Categories
Fieldcraft

Take the Shot? A World-Class Coues Deer Offers A Challenging, Long-Range Shot In High-Wind Conditions – Presented by Springfield Armory by ARAM VON BENEDIKT

A precision rifle combined with accurate ammo and premium optics make tough shots doable. Even on tiny game like Coues deer.

A World-Class Coues Deer Offers A Challenging, Long-Range Shot In High-Wind Conditions. The Hunter Is Using Cutting-Edge Long-Range Shooting Gear. Should He Take The Shot?

“Oh My Gosh! That’s a huge buck!” My shouted whisper was snatched away by the wind, bouncing off a mountainside in Mexico a few seconds later. My friend and hunting buddy Jordan Voigt had just spotted a Coues buck across the bend of a jagged canyon, and it only took a glance through my binocular to see that it was a really good deer. Even at 514 yards.

We had started the day high on the same ridge, crawling out of our bivy tents at dawn and making our way Ninja-style to a little jutting point. There we settled in to glass miles of classic Coues deer habitat. The wind was strong, battering our backs and shoulders and creeping its cold fingers inside our collars and down our necks.

We spotted a few does, which were holding tight to heavy brush and feeding on dry mesquite beans littering the ground under the older trees. It was the third day of our hunt. I had killed a great old warrior buck the noon before, and our plan called for us to exit the backcountry during this day’s noontime so we could resupply, as well as join some friends for a traditional Argentinian dinner. After a couple days of freeze-dried food, that sounded like heaven in Coues country.

We shivered behind our binoculars and huddled on rocky shelves below the rim of the cliff, trying to escape the brutality of the wind, telling ourselves that if we glassed just a little longer a buck would show itself.

Coues deer country is often rugged and steep. Stalking close can be done, but only rarely. More often long, cross-canyon shots are necessary.

There were three of us on this adventure; myself, Jordan, and another friend and hunting buddy Natalie. This was Jordan and Natalie’s first hunt for the elusive “Grey Ghost”, the diminutive Coues whitetail of the American Southwest. They (the deer, not Jordan and Natalie) have earned their nickname honestly, being some of the most illusive creatures alive to spot and stalk amid the cactus, dense brush, and hip-high grass of their native mountain terrain. They’re tiny things, with a big, old mature buck tipping the scale at just over one hundred pounds. That’s barely bigger than your neighbor’s German Shepherd, and hunting the little deer calls for an accurate rifle and precise shooting. And more often than not, long cross-canyon shots.

The brand-new 6.8 Western cartridge is well designed and built for distance. It’s an ideal all-around cartridge for western big game.

RIFLE, SCOPE, AND AMMO

Jordan was hunting with a bolt-action rifle chambered in the brand-new, cutting-edge 6.8 Western cartridge. It was an accurate setup, turning in an average group size of less than three quarter minutes of angle. Most of the 100-yard groups could hide under a nickel. Lightweight Talley rings mounted a snappy Leupold 2-12X44 VX6 HD riflescope atop the action, and a superb Javelin Pro bipod by Spartan Precision quick-attached to the forend via a rare-earth magnet. The rifle was zeroed at 200 yards, and a drop chart showing ballistic information and “come-ups” for every distance from 200 to 1,000 yards, at average local elevation and temperature, was pasted to the side of the rifle’s forearm. Jordan had used the rifle to ring targets out to six hundred yards and more the day preceding our hunt, and I had no doubt of his ability to place an accurate shot when the moment arrived.

The ammunition nestled in the magazine on Jordan’s rifle came from the Browning factory, loaded with a new 175-grain Sierra Tipped Game King bullet designed specifically for the new 6.8 Western. The diameter of the bullet is .277, exactly the same as a .270 Winchester. Long, sleek, and streamlined, the bullets sport an extraordinarily high G1 Ballistic Coefficient of .617. Starting downrange with a muzzle velocity of 2,834 feet per second, the round packs terminal energy and momentum far beyond any distance a reasonably intelligent person would want to shoot at a little critter like a Coues buck.

Photo 4

The best Coues deer hunting is often found while living from your backpack.

We finally gave up on spotting a buck from our windy point, and slunk back to stuff our bivy tents and sleeping bags into packs and swing them aboard sore shoulders. Determined to hunt along the way we stayed high, finally running out of ridge above a big bend in a canyon. We decided to stop and glass for a while, and I hadn’t even found a comfortable rock to sit upon when Jordan hissed “big buck!” jolting us into full-throttle predator mode. I put glass on the buck, gulped my heart back down where it belonged, and settled my spotting scope onto the deer to verify what a quick glance through my binocular had told me. Sure enough, the buck was a monster. Wide, heavy beams swept out and forward, with long brow tines and G-2s, 3s, and 4s reaching toward the sky. I never could get a perfect look at the buck’s left antler, but if it matched his right side – and every glimpse I got said it would – we were undoubtedly looking at a record book buck.

When we first saw the buck he was standing broadside on a jumbled boulder face that a goat would struggle to maintain its balance on. By the time I set the spotter up and Jordan found a field position to shoot from the deer had walked under the canopy of a giant old oak tree that overhung the cliff side, stopping with only his right antler and shoulder visible through a hole in the tree limbs. He was quartering slightly toward us, but remarkably, we had a good shot at his shoulder and the vitals beyond. Jordan gallantly asked if Natalie wanted to take the opportunity, and once she’d refused settled in behind his rifle. The distance was 514 yards. He checked his chart and adjusted the turret on his scope. His position was steady, but there was a problem:

The wind. The wind was ripping left to right, sweeping in jagged bursts up and across the canyon. I’m fairly confident in estimating wind up to about fifteen miles per hour, and this air was maintaining significantly more velocity that that. The gusts, I surmised, were ripping through at 35 to 40 miles per hour. Depending on what the wind was doing at the buck’s position, and in the 500-yard void between, the Sierra bullet would drift somewhere in the neighborhood of 4 to 11 minutes of angle. That’s equivalent to between 20 and 55 inches. Jordan would have to make a long range downhill shot with a violently gusting crosswind at one of America’s smallest big game animals. Through a hole in a tree.

But this was no ordinary buck. It was the biggest Coues buck I’d seen in my life; one that would very likely score well into the all-time Boone & Crockett record book. Would it be wise to push our luck? To try to make that shot regardless of the complications? We studied our options.

Could we sneak closer? Coues deer are notorious for seeing any movement and just disappearing. This buck was across a canyon, with no good cover for stalking. Our chances of finding him again later were not good either. The forecast called for continuing wind through the day and following night, so we couldn’t simply wait it out. We were between the proverbial frying pan and fire.

The author with a pack full of Coues meat and topped off with a nice set of antlers.

THE MOMENT OF TRUTH

Place yourself in Jordan’s shoes. You’ve drawn a coveted tag, flown to Arizona, worked your rifle out to long distances, and backpack hunted in the backcountry. You’ve done everything you could to prepare for a tough hunt, and a tough shot, at a hard-to-find animal. You know your rifle, and are confident you can make a good shot at greater distances than you now face. And you’re looking through the crosshairs at the buck of a lifetime.

But it’s impossible to figure the wind. What is it doing at 150 yards? At 250? At 400? Will it remain steady long enough for you to squeeze off a good shot, or will it gust at the last moment, drifting your bullet an additional 25 inches? You just don’t know. YOU DON’T KNOW.

Do you take the shot?

HERE’S WHAT HAPPENED (TRUE STORY)

Jordan and I watched the wind. We tried to watch dust, cobwebs, debris, anything – to get an idea of what the wind was doing in between the deer and our position. We watched for any kind of pattern in the gusts. And then, agonizingly, we decided it would not be wise, or ethical, to take the shot. So we slid through the rocks and the ocotillo cactus and down the steep side of the ridge, trying to close to within 300 yard of the buck. If we could get that close, we could kill him. At 327 yards the buck spooked, bounded up his cliff like a mountain goat, and disappeared. Except from our dreams.

We didn’t get that buck. Nor, I believe, did we ever regret not attempting that shot. Passing was the ethical decision. Jordan did get a good buck a couple days later, with a first-shot kill at nearly the same distance. That day, there was no wind. But that is another story.

Categories
Fieldcraft N.S.F.W.

“Gun !?! What Gun?!?” Said the Man to St Peter, NSFW

Chloe moretz xxx, Albúm de fotos de Emmaisapervert - XVIDEOS.COM

Categories
All About Guns Fieldcraft

The True Distance of a Typical Gunfight

Categories
Fieldcraft

A Public Service Announcement

Categories
Fieldcraft

Moscow Rules or How to survive in todays Hyper Sensitive PC Woke era

The rules

Rule #1: Never let suspects stay together.This is the first rule of investigation not a real Gibbs rule.
Rule #1: Never screw over your partner. Note: This is quoted by McGee to be Gibbs’ Number One,but the other Rule One is quoted in other episodes to be his. Earlier, McGee had told Agent Borne that rule number one has been taken twice, showing that he knows that there are two number one rules.
Rule #2: Always wear gloves at a crime scene.
Rule #3: Don’t believe what you’re told. Double check.
Rule #3: Never be unreachable. (*Most likely one of Mike Franks’ “Golden Rules” (see below) as opposed to Gibbs, because Gibbs has been known to intentionally be unreachable.*) This was a rule quoted by Tony regarding Ziva or Tim[
Rule #4: The best way to keep a secret? Keep it to yourself. Second best? Tell one other person – if you must. There is no third best.
Rule #5: You don’t waste good.
Rule #6: Never say you’re sorry. It’s a sign of weakness. Note: This is continuously told to Tony, Ziva and Tim through a smack to the back of their heads.
Rule #7: Always be specific when you lie.
Rule #8: Never take anything for granted. Note: This is re-quoted as “Never assume.” by McGee to Gibbs six years later.
Rule #9: Never go anywhere without a knife.
Sometimes listed as “Never leave home without a knife.”
Also quoted as “Always carry a knife.”
Rule #10: Never get personally involved in a case.
Said by the SecNav to be Rule #1 in Washington politics.
Rule #11: When the job is done, walk away.
Rule #12: Never date a co-worker.
Rule #13: Never, ever involve a lawyer.
Rule #15: Always work as a team.
Rule #16: If someone thinks they have the upper hand, break it.
Rule #18: It’s better to seek forgiveness than ask permission.
Rule #22: Never, ever bother Gibbs in interrogation.
Rule #23: Never mess with a Marine’s coffee… if you want to live.
Rule #27: There are two ways to follow someone. First way, they never notice you. Second way, they only notice you.
Rule #35: Always watch the watchers.
Rule #36: If you feel like you are being played, you probably are.
Rule #38: Your case, your lead.
Rule #39: There is no such thing as coincidence.
            DiNozzo says “There is no such thing as a small world” is 39a in 10×14 “Canary”
Rule #40: If it seems someone is out to get you, they are.
Rule #42: Never accept an apology from someone who just sucker punched you.
Rule #44: First things first, hide the women and children.
Rule #45: Clean up the mess that you make.
Also stated as, “Never leave behind loose ends.
Rule #51: Sometimes – you’re wrong.
This is written on the back of the card with Rule 13 (which Gibbs circles first) in the tin where Gibbs keeps the rules
Rule #69: Never trust a woman who doesn’t trust her man. Moscow Rules @FairyArtMother | Writing inspiration, Dont look back, Lull
Categories
All About Guns Fieldcraft Gun Info for Rookies

RETRIEVING THE RIFLE: AN OVERLOOKED SKILL

If you haven’t taken my Perimeter Defense Rifle class (or read Protecting Your Homestead), you may not know that one of the things I teach is the idea that the rifle is the gun we are most unlikely to have on our person when we need it. It’s the firearm that needs to be retrieved in order to use, and that affects how we train and practice.

The popularity contest

It’s quite popular in rifle classes these days to shoot from a slung-in-front configuration — with the rifle hanging in the perfect position, hands pre-placed and, very often, with the buttstock already on the shoulder. This makes it fast and easy to simply swing the gun up and into a shooting position, decreasing the time it takes to fire a shot (and giving the guy holding the shot timer some reason for existing.)

Despite the ubiquity of the practice, I consider it so unrealistic as to be laughable, because it assumes you already have the gun with you, and slung just so, when the problem starts!

In reality, when an incident occurs for which you need the rifle it’s very unlikely that you’ll be “on patrol”, with the gun conveniently slung where you can simply raise it and shoot. You’re not going to be on a SWAT entry team with the butt of your rifle already planted on your shoulder.

The more likely scenario is that you’ll suddenly become aware that you need a rifle. You’ll run to the rifle’s storage place, grab it (and a magazine, if necessary), get the gun into a condition to be used, make your way to the point where you can/will employ it, then (if necessary) shoulder it and make the shot.

That’s a very different set of skills.

Sling, slung, slang?

Because of the need to respond to a developing situation, and the urgency it causes in one’s reactions, I don’t believe most people will actually take the time to get “slung up” or don one of those chest harness/magazine carrier contraptions.

I’ve used a rifle as a defensive tool, and in none of my incidents did I even think about using the sling. (I’ll admit to not owning any of those chest harnesses, but I’m quite sure I would also have left it behind in my rush to get the rifle into play.)

This is quite consistent with what people I’ve interviewed have told me about their defensive experience with the rifle. As one said: “When someone is shooting at you, everything that’s non-essential goes right out the window.”

The sling, in my opinion, is usually non-essential to the job of putting rounds downrange. Someone once said that the sling is to the rifle what the holster is to the pistol, but I think even that analogy implies more importance than it should. Practicing from a slung position, I believe, is a waste of valuable resources because plausible incidents don’t often happen that way.

I think it’s far more valuable to practice a realistic skill set, those things that you’ll actually need to do when it’s time for the rifle.

What might that look like?

Grab and go

Since the rifle is the arm that you need to go and get, it seems to me that learning how to retrieve and move with it is important. Like drawing the handgun, retrieving the rifle is a skill that must be practiced. Oddly, though, it’s one that gets little to no attention in most rifle curriculums. See the disconnect?

Being able to get to the storage area quickly, access the rifle, easily get it out of the storage device, and move rapidly and safely to the point where it will be employed are all tasks that need to be practiced if they’re to be done efficiently. This is the time for “grab the gun and go”, not “get geared up to be all tactical and stuff”.

Think about your rifle and how you train with it. When was the last time you factored any realistic  skills into your practice routine? I submit that you’ll gain far more from paying attention to those  than adjusting a sling to reduce your shot time by a tenth of a second.

-=[ Grant ]=-

P.S.: My Threat-Centered Revolver course in Phoenix, AZ this November is filling up! This will be my last open-enrollment course of 2019, so if you’ve been putting off registration don’t wait any longer. You can learn more (and sign up) at this link.

Listen to this blog – and subscribe to it on iTunes by clicking this link! 

  • Posted by Grant Cunningham
Categories
Fieldcraft

Some more great survival hints

(A quick explanation: I was actively involved in relief efforts for Hurricanes Katrina and Rita, organizing and dispatching teams of field workers to assist in the disaster-stricken areas. This is where many of the references in this post came from.)

Over the course of today I’ve heard back from several of our field reps who were in the hurricane-damaged areas from Wednesday through Sunday, and have also picked up on after-action reports from my contacts in the Louisiana State Police, and, through them, some from the Mississippi State Police. This e-mail summarizes experiences and lessons learned.

1. People who were prepared were frequently mobbed/threatened by those who weren’t. This was reported in at least seven incidents, five in Mississippi, two in Louisiana (I suspect that the relative lack of Louisiana incidents was because most of those with any sense left before the storm hit). In each case, the person/family concerned had made preparations for disaster, with supplies, shelter, etc. in good order and ready to go. Several had generators ready and waiting. However, their neighbors who had not prepared all came running after the disaster, wanting food, water and shelter from them. When the prepared families refused, on the grounds that they had very little, and that only enough for themselves, there were many incidents of aggression, attempted assault, and theft of their supplies. Some had to use weapons to deter attack, and in some cases, shots were fired. I understand that in two incidents, attackers and/or would-be thieves were shot. It’s also reported that in all of these cases, the prepared families now face threats of retribution from their neighbors, who regarded their refusal to share as an act of selfishness and/or aggression, and are now threatening retaliation. It’s reportedly so bad that most of the prepared families are considering moving to other neighborhoods, so as to start afresh, with different neighbors.

Similar incidents are reported by families who got out in time, prepared to spend several days on their own. When they stopped to eat a picnic meal at a rest stop, or an isolated spot along the highway, they report being approached rather aggressively by others wanting food, or fuel, or other essentials. Sometimes they had to be rather aggressive in their turn to deter these insistent requests. Two families report attempts being made to steal their belongings (in one case, their vehicle) while overnighting in camp sites on their way out of the area. They both instituted armed patrols, with one or more family members patrolling while the others slept, to prevent this. Seems to me to be a good argument to form a “bug-out team” with like-minded, security-conscious friends in your area, so that all concerned can provide mutual security and back-up.

I can understand these families being unwilling to share the little they had, particularly in light of not knowing when supplies would once again be available. However, this reinforces the point I made in my “lessons learned” post last week: plan on needing much more in the way of supplies than you initially thought! If these families had had some extra food and water, and hidden their main reserve where it would not be seen, they could have given at least some help to their neighbors and preserved good relations. Also, a generator, under such circumstances, is a noisy invitation (and a bright one, if powering your interior lights), saying, “This house has supplies – come and get them!” I suspect that kerosene lanterns, candles and flashlights might be a more “community-safe” option if one is surrounded by survivors.

2. When help gets there, you may get it whether you like it or not! There are numerous reports of aggressive, overbearing behavior by those rescuers who first arrived at disaster scenes. It’s perhaps best described as “I’m here to rescue you – I’m in charge – do as I say – if you don’t I’ll shoot you”. It appears that mid-level State functionaries and Red Cross personnel (the latter without the “shoot you” aspect, of course) were complained about most often. In one incident, a family who had prepared and survived quite well were ordered, not invited, to get onto a truck, with only the clothes on their backs. When they objected, they were threatened. They had pets, and wanted to know what would happen to them. They report that a uniformed man (agency unknown) began pointing his rifle at the pets with the words, “I’ll fix that”. The husband then trained his own shotgun on the man, and explained to him, in words of approximately one syllable, what was going to happen to him if he fired a shot. The whole “rescuer” group then left, promising dire consequences for the family (including threats to come back once they’d evacuated and torch their home). The family were able to make contact with a State Police patrol and report the incident, and are now determined that no matter how much pressure is applied, they will not evacuate. They’ve set up a “shuttle run” so that every few days, two of them go upstate to collect supplies for the rest of the family, who defend the homestead in the meantime.

Another aspect of this is that self-sufficient, responsible families were often regarded almost with suspicion by rescuers. The latter seemed to believe that if you’d come through the disaster better than your neighbors, it could only have been because you stole what you needed, or somehow gained some sort of unfair advantage over the “average victims” in your area. I’m at a loss to explain this, but it’s probably worth keeping in mind.

3. There seems to be a cumulative psychological effect upon survivors. This is clear even – or perhaps particularly – in those who were prepared for a disaster. During and immediately after the event these folks were at their best, dealing with damage, setting up alternative accommodation, light, food sources, etc. However, after a few days in the heat and debris (perhaps worst of all being the smell of dead bodies nearby), many found their ability to remain positive and “upbeat” being strained to the limit. There are numerous reports of individuals becoming depressed, morose and withdrawn. This seemed to happen to even the strongest personalities. The arrival of rescuers provided a temporary boost, but once evacuated, a sort of “after-action shell-shock” seems to be commonly experienced. I don’t know enough about this to comment further, but I suspect that staying in place has a lot to do with it – there is no challenge to keep moving, find one’s survival needs, and care for the group, and one is surrounded by vivid reminders of the devastation. By staying among the ruins of one’s former life, one may be exposing oneself to a greater risk of psychological deterioration.

4. There is widespread frustration over the lack of communication and empathy by rescuers and local/State government. This is partly due to the absence of electricity, so that TV’s were not available to follow events as they unfolded: but it’s also due to an almost deliberate policy of non-communication by rescuers. There are many accounts of evacuees wanting to know where the bus or plane was going that they were about to board, only to be told “We don’t know”, or “To a better place than this”. Some have found themselves many States away from their homes. Other families were arbitrarily separated upon rescue and/or evacuation, and are still scattered across two or three States. Their efforts to locate each other are very difficult, and when they request to be reunited at a common location, all of those with whom I have contact report a blanket refusal by the Red Cross and State officials to even consider the matter at this time. They’re being informed that it will be “looked into” at some future date, and that they may have to pay the costs involved if they want to join up again. This, to families who are now destitute! I’m very angry about this, but it’s so widespread a problem that I don’t know what can be done about it. I hope that in future, some means will be implemented to prevent it happening again. Lesson learned: never, EVER allow yourselves to be separated as a family, even if it means waiting for later rescue and/or evacuation. Insist on this at all costs!

5. Expect rescuers (including law enforcement) to enforce a distinctly un-Constitutional authority in a disaster situation. This is very widely reported, and is very troubling. I hear repeated reports from numerous States that as evacuees arrive at refugee centers, they and their belongings are searched without legitimate Constitutional authority, and any personal belongings seen as potentially suspicious (including firearms, prescription medication, etc.) are confiscated without recourse to the owner. I can understand the point of view of the receiving authorities, but they are acting illegally, and I suspect there will be lawsuits arising from this practice. Another common practice reported on the ground in the disaster areas is for people to be ordered to evacuate, irrespective of their needs and wishes – even those folks who were well-prepared and have survived in good shape. If they demur, they are often threatened and bullied in an attempt to make them abandon their homes, pets, etc. Lesson learned: in a disaster, don’t expect legal and Constitutional norms to be followed. If you can make it on your own, do so, without relying on an unsympathetic and occasionally overbearing rescue system to control you and your destiny.

6. Don’t believe that rescuers are all knights in shining armor who will respect your property. There have been numerous reports of rescuers casually appropriating small items that took their fancy in houses they were searching. Sometimes this was blatant, right in front of onlookers, and when protests were made, the response was either threatening, or a casual “Who’s going to miss it now?”. Some of our field agents report that this happened right in front of their eyes. Another aspect of this is damage caused to buildings by rescuers. I’ve had reports of them kicking in the front door to a house, or a window, instead of trying to obtain access with as little damage as possible; climbing on clean, highly-polished tables with hobnailed boots in order to get at an attic hatch to check for survivors; etc. When they left the house, often the door or window was left unlocked, almost a standing invitation to looters, instead of being secured. When the families concerned get home, they won’t know who caused this damage, but they will certainly be angered by it. I think that if one evacuates one’s home, it might be a good idea to leave a clearly-visible notice that all residents have left, so as to let would-be rescuers know that this house is empty. On the other hand, this might make it easier for looters, so what you gain on the swings, you lose on the roundabouts . . .

FOURTH POST

This will be about broader issues than just bug-out or threat situations. Over the past couple of weeks, I’ve been watching closely as the whole evacuation and rescue drama has played out, and have been very active in the relief process, learning all I can for future reference. There are some broader issues that might not come to mind at first thought, but which are directly relevant to our own safety, security, and peaceful possession of our homes. Some of these have been mentioned in earlier e-mails, but they bear repeating in the light of the number of incidents of which I’ve heard.

1. If you choose to help, you may be sucked into a bureaucratic and legal nightmare. Example: a local church, in the beginning stages of the crisis, offered its hall to house evacuees. Local and State officials promptly filled it up with over 100 people. Their “social skills” proved extremely difficult to live with . . . toilets were blocked, restrooms left filthy, graffiti were scrawled and/or carved on the walls, arguments and disputes were frequent (often escalating to screaming matches, sometimes to physical violence), evacuees roamed the neighborhood (leading to all sorts of reports of petty theft, vandalism, etc.), church workers were subject to aggressive begging and demands, etc. Requests to the authorities to provide better security, administrative assistance, etc. apparently fell on deaf ears – the crisis was so widespread and overwhelming that a small facility such as this seems to have been very low on the priority checklist.

After two days of this, with complaints from the neighbors becoming more and more insistent, the church informed local officials that it wanted the evacuees removed at once, if not sooner. They were promptly subject to bureaucratic heavy-handedness (including threats to withhold previously-promised reimbursement for their expenses); threats of lawsuits for daring to insinuate that the evacuees were somehow “lower-class” in their conduct, and for alleged racism, slander, and general political incorrectness; and threats of negative publicity, in that officials threatened to put out a press release denouncing the church for its “elitist” and “un-co-operative” attitude in a time of crisis.

The church initially caved in to this pressure, and allowed the evacuees to stay: but within a couple more days, the pressure from neighbors and from its own members became impossible to bear, and they insisted on the evacuees being removed to a Red Cross shelter. I’m informed that repairs to their hall will cost over $10,000. This is only one example among many I could cite, but it makes the point clear – if you offer your facilities to authorities, you place yourself (to a certain extent) under their control, and you’re potentially liable to a great deal of heavy-handed, insensitive bureaucratic bullying. Those of you in the same position as this church (i.e. with facilities you could make available) might wish to take note.

2. Law enforcement problems will often be “glossed over” and/or ignored by authorities. In many cities housing evacuees, there have been reports of a significant increase in crime caused by their presence: but you’ll find that virtually all law enforcement authorities publicly deny this, and/or gloss over it as a “temporary problem”. This is all very well for publicity, but it ignores the increased risk to local residents. I’ve been tracking crime reports in about a dozen cities, through my contacts with local law enforcement and the Louisiana State Police. All the LEO’s I speak with, without exception, tell me of greatly increased crime, including rape, assault, robbery, shoplifting, vandalism, gang activity, etc. However, you won’t see these reports in the news media – indeed, you’ll often see senior LE figures actively denying it. The officers with whom I speak are angry and bitter about this, but they daren’t “go public”, as their jobs would be on the line if they did so. They tell me that often they’re instructed not to report certain categories of “incident” at all, so as not to “skew” or “inflate” the “official” crime figures.

I’ve also heard reports from Texas, Alabama and Tennessee of brand-new high-end motor vehicles (e.g. Cadillacs, Lincolns, BMW’s, etc.), with New Orleans dealer tags, being driven through various towns on their way North and West. The drivers were described as “gang-bangers” (and sundry less complimentary terms). However, there have been no reports of stolen vehicles from New Orleans, because there are no workers to check out dealer lots, or report thefts, and no working computers to enter VIN’s, etc. into the NICS database of stolen vehicles – so officers have had no choice but to let these vehicles proceed. Draw your own conclusions.

3. Your personal and/or corporate supplies and facilities may be commandeered without warning, receipt or compensation. I’ve had numerous reports from in and near the disaster zone of individuals (e.g. boat-owners, farmers with barns, tractors, etc.) and corporate groups (e.g. companies with heavy equipment, churches with halls, etc.) finding an official on their doorstep demanding the use of their facilities or equipment. If they demurred, they were told that this was an “emergency situation” and that their assistance was being required, not requested. Some of them have lost track of the heavy equipment “borrowed” in this way, and don’t know where it is, whether or not it’s still in good condition, and when (if ever) it will be returned. In the meantime, they can’t continue their normal operations without this equipment. Others have had their land and facilities effectively confiscated for use by rescue and relief workers, storage of supplies, etc. In some cases, in the absence of their (evacuated) owners, the property of the individuals and groups concerned (e.g. farm gasoline and diesel supplies, the inventory of motor vehicle dealers, suppliers of foodstuffs, tarpaulins, etc.) have been commandeered and used by law enforcement and relief workers, without permission, receipts, reimbursement, etc. Protests have been met with denials, threats of arrest, insinuations of being “uncaring” and “un-co-operative”, etc.

Lesson learned: if you’ve got what officials need in a time of crisis, forget about Constitutional protections of your property! Sure, you can sue after the fact, but if you need your goods and facilities for your own survival, you’re basically S.O.L. Those of us who stockpile necessities for potential crises like this might want to consider concealing our stockpiles to prevent confiscation: and if you need certain equipment for your own day-to-day use (e.g. tractors for farmers, generators, etc.), you might have a hard time retaining possession of them. This applies to relief workers as well. I’ve had several reports of private relief workers (e.g. those sent in by churches, etc.) having their vehicles and supplies commandeered by “official” relief workers, without compensation or receipt, and being kicked out of the disaster area with warnings not to return. The fact that the “private” workers were accomplishing rather more than the “official” workers was apparently irrelevant (except to annoy the latter).

4. If you look like you know what you’re doing, you may be a target of those less prepared. There have been many, many reports of individuals who were more or less prepared for a disaster being preyed upon by those who were not prepared. Incidents range from theft of supplies, through attempts to bug out with these persons (uninvited), to actual violence. It’s genuinely frightening to hear about these incidents, particularly the attitude of those trying to prey on the prepared. They seemed to feel that because you’d taken steps to protect yourself and your loved ones, you had somehow done so at their expense, and they were therefore “entitled” to take from you what they needed. There’s no logical explanation for this attitude, unless it’s bred by the utter dependence of many such people on the State for welfare, Social Security, Medicare/Medicaid, etc. Since they’ve always been dependent on others, and regarded this as an “entitlement”, in a disaster situation, they seem to automatically assume that they’re “entitled” to whatever you’ve got! In one case the family’s pet dog was held hostage, with a knife at its throat, until the family handed over money and supplies. In two cases, families were threatened with the rape of their women unless they co-operated with the aggressors. In four cases that I know of, children were held hostage to ensure co-operation. There have also been reports of crimes during the bug-out process. Families sleeping in their cars at highway rest areas were a favorite target, including siphoning of gas from their tanks, assaults, etc.

The lessons to be learned from this are obvious. One family can’t secure itself against these threats without great difficulty. It’s best to be “teamed up” with neighbors to secure your neighborhood as a whole, rather than be the only house with facilities in an area filled with those less prepared. If you’re in the latter situation, staying put may not be a safe option, and a bug-out plan may be vital. When bugging out, you’re still not safe from harm, and must maintain constant vigilance.

5. Those who thought themselves safe from the disaster were often not safe from refugees. There have been many reports of smaller towns, farms, etc. on the fringe of the disaster area being overrun with those seeking assistance. In many cases, assistance was demanded rather than requested, and theft, looting and vandalism have been reported. So, even if you think you’re safe from the disaster, you may not be safe from its aftermath.

6. Self-reliance seems to draw suspicion upon you from the authorities. I’ve mentioned this in a previous e-mail, but I’ve had many more reports of it from those who survived or bugged out, and it bears re-emphasizing. For reasons unknown and unfathomable, rescue authorities seem to regard with suspicion those who’ve made provision for their safety and have survived (or bugged out) in good shape. It seems to be a combination of “How could you cope when so many others haven’t?”, “You must have taken advantage of others to be so well off”, and “We’ve come all this way to help, so how dare you not need our assistance?” I have no idea why this should be the case, but there have been enough reports of it that it seems to be a widespread problem. Any ideas from readers?

7. Relief workers from other regions and States often don’t know local laws. This is a particular problem when it comes to firearms. I’ve had many reports of law enforcement officers sent to assist in Louisiana from states such as New Jersey, California, etc. trying to confiscate firearms on the streets, etc., when in fact the armed citizens were legally armed, under local law. One can’t reason with these officers in the heat of the moment, of course, and as a result, a number of people lost their firearms, and have still not recovered them. In the chaos of the immediate post-disaster situation, they may never do so, because I’m not sure that normal procedures such as logging these guns into a property office, etc. were followed. I understand that in due course, steps were taken to include at least one local law enforcement officer in patrols, so that he could advise officers from other areas as to what was legal, and what wasn’t. Also, in Louisiana, law enforcement is conducted differently than in some other states, and officers from other states who came to assist were sometimes found to be domineering and aggressive in enforcing a law enforcement “authority” that doesn’t normally apply here. So, if you’re in a disaster area, and help arrives from elsewhere, you may find that the help doesn’t know (or care) about local laws, norms, etc. Use caution!

8. Relief organizations have their own bureaucratic requirements that may conflict with your needs. A good example is the Red Cross. In many cases across three states, I’ve had reports that locals who needed assistance were told that they had to register at a particular Red Cross shelter or facility. The help would not come to them – they had to go to it. If they wished to stay on their own property, they were sometimes denied assistance, and told that if they wanted help, they had to move into the shelter to get it. Also, assistance was often provided only to those who came in person. If you left your family at home and went to get food aid, you might be denied aid for your whole family, because there was no evidence that they existed. Only the number that could be physically counted by relief workers (who would not come to you, but insisted you come to them) would be provided with food. Needless to say, this caused much anger and resentment.

Categories
All About Guns Anti Civil Rights ideas & "Friends" Cops Fieldcraft Some Red Hot Gospel there! Some Scary thoughts

The Mathematics of Countering Gun Control (A little long, but worth the read)

Gun Control

Introductory Proviso: The following essay on possible gun confiscation is a purely conjectural gedankenexperiment about the future that extrapolates from recent history and current trends. Nothing herein is seditious (per 18 U.S. Code § 2384), nor a call to arms, nor a threat to our government or to any individual, agency, or group.

THE COLLECTIVIST DREAM

The current mass media-driven “debate” on firearms (actually more like paternalistic lecturing or chiding) seems to be leading toward greater restrictions by Congress. The collectivist gun grabbers have the dream of ignoring the Second Amendment and somehow magically removing all detachable magazine semi-auto rifles from civilian hands. But it is just that: a dream. If they think that they can disarm us, then they are thoroughly deluded.  I’ll explain why, with some simple mathematics.

The United States has the world’s first or second most heavily-armed populace, per capita. (It’s possibly second only to Yemen.) The number of FBI firearms background checks for transfers by Federally-licensed dealers from November 1998 to April 30, 2018 totaled 287,807,015. That isn’t all new guns. It of course includes many second-hand sales that cycled back through FFL holders. But it is still a staggering number. And it does not include any private party (“not through a dealer”) sales of used guns. That is thankfully legal in most states. Nor does it include guns that are legally made at home. (Typically made with 80% complete receivers.) Those home “builds” are becoming quite popular. Their ownership is mostly opaque to any would-be tyrants who might covet seizing them.

There are somewhere between 370 million and 420 million privately-owned firearms in the United States. Let’s just call it 400 million for a nice round figure. Most of those guns are not registered to particular owners. That is why there are only rough estimates. It makes me feel good to know that Big Brother has no idea where those guns are, and who owns them. When I last checked, the total U.S. population is 327,708,500.  So that is about 1.2 guns per person. The adult population is around 249,500,000. And according to Wikipedia, the “Fit for service” Military Age Male population (men, ages 16-49) of the U.S. is just 59,764,677. That equates to 6.6 guns per Military Age Male in the United States.

 

Of the 400 million American guns, roughly 20% are single-shot or double-barreled, 60% are manually-operated repeaters (e.g., bolt action, lever action, pump action, or revolvers), and 20% are semi-automatic. There are only about 175,000 transferable Federally-registered full autos. That number would have been much larger by now but production was sharply curtailed by a hefty $200 tax (starting in 1934) and then there numbers were effectively frozen in 1986. It is noteworthy that if it were not for the National Firearms Act of 1934, selective fire guns would by now be in what the Heller decision calls “common use“. After all, it costs only a few dollars more to manufacture a selective-fire M16 than a semiautomatic-only AR-15.

With every passing year, the predominance of semi-autos is gaining for both rifles and handguns. (In sheer numbers produced, revolvers are becoming almost passé.) The biggest-selling handgun in the country is the Smith & Wesson M&P 9mm, followed closely by the Glock Model 19 9mm. Gaining rapidly is the highly modular SIG P320, which was recently adopted by the U.S. Army. All three of these are semi-automatic. Standard magazine sizes for autopistols range from 13 to 20 rounds. And the most popular rifles of the decade are AR-15s and their clones. Their standard capacity magazines hold 30 cartridges. (That isn’t “high capacity”.)

THE MATH ON AR CLONES

AR-15 and AR-10 variants are truly generic and have been sold under more than 120 brand names. The number of ARs (AR-15s, M4s, AR-10s, and variants) sold from 2000 to 2014 was approximately 5,672,900. Since then, AR-15 clones have become even more popular and ubiquitous with approximately 1.2 million more produced in 2015, 1.6 million in 2016, and 1.5 million in 2017. At least 1.2 million will be produced in 2018. It can be assumed that 99% of the ARs produced since the year 2000 are still functional. There were more than 2.3 million other ARs produced for the civilian market between 1962 and 1999. It is safe to assume that at least 95% of those of that vintage are still functional. So the total number of functional ARs in private hands in the U.S. is somewhere around 11 to 12 million. (As of May, 2018.)

SOME MATH ON OTHER SEMI-AUTOS

Next we come to the more fuzzy math on the wide variety of other models of semi-auto centerfire rifles in private hands. They include detachable magazine, en bloc clip, and stripper clip-fed designs. Here are some rough estimates. (Some of these estimates are based on my own observations of the ratios of different models I’ve seen offered for sale):

  • Various semi-auto hunting rifles (Remington 740/7400 series, AK Hunter, Browning BAR, Winchester 100, Valmet Hunter, Saiga Hunter, HK SL7/SL8, HK 630/770, et cetera): 2 million+
  • Ruger Mini-14 and Mini-30: 1.2 million
  • M1 Garand: 800,000+ (With many more being imported, soon.)
  • AK Variants (imported and domestically made, from all makers including Valmet and Galil): 2 to 3 million
  • M1 Carbine: 1.5 to 2 million
  • AR-180 and AR-180B: 35,000
  • M1A and other semi-auto M14 variants: 360,000
  • SIG 550 series: 80,000+
  • Thompson Semi-Autos (West Hurley and Kahr Arms): 75,000
  • HK variants: CETME, HK91/93/94 series, PTR91, etc.: 600,000 to 700,000
  • FAL variants: FN-FAL, FNC, and L1A1:  425,000
  • SKS variants: 1 million
  • Steyr AUG: 110,000
  • IWI Tavor & X95: 70,000
  • Various semi-autos assembled from military surplus full auto parts sets (M1919, BAR, Sten, M2 Browning, M3, Etc.): 75,000+
  • Assorted Other Models (These include: Kel-Tec, Barrett, Leader, FAMAS, Uzi carbines, Wilkinson, Feather, Calico, Hi-Point, SIG AMT, SIG PE57, SIG MCX, SIG MPX, Johnson, BM59, HK USC, TNW, Demro Tac-1, Calico Carbine, ACR, SCAR, Chiappa Carbine, SWD (MAC), Robinson, Hakim, Ljungman, Beretta AR-70, Beretta CX4, CZ Scorpion, Kriss Carbine, FN-49, SVT-40, SVD, PSL, Gewehr 41 & 43, Daewoo, FS 2000, Ruger PCR, Marlin Camp Carbine, et cetera): 2+ million.
THE AGGREGATE GUN MATH
Totaling the list above and adding it to the preceding estimate on ARs, there are 20 million semi-auto centerfire rifles that are in civilian hands here in the States. And that number is increasing by nearly 2 million per year. (More than half of which are AR-15 or AR-10 clones.) Again looking at the Military Age Male  population (men, ages 16-49) of 59,764,677, that equates to roughly one semi-auto rifle for every three Military Age Males.

 

If a production and importation ban requiring registration were enacted, there would surely be massive noncompliance. For example, the registration schemes enacted in the past two decades in Australia, Canada, The Philippines, Indonesia, Brazil, and the States of California and New York have been well-documented failures. They have been met with noncompliance rates ranging from 50% to 90%.

Even with an optimistic 50% registration compliance rate, that would mean only 10 million of the nation’s 20 million semi-auto rifles would have a current name and address attached, to allow eventual gun confiscation.

 

Let us surmise that following several years of a registration scheme there were an outright “turn them all in, Mr. and Mrs. America” ban. I predict that even if $1,000 per gun were offered, no more than 11 million would be turned in, by compliant and history-ignorant Sheeple. (An aside: They’ll probably call this a “Buy Back”, but that will be a lie. They can’t “buy back” something that they’ve never owned.)

But that would still leave at least 9 million in circulation, as contraband.
THE SWAT AND ATF MANPOWER MATH

So let’s suppose that a full Federal semi-auto rifle ban were enacted with a gun confiscation order issued.

This is where the math gets very interesting: There are only 902,000 sworn police officers in the United States. At most, about 80,000 of them have had SWAT training. There are only 5,113 BATFE employees–and many of those are mere paper shufflers. As of 2017, there were just 2,623 ATF Special Agents. The FBI’s notorious Hostage Rescue Team (HRT or “Hurt Team”) has a cadre strength that is classified but presumably less than 200 agents. Together, they comprise the pool of “Door Kickers” that might be available to execute unconstitutional search warrants.

If they were to start going door-to-door executing warrants for unconstitutional gun confiscation, what would the casualty rates be for the ATF, HRT, and the assorted local SWAT teams?  It bears mention that the military would be mostly out of the picture, since they are banned from domestic law enforcement roles, under the Posse Comitatus Act.

THE DIVISION EQUATIONS

Next, let’s do some addition and then divide:

80,000    SWAT-trained police
+ 2,623     ATF Special Agents
+    200     FBI HRT Members
=  82,863    Potentially Available Door Kickers

… presumably working in teams of 8, attempting to seize 9,000,000 newly-contraband semi-auto rifles.

Before we finish the math, I’ll state some “for the sake of argument” assumptions:

  1. That every SWAT-trained officer in the country is pressed into service.
  2. That there would be no “false positives”–meaning that 100% of the tips leading to raids were accurate. (Unlikely)
  3. That no local police departments would opt out of serving unconstitutional Federal gun warrants. (Unlikely)
  4. That all raids would be successful. (Unlikely)
  5. That each successful raid would net an average of three contraband semi-auto rifles. (Possible)
  6. That every Door Kicker would get an equal share in the work. (Very unlikely)
  7. That every Door Kicker would be alive and well through the entire campaign of terror–with no incapacitating injuries or deaths of SWAT officers, no refusals, no resignations, and no early retirements. (Very unlikely)

A lot of those are not safe assumptions. But for the sake of completing a gedankenexperiment, let’s pen this out on the back of a napkin, as a “best case” for an unconstitutional gun confiscation campaign. Here are the division equations:

9,000,000 ÷ 82,863 = 108 (x 8 officers per team) =  864 raids, per officer 

Let that sink in: Every officer would have to survive 864 gun-grabbing raids.

Those of course are fanciful numbers. There will be a lot of false tips, and there will be many owners who keep their guns very well-hidden. Each of those raids would have nearly the same high level of risk but yet many of them would net zero guns. And it is likely that many police departments will wisely decline involvement. Therefore the “best case” figure of 864 raids per officer is quite low. The real number would be much higher.

How long would it be until mounting law enforcement casualties triggered a revolt or “sick-out” among the rank and file Door Kickers?  For some historical context: Just four ATF agents were killed and 16 wounded in the Waco raid, and that was considered quite “devastating” and “traumatizing” to the 5,000-member agency.

 

Here is some sobering ground truth: America’s gun owners are just as well trained–and often better trained–than the police. There are 20.4 million American military veterans, and the majority of veterans own guns.

RESISTANCE STRATEGY AND TACTICS
Rather than meeting the police one-at-a-time on their doorsteps, I predict that resisting gun owners will employ guerilla warfare strategy and tactics to foil the plans of the gun grabbers:
1.) They will successfully hide the majority of their banned guns. This is just what many Europeans did, following World War II. There are perhaps a million guns in Europe that were never registered or turned in, after the war. Particularly in Eastern Europe, Scandinavia, Spain, and Greece, there is still massive noncompliance. It has now been 73 years since the end of WWII. So the gun registration noncompliance in Europe is now multi-generational.
2.) They will form small, fully independent “phantom” resistance cells. This is commonly called leaderless resistance. Such cells are very difficult to detect or penetrate. These resistance cells will carefully choose the time and location of their attacks, to their advantage.
3.) They will individually target the legislators who voted for unconstitutional gun ban legislation. This will make it  almost suicidal for these legislators to return to their home districts.
4.) They will individually target any outspokenly anti-gun police chiefs.
5.) They will target all BATF agents and FBI HRT agents–first with intimidation, and then with targeted killings.
6.) They will pillage or burn down the facilities where confiscated guns are being stored and destroyed.
7.) They will anonymously phone in false police reports about gun control advocates. (This is commonly called “SWATing.”)
8.) They will use time-delayed explosives, time-delayed incendiaries, time-delayed bursting toxin containers, cell phone-triggered IEDs, computer program worms and viruses, and long-range standoff weapons to minimize the risk of being detected, apprehended, or killed. Likely targets will be Federal buildings, courthouses, SWAT training facilities, police training ranges, and especially the private residences of anyone deemed to be a gun-grabber.
9.) They will use anonymous re-mailers and VPN to encourage others to resist by forming their own leaderless resistance cells.
10.) They will begin a War of Attrition on the Door Kickers, with tactics such as these:
  A.) Ambushing SWAT vehicles while in transit, rather than waiting for the SWAT teams to set up raids.
  B.) Ambushing individual SWAT team members at unexpected times and places–most likely at their homes.
  C.) Sabotaging SWAT vehicles, most likely with time-delayed incendiaries.
  D.) Targeting SWAT teams or individual team members while they are at home, in training, or when attending conventions.
  E.) Harassing and intimidating individual SWAT team members and their families. The systematic burning of their privately-owned vehicles and their unoccupied homes and vacation cabins will be unmistakable threats.
11.) They will individually target “gun control” advocates, organizers, and group leaders.
12.) They will individually target the judges that issue gun seizure warrants.
13.) They will individually target journalists who have vocally advocated civilian disarmament.
14.) Some owners of M1 Carbines, AR-15s and HKs in the resistance movement will convert them to selective fire. (They will assume: “Well, if it is now a felony to possess a semi-auto, then what is the harm in making it a full auto?”)
15.) They will be willing to wage an ongoing guerilla warfare campaign using both passive and active resistance until the collectivists relent. This would be something like “The Troubles” in Northern Ireland, but on a larger scale, with greater ferocity, and with far more weapons readily available. Unlike the IRA, which had to import arms, all of the the firearms, magazines, and ammunition needed for any American resistance movement are already in situ. It is noteworthy that the agreed “Decommissioning” the Irish Republican Army (IRA) was delayed for more than five years because of their remaining caches of arms, which by then included only around 1,000 battle rifles!)
THE GUN CONFISCATION END GAME
I believe that once it was started, the whole affray would be settled within just a few weeks or months. American gun owners clearly have the numbers on their side. Once the shooting starts, the gun-hating politicians will quickly feel isolated, vastly outnumbered, and incredibly vulnerable. And when they realize they’ve lost their Door Kicker shock troops, they will capitulate. After some horrendous casualties in a brief but fierce civil war, the politicians would be forced to:
  1. Declare a cease fire and stand-down for all gun confiscation raiders.
  2. Repeal all Federal gun laws.
  3. Order the destruction of all Federal import, purchase, transfer, and registration records
  4. Issue unconditional pardons for all convicted Federal gun law violators.
  5. Declare a general amnesty for all involved in the resistance, and drop all pending charges.
  6. Disband the BATFE.

Without all six of those, the hostilities would continue.

BUT THERE’S MORE
The foregoing math on the roughly 20 million semi-auto rifles is not the full extent of the problem for the gun grabbers. Additionally, there are at least 50 million centerfire handguns that would be suitable for resistance warfare. (And another 3 million being made or imported each year.) There are also perhaps 40 million scoped centerfire deer rifles in private hands. The vast majority of those have no traceable paper trail. Fully capable of 500+ yard engagement, these rifles could be employed to out-range the tyrants and their minions.

 

Then there are the estimated 1.5 million unregistered machineguns now in the country.  Except for a 30-day amnesty in 1968 that generated only about 65,000 registrations, they have been contraband since 1934. Their number is particularly difficult to accurately estimate, since some semi-autos such as the M1 Carbine, HK91/93/94 series, and AR-15 are fairly easy to convert to selective fire. Similarly, nearly all “open bolt” semi-auto designs are easy to convert to full auto. Large numbers of conversion parts sets have been sold, with little recordkeeping. Some guns can be converted simply by removing sear springs or filing their sears. Just a trickle of unregistered full autos are seized or surrendered each year. This begs the question: If Federal officials have been unable to round up un-papered machineguns after 84 years, then how do they expect to ever confiscate semi-autos, which are 15 times more commonplace?

As evidenced by the 1990s wars in the Balkans, when times get inimical, contraband guns get pulled out of walls and put into use. We can expect to see the same, here.

Now, to get back to the simple mathematics, here are some ratios to ponder:

  • NRA members (5.2 million) to Door Kickers (82,863) = 63-to-1 ratio
  • Military veterans (20.4 million) to Door Kickers (82,863) = 249-to-1 ratio
  • Unregistered machineguns (1.5 million) to Door Kickers (82,863) = 18-to-1 ratio
  • Privately owned semi-auto rifles (40 million) to Door Kickers (82,863) = 485-to-1 ratio
UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES
The mathematics that I’ve cited don’t bode well for the gun-grabbing collectivists. If they ever foolishly attempt to confiscate semi-auto rifles, then it will be “Game On” for Civil War 2. I can foresee that they would run out of willing Door Kickers, very quickly.

I’ll conclude with a word of caution: Leftist American politicians should be careful about what they wish for. Those who hate the 2nd Amendment and scheme to disarm us have no clue about the unintended consequences of their plans. If they proceed, then I can foresee that it will end very badly for them. – JWR

End Notes:

Again, the preceding is a purely conjectural gedankenexperiment about the future that extrapolates from recent history and current trends. None of the foregoing is seditious (per 18 U.S. Code § 2384), nor a call to arms, nor a threat to our government or to any individual, agency, or group.

Permission to reprint, re-post or forward this article in full is granted, but only if credit is given to James Wesley, Rawles and first publication in SurvivalBlog (with a link.) It must not be edited or excerpted, and all included links must be left intact.

From SurvivalBlog.com via WRSAhe

Categories
All About Guns Fieldcraft Gun Info for Rookies

Child Gun Safety

Categories
Art Fieldcraft Soldiering

Why one should keep an eye on the Tree Line

hadece - Professional, Interface Designer | DeviantArt