10Nov05

On this 230th Anniversary of the beginning of the USMC at Tun Tavern, I nee d to comment on rifle accuracy:

Several have suggested that, at 40m in range, I should have taken a head shot on that pig. Well, "A man has to know his limitations,=80 and, at least with iron sights, I'm not good enough to consistently make that kind of shot on an animated target. Who can do it consistently is a better man than I!

Many, both shooters and manufacturers, just can't wait to turn utili ty, military, fighting rifles into sniper rifles. Anal accuracy is the only th ing, it seems, anyone wants to talk about. I, for one, disagree! A good, utili ty, military rifle must be loose enough to continue to function reliably, despite severe conditions, dirty ammunition, heavy use, and continuous lack of maintenance. Skintight guns, with tight, SAAMI chambers, are not up to the task. Their users may gloat at small groups now, but, when put to serious use over extended periods, their hapless owners will not live through it. They will die miserably, with a seized rifle in their trembling hands, desperately trying to get it running!

A good, urban, fighting rifle needs a NATO chamber (plenty of freebore), an d tolerances on the entire gun need to be deliberately loose, SO THAT MOVING PARTS HAVE ROOM TO MOVE, even when mixed in with grit and dirt! When the AR-15 was first introduced into military service, parts were so tight-fittin g that the rifle was billed as "self-cleaning." From painful, personal experience I can tell you what a crock that was!

In any event, I consider acceptable accuracy for a personal, fighting rifle , a "car-gun," to be four inches at 100m. That is plenty accu rate enough for nearly any legitimate purpose one could imagine, and the rifle will keep going as long as its owner will. Snipers have an entirely different challe nge and need different equipment. A sniper rifle and a utility, fighting rifle

cannot successfully be combined into the same piece of equipment, although I know it has been tried.

One more note, from an experienced PH with whom I've worked many tim es: When contemplating a shot, on an animal or a person, IT IS MORE IMPORTANT TO VISUALIZE WHERE THE BULLET WILL COME OUT THAN WHERE IT WILL GO IN. We like to talk a lot about "shot placement," but we practice too much on stationary, frontal silhouettes that are nice enough to stand there, motionless, until i t is convenient for us to shoot at them. In the field, all targets are animated

to one degree or another, windows of opportunity come and go quickly, and target presentation is seldom flat, frontal. We need to be skillful at calculating the part of the anatomy the bullet will penetrate on its journey THROUGH the target. Sometimes, target presentation is such that hitting the normal

impact point actually constitutes a poor shot, as the bullet subsequently fails to pass through anything vital.

After impact, not all bullets follow a straight path, but adequate destruction of vital tissues must always be our goal. This is the main rea son I like bullets that do not fragment and break apart. Judging where to strike the target is a foursquare decision when one can depend upon the bullet staying in one piece after impact.

World history, as well as recent geophysical events, has taught us that we live on a piteously indifferent planet. Do not look to your opponent for mercy. Do not look to fate for "understanding." Be ready t o take care of yourself!

/John