Guns

Long distance pistol shooting

/ hsoi / 1 Comment

Another from John Farnam, this time discussing how times are changing and how people with pistols in a self-defense situation may be required to make longer-distance shots, say out to 50 yards.

John mainly discusses the growing trend for compact pocket pistols:

With the currently-exploding market in “concealed-carry” pistols, manufacturers are focused on producing small guns. Many such pistols, though otherwise perfectly functional, have short slides and, thus, short sight-radiuses. While suitable as back-up pistols, these short guns, with their limited range, need to be re-evaluated with the foregoing in mind.

As a main, carry pistol, a four-inch (or longer) sight radius is now a critical feature, if we are going to have the range capability that is likely to be acutely necessary for first-responders. Our sincere affection for small pistols must thus be tempered with the necessity of honestly confronting these new challenges.

And granted, the majority of self-defense shootings happen at a distance from 0 to 5 yards. But while that may be the statistical majority, you just know your day will be the exception.

This is one of the main reasons I stopped using XS Sights’ 24/7 Express Big Dot sights on my carry gun. Can you get precise hits out to 25 or 50 yards with those sights? Well, I guess it depends upon your definition of precision. For instance, there’s video of James Yeager hitting pepper poppers at long distance. So yes you can hit stuff, but the question that video doesn’t answer is where on the popper did the bullet hit? Maybe you didn’t mean to shoot him in the leg, but that may be where it hits and what good is that? I recall one day while I had XS Sights on my gun being at a Jason’s Deli having lunch with Daughter. We were sitting about as far away from the order line/cashier as possible, certainly over 25 yards. I wondered to myself if I’d be able to hit someone at that distance and I thought no I wouldn’t. Granted, it’s probably more commentary on me than the sights, but the reality is that big dot front sight is huge and these sights are meant for fast and dirty acquisition, not precision. Yes they say to do a 6 o’clock hold at that distance but spending a good deal of time on the range trying to do it their way and I still would find it hard to hit the A-Zone in the head of an IPSC target at even lesser distances. If you can do it, great, you’re obviously better than me. I switched to a set of Dawson Precision sights (0.100″ red fiber front, fixed black rear) and have been most happy, including the ability to be far more precise at longer distances while still being fast at close distances.

Just shoot him in the leg

/ hsoi / 2 Comments

It’s a common question to ask why, in a self-defense situation, you can’t just shoot someone in the leg (or arm or other non-vital area).

John Farnam provides a proper response to that question, and why it’s a poor idea.

When defending yourself with gunfire, it is always because you perceive an imminent, deadly threat to yourself (and/or other innocent parties), and other, lesser options are precluded, ie: unlikely to be efficacious, unavailable, or not practicable.

Any time you shoot someone, you are employing ‘deadly-force,’ because no one can accurately predict the ultimate damage a bullet (any kind of bullet, striking anywhere on the body) will do. You may attempt a shot to an extremity, and you may even be successful, but your bullet may still sever an artery, and, as a direct result, the person may bleed to death in short order, even when that outcome was not your ‘intention.’ Even when death does not result immediately, permanent disablement/impairment/disfigurement surely will. No one ever ‘recovers completely’ from a gunshot wound!

Deadly force is deadly force. Know and understand that you cannot shoot anyone in a ‘non-deadly’ manner!

This is not only a consideration from an anatomy standpoint, but a legal one as well.

In defensive shooting, our goal is, of course, to end the criminal’s violent behavior as quickly as possible. To that end, we shoot with sufficient precision and volume to accomplish the goal. After that goal is accomplished, additional shooting is unnecessary, and thus unjustified.

The incontrovertible, inescapable maxim is: Shot placement that is most likely to stop violent, criminal behavior quickly is also most likely to beget fatal wounds. For better or worse, the two outcomes are inseparably linked! Accordingly, purposely attempting to inflict ostensibly non-fatal wounds may well actually prolong the fight, exacerbating risk-exposure yourself, other innocent parties, even the VCA himself.

In addition, attempting to hit arms or legs of an aggressively animated attacker represents a far greater challenge, even for competent marksman, than does aiming for the chest and trunk. Thus, attempting to ‘shoot him in the leg’ is unlikely to be successful to begin with!

You must, at long last, confront the unavoidable fact that employing gunfire in self-defense, no matter your intent, is likely to result in forceful death, or permanent, crippling injury, to the VCA in question. Who cannot accept, nor deal with, that stark reality, should have naught to do with guns!

The last part is true. You must be able to accept the consequences of this potential action.

Read the whole thing.

Reloading speed

/ hsoi

Not that any of you probably care but…. seems I can reload about 200-300 rounds an hour.

I wanted to load about 500 rounds of 9mm and it only took me a couple hours to do. Not to shabby. It’s good to know the pace I can move tho, for future work planning.

One thing I can say. Most of my loads were using the Berry’s 115 grain plated RN DS bullets. However, I opted to load 100 of the Hornady 115 grain FMJ RN. As well, I had a box of Speer 115 grain TMJ RN’s from when I bought all the reloading gear off dockbot/exodus. I figure what the hey, might as well load those up too. So the recipe remained the same, save the bullet I used. I’m going to see if I can chrono them and see if any differences are to be found.

Hey Mr. UPS Man

/ hsoi / 4 Comments

Look what the UPS man brought to me:

1000 Hornady 9mm 115 grain FMJ RN bullets. This is Hornady’s “free gift” from purchasing their Lock-n-Load AP. Whoo!

16.5 lbs. of bullets.

I did some caliper measuring and comparison to the Berry’s 115 grain RN DS bullets. The Hornady are a hair more rounded and the Berry’s a hair more “pointed” shaped, but all really seems negligible. I’m going to use my 9mm plinking load recipe and load 100 of these for a trial run.

Speaking of which, I know I’ve been talking about needing to load 2000 rounds for a class in October, and that hasn’t changed. However, next weekend I’ll be taking AT-6 Pistol Workout and I think loading 500 rounds for that class would be a good testing ground. I’ll take 500 rounds of factory with me as well, just in case, and a backup gun, just in case. The 100 with the Hornady will be a part of that run.

If not for arms, where would civil rights be today?

/ hsoi / 5 Comments

A little late in presenting this but given my giant computer snafu I have some time to catch up on my reading while I wait for files to move and copy.

David Kopel writes an informative piece on how the civil rights protesters of the 1960’s may have been non-violent, but they knew people wanted them dead. There was only one way for them to preserve their own lives: to have guns and let it be known they had them.

Later, I worked for years in the Deep South as a full-time civil rights organizer. Like a martyred friend of mine, NAACP staffer Medgar W. Evers, I, too, was on many Klan death lists and I, too, traveled armed: a .38 special Smith and Wesson revolver and a 44/40 Winchester carbine.

The knowledge that I had these weapons and was willing to use them kept enemies at bay. Years later, in a changed Mississippi, this was confirmed by a former prominent leader of the White Knights of the KKK when we had an interesting dinner together at Jackson.

[…]

We were opposed by white racist organizations (e.g., Nazi Party) and various youth gangs of many sorts. My staff and I received countless death threats, there were arson attacks on our offices, and, on one occasion, men with weapons came to my home and told my wife and children that they intended to kill me. (I happened to be at work.)

Again, I was glad I had many firearms and, again, we guarded our home and let this be known. We responded to hate calls on the telephone by telling the callers we were quite prepared for them.

For Salter, the right to own a handgun was apparently a crucial part of his ability to exercise his right to defend himself and his family, which was a sine qua non of his ability to stay alive in order to exercise his First Amendment rights to advocate for enforcement of the Fourteenth Amendment.

Yet in modern Chicago, decent law-abiding citizens are forbidden to own handguns. As I detailed in my amicus brief in McDonald v. Chicago (pages 39–45), many people find that a handgun is best choice for family defense, especially in urban areas such as Chicago. As the history of the Civil Rights Movement demonstrates, the denial of the constitutional right to own a handgun could endanger other constitutional rights, particularly the rights of community organizers.

Read more here.

Berry’s Tour

/ hsoi / 2 Comments

A guy goes on a tour of the Berry’s Mfg plant.

I use Berry’s bullets in my reloading, so that was neat to read.

And to boot, the blogger is a homeschooled kid. Try having field trips like that in public schools!

Home invasion defense handgun choice

/ hsoi

Via SayUncle I’m pointed to this 3 part series on home invasion defense.

The intentions are good, but I take issue with a few things.

From part 2

Handguns are more portable and easier to keep with you, and can be kept on your person if they are not too large.

If they are not too large? Can someone show me a handgun that is too large to keep on your person? OK, maybe some of those “pistol AR’s” or something like the Ruger Charger. But most of your traditional “full sized handguns” (think 1911 with a 5″ barrel) are able to be kept on your person. Concealed even.

Then in part 3:

Revolver manufacturers also make double action only (DAO) revolvers, such as the Smith and Wesson Model 640 at right. The advantage of the DAO revolver is the fact that the hammer is completely enclosed.

And how is a completely enclosed hammer an advantage in a home defense situation? It’s useful in a concealed carry situation, sure, but I’m unclear as to how it’s an advantage for home defense.

Semi-auto handguns come a a wide variety of sizes and functions. The Beretta Model 92 at right is the civilian version of the military issue M9. It comes in 9mm Luger caliber. The Model 92 is a double action/single action autoloading handgun. This means that the first cartridge is fired with a long DA (heavy) pull, and subsequent shots are fired single action (light). Pro – proven as the primary US military sidearm for over two decades, large capacity magazines. Con – fairly heavy.

Fairly heavy is a con? No, that’s a pro because being heavier will help with recoil management. The author also implies the DA/SA trigger is a pro. No, that is a con. Previously in the article the author says how the double-action trigger pull is a con of revolvers (for the correct reasons). If a double-action trigger is a con, it’s a con.

The author then goes on about a S&W 640 (snub revolver), and other small guns like a Sig P238 and Kel-Tec P3AT. He talks about how great they are because they’re so lightweight, portable, how they can be carried in a holster. Um…. I thought this article was supposed to be about home invasion defense? The choice of guns here is arguably more geared towards carry guns, tho I’d debate some of the selection there too.

While the author’s intentions are good, the article loses focus and even contradicts itself. The guns recommended are not good choices for home invasion defense. While I have my take on good tools for home invasion defense, if we want to talk handguns for home defense I’d have to err on the side of larger guns. You can shoot larger guns better. You’re not necessarily going to carry this thing around, so it’s not a consideration. While a self-defense situation on the street is likely to happen within 5 yards of you, a home defense situation could require a shot up to the longest distance across your house. In my house it could be 25 yards, and frankly I’d rather take a 25 yard shot with a full sized handgun that provides me with excellent sights and a long sight radius vs. say a snub revolver or pocket semi-auto with their crappy sights and miniscule sight radius. So big gun, proper gun fit, adequate caliber, that’d be my general guidelines for a home-invasion defense handgun.

Tactical – Even my kids think it’s silly

/ hsoi / 5 Comments

Returning from the mailbox yesterday I started flipping through the latest Cabela’s flyer.

Tactical Turkey shotgun.

What the fuck is a TACTICAL turkey shotgun? To help you take out those Ninja turkeys? Has Al-Qaeda started recruiting gobblers? Or is this perhaps to help prepare for great turkey uprising, because they’re tired of the mass slaughter of their feathered brethren every November?

*sigh*

So Youngest overhears me spouting off about “tactical” and he asks what the word means. I explain what the word really means, then I explain how it’s become bastardized by marketing departments. How is making the barrel of a gun a particular length, tactical? How is making something out of black plastic, tactical? Giving it a pistol grip is tactical (so all handguns must be tactical by definition). We can’t forget needing a shoulder thing that goes up. Hell, you can make a pen tactical! Of course, CMMG understands how silly this all is, thus we have tactical bacon, black can of course.

Hrm. Does anyone make tactical toilet paper yet? It’d have to be black (natch), the tube would be made of plastic (not cardboard) and come with an ergonomic grip for ease of deployment. I’m sure if we could put a fart silencer on it that’d jack up the tacticalness.

Oldest and Daughter wandered over as I was explaining all of this to Youngest. My kids agree, it’s silly.

Updated: of course, earlier this morning I posted on the “tactical reload”. What makes it so tactical? Using the proper definition of the term, aren’t all reloads ultimately tactical? Bitch bitch bitch… 🙂

On the Tactical Reload

/ hsoi / 2 Comments

Found at tgace’s blog and worth reposting to spread the word:

Clint Smith, of Thunder Ranch, on the tactical reload:

I too must agree here.

If your gun is working, why put it into a non-working state?

If your gun isn’t working, you need to get it back to working as fast as possible or transition to a backup gun.

If you must put it into a non-working state, you should ensure you’re in a position that can manage that. So you’re behind cover, you have a partner, you know you have time/opportunity, or you have no other choice.

I forget exactly where I read this, but I know the source is Tom Givens. Tom has had a lot of interaction with folks in gunfights, from studying fight reports, being involved in hundreds of post-fight debriefs, to 50+ of his own students being involved in a gunfight. He has yet to find a time when there was a need for that “ammo/magazine retention”, at least in civilian situations. In Tom’s classes he advocates the “speed reload”, which is dropping the magazine out of the gun and onto the floor and inserting a new magazine. You work to keep the gun running and keep downtime as minimal as possible.