Thursday, March 26, 2009

Clarity is not optional in front of a frightened crowd.

(This would have gone in a comment on the relevant page, but on said page the captcha system went insane, and locked me out. This is my recourse.)

(page in question: )

Now, I've very carefully reviewed both posts, and determined the problem here.

Mr. Yon, you are guilty of horrible timing. You see, today on the news we all heard Secretary Clinton invoke AmMex as a prime reason to reinstate the assault weapons ban. You turn this phrase;

"I have no plans to give up my hardware, but we must be honest here and help curb flows that are killing Mexicans and Americans. "

..without any corroboration or real explanation. In the mind of the reader, who has just had the world painted in terms of Mexico==AWB thanks to Hillary, you just said "Ain't gettin' rid of mine, but some's got to be rid of".

McCaffrey uses the same idea in his post, but a little clearer.

"We owe the Mexican people better protection of their security forces by effectively interdicting the huge US flow of automatic weapons and laundered drug money back south. (26,000 weapons seized last year.) "

Heuristically, exactly the same as your sentiment (I gather, as you are unclear). Interdiction of illegal arms trade does not equal AWB, and would likely be highly supported by the community of shooters.

There is nothing patently offensive to the "gun crowd" in McCaffrey's NJO writing. It's quite supportable. But the TIMING is AWFUL, particularly to bring it up in the midst of a vague and "buzzword" filled post, which paints the NJO article and colors it's tone by association. And yes, your post is rather vague and buzzy, given the "mood of the day".

And if that wasn't bad enough, Mr. Yon, I've seen your initial reply, even though it's off the site. It's offensive, both directly and indirectly to the intelligence of the reader.

"My work is misquoted around the world every day, but nowhere as often as on my own site. "

Fantastic. Unfortunately in this instance your work was misquoted because the definition and intent was not clear at all.

"If they invest only that minimal level of attention to the guns they are apparently packing, it's just a matter of time before they accidentally shoot themselves or someone else. Attention to detail is an important component of gun safety."

Oh, Mr. Yon. On the defensive, and antagonizing the audience. That's not a very wise move, particularly when the vast crowd who's disturbed by the original post consists of more than a few supporters... or ex-supporters. You shifted to a high-handed tone and patronized an angry mob of "hurt" people who thought you were "one of the guys".

It's a mistake, I'm telling you. And you'd best consider your next response to these people and make a clear, unequivocal statement on your stance and the intent of your post or they will, as they have already started, eat you alive in front of the altar of Zumbo.

I don't want to see that happen, you do good work.

Tuesday, March 10, 2009

Suitably strange.

I haven't had a truly "odd" thought stream in a while. And then, one struck.

.38 S&W. 9mm Makarov. Has anyone ever really looked at how close these are?

1 - With a .002" swaging, you should be able to load ~95gr Makarov bullets in .38 S&W cases, and probably get close to the listed 1000fps ballistics (if you can get 800fps from a 158gr, you ought to be well within pressures with a 200fps rise on a bullet less than 2/3 the weight). If I had a ballistics simulation program I could figure what .361"@95gr FMJ into 14Kpsi ends up being, but I don't.

2 - With relatively little work, one could modify a makarov-based platform into a .38 S&W single shot and possibly still get reasonable accuracy of it. The .38 case is only 0.060 longer roughly, and the rim could be accounted for by filing the end of the chamber down... you may have the bullet stuck into the rifling but you're 0.002" undersized soft lead.

3 - With even less work, and some crossed fingers, it seems to me that one could, given a suitably strong pistol, shoot 9mm Mak out of a .38 S&W revolver. I AM IN NO WAY, SHAPE, OR FORM ADVOCATING ANYONE ATTEMPT THIS. .38 S&W is 14,000psi, Mak is 23,000PSI, halfway between .38sp +P and .357 Magnum. I'm just looking at the numbers here... if you stuck a .015" thickness C-clip into the extractor rim of a mak cartridge, you have a reasonable, though .002" oversized, approximation of the size of the .38 S&W.

You will very probably damage the gun beyond repair, but that's handy to know if you're stuck in the middle of nowhere during zombie apocalypse, and you have everything and the kitchen sink with you as far as "common" calibers, but someone in your party has Grandad's old Enfield tanker and no ammo. One zombie, two zombie, three zombie, four, *ping* there goes the top latch, gun's thoroughly toast but you're +4 better in the odds bank, better some help than none right?

Ramble ramble ramble...

Sunday, March 08, 2009

I don't work at CCA for the guns or the money, no...

I work there for the incredibly stylish pens we get every year. I do seriously like this though :)


H&R handi-rifle SB2, in .357 magnum

LOOK at the beef around that chamber! I'm not particularly worried about *any* commercial load I can find ever wearing this sucker out.

And, I finally figured out how to take a photo of a reticle; this is a Tasco Pronghorn 2.5x with the diamond reticle. Works very well with this package.

The irony won't be lost on some folks... the pen photos were taken using the lovely robins-egg blue of the ATF's 2005 publication 5300.5, State Laws and Published Ordinances - Firearms.