Ammo 101

By Kellene Bishop

Photo c/o military.co.il

While men roaming the earth seem to possess an innate understanding about the various types of ammo to use for this and that, my female friends tend to be more focused on how to convert a quart into cups, which jeans make us look fat, the pursuit of career and education, and how to whip up a mean dish of something or another.   So, forgive me, my gentlemen readers, for taking time to give a little tutelage to our sisters in arms on the various merits of ammo—Ammo 101.

Ladies, have you ever giggled at a person who refers to a truffle dish as a salad bowl?  Or perhaps you’ve seen that blank look when it comes time to change a diaper.  Or have you wondered how anyone in their right mind could put the toilet paper “under” instead of “over”?  You know what I’m talking about.  We women are walking dictionaries and encyclopedias of everyday information, but when it comes to understanding rounds of ammo, well, we usually fall short.  So here’s some education in what may not only save you some embarrassment in the future, but may very well save your life through making educated decisions. 

Ammo 101: It’s not a “bullet”—it’s a “round” or a “cartridge”

First of all ladies, let’s be sure that you never commit the gaff of calling any part of the ammo something it’s not.  For example, the “bullet” isn’t usually what you think it is.  Usually what you see lying on the ground after someone else has been shooting is called a casing, though many newbies call it a bullet.  The casing is the part of the round that has housed the primer and the bullet tip and has been expelled from the gun when it was shot.  If you really want to be knowledgeable, you may want to test yourself as you go to the shooting range and see if you can identify the types of rounds used simply by looking at the leftover casings.  For example, a Shotgun round, 9mm, 357 magnum, .22, etc.  A lot of folks refer to these casings lying around as “brass.”  In fact, you may see signs at the practice facilities which instruct you to “clean up your brass.”  It’s the casings that are being referred to.  Bottom line, the case/casing is what holds all of the components of the ammunition round in place.

The bullet is actually the pointed top or tip that you typically think of when you picture a round.  A shotgun round does not have an actual “bullet” housed inside.  It has either buckshot, a lot of little round pieces or a “slug” which is shaped like a bullet.

Ammo 101: Powder is not the same as primer

Looking at a cartridge from top to bottom, your first layer is the bullet.  That’s what leaves the gun towards your target when you pull the trigger (assuming all goes well J).  The next layer is your powder charge.  This is the part that actually is quickly ignited by the next layer of the bullet.  The very bottom of your cartridge, usually the round shape at the base, is your primer.  Primers can be ignited by striking the outside of that round shape or right on the inside of the round base, depending on whether or not it’s rim-fire or center-fire ammo.  What happens when you fire a gun is that the firing pin inside the gun hits the rim or center fire.  This causes an ignition of the powder inside the casing, which causes the bullet to propel forward towards your target and the casing to expel out the ejection port.  This is how the casings end up landing all around, and sometimes even down your shirt.  Since the casings have housed the fiery dance between the primer and the powder, they are inevitably hot–thus, you don’t want them to land down the front of your shirt and nest.  ;)  Don’t worry ladies.  I’ve even seen some men do the “hot casing line dance”, too.  It does happen and for the most part you don’t have any control over them with the exception of what kind of clothing, hat, and eye protection you wear to inhibit the rogue piece of hot brass.

Ammo 101: Self-defense roundsThe best type of self-defense rounds are much more expensive than what I would use to practice with.  The ideal self-defense rounds are known as hollow-point bullet.  The reason why they are ideal for self-defense is because of their stopping power.  Perhaps you’ve heard the expression of the “bullet went clean through.”  If a bullet does not expand once it hits mass, then it can indeed go clean through and thus not have the efficacy of stopping the threat that you need in a self-defense scenario.  However, a hollow-point bullet head will actually expand outwards, like a well-rounded claw, once it hits mass.  Some describe this as mushrooming as well.  This is ideal for a couple of reasons.  

 

1)     When you’re using hollow-point bullets for self-defense and it does hit your target, it will actually expand and do sizeable damage within the body cavity as it passes through.  Most times a hollow-point bullet will not actually exit the cavity, or if it does, there will definitely be a significantly larger exit wound than the entrance wound.  

2)     If you were to miss your target, say, while you’re defending your home, the bullet will expand as it hits the wall, and thus stop traveling sooner.  This means you’re less likely to shoot through your walls or doors and harm bystanders or neighboring property. 

Now, in terms of hollow-point ammo, many shooters swear by the use of Hydra-Shok™ ammo.  Reason being is it has been found to reliably mushroom upon impact, whereas some of the hollow points mushroom simply by hitting clothing fiber.  The good news is a hollow-point round will also give even a 9mm more stopping power, and as such I still recommend it as a self-defensive round.  (FYI, Hydra-Shok bullets will expand at any velocity much over 800 feet per second, and perhaps even less.  Ordinary hollow-points generally require 1,000 feet per second of velocity to reliably expand.)

Ammo 101: It’s grain, not grains.

Grain is the actual weight measurement of a bullet—not the cartridge.  Newbies often call it “grains”—plural.  If you want to sound like you know what you’re talking about, refer to it as grain—singular.  The more a cartridge weighs, the more grain it has.  Standard weight for .45 ACP ball ammunition (full metal jacket – FMJ) is 230 grain.  Standard for 9mm is around 115 grain.  Generally the heavier bullet moves slower than a lighter bullet.  There is quite the battle raging among shooters as to which is better for defense.  Some say to use a big, heavy, slow bullet for target penetration and some say to use a lighter bullet at higher velocity for expansion.  Personally, I’m in favor of a heavy bullet with a good hollow point.  After all, a heavy bullet still moves “at the speed of a bullet,” right?

Ammo 101: +P or +P+ ammo

“Plus P” or “Plus P Plus” designations simply mean that a cartridge is loaded with a higher pressure than standard ammunition.  Essentially what this does is give your round more firing power and a greater impact on your target.  It’s one of the variations of ammo that I recommend for women to use who are more comfortable with shooting a 9mm for self-defense.  Be sure that your gun is designed for such ammo use though.  You can see whether or not your ammo is +P or +P+ on the cartridge box, or sometimes it’s stamped on the base of the cartridge.  +P or +P+ cartridges are usually center-fire cartridges.

That’s all for Ammo 101 today!  Tune in for more later on. 

Copyright 2009 Kellene Bishop. All rights reserved.  You are welcome to repost this information so long as it is credited to Kellene Bishop.

Back Door CIFTA Threatens Firearm Freedom

“If you can’t beat ‘em, hide from them.”

 

The Obama Administration has unabashedly announced in several instances that they intend to bring in more gun control, even going so far as to taking away our firearms of self-defense.  However, the likelihood of our 2^nd Amendment being taken away from us is highly unlikely.  So what does Obama do?  He uses our apathy in international relations to try to accomplish the same end. 

 

Stage Left: Enter CIFTA  (read text here) 

 

CIFTA appears to remove ownership of any firearm manufactured for, or any based on a military design, OF ANY AGE, from 2nd amendment protection.  No exemptions for flintlocks, or pre-1899, either.

The treaty bans ‘“illicit” manufacturing’ of firearms, defined as:

the manufacture or assembly of firearms, ammunition, explosives, and other related materials:

a. from components or parts illicitly trafficked; or

b. without a license from a competent governmental authority of the State Party where the manufacture or assembly takes place; or

c. without marking the firearms that require marking at the time of manufacturing.

This would seem to require a government license for home building, assembling from parts, and quite likely many types of repairs and customizations.  And here’s the really scary part, it defines “other related materials” this way: “any component, part, or replacement part of a firearm, or an accessory which can be attached to a firearm.”  This would make all people who make accessories that attach to a firearm to have a license.  It would presumably also ban home manufacture of these items without a government license.  Do you own trigger jobs?  Reload your own ammunition?  Not anymore, not without a government license!

It defines illegal trafficking as “the import, export, acquisition, sale, delivery, movement, or transfer of firearms, ammunition, explosives, and other related materials from or across the territory of one State Party to that of another State Party, if any one of the States Parties concerned does not authorize it.”  This would not seem to affect any of these things happening exclusively within the domestic market.

It requires states to destroy seized firearms.  “States Parties shall adopt the necessary measures to ensure that all firearms, ammunition, explosives, and other related materials seized, confiscated, or forfeited as the result of illicit manufacturing or trafficking do not fall into the hands of private individuals or businesses through auction, sale, or other disposal.”

It would seem to require some vague requirement for transport: “States Parties, in an effort to eliminate loss or diversion, undertake to adopt the necessary measures to ensure the security of firearms, ammunition, explosives, and other related materials imported into, exported from, or in transit through their respective territories.”

Here are the licensing requirements:

States Parties shall establish or maintain an effective system of export, import, and international transit licenses or authorizations for transfers of firearms, ammunition, explosives, and other related materials.

States Parties shall not permit the transit of firearms, ammunition, explosives, and other related materials until the receiving State Party issues the corresponding license or authorization.

States Parties, before releasing shipments of firearms, ammunition, explosives, and other related materials for export, shall ensure that the importing and in-transit countries have issued the necessary licenses or authorizations.

The importing State Party shall inform the exporting State Party, upon request, of the receipt of dispatched shipments of firearms, ammunition, explosives, and other related materials.

It’s hard to say how they expect this to be implemented.  It could, if interpreted strictly, make traveling internationally with a firearm impossible or next to impossible without expensive licenses.  We already have licenses required for commercial import or export, but personal import, export, or international transit has always been considered a separate matter.

It would seem to regulate carriage of weapons:

1. States Parties shall exchange among themselves, in conformity with their respective domestic laws and applicable treaties, relevant information on matters such as:

a. authorized producers, dealers, importers, exporters, and, whenever possible, carriers of firearms, ammunition, explosives, and other related materials;

This means your concealed carry records would be subject to being shared with foreign nations.  “Carriage” in this CIFTA sentence seems to imply carry permit information.  “To the extent possible” means that if the records exist, it must be delivered.  Registration leads to confiscation — in this case, confiscation by foreign criminals breaking into your house to steal the guns that they know you have.  Could this bring about gun-control through crime?  Do you trust the Mexican government with information about you?  I believe that that “list” would have about a 30 second life before some international enemy successfully bribed a Mexican official for it…”  hmmm… let’s see which Americans we take out first.”  And once it’s out, it’s out everywhere, so the threat of security doesn’t just lie in “official circles.”  It can easily make its way into the hands of our own neighbors.  

This treaty will clearly result in establishing national gun registration.  The treaty requires signatories to establish and maintain records of all firearms manufactured and transferred to allow participating nations to trace back a weapon found in their nation to its manufacturer and owners (Article XI).  This also addresses issues of extradition to other nations for “offenders” (think gun makers and dealers), and establishment of international oversight committees. 

The Washington Post article today clearly points out that Obama wants to push CIFTA through the Senate ASAP!  This is an end-run around our rights associated with the Second Amendment!  Entering into this treaty will make illegal the acts of hand loading your own ammunition, adding attachments to your own firearms, etc!  This is clearly a back door attempt all the way, to get serious gun control implemented in our nation.  Obama pushes the treaty like he’s fighting a wildfire.  The Senate then ratifies it based on the Democrat agenda.  The Dems then use treaty as an excuse to pass a variety of legislation to register and track arms.  All of which aids Heller et al…

 

This is the WP article about Obama’s discussion of CIFTA with Calderon while in Mexico.

 

We absolutely MUST make sure that our US Senate does not ratify and enter us into this treaty.

 

Silence is Concession, folks.

 

Copyright 2009 Kellene Bishop. All rights reserved.

You are welcome to repost this information so long as it is credited to Kellene Bishop.

Do You Have Enough Ammo to Last You 4 Years?

3/18/09 Update: While we’re ecstatic to hear that the NRA-ILA and a couple of good politicians have rectified this wrong, there’s still merit to this particular blog below in showing just how vulnerable we are to the minds and wills of a select few. 

I would suspect that there are very few readers who do.  And that’s a huge problem with the latest twist in the government soap opera.

As you may know, Obama previously proposed as a Senator that ammunition would receive a 500% tax hike.  He did so as a crafty way to essentially take away our guns.  Obviously, without ammunition, gun owners had better get good at throwing our firearms at an assailant or using them as batons without ammo.  You and I both know that with his penchant for taxing the American people worse than any president ever (even through the liability of his spending packages), he’s not likely to get past a deaf and moot Congress this proposal for a 500% tax hike on ammo.  So what does he do?  Nothing.  He doesn’t have to do anything because his Secretary of State is interpreting a Department of Defense directive to favor this new administration’s distaste for guns.  And it’s done without Congress having any say in it.  As of June 11, 2008, the Department of Defense is to no longer allow the military to sell fired casings to ammunition remanufacturers until they have been “mutilated”, aka shredded into scrap brass.

Let’s break this down a little bit.

In order for you to shoot, you have to have ammo.  Duh, right?  Bear with me here.  When you practice shooting, you will typically use remanufactured ammunition because it’s less expensive.  For example, 1,000 rounds of 9mm ammo (115 grain) which is remanufactured costs $207, while new ammo, 9mm (115 grain) costs $269 at a bargain price.  So the savings can be substantial.  The key to the pricing advantage of remanufactured ammunition is that the remanufacturers are able to buy their once-fired casings primarily from the military.  As you can imagine, the military uses a LOT of ammo and due to their rules they can only use new ammo.  This makes them an ideal source from which to purchase used casings.  However, now that the DOD has determined that they are only permitted to sell their ammo casings AFTER they have been shredded, this means a whole lot to your wallet.

1)     Yes, the “remanufactured” ammo will be more expensive (as if the past year of price increases haven’t been bad enough.)  The reason being is now there is an extra step in the process in order for the remanufacturers to have foundries turn the shredded brass (and other metals) into the casings they need. The reason why I put the “remanufactured” in quotation marks is that it’s doubtful to me that the new product should be called “remanufactured” as opposed to new since this additional process entails what new-ammo manufacturers have to do to produce their ammo.

2)     Your tax dollars now pay for the shredding of the casings which the military will now perform on all of their casings prior to selling it. 

3)     The remanufactured ammo represents approximately 65-75% of the ammunition market among civilians AND law enforcement.  Law enforcement regularly uses remanufactured ammo for their target practices.  Thus, now law enforcement is paying a higher price either for the remanufactured ammo, or a higher price to buy new ammo.  Guess whose tax dollars pay for that?

4)     Due to the interpretation of this DOD directive, there are a great deal of ammunition remanufacturers who will have to lay off a sizeable portion of their employees.  Hello, unemployment.  Hello, extra foreclosures.  Hello, extra bankruptcies. 

5)     This all presumes that since the casings are being shredded they will still be sold to the remanufacturers.  This is doubtful as China is the largest buyer of such metals from us in its shredded condition.  Don’t think for a second that they won’t get first crack at buying this shredded brass.  After all, we owe them for buying up so much of our debt, right?   This means that we may have put out of business ALL of the remanufacturers in the U.S. with this one strategic directive.  If the remanufacturers go out of business, then we have the small number of new-ammo manufacturers to provide all the rest of us with ammo.  And the military gets first shot in front of any buyer to obtain their ammo. 

Now think about this economically.  You have what used to represent about a third of the ammo sales in the U.S. and now they are the primary source to handle nearly all of the ammo manufacturing.  That’s called a serious supply-and-demand problem.  If you talk to anyone who buys ammo, you will undoubtedly hear stories of empty shelves, and hard-to-find ammo.  Are you starting to see why ammo is so hard to obtain now and why prices have increased substantially?  Expect an even greater supply-and-demand imbalance as the dominos continue to fall, folks.

So why do I ask if you have enough ammo for 4 years?  Because if you don’t, that situation is not likely to change unless this administration reigns-in how the directive is being interpreted, or an administration change occurs four years from now.  It won’t matter how much money you have.  You simply won’t be able to buy enough with the military standing in line in front of you.  NOW some of you may know why I predicted that there would come a time when a bucket of ammo would be worth more than a bucket of gold…on so many levels. (see www.preparednesspro.wordpress.com)

Clearly the economists who thought this one through are on the same team as those who are running Wall Street and are devoid of much in the form of patriotism or intellect. 

See the link below the draft of this directive. 

www.dla.mil/j-6/dlmso/Archives/JSACG/meetings/11Jun08/ADC_220_Small%20ArmsDefinition_DRAFT_JSACG_11June2008.doc

 

Copyright 2009 Kellene Bishop. All rights reserved.

You are welcome to repost this information so long as it is credited to Kellene Bishop.

My First Time…Shooting

People assume that as a self-defense and firearms instructor that I’m some kind of super bad “you know what” and have always been “fine” with guns, etc. Well, they would be dead wrong.

When I married my husband I was a city slicker from Columbus, OH. I had never been around guns. I was raised that they were super bad, super dangerous, etc.

As my brand new husband (a Utah mountain boy) and I were moving items into our new home just a week after our wedding, I found myself bringing in a couple of heavy black cases. The cases were small and I couldn’t fathom what in the world could be inside them that would be so heavy. Finally, curiosity got the better of me and I asked my husband what the heck they had in them. He sheepishly looked at me and said “Oh. I guessed we should have talked about that before we got married.” As it turned out, the cases had handguns in them and my husband was very adept at handling them and shooting them.

This began the long 12 + months of him trying to convince me, the city girl, that it would be perfectly OK for me to “allow” him to get his concealed carry permit. I just couldn’t stomach the thought of him carrying a gun around all the time though. To his great credit my husband was patient in educating me and waiting for me to be ok with him taking a more proactive stance in his 2nd Amendment rights. So finally I relented and “let” him get his concealed carry permit, with the understanding that I wasn’t yet ready for him to actually “carry.” And so his patience continued. Finally, I decided that he was perfectly capable and competent and this was important to him so I put aside my inhibitions and relented as a “birthday present.” But boy howdy did it make him happy!

Then, as a course of natural progression, he patiently attempted to get me to try and shoot a gun. So we finally went to a range. He taught me forEVER about safety, handling, etc. All the while I’m thinking “let’s just get this over with and let me shoot and get out of here, already!” He had me shoot a little Beretta Tomcat .32. (This is a little bigger kick than a .22 but less than a 9 mm.) Terrified, but trying to be brave, I shot it six times and then began crying, shaking inside, and informed my husband we were done with the shooting exercise.

After this I couldn’t watch action/adventure movies (my favorite genre up to this point) for several weeks. When I saw someone on screen shooting a gun, it suddenly felt much more real to me, no longer pretend. I no longer had the desire to cheer for the good guy and yell “Get ‘em!” Instead, I recalled what I felt were the heavy bass reverberations that I experienced shooting the first time and listening to my husband’s shooting. After shooting a firearm I felt just how real, instant, and deadly a gun was. And that kind of power in my hand initially scared the crud out of me and I certainly didn’t want to relive it in a movie.

Several weeks later my husband chose to make use of my competitive spirit and convinc ed me that I should try again and not let this fear get the better of me. So I did. This time he had me shoot a Glock 9 mm. I lasted an entire 20 minutes of shooting this, hitting the target occasionally, and then informed him that I had met my quota for the day. At least this time I didn’t cry.

So what transpired between the crying, the stress, and such and my now being a firearms and self-defense instructor to women?

First: Purpose.  I realized that as our world becomes more volatile, the more likely we will need to defend ourselves in such a manner someday, whether it be protecting our homestead, a family member, virtue, or other scenarios I won’t get into here.  And it’s naive of me to think that my “Rambo” of a husband will be there to save the day when I’m in trouble.  There is a great likelihood that when something does “go south” my husband will be the one out patrolling in the neighborhood, or coming to the aid of others.  I realized that I didn’t want to be a liability for him and wanted to be able to stand on my own when it may be necessary. 

Second: Vision. Then I realized that there were a lot of other women that are in the same shoes as me—their husband may be confident in defending himself physically or with a firearm, but their wives are not. I’m sure it would give a greater peace of mind to those who love their wives to know that their wives can be a protecting asset to the family too. Yet, I also know just how hard it was for me to overcome my stigmas about guns, protection, emergency preparedness, and self-defense. Frankly, in spite of my husband being an excellent and patient teacher with me, there are some things that a man would never think of when instructing a woman, things that I think would have made it easier for me to come around and be more confident in my ability to defend myself without hurting innocent bystanders. I think learning from a man is difficult for a woman…especially when it’s a husband or a boyfriend. There’s already an enormous amount of pressure in this new experience without stressing that you’re disappointing or not measuring up to someone you love as well.

Additionally I realized that there were also a lot of non-married women that aren’t sufficiently protected simply because of a lack of knowledge. When I was Marine-trained to learn physical self-defense (by a couple of men), I realized that there were better ways to communicate and thus properly train a woman in order for her to be effective and proactive, rather than reactive to fear or potential “what if” scenarios. I felt that it would be better to prevent those scenarios from ever happening than trying to educate someone traumatized after the fact.

Assault crimes have continued to rise in our nation.  Criminals are becoming more brazen in their efforts to win the “Oscar” for the biggest, boldest, most gruesome assault.  I realize that simply maintaining the status quo for women and their ability to truly defend themselves really was no longer an option.  And yet they didn’t have a lot of viable answers.

Third: Confidence. It’s one things to have a Concealed Firearm Permit.  It’s another to have the mindset that you will be able to use the firearm if necessary, and that you can do so without harming others.  I was very fortunate in that I was able to get some unique training that enabled me to hit exactly what I was aiming at, without the “fog of war” intruding, and in a quick-draw fashion.  This SKILL made me very competent and confident.  This made a HUGE difference in my acceptance of this new responsibility. I was ready to take it on.  This confidence made a significant impact on my view of circumstances around me.  I no longer seemed to worry as much about things which were out of my control, because I felt in control of the most vital matters, protecting myself and others. 

Fourth: Clarity. Martial arts and boxing training are great for physical activity, confidence, and discipline. But for the majority of ALL students, they are ineffective, and even dangerous (because of the false sense of competence they may invoke) in the heat of a real assault. I’m sorry to offend anyone when I say this, but reality can’t be subject to a popularity contest. The reality is it’s unrealistic to think that someone can get this kind of instruction and effectively defend themselves against a psychotic perpetrator in the heat of the moment. Unless you’re Chuck Norris or Jackie Chan, it’s not likely you’ve instinctively mastered the skills necessary to make these disciplines life-saving. There are too many “moves” to master. There’s too much thinking necessary. Additionally, it appeared that only “beautiful, skinny, and fit women” were capable of using these techniques in an attempt to protect themselves. Considering that I was over 200 pounds, only 5’ 2 ½” and overall out of shape, I didn’t like that idea very much. I didn’t care for the social insinuation that chubby women were ideal marks for perpetrators. That’s when I had an “Aha Moment.” My personal discovery was that the competent use of a firearm far surpasses the effectiveness of a “crouching tiger” or a “right cross” and it is no respecter of what you had for breakfast, lunch or dinner for the last decade! While the knocking someone unconscious may be a more compassionate approach to defending yourself, I had to come to a point where I no longer fostered compassion towards someone who would take me away from my family, cripple me, harm my children, or others that I loved or who were helpless to defend themselves. And whether one is scrawny, hefty, young or ancient, the competent use of a firearm coupled with some street smarts is a great equalizer between good and evil.

After commiserating with so many women over the years who were just like me in their fear and other inhibitions of defending themselves, I SO wanted to share my relatively newfound knowledge with as many women as I could. I wanted them to have the opportunity to learn from a very REAL woman who completely understood and overcame their same fears. To not just learn enough so that they can legally carry a firearm, but to learn enough so that they can skillfully use one when necessary, and can defend themselves when necessary. I also saw value in training women real street smarts with the proper use of other methods of self-defense in the event a firearm isn’t readily available, malfunctions, or could endanger others.

To this end I’ve spent years becoming the most certified female NRA instructor in the Western States as well as a certified Utah CFP Instructor (Concealed Firearm Permit). In addition I’ve endeavored to learn and master as much as my military, DEA, and other helpful experts have to teach me so that I can expertly pass on real life skills to women all over. I’ve also worked closely with my husband to create an exclusive technique that enables a shooter to consistently hit exactly what they are aiming at, with only a couple hours of instruction! So if you’re inclined in the least, begin your journey with me at http://www.womenofcaliber.com/

And that, is the rest of the story.

Copyright 2009 Kellene Bishop. All rights reserved.

You are welcome to repost this information so long as it is credited to Kellene Bishop.