We are developing the social individualist meta-context for the future. From the very serious to the extremely frivolous... lets see what is on the mind of the Samizdata people.

Samizdata, derived from Samizdat /n. - a system of clandestine publication of banned literature in the USSR [Russ.,= self-publishing house]

On target

I have to agree with the majority of Perry’s comments on both the 40 cal. and the SIG 229. Excellent choice of caliber and weapon. The 229, like most weapons chambered for the 40 S&W, also has the advantage of being readily converted via a simple barrel change to the .357 SIG, a caliber that has garnered rave reviews in both civilian and government circles. As for leaving home without it, however, depending on dress and circumstance the somewhat smaller SIG 239 might be more appropriate.

Unfortunately for Perry, he lives in the UK where the great experiment in civilian disarmament continues unabated despite all the evidence proving it is simply a bad idea. So until he makes the move back to the US, his desire will remain a futile, unfulfilled dream.

Pity, old chum.

40 cal, the choice of the cognoscenti

Now Dawson is certainly entitled to his opinion that the Colt .45 “has never been surpassed as a combat weapon side arm”, but I think times have moved on. Sure, it is a fine choice, but I cannot see any real advantage over more modern .40 cal weapons like the excellent SIG 229 but I can see several disadvantages. The SIG has 12 rounds in the magazine (vs. 7 in the Colt), is a smooth double action out of the box and just as reliable as the venerable 1911-A1 (and it’s various grandchildren). To be honest, I think the Colt is only really competitive these days if heavily modified (polished feed ramp, extended slide release etc.). Most importantly, I just don’t like a Colt style lock safety in a combat piece… it is just too easy to forget that it is on at the moment of truth and too dangerous to leave it off in the mean time.

Don’t get me wrong, the Colt .45 is a great weapon and fun to shoot but when the chips are down and it is time for business…I want a 40 cal SIG 229…Don’t leave home without it.

It must be true, because the government said so

I was reading Ian Murray’s blog The Edge of England’s Sword and followed a link to an interesting article he wrote for Britannica regarding the use of statistics in the victim disarmament debate. It is a excellent piece but the bit that stood out to me was:

The level of contention is so high that acceptance of a set of data by one side often means a knee-jerk rejection by the other. The research of U.S. government agencies should be objective enough to be acceptable to both sides, yet some data produced by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services have been criticized for being biased in favour of gun control.

Now whilst I realise I am a wild-eyed libertarian, it never ceases to amaze me how many people do indeed seem to think that government agencies are somehow less likely to have an axe to grind when they make some pronouncement. States are in no sense a disinterested third party standing apart from sectarian concerns of society. What they are is a group of people defending their own narrow institutional objectives and with a vested interest in finding ‘reasons’ to expand the remit of their authority. To think otherwise is almost hilarious.

Only it is not really funny at all.