GO3 Regarding the post about the EOTech sight and dvc's comment. First, of course proper sight alignment and sight picture is always important. My comment was made from the standpoint of the requirement to be so precise to maximize the effect of the projectile (there, see, I didn't say "slug" to get some angry ) to the nth degree.
OTOH, I am not a big critic of the M16/M4 firing a 5.56mm round. It helps if one separates the functioning of the weapon from the effects of the bullet on the target. Expert wound ballistics doc, Marvin Fackler, notes that there are only two things that count in wound analysis: temporary tissue stretch and permanent tissue cavitation. The short version is the two rounds which excel at both are the venerable 30.30 and the 5.56. In the 5.56 it's largely due to internal fragmentation.
My point with the EOTech is that beyond CQB of downtown Fallujah; for instance in the hills and valleys of Afghanistan, is that the sight's effectiveness is reduced as is the 5.56mm in that tactical environment. Trying to gain fire superiority when the bad guy is behind rocks, trees, at beyond 100m and uphill is problematic. And the infantry had to be weaned off the immediate action drill of picking up a radio to call for fire support when none was available. This is why eventually, the Army requested Armalite send over some NATO 7.62 AR-10s.
I don't begrudge any piece of equipment needed by the troops, and if there is a problem with it as the Army seems to think, then it should be fixed. It's just my experience and opinion that training has always been the best and cheapest solution versus, in this case, spending the same amount of $$$ that could buy an additional rifle.
April 4 at 13:33 EST .
2 people like this.
Wetenschapper This is pretty much what I was thinking when I commented on the article. I particularly agree with the summary you give in the last paragraph: "let the Military decide. I originally commented on the article because it looked like a typical WaPo sensationalist story by a reporter writing on a topic he doesn't really understand with any depth.
April 5 at 06:38 EST .
Safetydude Things are are getting a little tight.....
Safetydude I really did spend an hour at the range yesterday with my Ruger SR-45 after I had the Crimson Trace laser installed. What a treat. You don't aim, just point and pull. Right hand left hand, doesn't matter. Later this week I'm going to the outdoor range to check out how far out I can still hit a target.
May 19 at 12:44 EST .
35 people like this.
Bettijo Is this gun too heavy for an elderly woman?
May 28 at 17:09 EST .
18 people like this.
Safetydude That's a question I can't answer in a venue like this.
Here are some thoughts, not instructions. If you can hold the weight of the gun, which is about two pounds, most of which is in the slide, you should be able to fire it. However, since most of the weight is in the slide this gun tends to be a bit front heavy, even with a full magazine, so a stiff wrist is required to hold the barrel up. Also, it's a .45; it means a pretty heavy recoil. I use a 'modified' Weaver grip with my left hand wrapped around and supporting my right wrist, about where a watch would be worn. I let my right hand pivot up at the wrist to absorb most of the recoil. By trying not to move my arms I can keep a basic sight picture through the recoil.
So back to your question; no, I don't think the gun is too heavy for an 'elderly' woman. Being able to pull the trigger and handle the gun safely might be something else.
May 30 at 21:19 EST .
17 people like this.
Fireball27 Bettijo check out the Colt Mustang 380. This is a small gun I'm sure you would be able to handle. With a laser sight, it should do the trick. Some gun ranges will rent you a gun like this so you can tell if it will work for you. I might get one myself.
August 1 at 13:44 EST .
10 people like this.
Safetydude I went to the range the other day. I spent the day picking up brass.