Comrade Thumb: Mike takes on the AKM

By

-

June 12, 2019

The AKM is the most widely produced assault rifle in the world. Often mislabeled as its predecessor, the AK 47, the Soviet designed 7.62x39mm rifle armed most of the Union (the main exception was the Czechoslovakian designed VZ 58). Mike “GarandThumb”, one of our favorite gun guys in plaid, gives a fantastic overview of this well aged rifle.

The AKM, like the AR will be a legacy weapon that lasts a century or more. It’s obsolescent phase will be a long one, drawn out by the fact the core rifle works so well. My Galil ACE is a direct descendent with a slew of ergonomic improvements around a largely unchanged internal. The X95 and PWS ARs uses the long stroke piston that makes up the heart of the system.

Vietnam War
Laotian Civil War
Portuguese Colonial War
Rhodesian Bush War
Cambodian Civil War
Nigerian Civil War^[1]
The Troubles
Angolan Civil War^[2]
Yom Kippur War^[3]
Lebanese Civil War^[4]
Ethiopian Civil War^[5]
Cambodian–Vietnamese War
Chadian–Libyan conflict
Sino-Vietnamese War
Soviet–Afghan War^[6]
Nicaraguan Revolution
Iran–Iraq War^[7]
United States invasion of Grenada^[8]
Kurdish–Turkish conflict
LRA insurgency
First Liberian Civil War
Persian Gulf War
Rwandan Civil War^[9]
Somali Civil War^[10]
Georgian Civil War^[11]
Algerian Civil War
Yugoslav Wars
First Chechen War
Second Chechen War
Second Liberian Civil War
War in Afghanistan (2001–present)
Ivorian Civil Wars
Iraq War
War in Darfur^[12]
Mexican Drug War
Russo-Georgian War
Boko Haram insurgency
Libyan Civil War
Syrian Civil War
Central African Republic Civil War (2012–present)^[13]
War in Donbass
Iraqi Civil War (2014–2017)
Yemeni Civil War (2015–present)

A long list of conflicts from the 60’s until today have the AKM at its heart. The AK has history. It’s legacy is effectiveness. It is often on every side in a conflict, so many exist. List via Wikipedia

It’s quite the statement of success for a device. It’s wielders are not always benevolent, but such is true of any technology that can project power.

The AKM

Florida Arms First Responders

By

Keith Finch

-

June 11, 2019

In response to deliberate attacks on paramedics, Florida Governor Ron DeSantis has signed into law a bill that will allow first responders to be armed.

TALLAHASSEE, Fla. — A new law in Florida will allow paramedics to carry firearms when responding to shootings, drug raids and other high-risk situations.

Gov. Ron DeSantis signed the measure Friday, June 7. It says paramedics don’t have to retreat and are justified in using force to defend themselves or others bodily harm.

The law takes effect July 1.

It identifies other such instances as dealing with an armed suicidal person and hostage situations.

Medical professionals carrying firearms are required to complete annual firearm safety training and tactical training, the measure says. – Fox 6

It’s not a unique circumstance. Paramedics and Firefighters are often at risk from persons not in their right mind.

Kansas and Ohio already have these laws on the books, allowing emergency personnel to defend themselves in the event someone makes an already dangerous situation far more so. Tennessee, Mississippi, and Virginia are considering the measures.

An ambush against first responders is an act of cowardice but it does guarantee headlines. Attacking the emergency personnel who are not there to deal with a violent threat, but a medical or environmental one, falls into the same train of thought as attacking an unarmed school.

I hope to see more states take these steps and allow FR’s to protect themselves as they are a proven target.

Concealed carry with several parameters makes sense. Having an accessible secure weapon on the rig to counter an attack. Secure so that a patient cannot access it, only the certified crew. This isn’t a situation where “just let them carry” is an easy fix, patient and FR crew safety must be accounted for on weapon access. Done properly this is a very viable tool.

SCOTUS Turns Down Suppressor Challenge

By

Keith Finch

-

June 11, 2019

Yesterday the Supreme Court of The United States (SCOTUS) rejected a challenge from Jeremy Kettler and Shane Cox that could have removed suppressors/silencers from the National Firearms Act.

A little background. In 2013 Kansas passed a law that exempted any item built in the state and that remained in the state from Federal firearms laws… allegedly. So in theory, under that law, a Kansas resident could build otherwise NFA controlled items in compliance with state law as long as the items were only transferred within the state.

So Cox made silencers.

After Kettler purchased a silencer from Cox and put it on Facebook the ATF got involved. Both Kettler and Cox were arrested, charged and convicted of violating the NFA, despite the Kansas law. Cox thought he could make them under the Kansas law and Kettler thought he could purchase them. The ATF disagreed.

Kettler and Cox appealed but…

But the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled the Second Amendment does not protect silencers, as they are not “bearable arms.” A gun suppressor, the Denver-based appeals court said, is a “firearm accessory; it’s not a weapon in itself.”

Umm.. that’s bullshit there 10th Circuit.

Silencers are Title II weapons under the National Firearms Act.

They are serialized and tracked in the NFA registry. They go on a 4473 form like any other firearm transfer. Legally, in all facets, they are weapons. They are more restricted than the average firearm. “Accessories” aren’t subject to any of those transfer requirements. Grips, stocks, magazines, triggers, and just about anything else you can accessorize a firearm with are not legally firearms and do not go through that process. But silencers do. So silencers are “accessories” when it is legally convenient for them to be and NFA firearms when it is legally convenient for them to be.. got it.

I’m not arguing what Kettler and Cox did didn’t violate the NFA. It did. I do agree the NFA is an egregious breach of the 2nd Amendment.

And the logic applied by the 10th Circuit is a steaming pile. No other “accessory” is handled like a silencer, not one.

There has been speculation that the President’s recent comments on a possible silencer ban influenced this ruling. While possible I don’t know if that was it. Combined with Virginia Beach shooting the optics would certainly look horrific, deregulating an item used in an attack like that would earn the full measure of undeserved ire. Announcing the NFA was open to new machine guns would have been just as impossible right after Las Vegas…

This sucks. That’s all there is to it. I think Kettler and Cox got hosed. I think the 10th Circuit used bullshit reasoning. And because of Virginia Beach and the President’s comments I think Kettler and Cox are staying hosed…

Shotgun Mini Shells – A Realistic Look

By

Travis Pike

-

June 10, 2019

In 2017 I saw the first Mossberg Shockwave at SHOT show. I got some time behind the gun and fell in love. It’s a fun gun. However, more importantly at SHOT they were loading it full of mini shells. This combined with the Opsol Mini Clip gave us a 12 gauge shotgun with a 14-inch barrel that could hold 9 rounds and cycle perfectly. These mini shells were fascinating to me and since then I’ve purchased and played with buckshot, slugs, and birdshot in the mini shell variety.

The two main producers of mini shells are Aguila and Federal. Federal entered the mini shell game earlier this year and was polite enough to send me both the bird shot and slug varieties of ammunition. Unfortunately, the buckshot wasn’t ready just yet. I also have some Aguila slugs and buckshot

I’ve shot a lot of this ammo and I feel I can give you an accurate assessment of mini shells.

Shotgun Compatibility

You can go ahead assume semi-autos are off the table, as are any mag-fed shotguns. However, what about pump shotguns? Will they work? Well…. Sometimes.

Any pump gun can run mini shells, however, they may not run reliably. Reportedly they work perfectly in the Kel-Tec KSG, and with the Opsol Mini Clip they run 100% in Mossberg 500 series shotguns. However, in most guns, they tend to hang up. They can flip, and slide, and make it impossible to cycle reliably. The Opsol works with the Mossberg because of the skeletonized shell lifter.

I’ve had them run in Winchesters and Remington, but you have to run the pump very hard and very fast. Even then it’s still spotty as to whether they will work or not.

Single and double barrel shotguns eat these things up with zero issues. At the end of the day a Mossberg 500 series with the Opsol Mini Clip, or a break barrel gun are what I’d suggest. The Mossberg Shockwave can be a challenge to shoot, but with these shells, it’s light recoiling, and easy to control.

Home Defense and Mini Shells?

I have to say no when it comes to any kind of home defense or duty use. Yes, in a pump gun with a magazine tube it will increase your capacity a lot. However, you are giving up the main feature of a shotgun, that devastating single shot power.

Of course these are still lethal, don’t mistake. The slugs are hitting as hard as a 44 magnum. That’s a lot of force for sure, but a regular 2 3/4″ shotgun shell is going to hit even harder. Plus, in a home defense scenario buckshot is often preferred. The spread of shot as it strikes the body making multiple wound channels simultaneously, a regular shell has more shot at a faster velocity.

Plus, the reliability aspect is always present. Federal advertises these are sporting rounds for the range, not as defensive loads.

Survival Preparation

Here is a serious task these shells can excel at. Shotgun ammo is big and heavy, but shotguns are incredibly common and very versatile. This ammo will allow you to carry more shotgun ammo. At close ranges, these are great hunting rounds. Especially when we look at the slugs.

Six Rounds in a gun that normally fits three

The birdshot loads are more than capable of taking small game at close range too. Even if it’s less than half the size of a standard shell it won’t have issues taking small game and birds.

In a pinch, these could be a self-defense choice if your main rifle is down.

Training

Here is another excellent task for these shells. If you only own a 12 gauge shotgun and want to teach new shooters mini shells are excellent. These shells will allow you to teach new shooters the basics of a shotgun without the fearsome recoil. They can learn how to load, shoot, and use shotguns without nearly the risk of injury or scaring themselves.

Hunting

Outside of a survival situation, I would still take 2 3/4 or 3-inch shells for hunting deer and hogs. It is more powerful and more humane to use the proper ammo. You’ll get better range, better penetration, and loads designed for hunting. In a survival situation, things are a little different.

Mini Shells For Fun?

Here is where these shells really shine. When paired with a Mossberg Shockwave these shells are an absolute blast. They make it easy to handle, and fun to shoot without the control challenge standard shells have.

Ringing steel at 50 yards with the slug mini shells is pretty damn fun. It gives you a real sense of pride and accomplishment. If you have the ability to I also suggest trying to hit some clays with the mini shell birdshot.

Ultimately Mini shells are like any other shotgun load out there. They have their place and are a tool to put in the box. The shotgun is a versatile weapon and these provide one more option for shotgunners. Be it for prepping, for fun, or for small game hunting.

Why Does the Second Amendment Refer to “The People”?

By

DRGO

-

June 10, 2019

(from sigsauer.com)

Madison’s draft of the Second Amendment declares that “the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed”. He could have left out “of the People” without loss of meaning if he intended to guarantee that natural right to all. Alternatively, he could have defined the class of protected persons with some other term. For example, the Third Amendment pertains to “the Owner”. The Fifth Amendment reads “No person . . . “ The Sixth Amendment refers to “the accused”.

Consistency in constitutional interpretation precludes assuming any word to be happenstance. And, of course, the ratifying generation accepted this limitation of right to “the People”. Regardless of whatever might have been on anyone’s mind in the 18^th century, the Second Amendment was written and ratified with this constraint which we may not sweep under the rug.

Today, the debate concerning “the People” is focused on whether the right was intended to be limited to the militia. Instead, I wonder who Madison and the founding generation understood would be excluded from the class “the People”. (On occasion, the militia included a few individuals who would not have been construed to be full-fledged members of the political community.)

A 16^th century perspective would imply that native Americans would be excluded from the class “the People”. However, this hypothesis is unpersuasive in that, by the 18^th Century, it was clear that a policy of “no guns for Indians” was unnecessary and impractical. Hostile Indians had been driven far from territories well populated by colonists. Belligerent Indians on the frontier were being supplied with arms by French and other traders beyond the control of the English colonies. A 19^th century perspective would imply that slaves and free blacks might be excluded from “the People”. While obviously true, it’s difficult to imagine that this consideration was high in the founders’ minds. Slaves were under the absolute control of their masters. Few Blacks were free and these were not deemed any threat in the 1780’s.

What was fresh in the minds of the founding generation was the Revolutionary War. Only 1/3 of the population were thought to have favored independence. Another 1/3 were indifferent. The remaining 1/3 were Loyalists and most of them were still around in the 1780’s. Revolutionaries disarmed Loyalists without the slightest compunction.

The hypothesis in this essay is that the right to arms was reserved to “the People” to preserve the majority’s power to disarm any who might not be loyal to the Constitution. This seems plausible for a federal government intent upon preserving and defending the Constitution. It seems incongruous to believe that the founding generation intended to allow an ambitious government to undermine the Constitution by disarming the People who ordained and established that document.

Today, as in the early 20^th Century, there is a struggle for power between factions we may call “Radicals” and “Reactionaries” on opposite sides of the political spectrum. Control over our government shifts back and forth, or so it seems to partisans in the struggle. What is objective fact and what is perception is difficult to discern in politics. But it is clear that perception drives sentiment.

According to the Marbury v. Madison doctrine of Constitutional interpretation, the advocate able to persuade a majority of a Court’s justices prevails in the debate. Imagine if Reactionaries captured a majority of seats on the Supreme Court, along with both houses of Congress and the White House. The question might arise as to the Constitutionality of a law disarming seditious inhabitants of the United States. Judges might be authorized to ask suspects: “Are you now, or ever been, a member of any Radical organization?” And, thereupon, issue an Extreme Risk Confiscation Order stripping any such suspect of his arms.

Such was the problem faced by abolitionists and Republicans before and after the Civil War. Supporters of Southern interests sought to outlaw concealed carry, or any carry for that matter, in part to prevent free blacks and political opponents from being able to defend themselves against extra-legal violence. As Karl Marx wisely implored his readers, “the workers must be armed and organized. The whole proletariat must be armed at once with muskets, rifles, cannon and ammunition, and the revival of the old-style citizens’ militia, directed against the workers, must be opposed.” Likewise, Chairman Mao declared: “Political power emerges from the barrel of a gun.”

To return to contemporaneous usage, Progressives, as well as Communists and Democratic Socialists, see their political-economic visions as the inevitable course of history. Nevertheless, the dialectical ebb and flow of political power causes the “inevitable” to be reversed at times. Those committed to gun control advocacy should bear in mind that it is not inevitable that they will always be in control.

When Conservatives hold power, the interpretation of “the People” in the Second Amendment could shift the balance of power against Progressive objectives. Once accomplished, history shows that such change is not easily reversed.

The only policy that would be intrinsically resistant to power struggles among factions seeking to rule over an unarmed majority would be universal arms ownership, as is mostly the practice in America, Switzerland and Israel. In reverse order, Israel has near universal conscription of both men and women. While off-duty, those in service often carry their arms. After completing service, they are often licensed to carry government-owned arms. Switzerland has universal male conscription with a long period of reserve status. After military service is completed, veterans are permitted to keep their rifles. And, of course, in America we take the “right to keep and bear arms” as a badge of citizenship. Some judicial or quasi-judicial act is prerequisite to losing this right.

There is an important distinction between rights and privileges. A right is held generally by members of a class, e.g., citizens inhabiting a state enjoy the right to vote. A privilege is granted to specific individuals.

The line between a right and a privilege is often obscure. A privilege is often identifiable by the prerequisite of a license in the form of a certificate. Even so, the right to vote has traditionally been evidenced by a voter registration card. We speak of the privilege of operating a motor vehicle on public roads as evidenced by a driver’s license.

We can say with a high degree of confidence that holding a “right”, like the Second Amendment assures, precludes most tests or qualifications prerequisite to lawfully keeping and bearing arms. Constitutionally, one could be obliged to evidence membership in the class “the People” (however that broad term is defined). For example, one could be obliged to evidence having reached the age of majority, whether that might be defined as 16, 18 or 21. But on meeting the definition, one should enjoy the “the right” of “the People” without additional tests.

A citizen may be “dis-abled” of a right by law upon conviction of certain crimes or if adjudicated incompetent. Any such act of government must be held to strict standards of legal due process. We would not find it acceptable to strip an adult citizen of either the right to vote or to keep and bear arms based on a conviction for jay-walking or having an IQ below 123. We must be concerned with the propensity of government to excessively limit the standards for exercising the rights of citizenship.

People with felony convictions account for 8% of the population, that is, one-twelfth of “the People” can be denied their rights to vote or keep arms on this criterion of dis-ablement. That figure is small enough, and for a generally accepted reason, not to be alarming. However, 33% of Black males are felons. What if those convicted of misdemeanors subject to sentences of 2 or more years in jail and domestic violence crimes were added to that figure? The fraction of dis-abled members of this minority group might exceed 40%.

When should we begin to wonder whether this minority constituency would become unfairly deprived of their sovereign rights? As Thomas Jefferson put it: “[W]henever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.”

The foregoing may illuminate some of the implications of the Second Amendment’s reference to “the People”. It should be out of the question for rights, such as to keep and bear arms, to be limited to arbitrary sub-classes such as those formally enrolled in state militias, sworn police officers, those privately employed in protecting the wealthy, or those who are left-handed.

The Supreme Court held in Heller v. D.C. that “the enshrinement of constitutional rights necessarily takes certain policy choices off the table.” Thus, the only truly politically correct approach to Second Amendment rights is near universal, even-handed, natural qualification with very limited exceptions. That requires, essentially, a “shall-issue” approach to the right of all qualified Americans to keep and bear arms.

.

—‘MarkPA’ is trained in economics, a life-long gun owner, NRA Instructor and Massad Ayoob graduate. He is inspired by our inalienable rights to “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness” and holds that having the means to defend oneself and one’s community is vital to securing them.

All DRGO articles by ‘MarkPA’

HOG HUNTING WITH THE XD-M

By

The Armory Life

-

June 10, 2019

Pigs have become invasive throughout much of the United States, damaging farm land and running off native wildlife that many land owners would rather not see leave. What has been one man’s problem has conversely become another man’s pursuit. The sport of hunting pigs is a burgeoning one with ever more hunters looking to fill tags and their freezers.

For folks from much of the Midwest like myself, we thankfully have not been overrun by pigs, but still would like the thrill of that type of hunt, and honestly, who doesn’t love bacon? So I booked a hunt with the good folks from Big Oak Elk Ranch in West Union, Iowa so I could bring home the bacon, too!

Gear Load-Out

To do a pig hunt where you are on the confines of a game farm, yet dealing with a wild animal, I did not want to bring the entire kitchen sink with me on my hunt. I decided to challenge myself by using a handgun for the hunt. Beyond that, three decisions for gear had to be made: firearm, holster and ammunition.

Firearm: Springfield Armory XD-M 5.25″ Competition Series Model 10mm

Holster: Galco Silhouette High Ride Belt Holster

Ammunition: Federal Premium 10mm Auto 180 Grain Trophy Bonded Bear Claw

I chose the Springfield Armory XD-M Competition 10mm because of its sighting radius, match barrel, magazine capacity, and stopping power. “Which is the best handgun pig cartridge?” could be argued until the cows come home, but there is no denying the strength of the 10mm Auto. The Galco holster was something well-worn that I already owned, and the Federal ammo was a no-brainer for its 650 ft-lbs of energy.

Preparation for the Hunt

The recoil of a 10mm is likely more than most of us who constantly shoot 9mm or .22 LR are used to, myself included. However, it is something very manageable in the Springfield Armory XD-M Competition 10mm. I shot roughly 50 rounds of American Eagle FMJ to refamiliarize myself with the recoil and to sight-in my XD-M out to 20 yards. I made this a slow, concerted exercise and felt very confident leading into the hunt.

Read the whole hunt with our friends over at The Armory Life

“Anybody can buy any weapon … without much, if any, regulation,” including “machine guns.”

By

Keith Finch

-

June 7, 2019

-President Barack Obama, 30th May 2019

Mr. President, that is news to me.

Allow me to be the first to forward your comments to the Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco Firearms & Explosives and they should be able to release my pending tax stamp and refund me my $200.00 because those regulations do not exist. I’m certain that conversation will go splendidly. I really do want my X95.

I can also go off and find a full auto trigger system for several of my rifles and handguns, right? One of those Wish switches should do the trick for a Glock. There are no legal repercussions because there are no regulations. I can buy whatever I want!

Right? ATF? Why am I going away in handcuffs!?

Reality

While our former President may feel like our system is fast and loose the reality is a vastly different matter. As a current example, I’ve been chasing a rifle that I need delivered through FedEx for 3 days now because it must be delivered to a Federal Firearm Licensee… all because of regulation.

1. Anybody can buy a weapon.

Except…

Under 18 years old for any firearm
Under 21 years old for a handgun from a licensed dealer
Felon. Any felony, no tie to violence required. Alabama: residents commit unlawful bear exploitation if they purchase, possess, or train a bear for the purpose of bear wrestling. It’s a Class B felony, punishable by a fine, confiscation of the bear, and restitution to a humane society for animals. In Montana, derailing a train or stopping it with sheep also carries this prohibition.
Use Marijuana.. at all for any reason.
Under any Personal Protective Order
Dishonorably Discharged from the Armed Forces
Conviction for Domestic Violence, Misdemeanor

These are just the Federal restrictions. States may impose further restrictions such as possession of a license in order to purchase or a Firearm Owners Identification Card or FOID.

So no, not “anybody can buy” a weapon legally.

2. Any weapon

Nope.

Starting with only the two different age requirements between handguns and rifles, this is not accurate. Add to that a myriad of state restrictions and variations on things like magazines, “assault weapons”, and specific item/device or firearm type bans and “any weapon” vanishes quickly into a quagmire of legal problems.

The National Firearms Act alone with its Title I and Title II classifications on firearms and devices puts even nearly identical guns into vastly different legal boxes.

Buying a Title II Firearm, which I’m in the middle of. Here’s the “regulation free” process thus far to “buy any weapon”.

IWI X95 Short Barrel Rifle, factory model. (Characteristics are the same as just about every 5.56x45mm rifle or pistol)
Start – Early December 2018
IWI must submit the serial number # to the ATF as being manufactured into a Short Barreled Rifle. ATF Form 1
ATF must approve and send back that the serial number and characteristics are recorded in the NFA registry. ATF Form 1 approval.
IWI must ship the rifle to my NFA item approved dealer, a certification beyond a standard Federal Firearms License known as an Special Occupational Tax (SOT).
IWI applies to ship the firearm with the ATF going from themselves to the NFA approved dealer. ATF Form 3.
The ATF approves the transfer and the serial number is moved from IWI to my SOT holding FFL. ATF Form 3 approval.
FFL completes a minor business restructure, changes official name. Must get an entirely new FFL and SOT (cannot be applied for simultaneously to the best of my knowledge, FFL must be complete first to issue a number to tie the SOT into)
FFL must have the ATF transfer all his current NFA inventory back to himself under the new official business name, FFL license number, and SOT. Many ATF Form 3’s…
ATF approves all the items to still be in the possession of the FFL under the new license numbers. ATF Form 3 Approvals.
Keep in mind any typo on any one of these forms results in the process, at best, pausing to get the information entirely accurate. A variance as minor as typing 13″ or 13in into the length column of the barrel length descriptor when the ATF Form 1 only says 13 can result in the entire process halting and a new form being required.
Get two passport photos and two full FBI fingerprint cards done up (the ATF already has me on file. I own another NFA applicable rifle, also in the DoD and DoJ databases for employment. None of that matters)
Submit an ATF Form 4 costing a $200 tax and in triplicate to transfer the rifle serial number to me as owner. April 2019. Average approval time from this point is about 320 days, with the lowest at 67 days out of 2,949 records.

Likely 18 months of regulation free regulations right there for a rifle with the same basic capabilities as a “Firearm”, a Title I classification, that I built. The parts are just in slightly different spots.

3. Machine Guns

Ha! Haha! Hahahaha!

The National Firearms Act makes buying a machine gun the same process I am currently going through with my X95. The Firearm Owners Protection Act signed May 19th, 1986 closed the sale of new production machine guns to the public. Anything made after May 19th, 1986 and not on the NFA registry as a transferable firearm cannot be sold. Period.

And that, ladies and gentlemen, is the surface of the United States of America’s “regulation free” firearms market. We’re basically Bakaara over there in Mogadishu.

The ARC by PHLster

By

Keith Finch

-

June 7, 2019

The team over at PHLster and Steve Fisher of Sentinel Concepts have been teasing us with this little device for awhile now. This morning PHLster pulled back the curtain.

For years, serious shooters have been executing DIY modifications to their WML switches. Using JB Weld, putty, or epoxy, shooters have been improving their speed and consistency of WML activation by building up the small switch nubs on their lights. Drawing on those years of end-user experience, PHLster is excited to announce the launch of their ARC Enhanced WML Switches.

Shipping as a set of three pairs of switch enhancements, the ARC allows users to decrease the distance between activation fingers and switches, optimize their light for right or left handed use, improve speed and consistency of activation based on their preferred method, and reliably engage the WML switches with gloved or wet hands. Each set of switch enhancements includes a Large, Extra Large, and Extra Large Blank set of switches. The L and XL are both aggressively textured and the XL Blank allows users to shape, carve, and stipple the switches to fit their specific requirements, while remaining within a holster-friendly dimension.

If you have short fingers, are tired of compromising your grip to activate the WML, dislike grip switches, need more reach to activate the switches when installed on certain pistols, or just want to make WML activation faster and easier, the PHLster ARC is a necessary upgrade.

Switch installation is easy and requires no permanent modification. The stock switch nubs are easily removed with pliers or a small screwdriver and the enhanced switch endcaps press on to the switch armature bar. And, the ARC switch enhancements fit pretty much every decent WML holster on the market, including Safariland and many, many others.

At launch, the ARC is available at PHLsterHolsters.com and BigTexOutdoors.com for $24.99.

Trump on Silencer Ban: “I’m going to seriously look at it.”

By

Keith Finch

-

June 6, 2019

180220163143-donald-trump-bump-stock-ban-1280x720 — Image from CNN coverage of the speech

The President, speaking with Piers Morgan on Good Morning Britain, has followed up his quick comments boarding Marine One with more that suggest he has banning firearm silencers on his table. Trump moved to ban bumpstocks in the wake of Mandalay Bay and moving on silencers would be in the same vein of activity, meaning the “the war on the 2nd Amendment is over” President would accomplish far more gun control than President Obama (although he told a series of lies in Brazil concerning U.S. Gun laws).

The real practical question will be, as an NFA regulated item already, what can he do?

The legal footwork that allowed the bumpstock ban used the NFA to classify them as “new” machine guns.

Silencers do not inhabit that same part of the National Firearms Act and aren’t subject to the same reclassification. Banning the devices would be an act passed through Congress. Such an act would certainly pass the House and could likely be passed in the Senate with President’s support. But will it get that far?

During the interview the President turned the questions towards knife violence domestically in London. His language suggests he has “a belief” at some level that supports the 2nd Amendment and self defense like he stated at NRAAM. His opinion didn’t include bumpstocks and apparently does not include silencers. A silencer ban could be okay in his mind, he stated however “I don’t love the idea of it.”

That statement may be in reaction to the highly negative response from the firearms community who could see this action as a pattern discrediting his vocal support of the 2nd Amendment. It would be seen as a hypocritical act and proof that he would move gun control after every remotely horrific act of violence. Trump has expressed support for concealed carry reciprocity, the AR15, and many other aspects of the Right to Keep and Bare Arms. However anything he personally does not like under the 2nd Amendment umbrella he seems to extend as unnecessary for all and that his opinion is the sole guiding arbiter.

We will see when this hits the courts.

VICE News No-Show

By

DRGO

-

June 6, 2019

(from vice.com)

[Ed: On May 2, DRGO received an email from a VICE reporter who said “I would love to tell you more about what I am working on and to hear your thoughts“ about a proposed documentary about “firearms and dementia”. Dr. Przebinda, our Project Director, replied offering to talk. No response. So I sent the longer reply below on May 9, taking the opportunity to point out some of the shortfalls in a documentary about women shooters, provided as an example of VICE’s work: Fear and Loading: Meet the NRA’s Most Wanted Customer. Still no response. but we always hope to educate someone a little bit more.]

Hello *****,

Glad you contacted us. We are always interested in communicating the facts about responsibly armed Americans who value the Second Amendment. I am replying on behalf of Dr. Przebinda and myself.

DRGO’s position on dealing with dementing gun owners is that families and caretakers, advised by their doctors, are responsible for ensuring relatives’ safety in every way, including by deciding whether to restrict access to firearms, cars, sharps, gas stoves, etc.—just like they should do for children. Is there any good reason to pass laws intruding in such private matters? No. How often do we hear about an elderly person with dementia shooting someone when there was no one previously in a position to have intervened?

I reviewed the video you linked Fear and Loading: Meet the N RA’s Most Wanted Customer. You clearly presented “both sides” of the question about women choosing to learn to shoot in order to protect themselves. It is unusual to see media present the pro- side first or at such length, and I am impressed by that.

Yet I also noted all the unchallenged misinformation included in the following segments with Susan Nelson:

1. Manisha Krishnan’s comment: “The NRA says to women that having a gun in your house will stop you from getting attacked.” You must know that’s not true. Having a gun (and knowing how to properly use it) is a way to defend against an attack. It won’t prevent one, and no one says that. (The converse is that labelled public “gun-free zones” do invite attackers, while places where people can carry almost never are attacked.) Of course, Nelson’s response is a complete non sequitur, telling her moving story of being shot years ago. But living “with a bullet in my brain” confers no expertise on public policy, let alone on firearms she has never learned to use.

2. She adds “More than likely, a gun’s going to be taken from you and used against you.” That’s absolutely the opposite of reality. It’s happening to her, again, is no reason to consider her knowledgeable about the subject. See “Myth: Guns are not effective in preventing crimes against women” with it’s well-footnoted references.

3. “Studies that show women successfully using a gun in self-defense are few and far between.” On my desk is a book I recently reviewed for DRGO: #MeToo: Women Who Shot Men in Self-Defense. That includes 257 incidents, nearly all from 2015-2018, derived from media reports. The greater likelihood of women being killed than successfully defending themselves is based on the fact that many more men have firearms than do their victimized female partners. Being “murdered by a gun” is no more murdered than by any other means, and only firearm possession and the skill to use it can equalize women’s chances against bigger, stronger, more aggressive males who mostly kill women by other means. About 75% of women killed by partners in domestic violence happen after they’ve left the violent partner. That is exactly when the women should have been armed. (Obviously, leaving is the first most important step.)

4. “Gun safety reform” is a gun control meme that has nothing to do with “gun safety”, which is actually about how you use a gun, not restrictive laws that dictate peripheral actions, e.g., storing it locked in one room with ammunition locked elsewhere. That’s typical and makes firearms useless in an emergency.

5. Krishnan states that “Texas has some of the loosest gun regulations in the country”–as if that’s bad. How about, alternatively, “some of the most reasonable”. Yes, a Constitutional right that “shall not be infringed” clearly must limit gun control regulations. Training is highly desirable, but exercising a right can’t be contingent.

6. Krishnan says: “FBI data, women are 100 times more likely to be fatally shot by a man than to actually use a gun in self-defense.” That’s entirely a result of who has the gun and the willingness to use it. Just having a gun in the home does NOT make it dangerous, and the early pseudo-research claiming that was long ago revealed as invalid data being manipulated into those conclusions.

7. Krishnan’s repeated reference to “the gun lobby” is disturbing. That lumps together half the American population, rights advocacy groups like NRA and many others, and the firearm manufacturing and training industries. “Gun lobby” has become an anti-gun meme that demeans all the people trying to protect their rights and their families from others who are ignorant about firearms and want to believe that laws restricting possessing and bearing guns would make any difference. Good research has shown that’s not true.

8. “Can women stand up to a $51 billion a year industry?” Excuse me, but that statement is utterly sexist. Women are for good reason (along with minorities) the fastest growing segment of our population choosing to own and use firearms. Women are also “the gun lobby.” “Targeting women because we’re weak and they’re going to save us” . . . that doesn’t even make sense. Gun rights organizations exist for one reason–not money, not “influence”, except in order to protect the imperiled civil and Constitutional right to keep and bear arms. If that were better respected, there’d be no gun rights “lobby”.

So, I am still concerned about the inaccuracies of that piece about women and guns, but recognize that it came out somewhat better than many. I’d be glad to talk with you about the possibility of an interview.

Again, thank you for reaching out to us!

Best regards,

Robert B. Young, MD
Editor, DRGO.us

.

— 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.

All DRGO articles by Robert B. Young, MD

Deer Vasectomy Boondoggle

By

Dr LateBloomer

-

June 5, 2019

Oh, Borough of Staten Island, why you have wandered into Crazytown?

According to this article the state of New York, which recorded an apparent record high deer harvest of 308,216 animals in 2002, contains a certain borough of New York City which in an effort to control local deer populations has now reduced itself to… buck vasectomies.

You read that correctly. Staten Island, New York has apparently spent 4.1 million dollars over the past three years to sterilize 1577 male whitetail deer. That’s $12,975 per buck. For cost comparison, I wasn’t sure what the average cost of a human vasectomy was, so I Googled it.

According to this reference, the average U.S. human vasectomy costs in the ball park of a couple or three thousand dollars, including follow-ups.

I don’t know the ins and outs of veterinary medicine, but I imagine the huge cost differential between a human and deer snip job is related to sentience and ability to cooperate. You can’t just invite a buck into the clinic and give him a local. And you can’t just send him home with a bag of frozen peas and instructions to watch basketball on TV for a few days. There is tranquilization involved. And transport. And behavior considerations.

I imagine that human costs would go up too if you had to dart Bro-dudes as they staggered out of the sports bar, drag them into a medical truck, make sure you hadn’t already snipped them last season, do the deed, tag their ears, drag them back to where you found them in front of the bar, and watch to make sure that they didn’t hurt themselves as they were waking up and trying to figure out what the eff just happened and why their privates hurt like the devil.

So, I get that deer vasectomy is expensive. But my question is why is this even considered a viable option? Especially in a state chock-ful of deer hunters.

It’s because of the Bambi-ization of city dwellers. These are people who purchase their meat precut, on shrink-wrapped styrofoam trays. This is, IF they eat meat at all, and not just super-pre-processed tofu burgers from Whole Paycheck Mart.

Controlled hunts provide high quality protein to homeless shelters, soup kitchens, and food banks. And you can even sell licenses in a lottery to offset other costs. Hiring sharpshooters is another option, and although probably more expensive than a controlled hunt, would undoubtedly give faster deer population reduction for much less than the millions of dollars already wasted.

This boondoggle has resulted in a reduction of approximately 316 animals by last estimation. Over the course of three years. A well-executed controlled hunt could do that over the course of a few days.

But, the Bambi-ized citizens of Staten Island don’t see that hunting these animals – even if the meat is used to feed the hungry – is an option. No, they treat these wild animals as if they were human beings, and insist on projecting a human medical procedure as a “solution” to overpopulation of these anthropomorphized ungulates.

If they’re going to treat these deer like humans, they should do something useful. For $12,975 each, you could send all those young bucks to trade school instead. Get them out of the woods and into useful careers where they’re too busy earning high wages to waste time reproducing, I say. If you’re going to anthropomorphize, you might as well do it right.

Granted it’s their money. But I could think of about a million better ways to spend it than on deer vasectomies, couldn’t you?

“I Don’t Like Them At All” Silencers

By

Keith Finch

-

June 4, 2019

While boarding Marine One on his trip to the U.K our President, who so recently spoke at the NRA Annual Meeting, was quoted quickly as saying he did not like firearm silencers. “I don’t like the at all.”, President Trump stated amid a flurry of other questions on Mexico, the U.K., Australia, and other topics.

Does this mean action against the NFA regulated items?

Who knows… The President is certainly known for off the cuff remarks and for whatever his opinion is as he understands the topic the moment he is asked. His history on firearms items that generate controversy is not encouraging though. RIP bumpstocks.

The major difference is that silencers are National Firearms Act controlled items already, they fall under the strictest level of federal gun control. Silencer owners are taxed, they are are fingerprinted and tied specifically to the silencer, and they must wait months to complete their purchase as an investigation is conducted into their background. What more can you ask of them?

Ban.

Gun control proponents would love themselves a good hearty ban. It would accomplish nothing to improve homicide rates, violent crime, or mass shooting statistics but it would give them momentum in the legislative direction they would prefer.

It’s a little early to panic.. Never to early to pay attention.

It was one comment during the portion of the tragedy news cycle that has latched onto silencers as the item to blame for this workplace violence incident. That’s how we term these events right? Nidal Hasan? Oh wait no, he had a known motive when he attacked a government building full of soldiers whose care he was charged with as a Medical Corps. Officer.

As the President concludes his visit to the U.K. and returns we will see if he directs any actions against silencers or makes moves for gun control like he did with bumpstocks. But for now we wait.

Virginia Beach: The Silencer

By

Keith Finch

-

June 3, 2019

The silencer the silencer the silencer… oh, and the silencer. Talking heads are running hard on the National Firearms Act controlled items.

Silencers or suppressors are devices added to the muzzle of a firearm to reduce the extremely loud gas discharge of a gunshot by about 25-30 decibels. That is approximately the same noise reduction you get from putting in properly rated earplugs. The term is legally and practically interchangeable, either word means the same device.

AP News opened their analysis with this however…

It’s the nightmare scenario that gun-control advocates have warned about amid efforts in recent years to ease restrictions on the devices, which they say can help shooters escape detection and inflict more carnage.

“Nightmare scenario, escape detection, more carnage” all credited to the use of a suppressor. Yet Craddock (the shooter) didn’t escape detection at all, he died in a gunfight with the police. An attack on the workplace fits the ‘nightmare scenario’ descriptor entirely independently of the suppressor. The suppressor didn’t enable the deaths of 12 people, his actions with his access did.

What do we know?

Not as much as we would like. Confirmation on whether he owned the suppressor for his .45 legally under the NFA hasn’t been confirmed however the firearms were (as last reported) legally acquired. If the NFA paperwork were done there is no reason the suppressor wouldn’t be legal either.

We know Craddock was a public works engineer in good employment standing. That he tendered resignation with a 2 week notice earlier that same day for “personal reasons” and then attacked his place of employment killing 12 and wounding 4. He was very familiar with the building, the people there, and there was no known reason to bar Craddock from the premises as he was still employed.

Police response time was two minutes. The responding officers searched and four of them engaged Craddock in a firefight on the second floor, wounding him fatally.

Did the suppressor/silencer matter?

No.

“A suppressor does not alter the lethality of the weapon at all. All it does is just limit the noise it makes,” said Gregory Shaffer, a retired FBI agent who was a member of the bureau’s elite Hostage Response Team. “It doesn’t increase the rate of fire. It doesn’t do anything other than make it more comfortable to shoot because it’s not so loud.” – USA Today

In a broad analysis of the entirety of the situation a suppressor provides an immaterial advantage. The suppressor didn’t give Craddock access to the building interior, familiarity with the building floor plan, or a rapport with his coworkers. His employment did.

A suppressor on a .45 does reduce noise to a notably significant degree.

Because .45 ACP is a subsonic round (slower than the speed of sound) it already does not produce one of the two noisest factors of a gunshot, the sonic crack by breaking the sound barrier. The suppressor lowers the second factor, the noisy gas discharge at the muzzle. A suppressed .45 is a “quiet” firearm. Craddock, using the suppressor, limited one of his detectable signatures and that was the ‘advantage’ gained. This does nothing to limit any aware individuals from reacting to his actions or shooting back (as officers did).

Would a louder firearm have changed the building occupant’s reaction?

Possibly… but not likely. Those not immediately under attack, if they recognized the noise independently of other factors, could evacuate. There is nothing in an office building remotely like good cover. Looking at that factor alone the suppressor appears to be a lethality enhancement. Looking at the situation and removing the suppressor however wouldn’t have changed the access for, speed of, and surprise achieved for the attack.

While talking know-nothings may focus on the silencer, experts focused on those lethal modes of action.

Drawn Conclusions

Craddock’s attack on his place of work seems to be largely to totally without warning. No threats to his employer (the DPW), the city, or other motives are available at this time. There was no reason for DPW or Law Enforcement to consider him a special threat. This may end up being an unknown motive attack similar to Mandalay Bay.

If there are no warning signs there cannot be a build up or intervention beyond general active shooter/workplace violence preparation. Physical onsite security and individual response procedure for the DPW building is not known at this time: emergency medical preparedness, lockdown procedures, etc.

What is known is that Craddock had full access to the building as a badged and active employee. The majority of offices everywhere are woefully underprepared for this emergency. It is the Department of Public Works, not a forward operating base (those get breached too by the way).

After the initial emergency call was placed the response to site is listed at 2 minutes. That’s as textbook a perfect response time as could be asked for in any emergency. Officers entered, found Caddock, and ended the threat. Caddock died of his wounds.

Defensive response could be improved for the site in two ways. Dedicated armed staff or allowance of concealed carry by staff and contractors. Dedicated uniformed armed staff would be a priority target in an attack but their presence may further deter an attack and depending on their level of training and equipment they can survive the initial shots and respond. Concealed carry allowed on site undisclosed would mean any potential attacker is walking into a proverbial minefield of people who can shoot back without a reliable way, other than first hand knowledge from conversations, to target armed persons. This situation also produces a strong deterrent effect by shifting the survivability odds and theoretical time unopposed during the attack drastically against them.

This security theory vs security theater. Theater looks good on paper but is easily circumvented. Theory acknowledges limitations of all approaches and puts policies in place to best generate effective responses.

Final thoughts

12 people died in Virginia Beach because their coworker decided to take their lives. Not because of guns, silencers, the phase of the moon, high tide, or any other extrapolative backflip.

Presidential Candidate Cory Booker couldn’t answer a simple question when asked about this attack. Booker couldn’t name a policy change that would have prevented this, only trot out the asinine party platitudes of “thoughts and prayers aren’t enough!”

You’re right Cory, thoughts and prayers are not enough. Hope is not an effective emergency plan, so perhaps we start listening to people who are experts in the area of emergency planning. This dedicated cadre of professionals who don’t feel like lying about safety for the sake of feelings, bruised egos, or political points might have an idea.

Police Response Time – Why You Should Own Guns

By

DRGO

-

May 31, 2019

[Ed: Kevin Murphy said that our articles inspired him to write this. We said that we want to repost it. We are, with his permission, and hope he will become a regular contributor. First published 4/24/19, updated 5/21/19 on GunGoal.com.]

Suppose one is considering whether he/she should get a gun for home defense, disregarding all other factors such as 2A supporter and fun of shooting sports, one crucial determinant is how fast and reliable the cops could come to his/her emergency call.

Many scientific studies (and common sense) tell us that the shorter the police response time, the higher arrest rate¹, safety² and satisfaction.

In this article, I’ll be digging into data of police response time, factors that lengthen/shorten police response time, average time criminal took to complete a crime and lastly, is buying a gun for self and home defense a good idea.

Table of Contents

Time for Police to Respond to an Emergency Call

A Nationwide Study

Source : Police Response Times to Calls for Service: Fragmentation, Community Characteristics, and Efficiency – Daniel S. Bennett (Nov 2018)³

A dispatcher takes an emergency call at the Jackson, Tennessee 9-1-1 Dispatch Center. (2003)

Daniel S. Bennett, the researcher made a series of Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests to 249 different police and law enforcement agencies across the nation for every record of Computer Aided Dispatch (CAD) systems during January 2015 to December 2016.

Though almost every agency responded to his initial request, only 57 agencies provided him with data citing technical limitations. Typical technical limitation is that their CAD systems were not designed to allow users to extract customized reports, and the default reports contained personal information, such as names, that would have to be redacted by hand and thus prohibitively expensive to assemble.

17 out of these 57 datasets were incomplete and were dropped from the study. Final sample of 40 datasets consists of 7.5 million CAD (Computer Aided Dispatch) events, of which, 3.4 million were public calls for service.

Before we continue, let’s take a look at some definitions.

Police Response Time = The time between the call being created by CAD (Computer Aided Dispatch) system and the first officer arriving on scene
High Priority – The researcher classified incidents into Priority 1, 2 and 3.
- Priority 1 = Calls that require an immediate response, which includes crimes in progress and some medical emergencies
- Priority 2 = Calls requiring an expedited response, which includes crimes that occurred recently, some traffic accidents, etc…
- Priority 3 = Calls that require a routine response, which includes crimes without a suspect, noise complaints, reports and patrols, etc..

Generally, police respond to Priority 1 calls faster due to urgent nature of the calls. For our purpose, we’ll be focusing on the police response time of Priority 1 calls of this paper.

From those 40 datasets, there are :

	Calls	Percentage
Priority 1	667,172	19.44%
Priority 2	1,608,127	46.86%
Priority 3	1,156,145	33.69%
Total	3,431,444	100.00%

Research findings

Police response time in minutes for each priority calls :

	Priority 1	Priority 2	Priority 3
Mean	24.8	37.8	94.3
Median	8.8	12.3	22.7
SD	81.5	93.2	175.9

According to this data, 50% of the time (Median), police can respond within 8.8 minutes for priority 1 calls. Average and standard deviation are much higher than median, suggesting much slower response time for other unfortunate cases.

Cumulative Distribution Function of Raw Response Times in Minutes by Priority

For Priority 1 calls :

Responded within	Probability	Cumulative Probability
5 minutes	20%	20%
5 – 8.8 minutes	30%	50%
8.8 – 12 minutes	10%	60%
12 – 18 minutes	20%	80%
18 – 60 minutes	15%	95%
More than 60 minutes	5%	100%

The above is a national data. Let’s take a closer look at police response time rate of each city.

Police Response Time by City

20 cities’ average police response time, land areas, population estimates and population density.

Rank	City	Data period	Average police response time (mm:ss)	2016 land area (sq mi)	2017 population estimate	2016 population density (per sq mi)
1	Jacksonville, FL	2017	3:13⁴	747.4	892,062	1,178
2	Chicago, IL	Jan 1, 2012 – Feb 12, 2012	3:28⁵	227.3	2,716,450	11,900
3	Allen, TX	2015	4:17⁶	27.1	100,685	3,715
4	San Francisco, CA	July 2017 – June 2018	5:30⁷	46.9	884,363	18,569
5	Houston, TX	Jan 2019 – Feb 2019	5:35⁸	637.5	2,312,717	3,613
6	Los Angeles, CA	Dec 2017	6:06⁹	468.7	3,999,759	8,484
7	New York City, NY	Jan 7, 2019 – March 25, 2019	6:18¹⁰	301.5	8,622,698	28,317
8	Seattle, WA	2018	6:20¹¹	83.8	724,745	8,405
9	Phoenix, AZ	Feb 1, 2017 – May 31, 2017	6:27¹²	517.6	1,626,078	3,120
10	Washington, D.C.	2017	6:41¹³	61.1	693,972	11,148
11	San Antonio, TX	2017	6:48¹⁴	461	1,511,946	3,238
12	Austin, TX	2018	7:09¹⁵	312.7	950,715	3,031
13	Indianapolis, IN	2011	7:12¹⁶	361.5	863,002	2,366
14	Boston, MA	2011	7:40¹⁷	48.3	685,094	13,938
15	Dallas, TX	Jan 1, 2019 – Feb 12, 2019	8:06¹⁸	340.9	1,341,075	3,866
16	San Jose, CA	July 1, 2017 – June 30, 2018	9:12¹⁹	177.5	1,035,317	5,777
17	Detroit, MI	2018	14:18²⁰	138.8	673,104	4,847
18	Denver, CO	2013	14:18²¹	153.3	704,621	4,521
19	San Diego, CA	2018	16:30²²	325.2	1,419,516	4,325
20	Milwaukee, WI	2015	21:00²³	96.2	595,351	6,186

*Population and land area data is from : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_cities_by_population²⁴

Correlation tests on these 20 data points reveal that police response time has :

-0.3 correlation with land areas
-0.21 correlation with population
-0.18 correlation with population density

Apparently, larger land area contributes to longer police response time. Next we explore some other known factors affecting police response time.

Factors Affecting Police Response Time

Police response time is faster during the night.

Perhaps the most obvious factors that come to mind are distance and traffic. Farther distance and traffic congestion would obviously delay police response time.

But guess what? There are tons of other not-so-obvious factors lying around such as race income, neighbourhood, crime frequency and more. Here are a list of factors with supporting papers:

Time of incidents

Police response time is shorter during night time than day time. (2001)²⁵

Calls for domestic violence made on weekends had significantly less response time. (2017)²⁶

Rush hour (0700-0900 and 1600-1800 on weekdays) did not appear to be associated with domestic violence call response time. (2017)²⁶

2. Distance from response station

Crimes further away from response station have higher average response time and lower clearance rate. Luckily, the study showed that farther distance from response station correlates with lower crime rate. (2015)²⁷

3. Traffic

Traffic slows down fire trucks arriving at the scene of an emergency and increases the average monetary damages from fires. (2018)²⁸

4. Weapon

Presence of weapon was associated with a lower response time for domestic violence calls. (2017)²⁶ (2008)²⁹

5. Neighborhood Characteristics

Hispanic neighborhoods enjoy faster police response time.

Police response time is shorter in neighborhoods with low income and a high level of minority population. (1978)³⁰

For domestic violence cases in Houston, Hispanic complaints experienced significantly faster police response time. (2017)²⁶

A study in 1997 suggested the opposite, that police response time was longer in socially and economically stressed neighborhoods. (1997)³¹

6. Crime Hotspots

Police agencies deploy more patrol units during certain times and days and in areas which generate high demands, contributing to more efficient, quicker responses and fairer officers’ workloads. (1992)³²

A study in 1997 suggested the opposite, that police response time increased after responding to repeated Calls For Service from a high crime neighborhood. (1997)³¹

Quite a number of factors contribute to police response time. But to determine whether the waiting time is long or short, we need to know how much time criminals need to conduct their evil deeds.

Average Crime Duration:

Burglary

According to a 2013 research by SECURAMERICA³³ :

Average burglary duration is 8 – 12 minutes.

Average burglary duration is 8 – 12 minutes.
Most burglaries occur during 10 a.m. – 3 p.m. since that’s a prime time frame where many homes are not occupied.
Average dollar lost from a burglary in the US is just over $2,000.
Cash, jewelry, guns, drugs and small electronics (smartphones, tablets) are the most common items stolen due to ease of carrying and ease of turning them into money.
Burglaries typically spike during the summer months (July and August).
Regionally, the south accounts for 47% of burglaries (the relatively warmer weather is a key contributor of this). The Midwest and West each account for 21% of burglaries, and the Northeast accounts for the remaining 11%.
The State of Ohio experiences the most burglaries in the country.
Only 13% of burglaries are arrested on average, resulting in low chance of recovering your stolen possessions.
Burglars want an easy target where they won’t likely be seen and can get in & out fast.
Although burglars are typically not prone to violence, when surprised or confronted by an occupant, they could attack.

Another research in 2012 by University of North Carolina at Charlotte, Department of Criminal Justice & Criminology³⁴, employing survey data on 422 incarcerated burglars from North Carolina, Kentucky and Ohio, found that :

Most burglaries are finished within less than 10 minutes (although some lasted over an hour).
Top cited reason s for engaging  in burglary are :
- Foolishness
Female burglars prefer home and residence targets in the afternoon time frame, while male burglars focus on business targets in the late evenings.

If the majority of burglaries were done within 12 minutes, and 60% of Priority 1 police response time are within 12 minutes, we can conclude that even if victims dial 911 immediately at the beginning of burglaries, the police didn’t arrive at the crime scene before burglars fled for at least 40% of the cases.

Obviously, there are cases where victims were not at home, or did not notice the invasion immediately. Thus, cases where police could come to prevent and protect victims from burglaries are even less than 60%. Luckily, most burglars aim for monetary gains and hurting victims aren’t their primary goal.

FBI data indicates that there were 1,430,698 burglary cases in 2017

2. Sexual Assault

According to Siskiyou Domestic Violence & Crisis Center³⁵, average sexual assault lasts 4.5 hours. Some sexual assault cases span over a period of days.

Data from RAINN.org³⁶suggests that :

On average, there are 321,500 victims (age 12 or older) of rape and sexual assault each year in the United States.
People age 18-34 have the highest risk of sexual violence.
1 out of every 6 American women has been the victim of an attempted or completed rape in her lifetime.
90% of rape victims are female.
Transgender students are at higher risk for sexual violence
Sexual violence can have long-term effects on victims
American Indians are twice as likely to experience a rape/sexual assault compared to all other races.

Since average duration for rape is 4.5 hours, police response time is fairly good for this type of crime.

3. Murder, Nonnegligent Manslaughter and Aggravated Assault

There are 16,617 cases of Murder and non-negligent manslaughter in US 2017. u

Criminals armed with guns, knives or other weapons can seriously injure victims within seconds.

According to “Murder and Medicine : The Lethality of Criminal Assault 1960-1999”³⁷, a 2002 study :

Injured victims from aggravated assault and homicide cases in St. Louis has 4% mortality rate if they arrived at a hospital within 20 minutes of their injury.
If victims arrived later than 20 minutes, mortality rate jumped to 20%.

Data from “Office for Victim of Crimes”³⁸ regarding Homicide shows that :

In 2016, there are 5.3 murders and non-negligent homicides for every 100,000 people.
Main homicide victims are male and female age between 20-29 and female age above 50.
Black male and white female are more riskier to be homicide victims.
The majority of perpetrators are Non-family acquaintances.

For assault cases, data from “Office for Victim of Crimes”³⁹ indicates that :

There are 11.8 and 3 cases of aggravated assault and simple assault per every 1,000 people
In 2015, 33% of aggravated assault victimizations were committed with a knife, 23% with a firearm, and 11% without a weapon.
More than half of aggravated assaults were committed by acquaintances of the victims.
“At or near victim’s home” is the aggravated assault hotspot for female victims. While commercial place, parking lot and public areas are hotspots for male victims.
People age above 35-49 have the highest risk for aggravated assaults.

Since these types of crimes are done within matter of seconds while the police are minutes away, you certainly need some form of self-defense mechanism.

Conclusion

During January 2015 to December 2016, national average police response time is within 8 minutes 48 seconds. Police response time differs greatly between cities due to factors such as traffic, distance, neighborhood and weapons involved. Thus it would be wise for you to check average police response time in your area.

Comparing average police response time with average crime duration, police won’t be able to arrive in time to catch burglars at crime scene for at least 40% of the cases. For sexual assaults, police response time should be adequate.

However murder, manslaughter and aggravated assaults are types of crime where police response time falls short, and you’d need to depend on your own defense mechanism.

“As the old saying goes, when seconds count, the police are just minutes away.”

Sources

Relationship of Response Delays and Arrest Rates – C Clawson; S K Chang (1977)
Response Time and Citizen Evaluation of Police – S L Percy (1980)
Police Response Times to Calls for Service: Fragmentation, Community Characteristics, and Efficiency – Daniel S. Bennett (Nov 2018)
https://www.jdnews.com/news/20180715/calls-up-response-times-down-for-local-law-enforcement
https://www.wbez.org/shows/wbez-news/chicago-police-response-time-is-down-in-2012/6f6f56c9-ff77-40ca-ab47-737f0c31e81f
https://www.cityofallen.org/CivicAlerts.aspx?AID=1323&ARC=2406
https://sfcontroller.org/sites/default/files/Documents/Auditing/FY18%20Annual%20Performance%20Report%20FINAL.pdf#page=11
https://www.houstontx.gov/police/department_reports/operational_summary/FEBRUARY19.NIBRS_Monthly_Operational_Summary_FINAL%20032019.pdf
https://www.nbclosangeles.com/news/local/LAPD-Pulling-Out-of-LAX-Narcotics-Task-Force-as-it-Works-to-Boost-Patrols-503166701.html
https://www1.nyc.gov/site/911reporting/reports/end-to-end-detail.page
https://www.seattle.gov/police/information-and-data/calls-for-service-dashboard
https://www.abc15.com/news/region-phoenix-metro/central-phoenix/phoenix-police-taking-longer-to-respond-to-911-calls-despite-adding-officers
https://mpdc.dc.gov/sites/default/files/dc/sites/mpdc/publication/attachments/MPD%20Annual%20Report%202017_lowres.pdf
https://report.sa2020.org/community-safety/
http://www.austintexas.gov/budget/eperf/index.cfm?fuseaction=home.PerfMeasure&DEPT_CD=POLIC&DIV_CD=5OPS&GP_CD=21AA&MEASURE_ID=6689
http://ftpcontent.worldnow.com/wthr/PDF/impdreport.pdf
https://www.cityofboston.gov/images_documents/Police%20-%20FY11%20Q1%20Web_ver2_tcm3-21707.pdf
https://www.dallaspolice.net/resources/CrimeReports/New%20Response%20Time%20Report.pdf
http://www.sanjoseca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/81795
https://www.detroitnews.com/story/news/local/detroit-city/2019/02/04/detroit-police-response-times-questioned/2744186002/
https://www.denvergov.org/content/dam/denvergov/Portals/741/documents/Audits_2016/FollowUpReports_2016/Police-Response-Time_FollowUpReport_August2016.pdf
https://www.sandiego.gov/sites/default/files/fy18pb_v2police.pdf
https://milwaukeenns.org/2018/08/06/special-report-mpd-slow-to-respond-to-violent-crime-calls-police-data-shows/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_cities_by_population
L. Blake, R. T. Coupe, The Impact of Single and Two-Officer Patrols on Catching Burglars in the Act: A Critique of the Audit Commission’s Reports on Youth Justice, The British Journal of Criminology, Volume 41, Issue 2, March 2001, Pages 381–396, https://doi.org/10.1093/bjc/41.2.381
Lee, J.-S., Lee, J., & Hoover, L. T. (2017). What Conditions Affect Police Response Time? Examining Situational and Neighborhood Factors. Police Quarterly, 20(1), 61–80. https://doi.org/10.1177/1098611116657327
Blanes, Jordi & Kirchmaier, Tom. (2015). The Effect of Police Response Time on Crime Detection. SSRN Electronic Journal. 10.2139/ssrn.2630987.
Beland, Louis-Philippe & Brent, Daniel. (2018). Traffic congestion, transportation policies, and the performance of first responders.10.13140/RG.2.2.10201.42088.
Kernsmith, Poco & Craun, Sarah. (2008). Predictors of Weapon Use in Domestic Violence Incidents Reported to Law Enforcement. Journal of Family Violence. 23. 589-596. 10.1007/s10896-008-9181-8.
Mladenka, K. R., Hill, K. Q. (1978) The distribution of urban police services. The Journal of Politics 40(1): 112–133.
Klinger, David. (1997). Negotiating order in patrol work: An ecological theory of police response to deviance. Criminology. 35. 277 – 306. 10.1111/j.1745-9125.1997.tb00877.x.
Walker, S. (1992) The police in America, New York, NY: Mcgraw-Hill.
http://www.jsu.edu/police/docs/Schoolsafety.pdf
http://airef.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/BurglarSurveyStudyFinalReport.pdf
https://sdvcc.org/sexual-assault
https://www.rainn.org/statistics/victims-sexual-violence
http://www.universitychurchchicago.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/Murder-and-Medicine.pdf
https://ovc.ncjrs.gov/ncvrw2018/info_flyers/fact_sheets/2018NCVRW_Homicide_508_QC.pdf
https://www.ncjrs.gov/ovc_archives/ncvrw/2017/images/en_artwork/Fact_Sheets/2017NCVRW_Assault_508.pdf

.

— 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.

All DRGO articles by Robert B. Young, MD

The Remington/Bushmaster ACR: How well has it aged?

By

Keith Finch

-

May 31, 2019

The Remington/Bushmaster Adaptive Combat Rifle (ACR) is a modular semi-automatic rifle designed by Magpul Industries, known initially as the Masada (not to be confused with the developing handgun from IWI of the same name) the ACR was to be a cutting edge modernized service rifle.

The ACR, like the SCAR, H&K 416, XM8, and X95 was an early 21st century venture into modernizing small arms technology. Magpul was a much smaller entity at the time and could not bring the rifle to market in the way they wanted and so they partnered with Bushmaster and Remington to do so…

This would not turn out in the rifle’s favor…

The Dark Times…

Magpul had voiced a number of promises with this new rifle. The chief two among them were reasonable cost and lightweight. Bushmaster failed delivery on both those critical accounts and did so far behind schedule. Bushmaster was plagued with utterly ridiculous quality control concerns on a heavier than promised rifle that was priced at twice the original estimate.

Magpul had stated the Masada would come in near the cost of a high quality AR like a Daniel Defense or LWRCi DI, topping out at the most near something like the X95 for the (E)nhanced model. The extensive use of polymer, components from the AR15 platform, and the miracles of modern industry were going to make this the 21st Century Everyman’s Carbine.

The ‘Everyman’s Carbine’ it was not, that honor is the AR15’s for the whole of the foreseeable future.

What We Received…

Instead we, the excited consumer public, were handed a rifle selling for nearly $3,000 for the basic model. No quad rail or adjustable stock, just an MOE inspired handguard and a fixed length of pull MOE stock, both of which could be had for the AR for less than $100… Oh, and a safety selector that didn’t stay selected to actuate a very very rough mil-spec trigger.

The Enhanced model was even more expensive, if you could find one at all. Bushmaster chose 1:9 twist barrels for some incredibly head scratch inducing reason, putting such a barrel on a rifle that was clearly designed for a military 1:7 seemed lazy and out of touch. The slower 1:9 twist, while useable, was a hallmark of ‘budget’ rifles of the era and was never seen on high end carbines. This fact further cheapened the felt value of the far higher than promised priced rifle.

The most svelte version of the ACR weighed in the same as the SCAR17 for very nearly the same dollars on the table. Bushmaster had delivered none of the Magpul promises… and the rifle was far from flawless, it wouldn’t outmatch the M4A1 as released.

On these dark chapters for the highly hyped rifle… I spoke with Remington. Why these issue occurred came down to one very simple thing. Logistics. This was a project that didn’t get the attention it needed at the time it needed it. Remington higher couldn’t pick where to build it, where to source or manufacturer parts, or nail down crucial details on QC with all of its other acquisitions and projects also running simultaneously.

As for military contracts only Poland bought a few and then proceeded to reverse engineer it (or it certainly looks that way) into the MSBS to produce domestically as their service rifle. They even made a neat bullpup kit for it.

However, Fans Persisted

A group of enthusiasts still purchased the rifle. Some early adopters were disappointed by the teething and QC concerns, they moved on while others remained. The ACR developed a sort of pop cult enthusiast culture and is well liked overall by the owners who kept it. By many reports it makes a wonderful SBR and a great host for a suppressor. The Call of Duty series cannot do away with it, it’s almost a franchise brand item and it makes appearances in most shooter games today. So…

The Adaptive Combat Rifle – 2019

I had never fired an ACR until this year. It was always the rifle that seemed to have been passed by for shooters. Surpassed due to its own production problems and lack of serious agency adoptions. However, Bushmaster is still producing the rifle and I decided to indulge my nostalgic Modern Warfare 2 fanboi and see if the kinks were gone.

I picked up an ACR-E, black, and had it shipped to me. While ACR variants of the past had a myriad of options, often hard to distinguish, including various stocks, handguards, calibers, and barrel twist rates, Bushmaster has cleaned up the categories to align with the industry at large, Basic and Enhanced.

The ACR-Basic comes with the Magpul MOE style handguard that supports M-LOK attachment and the ACR-Enhanced comes with an aluminum forearm in MIL-STD-1913, Keymod, or M-LOK.

Caliber options include 5.56mm, 6.8 SPC II (for those shooting the exotic ammo), 300 Blackout, and 450 Bushmaster (both calibers developed under Remington). The typical commercial variants have 16.5″ barrels with the 10.5″, 14.5″, and 18.5″ available aftermarket. I will note that the aftermarket barrels for the ACR are far less expensive than SCAR barrels, 46% of cost comparing MSRPs. The barrels are cold hammer forged, chrome lined, and quick replace. This is what makes the platform such a potent candidate for a From 1 SBRing.

Muzzle to stock, the ACR of today is a put together and fairly forward thinking platform. It supports suppressor use right out of the box with an AAC 51T three prong flash hider (yes, it rings). Standard muzzle threads allow you all the flexibility in the world to replace it. The gas system and short stroke piston are integrated to the barrel assembly. Gas blocks are two position, (S)uppressed and (U)nsupressed. The barrel nut and handle for changing the barrel are also part of the assembly, all one neat package.

There was some talk about the return to zero capability of the rifle and this barrel change system, but let’s keep that in operational perspective.

An absolute return to zero on this system is not a necessary feature. You are not going to quick change your barrel in a gunfight, not on your carbine. Even though the ease of the system makes it an operator/user level task the process will require you to confirm zero again when you change operational configuration. Every time you mess with zeroed portions of a gun you reconfirm zero, period. Return to zero makes this process easier, it is not a substitute for it.

The quadrail handguard of the ACR is a monster. It’s also short. The design supports the SBR 10.5″ barrels. I swapped it for the M-LOK 12.5 from Midwest Industries. The MI M-LOK felt lighter, more comfortable, and is a more rigid handguard. The system mounts via one captured push pin, easy off and on, and tracks into a pair of receiver cuts on the front. The tradeoff picking this design for the ACR is that no zeroed equipment can mount to the handguard, there is far too much play. Anything that retains a zero, a PEQ or DBAL, must mount to the top rail on the receiver. This is notable on both the factory and MI handguards.

Midwest Industries Handguard and Combat Sights

The factory stock Enhanced handguard supports QD sling swivels at the 3 and 9 o’clock positions. These mounts are removable via a couple small hex screws. It is necessary to remove them if you want to utilize the front portion of the picatinny rail. Two additional QD’s at 3 and 9 are on the receiver near the barrel lock up and one reversible QD is on the adjustable stock. The design allows you to set the rifle up comfortably in a number of two-point sling configurations. My preference has the stock QD in the right side/3 o’clock position and wrapping around to the 9 o’clock QD on the receiver.

Of note, the fact that the QD’s are not rotation limited is less than ideal and one of the features I most dislike on the rifle overall. The sling twists and binds. The positions are excellent but not having them limit rotation is a detail that shouldn’t have been missed at a rifle this price and trying to compete this late in the game.

To be fair the SCAR doesn’t have rotation limited QD’s either. The factory configuration is for HK clips by SOCOM TPD. The ACR does have a rear receiver HK style sling hook, similar to the SCAR.

The charging handle is non reciprocating and well placed. There is an ambidextrous option available from Bushmaster that adds the capability to charge the ACR from either side. The bolt catch is a mirrored design next to the trigger guard and useable with your index finger. Magazine release and 90 degree throw safety selector are equally ambidextrous and mirrored.

The ACR is legitimately a paragon example of ambidexterity, especially adding the dual charging handle. About the only thing I wish they would have done or updated on the control suite is AR grip compatibility. MOE style isn’t bad but I prefer K2 or BCM Mod 3 and I do not have that option.

The stock is 7 position, foldable, and with a cheek riser for optics. The design is so well liked it’s available for several other rifle systems, including the SCAR. Other than wanting the QD point to be rotation limited it is a fantastic stock.

The ACR comes “Optics Ready” which is a polite way of saying no iron sights. I chose a set of MI Combat Rifle Sights. Lightweight, lo-pro, a middle diameter rear aperture. The MI CRS keep a perfectly acceptable group at 50 yards, printing about 2 MOA with M193 ammo.

One captured pin “shotguns” the receiver open for maintenance. 4 pins and the whole rifle can separate into its assemblies.

Conclusions on the ACR

Is the ACR worth considering as carbine?

Yes.

The rifle’s performance was more than enough to justify its consideration as a service rifle or defensive rifle.

Personal protection, patrol rifle, multi-gun, or CoD WM2 Cosplay. The ACR sends 55gr and 62gr ball ammo wherever I asked it. The manual of arms is easily translatable from the AR and SCAR. It is a maintenance light piston system with a fair amount of aftermarket support. It’s a great SBR host as the conversion is far less expensive than an X95 or SCAR for rebarreling.

It’s detracting factors are minor, but present. The stock handguard, 9lb weight, and QD sling points are less than ideal but solvable aftermarket. A new trigger and new handguard do the rifle justice.

At an MRSP of $2,249 and available in the much more reasonable $1,700-$2,000 range the Bushmaster Adaptive Combat Rifle has come into its own as a contender. Better late than never.

I like it.