packaged food provider. Their display was all the way up on the fifth floor, and for only one day, at a SHOT Show pop-up event. Amid all the recent noise about Coronavirus and prepping, I thought I should give them a review.
Omeals offers a variety of self-heating ready-to-eat entrees for varying needs – whether you are a backpacker, family camper, or small scale prepper. Omeals parent company also makes the XMRE line of MRE-style food packages for military, rescue, and disaster relief purposes.
The SHOT display for Omeals and XMRE.
They claim that “…we’re also the number one choice for government relief agencies and humanitarian groups around the world.”
That sounds like a pretty expansive claim, so I wanted to try their product for myself.
Omeals provided me with one sample entree bag to try, and on a recent snowy Friday night I gave it a whirl in my kitchen.
The opened package contained heater, spoon, napkins, SandP, and the food pouch.
Self-heating
I followed the package directions for heating, thus adding 3-5 ounces of “any liquid” – tap water in my case. I didn’t want to waste good beer just to heat my food (or god knows what else they were suggesting – maybe mud puddle water if you were conserving your drinking water). It took a minute or two, but then the sealed pouch inflated, started to sizzle, and began to emit steam from the vent hole.
I waited about 5 minutes after the pouch inflated, then removed my meal pouch with tongs, tore it open, and dumped it out onto a plate. I used a plate because I was at home but there’s no reason you couldn’t eat it out of the pouch – though the spoon was just a bit too short.
The outer bag continued to steam for about ten more minutes after removing the meal pouch, so you could probably heat an additional small pouch of something else in it as an extra. Maybe reuse a previous entree pouch filled with water for coffee? Or a small can of something else? If you don’t have any other heat source you might as well use ALL of it. Waste not, want not. Unfortunately I thought about this too late, so I wasn’t able to experiment with this meal. But I’ll be ready for next time!
The spoon and napkin package came with salt and pepper packets, but I didn’t feel that my entree needed extra seasoning. I thought it was fairly tasty for a pre-packaged shelf stable meal. It didn’t look much like the package photo, but what prepared food does? There was a fair amount of meat, and the beans and lentils made it filling. Lentils are also pretty high in dietary fiber, so one should not experience the usual problem common with MRE’s (Meals Refusing to Exit) – at least with this particular entree.
Supper time!
Portion size
The portion size was plenty for me, but I don’t think it would fill up a 6 foot 200+ pound man doing heavy labor. The package said 240 calories, so you would definitely need some sides – tortillas, fruit, etc – to make this a complete meal. I ate it with whole wheat crackers and some home-canned pears for dessert.
I searched the Omeals website to see if all of the entrees had similar size and calorie counts, but couldn’t find anything with which to compare one entree with another. Having to add additional food kind of defeats the purpose of a pre-packaged meal IMO, but it does at least give you the hot entree portion to build a meal around. For a skinny woman’s office lunch it would be fine.
I did however, appreciate that the ingredients list did not include a boatload of preservatives or weird additives.
No unpronounceable ingredients.
Shelf Life
Omeals advertises a shelf life of 60 months. This is comparable to the 3-5 year shelf life of regular MREs (if stored under optimal conditions).
Varieties
Omeals offers a fair variety of options – chicken, turkey, beef, and also vegetarian choices. The descriptions sounded appetizing, but as I stated above I couldn’t find any website info about calorie content for comparison between the various meals.
Heating System
As to how this heating system works, the website states that,
“OMEALS® is powered by NXH® Heating Technology. Tested and certified non-toxic, odorless and safe to use in confined space”
It was certainly easy to use. However, my package did state that it was not to be used on an airplane. I’m not sure if that has to do with the chemical reaction involved in the heating process, or something simpler like reduced atmospheric pressure in the cabin. But I guess this is not an option for lunch on the plane to SHOT Show next year.
Pros and Cons
Pros: Omeals are easy, convenient, tasty, and not full of preservatives.
Cons: Serving size will not be big enough for some people – at least with the sample and product line I was provided. The spoon was also just a tad short for getting all the food out of the bottom of the pouch.
Overall, I thought Omeals was a fine idea for the civilian and traveling family market. There are times when a fully-loaded MRE wouldn’t necessarily be desirable. It could also serve as a “gateway” into a market where folks have no idea what an MRE even is.
The flavor is there, the convenience is there, the serving size could be increased a bit, but there is definitely a market niche available for this product. I’ll be ordering some to augment my stored food supply. I’m also going to check out XMRE while I’m at it.
Ken Hackathorn and Massad Ayoob go into the rise of the AR-15 as a home defense firearm since 1963 and tracks the parallels between Law Enforcement firearms for protection and everyday Civilian defensive firearms.
Massad goes into the “Pool Weapon” theory of home defense long guns and the facts that support the more widely usable AR-15 and similar firearms. A Pool Weapon needs to be usable by every person in the user pool from weakest to the strongest. The AR and similar carbines fit that need in a way shotguns and handguns cannot.
Thanks to Wilson Combat for producing and sharing.
Essentially, their argument is that “large-capacity magazines” (at least a better phrase than “high-capacity” for those containing more than 10 rounds) are associated with a higher incidence of “high-fatality mass shootings” (those with more than 6 fatalities other than the shooter’s). Of the 69 HFMSs counted during the study’s 28 years, 44 involved LCMs and 16 didn’t, while in 9 cases magazine capacity couldn’t be determined. 49 occurred in states allowing LCMs compared to 20 where they were banned. More shooters, 81%, used LCMs in states without bans versus 55% in ban states. Likewise, LCM bans were associated with fewer fatalities in each incident (averaging about 7 per shooting in ban states versus about 12 in non-ban states).
That’s a lot of suggestive numbers. But do they really mean that “LCM bans have saved lives”? Let’s look closer.
In 1990, only New Jersey had instituted an LCM ban. From 1994 to 2004, they were outlawed nationally during the federal “assault weapon ban”. From 2004 to 2017, a total of only 8 jurisdictions (7 states and D.C.) had established bans. Which states are not described. On a very gross level, that’s barely 1/6 of the nation. It very much matters which sixth these are because of how different each state’s mix of urban and rural, economic factors, gun and other cultural aspects. Their covariables of population density, education level, unemployment and incarceration rates, and approximate gun ownership incidence don’t nearly address the distinctions that exist between states.
This, again, is why only comparing the same geographic area over time is a useful control; comparing one state against another is always comparing apples and oranges. And as always, discovering a difference before and after a change (e.g., LCM bans) is not sufficient analysis—observing a change in trend is necessary. This is a lot more work—for example, by Mark Hamill’s group that soundly found no correlation between “State Level Firearm Concealed-Carry Legislation and Rates of Homicide and Other Violent Crime”.
Similarly, while the overall increase in incidence of HFMSs is noted, how is this changing in different localities? We can’t tell without know what those places are.
An even more fundamental problem is the definition chosen of a HFMS as one in which 6 fatalities (other than the shooter) occur. There is no clear explanation as to why that number seemed best. They even note that mass murders (“typically defined as ≥ 4 homicides”), not six. In addition, “there has been an average of 2.5 incidents per year”, certainly not enough to draw conclusions about common elements. One has to wonder whether different definitions produce different findings.
For more (and better) information about the relevance of LCMs in shooting, check out Gun Facts. This is a site you should have on top of your gun bookmarks for its great collection of hard data about every aspect of the role and use of firearms in modern life.
Finally, the same elephant is in the room every single time that public health “experts” claim they’ve proven some danger due to the irrationality of allowing American citizens to choose their best defense. There is no consideration of the value of “LCMs” for defense, just as they will never recognize the value of firearms in lawful defense of innocent life. We know that American civilians probably perform somewhere north of 1 million (per the CDC) to over 2 million (per Kleck) defensive gun uses each year. By any standard, farm more lives are saved that way than are actually lost to firearm misuse.
So where is the data on the frequency of gang attacks on individuals, or in multiple assailant home invasions? That’s what we need to compare the questionable danger of LCMs in criminal mass shootings to their value in self-defense against more than a single attacker.
How does this “research” ….. thee? Let us count the ways:
Researcher bias
Seeing a firearm accessary as the primary variable (as the prime issue)
Likely cherry-picked definitions, and therefore data
Setting up straw-man arguments (as if the key to reducing mass shootings is the magazine)
Rationalizing that correlation = causation (“the theory . . . makes sense”)
Ignoring data that is far more important that the study variables
Insignificant significance in the conclusions drawn (here, on negligible bases)
— DRGO Editor Robert B. Young, MD is a psychiatrist practicing in Pittsford, NY, an associate clinical professor at the University of Rochester School of Medicine, and a Distinguished Life Fellow of the American Psychiatric Association.
Image via Google Search... couldn't see across Huron today so...
Canada is following in liberal gun control dreamer footsteps and pushing forward ERPO style legislation that would add additional methods to remove firearms and confiscate licenses to acquire new ones. I’ll assume with even greater circumventions of anything resembling due process, as that is how ERPO’s operate nearly extrajudicially.
Three Conservative MPs clashed with Public Safety Minister Bill Blair Thursday over opposition claims that Prime Minister Justin Trudeau misled the Commons in an earlier question period bout over Liberal plans to bring in U.S.-styled “red flag” laws.
The legislation would open new avenues for citizens and abused women to access police or the courts for firearm seizures and license revocations in threatening situations.
The heated confrontation near the end of question period sparked Blair to suggest that Quebec Conservative MP Steven Blaney, a former public safety minister under the Harper government, was “unconscionable” after Blaney and the other Conservatives said existing law gives police, firearm officers and the courts plenty of grounds for gun seizures and licence revocations.
In short, liberals are saying there are “loopholes”, a favorite word meaning anything we don’t like but is legal, and conservative opposition is saying there are laws on the books to cover the situations described.
…Trudeau told the Conservatives a new regime is needed because although police have the ability to remove firearms from a gun owner who presents a threat to themselves or others, they “cannot suspend the licence and prevent the person from acquiring new firearms.”
“That is what the red flag law is all about,” Trudeau said, sparking a loud and angry response from Conservatives, who believe the existing law is adequate.
There, the declaration that no rule or law exists to cover situations in which probably a firearm should be seized and an individual’s right to their property must be suspended or permanently revoked.
It is unclear what Trudeau meant since sections in the federal Firearms Act and Criminal Code prescribe for police seizure of firearms as well as licence revocation in cases of gun threats or violence.
Hmmm. So that was lie.
Blaney, the second of the three Conservatives to go after Trudeau and Blair, claimed federal law is already clear: police can suspend firearms licences and prevent someone with mental and health issues or links to crime from acquiring a firearm in the first place.
“The law is clear, so nothing needs to be changed,” he told Blair.
“Why attack honest citizens instead of tackling the real problem, street gang.”
As with the United States, organized crime makes up a significant portion of violent incidents in Canada. Tackling those issues and pursuing the most violent of criminals who leave the injured and dead will move the needle on homicides and assault.
“Anyone who suggests the constant threat that women in an abusive relationship face from the potential of firearms in the home, for anyone to suggest nothing needs to be done is unconscionable,” Blair said in response to Blaney’s position.
Constant threat? Way to straw man, or straw woman as is the case here, that one in. I suspect, as is the case in the US, that Canada holds very strong opinions with matching laws against abusers and their access to firearms.
“The current law is very clear, if a firearm owner poses a threat, authorities can confiscate firearms and suspend licenses, preventing further purchases of firearms or possession,” Calgary Conservative MP Bob Benzen responded.
“If our public safety minister actually had a PAL (possession and acquisition licence) or an RPL (restricted possession and acquisition licence) he would already know this instead of trying to dig out [of this],” said Benzen, who represents Stephen Harper’s former riding.
Well then.. Benzen is bringing the fire. I forget how entertain foreign legal proceedings can be. They get spicy. Basically, ‘you don’t know what you’re talking about, Ignoramus’.
“I will admit I’m not a recreational firearm user but I have actually enforced and used these laws to keep communities and people safe,” retorted Blair.
Translated, ‘You’re right, I am ignorant. But that has never stopped me before.’
Blair, your officers may have used these laws. They may have used them to good effect. The laws you’re claiming aren’t there to be used, by the way. But I doubt very much you as a senior administrator put together these cases or collected data to see just how egregious different problems around firearms were before jumping on the “Do Something” express.
“What I can tell you, the authority that exists in law, the laws that are currently available, that enable law enforcement to seize firearms and to revoke licence are limited in their application, and it is only in the circumstances where reasonable and probable grounds exist, and it is only in circumstances where a seizure of a firearm has taken place that a firearm (licence) can be revoked,” Blair claimed.
Yes. All that seems very reasonable and in accordance with not granting the state full license to abuse whoever they please. Seeing a top law enforcement official say the things like ‘reasonable’ and ‘probable’ aren’t enough power to act? That’s frankly terrifying. What’s the next step down from ‘reasonable and probable’, ‘just seems like it’?
“Let me be very clear, red flag laws save lives. I’ve actually used those sections of the Criminal Code to seize firearms in these dangerous situations, and I can also advise you Mr. Speaker of the limitations of those laws,” he continued.
So which is it? Are they there or aren’t they? Why do you want more power?
“We know that the average assaulted woman in Canada is assaulted 25 times in a domestic relationship before the police are in fact called.”
So how would opening further authority change that? How would the myriad social pressures and influences that shape the decision making of the hypothetical abused female be improved by your rule change? Will the average drop to 15 times? 10 times? How likely is it any of those 25 are with a firearm or that the abuser is a legal licensed firearm owner?
Blair is quick to pull an emotion grabbing statistic but with nothing approaching useable data to support making a change. I always find that suspect, it’s even more so when we want to throw reasonable and probable to the wind as standards.
The bill further states that any person who legally owns an assault firearm on July 1, 2020, may retain possession of such assault firearm after January 1, 2021, if such person has obtained a permit from the Department of State Police to possess an assault firearm in accordance with procedures established in the bill. A person issued such permit may possess an assault firearm only under the following conditions: (a) while in his home or on his property or while on the property of another who has provided prior permission, provided that the person has the landowner’s written permission on his person while on such property; (b) while at a shooting range, shooting gallery, or other area designated for the purpose of target shooting or the target range of a public or private club or organization whose members have organized for the purpose of practicing shooting targets or competing in target shooting matches; (c) while engaged in lawful hunting; or (d) while surrendering the assault firearm to a state or local law-enforcement agency. A person issued such permit may also transport an assault firearm between any of those locations, provided that such assault firearm is unloaded and secured within a closed container while being transported. The bill also provides that failure to display the permit and a photo identification upon demand by a law-enforcement officer shall be punishable by a $25 civil penalty, which shall be paid into the state treasury. The bill also requires the Department of State Police to enter the name and description of a person issued a permit in the Virginia Criminal Information Network (VCIN) so that the permit’s existence and current status will be made known to the law-enforcement personnel accessing VCIN for investigative purposes.
“Assault firearm” means: 1. A semi-automatic center-fire rifle that expels single or multiple projectiles by action of an explosion of a combustible material with a fixed magazine capacity in excess of 10 rounds;
2. A semi-automatic center-fire rifle that expels single or multiple projectiles by action of an explosion of a combustible material that has the ability to accept a detachable magazine and has one of the following characteristics: (i) a folding or telescoping stock; (ii) a pistol grip that protrudes conspicuously beneath the action of the rifle; (iii) a thumbhole stock; (iv) a second handgrip or a protruding grip that can be held by the non-trigger hand; (v) a bayonet mount; (vi) a grenade launcher; (vii) a flare launcher; (viii) a silencer; (ix) a flash suppressor; (x) a muzzle brake; (xi) a muzzle compensator; (xii) a threaded barrel capable of accepting (a) a silencer, (b) a flash suppressor, (c) a muzzle brake, or (d) a muzzle compensator; or (xiii) any characteristic of like kind as enumerated in clauses (i) through (xii);
3. A semi-automatic center-fire pistol that expels single or multiple projectiles by action of an explosion of a combustible material with a fixed magazine capacity in excess of 10 rounds;
4. A semi-automatic center-fire pistol that expels single or multiple projectiles by action of an explosion of a combustible material that has the ability to accept a detachable magazine and has one of the following characteristics: (i) a folding or telescoping stock; (ii) a thumbhole stock; (iii) a second handgrip or a protruding grip that can be held by the non-trigger hand; (iv) the capacity to accept a magazine that attaches to the pistol outside of the pistol grip; (v) a shroud that is attached to, or partially or completely encircles, the barrel and that permits the shooter to hold the pistol with the non-trigger hand without being burned; (vi) a manufactured weight of 50 ounces or more when the pistol is unloaded; (vii) a threaded barrel capable of accepting (a) a silencer, (b) a flash suppressor, (c) a barrel extender, or (d) a forward handgrip; or (viii) any characteristic of like kind as enumerated in clauses (i) through (vii);
5. A shotgun with a revolving cylinder that expels single or multiple projectiles by action of an explosion of a combustible material; or
6. A semi-automatic shotgun that expels single or multiple projectiles by action of an explosion of a combustible material that has one of the following characteristics: (i) a folding or telescoping stock, (ii) a thumbhole stock, (iii) a pistol grip that protrudes conspicuously beneath the action of the shotgun, (iv) the ability to accept a detachable magazine, (v) a fixed magazine capacity in excess of seven rounds, or (vi) any characteristic of like kind as enumerated in clauses (i) through (v).
“Assault firearm” includes any part or combination of parts designed or intended to convert, modify, or otherwise alter a firearm into an assault firearm, or any combination of parts that may be readily assembled into an assault firearm. “Assault firearm” does not include (i) a firearm that has been rendered permanently inoperable, (ii) an antique firearm as defined in § 18.2-308.2:2, or (iii) a curio or relic as defined in § 18.2-308.2:2.
The committee will hear and decide whether to push the legislation to the full assembly today, in before a February 11th deadline.
These are the people on the and reminding them that the thousands and thousands who showed up to express their opposition to this egregious awful legislation that will do nothing to promote the general welfare of the Commonwealth is paramount.
UPDATE: The Committee Passed the Bill
It will now go into the full delegation, begin you efforts with the full swath of delegates, first with those who represent you if you are a Virginian.
[Editor’s Note: Readers, this article is primarily to help users of the M2A1 on the M205, for everyone else it will be technical entertainment. Enjoy or employ as relevant.]
The Army is all about lightening the load these days. Making ammo lighter, making equipment lighter, and trying to make Soldiers lighter (ACFT: Hint Hint)
In this case though, the M205 is the latest in making a piece of equipment lighter. This tripod replaces the M3 Tripod. It is now considered a Basic Issued Item (BII) for the M2A1, which means that it currently cannot have a separate work order created for it (for civilians reading, these are rules of repairing and maintaining it). It will be also be a one for one swap with your M3 Tripod.
This tripod comes with a built in Traverse and Elevation (T&E) mechanism and pintle. This tripod is 16 lbs. lighter than its predecessor. While all of these are great changes, it comes with some cons as well.
Soldiers need to know how to maintain the tripod before putting it into operation, how to properly employ it and use it to its full potential, and how to properly set up and takedown the tripod. My coworker recently worked on 15 of these tripods back to back, due to this exposure, he learned tips and tricks to pass on. Some of these tricks are also mentioned in the Technical Manual and Heavy Machine Gun Training Circular which can be found on Army Pubs.
Maintenance
When receiving your tripod it will be covered in cosmoline. It’s recommended that you job order it to your shop to properly inspect and clean it. Inspection is key as there have been mistakes found with new equipment. Also, if it is not properly cleaned it won’t lock and function correctly.
To clean, use dry cleaning solvent on the entire tripod to first strip off all cosmoline. After the solvent dries, so as not to mix different lubricants, thoroughly put a layer of Cleaning, Lubricant, and Preservative (CLP) on. If this is not done, the pintle will not rotate when locked in entirely. This is a cleanliness issue, not an equipment issue.
Deploying
Set up is pretty self-explanatory for this mount but there are some interesting things to know.
First, you will lift up on the locking lever letting the front leg go forward, and then locking it in again. You will take the T&E out of the notch; make sure not to adjust it because it will already be ready to roll into the slot on the right leg. Roll the traverse bar down into the notch. It shouldn’t need to be pounded in, as it should roll in, but it can be tight.
Next is the pintle. IMPORTANT, an older pintle that went with the M3 tripod will fit into this mount, however it has been known to become stuck and damage the tripod Make sure that the correct pintle is installed. Be sure that the pintle is locked in all the way, meaning no space at the bottom. It should turn 360 degrees. If it is only partially locked in, it will bounce when firing. Shooting past 1000m, I don’t want my M2A1 bouncing.
Properly seated
Improperly seated
The key to making your setup really work for you is to mount the gun and then mount the tripod to know where you want your legs to be locked in, shorter or taller, and terrain dependent.
Stowing
Take down for this tripod can be a pain if you just try to “wing it”. Both traverse and elevation bars need to line up perfectly to fit into the slots to takedown the tripod. To do this, it’s really easy, if you actually do it.
Bring your traverse mechanism all of the way to the left, and elevation all of the way up. Close the legs of the tripod and it should line up directly in both slots. Remember to stow the pintle in the proper spot on the front leg. Make sure to lock the front leg handle when stowing the tripod.
Operation
With lighter weight, there is more recoil. The weight will be to the rear of the tripod due to the receiver and components of the weapon.
When firing, due to that weight distribution, the front leg will pop up. Putting more sandbags and digging the legs in, can help that recoil management. When firing, try lifting up and forward as well to put that pressure into the front leg.
To adjust the traverse limiter knob there is another trick.
There are two ways to loosen the knob. You can either use the mechanism to slap the knob. Release both elevation and traverse handles and freely hit the mechanism against the knob, this will allow you to loosen it and move it to where you want it. The second way is to move the mechanism all the way against the knob and click over twice until it contacts the knob with enough pressure to allow you to loosen the knob.
If you are using a tool, such as a wrench or hammer, you are wrong.
There are always pros and cons when it comes to any piece of new equipment. The trick is just to learn how to properly maintain it and employ it. Take some time to read the manual first, and let the mount work for you.
