"Classic" Guns

I was listening to an old radio segment of one of my favorite talk shows (Tom Gresham's Gun Talk), and they brought up the subject of classic guns. It was great fun to listen to people call in and suggest what they thought should be considered a "classic" gun. "Classic" doesn't necessarily mean old, but a gun that significantly changed the firearm industry.

Of course we have the obvious classic guns like the Colt Single Action Army, Colt .45 1911, Winchester Model 1873, M4, AK-47, and the Browning Hi-Power, but my list will have guns that may not be considered "classic" but should be or will be in 50 years or so.

• Colt 1903 Pocket Hammerless
• One of the most overlooked pistols was designed to cater to the concealed carrier. Also can be considered a precursor to the 1911.

• Beretta 92
• Love it or hate it, it's one of America's longest serving military weapons. Timeless design  that is replicated by other manufacturers and ultimate reliability. 

• HK VP70
• The first pistol with a polymer frame. That's right - Glock wasn't the first.

• Remington 700
• Possibly the most iconic American hunting rifle. Available in almost every caliber and any configuration. Many consider the 700 to be the standard in which other rifles are compared, but I've never heard it called a "classic."

• SKS
• Russia's semi-automatic rifle that changed the way we looked at the carbine.

• Walther PPK 
• Not only a staple of German WWII weapon manufacturing, but an iconic movie legend. The company has changed hands several times, but the PPK has stayed the same.

• Thompson Machine Gun
• Nothing portrays the "1950s gangster" style more than the Tommy Gun. Shooting the almighty .45 ACP, it packed quite a punch.

• Winchester Model 12
• Basis for all pump shotguns to come. One of the first widely successful pumps produced. Used in WWI, WWII, Korean War, and Vietnam War. 

• Glock 17
• Police bought it because it was cheap and reliable. Now it's widely accepted as industry standard in polymer reliability....unfortunately.

• Mossberg 500
• Believe it or not, Mossberg has sold more 500 model shotguns than the 870 Remington. Did you know that? 

• Sig Sauer P226
• The often overlooked P226 is quite a workhorse. All metal frame, unreal reliability, beautifully designed and well equipped right out of the box.

• Smith & Wesson Model 686
• While the Python will always be considered a classic, the 686 will carry the torch for years to come. 

I know I've only scratched the surface of what could be considered a "classic" gun, but I'd love to hear from others what you think is a classic.

The ASJWs and the Trending Violence Problem

*Before I get to my main topic for today, I have to apologize. I intend to have another gun review before too long, however my local gun range has been closed for renovations. Please bear with me.
_____________________________________________________________________________

As I listen to the news during my morning commute, I hear of another shooting that occurred at a shopping center in Houston. This is the second shooting that's gained mass media attention in the span of 3 days - the first incident was at a mall in Washington state over the weekend.

Most of America will jump to the conclusions that these killers are mentally unstable and should have been banned from having "weapons that can kill so efficiently," and they will push the gun control agenda. But here's the thing that everyone overlooks:

*MOST OF THESE KILLERS CANNOT, AND DO NOT, OBTAIN A FIREARM LEGALLY* 

Surprising I know, but most of these crimes, including street violence, occurs with weapons that were obtained illegally. That being said, those in favor of gun control will say things like, "Well if law-abiding citizens didn't have guns, they can't be stolen by criminals and then used in crimes." To that I say:

*CRIMINALS WILL FIND WAYS TO COMMIT CRIME, NO MATTER WHAT*

This bugs me because many people that are pushing for gun control fail to see this very simple concept. I know they're tired of hearing it, but you can't stop insane people from doing insane things. I hope we eventually get to the point in our lives where we can predict and identify mentally incompetent individuals before they can act, but until then, no amount of federal background checks will change anything. Banning certain types of guns won't change anything, firearm registration won't change anything, and until the terrorist watch list has due process, it won't change anything either (even with due process it may not). The shooter in Orlando had every background check imaginable, and that didn't stop him.

You'll hear liberals say things like "this is an everyday occurrence in the U.S. We need to look at Great Britain and Australia as an example for gun control." Here are my replies:

• No, it's not an "everyday occurrence" - thank goodness. As a matter of fact, gun violence is the lowest it's been in 20 years, according to the FBI.
• The media (most of which is liberal) are covering more shootings to push an agenda - there's no such thing as non-biased journalism today. Violent crimes can happen frequently, but you only hear of the crimes they want you to hear (more on this later).
• Great Britain and Australia have a higher violent crime rate than the U.S. according to the FBI. 

So why are these mall shootings happening? Here's my honest and brutal opinion: It is becoming a trend. Every time the media attempts to push their gun control agenda, they are glorifying every shooting that occurs. The shooter's name goes down in history, even if it was for a heinous act. Some of these shooters have pledged allegiance to terrorist organizations like ISIS/ISIL, but terrorism is a topic for a different post. How do we end these so-called mass shootings? Stop glorifying the shooter. Don't say his/her name and don't tell the race of the shooter. Why does the shooter's name/race/religion matter? IT DOESN'T.

____________________Beginning Media Rant____________________

What bothers me more than ANY of this, is the violence that does occur every single day in the U.S. that doesn't get attention. The only stories that media covers are the ones that could cause riots in the streets - because that's what sells. They don't care about the insane gang-related inner-city violence numbers. They only care about violence if it could be linked to racism....and then the Armchair Social Justice Warriors (ASJWs) come out on social media for the sole purpose to make themselves look superior. 

                       *The league of ASJW's job is to sit behind their computer with their 

                         haughty attitude and share unchecked, false information while spouting off 

                         their opinions just so they can feel high and mighty. It's a very 

                         egocentric group of individuals.

But you better believe the ASJW's opinions will be the popular opinion - regardless of actual facts. They're the kind of people that didn't originally care about a topic, but then immediately switch and care too much when the opportunity arises.

____________________Rant Over____________________

I'm getting too worked-up about that. Now back to guns. The point I'm trying to make with this is that the ASJWs will not do the actual research on gun violence in the U.S. before claiming "We have a gun problem!" and posting false statistics. They won't look up the inner-city violence numbers and how many of these criminals should not even be on the street because of currently existing gun laws. They don't care about same race violence. They are only looking for a topic that they can cause unrest.

U.S. Military Sidearm UPDATE

Over a year ago, I wrote an article about the military's search for the next sidearm. Well now the Modular Handgun System is in full-swing and the options have changed quite a bit since I wrote about it last. I decided to compare my estimates from last year to what has been confirmed so far.
                                                             *Updates are in RED*

______________________________________________________________________________

*There is no particular order to this list. I will not pick favorites*

• Springfield XD - While I love a good all-metal design, I feel like the next generation pistol will favor polymer, mainly due to weight, ergonomics, and ease of production. The XD is similar to a Glock because of it's cult following. Not so easy on the eyes, but it offers many different models and calibers to choose from and includes an added safety feature that the Glocks don't have. I personally am not a huge fan of the XD, but it meets the specified requirements - all without breaking the military budget.
• UPDATE: The Springfield XDM 9mm and .40 is currently being tested

• Smith and Wesson M&P - Again, another pistol with adaptable ergonomics and slender frame. Comes in a variety of calibers and models. you can get these pistols with or without the frame-mounted safety. Either way, it is a very small safety that won't get in the way. Trusted by police forces all throughout the nation.
• UPDATE: The M&P .40 is currently being tested

• Beretta Px4 Storm - In the early 2000's, Beretta released their second full-sized pistol. Primarily for the purpose of becoming the next military sidearm for the now-defunct Joint Combat Pistol program. With it's polymer frame, interchangeable back straps, accessory rail, and adoption by numerous police forces in the U.S., the Px4 is building a solid reputation as a great all-around gun. It is a little thick, but its large, beefy external safety is not a mandatory option.
• UPDATE: No longer in consideration. Originally to be carried over from the Joint Combat Pistol trials, but it appears that the military wants a hammerless design.

• Glock - I cannot give an exact model that would be used, but I still believe that the military would value the capacity of the 9mm over a 45. So maybe a Glock 17 or 19? A valued feature of the Glock would be how flush the gun sits. It is a very "snag-proof" design. And now the 4th generation pistols have the ability to swap out the back straps. The biggest issue with the Glock is that soldiers will not have the ability to tinker with the gun to make it "perfect," therefore I feel like many military Glock fans would be upset with this.
• UPDATE: The Glock 17 and 22 Gen 4  are both currently being tested

• H&K 45c - Already used by several branches of the military. This has everything you could want in a new pistol design, including the long sought-after 45 caliber bullet. However, the price tag will be this weapon's downfall. I'm sure it'll be less under military contract, but I can't imagine the military paying close to $1,100 per handgun.
• UPDATE: No longer in consideration. H&K instead submitted their VP9 and VP40 instead of the 45c

• FN Five-Seven - I am adding this to the list only because it was designed to not only meet the requirements of the new military sidearm, but also be an alternative to the 9x19 NATO round. I feel like if the gun didn't cost an arm or leg to buy, our soldiers would already be carrying this weapon. The Five-Seven uses a unique cartridge, the 5.7x28 mm. It is a long and skinny round, designed to act like a rifle caliber, but for a pistol. It holds 20 rounds and has greater effective range and stopping power than a 9x19 NATO round. After holding this weapon, you can tell that this gun was built around ergonomics, it's possibly one of the most comfortable pistols I have ever felt.
• UPDATE: Status unknown. FN has reportedly entered a striker-fired design, but they have not officially announced a model or caliber. Could still be the Five-Seven...

• Beretta APX - Beretta has finally done it. After years of criticism of not making a striker-fire pistol, they finally have an answer. The Beretta APX. This pistol falls right into the "no external safety, split trigger, polymer, striker-fire" category. Price hasn't been announced yet but we could probably expect that it falls around the $600 mark. It's a little late to the game, but maybe it'll get some military consideration. Only time will tell.
• UPDATE: Still in consideration. Both in 9mm and .40

• FN FNP - The FNP is right there with the H&K 45c when talking about look and feel. But it's a little more reasonable when it comes to price. And talk about options! This pistol comes in about as many configurations as you can imagine. I feel like the military could have a field day just building what they want. This is one of the few pistols that have replaceable frame rails that allow it to be rebuilt after extensive use. This will drastically increase the gun's service life and end up saving money. 
• UPDATE: Probably no longer in consideration. This was a good option before I knew about the apparent striker-fire only rule.

______________________________________________________________________________

BUT WAIT! THERE'S MORE!
Since I wrote the last article, there are several new contenders to recognize. I'll give a one sentence opinion on each:

• Sig Sauer P320 MHS 
• I love this gun, I could see this winning easily.
• CZ P-09 MHS 
• Great gun! Cannot argue with this option. I feel that the only thing that could hold the CZ back from winning would be the overall size - it's rather large.
• STI-Detonics Defense STX 
• Another attempt to go back to 1911. Do we want that?
• Taurus PT24/7 OSS 
• I just don't see it passing the NATO endurance tests. Sorry Taurus. 
• Walther PPQ M2 
• Good option, but for some reason it's not compatible with standard PPQ mags already in production. Strange move on Walther's part.

I am also a little surprised that the military is conducting tests with the .40 S&W variants of the pistols. Especially after the FBI studies on the reduced lifespan of service weapons. 

I won't go into too much detail about each gun in consideration at the moment, but if we get a confirmed short-list of options, you better believe I'll have a lengthy opinion on the matter. 

Sig Sauer P238

I wish .380 ACP ammo was less expensive. The only thing I wanted to do after shooting a box through the P238 was to open up another and keep firing. This accurate little gun has got to be one of the most comfortable subcompact pistols I've ever shot. The single-action trigger is crisp and relatively light. I didn't have the extended 7-round magazine (with pinky extension) but the pistol was still very easy to control. After about 20 rounds, I even forgot that my little finger was hanging off the bottom of the gun. Just like with any new firearm, there was a suggested break-in period of a few magazines, but even during the break-in, it functioned perfectly and had no issues. The reviews on the P238 are stellar, but one cannot truly appreciate how comfortable it is until you shoot it for yourself.

Some people might be asking, 

    

 "Hey - why didn't you get the P938 and have the extra power of a 9mm and you could keep the sub-     compact size."

Well, I could've done that. But after reading hundreds of reviews and EVERYONE raving about how comfortable the .380 was, I just couldn't turn it down. It seems that this gun was built around the .380 ACP cartridge, just like the 1911 was built around the .45 ACP, so getting this Sig in 9mm would just be...wrong. Although I would enjoy the 9mm ammo pricing. Another added bonus of the .380 is the very light recoil spring. The slide operation is so light that anyone could rack it with ease.

Also, anyone saying that the .380 is not a good self-defense round can go jump off a cliff. Modern self-defense ammo in .380 has come a long way since it's introduction, especially in the last few years. Just a simple Google search for .380 ballistics testing will show that it can easily stop a threat when called upon. Now, is it as good as a .45 ACP for self-defense? Of course not, but the .380 allows me to be comfortable and confident when shooting, and that is more important to me than single-bullet stopping power. Especially since I'll be doing way more range shooting than protective shooting.

Back to the P238. It's got spectacular sights for a gun so small. Usually a tiny pocket pistol like this has microscopic sights, but not the Sig. The P238 has 3-dot tritium night sights which are extremely visible in low-light situations. The Nitron grips that came on my model gun are good but I'll probably be replacing them with a textured rosewood before too long. It does have a manual safety (like most 1911s) that can lock the slide, if it's not already been cocked, and disconnects the trigger. 

I'm going to have a hard time finding something that I dislike about the Sig. Like with any of my personal guns, I'll edit this post if any issues arise, but I'm sure I'll have many good years of service with the P238. It's certainly a welcome addition to my firearm family.

Review of Sig Sauer P238...Coming Soon

For the past year or so, I had been looking for a great concealable pistol. I wanted something that could easily fit in a pocket holster and/or not be uncomfortable to carry on a day-to-day basis. While I love the 9mm round, I wanted something that was as compact as could be, while still being comfortable to shoot. I had my heart set on the Walther PPK/S. With its timeless look and legendary reliability, I felt like it was the natural next step. It was also important that I could hold the gun comfortably with my little finger hanging off the bottom frame (which is almost an inevitability with a pistol this size). Well, I found myself wandering into a gun store like I frequently do, and this little guy caught my eye.

This is the Sig Sauer P238. It's a subcompact, single action, all metal pistol chambered for 380 ACP. I picked it up at the counter and was immediately impressed by its weight and how easy it was to rack the slide. I was also very impressed with the 3-dot tritium night sights that come standard. This particular model has what Sig calls a Nitron finish which helps prevent scratches. And one of the best things about it is that it's based on the 1911 platform - this means it has an external safety which allows it to be carried "cocked and locked." After several months of consideration, the Sig eventually took over as my number one option over the Walther. *It's worth mentioning that the Walther is incredibly hard to find due to the manufacturing changing hands this year.

As you can probably tell from the pictures, this will soon be my new concealed carry gun. I'll eventually be taking this out to the range and giving it a very thorough review. Normally, I would've taken this gun shooting immediately after I purchased it, but our local range is undergoing renovations for the next month. 

*Sigh* The review will have to come later.

She can't ban guns, can she?

I know that many of you don't care about politics. Honestly, I didn't used to. I felt like my opinion in politics fell on deaf ears, so why should I even bother? What's the point of voting in the state of Alabama when I already know it'll always be a red state? Because this year, there's someone who is running for office that will absolutely use every chance she gets to destroy the gun culture in America.

What is the "current gun culture" in the United States? It's getting up in the early hours of the morning in frigid temperatures to go hunting to put food on the table. It's taking a bunch of friends out to the range and enjoying a day of shooting sports. It's having long discussions over drinks about what caliber is best. It's what will keep you safe when everything else goes wrong. What makes the gun culture in America different from other countries? It's that it's guaranteed.

Or at least it should be. Most people in the U.S. agree that the Second Amendment to the Constitution guarantees the right of an individual to keep bear arms. This was verified in 2008 by the Supreme Court decision, District of Columbia vs Heller. However, Hillary Clinton disagrees with this. She has openly said "the Supreme Court got it WRONG on the Second Amendment." Why would she say that? Maybe she knows better than any of the Supreme Court Justices (sarcasm). She interprets the Second Amendment to apply only to the armed services (or "militia") and doesn't apply to the average citizen, even though the words say, "right of the people" and "shall not be infringed." So when a person says to me "Look, she said she's not 'coming for your guns'," I'm calling BS. Hillary has said multiple times that we need to "look to the Great Britain or Australia model" as an example for what we should have here in the United States. Have you looked at what happened in Australia? Gun ban and confiscation.
"Well she can't do that without going through the Congress." Haven't you heard of an Executive Order? President Obama has been abusing this power for the last year after he's been unable to do much about gun control during his term.

Now, I don't believe she'll just come in and confiscate weapons. Here in the U.S. (especially the south) that's a good way to start an uprising. But she'll find different ways around this. First thing is that she'll appoint her Justices to the Supreme Court and get the Heller decision reversed - so now the Second Amendment will only apply to the militia. What does this mean? This means citizens can keep and bear arms only as long as she says it's okay. That won't last long.

With the courts on her side, she'll then decide that gun manufacturers can be held liable for the actions of a killer. Once that decision is made, ALL of the gun companies in the United States will go out of business or move out of the country - which of course will prompt strict importation laws against guns and gun related products. No company would insure a gun manufacturer in the U.S. Scared yet? It gets better.

Re-instatement of the old Clinton Gun Ban from the 90's, except this time there will be no "work arounds" and no sunset clause. Semi-automatic weapons like the AR-15 will become illegal to own overnight (already happened in places like California and Massachusetts) and possibly even semi-automatic rifles in general because "you don't need a semi-automatic rifle to hunt deer." Magazines with over 10 rounds will also be banned - and magazine confiscation has already begun in California. But wait! There's more!

As the violent crime rate inevitably increases (Great Britain model), the Democrats will say "well it must be due to all of those semi-auto handguns because they kill faster." ......and I think you get the picture. It won't take long at all for someone like Hillary to change the gun culture in America. It certainly won't be for the better.

So now I bet you're wondering, "What can I do to change this?"
Unfortunately, there's very little only one person can do about this. The best thing you can do is inform your friends. Correct those who are uneducated about guns and make sure they know the facts. Educate anyone who wants to preserve their right to keep and bear arms and get them to vote in November. Yes - one vote doesn't do much, but what if everyone thought that way? What about 50 votes? 1,000 votes? You need to get to the polls and bring your friends. You don't like the choices on the ballot this year? Too bad. Unfortunately, Mr./Mrs. Perfect isn't running this year. If you're a one-issue voter and that issue is on guns, there's only one real choice.

CZ Scorpion Evo 3 (S1)

See... I'm not as boring as you thought.

As you probably already know, the Scorpion Evo 3 is a small, lightweight "submachine" gun chambered in 9x19mm Parabellum. I had the golden opportunity to shoot the Evo at one of my more recent range visits. Of course, this was a semi automatic variant (the S1). Don't be fooled, just because it's the civilian version, doesn't make it any less fun to shoot. This particular version also lacked the stock which did occasionally make it tricky to aim.

Now, I have been known to rant about an AR-style pistol. I don't like them, but this was different. The 9mm cartridge is perfect for this weapon. The gun weighs in at around 5 lbs. with a full magazine and you hardly notice any recoil. You better be careful though, it's very easy to lose track of how much ammo you've gone through. Before you know it, you'll be like me - reaching for another box of ammo that isn't there.

The trigger and grip are wonderful, the function is flawless, and the finish looks and feels extremely durable. The standard sights are okay - but if you were able to put a red/green dot on there, you'd have one amazing set-up. 9mm ammo is cheap nowadays (compared to .223 or most other rifle calibers) so you don't have to worry about draining your wallet every time you go to the range. You can also afford to fill up your magazines all the way!

*I don't usually fill up my AR mags to 30 when I shoot. Keeps me under control.

I can see why there's a bit of an internet obsession over this rifle. You CAN'T NOT fall in love with the Scorpion once you shoot it for the first time. There's a reason it's in the armory of so many forces all over the world. 

My Response To Academy Sports + Outdoors

The following is my reply to the absurd new policy Academy Sports + Outdoors that removes Modern Sporting Rifles (AR-15s) from public view. The rifles are still available, but you have to ask a person at the gun counter to retrieve them from the back. Academy is doing this so they don't "offend" any of their customers. Well... now they've offended more people than they ever would have if they left the MSRs on the shelf.


To whom it may concern,

Up to this point, I have always been a loyal customer of Academy Sports & Outdoors. My family and I have spent hundreds, possibly thousands, of dollars on ammunition and shooting supplies. However, after the stance that you have taken on Modern Sporting Rifles, I will be looking at alternative businesses when I need to make my outdoor/hunting purchases. Your new policy on "hiding" AR-15 rifles is not only confusing, it's just downright absurd. If you are doing this so that you don't offend customers, you are not succeeding in your goal. As a once regular customer, it makes me feel uncomfortable when I have to ask an employee to see items "from the back" -  like I'm participating in some shady dealings. I would like to thank you for years of quality products and service. I hate that my business with you has to come to an end... all because of outrageous policies that are designed cater to the nonexistent 1% and offend a vast majority of your customers.

Best Regards.


Feel free to copy some of this verbiage and send it to Academy's info desk on their website.
Remember to stay civil when commenting. Law abiding gun owners are above name-calling and swearing.

Gun Reviews - What I Look For

As I've said before - I love guns of all kinds. I feel like I've gotten past the "I hate all *insert manufacturer here* because they all *insert derogatory statement here."

Some might be saying "Not so fast! You've already said that you hate all GLOCKs!"
Wrong! I said that I hate the marketing of Glock being the "perfect pistol." As a weapon I believe that its a fine gun. Very reliable and very durable - but I personally wouldn't have one and the reasons change from model to model.

When I review guns, there are several key things that I look for.
First thing item is ergonomics. If a gun isn't comfortable to shoot, there's no point in purchasing it. For example, I've shot several small pistols where the pinky extension pinches your finger with every shot. It kinda ruins the experience if you have to wince in pain with every shot.

Second most important feature for me is the trigger. Not necessarily the weight, but how smooth it is. I also want to be able to easily predict the trigger break. Items like trigger weight and reset are important, but minor compared to how smooth the trigger is and breaks. Have you ever pulled the trigger on a Ruger American Pistol? Once you do that, you'll know exactly what I'm talking about. It's even more impressive when you find a double action revolver that can do the same thing.

Third: Off-the-shelf features and value. First impressions are everything, and like a car, more features are always a plus. What comes with the gun? Not necessarily how many magazines come with the it, but what kind of sights come on it. Does it come with a rail? How about interchangeable grip options (see ergonomics)?

Fourth: You can't purchase a gun if it's unreliable. If a gun malfunctions while I'm testing it, I will mention it. A gun needs to be 100% reliable, and if it can't make it through the 100 or more test rounds I put through a gun, there's no reason to think it will last for thousands of rounds and it will not get a recommendation from me.

While there are still some other features I might look at, these are four items that are taken into serious consideration. Rest easy, if I can't shoot a gun long enough to write a thorough review, I won't write one. Simple as that.

Mind of a Proud Liberal (on guns)

This election season is driving me crazy. I've hardly been able to talk about new products because I'm too busy watching and waiting for some gun-bashing politician to get all fired up over something that they know little to nothing about. The mind of a liberal truly is quite an awe-inspiring thing.

Here are some of my observations about the anti-gunners:

• They think that you can buy a gun at any gun store without background checks.
• They believe that gun purchases at gun shows don't have mandatory background checks.
• They think that any person can purchase a fully-automatic weapon.
• They think that you can have a gun shipped to your house.
• They think that guns "just go off."
• They think that guns are more responsible for shootings than the person pulling the trigger.
• They want to ban guns, but in case of an emergency, call for police to bring a gun.
• They call people that allow an infant to accidentally fire a weapon, "another responsible gun owner."
• They refuse to admit that gun violence is at a 20-year low (according to the FBI).
• They refuse to admit that accidental child shootings are at an all-time low (according to the FBI).
• They may not know because they're just spouting off what they hear from anti-gun media.
• They refuse to think that there are such things as "responsible gun owners."
• They think that magazines take minutes to swap and a mag restriction will save lives.
• They think that removing guns from the hands of non-felons will keep felons from committing crimes.
• They fail to see the words "right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed" in the Constitution. 
• They think the NRA gets all their money from gun companies but fail to recognize the NRA's 5+ million members. Not to mention the millions of supporters.
• They call a murder/suicide a "mass shooting."
• They think that so called "assault rifles" make up a majority of shootings in the U.S. (when in fact it makes up less than 1% of all gun crime)
• They fail to see that gun free zones don't work.

.... And my personal favorite:

• They call gun owners paranoid but then say things like "mass shootings are becoming commonplace." 
• If they are so "commonplace," why don't you want to be prepared to defend yourself and family? 

As you saw in my last post, you can't just say any of these things to an anti-gunner. If you post a comment they don't like, you'll be silenced. If you try to talk to them, they will walk away. 

Why do they avoid the conversation?

Because they know they'll lose.

The Coalition to Stop Gun Violence Banned Me on Facebook

I shouldn't be surprised that an organization that wants to get rid of second amendment rights also seems to want to ignore the first amendment as well. There is no free speech on the Coalition's Facebook page. I made one comment as a rebuttal to an incorrect fact that one of the group members had posted. There was no name calling. There was no foul language on either side. All of a sudden, not only can I not view my post on their page any more, I can't continue the intellectual conversation that I had started having. All of my commenting privileges have been removed.

This seems extremely typical of the anti-gun media. They see something they don't like - they repress it. They ask a question and receive a pro-gun answer that they don't expect - that answer is removed. All of a sudden, they will comment as if gun owners are left "speechless."

Sounds a little like Katie Couric doesn't it...

Muzzle Discipline

"Don't point the muzzle of a gun at something that you're not willing to destroy."

It's a quote uttered by many who train or teach firearm safety. I have witnessed many people who would call themselves "gun experts" who show blatant disregard for possibly the most important rule of gun safety. If you are at a range and you see someone point the muzzle of a gun at you or someone else, SPEAK UP! Let that person know what they did, and even though they may say something like, "I'm not going to shoot anyone" or "It's not even loaded," you will have made an impression in that person and they may think twice about how they handle their weapon. If a person gets defensive about the issue, it's only because they're embarrassed. You should NEVER feel bad about embarrassing someone that's being unsafe. A possible alternative is someone getting accidentally shot.

I cannot stress this enough - if you see someone acting irresponsibly with guns (anywhere, not only at the range) and they repeatedly make you feel uncomfortable, LEAVE THE AREA. So what if you're not done shooting? So what if you're in the middle of a conversation with other people in the room? There is no reason to risk your life in the hopes that they won't make a critical mistake. There is no reason the barrel of any gun (yours included) should sweep across anything you don't intend to shoot- even if the gun is unloaded- because we've all heard the saying: "Everyone is shot with an 'unloaded' gun."

There's a video circulating right now of a man who was at an indoor range who was trying to see if the laser on his gun was working. He had the bright idea of testing it by putting his hand in front of the barrel. And yes, he did press the trigger, and yes, he did shoot a hole in his hand. These type incidents cause many responsible gun owners to shake their head in shame.

Be alert. Stay safe out there.

9mm vs .45 ACP

Yes. I'm going there. Light and fast vs. heavy and slow. This debate can get more heated than a GOP primary. This is an argument filled with hatred and bias, but it's a fun topic if you're willing to have a civil discussion. I'll be discussing some of the pros and cons of both rounds as a defensive round, then giving you my personal opinion on the issue. I will also be discussing the rounds as if they were fired from the same pistol. Don't worry, I won't dive into history of the cartridges - there's no point. I'm sure anyone reading this will only want to know which is considered "best" and not really care about how it was developed.

9x19 Parabellum - Also known as "9mm Luger" or just "9mm"

Pros:

• Higher velocity than .45
• "Flatter" shooting
• Greater effective range than .45
• Greater penetration
• 9mm magazines generally have higher ammo capacity than .45
• Rounds are less expensive
• Less recoil (depending on weapon size)
• Increased accuracy due to quicker follow up shots
• Universal - can be found most places in the world

Cons:

• Over- penetration (FMJ rounds)
• Not always a "one shot stop"*

.45 ACP

Pros:

• Bigger bullet = bigger hole than 9mm (when comparing full metal jacket rounds)
• Subsonic ammo is great for suppressing
• Safer to be used in close quarters
• Rounds are less likely to over-penetrate walls and endanger bystanders

Cons:

• Effective range is less than 9mm
• Due to lower velocity
• .45 ACP magazines' capacity is usually under 10 rounds.
• Rounds are generally more expensive
• Greater recoil = longer time to re-aquire target

Conclusion:

While some people are shouting at me through their computer screen about the "legendary" stories of the .45 and how it saved their life from a charging Triceratops, others will look at these pros and cons and say something like, "Well, it looks like I have more reason to carry a 9mm over a .45." I share your opinion! While I love the .45 and everything that it's accomplished throughout the years, it just doesn't have as many positives as the 9mm. Especially now with advances in defensive ammo. Recent developments with hollow point rounds means you can have a bullet with equal or greater stopping power as your .45, but have twice the number in your magazine. To me, that's a no-brainer.  

Don't listen to the crazy, biased stories that you may hear when debating caliber. *The truth is, there is no such thing as a "one shot stop" or "perfect" round. Every cartridge performs differently in different scenarios. Plus, if you're in a self defense scenario, odds are you won't stop at one shot. You'll probably end up shooting 2-3 times anyway even if the criminal has already been incapacitated. Shot placement is the most important thing when acting in a self-defensive manner. If you can shoot better with a .45 than a 9mm, then by all means, get a .45! This article is based on condensed and over-simplified cartridge facts. Personally, when I take these facts and pair them with my own comfort level of shooting, 9mm will be my choice every time.

What's your pick? Why?

Remington M887 Nitro Mag

It's time for my first review of a shotgun. As you may know from my last post, Remington is no longer producing this product, and for me, it's quite a shame. But it can still be found in some stores and on the used gun market. This is the 887 Nitro Magnum pump-action shotgun.

Remington is known for creating possibly the most iconic and mass produced shotgun in the world, the 870, so when they added another pump shotgun to their lineup, reviews were mixed. When originally introduced, people thought the 887 was produced to eventually replace the 870...which was never was the true purpose. The 887 is almost entirely different than the 870. It was geared more towards waterfowl and to be that gun that can withstand the tough conditions of the average hunter. One of the gun's most interesting feature was the "ArmorLokt" coating on the barrel and receiver which protected all metal exterior surfaces from rust. It also has several other improvements that I like. It has fiber optic sights, an oversized pump release that can be activated with numb fingers, a SuperCell recoil pad, and the ability to shoot up to 3.5 inch shells. The 887 is also lighter than your standard 870, which makes for easy target acquisition.

The 887 isn't without it's flaws. Since the gun has a rotating 3-lug lockup, it can occasionally get stuck and require quite a bit of force to open - however this is a relatively rare occurrence. I've also found that field stripping this weapon is extremely easy. Reassembling it is a different story. I feel like if I had two additional hands, maybe I could put the action and pump back together in under 5 minutes, but since I don't have two additional hands, reassembly takes a while. But overall, I've really enjoyed my time with this gun. I've shot many other shotguns, but this one is still my favorite. Despite being criticized and discontinued, I'll continue to sing it's praises for as long as I own it.

Bushmaster Carbon 15

Freedom Group is really starting to tick me off. It seems like every time I want to review one of their weapons, the company immediately decides to discontinue it. It happened with the Remington 887 Nitro Mag shotgun, the economical Remington 770 rifle, the R51 pistol (that I was SO excited for but they ended up ruining it), and now they may have discontinued this: the Bushmaster Carbon 15. I need to write about this thing before it becomes impossible to find.

Before I finish my rant, let me say this: THESE ARE GOOD FIREARMS (except the R51). Unlike the other guns mentioned, I haven't been able to confirm that the Carbon 15 has been discontinued. The Bushmaster website is under construction and the catalog is showing a very small production line. So who knows at this point. I'll update this when I know for sure.

**Update: I have been officially informed by Bushmaster that the Carbon 15 is no

longer in production. It can still be occasionally found in stores.**

The Bushmaster Carbon 15 is a platform that very few manufacturers dare to even attempt. The upper and lower are completely made of, you guessed it, carbon fiber (amongst other materials). The only other AR manufacturer that comes to mind that has had success with a carbon fiber platform is Windham Weaponry. According to several sources, carbon fiber builds hold up to tolerances above that of aluminum with the added benefit of being very light. This AR weighs in at only 6 lbs. That's super light compared to most ARs. Of course once you add modifications like a quad rail, grip, good scope, etc, you'll get back up to average AR weight in no time. The Carbon 15 is rated for 5.56 rounds and the barrel is a 1/9 twist rate which stabilizes bullets as heavy as 69 to 70 grains. This gun's MSRP is about $900 but you can pick one up for $700 or less at most retailers. Just make sure that you get the second generation Carbon 15. The first generation had mixed reliability reviews and it also lacked the dust cover and forward assist.

So far, the gun seems very versatile and I've not had any issues so far after several hundred rounds. The only thing that I had to replace was the "red-dot" sight that it came with. See the one in the picture? That one. Don't even bother installing it. Give it to charity or trash it and install something (anything) else. It's blurry, ugly, unnecessarily large, has a battery cover that WILL break immediately, and makes the gun top-heavy. I've since added an inexpensive TruGlow 5 MOA red/green dot open sight and it's a 100000% improvement. I've also added an aluminum quad rail to the front with a MAGPUL forward grip. Even after the additions, the light weight of the rifle makes shouldering and maneuvering very easy. You may need to install some flip up iron sights eventually, as this is an ORC (Optics Ready Carbine). I'm excited to get out and do some more shooting. Powdering clay targets on a dirt hill is extremely fun with this guy.

If you are wanting a lightweight, durable, reliable, optics-ready AR-15, take a look at the Bushmaster Carbon 15. Hopefully you will still be able to find this rifle for many years to come.

Finding the Middle Ground?

I occasionally find myself going over to the dark-side of social media - I have, on more than one occasion, caught myself looking at the different pages of anti-gun groups like the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence and the Brady Campaign. I feel that if we want to make a compelling argument for the rights of gun owners, we must understand what the other side's viewpoints are. Anyone can sit there and say "YOU'RE WRONG and I'M RIGHT," but nothing ever gets resolved with this method. I see ignorance on both sides of the argument. Gun control activists see gun owners as a bunch of irresponsible, law-breaking thugs and rednecks who want nothing more than to use their guns to provoke violence at every turn. Gun rights activists see the other side as uneducated, naive, constitution-hating liberals who only want to take away their guaranteed right to self defense. The interesting part of this is, we all want the same thing! We all want to see the end of unnecessary violence.

There's always a shred of truth behind all stereotypes. Of course, gun control activists don't hate the Constitution, nor are all gun owners irresponsible. But guns are a hot topic of late. There could be a gruesome chainsaw murder in a quite town in Kansas, but we'll never hear about that from mainstream news sources. However, if a gun accidentally goes off and strikes a person in the toe, the media marks that up as another mass shooting and the entire anti-gun population erupts into one giant hate-filled rage mass. When the hate-filled rage mass descends on social media channels, the gun owners of the U.S. get defensive (pardon the pun). Pro-gun people see that the person who accidentally fired a round was acting irresponsibly and press for more gun education. The other side refuses to see this as a learning opportunity and want to remove the gun in question from everyone due to one person's action. They want confiscation. 

This reminds me of a scene from the movie classic, Full Metal Jacket. The movie follows a group of Cadets who are at boot camp and training for deployment to Vietnam. During this time, one of the Cadets breaks a camp rule by bringing food into the barracks. From then on, if that Cadet did anything worthy of punishment, the entire squad would have to share in his punishment. After breaking several rules, the squad had enough of being punished for his mistakes and turned against this particular Cadet and initiated him by hitting him repeatedly with bars of soap in pillow cases while he slept. Gun ownership is exactly the same! Law-abiding gun owners all cringe when we see someone acting irresponsibly with guns. When we hear of a young child who accidentally shoots his/her sibling with their parents' gun that wasn't stored properly, we want to bludgeon said parent with a pillowcase filled with bars of soap...numerous times. We don't believe it's fair to be held accountable for someone else's actions...and it's really not. 

The anti-gunners see a person being irresponsible with a firearm and immediately think that every gun owner is as irresponsible as the perpetrator.  

The part I can't wrap my head around is that the anti-gun community seem to completely ignore the person who uses a gun for harmful purposes. Every time something bad happens and a gun is involved, the Brady Campaign kicks things off with the headline: "Another victim of gun violence" and then continue to talk about how "the gun" murdered two people in an alleyway in South Chicago. They completely miss the most important part of the story - the person. 

How could we have stopped this person from committing a crime? 
**This is where our opinions differ.

Anti-Gun Response: Remove the deadly tool that the bad guy used in hopes that he cannot/will not commit crime.

• This answer to me is like saying, "Let's revoke Vin Diesel's driver's license so that he can no longer drive so fast and furiously."

Pro-Gun Response: Use an equally deadly tool to defend yourself and others from the bad guy.

• Make criminals think twice about pulling a knife on you and have the ability to take control of the situation at hand.

For me, the choice is easy. I feel that a majority of people that are anti-gun don't know much about the tool that they want to ban. It's often very apparent. I'd love to have a conversation with a person that has experience with guns AND is still against civilian ownership of firearms. Those people are in short supply. I wonder why?

Which side do you stand with?

Should Buy Your Child a Firearm?

I've seen people argue about this often. A father (or mother) takes their son (or daughter) of 9 years to a gun shop and buys them their first .22 LR rifle. Afterwards, other parents hear of this purchase and protest that no child should ever be given a gun as a present.

This is an issue where I can see both sides of the argument rather clearly. Yes - a child is inexperienced, and from the outsider's point of view, it's the equivalent of giving a child a knife and telling him to go play with it. While on the other side of the argument, if a parent purchases a rifle for a child and takes the time to teach the kid how to maintain, use, and store their rifle properly, an accident is far less likely to happen. I agree with the latter. You hear stories about kids that accidentally shoot their parents or friends. If you look into it, most of these accidents occur because their parents were being irresponsible and left a firearm where their inexperienced child could get their hands on it.

This is my stance: If you want to teach your child about guns and gun safety, do so. But know that you, as the parent or guardian, have the responsibility to practice the same level of gun safety that you teach. You may be more experienced, but that doesn't make you immune to firearm accidents.

Bothersome MHS Dilemma

As you may or may not know, the Modular Handgun System (MHS) is the process of researching and testing an of-the-shelf, commercial pistol to replace the current sidearm of the United States military. The Beretta M9 has been the primary sidearm since 1985 and is due to be replaced within the next year or so. The trials have commenced and some of the media has decided to interview some of our soldiers and ask their opinion as to what should be the next military sidearm.

Now, before I go any further, I need to clear the air about one thing: I am not a soldier. I have not served in the U.S. armed forces. My hat goes off to all of those who've made sacrifices for our country. However, most of the people that I know personally in the military don't know much about guns. I know what you're thinking; "The guys and girls in the military must know everything there is to know about guns." They know how to operate their own tools very well, outside of that, they all seem to come out of the military knowing only a couple things about guns, and they are:

• The Beretta M9 sucks
• We should've kept the Colt 1911 .45
• I want a Glock

If asked why.....

• Why does the M9 suck?
• "The slide is known to break and injure the operator."
• "The parts feel cheap and can cause jamming."
• Why keep the 1911?
• "It's a legend. It also shoots a .45 which is more effective than a 9mm. Just one shot can kill 5 terrorists."
• Why a Glock?
• "Because it's the best weapon in the world and never jams. Everyone knows that."

Sounds a little funny doesn't it? Let's start by looking at the claims against the M9. In the 1980's, an early model M9 did indeed brake and the slide came off and hurt a Marine. There was only one instance of this happening.... almost 30 years ago. Yet many soldiers believe that this could happen to their sidearm today. The model used today has many improvements over the one used back then. As for the jamming, you can thank the U.S. Government. To cut military costs, the U.S. Government decided not to buy M9 magazines from Beretta, and buy them from a third party instead. Surprise, surprise! The magazine caused all kinds of failures in the gun - which made our soldiers blame the gun itself. We've since switched back to Beretta magazines, but those off-brand ones are still floating around.

Why keep the Colt 1911? I mean, I will not argue the weapon's history. It's a beautiful piece that shot the almighty .45 ACP cartridge. But I seriously doubt that a soldier would rather give up their 16 -round 9mm magazine for an 8-shot .45 ACP. The FBI recently decided to switch back to 9mm after using .40 S&W for years, this is because new expanding 9x19 ammo is so good, it's proven to be just as effective as the .40 with the right loads, they value the greater capacity, and it causes less wear and tear on service weapons. There has been talk of the military using expanding ammo, and if this happens, you can forget any talk of a larger caliber. 

Why do Marines want a Glock? EXCELLENT QUESTION!!! I don't know if I can answer this, but I'll try. Let me go back to my original story. The media has decided to interview some of our soldiers and ask their opinion as to what should be the next military sidearm.  Their response was somewhat comical to me. 

One (newly enlisted) soldier stated "The Beretta just felt cheap and poorly made" and then he goes on to say, "I prefer a Glock 17 or 19. Those or the .45 variant."

Really guy? You think the all-metal, Italian-made weapon feels cheap and your comeback gun is a Glock?!? The Glock doesn't even have a fully-supported chamber! I bet he doesn't even know what this is or what one looks like! Nor does he know the model number for the .45 variant. All he knows is that he "wants a Glock 'cause it's the best." So many people that come out of the military feel this way. And I CANNOT for the life of me figure out why they believe this. If you're wondering where all this frustration is coming from, just check out my first-ever blog post. 

But I do agree that it's time for a weapon that is a little more modern to take the reigns. Sig Sauer has an entry, Beretta has a new gun, FN has a new gun, and Ruger might enter their new gun in the trials as well. And I suppose if Glock wants to enter...I can't stop them. I guess we'll just sit back and see what happens.

Suing a Gun Manufacturer

As you may have heard recently in the news, the parents of the children that were tragically killed in the Sandy Hook Shooting are now attempting to sue Freedom Group for the damage that their rifle caused while in the hands of Adam Lanza on December 14, 2012.

-------------------------------------------------

Right off the bat, I'd like to say that few of us will EVER know the pain and suffering that the parents of these children are going through, and we hope we'll never have to. Whatever my opinion may be on this matter, those inflicted have my deepest sympathy. 

-------------------------------------------------

I'll keep my opinion on the matter brief. The gun manufacturer (Bushmaster - whose parent company is Freedom Group) cannot, and shouldn't, be responsible for the actions of the individual who used their product to inflict harm. The shooter, Adam Lanza, is the only one who committed a crime and is the only one that should take responsibility for his actions. However, many say that his mother, if she were alive, would also take responsibility because she was the original owner of the rifle. But in my opinion, those who are filing the lawsuit are doing so because they believe that these weapons "should" be banned. As it stands today, an AR-15 is legal to own and legal to produce by manufacturers, like the one in question, who have the proper licensing.

A lawsuit will not succeed unless the company in question has done something illegal or if there was negligence with the production of the item. It is also stated everywhere and known by EVERYONE that an AR-15 should be handled with care and that any misuse of the firearm can result in severe injury or death. Bushmaster has complied with any and all regulations set forth by the U.S. Government. They would not be able to produce their products otherwise.

I feel strongly that the parents of the Sandy Hook victims are not satisfied, and cannot be satisfied, until they see someone being punished for their actions. However, since Adam took his own life along with his mothers', the parents are left with a sense of injustice. They feel that in order to move on with their lives, someone must be to blame; someone/something that is still alive. But the hard truth is, this lawsuit is absurd. This court case is like blaming Ford for the damage caused by their vehicle in the hands of a drunk driver. Anyone with half a brain can tell you that the person is to blame, not the car. How is this scenario any different? Cars cause many more fatalities in the United Sates than the AR-15 rifle. How about blaming the alcohol for getting a person drunk? This list goes on and on. The blame game will never cease until money is exchanged...and I hate saying that.

I have a small feeling of distrust with these parents. We've all seen it time and time again, where the affected attempt to profit off of their misfortune. I'm not saying that this is, in fact, the truth. But it's become so commonplace in America, I can't help but think that may be a reason for the lawsuit. Especially since this case is just now being brought to our attention - 3 years afterward. I apologize if this is not the truth. I am only speaking my mind.

I'd love to hear some opinions.

Kimber K6

This is definitely an interesting twist. Kimber, the 1911-obsessed gun company, has decided to enter the revolver market. The K6 was introduced at the SHOT Show a few weeks ago and now has been the talk of most gun publications.

This compact package weighs in around 23 ounces unloaded, has a 2-inch barrel, and is available in .357 Magnum (of course, it will also shoot .38 Special). The K6 also has several grip configurations. 

This pistol is definitely for those who enjoy the "air-weight" line of guns and don't mind dealing with some heavy recoil. While I can appreciate what Kimber is doing with the K6, I still have a hard time thinking that it's worth the $900 MSRP. There are many revolvers with the same level of quality that are $200 - $300 less than the Kimber. Before I jump to any more conclusions, I need to see one for myself, and preferably shoot it.

SHOT Show Update

I apologize for not "live-streaming" the SHOT Show like I intended. There ended up being way too many products for me to be as thorough as I wanted to be. So after I'm done gathering more information, I'll be posting a product summary of the most anticipated products. I'll also be introducing something that has also been needed... PICTURES!!! But I'm not going to leave you hanging, here's a quick summary of something that was introduced at the SHOT Show that will make any AR person drool.

The Smith and Wesson Sport 15 has been a solid and reliable weapon for someone that is new to the AR platform. Even someone who is an experienced AR shooter knows not to disrespect the S&W Sport 15. At a price point around $700, it's very tempting. And now, it's getting even better!

Introducing the M&P Sport II. This new rifle has all the features of the original AR, but now has a forward-assist and a dust cover. Not sure if it has optics out-of-the-box but it at least comes optics-ready. But that's not the best part! By far the best part about this particular rifle is that it costs EXACTLY the same as the first generation M&P Sport. This gun received some pretty major upgrades and it can be yours for the same price. Do you need any more convincing?

P.S. - I am reviewing my notes and will be writing about the hot items from SHOT. Check back soon for more updates.

*UPDATE: There seem to be a lot of people selling the first-gen model of this gun at great prices! If you don't care too much about these new features, grab a first generation Sport 15 while you can! Prices won't be much better than they are right now.

Executive Action on Guns

Executive action should never be taken to undo rights set forth by the Founding Fathers and the Constitution of the United States of America. This action would break any oath the president swore before taking office. It was intended that if any president were to break their oath of office, that they be removed from their position.

... something to think about.

I don't know what Obama has in store for us over the next week, but we better be prepared for anything.