Jump to content
308AR.com Community
  • Visit Aero Precision
  • Visit Brownells
  • Visit EuroOptic
  • Visit Site
  • Visit Beachin Tactical
  • Visit Rainier Arms
  • Visit Ballistic Advantage
  • Visit Palmetto State Armory
  • Visit Cabelas
  • Visit Sportsmans Guide


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited


Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

MajorJim's Achievements


Newbie (1/14)

  1. But that is a very important point - he was not stripped of his citizenship and remained a US citizen. I am very familiar with what this shitbag did in the past. However, the analysis the Administration did to justify this did not argue for his loss of citizenship or use that as a factor. And that is a very important factor. Instead, they argues that because he presented a "threat" and that he was too hard to catch, we could skip the arrest and trial and go to execution - all without due process guaranteed to US citizens under the Constitution. Even the detainees at GITMO are getting trials. We tried Nazi brass at Nuremburg. The reason a trail is important is that you have an impartial third party evaluating the evidence in a setting designed to guarantee due process rights. He's too hard to catch? Try him in abstentia. That has been done before. Or at least make a pretense for revoking his citizenship before ordering the guy killed. Like any new power found by the government, once the door is opened there is no going back. And with any new toy, the limits of that new found power will be pushed. Just what will stop this precedent form being applied domestically? Or having the definition of "threat" expanded to include those whose political ideology conflicts with yours? You have given the Executive Branch of government absolute power here, without the ability to subject it to the checks and balances of either the legislative or juducial branches. That certainly is not consistent with the protections under the separation of powers provisions in the Constitution. The Constitution is not some ala carte menu to pick and choose from; it is not like the Pirate Code - "guidelines, really". It is the North Star of government that has guided us for over 200 years. Abandon the Constitution and we lose our sense of direction. Once the nation loses its bearings, all bets are off as to where we are led, or where we end up.
  2. Here is the report I referenced above. http://www.fas.org/irp/eprint/rightwing.pdf Since the "memo" has not been released, I cannot link to that and can only reference what has been reported about its contents. The point being made was that without some objective guidance, those in charge of subjectively determining just what is a threat, when someone can't be found and stopped or caught, and just what rises to the level of being "at war" with the US, have a trump card in voiding the Constitution. This Administration wantted to try Al Qadea detainees in a US court because justice demanded it. They were not US citizens, and were captured in connection with Combat operations or proven to have had direct involvement in terrorist attacks against the US (Khalid Sheikh Mohammed). While the Administration seems to have relented, Mohammed and others will still get a military trial and a right to due process under the UCMJ. The concern is the precedent set. Just what happens once you put a foot on that slippery slope?
  3. Just to run a few things down: there is an executive order banning assassinations, a federal law against murder, state laws against murder, due process and right to trial protections in the Bill of Rights and international laws of war that apply. But if you get a memo, all is good. There was a memo, which has not been released. Reports from those who have seen it indicate that the legal analysis reached the conclusion that Awlaki could be legally killed, (i) if it was not feasible to capture him, (ii) because intelligence agencies said he was taking part in a war with the US (not declared) and "posed a significant threat to Americans", and (iii) because Yemeni authorities were unable or unwilling to stop him. The "memo" focused on subjective factors and sounds like it was a tad short of providing a list of objective factors as support. Despite the spin stating that this will not be used as precedent and that this was a "one time" deal, I for one do not find a lot of comfort in that. What happens if an administration concludes that an individual is "at war" with the US based on reports by "intelligence sources" and that the individual "poses a significant threat to Americans", and that the authorities are unable to stop this person. Since capturing the person is not "feasible", it is A OK to kill. I have no problem with killing the enemy in a time of war. But Awalki was not near any battlefield, and was not even present in a country where we are engaged in armed conflict. It might have been easier to swallow if they said Awalki had effectively renounced his US citizenship and forfeited his rights as a US citizen. And crafted some legal analysis around the fact that he permanently left the US and focused on his links to Al Qaeda that he was part of their command structure. Something other than he is an enemy of the state who is too hard to catch, and, in the estimation of unnamed sources, poses a danger to US citizens. I for one don't take a lot of confort in who is making those determinations, particularly when the Director of Homeland Security believes "right wing extremists" are the same as terroritsts, and goes on to define right wing extremists to include verterans, those who support the US Constitution, the 10th Amendment and the Second Amendment to the Constitution, immigration enforcement advocates, Christians, and basically anyone who is conservative in their political views. The subjectivity in the reasoning for taking out Awalki gives the people who control the definitions virtually unlimited authority. I have no problem taking out a bad guy. I do have a problem with being unable to come up with an objective and rational reason for doing so in light of domestic and international laws making it illegal.
  4. She is the new Marie Antoinette...."let them eat cake".... Of course, that mentality was part of the fuel for the French Revolution.
  5. A good shooting mat is a must. Since I believe in leading by example, let me be the first to volunteer for mat duty.
  6. I will admit, I am probably older than a lot of the crowd here, so my perceptions on a few things may differ. I went through my basic at Fort Bragg in the mid 70's, and was fortunate to have a cadre of fine Special Forces NCO's and officers with significant combat time. I knew how to shoot and handle firearms - my dad made sure of that starting at age 5. But they made me better. Much better. One thing that has stuck with me is that there is the shooting technique the Army wants to see, and then there is the technique that works for you. They are very similar, but we are all built differently, have different wiring, etc., so one man's winning style is another's Barney Fife. So it is with great interest that I observe the rather unorthodox technique displayed by these two ladies. Let me start by saying I am very heartened to see young women enjoying shooting sports. And that 98Z5V keeps the company of heartbreakers! <thumbsup> But the technique... I can only ASSume that 98Z5V has passed on some of what he learned and adapted for his own methods. In the first picture, though, well, that's some flexibility right there. Are they now teaching ballet in basic? I would try that during my next range visit, but only with an ambulance on standby. But if it works, doesn't matter how I look. Camp Perry here I come! The second picture is really my favorite. A three point base anchrrrored by the balls of both feet and an elbow on the knee, perfectly perpendicular. That left foot flexed in a way that my old bones don't move. I am impressed. I am wondering just how 98Z5V teaches that???? Can you help a brother out with two blown out repaired knees (one with no ACL left), two repaired achilles, and other various maladies wrought by a lifetime of bodily abuse and a very misspent youth? Just from looking at the picture, it occurred to me that walking around in high heels might help with stretching the ligaments and tendons in the proper position. If so, what height of heel is optimal for that training? Is there a version available to support a 6'1" 275 pound frame? Seriously though, way to go!
  7. Option 4. If you are thinking about buying another barrel, Lothar has LW50 .308 VarTac profile 20" barrels in stock. I found that out yesterday or the day before when I was talking to them. $360, and it comes with a matched DPMS bolt. It uses an Armalite AR10 length gas tube, but has a DPMS estension and bolt. I think it has an .875 gas block. When your other barrel arrives, switch to your new barrel and sell the VarTac and bolt. Or, follow the 98Z5V playbook, and get another upper receiver ;D (I confess I have built another upper "not to waste spare parts" - sounded good at the time).
  8. Matt, If you don't mind me asking, what is the profile you are having LW make for you? I have always liked their barrels, and their LW 50 steel is fantastic. Stainless on steroids, which makes the barrel life one of, if not the, the longest out there.
  9. Anyone using one of these? I understand that they have one in a profile they call the "Var Tac". A 20" barrel, LW50 stainless, with a 1.2" OD at the breach tapering to 1" just before the gas block; .875 gas block tapering to .780 just before the muzzle thread. Has a DPMS barrel extension, but uses an Armalite length gas tube. Seems to have all the barrel mass where you need it - at and just after the chamber. I'd imagine that is going to come in at between 3.5 and 4 pounds.
  10. More: http://www.rndrifles.com/ http://www.defensereview.com/bushmaster-338-lapua-magnum-mcr-modular-combat-rifle-semi-auto-338-lapua-magnum-anti-materielsniper-rifle-for-long-range-interdiction-will-it-live/ More of a BAR clone, but can get it in a 505 Gibbs http://www.vigilancerifles.com/
  11. A few in 338 out there, including this one: http://www.onlylongrange.com/badnews.asp (They have a 300 WM version for the wimmin folk);
  12. Hell, if you're gonna be a bear, be a Grizzly! 300 WM? Hah. Grab one of the selections in 338 Lapua Magnum. Much higher "bad ass" factor. Just plan to get into reloading, if you don't reload now.
  13. And the search commenced! I was looking for a light weight scope with a magnification that would match the maximum effective range of my .308. There is a pretty wide selection in the 1 X 6 range, but things get really interesting if you are looking for something 10X or above. The "old school" general rule of thumb was that you went up 1X for every 100 yards. So a 5X scope would fit a 500 yard platform Actually, there is also "old, old school", that says men use iron sights, and scopes don't belong on a field rifle, but I won't go there. Scopes have come a long way since the old days, and a good scope won't take a dump in a stiff wind. More power is certainly nice, up to a point. The higher up you go, the less your field of view, any shake or movement of the rifle is magnified, and of course, the weight goes way up. But, a decent powered scope can be used as a field expedient spotting scope and to more clearly identify targets, So what do I need for a .308? My starting point was something a tad over 10X, with a low enough bottom range to allow for a decent FOV and quicker shots at closer targets. And if I ever wanted to push the limit of a .308 in the face of say, a rampaging prairie dog platoon, I would not be missing the higher power. 4X is about the highest low I felt comfortable with. Under that would be a plus. It is pretty easy to add an additional 2.5 to 3 pounds to your rifle with a scope in this range. That is not what I wanted. My target was something under 20 ounces. In case you didn't know, rifles GAIN weight in the mountains. About 7 years ago, I was in Alaska and I noticed that the weight gain of the rifle is directly proportionate to the distamce walked times the average slope during the trek. I began with a 9.5 pound .416 Rigby, and after a 12 mile day where the slope average over those 10 miles was "vertical", my rifle weighed 78 pounds at the end of the day. Thank goodness that after the rifle rested overnight, it dropped back down to 9.5 pounds. Back on topic. The scope would have to be durable, waterproof and shock proof. Figure that the amount you get banged around on a trip is equally borne by your rifle. And the last thng you need when you are many miles from a road, and several zip codes away from a shop, is to have a scope go from working to not working. BUIS are great for backups, but I personally would not rely on them for a money shot at a distance beyond about 70 yards. The tube would need to be 30mm. You can save a lot of weight going to a 1" tube, but you give up the ability to make full use of the windage and elevation adjustments at longer ranges. Plus, a 30mm tube is sturdier than a 1" tube. You will not pick up light gathering ability with a 30mm versus a 1" tube. That is a function of the objective diameter and of course, the glass. And onto the glass. When it comes right down to it, it is all about the glass. Unfortunately, the better glass is usually on higher priced scopes. Here, though, you do get what you pay for. So after bracketing in on the basic requirements, Great glass was a must. So we are looking at manufacturers like S&B, Zeiss, Leica, Nightforce, US Optics and others in that class (Yes Hensoldt is great, but not $1000 more great). As mentioned before, there are a lot of options at there n the 2 pound plus range. So just what adds that weight? Well, the bigger the tube, the more weight. So I stuck with the 30mm tube rather than going to a 34mm one. Illuminated reticle. Illuminated reticles are great. However, they add weight. A "nice to have" option, but something I would be willing to part with. Then there is the objective diameter. A 28mm objective will be lighter than a 56mm one (and a 56mm less than a 72mm "hubbel"). Of course, the bigger the objective the better the light gathering ability. I could stay with a smaller objective WITH illuminated reticle, but if I wanted more light, I could go to a higher ojective and lose the illumnation. Illiminated reticles take batteries, and it is another part that can fail on a field rifle. The decision was to lose the illumination, trading up for a decent sized objective. Decent sized? Something North of 35mm but below the 50 plus uber range that begins to seem to exponentially add weight to the scope. Sizes commonly available in that range are 37mm, 42mm and 44mm. For hunting, most game seems to move at sunrise and sunset. NOTE: The game I have hunted can tell time, and subscribe to legal shooting tables for each state's game commission. At least with a higher objective, I can see them giving me the hoof or the paw as they pop out right after legal shooting time. I ended up zeroing in on a Leica ER 3.5-14x42 Model 51022 . http://en.leica-camera.com/sport_optics/rifle_scopes/ER_3.5-14x42/ It seems that until just recently, Leica did not make scopes. They were not even on my radar when I started my search. 18 OZ with tactical turrets (adds a whopping 2 oz versus the stock turrets), eye relief at a shade under 4", their "ballistic reticle" (I like to use holdover when there is a need for speed rather than making elevation adjustments to the scope), nice low profile, 30mm tube, and side parallax adjustment. And for once, my timing was good. Leica just dropped the prices on these by $400 or more due to the economy. The model I chose came in at about $600 less (Alex at Euro Optics). No, it is not tacticool. No it does not have a Horus reticle designed to confuse even air traffic controllers. No, it does not have official military sounding knobs. It is just a mechanically sound, reliable, durable, crystal clear scope. In the future, if I choose to employ a spotter calling wind, range, slope, elevation, etc., I might gi with a different model. But for now, this is the ticket I am going with.
  14. Will there be a deer roping exhibition?
  • Create New...