Articles by Herschel Smith

From Twitchy.

” … both the AR-15 and M4 contain barrel rifling to make the round tumble upon impact … “

I’m willing to bet you didn’t know that’s the point of rifling, did you?

I am in absolute awe

I was today years old when I was informed, by an “expert” testifying for California’s DOJ, that an AR is an area effect weapon, a single .223 round can sever a human being in half, barrel rifling is what makes a round tumble upon hitting it’s target and… https://t.co/5VZ5vIWN4c pic.twitter.com/Qnl7Qr0uQC

— Bad Weapon Takes (@BadWeaponTakes) February 11, 2023

And not only that, semiautomatic rifles are more effective than fully automatic ones.  Furthermore, it’s “very difficult to use as a defensive weapon, except as a blunt force instrument.”

It can cut a body in half, the semiautomatic version is more dangerous and effective than a machine gun, and it’s no good for a defensive weapon.

No, it’s not just you.  No one else can make sense of this mish-mash either.

At this point it makes no sense to try to decipher this gobbledygook.  But it does go to show just how badly the USMC has screwed up by promoting men like this, either idiots, or traitors, or both.  The USMC should be ashamed, but probably isn’t.

The last vestige of reliable American defensive forces has been infected, corrupted, and turned into a sham and hollow shell.  How sad.

UPDATE: Here is a rebuttal to the nonsense in the opinion of Tucker.

Charlotte Observer.

I write in support of the Bipartisan Background Checks Act of 2023. I’m a gun owner and target shooter. My guns came from licensed firearms dealers after passing background checks. It’s essential that background checks are conducted and done before an individual acquires a firearm.

The proposed bill requires that all gun transfers go through a federal firearms dealer with exceptions for gifts or transfers between family members, sharing at a range or hunting. No rights are infringed with this legislation. The language of the bill specifically prohibits the creation of a registry.

Preservation of our rights requires common sense regulation. I urge my representatives in Congress to support the Background Checks Act of 2023 and ask everyone else to do the same.

Malcolm Smith, Charlotte

I suspect Malcolm is a liar and impostor.  But then I suspect that about all such people who begin with “I’m a gun owner and I support [blah blah] gun control bill.”

If he’s not an impostor then he’s a tool and goober.  Either way we’re not too concerned with Malcolm.  This is yet another media attempt to press a narrative.  How do I know?  Because Malcolm’s letter is just that – a letter to the editor.  He’s a nobody.

And yet, his brief letter to the editor at the Charlotte Observer hit the Google news feed, as if it’s important.  After so many years of doing this I’ve learned a thing or two about how this all works.  The legacy media presses a narrative, and if they need a stooge in Charlotte to make headlines about how good so-and-so is, they’ll fabricate him out of whole cloth, or if they don’t have to, they’ll elevate his opinion to the headlines like it’s a big deal.  So what’s the big deal?

Congresscritters have reintroduced yet another universal background check bill, called the Bipartisan Background Checks Act.  It has the support of Everytown, Giffords, and every other gun control group.

But no one actually believes that criminals are going to purchase guns via a Form 4473, and the only people this affects are peaceable law-abiding men who the FedGov want to monitor.  That’s the whole point.

So this failed last year with the Democrats in control of the House.  It will certainly fail again this year.  No GOP House member wants to go on record right now backing a UBC bill.

The whole point of the post is to alert readers to the continuing efforts to infringe on your rights.  The collectivists aren’t satisfied with the results of Bruen, and don’t care about any of that.  They want your guns.

There are no good gun bills unless they undo gun control and abolish the ATF.

The M1 Carbine is a fine weapon for its intended purpose.  However, the classic legacy models are very expensive.  They’re treated as collectibles regardless of how many are in circulation. If you don’t mind having a new production model … well, they’re not any cheaper than the collectibles are. Those guns have maintained their value for many decades.

The current count is six pistol brace lawsuits.

Gun Owners of America

Second Amendment Foundation

Texas Public Policy Foundation, et. al.

Firearms Policy Coalition

Wisconsin Institute for Law and Liberty, Veterans

Firearms Regulatory Accountability Coalition

Source.

More than 20 Republican-led states, along with gun rights groups and a disabled Army veteran, on Thursday sued the Biden administration over a new rule restricting sales of gun accessories known as pistol braces.

In a lawsuit filed in federal court in North Dakota, the states said that the rule finalized earlier this year by the U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) was “arbitrary and capricious” and violated the right to bear arms under the U.S. Constitution’s Second Amendment.

This case is joined by the NRA.  I guess they arm twisted and pulled enough money out of Wayne’s account for buying suits to assist with the lawsuit.  I cannot locate a URL for the complaint.

Why on earth they’re targeting the state of ND I have no idea.  They’re not likely to be successful there, and the whole goal should be to drive this to the supreme court.  On the other hand, this might be the sacrificial lawsuit to do just that.

A much better chance comes from GOA, and the complaint can be found here.  Friend of TCJ, Stephen Stamboulieh, is responsible for this fine work.  It has been filed in Texas.

At Outdoor Life.

At close range (i.e., < about 350 – 400 yards), .308 packs a slightly bigger punch than 6.5 Creedmoor, but not by much.  I’ve known this for a long time.

The real advantages of the 6.5 Creedmoor are (a) distances longer than that, and (b) less recoil thus the ability to stay on target with your scope, and (c) the longer profile of the 6.5, meaning that it minimizes free bore and thus avoids bullet deformation, and has less drag.

This video – while somewhat chaotic at times – shows essentially the same thing.

To me this comes down to intended use and personal preference.

Since Caleb is demonstrating gunsmithing techniques, I suspect this video will be demonetized by the communists at Googletube very soon.

But I found it interesting.  I would have instinctively taken a torquing pass approach to those screws without having to be told so, just like the torquing passes you take for an engine head.

Slate is mostly a worthless rag, but this one actually brings to light more than the author realizes.

The Bruen decision was a multi-faceted decision partly because of the way the votes separated.  Sure, it got the votes it needed in the court.  We know that Alito, Thomas and Gorsuch are reliable allies.

From the comments:

“The guys at Vortex recommend not using loctite on scope bases and rings. They say that loctite acts like a lubricant on the threads and can potentially make you over-torque the screws.”

“PURPLE!!! Purple people!! Purple is for the smaller screws, like you see in firearms. Read the instructions. The blue is rated for certain sizes, as is the purple. So few know purple exist. It will save you many a headache. READ the instructions.”

And finally, this one.

“A vortex customer service representative recommended that I use clear nail polish as threadlocker and I’ve never looked back never had a problem. Handles vibration and heat like nothing and breaks loose with not much torque when actually trying to remove something.”

Nail polish is an interesting take.  I wouldn’t have thought of that.  Any takers here?

Readers know I have been closely following this issue.  Here’s an update on the Florida constitutional carry effort this session.

People who carry concealed weapons in Florida must complete a gun safety course, but that could change under a bill that has the backing of the state’s Republican leaders.

“Central to the idea of freedom is the right that we can defend ourselves against physical attack, as well as defend those that we love,” said State House Speaker Paul Renner last week after unveiling a proposed measure to allow “constitutional carry,” which would eliminate the requirement of a permit to carry a concealed firearm.

“All aspects of that permit would go away.”

The bill — HB 543 — would eliminate permitting requirements to carry a concealed weapon. Those include completion of a gun safety course and an attestation that the concealed carry permit is desired for lawful self defense.

If enacted, it would take effect on July 1.

At a press conference announcing the legislation, Renner expressed confidence that the measure wouldn’t pose a serious threat to public safety. “Anybody that’s a gun owner and uses guns knows that safety comes first.”

So this discusses the permitting scheme.  What about open carry?

The bill reads as follows.

… specifying it is not a violation for persons authorized to carry a concealed weapon or concealed firearm without a license to briefly and openly display a firearm under specified circumstances.

Oh, so they’re throwing bones to the dogs who want to openly carry to make them happy, but “the only ones” are the only ones who are permitted to openly carry their weapons.  “Briefly and openly.”  Your shirt or coat tail can accidentally go above your firearm and when the only ones come to arrest you because of that Karen-call down at the grocery store, you can plead for leniency because you really didn’t mean it, and they can take the statement of Karen versus yours and see what a prosecutor will do with it.  You can discuss it with the judge in court.

So they’ve queued up an abject failure as far as I’m concerned.  Open carry is an essential part of constitutional carry.  It isn’t constitutional carry if the state tells you how you must carry your weapons.  The job isn’t complete.  The job has been left undone.

As far as I’m concerned, they failed.  This is a cheap trick to persuade the citizens of Florida that they respect their God-given rights concerning weapons.

I’m not impressed.  I’m disgusted.  Pffft …