LooseRounds.com
5.56 Timeline
Weaponsman.com

Guest Post: How they’ll use the Trump Manouver to ban Standard Magazines in the Future

Reposted with permission. Originally Posted by MKSheppard on AR15.com

Maryland’s Bump Fire Stock ban bill had this language originally: 

“RAPID FIRE TRIGGER ACTIVATOR” MEANS ANY DEVICE, PART, OR COMBINATION OF DEVICES OR PARTS THAT IS DESIGNED AND FUNCTIONS TO ACCELERATE THE RATE OF FIRE OF A FIREARM BEYOND THE STANDARD RATE OF FIRE FOR FIREARMS THAT ARE NOT EQUIPPED WITH THAT DEVICE, PART, OR COMBINATION OF DEVICES OR PARTS ANY DEVICE, INCLUDING A REMOVABLE MANUAL OR POWER–DRIVEN ACTIVATING DEVICE, CONSTRUCTED SO THAT, WHEN INSTALLED IN OR ATTACHED TO A FIREARM: 

(I) THE RATE AT WHICH THE TRIGGER IS ACTIVATED INCREASES; OR 
(II) THE RATE OF FIRE INCREASES.

The following clause was struck out of the final bill apparently. 

ANY DEVICE, PART, OR COMBINATION OF DEVICES OR PARTS THAT IS DESIGNED AND FUNCTIONS TO ACCELERATE THE RATE OF FIRE OF A FIREARM BEYOND THE STANDARD RATE OF FIRE FOR FIREARMS THAT ARE NOT EQUIPPED WITH THAT DEVICE, PART, OR COMBINATION OF DEVICES OR PARTS

so that the text is now 

“RAPID FIRE TRIGGER ACTIVATOR” MEANS ANY DEVICE, INCLUDING A REMOVABLE MANUAL OR POWER–DRIVEN ACTIVATING DEVICE, CONSTRUCTED SO THAT, WHEN INSTALLED IN OR ATTACHED TO A FIREARM: 

(I) THE RATE AT WHICH THE TRIGGER IS ACTIVATED INCREASES; OR 
(II) THE RATE OF FIRE INCREASES

A judge noticed how restrictive this was: 

https://www.ammoland.com/2018/09/maryland-gun-owners-out-to-dry-gun-oil-ban/#axzz5lIEIh0to 

At the hearing, Judge Bredar remarked on the extreme vagueness of the State’s law as he demonstrated how GUN OIL being used to lubricate a BOLT-ACTION RIFLE to “increase” the “rate of fire” of the rifle because the action could be worked more efficiently, meaning the trigger could be manually activated faster than it could before using the GUN OIL.

By the way, while doing research for the next section; I noticed that ATF/Police personnel when they were asked by the media how long it took to empty a magazine, they used Jerry Mikulek speeds. 

If we assume someone can fire 1.5 shots a second and takes 3 seconds to change a magazine; then it breaks down as: 

5 Rd Magazine: 47 RPM (Cyclic) 
10 Rd Magazine: 62 RPM (Cyclic) 
20 Rd Magazine: 73 RPM (Cyclic) 
30 Rd Magazine: 78 RPM (Cyclic) 
60 Rd Magazine: 83 RPM (Cyclic) 
100 Rd Magazine: 86 RPM (Cyclic) 

You can see that by simply existing, a 30 round magazine increases the cyclic rate of fire of an AR15 from the 62 RPM of a 10 round magazine to 78 RPM. 

Therefore, it falls under the bump stock ban language used in Maryland: 

FUNCTIONS TO ACCELERATE THE RATE OF FIRE OF A FIREARM BEYOND THE STANDARD RATE OF FIRE FOR FIREARMS THAT ARE NOT EQUIPPED WITH THAT DEVICE, PART, OR COMBINATION OF DEVICES OR PARTS

and is banned. 

Let’s go a little bit further on how dangerous this is legally from the talk that the NRA put forth about how devices that simulate machine guns should be banned/regulated: 

Let’s assume that your AR15 fires 700 RPM (or 12 shots a second) as long as the magazine holds out and the trigger is depressed. 

Let’s assume that the media/ATF/Presidency (it’s going to go to a democrat eventually) play semantic games and pit: 

Zero Training Shooter, 1.5 shots a second semi automatically, 3 seconds to change magazine 
against 
Competition Shooter, 3 shots a second semi automatically, 1.5 seconds to change magazine 

Basically, they get an average untrained government worker with no experience in guns or automatic weapons, and put him behind a M4 Carbine with a giggle switch; and then test him against the best shooter from the JSOC units (MARSOC, SEALs, DELTA, etc) and using him with a 60 round drum as the baseline for semi auto weapons. 

The numbers crank out as: 

Automatic Rifle, Zero Training Shooter: 12 shots a second (720 RPM cyclic) , 3 seconds to change magazine. 
10 rd magazine: 156 RPM Average 
20 rd Magazine: 257 RPM average 
30 rd Magazine: 327 RPM average 
60 rd Drum: 450 RPM average 

Competition shooter, 3 shots a second, 1.5 seconds to change magazine. 
10 rd magazine: 124 RPM Average 
20 rd Magazine: 146 RPM average 
30 rd Magazine: 156 RPM average 
60 rd Drum: 167 RPM average 

You can see how there is a crossover if you limit the machine gun to 10~ round magazines; and put the best guy on the semi automatic; leading to situations where a semi automatic rifle with a so-called “Large Capacity Magazine” can put more bullets down range than a machine gun in the same amount of time (say, 60 seconds?). 

Thus, they get their “technically accurate” soundbite that gets disseminated on every network news show and all over Vox and The Trace about how 30 round magazines make semi autos equal in rate of fire to a machine gun! 

I’m no genius level intellect, and it took me only a few moments to come up with this attack mode — there are bound to be more that the antigunners will come up with. 

This is called “Red Teaming” where a group of players tries to poke holes in the plan of action — it appears that the anti gunners do a lot of “Red Team” counter study of their own proposals; witness how much smoother and slicker they are now, compared to the 1994 AWB. 

Meanwhile, the NRA is all hurf a derp, Wayne wants you to donate to get a chance to win this Kryptek truck! 

PS: When they use the Bump Stock attack mechanism to ban standard capacity magazines, they will lie to the general public and say that people can keep the magazines they have (grandfathering) as long as they register them.

What they won’t say is that the magazines since they are ruled as “converting a semi auto to simulate near machine gun sustained rates of fire”, they must be registered as destructive devices under the national firearms act, with each individual magazine being serialized and subject to a tax stamp. 

They’ve already done this — look at Washington state — they said one thing in the two sentence description of I-1639 on the ballot; “ban semi automatic assault weapons”, but when you looked at the 50 page text of the actual initative of I-1639, it defined “semi automatic assault weapon” as ANY semi automatic, even a 10/22. 

Happy dreams.

WORLD’S LUCKIEST SIX-GUNNER

I ran across this series of pictures over at ARFCOM with no real back story other than a local gunsmith posted the pictures. Apparently some worthy had fired the cylinder empty with every round getting stuck in the bore. Cylinder gap likely saved them from a nasty KABOOM. PIctured add proof to my own personal theory about a lot of people who buy 500 S&W revolvers..

https://www.ar15.com/forums/General/Gunsmithing-must-be-fun-sometimes-photos-included-/5-2211807/

I don’t get the appeal of .300 Blackout

Long ago I was at the range and one of the regulars was talking about how he had loaded some .300 Whisper rounds and that they were so super quiet. Everyone was so excited to hear them, that it was suppose to be like shooting a silenced rifle. I was working as a range officer at the time so we arranged for the line to be called hot just for this guy so we could hear him shoot.

A shot was fired. I was so very disappointed because it sounded like any other gunshot.

.300 Whisper was changed slightly, and became the .300 AAC Blackout. Robert Silvers did some brilliant marketing and made it popular.

I have heard and read some really outlandish claims about the .300 BLK. Had someone tell me it makes .308 obsolete. I’ve seen many claims online that a suppressed subsonic .300 is hollywood quiet. I’ve even seen more than one person proclaim that the U.S. Military needs to replace all the rifles, carbines, machine guns, and sniper rifles with .300 Blackout. Claims like that made me even more skeptical about the round.

A more realistic comparison is 7.62×39 Russian or .30-30 Winchester. Both are good rounds, but I don’t see anyone clamoring for the U.S. Military to switch to either of them. .300 BLK does have the advantage of using a wider variety of bullet weights than either of those two other cartridges.

For someone plinking unsuppressed, 7.62×39 is far more available and cheaper. .30-30 has more than proven it self over the years.

It seems to me the best strength of the .300 Blackout is out of short barrels. You can have a subgun sized weapon with better performance than a pistol caliber.

An overlooked plus of the .30 cal bore for special operations would be that the barrel would drain quickly when exiting water. Unlike the issues with capillary action keeping water in a 5.56 bore.
https://apps.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/202468.pdf

Subsonic .300 BLK provides muzzle energy similar to a .45 ACP. Subsonic .300 BLK is more like a pistol cartridge than a rifle round. But it retains the greater flash and blast of a rifle. With the really short barrels and super sonic ammo, you are talking similar performance to an M1 Carbine firing .30 carbine.

I often see the comment of a short barreled AR15 in .300 BLK as a replacement for the MP5. That makes sense as the MP5 is old, large, heavy, has a worse manual of arms. But if you are looking for the smallest package, a SMG with the mag in the grip would be even smaller than an AR15 style weapon.

I don’t really see the appeal. Certainly not a bad round, but what is the real niche of it?

Optics for Sale

A while back I wrote a post about the discontinued C-More Tactical sight. Since then, I have had many people ask me where to buy one. Hell if I know.

Well lucky for you, there is one for sale right now in AR15.com for $225. This is a different model than the one I reviewed. It has a different brightness knob and I believe it has a plastic body.

https://www.ar15.com/forums/Equipment-Exchange/C-More-AR15-Red-Dot-sight-4-moa-225-shipped/163-1865160/


Next Up. I saw ACOG serial number #123 is for sale. That is a cool little collectible.

The seller wants $1250, which I think is nuts, but I’m sure someone will pay it.

https://www.ar15.com/forums/Equipment-Exchange/ACOG-TA-01-Serial-123-First-Year-Production-photo-/163-1796394/


Also there is a Single Point sight for sale, like what was used on the Son Tay Raid. These sights are not uncommon, but the mounts for them are very rare. This one has a mount that looks like it had never been used.

Picture is upside down.

Seller wants $1300, again a high price, but I’d bet someone will pay it just to get that mount.

https://www.ar15.com/forums/Equipment-Exchange/RARE-Retro-Single-Point-Sight-with-original-plastic-mount-San-Toy-Raid-Made-in-England/163-1866927/


I have no affiliation with any of these sellers, and I have no idea when or if this stuff will sell. All sorts of cool stuff is out there, but you just gotta have cash ready and look around if you want it.

Greatest innovation to happen to the modern AR-15 and it’s variants?

Over on arfcom yesterday I ran across a thread with a poll asking members what they thought the biggest advancement has been for AR15s. The thread poster then gave a list of choices for readers to vote on. See above. Sadly most of the option were eye roll inducing or not really even worth mentioning. It did get me thinking about the subject though which is rare for something posted on arfcom GD.

First I want to talk about the choices.

1.Red dot sight. While the use of durable, reliable and simple red dot sights have been a great leap forward in helping average dude with hitting it had to have something else that facillitate that. ore on this later.

2. The accessory rail. Primarily this would be the Knights Armament RIS/RAS. Yes there was other but the KAC rails for the M4/M16 was what really kicked it off because it was the rail the military went with. This allowed for a now unlimited variety of force multiplier to be attached to the rifle. A great contender for the number one spot in my opinion and a good argument could be made that it is. But like the first choice something had to come before.

3.Piston. No. An unneeded “advancement” Colt already developed in the 60s that solved a problem that doesn’t really exist.

4. Too idiotic to even address seriously

5. Polymer magazines like the Pmag, Lancer etc. An advancement to be sure. Have we all given up on USGI spec aluminum though? I don’t know anyone that has. Would the AR be less if they never come along? I don’t think so. I think they fall some where with the red dot sights but I would like to hear your opinion on this one.

5. The arrival of the used car salesman equivalent of gun companies. Is this an advancement? I would submit to you this is actually something that is hurting things. More than one first rate Mfg. has told me that PSA and their like are causing them to offer more and more cheap shit models with cost cutting measures to compete. You may view this as a good thing but I don’t think a world of mainly DPMS “sportical” ARs being sold by every company other than the boutique makers as a good thing.

Now. What do I think is the greatest advance for the AR15? The “flattop” upper receiver and the development of the M1913 rail of course. It wasn’t the first of its kind of course, but it was the one the US standardized and adopted. There was attempted at weaver type rails and the Canadians had a version but once Dick Swan and Colt came up with the current rail everything changed. Slowly at first but then like a snowball rolling down hill. The rail led to being able to mount optics lower. This lead to the Ar15 being better developed for precision use for more than just service rifle competition. The 1913 standard helped with the handguard rails like the KAC and on and on and on. Yeah yeah, the MLOK and KEYMOD and whatever MOD are a big thing now, but not on the top of the receiver it ain’t. The flatop upper has doubled the modularity of the AR15 maybe tripled it or more.

A couple of other factors that spurred development in a big way. 1. The 1994 AWB and its end 2. the GWOT. These two aren’t changes to the gun itself from a technical or mechanical standpoint but they sure did speed that up. I think I will leave that for another day or Howard can tackle that if he wants to add to this.

Some smaller things that I think advanced the system in increments. The change over to the then not all that popular but now very useful 1/7 twist and related ammo that followed . At first we got the arguable smaller step up to the 62 grain M855. Meh. Then we got the 69, then 77grain and now 80 and 85 grain bullets. The outstanding accuracy and lethality of the heavier rounds can not be ignored. Of course the ammo was developed for competition at first then as a more accurate round for the MK12 which came about because of the ability to mount optics to the flat top upper.

While not an AR15 but something related, companies finally working out the kinks to get us reliable, durable and accurate SR25 pattern 7.62MM ARs. People forget that while the Stoner SR25 and the “armalite ” ( read eagle arms) AR10 had been around for a while, it wasn’t really until about 09 that we started to see 762 rifles and carbines that you could shoot at a high round count schedule like an M4, be reliable and accurate. And now we have most of them using the SR25 pattern magazine like God and Eugene intended. But that’s a talk for another day.

I’d really like to hear some thoughts and comments about this. What do you think was the biggest advancement. Please don’t count the AR15 itself because of course it was. Some discussion on this would be much appreciated .

If you want to read what the expurts had to say on arfcom. Link below. Though you can save yourself the trouble if you saw the poll image screen shot above on how they voted. Some posters offered up much better possibilities than the original posters nearly joke like selection though.

https://www.ar15.com/forums/general/What-is-the-greatest-innovation-to-happen-to-the-Modern-AR-15-and-it-s-variants-/5-2207990/