Jeremy D. Lawhorn writing at SWJ.

The Pew Research Center suggests that political polarization in the United States has reached a dangerous extreme. Divisions on fundamental political and social issues reached record levels during President Obama’s term in office. And the gaps have increased even further during President Trump’s first year. This polarization is caused by political and social entrenchment combined with a general reluctance to compromise creating extreme fractionalization. Fissures have opened up along every major demographic line including race, ethnicity, religion, place of origin, gender, and along every major political and social issue including immigration, national security, gay marriage, religious freedom, structural inequalities and many others.

The extreme fracturing along these fault lines has wide ranging social, political, and security implications for the United States. Today, the single greatest challenge to the United States national security is the growing threat posed by people that are being forced to join factions that align, if only loosely, with their beliefs, creating deep fractures and eroding the internal cohesion of the country.

[ … ]

Understanding the U.S. center of gravity’s current strengths and weaknesses is crucial for accurately assessing the U.S. national security. The Pew Research data on political polarization suggests that the U.S. center of gravity is critically weak. Analyzing these critical vulnerabilities, exposes the dangers posed by expanding fractures that are ripe for exploitation. As the population continues to become more polarized and deeper fractures emerge, the nation loses its cohesion which is one of the critical requirements. As each of the critical requirements disappear, America’s center of gravity becomes weaker. If not properly addressed, these fractures will continue to present significant challenges and have potentially devastating consequences for national security.

[ … ]

These historic lessons of entrenchment are instructive for leaders today. The difference is, that the speed at which information travels today exacerbates political polarization. As a consequence, the United States is once again at the precipice of self-destruction. While the United States is currently addressing threats to national security all over the world like those posed by violent extremist groups, a greater threat is looming at home. The homeland is primed to implode; at present, the political polarization and fractionalization driven by growing resentment over unresolved internal problems is becoming a significant vulnerability as more people are becoming radicalized along major fault lines. As people become more radicalized in their views, they become reluctant to engage in debate and prefer to take action.

The author goes on to explore race, social and economic strata.  This is an interesting essay in that it is the first I can remember from the professional military in which these admissions are made.  They all know it, but no one talks about it.

The problem with the essay is that it doesn’t even begin to address or identify the root causes of these “polarizations.”  Barack Obama didn’t polarize America.  Donald Trump isn’t polarizing America.  They are symptoms, not the disease, branches, not the roots, effects, not the causes.

These divisions have been deep in America for quite some time.  In the old South, men like James Henley Thornwell, Robert L. Dabney and Benjamin Morgan Palmer were the philosopher-theologians, and their pulpits and classrooms were the center of culture and philosophy.  They didn’t just exegete the Scriptures, they conveyed a holistic world and life view throughout not only their congregations but to the entire South.  The notion that proper governance, economics or plowing the fields for crops could be divorced from the edicts and laws of the Almighty would have been preposterous.

In the Nineteenth century social Darwinism saw it’s ascent to throne of American culture, leading to the temperance movement and in no small part the war between the states.  Forgotten was the old hymns of the church, so even though theology was undercut and infected, it took a while (decades) for the church members to begin relinquishing their beliefs.

Eventually though, it happened.  It was in no small part aided by the pagan philosophy of the American educational system promulgated by William James and Horace Mann.  If students at American universities relinquished their theology, they replaced it with something else.

In the mid-twentieth century the hippies were reading Marx, Sartre and Camus.  Several decades ago they were studying Jacques Derrida (does anything good ever come out of France?).  Today they wear Che Guevara tee shirts and take to the streets to advocate fourth wave feminism.  The self loathing is nearly complete.

The election of Barack Obama was a catalyst at the very most, and possibly just an opportunity for these divisions to manifest in the public life to an extent that would cause the writer to pen an essay discussing the fracturing of America.  It’s a quaint notion, this idea suggested by the author that we do something about this.  But the destruction of a society has taken more than a century to effect, and it will take longer to undo.

It might be tempting to simply observe that we’re adjusting and preparing for a separation.  But a separation from what, and to what?  There are two problems.  The first is geographical.  From the town council in Jackson, Wyoming, to lower state South Carolina where their ideas still hold sway locking the state into union with California, Hawaii and New York as prohibiting open carry, from the so-called “Northwestern Redoubt” to Appalachia where many still vote for the party that will give them the largest welfare check, America is in trouble.  There is an admixture of ideas, political beliefs, self interests and no beliefs at all, making a division based on geography impossible.

Deeper still is the problem with world and life view.  Even if a division based on geography was possible, with beliefs so scattered, fractured, disjointed and disconnected, with the concept of social covenant and contract outdated, and moral scruples so out-of-favor, it’s unlikely that there can be a national agreement on much of anything, much less something so significant as a covenant under which we must all live and work.  Even if there could be agreement, that doesn’t ensure fidelity to the promise.

Unlike the author, I have hope, but it is not in addressing grievances or coming together as a nation.  My only hope is in an American reformation not unlike the European reformation of the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries.  But take careful note – the first one was rather hard, required centuries to effect, required the leadership of fearless men, and wasn’t bloodless.

Via David Codrea, we learn that Mexican cops have found 166 bodies in a cartel killing field.  Perhaps some of those cartel killers are in this video.  Perhaps with out globalist masters in charge, you’ll get the chance to meet some of them face to face.

The Daily Signal:

The state of Louisiana recently held some members of the corporate social police accountable for discriminating against law-abiding Americans.

By a vote of 7-6, the State Bond Commission excluded Citigroup and Bank of America from the running for a lucrative state contract. Our reason for doing so: these corporations had introduced bank policies that restrict legal access to firearms and bank misrepresentations on those policies.

While our governor and his allies sided with these anti-gun corporations, conservatives stood together to protect the Second Amendment rights of Louisiana citizens.

Citigroup and Bank of America’s policies were grotesque attempts to capitalize on the tragedy in Parkland, Florida. In the wake of the tragedy, they proudly and publicly announced plans to restrict the distribution, manufacture, and purchase of firearms.

When called to task by our commission this past spring, these “too big to fail” companies asserted that they had no policies restricting the availability of firearms to law-abiding citizens.

When asked to defend these positions a second time, Citigroup and Bank of America then attempted to convince us their policies would have minimal effects on Louisianans, stressing that they were specifically tailored to either a particular age group or class of firearm.

A “particular class of firearm.”  Translation: BoA doesn’t think you have the right to own an AR-15, or any semi-automatic firearm, for that matter.

This is more than mere showcasing or theater.  This is a big deal, as you know BoA wanted this deal.  And the AG stood up not only to the elitist corporations, but to the own governor of his state.

Perhaps there’s a good future for Mr. Jeff Landry in politics.  I hope so.  We need more like him.

HuffPo:

This sort of technology hasn’t caught on in the U.S., so it’s something of a gamble for LodeStar, which is raising $3 million in seed funding to finalize a prototype. The company is banking on being able to disrupt the firearms industry by capitalizing on an uncertain demand for gun safety features. If such advances prove popular, LodeStar says, it could lead to an industrywide evolution that would ultimately save thousands of lives each year.

LodeStar is still ironing out the specifications of its pistol; regardless of how it turns out, it won’t be the first or only smart gun on the U.S. market. Firearms manufacturers have been tinkering with personalized locking technology for decades, hoping to sell consumers on handguns that are resistant to misuse by children, thieves or assailants.

Oh please, please, please, please let it be.  Please Lord let a company invest huge sums of money into a gun that costs too much, is too complicated, has too many failure modes, and [oh please Lord let it be] requires surgery to operate.

And remember what I said about hard hats and ketchup.

From Shooting Illustrated.

So if, like me, you believe in Genesis Chapter 2, you believe in the second law of thermodynamics.  If you don’t but still believe in the second law of thermodynamics, your belief if spurious and baseless but still useful.

Either way, entropy increases.  That means parts rust, corrode, fatigue, wear, fracture and fail.  Always inspect your guns.

So at the invitation of Fred and BRVTVS, I thought I would lay out a few disconnected thoughts on rifles and then open it up for a free-for-all where readers weigh in.

To begin with, I had been thinking about another semi-automatic rifle that is different in caliber from the 5.56mm/.223.  I’ve been trying to focus my ammunition purchases a little more towards the heavier end for 5.56mm, i.e., a 62 grain bullet.  Hornady makes a hot load for that weight.  Expensive, but good.

But taking a hard look at the muzzle velocity for even heavier rounds (like 77 gr.) I just don’t like the drop in performance.  It’s just a matter of choice, but for me, a heavier round requires a different cartridge.

Here there are a number of choices short of the .308 cartridge we’ve discussed before, like 6.5 Grendel, etc.  I don’t like the 6.5 Creedmoor for a semi-automatic rifle.  The recoil is too similar to the .308, and to me that negates the very purpose of the small caliber, high velocity, low recoil round that allows rapid sight picture reacquisition.

I’ve settled on the .224 Valkyrie for this next purchase, and more specifically looking hard at the Savage.  The fact that there is no loss in muzzle velocity compared to the 5.56mm 55- or 62-gr round is appealing, even shooting a 90 gr round.  I wanted to stop short of bullet masses much higher, like in the 120 gr range.  I want to be able to shoot a 90 gr. round at high muzzle velocity and low recoil.  This basically means the .224 Valkyrie.

This leaves me with the option of a bolt action for larger rounds, which I think is appropriate.  I do like my Tikka .270, Walnut Stock, as it is beautiful, well-crafted, and extremely accurate.  I’ve put two rounds through the same hole in paper before at 100 yards, and if I wasn’t shooting everything within one inch or less it was a bad day at the range.

But I’m thinking about gifting this rifle to someone.  I might replace it with another Tikka .270, as big game hunting requires .270, 7mm Magnum or 300 Win Mag in my opinion.  There are some other more exotic cartridges, and I’m not including those here.  The .270 is a 30-06 casing, and has plenty of power to take down anything in North America.

Upon thinking about bolt action rifles, I like the .270 and the 6.5 Creedmoor, both of which have a higher muzzle velocity and BC than the .308.  As for types, the following are my brief thoughts.

Wood Stocks (Pros): Walnut stocks are beautiful.  They make for a fine piece of furniture you would be proud to turn over to your children’s children.

Cons: They get dinged with use.  If they get wet, a free floated barrel becomes a poorly bedded barrel that changes everything if the swelling is severe enough.

Synthetic stocks (Pros): It doesn’t matter if it gets dirty or wet.  It can be Cerakoted, and some of the finishes are very nice and appealing.

Cons: Not fine furniture.

Caliber (Pros): The 6.5 Creedmoor and the .270 are literally ubiquitous at the moment, everywhere I turn, in every store I enter.  This is good.  For my budget, I don’t like to spend a wad of money to mail order ammunition.  Besides, from the weight considerations and mail expenses, I rarely save that much money anyway.  I mostly use mail order for ammunition I cannot find locally.  For everything else, I find that if I happen to have $50 left at the end of the month, I know just how to spend it.

Cons: I simply cannot find 6.5 Grendel anywhere around here.  If I cannot find it, that means I will have less, and it also means that few other shooters will have it.  For reasons my readers understand, it matters what other people are shooting.

I can also find .224 Valkyrie almost everywhere around here.  It has become a very popular round, and I expect it’s popularity to increase.

Savage is making some nice rifles, but so is Ruger.  The folks at Hyatt Gun Shop (near me and the best in the two-state area) are good in that they aren’t snobs.  If a person cannot afford a more expensive gun, they know what the good less expensive guns are and will steer the buyer in that direction.  They don’t like Remington 700 series.  They like Tikka, Savage, Ruger, Weatherby, and a number of other brands.

Finally, I like what I see in the chassis guns, but they are almost all prohibitively expensive for my tastes.  If I can get a good Savage or Ruger for 1/3 the price of a custom chassis gun, why not?  I’m not a competition shooter.

I want to enjoy the experience, whether sighting a rifle in, shooting it rapid fire, drills, range play time, or more serious applications.  I don’t want to beat or be better than someone else.  That has no interest for me.

Please weigh in with comments.  Frankly I hadn’t thought much about magazine type and long-action versus short action design in the Ruger American guns, which was brought up in the comments.  I learn a lot from the comments, especially from people who can say, “Been there, done that.”

The Washington Post:

Witnesses said they heard volleys of gunfire, and one said that a woman was shot as she entered the bank building’s lobby. There were people screaming, “Shooter! Run — leave!” in Fountain Square, a park that often hosts concerts, dancing, and food trucks.

How sad.

Now.  Wouldn’t this have gone down better if, after hearing gunfire, someone had been able to yell, “Shooter, unholster, present, kill?”

Where darkness, lies and injustice find a home.

One redditor remarks, “My god, shes like Voldemort’s soul wrapped up in McGonagall’s grandmother’s body.”

Indeed.

And is it is a wizard or a witch?  And does it really matter if it’s both at the same time?

So much for repeal of the Gun Control Act and National Firearms Act, or the legalization of class 3 weapons.  Remember when we were discussing that at the beginning of the Trump administration?

At North American Whitetail.  The most visually appealing to me is the revised Ruger American.

Fortune.com:

In November 2016, I wrote an open letter requesting that gun owners not bring firearms into our stores, offices, or facilities, even in states where it’s permitted by law. This was following an incident in one of our stores in which a customer accidentally shot and injured himself while trying on a pair of jeans. While that was bad, it could have been worse: The bullet could have killed him, another customer, or one of our employees.

In the days after I published that letter, I received threats to our stores, our business, and even on my life. It was unsettling. But these personal attacks pale in comparison to the threats that activists and survivors from Parkland, Sandy Hook, and daily incidents of gun violence face every time they speak up on this issue.

As president and CEO of a values-driven company that’s known the world over as a pioneer of the American West and one of the great symbols of American freedom, I take the responsibility of speaking up on the important issues of our day very seriously. We can’t take on every issue. But as business leaders with power in the public and political arenas, we simply cannot stand by silently when it comes to the issues that threaten the very fabric of the communities where we live and work. While taking a stand can be unpopular with some, doing nothing is no longer an option.

That’s why Levi Strauss & Co. is stepping up our support for gun violence prevention. You may wonder why a company that doesn’t manufacture or sell guns is wading into this issue, but for us, it’s simple. Americans shouldn’t have to live in fear of gun violence. It’s an issue that affects all of us—all generations and all walks of life.

That would be nice if it was true.  At a recent business meeting of cowboys in another city, I noticed they were all wearing Wrangler, not Levi Strauss.

Go back and try again, or admit that your apparel is worn by California hippies and not cowboys.