If you haven’t seen the story, various elements of the media are between scratching their heads or complete hysterics, as they wonder just how a “teenager” of 18 years could purchase a shotgun in Colorado.
If you read that and are saying to yourself, “Because she’s 18 and has no disqualifying record.” you would have used a basis of logic that seems to escape many.
For context, the story we are discussing is that of Sol Pais, a Florida teen with a published digital trail concluding on a dangerous obsession with the Columbine school shooting.
The conclusion arrived at by authorities was that she was a high risk of commiting a copycat shooting and had possibly set out to do just that.
She made her way to Colorado, purchased a shotgun at a dealer (NICS check and all), and by all current reports then took her own life instead of commiting the attack authorities feared.
Schools were secured in the region until the clear was given.
So what’s the kerfuffle about?
How was a 18 year old Floridian girl able to buy a shotgun in Colorado, because Florida changed its age requirement to 21?
No, not ‘how come the fears of her probable copycat attack could not be flagged in NICS after, say, examination by a judge?’ It is how could an 18 year old buy a shotgun out of state when her home state requires her to be 21.
This has since become a game of finger pointing. Some of the inquiring body are referencing a passage stating that an out of state dealer must comply with their state laws and those of the purchasers residency as well.
Generally, a firearm may not lawfully be sold by a licensee to a nonlicensee who resides in a State other than the State in which the seller’s licensed premises is located. However, the sale may be made if the firearm is shipped to a licensee whose business is in the purchaser’s State of residence and the purchaser takes delivery of the firearm from the licensee in his or her State of residence. In addition, a licensee may sell a rifle or shotgun to a person who is not a resident of the State where the licensee’s business premises is located in an over–the–counter transaction, provided the transaction complies with State law in the State where the licensee is located and in the State where the purchaser resides. [Emphasis added]
Last Reviewed September 10, 2015
The passage seems to indicate the burden of knowledge is on the seller to be up to date on all 50 states various gun laws.
The ATF, however, have declared the transaction was legal and that the FFL in Colorado is not at fault in any way. Reasonable, in my opinion.
Florida’s law appears to effect only its residents while in state. They will apparently sell long guns to persons 18-20 who are not Florida residents and thus Florida residents purchasing out of state may not be subject to the in state restriction, just the normal federal ones.
It is entirely unreasonable, in my view, for an FFL to be the accountable entity for the legislative quagmire that constitutes the mass of the entire nation’s firearm regulations. That burden should be on the FBI and their NICS system or the equivalent state systems to flag noncompliance with the law and form the basis, when necessary, for arrest, prosecution, or any other intervention.
The FFL should be accountable for accurately transmitting the provided information for the check and on their recognizance for the warning signs of criminal activity, especially per any information that they get from local LE organizations, the ATF, or the FBI. They are not legal experts on the intricacies of interstate firearms law on the state by state level, they are federal dealers.
In short, the overly complex, overregulated, and poorly meshed layers of legalise make it a nightmare to navigate the rules and try to remain in the right of them all while trying to conduct business and check due diligence.
So who’s fault is it a disturbed eighteen year old, a legal adult who can vote, drive, purchase, make medical decisions, and has all the adult self sovereignty an eighteen year old legally possess to include buying a firearm, bought a firearm?
Hers.
Ultimately the responsibility for her actions was hers. If anyone else holds a degree of liability for what might have happened, it would be those who manage the information system designed to warn FFL’s of those persons who should not be buying a firearm.
The 1980s were a wonderful time for guns. Something was different back then. It was an odd time when we were transitioning from WW2 designs to the modern guns we see now. I wanted to gather some of my favorite guns of the 1980s. I looked at both pop culture and actual use by police and military forces and gathered my Top 5!
Beretta 92 Series
There are several models of the Beretta 92 and I’m including the entire series. From the 92S to 92F and 92FS and so on and so forth. The life of this series started in 1975 and continues to this day with the Beretta M9A3. The Beretta has a very distinct appearance and the design helped usher in the age of the wonder 9.
In the United States, the gun was extremely popular, especially with police and military forces. The Beretta 92 was adopted by the LAPD, INS, the Border Patrol, and most famously the United States Armed forces as the M9.
In fiction, the gun was everywhere. My earliest memory of it was the film Kuffs, where the main character requests, “a really big gun that holds a lot of bullets.” That little movie is nothing compared to its appearances in massive blockbusters like Die Hard and Lethal Weapon. These films made the gun a legend.
Colt Python
The Colt Python was created all the way back in 1955 and it remained a staple of Colt’s revolvers for decades. The guns now fetch a premium due to the fact Colt hasn’t produced them in forever. The gun has always been popular and in the 1980s it was THE revolver. The Florida Highway Patrol, the Colorado State Patrol, and Georgia State Patrol all notably issued the gun throughout the 1980s.
The Colt Python was also notably a status symbol in the LAPD before being replaced by our already listed Beretta 92. The Python is an aggressive looking revolver with a big ribbed barrel. It was and still is a finely crafted precision gun.
The Colt Python was and is a cultural icon too. Back in the day, it was immensely popular in films likely due to its aggressive looks and how distinct it was. We saw John Candy carry one, as well as Burt Reynolds, Judge Reinhold, Don Johnson, and even Roddy Piper rocked one in They Live. As far as guns of the 1980s go I couldn’t leave a revolver off the list.
UZI
The Uzi is another series of weapons that come in a variety of sizes and configurations. This covers all of them because in the 80s they were everywhere. The Uzi is a 9mm submachine gun developed domestically for Israeli defense forces. However, the SMG was widely exported in the 1980s and adopted around the world. The Uzi was originally adopted in 1950, but it made the 80s roar. IMI, who owns the Uzi, has made over 2 billion from its exports.
One of the most famous photos out there is a Secret Service Agent covering Press Secretary James Brady, after an attempted assassination, with an Uzi. The Uzi has been produced in full size, compact, and micro variants. There are also semi-auto carbines and pistols out for the civilian market.
Courtesy of Guns.com
In films and media, the Uzi has been everywhere. The Uzi was wielded by Arnold as a robotic killing machine, as well as Chuck Norris in Delta Force and dual-wielded Uzi pistols in Invasion USA. It made appearances in Lethal Weapon, RoboCop, Miami Vice, Magnum, P.I., and dozens of other tv shows and movies of the 1980s. This makes the Uzi one of the premier guns of the decade.
Mini 14
The Mini 14 is a totally 80s rifle. It was created in 1973 and saw its heyday in the 1980s. As a semi-auto 223 caliber rifle, the Mini 14 featured a wooden stock traditional rifle design. In function, it was similar to the AR15 rifle, but the wood stocks made its appearance far more conventional. The Mini 14 is interesting because it found itself on both sides of the law often in the 1980s.
Courtesy NBC
The San Bernardino Sheriff’s Department adopted the Mini-14 after a shoot-out that claimed a Deputy’s life. In France, the Mini 14 has been adopted by federal police forces and still serve to this day. The Mini 14 was later adopted by forces in Brazil, Haiti, and Bermuda. The Mini 14 was also used in the deadly 1986 Miami Shootout with the FBI.
In film and television, the Mini 14 was famously wielded by the A-Team, to effectively miss everything they shot at ever. The gun was also seen in Death Wish, Commando, and Mad Max 3. The Mini-14 survives today for those who want a wood stocked AR alternative.
MP5
THE choice for Gun of the 80s is the MP5. To me, the Cold War was defined by two weapons, the AKM and the MP5. The MP5 was produced at just the right time. We saw a rise in terrorism and therefore a commensurate rise in counter-terror teams. These teams needed a lightweight, low recoiling, easy to handle submachine gun.
At that time the selection of SMGs consisted mostly of bulky, heavy, and open bolt. Open bolt guns have compromised reliability due to the design and conventional wisdom says open bolts don’t breach doors. The MP5 comes along with its closed bolt design, lightweight, and plenty handy. Who can forget the photos of the SAS lads breaching the Iranian Embassy armed with MP5s.
In the 1980s the MP5 took root everywhere. Almost every Federal Police service issued the gun, as well as hundreds, possibly thousands, of SWAT teams around the country. Additionally, the MP5 is in use by over a dozen different countries. The gun was everywhere, and of course made it to Hollywood.
“Ho, Ho, Ho, Now I have a Machine Gun,” an immortal phrase from an immortal movie that starred both the Beretta 92 and the MP5. It was a little flick called Die Hard. The gun also found itself in Lethal Weapon 2, Tango and Cash, and dozens of other films in a number of different configurations. The MP5 by HK earned its place as one of my favorites and a true gun of the 1980s.
Notable Contenders
If this was an article based solely on pop culture use two guns would reign supreme, the MAC series and the TEC 9. Both were heavily used in movies and TV shows of the time, often the choice for the bad guy and their henchman.
These guns ruled the airwaves and gave Diane Feinstein nightmares. However, the extent that was used for crime is difficult to actually know. The MAC was used in a few high profile crimes, as was the TEC 9 and its derivatives. According to the NY Times, the vast majority of weapons seized during the Cocaine wars were MAC style guns, however no information on exact numbers in provided.
These sub guns absolutely dominated TV shows and movies, and to an extent, this has shaped their perception in both popular media and the gun world. As far as guns of the 1980s go it loses out only because of its rare use in real life.
Guns of the 1980s
The 1980s were an fascinating time in both guns being issued and how guns were being portrayed in the media. The result in part was a constantly changing firearms law landscape. They were the cutting edge and now a nostalgic reminiscence.
I’m a cautious person when it comes to buying guns, or at least first generation guns. Something happens when a good gun concept reaches mass production, somehow little fairies come in and ruin things. I usually wait a minute and see what is what. This has kept me from buying IO AKs, the R51, and the CZ P10 C. Until now anyway.
I love CZ firearms and own several and constantly suggest CZs to my friends and family who are looking for something new. I was cautious with the P10 C for a few reasons. Outside of just being a new gun the P10 C was a striker fired gun that is coming from a company known for hammer fired guns. I waited until this year to finally purchase one after ready nothing but good reviews.
I found the CZ P10 C Suppressor Ready Model for a screaming good deal at my local gun store. The gun features a sand colored frame CZ Calls Urban Grey, an extended and threaded barrel, 17 round extended magazines and suppressor height night sights.
The P10 C isn’t the first striker fired CZ. I’m sure some of us remember the CZ 100, but many do not. It failed with very few people wanting a true DAO striker fired design. It’s certainly their most successful.
The P10 C Specs
The CZ P10 C is basically the Glock 19 of CZ firearms. The C stands for compact and as we’ve seen the there is now a Full sized and Subcompact model. The gun has the following specs:
4.61-inch barrel
Overall Length 8 inches
Weighs 26 ounces
17 round capacity
MSRP 559.00
It’s very Glock 19 in size, but the threaded barrel adds a little more to the gun. It will fit the majority of Glock 19 holsters and I found this true with my NSR Appendix holster.
P10 C Ergonomics
If CZ is renowned for one thing its ergonomics. Their guns are ergonomic powerhouses and the P10 C is no different. The P10 C has an excellent grip angle and a well-rounded grip overall. The P10 C is an incredibly comfortable gun and CZ has always been a master of making great grips.
The grip itself is aggressively stippled and you will start to feel it after a short period of shooting. The stippling is not painful, but present.
It’s best described as aggressive.
It’s almost like CZ saw all those bubba’s defacing Glock grips with stippling and said, “We don’t want any part of that.” So they gave us aggressive stippling from the get go.
The rear beaver tail is more of a shelf. Kinda like Glock, but extended like the 80 percent lower Glocks from Polymer 80.
CZ Also went and made all the control ambidextrous. This is truly ambidextrous and not just a magazine release that can be switched back and forth. Both your magazine release and slide lock are ambidextrous.
Both the magazine release and the slide lock are very small. The magazine release is also very stiff and requires some force to activate. Hopefully it will smooth out over time. I personally wished they went with the same slide lock on the P09/07 series.
This model is placed more rearward and my thumbs sit on top of it, this results in the slide failing to lock after the last shot is fired due to my thumb placement. The slide lock is super skinny and hard to press downward overall.
The slide features aggressive serrations on both the front and rear of the slide. They are nice and easy to grip and the slide itself is much larger than previous CZ’s. CZ abandoned the slide in frame design with the P10 C which is an interesting decision.
The gun also includes two extra back straps to customize the gun’s size to your hand.
The Trigger
The trigger is a semi-flat design and is placed pretty far rearward. This makes it easy to reach for people with small hands. The design incorporates a trigger safety that is pinch-free so far.
The trigger pull is short, concise, and light. The trigger breaks very crisply and has an ultra short reset. This is one of the finer stock trigger on the market, surpassing other plastic fantastics from Glock and SIG. It’s nearly on par with the Walther PPQ, a gun which i consider to have the finest trigger of all polymer striker fired guns.
The trigger is excellent and very comfortable. The short reset makes it easy to fall into a fast pattern of fire, regain sight picture, fire, etc. It’s easy to dump a magazine into one ragged hole. The trigger pull comes in at about 4.5 pounds and it’s consistent.
Range Time
As you’d expect this 9mm has very little recoil and is quite controllable. On my first outing, I found myself surprised how quickly I adapted myself to the gun. Before the first magazine was empty I was backing up further and further to see how far I could consistently ring steel.
My small popper was the perfect target. I got back to 60 yards and was still ringing steel more than I was missing in a standard standing position. The sights are excellent and the front sight is very thin and makes it possible to still see a small target at this range.
The gun is very enjoyable to shoot and from round 1 I was hitting exactly where I was aiming. It’s a well put together design that incorporates a number of design features that meshes together very well.
The trigger, the sights, and the cold hammer forged barrel make this a very accurate gun. The grip helps with recoil control and you can easily make one ragged hole very quickly with little practice.
I was able to shoot the iHack drill clean with the 3 second par time on my first day with this gun. If you don’t know that drill requires you to shoot 3 shots, on 3 targets, in 3 seconds. The iHack is a modified drill of the Hackathorn head shot standards. This uses 2 inch circles as targets and can be quite challenging.
Admittedly I didn’t get the par time down until the third time I ran the drill. Still, for my first day with the gun I was quite pleased with it.
Final Thoughts
The CZ P10 C is a fantastic little gun and one that I am admittedly impressed by. CZ has found a way to go against their typical grain with a successful striker fired design that isn’t just good compared to similar guns, but surpasses them in many ways. Right now these guns seem to be selling at a low price to make room for Optic’s ready models so I’d jump on one if you can.
Knight’s Armament Company wins the U.S. Army’s solicitation to supplement and replace the M24 with a new and radical “Big Army” shift in weapons employment. The designation, M110 SASS, Semi-Automatic Sniper System.
Semi-autos had been employed with success in a precision role in Iraq and Afghanistan to this point but all of those solutions were shoe horned into place. The M14’s chopped and restocked into an EBR Chassis, the M16A1’s turned into Mk12 SPR’s, and the small inventory of Mk11’s had all proven the concept of 7.62x51mm Sniper/Support rifle in working theory.
Knight’s job was to make that theory into a single cohesive working unit. They were successful.
Image via Wikipedia, USMC Shooter with an M110 and suppressor
Between the contract win in September 2005 and it’s ground debut in April 2008 (Task Force Fury), Knight’s set about making the most accurate and durable product they could to the military’s requirements.
As an Armament Corps. tech I have a little insider information on why certain features were chosen or added. Many were practical reasons, the barrel system is optimized to produce the required accuracy at sustained rates of fire that other systems simply couldn’t produce (M14).
Some were because “it was in the paperwork”, there are features in the buttstock for example that were put there or not put there just to make weight. They are then swapped with a superior part in a Product Improvement Program (PIP) because then they don’t have to conform to a weight requirement. Government at its finest.
11 years after hitting the ground in Afghanistan the M110 has “technically” been replaced by the M110A1, an H&K product.
But that technicality hasn’t stopped their purchase. The M110 in its precision glory is still a rifle to be reckoned with and will be for years to come.
Getting an M110
Can a non government consumer acquire an M110?
Yes, but with a minor catch…
The M110’s are DoD contract rifles and nearly every single rifle, and thus every part, Knight’s builds goes straight to the waiting arms of DoD procurement, and from there to the unit that is in need of it.
“But… you’re shooting an M110 in that picture?” -An acute observationalist
Yes.
The M110 is a Knight’s SR-25 variant, like the Mk11 before it, and an SR25 lower can be built out into a parts complete M110. But the civilian lower will be marked SR25 unless you get the markings altered yourself.
Operation Parts and their FFL arm, Small Arm Sales, is the premier consumer level dealer for Knight’s Armament. If you want a KAC product this is the place to look, and if you don’t see it then ask for it.
Starting with an in stock SR-25, Operation Parts strips the whole receiver bare. The proper 5R barrel, gas block, URX Rail, and stock are all ordered and assembled onto the bare gun. Proper FDE coating is applied and…
SR-25 marked receiver. The only other “inauthentic” part is the use of a Geissele mount for the Mk 4 Leupold Scope instead of a KAC mount.
Viola! The 20″ Semi-Automatic Sniper System.
Like most new things the M110 system had its detractors, critics, and a few of its own problems. An issue arose resulting in the general rumor that the rifle was ‘finicky’ and dirt averse. A poorly reported on DoD solicitation in 2011 seemed to confirm all those rumors.
It wasn’t the case. The M110’s were working fine in their role. The accurate direct gas rifles were delivering in their intended niche and their users were largely pleased. What the memo and solicitation were about was lighter, more mobile, more compact variants of the gun retaining most of the capabilities. A CSASS. (More on that to come)
The number one complaint from my own battalion’s Scout Snipers was that, for a rifle that we had been told was designed to “blend” with a Marine Corps squad, it was the wrong color. Observers looking at a squad imbedded sniper team could pick out snipers rolling with M110’s just as easily as anyone rolling with M40’s, the rifle looked different. So that wasn’t a legitimate selling point.
It’s higher rate of fire and accuracy certainly were.
Sustained Accuracy Defined
The M110 is required to fire M118LR 175gr (now replaced largely by MK 316, a more all climate friendly 175gr variant) in a 1.1 inch or smaller grouping at 300ft (100 yards) using three 10 shot groups with the suppressor on or off. Additionally requirements stated an Average Mean Radius (AMR) of .68 inches using 5 seperate 5 shot groups. The rifle is truly accurate.
“1.1 inches? That’s not minute of angle? My X brand rifle is sub-MOA! The military is stupid.” -Somebody with an X brand rifle
Sorry to bust the bubble, but your “sub-moa” gun probably isn’t. Not in the true sense. Almost any rifle can print a sub 1″ 3 round group, it’s not a statistically significant measure of accuracy. Can the rifle do that with 10 rounds? Can it do so consistently?
This one can. The heat sunk heavy 5R rifled barrel has a maximum acceptable accuracy of 1.1″ using a 30 round measure.
Even using the comparably terrible M80 ball the M110 is still incredibly precise. I was printing sustained groups under 2″.
As SOCOM and others start playing around with high accuracy rounds like 6.5 Creedmoor I would honestly not be surprised if the we see a selection of 6.5 or another ballistically superior variant. Especially considering that they can make the conversion with only a barrel change and updating any literature to the new rounds effective range and ballistics.
But for the moment the 7.62’s are the standard and ammunition is abundant and affordable. Federal M80 ball from Widener’s and Sig’s 168gr and 175gr Match kept the M110 fed and happy.
Drawbacks?
A few. The M110 represents the pinnacle of the .308/7.62 AR platform as a rugged precision instrument… in 2008. The rapid pace of change has left the M110, like the M16A4 and M4/M4A1, as a weapon system with a technical data package that is becoming more obsolescent as time progresses.
Can that be corrected? Certainly, it wouldn’t require a tremendous effort either and we could very well see that from the military. However that is a tremendous additional spend on a product that works as advertised.
It isn’t a compact or light weight system. 15lbs in use (depending on optics) and 20 rounds of 7.62 in a mag is more than twice the weight of the same in 5.56.
This isn’t a ridiculous or unuseable weight, the M249 is heavier, the M16 with an underbarrel grenade launcher is comparable.
46.5″ in length with suppressor certainly qualifies it as a longarm and runs into the constraints that longer rifles do, especially in a CQC situation. But there are solutions for that too, offset irons or RDS.
The M110 is brilliant at the things it can do. There are simply things that it was not designed to do. It is a precision rifle first that can be utilized as a battle rifle at need, not a precise battle rifle.
For personal use, it’s easily one of the more costly investments you can make. It can have a 5 figure buy in price, especially considering putting good glass on it.
For that investment though you own thestandard of the AR-10 derived precision rifle systems. The collectable nature of such a significant milestone in the history of sniping also appeals highly.
It might not be for everyone, but for anyone wanting to chase such a rifle down for the inventory it is well worth the tag.
In the past, guns were seen as fairly ordinary implements for fighting and hunting, even though most aristocracies reserved them for themselves and their armies. Then English common law supported the ownership of firearms by the people, and the American constitution enshrined the natural right of defense by protecting the right to keep and bear arms in the Second Amendment.
However, times are changing, and so are gun politics. For some people, they are taking a turn for the better. Others think that they are taking a turn for the worst. However, as the debate is getting more and more heated, gun sales are also changing based on these politics.
Politics and Gun Control
Politics can be described in several ways. It can be about the activities associated with a country’s governance, such as the debate between two parties contesting for power. At the same time, politics also involve the activity of improving a particular person’s or group’s status and power from within an organization.
National politics is about discussing what’s good or bad for the country–and every party comes with its own suggestions for improvement. Gun control is no exception from to this–-and its rising popularity has made it a very controversial aspect of American politics.
After the alarming number of school shootings that took place in recent years, activists have begun raising their voices. Students need to be protected and when a gun-related threat appears within the walls of the school, those who are inside need to be ready.
For this reason, President Trump suggested that at least some teachers should be allowed to carry guns in school. Some instructors have always carried concealed guns, but this suggestion aimed to make the carrying less “concealed”. This way, any potential shooter would know that if they attempted anything, they would also meet with trouble along the way.
This suggestion was not well accepted everywhere. While some schools did adopt this policy, they were met with complaints from some parents. For instance, a lawsuit was filed by parents against the Tamaqua Area School Board, claiming that this new policy would endanger the community and, obviously, their children.
Despite the controversies, America remains the leader of the world’s gun industry.
The Spike in Gun Sales
Whenever a threat to gun ownership arises, gun stock prices seem to be go ing up. This also happens with large shootings, such as at Orlando’s Pulsenightclub or the Las Vegas massacre of 2017.
These spikes in gun prices are so predictable now that investors are betting on them with each incident. The more the gun debate goes on, the more the gun popularity will grow, and increasing numbers of people will purchase guns. Gun prices also reflect performance and versatility–with more efficient guns being made every year.
This has been a pattern for quite some time, as gun sales rose consistently when Barack Obama was still President. Demand went down with the election of President Trump in 2017 who campaigned on his support of the Second Amendment. Despite this, with every new even, interest in guns spikes.
Restrictions and Gun Sales
Let’s talk a bit about restrictions. The more restrictions there are, the more interest may grow in the product, though it may be more difficult to increase sales. These Sales will generally depend on the states where the gun law is present. Where gun laws are more flexible, gun sales will respond more readily.
To continue with the example about armed teachers, more and more schools are encouraging their teachers to carry. It is believed that this might reduce the number of school shootings, as the shooters will be too afraid to attack those schools. As more teachers purchase guns, gun ownership would further grow.
Politics also caused reflects decreased popularity of one-gun-a-month laws. Where these laws are in effect, people can only purchase one gun each month. The number of murders didn’t decline, but sales took a big hit. When the laws are absent or repealed, gun sales move higher.
Gun politics, to an extent, raise fear in the hearts of people–which links it directly to influences gun sales. Surveys show that the biggest reason people purchase firearms now is for self-protection. People are afraid for their life, for their property, for their well-being – which strengthens gun sales.
At the same time, there is quite a political conflict expressed as fear for (and seeking to protect) one’s life and fear of guns putting lives at greater risk. Some believe that they should have the untrammeled right to bear arms for their own protection, others believe that making guns illegal would end gun violence. Interestingly, both positions tend to drive gun sales upward.
Final Thoughts
Gun sales are responsive to gun politics, and gun politics are influenced by gun sales. It’s a curious but obvious circle. The more guns are sold, the more opposition to their sales may mount—and the more guns then get sold.
.
.
—Jay Chambers is a Texas business owner, archer, shooter and survivalist. He believes in free speech, resiliency and self-sufficiency in an increasingly unpredictable world.
Welcome to Part 4 of “A Pediatrician Builds her Own AR” or #soeasyapediatriciancandoit, brought to you by Aero Precision and Ballistic Advantage.
To briefly recap, Part 1 of this series covered the ordering of parts and tools, Part 2 covered the receiving and preparation, and Part 3 covered the Lower build. Which brings us to today’s installment – the Upper build.
Like the lower receiver, the Aero Precision M5 upper receiver was very smoothly finished. No burrs or sharp edges. The cerakoting was beautiful. Being able to run my hand along the rail without getting snagged is an important feature for me. I don’t want to have to wear work gloves just to handle my rifle or go shooting. My upper arrived with the forward assist and the ejection port dust cover already installed, so that was less work and fewer springs for me to mess with.
For the barrel on this hunting gun I chose an 18” Ballistic Advantage Tactical Government Midlength AR308 Barrel. Although I liked the look of the heavy fluted stainless barrels, this one was significantly lighter. If I’m hauling this gun around the woods – even with a sling – even a half pound makes a lot of difference over a day of stalking. I also ordered the low profile gas block and gas tube while I was at it.
I’m going to start off the barrel install story with the admission that I had to ask for help with this part, although I still did all the work myself. A friend from the gun club had a set of .308 go/no-go head spacing gauges, and offered to show me how to use them so I didn’t have to buy my own. I gratefully took him up on the offer.
Go/No-Go gauges for .308Learning how to use headspace gauges.
I learned a few things during that visit to his shop and the go/no-go gauges procedure was interesting. Somewhere in there he also pulled out a paint can of what looked like military surplus peanut butter. We applied a dollop to the barrel threads to get me started on the next part at home. This “peanut butter” was really labeled “Grease, auto & artillery”, and it saved me buying a tube of my own grease.
No, it’s not peanut butter.
Though I attempted to get my barrel nut tightened sufficiently with my clamp-on vise at home, my vise just wasn’t strong enough to keep things from twisting while I was using the torque wrench and my Geissele reaction rod.
So that friend invited me to come back down a few days after the head spacing trip, so that I could use his heavy bench vise. He does his own barrel machining and precision match rifle construction, so he has every tool and piece of equipment imaginable.
I still did the work myself while he supervised. He also offered advice and did some teaching. I learned about leverage in that shop. I had brought my own torque wrench (delivered by the Amazon Fairy the previous day) so that I was using as much of my own equipment as possible. With an 18-inch handle I had plenty of leverage to turn that barrel nut. Being a female with wrist/hand issues didn’t matter much – leverage did most of the work for me – as long as I was using the right vise. Now I think I have to get myself one of those vises.
Using a suitable vise.
The barrel install thus accomplished, we moved on to the gas tube. I had already pinned the gas tube to the block at home, so my friend just helped steady the the lined-up gas tube while I tightened the set screws. It does sometimes help to have a third hand, especially when one is inexperienced.
The handguard I chose, the 15” Atlas R-One is another fantastic Aero product. This aluminum free-float handguard is very light, and like the rail on the Aero upper receiver, the integrated rail is nicely finished and not at all sharp. The wedge-shaped nuts and double-ended bolt made the handguard install uneventful. I finished turning the little wrench that was included in the package and was like, “That’s it? Wow.”
That’s all there was to it.
For the muzzle I chose the VG6 Epsilon 7.62, a muzzle break model in the VG6 line up. I wanted maximum possible recoil reduction for my .308 rifle. I’m not really recoil sensitive, but why beat myself up if I don’t have to?
The VG6 brake installed easily, just like the videos said it would. Though I admit to being initially a bit confused by the logo being on the bottom and not the top of the brake, the videos confirmed that I had done it correctly.
The underside of the muzzle brake
I was almost finished and was excitedly putting the bolt and charging handle into the upper when I discovered a problem – I had somehow accidentally ordered an AR15 charging handle, instead of an AR10, so it didn’t fit. *Head. Desk.*
The size difference between AR10 and AR15 charging handles.
I called around locally, but that part wasn’t in stock. So I ordered online with 2-day delivery. Aero Precision’s website was sold out of the ones I was interested in, so I ordered from Midway instead.
I was ridiculously happy that this was the only major screw-up I had with this build. Granted, it cost me more money, but I can either put the other charging handle on an existing AR15 in my safe, or save it for the next build.
Now… I said I “was” happy about that being the only screw up? Well… Murphy heard me… so that was before I accidentally dropped the BCG onto a concrete floor and bent the gas key. Yes. I did that. I can’t believe I did something so stupid (well – yes I can actually). And I only figured out it was bent when it wouldn’t mate up with the gas tube again.
Insert Profanity
Remember kids – just because something is made of steel and designed to take abuse, doesn’t mean that you can’t still do something stupid. That one is totally on fumble-fingered me. I’m going to call it a “learning experience”. But I have to get myself a replacement, and that delays the test-shooting.
Now I’m waiting for either 1) my friend to be able to repair the damaged gas key, 2) me to order a replacement for the gas key, or 3) me to order a replacement for the entire carrier housing before I can proceed to the test shoot. I know. I’m sorry. Please be patient with the newb. I’m disappointed too.
Stay tuned for the final installment of my gun-building saga where I actually get to shoot this gun! (Soon, I hope!)
Oh, this should be good. The analytical and well reasoned opinion of Lucian K. Truscott IV on “gun nuts” vs reasonable “gun owners”
I consider myself a reasonable fellow. Proceed, Lucian.
Woe be unto the innocent bystander, or even the less-than-innocent liberal wuss Salon columnist, if you raise your hand and say something . . . anything . . . about guns and gun ownership. Boy, are the gun nuts ever ready for you!
Well if what you say has some holes in the logic I feel an obligation to note that, sir. The more ludicrous and unreasonable the more we must insist you pump the brakes.
The first thing they accuse you of is wanting to ban guns, all guns. You want to take their guns away! Or the government does.
That’s been true for decades and the government would be the enforcement method. Apple and Amazon certainly aren’t going to go taking products from customers.
Or somebody does. I mean, look at the reaction of the NRA to something as sane as the recent ban on bump stocks
, which take an “ordinary” (if such a thing can be called ordinary) semiautomatic assault rifle and turn it into a fully-automatic weapon.
No it doesn’t. The Obama administration ATF could not justify removing them as an approved device because mechanically they make it easier to fire faster (not consistently or accurately) but still just semiautomatic. Your finger is also capable of working the trigger quickly. The bump stock is a gimmick device.
You’d think they were coming to take guns away from gun owners, when in fact, it’s an utterly defensible ban on a device that converts a legal gun into an illegal weapon of mass destruction.
Did we not just cover the fact that they were legal and were not found to constitute building a machine gun? It didn’t make them illegal or weapons of mass destruction, unless there’s H-bomb edition bump stock somewhere that made it past the proliferation bans?
I want to chalk this up to hyperbole but you seem genuine, if entirely inaccurate.
The shooter in Las Vegas had bump stocks on nearly all of the 24 guns that were found in his room at the Mandalay Bay hotel after he killed 58 concert-goers and wounded over 400. Bump stocks are what enabled him to fire more than 1,000 rounds down on the crowd across the street from his hotel room.
Okay… Hard facts time.
A semi-wealthy Vegas regular decides he’s going out in a blaze of infamy. Bought a bunch of guns, bump stocks, and a window view of a packed concert venue, one that he had thoroughly scouted. Some of this should be ringing bells in long distance ambush tactics.
No, we have no motive beyond him deciding to do this. What truly terrifies us is that this is beyond our power to stop. It is. We can investigate. We can respond to threats and information about threats. We can perform our due diligence but preventing a violent attack, with certainty, in a free society (or any society) is impossible.
No rule would have prevented this attack, nor complicated it particularly, and segments of society cannot accept that. So they blissfully choose not to. A faux righteous anger towards anyone so brazen as to highlight the glaring flaws in the “common sense” utopiavision solutions to deadly serious problems is also common.
This was act was choice, a devastating one that the security present were not prepared to respond to. In a perfect world they wouldn’t need to consider such an atrocity. In a perfect world there wouldn’t need to be security, period.
Second hard fact: Nobody but the SME’s want to admit it but the bump stock use probably saved lives. Unwieldy and unaimed automatic fire is not effective.
Note: The concert crowd was over 300 meters away
The density of the crowd contributed most to the effectiveness of the attack and death/injury figure. The long roaring rips of unstable bump stock assisted fire could not be individually targeted. The crowd’s occupied area itself was the target.
A single equipped counter sniper police officer with a rifle could have accurately broken the attack at the ranges involved. A small team of them even more quickly. These wouldn’t have to be officers of a SWAT training standard either, just aware of the situation and recently drilled to deal with a long ambush. This is a drill I ran with Marines for years, especially as we worked for up for an Afghanistan deployment (cancelled). Its adaptation to the security and LEO’s at a venue isn’t rocket science.
A hunting rifle could have produced a higher lethality figure. It would do so with fewer rounds fired as hunting ammo has greater wounding potential at distance. More powerful rounds designed to stop medium and large game, like bears, elk, and moose at distance.
If you listen to the NRA, you would think that banning bump-stocks is the first step on a slippery slope to disarming America.
Again, it was the NRA’s idea. It absolutely is the “slippery slope” because it won’t work. Therefore the next time a mass casualty event occurs we will have to ban more firearms because it didn’t work.
I’ve said it before and I will say it again, the ONLY meaningful ban arithmetically would be a total ban and confiscation of firearms. It could never be effective enough to justify. Bataclan Theatre, France.
It’s bullshit, of course, as are many of the so-called “arguments” you get from gun nuts. I heard from one lunatic last week who used the old automobile straw man: cars kill, so what are you saying, we should ban cars, too? Wow. You got me there.
We do, actually. Automobiles contribute to far more funerals and injuries than rifles do. Automobiles can even be used as both assault weapons and weapons of mass destruction.
168 Dead, 680 injured. 324 buildings damaged. Method of attack: Rental Truck and Chemistry. Motive for attack: Ruby Ridge and Waco,TX. Civilian deaths at Government Agency hands
Then they go after you for mis-using, or mis-interpreting gun language.
Definitions, specificity, and attention to detail are vitally important in the process of forming effective laws, procedures, and responses. You being an ignoramus is absolutely a reason to ignore you.
How much your opinion matters is directly correlative to how deep your understanding actually is on a topic. You have demonstrated no reason for your opinion to matter, Mr. Truscott.
Define an “assault weapon!” AR-15 style rifles aren’t “assault weapons” because they don’t have “select fire.”
Correct. Assault weapon is a misnomer. An assault rifle, by definition, is a select fire rifle in an intermediate chambering.
On and on they go, down the rabbit hole of military-macho-gun-speak.
Nomenclature. A topic a West Point graduate should be familiar with.
One recent “review” in Tactical Life Magazine of something called the CMMG MkG Banshee AR Pistol described it as having such features as “Radial-Delayed blowback operating system . . . ambidextrous charging handles, sling plates and safeties as well as Tailhook Mod 2 arm braces from Gear Head Works . . . a five-inch, 4140 chrome-moly barrel with .578×28-tpi muzzle threading for devices like suppressors, and a knurled thread protector . . . a full-length top rail, M-LOK slots on the sides and a hand stop on the bottom.” My goodness! You would think that would be enough stuff for any self-respecting assault weapon! But no! There is more! “CMMG then installs a mil-spec-style single-stage trigger as well as a Magpul MOE pistol grip.”
Whew. I wouldn’t have an assault weapon with anything less. Have a look at this thing. I’m sure the gun nuts will weigh in, assuring us that this is a fine weapon for hunting small game, or self-defense, or target shooting or whatever. But really…this?
You have no idea what you just said, no clue. Everything you copied from Tactical Life you mean to portray as terrifying, overpowered, and with murderous intent. Projectionism, probably. Not a single thing in that descriptive paragraph registered in your head as a functional device.
If I say, “use of the accelerator or gas pedal has been directly linked to nearly all traffic fatalities and injuries”, I am 100% correct. But the terms accelerator or gas pedal put the image of a device in your mind, not some nebulous mass carnage cause. 34,439 deaths (2016), 2,177,000 injured, 5,065,000 damage incidents, by the way
That list is just parts. Parts.
From top to bottom in that apparently terrifying paragraph:
Radial Delayed Blowback: the method of assuring the chamber stays safely sealed that also makes the gun safer to control and more comfortable to shoot
Ambidextrous CH: Left and right hand friendly
Sling Plate: Left and right hand friendly for a sling
Safety: Left and right hand friendly safety switch
Tailhook Mod 2 Brace: The brand/type of a pistol part on a pistol, a popular one. Aids in safe control of the gun.
5″ Barrel: 5 inches of pistol barrel. Slightly shorter than a Glock 34.
4140 Chrome-moly barrel: The grade of steel used in the barrel, a common one. Listing the grade is done mostly because everyone else does it and it adds validity and accountability to the product.
Knurled Thread protector: little screw on thing that protects the barrel’s threads because threads can become damaged easily.
Full length top rail: You put sights here
M-LOK rail: Magpul designed attachment method handguard. Like LEGO or K’NEX
Mil-spec trigger: Trigger with a break weight of between 6-9 lbs of pressure. Least expensive, most common, mass produced trigger for AR style firearms.
This is what this amounts to: what items are or are not in this firearm and what material.
Culminating on feigned or genuine terror/outrage on the trigger is quite strange… I honestly rather it be feigned because genuine reaches a level of ignorance that validates every poor lost second lieutenant stereotype, especially from an academy grad.
I don’t care what they say. That’s not a civilian weapon.
Yes it is. The military has very little use for a weapon like this, and B&T won that contract. This won’t be widely issued either, niche PSD use only.
B&T’s contract winner for the SCW contract, the APC9K
That’s a weapon designed for use by the military to kill human beings.
Not for the military, but yes guns are lethal when they cause lethal trauma to a body. Weapons are, by definition, built to project force. Lethal force.
The thing costs $1,249.95. It is, of course, sold on the open market to any civilian who walks in with the scratch to buy one.
After a Federal background check and complying with all state regulations regarding pistol purchase to include licensure, registration, and waiting periods. Or is checked thoroughly by the ATF under the regulations of the National Firearms Act for an SBR, waiting the better part of a year to be cleared for the purchase, then must ask the permission of that agency to move the weapon.
The people who buy weapons like this are, strictly speaking, gun nuts.
I prefer to identify as a cashew cannonade, thank you.
Their sense of embarrassment when the way gun nuts talk about these things in gun magazines and on-line forums is obvious to all outsiders, though. All that worshiping at the altar of descriptions of killing power. Car nuts use similar language in car magazines when they talk about the capabilities of sports cars, talking about limited slip differentials and how many G’s it pulled on the skid pad. It’s vaguely adolescent and a little embarrassing when it’s pulled out of context, and I read the car magazines and love cars and I’ve indulged in that stuff since, yes, I was an adolescent . . . and I still do.
Embarrassment?
But car nuts aren’t gushing over a machine designed for killing. Gun nuts are. And that’s the essential difference, isn’t it? To talk about the efficacy of guns is to talk about how good they are at killing.
And yet the car, despite not being a weapon, is the far more lethal instrument by body count. Imagine if someone deliberately used one as a weapon?!
2016, Nice France, 86 Dead 434 Injured.
Oh, but trucks aren’t built to kill. So the staggering body count deliberately wracked up by one doesn’t count? It’s higher than Vegas, by the way. An attack on another crowded event.
That’s what they’re doing when they advertise the things and review them in gun magazines. They’re essentially bragging about what wonderful killing machines they are. In the context of the military, that’s a useful thing to know. If you’re in the military, and you’re going to use a gun like the MkG Banshee AR Pistol, or any of the other assault weapons for that matter, you should care about how good they do their job, because you’re going to use them in situations where someone may be shooting at you, and you want to shoot back as efficiently and accurately as you can so you don’t get killed.
“…you should care about how good they do their job, because you’re going to use them in situations where someone may be shooting at you, and you want to shoot back as efficiently and accurately as you can so you don’t get killed.”
That! There! Lucian, you nailed it!
But less than one percent of our population is in the military.
Sad fact, but that is what a professional military results in with a nation our size.
The rest of us are civilians, and these things are being marketed and sold to civilians.
Have civilians never been shot at? Never been in mortal danger of life ending violence? Remember that thing you just said?
They use of the term “tactical” to yank at the heartstrings of arm-chair warriors, to make them feel like they’re buying something big and powerful. “Tactical” is a purely macho word. It’s used to appeal to gun nuts. Sadly, it seems to be working.
Tactical: Calculated, planned, strategic, prudent, politic, diplomatic, shrewd, judicious, cunning. -Relating to or constituting actions carefully planned to gain a specific end.
Yes tactical is a term associated closely with the military, the military use tactics to complete its missions. You are not required to be a serving member to use tactics though, that isn’t a rule.
The simple fact about people who buy and own guns is that they are buying a device that can be used to project power at a significant distance away from themselves. That’s what guns do.
Yes, that is entirely the point. It also means physical size, health, and relative strength are not the de facto determinant factors in a potentially deadly attack. Women, the elderly, physically disabled persons, outnumbered persons, now all have a force equalization option.
Even a pistol can be used to hit something or someone across a room, or across a street, or outside of your house when you’re inside.
Yep and remember that this is a pistol, or a pistol force equivalent. It has exactly the terminal ballistic energy and lethality a 5″ 9mm pistol generates. It even uses the same magazines as the Glock pistols. It’s just far easier to control and shoot accurately with, little things that happen to be important when your life’s on the line.
They talk all the time about the “stopping power” of guns.
That is a dated marketing troupe, terminal ballistics is a multifaceted topic dependant on a myriad of factors so it was oversimplified into the term “stopping power”.
And that’s it in a nutshell. A gun stops things. It can be used to stop an intruder from entering your house.
Defensive use of force. A fundamental human right.
Unfortunately, guns are used every day not only to stop burglaries or other kinds of crimes, they are used to stop arguments, or marriages, or in the cases of Parkland and Las Vegas and New Zealand and Sandy Hook and Pittsburgh and so many other places, guns are used to stop the lives of people the shooters simply don’t like, or to make “political” statements, or to satisfy some dark unknowable craving.
1,138,534 – Estimated number of defensive gun uses in the U.S. annually based on CDC data. The 20 additional studies referenced in the paper by Kleck range from 600,000 to 6.1 Million uses. The most recent listed (2017, Pew Research) put the number at 2.6 Million.
The purpose of a gun is not to craft a clever rebuttal to win an argument.
No, its purpose is to survive a lethal fight.
It’s to end that argument right now and for good.
No, its purpose is to survive a lethal fight.
A gun isn’t designed to achieve the divorce a court can grant to end a marriage. A gun can be used to end that marriage right this minute by killing a spouse, and guns are used for that purpose all the time.
Spousal Homicide, Family Violence Statistics, DOJ (2002): 787
81% Female victim, 19% Male victim.
Spouses as a percentage of annual homicides with any reported relationship between perpetrator and victim: 8.6% Note: 9,102 of 16,204 total murders (2002) had a listed perpetrator/victim relationship established, the others had no relationship reported.
It is 1,446 times more likely for a gun to be used defensively than as a lethal divorce alternative.
Guns can be fired at paper targets on a shooting range, of course, but they are designed to kill, and they do just that more than 30,000 times a year in homicides and suicides and mass shootings and accidents every single year.
In 2013, there were 73,505 nonfatal firearm injuries (23.2 injuries per 100,000 persons),[5][6] and 33,636 deaths due to “injury by firearms” (10.6 deaths per 100,000 persons).[7] These deaths included 21,175 suicides,[7] 11,208 homicides,[8] 505 deaths due to accidental or negligent discharge of a firearm, and 281 deaths due to firearms use with “undetermined intent”.[7] -Gun Violence in the US, Wikipedia Summary -Total deaths and injuries combined: 107,141
It is 10 times more likely that a firearm is used for defense, as “rare” as that is, than homicide, suicide, injury, or accident combined. This number includes the deaths and injuries caused during defensive use which, by rights, should be excluded.
Oh and did we gloss over the fact that rifles, of which of “Assault Weapons” is a subset, are a single digit percentage contributor to homicides?
2012 Weapon – Rifle: 298 Knife: 1,604
2013 Weapon – Rifle: 285 Knife: 1,490
2014 Weapon – Rifle: 258 Knife: 1,595
Rifles as percentage of total homicides
2012: 2.3%
2013: 2.3%
2014: 2.1%
So even as you try to narratively invalidate the shooting sports by giving them a sentence on what you can do with a gun, “of course”. You conveniently overlook the fact that defensive gun use is far more prevalent and other lawful uses are magnitudes more common than defensive use.
Highlighting the fact that a weapon is, in fact, a weapon and therefore it can be used to kill is just reiterating the entire point of defensively having a weapon, that it can kill if you need it to. Sometimes that’s the remaining option.
That firearms, like tools throughout history, are at times used for wrongful and harmful intent is a tragic consequence of always having a segment of the population that will self justify lethal force to accomplish their ends. Whether that end is gain, gratification, terror, or retribution doesn’t much matter at the time the event.
What will matter in that moment is your ability and capacity to do something about it.
Of course, gun nuts scream and yell all the time that they need their guns for “self-defense.”
That’s the argument the Supreme Court bought in District of Columbia v. Heller, which specifically allowed guns to be kept loaded and ready for use in people’s homes. The pro-gun lobby made the argument that you need a loaded, unlocked gun to defend yourself, and the Supreme Court agreed and located that right in the Second Amendment to the Constitution when for more than 200 years, that right had not been recognized in that manner before.
“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights…” “The right of the People to Keep and Bear Arms shall not be infringed.”
Self evident truth, my friend.
According to an analysis of figures from the National Crime Victimization Survey quoted by NPR, Americans protected themselves with a gun during the commission of a crime 0.9 percent of crimes from 2007 to 2011. So there is evidence that guns have been used by gun owners to defend themselves and their property. But it’s not the reason so many people in this country own guns.
It’s not?
Seems like it is.
There are an estimated 393 million guns in the United States, according to the Washington Post. There are more guns than people in this country.
I’ve seen estimates as high as 610 million actually. I wonder what the person to knife ratio is?
I am a gun owner.
This does not validate your opinion with any sort of expertise, sir.
My guns are locked away in a storage locker right now. I own a 12 gauge Remington pump-action shotgun, a .32 revolver, a .38 revolver, a .22 bolt action rifle I inherited from my grandmother, and a .177 bolt action rifle my brother gave me. I’ve never owned a semiautomatic weapon. Not even one. The last one I shot was an M-14 in the Army in 1965.
Ok.
I come from a military family.
This doesn’t mean anything validating either. Holding two military MOS’s myself I can attest and would in any court and to God Almighty that Veteran status does not, confer expertise with firearms. It grants a closer and more professional exposure to handling and characteristics, but not expertise. The military does not require expertise, it requires proficiency. The Armament Corps, one of my MOS’s, are much more likely to be subject matter experts yet even within those ranks expertise isn’t required so long as you can follow a maintenance manual.
You would think a family of Army officers would have owned a lot of guns.
No, not in my experience.
You’d be wrong. My father owned the 12 gauge pump-action shotgun I inherited from him and the .45 caliber Army-issue Colt pistol he inherited from his father. My grandfather, a four-star general, owned two guns: the .45 pistol he gave to my father in 1951 when he left for the war in Korea, and the German Luger taken from Field Marshal Albert Kesslering, commander of Nazi forces against whom grandpa had campaigned the Fifth Army in Italy.
That’s it.
Cool. Especially Kesslering’s pistol. Still not validating expertise.
I was raised to understand that guns are designed and manufactured to kill.
So was I.
I was trained in the Army on multiple guns, and I was trained to use them to kill.
Mission of the Marine Rifle Squad: Locate, close with, and destroy the enemy by fire and maneuver or repel enemy assault by fire and close combat. 0311, Infantry Rifleman. I can play that card too.
That’s what they are for. Killing. Guns like the assault rifles used by the Las Vegas shooter, or the shooter in Parkland, or Sandy Hook, or Pittsburgh, or New Zealand, are civilian guns that are designed to kill more people faster.
I thought they were military guns? That was the argument a few paragraphs ago.
That’s what the gun nuts don’t want to admit. These military-style
Back to military!
weapons may be legal, but they are high powered,
A nonsense argument coming from you. That Banshee you maligned earlier has a fraction of the power of your 12 gauge pump. The terminal ballistics will be exactly those of a 5″ barreled 9mm handgun of any sort.
rapid-firing, efficient killing machines.
If you want to own one of these things, you’re a gun nut, not a gun owner. There’s a difference.
Timothy McVeigh must’ve been a rental truck and chemistry nut
Thank you, Lucian. Your invalid opinion is noted and properly filed.
Now then, I’m going to go build an AR because reading this filled me with a spite for ignorance and bombastic attitudes.
Ahh. Feeling better already. Aero and Daniel Defense combo via Operation Parts
[Ed: DRGO sees lots of “studies” marketed as gun control justification that we don’t have time to report on in detail, though they all should be. Thankfully, they often are reviewed by other Second Amendment advocates. We thought we’d catch up on a few here this week, some having been mentioned on our Facebook timeline, some not, but all worth attention (sometimes repeatedly). The next installment comes Thursday.]
“California’s comprehensive background check and misdemeanor violence prohibition policies and firearm mortality” by Daniel Webster, ScD, MPH, Garen Wintemute, MD, MPH, et al, in February’s Annals of Epidemiology. We love this one, because it is one of the few from either the Johns Hopkins School of Public Health (Webster) or UC-Davis (Wintemute) that is reasonably well designed, following changes in the same location over time (trend analysis) rather than comparing different locations at the same time (cross-sectional analysis). And they found that neither California’s comprehensive background checks (UBCs) nor it’s prohibition of misdemeanor violence conviction status for firearm purchases made any difference in the incidence of firearm homicides or suicides—i.e., in “gun violence”. They were left advocating for “permit to purchase”, naturally, an escalation of infringement rather than admitting that their “gun violence” solutions are not.
Pair this with January’s publication of DRGO member Dr. Mark Hamill’s group of “State Level Firearm Concealed-Carry Legislation and Rates of Homicide and Other Violent Crime” in the Journal of the American College of Surgeons. Here, in another quality study comparing the trends before and after changing concealed-carry laws in all states, they found no correlation between these laws’ restrictiveness and rates of violent crime, “there was no significant association between shifts from restrictive to nonrestrictive carry legislation on violent crime and public health indicators.” We know that UBCs, tightening prohibiting criteria, and freer concealed carry laws do not cause increased violence.
Stir in confirmation by the CDC of Gary Kleck’s seminal work that there were easily over a million episodes of defensive gun uses (DGUs) each year during the 1990s (“Case Closed: Kleck is Still Correct”). That’s most of what we need to know to prove how valuable our responsibly armed citizenry is in keeping this country safe and more peaceful than not. That’s without even checking Dr. John Lott’s Crime Prevention Research Center, where the rest of the work has already been done, or GunFacts which keeps track of everything there is to know about it.
Ah, but according to the CDC: School Homicide Rate Up Dramatically from 2009 to 2018. Even if we buy their numbers, this was 514 victims in 431 incidents overall through 24 years, or about 21 people per year. Each one is tragic, yet as national emergencies go, is this? The CDC doesn’t track many causes of death with such little objective impact. We like to point out the more than 400,000 or more iatrogenic patient deaths each year that the health care professions are responsible for as meriting far greater attention from public-spirited doctors; this would be very much in their lane.
And we shouldn’t accept those numbers at face value. By dividing the types of killings into “single” and “multiple”, the authors are ignoring the standard historic FBI definition of “mass shootings”. That requires one or more perpetrators randomly shooting people unrelated to them in a public place, with at least 4 deaths not including the shooter(s). Their classification includes two or more fatalities, without reference to whom.
There were only 30 “multiple-victim” incidents killing 90 children ages 5–18 years old. (The age range is realistic, and relieving, because too many refer to “youth” up to 24 years old.) Obviously, nearly all of the victims were actually killed in single murders, which were nearly all purposeful and personal.
These “school homicides” occurred not only on school property, but also when the victims were “traveling to or from” any school or school-sponsored event. It doesn’t clarify whether every attack had anything to do with these events. Media makes far more of fewer than 4 victims of these not necessarily “school shootings” each year than public policy should.
The CDC researchers’ statement in the study reveals the agency’s unabated agenda to promote “gun violence” regulatory intervention: “A comprehensive approach to violence prevention is needed to reduce risk for violence on and off school grounds.”
CNN (of course) also reports that “Handguns are more popular in US homes, with deadly consequences for children” 1 to 5 years old. This refers to “Family Firearm Ownership and Firearm-Related Mortality Among Young Children: 1976–2016” published in Pediatrics in February. Now there is a good point made by the end of the article, that the intervention that counts is to ensure that unsupervised children cannot access our firearms. But the implication is that increasing numbers of handguns themselves (and not also increasing numbers of long guns?) are responsible. Besides that being nothing but correlation (≠ causation, remember), they are assuming that “changes in firearm ownership from predominantly rifles to handguns” has occurred. No one knows which class predominates, even though there are increasing sales of handguns.
“Child deaths from firearms [sic] . . . were on the decline until 2001” then have increased . . . “over the past decade from 0.36 per 100,000 children ages 1 to 4 to 0.63 per 100,000.” Now there were 80 deaths from all gun-related causes in the United States in the age group 1 to 4 years old in 2017. If we’re concerned about a 75% increase to 80, that means 46 deaths at baseline. Given the overall death rate of 25.3 per 100,000 for these ages in 2016, a change in such small numbers of .27 per 100,000 is not what we’d call a public health crisis—it’s a rounding error. (The point is valid even though years 2016 and 2017 were used here.)
.
.
— 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.
With the number of “affordable” ARs on the market I was glad to see Sig Sauer produce a practically perfect out of the box AR, the Tread.
When I say practically perfect, it has an M-Lock forearm, flip-up co-witnessing sights, ambidextrous charging handle, ambidextrous magazine release, six position adjustable Magpul SL-K stock, 1 in 8 twist mid-length gas system barrel and crisp single stage trigger. At full retail the Tread is $951, with these options that is a good deal. No doubt, you may find it for less at your local FFL dealer.
Out of the box Sig’s Tread is ready for use.The ambidextrous controls are a blessing for shooters. Unlike aftermarket parts they do not interfere with the trigger.
My sample Tread arrived with a 1-6 power Tango 6 scope with Tread short fore-grip and three prong flash hider. If you prefer to install a different brake or suppressor mount the barrel has ½-28 threads, standard. If this were my Tread I would install a Surefire brake so I could mount my Surefire Mini, to reduce the sonic crack and virtually all muzzle rise. It was very overcast when I was testing the Tread and there was no muzzle flash.
The Tango 6 arrived mounted and with a throw lever, a must for three gun.
What impressed me most about the Tread was the trigger. I have been shooting AR style rifles for nearly forty years and this is one of, if not the best factory trigger I have fired. It was crisp, breaking at four pounds with virtually no reset distance. I know many will want to swap out the trigger for something lighter like pro three gunners shoot, but I am looking at this as an economical carbine to protect myself and others. Dropping in a two to four hundred dollar trigger group defeats that goal. I would prefer to put that money toward a quality optic like Sig’s 1-6 Tango 6 optic.
The Tango 6 is available in first or
second focal plane models. Our sample was a first focal plane and retails for
$1799. When shooting a first focal plane optic you will notice the reticule
size changes in relation to the magnification. This means you will find little
or no point of aim/point of impact shift as you change the magnification. The illuminated
horseshoe BDC is fast and accurate. Once I had zeroed the Tread and Tango 6 at
fifty yards, I was dead on at two hundred yards. I prefer using the fifty yard
zero over one hundred yard zero for my applications. Like Ford versus Chevy,
the choice is yours.
The windage and vertical adjustments are positive and the reticule brightness is easily adjusted.
What I found intriguing about the Tread is Sig’s new design for the forearm. It is not round, it’s not a polygon. I would describe it as a flat roofed house with rounded corners of the foundation. On each of the forearm’s sides there are M-LOK slots to allow you to mount lights, lasers, grips, etc. The best feature of this design is it just feels good. You have the smoothness of a round forearm and the stability of a polygon shaped forearm when using a table or fence as a support. This forearm is just like the last bowl of oatmeal in The Three Bears, it is just right.
The forearm and short grip fit and feel just right. The flat bottom gives you a solid support on tables, auto hoods, etc.
After examining the Tread and lubricating the bolt carrier group and trigger, I ensured the scope was properly mounted and bore sighted. Next I needed ammunition to shoot with. I had a bag with mixed factory 55 grain full metal jacket cartridges that would be ideal to check actual zero and to run through her to check function. To see how well the Tread performed I had two loads from Black Hills Ammunition; 68 gr. Heavy Match and 77 gr. Hollow Points, Federal’s 69 gr. Gold Medal match and three loads from Sig, 55 gr FMJ, 60 gr HT and 77 gr OTM.
To feed the Tread ammunition I used Lancer’s
L5, Troy’s Battle Mag and Brownells CS SOCOM magazine, and the OEM P-Mag. I
used a couple twenty round magazines while shooting from the bench using MTM
Case Gard’s Pistol Rest to steady the Tread. The twenty round magazines set
nearly perfectly on the Pistol Rest giving two points of contact to steady the
carbine.
I was not resting the magazine on the rest because I was shooting bowling pins at about 25yds
I had the Tango 6 and Tread zeroed in less than a dozen rounds. After that I fired several groups off hand at distances from seven to fifty yards.
After a couple hundred incident free rounds, it was time to shoot the Tread for accuracy at the traditional distance of one hundred yards. Thanks to the magnification on the Tango 6 and Birchwood Casey’s Shoot-N-C Targets, I did not have to trek down range to check every target. I found the 1 in 8 twist barrel accurately stabilized all the cartridges. There were no great differences in the performance of the loads. Five shot groups of each load all were under an inch and a half. I did manage to get one five shot group with BHA’s 68 grain Heavy Match to come in at 0.634”. After that I quit, figured why press my luck.
Over the last couple of decades I have fired dozens of ARs. Most of them I thought, I need to do XYZ to make it perfect. This was not the case with the Sig Sauer Tread and Tango 6. The only thing I would add are, a quick detachment point for a sling, a light, possibly a section of rail for a front back-up sight, and flip-up back-up sights. Other than that, the Tread is good to go. This carbine would serve well for varmint hunting, three gun competition, and duty or home protection.
For the last few years, Sig Sauer has been responding to the consumer’s wants and needs. The Tread is the latest of Sig Sauer’s fine firearms that live up to Sig’s motto “to hell and back reliability”. If you are looking for a new AR, put the Tread on the top of the list. Take it out to the range to shoot it accurately, safely and have fun doing it.
For those not in tune with the gaming world, or Tom Clancy games, this is the latest in the string of titles released.
The Division 2 is a sequel (hence “2”) of the original title, Tom Clancy’s: The Division. This game series is a departure from classic First Person Shooter and Third Person Shooter styles like Ghost Recon.
Instead we are treated to a “shoot n’ loot” RPG style game where the motivation is basically -kill bad man, take his stuff to kill the next bad man, take his stuff too- “Shoot n’ Loot”.
The reward system in the game centers around acquiring more powerful versions of your favorite guns, some neat gadgets, and armor.
I love a good post apocalyptic yarn. A game that is entertaining and that I enjoy playing I can suspend A LOT of disbelief for.
But… there are limits. The Division 2 crosses those limits several times…
It is apparent to me that the writers for this game did maybe 10% of the viable research to make the game flow smoothly story wise and instead fell prey to easy troupes of both stereotypes and anti-stereotypes. They then gave themselves a hearty well done and hoped nobody would ask questions and just continue the extreme suspension of disbelief.
But again, I like this game. It’s fun. I must reiterate this point. These are just funny little plot and detail points where they could have done better very very easily.
The Plot [Spoilers]
In the very near future an insane evil virologist creates a super viral strain of many bad diseases all rolled into one. The Green Poison or Dollar Flu was spread initially on money and then like any normal hyper contagion. Lots of people died. There was panic. Quarantine was ordered at the origin point in New York City. That structure of containment and control made of government personnel and private corporations failed.
Enter -> The Division
The Division is essentially a group of special operators who only get called up in an apocalyptic emergency, like some kind of super secret squirrel national guard. They are there to assist local government structures and assist in the continuity of the United States… they also have all the extra judicial authority in the universe and are masters of body stacking turbo murder justice… very Judge Dredd.
So these ordinary citizen special operators get activated for NYC and shit goes sideways.. soooo they activate a few more.
This is where you enter in the first game. You then run around NYC dealing justice through automatic weapons fire and helping to restore something like a functioning situation in New York with the help of your Asian sidekick and New Yorker’s New Yorker Police Chief.
You fight groups of looters and rioters, a culty group of former city workers and hangers on who are trying to burn away the plague, and a PMC group turned warlord junkies. It’s actually a really fun premise and makes for a good narrative despite some of the first game’s issues (end game *cough cough* there wasn’t one).
Hooray! You saved NYC… kind of. It’s doing alright..
Sequel Time!
The Division 2 starts a few months later during the following summer. You’re a different agent of The Division’s second deployment and the U.S. has been reduced to tribal clannish enclaves of survivors nationwide.
Then your super secret extra special tech powers all go out and you have to run to Washington D.C. to basically be the heavily armed IT department.
Cool. Still tracking. Fiction requires suspension of disbelief and mine is having a great time. Roll into D.C. and get this party started.
The “Factions”
You roll into a gunfight on the white house lawn (with the weakest baddies of the game who have laid siege to your main base, that’s how ‘bad’ things are in D.C.)
You’ve now met the first faction, “Hyenas” aka looters with a tribe. This loose group of murdery hooligans has a pretty standard motivation in the shell of The Capitol, survive and take what you want/need from everyone else.
You, shiny watch anointed citizen special operator with extra judicious shoot on sight authority, fight this band of thugs in a kind of tribal warfare counterinsurgency with the help of a terribly armed citizenry who semi-regularly take on juggernaut heavy machine gun wielding type enemies with wooden baseball bats.
At other points you roll across “public executions” happening for no apparent reason… and in front of no actual public… except you, special watch operator, who sweep in and start stacking bodies and then OH! look at that the people about to be executed pulled out their concealed carry pieces and now you’re having a merry old gunfight with somewhere between 6:1 and 10:1 odds.
Luckily you’re a Division Agent.
The RPG mechanics are not my beef here, it’s the literal random execution of random citizenry on public display but to no actual public. But hey its a random encounter, and they are fun to roll up.
The fact that the local population are mostly armed this far into the badness actually makes a degree of sense, but the fact that as you progress through the game and “assist them” (mostly by viciously cutting down their enemies with gunfire) they go from packing their pistols and an occasional shotgun or rifle (realistic) to every civilian squad rocking M60E6’s with high end optics (I think I’ve personally picked up more M60’s in that game than were actually produced, glad they’re all in D.C.)
But hey, you did get that fabrication specialist. So she’s cranking out those modern Special Forces level belt feds and supporting equipment… Yeah her, the early 20’s hipster looking minority master gunsmith. She alone is cranking out high tier weapons for you and the militia. The world wide disaster is so inclusive!
You’ll also find a Brit to run your gun range (nobody else was available, I guess), also put it in the bowling alley… seems safe… good thing we have this highly sophisticated target system in the back room! The fine English gentlemen will stare disapprovingly at your targets, some of which you must deliberately shoot the ceiling ala VODA style.
The range is a cool in game feature to try gear and get DPS numbers but the explanation for “staffing” it is weak.
The staffing unlocks that follow the main storyline are an obvious nod to inclusiveness… taken just a tad too far. So far that they are using it in place of narrative instead of including it in the narrative. There is no explanation for these people, like this girl’s mom or dad was a Sig Sauer executive or something, just ‘here is your very well racially and gender balanced team to do things at the base.’
Might be an explanation in the ‘deep lore’ somewhere but literally nothing during gameplay.
Ok, next faction: The “Outcasts.”
Cults!
Everyone loves an evil cult. The twist on the original in the first Division, The Cleaners, was that they wanted to burn away the Green Poison and kinda went crazy with it. Flamethrowers everywhere! Very toasty.
The Outcasts are the opposite, infected carriers who have embraced their demise and seek to keep spreading infections and bring those they blame down with them. Plague spreading hooligans!
Cool faction. Lots of fun to fight. The rusher enemies are straight up just the psychos from Borderlands but that was a good enemy type. The sledge wielding roid raged murder freight train bullet sponges are a trip too.
Anyway, second cool enemy faction with an understandable plausible motivation in our fictional D.C. and well done from a story standpoint. They’re further down the maniacal train than the Hyenas or any other faction actually, probably my narrative favorite.
Here it’s your allies who bug me. You’re operating out of a former college campus where a loudspeaker is asking for volunteers to head to the little ad hoc shooting range the compound has set up (mind you far more advanced shooting ranges just spring up randomly as friendly events for some bonus XP) because they need marksman for… deer season.
Yes, deer season. During a worldwide epidemic apparently the DNR has survived and will be checking if you bought your deer tag. Far be it from you to be collecting fresh game for a conclave of survivors. Deer are also everywhere in D.C. , like I shot 4 just outside the compound gate to see if you could collect them, nope… must not be in season.
The story here takes a hard derailment in the suspension of disbelief category and its on a stupid detail. These guys aren’t going to wait until November to grab venison! If they’re hungry it’s going to be game on. People poach today for food and yet the epidemic societal conclave is going to issue deer tags? Are you going to have to wear hunters orange too? So that the other groups bent on murdering you and taking your stuff will recognize you’re hunting deer, not people…
Massive detail fail.
Faction 3: The Last Man Battalion!
Oops, I meant True Sons. LMB was D1.
Faction 3 is a copy paste from the first game with a new tag stuck on it. Narrative wise these guys were allegedly JTF (Government Forces) who went rogue and not PMC’s (Government paid private forces helping the government forces.)
It works, group of soldiers followed a charismatic misguided criminally convicted Colonel who then styles himself a General to restore order under his watch… It’s more lazily done than in D1 and it’s more loosely explained and hinted at but it rolls through and the more active and multifront combat partially makes up for not really knowing what their motivation source is.
The True Sons just end up being another squad of baddies to engage in gunfights and don’t have the narrative gravitas the other two do. They’re definitely evil bastards, they totally gas a settlement of folks (for no discernable reason actually, just a couple of assholes with a mortar that you then go provide sweet automatic weapons justice to) and their squads are attacking and harassing your allies… But there are just holes in the motivational chain all over and are unexplained.
Yes, the bad guys gassed the settlement… but why? Because they’re “bad?” This was a group of soldiers, cops, firefighters, and paramedics who are allegedly still trying to beat the infection and restore order in just a twisted despot survivalist sort of manner. But they keep just doing “bad” things with no narrative motivation.
Game writers just making up tid bits of things the hero should fight against and stop but there’s nothing in the general gameplay to link them.
Maybe it’s buried in ‘deep lore’ but it shouldn’t be! I should clearly understand why I’m running in with an M249 to blast belts of ammunition into these red, purple, and gold health bar enemies. A little more effort into connecting the narrative. It feels increasingly lazy and like the focus at this point was entirely on the loot table (which still had/has issues)
Faction 4: Random Archer Guys
Completely random groups of compound bow armed black clad folk who just need killing. I have no idea if they are in with The Outcasts or not. There’s no intel or motivation for these guys except wanting to try and turn you into an archery target… Maybe more on them comes later?
Faction 5: BLACK TUSK
I assume the conversation for the Black Tusk PMC’s (Hey! Here come the evil mercenaries! I missed them) went something like this.
GameDev 1: We need another bad guy faction for the end game. Some real hardasses.
GameDev 2: Mercenaries?
GameDev 1: Okay, cool. How do we introduce them?
GameDev 2: Have the narrator guy say, “Hey look, mercenaries.”
GameDev 1: After a huge cutscene which takes a giant steaming dump on all the work the character just completed?
GameDev 2: Oh yeah! Hell… Wait, why are these guys here? Who’s paying the near future tech mech armed mercs? They look super expensive and the world probably doesn’t have a functioning economy 7 months after a viral disaster.
GameDev 1: Carl, don’t ask silly questions. We have them hooked on loot drops at this point.
Gameplay
Some nuts and bolts items. (a tradable currency in the game for XP by the way)
Obviously the game is an RPG style which means numbers based damage in place of more “realism” in anatomy when engaging enemies. A head shot won’t drop most bad guys. That’s fine.
They actually do a fair job of keeping the enemies from feeling like bullet sponges even on the high health bad guys. Blazing well aimed shots into a threat will drop them reasonably and you cannot sit in the open taking endless damage yourself.
A significant improvement of note: the accessory system. Instead of acquiring a pile of guns and then a far more substantial pile of accessories for those guns, seeking ever slightly better RNG’d versions of your favorites, once you have an ACOG its accessible for any gun it is compatible with and provides a set bonus. Way less junk management and RNG grinding.
But the guns… for a franchise known for its attention to detail they goofed up a few. The venerable M16A2 is placed in the category ‘Rifle’ and fires 3 round burst. The M4 is in the assault rifle category and fires full auto.
This wouldn’t be a problem if they drew ammo from the same ammo pool (like in real life) but they don’t. The game does a poor job compensating mathematically for it too.
But that isn’t the most confusing one. The single most confusing is the USC…
The goofy neutered version of the UMP (also in the game a submachine gun) is also in the ‘Rifle’ category and draws from that ammo pool. None of it makes sense and the guns do not balance well. The majority of the guns in the game feel like they fit where they sit but these generate just enough cognitive dissonance that it breaks down the suspension of disbelief. If they were good guns in the game, in their categories, they would actually play out alright. But they aren’t.
Not only are they a testament to sloppy detail work by being out of category (the M16A2 could rock in the AR category) but their subpar game performance makes them throwaway items in addition to being totally wrong on details.
I’d be on board with a SMG category semi-auto with high individual round damage andpulling from the SMG ammo pool. Having the USC pull ‘rifle ammo’ from what are largely .308’s (the best performing guns in the category), .300 BLK, and 5.56 SPR type rifles relegates the USC to the trash heap over and over again.
Both the weapons could be good in game but they are in the wrong pile, making them trash and failures in attention to detail analysis.
Am I being harsh on a game too many steps from real as is?
I don’t believe so. Again, I enjoy this game overall. I’m just commenting on a few of the less pleasing details that break me out of the game immersion because they’re just so lazily wrong.
I do not believe that there is any such thing as “gun violence”. There is also no such thing as knife violence, car violence, alcohol violence, etc. Violence is perpetrated by an individual or group. The tool used is irrelevant.
Most articles about ‘gun violence’ are written as if to justify positions that the authors don’t recognize or accept aren’t true. Let’s break it down:
1. Suicide, whether involving firearms or not, is an act of desperation, remorse, inability to accept circumstances, or choosing to avoid a situation that the individual cannot control.
The literature is replete with data about other countries’ numbers and rates of suicide. Culture strongly influences rates as well as the preferred mechanisms. Suicide by firearm makes up approximately half of United States firearm associated deaths.
2. Justifiable homicide falls into the category of self-defense, including law enforcement action. Whether it involves firearms, conducted electrical weapons, blunt objects, pointed objects or blades, or hands makes no difference in the end.
These make up 20 to 25% of firearms associated deaths. These outcomes are socially and culturally acceptable.
3. There are small and declining numbers of accidental firearm deaths in the United States.
4. That leaves approximately 25% of firearms associated deaths due to criminal activity. More than half of these occur in just a few of our large cities and are associated with gang activity and other drug or sex trafficking crime.
With that basic information on the table, the question becomes: What to do about violence? The emphasis on firearms is the proverbial red herring. The problem is not firearms, knives, or tire irons in the hands of the police or honest citizens.
The avowed intent of much of the literature on “gun violence” is to design laws that will preclude criminals obtaining firearms. That idea is either mistaken or malicious. No law will prevent a criminal from breaking the law. That is what defines “criminal”. The only purpose of laws is to punish people for violating them, which may be of some deterrence. Until human nature becomes angelic, there will be the need to punish criminal behavior.
By definition, honest people are not criminals, so the only purpose of such laws can be to harass honest people. To paraphrase Ayn Rand in Atlas Shrugged: “The government cannot control honest people. The government can only control criminals. Therefore the plan is to pass laws that no one can obey and make everyone criminals. Then the government can control everyone.”
The emphasis on firearms by many of our politicians and academics represents their blatant failure to grasp reality. Life circumstances do not explain the venality of Bernie Madoff, the pederasty of some clergy, or the violence of gangs. They have all chosen to manipulate and control people criminally. A firearm is a tool some use to exercise that control, nothing more or less.
I value laws that are based on the moral principles of society. Abusive behavior toward other human beings is the problem, not the tools used in doing so.
.
.
—Robert A. Margulies, MD, MPH, FACEP, FACPM is an emergency medicine specialist, retired Navy Medical Corps captain, sworn peace officer, and firearm trainer with multiple certifications from the NRA and the Massad Ayoob Group.
With
the onset of spring it is time to start getting ready for this year’s
competition season or to start getting ready for hunting season. One of the
biggest things to learn is shooting from non-traditional positions. When I was
a kid, my dad told me to practice shooting “like Daniel Boone (one of the
greatest woodsman of the colonial era)”.
What dad was telling me was shoot off fence posts, use your hand as a
support on a tree trunk, use a cross timber on a fence as your rest, shoot
seated, etc. These non-traditional shooting positions will improve your scores
and increase your odds of getting a trophy. If you carry a firearm
professionally you will find hoods of vehicles, window ledges and even your
partner’s shoulder maybe an improvised supported position.
Bracing on a tree, rail, or any vertical object gives you a stable platform.
If your range be like mine, you can
use the bench and roof supports to simulate shooting off of a tree, a stump,
hill rise, etc. You can also practice seated shooting, prone, or kneeling-double
knees down, traditional kneel; whatever position you can come up with; as long
as it is safe. In the woods, on duty, and in competition; you never know where
or when you will need to execute a shot, so practice in various positions. You
can practice them dry firing in your house as well.
Double kneeling is a stable shooting position that raises you above obstacles. When combined with a fence rail it is like shooting from a bench rest
Kneeling and seated positions have been used by hunters and armed professionals since the dawn of shooting. The key to making these stable positions is to have the fleshy muscle of the triceps/bicep resting on the inside or outside of the knees. You can see in the accompanying photos how LLP has positioned herself. If you place your elbow directly on the knee, you will slip. Two hard objects are not stable; the belly of the muscle acts as a shock absorber against natural movements such as breathing. In the photos you will notice she also has looped her hand through the rifle sling. If you are sitting in front of a tree, use it to further stabilize your position. Combining a sling and proper positioning; kneeling and seated shooting positions are nearly as stable as the prone position.
Wrapping the sling around your back and shoulders ensures you have a solid lock on the rifle. Wrapping it around the support hand further improves the position.
Slings create a support when you
wrap your hand through the forward portion of the sling in a shooting position.
This increases the isometric tension across your back from the butt of the long
gun to your wrist to your support hand. If your sling is properly fitted the
long gun will be rock solid without the use of your shooting hand. What this
does is allow you to take more precise shots, because your shooting hand only
shoots, it does not support the firearm. You will find many examples of how to
fit a sling on youtube or Kyle Lamb’s page Viking Tactics. Both are invaluable
resource to improve your shooting.
Substituting the wall of our range building for a tree, you can see how the seated position becomes as solid as a rock
Because the sling is a tool not a
carry strap buy a quality sling.. When I say a quality sling, the sling should
be a two point military leather or nylon style sling; slings from The
Wilderness (Giles Sling), Gunsite (Ching Sling), Blue Force Gear and BLACKHAWK
come to mind. These allow you to adjust the sling to fit for carry and
shooting.
Another piece of gear all hunters
should have that ensures a reliable rest and works from a number of shooting
positions is shooting sticks. Shooting sticks were around long before modern
bi-pods and weigh substantially less and far more versatile. Those with
diminished upper body strength from injuries or simply by virtue of your size
will find shooting sticks give you a rigid shooting position. Folks who hunt
with scoped handguns swear by shooting sticks. The other feature that makes
them popular is the ability to fold them and for easy carry in a pack.
Shooting Sticks come in a variety of styles. The traditional style is a pair of sticks bungeed together to form a “V” that is the rest. These are generally sized for use in a seated position but they can be had in lengths long enough for standing. Here in the states the seated length works well for most applications, the standing length because of all the tall brush and grasses is popular for big game hunters in Africa.
When using shooting sticks grasp them at the “X”. This stabilizes the sticks and rifle.
You will also find walking sticks that are shooting sticks, this come in handy when trekking over rugged terrain. Another popular version is the tripod version. These are slightly heavier but more steady, especially when used shooting while standing. You can find shooting sticks at most popular big box stores such as Cabelas, Bass Pro, Brownells, etc.
You will find your backpack makes a solid rest in the field. The reason I and many others use a pack as a rest is its versatility. It can be laid over items such as a log, a rock, rise of a hill; all to give you a make shift “sandbag”. The pack like a sandbag cradles your long gun, giving you a solid rest and it will protect your long gun from getting damaged if you are using a rock or other natural item that could scratch your firearm.
As you can see there are many stable positions to shoot from that do not require you to have the additional weight of a bi-pod on your firearm. Hopefully this will help you while hunting, in competition or just on the range. As always; shoot straight, shoot safe and have fun.
I recently received a letter from the American Academy of Pediatrics, requesting my participation in one of their surveys about three issues – Suicide Prevention, Maintenance of certification, and the topic I particularly want to discuss—“Firearm Injury Prevention”. The letter and survey were accompanied by a 2-dollar bill as a “token of appreciation”.
I was treating this as just more AAP junk mail, when I perked up at reading the part about firearms. I briefly considered participating in the survey. Maybe they are finally wising up, I thought naively. But my excitement wasshort-lived as I read over the wording of the questions and saw how slanted the survey was from the get-go.
When I was in college, and also in my Master’s program in public health, I distinctly remember being taught that survey creation is a delicate process because of the amount of bias that can be introduced merely by the wording of the questions. Iʼm going to share a sampling of these firearm-related survey questions, and you can decide for yourself if this survey is a biased load of hooey or not (not that Iʼm trying to bias your opinion or anything).
Iʼd include a few photos of the survey questions, but unfortunately I already scribbled smart aleck comments all over most of them in my initial fit of pique.
Hereʼs a sampling [emphases are mine]:
13. When providing health supervision, how frequently do you or your staff: (Always, Sometimes, Never)
___ Identify families who have firearms in the home.
___ Recommend to families who have handguns their removal from the home.
___ Recommend to families who have any firearms their removal from the home.
___ Recommend to families who have firearms the unloading and locking away of guns.
___ Counsel families to inquire about the presence of guns in homes where their children play/spend time.
#?. If you do not always identify families who have firearms in the home or counsel them on removal or storage, what are you reasons for not doing so?
___ Parents object to inquiry/counseling on firearms.
___ I am fairly certain no families in my practice have firearms.
___ Firearm injury prevention is not an important issue in my practice.
___ There is not enough time in health supervision visits to address firearm issues
___ It is not the role of a pediatrician to ask/advise families on firearms.
___ Concern that the law does not permit me to inquire/counsel on firearms.
#?. Overall, how well prepared do you feel to counsel patients and their families on firearm injury prevention? (Not at all, Somewhat, Moderately, Very Prepared)
#?. Overall, how interested are you in receiving additional training on firearm injury prevention? (Not interested, Somewhat interested, Moderately interested, Very Interested)
#?. Pediatricians should support community efforts to enact legislation:(Strongly Disagree, Somewhat Disagree, Neutral, Somewhat Agree, Strongly Agree)
___ Restricting possession or sale of handguns.
___ Banning the sale and possession of handguns.
___ Banning the sale and possession of assault weapons.
___ Banning the sale and possession of high capacity magazines.
___ Requiring universal background checks.
___ Holding gun owners responsible for child and adolescent use of guns.
___ Requiring safe storage of all guns (ie; trigger locks, storing firearm and ammunition separately, using a gun safe)
___ Requiring firearms be subject to consumer product regulations regarding child access, safety, and design, thereby restricting access to unauthorized users, and facilitating reporting of firearm-related injuries.
Thereʼs more, but you get the idea. This is nothing but a laundry list of their usual party line anti-gun talking points. Iʼm surprised that they even included the option to disagree. And there is one (count ‘em, one) option which allows you to check the idea that none of this is the pediatricianʼs role. Iʼm especially interested in number 20, and who they think is going to provide this “additional training”.
There is no doubt in my mind that the AAP leadership plans to use the results of this slanted survey to claim that the membership supports their anti-Second Amendment agenda. They will continue to do what they are already doing, but now they will claim that they represent their membership in this “mission”.
How about if the AAP bigwigs stick to actual medical issues, like—oh, I dunno—maybe measles outbreaks, and why we have to medicate literally millions of American children just so they can make it through the school day? That ought to keep them busy for the next 20 years or so.
They need to stay in their lane, and leave their nanny-state paws off the Second Amendment.
As for me, Iʼll not be returning the survey, but I will be taking their $2 “token of appreciation” and buying more ammo.
.
.
—’Dr. LateBloomer’ is the pen name of a female general pediatrician (MD, MPH, FAAP) who enjoys competitive shooting sports, including IDPA, USPSA and 3-Gun. Evil semi-automatic firearms are her favorites.
This weekend marked the first truly ‘good’ range weekend of this year in my home state. A wonderful 67 degrees, dry, and partly cloudy.
So who grabbed their rifles to knock the dust and rust off?
Sometimes you just have to go have fun. It’s not always about drills. It’s not always about running best kit with the best times. So when my good friend tells me we need “to shoot” I know exactly what she’s talking about.
For things to shoot at… RE Factor Tactical. Shooting 2-Gun match next weekend and the IDPA standard silhouette is the scorable target. The GTG Baseline covers IDPA and USPSA. It gives a myriad of other drill options too. Zeroing groups. Dot torture light. Consistency gauging.
We tore up the targets and dusted off the unused skills box. Getting back into the rhythms of consistent proper fundamentals.
And ultimately, just had fun punching holes in the paper.
I did work a couple items for the ACTS 2-Gun. Reloads, controlled pairs, transition from rifle to pistol, just waking up skill sets I haven’t used seriously beyond dry fire practice in months.
Ultimately two things.
First, get out the guns and get them running again, especially anything used for serious purposes. Double check zero, function, clean and lubricate, make them ready.
The Ed: note in our last article “Beating Dead Horses” mentioned that statistical significance does not prove a contention and is not necessarily determinative. The Nature article “Scientists Rise Up Against Statistical Significance” referenced is important both for describing this real problem in a multitude of research and for the more than 800 scientists from 50 countries who want us to know about it.
A finding of statistical significance in a study generally means that the association being examined has at least a 95% chance of being meaningful. That is not the same as being true in the sense of causative or even necessarily concurrent. In the same way, not finding an association significant just means that in that particular study there appeared to be only a less than 5% chance that there really is one. (This can be phrased in other ways, such as in the Nature article. For an entertaining but serious discussion on how correlation does not equal causation, see Dr. Przebinda’s “Spuriouser and Spuriouser”.)
Too often, the 95% “confidence interval” justifies authors claiming that they’ve more or less proven the hypothesis they designed the research to test. (Confirming theories is a lot sexier, more publishable, and better for career advancement than failing to.) Yet there is far more value in disproving the countless ideas that scientists come up with because narrowing down a range of possibilities is what ultimately leads to consensus about the best ones.
The big problem is that the majority of studies published, especially in the social sciences (yes, I’m talking to you “public health researchers”—because that’s not medical science), have not been replicated. And when the attempts are made, most can’t be. (We discussed this in 2015 in “Trouble in the Ivory Tower”.) Invalid significance is (only) one reason.
A “significant” finding is also just the tail end of the formal process of research design, and is utterly dependent on the quality of the preceding steps. They begin with a theory about something contributing or causing something else, whether mechanical, biological, geological, psychological or social. A question has to be posed about the theory which, if testable, could shed light on the theory’s validity. Then a way to answer that question experimentally has to be designed. The design has to be able to be carried out in a way that observing it does not influence the results. Once obtained, the results (data) from the experimental test have to be understood. Here is where statistical analysis comes in, with various mathematical tests to put them together in meaningful ways. With that comes tests for “significance”.
A study can go wrong at any step of that sequence, from the logic of the theory to the kind of question posed to the way it is experimentally tested to the way the results are interpreted. As even scientists, despite popular belief, are human—and rather egotistical—there are usually problems that can be identified. The proper course of science is to critique and question all those steps in order to do a better job of ascertaining the utility of the approach and the accuracy of the findings. And there are always issues worth identifying.
That is, unless the researchers are publishing studies with biases that their professions and publishers share, with agendas that politicians and their media fellow travelers want to promote. Which, of course, includes work purporting to show that guns are dangerous to society. That lane is where DRGO’s counter-insurgency as a scientific watchdog group fights back for the right to keep and bear arms.
We want readers to understand what to look for and how we look at such research. In 2016 we published a piece “Critiquing the ‘Research’ Criticizing Guns” listing a number of ways we can get fooled into accepting experts’ claims. This is worth another read, and thanks to the Nature article, we’re adding another item to that list: Insignificant Significance. You can find the whole list via our home page set of “Positions & Resources”, under “Gun Research”, which directs readers to our PDF “Reading ‘Gun Violence’ Research Critically”.
Here’s the whole list:
1. Personal bias: Antipathy toward gun ownership is often evident in the language of the introduction and summary of the work. It may arise from the authors’ personal histories or fit their career arcs. Hoplophobia is often present.
2. Guns as independent risk factors: Studies that treat guns as a causative agent (e.g., the “guns as viruses” meme). Then a hypothesis is proposed and analytic approaches are chosen that reinforce the notion.
3. Selection bias and cherry-picked data: Choices are always made about what data will be sought, from what sources and over what time periods, and then how it should be interpreted. Smart academicians (and they are very smart) can skew outcomes from start to finish. Scrupulous ones don’t.
4. Arbitrary analogies: Comparing deaths from gunshot to entirely different phenomena (e.g., vehicle accident deaths). Using flawed premises and logic that have no relationship to the ways that guns work and can harm (e.g., that we must have “smart guns”, because autos have built-in safety devices).
5. Blame mongering: Holding responsible people other than the ones in the wrong who wrongly use guns at the wrong times.
6. Diversionary tactics: Setting up straw men, such as proclaiming that being shot by someone you know is more likely than being attacked by a terrorist.
7. False attribution: Depicting correlation as causation, a near universal tactic. Presenting gunshot deaths and injuries as consequences intrinsic to the existence of guns, rather than as aberrations from normal gun use and users.
8. Data Withholding: Refusing to share data avoids criticism, probably when it is most merited. Charging for access to articles behind pay walls is another, commercialized way to limit criticism.
9. Insignificant Significance: A significant result only demonstrates a > premises and methodology chosen, is accurate. It does not prove something is or is not true, nor does it negate criticism of any part of the study
That is quite a list of potholes on the road to enlightenment. But we’ll keep steering ahead even while navigating the bumps.
.
.
— 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.
