Iraqi Army Switching To M-16s

Courtesy of Emperor Misha comes this article from military.com announcing the Iraqi Army is switching to M-16s over the Kalishnikov AK-47 that has been a staple of their army for decades.

It appears they like it better...

After seeing some of the firing range training himself, Scott added that he "asked the Iraqis how they liked the weapon and they said it was far superior, it was more accurate ... and more reliable."

And what is probably a first for the Iraqis, they are responsible for the weapons personally and so far it appears to be working.

A system that registers each rifle with the individual who receives it using biometric data such as thumb prints and eye scans is meant to address concerns over U.S. weapons winding up in enemy hands. A July 2007 Government Accountability Office report concluded that as many as 190,000 weapons delivered to the Iraqi army were not accounted for and could've wound up in terrorist caches.

That's something Scott isn't going to allow on his watch.

"These Iraqi soldiers know that this weapon becomes part of their person," he said. "And they also know that they are responsible and accountable for that weapon."

And from the looks of it, Iraqi soldiers aren't willing to hand them over to the bad guys.

Too bad they are sticking with the 5.56mm NATO round. It would be cool to see the Iraqis adopt something like the 6.5mm Grendel or 6.8SPC, which would probably be better suited to the combat environment they are in. Perhaps in a future US arms deal for 200,000 uppers and a few million rounds of ammo.

Good for them.

Source for a Mk.32 Enfield Scope?

I have a thing for sniper rifles. I own a couple. I believe one of them may actually be an original, the rest I am simply content to assemble as replicas. But I like to use original parts where possible. It allows me to experience what it was like for a soldier of a past era to be behind the trigger and see things the way they did.

On my list of "nice to have" sniper configurations include the Springfield 1903A3, Kar98K and so on.

And a Lee-Enfield.

I have an Enfield No.4 Mk.1 I'd like to assemble into a sniper configuration. Sure, it won't be exact but these are my guns and my desires.

With that said, does anyone know where I can source an original or replica Mk.32 scope that was fitted to the Enfield snipers? I've found a replica mount so all I need is the scope.

Can anyone help me out? Either the scope or a complete original mount plus scope.

More on HB517

Fun Turns to Tragedy was at the hearing yesterday. Here is his summary. Great stuff.

It touches on a point that folks pushing this tend to ignore: manufacturing.

Ammunition manufacturing is a high-volume, low-margin business. They need to produce lots of rounds to make a small amount of profit. The only way they do this is by automation. Introducing encoding into an automated production line would add prohibitive costs and slow things down. And if that production rate falls below your "break even" rate in terms of rounds per hour, you lose money.

It has been mentioned by the manufacturers that it would take three weeks to produce the same amount of encoded ammunition that is currently produced in a single day. That's a 21 fold reduction in production capacity over current levels.

If this technology were introduced, guess who those extra costs for this are going to be passed on to?

You guessed it: Us.

Some folks are arguing that such a scheme would merely add the $2.50 tax on a box of 50 rounds of 9mm. This is incorrect. They will also pass on the encoding tooling and time-to-make costs. I would fully expect a box of 50 rounds of 9mm practice ammo to cost somewhere in the region of $22-$25 a box before the $2.50 tax.

FTTT makes reference to a question of whether the makers would produce ammo just for Maryland. They replied that there would have to be a business case for them to do so. Reasonable response. However, I think the more appropriate response should have been a simple "No.".

I think if this passes (not out of the woods yet), I would expect any ammo maker to simply abandon the state just as Ronnie Barrett did when California passed their .50 caliber ban. I would if I were them. Bear in mind that HB517 has no exemption for law enforcement usage. This means any ammo they use must be encoded. I suspect the only suppliers for LEO usage would be the patent holders of this useless technology themselves. They did testify they did produce 1000 rounds of encoded ammo in their garage. Let them do it and pass the costs along to the taxpayers.

And then let the citizens howl when law enforcement training costs involving live fire and issue ammunition quadruple. There's fiscal responsibility for you right there.

I hope Russ Ford gets smacked around when his investors hear about this.

Maryland HB517 "Encoded Ammunition Tax" Down in Flames

Yesterday was the hearing in Maryland on HB517 "Encoded Ammunition Tax". As you might know, there has been a push across several states to implement this. This is not a coincidence. This is a patented technology that the rights holders are pushing through lobbying to various state legislatures in an attempt to get a government granted monopoly (read: gravy train) on ammunition sales.

They stand to make a fortune if any of these bills pass.

I was unable to attend the hearing yesterday but from all accounts, the bill's supporters had their asses handed to them.

Norton of the Maryland Shooters Forum has granted me permission to post his summary here since I was unable to attend. So here it is:

There were 3 people speaking in favor of the bill:
1. Delegate Burns, lead sponsor.
2. Another Delegate from Baltimore (Robinson, I think)
3. Russ Ford, so-called expert on this technology and one of the patent holders.

I don't share 00 Guy's compunction about saying nasty things about people so I will say that Delegate Burns is ****ing numbnuts, no-load intellectual vacuum. He spilled more garbage out of his mouth than a truck at the Burns Crossing Landfill. When pressed on some of his alleged facts, he stumbled and hrrummphed because it wasn't on his prepared cue cards.

Russ Ford sucked up the most time and began reading his prepared testimony. He went on about how he has many firearms and is a licensed CCW holder and how this was not an anti-gun bill, yada, yada, yada.

I figured out that this bill was basically DOA when Chairman Vallario cut the guy off and said they already had his written testimony and didn't need to hear it verbally as well.

Delegate Robinson (?) went on and on about how we needed this bill because "her people" were dying in Baltimore. Delegate Smiegiel replied that if they wanted to reduce murders in Baltimore they should get behind the right to carry a concealed firearm because it has been proven time and again that CCW saves lives.

I thought Burns was going to explode. He said he didn't believe in the right to carry and that it would cause mayhem.

Then Smigiel and Dwyer went on the offensive. Smiegiel asked Ford if he was the patent hold to which he replied that he was. Smieigel commented that it seemed Mr. Ford had a lot to gain financially from passage of this bill. Ford replied, "Well it is a for-profit business".

Dwyer told him that it might have been more convincing of the viability of the technology had he not sent them an unfired example of a encoded bullet. He said that he didn't expect that he would support the bill for any reason but that he didn't believe that a bullet would stay intact after firing.

Smiegiel cornered Ford on the subject of ballistic fingerprinting and asked him if the encoding was more effective. Ford said, "Yes". Smieigel asked if ballistic fingerprinting worked at all and Ford said, "No".

Smigiel said that he felt like this expert testimony on eliminating ballistic fingerprinting.

Papa Joe Vallario put off opposing testimony too late for me to be able to stay. I had a 5:30 family engagement, but did submit my written testimony.

Trbon8tr and I passed Ford and his pubescent lobbyist/handler out at the bus stop. He gave me a little nod and I said, "Good luck in your other states with this because it's not going to pass here."

trbon8r summed it up very well with this comment:

The highlight for me was Smigiel telling Ford that he hopes his company "never makes any money".

I think I saw Ford's head snap back a few inches after that verbal slap.

I got the feeling Ford received a much more icy welcome in Maryland than he expected. Now he can head back to Seattle and explain to all his investors how he got his ass handed to him again.

Good job everyone! We need to keep the pressure on to ensure this thing dies in committee. Based on the recaps and the testimony of those opposed to it (including representatives from Federal and Remington), it looks like this one is going down in flames.

As it should.

Take the Zombie Survival Quiz

If you own a copy of "The Zombie Survival Guide", you should do well.

The quiz is located here.

I ranked a Z+. "Your knowledge, strength and will to survive are unstoppable. It would take a nuclear holocaust to remove you from the face of the Earth. Zombies don't stand a chance."

Bring Zack on!

2A Sisters Gathering for Heller vs. DC

Just in from Maryland Alert:

Second Amendment Sisters, Inc. has requested a permit to assemble at the U.S. Supreme Court Building on March 18, 2008 from 8:30 AM until 5:00 PM. Details to follow.

The SCOTUS building is located at First Street and Maryland Ave., NE and is open from 9:00 AM until 4:30.

We have indicated people will carry signs and banners, and possibly use bullhorns. We are not planning any civil disobedience.

All of our members and friends from DC, Maryland, Virginia, and across the country are welcome to join us--and please feel free to use the text of our slogan on your signs and shirts!

Regards,
Jane Weaver
Maryland Coordinator
Second Amendment Sisters Inc.
Self defense is a basic human right
Mother ship: www.2asisters.org
Maryland: www.2asisters.net/md

If you can take the time off from work to rally with them for our rights, do so! The more we have cheering for our rights and freedoms, the better! Let's drown the antis in numbers and passion by a factor of 100 to 1.

PA Alert: HB.2228 Encoded Ammunition Tax

This is a heads-up for those of you in Pennsylvania. Looks like they are bringing the encoded ammunition tax to your neck of the woods. I guess some Maryland legislators found time to call their buddies up there.

Unlike the Maryland proposal, police are exempt from this and it would take effect within 60 days of enactment. Like other such proposals, it requires owners of non-encoded ammunition to dispose of it without compensation within 3 years.

Here's the bill text.

Get moving, Pennsylvania. We need to nip this in the bud. This crap is too organized to be random.

I Fear Them Later

I monitor Democratic forums like Democratic Underground pretty regularly. One is for the sheer entertainment value of some of the posters. There are some world-class idiots posting there in the Guns forum. Some are woefully ignorant, others are shaped by their experiences.

Part of the reason I do this is to get a feel for the arguments that might be coming and to enjoy the responses of the regulars who respond in favor of gun rights. I'm independent and diligent rights support is something I welcome no matter the political affiliation of the one making it. An an independent (or would be if I could vote) issues matter more to me than ideology.

Occasionally I jump in. I was booted off once for calling one of the anti-rights folks who lives in DC a fucking idiotic moron. Kind of violates the terms of service, you know? A link to my blog in the profile probably didn't help either. I'm back on there now but far more quiet and level-headed. As much as I think someone is a fucking idiot, it's best not to call them that on the 'Net. It damages the credibility of your words. I'm supposed to be better than that with regard to personal attacks.

I do learn from my mistakes.

That aside, one poster in a recent thread stated the following about the Democratic Party in a conversation regarding Barack Obama's so-called change of heart on gun rights. This is what he stated. It's general but a pretty common view of a lot of Democratic supporters, I think.

not too worried

The Dems know the best way to lose control of congress again is to pass some gun control. I just don't see any big anti gun legislation passing. Esp since a lot of the new dems are pro gun.

This got me thinking. So took the opportunity to provide my opinion on the matter. I feel my response is worthy of a blog post in its own right. So here it is for you to think about. I would welcome comments on whether my views on accurate or if I am out to lunch.

Without further adieu...

I think the Dem front runners are fully aware of the damage the gun control issue can do to them ala 1996. I think they've smartened up and decided to provide platitudes of support to 2A rights when asked and keep silent otherwise. Why cause problems for themselves by making an issue out of something that isn't being asked? Yet.

My fear is with a slightly stronger Dem majority in Congress with either Obama or Clinton as President that they will take their victory as some sort of "mandate" for change. Especially in light of recent events. This is tactical maneuvering we're seeing. I'm worried about the big picture post-November.

I am firmly convinced that given an opportunity to enact more gun control with a perceived mandate for change that Congress will try at a Democratic president's urging. Both candidates have poor histories on the issue and I frankly do not trust either one of them not to try. That will give a firm Democratic administration two years to enact such proposals. Especially things like a full AWB. Not the cosmetic one of 1994 but something resembling an actual ban that would destroy a significant part of the firearms industry in this country along the lines of HR.1022. Among other things.

A positive Heller decision may blunt it but bear in mind all Heller will do is set some initial boundaries. I believe the Court will uphold it as an individual right but I think they will leave room for "reasonable regulations" and leave it to future cases to define what those are. Except "reasonable" to someone like Barack Obama will be nothing of the sort. Gun rights may be ultimately victorious in the long-term but the short-term damage could be devastating. It may take a decade or more to undo the damage fully. If ever.

I admit that such an action may be political suicide on the part of the Dems but it might be all too easy for renewed Democratic power in Washington to get carried away and really try to press on with a so-called "mandate". That is what I fear. I don't fear them now; I fear them later.

I DO NOT trust the Democratic Party as a whole on this issue at the National level. State-wise, I'm thrilled with Democratic candidates in places like Virginia. But the DNC at the national level is a different story.

Not to say that I don't think they wouldn't lose in the end. I predict if they manage to push through a major gun control package in 2009-2010 such as licensing, limited bans (AWB), registration, ammo serialization, or anything else extremely intrusive on the status quo that exists today, they will not be holding power come the tail end of 2010. If they succeed in something seen to be as a major limit on 2A rights despite whatever Heller says, most Americans will react in two ways. One will be to stock up. I'll be one of them. My acquisitions leading up to a ban will make my current collection seem paltry. The second will be to vote them out of office with a fury you've never seen. My prediction is if something with teeth like HR.1022 or any form of national licensing/registration (which requires existing law to be repealed) comes to pass, it won't be 10 years or so. It'll be a generation before you see a Democratic president again and probably a very weak Congress/Senate as a result.

I seriously wish the DNC and the national candidates would back off this issue and accept the perception of most Americans. If not, 90 million+ gun owners in America can be a very powerful voting block. Only the AARP is stronger in terms of sheer political lobbying power. The 4 million odd members of the NRA are merely the most vocal and visible gun rights lobbying part. Worry hard about the other 86 million or so evenly split across all political lines. When you start going after Grandpa Walt's M1 Carbine as a deadly "assault weapon", that "inactive" block is going to wake up and all they are going to see is the "D" next the name. Public perception is funny that way. The sad part is, that perception will probably be correct.

In the end, I think they know it and I think they are biding their time. They learned from 1996. I just don't think they've learned enough.

Time will tell.

Guns, Guns Everywhere!

When the antis scream about how more guns equals more crime, more death, more carnage, I guess they could say now that gun violence is out of this world.

There's apparently a gun in the survival kit onboard the International Space Station provided by Russia. Probably a Makarov.

Personally, I think it is kind of cool. Just for the aspect of the PSH that would result. Given that the Russians are the ones that provided it, you can't blame the gun-happy Americans for this one. Not that an anti would let facts get in the way of a good panty soiling.

On the other hand, you have to ask: "What in the hell for?!?". Do the Russians know something about alien visitors in orbit that we don't? Is there really a serious piracy problem in orbit from mercenaries and scavengers stealing old satellite parts and spent rocket boosters for scrap value?

"Popping a cap in your ass" takes on a whole new meaning a couple hundred miles up in what is essentially a thin aluminum can.

Sometimes you just can't make this stuff up.

No Big Surprise: Maryland Doesn't Believe in Gun Rights

Sorry for the long delay folks. I am getting over a very bad case of food poisoning. Salmonella is not pleasant under the best of circumstances.

I just checked the list the Washington Post so thoughtfully provided of those Senators and Congressional Representatives who are supporting Heller in its case before the Supreme Court.

There is only one Maryland Representative on the list:

Representative Roscoe G. Bartlett (MD-6, R)

Mr. Bartlett, I would be happy to shake your hand and send you a campaign contribution. You aren't even in my district.

Of course what is unspoken is all the rest of our representatives in the so-called "Free State" who believe you don't have an individual right to arms. Given we are speaking of Maryland, no big surprise there.

For me personally, we once again come to my own representatives leaning on the levers of power:

Senator Barbara Mikulski
Representative Chris Van Hollen

Just because I can't vote in 2008 doesn't mean you can ignore me. I am telling you now that I will not be voting for you in 2010 or 2012. I'll support your opposition. Vigorously. The pointed letters to both of these individuals will be posted here because I would seriously like an explanation of why they do not support our rights as guaranteed under the Constitution.

For the rest of you in this craphole of a state, if you representative is not the aforementioned Roscoe G. Bartlett, a true defender of liberty, why don't you contact your representatives and find out why they won't defend your rights? I'm sure it will be enlightening.

A pox on all of them.

On the Other Digs...

I decided to play along with Fighting for Liberty's post on "Movies I've Seen". My answer is over on the other digs.

On the rights and politics front, I will post later today on my views on the next President and in the next day or two, I wish to tear apart a bill pending here in Maryland that absolutely must be stopped or it will be the end of the shooting sports in this state.