News
Click Here for Our Newsletter Archive

November 30, 2004

The Elements of a Trigger Job on an M1911 Pistol

November 29, 2004

THE DEER HUNTER MASSACRE
 
By now, I'm sure everyone has heard of the incident in Wisconsin in which six hunters were killed and two wounded by another hunter armed with an SKS rifle. Since I wasn't there and have no inside channels to the law enforcement agencies investigating the case, I will forgo speculation on what happened and what went wrong.
 
An incident such as this makes me think about the struggle for freedom that has been a hallmark of the American experiment since the beginning. Freedom has two dimensions: the individual and the collective. Our individual freedom does not operate in a vacuum; it operates and defines itself in relation to the freedom of every other free individual. We are responsible to and for our fellow free citizens because we cannot be truly free if everyone around us is enslaved. I am free to own a powerful rifle, but I am not free to go out into my front yard and fire it into the other houses on my street. I am free to carry a pistol, but I'm not free to shoot someone who cuts in front of me in line at the post office. Why? Because I don't want other people acting that way and so I accept some conditions on my absolute personal freedom for the common good. I accept the responsibility of a free man to structure my life in ways that do not needlessly endanger others or deny the individual freedom of others. When we all subscribe to the ideal of individual freedom and mutual respect for the rights of others, we get along, enjoy a great deal of personal freedom, and live in a fairly civil and peaceful society. As soon as we forget the responsibility of personal freedom, it is diminished for everyone.
 
The issue of gun rights puts this into sharp focus. When a man in Wisconsin abuses his right to own a firearm, six people are denied the right to live their lives, hundreds of thousands of hunters are denied the right to hunt without looking over their shoulders, and my right to own a military-style rifle is threatened. Freedom is diminished for everyone.
 
Historical Note: The Hmong were our friends in Vietnam and Laos. They fought valiantly under the direction of our special forces and suffered horrendous casualties and persecution because of it. Most of the first wave of Hmong people who were allowed to immigrate to this country were brought in to spare them of the genocidal slaughter that they would have received at the hands of their communist overlords. Their transition to this country has not been altogether smooth. You can’t transplant a mountain tribe from Southeast Asia to St. Paul, Minnesota and not expect some difficulties along the way. They are a noble and courageous people who are deserving of our respect and gratitude. This is not meant in any way to excuse the actions of Mr. Vang. It is to say, let’s not pillory a whole people for the misdeeds of one individual.
 
The upshot of all of this may be that we need to do a better job of teaching the concept of freedom in its fullness to our citizens. New citizens need to be taught and those who have been here all along may need a refresher course. Freedom may be promised by the Constitution, but it can’t be assured without the active participation of every member of our society.
 

October 23, 2004

Mr. Kerry,

How many little animals have to die in this futile blood sacrifice to the gun gods? Personally, I don’t want the deaths of all these birds and varmints on my conscience. You’re not a bubba and you’re not going to be no matter how many waterfowl you slay. You look ridiculous in cammo. We gave up sacrificing animals as we emerged from the Iron Age, and I think it’s about time you did too. The bubba gods aren’t listening. The gun gods aren’t listening.  They’re not listening because they don’t believe you. They don’t believe you because they know your voting record.

The Second Amendment isn’t about duck hunting, but then, you knew that already, didn’t you?

Between you and me, I would have so much more respect for you if you’d own up to what you are and were. If you were to say, “I was a lefty, peace-nik, anti-Vietnam War protester. I said some things that I shouldn’t have, things I believed to be true at the time that turned out to be wrong, and I’m sorry,” I would take you seriously. But this phony-baloney Rambo thing just isn’t getting it. To paraphrase the venerable Lloyd Benson, “Senator, I knew some meat eaters. Some of those meat eaters were friends of mine. Senator, you’re no meat eater.”

 Peace and love,

 Syd

October 9, 2004

Kimber Pro Carry: A Modern Classic by Syd

September 13, 2004 – The Sunset of the Assault Weapons Ban

The “Assault Weapons Ban” does not go gently into that dark sunset. Its swan song is accompanied by a wild chorus of phony claims, political recriminations, unearned chest-thumping from some gun rights organizations, and dire prophesies from gun grabbers and opportunistic politicians. One statistic that has intrigued me through this latest round of the debate is that a significant percentage of NRA members are supposed to support renewal of the AWB according to polling by the Brady Campaign and the Violence Policy Center. While I don’t pretend to know what these folks are thinking – and no doubt a significant sub-percentage of this group may be attributed to the way the questions are asked and misunderstanding about what the AWB actually does – I can’t help but wonder if the NRA supporters of the AWB support its renewal precisely because they do understand it. They have done their homework and know what a toothless and hollow piece of cosmetic legislation it really is. Perhaps they prefer this feel-good hodge-podge of cosmetic restrictions to another more restrictive ban which could appear in the future. “Lessee, how does it go? I can have a 30-round mag but no grenade launcher; or I can have the grenade launcher as long as I don’t have the bayonet lug. No, I can’t give up my bayonet – I may need it to hold off the next banzai charge by the IJN marines lurking just the other side of the Stop-N-Shop.” It’s just silly unless you understand that it’s about symbols and images.

The AWB is about conditioning people to accept incremental prohibitions on guns based on features, and we know where that goes. It is about demonizing civilian ownership of military style rifles (“…no one goes deer hunting with an AK-47”). It is about characterizing anyone who wants to own a military rifle or even a high capacity semi-auto pistol as a “domestic terrorist” or a potential mass murderer. Remember the historical setting that produced the AWB. Following Ruby Ridge and Waco, membership in civilian militia groups was expanding rapidly and the Clinton administration feared these groups in a way that was completely disproportionate to the actual threat they may have represented. Military rifles are only rarely used by street criminals and drug gangs. They were the preferred guns of the civilian militias. Symbol, image and politics – the stuff the AWB is made of.

Another statistic that has been bantered around is that crimes with “assault weapons” have decreased since the ban because “we have gotten these weapons of mass destruction off the streets.” Makes for a great sound-bite, but it suffers from a fatal flaw in logic. Nothing has been removed from “the streets” as a result of the AWB. Has anyone had any difficulty in buying a semi-auto military rifle or procuring high capacity magazines for their M9’s during this ten years? No. If you could buy a five-shot snubnose revolver, you could buy a semi-auto Kalashnikov clone. And for that matter, if you were willing to pay the inflated prices and go through the red tape, you could buy an honest-to-gawd selective fire assault rifle or submachine gun. If crime with “assault weapons” has decreased, it is because of other forces, such as demographic changes and the fact that all gun crime has diminished since its statistical peak in the late 80’s and early 90’s. The AWB had nothing to do with it.

The AWB has always been about symbols and politics. It still is. I will make two predictions: nothing will change in terms of crime statistics as a result of the AWB sunset, and it will be back. When it comes back, it will be far more obnoxious, restrictive and unconstitutional than the old, dead AWB it hopes to replace.

August 27, 2004

Recognizing and Avoiding Spyware.

August 18, 2004

Colt Gunsite Pistol Review By Darryl Rowe

August 10, 2004

My Brief Love Affair with the Kimber Gold Combat Stainless By Darryl L. Rowe

July 1, 2004

CyberCondoms - How to stay uninfected on the internet. This isn't about guns, but if you're on the internet, you should be concerned.

May 22, 2004

A Tale of Two Springfield's by SSgt Mark D. Littlejohn

May 18, 2004

FTF (Failure to Feed) & FTE (Failure to Extract) Troubleshooting Guide By Randy Adams

May 18, 2004

I happened to catch the re-run of "The West Wing" in which the show takes its pot shots at "shall issue” concealed carry. After a fictitious shooting at a church, the president attempts to get his vice president to attend a gun control rally to express the president’s opposition to “shall issue.” The vice president is reluctant to go because he doesn't share the president's anti-gun sentiments, and he doesn't think it is a wise move politically. They engage in a lop-sided argument about the merits and liabilities of “shall issue.” President Bartlett makes the point, "If firearms are a deterrent for crime, what's the point of concealing them? Shouldn't they be carried for everyone to see?" The vice president replies weakly, "I don't know."

While the imaginary vice president may not know the answer to this question, I do. There are three primary reasons that concealed carry is preferable to open carry.

First of all, most people are actually more comfortable with concealed carry than they are with open carry. It’s more comfortable to wear a gun concealed just because you don’t have to deal with the emotional heat from people who aren’t comfortable with guns, and yet, you have your gun in case you need it. People who don't like or know guns are scared of people wearing guns. The gun control fanatics are all wrapped up with their dark projection fantasies which hold that every gun owner is a psychopath hunting for his next venue for a massacre. With the guns out of sight, they don't have to deal with that. They can pretend, as they always have, even long before any concealed carry laws, that they aren't there even though they are and always have been. We know that one day they'll get mugged or threatened, achieve enlightenment, and develop a whole new appreciation for our ugly old guns, but until that day comes, why upset them? Concealment makes everyone more comfortable.

The second issue is tactical and has two parts. You never want to give your adversary any information on your capabilities. If you know something that he doesn't know, you have a distinct advantage. Closely related is the fact that some types of criminals will target a person if they know they have a gun for the purpose of stealing the gun. If they don't know, they won't try something.

The third primary reason that concealed carry is an advantage is that it is a psychological "force multiplier." The fact that personal defense weapons are concealed means that the bad guys don't know who is and isn't carrying a gun. This means that every potential victim may be armed and ready to resist in a “shall issue” state. The uncertainty created by concealment multiplies the deterrent effect on criminals of concealed carry. One could say that a single concealed handgun protects a thousand unarmed citizens. Concealment is a force multiplier.
 

May 9, 2004

The Assault Weapons Ban of 1994

“A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear single shot duck guns with a minimum barrel length of 36" having neither detachable magazines, bayonet lugs, nor pistol grips, shall not be infringed.”

That doesn't sound quite right, does it? It doesn't sound right because it isn't the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution; it's the Second Amendment of the Brady Campaign, of Charles Schumer, Frank Lautenberg, Diane Feinstein, the Million Mom March and the Violence Policy Center. In other words, it's the Second Amendment of gun control extremists. These are the terms in which they want to frame the discussion of our civil rights.

Their current jihad targets the mythological beast often referred to as the “assault weapon.” Now, we’re not quite sure what defines this monster, but we do know that unless the fraudulent “Assault Weapons Ban” of 1994 is extended, these deadly tools of mass destruction will suddenly flood our streets, and turn our schools and ghettos into killing fields. This is all, from stem to stern, a complete fiction – the terms, the description of the law, and the imagined consequences of non-renewal. Not a word is true.

The “Assault Weapons Ban” of 1994, a.k.a. the “Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994,” is one of the great scams of the Clinton era. It is a masterpiece of double-speak and equivocation. In reality, the law banned rifles that had detachable magazines and two or more of the following characteristics: folding or telescoping stock, pistol grips, bayonet mount, flash suppressor, or threads to attach a suppressor, or a grenade launcher. Further, it banned the importation of foreign-built rifles having some or all of these characteristics, and it banned the ownership by civilians of high capacity magazines (more than 10 rounds) produced after 1994. (Notice that a rifle with a 100-round drum magazine and a grenade launcher could be completely legal under the AWB as long as it did not have a bayonet lug, flash suppressor, folding stock or pistol grip).

Notice also that AK-47’s, M-16’s, Uzi’s and MP5’s (real assault rifles and submachine guns) are not addressed by the Assault Weapons Ban of 1994. Guns capable of automatic fire have been controlled by the National Firearms Act of 1934 for the past seventy years. Contrary to the overheated rhetoric of the gun grabbers, the AWB will have no impact whatsoever on the presence of AK-47’s and Uzi’s on our streets. It never has. The gun control jihadists lie because they know their agenda will fail in the light of truth. Were the gun grabbers serious about fighting crime or violence, they would be focusing on weapons that figure prominently in the violent crime statistics of America. Military-style rifles do not.

The real agenda is to ban military-style rifles because they are seen as being vulnerable to these emotional, non-rational appeals. Next will be semi-auto handguns, then revolvers, and so on, until we’re down to single-shot duck guns. The agenda is to disarm and force the cult of victimization on the free and self-reliant citizens of America.

The Second Amendment is not about duck hunting. It never has been. It’s about freedom. It’s not about Charles Schumer, Dianne Feinstein, Donna Dees-Thomases or Josh Sugarmann telling me what kind of rifle I need or should have, and for what purposes. It is about responsible citizens of this republic making conscientious decisions for themselves about the tools necessary for their own security, safety, and recreation.

If we are to counter this campaign of disinformation, our response needs to be more than technical lectures about the fine points of firearms nomenclature. We must define the terms, but more importantly, we must shape the discussion in terms of civil rights, individual liberty, and the inalienable right to self-defense, and that includes the bearing of arms which are on a par or superior to those which might be used against us.

April 9, 2004

Crimson Trace Lasergrips - Laser Sighting System

March 30, 2004

The True Story of the Beretta M9 Pistol. by Tim Chandler

John Kerry Votes on Guns

March 20, 2004

Accidental Discharge of a 1911 in a Thumb Break Holster

March 14, 2004

John Luering, a.k.a Ironpony, died Friday night in his sleep. John was a friend, contributor to The Sight M1911, events coordinator for South River Gun Club, charter member of The Polite Society, and all-around good gun guy. He will be missed.

Review: Dillon Precision HP-1 Electronic Hearing Protectors
 

February 23, 2004

PERSONAL NOTE: THE MOTHER OF ALL HARD DRIVE CRASHES
2 ½ weeks ago not one but both drives on my primary working computer suffered a simultaneous mechanical failure. I have never seen anything like that in 25 years of running PC’s. One, yes, but two at the same time? Needless to say, this caused my life enormous disruption from which I am just now recovering. Moral of the story: backup anything that’s important to you. Those of you who signed up for the newsletter between 1/15 and 2/7 need to send me another sign-up e-mail because there was a period there where my backup got corrupted.

I finally saw “Bowling for Columbine” and all of the rotten things you have heard about it are true. I wasn’t going to pay money to see it, but it finally descended to cable TV and I felt obligated somehow to sit through it. It’s interesting if for no other reason than to see the kind of raw sewage that passes for documentary journalism among the gun grabbers and nanny-staters. Of course, the blame for violence in America is finally laid on the elderly and infirm Charlton Heston and the NRA, after casting about for every other paper tiger in the woods – the military-industrial complex, poverty, racial diversity, etc., etc. I guess we should be thankful that people like Michael Moore are so devoid of intellectual rigor. While it shouldn’t have surprised me, it was surprising to see how poorly the points were made. The film isn’t an argument leading to a conclusion. It’s nothing but a series of stunts rendered in extremely bad taste.

November 28, 2003

Selecting a Holster for Concealed Carry By Syd

The Kimber Series II Firing Pin Block - Discussion and Diagram

November 18, 2003

Kimber Pro CDP II - by Syd
Review and survey of what's happened with the M1911 since 1905 (well, sort of...)

Colt Commander - Evolution and Development
Pictorial history of the Colt Commander

Background Information on the United States Pistol Caliber .45 M1911 - Development history of the M1911 .45 Caliber Automatic Pistol including the Thompson-LaGarde cadaver tests of 1904

November 2, 2003

If you have been near a television in the past two days, you have no doubt seen the remarkable film clip of a man trying to kill an attorney in front of the Van Nuys, CA courthouse. William Strier, a disgruntled and mentally ill man, shot Gerry Curry, counsel for a trustee of Strier’s special needs trust fund. Strier empties what appears to be a .38 Special snub nose toward Curry who tries to shield himself behind a small tree. Curry was hit several times in the upper torso and face but managed to walk away from the encounter to later collapse across the street. For more details and the video clip, you can go to http://www.courttv.com/trials/blake/103103_ap.html

I will forgo any cheap-shot lawyer humor here because I see no humor in citizens being terrorized by maniacs with guns. This kind of behavior is reprehensible and dishonorable. High profile gun crime like this makes life more difficult for responsible gun owners. I do think some important insights about surviving violent encounters may be drawn from this incident.

Curry, the victim, does one thing right and several things wrong. What he does right is to move away from the attacker and he tries to get behind the cover of a small tree. This move many have saved him from taking a center-of-mass hit which could have been fatal. What he does wrong is that the cover he chooses is inadequate and he stops moving, and thereby allows Strier to get close and land some hits. Fortunately, none of them turned out to be lethal. Had Curry just run away, the odds are good that he would not have been hit at all. Also, Curry is woefully unprepared, mentally and physically, to deal with this attack. Had Curry been armed, he could have defended himself from this attack. Had Strier thought that Curry might have been armed, there is a good chance that he would not have launched the attack in the first place. This, to my mind, is the most powerful argument for shall issue concealed carry: not that citizens can carry out gun battles in the streets (and they haven’t in any of the 36 shall issue states), but that the possibility that citizens may be armed creates a powerful disincentive for potential evil doers.

Another striking feature of this film clip is how little the multiple hits from the .38 seem to affect Curry. I’m assuming that the gun was a .38 since that is the most common chambering for snub-nosed revolvers. The muzzle flash also looks like a .38. It has much more flash than a .22. It appears that one bullet hit Curry squarely in the center of his forehead but did not penetrate into his skull. The wound to the forehead appears to be too large for a .22 based on photographs I have seen. The apparent lack of effect of this handgun stands in stark contrast to the Hollywood mythology which holds that handgun bullets strike like rocket propelled grenades and throw the victim back 50 feet on impact. Curry flinches when he is hit, but that’s about all. Minor caliber handguns may be lethal with perfect bullet placement, but they are seldom fight stoppers, and they require expert skill and tremendous luck to employ effectively. They are marginal as defensive weapons.

Summary of learnings:

1. When going to a gunfight, take a gun.
2. Take enough gun to do the job.
3. A pistol is a tool used to fight your way back to your gun. (Clint Smith)
4. Movement, distance and cover are your friends.
5. Mental preparation and tactical awareness can save your life.

2003 News Page

2002 News Page

2001 News Page

2000 News Page

1999 News Page