John's Shameless Gun User Merit Badge Thread

[jalind]

Should have posted this long ago.
My first firearm was before Uncle Sam, a 4" barrel .357 magnum Ruger revolver. Never have done much of anything with small bore rimfire.

Spent 21 years with the US Army. No stranger to firearms, especially large bore after all that, and I have a few of my own. Smallest is a small .380 semi-auto. My original rifle qualification was done using a M14, a very fine rifle even if it's long and heavy compared to its successors. During most of the first third of my career I shouldered a M16A1. Given a choice between it and a M4, I'd take a M16A2 with the current optical sights although. During the second third of my career I carried a M1911A1 .45 ACP. The US Government stopped buying them at the end of WWII and lived on the warehoused stockpile for decades. The ones I used were old, but with a good unit armorer they could still be accurate enough to qualify Expert with them. One comes to realize soon enough the reason for taking your rifle away and handing you a pistol, which is only a personal defense weapon in any battle space, is to ensure you're directing and controlling operations instead of personally engaging targets. Then they took that away and I was issued a 9mm Beretta M9. Fine pistol, and great for law enforcement, but not so good in a mud, dusty mud, sandy dusty mud, and frozen sandy dusty mud environment. It was like having a high maintenance mistress compared to a M1911, and I still prefer the 230 grain .45 ACP ammunition over the 124 grain 9mm NATO.

First up is a Sig Sauer P238 .380 (aka 9mm Short or Kurtz) semi-auto. A fine little pistol and handles well but its very short barrel and short sight radius don't make for long range accuracy. Good for about 12 yards or less even though I can hit a silhouette center of mass at 25 yards. It's a 1911 pattern and feel at home with its operation, being intimately familiar with the 1911 .45 ACP. Pistols in this class remind me of the Colt 1903 .32 ACP and 1908 .380 ACP Pocket Hammerless (not to be confused with the striker fired 1908 "Vest Pocket"). Hammerless was a misnomer as the hammer was concealed by the frame and slide. Colt marketed them as personal protection pistols and numerous celebrities, law enforcement, military (generals in particular), hoodlums and gangsters carried them concealed. These are single action only, and thus carrying one is done either without a round chambered, or "cocked and locked" with a round chambered, but NEVER with the hammer down on a chambered round (much too unsafe to let a hammer down on a live round). Some prefer its ever so slightly larger 9mm Parabellum P938 but for me the recoil of the more powerful round was too sharp as the mass of the pistol is nearly identical. At the effective working range of these, 90-100 grain .380 ACP is plenty for me.



My first firearm was a 4" Ruger DA .357 magnum. Sold it just before going on active duty. Hauling your own personal firearms around in the US military is a royal PITA, especially stationed overseas with Status of Forces Agreements between the US and other governments, and local command policies regarding storage and transport of personal firearms and ammunition. Uncle Sam has plenty of firearms as it is. Now I have a 4.2" Ruger GP100. The extra quarter inch of barrel allows the revolver to be marketed and sold in Canada, which bans handgun barrels under 105mm, which translates to 4.13" effectively banning 4" barrel handguns. A 4.2" barrel is just under 107mm sliding in under the wire. Ruger makes a lighter weight 29.5 oz SP101, but with 158 grain full load .357 magnum cartridges, I'll take the heavier 40 oz GP100 to absorb some of the recoil. The .357 magnum, developed in the 1930's from the .38 Special, is a magnificent caliber with excellent range. General George Patton bought one of the initial S&W .357 Registered Magnum revolvers circa 1935 and wore on his left hip during WWII. Has the older style rosewood panel grips on it.



Up through the Spanish-American War, the US Army's standard sidearm was the .45 (long Colt) 1873 Single Action Army made by Colt. There are a variety of reasons why I wouldn't want one of those vintage revolvers, not the least of which is many of them were made for black powder long before the advent of smokeless powder. They can also require more maintenance with aging parts, leaf springs, etc. Finally, the hammer ride cannot be lowered on a loaded chamber as the firing pin will ride on the primer. The 1/4 cock "safety" position is inherently unsafe, especially with old SAA that are worn, and especially if they've been fanned. All that's holding the hammer is a weak sear. Unintentional discharge with sear failure, especially when dropped on the hammer, has been common. General George Patton's original revolver, the one he wore on his right hip in WWII, was a 1873 SAA. During the Mexican Expedition just before the US entered WWI, then Captain Patton only had one. He got into a firefight and immediately learned how reloading a SAA can seem to take forever. He immediately bought a second one, using a form of the "New York reload" and carried two revolvers thereafter. He gave one away after WWI to an actor he admired that had entertained troops during the war, ultimately replacing it with the .357 magnum as described above.

All the downsides of owning an 1873 SAA are the reasons I have a .45 long Colt Ruger Blackhawk. It's in the 5.5" "Artillery" barrel length, a partial misnomer because other dismounted troops such as infantry also used the shorter 5.5" barrel (mounted troops used the 7.5"). Using one of these makes one appreciate how long it took to unload expended rounds and reload one cartridge at a time through a loading gate before there were DA revolvers with tip up and eventually the swing-out cylinders used today. The Blackhawk also allows heavier load 225 - 255 grain cartridges. This is not the weak "cowboy action shooter" ammunition. Even Ruger's "New Vaquero" cannot handle more than "cowboy" ammunition. When using heavier loads, one appreciates the 5.5" barrel and overall mass to absorb recoil. It's my more modern appreciation of the past, and it has an adjustable rear sight that's easier to use which the original SAA and its clones including the Vaquero do not have (rear sight requires fully cocked hammer and uses frame strap groove).



The 9mm Parabellum Beretta M9 is the US military version of the 92FS and is very nearly identical to it with subtle differences. The Beretta 92 series has been in use by law enforcement for decades and is a fine pistol, especially in that application with a more benign environment. It's double-action and the safety, when engaged, will drop the hammer safely on a loaded chamber (moves a portion of the firing pin out of line to do so). I have a partial affinity for the M9 as I was assigned one for about seven years. As mentioned already, it was not as easy to care for as the .45 ACP, but eventually came to terms with it. I don't like firing these double-action on the first round as that's got a long and heavy trigger pull. If one has used a .45 ACP with its straight back trigger pull, the M9 takes some rounds downrange to get accustomed to a trigger that rotates and not "pull" off the aiming point when shooting it. I was told the upside was the basic load of ammunition going up from three magazines with 21 rounds for the M1911A1 to three magazines with 45 rounds for the M9. What they didn't know was many of us were already carrying 35 rounds in five magazines. The downside for me was 9mm versus .45 ACP and I still prefer the latter albeit the debates on it continue to rage on.



While my favorite revolver is a .357 magnum, my favorite handgun is the M1911. This one is a cross-breed between the M1911 and M1911A1 with its straight mainspring housing. Also has some improvements over the A1, including the trigger, hammer and adjustable rear sight with a much better notch for my aging, presbyopic eyes. Not much to say except if I had been given a choice I'd have kept carrying one of these for another seven years instead of an M9 and I'm still better at 25 yards with one than with the M9 even though I also qualified expert with the latter (usually just barely because of the DA requirement). Some folks say they're heavy compared to the M9, along with the ammunition, and especially so compared to the new Plastic Fantastic Sig Sauer P320 modular. Sorry, but I'm still a Luddite when it comes to frame materials and prefer steel. There's a reason the US military used these from 1911 through about 1990-1991 before they were all finally replaced (fielding the M9 occurred over a span of years, not overnight, and numerous units still had 1911's during Desert Storm). The USMC MARSOC continued using the 1911 until just recently. That's over a century and the longest any handgun has ever been fielded for active military use that I'm aware of, by any military. I won't claim the 1911 has any mythical powers, no firearm does, but John Moses Browning did create one of the finest pistol designs. It really is a joy to fire this one at the range.



During my era, we still had the Remington 870 12 gauge shotgun and it's still in use by law enforcement globally. There's nothing quite like a pump action shotgun in its simplicity and disciplined (i.e. aimed) rate of fire is nearly that of a more complex and prone to malfunction semi-auto. Many think the Geneva or Hague conventions outlaw military use of shotguns in battle. Not true. They've been used in battle since WWI employed them in the trenches with the US using (predominantly) the Winchester 1897 with a shortened barrel along with the Winchester 1912. (The Germans complained vehemently but it got no traction and AFAIK the German military does not use shotguns to this day). The latter continued into the early years of the Vietnam War. The model I was most familiar with that followed was the Winchester 1200 that continued in use through about 2003 in Operation Enduring Freedom (Afghanistan) and Operation Iraqi Freedom although others were fielded such as the Ithaca 37. Nearly all of the several models of shotguns scattered through the US Armed Forces have been replaced since then with the Mossberg 590. One of the vestiges still around, though, is the Remington 870, a favorite of law enforcement around the globe. The USCG and USAF still use the 870. They originally had bayonet a lug attachment for them that could take a M7 or M9 bayonet. Mine is much like the current configuration with a pistol grip, albeit an aftermarket not made by Remington. Has front blade with dot and rear peep sights. Much easier than using a standard shotgun front sight. The 12 gauge shotgun packs a wallop, and the recoil with full loads is quite substantial, especially with 1 oz. slug loads.



The indoor range I use allows slugs and I've learned to warn anyone else there that I'm going to put some 12 gauge downrange as the report is quite loud. For the required target I've got this one from after I had zeroed the sights at 25 yards on the indoor range. It's ten rounds at least eight of which were in the 10 ring. One was in the 9 and the upper one an outlier in the 7 ring. The other holes? Yup, there's more than ten! They're the wads. Had to get used to more holes than rounds at 25 yards  . They're usually a lot more ragged than the slug hole as they're tumbling, but not always.



Wouldn't be a complete thread without the required knives.

M7 bayonet fielded with the M16A1 with an M8 scabbard made for ALICE attachment. It is very similar to the M6 bayonet fielded with the M14 but with a completely different and IMHO much more reliable lug and attachment design. I got away with carrying one of these my entire career even after it was replaced by the M9 (by using my own, and you could buy them), except on those occasions when required to wear the M9 for events like parades in battle rattle where everyone must appear exactly the same. Some of the early M9 were prone to breaking and one didn't know the age of what you were issued out of an arms room.



M9 bayonet with M10 scabbard made for MOLLE attachment. This is a newer one that isn't from the breakage era. It's the same length as the M7 but beefier with a built in saw (sort of works) and a pretty good wire cutter copied from the Warsaw Pact and Soviet AK-47 bayonet. Cuts barbed wire and "Hurricane" fencing quite nicely.



The USMC continued with the M7 until the early 2000's when they replaced it with the OKC-3S. Has some resemblance to the M9 but is patterned after the USMC Ka-Bar. Blade isn't quite as thick as it's not made for sawing or wire cutting.



Finally, a gratuitous Swiss Army Knife porn shot. For something slightly different, it's a Victorinox Delemont RangerGrip 178 with some of my old battle rattle. It's a vestige of the Wenger RangerGrip line, and is the 130mm RangerGrip equivalent of the 111mm One-Hand Trekker and 2008 Soldier.



Hope this provides some information and a bit more than just posting the required photos for the merit badge. I need to add the pix of me using them on the range . . . when I find them . . . weren't in my phone.

John

[Nix]

Great post with some really nice photos! 

And a nice selection of firearms. I'm a 1911 fan myself. Many handgun users favor newer designs, but I've never shot a pistol with a better trigger design than the 1911.

[Kev D]

Very nice 

Don't forget to put your badge request in 

[Nix]

Here's my commander version of the 1911:

[Chako]

The 1911 is still my favorite semiautomatic handgun. Here is my Norinco 1911A1 that I have used in IPSC a few years ago. Trying to use it again this year, but the Serpa II holster I have currently isn't allowed anymore for IPSC.

[jalind]

Very nice 

Don't forget to put your badge request in 

Thanks

I'm slowly rooting around now among all my photos - on three cameras, one phone, two laptops, and 3 desktops for the range photos. Need two of me shooting. Someone else took them (obviously) and thought I had them. May have to do a re-shoot. [sigh] The thread will still be here though.

John

[jalind]

Some fine looking 1911 examples!

A couple other differences on mine from a stock M1911A1 are the full length guide rod and the larger ambi safety. I'd never seen a full length guide rod before acquiring that 1911. Went to do the first field strip to clean the shipping oil out and did a double-take at the plug. Took a few seconds to realize I was looking at the end of a much longer guide rod than found in the military 1911s that was flush with a hole in the recoil spring plug. Pushing down on that sharp plug edge to turn the bushing is harder on the thumb than the military 1911. The longer rod allegedly helps with recoil rise, but I've never been certain how much difference it actually makes with 230 grain full loads in a full size 1911. Some folks don't like the larger safety lever, or the ambi side but I like the size and the ambi side has never gotten in the way. I don't notice it at all.

John

[an0nemus]

 

[Nix]

A couple other differences on mine from a stock M1911A1 are the full length guide rod and the larger ambi safety. I'd never seen a full length guide rod before acquiring that 1911. Went to do the first field strip to clean the shipping oil out and did a double-take at the plug. Took a few seconds to realize I was looking at the end of a much longer guide rod than found in the military 1911s that was flush with a hole in the recoil spring plug. Pushing down on that sharp plug edge to turn the bushing is harder on the thumb than the military 1911. The longer rod allegedly helps with recoil rise, but I've never been certain how much difference it actually makes with 230 grain full loads in a full size 1911. Some folks don't like the larger safety lever, or the ambi side but I like the size and the ambi side has never gotten in the way. I don't notice it at all.

I've got a full-length guide rod on my Kimber. Some people don't like them, but I've had good results. I pulled the ambi-safety off my Springer and replaced it with an Ed Brown right-handed safety. I just like the slimmer profile, and I can operate it just fine lefty if need be.   

[ColoSwiss]

Nice collection!   

I'm a Beretta M-92 fan; never had a failure to feed or eject.

The last two Colts I owned didn't work new out of the box. One of them wouldn't even chamber a round due to an undersized breech-face. So much for quality control.

[David]

Great post John!         

[Poncho65]

Very nice pics and great thread

[jalind]

For the additional required photos showing me at the range . . .

But first, as a special feature for those fathers who have too many boys chasing after their daughter(s) . . .

Remington 870 Suitor Deterrent Deluxe with M9 Enhancement.
At the ready just behind the front door.



Yup, a real M9 bayonet and that's how they were mounted onto this and other shotguns, with the lug below the magazine and the barrel hole in the guard slipping over the end of the magazine extension tube which is necked down specifically to fit the M7 and M9 bayonets. Has an extended rifled choke on it right now as I was at the range shooting 2-3/4" 1oz. slug shells with it. Rounds in the side saddle are #4 Buckshot (not to be confused with #4 bird shot) which has a bit less penetration while maintaining very nearly the same potency as #00 Buckshot.

At the range today, this photo with my favorite pistol, the M1911 .45 ACP, full gov't size, and on the bench you can see the wheel gun coming up next.



This photo has my favorite DA revolver, a .357 magnum with 4.2" barrel, my favorite barrel length in that caliber wheel gun.



I do much of my shooting off-hand (aka one-hand), rapid fire, from a bladed stance. Has its cons and I also use a two-hand weaver stance. Today I put many rounds down range from a

• Sig Sauer P238
• Beretta M9 (US mil. 92FS)
• Ruger Blackhawk SA 5.5".45 Long Colt
• Ruger GP100 4.2" .357 magnum
• RIA M1911-A1 FS Tac .45 ACP
• Remington 870 Express Tactical

John

[Nix]

That is a fine Firearms Menu.

If I had to choose....the 1911.

#becauseJohnBrowning

[jalind]

That is a fine Firearms Menu.

If I had to choose....the 1911.

#becasueJohnBrowning

Thanks
John

[jalind]

Very nice pics and great thread

Thanks!

John

[Nix]

Spelling correction in order.....

I do better with a 1911...

[jalind]

Spelling correction in order.....

I do better with a 1911...

Yup, that's true compared to the four other pistols and revolvers I have. Verified it once again today.

John

[jalind]

Nice collection!   

I'm a Beretta M-92 fan; never had a failure to feed or eject.

The last two Colts I owned didn't work new out of the box. One of them wouldn't even chamber a round due to an undersized breech-face. So much for quality control.

Thanks

Too bad about the Colts. The M9 (92FS) is a fine pistol, especially for law enforcement use. The real problem I had with one in the military was tolerance to the mud, dusty mud, frozen dusty mud, and sandy frozen dusty mud. The magazines in particular had to be frequently cleaned. Slide and recoil mechanism wasn't as tolerant to getting dusty with bits of silt or sand either. Had to clean it much more often than the M1911. The couple of misfeeds I had were magazine. In a more benign environment such as nearly all law enforcement and with single owners/users versus being a virtual pass-around in the military, it fares much better as evidenced by its track record with law enforcement, especially in Europe.

I know it sparks debate, but IMHO the double action .357 magnum revolver is about as fool-proof as it gets because the action is simpler. Used it today with six speed loaders. Had the reloads in as fast as changing a magazine in a 1911. Requires knowing how to use a speed loader efficiently and getting a little practice at doing it. I've seen some dudes that are lightning fast with speed loader reloads and they're not even looking at what they're doing. With 6 rounds between reloads one must be disciplined with their fire.

John

[ColoSwiss]

Nice collection!   

I'm a Beretta M-92 fan; never had a failure to feed or eject.

The last two Colts I owned didn't work new out of the box. One of them wouldn't even chamber a round due to an undersized breech-face. So much for quality control.

Thanks

Too bad about the Colts. The M9 (92FS) is a fine pistol, especially for law enforcement use. The real problem I had with one in the military was tolerance to the mud, dusty mud, frozen dusty mud, and sandy frozen dusty mud. The magazines in particular had to be frequently cleaned. Slide and recoil mechanism wasn't as tolerant to getting dusty with bits of silt or sand either. Had to clean it much more often than the M1911. The couple of misfeeds I had were magazine. In a more benign environment such as nearly all law enforcement and with single owners/users versus being a virtual pass-around in the military, it fares much better as evidenced by its track record with law enforcement, especially in Europe.

I know it sparks debate, but IMHO the double action .357 magnum revolver is about as fool-proof as it gets because the action is simpler. Used it today with six speed loaders. Had the reloads in as fast as changing a magazine in a 1911. Requires knowing how to use a speed loader efficiently and getting a little practice at doing it. I've seen some dudes that are lightning fast with speed loader reloads and they're not even looking at what they're doing. With 6 rounds between reloads one must be disciplined with their fire.

John

I have a Smith 686 that sits in the night stand. Like you said - fool-proof; and extremely accurate.

[Nix]

I know it sparks debate, but IMHO the double action .357 magnum revolver is about as fool-proof as it gets because the action is simpler. Used it today with six speed loaders. Had the reloads in as fast as changing a magazine in a 1911. Requires knowing how to use a speed loader efficiently and getting a little practice at doing it. I've seen some dudes that are lightning fast with speed loader reloads and they're not even looking at what they're doing. With 6 rounds between reloads one must be disciplined with their fire.

I find it easier to change mags in a semi-auto than it is to reload with a speed loader. (Might be a training and practice issue.) I also find it easier to carry a spare mag than it is to carry a speed loader.

When I carry a revolver, I carry a speed-strip with reloads. Slower, but easy to carry and straightforward.

Having said that, I think this reloading issue is more hype than necessity. For my personal circumstances, I think the odds of needing a firearm are very low, and needing more than the 5 rounds in my favorite J-frame even lower....approaching zero.

Like you and ColoSwiss, above, I find a 686+ to be as good as a defensive handgun as any, and very simple/safe to use. Because the Winter has been so tough here, I haven't been doing much shooting at our outdoor range. I hope to get out to the range tomorrow though.......
 

[jalind]

I know it sparks debate, but IMHO the double action .357 magnum revolver is about as fool-proof as it gets because the action is simpler. Used it today with six speed loaders. Had the reloads in as fast as changing a magazine in a 1911. Requires knowing how to use a speed loader efficiently and getting a little practice at doing it. I've seen some dudes that are lightning fast with speed loader reloads and they're not even looking at what they're doing. With 6 rounds between reloads one must be disciplined with their fire.

I find it easier to change mags in a semi-auto than it is to reload with a speed loader. (Might be a training and practice issue.) I also find it easier to carry a spare mag than it is to carry a speed loader.

When I carry a revolver, I carry a speed-strip with reloads. Slower, but easy to carry and straightforward.

Having said that, I think this reloading issue is more hype than necessity. For my personal circumstances, I think the odds of needing a firearm are very low, and needing more than the 5 rounds in my favorite J-frame even lower....approaching zero.

Like you and ColoSwiss, above, I find a 686+ to be as good as a defensive handgun as any, and very simple/safe to use. Because the Winter has been so tough here, I haven't been doing much shooting at our outdoor range. I hope to get out to the range tomorrow though.......

The only range near me here is a 25 yard max indoor with five lanes. It can handle long gun 5.56 and shotgun slugs, but they allow nothing other than that in long guns.

Nearly all my hardware is too big for concealed carry without creating an obvious pattern except for the Sig P238 which is the concealed, or mostly concealed, if I'm carrying concealed. Everything else would be pretty obvious (not counting the Remington 870). For open carry, the .357 revolver is less intimidating because it's a revolver and I've got no problem with two reloads with speed loaders. I know a couple guys that carry multiple reloads plus a BUG, all concealed. They want to be prepared for the next Miami-Dade or North Hollywood firefight. Maybe they're thinking the zombie apocalypse could suddenly erupt. Conceivable but not credible scenarios for self-defense. Nearly all events are inherently over in about three shots even with a gang of perps. None of them wants to be next after the first shot and they scatter like rats. They don't know the difference between the sound of a .380 ACP, 9mm parabellum or .357 magnum. The most hardened and determined that don't flee are quite rare. If I need to reload anything, I'm in deep kimchi. Been my thought from the get-go.

In the home, it's currently the 1911 with one reload mag for instant response and then the Remington 870 with six shells of #4 buckshot if there's a little time, followed by the .357 magnum with one reload. I've switched back and forth between the 1911 and .357 being #1 several times. The one downside for a shotgun is its length making it more difficult to maneuver inside a home, even with an 18" minimum barrel and shorter pull stock. However, one #4 buckshot round ends it immediately. 27 pellets of .24 caliber shot @ 1325 fps does enormous damage, especially at 15-20 feet. If I'm ready to pull a trigger, it's to end it as swiftly as possible with overwhelming force. #4 buckshot isn't what I'd use for deer (1 oz 2.75" or heavier 3" slug) but it is used for coyote. Six shells in a shotgun is a six bad guy gun, presuming passable shot placement.

Regarding using a speed loader . . . see this video by Massad Ayoob where he shows unloading and reloading for RH and LH shooters.


Covers speed strip usage as you mentioned carrying one . . .


There are two newer ones for unloading and reloading using speed loaders:
Ejecting spent cartridge casings . . .

Reloading with speed loader . . .


I practiced this using spent casings that had chamber formed so they didn't just fall out and snap caps in a speed loader. I use the technique at the range now. If I were doing concealed carry with a smaller revolver I'd be using speed strips to conceal them as well.

John