Archive for the 'Firearms' Category

Survival Blog.

Many times, I’ve heard it suggested that restrictions on privately-owned sidearms developed because of Declaration III of the Hague Convention, which banned the use of expanding (mushrooming) bullets. The U.S. government has never been a signatory to that portion of the Hague Convention, but we’ve largely abided by it. Although we do have a penchant for military shotguns, which many European military leaders consider “barbaric.”  And most recently, the U.S. Army adopted a hollowpoint 9mm cartridge.

[ … ]

In later conflicts, the tradition of POWs for aviators continued, with many willfully flouting regulations. In addition to sidearms for personal protection, many pilots and other aircrewmen carried .22 rimfire guns, for hunting small game, in case they were shot down in a remote area. The Air Force had officially-issued “Survival Guns” which were available in just small numbers. But many pilots carried their own .22 pistols–most commonly those made by Hi-Standard, or Colt Woodsman pistols.

American servicemen in the Vietnam War had a fairly large number of privately-owned weapons. These were either guns from home, or captured weapons, or a variety of guns bought on the black market from ARVN soldiers. The “status symbol” guns for both aviators and ground troops were .357 magnum revolvers.  In some instances, soldiers would have family members mail them handguns or disassembled long guns. These were mostly riot shotguns, But a few soldiers asked for  — and received via mail — their trusty .30-30 Winchester carbines. To 21st Century readers this might sound hard to believe, but it really happened.

And from the comments there is this.

I had a friend who was in Viet Nam in 1968-69 and carried his personal S&W .357mag. His parents sent him several boxes of .357 HP ammo in the mail and the military stopped the delivery and sent the ammo back to his parents. The military included a letter to his parents telling them NOT to send their son anymore ammo, that they would supply him and that hollow point ammo was not allowed due to the Hague Convention, which you were right, the US did not sign that part of.

Finally, to close out the study James writes this.

In my opinion, any active duty or reserve officer or NCO should be able to carry whatever weapon he pleases, on-post or off-post, and whether deployed or stateside. But regulations say otherwise.

It’s difficult for me to see how logistics officers could possibly handle any weapon, any caliber, and a multitude of parts for those weapons.  But it seems to have worked in the past.

I agree with one commenter, who said that “I didn’t think I’d find this interesting” but I did.  I did too, very much so.  In fact, I’ve asked before – to no avail – for pictures of revolvers used in either OIF or OEF.  I do have one picture of a 1911 carried by a general in Afghanistan, who can of course carry anything he wants.

Also, I confess that I didn’t know that until the advent of the M17 that the U.S. military shot ball rounds.  I did know that, for example, John Basilone killed all those enemy troops with an M2 and a 1911 shooting ball ammunition.

But I didn’t know that we were still using ball ammo in OEF and OIF.  Can veterans confirm this?

American Rifleman.

Sometimes a POI shift is simply due to a parts change, usually toward the front of a rifle. Changing muzzle devices always requires a re-zero, but even removing and reinstalling the same flash hider or brake can shift POI. Changing a semi-automatic’s gas block or a barrel nut to support a different handguard will also affect shot placement on target. Any alteration of things that touch a barrel, especially in terms of their position, weight or pressure, will alter point-of-impact. So long as the parts change is intentional and everything is mounted and torqued securely, a simple re-zero is all that is required to deal with this shift.

Items that attach to rifle fore-ends are the root cause for most problems I see. The typical offenders are the screw ends for M-Lok, KeyMod and backer-plate accessories. At least one company includes screws that are about twice as long as needed to secure its M-Lok accessories. Thus, it is very easy to wind up impinging on a barrel or gas block, resulting in POI shifts and accuracy-related problems. The heavy-barrel contours typical of chamber areas increase the chances of this problem as you move rearward along a handguard.

I said the same thing about the affect of attaching lights directly to the barrel four years ago, and was [incorrectly] torched in the comments.

But I was right then and this author is right now.  I didn’t make it up four years ago, and this author isn’t making it up now.  Machine harmonics matters.

I would add that not only can you make changes to your rifle that affect the POI, you can make them in a way that yields reduced accuracy even if you re-zero the gun (due to additional harmonics introduced by the component, making for an unstable system).  So this would mean larger groups.

I love floated barrels, and I don’t attach anything to them.  And as all hunters know, if you have a wood stock and it gets wet during a rain, if the wood swells and you can’t take that piece of paper and slide between the stock and barrel (you know what I’m talking about), your zero is off.

I’m sure this will be a great series and I look forward to the next installments.  And don’t be fooled – when the communists go after semiautomatic weapons, they’ll come after lever action rifles too.  The communists in New Zealand did, right before they began forced vaccinations and quarantine camps of their population.

John Farnam writes at Ammoland.

I love Aimpoints and most other red-dot (non-magnifying) optics, because they’re fast, relatively compact, and with generous eye-relief, I don’t have glass in my face! Yet, SROs tell me that for their job they need more downrange detail than an Aimpoint will provide, even at ranges under 100m.

With Aimpoints (and most other red-dots), you can get a “swing-out magnifier,” but it is bulky, precarious, and gets in the way.

As a practical matter, when shooting in a congested environment without magnification, past 100m I can’t tell what I’m shooting at. In many cases, I can’t adequately identify a threat past 75m.

So, I equipped my wonderful IO (International Ordinance) M4 with a 1×4 Steiner optic (P4Xi) and their excellent low-profile mounting system.

From exchanging email with John he indicates to me that “The Steiner P4Xi that I’m using features an illuminated red dot (with variable intensity) at the center, which can be used when it is hard to make-out the traditional reticle.”

So he’s claiming that the scope he’s using gives him the shorter range red dot performance, along with the LPVO performance for longer distances if he chooses.

A very nice idea.  I don’t happen to do well with flip-to-side magnifiers.  Of course, this scope isn’t cheap.  You may have to break the piggy bank open for it.

John Snow writing at Outdoor Life discusses his time with a good number of very nice 2020 rifles and shotguns.

Very nice rifles: Tikka, Sako, Benelli, Bergara, etc.

And very nice shotguns: Beretta, CZ, Savage, and Mossberg 940 JM Pro.

Some of them way too pricey for me.

Drop comments on additions or observations.

American Rifleman.

Combat narratives from veterans who engaged Viet Cong or North Vietnamese Army units at close range during the war are filled with stories of pistols used effectively. Handguns became a necessary fall-back option when rifles or machine guns jammed or ran out of ammunition. In such desperate engagements, the stopping power of the .45 ACP round was particularly praised as a rapid and reliable solution.

Throughout the long war in Vietnam, a number of soldiers and Marines carried civilian-made sidearms. This was largely in the early years of the war, when regulations regarding personal defense weapons were more relaxed. These weapons were either brought from home or sent to Vietnam by anxious family and friends.

[ … ]

Just like in World War I, World War II and the Korean War, there were never enough M1911 pistols to meet the demand.  American troops believed in, trusted and faithfully carried it on their hip or shoulder whenever and wherever they went into combat.

My love for the firearm puts me in good company.  Regardless of your commitment to high capacity magazines, the 1911 still lives, and today earns more respect and demands more money than plastic pistols.

It shoots a man-killer round that can be converted with +P ammunition to be large-animal killers with ball ammo.  It’s slim, sleek design makes it easy to acquire and reacquire sight picture and target, its single stack design makes it easy to grip and handle (especially for someone affected with RA like me), and its reliable operation engenders trust and confidence.

While change marks the nature of the plastic pistol market, the 1911 has changed very little over the century – because perfection doesn’t need change.

So do you want to learn something about history?  History is where it’s at.  It tells you how we got where we are, why thing are the way they are, who is who, and how things got made and done.

This is a very well-produced and well-researched video documentary on the history of FN.  With it, you’ll learn how American industry (stupidly) shunned John Moses Browning and how he got connected with FN.

John Moses Browning and Eugene Stoner (we speak of these two men in reverent, hushed tones at The Captain’s Journal) are the premier firearms designers in American history.  You owe it to yourself to understand why things happened the way they did with Mr. Browning and FN.  By the way, FN-America is right down the road from me in Columbia, S.C., producing quality firearms to this very day.  I have one.

I commend this video for your viewing today.