Category: All About Guns
Here is a pair of classic African cartridges, both fully capable of taking any and all game on earth, one having been the workhorse of the African game departments and the other has attained unparalleled glory through the writings of an American on his first safari.
Both are designed to function in a bolt-action rifle, both are (relatively) easy on the shoulder, and can be built in a rifle that’s easy to carry. Both came on to the scene before the World War I, when the smokeless powder revolution had changed the course of cartridge development.
Starting with the elder of the two, the .404 Jeffery came onto the scene in either 1906 or 1907 (this date has been the topic of debate, but my friend Phil Shoemaker has a certified 1907 .404 Jeffery rifle), and was designed to be a rimless variant of the .450/400 Nitro Express, also known as the .400 Jeffery.
Instead of simply maintaining the .410-inch diameter bullet of the .450/400, the .404 Jeffery utilized a .423-inch diameter bullet of 400 grains, at the same muzzle velocity of 2150 fps, generating 4,100 ft.-lbs. of energy. A 300-grain load at 2600 fps was also offered, but was not very effective against dangerous game.
With a slight shoulder of 8˚-30′, the Jeffery case feeds like it was greased, and was an undeniable blend of striking power and low recoil. It was chambered in Vickers rifles, and was issued to the game scouts of Rhodesia, Tanganyika and Uganda for dangerous game control work.
Some feel that the initial loadings of the .404 Jeffery—the 400-grain/2150 fps combo—are a bit anemic, but for over a century it has worked and worked well. Though it isn’t among the most popular cartridges in the safari world—yet it has earned a place of reverence among professional hunters and those in the know—it has received a facelift as of late, with modern loads sending those 400-grain slugs at 2325 fps, for 4,800 ft.-lbs. of muzzle energy.
My own favorite handloads drive the 400-grain bullets at 2280 fps, mainly because that’s where I found the best accuracy; my Heym Express .404 Jeffery will put three shots into 0.75-inch at 100 yards. That load has taken elephant, buffalo and a good number of species of plains game.
In 1911, London’s John Rigby & Co. released what would become one of their most famous proprietary cartridges: the .416 Rigby. Bearing marked similarities to the earlier .350 Rigby Magnum—they share the same 45-degree shoulder—the .416 Rigby used a unique bore diameter and a case large enough to prevent extraction problems in the heat of Africa and India.
The .416 Rigby was advertized as driving a 410-grain bullet at 2370 fps, for just over 5,100 ft.-lbs. of energy. This formula—well, actually a 400-grain 416” bullet at 2400 fps—would go on to become an undeniable classic, with the .416 Hoffman and .416 Remington Magnum replicating the recipe, albeit at a higher pressure.
Though the number of rifles produced prior to World War II was actually quite low—a whopping total of 169 rifles—it was the writing of experienced African hunters like John ‘Pondoro’ Taylor who sang its praises; but the 1953 release of Robert Ruark’s Horn of the Hunter, in which he idolized his PH Harry Selby and his .416 Rigby, that sealed the cartridge’s fate.
Selby’s .470 double rifle had been accidently run over and damaged, and the only suitable rifle he could find in Nairobi was a “dirty, rusty-looking .416 Rigby.” Though there were so few produced, the reputation of the .416 Rigby inspired writers like Jack O’Connor, who also sang its praises.
The 400-grain .416-inch bullet has a sectional density of 0.330, and that plays a big part in the penetration for which it is so famous. Federal and Ruger helped make the cartridge and rifle available, when both announced that ammunition from Federal would feed the new Ruger Safari Magnum, chambered in .416 Rigby in 1989. There are plenty of factory loads, as well as component bullets available for the .416.
So, while both of these cartridges have a rather impeccable reputation, which one makes a better choice for the dangerous game hunter? This is a tough one for me personally, as logic would dictate that the wider availability of the .416 Rigby—including the resurgence of the Rigby Big Game rifle—coupled with the slight velocity advantage would give it the edge.
However, having spent a considerable amount of time with both cartridges—in a few different rifles—I will admit that the Rigby recoils harder than does the Jeffery. It’s also easier to get an extra cartridge in the magazine with the narrower Jeffery case than with the big Rigby case.
I don’t think the modern Jeffery load—the 400-grain bullet at 2350 fps—gives up much to the Rigby, though the higher sectional density of the Rigby bullet might influence a choice, but the greater frontal diameter—.423-inch v. .416-inch—might offset that concept. In the Norma PH line of ammunition, which uses heavier-than-normal bullet weights, both the Rigby and the Jeffery drive a 450-grain Woodleigh softpoint or FMJ to the same muzzle velocity of 2150 fps.
Both kill very well, both have proven to be very accurate (I have sub-MOA loads for both) and both are wonderfully nostalgic.
I wouldn’t find fault with a hunter for choosing one way or the other, so I’ll settle the argument with my own personal decision: I own two .404 Jeffery rifles—a Heym Express and a Bansner Custom—and I don’t own a .416 Rigby.
That said, you can’t go wrong with either. Though the Rigby is capable of higher velocities via handloading, I don’t really feel it’s necessary in a dangerous game situation. Dead heat here.
A federal judge has upheld Hawaii’s sweeping gun ban for adults under 21 by treating Founding-era restrictions on minors entering contracts as evidence of a historical tradition of denying them access to firearms.
In a 43-page order, U.S. District Judge Jill A. Otake denied the plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment, granted Hawaii Attorney General Anne Lopez’s counter-motion, and directed the clerk to enter judgment for the state and close the case.
The lawsuit was originally filed as Pinales v. Lopez but is now captioned Roache v. Lopez following the dismissal of plaintiff Elijah Pinales. The remaining plaintiffs are Juda Roache, the Second Amendment Foundation, and Hawaii gun dealers Aloha Strategics LLC and JGB Arms LLC.
AmmoLand previously covered the lawsuit when SAF challenged Hawaii’s prohibition on otherwise qualified adults between 18 and 20 acquiring firearms or ammunition.
Hawaii does not merely prevent federally licensed dealers from selling handguns to adults under 21. State law generally prevents them from acquiring any firearm through purchase, gift, inheritance, bequest, or almost any other means. It also broadly restricts their ability to acquire and possess ammunition, subject to narrow exceptions for activities including hunting and target shooting.
Roache is between 18 and 20 and would apply for a permit, purchase firearms and ammunition, and accept a firearm from his mother if Hawaii allowed it. The state did not allege that he was prohibited for any reason other than his age.
Court Admits Adults Under 21 Have Second Amendment Rights
The court rejected Hawaii’s preserved argument that adults under 21 fall outside “the people” protected by the Second Amendment.
“The Court is satisfied that 18- to 20-year-olds are part of ‘the people,’” Otake wrote.
The judge also acknowledged that Hawaii’s acquisition ban implicates the right to “keep” arms. The ability to possess a firearm does not mean much if the government can prevent a citizen from legally acquiring one.
That should have placed the burden squarely on Hawaii to identify a historical tradition supporting its law. The state could not point to a Founding-era statute that prohibited 18-to-20-year-olds from acquiring all firearms and ammunition. Instead, the court allowed Hawaii to use general contract law as a substitute for an actual firearm restriction.
Founding-Era Contract Law Becomes Gun Control
At the Founding, people under 21 were generally considered minors under the common-law “infancy doctrine.” Their contracts could usually be voided unless they involved necessities such as food, clothing, medicine, or education.
Because cash was limited, commerce often depended on credit, and children’s wages generally belonged to the head of the household, the court concluded that people under 21 were functionally unable to purchase firearms on their own.
From there, the judge determined that the infancy doctrine and Hawaii’s modern gun ban burden the right in a similar way and for a similar reason. Both, according to the court, reflected concerns about the judgment and maturity of people under 21.
That reasoning turns an old rule governing contracts generally into a historical firearm regulation. It also ignores the difference between a contract that could be voided and a modern criminal prohibition preventing an otherwise qualified adult from acquiring the means to defend himself.
The court further rejected the plaintiffs’ argument that today’s 18-to-20-year-olds are legal adults. According to the ruling, the contractual age of 21 at the Founding was not tied to a shifting general age of adulthood.
In other words, Hawaii may treat someone as an adult for most legal obligations while declaring him too immature to exercise an enumerated constitutional right.
Judge Discounts Armed Militia Service Beginning at 18
The plaintiffs also relied on the Militia Act of 1792, which enrolled able-bodied white male citizens beginning at age 18 and required them to appear armed.
That history has played a central role in other young-adult gun cases. In Reese v. ATF, the Fifth Circuit found that adults between 18 and 20 are part of “the people” and struck down the federal ban on FFL handgun sales to them.
The Hawaii court took the opposite view.
Otake reasoned that militia service was an obligation rather than proof of an individual right to acquire firearms outside militia service. She emphasized state militia laws that placed responsibility for supplying some young militiamen with weapons on their parents or guardians.
The ruling expressly found the Fifth Circuit’s reasoning in Reese less persuasive than decisions from the Fourth and Eleventh Circuits upholding other age-based restrictions.
That leaves the federal courts badly divided. Adults under 21 do not gain or lose their Second Amendment rights when they cross a circuit boundary, but the courts are increasingly treating them as if they do.
Later Pistol Laws Used to Uphold a Ban on Every Gun
The court encountered a bigger historical problem when it considered Roache’s desire to accept a firearm from his mother.
The judge acknowledged that the record contained no specific Founding-era evidence showing that parents were prohibited from giving firearms to their children. Militia laws requiring parents to provide arms could point in the opposite direction.
The court called the Founding-era record on family transfers “ambiguous.” But rather than hold that Hawaii failed to meet its burden, the judge invoked what the Ninth Circuit has called a “more nuanced approach” and placed greater weight on laws enacted during the second half of the 19th century.
Those later laws often prohibited selling, loaning, or giving pistols and other concealable weapons to people under 21. Some did not contain exceptions for parental gifts.
The court nevertheless acknowledged that Hawaii’s law is broader. Most of the cited historical restrictions concerned pistols and concealable weapons, while Hawaii bars adults under 21 from acquiring rifles, shotguns, handguns, and ammunition.
The judge bridged that gap by reasoning that modern rifles are more effective for violence than 19th-century muzzleloading long guns. The court then extracted a much broader supposed historical principle: government may restrict firearm acquisition by anyone under 21.
That is precisely where the ruling stretches Bruen beyond recognition. Historical analogues are supposed to test whether the government has traditionally possessed the authority it now claims. They are not raw material from which judges may manufacture broader regulatory powers that the historical laws never exercised.
Hawaii’s Ban Survives…For Now
The final ruling converts Founding-era contract law into gun control, discounts militia service beginning at 18, and uses later restrictions on concealable weapons to uphold a modern ban covering virtually every firearm.
The court admitted that adults under 21 are among “the people.” It admitted that acquiring a firearm is protected by the Second Amendment’s plain text. It admitted that the Founding-era record did not clearly support banning parental gifts. It also admitted that Hawaii’s law sweeps more broadly than the later historical restrictions.
Hawaii still won.
The Second Amendment does not establish a second-class form of citizenship for adults between 18 and 20. A right belonging to “the people” cannot be converted into a privilege withheld until the state decides a citizen is mature enough to exercise it.
About Duncan Johnson:
Duncan Johnson is a lifelong firearms enthusiast and unwavering defender of the Second Amendment—where “shall not be infringed” means exactly what it says.
A graduate of George Mason University, he enjoys competing in local USPSA and multi-gun competitions whenever he’s not covering the latest in gun rights and firearm policy.
Duncan is a regular contributor and editor-in-chief for AmmoLand News and is responsible for AmmoLand’s daily gun-rights reporting and industry coverage.
Categories
This Rifle Is JUNK…
Categories