Here's an awesome comparison of a normal, H type, 9mm, and rifle buffer tested on a few different gas systems in 1000fps video. From Vuurwapen Blog
Thursday, July 29, 2010
Wednesday, July 28, 2010
Wednesday, July 21, 2010
Tuesday, July 20, 2010
The Three Largest Threats to Gun Rights
When you think of the people who want to take your basic American right to shoot cans with an AR and a 100 round C-Mag, the usual culprits are damn liberals, Obama, those Brady idiots, and the crooked ATF that's out to get you. While all of those groups would certainly love it if you melted your collection, took up yoga, and renounced pumpkin and can shooting forever, their tired rhetoric is fairly ineffective these days. The groups I will talk about are far more dangerous than loudmouth lobbyists, as these threats come from inside the firearms world, and are deeply ingrained into it. These people discredit honest gun owners, and do their best to make the gun owning community live up to the stereotypes the gun grabbers love to showcase in their arguments. As a smart, active firearms enthusiast it is your duty to identify and speak out against these people that are mindlessly dragging us down and eroding our rights.
Threat #3 - Obese Carry Advocates
This kind of hypocrisy undermines one of the core values of the right to bear argument, the ability to defend yourself with a firearm. All over the net you will find these behemoths instructing you on how to conceal your .460 S&W under an XXL "Co-ed Naked Bass Fishing Team" T-shirt. These people apparently value their lives so much as to carry a firearm in their low crime Midwestern town, where the chances of being mugged are roughly the same of being attacked by an elephant, yet they ignore heart disease, which kills 40% of people in America? One can't help but question their motives here, especially to a gun grabber that probably despises McDonald's every bit as much as barrel shrouds and Black Talons.
Threat #2 - The Open Carry Movement
I've already gone on too long about this group and their crusade to lose the right to carry, so I'll just do a quick refresher. The worst part of this group as it consists largely of people that also fall into threat #3 and threat #1. The carrying of firearms in suburban Starbucks is on the same level as going into the same Starbucks and shouting racism/obscenities at the top of your lungs in an attempt to retain your 1st Amendment rights. All either can do is annoy people and cause a scene, as you can't gain a right you already have. A right unexercised is a right lost? Go ahead and ask the next OCer you see to explain the 3rd amendment for you, ask him what he is doing to not lose that right, and you will quickly realize they didn't read that far in the Bill of Rights.
Threat #1 - The Uneducated
While these people are a detriment to any cause no matter what side they fall on, they are particularly bad within the firearms community, as they are often the loudest. Most of the bomb throwing extremists fall into this category, and you will often find them labeling anyone who doesn't agree with them a "typical liberal" while reading ridiculously obvious pro-gun propaganda that is every bit as bad as something Michael Moore or the Brady Bunch would come up with. This polarizing of the argument will be the ultimate downfall of gun rights, as it attempts to force the middle to the outside, instead of being a live and let live person that may not be interested in firearms, but wouldn't want to remove that right. Wave a gun in their face at Starbucks or repeatedly tell them they will be killed by a home intruder unless they have a gun and guess which way they are going to sway in the poll booth.
So what can you do as an intelligent, honest gun owner that can see that there is more to the issue than the black and white the extremists want to portray? Don't sit back, tell these idiots within our own community to keep their mouths shut, and show the other side that the majority of the gun owning community are normal, educated people that enjoy guns for sport and recreation, and may choose to use them as protection. The majority of the community aren't 300 pound men wearing cowboy hats and AR-15s to city council meetings, and it's our duty to portray gun owners as the normal, level headed people that we are.
Threat #3 - Obese Carry Advocates
This kind of hypocrisy undermines one of the core values of the right to bear argument, the ability to defend yourself with a firearm. All over the net you will find these behemoths instructing you on how to conceal your .460 S&W under an XXL "Co-ed Naked Bass Fishing Team" T-shirt. These people apparently value their lives so much as to carry a firearm in their low crime Midwestern town, where the chances of being mugged are roughly the same of being attacked by an elephant, yet they ignore heart disease, which kills 40% of people in America? One can't help but question their motives here, especially to a gun grabber that probably despises McDonald's every bit as much as barrel shrouds and Black Talons.
Threat #2 - The Open Carry Movement
I've already gone on too long about this group and their crusade to lose the right to carry, so I'll just do a quick refresher. The worst part of this group as it consists largely of people that also fall into threat #3 and threat #1. The carrying of firearms in suburban Starbucks is on the same level as going into the same Starbucks and shouting racism/obscenities at the top of your lungs in an attempt to retain your 1st Amendment rights. All either can do is annoy people and cause a scene, as you can't gain a right you already have. A right unexercised is a right lost? Go ahead and ask the next OCer you see to explain the 3rd amendment for you, ask him what he is doing to not lose that right, and you will quickly realize they didn't read that far in the Bill of Rights.
Threat #1 - The Uneducated
While these people are a detriment to any cause no matter what side they fall on, they are particularly bad within the firearms community, as they are often the loudest. Most of the bomb throwing extremists fall into this category, and you will often find them labeling anyone who doesn't agree with them a "typical liberal" while reading ridiculously obvious pro-gun propaganda that is every bit as bad as something Michael Moore or the Brady Bunch would come up with. This polarizing of the argument will be the ultimate downfall of gun rights, as it attempts to force the middle to the outside, instead of being a live and let live person that may not be interested in firearms, but wouldn't want to remove that right. Wave a gun in their face at Starbucks or repeatedly tell them they will be killed by a home intruder unless they have a gun and guess which way they are going to sway in the poll booth.
So what can you do as an intelligent, honest gun owner that can see that there is more to the issue than the black and white the extremists want to portray? Don't sit back, tell these idiots within our own community to keep their mouths shut, and show the other side that the majority of the gun owning community are normal, educated people that enjoy guns for sport and recreation, and may choose to use them as protection. The majority of the community aren't 300 pound men wearing cowboy hats and AR-15s to city council meetings, and it's our duty to portray gun owners as the normal, level headed people that we are.
Wednesday, July 14, 2010
Wednesday Gun Porn
Another interesting plinker, this one from Diomed of silencertalk. What was once your average Mark II now has a 13" integral suppressor, a Practical Solutions M11 compact stock, and a custom made bolt lock.
Tuesday, July 13, 2010
Why 10mm?
Before we get into why I am a fan of the cartridge, and why you should be too, let's begin with it's development. On April 11, 1986, an attempt to apprehend William Russell Matix and Michael Lee Platt, two men who had embarked on a deadly crime spree in Miami, turned into one of the most well known and tragic shootouts in FBI history. Although the agents outnumbered the criminals 8 to 2, 2 agents were killed and 5 more were wounded. The agents were armed with .357/.38 revolvers and 9mm handguns, while the two suspects were armed with a 12ga shotgun and a Ruger Mini-14(.a 223 rifle). Matix was shot six times before he was killed, Platt 12 times. One of the shots from a 9mm had struck Platt early on, going through his arm and into his chest, stopping an inch short of his heart. Even after being struck Platt went on to kill agents Benjamin Grogan and Jerry Dove and injure several other agents. Had that shot with the 9mm penetrated the extra inch into his heart it was thought the deaths may have been avoided, and that was the birth of the FBI's attempt to switch to the potent 10mm auto.
The 10mm auto had already been in development for a few years before FBI studies, but didn't really take off until they became involved and a few handgun manufacturers including S&W and Glock began manufacturing handguns chambered in the round. In the end the FBI decided the recoil of the 10mm was too much for their agents, and opted with the .40 S&W, a round developed from the 10mm case, but shortened, and loaded to less pressure. Does this mean the 10mm is obsolete and you shouldn't use it because the FBI doesn't? Of course not. No matter how you look at it the 10mm is better than the "big 3" (9mm parabellum, .40 S&W, .45acp) ballistics and performance-wise. In all of the caliber debates I've heard, the same things usually come up at one point or another, and here we will break them down one at a time.
1. Shot placement is all that matters
This is common amongst the advocates of 9mm. It seems to be their belief that since all pistol calibers are somewhat anemic in the grand scheme of things (which is true to a degree) that you may as well choose something light and easy to shoot. This is clearly not true, or those agents in the Miami shootout could very well be alive. That wasn't the only incidence of a bullet falling an inch short of the heart, spine, etc. The bottom line is a hit with a good 10mm defense load, whether it be on a human, animal, or ballistics gel, is going to be more effective than a weaker caliber. 6" of penetration can easily be the difference between life and death.
2. But what about controlled follow up shots?
Often after the shot placement argument closely follows "well I can hit the target twice with 9mm in the time I can hit it once with .44 mag, so it must be better." Again, if the bullets don't penetrate it's not going to make a difference. But when looking into studies of shootings in the US, I found this:
The Number of Gunshot Wounds Does Not Predict Injury Severity and Mortality Cripps, et al, The American Surgeon 75:1
This is an analysis of 531 patients treated at an Oakland, CA hospital from 2004 to 2006.
• Of those who arrived to the ER alive, only 13.2% went on to die.
• Mortality rate from single head shots was 50%, multiple hits was 38%
• The rate for a single GSW anywhere but the head was only 9%, multiple hits was 8%.
• The mortality rate for a hit to the thoracoabdominal cavity was 13.6%, for multiples 12.9%.
• The mortality rate for a hit to an extremity only was 1.5%, multiples 0%.
• Their overall mortality rate for a single hit anywhere was 16%, for somebody hit more than once 11%.
Obviously it doesn't mean that multiple hits will increase the chance of survival, but it shows that single aimed shots are more likely to work than several unaimed shots.
3. The recoil of (whatever caliber is larger than my choice) is too much!
Anything you train with is going to feel normal to you. If you spent your life only shooting .22lr you would probably think 9mm is a bit harsh. In a high stress situation though recoil isn't going to be much of a factor. Either you are on target or you aren't, if you can't manage to draw and aim it doesn't really matter how much the weapon recoils, it's not like your shots are going to start landing 3 feet high from 8 feet away. It's more of an issue of comfort, if you are anticipating/afraid of the recoil before you shoot it's going to affect your accuracy. Of course you can train with any caliber and become comfortable with it, but it's that fear or a first time shooting experience that pushes people away from the large calibers back to their 9mm or .45acp comfort zone.
4. It's too expensive to train with (x caliber)
Obviously any handgun used for defense no matter what the caliber is useless without training. This is the argument I understand the least. If you value your life enough to own a handgun for your own self preservation how can you deem the extra cost of ammunition not worth it? 9mm, .40 S&W, .45 acp could all very well be adequate 99 times out of 100, but what about that last time? It's really a small price to pay in the long run.
Whether it be a mountain lion attack or a ccw draw, there are very few variables you can control. You will never know how you react under that stress, no matter how much you have trained. Caliber choice is the easiest variable to control, and all other things being equal nobody with the slightest bit of sense will argue a hit with a lesser cartridge will ever be more effective. With 10mm handguns available in the same size, weight, and capacity as their 9mm, .40, and .45 counterparts I find it to be an obvious choice. If the situation ever arises where you need to rely on your gun, can you ever see yourself wishing you had 9mm over the 10mm auto?
update: test results from FBI ballistics tests
The 10mm auto had already been in development for a few years before FBI studies, but didn't really take off until they became involved and a few handgun manufacturers including S&W and Glock began manufacturing handguns chambered in the round. In the end the FBI decided the recoil of the 10mm was too much for their agents, and opted with the .40 S&W, a round developed from the 10mm case, but shortened, and loaded to less pressure. Does this mean the 10mm is obsolete and you shouldn't use it because the FBI doesn't? Of course not. No matter how you look at it the 10mm is better than the "big 3" (9mm parabellum, .40 S&W, .45acp) ballistics and performance-wise. In all of the caliber debates I've heard, the same things usually come up at one point or another, and here we will break them down one at a time.
1. Shot placement is all that matters
This is common amongst the advocates of 9mm. It seems to be their belief that since all pistol calibers are somewhat anemic in the grand scheme of things (which is true to a degree) that you may as well choose something light and easy to shoot. This is clearly not true, or those agents in the Miami shootout could very well be alive. That wasn't the only incidence of a bullet falling an inch short of the heart, spine, etc. The bottom line is a hit with a good 10mm defense load, whether it be on a human, animal, or ballistics gel, is going to be more effective than a weaker caliber. 6" of penetration can easily be the difference between life and death.
2. But what about controlled follow up shots?
Often after the shot placement argument closely follows "well I can hit the target twice with 9mm in the time I can hit it once with .44 mag, so it must be better." Again, if the bullets don't penetrate it's not going to make a difference. But when looking into studies of shootings in the US, I found this:
The Number of Gunshot Wounds Does Not Predict Injury Severity and Mortality Cripps, et al, The American Surgeon 75:1
This is an analysis of 531 patients treated at an Oakland, CA hospital from 2004 to 2006.
• Of those who arrived to the ER alive, only 13.2% went on to die.
• Mortality rate from single head shots was 50%, multiple hits was 38%
• The rate for a single GSW anywhere but the head was only 9%, multiple hits was 8%.
• The mortality rate for a hit to the thoracoabdominal cavity was 13.6%, for multiples 12.9%.
• The mortality rate for a hit to an extremity only was 1.5%, multiples 0%.
• Their overall mortality rate for a single hit anywhere was 16%, for somebody hit more than once 11%.
Obviously it doesn't mean that multiple hits will increase the chance of survival, but it shows that single aimed shots are more likely to work than several unaimed shots.
3. The recoil of (whatever caliber is larger than my choice) is too much!
Anything you train with is going to feel normal to you. If you spent your life only shooting .22lr you would probably think 9mm is a bit harsh. In a high stress situation though recoil isn't going to be much of a factor. Either you are on target or you aren't, if you can't manage to draw and aim it doesn't really matter how much the weapon recoils, it's not like your shots are going to start landing 3 feet high from 8 feet away. It's more of an issue of comfort, if you are anticipating/afraid of the recoil before you shoot it's going to affect your accuracy. Of course you can train with any caliber and become comfortable with it, but it's that fear or a first time shooting experience that pushes people away from the large calibers back to their 9mm or .45acp comfort zone.
4. It's too expensive to train with (x caliber)
Obviously any handgun used for defense no matter what the caliber is useless without training. This is the argument I understand the least. If you value your life enough to own a handgun for your own self preservation how can you deem the extra cost of ammunition not worth it? 9mm, .40 S&W, .45 acp could all very well be adequate 99 times out of 100, but what about that last time? It's really a small price to pay in the long run.
Whether it be a mountain lion attack or a ccw draw, there are very few variables you can control. You will never know how you react under that stress, no matter how much you have trained. Caliber choice is the easiest variable to control, and all other things being equal nobody with the slightest bit of sense will argue a hit with a lesser cartridge will ever be more effective. With 10mm handguns available in the same size, weight, and capacity as their 9mm, .40, and .45 counterparts I find it to be an obvious choice. If the situation ever arises where you need to rely on your gun, can you ever see yourself wishing you had 9mm over the 10mm auto?
update: test results from FBI ballistics tests
Wednesday, July 7, 2010
Friday, July 2, 2010
NAA Mini Revolver Bayonet
I've always felt what was really holding the NAA Mini Revolver back as a good carry gun was lack of choices in bayonets. Apparently I wasn't the only person thinking that, and Laserlyte is finally jumping in on this untapped market.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)