May 2, 2018 -- A Quick Run Around the Web

"Lever Action Rifles: .30-30 vs .44 Magnum"--Paul Harrell (20 min.)

In this video, Harrell compares .30-.30 versus .44 Magnum as to drop at 100 and 200 yards, as well as how each performs against a cinder block and against his famous meat target. Basically, though, the two had almost the same drop at 100 yards, but the .44 Magnum had substantially more drop at 200 yards; both performed about equal against the cinder block and meat targets. So, if you wanted a lever action primarily for hunting, the .30-30 would probably be the way to go; for home defense, the larger magazine capacity (for a given barrel length) of the .44 Magnum tips in its favor.

• "Yet another tactical hobbyist fantasy bites the dust"--Grant Cunningham. One of Cunningham's readers asked him whether he needed to get something better than a lever-action rifle for home-defense. Cunningham writes: 

         In the book [Protecting Your Homestead] I express my appreciation for the lever-action as a defensive tool in and around the home. I like the slim, streamlined profile that makes it easy to retrieve and move with, the great balance, simple manual of arms, and the way those rifles shoulder for fast emergency shooting. I consider it to be a good defensive tool for those people who like its operating characteristics, and the capacity (particularly in those chambered for the Magnum pistol cartridges) is of little concern.

         Similarly, I also praised the handling qualities of the short 20-round magazine for the AR-15. I like them because of their lower profile, lessened tendency to catch and snag on things in the environment, and the better balance that results from less weight forward of the gun’s control point. I put that in the book, knowing that my advice would likely fall on deaf ears; most AR owners won’t use anything less than a 30-round magazine in their rifle!

         Lots of hobbyists in the defensive shooting world reject both the lever-action and the 20-round AR magazine for the same reason: because they’ve bought into the notion that every defensive rifle use is going to be an extended firefight with multiple heavily armed and highly motivated adversaries. This would be the “long duration gunfight”, which is a necessary construct to allow the existence of the aforementioned “short duration gunfight”.

Cunningham goes on to discuss why most defensive rifle situations do not require 30-round magazine dumps and quick magazine changes. But because much of the tactical training is set up to require rapid, extended fire, it drives out the lever-action rifles and 20-round magazines.

         While some of this is the background of those providing the training (i.e., someone with a military background is more likely to provide military-like training), it probably rests mainly on those seeking training. That is, because everyone wants to be "tactical," trainers try to offer "tactical" style training.

• Related: While you are over at Cunningham's blog, check out his Hump Day Reading List for this week.

• "LEVER-ACTION RIFLES: Ready for Action in the 21st Century"--SWAT Magazine.  A look at the continued popularity of lever-action rifles, and this bit on running one:

         Unlike what is portrayed in movies, the lever-action (like bolt-action rifles) should remain on the shoulder while the action is worked. Lowering it and then bringing it back into the shoulder takes more time to reacquire the target.

         That extra time may result in not getting a follow-up shot on game or, if used in a defensive role, allow a bad guy to put more holes in you than you were issued at birth. But with a little practice, rounds can be placed on target quite quickly with a lever gun.

• "Lever-Actions for Personal Defense"--American Rifleman. The author notes that for those who are unable, or unwilling, to use a semi-auto rifle for defense, the lever action is a viable fall back position. However, he makes some recommendations for making it a better weapon, such as installing ghost ring sights, using a butt cuff that holds extra ammunition (for topping off the weapon). While it is easy to pop a new cartridge into the action of an empty lever action, topping off the magazine can be a little harder. Of course, with a Henry style rifle, I don't see it really being an option, but a Winchester or Marlin with a side-loading gate allows it. But it takes practice to get good at it; and, sometimes, some work on the edges of the loading gate.
• In case you do decide to use 30-round magazines: "The Rifle Mag as a Monopod"--Recoil Magazine. The author notes: "I’ve never suffered a malfunction caused by driving the baseplate down into the ground. I think it should be standard practice, terrain and equipment allowing. It increases stability (unless there’s an earthquake or you’re on the deck of a ship) and reduces fatigue – why wouldn’t you do it?" And a product such as the Mag-Pod Base Plate for GEN2 PMAG can help.
• "How to Escape and Evade a Tracker"--The Art of Manliness. Some very basic considerations. For example:

         Avoid “honeypots.” Expert tracker John Hurth calls soft, impressionable areas of ground that readily capture tracks “honeypots” because they leave so much information behind. Mud, sand, soft dirt, and snow are examples of honeypots. Long grass can also be a honeypot because the tracker will be able to see the trampled, bent grass that you walked through. Avoid honeypots and do your best to stick to hard, rocky surfaces.

         If you’re escaping and evading in snow or in a sandy desert, avoiding honeypots will be difficult, but it is possible to minimize the trace you leave behind. If you’re evading on snow-covered ground, try to move only when new snow is actually falling from the sky. The falling snow plus the wind will erase your tracks. Same thing for sandy environments. Try to travel when the wind is blowing so that your tracks are blown away.

I would include in "honeypots" a dusty road or trail. It is amazing how easily tracks can be seen on these, particularly in the morning or evening when the sun is casting good shadows.

• "Cleaning Your Brass With Lyman: Pros and Cons of Different Techniques"--The Truth About Guns. A look at different types of cleaners (vibratory and tumbler styles) and various types of media. Be sure to read the comments as well. For instance, I didn't know that corn cob media could be washed and reused. Something that I will have to try.
• How soon before these come north? "Mexican Military Seizes Cartel’s Rocket Launchers, Dynamite, Grenades near U.S. Border"--Breitbart. Amongst the standard military weapons was an underfolding AK that was gold-plated with mother-of-pearl handguards and pistol grip.
• "Federal Premium/Speer Gold Dot G2 Eyes Possible Civilian Line"--The Firearm Blog. The G2 line uses a polymer plug inside the hollow-point cavity to ensure consistent expansion. Currently, Speer only offers it for sale to law enforcement. My guess is that Speer is considering a civilian line because of competition from Hornady. 
• Isn't there an Aesop's fable about something like this? "Man who tried to save rattlesnake from being run over DIES after he is bitten twice moving it off road"--Daily Mail. I think that this guy should be nominated for a Darwin Award. Just a reminder that real wildlife are not like those portrayed in a Disney film.
• "Here Are Three Scary FBI Scandal Factors You Must Know"--Polizette. These are:

(1)  Department of Justice Inspector General Michael Horowitz's report. The article indicates that: 

         [A] few months before Horowitz was sworn into the job in 2012, Eric Holder, Obama’s attorney general and previously deputy attorney general under President Bill Clinton, gutted the IG act provision that mandates their access to all necessary documents. Holder acted at the behest of then-FBI Director Robert Mueller and others at the bureau.

         Holder — who would subsequently be held in contempt by Congress for refusing to turn over subpoenaed documents in the “Fast and Furious” scandal — thus forced Horowitz to request in writing any documents he sought from the bureau.

          There then ensued a three-year struggle in Congress and the media that culminated in Obama having no choice but to sign the Inspector General Empowerment Act of 2016, which removed all doubt about the IG’s access.

(2)  Obama interfered with the investigation into Hillary Clinton's email server:

          "President Obama was sending messages and receiving messages on Hillary Clinton's private email server. Jim Comey knew that, and when President Obama went on television and said, 'There's no issue here, she didn't really intend to cause harm,' what he was really saying in essence is, 'You'd better let her off, because if you wind up accusing her, you wind up accusing me.'

          "Comey followed that lead. And the notion that this was somehow something that he had to do for the welfare of the country, there's a lot of disingenuous claptrap." In other words, preserving Obama's "plausible deniability" was priority number one.

(3)  Former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, former CIA Director John Brennan, former national security adviser Susan Rice and former U.N. Ambassador Samantha Power had access to surveillance data--and could unmask it--and probably used it to discover information on political opponents and to blackmail Congress-critters. Which probably explains a March 13 tweet from Brennan which stated: "With other investigative shoes yet to drop, legislators who try to protect @realDonaldTrump will face November reckoning." And, coincidentally, we have a record number of Republican Congress-critters voluntarily giving up their seats this year rather than run for re-election.

• Speaking of the election this fall, I see that liberals are already setting up the narrative should they fail to win majorities in the House or Senate. From an article entitled "There’s Nothing to Stop the 2018 Elections From Being Hacked" at The Atlantic: "Congressional Democrats are pledging not to exploit stolen materials in their campaigns, but Republicans have declined to match that commitment, leaving the midterm races vulnerable to malicious interference." The issue is that only the Democrats were hacked, so, of course, it benefits them (and only them) if the Republicans would refuse to use anything exposed by those hacks. Any Republican that falls for this is too stupid to serve in Congress.