As readers know I'm not exactly in a rush to go out and buy a Tavor. But right now it's one of the most sought after rifles in America. Here's a great video from MAC, where Tim visits Tel Aviv and takes a tour of the IWI factory where Tavors are made. Very cool scenes from Tel Aviv, very clean and efficient factory, full auto demos of the Tavor and other Israeli-made rifles...what more can you ask for! Check it out:
The Tavor is proving to be quite the Israeli ambassador!
Wednesday, July 31, 2013
Tuesday, July 30, 2013
Jewish Marksman Learns from Sergey Richter
I recently came across a youtube video of Israeli Jewish Marksman Sergey Richter, highlighting his unorthodox air rifle trigger technique. However, when I saw it, a light bulb went off for me. Here's the video:
Only Sergey can say exactly why he does it. But for me it seemed like an obvious way to "prime" the muscles of the trigger finger to operate independent of the rest of the hand, and thereby avoid disturbing the hold. Let me give some background. The standing position without a sling is the most unstable position in the shooting sports. That makes it the most challenging, most frustrating, and most fun. The body naturally moves, so you have a sense of a moving target. It is a lot harder to make the body perfectly still than most people would think. There are so many dynamics to successful standing shooting: good balance, extremely fine muscle control, and good reflexes. Depending on the weight of your gun, endurance as well. And don't forget chutzpah (you need it most in the standing position), and a bit of mazal never hurts. In High Power, for the standing stage the target is at 200 yards, with a 7" 10-ring (3.5MOA) and a 3"(1.5MOA) X-ring.
Broken down, there are two elements to successful standing shooting: your hold, and your triggering. Your hold is the natural path your muzzle takes as your body moves in position. Shooters practice making this path as small as possible. Beginners will have trouble keeping the muzzle within the 7 ring, top shooters can hold the 10 or X. Right now in NRA High Power my hold is mostly a 10 ring hold, at times an X-ring hold, and sometimes a sloppy 8.5 or 9. You don't need a perfect hold if you have good reflexes and can release a shot "on the move" as your muzzle first enters the 10-ring. Even if you have a great hold, on windy days you'll have to learn to shoot on the move as the wind blows your muzzle. On those days, you'll have literally fractions of a second to let off your shot in the 10, or miss your chance.
Triggering is the other half of the equation. You can have an X-ring hold, but if during the trigger pull your hand exerts unwanted direction on the rifle, you can end up with a 9 or worse. This is my major weakness at the moment, even though my trigger pull weight is only about 12oz. On the SCATT I see my 10's and X's turn into 9s and sometimes 8's because my triggering disturbed a 10-ring hold, or was not fast and aggressive enough. I have a really hard time activating only my trigger finger on the pull, and instead, almost reflexively, my other fingers move. (I have heard that this is normal for men, and women tend to be better shooters because their fingers are more inclined to work independently of each other, but it could be a shooter's wives' tale....). I can move my trigger independently of my other fingers, but it takes a lot of concentration, and in standing shooting you don't have that luxury--the triggering has to be pure reflex. I find myself not having the confidence to reflexively fire on a good sight picture because I'm not confident my hand is going to do the right thing. I feel like that is *the* hurdle I need to overcome to move up from Master to High Master.
What Segey's technique does for me when I do it, is that it helps my short-term "muscle memory" in my hand so that as much as possible, only my trigger finger is moving. It sort of points out to me any other muscular flaws in my grip so that I can adjust those too, as you do have to exert some force in the opposite direction for your trigger finger to be able to move straight back. I have a 2-stage trigger with a very long 1st stage pull, so it's perfect for this technique as I won't have to worry about accidentally touching off a round.
So far on the SCATT I've had tremendous improvement in both minimizing muzzle movement during triggering, and being more consistent with good trigger releases. I find the technique also lends itself to minimizing over-travel force as well. I've had 10 shot strings with more deep X's and 10's and my average is pushing up to 96, which is flirting with High Master territory. Hopefully it will translate to live fire, and maybe this is the key to me getting off my current plateau! I'm cautiously optimistic. Once again, I'm not sure this is why Sergey does it, but this is the effect it has for me. I could also imagine that it could just be a stepping-stone to triggering technique that does not need it, but I can't see how it could hurt even then.
Only Sergey can say exactly why he does it. But for me it seemed like an obvious way to "prime" the muscles of the trigger finger to operate independent of the rest of the hand, and thereby avoid disturbing the hold. Let me give some background. The standing position without a sling is the most unstable position in the shooting sports. That makes it the most challenging, most frustrating, and most fun. The body naturally moves, so you have a sense of a moving target. It is a lot harder to make the body perfectly still than most people would think. There are so many dynamics to successful standing shooting: good balance, extremely fine muscle control, and good reflexes. Depending on the weight of your gun, endurance as well. And don't forget chutzpah (you need it most in the standing position), and a bit of mazal never hurts. In High Power, for the standing stage the target is at 200 yards, with a 7" 10-ring (3.5MOA) and a 3"(1.5MOA) X-ring.
Broken down, there are two elements to successful standing shooting: your hold, and your triggering. Your hold is the natural path your muzzle takes as your body moves in position. Shooters practice making this path as small as possible. Beginners will have trouble keeping the muzzle within the 7 ring, top shooters can hold the 10 or X. Right now in NRA High Power my hold is mostly a 10 ring hold, at times an X-ring hold, and sometimes a sloppy 8.5 or 9. You don't need a perfect hold if you have good reflexes and can release a shot "on the move" as your muzzle first enters the 10-ring. Even if you have a great hold, on windy days you'll have to learn to shoot on the move as the wind blows your muzzle. On those days, you'll have literally fractions of a second to let off your shot in the 10, or miss your chance.
Triggering is the other half of the equation. You can have an X-ring hold, but if during the trigger pull your hand exerts unwanted direction on the rifle, you can end up with a 9 or worse. This is my major weakness at the moment, even though my trigger pull weight is only about 12oz. On the SCATT I see my 10's and X's turn into 9s and sometimes 8's because my triggering disturbed a 10-ring hold, or was not fast and aggressive enough. I have a really hard time activating only my trigger finger on the pull, and instead, almost reflexively, my other fingers move. (I have heard that this is normal for men, and women tend to be better shooters because their fingers are more inclined to work independently of each other, but it could be a shooter's wives' tale....). I can move my trigger independently of my other fingers, but it takes a lot of concentration, and in standing shooting you don't have that luxury--the triggering has to be pure reflex. I find myself not having the confidence to reflexively fire on a good sight picture because I'm not confident my hand is going to do the right thing. I feel like that is *the* hurdle I need to overcome to move up from Master to High Master.
What Segey's technique does for me when I do it, is that it helps my short-term "muscle memory" in my hand so that as much as possible, only my trigger finger is moving. It sort of points out to me any other muscular flaws in my grip so that I can adjust those too, as you do have to exert some force in the opposite direction for your trigger finger to be able to move straight back. I have a 2-stage trigger with a very long 1st stage pull, so it's perfect for this technique as I won't have to worry about accidentally touching off a round.
So far on the SCATT I've had tremendous improvement in both minimizing muzzle movement during triggering, and being more consistent with good trigger releases. I find the technique also lends itself to minimizing over-travel force as well. I've had 10 shot strings with more deep X's and 10's and my average is pushing up to 96, which is flirting with High Master territory. Hopefully it will translate to live fire, and maybe this is the key to me getting off my current plateau! I'm cautiously optimistic. Once again, I'm not sure this is why Sergey does it, but this is the effect it has for me. I could also imagine that it could just be a stepping-stone to triggering technique that does not need it, but I can't see how it could hurt even then.
Thursday, July 25, 2013
Jewish Marksman on REAL Marksmanship
Over at thetruthaboutguns.com blog, fellow Jew Robert Farago polled his readers' thoughts on long range rifle shooting. The poll was inspired by a previous post on that same blog by an author who successfully taught a new shooter to make 750 yard hits on his first day of shooting. Robert muses as to whether that outcome suggests that "today’s modern rifles, gear and ammo makes distance marksmanship a doddle."
Oy veh.
The problem with his statement lies with the meaning the present day "gun-enthusiast" community gives to the word "marksmanship." By "gun-enthusiast" I refer to people who do not actually compete in shooting sports or seriously train as professional gunfighters. I think the standard for what gun-enthusiasts consider marksmanship today is vastly different from what it meant a few decades ago. Today, many seem comfortable to judge marksmanship by what can be achieved under very controlled and stable conditions. Whereas, a few decades ago, the gun-enthusiast community seemed to have a better sense that marksmanship is judged by what can be achieved under unstable, dynamic, and uncontrollable situations. So what changed? Quite simply, the background, experience and knowledge level of the crowd.
Weekends at the local ranges used to consist primarily of people with a lifetime of shooting experience, often with some hunting, competition, or military experience under their belt. These folks understood that any schlemiel can shoot decently from a shooting bench, but it is quite another matter when a) the shooter is moving, b) time is of the essence, c) the target is moving, d) the wind is blowing or e) all of the above. They understood that a shooter from a bench can hit a 750 yard target, but miss a deer at 75 feet if he hasn't the real skill. Those people are still a component of the gun-enthusiast community, but their voices are being drowned out. For the past decade or so, the prevalent fad at the public ranges has been what some call the "tacticool" role-playing game, where fun at the range consists of mimicking the firearms of special forces soldiers, SWAT officers, FBI agents, etc. A day at the range for many of these folks is standing stationary with a black semi-automatic pistol with a laser sight, making two handed shots at targets 7 yards away or less. Good "marksmanship" is the ability to keep most of the shots somewhere on the bad guy (yes a shoulder or wrist hit counts) on the target. If rifles are shot, they are AR-15s, used with the rifle supported on some kind of bench set up, and almost always with some sort of scope that likely cost more than the rifle. A spin-off of the tacticool genre is the wildly popular "Zombie" theme, which as best I can tell means changing the black semi-auto guns to some kind of neon green color, and shooting at targets with Zombie-themed imagery.
Very few of these people go on to actually train or compete in tactical-inspired shooting disciplines like IPSC or IDPA, where "marksmanship" means not only speed, but scoring hits on actual "kill zone" sizes, all while having to actually move around like a tactical "operator" might, and sometimes with moving and dynamic targets. Many of them have no idea that a sling is for more than just carrying a rifle (and most don't even own a sling), and without a bench from which to shoot their rifle, I'm not sure they would know how to hold it. Sure, from the bench they can drill .5" groups, but ask them to stand and shoot the rifle unsupported, and suddenly you'll see off-paper misses.
Don't get me wrong, recreational shooting is supposed to be fun and I do not judge anyone for how they choose to spend their time and money at the range. Frankly, those cowboy action shooters who get dressed up in period clothes using period guns seem to be having the most fun out of all the shooting disciplines, and more power to them. But lowering the standard for "marksmanship" is not helpful or positive to those of us who know that even a 0.0MOA laser rifle with a laser sight and ballistics computer in the wrong hands will loose to a "real" marksman with a 30 year old Remington 700. Or, as my readers know, with an 80 year old K98 Mauser. When I bought my current .308 match gun, there was never really any doubt that it was capable of 1MOA or less at 600 yards from the bench. But it took me nearly a year to prove I could do it from the prone slung position, with irons.
The problem, as I see it, is that statements like Robert's could have the effect that other gun-enthusiasts, and the non-shooting public, will not appreciate the incredible skill and practice it takes to shoot competitively away from the bench. They will wrongly assume that shooting for distance while standing, kneeling, sitting, or prone is easy, provided you just buy the right (and expensive) gun. They will look at Olympic-style and other shooting sports as silly, and have little interest in developing dynamic shooting skills.
I think the proof in this is that most gun-enthusiasts, although passionate about guns and shooting, today probably cannot name a single member of the Team USA shooting team or know that the National Championships take place every summer at Camp Perry in Ohio. Most do not know what NRA High Power or Bullseye is all about, and probably wouldn't be interested. It's not that they might not be interested or up to the challenge of trying to compete in those sports, but rather, they'll just assume it's all about buying the right expensive gun, and not about hours of developing the fine motor skill and above all, incredible mental discipline. So instead of joining me on the rifle range for a dose of Zen, they'll sign up for a ridiculous yoga class...
For a great blog that keeps its marksmanship 'old school,' check out http://artoftherifleblog.com/ which the author describes as "A Shooter's Quest for Excellence in Marksmanship." Emphasis on the word "quest," which is a concept seemingly lost on the modern gun-enthusiast community. Too many of them think they've already arrived, because they bought the same gun used by the Navy Seals.
Oh well, as for me I guess I'll just keep doddling away.
Oy veh.
The problem with his statement lies with the meaning the present day "gun-enthusiast" community gives to the word "marksmanship." By "gun-enthusiast" I refer to people who do not actually compete in shooting sports or seriously train as professional gunfighters. I think the standard for what gun-enthusiasts consider marksmanship today is vastly different from what it meant a few decades ago. Today, many seem comfortable to judge marksmanship by what can be achieved under very controlled and stable conditions. Whereas, a few decades ago, the gun-enthusiast community seemed to have a better sense that marksmanship is judged by what can be achieved under unstable, dynamic, and uncontrollable situations. So what changed? Quite simply, the background, experience and knowledge level of the crowd.
Weekends at the local ranges used to consist primarily of people with a lifetime of shooting experience, often with some hunting, competition, or military experience under their belt. These folks understood that any schlemiel can shoot decently from a shooting bench, but it is quite another matter when a) the shooter is moving, b) time is of the essence, c) the target is moving, d) the wind is blowing or e) all of the above. They understood that a shooter from a bench can hit a 750 yard target, but miss a deer at 75 feet if he hasn't the real skill. Those people are still a component of the gun-enthusiast community, but their voices are being drowned out. For the past decade or so, the prevalent fad at the public ranges has been what some call the "tacticool" role-playing game, where fun at the range consists of mimicking the firearms of special forces soldiers, SWAT officers, FBI agents, etc. A day at the range for many of these folks is standing stationary with a black semi-automatic pistol with a laser sight, making two handed shots at targets 7 yards away or less. Good "marksmanship" is the ability to keep most of the shots somewhere on the bad guy (yes a shoulder or wrist hit counts) on the target. If rifles are shot, they are AR-15s, used with the rifle supported on some kind of bench set up, and almost always with some sort of scope that likely cost more than the rifle. A spin-off of the tacticool genre is the wildly popular "Zombie" theme, which as best I can tell means changing the black semi-auto guns to some kind of neon green color, and shooting at targets with Zombie-themed imagery.
Very few of these people go on to actually train or compete in tactical-inspired shooting disciplines like IPSC or IDPA, where "marksmanship" means not only speed, but scoring hits on actual "kill zone" sizes, all while having to actually move around like a tactical "operator" might, and sometimes with moving and dynamic targets. Many of them have no idea that a sling is for more than just carrying a rifle (and most don't even own a sling), and without a bench from which to shoot their rifle, I'm not sure they would know how to hold it. Sure, from the bench they can drill .5" groups, but ask them to stand and shoot the rifle unsupported, and suddenly you'll see off-paper misses.
Don't get me wrong, recreational shooting is supposed to be fun and I do not judge anyone for how they choose to spend their time and money at the range. Frankly, those cowboy action shooters who get dressed up in period clothes using period guns seem to be having the most fun out of all the shooting disciplines, and more power to them. But lowering the standard for "marksmanship" is not helpful or positive to those of us who know that even a 0.0MOA laser rifle with a laser sight and ballistics computer in the wrong hands will loose to a "real" marksman with a 30 year old Remington 700. Or, as my readers know, with an 80 year old K98 Mauser. When I bought my current .308 match gun, there was never really any doubt that it was capable of 1MOA or less at 600 yards from the bench. But it took me nearly a year to prove I could do it from the prone slung position, with irons.
The problem, as I see it, is that statements like Robert's could have the effect that other gun-enthusiasts, and the non-shooting public, will not appreciate the incredible skill and practice it takes to shoot competitively away from the bench. They will wrongly assume that shooting for distance while standing, kneeling, sitting, or prone is easy, provided you just buy the right (and expensive) gun. They will look at Olympic-style and other shooting sports as silly, and have little interest in developing dynamic shooting skills.
I think the proof in this is that most gun-enthusiasts, although passionate about guns and shooting, today probably cannot name a single member of the Team USA shooting team or know that the National Championships take place every summer at Camp Perry in Ohio. Most do not know what NRA High Power or Bullseye is all about, and probably wouldn't be interested. It's not that they might not be interested or up to the challenge of trying to compete in those sports, but rather, they'll just assume it's all about buying the right expensive gun, and not about hours of developing the fine motor skill and above all, incredible mental discipline. So instead of joining me on the rifle range for a dose of Zen, they'll sign up for a ridiculous yoga class...
For a great blog that keeps its marksmanship 'old school,' check out http://artoftherifleblog.com/ which the author describes as "A Shooter's Quest for Excellence in Marksmanship." Emphasis on the word "quest," which is a concept seemingly lost on the modern gun-enthusiast community. Too many of them think they've already arrived, because they bought the same gun used by the Navy Seals.
Oh well, as for me I guess I'll just keep doddling away.
Wednesday, July 24, 2013
Maccabiah Shooting Sports Update
50m Prone Rifle:
Gil Simkovitch ISRAEL 618.1
Emmanuel Ben Hefer ISRAEL 615.6
Doron Shaziri ISRAEL 613.7
Micha Berg HOLLAND 589.5
********** HOLLAND 584
Jeremy Griffiths MAURITIUS 526.3
25m Rapid Fire Pistol:
KRIEVSKY ALEXY ISRAEL 286
ZDOROVSKI ALEXAMDER ISRAEL 258
SHTINMAN YEVEGENY ISRAEL 238
LEVOTZKIN GILAD GERMANY 238
TZUR PANTZER VERED GERMANY 237
50m 3-Position Rifle:
IMMI BEN HEFER ISRAEL 1147
GIL SIMKOVITCH ISRAEL 1132
ROEY FRENKEL ISRAEL 1065
MICA BERG HOLLAND 1052
********** HOLLAND 1023
50m Free Pistol:
Evsey Kossover ISRAEL 533
Alex Tripolsky ISRAEL 530
Daniel Katz ISRAEL 529
Gilad Lavochkin GERMANY 499
Roman Gronsky CZECH REPUBLIC 468
Vered Zur-Panzer GERMANY 461
Saturday, July 20, 2013
Jewish Marksman's Day at the Range
The sight was dialed in for the 600 yard prone stage. I was eager to see if the concentricity tool had done anything to improve the ammo. Luckily, the way the pit rotation worked out, I was able to take a picture of my target with the pasters marking my hits. You see, the way NRA High Power matches work is that competitors take turns doing "pit duty" behind a safety berm, where they raise and lower the targets, marking hits with a large colored disk in between each shot. This is because it would be almost impossible to see your hits at 600 yards without a humongous spotting scope, but an inexpensive 20x spotting scope can easily pick up the marking disk. Well anyway, usually I never go back to the pits after my 600 yard stage, but this time I did and was able to see my group as opposed to just one shot at a time. For perspective, the 10 ring is 12" wide and the X is 6".
So I ended up shooting the same exact score as last time (a personal best at 600 yards), a 193, which is pretty good. I had one mental lapse and shot a 7, and man, if I could have that shot back I could have done 195 or better and been in High Master territory. Even if that 7 had broken the 8 line I would have had a personal best at 194. Oh well. I also got a little lucky where that high 9 just barely stayed in. It was also very hot and humid, so I was soaked with sweat under my shooting jacket, which makes the sling and shoulder feel unstable--I found myself breaking position to reset things more often than usual. Otherwise, as you can see the group is relatively tight in the 10 ring. It was just one of those days where the shots just circled the X ring. So I think the concentricity tool may have helped slightly at 600 yards, maybe .25MOA or so. One thing I am now convinced of is that my rifle and ammo are capable of shooting a "clean" (all 10s), take out the human error and the rifle seems to want to shoot 1MOA or less at 600 yards. I just need to make that happen. The load I'm using is a 155gr Nosler HPBT bullet, with 43 grains of 4064, which is a mild load.
It was an overcast day and we got all are shooting in before the storms came, here is a view of the range with the targets hidden in the pits. You can see the wind flag off to the left, very little wind, mile 3-5 mph gusts that I just waited out and shot during lulls:
Friday, July 19, 2013
Friday 7/19/13 Maccabiah Results
Long time readers of the blog know that there are many excellent American Jewish international-style shooters we might have seen there. In the teen and "young adult" category:
Sandra Fong, Danielle Fong, Abigail Fong - With Sandra notably competing at the Olympic levels.
Hanna Black, Josh Black - Hanna competes at the collegiate level in Air Rifle, Josh at the junior nationals level in Air Rifle and Pistol.
Jessica Levine - Won national awards at Camp Perry a few years back in smallbore.
Laura Spector - Olympic biathlete.
Sharon Barazani - Up-and-coming international shooter (not sure, she may technically have been born in Israel...?).
Adults:
Dmitriy Shteyman - International pistol disciplines.
Sloane Milstein - Air pistol.
The "Blackhawk Bagel Boys" - An entire 2011 team of Jews at the national championships in smallbore prone.
Sorry if I am forgetting anyone!
This does not even include dozens of American Jews like myself who compete at the amateur levels in center-fire sports, but would still be competitive in an international air or smallbore event. My readers know this because I've been documenting them for several years now! There are many Jewish NRA Bullseye shooters who shoot slow fire at 50 yards who I'm sure would do well at 10m Air Pistol, or already do. Those of us NRA High Power shooters who shoot prone at 600 yards can also shoot a smallbore rifle prone at 50m pretty well.
So let's get to Israel soon and show them what we've got!
On to Friday's results:
10m Air Rifle:
Sergey Richter ISRAEL 626.1
Leor Madlal ISRAEL 625.0
Doron Egozi ISRAEL 607.0
******* HOLLAND 564.9
Gilad Lavochkin GERMANY 521.5
Jeremy Griffiths MAURITIUS 423.8
Alex Tripolski ISRAEL 571
Daniel Katz ISRAEL 564
Tamir Adler ISRAEL 554
Gilad Lavochkin GERMANY 552
Vered Zur Panzer GERMANY 530
Roman Gronski CZECH REPUBLIC 517
David Peer SLOVAKIA 456
Robert Gatner CURACAO 377
If you are, or know any of the above shooters, please contact me so I can profile them and add them. If you are new to the blog, please take the time to browse the right side where all of the profiled Jewish shooters are listed.
Mazal Tov to all the competitors!
Wednesday, July 17, 2013
Correction and Survey for Maccabiah Games Shooting Sports!
One of our readers in Israel has informed that I was mistaken--there are indeed shooting sports in the 2013 Maccabiah Games! The events are various international disciplines like air rifle, air pistol, prone rifle and rapid fire pistol. The reader tells me there are 7 shooters from various European countries. So where are the Americans? Despite being The Jewish Marksman, I had no idea that shooting events were part of the games...I thought shooting had been dropped for lack of interest. I think other American Jews also did not know.
I know that several of the top tier American Jewish shooters (including Olympians and national champions) have made trips to Israel in the past, and plan on going again in the future. I have to think they would be happy to combine a trip with a few days of shooting in the Maccabiah Games. WHAT ABOUT YOU?
I know most of us probably cannot afford the time and expense every year, but what if we organized as many as we could to go every few years? Please send me an email (jewishmarksman at gmail dot com) if you think you would have interest, and we'll see if we can organize something!
I know that several of the top tier American Jewish shooters (including Olympians and national champions) have made trips to Israel in the past, and plan on going again in the future. I have to think they would be happy to combine a trip with a few days of shooting in the Maccabiah Games. WHAT ABOUT YOU?
I know most of us probably cannot afford the time and expense every year, but what if we organized as many as we could to go every few years? Please send me an email (jewishmarksman at gmail dot com) if you think you would have interest, and we'll see if we can organize something!
No Shooting Sports at 2013 Maccabiah Games
As long time readers know, I have always been open to including archery in the blog's coverage, but just have not stumbled across any non-Israeli competitive Jewish archers. I'll do my best to follow up on the Jewish archers in the 2013 games, but help from readers is always appreciated!
Monday, July 15, 2013
Jewish Marksman on Zimmerman Verdict
צֶדֶק צֶדֶק תִּרְדּף לְמַעַן תִּחְיֶה וְיָרַשְׁתָּ אֶת־הָאָרֶץMonths ago, it became apparent to me that the state of Florida, the federal government and the media had begun a tyrannical scapegoating campaign against George Zimmerman. I knew that I was watching a modern day version of the Deryfus affair, or countless other scapegoating campaigns we Jews have suffered for centuries. Scapegoating in the Torah is the concept of projecting society's sins upon the goat, then casting the goat away to symbolically wash away the sins. So what sins did society try to pawn off on Zimmerman? Deep down, those most outraged by the verdict must know that it is certainly possible that Trayvon Martin engaged in inappropriate violence against Zimmerman. Whether Martin was a violent young man or not, those outraged by the verdict are simply unwilling to accept responsibility for American society's sin of producing violent young men, of all races, by our failing public schools, families, and other institutions we are all responsible for maintaining. It is so much easier to deny that a violent "gangsta" culture has infiltrated American youth, and blame George Zimmerman for the crisis. How many times did we see the media show the pictures of Trayvon Martin as a young child, but refuse to show the photos of him exhibiting behaviors advanced by the youth "gangsta" culture? That is simply unfair and unjust to George Zimmerman. No, George Zimmerman is not Jewish, but Hashem commands us to seek truth and justice for all. Although I have voiced criticism of star attorney Alan Dershowitz in the past on this blog, even he agrees that the government's actions here were unjust. I made a modest donation to Zimmerman's defense fund, and he was kind enough to send me personalized thank you note you see above.
אֲשֶׁר־יהוה אֱלהֶיךָ נתֵן לָךְ
"Justice, justice shall you pursue, that you may thrive and occupy the land that the LORD your G-d is giving you." (Deut 16:20)
The fiasco surrounding George Zimmerman's shooting of Trayvon Martin has severely tried my patience with the media, and the public generally. In the mainstream media and social media, innumerable ignoramuses have blathered on about Florida's self-defense statutes, plainly without any legal training whatsoever, and in many cases, without even bothering to read the laws. Despite being characterized as "complex," Florida's self-defense laws are simple and straightforward to those who bother to read them. There are some technical aspects regarding judicial procedure that lawyers may bicker over, but the general principles that citizens need to know are very straightforward. Here I try and help. To the intellectually honest who understand the law and objectively examine the facts, it will be obvious that the case against George Zimmerman was doomed from the beginning.
With respect to deadly force in defense of self, Florida statute 776.012 states that a person may use deadly force if that person "reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the imminent commission of a forcible felony." Re-read that 10 times if necessary, and think about each and every word. Understanding that sentence is critical to understanding Florida law. Florida law is not "crazy," to the contrary, it is sane, fair and just.
1. It is critical to understand that under Florida law, self-defenders are allowed to make reasonable mistakes. Florida law examines what the defendant could have reasonably believed at the time she used deadly force, not whether deadly force was reasonable had all the facts been known. This may seem odd at first, but after analysis it is clearly fair and just. For example, if someone pulls an unloaded gun on you in a threatening manner, in truth they are not a threat to you, but you cannot know that at the time. Suppose you shoot this person with the unloaded gun, using your loaded gun. In fact, you have made a very unfortunate mistake as to the reality of the threat. But, any sane person would agree that under those circumstances, the question is not whether your life was really in danger (it never was, remember--the gun was unloaded), instead, the question is whether you had a reasonable belief that death or great bodily harm was imminent. In other words, you are allowed to make a reasonable mistake. On the other hand, suppose a child points a clear plastic squirt gun at you. You can tell it is only a water pistol, but have some unreasonable belief that the squirt gun is filled with deadly acid. If you shoot the child, no matter how real the fear was to you subjectively, because the mistake was objectively unreasonable under the circumstances you would be acting unlawfully.
So for example, let's consider the State's allegations that after the fight, the wounds to the back of Zimmerman's head did not look so bad, and a medical professional determined that he did not have a concussion. It does not matter that these wounds were not "serious bodily harm" after the fact. What matters is what Zimmerman reasonably believed at the time it was happening. Notwithstanding that the blows didn't cause any permanent brain damage or death, I think it was reasonable for Zimmerman to fear that at the time, and the six members of the jury obviously agreed. I know the State tried to argue that the wounds were so light, that at the time Zimmerman was receiving them, he should have known they weren't serious. I think that argument is ridiculous, and obviously the jurors did too.
2. It is critical to understand that a perception of an armed attacker is not a prerequisite to responding with deadly force. Nothing in Florida law states that a defendant's reasonable belief of imminent death or great bodily harm needs to be based on the perceived use of a weapon by the attacker. Plenty of people have had their skulls bashed in, been strangled, paralyzed, and otherwise brutalized by nothing more than another person's hands. People who keep repeating the mantra that "Trayvon only had a pack of Skittles" are being intellectually and morally dishonest. Bare hands can kill, and the real question is to ask exactly what Trayvon was doing with his hands. Far too many refuse to ask that simple question, and refuse to accept the fact that Martin was indeed engaged in violence with his hands.
2. Florida's "Stand Your Ground" (SYG) probably had nothing to do with the verdict. (The so-called SYG law includes some procedural rules, but most Floridians understand it only as abrogation of the common law duty to retreat before responding with deadly force). Under the aforementioned statute, a person "does not have a duty to retreat" in the face of a reasonable belief that death or great bodily harm is imminent. This is repeated in 776.013(3). Under the old English common law, a person had a duty to "retreat to the wall" before defending with deadly force, i.e. exploit all reasonably possible means of escape. This may have sounded good in theory, but in practice the courts found it unworkable, and the second guessing by prosecutors and juries was incredibly unfair to citizens that had otherwise justly defended themselves. So Florida and some other States did away with the common law, and explicitly removed a duty to retreat. In most states, within your home you have no duty to retreat. Florida extends the doctrine to the public square.
Rather than debate the wisdom of SYG, consider that it likely had no bearing on the Zimmerman verdict. The evidence was clear that Martin had mounted Zimmerman, and thus, retreat was not reasonably possible for Zimmerman. In other words, even if you think SYG is a terrible law and Zimmerman should have been required to retreat, that is a moot point because Zimmerman couldn't have retreated from under Martin even if he had tried. SYG was included in the jury instructions, so we'll never know if the jurors agree with me on this point, but I strongly suspect they would, i.e. Zimmerman was trapped under Martin and couldn't have retreated.
3. Zimmerman's following or "profiling" of Martin is legally irrelevant. Frankly, I am baffled by the idea that somehow, because Zimmerman followed Martin or was concerned he might be a burglar, Zimmerman was not entitled to defend himself. Even for those that think Zimmerman started some kind of fist fight or shoving match, under Florida law Zimmerman was still entitled to defend himself. Specifically, 776.041(2)(a) states that even if Zimmerman "provokes" Martin's use of force by following him, Zimmerman is entitled to defend himself with deadly force if he first tries to escape or defend himself by other means. Again, the facts show that retreat was impossible at the time Martin began causing Zimmerman to imminently fear for his life (banging his head into the concrete). So long as Zimmerman did not commit any actual forcible felonies (defined under 776.08) to provoke Martin, Zimmerman was entitled to defend himself. Shoving, restraining, or taking a single swing is at most, a misdemeanor. Following someone is not a crime at all (Florida does have a crime of stalking 784.048, but Zimmerman's acts were unlikely stalking by definition, and one-time stalking is only a misdemeanor, and while aggravated stalking is a forcible felony, it occurs only in violation of a restraining order).
Thus, even if you somehow think Martin's acts of violence towards Zimmerman were reasonable (albeit possibly mistaken under the circumstances) because Zimmerman somehow "provoked" Martin, unless Zimmerman actually committed a forcible felony in the first instance, Zimmerman was entitled to defend himself with deadly force from reasonably perceived deadly force from which he cannot retreat. Again, this makes sense to reasonable people. If a person starts a simple fistfight in a bar, she should, with few conditions, be allowed to use deadly force against the defender who responds by jumping on top of her and pulling out a knife. Even if you believe Zimmerman started a "scuffle," to argue that once Martin escalated the violence and left Zimmerman no opportunity to retreat, Zimmerman should not have been allowed to take action to stop his fear of imminent death or serious bodily harm is unreasonable.
As far as I can tell, nobody who paid attention to the evidence seriously believes that Zimmerman committed a forcible felony to "provoke" Martin. However, it is not entirely clear to me why no instructions relating to 776.041(2)(a) were included in the jury instructions. Perhaps nobody thought of it, or perhaps the defense did not want to plant any seed with the jury that Zimmerman may have provoked Martin, despite the fact that the State seemed to go with that theory.
4. The initial decision by the local police force not to arrest Zimmerman. In most states, if you shoot someone in lawful self-defense, you will still be arrested nearly 100% of the time. Whether you will be later charged with murder is another story, but initial arrest is almost always certain. The police are not required to consider whether or not you acted in self-defense, and rarely will. In Florida, things are slightly different. 776.032 prohibits Florida police from arresting unless they believe they have probable cause that the shooting was not justifiable by self-defense. They can continue to investigate and gather evidence, but they cannot arrest until they have probable cause. "Probable cause" is an elusive concept. There is Florida and federal case law discussing the concept at length, but I like to tell people that in layman's terms it means "reasonably possible." This is a very low standard, much lower than "beyond reasonable doubt" that is required to convict at trial. So technically, one could say the police should not have arrested Zimmerman until they believed it "reasonably possible" that his claim of self-defense was unsupported. After reviewing the evidence at trial, I believe this decision could have gone either way, and do not fault the Sanford police for their decision. There is no statutory bar against the State for simply bringing charges. However, defendants are entitled to an immunity hearing, which essentially tries the case in front of judge solely to first determine if it will ever go to a jury. Although it would seem that a defendant has nothing to lose by seeking such a hearing, there are complex strategical reasons why some defendants, like Zimmerman, might choose to forego the hearing. We'll never know if Zimmerman's defense team made the right choice by forgoing the immunity hearing, but it all worked out in the end.
5. The burden is always on the State to prove guild beyond a reasonable doubt, including that the shooting was not in self defense. An incredible number of Americans seem to refuse to acknowledge that our system functions on the principle that the State must prove its case to the exclusion of all reasonable doubt. This includes proving that Zimmerman's self-defense claim is unreasonable (technically, a defendant must only make a prima facia case of self-defense, then the State must rebut it to the exclusion of all reasonable doubt). It is not enough that a juror thinks the defendant is probably guilty, rather, the juror's perception must be that there are no reasonable doubts whatsoever. How any rational person could examine the actual evidence (not the lies and half-truths told by the media) and not have reasonable doubts (and in fact believe Zimmerman is innocent) is beyond me.
6. Potential for Federal case against Zimmerman
Yes, there are federal criminal laws against committing violence against someone solely based on their race. But the FBI investigation conducted at the outset of the case revealed Zimmerman was not racially motivated, nor was he a racist. The news outlet NBC is now the subject of a civil trial because they intentionally edited the 911 tapes to make Zimmerman appear racist. In fact, Zimmerman never used any racial slurs, instead he only identified Martin as black because the 911 operator specifically asked about Martin's race. Frankly, I am shocked that the American public is not more outraged by NBC's behavior. Nothing Eric Holder's DOJ does surprises me, but bringing a federal case against Zimmerman would only make things worse the (misinformed) angry public, because Zimmerman would undoubtedly win that case.
7. Potential for Civil Case against Zimmerman
In theory, Martin's parents could pursue a wrongful death claim under 768.16-26. The theory would be that Zimmerman was somehow negligent or reckless, and that negligence was the proximate cause of Martin's death. However, not only would self-defense be a defense to that claim, Florida adopts the concept of comparative negligence, i.e. Martin could be found to also have been negligent (or reckless) and his percentage of negligence would reduce Zimmerman's liability. But perhaps most importantly, 776.032 actually shifts attorneys fees to Zimmerman if he prevails in a self-defense claim. Normally, plaintiffs attorneys are eager to take wrongful death cases on contingency...they and the plaintiffs have nothing to lose, and would normally not have to pay a defendant's attorneys fees regardless of the outcome. However, in this case if Martin's parents lose their claim against Zimmerman, they could be obligated to pay Zimmerman's attorneys fees! That might make them and any attorney think twice about bringing the case, given that the theory of the case has already failed in front of a jury of six mothers.
I hope this post sheds some light on the laws of Florida that affected the outcome of the case. It is important as Jews that we speak out against persecution of all kinds. Just because the mainstream media and the government have attacked George Zimmerman does not make him guilty in any way, shape, or form. Jews who know their history should know better. Baruch Hashem, George Zimmerman is finally on the path to the justice he deserves.
Friday, July 12, 2013
Israeli Mauser Watch: Remarkable Israeli Mauser on Gunbroker
Right now on Gunbroker.com is a classic example of the type of Israeli Mauser that I really like, perhaps the best I've seen online. German-made receiver, Stars of David stamps on the receiver and carved into the stock, stamped out Nazi markings, matching bolt and receiver, sling, grenade launcher. Lots of pictures so check it out (click to visit)!
Also there is Hebrew word on the receiver and stock, and I'm not quite sure what it means, or if it is an acronym. I can't tell if the letters are מכלן or מפלן so perhaps one of my readers can help read and translate the markings.
With two days left in the auction, bidding has reached $650. I suspect it will go for $900-$1200.
As always, buyer beware!
Also there is Hebrew word on the receiver and stock, and I'm not quite sure what it means, or if it is an acronym. I can't tell if the letters are מכלן or מפלן so perhaps one of my readers can help read and translate the markings.
With two days left in the auction, bidding has reached $650. I suspect it will go for $900-$1200.
As always, buyer beware!
Wednesday, July 10, 2013
Jewish Marksman Shoots Another Personal Best
A few interesting things to point out. First, this was the first outing with ammo that I "fixed" using my new Hornady concentricity tool. Within the green circle there are roughly 12 shots, and I've never shot a group this tight at 100 with this rifle. I really did not expect the concentricity tool to improve much at 100, but I think it did. Maybe a .5 minute adjustment to the right and I might have squeezed in a clean 200. Hopefully this will carry over to the 600 yard line later this month. The second remarkable point is that although I practice on the SCATT system several times a week, I almost never practice prone or sitting (only off hand), and haven't for several months. Nonetheless, my prone and sitting scores keep getting noticeably better in matches. Meanwhile, my off hand scores, while ever-increasing in practice, a sinking and unpredictable in matches, primarily due to nervousness at the outset of a match. It confirms the belief that skills gained in offhand carry over to other positions, I just need to get my head on right in the off hand phase. I'll write more about the mental management training I've been exploring in future posts.
Third, I think the biggest factor is my becoming more particular and consistent with head position on the rifle, and maintaining it during a shot. I've tightened up my cheek weld slightly, and maybe become slightly more concerned with keeping consistent head position than whether the bull is perfectly centered. I think the outer 10s and the 9 came when I got a tired and a little sloppy with head position, although I still find that after 12 shots or so my body wants to fight that .308 recoil, and I start to anticipate the muzzle blast. That is why the shots tend to go up from that centering point. I think the next match I will take a 2 or 3 minute break after the first 10 shots to allow my body to recover and see if that helps.
Tuesday, July 2, 2013
Jewish Marksman's Thoughts on the Tavor Rifle
As it turns out, I am currently putting a lot of thought into the Jewish Marksman's home defense plan with respect to firearms, and have come to the conclusion that a SBR (short barreled rifle) or similar firearm makes more sense than our current plan, which relies on unshoulderable handguns. To make a long story short, a shoulderable firearm is almost always more accurate for the user, and a SBR or SBR-like weapon is almost equally maneuverable. The ATF defines a SBR as a shoulderable firearm with a barrel length less than 16". Thus you can put a stock on a Glock pistol, but doing so creates an SBR. In my home state SBRs are legal, but a federal registration is required beforehand, along with a $200 stamp tax. Some folks argue that a "bullpup" style rifle with the barrel set further back into the stock, such as the Tavor, offers the same maneuverability as a SBR but without the need for federal registration and taxes because the barrel is still 16". Further, proponents of bullpups point out that such rifles are typically more powerful than a short-barreled SBR in the same caliber (longer barrels means more complete powder burn, thus more muzzle velocity). This is a fine theory regarding bullpups, but until the Tavor came along, many reviewers of other bullpup rifles found them ergonomically deficient.
But at the end of the day, I don't see myself getting a Tavor, for several reasons. For me, a rifle would be either for indoor home defense in the quasi-SBR role, or as a long range (600 yd) competition rifle capable of 1MOA or less with metalic sights. So first off, I tend to not want to be an early adopter of firearms. There are sometimes annoying "bugs" that need to be worked out of designs, and significant improvements are made in later generations. Second, it is unclear what the market will be for replacement parts and barrels over the long term. Compared to say, an AR-15 or AK-47 which has a humongous after-market parts industry, the future of the Tavor in that respect is completely unknown. I'm sure the IDF has huge stockpiles of spare Tavor parts, but American distributors do not at this time. Third, it is unclear how or if the Tavor can be customized for 1MOA-standard target shooting. The AR-15 platform can be used to build world-class metallic sight target rifles, but it is unclear how to get there with a Tavor, and long range precision shooting is my primary sporting interest. Fourth, I do not see traditional rifle cartridges as an ideal home defense option for my situation, and I have yet to see any reviews of a rumored 9mm conversion kit for the Tavor, nor does it appear that other 9mm versions of the Tavor will hit the US market anytime soon. Fifth, the price of the Tavor equals or exceeds other SBR options, even factoring in the tax stamp. Sixth, some of the SBR options I am considering, such as simply putting a removable stock on a Glock, are highly concealable even with the stock attached, and has the option of removing the stock when desirable for concealment or transport. The Tavor is not very concealable, although there are some smaller SBR versions (not yet available to US market), but that puts us right back where we started with a tax stamp. Now, if my home state made SBRs illegal (as I understand some states do), then it might be a different ballgame...the Tavor with a 9mm conversion kit might be a very viable candidate for the home-defense role.
But doesn't everyone need a "range toy?" Frankly, since I've been shooting .308 in a bolt gun in competition, I've come to enjoy, yes enjoy, recoil and muzzle blast as part of the fun and challenge of rifle shooting. It's the same fun one experiences shooting a .45ACP pistol as opposed to a 9mm. And if I do go smaller in the future for competition, it will probably be to a .260 or similar cartridge, not the .223, which is simply not the best option for long range (although arguably the most economical). So the idea of another .223 rifle for fun just doesn't excite me, and certainly not so given how much more expensive the Tavor is over an AR-15 platform, which I already have. Frankly, I'd rather just plink with a .223 bolt gun or even a .22LR AR-15, which again, I already have. There are supposedly going to be Tavors made in .308 and even .300BLK, but again, what's the excitement over the AR platform in either caliber (AR-15 or AR-10) to justify the price? I like to go to the range to make hard precision shots that most people don't bother with...I find it meditative and relaxing (some call it "yoga for Republicans"). Some people go to the range to fantasy "role play" cowboys, police or Navy Seals, and the Tavor's looks certainly lend itself well to that role, and to each his own.
As for a "battle rifle," I'll admit I'm not really qualified to opine in that area. But it seems to me that for citizens who want such a rifle for SHTF scenarios, an AR-15 or AK-47 would be a better choice primarily because the American market is filled with aftermarket parts and has a huge ownership base, and the Tavor simply does not, even if in theory the Tavor were the better rifle, functionally speaking. I know if me and my neighbors had to hunker down following a hurricane (or rioting in the wake of a potential George Zimmerman acquittal?), there are more than a few friendly neighbors with/from whom I could borrow/lend/trade AR-15 springs, pins, bolts, etc. (and troubleshoot) if need be within walking distance. Tavor breaks down, you're on your own unless you've kept enough spare parts around. That could change, but could also take decades for the market to shift. So for whatever ergonomic advantages the Tavor may have over an AR-15, for Americans I would still say the AR-15 is a better choice until Tavors and their parts come down in price significantly.
At the end of the day, the scales tip in favor of other options for my needs. That is not to slight the Tavor, as the rifle has received nothing but outstanding reviews from sources I trust, namely MAC and Jerry Miculek. But I think people ought to think long and hard before selecting a Tavor over some other (AR-15 based or otherwise) solution for their individual needs, especially if the rifle is to have duties other than being a range toy. And if you really want one, if the rifle really does have mass US appeal, then I suspect prices will drop and a used market will open up, unless IWI has some plan to keep the number in US circulation low to maintain a higher price. Also, like anything else in the gun business, anything successful will be cloned. IWI is not the only manufacturer with bullpup experience, and improvements in its designs could be implemented by others.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
