Articles published in November, 2009
While anyone with an elementary knowledge of firearms recognizes the advantages of a handgun for concealed and close quarters defense use, the time where a battle rifle could be used for self-defense is rapidly approaching. The size and weight of a handgun provides many advantages but these factors also become a liability if one is forced to defend themselves at a distance of more than a few yards. While there exist handguns used for hunting and target shooting, those are not usually carried or used for self-defense and their effective range is still limited, especially when compared to a battle rifle.
Everyone, with the possible exception of those who still believe answers to our financial woes can be found within the democrat or republican paradigm, know that eventually those economic issues will lead to chaos in this country. When that happens, some 40 million plus who have been told by politicians that they are “entitled” to the property of others will use whatever means available to forcibly take that which they want. The logical scenario will see these folks banding together, most likely in roving bands. They will use numbers and force to steal what others who have seen this coming have set aside for themselves and their loved ones. This criminal activity very possibly could happen with the blessing of the government, for those who are stockpiling food, water, guns and ammunition are already being demonized. The Lever Act of 1917 gave government control over food and fuel storage amounts; it can and will happen again.
Using the events that occurred after Hurricane Katrina as a template, one can see that those who were armed were able to secure themselves and their property on several occasions by simply displaying a firearm when confronted by these roving bands of criminals. Of course after this happened the government moved to forcibly disarm law-abiding citizens. Simply stated, the criminals in government moved to protect their brotherhood among the street gangs and criminal element by disarming law-abiding citizens. This explains in vivid detail why the government continually seeks to disarm the public: it is easier to steal from and enslave those who are unarmed. Considering the police in New Orleans became thieves themselves continues to blur the distinction between government employees and thieves.
Several factors should go into the selection of a battle rifle; there are many platforms and calibers available and strong consideration should be given to the environment in which one believes they will operate when events lead to chaos in this country. What is the maximum range one can actually see and determine if a possible target is a threat? Is one’s environment urban or rural? Is there a chance the environment could be fluid due to attempts to move about in both environs? What is the experience level with rifles and engaging targets at distance?
Bolt-action rifles are more inherently accurate at long-range than semi-autos, especially in the larger calibers. Semi-auto rifles offer greater firepower and magazine capacity as a rule. Lever action rifles are accurate and shoot well at short to medium range, (200 yards max) mainly due to caliber selection. If one were to determine the maximum range at which they believe they would encounter someone bent on mayhem at 300 yards or less, lever guns and smaller calibers could suffice. Consideration should also be given into the amount of time a person is willing or able to devote to practice. To master a battle rifle at distances over 400 yards requires a great deal of time, effort, and projectiles down range. I have been shooting long-range battle rifles for over 50 years and certainly do not consider myself a master.
For the great majority of people interested in a battle rifle I suggest the AR-15 platform for several reasons. The platform is extremely accurate for a semi-auto. Five shot groups at 100 yards measuring less than an inch are certainly not uncommon with this rifle with some quality time at the range. Extreme accuracy can be expected if one is willing to spring for an upper designed for that type shooting. If this tweaks your interest, check out White Oak Precision here. When one thinks of an AR-15, usually the immediate thought as to caliber is the 5.56 NATO round or the .223. What I consider to be the greatest advantage is the number of calibers available in this platform with the purchase of an “upper” in different calibers which can easily and simply be attached to your existing AR-15 lower. While I consider the .223 round to be marginal for a self-defense round, the firepower, accuracy and availability of ammo makes it a must-have. There are a wide variety of uppers in different calibers, many of which can be found here. This gives the shooter the capability of several calibers with the purchase of only the basic AR-15 lower assembly. My personal choice for the off-the-shelf AR platform is Rock River Arms. I have a Rock River lower with uppers in .223 and .458 SOCOM. As previously stated the .223 for accuracy and ammo availability and the .458 for sheer knockdown power out to 200 yards. Due to the availability and price of the ammo to feed the .458, I reload my own. I like this combination for I can use the same magazines for .458 that I use for the .223. For those who choose to have some longer range capabilities for their AR platform I recommend the 6.8X43 or 6.5 Grendel calibers, which provide longer-range capabilities. With the new available ammunition and for those who reload, the Grendel gets the nod in my estimation.
While the original platform for the AR was the AR-10 in .308, uppers and lowers for this weapon are not interchangeable with the AR-15 platform. The AR-10 is a fine choice for those who like the AR but desire the versatility of the 7.62X51/.308 round. Also available is the FN/FAL configuration. This too is a fantastic rifle with great dependability and accuracy.
My personal choice in a battle rifle in .308 caliber is the M1A made by Springfield. I own more than one with full size and carbine versions known as the M1A SOCOM, which has a 16″ barrel and composite stock. The .308 is a most effective round out to 800 yards and beyond with an accomplished rifleman. Again, this caliber and platform is harder to master than the AR platform in .223. While the ideal situation is to have a caliber and platform in which one could engage an adversary at a greater distance than they could engage you, being able to hit that target is of primary importance. Again, a couple of hits with a .223 are far superior to 8 misses with a .308.
If one is available, a M1 Garand is also a very effective battle rifle. While limited in firepower due to the 8-round “clip,” the 30-06 caliber is very effective at ranges up to 1000 yards and has been battle tested for almost a century. Owning an original M1 Garand allows one to own a piece of history and a fine battle rifle as well.
Of course there is the choice of the venerable AK-47. Packing more knockdown power than the AR-15 in .223 and at greater range, it is the favorite choice of many. At one time the cost of the firearm and the availability of cheap ammo made this a great choice. The increase in price of both the weapon and ammo over the past couple of years now brings this choice into the price range of the AR platform. The discussion of which weapons platform (AR/AK) is the best battle rifle began over 40 years ago and is still the subject of some great conversations.
Having the ability and the equipment to engage, at distance, roving bands of criminals who are bent on stealing, confiscating and imposing their will on others could prove an invaluable asset in the coming months. Those who fail to plan, plan to fail.
While this article should provide some basics on selection of equipment for long range shooting, the challenges are many if one seeks to become proficient with such equipment. To that end, I am teaming up with a friend and fellow long-range shooter, Mr. James Lawson, in a series of articles dealing with optics, ballistics, bullet trajectories, wind, temperature, relative humidity and shooting uphill and downhill for those who are interested. The first of these offerings should appear shortly.
This from lewrockwell.com
It took place at a university in Virginia. A student with a grudge, an immigrant, pulled a gun and went on a shooting spree. It wasn�t Virginia Tech at all. It was the Appalachian School of Law in Grundy, not far away. You can easily drive from the one school to the other, just take a trip down Route 460 through Tazewell.
It was January 16, 2002 when Peter Odighizuwa came to campus. He had been suspended due to failing grades. Odighizuwa was angry and waving a gun calling on students to �come get me�. The students, seeing the gun, ran. A shooting spree started almost immediately. In seconds Odighizuwa had killed the school dean, a professor and one student. Three other students were shot as well, one in the chest, one in the stomach and one in the throat.
Many students heard the shots. Two who did were Mikael Gross and Tracy Bridges. Mikael was outside the school having just returned to campus from lunch when he heard the shots. Tracy was inside attending class. Both immediately ran to their cars. Each had a handgun locked in the vehicle.
Bridges pulled a .357 Magnum pistol and he later said he was prepared to shoot to kill if necessary. He and Gross both approached Odighizuwa at the same time from different directions. Both were pointing their weapons at him. Bridges yelled for Odighizuwa to drop his weapon. When the shooter realized they had the drop on him he threw his weapon down. A third student, unarmed, Ted Besen, approached the killer and was physically attacked.
But Odighizuwa was now disarmed. The three students were able to restrain him and held him for the police. Odighizuwa is now in prison for the murders he committed. His killing spree ended when he faced two students with weapons. There would be no further victims that day, thanks to armed resistance.
You wouldn�t know much about that though. Do you wonder why? The media, though it widely reported the attack left out the fact that Bridges and Gross were armed. Most simply reported that the gunman was jumped and subdued by other students. That two of those students were now armed didn�t get a mention.
James Eaves-Johnson wrote about this fact one week later in The Daily Iowan. He wrote: �A Lexus-Nexis search revealed 88 stories on the topic, of which only two mentioned that either Bridges or Gross was armed.� This 2002 article noted �This was a very public shooting with a lot of media coverage.� But the media left out information showing how two students with firearms ended the killing spree.
He also mentioned a second incident. And while I had read many articles on this shooting for an article I wrote about school bullying not a single one mentioned the role that a firearm played in stopping it. Until today I didn�t know the full story.
Luke Woodham was a troubled teen. He felt no one really liked him. In 1997 he murdered his mother and put on a trench coat. He filled the pockets with ammunition and took a handgun to the Pearl High School in Pearl, Mississippi. In rapid succession killed two students and wounded seven others.
He had the incident planned out. He would start shooting students and continue until he heard police sirens in the distance. That would allow him time to get in his car and leave campus. From there he intended to go to the nearby Pearl Junior High School and start shooting again. How it would end was not clear. Perhaps he would kill himself or perhaps the police would finally catch up with him and kill him. Either way a lot more people were going to get shot and die.
What Woodham hadn�t planned for was the actions of Assistant Principal Joel Myrick. Myrick heard the gun shots. He couldn�t have a handgun in the school. But he did keep one locked in his vehicle in the parking lot. He ran outside and retrieved the gun.
As Myrick headed back toward the school Woodham was in his vehicle headed for his next intended target. Myrick aimed his gun at the shooter. The teen crashed his car when he saw the gun. Myrick approached the car and held a gun to the killer who surrendered immediately. There would be no further victims that day, thanks to armed resistance.
So you didn�t know about that. Neither did I until today. Eaves-Johnson wrote that there were �687 articles on the school shooting in Pearl, Miss. Of those, only 19 mentioned that� Myrick had used a gun to stop Woodham �four-and-a-half minutes before police arrived.�
Many people probably forgot about the shooting in Edinboro, Pennsylvania. It was a school graduation dance that Andrew Wurst entered to take out his anger on the school. First he shot teacher John Gillette outside. He started shooting randomly inside the restaurant where the 240 students had gathered.
It was restaurant owner James Strand, armed with a shot gun, who captured the shooter and held him for police. There would be no further victims that day, thanks to armed resistance.
It was February 12th of this year that a young man entered the Trolley Square Shopping Mall, in Salt Lake City. The mall was a self-declared �gun free zone� forbidding patrons from carrying weapons. He wasn�t worried. In fact he appreciated knowing that his victims couldn�t defend themselves.
He opened fire even before he got inside killing his first victims immediately outside the front door. As he walked down the mall hallway he fired in all directions. Several more people were shot inside a card store immediately inside the mall. The shooter moved on to the Pottery Barns Kids store.
What he didn�t know is that one patron of the mall, Kenneth Hammond, had ignored the signs informing patrons they must be unarmed to enter. He was a police officer but he was not on duty and he was not a police officer for Salt Lake City. By all standards he was a civilian that day and probably should have left his firearm in his vehicle.
It�s a good thing he didn�t. He was sitting in the mall with his wife having dinner when he heard the shots. He told her to hide and to call 911 emergency services. He went to confront the gunman. The killer found himself under gun fire much sooner than he anticipated. From this point on all his effort was to protect himself from Hammond, he had no time to kill anyone else. Hammond was able to pin down the shooter until police finally arrived and one of them shot the man to death. There would be no further victims that day, thanks to armed resistance.
In each of these cases a killer is stopped the moment he faces armed resistance. It is clear that in three of these cases the shooter intended to continue his killing spree. In the fourth case, Andrew Wurst, it is not immediately apparent whether he intended to keep shooting or not since he was apprehended by the restaurant owner leaving the scene.
Three of these cases involved armed resistance by students, faculty or civilians. In one case the armed resistance was from an off-duty police officer in a city where he had no legal authority and where he was carrying his weapon in violation of the mall�s gun free policy.
What would have happened if these people waited for the police? In three cases the shooters were apprehended before the police arrived because of armed civilians. At Trolley Square the shooter was kept busy by Hammond until the police arrived. In all four cases the local police were the Johnny-come-latelys.
Consider the horrific events at Virginia Tech. Again an armed man enters a �gun free zone�. He kills two victims and walks away long before the police arrive. He spends two hours on campus, doing what is unknown. He then enters another building on campus and begins shooting. He never encounters a police officer during this. And all the students and faculty present had apparently complied with the �no gun� policy of the university. So no one stopped him. NO ONE STOPPED HIM! And when he finished his shooting spree 32 people were dead. It was the killer who ended the spree. He took his own life and when the police arrived all they dealt with were the dead.
There were many further victims that day. The shooter never met with armed resistance.
Attorney General Holder Reveals Aggressive Illegal Unconstitutional Gun Control In Response to Ft. Hood Terror Attack
This is the shit we have been warning you about. None of this plan is legal or constitutional. And this is something the NRA should be railing about. However seeing as this came out on the 18th they seem to be OK with it.
WASHINGTON — Before the Senate Judiciary Committee on November 18, Attorney General Eric Holder revealed a stunningly broad and aggressive anti-gun agenda, according to a release from the Law Enforcement Alliance of America (www.LEAA.org).
“The President of the United States asked that politicians not use the Ft. Hood attack to engage in ‘political theater.’ It appears those committed to attacking gun owners and the Second Amendment simply can’t help themselves and are engaged in blaming guns and gun owners on the heels of this terrorist attack. Sadly it looks like ‘politics as usual,’” said LEAA’s spokesperson, Ted Deeds.
After explaining and defending his decision to give enemy combatants constitutional protections and the right to public trial in civilian courts, Attorney General Holder revealed his support for a national gun owner registration scheme and authorizing the government to ban firearm possession for any person by merely adding that person’s name to the terror watch list.
The LEAA said that Holder wants new federal authority to prohibit any person on the federal watch list (reported to be 400,000 names) from buying guns and supports confiscating guns from those on the list who possess them.
LEAA’s Executive Director Jim Fotis said, “Those behind the badge don’t believe more restrictions on honest gun owners is a reasonable, practical or constitutional response to acts of terrorism. As a retired officer, I know that America’s men and women in blue want to fight terrorism, to stop terrorists; not waste time keeping records on innocent gun owners.”
NRA favorite, U.S. Senator Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.) has joined Representative Carolyn McCarthy, one of the countries most ardent gun control supporters.
Why is this important? Because the NRA bent over backwards to put Gillibrand in office. Proving once again that an NRA endorsement only means one thing, “beware”.
And lets not forget Freudenthal and the NRA.
This “tit for tat” strategy by the NRA has become part of the problem in Washington. Instead of changing the political machine the NRA has become part of the dysfunctional chaos.
We must no longer compromise the Bill of Rights. To understand how this mentality has infected Wyoming, earlier this year in a discussion of concealed-carry legislation in Wyoming, Matthew Huntington from Gadsden Legal and Mark Spungin from the state level NRA group WSSA, both left me with the impression that it was perfectly acceptable to support legislation that has a “disarm the citizens” clause. For the record the NRA regularly supports legislation like this as well.
“…inform the peace officer that he is carrying a concealed deadly weapon…The peace officer may secure the concealed deadly weapon, or direct that it be secured, during the duration of the contact between the person and the peace officer…”
Since almost every gun rights case has been won because of the fourth amendment – Why would anyone support legislation that would give up fourth and fifth amendment rights?
More important, once you give up your right to say no or nothing at all, you loose!
No more must we give in to this stupidity. In the words of Gun Owners of America, Larry Pratt – “When we politically compromise…no matter how insignificant it may appear to be, we have abdicated our responsibilities. Abdication is the work for surrendering our principles legislatively. Honor binds us to resist with all our might.”
For the sake of liberty, the Bill of Rights must stand intact and we must not compromise on its principles. All legislation must pass through this “eye of the needle”
Rumors have it that the good folks of Utah are getting ready to tell the fed to shove their unconstitutional gun laws up their collective ass’. Bad news for the NRA
We are starting to see rumors that Utah State Senator Margaret Dayton is in the process of trying to get an FFA (Firearm Freedom Act) law presented to the state congress there in Utah. Utah would be roughly number 14 to either pass a FFA law or introduce one. Go get them Utah.
How is this bad for the NRA? Well simply, if every state pass’ FFA law’s then the NRA would loose it’s big gun status in the “second amendment” supports group. Please excuse the Pun. There would in fact be no need for the NRA at that point. This writer can’t help but wonder when (Not if) the NRA will start fighting to stop states from doing this. What it comes down to is money. Think about it. If every state in the union were to pass these laws. Or at least 45 or so people in said states will begin to wonder what do they need the NRA for. Just something to think about.
By the way Good Luck Senator Margaret Dayton we hope and pray you can get this passed for your state residents.
South Carolina shoppers will get a second chance to buy tax-free guns.
The state Revenue Department sent out a reminder yesterday of the “Second Amendment Weekend.” The 48-hour tax break begins just after midnight the Friday after Thanksgiving.
Shoppers will pay no state or local sales taxes on handguns, rifles and shotguns, which can tally 9 percent. Taxes still apply to ammunition and accessories.
South Carolina had the nation’s first tax holiday on guns last year, after legislators tacked it on to a tax break on energy-efficient appliances. But the state Supreme Court threw out that law in May because of an unrelated energy amendment. Legislators restored the tax break as a one-time event in the budget this year.
Louisiana followed this year with its own sales-tax holiday for hunters in September. That break went further, applying to any item that can be used for hunting or fishing, including off-road vehicles and airboats.
South Carolina is the only state to designate a tax-free weekend during two of the year’s biggest shopping days.
How much shoppers saved in the gun-friendly state last Thanksgiving weekend is unknown. State economic officials estimated it would cost the state about $15,000.
The National Rifle Association praises the idea. But the director of a nonprofit group that advocates for changes in South Carolina’s tax structure said “there is no good tax reason to have a gun sales-tax holiday.”
“It isn’t tax policy. It’s gun policy,” said John Ruoff of South Carolina Fair Share.
Today burglars fear the homeowner much more than the police. They know the police cannot shoot them for crimes against property and cannot chase them if they flee in a vehicle. When was the last time you heard of the Supreme Court handing down a ruling in favor of the victim and their property or more authority for the police to apprehend?
Burglars are familiar with how the criminal justice system works to their benefit from slap-on-wrist judges who hand out probation five or six times to sympathetic jurors who view a burglar’s drug addiction, abusive father or alcoholic mother as a valid excuse. They are also aware of jail overcrowding and budget cuts which lessens punishments for their crime.
Hardly a day goes by that a team of psychiatrists, psychologists, social workers, behaviorists, criminologists, etc. aren’t doing Q & A surveys in prisons and jails seeking answers to antisocial behavior.
The most profound and undisputed survey I reviewed was asked of convicted burglars by an FBI behaviorist:
1. Would you B&E (break and enter) a home if you thought it occupied?
A. No — 88 percent (the other 12 percent are hard-core burglars).
2. Would you B&E a home if you knew the owner was home and maybe had a gun?
A. No — 95 percent (the other 5 percent are called cat burglars)
3. Would you B&E a home if you knew the owner was home and did, in fact, have a gun?
A. No — 100 percent (I told you they fear the homeowner).
No other survey I studied in my 27 years of law enforcement in Miami Metro Dade County did I see a 100 percent, not even for a Mother’s Day holiday.
Edward F. Davis
If you are a firearm owner and supporter and this doesn’t piss you off nothing will. NRA members need to leave that crocked group. We try not to use foul language in this blog. But, this video makes me so mad I could spit bullets. Please forgive the pun.
The evidence seems to be presented in the video that the NRA is playing politics, abandoning their no compromise policy. You be the judge.
Now Personally I take several types of anti depressants to help me sleep because of massive insomnia. I have for more then half my life. Let them try to say I am a danger because of that and try to take my guns. They will then see what dangerous really is. By the way this bill is completely unconstitutional and thus not legal. Because of that anyone trying to take my guns and ammo are attempting to steal from me. And thus I will respond with deadly force.
We here at the Guns and Ammo Enthusiast Blog would like to thank all of our veterans, currently serving in the military, and no longer serving. As well as those who have left us. We say Thank You to those people throughout Americas history. Thank you all. And Thank You to the families of said members of the military. Without you the soldiers job would next to impossible.
A warning from Australian and British Shooters, gun owners, firearm collectors, and law abiding citizens.
I am a law abiding citizen. I do not break laws. However WHEN not if this come to The United States of America I will become an instent criminal, and not turn in my firearms. Also at that point the government can have my firearms after I give them ALL of my ammunition. One bullet at a time sent to whomever comes to collect them. At about 1100 or so FPS out the barrel of my firearms. This will not happen until the below happens.