Not just the guns, but all the stuff that goes with them
…just take a little bite of this apple (from my Inbox):
As any fule kno, I’m NOT in the target market (so to speak) for one of these puppies, but sheesh… it sure is tempting.
Doc Russia had the best comment when I showed it to my buddies on WhatsApp:
It’s a good thing that by the time I get my guns out of hock, this sale will be over. And I don’t need yet another caliber in Ye Olde Ammoe Locquere anyway. (Keep talking, Kim…)
That word describes so much about FJBiden, but this one is especially so:
President Joe Biden spoke to the NAACP and called for Congress to “outlaw” AR-15s and similar rifles in the wake of the assassination attempt on Donald Trump. Biden began by saying, “If you’re going to speak about violence, you’re going to speak about guns.”
He said, “An AR-15 was used in shooting Donald Trump, this was the ‘assault weapon’ that killed so many others, including children. It’s time to outlaw them. I did it once and I will do it again.”
…followed by all the old lies about infant mortality, which we’ve heard before ad nauseam.
You know, when it comes to a lone asshole with a gun and an agenda, an unscoped AR-15 poodleshooter in the hands of a callow 20-year-old loser might actually be less dangerous than, say a scoped Savage 110, chambered in .308 Win in the hands of an experienced hunter (of any age).
No doubt the Communists would be all about banning “sniper rifles”, then.
Feckless bastards, and that goes especially for FJBiden who, if his brain was operating at any level higher than warm rice pudding (a big “if”) might be taken seriously on this issue.
As it is, just file his feeble rantings about assault rifles with all the other sludge emanating from his wide-open cakehole, and ignore.
I once heard a very cynical man describe engraving guns as akin to engraving a hammer or an anvil: “Looks good, doesn’t do nothin’ for it.”
In pure common sense, I agree with him. However, as someone who appreciates great skill and craftsmanship as much as anyone alive, I deplore such cynicism.
You see, art doesn’t have to be functional; it just has to excite.
And right on cue, we have this example from Steve Barnett (and right-click to embiggen and enjoy):
Let me start off by looking at the lines of this Safari Custom rifle as a whole: without a single cut of engraving, that is one exquisite rifle: lean, curved in all the right places and just plain beautiful. Now let’s look at the engraving:
Good grief, that is so lovely, and so tastefully designed that it makes my heart race.
Now let’s look at the price: $13,500.
Before anyone gets to having palpitations and fainting fits, allow me to point out that a new Mauser M98 Diplomat in the same caliber runs for: $15,000.
Functionally, it is identical to the custom rifle; aesthetically, it’s not even in the same zip code, let alone ballpark. Lexus, meet Lambo.
And finally, I know that someone’s going to say that they’d be too afraid to take the Safari Mauser out on an African safari, lest they scratch or somehow mar the finish. Me, I say phooey:
And yes (sigh), I know you can get a Ruger African rifle (in .375 Ruger, though) for a little more than a tenth of the cost of both the above Mausers.
Oscar Wilde once described a cynic as a man who knows the price of everything and the value of nothing. I think the old pederast nailed it.
I can’t argue much with this line of reasoning (in favor of large-capacity magazines in your handgun):
Gun control advocates who try to justify restrictions on law-abiding citizens may sometimes look at how violent crimes unfold to justify their argument. They might say that most gun fights only involve a few rounds, for example, so why would you need a 15-round magazine?
I’ve had that conversation.
And, to be fair, most gunfights actually are over after just a few shots. Most don’t even need to hit to end the fight because most bad guys are cowards who want easy meat, not someone ready to fight back.
The problem with this is that it assumes the average is universal. The average gun battle may only have, say, three shots fired, but a lot of them only have one round discharged. That means some involve a whole lot more.
Statistically, of course, that is absolutely correct. When the argument comes to grief, however, is also part of the law of averages, in that you have to ask yourself: “How many home invasions or self-defense situations involve multiple attackers?”
The answer, of course, is “precious few” (outside a BLM or Antifa riot).
But I know that when it comes to self defense, one should always expect the best but prepare for the worst. And frankly, this is the conundrum we gun owners face every day.
It’s probably best to illustrate this by using my own position, because I’ve tortured myself for years about quantity vs. quality: should I rely on a hi-cap 9mm Europellet gun, or a limited-cap .45 1911?
The answer, for me,as any fule kno, is the 1911, because I trust that a single wound made by the .45 bullet is going to likely end the business more reliably than a single round of 9mm. I practice long and often to make sure that my first shot is right on target — but that doesn’t mean that my decision is a correct one, especially if my home were to be invaded by more than a single goblin. Four of the bastards, as in the linked article? Phew.
Next to my chair (actually, in a pocket on the side thereof), is my Springfield 1911, loaded with an 8-round Chip McCormick Power Mag (+1 in the tube). What I should do is load up a 10-round mag in my chair gun (I may have a few knocking around somewhere) and have a spare mag of similar capacity sitting in the pocket. My reloading speed with a 1911 mag isn’t as good as the pros, but it’s nothing to sneeze about. I don’t carry 10-rounders on my belt when I go out, though, simply because I don’t have a mag-holder large enough for the longer 10-rounder, and the longer mag likewise is problematic to carry so I content myself with three 8-round Power Mags (one in the 1911, the other two in their holster). And frankly, it’s too much of a PITA to keep exchanging the 8- and 10-round magazines every time I leave the house and come back.
So I guess I’ll have to rely on just the one 8-rounder in the chair gun (but with a 10-round backup). Long ago I made the decision that carrying a heavy old 1911 and spare mags around is worth the hassle (YMMV) because I have absolute faith that it will suffice to protect me in pretty much any situation outside the house. (If I were to need more, there’s always the trunk, ’nuff said.)
Next to my bed (on top of the drawer) can be found my S&W Mod 65, loaded with of course only 6 rounds of .357 Mag. A little while ago, though, I added my backup S&W 637 (5 rounds of .38 Spec +P) simply because of the above argument. That’s 11 rounds, and if necessary I can shoot the two revolvers simultaneously (yes, I’ve practiced a lot shooting the little 637 left-handed.) And yes, while I have several speedloaders for each gun right there, I’m under no illusions about my reloading speed with them, despite many, many hours of practice. I’m no Jerry Miculek, for sure.
Then again, under the bed is my loaded AK, and if I get but a minute or so’s warning, I would suggest that 20 rounds of 7.62x39mm Commie should suffice for pretty much any number of attackers. (I know, should be a pump shotgun, but I don’t have one of those yet, shuddup I’m working on it.)
On a tangential note, however, I should point out that most people seem content with the low-capacity (5 rounds) in a shotgun tube mag, on the basis that a single charge of 12ga. 00 Buck should be a showstopper — which, generally speaking, it is. It’s more or less the same argument I have for using a .45 instead of a 9mm, although of course I’m not equating the efficacy of 12ga. buckshot to the .45 ACP hollowpoint. But there’s also no argument that the 1911 (or Mod 65, for that matter) are a great deal less cumbersome than a long gun in a confined space such as my tiny apartment, so there’s that side of it.
One last note: I have pretty much decided that “close at hand” is of paramount importance. Whether in my chair while writing, or next to the bed while sleeping, my guns are both well within arm’s reach and can be brought to bear in close to two seconds. (I’m not going to take this to the extreme and have a “bathroom” or “kitchen” piece because a) the likelihood I’ll need either is vanishingly small and b) I don’t own that many self-defense guns, any more. At least 95% of my time at home is spent in the char or in bed, so I’ll leave the remaining 5% to chance.)
So there’s the argument, from my personal perspective. As we all do, I’m faced with all sorts of compromises when it comes to self-defense, and I’ve made my decisions based on preference, likelihood and circumstance. Yours may (and probably will) differ, but I thought you might want to see my thought processes, in case that helps you refine your thinking and make your own decisions.
And now, if you’ll excuse me, it’s time to head to the range. All this gun talk has made my finger itch.
If ever there was a handgun chambering that could be called “pointless”, it might be the venerable .30 Carbine. Originally designed for the M1 Carbine of WWII (itself a replacement for the Colt 1911 Government, and carried by support personnel and so on), the .30 Carbine cartridge itself is often derided as being inadequate as a manstopper — although from a carbine-length barrel, it has better ballistics than the .357 Mag fired from a revolver.
It makes even less sense in a handgun. AMT once made one of their Automag models thus chambered, to general derision, but Ruger takes the cake with its single-action Super Blackhawk model (7½” barrel).
Why, one may ask, would one choose a single-action revolver (with its signature clunky reloading mechanism) as a companion piece for a carbine?
I’ll tell you why.
Because pound for pound, there is no more shooting fun than touching off a few (okay, lots of) .30 Carbine rounds out of this bad boy. The 18″ jet of flame comes out the muzzle, the cylinder-gap flash a couple inches too, and the recoil is about the same as a .357 Mag out of a long-barreled gun weighing nearly four pounds (!), i.e. very manageable.
And then there’s the noise. At the range, few guns can cause a “prairie dog” scenario among the other shooters, as they quit shooting their own guns and crane their necks back from the partitions to ask “What the hell was that?” I once even had a Good Samaritan rush over to see whether I’d had a barrel blowup.
As you can tell, and if you are a Reader Of Long Standing, you will no doubt realize that I have owned such a gun before. The only change I made to the Blackhawk was to change the grips into some meatier stuff which a) made it fit better in my hand and b) attenuated the recoil still more.
But lo, there came a Time of Great Poverty, wherein your Humble Narrator was forced by the moneylenders into selling his beloved .30 Carbine Blackhawk, and many bitter tears did he weep in the doing thereof.
However, the buyer was a Longtime Friend and Loyal Reader, who agreed to my terms of not selling the gun in the future unless I go right of first refusal. He never sold it.
Anyway, many years passed by until a couple weeks back, when we were idly chatting about this and that, and we came to discover that I had a gun of particular interest to him, and yes, he would absolutely entertain the idea of a straight swap thereof for the Blackhawk.
Say hello to the Prodigal Gun:
And this, O My Readers, is the gun that I had intended to shoot at the range until the foul pestilence known as the Upper Bronchial Respiratory Infection laid me low.
Next week, I promise.
One additional note: along the way, I (and my buddy) had occasion to lay up an adequate supply (+/- 1,200 rounds) of .30 Carbine ammo to feed both the M1 Carbine and the Blackhawk. Both of us had purchased a couple hundred Remington soft-point rounds (which the M1 carbine doesn’t chamber very reliably) and for reasons of price, also about 500-odd rounds of the steel-cased Wolf ammo — which, according to Reader RHT447 who knows about these things, is not good to shoot out of the M1 carbine because the steel casing beats up the action fearfully (and may have been the cause of the extractor breaking, as chronicled earlier on these pages).
Of course, the Blackhawk pays no heed to such fripperies, and being a Ruger digests the steel casings as candy. So it’s the lovely Korean-surplus FMJ ammo for the carbine, and the Remington SP and Wolf ammo for the Blackhawk.
I wonder which one will run out first.
Smith & Wesson have made several excellent revolvers over the many years of the company’s existence; in fact, they’ve made so many that the blizzard of differently-numbered models is bewildering, especially to an Older Man Of Little Brain And Much Confusion like myself.
Nevertheless, that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t look on any specific model with a jaundiced eye, oh no. Rather, we should regard each of them with extreme pleasure… and which brings us to this particular model, the 19 (from Merchant Of Death Steve Barnett) — which many regard as one of the very best:
I guess the only question to be asked is: “Would this be an acceptable gun for the Governor’s BBQ party?”
My answer would be: “Of course it would. It’s absolutely gorgeous.”
My own taste would run instead to the blued 6″ version (because blue is less show-offy, and the 6″ barrel handles the .357’s recoil better than the shorter 4″):
…but it wouldn’t matter, because it’s still the same damn fine revolver.
And yes, I know: the K-framed Mod 19 may not stand up to heavy shooting of the .357 Magnum cartridge, the N-frame (model 27) being perhaps better-manufactured for that purpose.
But honestly — and I say this as an owner of a K-frame Model 65 in the same chambering — exactly how much intensive .357 Mag shooting can one handle before there’s an aching wrist in the picture?
I just think the K-frame revolvers fit better in my hand than the beefier Ns; and that is one of my major criteria in buying a handgun, any handgun. And for those of an historical bent, it should be pointed out that S&W has been making their K-frame revolvers since the late 19th century.
Discuss.