Advertisement

‘People without assault rifles have right to freedom from fear (Letter)’ – I Respond

Ooga Booga Booga - Assault Rifles, apparently

This next letter comes from The Westfield News, via MassLive.

I must wonder what people think a ‘freedom’ is, because evidence suggests that people want their freedoms to be any ‘thing or concept they like’ and put little further thought into the requirements of a true freedom. This ‘liked thing’ is a far cry from the conceptual and physical freedoms they have as natural creatures, persons of reason, or freedoms that can be backed, and violations of them redressed, by the force of law. This mental disconnect between what is and what people want because they think it should be, usually without due regard to differing opinions or reality, is a serious problem of modern debate.

A recent opinion piece (“America’s Rifle Fetish Is Destroying its Freedom,” The Republican, Nov. 2) by Jamelle Bouie describes a dystopian American society in which the possession of guns has become a fetish and one gun in particular, the AR-15 assault rifle, has become iconic.

Mr. Bouie poses this question: “How free are you really when you know a trip to the grocery store or a morning in prayer or a day at school or a night at the movies can end in your death at the hands of a gun?”

Was life better in the past when it was at the tip of a sword? Are we disregarding that you are far more likely to be killed by a vehicle on any of those aforementioned trips than by a gunman? What should you fear?

Serious question, is the threat of death to any of us for who, or what, or where we happen to be greater now than before the advent of the assault rifle? I’ll answer that, life is objectively better and safer today. Life has become safer since the rise of modern firearms, but the state of absolute or near absolute safety doesn’t exist. It didn’t then and it does not now.

Absolute safety is impossible. Near absolute safety looks nothing like absolute safety, and reasonable safety looks even less like the utopian dream of absolute safety. Absolute safety from something like ‘gun violence’ is an unachievable delusion of the modern pseudo-progressives, people that like to declare preferred states of existence to be human rights.

This question is particularly relevant, considering the 597 mass shootings this year. (at the time of the letter)

It isn’t though. It isn’t ‘particularly relevant’ considering we like to declare mass shootings to be any multi-victim event, regardless of causative information.

Follow up question for that ‘particularly relevant’ statement, how many of those ‘mass shootings’ resulted in 4 deaths or more? Answer, 38 out 630 (as of 12/4/23 GVA), and this has sadly been a record year in that particular metric.

But that isn’t the point. My point is that mass shootings are not mass killings and mass shootings are down as mass killings are up. So which is the metric?

Media constantly and purposely blur the line between those two terms because 630 events is far more compelling than 38, even as that is a record number. The events themselves are wildly different in causation. We are talking about such a broad set of motivations for violent events as to be nearly meaningless when trying to track causation.

Now, do we want to compare that 630 to the GVA’s undercounted defensive gun uses, at only 1,102? Or do we use the more likely CDC posted minimum of 60,000 incidents (to a max 1.5 Million defensive uses annually)? Do those 60,000 defensive uses annually weigh against the 38 significant negative outcomes? Or is that any negative outcome you dislike enough or is scary enough should be outweigh any positive outcomes?

Let’s play that game. Let’s say only half of the 60,000 DGU’s would have resulted in death or serious injury. Are an additional 30,000 people dead or maimed worth the laws and their dubious efficacy? Let’s go further down the absurdity line, the only 1,102 DGU’s confirmed by GVA. We’ll say these were all lethal preventions of at least one person, so one life saved. Is whatever gun control magic pill you’re thinking of worth killing those 1,102 people?

“But, Keith, he’s talking about assault rifles. It isn’t the same…”

I am aware it ‘isn’t the same’, but if we’re going to jump down the straw man hyperbolic hole then let’s do it. Most mass shootings happen with handguns, most crimes happen with handguns, most of the mass murders on GVA’s list occurred with handguns, not ‘assault rifles’. So if your gun violence prevention magic bullshit law works to absolute perfection, so AR’s and their ilk are gone totally, and the future killers mysteriously do not choose to use the most common weapon for mass shootings, we save how many people?

Now let’s put some reality on this nonsense, how many do we condemn to die because they didn’t have their rifle, or their magazine is permanently stuck in their gun, or the background check wasn’t universal enough and it denied them but the murderer didn’t get the memo? How many is an acceptable amount to legislate away? How many weapons can we expect to ‘get off the streets’ when, even in the states where gun control is most popular, compliance with bans is so abysmal it is a joke? Illinois is currently sitting at a less than 1% registration rate for their assault weapons.

According to ISP, as of Wednesday, 4,089 individuals have registered their assault weapons out of 2,415,481 state residents who possess Firearms Owners Identification cards. Gun owners have until January 1, 2024 to be in compliance.

Now, I’m not saying every one of the FOID card holders in Illinois also owns an AR-15, but it is the most popular rifle in the United States so I bet it is greater than 1%.

How do you make your magic bullshit work? Genuinely curious.

Second Amendment devotees lecture us about the freedom to own a gun. However, one freedom they do not speak about is freedom from fear that you might be shot to death with neither rhyme nor reason.

We have no human right to be free fromfear‘.

Fear is the word we use to describe the collection of survival emotions and instincts that help us process risk, you can’t legislate those. If we could, we’d make anxiety illegal tomorrow as a constitutional amendment and the country would be oh so much healthier. No such human right exists. It cannot exist. What you choose to assign or not assign risk to is up to you to manage. If that assigned risk and the actual risk happen to be drastically different, that is entirely a you problem.

Should people who use firearms for defense have to trade their real safety because of a firearm (60,000 incidents a year, minimum, according to CDC) into victimization so that you can feel safe from as mass shooting?

Not be safe, feel safe.

In 1941, with the United States and the world at war, President Franklin Roosevelt identified freedom from fear as one of the “four freedoms” that people throughout the world should be able to enjoy. In 1933, in the depths of the Great Depression, Roosevelt warned Americans, “The only thing we have to fear is fear itself.” A victim of polio, Roosevelt knew something about fear. He went on to speak of how fear “paralyzes.” He understood that fear can incapacitate us and render us powerless. He understood that the main purpose of government was to provide safety and security for its citizens. In other words, to free us from fear.

Under those auspices Roosevelt imprisoned 112,000 people, many of whom lost everything they had owned. 70,000 of them were US citizens, all of whom were never charged with disloyalty, and there was no appeal process to recover anything that the government caused them to lose by relocating them on the off chance they might be a spy for the Imperial Japanese. This is by the US Government’s own admission, so how much worse is the reality?

In 1988, 47 years later, the US government finally apologized and provided $20,000 cash payments to each incarcerated person. That is the equivalent of about 16 months average salary in the US at the time, for the total loss of all their property, 47 years later. Freedom from fear, indeed.

So no, not ‘in other words’. The four ‘freedoms’ are really only two, the other two are progressive talking points that garner votes. The freedom from ‘want’? What a utopian pipe dream that is, to not need to produce to survive. I would bet 70,000 Americans of a certain heritage ‘wanted’ quite a bit around 1945 when they were let out of their “relocation”, and what they got was $425.43 per year they had to wait after 47 years of waiting.

In all of human and natural history animals and people alike have had to produce to survive. We cannot simply exist and be sustained. We live in the best of times thus far when it comes to producing efficiently, and thriving thusly, but we cannot do that without wanting to and working to fulfill those wants and needs. That want always carries a risk of failure, we might fail to produce, we might make a mistake, that mistake might be fatal. We have no freedom to be free of ‘want’.

Likewise the government does not exist to ‘free us from fear’, what an absurd notion.

The government exists as an organized generalized force of the people. It will not, cannot, and should not perfectly execute the individual wills of all people. Not all those wills are created equal in value for the rest of the people. But all those people have certain rights, inalienable by government or other people, that the government can ensure a response to if they are violated by one person or another. Also, hopefully, if the government does it. But that outcome may be a far cry from satisfactory, see above.

This is not a freedom from fear, it is a promise of force on your behalf under certain conditions. It is also a promise that the government cannot use certain force against you, at least without you being able to take it to court afterwards and hold them accountable to their ruleset. You should fear your government in a healthy manner, and it should fear you. That is the respect of two bodies with the ability to truly influence each other.

In 1651, political philosopher Thomas Hobbes described a state of perpetual fear. He called it the “state of nature.” In this state, men enjoyed absolute freedom. However, freedom came at a price. There were no governments or laws to constrain men from freely exercising their passions and appetites (anger, aggression, envy, greed, ambition, lust). Without restraints, the state of nature was a state of war between man and his fellow man. Consequently, men lived in continual fear that someone would take away their lives, their liberty, and their property.

How is that different under today’s societal structures? A man can still take my life, my liberty, my property, and so can (and have) the governments we’ve instituted for that matter, and the only recourse I have against that with any assurance under my control is force. Force, in other words, meaning the ability to bring violence to bare on my own behalf. I may lose, but it is one of the only true freedoms I possess.

Hobbes famously described this state in which there was “no society; and which is worst of all, continual fear, and danger of violent death; and the life of man, solitary, poor, nasty, brutish and short.”

For that reason, men joined together to form a government for the common good (commonwealth) and the mutual protection of life, liberty, and property. Men relinquished their absolute freedom and submitted to laws that provided security and freedom from fear.

No they didn’t. Men did not relinquish it. We just, as a majority, agreed to a consequence.

We are reminded, daily in many cases, that man is still free to act as they choose. What they are not free from is consequence. They weren’t free from consequence in the so titled “state of nature” either, but it was not a consequence organized by the majority. It was instead just a risk of violence from whomever they were offending against directly.

That seems to be the great lie, the constant sticking point that nobody with this sort of worldview seems to grasp, is that making something illegal deprives man of nothing, it does not deprive them of the ability to do a thing. To take from someone, to do violence to someone, to kill someone, a law does not deprive someone of the ability to do any of those things. What a law organizes is a consequence to being caught doing them.

That is it. Government is organized force, ordered on behalf and by the majority to be projected under certain circumstances. The better ones are enjoined with more things they cannot do than things that they can. The government exists to project force en masse on behalf of the individuals it represents. Thus its primary functions are defense from foreign threat and enforcement of contracts.

Government does not free you from fear, it is a form of projecting fear. The fear of consequence.

Our government has failed to act against gun violence and has failed to free us from fear. According to several polls, Americans want a ban on assault rifles: 66% (Pew); 58% (Gallup); 67% (Statista). However, far-right Republicans in both the House and the Senate, in the name of Second Amendment freedom, block any meaningful legislation to curb gun violence.

Maybe because mob democratic rule does not make for good policy? It doesn’t matter that a ‘majority’ of Americans want to ban assault rifles in poorly worded, ill-informed, binary choice polls. This is a subject matter the vast majority of them do not understand to a level worth rendering an opinion on, you value the opinion only because it aligns with yours.

My opinion on a nuclear reaction should not be weighed with equal measure to that of a leading nuclear physicist. My thoughts, and feelings, and fears of nuclear reactions or nuclear reactors should not be weighed the same as an expert. Therefore my ‘vote’ on whether to ban nuclear energy should only be weighed as much as I understand nuclear energy. We can take as many polls about how scared people are of nuclear energy, if that fear is objectively misplaced and erroneous then it should be disregarded and the public educated. It should not be implemented blindly as a policy of the mob.

This is something that government is terrible at by the way, educating, look at the information flow surrounding COVID-19.

Certain things should be public votes, of course. These are things that effect all and can be voted on in an informed manner. But just as government’s role has limits, so do public opinions rendered on a binary vote sheet.

What we have is not freedom. What we have is a betrayal of civic responsibility. What we have is irresponsible behavior. What we have is fear of senseless, violent death.

Michael Camerota

Westfield

No Michael, what we have is an illustration that promised delusions, like that we can make natural laws bend to our will and work differently through words on a sheet of paper, sell gangbusters. We see that people would rather continue being told that X, Y, or Z politician or policy will finally fix ‘violence’ and ‘bad thing’ for good and all, even with the repeated illustrations of failure time and time again. That it is more comforting to live in the lie that if we just keep ‘working to end’ a manifestation of natural law, the ability to project force, that is better than acknowledging the limits of written law.

Written law requires consent, your consent, to be governed by it. You probably withdraw that consent multiple times, and in multiple ways, every single day. Do you speed? You have decided to withdraw your consent to be governed by a traffic law and risk the consequence. Drink and drive? Even just once, a short distance home around the corner, and you were really only buzzed not drunk so it was fine? Again, you withdrew consent and chose not to be governed by the law at that time.

Why is it so surprising that there are extreme cases of this departure from the governance of law? Why is it so surprising that because you can divest yourself from the governance of law, without immediate ill effect, that it can manifest in an extreme way like a multiple homicide too, and that divestment is only reigned in when the government or a private individual projects enough violence to counter it or the divested individual stops on their own? And why do you expect the government to solve your fear of those extremes when they cannot stop you from speeding?

The TCM-365 – A P365 Weaponlight

The popularity of the P365 has guaranteed it will have a massive aftermarket. The P365 series has dominated the concealed carry market, and the numerous models of the gun have instituted a new level of modularity. The P365 features a proprietary rail that has been a popular option with various light manufacturers. The most popular is the Streamlight TLR-7 sub, but an unlikely competitor in the form of the Nightstick TCM-365.

At first glance, the lights are very similar. The TCM-365 looks a lot like the TLR 7 SUB but does differ inside and outside. The TCM-365 is also seemingly the most powerful of these subcompact weapon lights on the market. The TCM-365 utilizes an aluminum case with some polymer and is powered by a single CR123A battery. The TCM-365 weighs 2.25 ounces and is 2.51 inches long.

On the XL slide model, it does stretch past the end of the barrel ever so slightly. From pictures on Nightstick’s website, it seems like the light goes a bit past the standard P365’s slide and barrel. This isn’t an issue other than adding length to a compact gun.

The TCM-365 – Light it Up

What first caught my attention was the lumens of the little light. I’ll be the first to admit that lumens aren’t everything, but they are still important. The TCM-365 throws 650 lumens of bright white light outward. That’s 150 more than the TLR-7 SUB. It’s tough to squeeze extra light into such a small light. The run time is two hours on a premium-quality battery.

The candela is a very specifically listed 4,612. That’s fairly standard for a little light but is about four candela short of the TLR-7 SUB. That’s one of the problems: when you brighten up the lumens, you often sacrifice some candela. The TCM-365 is IPX-7 waterproof, so you can splash it, but don’t go swimming with it.

Run and Gun

The TCM-365 has a set of ambidextrous buttons on either side of the light. A quick press on either button results in an instant on. The buttons are nice and tactile and presented for an easy press. With this light, we have both a momentary and constant on mode. Constant on is just a press, and the light fires up. A longer press is momentary, and the light shuts off when released.

The control is programmable. You can press both buttons five times to enable a strobe mode if you like strobe modes. You can also turn the life off entirely. Hold both buttons for three seconds, and it’s off and won’t come on until you hold both buttons again for three seconds. This is great for storage and transportation to avoid killing your light.

Through the Darkness

The TCM-365 packs an interesting beam. It’s actually well-tailored for a compact, concealed-carry weapon. The center hotspot is very distinct from the corona and casts out fairly far. A TIR lens does a great job of creating a very wide beam that fills your vision with light. It casts a wide beam that’s tailored for close-quarters use. It really does a great job of filling your vision with light.

The hotspot carries itself out very well to 25 yards. At 25 yards, I feel pretty good about being able to identify a threat and deal with it. Beyond 25 yards, the beam still carries far enough to spot potential threats, but being able to determine if that target is a threat might be tough if they don’t have a long gun.

The TCM-365 activates quickly and does a great job cutting through the darkness. The beam is cooler than most and more of a white-colored light rather than a yellow light. It’s effective for sure, especially indoors. If it’s being used in the home, a parking garage, or an alley, you have quite a good bit of light to deal with a threat.

Rough and Tough

Recoil certainly isn’t an issue for the light. The mount locks the light to the gun, and it doesn’t move. It’s tough and durable enough to resist falls for up to two meters, according to Nightstick. I tested that by dropping it from head height at different angles. The only thing I achieved was getting my gun dirty. The light fired right back up and on.

The TCM-365 is a great tool to turn your carry gun into a capable home defense gun and night fighter. You can argue your carry gun doesn’t need a weapon light, and I wouldn’t argue back. To me, it’s another option. However, where this light and other P365 lights work best is if you use your carry gun for home defense. While most of us have specific guns for specific purposes, the average gun owner likely only has one gun.

Home defense guns should most certainly have a weapon light, and the TCM-365 is tough to beat if the P365 is your go-to gun.

Record ‘Mass Shootings’? Violent Crime Down? Are things better? Worse?

First, the good news. Homicide in my area dropped 18% from last year which puts us at the lowest level since 1966. The six decade record is good news for Oakland and Wayne counties, and Motor City herself. Good job Detroit.

2022 was a record year for violence, as were 2020 and 2021, with the COVID-19 and George Floyd riots spike leading to nationwide strife on levels we hadn’t seen for many years. We still haven’t hit early 90’s bad, but it isn’t great. There are signs it is getting better in many ways and in most places.

Via Ground News

But that isn’t all ways or all places.

The Hill has a honestly titled report out that details the US hit a record in mass shootings with 4 or more deaths, recording 38 in 2023. This beat last year, 36, and was the highest we know since 2006. We are on pace to have a lower number of mass shootings of 4 or more injuries than 2022 and 2021, but the number of incidents with 4 or more deaths peaked.

This is why language matters so much in reporting. Context also matters. Most of these 4 or more death events were domestic. The most significant shooting of the year was Maine where a US veteran shot 31 people, killing 18, before being found dead days later from an apparent suicide.

The issues are complex and the mass killing events, while a “record” number in a year, are still too rare to well quantify as an issue nationally. Stress is a complicated compound issue and we can’t find too many commonalities other than stress and usually a final triggering event. Mental health issues, paranoia, traumatic personal events, traumatic world events that play into biases, all of these things have at some point been the trigger or trigger combination for violence on this scale. But it is still rare.

For reference, agricultural deaths due to accidents with tractors kill more people, 241 dead (2021), than were killed in mass shootings of this 4+ scale, 197 dead (2023). Am I saying we shouldn’t look at mass shooting deaths? No, they are eminently preventable because they require a hostile motivated person or persons to occur. With fewer so motivated people we have fewer deaths. The comparison is that in accident prevention we have the same base level formula, if we mitigate the circumstances for accidents we have fewer.

The problem in both is we cannot eliminate all the the factors for the negative event. Tractors need to be able to do certain things that put people working around them at a certain level of physical risk. Comparatively people cannot be divested of their capability for hostile acts and we cannot divest them of the ability to cause harm, a partial token removal of the ability to cause harm is without value.

Let’s take a look at the ‘preventative’ measures that are currently popular in the gun control mainstream and if they would reduce or eliminate the ability of a shooter to kill four people.

Assault Weapon Ban, Partial (No Mandatory Confiscation/Buy Back)

  • Most proposals do not remove any currently held firearms, tens of millions are in circulation and will remain so for decades. This does not reduce the risk of death to four people
  • Only makes new transfers illegal. Illegal transfer status does not curb current felonious use and would be unlikely to significantly impact extreme cases like mass shootings. This does not reduce the risk of death to four people.

Magazine Capacity Limit, 10 Rifle and 15 handgun

  • 10 round magazine of rifle ammunition is more than enough to kill four people
  • 15 round magazine of handgun ammunition is more than enough to kill four people
  • Hundreds of millions of standard capacity magazines are in circulation.

Fixed magazine

  • Making the magazine remain affixed to the firearm does not reduce or eliminate the ability to kill four people

Universal Background Check

  • Every study about background checks associated with point-of-sale checks, whether commercial or private and on handguns or all guns, found no conclusive evidence that background checks have an influence on mass-shootings. Background checks therefore have no influence on the reducing harm in incidents of mass shootings where four or more deaths occur.
  • Many of the deadliest mass shootings in the nation have occurred with people who passed their background checks and who had no disqualifying criminal or mental health record at the time of purchase. Other incidents circumvented the background check in some trivial (simple theft) or violent (murder) manner.
  • The collection of studies by Rand, linked in the first bullet point, actually associate greater likelihood of a mass shooting after background checks in 4 of the 5 policies studied.

Caveat to the UBC point, the data is thin. Mass shootings are (thankfully) too rare an event to track across this causatively, but the best data we have available suggests an increase events after background checks are implemented, not a decrease.

How could that be? Because correlation isn’t causation. If you harken back to my context article taking apart the ‘Terror on Repeat’ nonsense, you’ll notice that the rise in mass shootings also correlates strongly with the rise of 24hr news cycle and then real time social media consumption. Background checks happen to have been implemented for firearms transfers in the 90’s with NICS right about the same time as the rise of the 24hr news cycle gave mass shooters their instant world stage.

So, in all likelihood, background checks are mostly a feel good measure.

That’s 2023. Hopefully we see the world continue the chilling trend, maybe faster, in 2024. Two increasingly divisive wars on the global scale and high government distrust do not make it an easy forecast.

Being Basic: Pistolero

There’s a lot of discussion on the fundamentals of marksmanship, and everyone has their version of the priorities.

I break down my thoughts based on the discoveries I’ve made and takeaways I’ve found from multiple classes.

This is not intended as the gospel, but my hope is that for those struggling to find some direction it can help shed some light.

The Invrt Bandolier From IC13

At first glance, you might pass off the Invrt bandolier from IC13 as a silly contraption. It’s a bandolier that straps across your chest and gains its name from the fact that it’s designed to be worn inverted. Your magazines are oriented downward, and that’s not exactly the usual for load-bearing gear. You might also think it’s the smallest chest rig out there, but you’d be wrong there, mostly because it’s not a chest rig.

The Invrt is a bandolier. It’s not designed to be a chest rig. The Invrt is load-bearing gear, but it’s made for a minimalist load. I would argue it’s made for a realistic load. Most people, including law enforcement, will likely never have to reload in a firefight, especially with a rifle. However, no one ever complained they had too little ammo in a gunfight.

The Invrt System

The minimalist nature of the Invrt allows it to be several things. First of all, the Invrt system allows you to carry anywhere from two magazines and a mini IFAK to three magazines. When we get into the .308 caliber rifles, that can be a little tougher, either way, you can get at least two rifle or SMG mags on your chest for a rapid reload.

IC13 sells the Invrt plain, and you can add your own pouches, or you can purchase them as complete kits for several different platforms. This includes the AR, the AK, and even subguns like the Scorpion MP5 and more. The system Invrt sent me is for the CZ Scorpion and came with two CZ Scorpion mag pouches, a pistol mag pouch, and a small admin pouch.

The second thing the Invrt excels at is being easy to stash. You can fit it into a go bag or active shooter kit easily. It doesn’t take up much room by any means. This allows you to stash the Invrt nearly anywhere without it taking up much room.

Finally, the Invrt is easy to rapidly put on. You can do it moving and grooving. If you’re responding to violence, you don’t have much time, so you can swim into the Invrt with ease. You can do it while holding a long gun. It takes seconds to toss on and get back to responding directly. Like any bandolier, it fits across the body, primarily across the chest. A third strap goes under the arm and locks it in. This third strap can be secured with a buckle or with hook and loop as you see fit.

Running the Invrt

The Invrt’s upside-down magazines are an interesting touch. It’s different, but fast. The pouches are friction fit. When a mag’s loaded, it’s fine when you’re just walking and shooting. However, once you start sprinting and taking stairs, you’ll want some degree of retention. The mag pouches are set up for bungee cables, and IC13 sells bungee cables fairly cheaply to secure the mags. I would certainly suggest getting the bungee cables or not running the rig inverted.

With the upside-down magazines, you can quickly grab the mag and get it into your gun. It works really fast, impressively so. It’s way more intuitive and doesn’t call for you to bend your wrist this way or that for a clean draw. Just grip, rip, and reload.

The rig is super comfy. The back of the Invrt has some slight padding, and when you run, it doesn’t bounce or slam loaded magazines into your chest. After several sprints, I didn’t notice any discomfort. The support straps are both very wide, which helps distribute weight well. However, there isn’t much weight between two Scoprion magazines and a Glock mag.

Getting the Invt on and off doesn’t take much effort. You hold it with your dominant hand and swim into it essentially. Then, grab the strap and lock it down. Although to be fair, you don’t have to use the support strap, but it keeps the rig from rotating when worn.

What About Shotguns?

Plenty of police officers still rock and roll with shotguns. With that in mind, IC13 doesn’t seem to offer a shotgun kit. Luckily, the Invrt panel uses standard MOLLE. It’s easy to make your own. I grabbed two of my many bandoliers and strapped them to the Invrt. This gave me ten rounds of firepower, which is likely plenty when it comes to shotgun fights.

The bandoliers strap on easily enough, and I have the shells orienting in the same direction to make it easy to retrieve shells from either five-shot bandolier. It’s a little clumsy, but it still works and makes feeding your shotgun easy.

The Invrt could be set up in all sorts of ways. Maybe it’s a bit medical kit. Maybe it has a radio, or maybe it’s nothing but magazine pouches for your handgun. You can configure it to make sense for your needs like any other piece of modular gear. With the Invrt, you get a piece that’s rapid to don, easy to stash, and still as modular as any piece of modern load-bearing gear. It’s a realistic setup for most encounters and was clearly made with a lot of forethought.

Check it out here if you think it’s a good fit for your go bag.

Training With Green Ops: 2-Day LPVO Course

Green Ops 2-Day LPVO Course Chris Alvarez

A few weeks ago, I had the chance to attend the Green Ops 2-Day LPVO Carbine course at The Ranch in Dilley, Texas south of San Antonio. Although I will not deny my bias in favor of the LPVO and find them both useful and fascinating, I also understand that like with anything else, these scopes have trade-offs. To be successful with LPVOs, it’s crucial to understand their strengths and weaknesses which is why this Green Ops course has been a huge interest of mine. The course is focused on the entire effective range of the modern carbine and its use with an emphasis on the LPVO as the principal aiming implement, from 0 to 500 meters. I felt quite fortunate after finally attending the course and training under keen instructors.

LPVO equipped carbines employed during final exercise
Green Ops LPVO Course Students working through the course’s final exercise.

Green Ops And Their Training Philosophy

Green Ops is an international firearms training and tactics company based in northern Virginia and central Texas founded in 2005 by Special Forces soldier Mike Green. (It should be noted that Mr. Green is also a SOLGW pro-staff shooter and this “local” carbine company was well-represented at this event). Green Ops teaches rifle, shotgun and pistol courses to eligible civilians in addition to the military and law enforcement and is staffed by extremely competent shooters with loads of experience. I first met Mr. Green some time back after squadding together in local USPSA, IDPA matches or crossing paths at other locally hosted training events. This LPVO course was my first time participating in any Green Ops event as a regular student.

Each instructor at this recent LPVO class is the same way as Mike Green; though most of them have decades of serious military experience, they all still actively practice, train and compete with firearms. In other words, every single person that represented Green Ops at this class spends time pursuing the very things they teach their students. They don’t sit on their laurels and you can see it on their social media channels which are always talking about this or that instructor participating at this or that event. For example, our lead instructor for the class, Chris Alvarez, kept making all kinds of references to competitions all weekend long and tying it back to the relevancy of the material. One of the assistant instructors donned his USPSA competition style belt and wore his match pistol for the entire weekend as well. I just point this stuff out because it’s worth nothing that as a group, Green Ops instructors don’t just talk about the thing, they’re all about it too. Another way this particular 2-day course also stood out was the fact that there were five staff members present for whole event. With approximately 14 or 15 students in attendance, the ratio of students to instructors was excellent and all of us had a chance to get individualized attention. Furthermore, with the level of competency amongst the staff that weekend, any one of the them could have equally filled-in as the lead instructor without compromising the quality of the class or the curriculum.

Getting Down To Business: The Low Powered Variable Optic

The typical modern 5.56mm chambered carbine has a general effective range of approximately 500 meters. LPVOs can help extract every last bit of shooting performance available from a general purpose carbine down to that last meter. Simply put, LPVOs work like red-dot sights up close and like traditional riflescopes at further distances. (Note: they are not sniper-scopes, nor should they be used as such. This is something Mr. Alvarez constantly reminded us of all weekend). And yes, even amongst riflescopes, the LPVO has its own set of trade-offs, but that’s beyond the scope of this article. As wonderful as LPVOs are, they aren’t without their challenges and nuances either. In a previous conversation with Mr. Green, he told me that both he and Mr. Alvarez developed the curriculum for the Green Ops LPVO Course to challenge the notion that LPVOs are niche optics. Of course, Mike will also be the first to tell you that to get there, it takes a lot of work and dedication. No free lunches, ever. I make it a point to shoot carbines with LPVOs whenever possible and I know exactly what he is talking about, so this class was great because we employed the LPVO across various distances and positions, some contorted. This class will expose just how squared away the shooter needs to be with their optic to make the system work correctly.

My take on the LPVO is that as a shooter, you “pay” your dues up-front as it takes more work to master (especially at CQB distances), but it “pays for itself” at distance. With those further shots, you not only get magnification but an actual useful reticle with subtensions or stadia lines that add another level of precision that isn’t possible with a red-dot or holographic sight. If the weapon I carry has an effective range of 500 meters, I’d like to be able to be as effective with it all the way to meter #499. Back to no free lunches: LPVOs tend to be more expensive and complex than simpler red-dot sights. This also includes their scope mounts, which are also more expensive and complex than RDS mounts. At retail prices, a “nice” red-dot sights costs nearly the same as a mid-tier LPVO. Because LPVOs are riflescopes, matters of eye-relief, the eye-box, exit pupils, etc. are still in play. This means the shooter’s eyes and face still need to be lined up properly with the optic to work. Alignment is a big part of mastering the LPVO’s learning curve. Even with my own NF 1-8 ATACR, I experienced some challenges when trying to aim with a zoomed-in scope in a contorted position off a barricade. This is why understanding the short-comings of an LPVO is also as important as learning how to use it correctly. And yes, that weekend I saw plenty of offset red-dots in conjunction with LPVOs on both instructors’ and students’ carbines. It’s not about one against the other, it’s about using the right tools for solving problems.

The Value Of The Green Ops 2-Day LPVO Course

Green Ops organizes this course into a couple different parts. There’s a classroom portion, a portion to confirm zero [very important!], a CQB portion, barricades, plenty of time shooting at longer distances, live-fire-and-maneuver and the “final exercise” where two students paired together run and shoot through a tactical stage with targets and cover at varying distances. The final exercise is a lot of fun to run through and it calls for everything we learned during the course. In my opinion, the biggest value of the Green Ops 2-Day LPVO course is how comprehensive it is.

carbine with LPVO being shot off a barricade

you learn how to do everything with your GENERAL PURPOSE carbine from 0 to 500 meters using the best General purpose optic you can pair with such A carbine.

PE Fitch

With the amount of instructors, we all got enough attention as needed. The class was organized in such a way that no one portion had to be rushed. For the CQB portion, besides regular shooting instruction and plenty of repetitions, the instructors covered sling management, shooting on the move, and heigh-over-bore. In my case, one of the instructors took it upon himself to make sure I was squared away as left-handed shooter. They did this for all students in whichever way they needed assistance.

5.56mm carbines with variable optics
The Leupold Mk.5 HD 2-10×30 FFP MRAD Scope with a TMR reticle on a Leupold Mark AR 1.50″ mount next to a Nightforce ATACR 1-8 FFP LPVO with the original FC-DM reticle. It can’t be seen from this angle, but the carbine with the Leupold is also equipped with an offset micro reflex sight.

The chance to shoot at extended distances is a big deal because most of us don’t get the chance to do so often, much less under the supervision of extremely qualified instructors without being rushed. This is priceless. I was more than happy to use my NF ATACR and the carbine it’s mounted on at these further distances while also taking advantage of the chance to begin my testing and evaluation of the Leupold Mk.5 HD 2-10×30 riflescope on another carbine. While this specific Leupold Mk.5 scope isn’t a “true” LPVO since it only goes down to 2-power on the low end, it’s a scope I’ve been quite interested since it first launched, especially for short to mid-range shooting. I didn’t feel “stuck” too badly limited to only 2-power, even during the CQB portion. Of course something closer to true 1-power is desirable but I made this work just fine. Naturally, this Leupold shined at distance and it felt like cheating when compared to shooting with the typical 1-6-power LPVO. In the spirit of the LPVO-specific curriculum, I held instead of dialed, (although the Leupold Mk.5 HD 2-10×30 paired with the TMR reticle is really built to dial).

All students had ample opportunity to take shots through their carbine and scope combo at steel IPSC targets found at distances ranging from 100-386 yards*. Even though this wasn’t required, I entered some estimated numbers into a ballistic app to get quick “dope.” With my 100 meter zero, on both of my carbines, I could hold high center out to 250+ yards with no problems. At 300 yards my come-up was only 1-mil and at 400 yards, a little less than 2-mils. Being able to verify this in real time and seeing that there wasn’t too much of a difference between both of my carbines with 14.5 and 16-inch barrels was quite neat.

The Cost Of Training

Training isn’t cheap. Ammunition isn’t cheap. Guns and gear also add up in cost, and so does the time it takes to attend training events. If you’re like me, you want your time and training dollar to get you as much value as possible. After training with Green Ops, I didn’t feel like I wasted my time. It’s hard to feel that way when the entire instructor cadre actively shoots, competes and attends outside training to stay relevant. And more so when there’s a beneficial ratio of instructors to students. Lastly, I also appreciated that this course wasn’t focused on gear any more than it had to. I saw carbines and LPVOs from all price-points, without any real gear elitism. This also went for the Green Ops staff themselves too. Not one of them acted like they were “all-that” (even though some of them probably legitimately are). No one tried to sell me on anything other than “doing the work” in order to improve. Anyone who is interested in exploring the full spectrum of utility of their carbine would do well to check out this course.

Special thanks to @jaq_thepewpewplumbrtx for most of these photos. Jaq is not only Green Ops staff, but also a talented photographer and not to mention downright surgical with a handgun from appendix.

**Total maximum distance for extended targets will depend on the specific venue where the class is hosted. I describe the LPVO and the general purpose carbine as 500 meter system and I stand by that. Whether one shoots at 386 yards or 510 meters, the concepts remain the same, but the hold-overs change.

Reacher Season 2 Featuring 5.11 Tactical

5.11 Tactical and Prime Video to Celebrate The Debut of the Highly Anticipated Season 2 of Reacher

Costa Mesa, Calif. (Dec. 4, 2023)5.11 Tactical, the global innovator of purpose-built apparel, footwear and gear, has teamed up with Prime Video to celebrate the release of the highly anticipated second season of the hit series Reacher with a specialized sweepstakes offering a prize package giveaway.

The enter-to-win Ultimate Gear Giveaway sweepstakes will offer fans a chance to win a robust 5.11 prize package valued at $2,500 and comprised of some of the latest 5.11 gear and technical apparel seen throughout the action-thriller series, Reacher, in addition to a signed copy of author Lee Child’s re-covered Bad Luck & Trouble book. Entries will be accepted now through Sunday, Dec. 31, 2023. To enter and view products featured throughout the show, or for more information, customers and viewers can visit https://www.511tactical.com/UltimateGearGiveaway. No purchase is necessary, one entry per email, must be 18 years or older and a U.S. resident to enter.

Reacher Season Two premieres on December 15, 2023 on Prime Video. The season begins when veteran military police investigator Jack Reacher (Alan Ritchson) receives a coded message that the members of his former U.S. Army unit, the 110th MP Special Investigations, are being mysteriously and brutally murdered one by one. Pulled from his drifter lifestyle, Reacher reunites with three of his former teammates turned chosen family to investigate, including Frances Neagley (Maria Sten); Karla Dixon (Serinda Swan), a forensic accountant for whom Reacher has long had a soft spot; and fast-talking, switchblade-wielding family man David O’Donnell (Shaun Sipos). Together, they begin to connect the dots in a mystery where the stakes get higher at every turn, and that brings about questions of who has betrayed them—and who will die next. Using his inimitable blend of smarts and size, Reacher will stop at nothing to uncover the truth and protect the members of his unit. If there’s one thing Reacher and his team know for certain, it’s that you do not mess with the Special Investigators. This season, get ready for Reacher and the 110th to hit back hard.  Information and assets for Reacher Season Two can be found on the Prime Video Press Site.

Throughout the season, Reacher, his ex-military unit, and other characters can be seen wearing and using 5.11 apparel, footwear, packs and accessories that are included in the sweepstakes prize package.

To learn more about 5.11, its product offering or its latest events and sweepstakes, visit www.511tactical.com.

# # #

About 5.11, Inc.

With offices around the globe, 5.11 works directly with end users to create Purpose-Built Gear™ to enhance the safety, accuracy, speed, and performance of tactical professionals and technical enthusiasts worldwide. 5.11 products exceed rigorous standards, which have allowed the brand to establish a reputation for innovation and authenticity, and become the premier choice for those who live the Always Be Ready® lifestyle. 5.11 products can be purchased online, through authorized dealers and retailers, as well as at 5.11 company-owned retail stores.

Learn more about 5.11’s best-selling gear and accessories at www.511tactical.com. Find a full list of 5.11 company-owned retail stores at https://www.511tactical.com/locations/. Connect with 5.11 on Facebook, Twitter @511Tactical and on Instagram @511Tactical and #511tactical

5.11, Inc. is a subsidiary of Compass Diversified (NYSE: CODI).

5.11, 5.11 Tactical, Always Be Ready, and Purpose-Built Gear™ are trademarks of 5.11, Inc. All rights reserved.

Weekend Win: Federal Judge has stuck down the Federal Ban on 18 to 20 year olds buying handguns

Federal Judge Thomas Kleeh struck down the long standing prohibition on 18, 19, and 20 year old adults form purchasing handguns. This ruling, if allowed to implement without appeal from the DoJ, will set the federal requirements to buy a handgun in line with those or rifles and shotguns.

This change effectively realigns all Title I firearms to the same age standard for ownership. This will not change state laws (yet) but could as the effects of the ruling trickle down and states either adjust on their own or are adjusted via lawsuit.

Here are the highlights.

  • Judge Kleeh has struck down the federal prohibition against 18 to 20-year-olds purchasing handguns.
  • The plaintiffs in the case are Steven Robert Brown, Benjamin Weekley, the Second Amendment Foundation, and the West Virginia Citizens Defense League.
  • Kleeh’s decision enjoined the ATF, Garland, and Dettelbach from enforcing a ban on handgun purchases for 18 to 20-year-olds who are qualified.

“Back in my day…” – Yes, you should still learn irons and probably use BUIS

I found this meme upon the internet, and twas funny. IG disgruntled_vets

I know, I know. The quality of the modern optic means that “irons” are no longer a strict necessity and are omitted on certain systems, like certain competition firearms and precision rifles, in their entirity.

I’m not talking about for specialist systems. I am talking about your carry handgun and general purpose carbine, maybe your home defense shotgun too. The two or three guns you probably use the most, handle the most, touch the most, and will grab in an emergency. That use, handle, touch, and play with controls on also gives them the highest probability change that the systems that need to be on might be off when you need them.

What do I mean?

I mean you have to have a viable way to shoot certain guns regardless of their battery status at the time you pick them up. I have an extremely high degree of confidence in modern optics, I still prefer the on deck ability to shoot around or through the optic too.

Are all of my firearms set up like this? No.

Am I worried? Not particularly. The Aimpoints on my MP5 and AK that I can’t use the irons through are probably going to be alright. But I have had that Aimpoint on the AK die during a class.

compm5
Aimpoint CompM5 RDS

Yep, that one. That CompM5 decided it had been on long enough on its battery. Middle of the drill, most inconvenient.

Luckily, it was just a drill. I cleared from the line real quick and got a battery. My point isn’t how simple the fix was that got my optic back, my point is that when I needed my optic it was off.

No more dot…

If you have co-witnessed irons or a removable optic via QD, you’re still in business. Flip things that need to be flipped and get back on your sights. Its this ease of resumption that makes keeping irons and paired with your optics in a cohabitant manner preferred, in my opinion.

The options if you do not have irons or cannot remove your optic are not nothing though.

Shoot the tube

A red dot is still an aligned tube and depending upon how close and large your target is it might be good enough to start hammering shots.

Turn your dot off and give it a try at about 5 yards to see both what it looks like and what the impact location is. You may surprise yourself.

Living on the edge

Your sights represent an aligned line to where you want to place your shot. Your optic and irons are precisely aligned, however they aren’t the only things that can get you into the right spot depending on the shot. Take a look at the photo and see what edges on the firearm and sight could be used to line up a shot in a pinch. Yes the EPS Carry allows me to use the irons on the P365, think alternatively.

  1. Edge of the optic
  2. The slide, along a corner
  3. The line made by the slide and frame

None of these are ideal, none of these will stack rounds accurately and the viability falls off quickly at distance. But you aren’t done yet. You aren’t out of options.

Don’t freeze

The most common issue I see when folks pull up a gun and all is not right is a tire screeching halt, this is true of malfunctions, optics off, gun not loaded, anything that causes something to happen that isn’t the expected shot. What we want are options, regardless of the problem, to get us back able to take a needed shot as quickly as possible. Available irons make several of these problems simple to solve.

Don’t be quick to dismiss ye olde iron sights, that’s all folks.

The IXF2021 – The World’s Cheapest Weaponlight

A few months back, I wrote an article reviewing the cheapest red dot I could find on Amazon. To the surprise of no one, it sucked. Other than the dot being surprisingly crisp, it was best used for airsoft. I decided to return to the well of cheap crap and Amazon, this time looking to find the cheapest handgun light on Amazon. For the price of 11.99, I got the IXF2021 weapon light. 

My rules were the same as they were before. It had to be advertised to be used on real weapons. If it was advertised for airsoft for BB guns, it didn’t make the list. The first I came across that advertised itself for a real firearm cost only 11.99. The IXF2021 brags about its all-aluminum design and its 600 lumens of power. It comes in a simple cardboard box decorated as if it was a map. Inside, it comes with two generic rechargeable batteries and a charger. 

Admittedly, my first impression isn’t great. The charger feels cheap and crappy, and the batteries don’t inspire confidence. They might double as fire starters, and I’m curious what would happen if I tossed a real battery in this thing. Let’s get the batteries charged and see if the IXF2021 was worth the 11.99. 

The IXF2021 – To the Moon 

The charger doesn’t inspire confidence, but I dropped the battery in the charger and plugged it in. I got three red LEDs, and with a lack of directions included, I assumed this meant the batteries were charging. Ten hours later, they were still red, so I adjusted the battery, and they flipped to green. Again, confidence wasn’t high. With a charged battery, I attempted to install the light on a gun. 

It turned out to be way too tight for every gun I had except for the Glock rail. Even then, it was tight enough it shaved off a little polymer as I shoved it on. The release is a spring-loaded design that is pressed down to install and remove. A small hump on the release locks onto your rail. 

The controls consist of a switch on each side of the light. Press it one way, and it turns on; press it the other, and it shuts off. The light cycles between two modes. Standard on and strobe. Momentary is a pipe dream with the IXF2021. It also has this neat mode where you don’t even need the buttons. 

Shake the gun and light, and sometimes, it will magically come on! Who doesn’t love a truly wireless and press-button design? I’m sure it’s totally not an issue with the light being a piece of crap. 

The Power 

Six hundred lumens isn’t a ton of power, but it’s respectable for 11.99. I don’t have any professional equipment to test the lumens, but I can tell you right now that it’s not a 600-lumen light. It’s pitiful, maybe 200 lumens on a good day. I have a penlight from 5.11 Tactical that’s brighter and shines further than the IXF2021. It’s a joke of power. 

Not only is the power weak and limited, but it also dims rapidly and might flare up here and there. The light dies, ignites, and dies again. It’s a total piece of crap, to the surprise of no one. Battery life seems to be 10 minutes or so at full power, which makes me feel the batteries aren’t really 3600 MAH. 

Just for fun, I decided to drop-test it. I don’t know how to break this to everyone, but the IXF2021 did not survive the fall. The first fall. It just doesn’t come on reliably anymore. However, sometimes, if you really believe and you get a sprinkle of magic, then it fires up! The IXF2021 is all of 11.99, and it shows. 

Gunday Brunch 129: Weapon Mounted Lights

The boys are back and they’re talking about weapon mounted lights. Do you need one? Should you have one? Are they…lit?

The MP5 Submachine Gun – A Worthwhile Read

A while back, I read and reviewed a book by Osprey Publishing called US Combat Shotguns. I enjoyed it a good bit, and I recently finished another Osprey Publishing book called The MP5 Submachine Gun. Both books were written by Leroy Thompson, who is quite the expert in seemingly a wide variety of weapons. I know a lot less about the MP5 than I do combat shotguns, so I figured, let’s leap in and learn a thing or two.

Inside The MP5 Submachine Gun

Much like US Combat Shotguns, The MP5 Submachine Gun is a short and quick read. It’s roughly 80 or so pages. It’s a quick read, but it’s chock full of information. The book starts quickly with little need to ease you in. We know it’s about a submachine gun, so why would we need to flirt about it?

The book covers the history of the submachine gun but goes beyond just saying HK invented the gun in 19XX and leaving it at that. We get the context of submachine guns during this era, why the MP5 stood out, and how it went on to become the counter-terrorism and special operations choice of submachine gun.

We get snippets of stories of the weapon’s use in various operations and how its performance quickly led to its rise in fame. Readers learn what makes the MP5 different from the other options from Uzi and Walther during the same era.

It’s easy to read and not chick full of technical jargon that could leave some readers confused. It has an excellent description of what roller-delayed actions do and how it functions. It’s easy to understand and well-written.

The entire book is well-written and easy to follow. The MP5 Submachine Gun is easy to pick up and put down and gives you a ton of great information about the guns. One of my favorite pages was a table listing all of the variations, which revealed a few I had never heard of and made it easy to understand the slight variations of the MP5.

Yep, There Are Pictures

Hey, I’m a Jarhead. I want some pictures to go along with my books. The MP5 Submachine Gun provides plenty of them. This includes historical examples of the gun, as well as numerous photos of counter-terrorism teams from around the world using the weapon. The pictures are educational as well as entertaining. I’m always interested in seeing Cold War relics and old-school tactical gear.

In terms of history, we also get the history behind different variations of the MP5. We learned a bit about the MP5K and that it was built at the request of a South American sales rep. That makes sense since South America was a fairly violent place, and plain-clothes PSD teams needed something small and viable for defensive use.

U.S. Navy

The MP5K-PDW was built at the behest of 160th SOAR, the guys and gals responsible for inserting and extracting special operations personnel via aircraft. It makes sense they want something more than a pistol, but cockpit requirements ensure the weapon had to be small.

The MP5 Submachine Gun also details the HK SMG 2 project. I always thought it was an unsold prototype, but the book seems to allude to anywhere from 60 to 70 produced for a secret customer.

Fun Facts I Learned About the MP5

I won’t go too deep and reveal the whole book, but there are a few things I thought were interesting. I’m not an MP5 expert, but I know a good bit about the gun. Still, I learned several things about the MP5 and wanted to detail a few fun facts here.

First, I had never heard of the MP5F variant. The MP5F was a French variant with ambidextrous sling points and a beefed-up design. They increased the strength of the gun so it could withstand the +P+ SMG ammo the French were using. This beefed-up design would go on to become standard for MP5s.

A member of Sea-Air-Land (SEAL) Team 8, armed with a 9mm MP-5A5E submachine gun, gives a thumbs-up at the successful completion of a training mission aboard the USNS J0SHUA HUMPHREYS (T-AO-188). SEAL Team 8 is providing boarding teams to assist the ships of the Maritime Interception Force in their enforcement of U.N. sanctions against Iraq during Operation Desert Storm.

The too cool to last MP5/10 series actually had a last round bolt hold open device, which is cool and missed on 9mm variants. These guns also had a two-round burst feature, which is also pretty neat.

HK also produced .22LR conversion kits for the MP5s. This consisted of a barrel liner, a new bolt group, and recoil springs. These kits weren’t reliable, and only about 400 were produced.

I learned way more than this, including Dick Marchinko’s tie to the MP5 and an interesting conversation about MAC-10s. It’s a quick read and one worth reading. The Osprey books aren’t expensive and are seemingly always full of information. I’m thinking about reading the Bazooka one next.

Senator King’s GOSAFE Act: We’ve found Feinstein’s idiotic successor

After an introduction and six bloviating quotes about how bad guns are, especially gas operated guns apparently, Senator King’s website finally tells me what the Gas-Operated Semi-Automatic Firearms Exclusion Act holds in store for us.

King Introduces Legislation to Save Lives, Protect 2nd Amendment Rights for Law-Abiding Americans

Yep that headline is as full of shit as you think it is, folks. Here’s the bullet points.

Regulate Sale, Transfer & Manufacture of Gas-Operated Semi-Automatic Firearms 

Author's IWI Galil ACE Gen2 in 5.56 NATO
Much danger. Such gas.

The GOSAFE Act would regulate the sale, transfer, and manufacture of gas-operated semi-automatic weapons by: 

  • Establishing a list of prohibited firearms; 
  • Preventing unlawful modifications of permissible firearms; 
  • Mandating that future gas-operated designs are approved before manufacture; and  
  • Preventing unlawful firearm self-assembly and manufacturing.  

But don’t worry, they protect the 2nd Amendment. They say so.

Protect Americans’ Second Amendment Right 

The GOSAFE Act protects Americans’ constitutional right to own a gun based on a firearm’s established use for self-defense, hunting, and sporting purposes. The bill accomplishes this by including exemptions based on maximum ammunition capacity according to a firearm’s individual class: a rifle, shotgun, or handgun.  

This capacity must be “permanently fixed,” meaning the firearm cannot accept a detachable, high-capacity magazine that would increase the number of rounds that can be fired before reloading and make reloading easier. 

Exemptions include:   

  • .22 caliber rimfire or less firearms 
  • Bolt action rifles 
  • Semi-automatic shotguns 
  • Recoil-operated handguns 
  • Any rifle with a permanently fixed magazine of 10 rounds or less 
  • Any shotgun with a permanently fixed magazine of 10 rounds or less 
  • Any handgun with a permanently fixed magazine of 15 rounds or less 

God forbid you have a jam in your firearm while defending yourself that requires you to remove the magazine to fix the issue (that’s just about every hard malfunction or stoppage, by the way).

But this is fantastic news for classic H&K Roller-Lock and PCC fans, your guns aren’t gas operated.

They’re safe, according to these buffoons the PTRs and Zeniths and HK91s are going to be just fine. CMMG Banshee? Yep. Stribog? Those too. Gas operated is is the name of evil.

Would sure be a shame if they try and named non-gas operated firearms in their list of prohibited items and got called on their bullshit.

The PTR 32 KFR, and all of their firearms, are not gas operated. They are recoil operated with a roller delay. These are therefore totally safe so long as they have 10 round magazines or something.

Yep, magazine ban too. Don’t you worry they had that covered, of course.

Limit High-Capacity Ammunition Devices, Outlaws Conversion Devices    

The GOSAFE Act limits a firearm’s ability to inflict maximum harm in a short amount of time by directly regulating large capacity ammunition feeding devices.  The bill would limit the number of rounds that large capacity ammunition feeding devices are permitted to carry to 10 rounds of ammunition or fewer.  Additionally, the GOSAFE Act makes conversion devices, including bump stocks and Glock switches, unlawful. 

Glock switches are already unlawful unless you are a machine gun manufacturer. That hasn’t stopped them before.

More illegaler, make them MOAR I L L E G A L E R!!

But fear not, oh reader! If you want to sell any of your super dangerous and no longer transferable gas guns, the government will buy them in their “voluntary” buy-back program. Still unclear how you can buy back what was never yours. I’m sure they will give going market value too. $100 Gift Cards for all!

Create Voluntary Buy-Back Program

The GOSAFE Act will protect the value of firearms already owned before enactment and prevent stockpiling of these lethal firearms and large capacity magazines by establishing a voluntary buy-back program.  It would allow firearm owners to voluntarily turn over and receive compensation for non-transferrable firearms and magazines as defined by this legislation. 

King, your GOSAFE rule is dumb. I am therefore assuming you and your staff are as ignorant as the legislation makes you seem on this particular topic. You would have done better if you possessed the capacity, some might even say high capacity, to do so.

Should I point out the majority of crime guns are the explicitly exempt recoil operated handguns again? Should I point out the third deadliest mass shooting in the US used those exempt handguns guns exclusively, a Glock 19 and Walther P22?

Should I point out that this is, technically/legally, a recoil operated handgun?

I’ve got a PTR on the way I am fairly excited about, drop an order to them too and get on Senator King’s totally safe not-gas-operated train today.

Remember kids, technically correct can be the ‘King’ of correct and malicious compliance can be highly entertaining.

‘Letter to the editor: Why do we buy assault rifles?’ – I Answer

Or to put the title image quote in more modern parlance, “Opinions are like assholes, everyone has them and many of them stink.”

I do not know if the quote attributed to Marcus Aurelius, Stoic Emperor of Rome, was actually uttered by the man. I do however know the accuracy of the statement itself.

A news round up ends up on my inbox every morning and one of them looks for the term ‘assault rifle’. Karen Olson, who wrote the below, apparently has opinions on ‘assault rifles’ she expressed to the Portland Herald. Everyone is entitled to their opinions, no one is entitled to their own facts. Oregon is currently grappling with the consequences of constitutional republic v. ignorant mob vote democracy, so I believe these letters are in response to that change.

Letter in italics, my responses in plain text.

Why do we buy our assault rifles?]

Many reasons, Karen. But I assume this is a rhetorical question. We buy firearms today for the same reasons we have always purchased useful individual weapons.

[Who do we plan to assault?]

There it is. A betraying inquiry that lets me know that you, Karen, have never considered violence in a serious manner in your privileged, first world, super power inhabitant of a life. You’ve never had to. This doesn’t mean you haven’t considered violence or thought about violence as a topic, it means you have never had to consider it in an academic sense.

But you have seen a bad thing, the results of violence you do not understand, and it scares and upsets you. That last part is very reasonable, what isn’t reasonable is lack of understanding and the the expectation of your opinion being weighed expertly when you lack expertise. Your fear, anger, and pain do not translate to understanding the topic. Your privilege to live in a world, and a space in that world, that is as safe as it is does not imbue you with the opine authority to dictate back to reality when it rattles your perspective.

There is no ‘your truth’ here.

[Do we buy them “just in case?”]

Often, yes. It isn’t about assaulting, it is about potentially being assaulted. But no, they aren’t ‘just in case’ either. That implies these rifles would live in a vault or closet untouched until enemies are raining from the sky. That isn’t how the discipline of arms works. Know that shooting is a martial art too and firearms are used for many very lawful reasons.

The modern assault rifle, sure I’ll even use the term, is the best individual fighting implement currently in circulation. The problem is we are discussing it with people who are uncomfortable and unfamiliar with the concepts of the profession(s) of violence, the legitimacy of violence, and the currency that violence represents. It frightens them and because it frightens them they dismiss it quickly and try to ‘solve’ it simplistically.

“Your understanding and consent are not required for someone to destroy your world and everything you love.” -Dr. William Aprill, paraphrased.

[Do we fear foreign paratroopers will drop from the sky?]

I’m sorry, did we miss what happened in Israel on October the 7th? Literal paraglider troopers armed with assault weapons murdered 1,200 of the first people they could find and kidnaped hundreds of Israeli and international citizens. Hamas raped, pillaged, and retreated behind the civilians of Gaza, whom they are the defacto government of, as human shields.

That happened. That happened here, in the real world full of real people with WiFi, 5G, and McDonalds restaurants.

If you want to play the ‘Well… it couldn’t happen here’ card, I want you to pick which prejudicial form that comment comes from. Is it the prejudice of low expectations for the Palestinians? They can’t be bothered to act better. Is it the fault of the Israelis? Did the Jews somehow earn this outcome reasonably through their own actions or inactions? That’s a dangerous thought and aligns you with some unsavory types past and present, doesn’t it? Is it that we do not believe these groups, or other similar ones, capable of carrying out this attack here? Really? Despite dramatic successes in the past? We had a two decade long multi-front war about the last major one. Is it underestimating the cartels and groups south of our own border? Surely groups that are defacto power structures in Central and South America couldn’t replicate what the defacto power structure of Gaza could, right? They’re only better trained, better funded, and with much easier access to the logistics necessary.

‘Do we fear foreign paratroopers…?’, is trying to leverage Red Dawn as a silly ‘right wing’ power fantasy and dismissing real world threats even in the contexts of low probability. Low probability or probability in scale is not the same as ‘cannot happen’ by any stretch.

If you are going to immediately disregard all reasonable examples of how your rhetorical inquiry is flawed, don’t make it rhetorical.

[Do we fear a local militia will descend?]

Probably not. Have you seen your ‘local militia’ drill? It’s… something. It exists. Organized groups declaring themselves ‘militia’ have been, are, and will remain a part of the world in various states of efficacy. But there is actually a legal definition for the United States.

I know you’re being rhetorical and clearly have the following image mentally in mind. The ‘militia training montage’ featuring really heavy or too skinny to be healthy white dudes who ‘almost would’ve served ‘cept… [reason]’ doing vaguely tactical but valueless gun drills. That seems to have been a weird offshoot time of the training boom in the 2010’s after Magpul Dynamics showed us the way to dynamic dynamically.

But remember, Karen, you are also part of the militia. Given the modern interpretation of colonial concepts, it is all able bodied adults. All of ‘The People’ constitute the militia.

Legally speaking, however…

The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard.

(b) The classes of the militia are—

(1) the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia; and

(2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia.

So Karen you are probably, legally, not part of the militia. If we update the definition for modern Equal Opportunity and Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion standards then you probably would be. But as of now, legally, you are not.

[Do we fear our government will turn on us?]

Do we want to count the ways they have in the past? Literally the foundational principle of the 2nd Amendment is a preventive on the monopoly of force being centralized within the Federal government.

When the Federal government is acting in the best interests of and within the will of the people all is well (well… most is well) and continuing to grant them the legitimacy of the use of force has few negative consequences. However if we monopolize force in the state, then agree or disagree with it you no longer have the ability to say no and in a meaningful way. The US government has numerous past instances where they used ‘legal’ force and massacred people, they then promptly absolved themselves of responsibility.

Are we confident they won’t do it again?

[Do we fear a burglar will enter our house?

Yes. To a reasonable degree, home invasion should be ‘feared’ and guarded against. Next question.

Let us not devolve into hyperbolic absurdity. (But of course we’re going to…)

Where should we keep and bring our AR-15s? Should we carry them to the grocery store, out to dinner or a show?

Image via Quora, answering how common it is for Israeli reservists to carry long guns publicly.

I will point to Israel again, but let me just say ‘no’ for here in the US. No, because that is what discreet concealed handguns serve for rather nicely under most circumstances.

I must emphasize ‘most circumstances’ though. It would be, and has been, perfectly reasonable for US citizens to carry long guns in times of elevated threat. Riots and weather events that knock out the normal chains of logistics and authority in a region are the most common we experience. We know for a fact we cannot rely on the magnanimity of our fellow man at all times, even in good times. That compounds during times of larger scale environmental strain.

And, if so, it better be every time, because you never know.

I can agree to a degree.

But since you, Karen, mean this to be read in an absurdist tone and not as the fairly practical advice for carry of a concealed pistol it otherwise is, we are going to address that.

Yes, you should carry your firearm consistently. An emergency tool is not useful if it isn’t around in the emergency. That is for all emergencies and all tools to help mitigate and respond to them. An AED doesn’t help anyones heart if it isn’t around. A first aid kit doesn’t stop bleeding, aspirin a heart attack, or splint a broken bone if it is out of reach. A fire extinguisher extinguishes nothing it it cannot be presented to the fire.

I will say again that a concealed handgun is a both practical and effective enough tool under normal circumstances. Under circumstances of elevated environmental strain the ‘assault rifle’, as you say, is better at both deterrence and response to predations of hostile people.

Can we pull it from under the bed or a full grocery cart in time to do any good?

Evidence says… yes. We have numerous instances of rifles being used successfully at home and in public for the defense of people. The handgun is far more common because it is far more convenient and far more often carried. This remains true for crime statistics too, handguns are misused far more often than rifles.

But you mean this question, like your previous ones, in a rhetorical manner that mocks the concept of pulling a carbine, which you no doubt consider cumbersome, for defending oneself. You will be unlikely to take circumstances in which handguns or carbines were used to protect people as evidence enough to sway your opposition. That is fine, your opinion is yours. But stop asking things that have answers you will ignore.

If not, should we hang them from our necks? It already feels like they’re strangling us.

I… I don’t know how to ground this statement. Slings are things, I suppose.

But this prose is so out of bounds its probably closer to touching Mars than grass. How is the existence of tens of millions of rifles, and billions of rounds of ammunition for them, strangling you personally. How is it strangling society? Deaths at the hands of rifles represent a faction of a percent of ostensibly preventable deaths in this nation, regardless of how scary these deaths are.

I say ostensibly in this case because we act like an attack would not have occurred had the attack been somehow more illegal.

How many foreign paratroopers or outer-space aliens have we needed to shoot? How many of our neighbors, friends and family has this weapon shot?

Are we talking actual numbers? Because there are a lot of dead foreign troops due to the AR-15. I’m certain Karen does not consider authorized federal, state, or municipal use, as well as legitimate use against criminals and more mundane domestic threats, as ‘foreign paratroopers’. That does not fit the tone of the conversation. Karen is implying that because Red Dawn hasn’t happened the AR-15 is unnecessary.

How many neighbors, friends and family has the weapon shot? I don’t know. But it is far fewer in totality than have died from numerous other methods, including the aforementioned handgun murders, suicides of all methods, car crashes, alcohol, heart disease, and home accidents. Ostensibly preventable deaths due to the ownership of rifles are far outpaced by numerous other sources of untimely demise that simply rate ‘less scary’ to you.

People pull the trigger, but it’s the bullets that kill.]

So we acknowledge that it is the deliberate action of a person who fires the gun, but are then absolving that person of guilt in the injury or death? The bullet becomes independent and is ascribed its own motivation? Are we shifting focus to the existence of ammunition instead of the firearm? What is happening? What are we upset at now in the narrative?

[How many bullets at a time do we want to give a neighbor, friend or family member who suddenly or slowly goes berserk?]

Now who is scared of aliens, ‘paratroopers’ and other boogeymen? Which of your potentially nightmarish neighbors are going to go slowly mad due to the proximity of 5.56 ammunition? Should I also remove everything that could possibly be used to harm anyone from everyone on the off chance that any of all of our collective neighbors, friends, or family members suddenly or slowly go berserk? Is this reasonable?

No. Of course it isn’t. Yet we allow this emotive diatribe to stand in equal weight to reasoned argument. Why? Because guns, I guess. Gun bad, don’t think deeply about it. The threat of the AR-15 is outsized due largely to its popularity and has no place in a reasoned risk analysis.

[How many neighbors, friends and family members have to be butchered and die before we, the people, call out to our politicians to put an end to this evil-spewing weapon?

What happened to people pull the trigger? That opened this paragraph, Karen. If I must acknowledge it ‘spews evil’ in the hands of an evil person then you must acknowledge it does good in the hands of the good people, and no harm at all in the hands of the majority, because those are all true.

Karen Olson
Portland

The potential to cause harm is inherent in every single person, it is not bestowed by a weapon. I hope these answers are helpful to you readers. I do not believe Karen will think they are, but I could be mistaken.

The Geco Blitz Action Trauma Rounds

(Gun Auctions)

The history of hollow points goes back to the late 19th century. The first hollow points were molded lead rounds with a hollow point designed to reduce weight. A reduced weight meant a faster bullet. The fact that the round tumbled and expanded was a happy accident. Rounds like .32-20, the .38-40, and .44-40 were early adopters of hollow point projectiles. This led to them being banned from warfare under the Hague Convention, which is how the Geco Blitz Action Trauma rounds came to be.

According to the gun magazines of the 1980s, if you carried a 9mm, it should be loaded with Blitz Action Trauma rounds or BAT Rounds for short. These were exotic rounds from Germany that fetched upwards of a buck a round. A buck a round is pretty normal these days, but it was absurd in the 1980s. Still, they were seemingly popular, especially in an era where jacketed hollow points had taken root just yet.

(Gun Auctions)

The BAT rounds came in 9mm and .357 Magnum and were copper. I’ve seen the weights mentioned to be 84 and 86 grains, so it’s tough to say who is accurate and who isn’t. The solid copper slugs had a cavity that went all the way through them, and that cavity was filled with a plastic plug.

The plastic plug was to ensure the round would feed and depart from the projectile when the gun fired. The rounds moved at about 1,400 feet per second from a Browning Hi-Power. At first glance, it seems to be a bit of a mix between a hollow point and exotic loads like Liberty Defense.

Origin of the Blitz Action Trauma Rounds

Geco, a German Company owned by Dyanmit Nobel, apparently initially developed the rounds for shooting tires. Apparently, they could punch a neat 9mm size hold through a tire with little fear of overpenetration and ricochets. Some enterprising salesman also saw an opportunity to cash in on an exotic ammo type that could be an effective defensive round.

To me, it seems odd that the Blitz Action Trauma round would be needed to pop tires. How much action was that a necessity? This is pure speculation, but it seemed to me that the tire-popping action was just an excuse to produce an effective hollow point cartridge for police use. Geco is a German company and this time, the German police carried FMJs because that’s what the military carried. The BAT rounds were technically FMJs due to the plastic plug.

(CALGUNS)

As you and I know, FMJs aren’t great man-stoppers and aren’t great for police work. They pose additional risks due to the overpenetration of threats. This wasn’t a big deal when the police round of choice was the .32 ACP. In fact, FMJs make sense when you use the little .32 ACP cartridge.

The New World of 9mm

However, the Munich Massacre and the rise of left-wing terrorism in Germany caused the police to move to more potent firearms. The 9mm became the cartridge of choice, and the Walther P5, the HK P7, and SIG P6 became the guns of choice. 9mm FMJs tend to zip through things, including terrorists.

(HK PRO)

In 1977, the newly formed GSG9 stormed a Lufthansa airplane with HK P7s, S&W Model 66s, and MP5s. The rounds loaded were the Blitz Action Trauma rounds. In short order, the GSG9 killed four terrorists and freed all the hostages. I don’t know if the GSG9 used the rounds with permission or basically used the ‘Technically’ excuse.

The MP5 magazine went from straight to curved to aid in reliability and reportedly ensured the BAT rounds would feed. The BAT projectiles certainly saw some action in Germany.

Effectiveness

I can’t find any gel testing or wound studies on the Blitz Action Trauma rounds. If YouTube was around back then, we’d know everything there is to know about these rounds. Sadly, it’s tough to say how effective they were. They were available in the United States, but it seems like they were never evaluated, or the tests were never widely published.

The BAT Rounds worked here (GSG 9)

Compared to FMJs, I believe they were less likely to over-penetrate. I imagine they would expand and deform, but not as efficiently as modern JHPs. We know they worked well in putting down four Red Army Faction terrorists. The Blitz Action Trauam rounds form an interesting part of the history of defensive ammo.