Categories
All About Guns

A Great Article from the Daily Kona about the International Harvester Garand Rifle

The International Harvester Garand, The Rifle for the Nuclear Age

I am on vacation and I am using my baby laptop and blogging on this laptop is better than using my phone…but not by much, the curser will “wander” and if I am not paying attention, it will move and I will find myself putting my writings in the middle of the prior paragraph.   And yes it happened several times on this blog post.

I always had a fascination with the Garand, and I have had Blogged about the Garand and had adventures with the rifle, …until my lamented kayak accident *Sniff, Sniff*

My Son Shooting my Winchester Garand before the tragic Kayak Accident *sniff*sniff*

I had  wondered about the fuss about the IH Garand, but I never asked “why”.  After reading the article from “American Rifleman” I now understand the reasoning and the fascination

.At the conclusion of World War II, the M1 Garand had garnered a well-deserved reputation as the best standardized service rifle of the conflict. Large numbers of Garands were in inventory after Victory over Japan Day, and it was assumed they were sufficient to meet the needs of our armed forces for the foreseeable future. Five years later, though, this illusion was shattered when hostilities commenced on the Korean Peninsula.

Many of the M1 rifles left over from World War II were taken from storage and refurbished for issue to troops departing overseas. To augment the supply of existing rifles, the U.S. Ordnance Dept. elected to put the M1 rifle back into production. Springfield Armory ramped up its Garand production line as quickly as possible, but additional sources were needed. As was often the case in previous wars, the government turned to civilian firms for production of all manner of military items, including firearms.

On June 15, 1951, the Ordnance Dept. granted a contract for 100,000 M1 rifles to the International Harvester Co (IHC). The rifles were to be manufactured at the firm’s Evansville, Ind., plant with deliveries scheduled to begin in December 1952. The Evansville facility was built during World War II by the Republic Aviation Corp. for production of the P-47 Thunderbolt fighter.

In 1945, International Harvester bought the former aircraft factory and converted it for manufacture of farm implements and refrigeration and air conditioning units. The selection of International Harvester was, to say the least, a rather interesting choice. Although the company manufactured vehicles—including half-tracks, trucks and tractors—during World War II, the firm had never made firearms, either civilian or military.

One of the major reasons behind the government’s seemingly unusual selection of International Harvester to produce M1 rifles was the plant’s geographic location. All of the more than 4 million M1 rifles that had been previously made by Springfield Armory and Winchester were manufactured within a radius of about 60 miles (the distance between Springfield, Mass., and New Haven, Conn.).

This may not have seemed important in the late 1930s or early 1940s, but the dawn of the Atomic Age put it in an entirely different perspective. Since most of the established armsmakers were in the New England area, a nuclear attack on the Eastern Seaboard could conceivably cripple the manufacture of military small arms in the United States.

The Department of Defense established a policy of geographic dispersion of vital defense production to mitigate vulnerability to a nuclear strike. The fact that Evansville, Ind., and Springfield, Mass., are more than 800 miles apart was seen as an important reason for selecting International Harvester to supplement Springfield Armory’s M1 rifle production.

Actually, the selection of a commercial enterprise that had never previously manufactured firearms for the military was not without precedent. During World War II, nine of the 10 prime contractors that manufactured the M1 carbine had never produced firearms before the war (the sole exception was Winchester). As was the case with the carbine manufacturers, plans were formulated for IHC to utilize a number of subcontractors to assist its Garand production program.

There are three known variations of International Harvester hammer drawing numbers. The earliest were “C-5546008 IHC.” Mid-production were “IHC C5546008”, while the final were “5546008 IHC” along with a single letter-code marking.
The serial number ranges assigned to IHC for M1 rifle production were: 4,400,000–4,660,000 and 5,000,501–5,278,245. In order to augment Springfield Armory’s and International Harvester’s M1 rifle production, a contract was also granted to the Harrington & Richardson Arms Co. on April 3, 1952, for the manufacture of 100,000 Garand rifles with additional contracts to follow.
As International Harvester began to gear up for M1 manufacture, the firm was immediately faced with a number of daunting challenges, exacerbated by the fact the company had no prior firearm-making experience. Since the company had expertise in making complex machinery, such as trucks and tractors, it assumed making rifles wouldn’t be any different.
It is reported that IHC’s management planned to make the Garand rifles using standard machine tools already on hand rather than acquire specialized firearm-making machinery and to begin delivering rifles by Christmas 1952. The firm soon found this was impractical. A large number of unexpected problems arose, which caused a lot of consternation and resulted in a significant delay in starting rifle production.
Other than the receiver, one of the most challenging M1 components to manufacture was the barrel, and production was subcontracted to the Line Material Corp. The Milwaukee-based firm was an established maker of various equipment used in the transmission of electrical and telephone lines and had a well-regarded engineering and manufacturing team. In addition to making barrels for use by International Harvester, Line Material also supplied a large number of M1 rifle barrels to various ordnance depots for use in rebuilding Garands.

Receiver heel markings on IHC-produced M1 Garand rifles varied in the format of their stamped lettering, ranging from (l. to r.): the “Arrowhead” style, to the “Postage Stamp” style, to the “Gap Letter” style, in the latter case an earlier example.

It was soon widely acknowledged that the company’s barrels were of the highest quality. Line Material increased its capacity by adding a second shift to meet the demand for barrels for rebuilds and to supply IHC’s fledging Garand production program. It is reported that Line Material sent some barrels directly to ordnance units in Korea for use in overhauling M1 rifles in theater.

The barrels were marked “LMR” on the right side and were stamped with the drawing number (“D653448”), month and year of production, heat lot identification, “P” (proof) and “M” (magnetic particle inspection). Except for very early examples, the barrels made under subcontract for International Harvester can be identified by a punch mark between the “LMR” and the drawing number.

The high quality of the LMR barrels and their availability were among the few things to go smoothly with International Harvester’s M1 rifle production program. As IHC’s production problems became apparent, Springfield Armory dispatched John Garand’s chief tool and die maker, John Stimson, to Indiana to assist the company in setting up its production line. Once production was underway, a plethora of functioning glitches arose, including a serious jamming problem that completely shut down the assembly line for three months until the cause could be discovered and a remedy devised.

The drawing numbers of major parts on International-produced Garands typically include the “IHC” denotation. Examples include (r., top to bottom): the operating rod, bolt and receiver. Harrington & Richardson made M1 Garand receivers of its own (upper l.) as well as supplying them to IHC (lower l.).
The company received assistance from both Springfield Armory and H&R (which was concurrently manufacturing M1 rifles by that time). Harrington & Richardson engineers eventually determined that the jamming problem was due to incorrect specifications for spring-tension settings. Other problems cropped up and were solved one by one, but IHC was never able to meet its contractual production schedule.
In order to help International Harvester get into Garand production as expeditiously as possible, a number of parts were procured from other sources. Interestingly, one of those parts was the most basic component of the rifle—the receiver. In addition to receivers actually made in house by IHC, the company utilized receivers made by Springfield Armory and H&R. There were four distinct variations of M1 receivers manufactured by Springfield for International Harvester. 
The first receivers made by Springfield Armory for International Harvester were in the approximate 4,440,000-4,441,100 serial number range and, for the most part, were consecutively numbered. Although marked “International Harvester,” the logo markings on the receiver were applied by Springfield Armory, and serial numbers were stamped at the IHC plant.

Most of these receivers were fitted with LMR barrels, although a few were fitted with Springfield Armory-made barrels. Collectors have dubbed this variant SA/IHC receiver as the “Arrowhead” due to the layout of the nomenclature markings which, with a bit of imagination, resemble an arrowhead with a broken tip.

Soon after rifles with the SA/IHC “Arrowhead” receivers started to be assembled, the previously mentioned problem with function-firing difficulties surfaced. Once the problem was identified and solved, IHC began using unfinished Springfield Armory receivers that were on hand. Rather than stamping the receiver logo markings with “arrowhead” format, IHC chose to stamp them with a format consisting of four even lines.

This variant is known as the “Postage Stamp” SA/IHC receiver. Like the “Arrowhead” receivers, these were stamped with the Springfield Armory drawing number (“D 652891”), revision numbers (“42” or “43”), and heat lot numbers indicating production by Springfield. Most of the rifles were assembled with LMR barrels (typically dated late 1952 or early 1953), but it is believed some Springfield Armory barrels (dated early 1953) were utilized as well.

The next variation of M1 rifle receiver supplied to International Harvester by Springfield was the so-called “Gap Letter” type in recognition of the noticeable space between the centers of the first two lines of the nomenclature logo. The reason for this change in the format of the nomenclature is not known.
The final variant of receiver made by Springfield Armory and supplied to International Harvester was the “Gap Letter” variety serially numbered in the assigned range 5,198,034 to 5,213,034, representing about 15,000 numbers. These receivers were acquired from SA by IHC to complete its production commitments.

To its credit, Harrington & Richardson did a great deal to assist International Harvester throughout the latter entity’s M1 production program. As IHC was winding down rifle manufacture, the company needed additional receivers to complete its production commitments. To this end, a relatively small quantity of M1 receivers (approximately 4,000) was supplied to IHC by H&R.

Those receivers fall into the approximate 5,213,034 to 5,217,065 serial number range. Interestingly, the logo nomenclature on them was apparently stamped by International Harvester (“Postage Stamp” profile) while the serial number and the drawing number on the receiver leg were applied by HRA. 

Following is a summary of the type and quantity of M1 receivers manufactured for International Harvester by Springfield Armory and Harrington & Richardson:

SA/IHC “Arrowhead” 4,440,000–4,441,100……………….1,100

SA/IHC “Postage Stamp” 4,441,000–4,445,600…800–900

SA/IHC “Gap Letter” 4.6 M 4,638,000–4,660,000…22,000

SA/IHC “Gap Letter” 5M 5,198,034–5,211,600……….13,243

HRA/IHC 5,213,034–5,217,065…………………………………….4,000

Although Springfield and H&R supplied International Harvester with a number of receivers, the vast majority of the company’s M1 receivers were made by IHC. All of those were of the “Postage Stamp” variety. The receiver drawing number marked on the right side of the receiver leg was initially “IHC D6528291,” which was later changed to “D6528291” (no “IHC” prefix). 

The majority of barrels used by International Harvester were made by Line Material (“LMR” marked), although some Springfield barrels were used, mainly very early and, again, near the end of the company’s M1 rifle production program.

IHC contracted with other manufacturers to complete its rifles. Examples include the “LMR”-marked barrel made by Line Material Corp (top) along with other components such as the “DRC”-marked windage knob and “NHC”-marked gas plug (above)

The major components such as the bolt, operating rod, trigger housing, hammer, gas cylinder lock screw and rear sight windage and elevation knobs were generally marked “IHC” along with the appropriate drawing number and/or subcontractor initials. Although unmarked, IHC M1 front sights were typically characterized by the noticeably wider space between the two flared protective “ears,” approximately 0.875″ across, wider than any other manufacturer.

As with many of the other components, the manufacture of stocks by International Harvester did not proceed as smoothly as originally envisioned. Initial plans were for IHC to make the stocks and fore-ends rather than using subcontractors—as was done for a number of other components. As events transpired, though, most of IHC’s stocks were manufactured by subcontractors, chiefly the S.E. Overton Co. A hallmark of IHC M1 stocks is the presence of numbers stamped in the “barrel channel.”

Although three-digit numbers have been reported, the overwhelming majority are four digits, sometimes with a letter prefix or suffix. These numbers are believed to represent a variation of the Julian dating system. International Harvester was the only manufacturer to utilize stocks stamped with such numbers. The profile of the stock behind the receiver heel on the IHC Garand was noticeably narrower than found on the contemporary H&R M1 stocks.

IHC front sights, although unmarked, measure wider across their protective ears than do those of other makers’ rifles.
Although three-digit numbers have been reported, the overwhelming majority are four digits, sometimes with a letter prefix or suffix. These numbers are believed to represent a variation of the Julian dating system. International Harvester was the only manufacturer to utilize stocks stamped with such numbers. The profile of the stock behind the receiver heel on the IHC Garand was noticeably narrower than found on the contemporary H&R M1 stocks.

Early production IHC stocks were stamped with an Ordnance escutcheon emblem (“crossed cannons”) on the right side of the stock and a small—and often indistinct—“P” proof firing mark stamped on the bottom of the pistol grip. This was the only known case of a final inspection stamp on a post-war M1 rifle being applied to the right side of the stock.

Slightly later examples typically had the more commonly seen “circled P” proofmark (sans serif) applied to the face of the grip but still had the “crossed cannons” escutcheon stamped on either the left or right side. Circa October 1953, in the approximate 4.45 million serial number range, the “crossed cannons” stamp was replaced by a 1/2″ Defense Acceptance Stamp on the left side of the stock. 
 

The 1/2”-tall Defense Acceptance Stamp (top) replaced the “crossed cannons” in October 1953. Overton was the chief supplier of IHC stocks. It also, uncharacteristically, stamped the barrel channels with a three- or four-digit number (below).
International Harvester eventually accepted additional M1 production contracts totaling 418,443 rifles. Despite numerous setbacks and glitches experienced throughout the production program, the company worked diligently to overcome every obstacle put in its path, self-inflicted and otherwise. Just when it appeared that the company was going to successfully complete its M1 rifle production commitments, another complication arose.

In September 1955, IHC’s parent company negotiated a sale of the Evansville facility to the Whirlpool Corp. To add insult to injury, the sales contract mandated that Whirlpool take possession of the plant in January 1956. Since IHC had completed just over 300,000 rifles to date, it would have been impossible to finish the remaining 100,000 or so rifles called for in the contract in just two months’ time. This resulted in IHC having to negotiate an early “buyout” of the final contract. The following represents the total of rifles production from fiscal years 1953-1956:

Fiscal Year       Quantity Delivered
1953                     6,804
1954                     82,897
1955                     175,736
1956                     72,186
Total                  337,623

International Harvester’s M1 production program was obviously a source of consternation and almost continual headaches for the company. In hindsight, senior management (and likely stockholders as well) probably questioned the wisdom of getting involved in making military rifles. It was undoubtedly one of those, “It seemed like a good idea at the time” situations. Even though the company had to negotiate an early termination of its contract, it nontheless persevered and eventually made more than 337,000 M1 rifles by the time production ceased in December 1955.

The IHC people may not have been very proficient at making Garands but they can’t be accused of being quitters. Despite the numerous problems experienced by the company, an International Harvester M1 Garand is every bit as serviceable as those made by any other manufacturer. The International Harvester M1 has become one of the more popular examples of the genre among many collectors today due to the number of receiver variations and their relative scarcity as compared to Springfield Armory-made Garands of the same era.

Prior to the late 1970s, IHC M1s were rather hard to find on the domestic civilian market as compared to those made by other manufacturers. In the late 1950s and into the 1960s, many late-production Garands—especially Springfields and International Harvesters—were shipped to various countries under military foreign-aid programs. This accounts for the prior relative scarcity of the IHC rifles as well as Springfields in the very high number serial number range of 5.9 to 6.0 million.

While a few H&R Garands were also shipped to some allied nations, for some reason during this period, the bulk of these rifles seemed to be from International Harvester. Once the rifles were supplied to foreign governments, they could not be “re-imported” back into the United States for sale on the civilian market. Circa 1977-1978, a clause in the regulations permitted some of these former military rifles to be brought back to the United States, but sales were restricted to full-time law enforcement officers.

Quite a few rifles changed hands in this manner and, in the span of a couple of years, IHC M1s went from being quite scarce to being not particularly uncommon. The regulations were eventually tightened up to prohibit such sales, and the spigot was soon closed on the re-importation of IHC Garands. Not too many years later, the Director of Civilian Marksmanship and its successor, the Civilian Marksmanship Program (CMP), acquired significant numbers of Garands—including some IHCs—from overseas, and they were openly sold on to qualified buyers. As of this writing, the CMP periodically has IHC Garands available for sale. 

Perhaps surprisingly, in light of the extensive production problems experienced with the M1 rifles, it has been reported that the Ordnance Dept. later approached International Harvester about the possibility of manufacturing M14 rifles under government contract. Perhaps not surprisingly, that did not come to pass. In hindsight, International Harvester likely wished it had stuck with making tractors instead of rifles. Regardless, an IHC M1 rifle is a sought-after collectible today and is a very interesting, albeit often confusing, part of the story of John Garand’s rifle. 

Categories
All About Guns

Walther PDP Compact

Categories
Anti Civil Rights ideas & "Friends"

Wimp

You're wimps!: memes

Categories
Born again Cynic!

Uh oh!

Categories
All About Guns Anti Civil Rights ideas & "Friends" Cops Fieldcraft Some Red Hot Gospel there! Some Scary thoughts

The Mathematics of Countering Gun Control (A little long, but worth the read)

Gun Control

Introductory Proviso: The following essay on possible gun confiscation is a purely conjectural gedankenexperiment about the future that extrapolates from recent history and current trends. Nothing herein is seditious (per 18 U.S. Code § 2384), nor a call to arms, nor a threat to our government or to any individual, agency, or group.

THE COLLECTIVIST DREAM

The current mass media-driven “debate” on firearms (actually more like paternalistic lecturing or chiding) seems to be leading toward greater restrictions by Congress. The collectivist gun grabbers have the dream of ignoring the Second Amendment and somehow magically removing all detachable magazine semi-auto rifles from civilian hands. But it is just that: a dream. If they think that they can disarm us, then they are thoroughly deluded.  I’ll explain why, with some simple mathematics.

The United States has the world’s first or second most heavily-armed populace, per capita. (It’s possibly second only to Yemen.) The number of FBI firearms background checks for transfers by Federally-licensed dealers from November 1998 to April 30, 2018 totaled 287,807,015. That isn’t all new guns. It of course includes many second-hand sales that cycled back through FFL holders. But it is still a staggering number. And it does not include any private party (“not through a dealer”) sales of used guns. That is thankfully legal in most states. Nor does it include guns that are legally made at home. (Typically made with 80% complete receivers.) Those home “builds” are becoming quite popular. Their ownership is mostly opaque to any would-be tyrants who might covet seizing them.

There are somewhere between 370 million and 420 million privately-owned firearms in the United States. Let’s just call it 400 million for a nice round figure. Most of those guns are not registered to particular owners. That is why there are only rough estimates. It makes me feel good to know that Big Brother has no idea where those guns are, and who owns them. When I last checked, the total U.S. population is 327,708,500.  So that is about 1.2 guns per person. The adult population is around 249,500,000. And according to Wikipedia, the “Fit for service” Military Age Male population (men, ages 16-49) of the U.S. is just 59,764,677. That equates to 6.6 guns per Military Age Male in the United States.

 

Of the 400 million American guns, roughly 20% are single-shot or double-barreled, 60% are manually-operated repeaters (e.g., bolt action, lever action, pump action, or revolvers), and 20% are semi-automatic. There are only about 175,000 transferable Federally-registered full autos. That number would have been much larger by now but production was sharply curtailed by a hefty $200 tax (starting in 1934) and then there numbers were effectively frozen in 1986. It is noteworthy that if it were not for the National Firearms Act of 1934, selective fire guns would by now be in what the Heller decision calls “common use“. After all, it costs only a few dollars more to manufacture a selective-fire M16 than a semiautomatic-only AR-15.

With every passing year, the predominance of semi-autos is gaining for both rifles and handguns. (In sheer numbers produced, revolvers are becoming almost passé.) The biggest-selling handgun in the country is the Smith & Wesson M&P 9mm, followed closely by the Glock Model 19 9mm. Gaining rapidly is the highly modular SIG P320, which was recently adopted by the U.S. Army. All three of these are semi-automatic. Standard magazine sizes for autopistols range from 13 to 20 rounds. And the most popular rifles of the decade are AR-15s and their clones. Their standard capacity magazines hold 30 cartridges. (That isn’t “high capacity”.)

THE MATH ON AR CLONES

AR-15 and AR-10 variants are truly generic and have been sold under more than 120 brand names. The number of ARs (AR-15s, M4s, AR-10s, and variants) sold from 2000 to 2014 was approximately 5,672,900. Since then, AR-15 clones have become even more popular and ubiquitous with approximately 1.2 million more produced in 2015, 1.6 million in 2016, and 1.5 million in 2017. At least 1.2 million will be produced in 2018. It can be assumed that 99% of the ARs produced since the year 2000 are still functional. There were more than 2.3 million other ARs produced for the civilian market between 1962 and 1999. It is safe to assume that at least 95% of those of that vintage are still functional. So the total number of functional ARs in private hands in the U.S. is somewhere around 11 to 12 million. (As of May, 2018.)

SOME MATH ON OTHER SEMI-AUTOS

Next we come to the more fuzzy math on the wide variety of other models of semi-auto centerfire rifles in private hands. They include detachable magazine, en bloc clip, and stripper clip-fed designs. Here are some rough estimates. (Some of these estimates are based on my own observations of the ratios of different models I’ve seen offered for sale):

  • Various semi-auto hunting rifles (Remington 740/7400 series, AK Hunter, Browning BAR, Winchester 100, Valmet Hunter, Saiga Hunter, HK SL7/SL8, HK 630/770, et cetera): 2 million+
  • Ruger Mini-14 and Mini-30: 1.2 million
  • M1 Garand: 800,000+ (With many more being imported, soon.)
  • AK Variants (imported and domestically made, from all makers including Valmet and Galil): 2 to 3 million
  • M1 Carbine: 1.5 to 2 million
  • AR-180 and AR-180B: 35,000
  • M1A and other semi-auto M14 variants: 360,000
  • SIG 550 series: 80,000+
  • Thompson Semi-Autos (West Hurley and Kahr Arms): 75,000
  • HK variants: CETME, HK91/93/94 series, PTR91, etc.: 600,000 to 700,000
  • FAL variants: FN-FAL, FNC, and L1A1:  425,000
  • SKS variants: 1 million
  • Steyr AUG: 110,000
  • IWI Tavor & X95: 70,000
  • Various semi-autos assembled from military surplus full auto parts sets (M1919, BAR, Sten, M2 Browning, M3, Etc.): 75,000+
  • Assorted Other Models (These include: Kel-Tec, Barrett, Leader, FAMAS, Uzi carbines, Wilkinson, Feather, Calico, Hi-Point, SIG AMT, SIG PE57, SIG MCX, SIG MPX, Johnson, BM59, HK USC, TNW, Demro Tac-1, Calico Carbine, ACR, SCAR, Chiappa Carbine, SWD (MAC), Robinson, Hakim, Ljungman, Beretta AR-70, Beretta CX4, CZ Scorpion, Kriss Carbine, FN-49, SVT-40, SVD, PSL, Gewehr 41 & 43, Daewoo, FS 2000, Ruger PCR, Marlin Camp Carbine, et cetera): 2+ million.
THE AGGREGATE GUN MATH
Totaling the list above and adding it to the preceding estimate on ARs, there are 20 million semi-auto centerfire rifles that are in civilian hands here in the States. And that number is increasing by nearly 2 million per year. (More than half of which are AR-15 or AR-10 clones.) Again looking at the Military Age Male  population (men, ages 16-49) of 59,764,677, that equates to roughly one semi-auto rifle for every three Military Age Males.

 

If a production and importation ban requiring registration were enacted, there would surely be massive noncompliance. For example, the registration schemes enacted in the past two decades in Australia, Canada, The Philippines, Indonesia, Brazil, and the States of California and New York have been well-documented failures. They have been met with noncompliance rates ranging from 50% to 90%.

Even with an optimistic 50% registration compliance rate, that would mean only 10 million of the nation’s 20 million semi-auto rifles would have a current name and address attached, to allow eventual gun confiscation.

 

Let us surmise that following several years of a registration scheme there were an outright “turn them all in, Mr. and Mrs. America” ban. I predict that even if $1,000 per gun were offered, no more than 11 million would be turned in, by compliant and history-ignorant Sheeple. (An aside: They’ll probably call this a “Buy Back”, but that will be a lie. They can’t “buy back” something that they’ve never owned.)

But that would still leave at least 9 million in circulation, as contraband.
THE SWAT AND ATF MANPOWER MATH

So let’s suppose that a full Federal semi-auto rifle ban were enacted with a gun confiscation order issued.

This is where the math gets very interesting: There are only 902,000 sworn police officers in the United States. At most, about 80,000 of them have had SWAT training. There are only 5,113 BATFE employees–and many of those are mere paper shufflers. As of 2017, there were just 2,623 ATF Special Agents. The FBI’s notorious Hostage Rescue Team (HRT or “Hurt Team”) has a cadre strength that is classified but presumably less than 200 agents. Together, they comprise the pool of “Door Kickers” that might be available to execute unconstitutional search warrants.

If they were to start going door-to-door executing warrants for unconstitutional gun confiscation, what would the casualty rates be for the ATF, HRT, and the assorted local SWAT teams?  It bears mention that the military would be mostly out of the picture, since they are banned from domestic law enforcement roles, under the Posse Comitatus Act.

THE DIVISION EQUATIONS

Next, let’s do some addition and then divide:

80,000    SWAT-trained police
+ 2,623     ATF Special Agents
+    200     FBI HRT Members
=  82,863    Potentially Available Door Kickers

… presumably working in teams of 8, attempting to seize 9,000,000 newly-contraband semi-auto rifles.

Before we finish the math, I’ll state some “for the sake of argument” assumptions:

  1. That every SWAT-trained officer in the country is pressed into service.
  2. That there would be no “false positives”–meaning that 100% of the tips leading to raids were accurate. (Unlikely)
  3. That no local police departments would opt out of serving unconstitutional Federal gun warrants. (Unlikely)
  4. That all raids would be successful. (Unlikely)
  5. That each successful raid would net an average of three contraband semi-auto rifles. (Possible)
  6. That every Door Kicker would get an equal share in the work. (Very unlikely)
  7. That every Door Kicker would be alive and well through the entire campaign of terror–with no incapacitating injuries or deaths of SWAT officers, no refusals, no resignations, and no early retirements. (Very unlikely)

A lot of those are not safe assumptions. But for the sake of completing a gedankenexperiment, let’s pen this out on the back of a napkin, as a “best case” for an unconstitutional gun confiscation campaign. Here are the division equations:

9,000,000 ÷ 82,863 = 108 (x 8 officers per team) =  864 raids, per officer 

Let that sink in: Every officer would have to survive 864 gun-grabbing raids.

Those of course are fanciful numbers. There will be a lot of false tips, and there will be many owners who keep their guns very well-hidden. Each of those raids would have nearly the same high level of risk but yet many of them would net zero guns. And it is likely that many police departments will wisely decline involvement. Therefore the “best case” figure of 864 raids per officer is quite low. The real number would be much higher.

How long would it be until mounting law enforcement casualties triggered a revolt or “sick-out” among the rank and file Door Kickers?  For some historical context: Just four ATF agents were killed and 16 wounded in the Waco raid, and that was considered quite “devastating” and “traumatizing” to the 5,000-member agency.

 

Here is some sobering ground truth: America’s gun owners are just as well trained–and often better trained–than the police. There are 20.4 million American military veterans, and the majority of veterans own guns.

RESISTANCE STRATEGY AND TACTICS
Rather than meeting the police one-at-a-time on their doorsteps, I predict that resisting gun owners will employ guerilla warfare strategy and tactics to foil the plans of the gun grabbers:
1.) They will successfully hide the majority of their banned guns. This is just what many Europeans did, following World War II. There are perhaps a million guns in Europe that were never registered or turned in, after the war. Particularly in Eastern Europe, Scandinavia, Spain, and Greece, there is still massive noncompliance. It has now been 73 years since the end of WWII. So the gun registration noncompliance in Europe is now multi-generational.
2.) They will form small, fully independent “phantom” resistance cells. This is commonly called leaderless resistance. Such cells are very difficult to detect or penetrate. These resistance cells will carefully choose the time and location of their attacks, to their advantage.
3.) They will individually target the legislators who voted for unconstitutional gun ban legislation. This will make it  almost suicidal for these legislators to return to their home districts.
4.) They will individually target any outspokenly anti-gun police chiefs.
5.) They will target all BATF agents and FBI HRT agents–first with intimidation, and then with targeted killings.
6.) They will pillage or burn down the facilities where confiscated guns are being stored and destroyed.
7.) They will anonymously phone in false police reports about gun control advocates. (This is commonly called “SWATing.”)
8.) They will use time-delayed explosives, time-delayed incendiaries, time-delayed bursting toxin containers, cell phone-triggered IEDs, computer program worms and viruses, and long-range standoff weapons to minimize the risk of being detected, apprehended, or killed. Likely targets will be Federal buildings, courthouses, SWAT training facilities, police training ranges, and especially the private residences of anyone deemed to be a gun-grabber.
9.) They will use anonymous re-mailers and VPN to encourage others to resist by forming their own leaderless resistance cells.
10.) They will begin a War of Attrition on the Door Kickers, with tactics such as these:
  A.) Ambushing SWAT vehicles while in transit, rather than waiting for the SWAT teams to set up raids.
  B.) Ambushing individual SWAT team members at unexpected times and places–most likely at their homes.
  C.) Sabotaging SWAT vehicles, most likely with time-delayed incendiaries.
  D.) Targeting SWAT teams or individual team members while they are at home, in training, or when attending conventions.
  E.) Harassing and intimidating individual SWAT team members and their families. The systematic burning of their privately-owned vehicles and their unoccupied homes and vacation cabins will be unmistakable threats.
11.) They will individually target “gun control” advocates, organizers, and group leaders.
12.) They will individually target the judges that issue gun seizure warrants.
13.) They will individually target journalists who have vocally advocated civilian disarmament.
14.) Some owners of M1 Carbines, AR-15s and HKs in the resistance movement will convert them to selective fire. (They will assume: “Well, if it is now a felony to possess a semi-auto, then what is the harm in making it a full auto?”)
15.) They will be willing to wage an ongoing guerilla warfare campaign using both passive and active resistance until the collectivists relent. This would be something like “The Troubles” in Northern Ireland, but on a larger scale, with greater ferocity, and with far more weapons readily available. Unlike the IRA, which had to import arms, all of the the firearms, magazines, and ammunition needed for any American resistance movement are already in situ. It is noteworthy that the agreed “Decommissioning” the Irish Republican Army (IRA) was delayed for more than five years because of their remaining caches of arms, which by then included only around 1,000 battle rifles!)
THE GUN CONFISCATION END GAME
I believe that once it was started, the whole affray would be settled within just a few weeks or months. American gun owners clearly have the numbers on their side. Once the shooting starts, the gun-hating politicians will quickly feel isolated, vastly outnumbered, and incredibly vulnerable. And when they realize they’ve lost their Door Kicker shock troops, they will capitulate. After some horrendous casualties in a brief but fierce civil war, the politicians would be forced to:
  1. Declare a cease fire and stand-down for all gun confiscation raiders.
  2. Repeal all Federal gun laws.
  3. Order the destruction of all Federal import, purchase, transfer, and registration records
  4. Issue unconditional pardons for all convicted Federal gun law violators.
  5. Declare a general amnesty for all involved in the resistance, and drop all pending charges.
  6. Disband the BATFE.

Without all six of those, the hostilities would continue.

BUT THERE’S MORE
The foregoing math on the roughly 20 million semi-auto rifles is not the full extent of the problem for the gun grabbers. Additionally, there are at least 50 million centerfire handguns that would be suitable for resistance warfare. (And another 3 million being made or imported each year.) There are also perhaps 40 million scoped centerfire deer rifles in private hands. The vast majority of those have no traceable paper trail. Fully capable of 500+ yard engagement, these rifles could be employed to out-range the tyrants and their minions.

 

Then there are the estimated 1.5 million unregistered machineguns now in the country.  Except for a 30-day amnesty in 1968 that generated only about 65,000 registrations, they have been contraband since 1934. Their number is particularly difficult to accurately estimate, since some semi-autos such as the M1 Carbine, HK91/93/94 series, and AR-15 are fairly easy to convert to selective fire. Similarly, nearly all “open bolt” semi-auto designs are easy to convert to full auto. Large numbers of conversion parts sets have been sold, with little recordkeeping. Some guns can be converted simply by removing sear springs or filing their sears. Just a trickle of unregistered full autos are seized or surrendered each year. This begs the question: If Federal officials have been unable to round up un-papered machineguns after 84 years, then how do they expect to ever confiscate semi-autos, which are 15 times more commonplace?

As evidenced by the 1990s wars in the Balkans, when times get inimical, contraband guns get pulled out of walls and put into use. We can expect to see the same, here.

Now, to get back to the simple mathematics, here are some ratios to ponder:

  • NRA members (5.2 million) to Door Kickers (82,863) = 63-to-1 ratio
  • Military veterans (20.4 million) to Door Kickers (82,863) = 249-to-1 ratio
  • Unregistered machineguns (1.5 million) to Door Kickers (82,863) = 18-to-1 ratio
  • Privately owned semi-auto rifles (40 million) to Door Kickers (82,863) = 485-to-1 ratio
UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES
The mathematics that I’ve cited don’t bode well for the gun-grabbing collectivists. If they ever foolishly attempt to confiscate semi-auto rifles, then it will be “Game On” for Civil War 2. I can foresee that they would run out of willing Door Kickers, very quickly.

I’ll conclude with a word of caution: Leftist American politicians should be careful about what they wish for. Those who hate the 2nd Amendment and scheme to disarm us have no clue about the unintended consequences of their plans. If they proceed, then I can foresee that it will end very badly for them. – JWR

End Notes:

Again, the preceding is a purely conjectural gedankenexperiment about the future that extrapolates from recent history and current trends. None of the foregoing is seditious (per 18 U.S. Code § 2384), nor a call to arms, nor a threat to our government or to any individual, agency, or group.

Permission to reprint, re-post or forward this article in full is granted, but only if credit is given to James Wesley, Rawles and first publication in SurvivalBlog (with a link.) It must not be edited or excerpted, and all included links must be left intact.

From SurvivalBlog.com via WRSAhe

Categories
All About Guns Allies

GOING TO THE RANGE ALONE (AS A WOMAN) | What I bring, what I do, why I do it

Categories
All About Guns

And the Field Tests are back about the AK-47 versus The M16 Rifle

Categories
The Green Machine

Its no longer “This Mans Army” I guess

Nearly Half of Female Soldiers Still Failing New Army Fitness Test, While Males Pass Easily
More than seven months after the official launch of the Army Combat Fitness Test, or ACFT, nearly half of female soldiers are still falling short, with enlisted women struggling the most, Military.com has learned. The data again raises questions about whether the Army’s attempt to create a fitter force is creating more barriers to success for women.

Internal Army figures from April show 44% of women failed the ACFT, compared to 7% of men since Oct. 1. “Female soldiers continue to lag male soldier scores in all events,” according to a United States Army Forces Command briefing obtained by Military.com.

The pass rate for women is up 12% from last year, yet enlisted women continue to struggle the most, with a 53% fail rate. Female officers have only a 23% fail rate, but that’s still significantly higher than the fail rate for men, enlisted or officer.

“The ACFT — as part of the Army’s overall physical readiness program — continues to evolve, reduce injuries and empower Soldiers to perform basic Soldier tasks,” a FORSCOM spokesman told Military.com in a statement Monday.

Categories
All About Guns Allies

Is 30-06 Really as Versatile as They Claim?

Categories
Well I thought it was funny!

Well I thought it was amusing!