Semi-Auto Manual vs. Bump Fire

OK, a bump fire stock might be useful in a “Red Dawn” scenario (assuming a LARGE ammo supply), for suppressive fire on an objective, but apart from that, it’s just a (fun, from the looks of it) ammo-waster.

Saw a comment (sans clear reference to a transcript to an NPR segment that apparently aired in the past couple of days delineating the differences between bump fire-enabled and full auto firearms. No details in the comment; just a wee bit of amazement that such a thing would air on NPR. . .

Interesting comment elsewhere (Quora) that I immediately juxtaposed with visual evidence:

“Bump fire allows you to keep your finger in place while the gun moves. However, it is still only firing a single shot per pull of the trigger. The trigger is just being pulled faster than a person could manually do without bump-fire.”

The visual evidence I juxtaposed with it? A video of Jerry Miculek firing an AR-15 vs “some guy” (I dunno/can’t recall who, although I’ll post the video and we’ll all know then *heh*) firing a bump fire equipped AR-15. The bumpfire weapon did “outrun” Miculek by a split second, but Miculek’s shots were all on target and better-grouped. No one who’s not in a very elite group of shooters can do that, but no one–even the fastest finger in the world, if such can be definitively determined ;-)–can come even that close to even the slowest genuine full-auto.

And every example of bumpfired weapons I have seen shows that accuracy suffers a great deal. Just sayin’. If it comes to a “Red Dawn” scenario, use your handgun to get to your shotgun to get to your rifle, and use your rifle to “capture” more advanced weapons and ammunition. *heh*

Self-Defense Rights; Commonsense “Carry”

When people talk of “open carry,” “concealed carry” and “Constitutional carry,” they almost universally refer to the bearing of FIREarms for self-defense, and yes, firearms can be an important aspect of affirmative self-defense. But this post is limited to a very short take on another self-defense tool that is often neglected: knives.

Within 10 feet (or more; many LEO trainers cite a “21-foot rule” for knives as being the range at which a knife user could close to cause significant damage to someone who has still yet to bring his firearm to bear), a knife can potentially be more effective than a firearm.

Knives are really scary to many people, for one thing. And even folks who have no fear of knives and are skilled in their many, many uses know how devastating a knife wound can be. Seriously.

So, carrying at least one knife may actually be a fairly decent self-defense preparation, provided one learns how to use it for that purpose.1

But knives are so much more useful than that. Anyone who does not regularly carry at least one knife on their person is walking around unprepared for life in general, IMO.

But a knife? One simply Will Not Do. *heh*

Seriously, different knives have different “best uses,” and I find that I use three or four of the knives I regularly carry at least once daily. And then there are my “car and EDC bag knives. . . ”

I do appreciate that State laws in my locale are moderately unobtrusive. For example, open carry of knives (belt knives) is not forbidden, and no length limit on open carry knives exists in statute. Unfortunately, State laws here are not preemptive in the case of knives and firearms, allowing local ordinances to (illegitimately) modify one’s natural rights, AND are actually MORE restrictive concerning “concealed knives” than re: concealed forearms (*shrugs* Makes no sense to me), but fortunately, America’s Third World County™ is very “knife (and firearm) friendly.” The only problems that seem to arise are with in-movers, some of whom are surprised (and even fewer disturbed) by the open carry of knives and firearms.

Of course, some of the more recent in-movers are local “new hire” LEOs, and their learning curve is a bit steep. *sigh* Ah, well, live and learn or don’t live long, as Lazarus Long was wont to say. *heh*


1Here’s a decent start for those who would appreciate an “old school book larnin'” take on self-defense with knives. Instructional videos of widely varying quality abound on the Internet, and classes are available in various locales around the country, too.

Hank Reinhart’s Book of Knives

English. Learn Some.

Building an AR-15 Under 5 Pounds

Nice article, and reads like a nice build. I do lack a bit of confidence in their math, though, given that the build they were comparing to was 5lb5oz and ~$3,500 while the 4lb13oz build was “slightly more than $1,800, nearly half the price of the carbine in the article that spawned this exercise.”

“[N]early half the price”? No, slightly MORE than half the price. “Nearly” implies “almost” or “not quite,” and $1,800 is more than half of $3,500.

Numbers. Language. Not strong suits for this writer.

The Reasons I Do Not Carry a Handgun

Sure, I have the right to carry openly or concealed (and I have), but there are several reasons why I do not normally, habitually, carry a handgun on my person.

I’m gettin’ old, folks. Arthritis and difficulty quickly transitioning between near and far make sighting/aiming and firing a handgun an exercise in “maybe accuracy,” and that’s just not good enough to assure NOT hitting what I do not want to.

I also live in one of the safest places in the world, safer from physical attacks on my person than almost anywhere else in America that has people in it. *heh* That means that others around me are also pretty darned unlikely to experience physical aggression initiated against them (by anyone other than law enFARCEment ossifers, that is).

Sidebar: perhaps one of the reasons it’s so safe here in America’s Third World County™ is that firearms of all kinds outnumber inhabitants by quite a healthy margin, and many folks do carry a handgun both openly and concealed. Gives me warm fuzzies. 🙂

The only reason I might carry a handgun, given my circumstances, would be if I were to go out walking in “snake country” or “feral pig country,” and in that case, I’d probably need to carry a S&W Governor loaded in alternate chambers with .410 gauge shotshells and .45 long colt (each for a different contingency). The .410 (loaded with birdshot, for snake use) would pretty much obviate concerns about really fine aiming, though I’d just have to hope for decent enough luck if a feral pig got his mad on.

Still, even in such cases, I’d probably prefer to keep my head on a swivel and note issues well enough in advance to back away from a venomous snake or take to a tree in case of a feral pig.

Something Different

I own a little revolver that is. . . different in several ways from the norm.

It’s a lil .32 ACP revolver that uses a round designed for .32 semi-automatics.

It is from a defunct maker of second-tier-quality knock-offs of other maker’s guns.

It’s a top-break revolver (semi-unusual nowadays).

It is one of very few the manufacturer made in this caliber with a six-round cylinder. By far, most of the .32 caliber revolvers made by this maker were 5-round.

Before it came to be in my possession, it had been fired only once, in 1929, by a man who committed suicide after the stock market crash. In the 84 years that intervened between that event and me coming into possession of the gun, no one else put a single round through it, and aside from two small spots of surface corrosion, the gun was in pristine condition, the bluing–apart from those two small spots–still perfect.

It’s a pretty good lil plinker, and ammo for the thing abounds, but I mostly just leave it cleaned, oiled, and in its case. I don’t really have a use for it aside from plinking, though I also have a nice lil IWB holster (that I picked up for ~$29 less than retail–$1–at my local “fell off the back of a truck” store) so I could, if I wanted, carry it concealed. . . if I wanted to, which–.32 ACP?–I do not.

About that Missouri “Constitutional Carry”

Reading up on the new Missouri “Constitutional Carry” bill requires putting on my “legal eagle glasses” AND putting up with illiterate “booby-age” from Mass MEdia Podpeople (No, it’s NOT “county sheriff’s offices” dummy; it’s “county sheriffs’ offices”). The first, because the bill was written in such a way that it primarily just deletes portions of previous law, making understanding what lawmakers were doing more a matter of subtraction than anything else. The second because, well, Mass MEdia Podpeople: subliterates spreading their own misinformation/disinformation via sloppy, subliterate grammar and word usage.

It doesn’t help to have a few seriously illiterate “law enFARCEment ossifers” chiming in with lies, disinformation, and misinformation. (State HiPos who’ve been quoted have seemed to get things more right than not, though. Many local yokels–mostly from big cities–seem to be either clueless or simply liars.)

At any rate, I won’t rely on the law being in effect until January, not that it will affect my behavior one way or another. 😉

Grammar Matters

Seen various places:

A well tailored suit, being necessary to the appearance of a sharply dressed gentleman, the right of the people to keep and wear clothes, shall not be infringed.

So, according to the “understandings” applied to the Second Amendment by (wilfully) illiterate leftards, only “sharply dressed gentlemen” have a right to “keep and wear clothes”? That would certainly chap a few misandrists’ gizzards. . . (not to mention leading to some interesting sunburns and other such things. . . )

Cry “Wolf!”

“Man Profiles, Attacks Concealed Carrier”

I have a problem with these kinds of provocative articles from supposed “gun rights” advocates. The cited article clearly states that the person who was (wrongly) “tackled” for carrying a gun was a CCW permit holder. . . but was assaulted because some guy SAW HIS GUN. Most CCW state laws say it MUST be CONCEALED (no “printing” either) unless used in a lawful manner (self-defense, etc.). The assailant should definitely be charged with assault, but the CCW holder could be charged for failing to carry his weapon in a manner specified by his license as well.

And the linked post shouldn’t be hyperventilating about the incident and should note where the CCW permit holder was in error. The concealed aspect is pretty much to avoid this sort of thing–loony bin aspirants going off half-cocked and assaulting folks who are doing no harm.

BTW, the linked post wrongly states,

screencap-confused-post

The article the overblown, poorly-written post in the first link refers to clearly states that Daniels was the one assaulted and that his assailant was arrested and charged with battery.

Sloppy writing, sloppy thinking, bad, bad “pro-gun” article. Guy who wrote it should be spanked with a loaded, 30-round AR-15 mag.

Getting “The Vapors” at Boise State University

*head-desk*

http://www.campusreform.org/?ID=5689

“Boise State University’s Young Americans for Liberty chapter invited Dick Heller, whose lawsuit allowed citizens of D.C. to buy and own handguns, to speak on campus.

 “BSU forced YAL to hire three extra guards and two city police officers at the last minute for $465 to patrol the speech.”

District of Columbia v. Heller was a landmark 2nd Amendment case. Heller had been invited by YAL to speak @BSU. Approved by admin, then last-minute admin decided Heller speaking on 2nd Amendment was an “elevated threat” environment. Idaho “higher” ed: filled with Neo-Victorian shrinking violets? Not exactly, in later updates to the story BSU flacks revealed that BSU had assessed “elevated threat” environment evals at other times (75% of those were “conservative” type meetings. Of course). So, not “Neo-Victorian shrinking violets” but “Lefties with their panties in a bunch because of a speech on individual rights.”

Elevated threat level at a speech about Heller/2nd Amendment? Now just who might pose a threat there. . . and to whom? (One might suspect the real threat was to leftist pussies* in the college administration. . . in their own “minds”.)

“Higher” ed has long since been infiltrated, darned near everywhere, by leftists. This looks like just one—of many—more example of lefties with their panties in a bunch.

Dog bites man. Move along. Nothing to see here.

 


 

*N.B. “pussies” is used here in an understanding that the word “pussy” used in this context was likely evolved as a reference to “pusillanimous”—cowardly, timid. Of course, my understanding of the etymology may be flawed, but that’s how I’m using it, so there. 🙂

 

Teaser Over-promised, Under-delivered

Yesterday, James O’Keefe twitted *heh* about “hidden camera” video of Piers Morgan on gun control. *meh* Yeh, yeh, a few non-committal seconds of Morgan and loads of other nobodies (from the Hivemind left, apparently, though) on the topic.

(*heh* You did catch that, right? “…and loads of other nobodies” :-))