However, they seem to make it rather difficult to access: one needs to login with one’s member information, then view the magazine via some silly browser plugin. A PDF version is available, but accessing it requires a few more clicks to download, and a few more to unzip.

Why not just provide a direct link to the PDF version? That’d seem to be considerably easier. Rather than require logins, why not just send a unique URL to each subscriber so they can ensure that only subscribers can access it? Making it a multi-step process ensures that most people will simply continue to receive paper magazines, costing more money. I’m a professional geek, and even I am a bit frustrated with them.

C’mon NRA, get with the times…

While their article is long and makes a weak attempt at appearing balanced, it has some absurdities that I really must point out. I’ve made a few statements in my response that are likely to be common knowledge to gunny folks, though I’d appreciate it if readers could point out where I might find good sources for such statements so I can cite them properly.

Also, I wrote this post rather late at night, so I’m likely to have a few spelling or grammar mistakes. Mea cupla.

Behind the rows of gun-filled tables at the back of the exhibition hall, a large red banner shines like a beacon:

AK-47.

Beneath the sign, Joeken Firearms owner Joe Cox does a brisk business selling the popular semiautomatic rifle at gun shows such as this one and at his store in Winslow. The rifle is fun to shoot and easier to clean than other rifles, and, perhaps more importantly, it carries a powerful allure, he says.

“It looks cool,” Cox says. “Why do people buy flashy cars? Because they look cool.”

Ok, we’re off to a decent start. The AK is indeed fun to shoot, tends to be easier to clean, and does have a certain look to it.

Semiautomatic rifles such as the AK-47 and AR-15 — commonly called assault rifles — are favorites of the warring drug cartels in Mexico, which get most of their weapons in the U.S. and smuggle them south, says the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, commonly known as ATF.

What? Since when are the semi-auto AK and AR referred to as “assault rifles”? The term “assault rifle” has a very specific definition, and includes (in part) a requirement that the rifle be “select-fire” — that is, the gun must be able to be switched from semi-auto mode to full-auto or burst-fire mode. Semi-auto AKs and ARs, by definition, cannot be switched in this manner.

If the ATF (since their website is http://www.atf.gov/ and has the letters “ATF” in huge letters at the top of the main page, I think mentioning that the agency is “commonly known” as “ATF” is a bit unnecessary) thinks that semi-auto rifles are known as “assault rifles,” then someone at the ATF is grossly misinformed. More likely, however, is that the reporter is totally unfamiliar with firearms and simply added the words for dramatic effect.

I also doubt the veracity of the ATFs claim that semi-auto AKs and ARs are “favorites” of Mexican drug cartels. It seems unlikely at best that the Mexican cartels, which huge budgets, would bother buying semi-auto rifles, at considerable legal risk, in the US when they can simply get full-auto variants from their insiders in the Mexican army or simply order such guns on the international arms market. Anyway, moving along…

Firearms traffickers find it relatively easy to come to the U.S. and buy the high-powered weapons that fuel the billion-dollar drug-smuggling trade.

AKs and ARs are actually fairly intermediate in power. The .223 Remington cartridge, fired from the AR, is prohibited from use in deer and other forms of hunting in several states because it lacks the required energy to humanely kill such animals. The 7.62x39mm cartridge, fired from the AK, is similar in power to the .30-30 Winchester, which is on the low end of the power spectrum for hunting cartridges.

Rather, these rounds take a position in the power spectrum midway between pistol cartridges and full-power rifle loads.

Also note that it’s illegal for anyone, including “smugglers”, to purchase arms for export without government approval.

The article then proceeds to list the two reasons why “smugglers” like to buy guns in the US:

First, U.S. gun laws are rooted in the Constitution’s Second Amendment, which protects the rights of U.S. citizens to keep and bear arms. That make it easier to buy guns here than in Mexico.

Damn straight. The fact that Mexico has comparatively strict gun control and lots of violent crime might indicate that public safety is not directly proportional to gun control. Indeed, I’d say it’s a stretch to say they’re correlated at all.

Second, the principal agency assigned to stop criminal purchases, ATF, is grossly understaffed.

Perhaps. Why, then, is the ATF going after dealers for minor paperwork violations (like writing “N” instead of “No” on the required forms) rather than pursue actual criminals? Might it have something to do with the fact that hassling dealers over innocent mistakes is safe and easy, and confronting actual arms smugglers is likely to be a bit more difficult?

“If you wanted to design a system to supply gun traffickers, you would be hard-pressed to design one that would be easier than the U.S.,” said Kristen Rand, legislative director for the Violence Policy Center, a Washington, D.C.-based nonprofit group that works to reduce firearms violence in the U.S.

The Violence Policy Center and other gun-control advocates say tougher gun laws are the solution.

Ah, right…the VPC, an organization that accepted over $4 million from the Joyce Foundation between 1996-2006¹. You may recall that the Joyce Foundation sponsors a wide range of anti-gun groups that have routinely called for the banning of many common types of firearms.

As far as I’m aware, the VPC (and other Joyce-sponsored anti-gun groups) are full of bunk, and their “studies” have been thoroughly debunked and discredited.

The Star then interviews a rep from the NRA:

“We don’t need new gun laws in America to fix a problem in Mexico,” said Alexa Fritts, spokeswoman for the National Rifle Association. “Any laws that we impose, such as trying to outlaw certain types of firearms in the U.S., would only affect law-abiding Americans.”

Bingo. That sums it up pretty nicely.

The NRA rep continues with,

The NRA disputes the common claim that 90 percent of guns used in crimes in Mexico come from the U.S. It points out that fully automatic rifles, grenades and rocket launchers used by the Mexican cartels are illegal to sell in the United States.

“Those are not things they are walking out of U.S. gun shops with,” Fritts said.

While automatic guns, grenades, and rocket launchers are not illegal in the US, they are subject to a much stricter standard than common guns like AKs or ARs. I can’t fault the NRA for describing them as “illegal” when discussing the matter with a reporter who likely doesn’t know the first thing about firearms. It’s a lot less confusing than explaining the National Firearms Act and all the details that go along with it.

That said, the NRA rep is again right on the money: smugglers are not buying machine guns, grenades, and rocket launchers in the US and smuggling them to Mexico. Why would they spend $12,000 on one of the few legal M16s in the US when they can acquire them from the Mexican military for free, or from the international arms market for nominal cost?

The ATF contends that cartels get two-thirds of their weapons through either “straw purchases” — they pay somebody with no criminal record to buy a gun from a licensed dealer — or by buying from unlicensed dealers who are not required to perform background checks or record sales.

That seems to be dubious at best. It’s one thing for gangs in the US to buy from straw purchasers, as most gangs don’t need that many guns. Indeed, most of the guns US gangs have are stolen from law-abiding owners. It seems implausible that the cartels are getting the majority of their weapons from straw purchasers or private party sales in the US: to do so would involve such vast numbers of straw purchasers or private sellers as to be absurd.

Unless, of course, the ATF is classifying “Mexican soldiers who defect to the better-paying cartels and bring their military-issue weapons, often made in the US and exported to the Mexican military with government approval” as “unlicensed dealers,” but I doubt that.

As evidenced by the options at gun stores or gun shows, the cartels aren’t limited to hunting rifles and small handguns. Firearms used in crimes in Mexico are increasingly powerful and lethal, the [Government Accountability Office, -AZR] report found.

“Basically, you can outfit your own army, which the Mexican cartels have done,” Rand said.

Recall that AK and AR variants are considerably lower-powered than most hunting rifles. How, then, could “firearms used in crimes in Mexico [be] increasingly powerful”? Perhaps they look scary, and people assume that “scary looking” = “powerful”?

Also, recall that Ms. Rand is the VPC rep the paper interviewed. While the Mexican cartels may have equipped their own army, I haven’t seen any hard evidence linking the weapons the cartels use to US retail gun shops or private sales. Rand’s quote is a bit of a non-sequitur.

Until now, politicians have been too afraid of the gun lobby’s power to propose any changes to long-standing laws, said Garen Wintemute, a professor at the University of California-Davis who published a study on buying guns in the Southwest. “Politicians who think that something should be done about the issues are still terrified about actually doing something,” Wintemute said.

Something should be done, but it should be something well thought out, carefully considered, and tailored so as not to affect the rights of law-abiding citizens.

Also, not the mention of the “gun lobby” — that’s people like you and me. Everyday people who own firearms, and wish that their right to own such arms not be infringed. The fact that such a group of people has considerable influence in the halls of government are because we actually have a grassroots movement made up of real people, rather than Joyce Foundation-funded shills. It’s a bit less devious when you think about it that way.

But gun dealers say traffickers will find a way to get weapons, with or without more laws.
Cox, one of 6,700 federally licensed firearms dealers in the border states, said selling high-powered guns is no different from a car dealer selling a fast and powerful car. Society doesn’t blame the car dealer when a person buys a Ferrari, gets drunk and kills somebody, he said.

Other than the bit about AK and AR guns not actually being “high-powered,” the dealer is exactly right.

Tucked in beside the licensed gun dealers at the gun show are dozens of small booths run by private dealers. Some offer small collections of antiques or hunting rifles; others have high-powered arsenals.

Are these arsenals filled with the “high-powered” guns that we’ve previously established to not, in fact, be high-powered at all?

Licensed dealers must conduct background checks for each sale. Unlicensed dealers don’t have to do checks or record sales, which would make it easier to find a buyer if a gun is later used to commit a crime. And the law doesn’t restrict how many guns they can sell each year.

Oh no! No limit on the number of guns that a private person can sell? Whatever shall we do?

Oh, wait, we don’t limit the number of cars, kitchen knives, or other common, household objects that an individual can sell without a dealer’s license. Why should it be any different for a person selling other private property, like guns?

But wait…

The practice of letting people sell guns without a license was created so collectors of antique weapons could sell a few guns a year without having to become licensed, Wintemute said. The law forbids private dealers to sell guns “with the principal objective of livelihood and profit through the repetitive purchase and resale of firearms” but does not define that.

The ATF delivers “cease and desist” letters to unlicensed dealers who seem to be supporting themselves by selling firearms, said Bill Newell, ATF special agent in charge of the Phoenix office.

…there are actually limits imposed (though not strict numerical ones), and agent Newell seems to be on top of enforcing such limits. Ok, so it’s not really a problem after all.

Criminals don’t buy only at gun shows, but gun-control advocates and the ATF agree that shows are a particularly vulnerable area. The ATF estimates that at least 25 percent of sellers at gun shows may be unlicensed.

Actually, according to a study done in 1997 by the Bureau of Justice Statistics, about 2% of guns used in crime were purchased from a gun show². The study interviewed several thousand inmates in prison and asked them where they acquired their guns. While it may not address international smuggling of arms by drug cartel agents, I would be surprised if the cartels were interested in acquiring arms from gun shows: such shows tend to have a fairly heavy police presence and most people are alert for shady activity.

While 25% of vendors at gun shows may be unlicensed, the article didn’t specify if those vendors were selling firearms or more mundane things like hot dogs and beef jerkey. Obviously, a beef jerkey vendor needn’t possess a Federal Firearms License. Even if the 25% refers to gun vendors, remember that this includes people walking around with a “for sale” sign sticking out of the barrel of a rifle on their back, people who rented a table to sell a few of the guns from their inventory, and other perfectly legitimate, law-abiding people wanting to sell a gun or two to an interested buyer (it’s a pretty fair bet that people at gun shows are interested in guns, so it makes sense to want to sell things there).

Newell insists that his agency doesn’t oppose gun shows and says the ATF doesn’t send agents to every show. It does so based on tips about potential criminal purchases, he said.

Good to know.

The NRA’s Fritts said firearms traffickers know gun shows are teeming with law-enforcement members and avoid them, focusing on the black market.

Exactly.

John M. Hoffman, a Southern Arizona private gun dealer with a small collection, said he always asks for an Arizona driver’s license and never sells to someone he suspects could use the gun for criminal purposes. If the buyer doesn’t know anything about the gun he wants to buy, for instance, it’s likely he is buying it for someone else, Hoffman said.

“I feel like we do a pretty good job of policing ourselves,” he said.

That pretty much describes every private person I’ve ever seen selling a gun at a gun show; all legitimate, respectable people who obey the law. His advice about seeing what potential buyers know about a gun is good both for a crime-prevention strategy but also for basic safety — I wouldn’t sell a gun to a buyer unless they knew exactly how to use it.

Gun-control advocates want to “close the loophole” by requiring background checks on all gun sales, not just ones made by licensed dealers.

Something tells me that’s not all they want. Recall that “closing the loophole” would simply mean that all law-abiding sales would now be recorded and accessible by the government (and there are perfectly legitimate reasons for not wanting this to be the case), while criminals would still buy and sell guns illegally, much as they always have.

The Violence Policy Center proposes five other steps to slow gun trafficking to Mexico:

• A ban on importing semi-automatic assault weapons.
• Import restrictions on non-sporting firearms.
• Release of ATF crime gun- trace data.
• Aggressive investigation of licensed firearms dealers.
• Laws to reduce firepower.

This list doesn’t seem to have anything whatsoever to do with gun trafficking to Mexico. How would laws that prohibit importing so-called “assault weapons” have anything to do with exporting guns to Mexico? Couldn’t the cartels simply import their arms directly, or perhaps through an intermediary in some other country with less police resources like, say Guatemala?

What’s a “non-sporting” firearm, and what would import restrictions do to stop trafficking to Mexico? AKs and ARs are some of the most popular, commonly-owned rifles in America, and for good reason: they’re durable, rugged, reliable, and (in the case of the AR) accurate. Both types of guns have widespread aftermarket support, tons of accessories and equipment, and are widely used in sporting events, competitions, and for recreational shooting. Again, this makes no sense in the context of exporting weapons to Mexico.

I fail to see how releasing gun trace data would have any effect on exporting guns to Mexico. The NRA has a great page, including cites to the Congressional Research Service, that details why releasing trace data would be a bad idea. The police already have full access to trace data for legitimate law-enforcement purposes, but the data is restricted from public release so as to avoid it being used for misleading purposes. Indeed, I suspect this is precisely why the VPC wants the data released.

What does the VPC mean by “laws to reduce firepower”? Lower magazine capacities? Less powerful ammunition? None of which would have any effect on criminals, but would only infringe on the rights of honest people. The 1994-2004 “Assault Weapons Ban” banned several guns by make and model, certain features on guns, and set limits on magazine capacity. The ban was ineffective, and did essentially nothing to reduce crime.

“When ATF tries to do its job, it puts its own life at risk,” Wintemute said. He added that the gun-rights lobby has helped keep ATF a low-priority agency.

Oh no, not the big, bad gun lobby! Whatever shall we do? Perhaps it has something to do with the fact that there’s a fair number of Americans who  happen to like alcohol, tobacco, and firearms, and think that the heavy-handed approach of the ATF isn’t the best way of going about things. The ATF has very little impact on the day-to-day lives of most Americans, who are likely to support improvements for their local police department than some agency off in Washington.

There’s a lot of jobs that entail putting one’s life at risk. The ATF is hardly unique in that matter, and most people have little qualms about the ATF actually busting dangerous criminals. I, for one, object to the ATF hassling dealers for minor transgressions that might warrant a memo, not the threat of the revocation of their FFL. Perhaps people would object less to the ATFs work if they spent more time busting bad guys than hassling good guys.

There are 40 ATF agents in Arizona, the second-most-popular source for guns traced from crimes in Mexico, Newell said.

“I need at least double that to really stem the illegal flow of firearms to Mexico, and not only to Mexico but to violent criminals here,” he said.

I’ll bet that most of the ATF agents in Arizona spend most of their time conducting administrative tasks like doing routine checks on dealers, rather than leading the charge against gun runners. Newell’s claim that he needs 80 agents to “really stem the flow” of guns to Mexico and other criminals should be taken with a grain of salt: more agents equal a larger budget, which is generally welcomed by government employees. Can he cite some sort of direct correlation between an increased number of agents and a significant decrease in guns being diverted to criminals? If so, I might be more willing to accept his claims. For now, though, I remain skeptical.

There’s also no citation that actually identifies Arizona as the second-largest source of guns trace in Mexico. I’m curious to see such evidence.

The NRA’s Fritts said the group supports ATF efforts to enforce current laws and doesn’t oppose the Obama administration’s plan to curtail gun smuggling into Mexico. “What we don’t want to see,” she said, “is our freedoms weakened under the guise of crime reduction.”

Exactly. A solid conclusion to an article filled with bunk. There’s no evidence that increased gun control will have any effect on violent crime in this country, let alone violent crime in Mexico.

Fortunately, the commenters on the article have recognized it for the crap that it is, and have called the Daily Star on it. Given the nature of the Star, I doubt the reader comments will change a thing.

1. See http://www.joycefdn.org/Programs/GunViolence/GrantList.aspx
2. http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/guns.htm

In short, 64,329 NRA members came through the exhibit hall, and the NRA raised a whole lot of money for various programs they offer. Very cool.

On Sunday, I decided to be a bit adventuresome and take the metro light rail train into downtown Phoenix, so as to avoid the high parking fees. After getting horribly lost (which included driving through a shady looking trailer park whilst looking for parking — they need better signs) for a short period, Louis and I arrived at the train station, parked, and were off to the convention center.

Once there, we met up with a few other bloggers at the NRA Press Office and went out to lunch. Going off memory, we had Sebastian and Bitter, Eric, Mike, Bradford, and a couple other folks who I seem to have forgotten (sorry guys!).

From left to right, we have Sebastian, Bitter, Eric, Mike, and myself.

After experiencing the silliness of Arizona gun laws relating to carrying in establishments that serve alcohol, we had a tasty lunch, and most of us (Jason was going back to the airport) headed back to the show.

I really wanted to ask the Ruger reps some questions about the SR-556, but they were quite busy when I first checked, so Louis and I perused the exhibit floor and managed to get our hands on some things that we didn’t get to see the previous day, including the FN SCAR:

The SCAR had some different ergonomics than the AR platform (which I’m used to), but still seemed to be reasonably lefty friendly. One notable feature was the folding stock — a simple button-press released the stock, which folded around to the right. It snapped into a notch on the brass deflector and so could be secured in the folded position. The stock didn’t end up blocking the ejection port when folded, and since no operating parts were in the stock the gun could be fired while folded. Very cool.

One booth was run by a few skilled craftsmen who made very tiny, functional pistols. The gentleman (whose name I can’t recall) from the Pennsylvania Firearm Owner’s Association who was walking around with us mentioned that on Saturday the booth had a tiny, fully working 1911 that fired itty-bitty cartridges, but that exhibitor was not present today. That would have been really interesting to see.

Finally, I saw a break at the Ruger booth and struck. Fortunately, my questions were not terribly time-consuming, and I got most of them answered in just a few minutes.

Moving on, we found some very cool rifles at the Bushmaster booth — I’m very familiar with the solid, triangular front sight post on AR-pattern rifles, and I’ve seen and used various flip-up iron sights, but I’ve never seen the two combined into a flip-up, triangular front sight post:

This sight was remarkably rigid when extended and was quite compact when folded. The only problem I could see was that there wasn’t any sort of detent that would keep the sight folded — if one were to bump or brush the front sight against something, it’s possible that the sight could flip back up. There wasn’t a detent to lower the sight, but it required force applied in a specific manner, so I don’t think it’d be likely to fold down on its own. This particular front sight post also included a bayonet lug, though they have models without the lug if one wishes.

One can buy such a front sight assembly from the manufacturer here.

The .410 Shotshell/.45 Colt Taurus Judge revolver is an impressive beast, yet still fit comfortably in my hand. I’d really like to give this revolver a spin at the range sometime.

The Glock booth was near the Taurus booth, so we handled a few of the 4th Generation pistols and spoke with some of the reps.

Louis and I then went and lusted over the shinies at the CZ booth, where I was happy to learn that I could order a left-handed CZ-452 American direct from CZ, have their custom shop replace the ordinary barrel with the 16″ pre-threaded barrel found on this model, and have it sent directly to my FFL for pickup. Basically, I’d have a lefty, 16″, pre-threaded 452. Since I love shooting my .22s suppressed and have ammo that’s just barely subsonic out of a 16″ barrel, this is excellent news indeed. They gave me a card and asked me to call in the next week or so to work out a price.

We then headed over to the Leupold booth, where we got to play with their scopes. Compared to the other optics available at the show, the Leupold ones were far and away the brighter and clearer. Louis is an astronomer, and so has developed a great eye for optical aberrations and flaws…and found none in the Leupold optics, while detecting a few minor things (mostly chromatic aberration) in scopes from other brands like Nikon.

While their scopes are made in the US, I was a bit dismayed to discover their laser rangefinders are made in China. Even so, the different models were extremely consistent when ranging to the same object (the far wall of the exhibit hall), and were within one yard of each other. Several of the models took into account the elevation angle, showing both the actual range and the range that one should set one’s sights at when shooting at that angle. Very neat.

A few of the Leupold scopes also had illuminated reticles, and several of those went to eleven¹.

After Leupold, we briefly stopped by the Dillon booth and ogled their progressive presses. Alas, while we were doing so, 5:00pm rolled around, and an announcement was made that the annual meeting was over, and would people please make their way to the exits.

In conclusion, while I didn’t get to see any of the various meetings and presentations made by the NRA (with the exception of the one on Jeff Cooper, who was a truly amazing man), I did get to meet with several of the vendor reps, get some information about new products they were offering, handle many of their products, met with a bunch of gunbloggers, and generally had a great time.

I’m not sure if I’ll be able to make next year’s annual meeting and Blog Bash, but I’ll definitely make an effort to do so.

1. From This is Spinal Tap.

For all the progessive gun laws that Arizona has¹, it has a major flaw: at present, it is prohibited for a person to carry a firearm (even if they have a permit to carry concealed) into any establishment that is licensed to sell alcohol for on-premises consumption, even if the person does not drink and even if the sale of alcoholic beverages is temporarily suspended.

While I enjoy a good drink and finely-crafted guns, I strongly believe that drinking and the carriage of firearms should not be done at the same time. Much like drinking and driving, doing so is irresponsible.

That said, I see no reason why I (or any other law-abiding person) should have to disarm simply becuase I wish to enter an establishment that serves alcohol. As the law stands now, I’m prohibited from carrying when I go to Chili’s, even if I’m just there for a burger and soda with friends. If I’m walking around armed, as is my custom, I am forbidden from entering establishments like Chipotle for a burrito simply because they offer bottled beer.

This issue was a concern for the Phoenix Convention Center, as the center has a liquor license. Fortunately, they were able to successfully petition the Arizona Department of Liquor Licenses and Control for a temporary suspension of the liquor license in most areas of the event, thus allowing private citizens to legally carry guns around the event.

Certain functions at the event, such as the member banquet, served alcohol. In these places, the NRA maintained a gun-check station and allowed people to securely stow their arms prior to entering the restricted area. However, members who wished to eat at several of the nearby restaraunts were unable to do so, as many of them served alcohol. This was an issue for myself and a few other gunbloggers when we went out for lunch on Saturday and Sunday.

I’ve written to my state officials to encourage them to change the law so that people can legally carry in restaraunts so long as they don’t drink. I urge you to do the same.

1. Most notably the fact that open carry is legal in most places without any permit being necessary.

The crowds were slightly less at the Glock booth today, so I was able to get my hands on one of the 4th Generation “fish gill” Glock pistols and a few minutes of time from some of the Glock employees.

According to the reps, all the internals are the same. Existing replacement and aftermarket parts will fit 4th Generation pistols.

New Slide Serrations

When asked why Glock changed the rear serrations from the previous straight lines to the new, curved design, one employee answered unofficially, “it’s high-speed, low drag”¹

Another employee mentioned that the previous serrations went all the way from the top of the slide to the bottom, and so the steel at the bottom of of each serration was thinner. He had personally seen two previous Glock pistols, each used by extremely heavy users (100,000+ rounds out of each), suffer failures at the base of the serrations where the slide bent outwards. The “fish gill” serrations stop a millimeter or two above the base of the slide, leaving the base of the slide thicker and thus stronger. This is obvious in the below photograph that shows both the old and new serrations:

Textured Grips

The 4th Generation pistols also sport a new texture on the grip:

This texture consists of numerous tiny polygonal² nubs on the backstrap, sides, and finger grooves of the pistol, rather than the larger, blockier nubs found on the backstrap and finger grooves of previous generations of Glock pistols.

While previous generations had textured panels on the grips, the new texture is considerably more “aggressive”³ than the previous texture. I’m inclined to agree, but feel that the new texture is extremely uncomfortable — the grips feel extremely abrasive, and I find the gun uncomfortable to hold with a firm grip. I’m also concerned with the gun gripping clothing, making concealment more difficult. Abrasion of clothing is another concern voiced by some readers.

A member of Pennsylvania Firearm Owners Association (I’m terrible with names, so I apologize for forgetting!) was walking around with Louis and I, and mentioned to the employee his concern about the possibility of the new texture irritating the skin on one’s waist when carrying the gun in an IWB holster.

It’s possible to make things “grippy” without making them feel like sandpaper: Hogue aftermarket grips are extremely comfortable and grippy without being hard on one’s hands. I doubt Glock would be able to integrate both the ordinary plastic used in their frames with Hogue-type rubber panels in a single molded piece, but I feel that’d be a better option than the new texture.

According to one of the reps, the texture becomes less “aggressive” over time, while still retaining its gripping ability.

Glock had small survey cards where they asked people’s opinion of the new serrations and texture. I indicated that I preferred the previous textures as they were more comfortable, and the previous serrations (though I wouldn’t mind if they stopped the serrations above the base of the slide, so as to strengthen it) due to their more utilitarian appearance, ease of gripping, and ease of cleaning.

Magazines

I inquired about the notch on the front of magazines shipped with current, non-4th-Generation Glock pistols. My understanding that the notch was designed to allow for an ambidextrous magazine release was confirmed, though the pistols equipped with such a release⁴  are not terribly popular in the US for a few reasons, most notably because many holsters fit the pistols in such a way that they depress the ambidextrous mag release.

This issue results in the magazine being released when the pistol is reholstered. According to the reps, this is a problem with the holster makers, not with Glock — the design of the pistols is such that it is not possible for Glock to include an ambidextrous magazine release that doesn’t get pushed by most current holsters. In order for them to do so, the holster manufacturers would need to slightly redesign their holsters.

Additionally, one of the new models has a standard 1913 Picatinny rail, but this fits poorly with existing holsters due to the width of the rail. The models with the proprietary “Glock Rail” do not suffer this problem as the rail is smaller, but such models are still uncommon due to the mag-dumping-when-holstered issue.

None of the models on display at the booth were the “SF” models equipped with the ambidextrous magazine release, though they were selling various items like hats, shirts, and R. Lee Ermey⁵ action figures. The Gunny himself was present for a few days for handshakes, autographs, and pictures, though the line to see him was quite long. In overhearing his conversations with people, he seems like a decent guy; Mr. Ermey, if you happen to be reading this post and are in the Tucson area, please allow me to treat you to a drink.

1. In short, it’s new and shiny. People like new and shiny things.
2. According to the employee.
3. Quoting one of the reps.
4. The G20, 21, 29, and 30 “SF” models.
5. Who, among his numerous other achievements and positions, is a Glock spokesman.

1. The MSRP is $1995. Why so much? ARs are commonly available in the $800-$1,200 range.

Other piston-driven ARs are considerably more expensive, often starting at more than $2,500. An MSRP of less than $2,000 for a piston-driven AR from a reputable manufacturer is quite a bit more affordable than other similar guns.

The SR-556 was made to compete with HK 416s and Sig 556s, not common gas-driven ARs.

2. Do you intend to offer the SR-556 in other calibers, specifically .204 Ruger and 6.8 SPC?

Ruger is a publicly-traded company, which limits what we can disclose at this time.

3. Is the SR-556 upper and lower receivers compatible with other upper/lower receivers.

Our upper receiver will fit on mil-spec lowers, and mil-spec uppers will fit on our lower receiver. The SR-556 takes standard STANAG/M16 magazines.

4. Does Ruger intend to sell just the upper receivers to those who already have mil-spec lowers and want a piston-driven upper?

Not at the moment. Again, we’re a publicly-traded company and so cannot disclose certain things.

5. One reader mentioned that he shoots blackpowder .223 loads from his current AR. I have no idea why he does this, but he wanted to know if it was possible to do the same with the SR-556.

[hearty laugh] Honestly, I’ve never heard of anyone doing such a thing, and so cannot say if it’s possible or not.

6. Is the SR-556 compatible with registered Drop-In Auto Sears?

Not from the factory, no.

(At this point I asked him if I could look inside the lower, though he asked that we not take pictures of it. It had the standard cut-out at the rear of the lower where a DIAS would normally go, but without measuring equipment I was unable to tell if it was the proper size or not. Some machining may be required, but it doesn’t look like Ruger went out of their way to make DIAS installation difficult. Basically it looks like any ordinary lower one would buy from other manufacturers.)

7. Any plans for a longer-barreled target version?

No comment.

8. Any plans for a ban-compliant version that could be sold in California, Massachusetts, etc.?

This is something that Ruger could theoretically do, but I have no further comment on the topic at this time.

At this point, other people were clamoring for his attention and I felt like I had occupied enough of his time, so I thanked him and wished him a good day.¹

1. I feel guilty for wasting people’s time. Does this make me a bad journalist?

To be honest, I was pleasantly surprised with the NRA’s treatment of bloggers — they had a sizable press room, free snacks, coffee, and sodas, multiple big-screen TVs tuned into various news channels (including the occasional live feed from NRA events at the meeting), a small screened-off speaking area with a podium and chairs, and a few large tables for people to sit, write on their laptops (many power outlets were provided), and free wi-fi access. While we bloggers would have written about the meeting anyway, it was nice that they were so friendly and welcoming to us.

Many of the other bloggers were off sitting in on meetings and other events, so Louis and I took to the floor. As we descended the stairs to the exhibit hall, we were taken aback by the huge crowds, a small glimpse of who are displayed here:

Those crowds were simply people waiting to get into the exhibit halls, either as existing NRA members who needed to get an entry sticker or people seeking new membership to enter. There were several such counters, each with similar numbers of people lined up at each.

Equipped with our media passes (and openly-carried firearms), we went forth to the exhibit floor¹.

Now, I’ve been to gun shows before and I’ve been to various expos², but I’ve never seen anything this big before. There were thousands of people milling around the vast, interconnected, underground halls. Essentially all the major (and most of the minor) makers of guns, ammo, and accessories were present, including names like Bushmaster, Federal Cartridge, Barrett, Armalite, Ruger, S&W, Glock, Taurus, Dillon, CZ, Springfield Armory, Henry, Marlin, Blackhawk, Winchester, Browning, Leupold, US Optics and many more. Representatives from MidwayUSA, GunsAmerica, and other vendors were present, with several booths selling various items (holsters, gun lubricants, etc.) in addition to showing off their latest wares. Companies like Kawasaki and Yamaha had many of their ATVs, generators, and other outdoor power equipment on display.

In addition to the core group of manufacturers, vendors, and dealers, there were also booths manned by other organizations: safari expedition companies, collectors associations, small-time restorers of classic arms, and so on.

Surprisingly, I didn’t find a single vendor selling beef jerky.

Lest the NRA be thought of as the old fuddy-duddy of the gun-rights movement, concerned only with hunting and sporting uses of arms, the first booth we saw on the exhibit floor had an M240 medium machine gun as well as the very cool AR-FiveSeven:

While I can’t really see the utility of it (the AR-FiveSeven is chambered in 5.7x28mm, and basically turns an already-expensive .22 into an even-more-expensive .22), the rifle is surprisingly compact, has a Brady-scaring mag capacity of 50 rounds (it uses P90 mags and ejects empties out the magwell on the bottom), and looks fun to shoot.

ArmaLite had an AR-50 out on display, and this seemed to get a fair bit of attention from passers-by, including your humble scribe:

(While it certainly looks dangerous to be pointing a gun at other people, all the guns on display were unloaded, disabled (often having the firing pins removed, lest someone bring their own ammo), and otherwise rendered safe. Even so, Louis and I followed the four rules as best we could, and checked all guns prior to handling.)

Barrett had their much-lusted-for M82A1 out on display:

(Note: When aimed in such a position, one cannot remove or insert the 10-round magazine without lifting the butt of the rifle. I’d imagine this would be problematic for people using their M82 for Serious Purposes(tm) out in the field. Anyone have any experience with real-world mag changes with such a rifle?)

All the Barrett rifles sported very nice scopes with Barrett’s scope-mounted ballistic computer. Alas, I was dismayed to discover that the computer displays information on a small LCD panel, but does not include any in-scope display. I suppose that would be challenging, with the sealed, weatherproof nature of modern riflescopes. Perhaps my hopes were set too high?

Most of Barrett’s offerings were chambered in .50 BMG, but they had a few guns in .338 Lapua, which isn’t exactly the least-spendy loading around:

I’d really like to see them release a rifle in something a bit more affordable, like .308, so that Mere Mortals like myself can afford to buy and shoot their rifles.

A stop by the Ruger booth revealed the LCP, which I had read about before but never seen in person:

I have fairly normal-sized hands, and that gun was miniscule. Louis has somewhat bulkier hands and shorter fingers, and was only able to get a one-and-a-half finger grip on the tiny pistol. Even so, it packs a bit of a wallop with .380 (good luck finding any these days!). I’d imagine that the recoil out of such a small gun would be rather harsh.

I’ve been a fan of Ruger revolvers for some time, but had never gotten into their autoloaders: they always seemed rather bulky and unwieldy to me. The SR9, however, fit my hand rather well, and seemed to be well-made³ If I were in the market for a new handgun in the future, this gun would be on my shortlist.

I’ve been out of touch for a few days due to classes and exams, and so I had hear rumors⁴ that Ruger was going to release a new AR variant at the show, and was looking forward to it. At first, I didn’t see the new gun, as it wasn’t visible from the middle of the Ruger cluster of displays.

As I prepared to move on to the next booth, I decided to walk around the outside of their displays, and there saw this:

(While it might look like the man on the right was bowing, he was simply looking down at the moment.)

The Ruger rep was extolling the virtues of the new rifle, which evidently include a short-stroke gas piston, adjustable gas knob, chromed bolt carrier, full-length Troy rails, three 30-round Magpul PMags, a six-position adjustable stock, and some nifty flip-up iron sights. He was also sporting a rather dashing moustache:

They had a few SR-556s that they were passing around for people to inspect and handle. The build quality seemed good, and the rubber rail covers were a welcome relief from the uncovered, sharp four-rail handguards found on many of the other vendor’s AR-type guns. While my visit today was brief, I returned on Sunday to ask the Ruger reps a few more questions (more in a following post).

Federal Cartridge has released commercial .30-06 and .308 ammunition that meets the exacting specs required for the M1 Garand and M14/M1A rifles. While I couldn’t find this product on their website, I find it refreshing that a manufacturer is thinking about us M1 shooters — military surplus M2 Ball has been drying up (though I hear the CMP still has a bunch) and I’ve been switching to reloading where possible, but lack the time to make as much as I want. If I can find this stuff locally at a reasonable price, I’ll be very happy indeed.

HK’s impressive display included a rack of full-auto stuff not available to mere mortalsthe public:

Such guns included the MP5K, MP5SD, G36C, and MP7. Much drooling ensued until we moved over to the more mundane side of their booth, where they displayed their HK 416 (whee, another expensive, piston-driven AR clone!) and their wide array of rifles and handguns:

Lunchtime arrived, and we met up with Eric from Handgun Podcast some a few of his cohorts and grabbed some pizza at a shop near the convention center. Many thanks to Eric for buying lunch — next time we meet up, lunch is on me.

Despite the huge crowds inside, the area immediately outside the convention center was surprisingly devoid of crowds — a few people walked here and there, but there was no crushing swarms of people. Traffic was also rather light, which was also unusual for such a huge event. Evidently the folks who designed the area surrounding the convention center did a good job at tackling the issues with vehicular and pedestrian traffic.

After lunch, Louis and I headed back inside and started up where we left off — Mossberg’s booth had a variety of neat things, including their yellow-clad shotgun:

Presumably the yellow shotgun would be used for shooting the Taser XREP 12-gauge Slug of Shocking (+3), and is a different color to not be confused with shotguns loaded with lethal ammo⁵. In the event that a Taser-launching shotgun⁶ was insufficient, a rail on the pump mounted another Taser just in case. Surprisingly, the rail and mounted Taser didn’t interfere with gripping the pump as much as I thought it would.

They also had their absolutely absurd-looking Rolling Thunder shotgun, which is just a Model 500 equipped with an enormous muzzle brake. Seriously, this thing looks like it could be used to launch flares or throw lines from ship to ship. I honestly see no real purpose for such an attachment — they already had shotguns with impractically-large Barrett-style muzzle brakes⁷ and pointy, mean-looking breaching attachments, why bother with a huge, cylindrical brake?

A constant, satisfying “clack-clack” sound was heard around their booth. Surprisingly, no bowels were voided in the vicinity of the booth, leading me to question the age-old myth that racking a shotgun will instantly scare away people. Perhaps more extensive testing (preferably in an easily-cleaned chamber, just in case the myth has some truth to it) is needed?

FN’s P90/PS90 display was swarmed with people, and we weren’t able to get close. We did, however, manage to get our mitts on the FNAR⁸, which looks rather nifty:

It’s a magazine-fed, semi-auto rifle chambered in .308. This particular model was the heavy-barreled model, and it was quite heavy indeed. When held, it felt considerably heavier than an M1A. According to the FN website, these rifles must shoot better than 1 MOA to pass inspection. Comments on other blogs indicate a retail price of about $1,400, which is not unreasonable for a high-quality .308 rifle from a reputable manufacture. No idea on magazine prices or availability, though — it appears that they take proprietary mags. Ergonomics are good. Assuming the descriptions of accuracy are accurate (pun very much intended), this gun makes the short list.

Springfield had several of their XD-M pistols on display, but I honestly couldn’t figure out how they differed from my XD. They changed some textures around, but they look similar from the exterior. I also go to play withhandle an M1A SOCOM II, Springfield’s compact M1A:

According to other folks at the display, the shorter barrel makes this gun a bit of a fire-breather. While no doubt a fine rifle, the balance seemed a bit off. Perhaps I’m used to longer rifles like the M1?

Taurus had a huge, curving display with all of their handgun models shown:

I had no idea they produced so many different pistols, but they were all up on display. I’d not yet handled a PT1911, but they look promising (particularly for lefties like myself) and affordable, so I may have to put one on the list.

DSA had a bunch of their FALs on racks, and I got to handle one for the first time:

Unfortunately, these rails didn’t have rubber covers on them, and the edges of the aluminum rails dug uncomfortably into my hand. The pistol grip on FALs has always looked strange to me, but was quite comfortable in person. Assuming I get rubber rail covers, this one’s going on my list.

Around this time, my fiancee Sarah (hi honey!) arrived. After giving her the guest pass that the NRA thoughtfully provided at no cost, I tried to convince her that adding an AR-50 to the wedding registry would be a good idea:

She was less than convinced.

Evidently she’s under the impression that a new couple’s anti-matériel needs are evidently not as pressing as their needs for new cookware, pillowcases, and the like. Of course, we already have such things, why should we bother with more pots and pans were there’s a notable gap in the safe?

A quick stop by the CZ booth resulted in my gun-want-o-meter getting pegged high when I saw a left-handed CZ 452 American .22LR rifle:

My local shop rarely has CZ products, and never lefty versions. They also had the 16″, pre-threaded barrel version, but this is available only in right-handed models⁹.

Our feet were hurting after several hours on the exhibit hall floor, so we stopped by the press office, bid good night to the other bloggers there, and went to dinner near Sarah’s place in a nearby suburb of Phoenix.

The night was spent sorting through pictures and notes and prepping ourselves for the next day.

Below is a slideshow containing all the pictures that turned out reasonably well:

1. Observation: While of the people present were white males, the full spectrum of humanity was represented at the event. People all of colors, shapes, and sizes were perusing the exhibits, a few of whom were also openly carrying holstered firearms as they went about their business. Truly, this was a diverse event.
2. MacWorld, mostly.
3. Recall notwithstanding.
4. It turns out that other bloggers had been invited for the unveiling of the display before the show opened to the public, but I hadn’t checked my feed reader in some time, and was unaware.
5. Not to mention the options for color-coordinating!
6. Of course, it could fire ordinary 12ga ammo as well.
7. Massive brakes on huge guns like the M82 and AR-50 are fine, but they look really out of place on shotguns.
8. Which has an exceedingly Scandanavian-sounding name when spoken as a word, rather than as Eff-En-Ay-Arr. We were very amused by the name, and repeated it often.
9. A visit on Sunday to the booth revealed that CZ-USA’s custom shop is able to take the left-handed receiver and stock and mate it to the threaded, 16″ barrel and deliver it to my local FFL. They gave me a card with contact information in case I wanted to see how much such a gun would cost.

Is there anything in particular that my gentle readers wish for me to ask the exhibitors? Technical questions about Ruger’s SR-556? Should I let them know that the copyright notice on the bottom of their page incorrectly spells “Sturm” as “Strum”? Ask the HK folks if they might bring civilian-legal semi-auto (but still NFA-restricted) SBR versions of popular guns like the MP5¹ or G36?

You name it (within in reasonable bounds of polite conversation, of course) and I’ll ask it and post the response here. I’ll be checking my email and comments throughout the day.

For reference, a list of vendors and exhibitors is available here.

1. I know I’d love to get my hands on a semi-auto MP5K, or possibly a two-tax semi-auto, SBR, suppressed MP5SD.

• Met a few other gunbloggers.
• Perused the exhibits.
• Have sore feet from walking all bloody day.
• Trying to convince The Girl(tm) that we should put a Barrett M82A1 on the wedding registry is surprisingly difficult. She wants stuff like dishes, bedsheets, and so on. Who knew? Maybe an AR-50? I’ll keep trying.
• I’ve got a bunch of pictures from the day that I need to sort through. For the time being, enjoy this one: