Did You Know?
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Load more
Recommended publications
-
California Firearms Legislation – 9/13/2013
THE AR-15: ORIGINS • Background • In the late 19th century, small-arms cartridges had become able to fire accurately at long distances. Smokeless powder propelling small jacketed bullets were lethal out to 2,000 yards. • Units of riflemen firing in salvos (volley fire) could hit grouped soft targets at those ranges. • This fighting style was taken over by the widespread introduction of machine guns to make use of the powerful cartridges to suppress the enemy at long range. • Weapons for short range were semi-automatic pistols, and later automatic submachine guns, firing small pistol rounds. • The gap in cartridge ranges caused research into creating an intermediate round. This type of ammunition was being considered as early as 1892, but militaries at the time were still fixated on increasing the maximum range and velocity of bullets from their rifles. 2 THE AR-15: ORIGINS • World War I • The rifles with which the European powers went to the First World War in 1914 were impressive pieces of machinery. Their mechanisms and barrels were expertly machined from the finest steels, and their stocks were carved from high grade wood. • These battle rifles used powerful cartridges that were capable of launching heavy bullets (150 – 200 grain) of about .30 caliber at velocities between 2,400 and 2,900 feet per second. Their sights were finely calibrated and precision machined as well – still graduated to hit a man- sized target at distances up to 2,000 yards. • The tactical assumptions leading to these technical specifications had changed little since the Napoleonic Wars had been fought a century earlier. -
Case 1:14-Cv-01211-JAM-SAB Document 24 Filed 01/09/15 Page
Case 1:14-cv-01211-JAM-SAB Document 24 Filed 01/09/15 Page 1 of 6 Case 1:14-cv-01211-JAM-SAB Document 24 Filed 01/09/15 Page 2 of 6 Case 1:14-cv-01211-JAM-SAB Document 24 Filed 01/09/15 Page 3 of 6 ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD Page Date Description Correspondence and Litigation 1-6 July 2013 Legal Memo submitted with EP Arms submission (Davis & Associates) 7-9 February 2014 Classification Letter (Davis & Associates) 10-19 March 2014 Legal Memo submitted with EP Arms Request for Reconsideration (Davis & Associates) 20-25 Reconsideration Classification Letter (Davis & Associates) 26-33 March 2010 Classification Letter (Quentin Laser) 34-36 November 2013 Classification Letter (Bradley Reece) 37-42 May 2013 Classification Letter (Kenney Enterprises) 43-50 Portion of chapter in The AR-15/M-16 Practical Guide dealing with making an AR- type firearm 51-56 Graphic representation of the firing cycle of an AR-type firearm Semi Auto Functioning of an AR-15) AR-15 (Folder) 57-59 May 2014 Classification Letter (ERTW Consulting) 60-61 May 1983 Classification Letter (SGW) 62 May 1992 Classification Letter (Philadelphia Ordnance) 63-64 July 1994 Classification Letter (Thomas Miller) 65-66 December 2002 Classification Letter (Mega Machine Shop) 67 July 2003 Classification Letter (Justin Halford) 68-69 January 2004 Classification Letter (Continental Machine Tool) 70-71 March 2004 Classification Letter (Randy Paschal) 72-73 January 2004 Classification Letter (Continental Machine Tool) 74-77 July 2006 Classification Letter (Kevin Audibert) 78-79 April 2006 Classification -
2012 Blue Press 2012 Blue Press 2/14/12 9:48 AM Page 40
April 2012 Blue Press_2012 Blue Press 2/14/12 9:48 AM Page 40 40 LASSIC ILITARY IFLES By John Marshall C M volved were the newR chief designer Arthur: Miller, Thew ArmaLite AR-18 & AR-180 This out of the ordinary assault rifle was de- George Sullivan, and Chuck Dorchester. The new jo signed to be everything the AR-15/M16 series was rifle was called the AR-18. in not. Its structure was basically stamped steel. It had The AR-18 mimicked the AR-16 in almost all re- li a gas system that did not vent gas into the bolt area. spects. There was a short-stroke, three-piece gas th It had a folding stock for compactness, and it could piston above the barrel. It moved back to contact fe be manufactured cheaply and easily in just about the front face of the bolt carrier, pushing it rear- m any backwater area in the world with relatively ward. A rotating seven-lug bolt similar to that on s primitive equipment. In spite of many virtues, the the M16 rifle was rotationally cammed by the bolt w selective fire AR-18 and semiauto AR-180 have carrier to lock and unlock the bolt to and from the li now become relegated to collector status. barrel collar at the rear of the barrel. w After adoption of the 7.62x51mm M14 rifle by The bolt carrier did not contact the receiver m the U.S. in 1957, the U.S. Continental Army walls, but rode instead on two rods, each with its p Command looked into small-caliber, high-veloc- own return spring. -
GUNS Magazine March 1957
MARCH 1967 60o G l RIFLE? ' f- CHOOSE SIERRA'S FIELD & RANGE-TESTED sights on PRECISION BULLETS the Made in a wide selection of Lm- A -- sizes, weights & shapes- Â Ã w 22 caliber through 8 MM ; in weights from 40 grains to superb accuracy, year-'round use 180 grains; flat base or Sierra's exclusive boat tail. It's always "open season" with the Savage 340 .. round nose chambered for 2 great varmint cartridges and America's most popular deer caliber. Stock has medium-high comb and trim lines for steady handling, spitzer fine balance and streamlined appearance. This rugged bolt action repeating rifle has a ramp front sight and rear sight with elevation adjustment hollow point . drilled and tapped for popular receiver sights and 'scope mounts. Available in 3 great calibers: 333. Remington 50 grain bullet-A flat-shooting extremely accurate cartridge. The advanced design of boat tail the 340 brings out the ballistic potential of this high velocity cartridge. .22 Hornet 45 grain bullet-High velocity and fine accuracy make the .22 Hornet a favorite varmint match king fully jacketed cartridge. An economical cartridge that delivers peak accuracy in the Savage 340. If you have not tried SIERRA Bullets you 150 and 170 grain bullets-The most widely are missing the great thrill of firing the known and used high power cartridge in America. most dependable bullets made. Next time For more than 50 years it has proved its effectiveness ask your dealer for on deer and medium-sized game. The 340's exclusive head space control and FREE BROCHURE , specialized Savage manufacturing methods give ft.u you extreme accuracy at a price so low Find out why you should be you can buy the 340 complete with handloading your own am- c-*- munition. -
Appellants' Excerpts of Record Volume IX of XXII
Case: 19-56004, 01/27/2020, ID: 11575862, DktEntry: 24-9, Page 1 of 257 Case No. 19-56004 In the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ────────────────────────── STEVEN RUPP, et al., Plaintiffs-Appellants, V. XAVIER BECERRA, in his official capacity as Attorney General of the State of California, Defendant-Appellee. ────────────────────────── On Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California Case No. 8:17-cv-00746-JLS-JDE ────────────────────────── APPELLANTS’ EXCERPTS OF RECORD VOLUME IX OF XXII ────────────────────────── C.D. Michel Sean A. Brady Anna M. Barvir MICHEL & ASSOCIATES, P.C. 180 East Ocean Boulevard, Suite 200 Long Beach, CA 90802 (562) 216-4444 [email protected] Attorneys for Plaintiffs-Appellants January 27, 2020 Case: 19-56004, 01/27/2020, ID: 11575862, DktEntry: 24-9, Page 2 of 257 Under Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure for the Ninth Circuit, rule 30-1, Plaintiffs-Appellants Steven Rupp, Steven Dember, Cheryl Johnson, Michael Jones, Christopher Seifert, Alfonso Valencia, Troy Willis, Dennis Martin, and California Rifle & Pistol Association, Incorporated, by and through their attorney of record, confirm to the contents and form of Appellants’ Excerpts of Record. Date: January 27, 2020 MICHEL & ASSOCIATES, P.C. s/ Sean A. Brady Sean A. Brady Attorneys for Plaintiffs/Appellants Steven Rupp, et al. i Case: 19-56004, 01/27/2020, ID: 11575862, DktEntry: 24-9, Page 3 of 257 INDEX TO APPELLANTS’ EXCERPTS OF RECORD VOLUME I Dkt Date Document Description Page 111 -
Small Arms… As a Last Resort
1 Small Arms… As a Last Resort By Phil D. Harrison One can only contemplate the fearful moment of realisation that a situation has become dire, there are few options available, and in reality there will be ‘no quarter’ from your adversaries. At such a critical moment there is a desperate need for all systems, including small arms, to work flawlessly. The following Article discusses three historic battles, where such a situation arose. This Article aims to focus on dismounted infantry small arms and should not be considered as an exhaustive account of the battles or the circumstances surrounding those battles. I have also tried to address the small arms ‘bigger picture.’ This Article is my endeavour to better appreciate the role of small arms at three influential moments in history. The following is a ‘distillation’ of the information available in the public domain and consequently, there may be disappointment for those seeking new research findings. I hope that this ‘distillation’ may be helpful to those looking for insights into these events. The topic deserves a more lengthy discourse than can be afforded here and therefore, much has been omitted. The three battles discussed are as follows: th th (1) Ia Drang; November 14 -15 1965 (with reference to Hill 881; April-May 1967) (2) Mirbat: July 19th, 1972 (3) Wanat: July 13th, 2008 2 th th (1) Ia Drang; November 14 -15 1965 (with reference to Hill 881; April-May 1967) Above photo by Mike Alford LZ-Albany LZ-X Ray http://www.generalhieu.com/iadrang_arvn-2.htm 3 As an introduction I would like to mention a brief Article from: The Milwaukee Sentinel, of Tuesday 23rd may, 1967 entitled: Men Killed Trying to Unjam Rifles, Marine Writes Home. -
Small Arms by Jim Schatz
TimeTime forfor aa ChangeChange USUS ““IncrementalIncremental”” SmallSmall ArmsArms FieldingFielding –– FailuresFailures andand SolutionsSolutions PartPart II -- SmallSmall ArmsArms byby JimJim SchatzSchatz 052108 1 Introduction • 2-part Presentation – Q&A’s after Part II - Part I – Small Arms – Jim Schatz - Part II – Ammunition – Dr. Gary Roberts • All parts “stand-alone” – author prepared • Historic “Snap Shot” look at complex issues. Insufficient time available for a detailed look. Full briefing available on request. • Part I – Excess Data for future reference 2 Purpose • To create a national awareness and dialogue on serious small arms issues for US war fighters • Not to cast blame • To breach the deeply ingrained “institutional resistance” to “incremental” change • To affect positive, permanent change now - Current small arms and ammunition - In P&P to prevent repeated failures • To persuade “the system” to test incrementally superior COTS small arms systems today! Pertains to more than just the one weapon type! 3 Goal ToTo find,find, testtest andand fieldfield thethe bestbest smallsmall armsarms andand ammunitionammunition availableavailable toto thethe AmericanAmerican warwar fighterfighter todaytoday andand always!always! 4 Qualifications – Jim Schatz • User: 11B – 82nd Airborne Division • Trainer: US Army Marksmanship Unit • Provider: 22+ years to the US Government, war fighter - Logistical Support - Contracts - Fielding • Developer: HK416, M1014, USP, MP5/10, others • Student: Of small arms since age ten • Supporter: Of the end -
Rifle Development, Standardization, and Procurement in the United States Military 1950-1967 Robert Dale Hinrichs Iowa State University
Iowa State University Capstones, Theses and Graduate Theses and Dissertations Dissertations 2009 Rifle development, standardization, and procurement in the United States military 1950-1967 Robert Dale Hinrichs Iowa State University Follow this and additional works at: https://lib.dr.iastate.edu/etd Part of the History Commons Recommended Citation Hinrichs, Robert Dale, "Rifle development, standardization, and procurement in the United States military 1950-1967" (2009). Graduate Theses and Dissertations. 10552. https://lib.dr.iastate.edu/etd/10552 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Iowa State University Capstones, Theses and Dissertations at Iowa State University Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Graduate Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Iowa State University Digital Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Rifle development, standardization, and procurement in the United States military 1950-1967 By Robert Dale Hinrichs A thesis submitted to the graduate faculty in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF ARTS Major: History (History of Technology and Science) Program of Study Committee: Amy Sue Bix, Major Professor James T. Andrews Charles M. Dobbs Iowa State University Ames, Iowa 2009 Copyright © Robert Dale Hinrichs, 2009. All rights reserved ii Table of Contents Introduction 1 Chapter 1. The Light Rifle Project and NATO Standardization 7 Chapter 2. Domestic Challenges to the Light Rifle Project 29 Chapter 3. Opposition to the Light Rifle Project in the Ordnance Corps 38 Chapter 4. Small Caliber High Velocity Rifles 52 Chapter 5. Mismanagement of M-14 Rifle Procurement 67 Chapter 6. -
Twentieth Century Small Arms Development Videohistory Collection, 1988-1990
Twentieth Century Small Arms Development Videohistory Collection, 1988-1990 Finding aid prepared by Smithsonian Institution Archives Smithsonian Institution Archives Washington, D.C. Contact us at [email protected] Table of Contents Collection Overview ........................................................................................................ 1 Administrative Information .............................................................................................. 1 Historical Note.................................................................................................................. 1 Introduction....................................................................................................................... 1 Descriptive Entry.............................................................................................................. 2 Names and Subjects ...................................................................................................... 2 Container Listing ............................................................................................................. 3 Series 1: Stoner....................................................................................................... 3 Series 2: Kalashnikov............................................................................................... 6 Series 3: Star Tannery............................................................................................. 9 Twentieth Century Small Arms Development Videohistory Collection https://siarchives.si.edu/collections/siris_arc_217700 -
REDEFINING the “ASSAULT WEAPON” Meagan Kelly* the Term
KELLY FINAL (DO NOT DELETE) 2/19/2020 10:23 AM HOW CAN YOU BAN WHAT DOESN’T EXIST? REDEFINING THE “ASSAULT WEAPON” Meagan Kelly* ABSTRACT The term “assault weapon” has become synonymous with one of the most contentious political debates of our time. As gun politics stands today, there remains little room for compromise and a narrative mired in heavy emotion and staunch traditional principles. But as the debate swirls and deadlocks, the United States continues to experience a trend of violence unique amongst all other developed democratic soci- eties. Yet neither this characteristically American mass violence, nor the continuous political efforts to restrict or expand Second Amend- ment rights are recent phenomena. Our country has been deeply en- trenched in the “assault weapon” debate for more than half of the twenty-first century, and as the natures of societal violence, warfare, and the firearms market at large change, the understanding of the term “assault weapon” does so as well. This Note examines those different understandings of an “assault weapon” and how those conflicting un- derstandings have shaped legislation and, consequently, the resistance to legislation attempting to restrict the controversial weapon. Com- peting understandings of an “assault weapon” have led to a patchwork system of state-to-state assault weapon bans and a federal ban which not only lacked the political support to avoid expiration in 2004, but also had little overall effect during the decade it was in force. Mass shootings are a pervasive and continuous threat to the fabric of Amer- ican society and the problem must be addressed explicitly.