Table Of ContentRifles for Todays Militia
James Henry
Guns & Ammo, April 1994
I'm really tired of hearing the anti-gunner redefining the
Second Amendment in their own terms. If one feels the wording of
the passage itself is somewhat vague(frankly, I think its intent is
crystal clear), it is only necessary to turn to the Federalist
Papers to determine what the founding fathers considered to be the
"militia". No, it's not the National Guard or any other sort of
officially constituted force - it's you and me. The framers of the
Consititution were wise enough to put the ultimate power in the
hands of the people.
While I am sure the Thomas Jefferson, et all would be less
than enthralled with some of our current government's actions, at
this juncture, I am more concerned with the courts'
over-solicitousness toward criminals at the expense of the
law-abiding citizen. I'm not saying that this is the most
oppressive administration in our history, per se, but it's
permissive attitudes toward criminals, the basic undermining of
family values and constant reinterpretation of the Consitution
certainly would lead one to that conclusion. To me, it seems that
somewhere along the line, the law-abiding tax-paying citizen is
getting lost in the morass of political correctness and pandering
to the lowest common denominator.
Like my compatriots at Gun & Ammo, I lived through the Los
Angles riots of a couple years ago and came to a couple of
conclusions. First, in situations of civil insurrection, the local
law enforcement is totally incapable of providing adequate
protection to the populace. Second, it seems that the merchants in
the hard-hit areas who where armed managed to keep their business
somewhat intact. One of the few inspiring things about the riots
was the televisions pictures of the feisty armed Korean shopkeepers
protecting their business and property.
I have it on good authority that the G&A crowed became pretty
popular with the other occupants of the Petersen Building,
especially as the fires on La Cienega Blvd, moved closer and
closer.
The bottom line is, when things start getting hot, ultimately,
the only resource one has for personal protection is one's self.
Handguns are fine for circumstances in which concealment and
portability are primary considerations, but if I'm going to protect
hearth and home (and workplace) from external incursions, give me
a rifle any day. Its accuracy and effective calibers can keep the
bad guys at a distance and generally dissuade them from knocking at
my door or trying to break in.
Look, I'm one of the last guys in the world to run around
shouting, "the British are coming!" However, recent events in Los
Angles, coupled with a good look at the history books that
emphasize the events of the last century or so, have done nothing
to convince me that it's time to tote my sword down to the
agricultural implement factory. I'm not intending to be an
alarmist, I only think that it is a good idea to be prepared
against any domestic difficulties--organized or spontaneous-that
might beset us unexpectedly.
What is the ideal long arm for the task? If I had to pick only
one gun from my personal battery, it would be my Australian L1A1
variant of the FN-FAL semi-auto .308. The gun has a detachable box
magazine, fires a very effective round and is supremely accurate
and doesn't need to be reloaded every few rounds. Needless to say,
any military semi-auto rifle of this ilk (HK 91, Colt AR-15,
Springfield, Inc. M1A1 and the like) would be just about ideal for
the task. Interestingly enough, the very thing that makes them good
for home defense, makes them totally impractical for drive-bys and
surreptitious use by urban guerrillas. They are too big, to noisy
and split cases all over the place. Imagine trying to shoot an M14
clone from the passenger side of a moving auto!
On the other hand, if I didn't have the L1A1, I would have no
problem pressing my World War II Garand eight-shooter into service,
though some of my more exotic collectibles, such as a rather cranky
French Model 1944 MAS, would probably be retired in favor of a good
old Mark III Enfield, Model 1898 Mauser or 1903 Springfield.
Currently, based on reliability, low cost and availability, I
would be a strong supporter of any one of the various SKS semi-auto
rifles out there. While I would eschew a ratty Vietnam bring back,
any one of the current Chinese or Russian imports, in either
military or sporter configuration, would be particularly handy
defense long arms.
It should be evident that military rifles were designed for
this kind of self-protection work, but there is absolutely nothing
wrong with that Remington Model 700 or Winchester Model 70 in your
closet. These guns are both accurate and effective. They are
intended for rough use in the field as they bear witness to their
military ancestors and, with proper sighting setups, would be more
than adequate for the job.
Let's face it, the Pennsylvania rifle of a couple of centuries
ago was one of the least martial arms extant, and numbers of them
served the colonists quite well during the Revolution. True, the
smoothbore military musket was still the preeminent arm of the
period, but military and civilian confrontational styles have
changed somewhat over the last 200 years, and there is not quite
the disparity between martial and sporting arms that there was in
the 1770s.
To be honest, given my druthers, I would prefer a military arm over
a sporter if things got particularly hot. The army guns have
provisions for fast reloading, and frankly, their sights are
generally better adapted to combat situations. Still, there are
many fine bolt-action, semi-auto ( I would think any of the current
Remington, Browning, Marlin or Ruger autoloading sporters would be
particularly good choices) pump and lever-action rifles that would
provide excellent personal security, though the areas in which they
are to be used would dictate caliber and, to a degree, action
style. If the distance involved were not too great, I might opt for
a pistol-caliber lever gun, such as a .44-40 Model 1873 Winchester
copy over a .30-06 Model 70. Too, enclosed areas are not
particularly conductive to the use of semi-automatic big-bores, as
case ejection can often be quite forceful and could provide
discomfort or hazard to the shooter.
I recognize that many sporting rifles are fitted with scopes,
and that is fine at the ranges for which they were intended. Urban
distances are not kind to sophisticated qlassware, so it might not
be a bad idea to rig up some sort of see-through mount setup or
iron-sight backup for "militia" use.
If push came to shove, I would really have no problem with a
good semi-auto .22 autoloader, such as a Ruger 10/22 or Calico M100
Carbine. They could be extremely effective when loaded with one of
the hot .22 LRs on the market. Again, where the gun is to be
employed would be a major factor in the choice of one of the .22 LR
or .22 WMR guns, but even so, one should never underestimate the
effectiveness of the little rimfire in a self-defense posture. Too,
the size of the rifle, the lack of recoil and the lesser reports
and concussive effect make them particularly adaptable to tight
quarters.
Whatever you choose, make sure it is serviceable and not too
antiquated for the task. I would stay away from single-shots or
antique arms, even though you may shoot them on a regular basis.
Metal fatigue, coupled with sometimes cranky germinal mechanisms
could be more of a liability than an advantage in a sticky
situation. I would have no lack of confidence in some of my World
War II or even Great War rifles, but such things as a Krag-
Jorgensen or Model 71/84 Mauser would just be too risky to take a
chance on.
While I do have a couple of loaded handguns sited in strategic
places around my house to be used as party favors should my family
experience a nocturnal (or even diurnal) visit by some evil minded
uninvited guest, I don't really think it's necessary to have your
long arm charged and ready to go. For one thing, it is more
difficult to hide a rifle and keep it out of the hands of untrained
minors.
In the event of some sort of civil insurrection, there will
generally be plenty of advance warning and enough time for one to
charge his arms and get ready. I would admonish you to keep ammo
and (if applicable) magazines at least readily available within
your house or business so that you do not have to leave the
premises to go scrounging for cartridges.
Also, it would behoove you to take the time in advance to
determine the weak spots in your defensive position and to
formulate a basic plan to insure that all areas are adequately
covered.
You might note that throughout this guide, I have only
referred to the defensive usage of firearms. I cannot stress this
credo too strongly. I have no intention nor do I advocated any find
of preemptive strikes against real or imagined bad mashes out
there. By the same token, I do realize that in the case of civil
insurrection or even a common house burglary, the capability of the
"thin blue line" to respond in a timely fashion may be somewhat
limited. Given the fine rifles, military and civilian, we have at
our disposal, with a little planning and forethought, there is
absolutely no reason to become a victim. I, for one, intend to take
the "militia" portion of the Second Amendment seriously and to
exercise my rights whenever the need may arise! The bottom line is,
any rifle can be used as a militia rifle. The Second Amendment
doesn't have anything to do with sporting purposes!
�
