|On Monday, June 22nd, Senate Bill 67 and House Bill 91 went into effect.
As previously reported, SB 67, introduced by Senator C.B. Embry (R-6), allows the citizens of Kentucky more options for meeting the training requirement when applying for a Concealed Deadly Weapons License. Courses offered by the NRA and other national organizations may now be used, streamlining the time and expense required in obtaining a CDWL.
House Bill 91, introduced by Representative James Kay (D-56), clarifies Kentucky’s charitable gaming statutes, allowing nonprofits such as the Friends of the NRA to host more events.
Thank you to everyone who contacted your elected officials in support of these measures.
This post was originally written by Hognose, from Weaponsman.com . He kindly gave me permission to re-post it here as a guest post and we are always thrilled to share his work. You can read more of the websites always excellent and always entertaining and informative posts by going to this link.
Indeed it is the best website not out own.
Larry Vickers is thinking about safety:
Hat tip Miguel at Gun Free Zone, who wonders if one of the mishaps Larry’s writing about is this one. You can click the link if you like (and it’s a good tale of real-world first aid), but for most of you, the illustration will remind you what can go wrong with appendix carry.
That cat was danger close to living to collect the usually posthumous Darwin Award, but apparently the projectile did not connect with anything vital in his junk. Good luck, though, explaining that scar to dates. (“Go ahead and kiss it. It’s just a chancre!” probably won’t fly).
Instructor (and aidman) Stan Lee’s conclusions:
Briefing of the four firearms safety rules is of course a given, after that the first aid/gun shot wound treatment and medical evacuation plan should be thoroughly briefed as if an emergency incident had already happened to you.
He then runs through an emergency kit and emergency plan. It’s a good idea, for reasons we’ll cover in half a moment.
Someone should be able to brief all of the above in detail. That someone should be with the party from the beginning to the end. I think it’s acceptable to have the GSW kit centralized but extra credit points for wearing it.
Stan learned his first aid in the Navy. All the services teach much better and more effective first aid than they did when old dinosaurs like Tom Kratman and I went in, and even better than my old unit had on our first Afghan tour. Didn’t happen to our battalion, but in and around our time, other SF units lost guys because they exsanguinated, or developed tension pneumothorax, and the non-medics on site weren’t skilled enough to treat them. (Well, that, and medevac was weak until 2004 or so — too few frames and crews, and it’s a big country). That would never happen now; even support units get pretty decent combat life saver training.
Still, it’s a lot better to use your superior weapons handling skills so as not to have to demonstrate your superior first aid skills.
Stan makes another point (and another reason to Read The Whole Thing™ on Miguel’s site) in that simply briefing safety rules and plans at the start of a class is a Real Good Thing. In aviation, we found that when aircrews began briefing an instrument approach procedure-by-procedure, the number of errors (and mishaps) declined. In airborne operations, we found that when airborne units started doing a formal, stylized prejump briefing that everybody (especially devil-may-care skydivers) laughs at, the number of errors (and jump injuries) declined. It’s great that an American paratroop officer can command his battalion, regiment or division from a wheelbarrow pushed by one of his privates, but he’d probably rather not go down in history for that.
IWB and particularly Appendix Carry holsters introduce risk factors that are not present in an old-fashioned outside-the-waistband holster. (We also think that schools’ focus on quick-draw engagements is usually misplaced). You can have an accident with any holster, but unless you’ve got a lot of experience, choose one that adds minimal risks.
As Larry notes, if you use a safetyless (“trigger safety”, “safe action”, anything that would have scared the horse out from under a 1909 cavalryman who had the grip safety added to the 1911) firearm you need to be extra careful about holstering and reholstering. Or, well, look at the picture.
Now, you can choose any firearm, and every one has its own risk factors. You can operate any handgun safely (we do not believe Larry has ever had an ND in God-knows how many Glock rounds), but you have to know it and its properties and operate it either with your mind on it 100%, or with skills drilled and drilled until you’re always, instinctively safe with it.
As the graphic we usually use with safety posts says, if you shoot yourself in a training class, “Your [sic] Doing It Wrong.” Like this fellow in the ‘burbs of Orlando, Florida:
23-year-old man accidentally shot himself during a gun safety class at a pawn shop, according to the Orange County Sheriff’s Office.
It happened at Instant Replay Pawn Shop and Shooting Range on Colonial Drive between Dean and Rouse roads, said Lt. Paul Hopkins.
The gun went off accidentally and the bullet grazed his leg, Hopkins said.
Amazing how this guns just “went off.” No wonder newspaper guys all want to ban guns, they think of them as malevolent presences, stalking training classes and firing ranges, bent on bringing their primordial evil to bear on their hapless bearers.
Of course, that’s all bosh and nonsense. They’re simply machines, slavishly obeying the laws of physics and the input human operators apply to their user interfaces. In all history, the gun that “went off accidentally” is rarer that a comet sighting. He should admit he “set it off accidentally.” He, too, is going to live.
He’ll probably never make that mistake again. But you know, we’re supposed to be able to learn from his mistake, rather than only learn from our own.
Last year with the release of Glock 42, Loose Rounds was one of the first to get out a completely stripped down look at it. We have had to wait a little while to get the new single stack 9mm G43, as it is probably the most awaited single stack 9mm in history. Now that we have it, let’s strip it all the way down and compare the parts.
The new G43 has several unique, redesigned, internal components that are very different from all other Glock’s. You can see it is a 2 pin design, like the old Gen2 Glock’s, with a Gen4 magazine release and stippling identical to the G42. I have completely stripped this G43 to give you an idea of what the new internal parts are. The Slide and Frame are obviously different between the two fireams ,but when completely stripping the G43, you will notice some of the parts are similar to the G42. In-fact some of the internal parts are the same as the G42, but not all. While I will not go into a complete tutorial on how to strip your Glock down, it is not extremely difficult and you can learn how to properly do it with some quality research.
When stripping the G43 completely down, pay close attention to the parts that are significantly different in their design and placement in the G43, compared to the traditional larger Glock Models. Also if you have a G42 make sure you are very familiar with what parts are compatible with the G43 and which ones are not. Below are several pictures of a completely stripped G43, the new internal parts and parts that are shared with the G42.
LOWER RECEIVER PARTS
The front Trigger Pin is slightly larger, as the frame is wider, and is marked differently in the G43. The G42 pin has two circle cuts where the Slide Stop Lever engages the pin. The rear Trigger Housing Pin, interestingly, appears to be the same as the G42 pin.
The Locking Block appears to be the same as in the G42. They fit in both of the firearms.
Slide Stop Lever:
The Slide Stop Lever looks almost identical as in the G42, but you can see the spring tabs on the G43 Slide Stop are different. Also, The shape of the them is slightly different on the angle bars above the spring and they do have different part numbers. I found they worked in both firearms even though they have differences. I also have a G42 Vickers Slide Stop Lever and it works in both firearms but the Vickers is very loose in the G43. Im not sure I would bet my life on it working, so I would wait for the Vickers to come out in a G43 specific configuration.
Trigger Mechanism Housing w/ Ejector & Connector:
The Trigger Mechanism Housing (TMH) with Ejector and Connector, are identical to that of the G42. All the part numbers on the TMH and the Ejector are the same.
The Trigger Spring parts, from what I can tell they appear to be the same part as in the G42.
The Magazine Release is slightly larger in the G43. The frame is just a little wider and the Magazine Release has a different part number. These parts are not compatible between the two firearms.
The Tigger Bar is longer in the G43 and the part numbers are different. Unfortunately it is not compatible with the G42. I was hoping they would be the same as I absolutely hate Glock serrated triggers and I was hoping to swap it out to the G42 smooth trigger.
The Slide Lock is slightly larger in the G43. The frame is just a little wider and the Slide Lock has a different part number. The Slide Lock Spring appears to be the same part.
SLIDE UPPER PARTS
Barrel & Recoil Spring Assembly:
Obviously the Barrel and Recoil Spring are larger on the G43.
Slide Cover Plate:
The Slide Cover Plate is slightly larger on the G43. The plates will fit in each slide, but the G43 Plate is taller and does not match up with the inside of the slide on the G42, making reassembly of the slide and frame impossible.
Firing Pin Safety:
The Firing Pin Safety is completely different on the G43 vs G42, it is larger. Again it can only go in one way. The smaller notch on the left side of Firing Pin Safety faces the Firing Pin. The Firing Pin Safety Spring appears to be the same part.
Firing Pin Assembly:
The Firing Pin assembly is very interesting. Some parts are the same as the G42 and others are not. The Spring Cups and Firing Pin Spring appear to be identical to the G42. The Firing Pin and the Channel Liner are clearly larger.
Extractor Depressor Plunger:
The Extractor Depressor Plunger Rod is larger on the G43, but the Depressor Plunger Spring and the Spring Loaded Bearing appear to be identical as the G42s.
The Extractor is slightly larger and has a different part number on the G43. It is extremely hard to tell the size difference visually, but the G43 Extractor is wider than the G42s.
If you are not a Glock Armorer, Gunsmith or you are very unfamiliar with stripping your Glock down; I would not recommend any disassembly past regular field strip maintenance. Most people will have no need to break the firearm down to this level. A few of the G43 parts look identical or are the same parts in the G42, but several are also newly designed/beefed up for the larger 9mm G43. Hopefully this answered some of the questions out there about compatibility of parts with the G42 and G43.
For more information on how the parts fit in the single stack Glocks, see the link below.
Recently LaRue Tactical ran a sale on his 2 stage match trigger called the “Meticulously Built Trigger”. I bought one for during this sale for $125.
The MBT trigger came nicely packaged, it looks good and appears to be well made. The disconnector is riveted in place making the trigger a little easier to install than a Geissele SSA trigger.
I noticed the pins that came with the my MBT trigger were slightly longer then the average trigger/hammer pin. This caused them to stick out from the lower just slightly. In the picture below you can see the trigger pin sticking out from the receiver. The hammer pin is reversed and is sticking out similarly on the other side.
When I compared this trigger to the Geissele SSA, I found I preferred the SSA by a very small margin. I find the second stage to be just a touch stiffer than the SSA. When the MBT was new, it was noticeably stiffer and longer pull than the SSA, but after being greased and a few rounds fired it feels mostly similar to the SSA. The MBT used to be priced at $250, the SSA $220, at those prices I would always recommend the SSA over the MBT. At the sale price of $125, I don’t think the MBT can be beat. Now I see the MBT is priced at $200, which makes it better competition for the Geissele SSA.
The MBT appears to be a good trigger, but honestly I currently prefer the SSA a bit over it. The MBT is a very nice trigger and if you want one, get it. I am looking forward to seeing how it feels after it has more rounds on it and is better broken in.
A test and review of the SCAR-L by us has been long in coming. Over the past few days, we did finally got a chance to test and evaluate a SCAR. I shot it in some drills and did accuracy testing of it in my normal manner or off of a bench using sand bags.
The SCAR probably needs not introduction at this point in time. It was developed by FN to be what they hoped would be the replacement for the M4 carbine. Well. That did not happen, turns out it was not all that much better as claimed and the 5.56 guns issued out to certain elite units, were turned back in for M4s. That does not mean it is a bad gun or unreliable, just that it was not considered to really be much of an improvement over the excellent M4 family of weapons. Thought the 7.62 model has had more success.
So, to see for ourselves and those who may be thinking about getting one, lets take a look at it.
One of the bigger hyped things about the SCAR is the folding stock and the reciprocating charging handle. The gun came to me with the charging handle on the right side. I found this intolerable. If you are a lefty it would not be bad at all. But most of us are not. The charging handle was swapped to the left side where it was much better for handling. Then I found out that it was in the perfect place for me to tear the skin off my knuckles when charging the weapon if it had any optic mount on it. I had to be careful about this after a couple of times learning the slow way.
The Stock folding to the side does make it very compact, and unlike the AK type. it is also adjustable for length. I found it not to be bad at all. But not really all that great either. In the past there has been people reporting the stock to have some durability issues, but I had since heard that was over come on newer models. The stock also had a adjustable cheek rest I found marginally useful while I had it. Though I am sure it would be of benefit with some optics.
One thing to remember if you buy one, is that it will not take a military standard spec AR15 grip. So if you want to use something else you have to do some fitting with the grip or gun….
The optic that came with the gun is a Elcan Specter. I am not going to review it,since this is mainly about the gun. but it had a a max power of 4x and could switch to 1x and a red dot along with a few other gem jams. It was mounted with the ARMS throw levers that excelled at skinning my knuckles when using the charging handle on the left side.
I shot the SCAR at 100 yards using my usual method. First used 77 grain match ammo. You can see the results above. I have no explanation for the left side flyer. The gun’s barrel has a 1/7 inch twist. so it can stabilize the heavy rounds.
The above target it labeled both dots as 55gr Tactical Urban Rifle ammo, but that was a mistake on my part. I was talking to a friend while doing it and made a mistake. right side is 55gr. and the left is M855.
In rapid fire drills, I was surprised by it. The guns muzzle break is very effective. It is very flat and mild in recoil. Though it has plenty of unpleasant blast like any brake. After the first magazine I remarked it felt almost like a 22LR. The gun with that brake was calmer and flatter in recoil than any surefire brake I have used on a weapon of like size and barrel length and contour. Speaking of the barrel contour, it is thin. Thinner than I would ever want. Especially on a gun meant for heavy use. It got hot very fast and stayed hot. In addition to the pleasant recoil mitigating brake, this gun has a really good trigger. I have forgotten the make of the trigger but will get the info and update this with it as soon as I can. But the smooth match trigger and the muzzle device made the gun something easy to shoot. I can see why some use it in 3 gun type events. With the grip provided on the gun though. it was impossible for me to work the safety without changing my grip with the firing hand,
A few other points and opinions that may be unique to me. The rail section of the gun as is, is not enough. If you need more than a weapon light on the the stock gun, you are going to need a VFG. It is no wonder that companies came out with rail extenders for the weapon so fast. Another thing is, I was not a fan of the way it field strips as compared to the AR15. Also the front sight was not as intuitive as I would have preferred. Of course all this is probably due to me having much more time with AR15s and the hear set up for them. A warning to the “fit and finish ” and ” I want my guns to look good!” crowd. The color of the finish does not match. You will have about 3 different shades of FDE. so if you cry yourself to sleep at night because you have brass marks on your case deflectors, then you better not buy this one.
I enjoyed shooting the SCAR-L. But in my opinion, it is certainly not better than or more easy to use over an M4. I do not feel it to be more accurate than a good Ar15 either ( at least this model). I thought the stock left a lot to be desired. Reloading it was not much different than on a M4 thought the safety has a shorter arc to travel from safe to fire. Sad to say the grip used on the gun did not allow me to see for myself if it was really an advantage, I am doubtful it really is a huge advantage even if it seems like it would be. If you want to be different or want one for whatever reason and have the money and think you will love it. then you are probably right. but it is not for me.
If I had to make a recommendation on the SCAR weapons, I would suggest following the Army Rangers example and get the SCAR-H in 7.62 instead
One last detail. I used an ATLAS bipod on the gun over the 3 days time with the gun. I thought it had some nice features, and was certainly well made, but I do not consider it as handy as a decent Harris Bipod. I would not buy one with my own money. And if given one, I would not use it for anything that needed to be able to deploy it fast.
By Catherine Lindsay
At MAGS Indoor Shooting, Moriarty, NM, I teach a 6-hour Ladies Intro to Shooting class. This is a ladies-only class, for both novices and semi-experienced, teaching the basics: safety, basic parts of semi-auto/revolver & how they work, components of a round, loading magazines, proper grip & stance, and finding your sights. After the classroom time, we go to the range, where the ladies are able to shoot a .22 pistol, a .22 rifle, a .38 large-frame revolver, and any gun they have brought with them (usually a small-frame .38 revolver, a .380 semi-auto, or 9mm).
I use my Ruger SR1911 for classroom demonstration, mainly becuase it is large enough that the ladies can see all the moving parts from their seats and because it is my favorite! The “dummy” guns are based on full-size Glock & S & W M & P. Throughout the class, the ladies get to handle all the guns and they find that the full-size guns, both real & “dummy”, are more comfortable in their hands then the smaller guns they either own or have had suggested to them by SO’s/salepersons.
Once we get onto the range, many of the ladies want to try the 1911, as they have never shot one before. What some have told me: “Bigger/heavier=harder to shoot”, and “I was told I was too small/frail to handle a .45”.
Once the ladies are shown the proper grip/stance and how to operate the external safety, the first shot is almost always a big surprise to them, as they are used to a longer/heavier trigger. Each subsequent shot is controlled & the resultant holes can be coverd by the hand. They are also surprised by the controllable recoil, as they are used to a small revolver. I explain to them that the weight & size of a gun aids in recoil control. The ladies are so pumped by the fact that they CAN shoot a big gun!
I think the ladies leave my class more open-minded as to what they may choose to shoot/carry in the future.
We have a new Post from a new writer, Catherine Lindsay. She will be helping out with more articles from the ladies perspective.
For many ladies, the idea of shooting anything other than a small .38 revolver (the gun most likey to be pushed on them by well-meaning SO’s & counter guys) is daunting. But, after what I witnessed over the weekend, their minds can be changed.I regularly help out with CCW qualifications. In NM, the CCW license is caliber-specific, meaning one can carry any caliber below what is qualified with. Most CCWer’s qualify with a .45 semi-auto & a .38/.357 revolver.
Many ladies come into class with the idea of qualifying ONLY with the .38 revolver, and maybe a 9mm semi-auto, thinking that anything larger is just not controllable. They mistakenly believe that they are too small/too frail to handle a larger caliber. With gently coaxing by the instructors, they are willing to try.
After teaching them some basic fundamentals of good shooting (grip, stance, sight alignment), they soon find that the weight & shorter/lighter trigger pull of the .45, particularly the 1911, is MUCH easier to manage than a revolver. They are surprised by the ease of recoil control (again with proper stance & grip), and often do better than their male counterparts, as they have come to the .45 with no bad habits to correct. Ladies also find, especially on the 1911, the thumb safety to be comforting, as they are very safety-conscience.
As to whether this experience will gear them towards carrying a .45 is unknown, but I think that getting over the “big caliber” hurdle will help them to keep a more open mind as to carry options.