Marksmanship 101

[Kitwulfen]

Yeah. My father's been a cop for about 20 years now, and he's currently got a pair of Glocks that he uses (17 and 26, IIRC). I like 1911's myself, though I don't own any (yet).

It's hard to really call the M16/AR15 new. It's been around for almost 40 years (since 1967). Before now, I would've taken a M1A/M14 over an M16, and still would. But with the advent of stuff like the Leitner-Wise Gas Piston Operated AR15s in 7.62x51 (which pretty much makes it an AR15 only in name and looks), I'm pretty sold on that.

Unfortunately, you run into a lot of "tacticool" people with the AR15s. They've got like a VFG, bipod, light, scope, laser, glass breaker, and kitchen sink strapped on to the front of their rifle.

[Doink]

Now I really hope Doink doesn't show this thread to the parents. IMO that's the kind of juvenile trash talk that gives shooters a bad name. It reads like something from a Mack Bolan novel, or maybe an article in Soldier of Fortune magazine.

That's what editing is for....

But yeah, it does sound like a bad idea. Why'd you guys have to spoil this thread, eh?

[Kitwulfen]

Though I am sorry if you think this thread now needs editting for you to use it to convince your parents (and you think I am at fault), I really think you shouldn't need to use this thread. I think you need to learn to make an effective argument on your own, and not let others convince your parents. This thread provided you with some good resources for you to base your argument on, and some good reasoning that you could emulate. However, making effective arguments is a life skill that everyone needs, and you need to learn it some time.

You can do whatever you want; you are your own person. But in my oh-so-humble opinion, you should try doing this yourself.

[BrockthePaine]

Unfortunately, you run into a lot of "tacticool" people with the AR15s. They've got like a VFG, bipod, light, scope, laser, glass breaker, and kitchen sink strapped on to the front of their rifle.

I've a friend like that. Can't see what he likes about that plastic tinkertoy rifle. Yes, I'm biased... although I do want an AR15 someday, in .50Beowulf and 6.5 Grendel. But I have a lot of other guns I plan to purchase first.

Back to the subject at hand. Doink, I typed up a summary of my own move from no-gun to pro-gun - but it here on my website since it's just a wee bit on the long side. Here's the link: http://myweb.cebridge.net/paines4/experience.htm

I hope that helps you a bit.

[Doink]

You can do whatever you want; you are your own person. But in my oh-so-humble opinion, you should try doing this yourself.

So be it. I'll be picking up that 'Unintended Consequences' book soon, which will probably help me formulate an argument. Afterwards, I'll pester my dad into taking me to a shooting range.

The more I think about it, the more annoyed I get about their attitude. My father just flat out refused to take me to that one shooting range in Raleigh and it really ticks me off.

I still think that I shouldn't handle guns outside of a shooting range, though. I might have some anger issues that could prove troublesome otherwise.

[BlasTech]

Well, especially if you're just starting off. you want to begin in a safe environment. Otherwise should something go wrong, like the occasional misfiring bullet, someone will be able to tell you what to do. Plus it means you begin developing the good kind of shooting habits rather than the bad kind.

And yes, angry shooting not good ... completely messes up your aiming consistancy

[BrockthePaine]

I'd be more than happy to provide guns and ammo for a range trip... except for the slight fact that I live about 1,400 miles away from Raleigh. That's too far for me to drive to go shooting

[Kitwulfen]

I've a friend like that. Can't see what he likes about that plastic tinkertoy rifle. Yes, I'm biased... although I do want an AR15 someday, in .50Beowulf and 6.5 Grendel. But I have a lot of other guns I plan to purchase first.

I can't decide between 6.5 Grendel and 6.8 SPC. The next one on my list after my AR5.7 is a 7.62x51 LW-GP AR15, then either one of those in 6.8 or 5.56. I'm not too hot on 5.56, but it's so standard that having one really means you're never going to have ammo supply problems. Not too big on the .50s, but the .50 Beowulf is tempting cause, uh, it's got wulf in it. >.>

I got my beginning in 4H with a beginner shooters course taught by an NRA rangemaster. They provided us with single shot, bolt action .22's at the range and ammo for a small fee, and we learned proper safety techniques and proper shooting techniques. I've forgot most of the proper shooting stuff, but the safety stuff is something you should not ever forget.

If you're under 18, then your parents would have to purchase whatever firearm you want to get (though it could be done with your money). Be careful, however, of straw sales; this is where someone purchases a firearm for someone who could not necessarily own one themselve. This is generally intended to stop people from buying a handgun from a FFL and reselling it to Bubba, but it also means your father can't take your money, buy a firearm, and give it to you (legally). It'd have to be your father's firearm. Once you're 18, however, sure, whatever goes. I may not be explaining this too clearly; I'm a little tired.

[Zobeid]

I can't decide between 6.5 Grendel and 6.8 SPC. The next one on my list after my AR5.7 is a 7.62x51 LW-GP AR15, then either one of those in 6.8 or 5.56.

IMHO the 6.5 Grendel is way more interesting than 6.8 SPC. To me the 6.8 SPC looks like a 7.62 NATO (which is really 1940s technology) scaled down. The 6.5 Grendel is more like a modern cartridge design.

Anyhow, 5.56mm is pretty decent with the right ammo, and especially if you have a 20-inch barrel. But shorter barrels are fashionable now (the shorter the better!), and they don't always perform well with the newer 5.56 NATO-spec (SS109) ammo. This has been drawing complaints from soldiers in the field.

As already noted, the AR-15 is a 40+ year old design. Some will say the guns and the ammo have been improved a lot, but personally I think most of the "improvements" are pretty dubious. I'd take a Vietnam-era M16 rifle and M193 ammo and be happy with it.

As a military weapon the AR-15 is in the twilight of its lifespan. It is high time for the Army to take a clean sheet of paper and start fresh with a new design, new caliber, new everything. However, I predict the AR-15 is poised to become a major civilian hunting-and-target rifle of the 21st Century just as the 98 Mauser did in the 20th. It's a classic, and people are going to start recognizing it as such.

EDIT: I almost overlooked your comment about the Rhineland AR57. It looks cool! I'm not so sure about useful, but definitely cool. I'd like to see one with a real silencer, not the fake can.

[BrockthePaine]

I don't think age really need be a factor in determining the usefulness of a weapon. We still use the M14/M21, which has been around since the sixties, and is nearly identical to a design from the 1930s (M1 Garand). And then we can talk about the 1911 and how our Marines are still carrying it; or having the M2HB .50cal MG still in service after all these years, or the Browning Hi-Power... All usually referred to as "best of class". I think the new toy I'd like to see the Army pick up is the H&K G36 in 6.5 or 6.8 - except they won't do that, cause the Army won't buy something a foreign power is already using. The G36 is really the only modern infantry automatic that I really like, even if it is plastic...

[Doink]

If you're under 18, then your parents would have to purchase whatever firearm you want to get (though it could be done with your money). Be careful, however, of straw sales; this is where someone purchases a firearm for someone who could not necessarily own one themselve. This is generally intended to stop people from buying a handgun from a FFL and reselling it to Bubba, but it also means your father can't take your money, buy a firearm, and give it to you (legally). It'd have to be your father's firearm. Once you're 18, however, sure, whatever goes. I may not be explaining this too clearly; I'm a little tired.

Wait, are you saying that you have to bring your own gun to a shooting range? I want to rent a gun to use, not force the burden on my parents!

How much would these NRA shooting lessons cost?

[Jamestox]

Doink,

Just a few words of advice for you:

Don't handle a firearm while you're angry - you forget safety too easily when your brain is tied up with a strong emotion.

On to the main topic now:

Since you're 17, any firearm you use will either have to be "signed-off" at the range rental desk by a parent or have to be purchased by a parent. Unless you want to wait until you hit 18, be patient with them and try to work with them. Again, let them know you're wanting to learn SAFELY.

If you buy one yourself at 18, your first firearm will have to be a "long gun" because of your age. Handguns and handgun ammo can't be legally purchased by anyone under 21.

I strongly advise any new shooter to get a manually-cycled .22 rifle as his or her first firearm. .22 Autoloaders ("semiautomatics") tend to be picky eaters and a beginner doesn't need the hassle of trying to find the right diet for their rifle at the same time they're learning shooting basics.

Good choices in bolt action are the Marlin 980, 81TS, 981TS, 25 & 925 series, SavageMark 2 series, and theRuger 77/22 (although the Rugers are difficult to find used and tend to be pretty pricy). Most of these can be found in decent to very good condition at many gun shops and pawn shops.

A good slide-action ("pump") would be the Taurus 62 series, a re-creation of the classic Winchester 62 that literally thousands of shooters started with. The 62 is fun, reliable and accurate. It can be found in standard blued finish or stainless steel. The stainless is more expensive, but easier to care for. Remington makes the model 572. This slide-action rifle was made in both rifled and smoothbore versions for many years - make certain you get the rifled version. The older 572 Fieldmasters are classic firearms and fetch a high price.

Another good beginner rifle is the Henry lever action. I have handled - but not shot - several examples and they seem to be very well-made. Henry Arms has an excellent reputation for customer service, and the president of Henry Arms often lurks at Rimfire Central and talks directly to his customers. Marlin also makes the model 39 that has a very smooth action and is extremely reliable. The Marlin 39, however, is pretty expensive even used.

If you absolutely MUST have an autoloader, there are several good inexpensive choices. Marlin's model 60 is probably the most widely owned autoloader ever made. Many owners report better "stock" accuracy than the Ruger 10/22, although the Marlin 60 tends to be a picky eater. There are also variants (the 7000, 795 series) that use the same receiver as the model 60 with a detachable box magazine rather than the 60's underbarrel tube. Of the two, I prefer the 60's design because the box mags have feeding problems ocassionally. Plus, the tube holds 14-17 rounds (depending on the particular model) and the box mag 7-10. Ruger makes the excellent 10/22. There are so many available aftermarket parts you can essentially build a "non-Ruger" Ruger! The 10/22 is the customizer's rifle of choice. There are many stock 10/22's on the used market and the prices typically run between $75-120. Savage makes the excellentmodel 64. Remington makes the models 597 and 522 Viper and both of which are reported to be "jam-o-matics" and have magazine feed, extractor-ejector and firing pin issues. Stay away from these rifles. On the other hand, the552 Speedmaster is an excellent autoloader based on a time-proven design. Like other good firearms, though, it's fairly expensive even used. Another rifle you're likely to see used is the Winchester 190/290 series. These autoloaders made from the 1960's through the 1980's have a known bug and although I own a reliable, extremely accurate copy that I dearly love, I can't recommend them for a new shooter. Winchester made these with an aluminum alloy receiver that allows the barrel bushing to work loose over time and use. There's a fix, but a beginning shooter shouldn't have to concentrate more on his rifle than his shooting form.

Of all the manually cycled rifles mentioned, I recommend a good bolt-action the most. It's the easiest to clean and care for and mechanically has the least to go wrong. It's extremely accurate (there's a reason snipers and long-range hunters choose the bolt action) and having to manually cycle the action forces the beginner to concentrate on proper sighting technique. Bolt-actions are also more easily checked for a round in the chamber.

One more thing: whichever rifle you decide to buy, use the iron sights. Scopes are nice, but a beginner needs to learn proper sight alignment with the irons, since most firearms aren't equipped with scopes.

Hope this helps.

JTox

[Kitwulfen]

I drew this picture the other day of my website's mascot with an AR5.7, as it should look once I've got mine. I'll be using a CAA CBS/T buttstock, DPMS lower (custom-engraved by Tom Sawyer Manufacturing; quickie photoshop of what it should look like when done here), Rhineland Arms AR5.7 upper, and a Streamlight TLR-1 (not shown). The only thing left that I need to buy is the upper.

There's a lot of new goodies out there that're coming out, like the FNH FS2000, Sig 556, and the FNH SCAR. I think SOCOM put in an order for the SCAR. None of the .mil is going to order the 556, since it's a civilianized version of the 55x family. Same with the FS2000; civilianized. I like the FS200, but can't stand that green/OD colour that FNH thinks the stocks need to be.

Doink, don't worry about the limit of not being able to buy "handgun ammunition." The definition for it is ammunition that the dealer thinks you're going to use in a handgun. If the dealer thinks that the ammo is going to be used in a longarm, then it's longarm ammunition. With .22LR, no one is going to hassle you if you're over 18.

[BrockthePaine]

Wait, are you saying that you have to bring your own gun to a shooting range? I want to rent a gun to use, not force the burden on my parents!

How much would these NRA shooting lessons cost?

NRA shooting lessons are priced according to the cost of the materials (around $30, I believe) plus the cost of the instructor's time. My academic advisor at college (also an NRA instructor) basically made his class worth the cost of the materials, so about $30... but others have made the 8-hour class about $200. It's all according to the instructor. There aren't that many instructors about, so they can pretty much charge what they want.

People usually do bring their own guns to a shooting range... however, many times SOME of the bigger city ranges will have rental shops. I have never been in one of those ranges so I can't tell you how to proceed on that.

If you'd like, I can see if anybody from my gun forum is in the Raleigh area and would be willing to teach you. I would, of course, suggest discretion etc... but if you'd like, I'll ask around.

[Kitwulfen]

AR15.com has state-by-state section where gunowners can discuss local events/politics and set up shoots at local ranges. The section for the Carolinas is here. I'm certain there's several distinguished people who would love to help you with your interest.

[Zobeid]

I don't think age really need be a factor in determining the usefulness of a weapon. We still use the M14/M21, which has been around since the sixties, and is nearly identical to a design from the 1930s (M1 Garand).

The M14 was functionally obsolete before it even made it into production, in the 1950s. That some are still being used says a lot about the military mind, but not much about the advance of firearms technology.

And then we can talk about the 1911 and how our Marines are still carrying it

The Army had the 9mm Beretta rammed down their throats by political forces, in the name of NATO standardization. (Much as we rammed 7.62 NATO down the throats of our allies.) Preferring the M1911 over the Beretta is fine with me, but again that says virtually nothing about where firearms technology is today. And the Beretta itself arguably has been an outdated design ever since the Glock 17 made its big splash in the 1980s.

I think the new toy I'd like to see the Army pick up is the H&K G36 in 6.5 or 6.8 - except they won't do that, cause the Army won't buy something a foreign power is already using. The G36 is really the only modern infantry automatic that I really like, even if it is plastic...

The G36 is. . . a solid weapon, I presume, but nothing revolutionary. It's a product-improved AR-18, basically 1960s technology.

I'd like to see a bullpup design with caseless, electrically-fired ammunition. There should be an electronic trigger and fire-control module with settings for different burst lengths and cyclic rates. There should be extensive use of alloy and plastic to keep the weight down. I think we're ready for standard-issue optical sights too. I'm picturing something like a computerized H&K G11, with bits of P90 and AUG mixed in.

[Kitwulfen]

Look at the F2000/FS2000. Bullpup, standard optical sights, alloys and plastics.

[EdBecerra]

I'm a tad partial to the FN P90 myself.

[BrockthePaine]

The M14 was functionally obsolete before it even made it into production, in the 1950s. That some are still being used says a lot about the military mind, but not much about the advance of firearms technology.

"Functionally obsolete"? Compared to what? I could take any average group of soldiers equipped with M14s and take them up against an equal force armed with pretty much any weapon you wish to name, in any terrain except urban close-quarters, and I would be confident of the result. That's hardly a mark of being "functionally obsolete".

The G36 is. . . a solid weapon, I presume, but nothing revolutionary. It's a product-improved AR-18, basically 1960s technology.

Only the bolt carrier is from the AR18. The rest uses design cues from the AK and the FAL and a bit of M16 with the bolt itself. And probably only the AK can match the feat of the G36, firing 25,000 rounds without any sort of cleaning. That's because the G36 vents gas out the forearm and doesn't vent it straight onto the bolt face, like most guns. The only way it'd get any more reliable is if you were shooting a revolver or a bolt action.

I'd like to see a bullpup design with caseless, electrically-fired ammunition. There should be an electronic trigger and fire-control module with settings for different burst lengths and cyclic rates. There should be extensive use of alloy and plastic to keep the weight down. I think we're ready for standard-issue optical sights too. I'm picturing something like a computerized H&K G11, with bits of P90 and AUG mixed in.

Ah yes, the Microsoft guns. They did a fine enough job on Internet Exploder that I'm going to entrust my firearms to them now. (/sarcasm).

I've never been a fan of caseless ammo. Caseless ammo just makes a total mess in the chamber - it neither vents the gases or the unburned powder (which in a normal design would stay in the case and be ejected from the chamber). That was one of the single biggest problems with the G11 system which still must be overcome - it's a jam-o-matic. In any current incarnation, a caseless weapon is a non-contender.

I once challenged a bunch of gun forumites to come up with the gun of the 22nd century. Here's what we came up with:
A railgun. Retains all the significant advantages of a projectile weapon with none of it's disadvantages: in pure form you won't need much in the way of grease or lubricant because there are so few moving parts. My own personal design took a small cue from the MetalStorm design - the magazine holds three columns of 6x20mm long bullets (no casing) and it can fire either single rounds or triple burst. The small bullet size would allow roughly 90 rounds in the same space as a 30-round M16 magazine. It would be virtually silent (no explosions in the chamber to hear). You could also tweak the gun to give different muzzle velocities, anywhere from nonlethal 200fps to armor piercing 5,000 fps (which is close to the practical top speed of a round anyways). I'd mesh the optics system with a retinal display to provide "floating crosshairs" similar to current video games. The only bad part about a railgun is that you have a small problem with carrying both ammo and backup batteries, and the gun gives off a marginal EMP signature that techy enemies can use to pinpoint the shooters location. Not a sniper rifle, in other words. But if you clear the technical hurdles, you'd have a weapon superior to pretty much anything practical today.

As always, the above are my personal opinions taken from several years of pondering "the best weapon ever".

[Doink]

Okay, I know it's been a while, but I've done a lot of thinking on about this.

Firstly, I finally picked up 'Unintended Consequences,' and it's awesome. I am a bit put off by the excessive foreshadowing, not to mention the pace of the book (kind of slow, the main conflict of the book is barely even mentioned yet), but otherwise I can't complain. My favorite scene so far (I'm currently in 1969) is where Henry rescues a girl from a group of rapists. I believe that rape is worse than murder and that all rapists should be executed, so it did me a lot of good to see their heads explode.

My junior year is almost over, and I have about a month left of summer before I head to Florida for an art camp. I figure I'll persuade my dad to take me to the shooting range at least once before then. He's reading the book too, and I doubt he'll object to the concept once he's done.