Coming up next...

Range day with the Colt .22LR Rail Gun

Colt/Walther .22LR Rail Gun

 Got a change to go to the range today (took the Sunday School class along for fun).  I actually purchased this pistol probably six months ago, I just haven't had a chance to get to the range and shoot it.  Since my primary concealed carry and full-size defensive pistol are both Colt 1911s, this was the perfect companion training pistol.  It isn't my first .22LR 1911 - I have a Kimber conversion kit - and I've had issues with cheap .22LR, including Remington and Winchester bulk boxes, so when I found some CCI Mini-Mags, I grabbed 300 rounds or so.  I'm glad I did, because it's gone now, as I'm sure everyone's noticed.  The CCI functioned perfectly, and as illustrated below, was very accurate.

10 rounds @ 7 yards, rapid fire

The pistol itself is well executed.  I prefer this particular model over some of the other .22LR 1911s out there, mostly because all of its external operational controls are exactly the same as the real Colt Rail Gun. You can accomplish all of your shooting and immediate action drills on this pistol, and they translate directly over to your .45ACP. As advertised in their literature, aftermarket parts such as thumb safeties, triggers, sears, and hammers will fit into this pistol.  You could actually do a trigger job on your .22LR just like you can on your .45ACP.  Obviously, the slide parts do not interchange with your standard .45, nor does the magazine.  Another nice feature of this firearm is that the lower seems remarkably heavy compared to a .45.  It works out, however, because the slide is aluminum and a lot lighter than a steel slide.  Overall, the total weight is pretty accurate when compared to the Rail Gun, as opposed to the slide conversion kit I have, which ends up being a hair lighter.  Also, because this gun is designed from the ground up as a .22LR, it doesn't have some of the little twitches a .45 converted to .22 might, such as failures to feed and extract.
While .22LR is currently pretty hard to find, if you happen to have a stock and don't want to shoot up your .45ACP, this gun is perfect.  I highly recommend.

-Woody

Kyle Defoor class update

Thanks to people who have contributed, I am now 6% of the way to my goal.  If you can spare something small, even $1 - $5, that would be a big help.

In addition to the desire for skills, and wanting to utilize gear to review, this is a bit of an experiment in crowdfunding on the gun side.  It's been proven time and time again on the giving side, so I was curious to see if it could work for someone who wanted to try it in our realm.

If you would like to give, visit this link: http://www.gofundme.com/4bm5o8

If not, I'll still write posts, they may just be a little fewer and far between.  Hopefully you've been able to take something useful away from my ramblings.

-Woody

A word on open carry

There has been a great deal of noise made about the role of open carry in the Starbucks debacle, with many people expressing opinions that open carry is foolish, never applicable, tactically unsound, and so forth. Let me be very clear in my opinion: open carry is a valid option, and if open carry is authorized in your area, utilize it in appropriate situations.  I'll give an example: when I work in my yard, I carry a 1911 in a UM84 flap holster.  My reasoning is that my threat is mostly wildlife, I need to protect my firearm from the dust of yard work, and I need to protect my firearm from me.  If for some reason I need to go to get gas, or Wally World, or get a bite to eat from fast food, I am not going to shower, change into good concealment clothes, do my business, then  go home and get nasty again.  I will carry what I have how I have it.  With that said, at any time while open carrying, I attempt to be friendly, courteous, and not to make any moves that could be interpreted as a great. I also don't "display" my firearm, and I don't take my AR with me.  In short, I act like a normal person, not a pretentious asshole with something to prove. 

If you want to be perceived as a "good guy," actions speak louder than words...

Realize this, carry accordingly, and you shouldn't have any issues.

-Woody

Some thoughts from the Starbucks debacle

I was bored at work today, and spent a significant amount of time reading about the Starbucks letter.  I read about the history, various opinions about who was exactly to blame for this turn of events, and I hope that I have some useful takeaways:

Firstly, Starbucks was never pro-gun.  They were neutral, choosing to follow local laws.  They were portrayed as pro-gun because they chose not to cave to pressure from anti-gun groups.  When those anti-gun groups threatened a boycott, pro-gun groups stepped in to show Starbucks that they supported their stance.  That initial support, I think, was a good thing.  The bad thing came next - pro-gun groups just wouldn't leave, and they staged multiple demonstrations - essentially protests - in a store that had specifically asked not to be dragged into political activities.  The fact that Starbucks regularly supports liberal causes with their money was conveniently ignored by both Starbucks and pro-gun activists initially. 

Secondly, pro-gun groups staged their demonstrations in ways that would attract attention, which is good.  Unfortunately, they also did it in ways that attracted a lot of negative attention.  Let's face it, I've gotten weird looks walking from my car to the exhibition hall with my rifle slung, even when a gigantic GUN SHOW sign was clearly flashing in the window of the hall.  Did they really think the reaction from Starbucks was going to be different?

The lesson to be learned from this?  If your goal is to support an organization that either supports you, or at least doesn't oppose you, you may want to do it in a way that doesn't draw lots of negative attention that interferes with the conduct of their business.  No one likes to be featured on the news with a police car in the front parking lot (unless the cop is buying donuts).  The idea is to support the organization, not turn it away from you.  I have opened carry in Starbucks many times, but not as part of a large agenda-driven group, and have never received any complaints (although I did get thanks for my tip).

Thirdly, I think Howard Schultz made a big error.  He has the right to make decisions in the conduct of his business, but I also have the right to choose another store if I disagree with those decision.  While I have seen many posts that he asked people not to open carry, while leaving concealed carry open, his letter specifically states that he requests people not to bring firearms into his stores.  He doesn't say that he requests that people not open carry in his store, which actually could have been a good middle ground considering the tone of the rest of his letter.  He says he doesn't want people bringing any firearms into his stores.  Even thought he waffles in his letter about remaining neutral in the debate, the simple fact is that by asking for no firearms, he has taken a side.  This is not a "for us or against us" argument.  He leaves no room for debate in his letter.  His words: For these reasons, today we are respectfully requesting that customers no longer bring firearms into our stores or outdoor seating areas -- even in states where "open carry" is permitted -- unless they are authorized law enforcement personnel. While he references open carry, he clearly states no firearms in general.  I therefore choose not to do business at Starbucks anymore.

Fourthly, I have heard many people say that they will continue to carry concealed in Starbucks until he puts up signs.  To them I say:  Schultz requested that people not make his stores a political arena.  Neither side listened, open carry advocates got a little carried away (but broke no laws), and here we are with him "requesting...no firearms."  So to those who will still carry despite his request, how are you any different from the open carry guys?  Are you morally superior to the open carry advocates because you hide the fact that you are disregarding his request?  In other words, you are saying one thing with your appearance, while actually doing another.  In most places, a person who does that is considered "two-faced."  You are breaking no laws, but if CC advocates get outed to the corporate office, and it is established that guns are still coming in to stores and disrupting his "third place," I can assure you, the signs will go up just as fast as with the OC guys.

Fifthly, and probably most galling to me, are the people who state that they will carry even in places where it is legally posted they cannot, and seem to have no concept of the maelstrom that they are risking.  Which do you think will look worse in the news - three guys who broke no laws, but caused a few ruffled feathers, or a legal concealed carry permit holder who willfully disregards the law and carries where he is not allowed?  I know the arguments for carrying even where it is not permitted (Buffalo Wild Wings, Costco, etc), and I will not take a side on that.  My only caution is that if you choose to break the law, understand the consequences of your action.  You will be a Hero, or you will be a Zero, depending on how things play out.  There will be no middle ground, and chances are better on you being a Zero than a Hero.

Anyway, my rant is over.  I will not be doing business with Starbucks anymore, as stated in my letter.  Hopefully, my thoughts will be useful talking points for you to consider as you go about exercising your Constitutional right legally.  And yes, I include open carry.  Exercise your rights responsibly, and your chances of ending up on the front page of the newspapers are much reduced.

-Woody

An open letter to Howard Schultz

Dear Mr. Schultz,

     I read with great disappointment your open letter of 17 September 2013.  As a current Gold level Rewards member, and someone who's history with Starbucks spans nine years, I had previously supported Starbucks for their stance on Second Amendment rights.  Your previous decision to abide by local laws and not to cave in to those who demanded you ban legally carried firearms in your stores earned you the respect of gun owners across America.  When anti-Second Amendment organizations called for a boycott of your stores, gun owners rallied to your defense, encouraging fellow gun owners to patronize Starbucks, in an attempt to demonstrate to you that when you follow the law, your fellow Americans will support you.
     Sadly, yesterday's letter shows that despite gun owners' best efforts, their patronage is not wanted.  Therefore, as of today, I will no longer shop at Starbucks Coffee.  I do not make this decision lightly.  I have a strong emotional connection to Starbucks.  When my wife and I were dating nine years ago, she was working her way through college as a Starbucks barista.  Between work and school, she didn't have much free time, so I would sit in Starbucks for hours, drinking coffee until she went on break so that we could talk, then drinking more coffee until she got off work so that I could walk her home and tell her goodnight.  That was the beginning of years of delicious coffee, snacks, and desserts that I still enjoy.  However, your letter yesterday put me and my fellow gun owners on notice - we can either choose our rights or your coffee.
     You put me in a difficult position, Mr. Schultz.  Even though recent financial difficulties have curtailed my spending somewhat, Starbucks had remained a place where I would take my son for some special time.  Now I have to explain to him why we cannot go anymore.  I have to explain to him that he cannot have the cake pops he so loves because the owner of Starbucks doesn't want his Daddy there anymore. The Constitution and the Bill of Rights is a difficult concept to explain to a four-year-old.  He doesn't understand that a right not exercised is soon lost.  I knew someday I would need to have a conversation with him about the Second Amendment and what it means to us, and how standing up for the rights spelled out in the Constitution, however unpopular, is the highest calling of an American, especially those like me who have taken an oath to defend them.  I just never thought something as silly as coffee would spur that conversation.
     You state that you wish to remain neutral in the national debate about the Second Amendment.  Your letter clearly belies that neutrality. By asking Starbucks customers to choose between their rights or your coffee, you have taken sides.  You have chosen to side with those that seek to remove what many consider to be a sacred right, second only to freedom of speech in our Bill of Rights.  I will not threaten you with massive boycotts or financial retribution - I am only one man.  I can only say that you have lost at least one customer, if that even matters to you.

   Sincerely,

- Woody

* I apologize for formatting issues, this was posted with Blogger Mobile *

SOD Gear Operative Field Parka Review

 Initial Review

                I’ve been looking recently for a good jacket/concealment garment to wear year round in Virginia.  The un-tactical tactical vest is a bit passé to me (not quite so much as the fanny pack, but I digress), so I tried to look other directions.  My criteria were simple:

• Wearable in a variety of weather conditions, from summer heat to winter cold.
• Suitable for service as a windbreaker, with water-resistant properties.
• Capable of concealing my firearm (Glock 19 at the time).
• Capable of carrying a load, ie, blowout kit, small survival kit, magazines, cell phones, or water.

Most civilian jackets that I researched seemed sole-purpose, designed solely for warmth or keeping the wearer dry.  Pockets seemed to be ancillary, designed to warm hands or hold keys.   I’ve always been a fan of smocks, probably for nostalgic reasons, but as I researched their history and intent, I realized that they have uses in civilian life as well as their original military purposes (covered here).

                This is actually the third smock I’ve owned.  I previously had a SORD USA smock, which I sold due to some disappointments with quality and the country of origin.  I currently own a DropZone Tactical in Multicam, which I utilize as part of my cold weather layering system at work.  I had considered a DropZone smock for my civilian wear as well, but was not a huge fan of the twill they use for their non-camouflage colors, believing it too heavy for year-round wear.  After much research, I found the Italian company SOD Gear, the only manufacturer I could find that advertises non-camouflage jackets in the same 50/50 NYCO ripstop that they make their camouflage patterns in.  Knowing that smocks typically fit a little larger, I communicated with them through their Facebook account.  Despite a little bit of a language barrier, they were very glad to talk me through selecting a jacket.  I ordered online, and received the jacket within a week via DHL.

                My initial impression is that this is a very well-made jacket, with enough pockets to fulfill my every need.  There are 14 external pockets and two internal pockets.  By location, the jacket has:

·         Two zipper pockets on the upper arms,

·         Two zipper pockets on the lower arms,

·         Two button pockets on the chest, with

·         Two zipper pockets behind the button chest pockets,

·         Two button pockets on the lower front,

·         Two button pockets on the sides,

·         One large button pocket on the lower back, with additional zipper access, and

·         Two internal zipper pockets on the upper chest.

The hood has two drawstring adjustments, and the waist and hem have drawstrings as well.  The cuffs are   Buttons are NATO style, with fabric strips securing them to the jacket.  Fabric is 50/50 NYCO, with a tight enough weave to block the wind and provide light water resistance.  The jacket is cut roomy, allowing for another layer for warmth underneath (I’ve fit both the Army’s new Gen III Layer III and a Mountain Hardwear Monkey Man jacket underneath).

Velcro adjusted, and the front is zipper closed with a button wind fly.

I’ve carried a lot of stuff in it (probably too much at times).  I’ve carried blow-out kit (my full size one, not the one from the EDC pics), my S&W 442, survival kit, keys, phone, and wallet.  Oh, and I concealed my Glock underneath.  Overall, I’m very pleased with the jacket, and as the weather gets colder, I’ll probably go back to wearing it daily.  It makes a great windbreaker during the fall, and with the Mountain Hardwear underneath, it’ll keep even a biting wind in the 40 degree range off your core.

-Woody

Chest pocket showing taped button and fold over pocket

Rear pocket showing top and left side access

Chest pocket showing zipper pocket behind button pocket

Arm pocket with hook and loop patch

Lower sleeve pocket

Elbow reinforcement and pad pocket

Mesh underarm vent