M*CARBO Brotherhood

Falsehoods And Myths


If anything i’m pretty anal about keeping my firearms clean. If I take it out and shoot it, it gets cleaned usually the same day. Exception being if I’m out hunting. In that case they get wiped down daily and cleaned when I get home. I still hear my company commander from boot camp and my dad when I was a kid. Neither tolerated neglected weapons and it has stuck with me to this day.


Yet somehow the individual states keep eroding away that right to the point of where it is meaningless.


Here is another misconception.

People confuse a break in period on a weapon with a break in procedure. With the rare exception of PRS rifle barrels (and even that is debated) there is NO SUCH THING AS A BREAK IN PROCEDURE FOR A WEAPON!

All you do is clean, lube, and shoot. Parts and springs will wear and loosen normally over time. They will start out stiff and if built to tight tolerances prone to malfunction, then with use they will reach optimum performance, then they will slowly degrade. That is the weapon life cycle.


That is a good point and it ties in with one that needs to be made about the language of the Second Amendment; i.e. that the right to bear arms “shall not be infringed”

Those are the words used in the Second Amendment suggesting to any sensible person reading it that the right to bear arms is absolute and not subject to ANY regulation or limitation. Despite that, however, none of our Constitutional rights are really absolute and almost all are subject to reasonable regulation.

For example, the First Amendment provides in even stronger language that:

“Congress shall make no law … abridging the freedom of speech….”

Yet we cannot incite a riot, publish child pornography, defame someone or falsely scream “fire” in a crowded theater. All are reasonable and well-accepted limitations on what otherwise would appear from the language of the Amendment to be an absolute right to free speech that Congress has zero authority to limit.

The First Amendment also protects freedom of religion using the same “shall make no law” language.

Yet polygamy is illegal and you cannot sacrifice a goat (or virgin) on your condo balcony.

Even our most fundamental Constitutional rights to life and liberty may be taken away by the government so long as we are provided due process.

Courts will continue to struggle with drawing where the acceptable regulatory line is with regard to each right, whether it is our right to speak freely, to practice religion or to bear arms. But each of those rights unquestionably is subject to regulation and none of them are truly absolute despite the language of the Amendments recognizing them.

The following quotation is from the U.S. Supreme Court opinion in District of Columbia v Heller :

Like most rights, the right secured by the Second Amendment is not unlimited . From Blackstone through the 19th-century cases, commentators and courts routinely explained that the right was not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose. For example, the majority of the 19th-century courts to consider the question held that prohibitions on carrying concealed weapons were lawful under the Second Amendment or state analogues. Although we do not undertake an exhaustive historical analysis today of the full scope of the Second Amendment, nothing in our opinion should be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms. (citations & footnotes omitted, emphasis added).

As noted in Heller , the right to bear arms is not unlimited. Moreover, regulation of the right was approved by Courts almost immediately after the Amendment was adopted which is the best evidence of the framer’s intent and understanding of the Amendment.

The bottom line is that the rights granted by the Second Amendment are, and always have been, subject to reasonable regulation notwithstanding the “shall not be infringed” language of the Amendment. Whether we like it or not, that ship has sailed as a matter of Constitutional Law. The actual scope of permissible regulation was left by Heller to be decided another day and by the lower courts.

So some regulation is permissible and the States you mention are pushing the boundaries of what may be Constitutional. You will notice that many of them are in the notoriously liberal 9th Circuit Court of Appeals which is likely to find almost any gun restriction constitutional. The flip side is that the current Supreme Court is more likely to issue Certiorari to that Circuit and overturn such a decision. Others are where you would expect them and also will likely be challenged. The next few years are going to be interesting ones as litigation is initiated challenging those laws and then works its way through the system. And it will take time because the lower courts will almost always find the law Constitutional making appeals necessary.


Wow Brian you said a mouthful! But as always it was very interesting and informative.

Here is what worries me about the new tactic for gun control they are trying in Oregon.

They are creating liability were none existed before. So when your homeowner’s insurance refuses to cover you if you have weapons…its not the state taking away your rights. Same goes for vehicle insurance and insurance for gun ranges.

Without insurance (as mandated by law) we will cease to exist. Only the wealthy who pay cash and can put up a bond in lieu of insurance will retain their 2nd amendment rights. :astonished:


That is worrisome. Can you send me a private message pointing me to the pertinent statutes?


@JoeFridaySays Check your email. Was way to long to send as a PM.


Something @Kona said earlier about folks who complain that shooting competition s aren’t tactical (surprise they are not!) got me to thinking about this myth.

(But before I go further a disclaimer, I am NOT criticizing LEOs or military!)

Most police and most military, including the elite special operators, have minimal firearms skill.

What saves them is their opponents have even less!

They are NOT the uber shooters as portrayed in the media. Heck I was one of them, today I shoot more rounds in a single week than I would in an entire year in the USMC and I was considered to be part of that “elite”.

There is a reason why so many of your top shooters, national title and world record holders are…gasp! CIVILIANS WITH NO MILITARY OR LAW ENFORCEMENT EXPERIENCE!

To be honest if my “bad-ass” hard-charging younger self ever came up against my fat old self today in a gun fight that young man would simply perish. Every time all the time.

Shooting a couple of hundred rounds a year from a static position and running around with blanks is not the same as shooting a couple of thousand rounds a month while moving! :hushed:


it also depends on the quality of the setup/cnc/machinists that sets up and machines the tolerances. some of the lower end manufactures, such as Norinco, work to a ± .005 operating clearance and Les Baer works to a max of +.0000 -0005 difference between a $300 PW87 and a $3028.00 Baer 1911 premier II 6"hunter 10mm supported.
“Break In” by the definition of the lower end manufacturers, is literally wear metal till it actually functions hot and cold bore" you just addin a lil carbon in the action to act as lapping compound more or less. simply because a lit of em do a “Hit it hard and wish it well” as far as their hot and cold tolerances go.
when i hit 1000 round count on a weapon, I know that its good and smoothe as its going to get, after that tolerances start getting wider, and in the second thousand, your adding parts to tighten it back up. "accurizeing " is a term ive heard, that dont really describe that, but its used with a broad paint brush.

Ive quit counting the Mosin’s ive honed the chamber and lapped the bolt on, simply because after 2 rounds heat swelled the bolt and it was hell to open, and drag the brass out of the chamber kicking and and screaming so to speak, (usually if you check the numbers you find its a mismatched bolt to receiver, and cosmolene cooked in the bore, up near the bottleneck)
even my old model 29 rust speckeled and all, was still and heavy on pull, due to the fact although it looked rode hard and put up wet, I doubt if more than a box of bullets had ever been fired out of it.
I do a fitment/break in, due to the fact a lot of the firearms i get are problem children to start with, Failure to fire, Failure to feed, Failure to eject, or failure to go to battery.
the 4 “f” rule. and before a firearm goes in the grab and go category, I know once ive fired 1000 thru it, I know when i pull the bang switch in a tense moment, that it will truly go “Bang”

and face it besides a handfull of us, its doubtful I would say 70% of the gun owning population fire more than 50 to 100 rounds a year… Break in for those individuals, is break in on user operation and getting used to the firearm more than anything else…

Besides, its fun getting one up to 1000 rounds…


And for a semi that takes what…a week? :joy:

You know I have seen more problems during break in with the high end custom pistols with their tight tolerances than anything else.

But you are right, and as my wife constantly reminds me most people don’t shoot that much. (I tend to get a bit impatient with folks who have a high end weapon but can’t shoot.) :astonished:


Here is my new myth of the day.

Folks who claim they can build a 2,000 yard sub-moa AR rifle! :open_mouth:

Sorry Skippy, you can’t…you just can’t! :joy:

I have even heard claims like this from a gunsmith (he was either a fool or was trying to hustle me for some $$).


I do take a bit of exception to the statement “most have minimal firearms skills” The vast majority of civilians have little or no firearms skills. I know of many LE and military that have earned Sharpshooter and even Expert level, as I did. There are a lot of competitive shooters that are amazing to watch as they run a course. But it’s still only running against a clock and shooting at paper or metal, which can’t shoot back! I believe true skill involves much more than time and targets.


As did I, Expert sixth-award, but what does that mean? Compare that to a top ranked competitive shooter and I am not even in the same ball park.

However, I did say most because some LEOs and military are also competitors (such as our own @Kona) but they are often the exception.

I know of no LEO or military training that involves such a situation. (Paint ball always turns into a grabass.)

As someone who has worked ranges for quals with marines, border patrol, sheriff department, local PD, and as of late Coast Guard I can tell you they are very static, minimal skill affairs.

The reason I brought this up is because like Logan said we always hear the same excuse for not competing. :grin:


All firearms training is a game and results in a score regardless if you are competitive or tactical shooter. This old boy puts it better than me. :grin:


umm, regarding ‘break in,’ this company said there was for my WhistlePig (Acculite) barrel:


We did extensive training utilizing simunitions. Force on force, particularly active shooter training, building clearing, hostage situations etc. I took a hit in my left hand once and it definitely took it out of the mix for awhile. But did give me the opportunity to use my single handed shooting technique. There was no grabass, but I did see someone shot in the ass. Here in Wis. we don’t do static shooting, we are required to shoot moving forward and backward as well as laterally, move to cover and shoot high and low barricade. Even in a 25yd indoor range we shoot at distances from 3yds to 25, two handed, strong hand and weak hand. If what you are seeing is very static minimal skill, then that is the failure of the trainers and the administrations who run these organizations.


Many years ago back in the 1980’s PS magazine or another Army maintenance document did have a notice about long term storage of fully loaded magazines. If I recall correctly (and this is based on something that I read some 30+ years ago), that there was an effect on the spring in M-16 Magazines of that era. I know this to be true as we kept out mission loads fully loaded and changed them all out annually. We were a nuke site and dealing with a full mission load daily was a PITA. We had to then keep them at 28 rounds and mark the magazine for a pass off to the next shift thumb check. It was an honor system between guard shifts. I know we would replace the mag mag springs every year as the thought process was based on that one memo. Is it a real issue, frack if I know. Someone at Big Army thought it was, and posted a service wide bulletin. For the Record, if in fact that memo came from Tank, Automotive Command (TACOM), it most likely had a shred of truth to it. I am not sure if it did come from TACOM, but those were the folks back then that said if it needed to be changed you did it. M-16 Magazines in general have gone through more changes in my years of service with changes to springs, followers, base plates, and anything else. IMHO I feel it may be (again “may be”) related to M-16 Mags as they really do have problems from time to time.


Sure they can, and I have a death star on patrol off the planet Neptune!


@linux_author like I said it is a persistent myth and in fairness I was discussing pistols and I did acknowledge that PR shooters often follow a break in proceedure (no two of them agree) But to break down what WhistlePig recommend.

  1. Try several brands of ammo to see which works best. (We all know that and it is “indexing” not a break in procedure.)

  2. It will take 100 - 125 rounds for your barrel to break in. Still a process not a procedure.

  3. “Clean the barrel every 25 rounds for the first 100 and then as needed after that.” Actually this sounds like common sense to me, but since shooting 20-30 rounds through one of my benchrest rifles takes an entire session I do this anyways. But here is the thing as you read the rest of their recommendations it is basically index ammo, shoot, and clean. :grin:

Thank you for sharing Willie! :+1:


Sounds like competitive shooting to me! :grin::+1:

Here is my point, and I think it was also what @Kona was alluding to but I do not want to put words in Logan’s mouth. Competitive shooters do everything you just described except MORE FREQUENTLY than any LE Dept or military unit. My brother’s dept qualifies four times a year and each time they do it cost them $500,000 in overtime alone. Our local PD once a year and the same with the Coast Guard. A competitive shooter will easily burn through a couple of thousand rounds a month doing exactly what you described.

Another fact is “misses” in qualifications you are allowed a certain number of misses. In some cases you only need to hit the target 80% of the time. If I or Logan or any of others did that the time penalties would be brutal. In fact the last three competitions I have run “clean” no misses, no proceedurals, no penalties. That would be a bar of 100%. Now name a dept or agency that has that standard?

Like I said in my original post I am not disrespecting LEOs or military but I am pointing out the obvious fact that “frequency builds proficiency.”

I apologize for the long reply. I enjoyed reading your post. I hope you do not think I am being antagonistic or dismissing your point of view. In fact on my changing the paradigm thread I am trying to bring more tactical to the gaming community. :grin::+1: