LooseRounds.com5.56 Timeline
Weaponsman.com

 

Doug Casey: Six Reasons Why The Wrong Party Will Win The Most Important US Election Since 1860

I am not saying he is right, but I am saying it’s something we need to think about. Personally I chose to prepare my life in a way that assumes the commies are going to win. I suggest you do the same and vote like your life depends on it because it does.-Shawn

Authored by Doug Casey via InternationalMan.com,

The upcoming election may be the most important in US history. At least as important as that of 1860, which led directly to the War Between the States.

In 2016 I believed Trump would win and placed a money bet on him.

This time I’m not so sure, despite Trump’s “incumbent advantage” and the fact the Democrats could hardly have picked two worse candidates.

I see at least six reasons why this is true, namely:

  1. The Virus
  2. The economy
  3. Demographics
  4. Moral collapse of the old order
  5. The Deep State
  6. Cheating

The consequences of a Democrat victory will be momentous.

Let’s look at why it’s likely.

1. The Virus

Despite the fact COVID is only marginally more deadly than the annual flu, and the fact it’s only a danger to the very old (median death age 80), the hysteria around it is changing the nature of life itself. It’s proven much less serious than the Asian flu of the late ’60s or the Hong Kong flu of the late ’50s. And not even remotely comparable to the Spanish flu of 1918-19. None of those had any discernable effect on the economy or politics. COVID is a trivial medical event but has created a gigantic psychological hysteria.

The virus hysteria is, however, a disaster from Trump’s point of view for several reasons. None of them have anything to do with his “handling” of the virus—apart from the fact that medical issues should be a matter between a patient and his doctor, not bureaucrats and politicians.

First, the virus hysteria is severely limiting the number and size of Trump’s rallies, which he relies on to keep enthusiasm up.

Second, more people are staying at home and watching television than ever before. However, unless they glue their dial to Fox, they’ll gravitate towards the mainstream media, which is stridently anti-Trump. People who are on the fence (and most voters are always in the wishy-washy middle) will mostly hear authoritative-sounding anti-Trump talking heads on television, and they’ll be influenced away from Trump.

Third, older people have by far the heaviest voter turnout, but roughly 80% of the casualties of the virus are elderly. And over 90% of those deaths are related to some other condition. Be that as it may, fear will make older people less likely to vote in this election. The COVID hysteria will still be with us in November. Older people tend to be culturally conservative and are most likely Trumpers.

Fourth, in today’s highly politicized world, the government is supposed to be in charge of everything. Despite the fact there are thousands of viruses, and they’ve been with us thousands of years, this one is blamed on the current government. Boobus americanus will tend to vote accordingly.

2. The Economy

Keeping his voters at home is one thing. But the effects the hysteria is having on the economy are even more important. The effect of COVID on the economy should be trivial since only a small fraction of the relatively few Covid deaths are among people who are economically active.

Presidents always take credit when the economy is good and are berated when it’s bad on their watch, regardless of whether they had anything to do with it. If the economy is still bad in November—and I’ll wager it’s going to be much worse, despite the Fed creating trillions of new dollars, and the government handouts—many people will reflexively vote against Trump.

In February, before the lockdown, there were about 3.2 million people collecting unemployment. Now, there are about 30 million. So it seems we have over 30 million working-age people who are . . . displaced. That doesn’t count part-time workers, who aren’t eligible for unemployment but are no longer working.

The supplementary benefits have ended. If they return, it will be at lower levels. The artificial good times brought on by free money will end too. It will be blamed on the Republicans.

Worse, the public has come to the conclusion that a guaranteed annual income works. This virus hysteria has provided a kind of test for both Universal Basic Income and Modern Monetary Theory—helicopter money. So far, anyway, it seems you really can get something for nothing.

An important note here: Trump—whatever his virtues—is an economic ignoramus. He’s supported both helicopter money and artificially low-interest rates since he’s been in office. But especially now, because he knows it’s all over if today’s financial house of cards collapses on his watch.

I’ll wager that, out of the 160 million work-force Americans, 30 million will still be out of work by voting day. The recognition that the country is in a depression will sink in. The virus hysteria was just the pin—or sledgehammer, perhaps—that broke the bubble. But that’s another story. What’s for sure is that the average American will look for somebody to blame. As things get seriously bad, people will want to change the system itself, as was true in the 1930s.

The only economic bright spot for Trump is the stock market. But it’s at bubble levels. Not because the economy is doing well, but because of the avalanche of money being printed. Where it is in November is a question of how much more money the Fed will print, and how much of it flows into the stock market. Even then, there’s an excellent chance it could collapse between now and the election.

For reasons I’ve detailed in the past, the economy is now entering the trailing edge of a gigantic financial and economic hurricane. The Greater Depression will be much different, longer-lasting, and nastier than the unpleasantness of 1929-1946. And people vote their pocketbook. Bill Clinton was right when he said, “It’s the economy, stupid.” If stocks fall, it will compound this effect. A high stock market just gives the illusion of prosperity. And, at least while stocks are up, contributes to the atmosphere of class warfare. Poor people don’t own stocks.

3. Demographics

Since the gigantic political, economic, and social crisis we’re in will be even more obvious come November, people will want a radical change. Since that—plus lots of free stuff—is what the Democrats are promising, they’re likely to win. But there are other factors.

The last election was close enough, but now, four years later, there are four more cohorts of kids that have gone through high school and college and have been indoctrinated by their uniformly left-wing teachers. They’re going to vote Democrat overwhelmingly.

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (AOC), and people like her, are both the current reality and the future of the Democratic Party—and of the US itself. She knows how to capitalize on envy and resentment. The Black Lives Matter and Antifa movements have added the flavor of a race war to the mix. Racial antagonism will become more pronounced as whites lose their majority status over the next 30 years.

Nobody, except for a few libertarians and conservatives, is countering the purposefully destructive ideas AOC represents. But they have a very limited audience and not much of a platform. Arguing for sound money and limited government makes them seem like Old Testament prophets to Millenials. Collectivism and statism are overwhelming the values of individualism and liberty.

It’s exactly the type of thing the Founders tried to guard against by restricting the vote to property owners over 21, going through the Electoral College. Now, welfare recipients who are only 18 can vote, and the Electoral College is toothless.

For the last couple of generations, everybody who’s gone to college has been indoctrinated with leftist ideas. Almost all of the professors hold these ideas—as well as high school and grade school instructors. They place an intellectual patina on top of emotional, fantasy-driven leftist ideas.

When the economy collapses in earnest, everybody will blame capitalism. Because Trump is rich, he’s incorrectly associated with capitalism. The country—especially the young, the poor, and the non-white—will look to the government to “do something.” They see the government as a cornucopia.

A majority of Millennials are in favor of socialism, as are so-called People of Color. By 2050, whites will be a minority in the US. A straw in the wind is that a large majority of the people who commit suicide each year are middle-class white males—essentially, Trump supporters. The demographic handwriting is on the wall. Trump’s election in 2016 was an anomaly. No more than a Last Hurrah.

4. Moral Collapse

There’s now a lot of antagonism toward both free minds and free markets. A majority of Americans appear to actually support BLM, an openly Marxist movement. Forget about free minds—someone might be offended, and you’ll be pilloried by the mob. Forget about free markets—they’re blamed for all the economic problems, even though it’s the lack of them that caused the problem. The idea of capitalism is now considered undefendable.

Widespread dissatisfaction with the system is obviously bad for the Republicans and good for the Democrats, who promote themselves as the party of change.

It used to be pretty simple—the Republicans and the Democrats were just two sides of the same coin, like Tweedledee and Tweedledum. Traditionally, one promoted the warfare state more, the other the welfare state. But it was mostly rhetoric; they were pretty collegial. Now, both the welfare and the warfare state have been accepted as part of the cosmic firmament by both parties. The difference between them is now about cultural issues. Except that polite disagreement has turned into visceral hatred.

The Dems at least stand for some ideas—although they’re all bad ideas. The Republicans have never stood for any principles; they just said the Dems wanted too much socialism, too fast, which is why they were always perceived—correctly—as hypocrites. Antagonism between the right and the left is no longer political or economic—it’s cultural. That’s much more serious.

Look at the 20 Democratic candidates that were in the primary debates last summer. They were all radical collectivists, dedicated statists. The Republicans were all—with one exception—mealy-mouthed nonentities.

Unlike Trump and the Reps, the Dems actually have a core of philosophical beliefs—and that counts during chaos. It doesn’t matter that they’re irrational or evil. People want to believe in something. The Dems give them a secular religion that promises a better world. The Reps only represent the withering status quo—which is not very appealing.

There’s no political salvation coming from the Republican party. Like Trump himself, it doesn’t have any core principles. It just reacts to the Dems and proposes similar, but less radical alternatives to their ideas. It doesn’t stand for anything. It’s only capable of putting forward empty suits, pure establishment figures like Bob Dole, Mitt Romney, or Bush. Or a nobody like Pence. That’s a formula for disaster in today’s demographic and cultural environment.

Incidentally, I’m not a fan of Trump, per se. He’s an opportunist who flies by the seat of his pants. He’s essentially an American Peron, whose economic policies are disjointed and inconsistent. His foreign policies are dangerous, provoking the Iranians and the Russians and starting a cold war with China that could easily spin out of control and turn into a major hot war.

But on the bright side, he’s a cultural conservative. And that’s why people support him. He wants to see the US return to the golden days of yesteryear, the world of Leave it to Beaver, Ozzie, and Harriet, and Father Knows Best. We’d all like to see domestic tranquility and rising prosperity. But that’s not the world we’re going to be living in, not just for 2020, but the whole decade.

For years, I’ve joked that I planned on watching riots on my widescreen from a secure location, not out my front window. Things have now become so predictable that when I turn on the news, I kill the audio and just put the Stone’s “Street Fighting Man” on a continuous loop.

Anyway, conservatives are completely demoralized. They’re grasping at cultural and moral straws from a bygone era. It’s impossible to defend being a white person anymore; propaganda has made it shameful to be white. If you object to the race-baiters, you’ll be shouted down in the media—especially by white “liberals.” Everything you grew up with and thought was part of the cosmic firmament is being washed away as unworthy.

As an example, recently, in Stone Mountain, Georgia, 1,000 uniformed, armed black men went out of their way to say that they were looking for a fight. “Where are the rednecks that want to fight with us?”

It would have been out of the question at any time in the past, but no rednecks showed up to the party. That’s partially because they’ve been psychologically cowed, and partially because they recognize that if they did when law enforcement arrived, they’d be the ones that were prosecuted, not the black men.

It’s a complete inversion of what would have been the case only a generation ago. Then the blacks would have been too psychologically cowed to turn up for a fight, and the legal system would have railroaded them.

Just to be clear, I’m opposed to any kind of identity politics, regardless of the group. The point is that there’s been a sea change in mass psychology.

The demoralization of the ancien regime is why the destroyers of scores of statues of national heroes, from Columbus on down, are not being prosecuted. Nor do any citizens come out to oppose them. It’s a matter of psychology. Whites and conservatives no longer believe in themselves. When that’s true, it’s game over. Yes, I know it’s not true of all of them—but I believe it’s a fair generalization.

This was spelled out very presciently by late Soviet defector Yuri Bezmenov, a KGB agent who fled to Canada in 1970. Bezmenov stated in the mid-1980s that there were four stages of collapse: Demoralization, Destabilization, Crisis, and Normalization. Demoralization takes decades. Bezemov said in 1985 that the process of demoralization—an undermining of a target nation’s values that makes it ripe for revolutionary takeover—was “basically completed already” in the United States. Destabilization, which we’ve seen, especially since the crisis of 2008, is now reaching a climax. I believe a Crisis that changes everything is coming in November.

5. The Deep State

The president is important. But the fact of the matter is that the Deep State—which is to say the top senators and congressmen, heads of the Praetorian agencies, generals, top corporate guys, top academic guys, top media people—really runs the country.

Since the Deep State supports Biden and despises Trump, they’ll do everything in their power to defeat him. You’ve seen this with numerous commercials that don’t sell products so much as promote Woke and SJW ideology. Almost all corporations, universities, sports franchises, and media now make diversity hiring and social activism high priorities.

The 2016 election took them by surprise; they didn’t think it was possible. This time they’re going to be organized, and the Deep State is going to be working actively against Trump’s reelection. Whether it’s through active “de-platforming” by Google, Twitter, and Facebook, or the more subtle influence of how they present things, this time, they’re going all out to derail Trump. They have immense power and can use it in many ways.

They didn’t do much in 2016 because it hardly seemed worth the trouble; the election was thought to be in the bag for Hillary. This time it’s going to be different.

6. Cheating

The first five factors are important; they represent megatrends, tidal size influences. But let’s be candid. This election is going to hinge on who cheats the best. And the Democrats have, over the years, developed far greater expertise in cheating than the Republicans. I grew up in Chicago, and it was a joke even then. Saul Alinsky’s “Rules for Radicals” wasn’t written for the kind of people who vote Republican.

For one thing, there’s now an emphasis on mail-in votes, which makes it easier to cheat. You can register dead people as voters. You can register your dog as a voter. You could probably register 50 million Nigerian princes and get away with it. If the fraud is ever even discovered, it won’t be until long after the election. Which means it’s likely to be a contested election long after Nov 3rd.

That’s only part of it, though. A high percentage of voting machines are computerized. Fraud by hacking voting machines is apparently easy to do—and it’s pretty untraceable. It’s just a matter of planning and boldness.

One of the consequences of these widely acknowledged dysfunctions is to delegitimize the whole idea of voting. That’s possibly not a bad thing. Mass democracy inevitably degrades into a system where the poorer citizens vote themselves benefits at the expense of the middle class. Basically, mass democracy is mob rule dressed in a coat and tie. But if the populace loses faith in “democracy” during a serious economic crisis—like this one—they’re going to look for a strong man to straighten things out. The US will look more and more like Argentina. Or worse.

Remember what Stalin said: “Who votes doesn’t count. What counts is who counts the votes.”

But what about the idea of democracy itself? What does it matter the US starts to resemble a Third World country if that’s the will of the people? I’ve got to say that I don’t believe in democracy as a method of government. I understand how shocking that is to hear. Let me explain.

There’s something to be said for a few people who share traditions and culture and generally agree on how the world works, voting on who will speak for them when it’s appropriate. That’s one thing—and it can make sense. But it’s very different from a gigantic agglomeration of very different, even antagonistic, people fighting for control and power.

Winston Churchill said two things about democracy that are apposite.

  • One is that “Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all the others.” I would argue that’s simply not true. The alternatives are worth discussing.
  • The other thing that he said was, “The best argument against Democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter.” He’s absolutely right in that quip.

Getting back to cheating: Will foreign interference in US elections be part of the cheating? Kind of. There already are millions of foreign citizens—illegal aliens orchestrated by the left—interfering directly in the outcome by voting. That’s much more of a change than some random Russians making political comments on Facebook allegedly during 2016. Although the Russian thing isn’t even a tempest in a toilet bowl. So what if some Russian kids played around on their computers to see what they could do? It was totally trivial and meaningless.

In a way, it just proves the old saying, turnabout is fair play. For many years, the US government has cultivated regime change in foreign countries by interfering very overtly in their elections.

Why should Americans act surprised if it happens in the US?

A Counter Argument

What are the chances Trump could win, despite the six points I’ve just mentioned? There are two factors I can think of.

  • One is that the Dems may have overplayed their hand by first supporting, and now not denouncing the “mostly peaceful protest” (aka, riots), Defund the Police, Black Lives Matter, Antifa, and the like. People can approve or not—but they don’t want to be scared or have their lives disrupted. It may send the silent majority to the Republicans.
  • Second is the immense enthusiasm of Trump’s supporters. When he goes somewhere, they disrupt their lives and line-up, waiting for hours to get into the venue. It seems Biden and Harris can barely fill a coffee shop. Millions of middle Americans support Trump as if their lives depended on it. And in a way, they do.

If Trump loses the election—or more exactly, if the Democrats win—it is, in fact, going to change the nature of the US drastically and permanently. Unfortunately, that’s going to be the case even if Trump wins.

Next week I’ll follow up with what’s going to happen after the election. Stay tuned.

Q&A on the AR15/M855 at 1,000 yard post.

A  few weeks ago, I posted an article where I fired at 1,000 yards using  as close to an as issued M16A2 as I can get. I used MK262 ammo and M855 to make hits while shooting iron sights only and from prone with just as sling as support.   The  Article has been popular and has had a lot of views, but with it came a lot of questions and the inevitable  uneasy feeling from people who have given advice to others for years about how near useless the 5.56 is.   Almost to the point of being offended.

http://looserounds.com/2013/06/10/ar15-at-1000-yards-can-a-rack-grade-ar15-and-m855-make-1000-yard-hits/

A lot of people who emailed me, or commented on the subject wanting to know how it was done and my procedures etc.  After talking to a friend about it, I re read the article and realized that I should have been more clear in some parts. While the majority of people know what the point I was trying to make, some others seem to think I was trying to say something between the lines. So I am going to answer the question that have popped up from a few people since the article.

First is the assumption that I was making any claims about the terminal performance of the 5.56/M855 round or even the MK 262 at this distance.  I was not.   I simply shot  the drill as a way to demonstrate that the AR15 is capable of  accuracy and accomplishments a lot of people do not bother to imagine or try out.    I never said the 556 would knock a man down at 1K or penetrate X amount of inches.   But, a hit is a hit.   I doubt few would volunteer to be shot at 1K with a 556 to prove how wrong I am.   In the 6os a man was knocked off a bicycle from a stray 22LR shot that escaped over a range berm in Ohio.  It was over a mile from where the shooter was setting.   That does not prove a thing.  But a hit is still indeed a hit.  Even if it feels like a hornet sting, if some one is nailing you at 1,000 yards, that would demoralize me and seriously make me rethink wanting to get closer.  The SS109 was meant to fired at longer ranges in LMG use. So to claim it would not put some kind of hurt on a person is absurd.  How effective that hurt is, is another matter and not the convern of the article.

How did I see the target and what aiming point did I use to be able to hit such a target ?  That is the next common question.   It is simple.  I adjusted the front sight to account for more  elevation. I did not go out with a military 25Meter zero.   Elevation was adjusted using the front sight for the most part and I refined it with the rear since I had plenty left over to play with.   I zeroed the sights at 1,000 yard to the point I used a so called “6 oclock hold”  But actually I adjusted the sight to the point where I held the front site about 5 foot below the target.  That is why I had the steel gong painted neon orange.  I got on the steel. then moved to the paper.   It was not some impossible thing to do or a miracle.  Nor was it “flinging lead down range” ’till I got lucky

You can not get lucky if you don’t do everything right before hand.

Having the hold so far below the point of impact gave me plenty of room to see the target and light. I also could see any impacts into the dust to make windage changes or any other change I needed.  Also a spotter with a 60x spotting scope to help.

How did you do it without 80 grain  bullets with a OAL that required you to single feed?   That was where the gross amount of sight manipulation comes into play and a shooting lane between two hills blocking all but a head wind.   The 80s are great, and if you are trying to hit a X ring at perry, you will need them or the 77 grain HPBT. But with enough adjustment in your sights, you can get just about anything on target. If it is a decent weight.  Careful reading will show I shot the heavier match 77 grain load to get on target initially and had  doubts about the M855. I never said that the M855 was a wonder bullet.

What enemy did you expect to prove the M855 would kill at 1,000 yards?   A cardboard target is all I set out to prove the round would hit. Though few would really let some one shoot them at 1K with the 556 no matter how much the claim other wise.  Also when I said “lethal” hits,  I wrongly assumed people knew that most hits in the “black” of the target are considered solid hits, not anatomically correct. So yeah, my use of lethal was a slang term used in the context of the too large scoring area of military targets. And people have bled to death from groin and lung hits.  So I guess I would consider them lethal depending on the abilities and medical expertise of the enemies you are engaging.  But draw your own conclusions.  My point was to show that the AR15 in stock form will hit at 1,000 yards with good and issue ammo if you know what you are doing. Nothing more.  Furthermore, it was not just luck getting the M855 on target. It is certainly not match accurate ammo. But it is within reason to expect a decent lot of M855 to be able to hit a man.

If the article gave you more confidence in your weapon that was my goal. It does not matter if the average Marine or soldier can or can not do it. It matters what you can do with it when it is in your hands.   It does not matter if you can not imagine needing to take a shot like that. Having the skill builds your confidence and it is there on the off chance you ever need it.  Why does anyone even bother shooting at anything?

According to The Complete Book of US Sniping by Peter Senich,  confirmed kills were made in Vietnam with the M16A1 and 55 grain M193 at 800 meters.  That does not make the combo a sniper rifle or the last word on the subject, but it does show what the right combination of marksman, weapon and skill, can achieve.  Crazy long shots have been made with weapons people never dreamed  of since before  Billy Dixon  knocked and Indian Chief off his horse at the battle of Adobe Walls.   The test was done to show that no matter what you are using, you should always be confident in your skill being able to make hits that are beyond what so called experts say. And, to the limit of what the system is capable of and beyond if possible.Improved marksmanship is something to always strive for, no matter what the weapon and ammo is.  It hurts nothing to have the ability to shoot this far. Oddly enough some people are just out right offended that I did this.  As if hitting your target at such a long range is offensive to them.  It is never a waste of time to be able to hit as far as you can on a realistic sized target.

IMG_6636_zpsbcba1824

Any further  questions can be sent to the looserounds  Q&A email address or posted on the facebook page and I will try to answer them.

Q&A March 2013

1. What is the best length to fire  MK 318 SOST through?

As with all ammo, The longer the barrel. the more velocity and the better the performance of the bullet.  The MK 318 was meant for the A4 rifle down to the MK18. You can use it in any length, but longer barrels will always give better performance.

2. Can I ruse .222 re size dies for .222 rimmed cases?

yes. just like using 45 ACP and 45 Auto rimmed will work the same.

3. Can you adjust the sights on a colt rail gun?

You can, but it is a Novak fixed site not adjustable for elevation. You have to drift the rear sight to the left or right with a brass punch to make windage changes

4. What caliber rifle did carlos hathcock use in vietnam?

Carlos’ first tour rifle was a M70 in 30-06. his second tour rifle was a M40 in .308/ 7.62 NATO until wounded. He also used a scope mounted M2 Browning in .50BMG.

5. What is the break in procedure for sig sauer 716, 308 winchester?

None, it does not need to be broken in.  Combat rifles do not to be “broken in” This is a myth.

6. Why is  the shotgun is the best for shtf?

It is not.

7. What is the difference between fn pbr & fn spr?

There are major differences. The PBR has the same action, but with a hogue stock and with a shorter and lighter barrel profile. The SPR has a McMillian stock, a 24 inch Match chrome lined barrel with the same M70 action as the PBR but with over all  tighter tolerances and is made to be a precision sniper rifle.  The PBR is a slightly upgraded varmint type rifle meant to ride in a car trunk all day and make short to medium raange DMR type shots.

8.What wilson mag comes with colt usmc?

The 7 round 47D

9. Was the Winchester m52 target rifle a military training rifle?

The first version, the M52, was intended to be a .22Lr trainer. But the Springfield M1922 was more widely used for that role.

10. What is the winchester marksman rifle stocks?

That was a walnut stock used on the National Match and International and target models. Some where used by the USMC sniper team during the Vietnam War.  They had a wide flat fore arm and a rear stock at the correct height for optics.  the stock was also used on the M52B and C models.  Until the New Haven plant closed. The same stock design was used on the Heavy Varmint and Stealth line of Model 70s  but it was a synthetic and made by H-S Precision.  Current FN made Model 70s do not use the marksman stock style stock.

11. What is the marine corps hydration carrier?

The most common one is made by The Source called the WXP

 

QA@LooseRounds.com

This is a LooseRounds.com Q&A session.  If you have a firearms related question please email it to QA@LooseRounds.com. We will post the your questions anonymously and give you our answers.

How do I zero my sights?

Howard:  Well it would help if you told us what sort of sight you are using.  With iron sights, move the rear sight the same direction you want your impacts to go, and the front sight the opposite direction you need your impact to move.

Is the LMT MWS currently for sale the same as military issue?

Howard:  No, the currently LMT MWS is not the same as what was delivered in the order of 440 rifles to the British Military.  If you want the same thing as what they have, you will need to get an early MWS with an early stainless barrel.  Since then, MWS upper has changed, the barrel profile has changed, and the bolt and bolt carrier has changed.  If you do not care about these substantial changes, and just care about the look, you can buy LMT new package called the Sharpshooter.

Who makes the decals on the Pelican case in the articles?

Shawn:  Dogfightink is where you can get the decals.

Is there a screw on front sight installation tool for Glock?

Howard:  Yes, there are several brands of hex headed screw drivers for it.  Any dealer of Glock parts should have some, and it should run you around $10.

Will a Surefire x300 fit on a Sig P226?

Shawn:  If you have a rail on your P226, yes.

Howard:  You will need to buy a rail adapters if your Sig P226 does not come with an accessory rail.

Was the M16A1 used for sniping in Vietnam?

Shawn:  It was unofficially used, and even has a recorded hit out 800m, but offically consideration and testing it was not decided to be the basis of a sniper weapon in the Marine Corps or Army.

When did the Glock Model 20 come out?

Howard:  The 10mm Glock 20 came out around 1991.

Is the Sig 517 a SR25/M110 pattern rifle?

Howard:  The Sig 517 will use the same mags as the SR25/M110.  Other then that they are different.

Do they make a 30 round clip for the Scar-H?

Shawn:  No, no one make a 30 round “clip”, or a 20 or a 5 round “clip” for the SCAR.  The SCAR uses a Magazine.

Howard:  There are aftermarket 25 round mags, I don’t know if there are 30 round mags for it.

glock 36 6 round mag

Howard:  Please use complete sentences for questions.  Standard magazines for the Glock 36 hold 6 rounds.

Is the scar breaking optics?

Howard:  Many sources state that the FN SCAR’s recoil is harsh on optics.  This may be part of the reason why EoTech moved the battery location to being transversely mounted on the new Eotech and why Elcan now has a HD line of optics.

Q&A

This is a LooseRounds.com Q&A session.  If you have a firearms related question please email it to QA@LooseRounds.com. We will post the your questions anonymously and give you our answers.

1.  Which Night sights for a Glock 19 would you recommend?

Duncan: There are several high quality sights on the market. Since Trijicon makes the Tritium lamps for most high-quality night sights you can’t go wrong with a company that has Trijicon labeled on the side of the sight. I have used several sights and recommend the following:

For all around general use that’s easy on the pocket book, Meprolight, Trijicon or Glock factory standard three dot night sights work fine. I have carried all three on different duty Glocks and they are very close in function. I prefer the Glock factory out of this group as they have lasted the longest and are quicker to acquire in low light. There is a down side that the Glock night sights have that the others don’t.  Sometimes if you are back lit, the angle of the rear sight can reflect light, washing the rear sight out.  This is rare but something to consider. Out of the three, the Glock factory sights have traditionally been the lowest in cost.

If price is something you are concerned with but you want to upgrade from the standard night sights, Ameriglo is a great option. Trijicon makes all of the laps for Ameriglo, and the Pro Operator or I-Dot Pro would serve you well.  For the price these sights are hard to beat and will outperform the standard night sights.

If you want to step it up, my favorite sights currently are the Trijicon HD night sites. I have these on a Gen2 Glock 19 and I can tell you they are great. One of the best sight I have ever used. They have a serrated rear operator sight and photo luminescent orange ring front sight. The profile is higher and the sights are faster and easier to acquire for me. You will pay for these but they are worth it.

Howard:  I personally prefer the Trijicon night sights, I like the sight picture and they have good customer service should you manage to break one.  The downside to Trijicon sights is that the white ring around the tritium vials will wear away quickly.  Meprolight sights will not lose the white rings, however they have less gap between the sides of the front sight and the rear sight.

2.  Shotgun or carbine , which is best for general patrol work for police?

Duncan: There are so many factors that come into play when thinking about what would be the best long gun in your patrol vehicle. Both a shotgun and a carbine have their place. What patrol environment you are in, (metro, small city, rural, or county), will also play a factor. Price is also a point you might want to look at, but when your life is on the line, price is not a real factor for me.

Shotgun: The old pump action shotgun like the 870 is a great shotgun. I can tell you the intimidation factor of a pump action shotgun will beat all other weapons. It’s awesome for felony stops or an alarm call on a house/business at night. I don’t know what it is but bad guys fear the shotgun. I have had suspects tell me to shoot them or come running at me when I had an AR-15 or handgun pointed at them. The downside to the shotgun is that it is heavy, large/cumbersome, has a limited range and it only holds a few rounds. Used properly it is very effective but after four rounds you have to reload or transition.

AR-15: The trend over the last decade has really been moving toward the AR-15 type patrol rifles. I think this probably is the best all around choice. My department replaced the Remington 870 with the Colt M4/LE6921 in about 2003. The availability and ease to obtain body armor and the increase in the number of high profile incidents where suspects were heavily armed, are both driving factors in carrying AR-15 patrol rifles.  It is light, small, easy to maneuver, accurate, has a large ammunition capacity and will defeat body armor. As a police officer you can use the kind of ammunition you want, unlike soldiers in the military. Open-tip match bullets and bonded bullets have made the AR-15 platform more accurate and effective with improved terminal ballistics.  The AR-15’s range will exceed what the average law enforcement officer will need. Six inch steel target at 100 yards, no problem. With the ability to put multiple accurate rounds on target in quick succession, it is the preferred choice. Add an Aimpoint and this is an almost unbeatable combination in my opinion.

These are only some of the factors that you must consider when looking at your patrol shotgun or carbine. For general patrol work I feel an AR-15 variant is best. For patrol work I would go with a 14.5″ or 16″ barrel. If you are a part time tac-team member or well trained officer, I would go with an 11.5″ barrel. One thing to think about is a good 870 is only a few hundred dollars, so if your department approves it why not have both.

3.  What is the best technique for shooting a pistol with a handheld flashlight?

Duncan:  The best technique is the one that gives your firearm the most stable shooting position with the light you’re using. There are so many lights out there that this all depends on what particular hand held light you have.  For me, I always carried a larger flashlight. I really liked the Streamlight SL20X and Stinger series.

I found with most lights The Harries Technique works extremely well: Hold the flashlight in your support hand, like an ice pick.  Come underneath your firearm/dominant hand, then hook your wrist up and put the back of your hands together. Now your weapon hand is resting on your support hand wrist and the back of your hands are together. Apply a little pressure by pushing the backs of your hands together to make a stable shooting platform.

There are several other advanced techniques, (FBI, Surefire, Neck Index), most of them involve one hand shooting. The Harries Technique gets you very close to two handed shooting and works with flashlights that have end-cap or side pressure switches. The Harries is one of the most common techniques taught in Law Enforcement Academies.

Howard:  Before I learned any proper techniques, I played around with several ways to do this.  I found for me that I ended up using the the Harries Technique.  I also use a similar method for using a handheld flashlight with the AR15, my left wrist is placed on the mag well pulling the rifle into my shoulder and helping support it.

4.  What backup gun for police?

Duncan:  Once again there are so many things to think about when looking at a backup firearm. First you need to pick a quality firearm, el cheapo .25 auto or .32 auto is not going to cut it. Ideally a backup that carries your same duty ammo and magazine capability is best. For example: a Glock 27 to a Glock 22, or M&P compact to M&P full size. The operation/manipulation and familiarity of these compacts are the same as your duty weapon. If this backup is mounted in your patrol car or on your ankle you can use your full capacity duty mags for reloads. This is a huge plus (+) in a prolonged firefight.

I have always been a smaller guy, I tried to carry a Glock 27 on my ankle, but it was just too big and heavy for me. In this case a very reliable J frame revolver is a very good option. For Example: S&W 642 airweight or 340PD airlite. These J frame revolvers can weigh as little as 11 oz. While not compatible with your duty gun, in most cases this is a last ditch emergency pull. I personally would not want to carry anything smaller than a 9mm/.38 special/.357 mag round. If it is an emergency situation I want to make sure my ammunition has the ability to put the threat down. Having said that .380 has come a long way and if you want something small in an automatic this is another option to consider. Example: Sig P238.

I can never state this enough, no matter what you choose, training and practice are key. You must have the ability to put effective rounds on target with your backup, especially if your backup is not compatible with your duty weapon. You might only have those five rounds in the J frame to get the job done.

5.  Please find below an article that we at Onlinecolleges.net think you and your readers would be interested in reading, the post “12 College Campuses Caught Up in the Gun Control Debate” (http://www.onlinecolleges.net/2012/10/03/12-college-campuses-caught-up-in-the-gun-control-debate/). We’d appreciate it if you would take a look at the article and consider sharing it with your readers.

LooseRounds.com:  Sure.