Rags and Rattle Cans – How to Camo Up

Well, I finally took the plunge. I’d thought about it for months, maybe years here and there, but just never had the actual courage to do it: I finally painted some of my own guns.

Now, for many of you who do this all the time, painting your own weapons with spray paint is probably no big deal. Rattle canned guns are Instagram famous, and “operators” around the world have been doing it since ‘Nam… and earlier. But for me, the proposition of spray painting several thousand dollars worth of equipment with $8.00 worth of Home Depot spray paint was a little daunting. But I finally gave in to practicality. Black rifles stick out, appropriately camouflaged weapons don’t.

I researched high and low, watched hours worth of various “how to” videos on YouTube and probably started to develop chronic high blood pressure trying to figure out the best way to spray paint my blaster. So I thought I’d take a quick minute and share with you what worked for me. Fortunately for both of us, it’s not rocket science.

To start off, you’ll need some quality paint. Although any spray paint will wear pretty quickly on a firearm, that’s fine – you can always reapply it later. It’s not really a protective finish so much as a cosmetic thing, but a quality paint will adhere a little better and stick around a little longer than the off brand special. I used Krylon and Rust-Oleum paints from their “camouflage” line. It’s a flat matte that doesn’t reflect light, important qualities for a camo paint job.

You’ll also need a quality painter’s tape and some 550 cord. The tape you’ll use to mask off whatever you don’t want painted like optics lenses and the magazine well, so make sure you get a tape that adheres well and creates a good seal. The 550 cord is good for hanging the actual weapon up to paint it. The use of the cord isn’t necessary, but it helps keep the weapon from contacting anything else during the process and smudging the paint.

Nice, but not necessary – a cheap, “portable closet”. The kind that’s just PVC piping and cloth surrounded by a few zippers. It works really well as a paint station to contain everything if you paint in doors.


  1. Start by degreasing your rifle. I just wiped down the exterior of the rifle with an old rag and some mineral spirits. You could also use gun scrubber or break cleaner I suppose, but mineral spirits work and it’s cheap.
  2. Tape off areas that you don’t want covered in tape. I removed all optics, lights, sights, and any foregrips from the rifles and painted them separately. I did this to get maximum paint coverage on the guns in the even I change optics or something, I’m not left with a bare black spot on the rail. I also mask off the muzzle device since I frequently use a suppressor, and a tape up the trigger as well – it keeps the trigger group cleaner and less gritty if you don’t blow paint up into it through the lower receiver’s trigger cut.
  3. Spray – get creative. Use a pattern that makes sense for where you are – if you live in the Arctic Circle, it probably doesn’t make sense to use a woodland pattern, and if you live in a temperate climate, you probably don’t need a dusty, desert looking patter. As a general rule, if you plan on using a base coat, I’d start with the lighter color first. That way if the darker colors wear down over top, you can always reapply darker pain that wont mix over the lighter paint underneath. I started with a tan base coat on one rifle, and alternating brown and OD green coats on the other rifle. paint3
  4. Drink beers while you wait for the base coat to dry.
  5. Using native foliage or in my case, an old laundry bag from boot camp, lay a creative “micro” pattern over your primary colors. I used opposite colors on opposite base coats: browns on greens, greens on browns, etc.  Hold the foliage or netting approx. 4″ off the rifle and spray to create a disruptive, “three dimensional” pattern. The netting gives a sort of snake-skin texture… sexy. paint2
  6. Enjoy your rifle and finish your beers. Just don’t go fire it after consuming beers. You know… guns and alcohol don’t mix.

Is a minor note, if you plan on painting some plastic, it might help to “rough up” the surface before you prepare it. The same techniques can be used to made your plain jane black Safariland holster look dope! paint4

That’s it, enjoy! Give it a shot. Maybe practice on a piece of old cardboard first (I’ll admit I did), and find a pattern you like. I found that the lighter base resulted in a more “intermediate” color scheme and the alternating green and brown base created a darker, more “woodland” look. I dig it.

Until Victory.


AR Stocks – Finding the Right Fit

In the late 50’s to mid 60’s when the AR-15 was being developed and the M-16 and M-16A1 were in their infancy, very little was available for the weapon other than maybe a waffle pattern stamped magazine and a paracord sling. If you were American SOF in the 70’s, maybe you had access to a GAU/XM-177 carbines with their two position collapsible stock and Singlepoint Occluded Gun Sights… maybe.

Fast forward to 2018 and we’re living in the golden age of the AR, at least as far as parts development and availability go. (Gun rights… ehh… it’s good but could get better.) It can be hard to find the right takedown pins for your rifle, let alone something as important as a stock. The “old school” fixed stocks of yesteryear have largely fallen out of style, and now are more an uncommon sight. Even the old mil-spec collapsible stock from GI carbines aren’t nearly as common as they were ten… even five years ago! That’s not to say that either is useless but there have been evolutions of the design that generally improve on one or several of the following:

  • Ergonomics – fit of the weapon to the shooter. Adjustable length of pull helps accommodate shooters of various sizes, and allows for minor adjustments when wearing armor, heavy clothing, etc.
  • Durability – the ability of the stock to withstand damage and hard use. Specifically here the plastics/polymers used in stock construction as well as latch design have all improved.
  • Usability – enhancements that increase the stocks performance at doing it’s job: stabilizing the rifle and providing a third point of contact and reference point. This includes: battery compartments, enhanced cheek weld, or even the shape/construction of the buttpad itself.

So after we’ve decided what stock fits our needs best based on our “mission priorities” (tacti-cool alert), we need to know how to best actually use them. Well… you put it on the end of your rifle that faces you and put it in the pocket of your shoulder before firing.

Just kidding. It’s that simple in execution but sometimes even that simple task when done incorrectly or inefficiently puts a performance impingement on our shooting ability. That is to say: if you don’t know how to properly fit or use a collapsible stock, you might not be shooting to the best of your ability.

As a general rule of thumb, I find it best to actually have the stock extended as much as possible without making my support arm over extended or uncomfortable in the typical standing, kneeling, and prone positions. By having the stock longer relative to the end of the receiver, it allows for better head position and doesn’t force your face down and neck forward to get a good sight picture. This lowers fatigue and gives better field of view when using red dot optics. Additionally, this more upright position allows for more natural body mechanics that allow you to actually “drive” the gun faster between targets and into presentation than a compressed stock weld. The additional length also adds for stability when using a two point sling, both when actually firing the weapon as well as slinging it over the back.


As you can see from the above photo, my normal stock length is nearly the same as an A2 stock. The middle carbine is set up just one position in from maximum length to give me proper eye relief behind the Steiner P4Xi for use without any body armor. That’s how I’d most likely employ and shoot the gun. The Daniel Defense M4A1 is set two positions in from maximum extension, because it’s usually fired with at least soft armor on to replicate my patrol rifle (it’s my training gun – nearly identical in every regard to my Mk18 SBR).


I also like to add a witness mark with a silver Sharpie to the buffer tube so I know exactly where I usually run my stock under whatever “normal conditions” that weapon is designed to perform in. For example, I know that if I’m wearing hard armor, I go one click in from the mark, or if I don’t have any armor I’ll extend one position out. But I can always come “home” to my witness mark when I’m all done.

It’s sort of related, and it bears mentioning: the old “nose to charging handle”  (NTC) that still shows up in the shooting community was a development when teaching iron sight marksmanship to the military. The NTC position created a consistent index point for the shooter so that they would maintain a proper and consistent eye position relative to the rear sight aperture when using peep irons. This isn’t really a factor when using modern, near parallax free optics. This is the head position/stock weld now that compromises speed, vision, and honestly: creates neck pain after awhile. This position was part of what made a fully collapsed stock common place for the past decade or two.

For me, I like to run my stock out as long as I can, depending on what I’m wearing and the need for consistent cheek weld in relation to eye relief. If you need to get as compact as possible, it’s doable, but just recognize it might not be the best for magnified optics and may hinder your rifle’s stability. It might also just be uncomfortable in the long run. But you do you, and remember: situation dictates your equipment needs.

Side note: I like B5 Bravo stocks on anything that requires cheek weld (magnified optics) and Bravo Company Gunfighter Mod 0 stocks on non-magnified optics. I find that the slimmer profile of the Mod 0 allows my head to be more upright behind the red dot and allows for a closer stock weld in the shoulder pocket. 

Until Victory.


New Year, New Guns – Ruger Edition

Welcome to 2018! America is a weird, weird place today. Gun rights are simultaneously being chipped away at at the State level and expanded Federally, “cisgender” is a word now, everybody has PTSD, feelings matter, our political process has become nothing more than a meme war on social media,  and everybody… everybody is getting “triggered”.

Fortunately for you and me, we still have the 2nd Amendment (for now), and can get triggered the good ol’ fashioned way: behind a gun! And the last few months of 2017 and start of 2018 have been marked by a few pretty cool new guns to look forward to. Let’s take a look at some of the coolest/most interesting new blasters for the new year from a company that’s been EN FUEGO this year: Ruger. Honestly, they’ve been on such a hot streak, that I’m just going to hit you with a quick snapshot of a few new releases – in no particular order.

Security 9


(photo: Recoil Web)

The Ruger Security 9 takes its concept and namesake as an affordable defensive handgun from the Ruger Security Six of days gone by. The Security 9 is a hammer fired, box fed autoloading pistol that represents the essentials of a defensive handgun – pretty much everything you might need and absolutely nothing you don’t. It’s pretty barebones, but I think it will represent a good value for those looking for a more affordable 9mm option.

The PC Carbine

pccarbineNow this… this gun I’m actually really excited for. Pistol caliber carbines (PCCs) have been all the rage the past year or so, and Ruger has finally jumped into the market with one of the coolest options in the game. It’s fed by either Ruger or Glock magazines, and comes with magazine wells for both. It’s also a takedown design which makes it incredibly handy. The stock can be adjusted for LOP by adding/removing spacers and the barrel is threaded 1/2×28 for your variety of muzzle devices or suppressors hosts. Add to that a set of ghost ring sights, 10/22 trigger components, and a more traditional, rifle-like form, and you’ve got a seriously cool little blaster. The PC Carbine is on my list for 2018. Why? I have no idea. It’s just… so cool.

Ruger has also released a number of other cool designs that are more like product line extensions for the new year. The GP-100 get’s a 7-shot cylinder in a few different models, the American Rifle gets a ranch variant in 7.62×39 (also on my short list), and they introduce the “Ruger Precision Rimfire”, which is a little bolt action .22lr in a chassis similar to their precision rifle with an American rimfire action. The coolest part? It has an adjustable bolt throw that can be set to mimic the throw of a full sized centerfire bolt gun – very cool for precision rifle training.

I’ve always liked Ruger guns. They’re American, usually affordable, have a rock solid reputation for rugged reliability (if not being a little brutish), and lately they’ve had a pretty cool line up of new products. I think they’re doing it right in this down market – introducing innovate new products that the shooting market actually wants. Hell, I didn’t even know I wanted a few of these until I saw them. They’re at least being much better with product releases than a different company *cough, crossed cannons, cough*. But that’s for another day.

What’s on your list for this year?

Until Victory.


First Impressions: The FN 509

The Army’s XM-17 Modular Handgun System has of course concluded, and the Sig Sauer P-320 has been selected to replace the Beretta M-9 as the Army’s primary handgun, bearing the name “M-17” when it fields. Despite the hotly contested results of the MHS contest (which could be the subject for another article, if not nearly a book), there’s little doubt that the American consumer was probably the one to make out the best in the entire test. As new designs were produced and others modified to attempt to accommodate the MHS, many of these hit the market, including: the M-9A3, M&P 2.0, the Glock Gen 5 (which shared some features of the MHS and FBI Glocks), and a handful of others.

The Gun

Perhaps one of the best handguns to come from the MHS to the commercial market is the FN 509. Let’s take a first impressions look at FN’s evolution from the MHS submission.


The FN 509 is, on its face, a pretty typical modern service handgun. It’s a polymer framed, magazine fed, tilting barrel design that is controlled using an articulated trigger and ambi slide stops and a “full time” ambi magazine release. It’s fed by steel, 17 round magazines and comes with typical 3-dot sights, either white dot or tritium from the factory. FN claims that “over one milion rounds” of testing were conducted when developing the 509, and also has stated that much of the 509’s lineage comes from the FNS-9C. The latter part of that statement is interesting, as one would have thought that the full size FNS would have more in common with the 509, just due to size alone. Speaking of size, the FN 509 is a full sized handgun. Measured in its critical dimensions, the 509 is roughly Glock 17 in height and 19 in length.

Height: 5.56″ (Glock 17 – 5.43″)

Length: 7.4″ (Glock 19 – 7.28″)

Barrel length: 4.0″ 

Width: 1.35″

Weight: 26.9 oz

The 509 comes packaged in a dope, FN branded, soft case that has just enough room for the handgun and two extra magazines. It also includes a total of three backstraps that are held in place by a roll pin. The small is flat in profile – much like a flat 1911 mainspring housing, the medium is arched, and the large is a massive hump complete with extended beavertail.


But the measuring a gun by the numbers and packaging only give us an idea of relative size. As they say, the Devil’s in the details! The 509 seems to be an exceptionally accurate handgun, likely the result of FN’s barrel design. The barrel sports a target crown at the muzzle, which is pretty impressive for a service weapon. A barrel crown prevents the end of the actual rifling from becoming damaged, and enhances long term accuracy. The barrel’s locking interface also seems to stay locked into the slide for quite a bit of rearward travel, which usually results in a more accurate handgun (a la VP9). 


Practical accuracy is also further enhanced by the sight design on the 509, particularly in the notch shape of the rear sight. It’s best described as a “square/U-notch” hybrid that combines the easy reference points of the square cut sights with the quick target acquisition of a wide U-notch.


The orange follower is another one of the “little touches” that makes the 509 well engineered bullet slinger. Don’t mind my hands…

The handgun is also very controllable, both in administrative functions and actual firing conditions. The fore and aft slide serrations are very well cut, and afford a very positive grip when conducting slide manipulations. Additionally, the grip is textured with mix of checkering on the port and starboard sides, molded stippling up high near the thumb rests, and very thick, “chunky” feeling checkering on the front and backstrap.

Initial Performance 

Here’s where things get a little sticky. Although my 509 certainly hasn’t been subjected to any sort of endurance testing by any means, it also didn’t make it through the first 100 rounds without statistically significant issues. Generally speaking, I expect any modern service pistol to be able to function without issue right out of the box, after a minor cleaning. Before some of you get all worked up, I understand break-in, but don’t personally feel that a handgun marketed for self-defense and duty should require it. A stock Glock or M&P will run right out of the box (generally), but the 509 just didn’t quite swing it.

The first 100 rounds were fired very casually. I didn’t have a prescribed course of fire; and I was really just looking to see if the gun would run correctly. After a quick scrub down and lubrication with Slip 2000 EWL, I grabbed 100 rounds of Freedom Munitions 124gr Reman FMJs and began to hammer away. Quick aside – I’ve never had an issue with Freedom Munitions ammo of any kind. Rounds from the same box and lot work just fine in other guns, so I suspect it’s not an ammunition related failure – although no other brands of ammo have yet been tested. 

The Good – 

The 509 is accurate as hell. Like VP9 meets laser guided Copperhead accurate. I suspect that FN’s legendary barrel quality has a lot to do with this, combined with the long locking time of the slide and barrel in battery.

Additionally, the 509 “tracks” well. I don’t know if I could say that it’s the fastest shooting gun I’ve ever fired, but the sights settle back into proper alignment without any concerted effort from the shooter. I believe that this is a product of the aggressive grip along with the heavy spring weight of the 509. Now, recoil spring weight is a double edged sword, but as far as sight acquisition, I find that the relatively heavy spring helps the slide momentum bring the sights back into proper alignment to the shooter’s eye.

If you know how to grip a gun correctly, the 509 isn’t moving in your hand. In fact, the front and backstraps are so coarsely checkered that it became a bit fatiguing on my hand after awhile. But, when it comes to firing conditions, I’d much prefer a gun that hurts the hand but puts rounds on target than one that forces me to continually shift my grip after recoil.

The Bad – 

The 509 didn’t make it through 100 rounds without a few notable malfunctions. First of all, the 509 failed to lock back on an empty magazine at least three times. Although many might suggest that my thumbs may have been riding the slide stop, that’s just not the case – my hands aren’t big enough to do that. I noted which magazine it was that caused the issue, and it seemed to be the same one each time. For whatever reason, it would seem that one of my 509 magazines isn’t lifting it’s follower up high enough to engage the slide stop.

Additionally, I had at four failure to eject (FTE) malfunctions. Two happened during regular (standing, two-handed) fire, and two happened when shooting from a high pectoral retention position. All four times the spent brass failed to clear the ejection port and then was slammed in between the edge of the slide and the barrel hood. Initially I suspected that I was at fault, be it a limp wrist or other bio mechanical issue, but I couldn’t replicate it when I intentionally tried to induce the issue. For now, I’m chalking the issues up to “break in”, although I suspect this has to do with the weight of the recoil spring. I believe the slide is actually closing too fast for the ejector, causing it to slam into battery before the empty case can clear the ejection port.

So, after the first 100 rounds, I’d have to say this:

I have no idea yet how I feel about the gun. 

It seems to be well engineered and have a lot of promise, but the initial issues are a bit concerning to me. I’m not yet ready to trust my life to it by any stretch of the imagination (don’t trust any gun with only 100 rounds through it), and I plan on putting even more rounds through it that I normally would before I make any sort of substantial opinion. The 509 has a lot of promise and it seems to strike some serious sweet spots when it comes to a duty gun or full sized CCW piece, but the initial issues do give me some pause for hesitation.

Here’s to hoping the issues clear up, the gun breaks in, and Safariland releases a light bearing holster for the 509!

Until Victory.


In Defense of the 700 Ultimate Sheep Rifle

Well folks, we’re back. I know it’s been awhile since the last post, but Summer 2017 has been busy and full of guns, gear, training, and some other pretty dope stuff. I’ve got a lot of new material in the works, including some YouTube reviews and AARs.

But enough on us, let’s get down to the good stuff: guns.


Lately I’ve seen Big Green getting a lot of flak over their newly announced Model 700 “Ultimate Sheep Rifle”. In fact, just today I was listening to a podcast that was giving the USR the business – despite none of them having any trigger time behind it or any serious mountain hunting experience. They cited it’s use of a stock, and essentially criticized it for not being a chassis gun. They pointed out that the 6.5 CM is an unusual choice for a hunting cartridge, and even wondered if the gun was “custom” because it was made by Remington, and compared what they thought was the Remington Custom Shop to S&W’s Performance Center. And the biggest complaint of them all: the $5,895 MSRP. So let’s break it down.

First of all, yes, Remington does have a custom shop. Based in Sturgis, SD, the Remington Custom Shop does exactly what you would think it does: build custom guns. Although the USR is one of a few models that are available as pre-selected builds, Remington Custom also lets you have it any way you want. Prices can vary widely, as any custom project can from another. The shop itself is relatively new, having been established in Sturgis in 2015, but is run by a crew of experienced gunsmiths that know how to produce quality products. Hand checkering, hand layed custom stocks, jeweled bolts, and action truing mills would be pretty common sights at RCS.

Now let’s itemize the components. (All are MSRP and rounded to nearest dollar)

  • Action: Remington 700 Titanium Short Action (approx. $1,450)
  • Stock: Manners EH-8 ($632 + Cerakote)
  • Barrel: Proof Research Carbon Wrapped w/ Muzzle Brake (approx. $900)
  • Bolt: Badger Mini Knob w/ Badger M16 Extractor ($70)
  • Trigger: Timney 510 ($146)

Total: $3,198


Now, there area a few other various parts and accessories that should be accounted for, but are hard to track down solid numbers on. This would include the bipod rail, dual ejectors, and a hand full of aluminum parts to reduce weight. We’d also be remiss if we didn’t mention the bedding job, Cerakoting by Scalpel Arms, and presumed action truing of a titanium action. And that’s not even mentioning that the 6.5 CM barrel from Proof doesn’t appear to be commercially available yet.

So, if we calculate by the components alone being approximately $3,300 before any sort of gun smithing to actually get the gun running, the advertised MSRP of $5,895 doesn’t begin to seem nearly as unreasonable. I would venture to guess that people shelling out anywhere near this kind of money are probably used to the idea of a high-end, expensive custom rifle that commands a price tag similar to or even higher than the near 6K of the Remington.

Is it all worth it? Well… that’s for you to decided. But a custom rifle is a custom rifle, and if it floats your boat and you don’t need a second mortgage for it, then give it hell.

But with all that being said, if you measure the gun from a performance standard, you might run into more of a quandary. Accuracy and lightweight in bolt guns are easy to do, and you can certainly find cheaper rifles that might fit the performance build of the 700 USR. Certainly there are other rifles that are lightweight and accuracy, but they won’t be custom. And if you’re budget commands that, then a cheaper option is probably the way to go. Hell, the Ruger American is lightweight and accurate, but it feels cheap as hell. Because it’s not custom.

So as far as criticisms go, does the USR deserve all this negative attention? Well… probably not if you evaluate it as a custom rifle. But if you simply look at it from a performance based perspective, then yeah… it’s not worth nearly $6,000.00.

Until Victory.








The Army’s “New” Rifle – The Interim Battle Rifle

As early as April of 2017, there have been mutterings across the internet  via some “in-the-know” websites that the US Army was seeking information on a new service rifle cartridge. Although it’s been talked about for years, leaving the 5.56NATO has, until recently, seemed like a very distant prospect. With the Army’s new adaptation of the M855A1 cartridge and the proliferation of the Mk262 SOST bullet, it seemed that rather than adopt an entirely new cartridge, the services were more interested in making the 5.56NATO more efficient.

But fast forward to just a few days ago when Military.com reported that the Army was now officially seeking information on a commercial, off the shelf (COTS) 7.62×51 rifle to be fielded as the “Interim Battle Rifle”. The full article can be found here.

The RFI specifically calls for a 7.62×51 rifle that has either a 16 or 20 inch barrel, collapsible stock, “extended forward rail”, and be magazine fed with at least 20 round magazines. Oh, and by the way, make it less than 12 lbs.

General Milley also very clearly stated that it could not be a “custom” rifle, and had to be readily available. Additionally, he made it known that not every rifle in the Army’s inventory would be replaced with the “IBR”, but rather the 7.62 guns would be issued out to squads and teams as needed, depending on mission, environment, threat level, etc.

What does it mean for the future? Well, that’s hard to say. I think it signals the Army’s belief that a “more potent” cartridge is needed, but going back to the 7.62 wholesale just brings back problems that created the 5.56NATO and M16 in the first place: weight, magazine capacity, and load carrying ability. I think what’s more likely, based on the “INTERIM” label, is that a new “intermediate plus” cartridge will be more closely examined: something between the 5.56 and the 7.62. Will it ever actually happen? I’m a little doubtful. Price alone and conversion would be a pretty hard sell, but who knows.

My personal thought is that the Army is basically saying in this RFI is this:


Nice G28, Bundeswehr. We’ll take some of those.

The US Military has hit some home runs with H&K in recent history, and I suspect they’ll be looking hard at the 417 as a COTS rifle to fill their immediate needs. But that’s just me.

Until Victory.



Springfield Armory – What The Hell Are You Thinking?!

The XD-E? Really? I mean, on the one hand, I’m pretty pumped that my YouTube screen shot skills paid off and I nearly called the “secret” product release a few days in advance, but I’ve got to say, I’m probably even less impressed that I thought I would be.


It’s not that the design of the gun is necessarily bad, but I just don’t think it’s what the market is looking for – although this one is somewhat unique to the segment. It’s essentially a single-stack 9mm that’s has a hammer fired, DA/SA fire control group. It also has a manual safety/decocker, and can be carried either “cocked and locked” (a la 1911), DA with out safety, or DA with a safety, similar to Heckler and Koch’s multipurpose safety-decocker. The safety-decocker is what makes this particular gun a little different than it’s competition. Some will be glad the grip safety from the other X D series of guns is deleted, but personally I’m a take it or leave it kind of guy.

My prediction of a Springfield branded “Walther PPS” type gun was pretty close! But my biggest question is: why? Nobody asked for this. If you prefer small carrier guns that are hammer fired you can carry any number of revolvers or DA subcompacts, not to mention that SA essentially created a competitive product for their own XDS. This was Springfield’s “best kept secret”, and what they’ve been working on the past two years (according to Rob Leatham)? Bad call. Probably an even worse call than the Saint – which was also a huge market disappointment.

It’s not that Springfield is making bad products in a design or engineering sense, but they’re releasing the wrong products into an already flooded market. The Saint had a TERRIBLE marketing campaign – and still does, and nobody asked SA for the XD-E. 2017 demands new things, and the manufacturers need to figure that out: we want revolvers without internal locks, better optics ready pistols, rifles that aren’t just another lightened or “enhanced” AR, and more 10mm’s! ALL HAIL THE MIGHTY 10!

In other news, Springfield Armory and Rock River Arms both sold out their fellow 2A Americans in their home State of Illinois.

Illinois SB-1657 is essentially a bill that would create a State level gun licensing program that would be in addition to federal FFLs and BATFE regulations. It would also demand that anyone who sells more than nine firearms per year get a dealer’s license. In short – it would be a huge pain in the ass for a lot of lawful gun owners.


Instead of supporting their customer base and fighting the bill, Springfield Armory and Rock River Arms took the path of least resistance and offered a “neutral” stance if manufacturers of firearms in Illinois were provided an exemption to the proposed law. This was obviously immediately accommodated for two reasons: even Democrats can’t deny the tax base that firearms manufactures represent, and it’s easier to repress lawful gun owners if the manufacturers won’t back them with their own money.

Shame on you, Springfield and RRA. Law abiding, armed citizens are an awfully loyal bunch, and they won’t be quick to forgive you. Hell, people are still mad at Smith-Wesson and Ruger for their Clinton area deals, so I can’t imagine that either company is going to fair very well for this. Sucks to be you guys.

Until Victory.