Congress Playing Their Part

Hey, how can you argue with proposed legislation to rein in the jack-booted thugs of the ATF — especially when it’s known as the RIFLE Act?

Under the Biden Administration, ATF’s zero tolerance policy forced small and mid-sized gun stores out of business. The agency revoked Federal Firearm Licenses due to minor clerical errors like missing a customer’s middle initial or using a state’s abbreviation rather than the state’s full name. In 2024 alone, ATF saw the highest levels of gun store license revocations in 20 years—the third consecutive year of increased license revocations under President Biden’s leadership. Last week, the Biden Administration claimed it reversed its zero tolerance policy. Upon further review of the updated enforcement guidance, it appears to remain fully in effect.

Rep. Mann (R-KS) told Breitbart News, “President Biden did everything in his power to weaponize the federal government against gun store owners in the Big First District of Kansas and across the country. His zero tolerance policy undermined the Second Amendment and trampled on the constitutional rights of law-abiding citizens. Since day one, I have rigorously pushed back against this unconstitutional policy and fought for more oversight to rein in ATF’s abuse.”

He added, “On November 5, 2024, the country made it clear—our constitutional rights are not up for grabs. My bill makes that crystal clear by fortifying the Second Amendment rights of local gun stores and seeking to restore a degree of wholeness to individuals whose livelihoods were destroyed by this federal abuse. I look forward to working with President Trump to further strengthen the protection of the Second Amendment, deliver justice for our FFLs, and get our country back on track.”

Who’s the new head of the ATF, again?  (I know, I know:  a decent head of the ATF would rescind the enforcement instructions off his own bat — I know I would, if my application to head up the ATF had been successful.  But then again, considering that I’d have started shutting down the entire agency from Day 1 of my appointment, the whole issue would have been moot.)

Legal Oddity

When I first started looking to buy  gun, (very) shortly after I arrived here in the md-1980s, I was astounded to learn that while I could buy any long gun from an out-of-state Merchant Of Death, I could not buy a handgun in such fashion.

It made no sense to me back then, and it has never done so since, especially as the stupid NCIS-check thing (which has to be carried out before even buying a gun from an FFL in your home state) seems to make the whole issue a moot point.

Well then, lookee here:

The Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC) is taking on the federal ban on interstate handgun sales in their latest lawsuit. The filing is titled Elite Precision Customs v. ATF. Industry notables Tim Herron and Freddie Blish are plaintiffs alongside the FPC and Elite Precision, which is an FFL based out of Mansfield, Texas.

The federal ban makes it illegal for Herron or Blish, both of whom travel quite a bit for work, to purchase a handgun directly from Elite Precision Customs when they’re in Texas. Under current law, a handgun has to be shipped to a FFL in the buyer’s home state where the background check will be completed. If the ban can be successfully challenged, it would make it possible for people to purchase handguns directly from brick-and-mortar FFLs while visiting states in which they don’t reside.

Well, I don’t agree with the whole NCIS check thing at all anyway, but I would love to swing by a mom ‘n pop pawn shop or gun store in my travels, and pick up a handgun which caught my fancy.  (I actually stumbled on one such situation somewhere in Arizona, many years ago;  it was a peach of a 3rd Generation Colt Peacemaker, and the price was about three-quarters of what I’d expect to pay in Texas.  But noooo…)

Strikes me that if a federal law states that I need to have my ass checked before buying a gun anywhere, that a handgun should be treated no differently from, say, a shotgun.

But that would mean applying logic to Gummint — and that right there is a non-starter.  Silly me.

My Choice

Met up with Reader Jim and his lovely wife at the range yesterday at the Real New Year’s Day Shoot, and learned something  — or rather, re-discovered something.

You see, Jim’s wife had only recently started shooting, and her handgun was a compact HK 9mm with a green-dot sight.  It was shooting rather low for her, and at first I put it down to her flinch (which was quite severe;  clearly, even the mild recoil of the 9mm out of the diminutive HK was a little much for her).  I should note that she is a petite woman, and thus, I thought, the flinch.

But when I popped a few out of the HK, it still held low;  so I adjusted the sight upwards for her until it fired into the desired area.  That problem was solved, but she was still shooting a little low, and that was definitely the flinch.

So I invited her to shoot a few rounds out of my Buckmark:

…and the results were immediate, and very gratifying:  once she’d got used to the trigger, she was putting all ten rounds into a 3″ group, not once, but several times, with absolutely no flinch.  (Yup, it’s strange how much fun shooting a .22 pistol can be, huh?)

I therefore made a mild suggestion to Reader Jim that he purchase her a Buckmark to play with, and once I let go his arm and he stopped screaming with pain, he agreed that this would be A Good Thing.  (Okay, I’m lying;  he agreed immediately, with absolutely no hesitation, and a big grin on his face.)

Here’s a lesson to everyone:  if you’re going to teach someone to shoot handguns, let their first shots be out of a .22 pistol — Browning Buckmark, Ruger Mk IV, whatever — because shooting should be first and foremost a lot of fun, and you’re not going to pick up bad habits (e.g. a flinch) when shooting the .22 LR cartridge.

“So which one would you recommend, Kim?”

It’s all personal, of course.  But I’d recommend the Browning Buckmark — to be specific, this one, the Standard:


…but if Madame prefers something still lighter, there’s the Camper with its alloy barrel-sleeve:

I would stay away from the Micro, because even though it weighs next to nothing, it’s really difficult to shoot accurately at any distance past 20 feet with that lil’ shorty barrel:

Of course, you can go pretty, like with the Medallion:

…and for those of the red-dot persuasion there are these options (among many):

(For what it’s worth, this last — the Medallion Rosewood — is the one I’m lusting after, but as we speak it runs well over $800 including the scope, so I have to decide which gun I want to sell/trade to get it.  Also, it’s quite heavy — speaking for women in general — but the longer, heavier barrel makes for astounding accuracy.)

“So what about Ruger?”

There’s nothing wrong with the Ruger, specifically the Mark IV.  Here’s the Standard:

…the Target:

…and for those who would prefer less rake on the grip, the 22/45:

…which has an advantage in that it comes in a variety of girly-type colors:

 

And just so we are all on the same page, so to speak, I prefer the MkIV over all other Ruger .22 pistols because for the first time evvah it’s possible to field-strip and clean a Ruger .22 pistol without needing a third hand.  (In fact, the MkIV is easier to clean than the Buckmark, for that matter.)

And I know, cleaning the guns is typically the job of hubby / boyfriend, so this is not a little thing.  (If the woman in your life insists on cleaning her own gun, by the way, hold onto her with hoops of steel because she’s the rarest of all breeds.)

The only reason I still prefer the Buckmark over the Ruger in general is that the Buckmark’s trigger is miles better than the Ruger’s, in fact it’s better than just about any pistol ever made, including the 1911.

And of course there are jillions of other .22 pistols extant, so be my guest.  But unless Milady wants to go all historical / nostalgic with a Colt Woodsman:


…I’d stick to the above two brands.

Oh, and single-action is better than double, because the squeeze is easier for a first-time shooter.

All comments, of course, are welcome.


One final thought:  I’ve personally owned just about every variant of Buckmark and Ruger before, and fired a huge number of other .22 pistols (Walther, SIG, S&W etc.), and that’s why I pick the above two over all of them.  I will confess, however, to having no experience with the S&W SW22 Victory model, but I will happily hear stories thereof.

A Tale Of “Sixties”

Fiend Reader JC_In_PA sends me this article, which compares two old rimfire warhorses (the Marlin Model 60 and the Ruger 10/22) and then invites me to wade into the argument — which he correctly compares to the various X vs. Y arguments in the gun world (.45 ACP vs. 9mm, etc.).

And I respectfully decline the invitation.

You see, I’ve owned both at various times in my life, fired at least a jillion rounds through each — more than a few times at the same range session together — and for the life of me I can’t / won’t declare a favorite.

I love the heavier barrel of the Mod 60 — I shoot it more accurately than I do the 10/22 — and likewise prefer the reloading ease of the 10/22’s magazine over the Marlin’s tube.

At the moment, I don’t have a 10/22 — if anybody has a spare one that isn’t worn out, I’ll take it under advisement — but I’m not under any pressure to get one because I do have a Mod 60 standing in Ye Olde Gunne Sayfe #2 (alongside its bolt-action brother, the scoped Mod 880 SQ).

With these two Marlin brothers, therefore, I can indulge my plinking needs, whether in volume at tin cans (60) or when the occasion calls for single-hole accuracy at varmints or swinging plates (880).  I am blissfully happy with either activity.  While both rifles “prefer” CCI Min-Mag ammo, the Mod 60 will shoot just about anything, whereas the 880’s pinhole accuracy tends to drift towards more of a quarter-sized hole.

So yeah, I could do with some kind of 10/22 (because reasons) — such as this one:

…because with my crappy old-fart-eyesight, I need a scope to see the stupid target and one is somewhat limited in scope choice with the Mod 60 because of the scope mount shortcomings;  but I can’t honestly say that the lack thereof is burning a hole in my psyche, either.

What I really want is a Ruger 10/22M (.22 Win Mag) in its “International” full-stock variation:


…but they make hen’s teeth look like a household commodity, and when one does become available, it’s generally at a price which makes my nuts ache and causes my trigger finger to go numb.

Anyway… I seem to have wandered off the reservation here, but there ya go.

Marlin Model 60 or Ruger 10/22?  Take yer pick;  either is a good choice.

By the way:  everyone does own a .22 rifle, right?  Because if not:

It’s un-American.

(Furrin Readers — including those in New Jersey — get a pass on this one, because as we all know, semi-auto .22 rifles are the cause of a million human deaths every second — I read it on Teh Intarwebz, so it must be true  — and that’s why they’re banned in your benighted countries.)

Oh, and the title of this post?

The Marlin was released in 1960, while the Ruger 10/22 was released in 1964, making last year its sixtieth anniversary.

Ummmm

Saith C.W.:

And it is, right up until you pull the trigger.  I’ve had one of these in the past, and let me tell y’all, that teeny barrel doesn’t help with the .357 Mag’s recoil at all.

Carry lots, shoot a great deal less.