Advertisement

Close Range Alternatives for the M79 In the Vietnam War

What’s old is new, and new is old. The first 40mm grenade launchers were stand-alone weapons, and in the United States, the M79 ruled. It became a force multiplier in Vietnam. Soldiers had a very man-portable option to chuck 40mm grenades at the enemy. It offered the squad some minor indirect firepower and made getting through entrenched enemies in hardened positions possible. The problem was that the grenadier was vulnerable to close-range enemy fighters, and the solution was the Beehive Flechette loads and the M576 Buckshot loads.

Soldiers carrying the M79 often also carried M1911A1 pistols as a close-range personal defense weapon. I will say that was likely an optimistic idea. Sadly the military likes to hand pistols to officers who really don’t need them and leave soldiers carrying multiple weapons or lack a personal defense weapon. Even if the soldier had an M1911A1, well, we have to accept that handguns suck for fighting. Long guns offer more lethality, range, and capability.

In the middle of a firefight, as you close on the enemy, your grenade launcher might become somewhat useless. At close range, you have two problems. First, 40mm grenades have a specific arming range before they explode. Second, grenades send fragments for tens of meters, and you can’t be extremely close when you use one. So, the Army went about developing close-range killing rounds to better arm grenadiers for combat.

The M79 Flechette Rounds

In Vietnam, the US Army was really fascinated with flechettes. Flechettes were stocked in shotgun rounds and artillery rounds, and eventually, the 40mm grenades. The Army had this idea that flechettes would act like buckshot in terms of spread but as regular projectiles in terms of penetration and range.

An example of a modern flechette grenade

Try as a I might, I cannot find an official designation for 40mm Flechette rounds. Some of the Vietnam archives at Texas Tech refer to them as Beehive rounds. Beehive was also a term used for the flechette artillery rounds used in combat. The 40mm flechette rounds packed 45 fin-stabilized needle-like rounds. They were loaded into a plastic sabot.

When fired, the sabot fell away, and the projectiles traveled onward. Like most flechette experiments, the darts never remained stable enough to make it very far. Even at close ranges, the flechettes would hit with the back o sides more often than with the pokey part. They were quickly done away with.

The Buckshot Option

The M79 isn’t much different than a shotgun. It’s an unrifled, break action tube. Shoving buckshot into one made it a modern blunderbuss. These became the M576 round. They held twenty 00 pellets. That’s more than twice of what a single shotgun round held. They did some experiments with 27 pellets without a sabot, but the round didn’t work well, so 20 was the magic number.

A cut away of the buckshot load

The rounds moved fairly slowly at 880 feet per second. For comparison, a military load of 9 pellet 12 gauge 00 buckshot moved at 1,325 feet per second. They offered a decent range, with 13 of the 20 pellets consistently hitting a 1.5-meter-sized circle. The other seven did whatever they wanted.

The round certainly offered a lot of firepower up close, and the spread helped ensure a good hit in a running gunfight. Sadly, I’m sure the grenadiers still felt under-gunned. Fighting in a war with a single-barreled shotgun against bad guys with AKs sounds and is terrifying.

The End of Close Range 40mms

Once the M203 came about, the grenadier position no longer needed a buckshot load. He had a rifle and grenade launcher at the ready. This more or less eliminated the idea of the M576. That’s not to say similar rounds don’t still exist, as the M1001 from General Dynamics promises a flechette round that’s much more effective and designed for the MK-19.

Tat’s a subject for another day. It seems that the US is returning to single-shot grenade launchers with the popularity of M302. However, this lighter, more compact 40mm grenade launcher is still carried alongside an M4. The days of buckshot 40mm seem to be at an end.

With that said, how big can we make a Flitecontrol wad?

Gunday Brunch 95: Constitutional Carry

In this episode we’re talking about Constitutional Carry, and how a majority of US states now have this written into law. Pretty rad

Faxon Firearms’ Glock 17 Gen 5 Barrel Enhancements

Famed for its reliability, user-friendly operation, and precision, the Glock 17 Gen 5 has become a must-have for firearm enthusiasts around the world. While it is already a high-quality handgun, there is always potential for improvement through upgrades. One key aspect to consider is the barrel, which is responsible for guiding the bullet’s path as it exits the firearm. By upgrading the Glock 17 Gen 5’s barrel, you can experience significant enhancements in both performance and accuracy.

Glock 17 Gen 5 barrel (bottom) Glock 17 Gen 1-4 barrel (Top)

5 Benefits of Upgrading Your Barrel

Upgrading the barrel of your Glock 17 Gen 5 can offer a range of benefits that can improve its performance and enhance your shooting experience. Here are some of the top benefits you can expect:

Improved accuracy: One of the most significant benefits of upgrading your Glock 17 barrel is improved accuracy. A high-quality barrel will have a tighter bore and more precise rifling, which can help stabilize the bullet and keep it on target. This can be especially beneficial if you’re using your Glock 17 Gen 5 for competitive shooting or self-defense purposes, where accuracy is critical.

Increased range: Another advantage of upgrading your Glock 17 Gen 5 barrel is increased range. A high-quality barrel can improve the bullet’s velocity, allowing it to travel further and hit targets at longer distances. This can be particularly useful for outdoor shooting or hunting.

Enhanced safety features: Some aftermarket barrels for the Glock 17 Gen 5 may come with enhanced safety features, such as improved feed ramps or a tighter chamber. These safety features can improve reliability and reduce the risk of malfunctions or misfires.

Increased Reliability: Aftermarket barrels are often made with higher-quality materials than stock barrels, such as stainless steel or titanium. These materials can be more durable and resistant to wear and tear than a stock barrel, reducing the risk of failure or malfunction. Also, most aftermarket barrels are precision-machined to tighter tolerances, which makes the fit and function more consistent.

Ammunition Compatibility: Another factor that can contribute to increased reliability is the ability of aftermarket barrels to shoot a wider range of ammunition types. The stock barrel of the Glock 17 is designed to handle a specific type of ammunition, and using different types can sometimes lead to jams or malfunctions. However, many aftermarket barrels are designed to handle a wider variety of ammunition types, making them more versatile and reliable in a wider range of situations.

Glock 17 Gen 5 Barrel Differences

The Glock 17 Gen 5 features a switch to Glock 19 locking geometry. 

While the Gen 4 and Gen 5 19 barrels have different geometries, the Gen 5 barrels do away with the slope at the barrel hood and instead go to the simple right angles that the 17/34 have always had, similar to most G19 Gen 1-4 aftermarket barrels. 

Due to the shared locking block, a barrel can theoretically be used in a Gen 5 19. 

However, it’s important to note that Gen 1-4 17 barrels are not compatible with a Gen 5 17.

Even though Glock improved the Glock 17 Gen 5 OEM barrels to make them more accurate (hence the name “Marksman Barrel”), there is still room for improvement. 

Glock 17 Gen 5 barrel from Faxon.
Faxon Flame Fluting

Popular Glock 17 Gen 5 Barrel Options | Faxon Firearms

The optimized match barrels from Faxon Firearms have been redesigned to work better and with Gen 5 guns.

These Glock 17 Gen 5 barrels have been redesigned for improved performance and Gen 5 compatibility. A recessed target crown, a new match chamber, and a stylized barrel hood with engravings for caliber and model are some of the new features.

The proprietary broach-cut 1 in 14” left-hand twist rifling was developed to create the most accurate Glock aftermarket barrel available, and testing confirms a significant increase in accuracy over factory barrels in all standard bullet weights.

Manufactured from 416R stainless steel, which is an ideal material for making match-grade barrels because the material allows for the precise cutting of chambers and rifling, which results in a more accurate barrel.

Glock 17 Gen 5 Barrel

Specs

  • Handgun Type: G17 Gen 5
  • Barrel Caliber: 9mm
  • Barrel Profile: Flame Fluted, Drop In (Compatible with Gen 5)
  • Barrel Material: 416-R Stainless Steel
  • Barrel Twist: 1:10
  • Muzzle Thread: N/A
  • Crown: 11-degree Target Crown
  • Rifling Method: Button Rifled, Fully Stress Relieved
  • Rifling Type: Conventional
  • Inside Finish: Salt Bath Nitride
  • Outside Finish: Salt Bath Nitride

Glock 17 Gen 5 Threaded Barrel

Specs

  • Handgun Type: G17 Gen 5
  • Barrel Caliber: 9mm
  • Barrel Profile: Flame Fluted, Drop In (Compatible with Gen 5)
  • Barrel Material: 416-R Stainless Steel
  • Barrel Twist: 1:10
  • Muzzle Thread: 1/2×28
  • Crown: 11-degree Target Crown
  • Rifling Method: Button Rifled, Fully Stress Relieved
  • Rifling Type: Conventional
  • Inside Finish: Salt Bath Nitride
  • Outside Finish: Salt Bath Nitride
Glock 17 Gen 5 barrel from Faxon
Tighter lockup and SAMMI specs improve shot-to-shot accuracy and reliability.

Some of the features highlighted on the Faxon Firearms website to explain why their barrels are superior to those of their competitors are as follows:

  • 4150 or 416-R Stainless – When used in firearm barrels, these two types of steel are made for durability, longevity & accuracy.
  • 9mm SAAMI Chambers – Superior Accuracy w/ complete SAAMI Compatibility & Boring Reliability.
  • Tighter Tolerances – A Drop In barrel with better fitment and a tighter lock-up than competing brands.
  • Conventional Rifling – Fully compatible with cast lead bullets.
  • 11° Target Crown – This preserves and protects accuracy.
Glock 17 Gen 5 barrel from Faxon.

Glock17 Gen 5 Threaded Barrel and Compensator

The threaded barrel and compensator work together to enhance the accuracy and stability of the Glock 17 Gen 5. The compensator shown here for the Glock 17 called EXOS has a unique design with an angled front port and a single chamber.

This design helps to decrease the movement of the muzzle by reducing both the upward and sideward recoil, resulting in improved accuracy from shot to shot.

Muzzle flip reduction is baked into the DNA of Faxon EXOS compensators.

Upgrading your Glock 17 Gen 5 barrel can be a game changer for anyone who wants to take their firearm’s performance to the next level. 

With improved accuracy, increased range, reduced recoil and muzzle rise, enhanced safety features, and increased reliability, the benefits of upgrading your barrel are undeniable.

With the right barrel, you can unlock your firearm’s full potential and take your skills to the next level.

Shotgun Basics: Patterning Your Shotgun

Patterning your shotgun is the best way to vet your chosen cartridges and shotgun. If you’ve read any of my writing about shotguns, you are probably aware of the fact that I am always pointing out that no two shotgun barrels shoot exactly alike. This is also true for different lots of the same slugs or buckshot. Patterning your shotgun is the best way to vet your chosen cartridges and shotgun. And patterning your shotgun is a simple and straightforward affair that does not take up too much time. The ultimate aim is to be able to get a roadmap of how your load’s pellets pattern at various distances to see what your shotgun can and cannot do.

Here Is What You Need

  • 1. Access to an indoor range or shooting bay with at least 25 yards of distance and the ability to make shots at 5, 10, 15, 20 and 25 yards. Depending on your range’s set up, you can place the large target at the end of the bay and move back to the appropriate distances as needed. Or you can set up five different targets and shoot them in a line. It is up to you, but you must be able to make shots at 5, 10, 15, 20 and 25 yards once again.
  • 2. A very large piece of paper or cardboard–the back of a B27 target works fine. If a large target is not available, using smaller individual targets is fine. Using individual IPSC or IDPA targets would be fine. You are looking for something with enough surface area for each pattern to print in its entirety.
  • 3. The shotgun you’ll be patterning
  • 4. Ten shotshells of the load you’ll be patterning

Here Is What To Do

1. Once your target(s) are set up in your shooting bay, make sure it/they have five fist sized aiming points with at least 10 inches or more of distance between them. Conversely, if you are shooting targets one by one, make sure they all have a fist sized aiming point and are ready to move or set up at 5, 10, 15, 20 and 25 yards. You can mark your aiming point with tape, steel target spray paint, permanent marker, etc–you just need to have a repeatable aiming point for consistency’s sake.

2. Carefully shoot at every aiming point twice at each distance.

3. With a ruler or tape measure, carefully the two widest pellets of each composite pattern for every distance. Record this information by writing it down, taking pictures, etc. This is your shotgun’s dope, so to speak.

It is better to fire more than one shot at each distance because a composite of two or more shots paints a better picture of what is going on.

What To Do With This Information

After you’ve shot some patterns, look at all of them and see how they printed on the target. Do the patterns look acceptable or do they leave something to be desired? Will they work at the maximum distance of your home or business or the place where you plan to keep and possibly use your shotgun? I suggest patterning at 25 yards for two reasons. Most self and home defense situation concerning civilians happen within 25 yards, and many 12 gauge buckshot loads will print the majority of their pellets at 25 yards allowing you to get a good read. It also goes without saying that contextually we’re talking about pistol distances, and the shotgun is king within these ranges. Patterning your shotgun is important because it provides your shotgun’s dope but most importantly, because we are accountable for every shot and every pellet we send flying.

I originally learned this approach to patterning shotguns from Erick Gelhaus’ instruction block at the first inaugural Thunderstick Summit held at Dallas Pistol Club on September 2022. As always special thanks to my “shotgun colleague” That Shotgun Blog for support and photos.

The Colt SMG DEA Model

The Colt SMG was a true 80’s child. It might as well have a mullet and a pastel pink t-shirt. Colt wanted to compete for that Spec-Ops, SWAT Team, and Counterterrorism money that HK was eating up. The Colt SMG was a 9mm submachine gun with a 10.5-inch barrel that was externally an AR-type firearm. Internally it was a direct blowback gun. They saw some success withThe Marine Corps and numerous police agencies, including the DEA. The DEA bought standard SMGs, and they had their own special version made, commonly called the DEA Model.

The DEA Model, or RO636, only had one major difference between the DEA Model and the standard was an integral suppressor. The idea was to create what was essentially an Americanized MP5SD. The Colt SMG would be a light, handy, and quiet close-quarters weapon. This specific gun had a very specific purpose, and it wasn’t for DEA teams running quiet operations.

The Purpose of the DEA Model

The DEA has what’s called Clandestine Laboratory Enforcement Team. If you have a lab where you are creating drugs, then this team is specially trained to take you down and do it safely. Off the top of your head, you might think meth lab, and admittedly that is likely a common target. However, labs creating crack cocaine, fentanyl, and more are also in their purview.

These environments often have DEA agents wearing full hazmat suits and respirators and tackling these threats head-on. The original justification for the DEA Model was to reduce muzzle flash as much as possible. The suppressor and ported exhaust barrel would eliminate muzzle flash.

Why was muzzle flash elimination so important for the CLET teams? Well, apparently, there was some fear that muzzle flash and burning gasses could create a fire or explosion in these labs. Sure, I buy that meth labs are basically ticking time bombs, but I’m not so sure that’s the real reason.

But Really?

I’m also not an expert on meth labs by any means. What I am an expert on is coming up with fancy jargon to make excuses to make not-so-traditional things. I imagine the head shed of the DEA aren’t gunfighters and weren’t clearing rooms. They don’t know how awesome suppressors can be indoors to maintain communication and keep situational awareness high. If I was clearing a single-wide trailer that’s now a meth lab, I would also want a suppressed firearm.

Trying to justify a suppressor to the DEA head shed must have been tough. I imagine the bureaucrat at the DEA pictured assassins and whisper-quiet cans and couldn’t see the benefits of suppressors for clearing rooms. This was a great way to justify it. However, this 100% speculation is based on working for the government.

How It Got Made

Colt took the order and immediately teamed up with Knight’s Armament. They seemed to take things from there and produced and permanently attached the suppressor. They also used A2 length hand guards, with a cut for a front sight base, to cover the barrel and suppressor system.

It’s tough to say the steps KAC went through without an example, and there is limited information online. I found a print by an artist that does show a CLET team wielding them, but no actual photos. I can only dig up a few actual photos, and the majority come from a single ARFCOM post.

The DEA Model Colt SMG is an interesting mix and, certainly, something Colt didn’t take much advantage of. However, in the end, I guess the M4 won out anyway and replaced most SMGs in major military forces anyway.

The Scatterguns of John Wick

Much has been said about the many custom guns of gun guy favorite John Wick. Throughout the film series, he uses an impressive variety of handguns. The 2nd, 3rd, and 4th films all feature a ton of Taran Tactical Innovations firearms, and each film delivers us a new custom handgun. Lots has been said about the handguns, but what about John Wick’s shotguns? Yeah, no one talks much about those, but as the resident shotgun nerd, I want to do a deep dive. 

John Wick 1 – KelTec KSG 

The first John Wick hardly feels like a John Wick film. They’ve grown exceptionally in budget and vision. While he carried a custom HK P30, every other gun was fairly standard. Near the end, he gets his hands on a KelTec KSG. Like many of John’s guns, he liberates it from an enemy. His model is featured with a hand-saving vertical grip and an EOTech optic. 

The KSG is a dual-tube pump action shotgun. It’s capable of holding 14 rounds of 12 gauge, and it certainly seems to be an advantage to Mr. Wick as he fights around vehicles. Striking firearms are a big feature of these films, and the KSG has enough space gun vibes to stand out in the relatively modest first film. 

John Wick 2 – Benelli M4 

Described as ‘something bold, John Wick carries a Benelli M4 in the second film. During his escape from the catacombs, we see a 3-gun-inspired scene where John switches his guns around to incorporate a handgun, rifle, and shotgun. The Benelli M4 is arguably the king of combat shotguns and has a proper place in the film. This was when Taran Tactical began outfitting Wick’s weapons, and M4 has the TTI package. 

This gas-operated semi-auto shotgun gets a brilliant display of effectiveness throughout the film. One of the highlights is when Wick faces armored baddies and blasts their unarmored legs out from under them before delivering the coup de grace. Wick is constantly reloading the gun, famously using a match save to finish a pinned bad guy down. He certainly makes use of the gun’s more than-capable action. 

John Wick 3 – Benelli M2 

In the third film, John and Charon resist a siege by the High Table’s armed goons. As the situation evolves, he gets to meet heavily armored bad guys that can’t be stopped. He returns to the armory with Charon, and they grab Benelli shotguns. Charon takes the M4, and Wick takes the M2 alongside some armor-busting slugs. We suspend disbelief for armor-piercing shotguns here. Like the M4, the M2 gets the TTI treatment. 

The M2 is an inertia-operated semi-auto shotgun, and John uses it to turn heads into mush. Along the way, we see constant and competent quad loads and plenty of 3-gun gear. The M2 was and remains a great shotgun, but it felt like a bit of a step back and excuse to use a different TTI gun than the M4. 

John Wick 4- Genesis Arms Gen 12 

The latest John Wick film had our titular hero cutting his way through an Army of assassins. One group preferred the Genesis Gen 12 shotguns. These are AR-based, semi-auto 12 gauge shotguns that use a short recoil principle to function. They are mag fed and of extremely high quality. They’ve received the TTI treatment and are the TTI Model Dracarys guns in the film. These are certainly different, and what makes them stand out is the use of Dragon’s Breath rounds.

John Wick has great gun handling, but we have to suspend disbelief. Mainly because the Dragon’s Breath rounds are shown to be effective man stoppers. To be completely fair, John’s suit is bulletproof, but it seems like an incendiary round would be more effective than just buckshot against it. I’ve only fired DB rounds once, and they don’t cycle in semi-autos either….but movie magic is, well…magic. 

Scatter Guns 

I love shotguns and also perk up a bit when Wick gets his hands on one. The films do a great job of letting John and his guns be the stars of the show. Typically when a new gun is introduced, it gets some serious screen time, even to earn an Academy nod for best supporting actor. Every scene with these shotguns present is memorable, and for scattergun nerds like me, they truly stand out. 

John Wick’s Bulletproof Suit

https://blacklapel.com/thecompass/master-the-john-wick-suit/
photo credit: Black Lapel

In the pantheon of well-dressed gunmen, John Wick is definitely one of the first that comes to mind.

His iconic bespoke bulletproof suits are as much a part of the character as Batman’s cowl or Steve Rogers’ shield. But how feasible would it be to actually work ballistic protection into a normal suit jacket?

There’s a couple elements of this that we need to consider:

Ballistic Protection:

If you’re trying to work bullet resistant material into an existing article of clothing, it’s going to have to be soft armor. Something in the range of Level II – Level IIIA.

The material will need to not only be flexible enough to mold to the body during regular movement, but also thin enough that it doesn’t make the suit jacket look like a ski parka. Level II material is approximately 5mm thick, whereas level IIIA is 1.6x thicker at roughly 8mm.

Think about the thickness of the shirt you’re wearing right now. A heavy cotton t-shirt is ~0.4mm thick. So envision layering 12 shirts under a cover garment that needs to be somewhat fitted.

Tailoring Considerations:

The suit is going to need to look normal, so the facing/presentation fabric is going to have to be a traditional wool or wool blend. The best option is going to be replacing the canvassing of the jacket with ballistic rated material.

Canvass is the interlining that gives the jacket structure and allows it to conform to the body.

photo credit: Oliver Wicks

The other challenge is, as you can see, when the jacket is buttoned, the centerline from the sternum to the neck is still exposed. Now John Wick seems to address this by adding a waistcoat that pushes the coverage up a little higher and covers the vial organs, but does leave some of the center chest exposed above the nipple line.

photo credit: Lionsgate Films

Concessions:
The world in which John Wick exists requires some degree of suspension of reality. As such I think it’s fair to assume that this guild of assassins has access to the latest, cutting edge armor technologies that are not available on the open market. Given what’s currently available for purchase, it’s not a far leap to assume there are some restricted nanotechnologies that would offer much more effective ballistic protection in a slimmer, lower profile package.

It does bear mentioning though that companies like Safariland and MC Armor currently offer IIIA tank tops, which in my mind seem like a far more practical solution.

If you want to see a real bullet resistant suit constructed, check out the video by Hacksmith Industries. They did a great job of taking all the factors into account.

A History of Violence

Map of worldwide gun ownership rates, Wikipedia

After the attack by a 28 year old on a Christian elementary school in Nashville Tennessee, one that left three staff members and three nine year old students dead, an attack that was thankfully responded to and thwarted swiftly by very competent law enforcement responders, mass shootings are once again all the media rage.

The hot takes are flying. You can immediately guess the spin based on the source. Everything is being blamed. Our President took a minute prior to his address on the attack to say that he had come down because he was told there was ice cream and that he had a fridge full upstairs. No, seriously. He said that. The attempt at humor, likely a swipe at the stream of ice cream memes about Biden, was (at best) poorly placed.

It conveys complete tone deafness on the issue and lends credence to theories that the president actually doesn’t give a damn about these shootings beyond their use as a talking point to batter at congress with. If you wanted evidence that this is all just politics to them, you got plenty in that clip.

Conspiracy theorists are crying false flag and fake. Gun controllers are blaming guns. The right is blaming leftist antagonization and inflammatory rhetoric. The left is blaming right wing antagonization and inflammatory rhetoric. Both are antagonizing the other further and continuing to use inflammatory rhetoric. There is, as the phrase goes, zero chill at the moment.

Just another wonderful day in the 21st century where, if we’d just take a breath and take stock of our situation for a few seconds, we should recognize that things have literally never been better and we’ve never had more potential to continue improving things. We just had energy gain fusion three months ago, do you even understand how cool that is!? Sure, there is a land war in eastern Europe but that seems to be a tradition at this point. Sure, crime is still around, people still have problems, not everyone lives at a first world tech level, etc. But more people than ever do. We need to focus on continuing that uplift.

We won’t though. We’ll continue to compete in shortsighted victimhood bingo, one-upmanship of one form or another, and the hot take culture wars of all varieties.

Lamenting on our societal and species based shortcomings isn’t the point of this post though.

Instead, I wanted to take a look at the history of extreme violence in the nation. This delve was started by the an honest question from someone outside the ‘informed’ space. That question, paraphrased: ‘Do reporting sources automatically attribute mass casualty violence causes based on their perpetrator demographics?’

She didn’t ask it in those exact terms but it was the crux of her inquiry. In short, is a ‘mass shooting’ a ‘gang violence event’ if the participant(s) are Black but a mass ‘murder/mass shooting’ if the shooter(s) end up being of the white male persuasion?

For someone like me who dips into this information regularly, it’s almost an absurd inquiry. The data sources from the CDC, FBI, ATF, and Secret Service are detail heavy. They’re good about sorting the data and you can find the answers. However you can also filter it, like GVA, and Giffords, and Moms Demand do, to project a perceived result through some obfuscation if you want. You can do so without outright lying by grouping things. ‘Gun violence’ including suicides is one of the most common such stat stacking tactics, including the perpetrators in death tolls if they died is another. When you read the data in depth it is obvious the reporting agencies are making the honest attempts to look at this data and collect it objectively. I can find things to poke at here and there, like the ATF not combining revolvers and semi-auto pistols in certain reporting categories which can lend a severely undercounted bias to certain modes of inquiry. IE: How often are handguns (use as a general term for a small gun used in one or two hands) used in crime?

But for someone mostly consuming titles and headlines, because this data has zero relevance on their daily life, this perception of motive bias and reporting bias absolutely makes sense. It is the reason that the deeply pro-gun side of the internet clowns on, and with some justification, the fact that a shooting like this one in Tennessee will ‘disappear’ because it doesn’t ‘fit the narrative(s)’. It, of course, won’t disappear. But the traditional media will steer away from some of their more common tropes of white male rage and are less likely to parade the shooter’s identity. We saw this with the Walmart mass shooting too when it turned out the shooter was A.) a management level employee, and B.) of minority ethnicity. The event didn’t ‘disappear’ but the narrative shifted to generalizations like ‘preventing workplace violence’ and ‘Walmart’s liability’ with rapid pace. This, combined with the rapidity of event entropy in general, makes the stories fade away.

The Tennessee event is in danger of taking that same media route. Shooters are rarely female, regardless of how they identify. Because the shooter was Trans, female to male, and that is a highly divisive social topic and seen as a victim status classification for a myriad of reasons, and because a favored stereotype of the left towards the right is the ‘unhinged MAGA hat wearer white male mass shooter’, when a shooter isn’t that stereotype, and instead falls into leftist held thought camps, the elements on the right will quickly point out all their available leftist tendencies and habits.

It’s a multitude of political camps trying to imply that the minuscule number of individuals or small groups that turn spree-killer or attempted spree-killer can be categorized by 6 to 10 of the accounts they follow on Instagram. It’s more overgeneralization and stereotyping in response to overgeneralization and stereotyping.

That isn’t to say extremist categories on all edges of the political compass shouldn’t be red flags for observation (yes I know that’s a charged term, idgaf right now), they should and that is an obvious starting point to try and intercede pre-event. We don’t call things ‘pre-attack’ or ‘pre-violence’ indicators for nothing. But it is also to say that tracking those rare individuals that will actually rise and act out violently isn’t as simple as a game of connect 4, predicting human behavior is more at the complexity level of getting fusion power to work.

Now, what does our actual history of violence look like? Is it as matching of the stereotypes as headlines make it out to be?

Lone Wolf Mass Casualty Violence

We hear about hundreds of ‘mass shootings’ in the United States each year. We’ve been told repeatedly over the last few weeks that we’ve already passed 100 for the year 2023. I’ve gone into detail about how that title, ‘Mass Shooting’, and the factors defining it are rather meaningless in filtering information by event cause. Motive matters far more for preventative plans than method of injury.

So let’s narrow from the overly broad ‘Mass Shooting’ and let’s look at how many spree or rampage killing events have happened. Not this year, let’s look at history.

Wikipedia cited 1,979 total incidents worldwide that met the definition(s) of rampage killing.

When looking at something specific, like school massacres, the largest of those were perpetrated by governments and organized near-state level terror forces, the IRA, Al-Qaeda, etc. . In fact, of the deadliest 15 school massacres worldwide only one was perpetrated by a non-governmental or non-terrorist force. It was an arson by students and it killed 67, it occurred in Kenya.

We will largely omit government and large terror organizations from the discussion minus using them for scale. Large state or quasi-state actors/organizations are not pertinent when we are talking about what individuals or very small groups do and the prevention or intervention in their attacks.

The United States doesn’t make the school massacre list until 16th, the Bath Michigan bombing in 1927. There were 103 school massacres listed worldwide, 104 once the most recent attack was added. The highest death toll was 2,000, in 1907, perpetrated by the Chilean Army.

Rampage Killing, the Lone Assailant (or Small Group) Perpetrated Massacre

What we actually fear when we hear of a ‘mass shooting’ is a rampage killer. Not that a driveby or a group on group gunfight at a gas station, by gangs or just a rivalry of some form, is inherently safe by any stretch. But the real visceral fear is reserved for the killers looking for pure body counts on a planned attack.

The criteria laid out for rampage killers are three possible, based on casualty counts.

  1. 6 or more killed
  2. 4 or more killed with 10 or more total injured
  3. 2 or more killed with 12 or more total injured

These killers use more than just firearms in their slaughters, but firearms are predominant. However, if we take and combine all public rampages in the United States (105), home invasive massacres (51), all school attacks (24), all workplace attacks both domestic (26) and military (3), religious/political/racial motivated attacks (19), and attacks exclusively using a vehicle (9) We come up with 237 spree-killer incidents in total between 1843 and today (If I checked all the dates right).

Compare that with the annual reported number of ‘mass shootings‘ from various sources (over 600 for 2020, 2021, and 2022). I will give GVA credit with reporting both mass shootings and mass murders on their site, but we don’t talk about both of those in headlines we just say ‘mass shootings’.

How do we reconcile more than 1,800 ‘mass shootings’ in the last three years with only 237 spree-killings of various types in roughly a 180 year span?

Again, we are excluding government or large organization perpetrated incidents, they would dominate the casualty counts. We will also focus in on domestic and foreign incidents that involved firearms to provide certain comparisons. A common claim is our near limitless access to firearms is the primary reason our violence is as it is. We will examine that.

The first US massacre was, as posted, in 1843. It was a home invasion in Pennsylvania, 6 killed and 2 injured. It did not involved a firearm. The first time we see a recorded massacre in consecutive years is 1897 and 1898, both were shootings and one involved explosives, 5 killed and 5 wounded in the first and 7 and 2 respectively at the second. The first year we see more than one mass shooting massacre in the same year is 1903, 9 were killed in one incident and 3 in the other, with 25 and 11 wounded respectively.

The first recorded workplace massacre listed was in 1909, it was not a shooting, and killed 5-7. The first workplace shooting massacre was in 1935 and killed 6 people.

The first school massacre was the infamous Bath Michigan bombing, if we don’t count the colonial era mass shooting in Pennsylvania that killed 11 in 1764, and it is still the worst school massacre in US History, and the first shooting massacre was in 1966 at University of Texas, also infamous and unique in that Whitman (the shooter) hoped his brain would be examined and a cause of his compulsion found. A hostage situation that year at a college resulted in the execution style killing of 5, the shooter alleged admiration of Whitman and shows us the copycat effect. That killing was just under the spree-killing/massacre thresholds. A firearm was used in every school attack hence, sometimes accompanied by arson or other weapons. Notable in Bath, the perpetrator was an official of the town and schoolboard.

1998 began the era of what we could consider ‘modern’ school shootings, with one perpetrated by a pair of students, 11 and 13 years old, who killed 4 fellow students and a teacher and wounded 10 others, and in the second a 15 year old student who was about to be expelled killed 4 and wounded 25 others. It was also the first year more than one such mass killing would take place in a year. 1999 saw Columbine, the first time more than 10 were killed since 1966. 2012 would be the next occurrence of multiple in a year with Newtown and Oikos University. 2018

“Uniquely American”

Only 6 in the US years have seen two or more school massacres (4 or more dead, or 2 dead with 14 rounded in one incident) within the year, the earliest is 1966. 2018 saw three rampage killings at a K-12 school, one resulted in only 2 dead. All perpetrators were students or recent former students.

Since 1989 no more than 6 years have passed between a shooting that left more than 4 dead, since 1998 no more than 4 years between occurrences. In 2012 that dropped to a near annual massacre only with one three year span, 2018 until 2021, that didn’t have a shooting. Every other year had one or two school shootings with more than four dead.

Yes, they’ve dramatically increased in frequency in conjunction with their visibility nationally and internationally. The last decade averaged one a year, the two decades prior to that was one every other year. If we go from 1991 back to 1764, there are only 14 in total combining rampages and 4+ casualty lists

Countries or regions that have had school massacres on rampage scale, involving firearms, and since the year 2000, include Azerbaijan, Belgium, Brazil, Canada, Finland, Gaza, Germany, Russia, and Thailand. If we want to expand to non-firearm causes with the same casualty threshold we can add China and Japan to the list too. The US has experienced 14 school massacres since 2001, all firearm related. China has had 9 comparable school massacres, none of which involved firearms. China and Russia both have multiple massacres in a single year. Thailand has the deadliest school massacre not involving explosives, it occurred in 2022. Finland, Germany, Brazil, Thailand, Azerbaijan, China, Canada, the United Kingdom, and Russia all have at least one school massacre involving 10 or more dead.

The deadliest mass shooting in the US is Las Vegas with 60 dead. Norway had a deadlier mass shooting in 2011, Utoya, with 69 killed by gunfire and 8 with a VBIED. Nice, France has the highest death toll firearm related massacre, although the method of injury was a truck. The killer was shot by police before actually shooting anyone. 86 were killed in that incident in and 434 injured. Oklahoma City, 1995, remains the worst lone wolf massacre attack in the US, with nearly three times the death toll of Las Vegas, and it is still behind an arson in South Korea in 2003 that killed 192 and injured 150. An EgyptAir plane crashed by the first officer killed all 216 aboard when he flew into the ocean deliberately. Another deliberate crash of a German operated plane over France killed 149, again dwarfing shooting deaths.

No nation, regardless of law or development level, is immune from massacre level violence. Smaller, wealthy, and more societally homogenous nations have lower instances, but they aren’t immune. The US is the third largest nation on the planet and is socioeconomically diverse.

We cannot call the violence uniquely American while also trying to compare it to nations that are not comparable to the United States beyond their vague wealth metrics (“developed”). The US has a dramatic mix of socioeconomic realities.

And yes, we have more guns.

LOTS more guns.

Like so many more guns, that if it were guns that were the problem, and not the complex mix of socioeconomic pressure points and crazy folk that exists next to that conveniently accessible method of injury that firearms do represent, it would be so so so much worse than it is.

Let’s pull some fast numbers.

The United States has the most guns ever.

It isn’t even close. The next runner up that matters statistically, Yemen, only has 44% of our firearms per capita. By the time we get out of the top 10 gun owning countries, Finland, we are down to 27% of the United States. By our 2020 rate, the US is 60th worldwide for intentional homicide. By our firearm related death rate, we are 8th. Recall, the US is number one in ownership by a multiple of 2.27. We have 120+% per capita firearm ownership and we are only 8th in deaths. By firearm homicide we are 18th in the world.

Now, how many more guns do we have than the 17 countries who are deadlier than we are by firearm homicide rate per capita?

  • Uruguay, the US has 379% of their guns per capita. Their murder by firearm rate is 5% higher.
  • Paraguay, the US has 709% of their guns per capita. Their murder by firearm rate is 34.5% higher.
  • Nicaragua, the US has 1,565% of their guns per capita. Their murder by firearm rate is 39.5% higher.
  • Costa Rica, the US has 1,205% of their guns per capita. Their murder by firearm rate is 44.8% higher.
  • Barbados, the US has 3,443% of their guns per capita. Their murder by firearm rate is 50% higher.
  • Philippines, the US has 2,565% of their guns per capita. Their murder by firearm rate is 71% higher.
  • Panama, the US has 555% of their guns per capita. Their murder by firearm rate is 108% higher.
  • South Africa, the US has 949% of their guns per capita. Their murder by firearm rate is 190% higher.
  • Mexico, the US has 803% of their guns per capita. Their murder by firearm rate is 270% higher.
  • Colombia, the US has 1,193% of their guns per capita. Their murder by firearm rate is 308% higher.
  • Guatemala, the US has 920% of their guns per capita. Their murder by firearm rate is 358% higher.
  • Brazil, the US has 803% of their guns per capita. Their murder by firearm rate is 413% higher.
  • Venezuela, the US has 651% of their guns per capita. Their murder by firearm rate is 493% higher. If we distribute in the ‘undetermined’ causes evenly based on their listed homicide, suicide, and unintentional death rates the murder rate in Venezuela is 991% higher.
  • Honduas, the US has 1,072-1,217% of their guns per capita. Their murder by firearm rate is 559% higher.
  • Eswatini (formerly Swaziland), the US has 1,883% of their guns per capita. Their murder by firearm rate is 733% higher.
  • Jamaica, the US has 1,488% of their guns per capita. Their murder by firearm rate is 756% higher.
  • El Salvador, the US has 2,078% of their guns per capita. Their murder by firearm rate is 1,505% higher.

But Keith! Surely we can’t consider El Salvador “developed” right?

Well their Human Developmental Index (HDI) is .675, considered okay/medium and ours in the US is .921, considered very high (21st worldwide). High starts at .700 and very high starts at .800. So they aren’t the US but they aren’t in the stone age. The El Salvador HDI is only 27% lower than our national average. If you take and compare it to just Puerto Rico, El Salvador is lagging behind only 20% on HDI.

The US is approximately 21 times more heavily armed than El Salvador while having 16 times less firearm homicide. Are we attributing a 27% less but still borderline high HDI with absolute savagery and lawlessness? Is murder just not illegal in El Salvador? Did they forget to check that box on the things to make illegal checklist?

Costa Rica, Uruguay, and Panama all rank above a .800 HDI. Panama has double our homicide by firearm rate with 1/5th as many guns.

Our societal access to firearms in the US is effectively limitless yet our unique mixture of current societal strains, often regional and localized, result in an overall violence level that is suboptimal but not unexpected or out of control given socioeconomic realities. Countries with far fewer firearms have far more homicide by firearm We also cannot ignore that other nations with dramatically different social structures and controls, like China, are far from immune to massacre level violence, even deprived of firearms.

Gun control is the answer, right?

Let’s put it like this.

Leading State for public rampage massacres: California (19)

Leading State for public rampage massacres since 2002: California (6)

The California assault weapon ban went into effect in 1989, they had 9 public massacres after that date.

Leading State for school massacres: California (4, three after their AWB was in effect)

Leading State for school massacres since 2000: California & Texas (2 each)

Leading State for workplace massacres: California (6)

Leading location for military workplace massacres: Fort Hood (2) Note: Firearms are strictly controlled on military installations.

Leading State for politically, racially, or ethnically motivated massacres: New York (3)

State with the deadliest home invasion massacre: California (11 dead, 1928). Second deadliest: New York (10 dead, 1984).

So… how is that gun control working out, California? New York? What gun control policy is preventing a repeat of any such massacre? Which one?

What can we do?

We can stop being naïve, reactionary, and childish about violence and our responses to violence. We can stop using hyperbole about ‘mass shootings’ and overly broad entirely irrelevant definitions in order to make numbers look scary. Trying to one up the other team and get our legislative ways and with short term ultimately ineffectual victories erodes the trust in any promise to come after. We can stop demonizing large swaths of the population for something they own. We can stop promising government can ‘do it’ when we’ve proven time after time they cannot (and are sometimes the aggressor themselves).

We can stop pretending that minutely changing the definition or feature sets of the nearly limitless supply of firearms the United States citizenry has access to will materially influence instances of extreme violence. We can stop pretending that the incidents are somehow causally linked by method of injury when their motivations are so varied. We can stop pretending that 10 rounds is safe but 11+ is dangerous. We can stop bullshitting that if truly intelligent, evil, motivated people are hindered by having to reload, or need more magazines, or don’t get to have a flashhider or adjustable stock on their rifle that we’ll save lives. We can cut the crap about pretending most politicians have a clue, or that polls of the general public who couldn’t be bothered to recite how you actually buy a firearm in any sort of detail should be given weight.

If we consider the 20 deadliest shootings in US History, Las Vegas to Aurora, we have no commonality in anything but the most broad and useless demographic information. Sure all used guns and all but one of the shooters were male, neat. Not helpful. That timeframe goes from 1949 to 2022. The perpetrator ages range from 18 to 64. Their backgrounds vary wildly, and include a decorated WWII veteran with a stellar service record and a former prison guard. Their ethnicities touch on everything. Their motives, when known, are all over the spectrum. Their locations are a variety of common everyday spaces. What law would outlaw any or all of the specific extremes in any of those cases and prevent the slaughters? What law will be no real hinderance to the general public, their rights, and their sensibilities but an extremist of any persuasion shall be blocked and thwarted?

We keep trying to pass laws to stop the next shooting because “enough is enough” yet they wouldn’t stop nor even seriously hinder any of the previous shootings with any of the laws we’ve passed.

So we can stop all that.

We can start working to rebuild the public trust. We can rebuild the sense of community and stop the cheap and shallow practices that make people feel lied to and cheated by their officials. We can stop lying about the virtues, infallibilities, or degeneracies of broad groups of people to dehumanize them and again build on the strengths and uniqueness of the individuals and the universal human traits. We can stop taking the cheap easy wins that cost others, we can stop playing victim when we aren’t and we can take charge of our fates even if we are.

ETA: While I was finishing this an attack occurred in Brazil, 4 dead kids and at least 4 injured at a daycare. Method of injury, axe. Uniquely American though, right?

The Weapons of the North Korean Special Forces

Worst Korea has quite the arsenal. From ICBMs to odd AKs, they have a little bit of everything. Over the year, the North Korean Special Forces have launched numerous attacks on South Korea, from attempted assassinations of the President to submarine infiltrations. Through these attempts, we’ve gathered a bird’s eye view of what the special forces of North Korea are wielding, and let’s take a fun look at what the enemies of democracy carry. 

The Main Rifles of North Korean Special Forces 

The current main rifles of the Nork Special Forces are the domestically produced Type 88-2 and the Type 98. They are both very similar rifles derived from the AK-74 series rifles. The Type 98 has a slightly different receiver and a shorter barrel. 

Some of the significant differences include an odd top folding stock. This top folding stock accommodates the massive, likely poorly functional, helical rifle magazines. These massive magazines have been seen in use by the dictator’s armed bodyguards. These helical magazines likely hold anywhere from 75 to 150 rounds of 5.45x39mm ammunition. 

These magazines attach to both the magazine well and the bayonet lug. They can also use standard 30-round magazines, which are likely the choice of the special operation forces. 

The Imitations 

The North Korean Special Forces also take a page out of China and have been caught of seen imitating rifles in other countries. 

M16A1 – Locally produced M16A1 rifles were found with the North Korean Special Forces soldiers during the 1996 Gangneung submarine infiltration incident. At this period of time, the M16A1 was a common rifle among South Korean forces, and their copies allowed the infiltrators to blend in. 

K2 – The South Korean K2 rifles are the main firearm of the South Korean forces. South Korean intel force shave spotted North Korean special operations soldiers carrying K2 rifles and dressed in South Korean camouflage. It’s easy to assume they are infiltration troops training. 

Submachine Guns 

In modern times even North Korea has limited its use of SMGs. They seem to be reserved for deep infiltration troops and spies, not combative personnel

Sterling Submachine Gun – Early North Korean Special Forces wielded the Sterling SMGs, likely left over from the Korean war. 

Vz. 61 – The Vz. 61 Skorpion became the machine pistol of choice of North Korean Special Forces and spies. When a group of spies was caught in North Korea, the men were carrying suppressed .32 ACP VZ. 61s. These ultra-small firearms were designed for that purpose, and they served well in that role. 

Handguns 

Handguns of North Korea are something of an oddity, a mix of Chinese and Soviet designs, but the choice of both generals and North Korean Special forces is a rather interesting pistol. 

Baek Du San – The Baek Du San is a North Korean copy of the CZ 75 pistol. It’s domestically produced, and while generals carry a blinged-out handgun, the Special Forces carry a plain black model with wooden grips. If I was carrying a North Korean pistol, I wouldn’t mind it being a CZ 75 clone. 

The North Korean Special Forces 

North Korea has a very operational special forces unit, but they don’t seem to be very good at their job. In fact, they seem to be caught and observed fairly often. Although I haven’t read a book written by a North Korean Special Forces soldier, so maybe they are true quiet professionals. 

Streamlight Syclone Jr. Work Light: Bright and Small

First noticing the Syclone Jr. due to how small it was, the idea of it was intriguing. A work light that is smaller than the palm of my hand? How does that work? After using it on the work bench, it made sense. The Syclone Jr. is an adorable little rechargeable light that has multiple features packed into a little bright package. Easy to throw in your backpack or set on your work bench without taking up any room.

The Lumens

Alright let’s just get it out of the way since this is going to be the first question that anyone asks. The Syclone Jr. has two settings that can be adjusted by pressing the button on top of the light.

  • Low: 85 lumens; 49m beam; runs 8.5 hours
  • High: 210 lumens; 79m beam; runs 3.75 hours

Don’t be scared off by the amount of lumens. It is really bright. It can fill an entire bedroom sized room with all other lights off when tilted to the sky.

lighting up a room with the setting on low
Please ignore the messy work bench. This photo was taken with all of the lights and off and the door shut to the bedroom sized room. This is with the setting on LOW. It definitely lit up the room.

A Micro-USB cable is included to recharge the light. The light will be red when charging and green when fully charged, similar to other rechargeable products from Streamlight such as the ProTac lights with USB-C rechargeable batteries.

Set It, Hang It, or Mount It

The coolest thing about this little guy in my opinion is all of the ways to use it. It comes with a housing allowing it to be placed on a bench. That housing also allows the light to be swiveled 360 degrees allowing to be pointed to the sky to fill the room or tilted towards what you are working on.

It also comes with a little hook that fits into the housing for storage. Use the hook to hang off of anything. It is a good size, not too wide not too thin, so it can fit on a lot. I personally hung it from the cord that powers my overhead work light. It gave me more light closer to the bench when I was working on something.

The bottom of the Syclone Jr. Also has two small but strong magnets allowing it to be thrown onto anything magnetized and still allow the light to swivel.

For context, these work lights are seeming to be aimed at mechanics, at least in their work light advertisement video it is. Mechanics need lights that can be strong enough to stick onto a hood and small enough to see into tight spaces. They also need lights that can withstand chemical contact. Due to this, Streamlights work lights all have chemically resistant lenses, yes this includes gun oil.

Specs

data sheet for syclone jr
Above is the Syclone Jr. Product Sheet showing everything from specs on water and chemical resistance to the runtime and lumens. For how small it is the Syclone Jr. is pretty durable considering its shock resistance.

The Price is Right

The lowest price I’ve seen is $36 for the Syclone Jr. on Amazon. The highest I’ve seen from other retailers is $40-$50. Either way, it’s a great price for how bright and feature packed this work light is.

light aimed at clp
The head can be swiveled to just focus on what you are working on. The lens is also chemically resistant so no worries if you spill on it.

Commonly Owned: AR-15 Confirmed

Commonly Owned AR-15
Photo Credit: CRPA.org

“Commonly owned” is a phrase you will see a lot if you follow the topic of firearms legislation and related court cases. Two pivotal SCOTUS decisions in the last century have used the phrase to describe those arms covered by the 2nd Amendment. Anti-gun lobbyists and legislators, who seem to be professionally underinformed on the topic will often attempt to make many separate cases to illustrate the rightness of their cause, stepping on the toes of each point they make as a new one is born. This is just another in the litany of such cases that are so numerous as to be exhausting to explain, but that’s what we’re here for, so here goes!

One normally doesn’t expect the opposition to airdrop a victory onto your doorstep. Usually a competent opponent will present such opportunities on purpose to disguise their true intent, or lead you into a position of their design, the better to attack and defeat you. Fortunately, those of us invested in preserving the right to keep and bear arms are not often burdened with competent opponents, and in the midst of their fervor to make one point (black rifle scary!), they invalidate another (AR-15s aren’t commonly owned or covered by 2A!).

In this latest example, not only does the Washington Post completely fail to grasp the mechanical and cultural details surrounding the proliferation of the AR-15 as a sporting, hunting, competition, and self-defense platform, but they also shoot themselves in the foot repeatedly, if you’ll pardon the expression. According to their data, 25% of firearms sold in America are AR-15’s, and 1 in every 20 Americans own one. They make this point apparently with the intent of scaring people, but seemingly fail to grasp that in doing so they articulate publicly that they are aware that their attempts to ban them are implicitly unconstitutional, given how commonly owned they are. While we don’t understand how it is they can be so entirely dumb, we are eternally grateful for it.

Gunday Brunch 94: Training Class Do’s and Don’ts

So you’re signing up for your first or 500th training class, eh? Maybe you’re an instructor just hanging out your shingle. Regardless here are some handy tips from some guys who have countless combined hours of training

Shooting Around Corners – A Gear Retrospective From WW1 til Now

Peeking around a corner to engage a threat is always a little risky. What if someone is waiting right around that corner with a Kalashnikov and ill intent? That’s been a threat to deal with since cartridge firearms and open warfare have been fought. Throughout the history of warfare, there have been numerous attempts to figure out how to shoot around cover without exposing the shooter. Some are tactics-based, but others involve technology, and today we are examining the technology side of shooting around corners throughout history. 

Periscope Rifles 

World War 1 was a meat grinder involving trenches and brutal combat. The trenches provided protection and cover from the enemy. Peeking over a trench could result in some full-powered rifle rounds to the face. This brought about the idea of periscope rifles. These weapons varied depending on who made the gun. Some were quite complicated and split nearly in half to elevate the gun. 

Rock Island Armory

Others used simple mounts and periscope optics to get the job done. The Australians designed one, as did the Dutch, Russians, French, British, and Americans. The American variant employed a 25-round trench magazine to help with the reloading issue. We wouldn’t see a big return to trench warfare, so the periscope rifle died in World War 1. 

Krummlauf STG 44 

The Nazis did a lot of meth, and that’s really apparent near the end of the war. Their creative ideas were often silly, but they were desperate for anything that would turn the tide of the war. The Krummlauf was one of those ideas. This design fits the STG 44 with a bent, curved barrel to allow the user to shoot around corners or in armor from a vertical mount. 

The infantry version bent the barrel 30 degrees, and the Nazis dropped a periscope-style optic to allow the shooter to see and aim around corners. The entire idea was silly. The barrel life was about 300 rounds, and in US Army testing, the Army found that bullets were breaking inside the barrel at the curve. Needless to say, this didn’t work well. 

The CornerShot 

I tuned in weekly to watch this show called Future Weapons in the early 2000s. I loved the show, and watching back now, it’s still entertaining and interesting. One of the first episodes, if not the first, featured a device called the CornerShot. The name explains it all, it shoots around corners. The CornerShot wasn’t a weapon, but it was a stock system you dropped a weapon into. The device was the size of a rifle, and you fit a handgun into the end of it. 

Below the handgun sits a camera, and a folding screen broadcasts to the user what you are seeing. A hinging component allows the user to fold the device and gun around a corner to either the left or right. The user can position the handgun around a corner, aim through a screen, and engage the threat. This Israeli innovation is still kicking around but only saw limited adoption. 

Aimpoint Concealed Engagement Unit 

One of the more practical means to aim around a corner came from Aimpoint. In 2008 they released the Concealment Engagement Unit. This device works similarly to a magnifier but with no magnification. It mounts behind a red dot and is curved, and works like a periscope. You gaze through it, and you can see around a corner. 

Admittedly putting guns around corners will likely expose your hands, but not much else. I’d also imagine not shouldering the weapon and having a proper stance really limits your effective range. The CEU could spin from side to side and offer a variety of angles, and could quickly dismount to allow for normal use of your red dot. 

The GunEye 

The latest option I’ve seen comes from a company called GunEye. GunEye released a Picatinny rail-mounted camera that attaches to your firearm and wirelessly broadcasts to your smartphone. Point he gun around your corners and watch the video display on your phone. It premiered at 2023’s SHOT but is still in the preorder stage, so it’s tough to properly judge how well it works. While I like the idea, I’m not sure how much use it will be. 

Tactics Win 

As far as I’m concerned, the best way to clear a corner is still tactically based. It could be a slice-the-pie situation, a toss-a-frag, or throw a drone up, depending on your situation. While gear can help, good tactics still win the day. 

The AK 200 Series – The Modern Russian AK Family

The world’s largest arm’s exporters is a pretty interesting list. America comes in at number 1 because we are the best at everything. Sliding into a distant second is Russia. Russia exports a wide variety of weapons, from small arms to its tanks. While most of their equipment has taken a reputation hit in the last year, the AK series seems to be one of the last successful Russian exports. Today we are looking at the AK 200 series of the famed assault rifle layout.

The AK 200 is another attempt to modernize the aging Kalashnikov rifles. In the early 1990s, the Russians produced the AK 100 series of rifles to do the same. The AK 100 series was produced for internal use by police and security forces as well as exported to numerous foreign countries. The AK 200 series seems to be solely designed for export. Russia built this series to be what the AK 12 became, but Russia went back to the drawing board and developed the AK 400, which became the modern AK 12.

The AK 200 Series – What’s New

The AK 200 series rifles first saw service in 2017 when they were unveiled as the AK-100M series, but the name was changed to AK 200 in 2018. This is a family of rifles consisting of both full-sized rifles and carbines in varying calibers. We’ll touch on each variant a little later.

They all share similar traits outside of barrel length and caliber. The AK 200 series of rifles all share the same degree of modernization. The guns feature stocks that both collapse and fold. They have four positions for the length of pull and were designed to withstand the recoil from a 40 mm grenade launcher.

The AK’s ancient safety is still in place, but a thumb shelf has been added for a more ergonomic design. The pistol grip is no longer a nub, but a polymer grip that looks like CAA designed it. The magazine is Kalashnikov’s latest polymer design as well.

Across the top of the dust cover sits a section of Picatinny rail for adding optics. The handguards are also railed for adding lights, lasers, and foregrips. Overall it’s a modern take on the Kalashnikov platform that was certainly due.

The real question is, does slapping a new stock and rail on what’s essentially a WW2-era rifle make a huge difference? It will never be an AR in its modularity, but Russia isn’t moving on from its famed platform anytime soon. The AK 200 series rifles have been purchased by India to the tune of 670,000 rifles. Any additional sales are unknown at this writing.

Models and Calibers

There are six rifles in the AK 200 family, and it’s easy to see why Russia made so many models. It’s a lot easier to sell exports if you have a bevy of calibers to offer. Let’s break down the various models. The full-sized rifles have a 16.3-inch barrel, and the carbine series has 12.4-inch barrels.

AK-200 – A full-sized assault rifle chambering the 5.45 cartridge.

AK-201 – A full-sized assault rifle chambering 5.56 NATO cartridge.

AK-202 – A carbine variant chambering the 5.56 NATO Cartridge.

AK-203 – A full-sized assault rifle in 7.62x39mm.

AK-204 – A carbine variant chambering 7.62x39mm.

AK-205 – A carbine variant chambering 5.45.

The AK 200 series is a dynamic family. I wouldn’t hold my breath to ever see one hit American shores, but maybe Kalashnikov USA can spin us up a clone? If not, PSA seems to be unafraid to try new things. Here’s hoping because the AK-203 sounds fantastic.

Revolving Madness

.38 Special casings along with revolvers Smith and Wesson

Revolvers Are Stupid Guns

Hear me out before you rage fire that email to me or my editor. This isn’t the first time I’m saying this nor will it be the last: revolvers are pistols with very low capacity, have triggers that are harder to master and require additional care and consideration to keep in working condition. When these guns fail, they can go down hard and become merely blunt instruments. Unless you take the time and effort to handload, their ammunition costs more too. Revolvers are so damn stupid when you think about it! I could go on and on about what a waste of money they are. In fact, these days, a box of .38 Special costs approximately $12 more than a box of 9mm at standard retail pricing. As another point, it is said that serious revolver shooters carry around toothbrushes in order to clean out the star in between higher round counts. And of course, they own a Lewis Lead Remover too.

The Joy and Pleasure of Revolvers  

Revolvers are guns that have conceptually been around since the first quarter of the 19th century, and yet an early Colt revolver or a Pepperbox is nothing like a Smith and Wesson Model 66. That they have not fundamentally changed in nearly two centuries makes them fascinating. And when it comes to shot-for-shot satisfaction, revolvers are extremely seductive weapons.

It isn’t just their lines or sleek finishes. These are pistols of panache–heavy and archaic. I think the reason they draw me in the way they do comes from the fact that a revolver is technically more challenging to shoot, and nothing strikes dopamine receptors like when the target and timer show evidence of proficiency with these guns.

After all, with their fixed barrels, they can be extremely accurate. Perhaps this emotion comes from the same place in the heart where the satisfaction of knowing how to shift gears in a manual transmission also comes from. There is certainly a sense of appreciation for the craftsmanship and quality of American gunmaking of times past, when shop floors in Springfield or New Hartford (and other places) were full of expert smiths’ benches. Both their tools and their careful hands would carefully lay parts into a working weapon with a level of care and detail that would (and does) cost a premium today. There’s something certainly appealing from their analog nature–how one must load the charge holes in the cylinder and how the trigger pull actuates the entire gun. Shooting double action revolvers is pure pleasure.  

The results at 25 yards with two cylinders full of American Eagle 158-grain .38 Special Lead Round Nose bullets shot out of a Smith and Wesson Model 66.

Because the revolver’s trigger has to not only turn the cylinder but also cock the hammer, it has a long trigger pull path and usually a hefty pull weight with it. But I believe that mastering this trigger unlocks all of the other trigger styles as well. The similarity is obviously there when controlling a TDA (traditional double action) semi-auto trigger. Taking advantage of a single action or striker-fired trigger then feels like cheating. The revolver trigger also teaches you how to naturally ride the trigger reset and to forget anything about pinning the trigger–it’s a waste of time, especially on a double action revolver. 

Smith and Wesson Model 34-1 Kit Gun, .22 LR. It’s a J-frame and handles exactly like a Model 36 or Model 60, except the sights on the Model 34 are actually nicer. This gun is pure fun.

The Classic .38 Caliber

I prefer using .38 Special (and .22 Long Rifle ammo in revolvers). Because I shoot these guns purely for pleasure, I eschew the added expense of shooting [.357] magnum rounds. The classic .38 Special loadings work just fine, be they 158 grain lead, jacketed or coated round. The 158-grain bullet has been the classic loading for generations and most .38 Special revolvers’ sights and barrels are optimized for this weight of projectile. Adding to that visceral and emotional appeal of shooting these revolving contraptions is that lead ammunition leaves gunsmoke and leaves a certain smell wafting about the shooting bay. (Of which, lead ammunition also fouls up bores and part of the extra care and concern involves removing lead deposits from the bore). In addition to the classic 158 grain bullet, the .38 Special 148 grain wadcutter and 130 grain FMJ rounds are great to shoot too. Wadcutters are extremely accurate and even more gentle on recoil as their powder charges are milder. My favorite 130 grain factory load from American Eagle is a great round too. I find it to be very accurate and it groups consistently across various revolvers. Its only downside is that it does not shoot to some wheelguns’ fixed sight point of aim, something to keep in mind. When it comes to handloads, my goal with revolver loads is to stay within the classic specifications for consistency’s sake. After all, I don’t want my loads to interrupt my shooting and the sights are already regulated that way.

My Latest Madness

A few months ago and under poor impulse control, I accidentally bought a used Smith and Wesson 686-5 revolver with a four inch barrel. This fifth revision does not have the maligned “safety lock” hole on the frame, but it does have the more modern frame mounted firing pin arrangement which is actually easier to upgrade and mitigates failure from the exposed firing pin being damaged on the face of the hammer. This revolver is also new enough that it comes with a topstrap that is drilled and tapped from the factory. This only meant one thing! Time to dress up this L-frame with a red dot! My friend Caleb Giddings suggested an Allchin mount which I subsequently purchased. I picked out a mount with the Holosun/RMR/SRO footprint for my HS407C. Installing both the Allchin mount and the Holosun directly on top of the mount was extremely easy.

.38 Special loaded in cylinder
Smith and Wesson 686-5 L Frame revolver with Holosun 407C RDS. Extremely easy to mount and even more fun to shoot.

I had Tony Mayer of JM Custom Kydex bend me a dot cut appendix L-frame holster to further enable my madness. An L-frame revolver with rubber boot stocks is a very tall gun to conceal in the appendix position, but I am not too concerned about that as this gun and holster is solely for my pleasure. I can’t wait to sight this dot in and shoot some drills with this holster on a range bay. Life is too short to not enjoy shooting revolvers. And you can’t argue with the trigger control that carries over to other types of pistols.

Look at the soot that accumulates after a range session shooting mostly cast lead handloads. Yes those bullets are coated with a special coating, but they still produce more smoke and smell a certain way. It’s romantic.

Just wait until tell you how I really feel about 1911s.