Top Shot

I've been seeing some blogger chatter on History's Top Shot, so I thought I'd give it a shot. Two thumbs down, I think it sucks. The shooting challenges are good, but I can't get over the constant bickering, the fighting, the Big Brother-esque house. No thanks, can we get an hour or people shooting at stuff with interesting challenges? That would be good fun.

In fact, maybe we should just make up a competitive league where you compete in a variety of challenges. Something like IPSC meets IDPA meets 3-Gun meets CAS meets good old fashioned Kentucky Rifle challenge. I'd do that, walk from station to station, one station has me blasting clay birds with a scatter gun, the next has me going after the Lone Star wheel from CAS, another is a High Power rifle shot at 500 yards through open sights on an '03 Springfield, finish the day off with 100 yard silhouette shot on a turkey silhouette with a replica Kentucky rifle. The winner is the one who hits the bullseye the most times.

That'd be a better competition and more fun to watch to boot. I'll pass on Top Shot, too much in the drama queen department, not enough guns and shooting.

-Rob

Only a True Gun Nerd

Could stand on a range with thousands of dollars in short barrel ARs, suppressed Tactical Solutions .22s, suppressed fully automatic H&Ks and be bored and unimpressed. Only to be more impressed by a nice Webley MKVI cut for .45 ACP Moonclips (all the better to shoot the steel plate rack with), an early (3rd year) Colt Python, a British Military issued FN Auto-5 (that's the one with the 8-round tube and fore end that extends to the end of the barrel, issued to Brits in Malaysia post-WWII but pre-Korea), and an original Mauser C96 with stock (from 1902).

Yea that plastic stuff is okay, but ya know...plastic is cheap. Have you fondled a Pre-WWI Mauser C96? They DON'T make 'em like that no more, maybe in some ways they are better or worse, but the reality is they just don't make 'em like that no more. The machining, the fit, the finish...

-Rob

An armed society is a polite society...

As a kid, I was always taught to be polite, because it's easier to win friends and influence people (to steal a good quote) that way. One thing I remember though, was that being armed and being polite seemed to go hand in hand. My father always taught me to be nice in traffic, because you never knew when that guy you decided to flip the bird to, was going to pull out a gun and turn your driving affair into a shooting affair.

I remember an event that happened to me about two years ago at the BBOD. A customer had purchased a gun safe and taken it home, upon getting it home, they were unable to get the safe open, using the combination provided by the manufacturer. A manager, not my immediate boss, decided the prudent (read: STUPID) thing to do was to send an employee down to the customer's house and make sure the safe didn't open like the customer said it didn't, before we returned a $1000 gun safe and exchanged it. Somehow, I got drafted for this duty and was sent on my merry way to the customer's house. (In retrospect and perhaps the best advice I can provide from this experience is if you get stuck in this position, tell your boss to stick it).

When I arrived at the customer's house, the customer, a young gentleman in his late 20s was absolutely irrate! He was simply furious at me, while I inspected the safe and confirmed that indeed, the combination was not correct and I set about trying to correct the problem. The gentleman was just absolutely furious right up until one distinct and very memorable point in time. He was looking at me cursing when he simply stopped in the middle of his sentence and asked a question, "Is that a Thunder Ranch pin on your hat?" "Why yes, yes it is. I just received it last week, when I finished my Defensive Revolver course with them." "Oh..." And suddenly, the gentleman's tone changed as he realized he might have been cursing, screaming, and generally degrading a guy who had just spent three days with a premier firearms instructo, throwing enough lead down range to require a small mining operation to extract it from the berm. Suddenly, the whole experience changed, the customer was polite to me, respectful, courtesy, and realizing perhaps that I was doing my best to take care of him, he was grateful.

An armed society is a polite society. Remember guys that store clerk/auto mechanic/paper boy you're insulting, maybe he's packing a loaded .357 while your hurling insults at him. He is polite to you, both by being nice and smiling and doing his best, and for not pulling his smoke wagon out and giving you a few extra holes to run your mouth from.

Armed, polite. We shouldn't have to live in a world where being armed is a requirement for courtesy and kindness, but it would behoove us to remember that some folks are packing heat and we should just be nice to everyone, so we don't worry about who is who.

-Rob

Guns that don't make sense...

I have long been absent from my blog. A brief update as to why, in Mid-Feb, I left my job at the BBOD and started working for Major State School as an Undergrad Research Assistant. In early March, I was accepted to Major State School as a Graduate student, so in August I get a promotion with a new title, Graduate Student Teaching Assistant. This means that I have spent a considerable amount of my time, preparing for my new graduate school adventure, finishing required undergraduate work, and finishing required graduate school pre-requisites in course work. I have missed my time at the BBOD only slightly, admittedly, and I currently view the chapter of my life as a gun salesman, closed.

That doesn't mean we can't still blog about guns as time permits. So let's do some of that gun blogging stuff!

The title of this post should probably more properly read, "Concealed Carry Guns that don't make sense..."...The following is a list of recently produced guns for the market of concealed carry that...just don't make any sense:

The new Airweight Smith and Wesson J-Frames with 2.5" barrels. These guns don't make any sense. On the surface they seem like a good thing, longer sight radius, longer barrel, pinned front sights. But when you start to think about the role of the J-Frame, they don't make sense. The added length of the barrel, kills the compact J-Frame's ability to be neatly concealed inside a pocket. That's the real power of the Airweight snub, it's pocket concealability. If you're going to carry a belt gun, or an ankle gun, or a shoulder gun, you should pick something at least, heavier, than an Airweight J. The airweight guns are painful and difficult to shoot well. Opting for a heavier all steel J-Frame results in much better accuracy and control for nearly all shooters. And that's why the new guns make no sense, you carry a J-Frame, because you can pocket carry it easily. If you can belt carry a gun, you should belt carry a bigger gun. There are already better belt gun options than a 2.5" Airweight J-Frame. The 3" all steel J-Frame comes to mind, the all steel 3" Ruger SP101, the 3" GP100, the 3" K-Frame, the 2.5" or 3" L-Frame. All of these guns hold more rounds, are easier to shoot, and are chambered in a more powerful caliber (.357 Magnum or in the L-Frame's case at least a couple of 5-shot .44 special versions).

The Taurus Public Defender, the new snub nosed, bobbed, cut down, and rounded Taurus Judge revolver. I want to get the combination right, you take a hard to shoot gun, make it smaller and shorter, and sell it as the gun you need for concealed carry. Frankly, I would think the Public Defender was a good idea, if it were chambered in .45 Long Colt, because the gun would be only marginally bigger than a J-Frame, but it would be chambered in a heft cartridge. Unfortunately, the Defender comes in the .410/,45 chambered, you can have your .45 long colt if you want, but at the added price of an extra inch of cylinder. All the better to clean extra carbon from if you shoot it much? I suppose. The .410 loads as a defensive load are questionable at best, even with the new 000 Federal Buckshot load, you're getting 5, .36 caliber pellets at 70-grains each. You can get 5, .36 caliber bullets from a J-Frame, but at 158-grains each, or if loaded with .45 Long Colt, you can have 5, 250-grain bullets, to hurl out the end of your gun. In my opinion the Public Defender would be best, if it were shortened and chambered in .45 Long Colt only. Of course, Taurus already made that gun and it never sold well (it would be the Taurus 445). Then again in those does Taurus didn't have the marketing they used to have.

Finally, let's pick on auto pistols for a minute, I want to pick on specific class of semi-autos, the sub-compact, double stack, polymer framed gun. The gun that makes absolutely NO sense when it comes to concealed carry. I am picking on your Glock 26s and 27s, your Springfield XD Sub-Compacts, etc. Why am I picking on these guns? Because they don't make any sense. They commit all the same sins as the guns above. They create a gun that is hard to shoot well, doesn't conceal much (if any) better than its full size counter part, and are often less reliable than a full size gun. These guns have everything working against them, they often allow only a two-finger hold, which allows for only reduced control of the gun. Some people off set this, but adding a finger extension to the bottom of their magazine. This has always struck me as a moronic thing to do, you add a finger extension to the bottom of the gun, making it as long as a full size gun, thereby negating the concealment benefit of the shorter grip on the gun. Then there is the trade off, you have a shorter barrel, easier to conceal, right? Sort of. You do have to conceal the barrel of your gun, but for the most part your cover garment and or holster takes care of that for you. You aren't gaining much by shortening the barrel, to be honest, but you're losing a lot. A lot of control, you add recoil, reduce your sight radius (thereby amplifying any trigger control mistakes you make), and abbreviate the grip. All in the name of concealment, only you are still trying to conceal something that feels, looks, and has the weight of a brick. These guns just don't make sense from a concealed carry point of view, you have to wear a good belt, buy a good holster, etc. Your trade off then, less control, harder to shoot, less reliable, and still takes the same effort to hide a small gun than a big one. It would seem that this category then, falls heavily into the makes no sense category.

So, let us draw conclusions from this discussion, small and light guns have a place, they are typically for use in unique situations or for a unique carry option. If you're going to belt carry any of the above guns, there are better, larger, more powerful, and easier to shoot guns that will require the same level of work to conceal. But the payoff results in you being able to carry a bigger gun that you can have more confidence in.

More results to ponder and think about.

-Rob

The Cheapskate

As a BBOD employee and a University student, let me tell you, I am most assuredly not flush with excess cash funds to buy expensive firearms. None the less, I recognize quality and the importance of picking a quality firearm, if you intend to use it for self defense.

As I've said to in the past at the BBOD we deal mostly in sporting grade guns, but also in personal defense weapons. When it comes to personal defense shotguns, I generally grab the Remington 870 and the Mossberg 500 off the shelf, explain the differences and benefits of one over the other and sell the customer the safety of their choice (it almost always come down to the position of the safety on the shotgun and previous experience by the customer). I generally, do NOT really recommend the cheaper 18.5" barreled shotgun variants out there, the Mossberg Mavericks and the H&R Pardner (870 clones), because these guns have a hit and miss reliability record. As I have stated before and will state again, IN A DEFENSIVE GUN RELIABILITY AND ACCURACY ARE THE MOST IMPORTANT THINGS. Anything that I have a 10% of higher repair rate and customer concern with is junked from the list of "reliable defensive guns" and downgraded to "range plinker/sporting gun status." With all that said, let me tell you about a customer that I despise more than anything, the cheapskate.

Case in point, a cheapskate came into the BBOD today, who represents the WORST of the worst. The gentleman was looking for firearms for personal and home defense. After showing him the differences between the Remington 870 and the Mossberg 500, he decided that neither was worth their asking price and instead opted for the cheaper Maverick 88 shotgun. I informed him of the spotty quality control and hit and miss reliability and his response was, "Well, it will almost never get shot, so who cares? It's just for my wife to scare off anyone in the house. Besides, it's cheaper." Cheaper...that's what it is, cheaper. The cheapskate strikes again, buying a sub-par quality firearm to defend his family, because who cares and it's cheaper.

Well, I CARE, I don't want to read about your family and know that it was your tightness that caused them to be killed by some attackers, because the cheap shit gun you bought failed to go boom and instead went click. AND finally sir, I KNOW you can afford to buy a more expensive gun, because you're wearing a ()*@*(^&^*$@ $10,000 ROLEX!!!!!!!!!! Your watch is worth 10k, but your family's well being is only worth a HUNDRED AND EIGHTY NINE BUCKS?! You sir cheapskate need to have your head re-examined and your cranium removed from your rectal cavity.

I really hope that your wife or sons talk you into a more expensive and reliable gun to defend them with. Until then...I just don't know how to deal with you....

-Rob

I got a need a need for speed...loaders!!

Over the last year or so, I have noted some developments in the speed reloading section of revolver usage. So, while I have not owned all of these products and I do not have indepth reviews, I would like to share the knowledge of these products for those that might want and or need them.

Speed Loaders:

http://www.3dinc.net/page2.php <---These guys are brand new making CNC machined aluminum speed loaders for a little bit of everything, including the biggies S&W X-Frames in .500 S&W and Taurus Judges. They are also making what appear to be nicely done L and J frame loaders.

http://www.thunderranchinc.com/8shot.html <--Expensive, but the only game in town for 8-shot speed loaders for your Smith 327/627 series guns in .38/.357.

http://www.hksspeedloaders.com/SpeedloaderPage.html <--Still the industry standard and available for nearly all applications.

http://www.safariland.com/dutygear/d...edloaders.aspx <--The stand-by for revolver competition use and for those who don't care for twisty knobs.

Speed Strips:

http://www.tuffproducts.com/home.php...ction=0&page=3 <---The new guys! "Speed Strip" style strips for everything under the sun, 10-shot .22, 5/6/7/8 shot .38/.357, 5 shot .45LC/.410, even strips for 12-gauge shot shells. Check out there various pocket holsters with spare ammo carriers and their strip pouches too.

http://www.bianchi-intl.com/product/...TxtModelID=580 <--The Bianchi created industry standard, the 6-shot 580 series for .38/.357.

I hope that some of this information can be useful to some of us around here, especially those of us who are still toting around round guns, instead of flat ones. Yes, I do carry mostly round guns in the .38/.357 variety, thats why I call myself, "RevolverRob"...just sayin'.

-Rob

Meditations on Ammunition Capacity...

One of those posts, a comment on capacity. In this month's Blue Press author Serena Wood wrote an article titled, "Make mine a High Capacity Nine". I read it with some interest and thought it worth commenting on, ammunition capacity that is. There are many schools of thought, most seem to feel that if you can't "solve it in x" number of rounds, then it can't be solved. My thought is that this is always a defeatist attitude, because there is ALWAYS a possibility that you could be attacked by that "x" number of attackers or more. And my question is, why give up? You can solve the problem, you just have to work harder at it. None the less, the statisticians will drag the numbers out, the largest percentage of handgun carriers who have to draw their pistol in defense, will most likely not use it. Those that do, will likely fire less than 5 rounds. A smaller percentage will fire over five rounds. An even smaller percentage will fire more than 5 rounds and be attacked by more than two attackers. If the percentages are so small, why even carry a gun that holds more than 1 or 2 or 3 rounds?

In fact, there was a time, where mode of the day was to carry a single shot pistol, but soon after the introduction of the pistol, came the idea of a brace of pistols, and then a suite of pistols. So, in the day of duels and exploration, the common mode of carry was to carry at least three guns. In fact when I was at the Texas Ranger Museum, I noted that when the Rangers were founded, a Ranger had to provide a rifle, a brace of pistols, and his own ammunition. So, we know from the beginning of carrying a firearm for personal defense and offense, the preference has been to multiple shots.

And, let's be honest the first true innovation in handgun history from Sam Colt was that the gun could fire 5 rounds reliably, before being used as a club, not just one or two. Once the 5 and later 6 shot pistols were created, then came the habit of carrying two of them for a total of 12 rounds before needing to reload. Then came the real innovations in handgun history. Schofield created the easier to break open and reload Smith and Wesson No. 3 Schofield (Calvary) model. Then Webley & Scott made their MK. series of revolvers, which shortly after their adoption, an enterprising man created the Prideaux Device, to facilitate even faster reloading. In 1893 Hugo Borchardt invented the first successful semi-automatic handgun, and a more important idea, the detachable box magazine. All of these innovations where in the name of MORE ammunition and FASTER reloads.

What's the point I'm getting at? Ammunition capacity is an important factor in purchasing a firearm. But unlike Ms. Wood, who made it one of her main criteria in choosing a firearm, I feel that capacity is secondary to fit, reliability, and the ability to shoot the gun well. That's an important distinction, a handgun needs to FIT in order for you to shoot it well. The short nature of the handgun means that it requires more work to shoot well over a rifle or shotgun; it means that gun fit is more critical than anything else. This means, that I recommend that one pick a firearm that fits, over one that holds more rounds.

The continued evolution of magazine capacity is something to consider when purchasing a gun, but the reality is we haven't found a better way to reload guns in over a hundred years. We are still using versions of the detachable box magazine and the Prideaux device, in our big square box magazines and our HKS or Safariland speed loaders. These devices work quite well and with practice sub-second reloads are possible. With the ability to carry spare ammunition (especially handgun magazines, and especially single stack ones, because they are thin and imminently concealable), one can be less concerned with capacity and more focused on fit.

So, to sound like a broken record I will say again, when it comes to a capacity/caliber/handgun size argument the answer is simple. Pick the gun that FITS, the one that fits your hand, your body, and your purpose.

-Rob