Why Don’t We Know The World Is Getting Better?
It’s ironic that in a world where knowledge and education are improving dramatically, there is widespread abysmal ignorance about the improving state of the world. “More than 9 out of 10 people do not think that the world is getting better.”
Our World In Data suggests that the media are partly to blame. The media does not tell us how the world is changing, it tells us where the world is going wrong. It tends to focus on single events particularly single events that have gone bad. By contrast, positive developments happen slowly with no particular event to promote in a headline. “More people are healthy today than yesterday,” just doesn’t cut it.
The result is that most people are ignorant about how the state of the world has changed. In both the U.K. and the U.S. most people think that “the share of people living in extreme poverty has increased! Two thirds in the US even think the share in extreme poverty has ‘almost doubled’.”
Steve Denning
Why The World Is Getting Better And Why Hardly Anyone Knows It
August 3, 2020
Gamechanger for Shooting
July 20, 2020
Gamechanger: Shooting’s star on the rise but it needs fanbase to survive
With competitive sport in limbo, it’s an opportunity for those in charge to re-think how their sports could change…
You have to take your sport to the people rather than expecting people to come to your sport. The way to do that is through newer ideas. Evolve formats, evolve the way shooting is showcased.You have to look at sport keeping one principle in mind – to increase the fan base with an eye on non-fans. The current shooting fan base is made up of purists and they prefer the traditionalist form of the sport. But you have to ask yourself the hard question of whether the current fan base is going to be big enough to lead the sport into the next 10 to 20 years, into the next couple of decades. It has to be relevant to today’s youth.
I think there has to be a lot of involvement of people from outside the shooting community because you have to find a way to cater to the non-shooting fan and that can only happen when you take their point of view into consideration. Broadcasters also should be involved in discussions very early on because broadcasting in sport has certain principles and it’s the reason why certain sports are more successful than others.
https://www.espn.in/shooting/story/_/id/29460191/gamechanger-shooting-star-rise-needs-fanbase-survive
https://www.espn.in/shooting/story/_/id/29015791/three-refugees-one-olympic-shooting-champion-story-undying-hope
Equal Rights History
June 30, 2020
To CBS Sunday Morning and Ken Burns,
I am a long-time fan of CBS Sunday Morning and Ken Burns. Given his typical thoroughness with history, I was surprised at an oversight in his “Baseball is a Mirror of our Country” piece that aired on your show.
“The first real progress in civil rights since the Civil War took place… on a baseball diamond…” The oversight here is that marksmanship programs started just after the Civil War to better train up to the capabilities rifled small arms offered provided equal opportunities for competitors decades before this.
The U.S. Army began the Excellence-in-Competition (EIC) program in 1884, first creating Distinguished Rifleman and then Distinguished Pistol Shot gold badges to award competitors finishing in the top ten percent at EIC events. Buffalo Soldiers were equal participants and noteworthy competitors.
The first shooter to become Double Distinguished, earning both badges, was Cpt. Horace Wayman Bivins, earning the distinction in 1903. A member of the 10th Cavalry Regiment and decorated for valor for his actions at the Battle of Santiago de Cuba, accounts of his history “reads like fiction from the imagination of a pulp magazine writer” as one newspaper described him. The Army Reserve Postal Match has an event named in his honor.
The EIC program was managed by the U.S. Army Department of Civilian Marksmanship and then the Civilian Marksmanship Program and has been an open competition for military and civilian shooters. It is the only sport mandated by federal law, per Public Law Title 36, U.S. Code § 40727.
This is history worthy of your attention. I’ve sent articles on the history of Captain Horace Wayman Bivins and the Army’s marksmanship Equal Opportunities.
https://armyreservemarksman.info/equal-opportunities/
https://armyreservemarksman.info/cpt-bivins/
https://www.archives.gov/publications/record/1998/03/buffalo-soldiers.html
https://www.dyingtotelltheirstories.com/home/2020/3/5/qtznpg8giquyff1bwnaldudl2lgl95
John M. Buol Jr.
SFC, USAR
USARCMP Public Affairs/Postal Match Program
https://www.usar.army.mil/ARM/
Why Dry Prevention is Essential for Gun Safes
June 23, 2020
Shooting Jay Chambers, Minuteman Review Leave a comment
by Jay Chambers
As a gun owner, you already know that proper storage is key for both safety and longevity. Owning a gun safe not only prevents unwanted access to deadly firearms, but it can also keep your guns in tip top shape so that they last a very long time.
However, one of the most common questions about gun safes is regarding a dehumidifier, and whether you need one to keep moisture away from your most prized possessions.
Along with other proper cleaning and storage, in some cases, it may be necessary to use a dehumidifier in the room with your gun safe to keep moisture from cracking or rusting your guns.
Getting a Dehumidifier
If you live in a particularly moist region of the United States, it’s going to be highly critical that you place a dehumidifier in the same room as your gun safe. However, it’s important for most gun owners to do the same, no matter where you live.
The exposure to moisture may seem miniscule, but over time, water will slowly ruin your gun safe and everything in it, even if it doesn’t seem possible. Especially if your gun safe is in a dark, damp space, you’ll be giving mold and mildew a breeding ground for growth, which is a recipe for disaster when it comes to guns.
As your gun safe slowly gathers moisture, you may not notice it’s happening at all until it’s too late. It doesn’t matter how careful you are about tending to it or whether your gun safe is small, large, or moderately sized. And certainly, if you’re going to spend hundreds of dollars on the perfect safe for your firearms, you want to prevent that eventual aging as much as you can.
Throwing on the extra cost of dry prevention is well worth the price, and there are a couple of options from which you can choose. There are desiccant dehumidifiers and electric dehumidifiers.
Understanding your options will help you get a better idea of which to choose.
Desiccant Dehumidifiers
These humidifiers don’t have any electrical components. They come in many different sizes and shapes, but they all have one thing in common. They have special packets or containers full of absorbent materials.
This absorbent material is designed to attract moisture, much like a sponge, and hold it, so it stays away from everything else in close proximity. The type of absorbent material used is typically silica gel.
If you don’t want to have to use electricity or drill a hole in your safe, this is a great option. They also don’t require any replacement parts and you can find the perfect size for your safe.
This type of humidifier is more affordable than an electric dehumidifier, so it works well for those who don’t want to spend a ton of money, but as the absorbent material fills up, you’ll need to replace them completely.
Electric Dehumidifiers
Electric dehumidifiers are popular options. They are effective and long lasting, but they’re also more expensive. They work harder for longer, and are a better choice for people who live in humid climates and need more dry prevention measures.
These types of humidifiers use heat to remove moisture from the air. They have exposed heating elements that work to evaporate moisture, and can work in a larger area than a desiccant dehumidifier.
They can also prevent condensation because they create high temperatures and can attack excess moisture than smaller dehumidifiers might miss.
The one drawback to this type of dehumidifier is that if you want it to work from inside the safe itself, you’ll need to run the wire through a hole in the safe to a power source. That means drilling a hole in your safe.
If you can’t drill a hole or you don’t want to, you can get rechargeable battery operated varieties, or you can simply place the dehumidifier outside the safe, but in close proximity, so it will continue to work.
The Right Choice
Either option will work, but you have to decide which will work best for you. While they have the same end goal, they achieve it in different ways. However, the durability of your gun safe is of the utmost importance, so no matter which you choose, you need to choose one sooner rather than later.
If you can afford it and have a way to connect it, an electric dehumidifier will be much more effective. If you can’t spring for one right now, choose a desiccant dehumidifier for now and save up for something better.
There’s no reason to spend thousands of dollars on firearms and a gun safe to keep them, while continuing to neglect the problem that moisture causes over time.
Other Tips
Humidity is a problem for all gun owners, not just those who live in humid climates. However, there are a lot of factors to consider, like where the gun safe is stored, how humid it is, and how often you access it.
Fresh air can help prevent moisture, so if you open your gun safe more often, you may not need a large, expensive dehumidifier. You may be fine with something simple and inexpensive.
The same goes for people who live in particularly dry climates. While there are very few places that have 0% humidity, if you live in an area that doesn’t have much, you will also not have to purchase something big or expensive.
The Verdict
No matter where you live, moisture prevention is critical for keeping your guns safe and in good condition. Along with appropriate use and cleaning, storing them the right way will ensure that moisture doesn’t age them faster than it should.
I qualified EXPERT…. what does that mean?
June 20, 2020
Learn what a military expert qualification does (and does not…) mean.
Other points:
Those “small” green “Ivan” E-type targets used by the Army are a meter tall and over 1.5 feet (19 inches) wide. A hit anywhere is full value. And the Army qualification course can be passed with a 43% miss rate. 23/40 (57% hits) is a passing score
Like the APFT, Alt C is no good at telling you how good you are but is remarkable in telling how bad you are.
USAR Marksmanship program did a breakdown showing these qualification targets next to competition targets:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lwD7-Dzz3RQ
Squad Designated Marksman
June 17, 2020
MilitaryMarksman, Shooting Army FM, Beyond Expert: Tripling Military Shooting Skills, training Leave a comment
From Ash Hess:
The U.S. Army Squad Designated Marksman program is a source of much debate. Many are angry that this rifle fielded with a 1-6 optic. What those people fail to acknowledge is where the SDM really is in both doctrine and real world application.
The SDM is a Rifleman with an additional tasking of being the DM. He is employed by the Fire Team leader or Squad leader(ATP-3.21.8) This means he/she remains part of that fire team and must be capable of doing anything the Squad is tasked with doing, from trenches, enter and clear, to assault.
Thus, at the beginning of the SDMR, the optic choice was heavily debated. The result is an optic that allows the DM to engage targets from 0-600 meters with relative ease.
That’s part of the debate. Sniper trained SDMs are different from normal trained SDMs, and neither one want to meet the doctrinal concept.
The “program” should be a real course 2-3 weeks, immediately following OUSIT required for privates who are assigned to Light, Airborne or Stryker units.
Training the trainer does not work with SDM. You trained NCO’s, I trained NCO’s, MMTC is training NCOs and nothing has improved. By training the private, and all the privates that follow him, by the time that first private is a Squad leader, the entire squad would by SDM trained, improving the entire unit. As it is now, those NCO’s retain 60% of what they are taught, pass on 30% of that, and the private gets none of it. Then they task someone else with the role and handicap what they should be doing.
From Dan Shea:
The Dragunov. It was the doctrinal difference from US to Soviet thinking. The US, well, we want to hit a fly’s eye at 1000 meters with highly trained snipers we’ve invested heavily in. The Soviet theory was to take marginally trained people with reasonable skills and have them hit chest size at 600 meters. And as a bonus, a Dragunov in the hands of someone with natural skill honed in a better training environment, can shoot really, really well. Nothing like one of the Knight rifles of course…. but a Dragunov has a place well above an AK on a battlefield.
That bit, “…. theory was to take marginally trained people with reasonable skills and have them hit chest size at 600 meters” is telling.
This was the intent of U.S. Army doctrine. The old (around 2003) SDM qual as originally directed by the now-redacted FM 3-22.9 was supposed to be shot with a rack-grade M16A2 and M855 by personnel given a bit of additional training (which a fully-trained Rifleman arguably should already know…)
Table 2 of that SDM course allowed optics only if the Soldier’s unit had them available. If not, Table 2 was supposed to be shot with a base BZO (no wind 300 meter zero) and use hold overs and hold offs as needed.
Then everyone wanted to church it up and re-envision SDM into “sniper lite”… The quality of training behind it is has been all over the map. As Ash Hess wisely points out, to be fully useful this needs a formal course (possibly an Additional Skill Identifier) taught by vetted instructors rather than the Army norm of “telephone game“*** training, euphemistically known as “train the trainer”, which is too common with all small arms skill. The myth that “any NCO with the FM” (TC now, but most NCOs are still unaware of this, hence the problem) can teach small arms skill is one of the most detrimental training lies infesting the U.S. Army.
*** “The game has no winner: the entertainment comes from comparing the original and final messages. Intermediate messages may also be compared; some messages will become unrecognizable after only a few steps.” It would be funny if it weren’t such a tragic waste of taxpayer money and Soldier ability.
More:
https://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2020/06/12/raiders-field-new-squad-designated-marksman-rifle/
Full-automatic: Why does it render gun owners stupid?
June 5, 2020
MilitaryMarksman, Shooting Army Reserve Marksmanship Program, gunnery, machine gun, Marksmanship Qualification, suppressive fire 1 Comment
“Let’s waste thousands of dollars on BATFE-restricted gear and ammo, and then destroy it for no reason. Everyone will love it!”
What I don’t understand is why someone would go through the hassle and expense to obtain Class 3 equipment while having no interest in learning gunnery or anything related to effective full auto use. It usually ends up being a big jerk-off giggle fest. Knob Creek is a stunning and sad example. Military training on this is rarely better, even though the principles are there to be learned by anyone literate enough to read them.
Myths about what is and isn’t suppressive fire are common.
https://firearmusernetwork.com/suppressive-fire-myth-fact/
Handheld full auto always sucks. I should put “almost” in there as absolute statements are always wrong (as the self-conflicting adage goes) because outliers and exceptions do exist. However, these are unicorns in this case. With the very rare exception of a very few highly-trained full-auto shooters, semi-auto fire is much more effective with handheld firearms. Basically, only people that compete in and win NFA submachine gun matches. Nobody in the military or police is this good and those that claim otherwise are breathing Dunning-Kruger graphs.
Side note: The first NFA match I attended was with a friend from my local USPSA club using his M1A1 Thompson. After looking at the courses, I asked if I could just shoot everything with the “Tommy gun” on the single (semi-auto) setting. “No,” I was told, “That would be cheating.”
Every class, match, or range event that tested this proved this true.
Acutal machine guns are a different matter but they are only effective when employed using gunnery concepts, tripods and T&Es, and a knowledgable crew. For all the bluster of full-auto fire, I still know of only one free, public video discussing this. Let me know if you can find another.
What do you think? Why does full-auto fire render so many gun owners into idiots? Why aren’t people interested in fully-automatic firearms interested in learning how to employ them effectively?
Graubünden Jäger: Swiss Hunter-Shooters
May 28, 2020
HunterShooter, Shooting electronic targets, European hunting, hunter education 1 Comment
This video is a fine example of how much more serious and skilled hunters in Europe are compared to Americans.
Let’s just pause to consider this: In Switzerland, animal rights activists are mad at hunters because their marksmanship tests aren’t rigorous enough and they want them to do more practice on the range! Marion Theus, president of the Swiss Wildlife Conservation Association, says the already-mandatory hunter marksmanship tests are too easy to pass, should be more frequent, and should use ammunition reminiscent of the recoil/muzzle energy actually used in hunting. Georg Brosi, Hunt Inspector for the canton of Graubünden, agrees. Let’s also consider that Swiss hunter-shooters consider it common to practice on electronic targets. How many hunter sight-ins in the States have you seen using something similar?
I’d like to share their opinion about current U.S. military range qualifications with current leadership!
How to move the Overton Window
May 18, 2020
“I would have gotten the results I wanted if ‘those people’ had just done what I wanted” doesn’t mean that those people messed up — it means that you messed up.
The only way to achieve excellence is to hold yourself to uncompromising standards, with no excuses.
Figure out what you need to do to actually deliver results. Then do it.
https://opensourcedefense.substack.com/p/osd-65-diving-headfirst-through-the
Instruction is not Training
May 12, 2020
“Education is not the piling on of learning, information, data, facts, skills, or abilities – that’s training or instruction – but is rather making visible what is hidden as a seed.”
~ Thomas More
Too many in the firearms community define “training” as attending a class to receive instruction. While taking a class is a good idea, this tends to be self serving for people selling instruction classes (“you need training and that’s what I sell!”). Worse, receiving more instruction, even if you call it training, does not help.
If you’ve taken a good class, you already know about 70-80% of what every other good class offers. Once they’ve received good instruction (although, many gun owners, military, and law enforcement personnel have not…) shooters are better served working on skill on their own. If they can’t/won’t do that, taking another class or watching/reading another bit of instruction provides no help.
I have friends and family asking me to put together workout routines for them. It usually goes something like this:
“Hey Chris, I’d like to have a good workout routine and was hoping you could design a two-a-day, six-day-a-week hardcore program.”
Are you working out at all now?
“No, I’ve been pretty busy.”
OK, I’ll make you a deal. If you can workout 30-minutes a day, 3-days a week for one month, I’ll design you a custom program. To this day I have not designed a single workout program for any of those people.
Gun Fighting is a Skill That Requires More Training, Not More Information
https://www.itstactical.com/intellicom/mindset/gun-fighting-is-a-skill-that-requires-more-training-not-more-information/
