Categories
HUH! Paint me surprised by this Real men War

The Real Red October Heist You Never Heard Of by Will Dabbs

A young Italian officer stole a brand new submarine to drag his nation into war, then helped shape the frogmen who inspired modern special ops. It sounds like Clancy, but this actually happened.

The Real-Life Spark Behind Red October

As is the case with all proper gun scribes, Tom Clancy is my hero. He pioneered the genre of the techno thriller and was a lyrically successful writer. However, Clancy actually got his start as an insurance salesman. He never wore a military uniform because his vision was so bad. Clancy liked to play a board game called Harpoon about Cold War Naval combat and was also a rapacious reader.

Tom Clancy portrait, bestselling techno-thriller novelist, IMDB photo
Tom Clancy was a wildly successful novelist. That man had a gift. IMDB photo.

Over the course of four months, while still selling insurance, Clancy penned The Hunt for Red October. Trust me, writing a compelling novel is the easy part. The tough bit is getting it published.

As is so often the case, nobody in the mainstream publishing industry would give this nearsighted insurance agent the time of day. Clancy eventually got his book launched via the Naval Institute Press in Annapolis, a small publishing house that typically produced Naval technical journals. That first run sold 45,000 copies, some 40,000 more than Clancy anticipated.

Tom Clancy died of heart disease at age 66. When the dust settled on his career as a writer, Clancy had sold more than 100 million books and was part-owner of the Baltimore Orioles.

His first wife once gave him a fully operational Sherman tank as a Christmas present. Clancy was one of three authors ever to sell two million copies of a book in its first printing, in the company of John Grisham and JK Rowling. Tom Clancy is the guy that guys like me want to grow up to become. All that started with The Hunt for Red October.

Inside The Hunt for Red October Plot and Myth

The Hunt for Red October book and film, Cold War submarine thriller cover art
The Hunt for Red October was a compelling read. It also made an exceptional movie.

The Hunt for Red October orbits around a rather fantastic tale of Soviet submarine commander Marko Ramius. Ramius suffers a horrible family tragedy and finds himself disillusioned with the Soviet state.

He therefore quietly begins planning to steal the Red October, the latest Russian nuclear ballistic missile submarine. He rightfully feels that Red October, with its revolutionary stealthy caterpillar drive, is a first-strike weapon that will disrupt the international balance of power and create unacceptable nuclear instability.

Spoiler alert, he pulls it off after some truly gripping action, turning the sub over to the American military while convincing the Russians it had been sunk. It really is a great story.

If you aren’t so much into reading, the movie was pretty epic as well. Sean Connery plays Ramius, and Alec Baldwin debuts the character of Jack Ryan. This was obviously before Baldwin started shooting people for real on his movie sets.

While the plot was truly extraordinary, it was also far-fetched. There’s no way that, given the complex nature of a combat submarine and its crew, a single rogue sub Captain could commandeer an operational boat and use it for his own nefarious purposes. Or could he?

Could One Captain Really Steal a Submarine?

The Tactical Situation

Italian submarine F-43 at Muggiano shipyards near La Spezia, 1914, archival photo
Italian submarine F-43 was not a terribly large vessel by modern standards. Wikimedia photo.

On 3 October 1914, the Italian submarine F-43 lay at anchor in the Muggiano shipyards near La Spezia, Italy. The sub had originally been built for the Russians and christened the Svyatoi Georgjy. However, the Russians had bigger problems with the opening salvoes of WW1 and an imminent violent revolution. They just never bothered to pick it up.

Submarine technology was in its infancy in 1914. However, these were still radically advanced war machines. The capacity to move undetected underneath the surface of the ocean was a war-winning thing. With the entire world set to conflagrate, possession of these revolutionary warships carried the potential to change the course of human events.

Lieutenant Angelo Belloni portrait, WW1-era Italian naval officer and diver
This fun-loving guy is Lieutenant Angelo Belloni. This unkillable dude was the cockroach of WW1-era Italian Naval officers. He was one steely-eyed survivor. US Naval Institute.

1914 The Rogue Mission of F 43

During World War 2, the Italians went all-in with the Axis. In 1914, however, things were a bit murkier. Italy teetered regarding which tribe it might join. An Italian Naval officer named Angelo Belloni harbored strong feelings on the subject. He felt that the Italians should launch a preemptive attack against the forces of Austria-Hungary. By contrast, Italian politicians preferred restraint. Eventually, LT Belloni felt that he had to act.

Belloni’s Cover Story Goes Off the Rails

The Cover Story

Belloni approached fifteen hand-picked sailors and explained that they had been chosen for a top-secret mission. Fifteen was the minimum number of crew required to sail and fight submarine F-43. Believing themselves to be on some kind of righteous crusade, these rogue Italian submariners stole the brand-new boat and sailed it to Corsica.

Austro-Hungarian dreadnoughts at Pula, 1914 naval power in the Adriatic
The Austro-Hungarian Navy was quite formidable in 1914. Public domain.

What his crew did not appreciate was that LT Belloni intended to take F-43 and use it to attack Austro-Hungarian warships operating in the Adriatic Sea.

By doing so under the Italian flag, Belloni felt that he could drag his country into the war on the side of the French and the British and against the Central Powers. It was indeed a power move.

F-43 was seaworthy, but she was not yet fully armed. To pull this off, Belloni needed both torpedoes and the blessing of the French government. As this theft was taking place, British and French emissaries were working tirelessly to convince Italy to join their cause.

Near Misses, French Cannons, and Cold Feet

Period German U-boat similar silhouette to F-43, misidentification risk at Corsica
French gunners nearly engaged the F-43 after mistaking it for a period German U-boat like the one shown here. Public domain.

It didn’t take long for officers at the shipyard to notice that one of their new submarines was missing. The Italian Navy subsequently sent out patrols to search for the wayward boat. Italian destroyers saturated the area, but F-43 successfully avoided detection. However, along the way, Belloni’s crew began to grow suspicious that this so-called top-secret mission was not everything it was made out to be.

Corsica was held by the French. Upon their arrival, French shore batteries mistook F-43 for a German U-boat and very narrowly avoided engaging her.

Belloni made contact with French Naval authorities and explained his audacious plan. After carefully pondering Belloni’s request for ordnance, they told him he had lost his mind and suggested he go back from whence he came. The entire world was a tinderbox, and supporting this blatant act of piracy seemed ill-advised.

Belloni’s crew had had about enough by this point. Despite LT Belloni threatening to haul them up on charges of mutiny, these hapless Italian sailors surrendered themselves and their stolen boat to the French. The French then notified the Italian Navy that they had located their wayward submarine.

Arrest, Acquittal, and the War’s Turn

Military tribunal era image, WW1 courts martial context for Belloni
It was borderline miraculous that the authorities did not convict LT Belloni and execute him. Bundesarchiv.

The French dispatched F-43 back to Italy without its piratical captain. Lt. Belloni stayed behind in Corsica under arrest to face trial for stealing the submarine and plotting to instigate global war, among other things.

Under normal circumstances, Belloni would have been convicted and shot. However, in May of 1915, Italy did indeed enter the war on the side of France and England. The military magistrates tasked with Belloni’s prosecution acquitted him, and he returned home. All was forgiven.

With Italy now fully involved in the war, the Italians formally requisitioned F-43 and renamed it Argonauta. Argonauta served the Italian Navy throughout the rest of the war. LT Belloni went on to become an influential figure in the post-war Italian Navy.

From Argonauta to Frogmen

Lieutenant Angelo Belloni later career, pioneer of military diving and special operations
LT Angelo Belloni not only survived his bit of submarine larceny, but he also went on to radically expand the field of military diving.

Angelo Belloni eventually became a pioneer in the nascent field of military diving. He parlayed his propensity for audacious covert operations into a very effective underwater capability. Belloni helped establish the elite Decima Flottiglia MAS. These slippery Italian frogmen paved the way for what would eventually become the US Navy SEALs.

Italian frogmen, inspired and trained by Belloni, eventually caused the Allies no end of headaches during World War 2. Operating human torpedoes called Maiale or “Pigs,” these audacious early special operators infiltrated Allied ports under cover of darkness to attack warships at anchor. These Maiale vehicles sported a pair of seats, a steering apparatus, and a high-explosive warhead.

Alexandria 1941 The Punch Heard Across the Med

Italian Decima MAS frogmen in early drysuits with Maiale manned torpedoes, WW2
It took some serious stones to go to war dressed like this.

On 19 December 1941, six Italian frogmen operating three of these vehicles infiltrated Alexandria harbor in Egypt. Their primary objectives were the two British battleships HMS Valiant and HMS Queen Elizabeth. By following in the wake of British destroyers and avoiding depth charges, these bold Italian sailors successfully made their approach.

The Italian divers secured their torpedoes underneath the Valiant, the Queen Elizabeth, and the tanker Sedonia, which was refueling the British destroyer HMS Jarvis at the time. All six Italian operators were ultimately captured, but both battleships, as well as the Sedonia, were sunk. Jarvis was badly damaged. Half a dozen highly-trained Italian frogmen had shifted the balance of Naval power in the Med at the cost of three consumable torpedoes.

Legacy From Italian Frogmen to SEALs

Modern US Navy SEALs training evolution traced to early Italian combat swimmers
We’ve come a long way since LT Belloni ran off with that former-Russian submarine at the beginning of WW1. Public domain.

Nowadays, Naval Special Warfare is obviously a highly refined art form. US Navy SEALs can operate most anywhere on Planet Earth, conducting bold direct action missions the likes of which might only have been dreamt of a generation before. The specialized equipment and training required to do those remarkable things were decades in the making.

Curiously, all of that really did get its start with a young Italian pirate who took it upon himself to personally shape the geopolitics of the world. That same fearless spirit and willingness to act against long odds eventually suffused its way into the Navy SEALs, hands-down the most effective maritime special operations force in the world.

The Italians get a pretty bad rap when it comes to military operations in the 20th century. It sometimes seems that perhaps their well of military awesomeness ran dry with the passing of the Caesars. However, LT Angelo Belloni was one seriously steely-eyed frogman.

Categories
All About Guns Anti Civil Rights ideas & "Friends" Paint me surprised by this

Report: People Back Gun Control, Until They’re Asked to Pay for It by Dave Workman

Ammo and U.S. currency illustrating research showing declining public support for gun control when enforcement costs increase
A new study finds Americans become considerably less enthusiastic about firearm restrictions when asked to pay higher taxes to enforce them. iStock-1085946532

There’s an interesting report in Health Affairs Scholar which adds a new dimension to the adage that “money talks and B.S. walks.”

According to the authors— Robert Zeithammer, Supriya Kapur, Diana Silver and James Macinko—“While support for firearm restrictions in alcohol-serving venues is widespread, even modest implementation costs significantly reduce public backing.” It is an interesting read, and the authors deserve credit for broaching a subject which has gotten very little attention. Simply put: “How much are you willing to pay for the restrictive ‘feel good’ law you want to impose?”

The UCLA Anderson Review looked at the report and summed it up: Setting an annual tax of, say, $100 per taxpayer “seems to erode backing for restrictions on guns in alcohol-serving establishments.” In other words, people are keen about gun control so long as they don’t have to pay for it.

Amusingly, the UCLA Anderson Review observes, “The results suggest voters, given a price for a law, can be stingy, even in matters of public safety.”

Gun Control Support Weakens When Taxpayers Face the Bill

The discussion by Zeithammer and his colleagues focuses on a question about prohibiting firearms in establishments where alcohol is served. Regulations vary from state to state—in Washington, for example, people cannot carry firearms into areas of an establishment posted off-limits to anyone under age 21, because alcohol is served, yet someone can remain in the dining area and possibly have a cocktail, even if they’re discreetly packing, or if others at their table are drinking—while the authors note, “A recently published analysis of the current legal landscape found 10 different types of alcohol-related firearm laws, with nearly every state having passed at least 1 of these types of laws.”

The Anderson Review article notes, “These restrictions vary widely. Texas, for example, prohibits guns in establishments that get at least 51% of their revenue from alcohol sales, while New Mexico bans concealed firearms in any premise where alcohol is consumed.”

The notion of adding a cost-per-taxpayer to restricting guns in bars—and the reaction to it—may open up a broader conversation about gun control. Gun control supporters evidently get less enthusiastic about enforcing the laws they push when they have to specifically dig into their wallets to pay for it.

A $100 Tax Changes Attitudes Toward Firearm Restrictions

As noted in the study abstract, “Results show that when no enforcement costs are included, a majority of the respondent sample weighted to voting-eligible Americans (56%-74%, depending on the restricted group and venue size) supports firearm restrictions, with support exceeding 65% for restrictions in large venues.

 

However, introducing a $100 annual cost reduces support: significant majority support remains only for restricting combinations of felons, intoxicated people, or those with alcohol-related convictions and only in large venues.”

How’s that for a strategy to cool the verbal jets of gun prohibitionists? For each restrictive law they force on gun owners, they get billed for their enthusiasm.

While this may initially seem humorous to Second Amendment activists, Zeithammer, Kapur, Silver and Macinko have actually cracked open a “Pandora’s Box” of sorts, which amounts to an uncomfortable revelation: Gun control supporters aren’t so willing to “put their money where their mouth is.” The four researchers may have done a major public service.

Their research also sought reaction to prohibitions on guns in theaters and other “large venues.”

What the Gun Control Study Reveals About Public Opinion

There are three key points in the Health Affairs Scholar report:

  • While a majority of respondents favor firearm restrictions in alcohol-serving venues, support is stronger for larger venues and varies modestly by the targeted population.
  • Introducing even modest individual costs (eg, $100 annually) substantially reduces majority support, highlighting the importance of cost framing in legislative proposals.
  • Support is more strongly associated with gender and political affiliation (highest among women across political parties) than firearm ownership status.

The Anderson Review article includes a link to the Brady Campaign website, where one reads this claim: “Every year, gun violence kills over 40,000 people and wounds over 75,000 others in the United States. Gun violence costs the United States $557 billion annually – equivalent to 2.6% of the country’s Gross Domestic Product.

That’s more than twice what the Department of Education spent to educate US youth in FY 2022 ($235.74 billion). Every year, gun violence costs taxpayers $12.62 billion – or $273,904 per firearm death and $25,150 per nonfatal firearm injury.”

However, if one follows the links, one winds up at another report, from the Harvard Medical School in 2022, which refers to “research by Zirui Song, associate professor of health care policy in the Blavatnik Institute at Harvard Medical School and associate professor of medicine at Massachusetts General Hospital.”

This report also notes, “In his newest paper, published Sept. 27 in JAMA, Song reported that the overall economic cost of firearm injuries in the United States has been estimated at $557 billion annually, or 2.6 percent of gross domestic product.”

It’s an estimate, which Brady passes off as gospel.

And for the sake of argument, one might observe that “gun violence” doesn’t kill anyone. People misusing firearms are responsible for those fatalities, not the firearms, themselves.

Should Gun Control Advocates Have to Explain the Cost?

But the discussion is now launched, courtesy of the four researchers. Should every proposed gun control law include a cost-per-taxpayer for implementation, so that supporters understand how much money their ideas might pull from their checkbooks?

It could spawn an entirely new debate that puts a price tag on anti-gun activism.


About Dave Workman

Dave Workman is a senior editor at TheGunMag.com and Liberty Park Press, author of multiple books on the Right to Keep & Bear Arms, and formerly an NRA-certified firearms instructor.Dave Workman

Categories
COOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! HUH! I WANT ONE ASAP!!! Manly Stuff Paint me surprised by this Real men This great Nation & Its People

Building a Log House in 36 Minutes TIMELAPSE

Well I don’t know about you but I thought that this was Uber Cool in my book! (Yeah I have always wanted a log cabin to live in but I kind of doubt it is going to happen) Grumpy

Categories
All About Guns Cops Gun Fearing Wussies Paint me surprised by this

Ruby Ridge to Adamiak: ATF’s Troubled History With Criminal Informants by John Crump

PPS-43 parts kit with cut receiver sections, bolt, and recoil spring displayed on a wooden table.
Government records describe Gregory Pruess as a paid ATF informant in Patrick Tate Adamiak’s prosecution. Pruess denies assisting the bureau. The classification of cut receivers, similar to this PPS-43 kit, was a central dispute in ATF’s prosecution of Patrick Tate Adamiak. IMG Duncan Johnson

ATF’s reliance on confidential informants, including convicted felons facing fresh criminal charges, raises a recurring question: What happens when the government builds a firearms case around someone with powerful incentives to deliver results? Federal reviews have documented failures in the bureau’s disclosure and oversight of informants. Patrick Tate Adamiak’s prosecution brings those concerns into focus again.

At Ruby Ridge, a Justice Department review identified failures to disclose an ATF informant’s full compensation arrangement. At Waco, ATF’s own chronology describes a confidential source tipping a reporter about the impending operation before the bureau changed the raid date. In 2017, the Justice Department’s inspector general concluded that ATF’s confidential-informant oversight “required significant improvement,” identifying weaknesses in recordkeeping, payment tracking, and review of higher-risk sources.

In Adamiak’s case, the government relied on Gregory Pruess, a repeatedly convicted felon. According to the government’s appellate brief filed in July, 2024, ATF found Pruess unlawfully possessing two pistols and a rifle, secured his cooperation to avoid criminal charges, and paid him about $8,000. An earlier ATF affidavit from April, 2022, however, said no promises or guarantees were made.

Adamiak says Pruess delivered parts to his home, then introduced him by email to a man using the name Rick Hayes. The government says Hayes was Pruess himself, operating under an identity created at an ATF agent’s direction. Adamiak spent nearly four years in federal custody before President Donald Trump pardoned him in September 2026. His case raises the same accountability questions that have followed ATF’s informant practices for decades: how was the source vetted and supervised, what incentives shaped his conduct, and what was disclosed to the defense?

Gregory Pruess’s Criminal Record and Documented ATF Cooperation

ATF informant Gregory Pruess had a criminal record and powerful incentives to deliver results—raising serious questions about his reliability.

The last conviction on Pruess’s record before the Adamiak case is United States v. Pruess, 703 F.3d 242 (4th Cir. 2012). He pleaded guilty to possessing ammunition as a convicted felon, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1), and reserved the right to argue that the ban could not be applied to him because he was, he said, nonviolent. Judge Diana Gribbon Motz rejected that claim and affirmed on December 31, 2012. The district court had sentenced him to 21 months and a $550 fine.

Reading the 2012 opinion provides the history behind that plea. Pruess was a licensed firearms dealer and collector of weapons and military memorabilia, and he owned and operated a military museum. His first experience with law enforcement came in 1994, after an undercover operation by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms, the government charged him with twelve firearms offenses tied to his possession and transfer of three grenades and a mortar round, all with obliterated identification and lot numbers. He pleaded guilty to one felony count. The court sentenced him to twelve months.

Soon after his release, he went back to arms dealing as a felon. The Fourth Circuit wrote that he sold UZI submachine-gun barrels, M-16 components, M-122 remote firing devices, AK-47 machine guns, grenades, and other weapons, including stolen weapons, to undercover agents and a cooperating witness. On one sale, he brought extra guns and told the agents the guns were for protection, or in case anything went wrong with the deal. Authorities arrested him and charged him with twenty-five firearms violations. This was tied to a ring stealing weapons from Camp Lejeune. He pleaded guilty to eighteen counts. The court sentenced him to 108 months and 60 months, to run concurrently. In 1999, shortly before that sentencing, he ordered a pistol online using an altered firearms license. He pleaded guilty to an additional count. The court added eight months.

After he got out, he tried to buy belted ammunition, grenades, and parachute flares from a confidential informant, knowing they were likely stolen. Agents arrested him after he paid for the ammunition. That purchase is the 922(g) conviction the Fourth Circuit affirmed in 2012.

His 2009 judgment barred him from any business or hobby involving firearms or ammunition and from acting as an informant without the court’s permission. Those restrictions likely ended when supervised release ended around 2013, though public dockets could not confirm that date. Even so, the government’s brief in the Adamiak appeal describes Pruess as running a gun store around 2020 and 2021.

Parts Delivery and the Rick Hayes Introduction

The government’s brief and Adamiak do agree on how he met Gregory Pruess. Around November 2020, Adamiak started buying firearm parts from Pruess, who operated a gun store in North Carolina. Adamiak says those were USGI parts, and that the tab ran $60,000 to $70,000: hammers, springs, barrels, heat shields, and pins for AR-15s, M240s, M2HBs, and MK46s, plus a tripod.

Adamiak says Pruess delivered the parts to his house. That, he says, is when Pruess saw the parts kits.

According to Adamiak, it was after that meeting that Pruess introduced him through email to a man called Rick Hayes. Pruess said he had met Hayes at the Knob Creek, the Kentucky machine-gun shoot, and that Hayes wanted Adamiak’s extra parts kits for movie productions. Adamiak sold him kits. Hayes wanted more. Adamiak says he pointed Hayes to online listings because he didn’t have any extra kits. Hayes said he did not know how to use GunBroker and asked Adamiak to “bird-dog” the kits for him. Adamiak was already buying an M79 from a licensed dealer on GunBroker. That dealer had PPSh-41 kits and offered a deal on the kits and the M79 together. Adamiak says those are the kits that went to Rick Hayes.

Gunbroker exhibit PPSH41
Gunbroker exhibit PPSH41

According to the government’s later brief, between July 2021, when Adamiak met Pruess at his home, and October, 2021, ATF found that Pruess unlawfully possessed two pistols and a rifle. The government’s Adamiak brief says he agreed to cooperate to avoid criminal charges and was paid about $8,000. No federal charge from that search appears on the public record. The ATF affidavit filed in 2022 states that no promises or guarantees were made to Pruess regarding his cooperation in Adamiak’s case. The government’s own documents do not agree with each other.

That contradiction is not a paperwork quibble. Confidential informant cases turn on what the source was promised, what he was paid, and what he still had to lose. A jury that hears “no promises were made” hears a different case than a jury that hears the source was cooperating to stay out of prison and was paid thousands of dollars to deliver.

Affidavit Of ATF Special Agent William Hairston Jr.
Affidavit Of ATF Special Agent William Hairston Jr., April 2022
Screenshot of government's brief in Adamiak case.
Screenshot of government’s brief in Adamiak case. Filed in 2024

Who Was “Rick Hayes”?

The government’s brief and ATF Special Agent William Hairston Jr.’s affidavit tell the Hayes introduction differently.

According to the ATF agent’s affidavit, in October 2021, Pruess told ATF Special Agent William Hairston Jr. that Adamiak was trafficking machine guns on the internet and that Pruess had seen what he thought were destructive devices in Adamiak’s house. Hairston directed Pruess to open an email account under the name Rick Hayes so he could deal with Adamiak without revealing his identity. As Hayes, Pruess asked about “any kind of saw-cut machine guns that were easily put back together.”

“Direct Examination of C.I. Gregory Pruess on October 19, 2022.” Appendix O of Adamiak’s Supreme Court petition in No. 25-1190, starting at page 176a.
“Direct Examination of C.I. Gregory Pruess on October 19, 2022.” Appendix O of Adamiak’s Supreme Court petition in No. 25-1190, starting at page 176a.

In November 2021, ATF used him to buy a PPSh-41 receiver for $2,200. Controlled purchases continued into 2022. Agents then searched Adamiak’s properties.

On the government’s account, Rick Hayes was not a Knob Creek contact shopping for movie props. Rick Hayes was, in fact, Gregory Pruess.

From the brief:

“Agent Hairston directed Pruess to create an email account using a fake name, ‘Rick Hayes,’ to communicate with Adamiak without revealing Pruess’s identity.” As Hayes, Pruess asked about “any kind of saw-cut machine guns that were easily put back together.”

In November 2021, ATF used him to buy a PPSh-41 receiver for $2,200. The brief says the receiver had a single saw cut and could be put back together with minimal effort. A second November buy was five PPS-43 receivers for $7,050. Counts One and Two were the PPSh-41 sold to “Rick Hayes” in March 2022, the government brief stated.

Pruess Denies Helping ATF

Pruess, contacted by AmmoLand News, denied cooperating with the ATF even though his testimony under oath shows that he did, and the government called him a Confidential Informant.

“I don’t know what ATF did or didn’t do. I gave no assistance. That’s why I went to prison each time,” Pruess wrote in an email to AmmoLand.

Pruess said agents came after him on three occasions because he would not give in, that they offered him chances to “save myself,” and that he “did the honorable thing” by refusing. “They kept telling me if I don’t cooperate, I’ll regret it later, and they were correct on that.” He wrote that he never would cooperate with ATF “despite being beaten to death legally by them over the years.”

However, looking at the 2012 opinion and Pruess’ record, there is much that his email omits. Those documents describe a man who pleaded guilty in 1994, pleaded guilty to eighteen counts after going back to dealing, picked up eight more months for an altered dealer license, and then pleaded guilty again after paying for ammunition he believed was stolen. On top of all that, the Adamiak brief says ATF found two pistols and a rifle in Gregory Pruess’s house, asked him to cooperate to avoid charges, and paid him about $8,000.

Pruess’ denial stands in stark contrast to the government’s record of his legal issues and contact with the ATF.

Then, Pruess gave AmmoLand a third origin story. He wrote that people who turned out to be undercover asked him for parts kits, that he did not have any, and that he directed them to Adamiak’s GunBroker ads.

“Sure wish I never made that referral,” Pruess wrote to AmmoLand. “They asked me while they were undercover if I knew anybody else that had stuff, and I pointed to other people on GunBroker… that is how I got tangled up in this mess.”

A customer who spent $60,000 to $70,000 on USGI parts, a man introduced via email as a Knob Creek buyer, and a paid confidential source are three different facts. Adamiak describes the first two. The government’s brief describes the third. Pruess describes a referral he now regrets.

In the same email to AmmoLand, Pruess described himself as a witness. Pruess wrote that he was subpoenaed to testify, that he was told the government would handle any intimidation, and that further reporting could draw a criminal charge for “intimidation of a federal witness.” He also wrote that he would take legal action if he saw “any nonsense.” A request for comment is not witness intimidation.

If accurate, the subpoena claim is itself an admission that he was in the case as a witness. It does not sit easily next to “I gave no assistance.” AmmoLand News asked which proceeding he was subpoenaed for. Pruess did not reply.

Pruess also offered his account of the evidence presented in Adamiak’s case. He wrote that he used to be a destructive-device manufacturer and that the RPG-7 he was shown in the courtroom did not have the trigger-group parts destroyed or a hole cut through the bore the same size as the bore, “only a very small hole.” He wrote that the firing mechanism was not welded shut and that no crossbars were welded inside, “as was the regulation.”

On the receivers, Pruess wrote that Adamiak was selling improperly single-saw-cut receivers, cut once with a fine blade, and that “you could have glued it back together and it would function more than one shot at a time.” He wrote that he could “only figure” the parts came from Europe, because a receipt from another parts dealer “would have been the end of his case.” Those are his claims about what he was shown in court. They restate the government’s trial theory. They are not findings. Adamiak says the PPSh kits came from a licensed GunBroker dealer, in a package deal with an M79 he was already buying, and that he sold those kits to the man Pruess introduced as Rick Hayes.

Pruess made one allegation in the emails with AmmoLand that was initially nowhere to be found in the public appellate record. Pruess wrote that Adamiak “got so much time because of witness intimidation” before sentencing, and that Adamiak had not mentioned it. No sentencing memorandum or appellate filing reviewed for this story establishes intimidation by Adamiak. Until a docket entry says it, it is an allegation from the informant, not a fact about the sentence.

After further investigation, AmmoLand found the only allegation of witness intimidation in the case did not involve Adamiak. The government cited a video by Mr. Guns & Gear that named Pruess, but the judge rejected the motion because Pruess’s name was already in the public record.

Pruess Offers Saw-Cut Parts Kits for Sale

Pruess did not deny selling kits. He wrote that “all the few little parts kits that I have sold off, trying to raise money to survive, were legally imported by the thousands,” unlike what he says Adamiak sold. Gregory Pruess remains active on the Sturmgewehr forums, where he has posted since 2016, mostly under the name g36kinnc, including for-sale ads for submachine-gun parts kits.

Pruess's post on https://www.sturmgewehr.com/
Pruess’s post on https://www.sturmgewehr.com/

AmmoLand News contacted him under an alias and asked about kits. Pruess offered to sell a British Sterling kit for $850 and an Italian Franchi 9mm submachine-gun kit for $900. Both were described as saw-cut. A saw cut does not, by itself, make a kit illegal. Legality turns on when the cut was made, how it was made, and whether the parts can be readily restored under the National Firearms Act (NFA). The government’s brief says Pruess asked Adamiak to supply the same class of parts while working for ATF. Pruess closed that part of the email by blaming Congress, not the seller: “None of that stuff should be illegal. Saw cut or not.”

Pruess offered to sell this saw-cut firearm to AmmoLand through email. Pruess selling on https://www.sturmgewehr.com/
Pruess offered to sell this saw-cut firearm to AmmoLand through email. Pruess selling on https://www.sturmgewehr.com/
Pruess selling on https://www.sturmgewehr.com/
Offered to sell to AmmoLand though email. Pruess selling on https://www.sturmgewehr.com/

Pruess also blamed Adamiak’s freedom on publicity. “He has just gotten extremely lucky. Social media lobbied enough to believe what he was saying and got him a pardon,” he wrote. “Now it looks like he’s screwing it up fast and hard sadly.” He wrote that he was glad Adamiak “survived it with a good outcome,” and added that his own case had no GoFundMe and no pardon.

Ruby Ridge, Waco, and Documented ATF Informant Failures

Confidential informants have figured in the record of several of ATF’s most controversial operations, from Ruby Ridge and Waco to the case of Patrick Tate Adamiak. Their roles differed, and their presence alone does not prove they caused the failures that followed. But these cases raise a recurring question: when the government relies on a source with a criminal record, personal incentives, or influence over a target, what safeguards ensure that source is reliable—and not driving the investigation?

At Ruby Ridge, a Justice Department review flagged the failure to disclose all aspects of an ATF informant’s compensation arrangement during the prosecution. At Waco, a confidential source tipped a reporter that “something big” might happen at the Branch Davidian compound; ATF’s chronology says the bureau then moved its planned raid from Monday to Sunday. Years later, the Justice Department’s inspector general concluded that ATF’s oversight of its confidential-informant program “required significant improvement,” citing weaknesses in recordkeeping, payment tracking, and review of higher-risk informants.

Adamiak’s Pardon Leaves Accountability Questions Unanswered

The government’s theory and Adamiak’s are not reconcilable, and a jury accepted the government’s. What is reconcilable, because it is in the government’s own papers, is the informant’s motive as the brief describes it. He had unlawful guns in his house. He was asked to cooperate to avoid charges. He was paid about $8,000. His email denies that account and, in the same message, warns a reporter off as a federal witness. Adamiak says the man who delivered $8,000 to $10,000 in USGI parts to his house is the same man who, a month later, introduced Rick Hayes. The brief says Rick Hayes was the deliveryman. Those two sentences cannot both be the whole story. The Fourth Circuit had already written the earlier half of Pruess’s record in 2012.

For many Americans who distrust the ATF, cases like Ruby Ridge and Adamiak’s reinforce a longstanding concern: informants with criminal records and personal incentives can become powerful forces in investigations, while the public may never see the full terms of their cooperation. Adamiak’s pardon ended his prison sentence; it did not resolve the conflict between the government’s account that Pruess cooperated to avoid charges and received about $8,000 and the ATF affidavit stating that no promises were made. Until that contradiction—and what the defense was told about Pruess’s role—is explained, the central question remains: what safeguards keep an informant from shaping the case the government brings?

AmmoLand News contacted ATF’s media office for comment, but received no response before publication. This article will be updated if ATF responds.

Related: Trump Pardons Patrick ‘Tate’ Adamiak, George Peterson After ATF Prosecutions


About John Crump

Mr. Crump is an NRA instructor and constitutional activist with more than 26 years of experience in networking and cybersecurity for major Fortune 100 companies. John has written about firearms, the Constitution, and cybersecurity, and has interviewed people from all walks of life. John lives in Northern Virginia with his wife and sons. Follow him on X at @right2bear, or at www.crumpy.com.Investigative journalist John Crump

Categories
All About Guns Paint me surprised by this

Quality of Guns in 2026 WTF

Categories
Paint me surprised by this

The Dark Secrets Of FDR’s 4th Presidential Term | The Wheelchair President Real History

Categories
Born again Cynic! California EVIL MF Grumpy's hall of Shame Paint me surprised by this You have to be kidding, right!?!

The secret Cold War bioweapons test that exposed millions in the Bay Area By Katie Dowd,

US Army leadership decided the best way to protect the nation from a bioweapons attack was by attempting to poison the American people first
Aerial view of industrial areas and piers near the Embarcadero neighborhood of San Francisco, with the San Francisco Bay and Alcatraz Island visible, likely taken from Coit Tower, 1950. 

Aerial view of industrial areas and piers near the Embarcadero neighborhood of San Francisco, with the San Francisco Bay and Alcatraz Island visible, likely taken from Coit Tower, 1950.

Morse Collection/Gado/Getty Images

The story spoke of simulated biological attacks on San Francisco that took place over a few days in 1950. No one in the city knew the test was happening, and at least one civilian, a 75-year-old man, died after being exposed to the bacteria. The man’s name was Edward Nevin.

That article was how the Nevin family, scattered across the Bay Area, learned about what actually killed their beloved patriarch decades earlier. And although largely forgotten today, the story set off a firestorm of anger and fear about the U.S. government treating its citizens like a laboratory full of guinea pigs.

The American government has done many evil things in the name of national security, but few were as nefarious as its human experiments during the Cold War. Ordinary people were drugged with LSD, subjected to psychological abuse and pushed to the breaking point and beyond. With paranoia about the Soviet Union at a fever pitch in the 1950s, the government was obsessed with the threat of attack.

In 1950, U.S. Army leadership decided the best way to protect the nation from a Soviet bioweapons attack was by attempting to poison the American people first.

They identified eight cities across the country that were possible targets, among them San Francisco. To see how far deadly particles could spread through the air, scientists suggested the Army use a bacteria called Serratia marcescens.

Serratia first caught the attention of scientists in the early 1800s, when the people of Padua, Italy, saw something unusual: Their polenta kept turning red. Paranoid villagers brought in priests, fearful of a devilish influence on their dinner, but scientists discovered the organisms weren’t satanic. They were bacterial.

A Serratia marcescens colony is seen in a lab. The bacteria is known for its distinctive red color.

A Serratia marcescens colony is seen in a lab. The bacteria is known for its distinctive red color.

Sinhyu/Getty Images

In a healthy individual, Serratia marcescens exposure normally isn’t a problem, but for people who are immunocompromised, and especially those hospitalized, a seemingly harmless infection can become fatal.

Those infected can develop pneumonia, heart inflammation called endocarditis, meningitis or blood poisoning. Serratia marcescens is also largely resistant to antibiotics even today, making successful treatment difficult. But none of this was known to the military officials about to dose San Francisco with the bacteria.

In late September 1950, a warship normally used as a minesweeper was outfitted with commercial spraying equipment. Inside the sprayers was a slurry of Serratia bacteria. As the minesweeper sat a few miles offshore, the sprayers sent the bacteria wafting onto the wind into the city.

On Sept. 27, the final day of the test, like so many mornings in San Francisco, clouds drifted low over the water. A cool wind blew off the ocean, ruffling the hair of bankers hurrying to work in the Financial District, families grocery shopping in the Mission, and tourists taking in the view at Fisherman’s Wharf.

According to a declassified Army report, almost every person in San Francisco that day inhaled 5,000 or more particles per minute over the course of several hours. “San Francisco residents were inhaling millions of bacteria and particles every day during the week of testing,” Leonard Cole wrote in his book “Clouds of Secrecy.”

Government records would later show the bacteria dispersed much farther than the city of San Francisco. Clouds reached Army monitoring stations in Colma, Daly City, Sausalito and across the bay in Albany, Berkeley, Oakland and San Leandro.

‘The scientific method gone mad’

Within days, Stanford University Hospital in San Francisco began seeing a spike in unusual cases: Illnesses caused by exposure to Serratia marcescens. In the history of the hospital, they’d never had a single case. Now, they had 11.

Among them was a 75-year-old retired PG&E employee named Edward Nevin. He’d recently had a procedure for a prostate condition, but there had been no complications and he’d returned home.

Suddenly, though, he took a turn for the worse, experiencing what his son called “intense pain and suffering.” Nevin was rushed back to the hospital. Whatever ailed him didn’t respond to antibiotics, and Nevin languished for three weeks before dying.

A view of the urban skyline of downtown San Francisco on a sunny day, likely taken from Coit Tower, 1950. 

A view of the urban skyline of downtown San Francisco on a sunny day, likely taken from Coit Tower, 1950.

Morse Collection/Gado/Getty Images

“The doctors insisted on an autopsy,” his son Edward Nevin Jr. said. “They apparently were as perplexed as we were.”

The autopsy found Nevin had died of a heart infection caused by Serratia marcescens. The San Francisco outbreak was so sudden and mysterious that a group of Stanford physicians wrote up the event for a medical journal.

But although the Army now knew their experiment had likely killed a man, the tests continued for another 16 years in cities across the nation. One so-called “vulnerability test” involved secretly dropping a light bulb filled with bacteria from a New York City subway train. Samples found traces of the bacteria in tunnels spread from 14th to 58th Street.

In 1976, the experiments burst onto the national consciousness as some reports were declassified. The impacts, doctors and scientists feared, were long-ranging.

At San Francisco General Hospital, two dozen patients since 1969 had been diagnosed with endocarditis caused by Serratia marcescens; 13 of them died. A staff physician at the hospital told the Chronicle the cluster was 5 to 10 times the national average, and it was possible the uptick was linked, even years later, to that Army test.

The Embarcadero is seen from a photo taken near Coit Tower in 1950.

The Embarcadero is seen from a photo taken near Coit Tower in 1950.

Morse Collection/Gado/Getty Images

After learning about the likely cause of his grandfather’s death, Edward Nevin III spoke with the Chronicle. “It is just incredible — the scientific method gone mad — Dr. Strangelove, but it is not fiction,” he said. “The Department of the Army completely disregarded the dignity of the individual.”

Nevin III, who worked as a lawyer, sued the U.S. government on behalf of his family. By then, many of the leaders of the experiment were retired, aging but unrepentant about what they’d done.

The technical director of the government’s biological warfare program during the 1950s testified that “the Bay Area populace should be pleased” that they’d been unknowingly sprayed with bacteria in the name of Cold War safety. Another scientist said if he was put in the same position, with the knowledge he now had, he’d still run the test.

A jet plane from the Naval Air Reserve flies directly above the huge Oakland Naval Supply Center in 1950.

A jet plane from the Naval Air Reserve flies directly above the huge Oakland Naval Supply Center in 1950.

Bettmann Archive

With some government documents still classified — and the only contemporaneous account of Nevin’s death coming from Stanford’s medical journal article — there wasn’t enough evidence to prove the test had definitively caused his death.

A judge ruled against the Nevins, ending their legal quest for justice. But in the court of public opinion, history has joined their side. Nevin is regularly cited as a victim of the test, a death that the government apparently chalked up as a necessary evil to win the Cold War. When his son, Edward Jr., died in 2017, his obituary called it “one of the government’s darkest secrets.”

The long-term impacts

Then, there are the test’s ripples through the 21st century.

In 2001, a Bay Area UPS driver with chronic back pain went to his healthcare provider for a cortisone shot. Two days later, he died of bacterial meningitis. Within weeks, three deaths had been linked to contaminated cortisone shots prepared in a Walnut Creek pharmacy; the shots had all been tainted by Serratia bacteria, which can cause meningitis if injected near the spinal cord.

Much like the 1969 outbreak of Serratia-caused endocarditis cases, scientists wondered whether the 1950 experiment had done something fundamental to the Bay Area ecosystem. An infectious diseases professor at UC Berkeley said scientists could not dispel the theory that pumping millions of bacteria into the air had permanently changed the Bay Area’s microbial ecology.

To prove it one way or another, scientists needed samples of the Army’s 1950 strain of Serratia to compare with modern-day outbreaks. The government has never handed those over, if they were preserved at all.

Although Edward Nevin’s death devastated his close-knit family, his life has reverberated across the generations. He immigrated from Ireland, raised seven children in the Mission with his wife Mary and watched their children and grandchildren become nurses, teachers, police officers, lawyers and even the mayor of Daly City. His life was cut short, but his legacy remains.

Nevin is buried among family in the Holy Cross Catholic Cemetery in Colma. On summer days, soft fog rolls through the graveyard in waves. But now, it carries only the cool mist from the sea, fresh and clean.

Categories
All About Guns Paint me surprised by this

Switzerland: Tons of Guns but No Mass Shootings. How?

Categories
California Good News for a change! HUH! Interesting stuff One Hell of a Good Fight Paint me surprised by this

HUH!!!!!!!!

650-Pound Blue Marlin Caught off San Diego Coast Breaks State Fishing Record

 It took a crew of anglers to land a catch for the record books off the coast of San Diego this week — a 648-pound blue marlin, smashing the California state fishing record.

The sports fishing charter, piloted by 32-year-old captain Alec Stockfelt, showed up at the docks of the Southern California city earlier this week, wowing onlookers as the nearly half dozen fisherman wrestled the giant fish to a weigh station at Fisherman’s Landing.

The previous blue marlin sports fishing title holder weighed in at 395, caught in the waters off San Diego in 2021.

The previous record at that location for any fish caught was some 598 pounds, the captain said.

An adult male grizzly bear weighs about 600 pounds, for comparison.

Anglers and captains expect 2026 to be a robust year for records due to El Niño weather patterns bringing in more exotic sea life.

Marlin belong to a rare group, less than 1% of fish species, that exhibit regional endothermy. They maintain a “heater organ” near the eyes and brain. This organ keeps neural tissue warm even when the fish dives into cold, deep waters to hunt.

In addition, this warm-blooded adaptation gives them a massive neurological advantage. Their visual processing and reaction times remain sharp at depth. Therefore, they can detect and pursue prey far more effectively than their cold-blooded targets.

The Pacific blue marlin world record, caught off Kona, Hawaii in 1982, stands at 1,376 pounds.

Categories
Paint me surprised by this

5 Things You Learn at the Gun Range With Your White Friends