How To Argue With Anti-Gun Folks.

12/14/12 was a dark day for everyone in the United States.  As further details emerge on the horrific shooting which took place at an elementary school in CT, the demands and cries for heightened gun control are growing louder and louder.  The purpose of this article is to present you with the proper factual statistics and logical lines of argumentation you should utilize in order to effectively convey a logical and accurate picture of what affect gun control has on society if you are presented the opportunity to do so.  It's a shame that the anti-gun crowd is so quick to turn a tragedy into a political discussion, but alas, we live in the United States and they have the right to do so.

THE MOST IMPORTANT THING TO REMEMBER:
The burden of proof remains on the "Anti-gun" or "pro-gun legislation" individuals!  Whatever they might like to think, they are the one's who are trying to overturn hundreds of years of tradition, law, and court interpretation.  DO NOT EVER respond with an argument to someone who says "explain why you should be allowed to have a gun" or anything to the effect....always respond with "explain to me why I shouldn't...the burden of proof remains on you to showcase otherwise."  Don't let anyone sway you to the contrary or bait you into making statements which they can twist.  After they make an argument, you can then formulate your response based on their accusations.  This puts you in a massively advantageous position in any debate.  They must prove beyond a doubt, that their position is correct. 

PLEASE:
Read up on Professor John Lott.  Professor Lott is an economist who has done extensive studies on statistics related to gun crime and his findings are quite revealing.  Even if you don't agree with Lott's opinions, you can find some extremely valuable information in his statistical data.

ALSO:
Prepare yourself for the inevitable emotionally charged questions regarding the latest shooting itself.  While the event is difficult to fathom, emotion cannot outlast logic.  Providing factual data will always get you further than speaking out of emotion.  The most important thing you can do if posed with the question of "what about the kids in CT," is to suggest that in any specific case, we cannot gain by analyzing the method for the killing (as that can always change), but rather the reasons behind the killing which is what we can actively use to prevent further crime.  Try to steer the conversation away from the emotional and toward the factual.

SOME COMMON ARGUMENTS YOU WILL HEAR AND YOUR BEST POSSIBLE RESPONSES (some of the favorites I've heard in the past):

1. Assault Rifles Need To Be Banned, They Are Designed For Combat: 
1. Assault Rifles are already banned, you must be referring to "Assault Weapons" which is a government classification that describes a large group of guns on the market.  Assault weapons are nothing more than a certain class of "hunting/sporting" rifles which have had external modifications made to them.  Imagine an "Assault Weapon" like a Honda Civic which has had a Nascar body kit put on it, that doesn't make it ready for the Nascar track despite the fact that it may look like a race car and gain some slight aerodynamic advantages, just like adding external changes to regular stock sporting firearms doesn't make them "designed for combat" although they may have some slight ergonomic performance gains.
2. Britain/Australia Banned Guns And Their Gun Murder Rate Is A Fraction Of That Of The US:
1. Your absolutely right.  Britain only experiences approximately 50 gun related homicides per year to the US' 12,000.  However, there are some distinct differences between the US and Britain/Australia which need to be taken into account when analyzing this statistic.  First, while "gun related homicides" have decreased, the overall violent crime rate in Britain/Australia has risen to levels FAR above that of the United States.  For example, in Britain, 4100 of 100,000 are expected to be the victim of a violent crime whereas in the US, only 475 of 100,000 are victims each year.  (Statistics citations are available through the England Home Office and the FBI).  This showcases that while gun deaths may be decreased, overall people effected by violent crime increases as a correlated statistic to gun bans. Second, make sure to take into account that England and Australia are islands.  This means that when a ban goes into effect, the black market is limited in these countries...conversely, the United States has neighbors to both the north and the south...Mexico of course exports massive amount of illegal material (drugs and weapons) to the US on a daily basis already and has a network in place to smuggle even more weapons for a criminal black market in the US should it decide to expand and do so.
2. Do Note that the Assault Weapons are ALREADY BANNED BY CT LAW!!!  A ban does not work when the criminal has the ability to obtain arms illegally - not easy on an island, very easy when a country has borders with other countries.  Connecticut General Statute Sec. 53-202c.  
3. You Don't Need An AR15:
1. This is exceptionally subjective line of argument.  Although you may not feel like you need an AR15, you can only suggest an opinion as to whether or not I need mine.  For example, if 3-5 men attacked my home in an attempted robbery/home invasion, I believe I would NEED my AR15 or equivalent weapon to exercise my right to self preservation.  Although this scenario might not be probable, there is a perfect example right here of such an event transpiring:   Armed Men Assault House  
2. Further, an entirely separate line of rational thought would be the reasoning which the founders originally intended for the 2nd Amendment.  Of course the 2nd Amendment was designed to protect the rights of the populous against a tyrannical government.  Reading any of the founders memorandums or letters reveals this fact.  With this in mind, my AR15 or other "Assault Weapon" is one of the more modern weapons which would best allow me to best do this.  (While this line of logic is factually correct and still exists as a rationale line of logic today, many are far less receptive of this type of thinking and deem it archaic.  I always suggest utilizing answer 1 first, and using answer 2 if pressed on the issue).
4. The Founders Didn't Intend For The 2nd Amendment To Allow You To Own Semi-auto Weapons:
1. This is purely subjective.  You can't suggest that the founders suggested one thing or another unless you can produce a specific piece of factual evidence to back it up.  This of course is also not probable because in 1776, the founders suggested that private citizens owning cannons was perfectly legal!  Of course cannons were the most powerful means of weaponry at the time.
2. Further, an entirely separate line of rational thought would be the reasoning which the founders originally intended for the 2nd Amendment to the Constitution.  Of course the 2nd Amendment was designed to protect the rights of the populous against a tyrannical government and this would mean the populous would be legally allowed to posses weapons at least semi-comparable to those the government has access to.  Reading any of the founders memorandums or letters reveals this fact.  (While this is factually correct and still exists as a rationale line of logic today, many are far less receptive to this line of thinking).
5. There Is Never Going To Be A Revolution In The US Again
1. Libya, Egypt, Syria, etc.  While it certainly isn't probable, it can be argued that it doesn't seem probable simply because the people still control the power of the government...thanks in large part to the ownership of firearms.
6. Did You Forget About The First Part Of The Second Amendment:
1. Conveniently, the Supreme Court has ruled that the right to form a militia and the right to bear arms are not the same thing but rather two independent clauses of a law.  DC v. Heller specifically showcases this.  So, to answer your question, no I haven't forgotten about it, our highest form of court has simply ruled that the two aspects of the law are not dependent on one anther.
7. Assault Weapons Kill The Most People:
1. This is actually an extremely inaccurate statement.  Only 2-4% of firearm homicides are committed using assault weapons.  This number is repeated in various studies by law enforcement agencies across the country.  Further, regarding the 94-04 Assault Weapons Ban, statistics show NO meaningful effect on overall gun violence...again, because only 2-4% of homicides are committed using these guns to begin with.  So, NO, assault weapons kill barely any people in terms of percentage.
8. The Danger of Gun-Free Zones Is A Pro-Gun Myth:
1. This is certainly difficult to support based on the statistics.  ALL multi-victim shootings in the US, 3 victims or more, (in the past 50 years) with the exception of approx. 1 odd circumstance, have taken place in gun free zones...VA Tech, Newton, and CO (the worst shootings in US history)  all come to mind.  Of course the Oregon Mall case was in a CHL friendly zone.....and a CHL holder stopped the crisis with minimal loss of life PREVENTING a multi-victim shooting. 
2. Note that regarding the shooting in CO, the shooter had the choice of going to any of 7 theaters showing the batman movie within a 20 minute driving radius, and chose the 1 which did not permit legal concealed carry (this was also not the closest theater).
9. Self Defense With Firearms Is A Myth:
1. This is flat-out false.  Although some statistics in given data sets can appear to support this statement, Dr. Kleck of FL conducted a huge survey on this topic and concluded that 2.5 million self defense gun uses occur per year in the US.  EVEN IF THIS IS AN OVERESTIMATE (which I'm inclined to believe it is) even if just a fraction of this number used firearms defensively, then the fact remains that self-defense with a firearm is indeed a real part of societal life with weapons.  Further, as shown in the violent crime statistics, the mere presence of firearms in the possession of law abiding citizens directly correlates to far less violent crime.
10. You Don't Need "High Capacity" Magazines:
1. Just like the "You Don't Need An AR15" comment, this comment is completely subjective...medical statistics show that the 9mm round usually takes between 3-5 impacts to a vital area (minimum) to actually kill an individual; if 3 guys jump me in an ally, that means I need 15 rounds assuming I don't miss to assure that I can protect myself.  If I want to own STANDARD CAPACITY magazines, I need to be able to do so as they are an integral part of firearm ownership.  (Citation - Former SWAT officer and current LEO instructor Steve Fisher)
2. Further, lets not kid ourselves...reloading a firearm takes approximately 1 second if someone knows what they're doing.  So to suggest that by limiting a criminals access to these items we will save lives is purely wishful thinking...the only thing such a law would accomplish would be to make law abiding citizens less able to defend themselves.
11. Red Gun Friendly States Have The Highest Gun Murder Rates:
1. This is half-true and a half-accurate statistic.  It's half-true in that California and Illinois are mixed atop the list of states with the highest gun homicide rates...both of course being extremely anti-gun.  It's half-accurate because the statistic doesn't account for city breakdowns on gun violence, just state population.  The most violent cities in the US are New Orleans, Detroit, Baltimore, and DC, none of which are red areas other than NO (which accounts for why Louisiana is #1 on the list of violent states per population (due to population concentration).
12. The NRA Formulates A False Representation Of The Public Opinion On Guns:
1. Again, a completely false statement.  While the NRA is a lobbyist group which caters to a special interest, overall national poles showcase that people in favor of gun rights v. gun bans is right about 50/50 in America at this point in time.  Further, regardless of where that line is drawn, until you can PROVE that the Constitution doesn't guarantee my right to ownership, then it doesn't matter if 75% of Americans want guns banned...the US is a Constitutional Republic AND NOT A DEMOCRACY because it is designed so that the will of the majority shall not infringe upon the rights of the minority.  

THE HEAVY HITTING/CORE VALUE QUESTION:

1. Do you believe in a a fundamental right to self-preservation? 
1. If anyone answers "No", then the best thing to do is to understand that you have a fundamental value set disagreement that runs much deeper than the issue of guns.  Unless you can change this persons belief on self-preservation, you will never change their belief on gun ownership.

SOME DON'TS - avoid making these arguments, they are not the most effective way of conversanting on the subject and some lead to false comparisons which your opposition will jump all over:

1. If you want to ban guns you might as well ban cars, people kill people with cars  
1. This is a Straw Man argument, don't make it.  Use knives as an example if you really want to use this line of argumentation.
2. Abortion kills more children than guns
1. For the love of all things holy, NEVER SAY THIS.  This is like putting your head into the noose.  You cannot argue legality of gun ownership and then say abortion kills...both have been ruled on by the same court...you delegitamize your entire argument by saying this.
3. If you ban guns you have to eliminate every other amendment
1. Although this might sound correct on the surface, most amendments do indeed have some form of limitation.  Prohibiting the ownership of Assault Weapons is no different than saying that you can't scream fire in a movie theater in the minds of anti-gun activists.
4. Guns Don't Kill People, People Kill People
1. Although it's true, please don't say it, it's very cheesy and doesn't showcase much thought.  Your far better off with a statement such as "guns make it easy for bad things to happen when in the wrong hands, but equally easy to prevent those bad things when in the right hands".

All in all, don't make extreme comparisons or talk in absolutes, it won't win you any rational debates.   Remember that having the discussion is what is important.  Our country is so polarized on issues because we don't know how to civilly discuss anymore.  Learn to civilly discuss and debate and you will be a select breed of people in this country.

Purpose Driven AR15's: The Competition Setup

AR15's are arguably the most versatile weapons platforms in the world.  If you need a rifle to do work within 1000m, odds are, you can outfit the AR platform to work for you.  With that said, what parts and components make up an AR15 of the "competition" variety?  We as shooters constantly hear terms like "tactical" or "limited" thrown around when describing classes in Multigun competition, but rarely is a rifle being shot in either of these divisions "limited" or "tactical" (in the popular gun-nut definition of the term, meaning "practical").  Most of these "race guns" are purpose built down to the the size of the barrel's gas-port, so let's explore what exactly makes up a Race AR, and why those parts are chosen.  Further, I will explain the drawbacks of using such a purpose built weapon in roles other than competition.

The "Race AR" is a platform which first and foremost, is based heavily on recoil mitigation.  Parts are chosen and selected with the number one goal of muzzle control-ability in mind.  Parts integrally connected with recoil control and mitigation are:

1. The Muzzle Device
2. The Gas System
3. The Bolt Carrier Group
4. The Buffer System

1. The Muzzle Device - Compensators

The muzzle device on a Race AR will typically vary greatly from muzzle devices used in other "practical" applications.  Opposed to in these other applications, where flash suppression and concussive blast bare equal importance to recoil mitigation, in the competition world, there is virtually no reason to worry about suppressing flash or minimizing muzzle concussion/signature.  With this in mind, muzzle devices which redirect gasses exceptionally well (at the cost of creating a fireball and massive concussion perpendicular to the muzzle) may be, and are, readily used.

2. The Gas System - Adjustable Gas Blocks and Gas Ports

In order to abstain from a lengthy academic discussion on gas system length, allow me to state that carbine systems (the short gas system) produce a large gas impulse heading back into the weapon's action, midlength systems (longer than carbine systems) produce less gas impulse than carbine systems, and rifle length systems (the longest system) create little gas impulse.  The more of an impulse you have, the more likely the weapon is to be able to cycle, but also, the more recoil you will feel.  With this in mind, Race ARs typically are built around a rifle length system with a tuned gas port to perfectly regulate the exact amount of gas needed to cycle the weapon, OR, a midlength system with an adjustable gas block.  An adjustable gas block allows the user to cover/close off a portion of the gas port in order to regulate the amount of gas flow and therefore lessen the impulse.  Although some shooters do run various combinations of gas port size and adjustable gas blocks on various length gas systems, I have found that on a rifle system, if the rifle has a properly sized gas port (for the shooters load), then an adjustable gas block will not do much if anything to reduce impulse.  On a midlength system, I believe that there is still enough impulse to warrant using an adjustable gas block over simply a smaller gas port size.  With this said, when utilizing an adjustable gas block, the user MUST be sure the adjustment screw NEVER deviates or else, the weapon may not get enough gas to cycle, and turn into a single shot gun.  The same goes for a weapon utilizing a smaller gas port.  As the weapon gets dirty, remember that there is less gas heading back into the action to help the weapon cycle, and short stroking can become a problem.  The gas system and alterations made to the gas system are some of the primary factors which effect weapon reliability, and while reliability is important in Multigun, reliability after 1000 rounds shot in a swamp after filling the action with mud is not.  

3. The Bolt Carrier Group - Lightened Carriers

Swapping out the standard BCG with a lightened carrier is common practice in Race ARs...based on the discussion we just had on the gas system, can you think why this would be the case?  You guessed it - by lightening the carrier, the user can reduce the amount of gas required to push the carrier backwards and

cycle the weapon.  So does swapping out the carrier cause any serious disadvantages to the weapons function in practical application? - Not on a round to round basis, at least I haven't experienced any with thousands of round fired.  What can be an issue however, is the longevity of the carrier.  Because material is being removed from the carrier, it is, despite what anyone may say, being structurally weakened...not by much of course, but certainly it will wear out sooner than a milspec carrier made with the same materials.  Further, many lightened carriers have had the teeth for the forward assist removed; rendering the FA unusable. 

4. The Buffer System - Lightened Buffers and Harder Springs.

As you may have guessed by now, tuning the AR15s felt recoil is all about using as little gas as possible to cycle the action, which in turn means cutting down as much reciprocating mass as possible.  As was true for the BCG, the buffers on most Race ARs are lightened to allow for a lesser force requirement to cycle.  On the flip side, buffer springs are typical strengthened.  What this does is allow the buffer spring, not the buffer (and in turn the rear of the stock tube), to absorb the energy coming back from the gas impulse and the reciprocation of the BCG.  Further, having a +10% spring also allows for a noticeably faster return to battery which means that the recoil impulse is cut down to a shorter time frame rather than a long drawn out push.  In short, it makes the impulse of the gun snappier, but despite how this might sound, this is desirable because it allows the gun to be driven back to target sooner (think standard AK v. Standard AR both chambered in .223...the AK has a long drawn out recoil impulse that doesn't feel like much, but keeps you off target whereas the AR has a shorter snappier impulse that appears to be more severe, but in actuality allows for faster accurate follow-up shots).

All the speed in the world isn't worth anything if the weapon isn't able to hold a a tight group.  The next aspect to the Race AR, much like other precision rifles, is a match grade barrel.  Most Race Gun setups run an 18" barrel or a 16" on the low end.  The barrel is ideally setup with a .223 Wylde chamber and a 1:8 twist rate in a SS platform.  The SS allows for increased accuracy over Chrome-lined.  The Wylde chamber allows for more case expansion than a .223 chamber, but also maintains great accuracy than the 5.56 chamber.  18" barrels tend to be the ticket right now in 3 Gun as they provide a a platform suitable for rifle length gas, while also being shorter than their 20" counterparts.  With a longer barrel, fluting or dimpling is also commonplace in an attempt to cut down on weight and to maintain an effective balance point.

Magnified optics or optics with a variable power capability are the primary difference separating "Tactical" and "Limited" class.  In Limited, only irons or 1X fixed power optics are legal.  In tactical, any single magnified optic is allowed.  Most Tactical shooters utilize a 1-4X or a 1-6X depending on budget.  Conversely, the Limited group is much more split, with some of the older shooters sticking with iron setups while the new guys have switched over to RDS.  Either way, no true race gun ever runs Back-Up sights; at least I've never seen it.  Back-up sights do little for a shooter utilizing his weapon in the confines of a flat range, and the removal thereof is a great way to shave off ounces from the rifle.  Obviously, if the rifle was going to be taken to do any serious practical work, the user would want to have some form of back-up sighting system.

With all this said, ARs and AR parts are harder than ever to find, thanks in large part to the political climate.  No matter what AR you have, you will be able to compete and have a good time, so go head out to a match!  While Race ARs allow for shooters at the top of the pack to cut down on their times even more, a rifle is only as effective as the shooter holding it.  Most of the best shooters out there could pick up an Oracle Carbine and continue to run far above most shooters who might bring said weapon to a match.  So, get out and practice until you have outgrown your current gear, and then move to upgrade.  Cheers all!

The Magazine You Can't Do Without

If you're interested in Multigun and/or you shoot Multigun competitively, there is a product you simply can't do without.  The Nordic Components  PMAG Extension is an awesome enhancement for your standard AR15 Pmag, bringing the capacity of the 28-30 round magazine up to a whopping 46-48 rounds; all while maintaining the PMAGs famed reliability. 

(Right to Left: 20 Round PMAG, 30 Round PMAG, 48 Round Nordic PMAG)

 In Multigun, rifle stages typical range in round count, from approximately 16 rounds upwards to approximately 50 rounds (on the very high end).  What this means is that when using standard capacity AR mags, you will most likely have to preform a magazine change once during each rifle heavy stage.  While this might not seem like much lost time, if you spend just 2 seconds preforming a reload compared to your competitors, you will see a significant drop in your stage point percentage; the Nordic Extension eliminates the need for such reloads.  The Nordic PMAG Extension is a plastic housing which replaces the base-plate of your PMAG and is shipped with a new magazine spring to account for the increase in required tension for reliable feeding.  Compared to some of the other "high capacity" or "extended capacity" magazines out there, the Nordic is able to strike the perfect balance between capacity and weight management - Some of the magazines which allow you to hold 60 or 100 rounds might sound even better than the Nordic's 48, but when you rarely ever need those extra rounds, they become just added weight to your weapon, slowing down your transitions and fatiguing your arms.  In a direct comparison to other magazine extensions of similar round count, I can attest to having seen numerous other brand extensions splitting open sending rounds flying out the bottom of the magazine mid-stage more than once.  If you want to maintain your magazine's reliability, but get that slight competitive edge over your opponents, the Nordic Extension is for you.