RKBA is a DKos group of second amendment supporters who also have progressive and liberal values. We don't think that being a liberal means one has to be anti-gun. Some of us are extreme in our second amendment views (no licensing, no restrictions on small arms) and some of us are more moderate (licensing, restrictions on small arms.) Moderate or extreme, we hold one common belief: more gun control equals lost elections. We don't want a repeat of 1994. We are an inclusive group: if you see the Second Amendment as safeguarding our right to keep and bear arms individually, then come join us in our conversation. If you are against the right to keep and bear arms, come join our conversation. We look forward to seeing you, as long as you engage in a civil discussion. RKBA stands for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms.
In December 2008, I posted this at the end of a diary:
What to say when a friend or family member, when a co-worker or drinking buddy, claims that all liberals are hostile to guns and want to see people disarmed? Send them to this site: Ballistics by the inch, and tell them that one of the three people who did that project is a Kossack.
It's me. I'm proud of our ballistics project, our hard work, our solid results. I'm proud that we have made our results freely available as a service to the entire gun-owning community. Just as I am a proud member of this community.
That was almost two years ago. And since then, our site has become the default reference for questions concerning barrel length and velocity. We've had almost 4 million hits, there have been multiple online stories done about the project, one major firearms magazine has already done a feature on us, another one is doing a story in the near future, and I have a 1,000 word piece about our most recent research (which was just posted to our website in September) coming out in another magazine this month. All indications are that things will just continue to grow as we continue to conduct original research and post it freely for all who are interested.
Now, why does a good liberal like me take pride in doing this research and providing this information? Can't this information be used to determine what is the optimal barrel length for a concealed weapon, or to choose what ammunition works best? Isn't that, like, evil?
No, it is not evil. Quite the contrary, I'd argue. Like with our most recent testing of .380 ACP ammunition: this has become a very popular caliber for very small concealed-carry guns, frequently referred to as 'pocket pistols' because they will easily fit into almost any pocket or handbag. These are pistols which are carried by a lot of people who have decided that they wish to have a gun for self defense, but because of size, or age, or some other physical limitation don't want to carry a large, heavy, bulky gun. These are not guns which someone carries because they want to seem macho, or because they want to intimidate, or because they wish to 'play cop'.
Personally, I didn't have much interest in this cartridge, or the dozen small pistols we tested. My hands are large, and a number of these guns I can barely even shoot. Because the guns are designed to be very small, and to not snag or get caught in clothing, they have minimal sights and are not terribly accurate for someone who enjoys shooting at targets. Which is fine - they are intended to be used at self-defense distances, usually within about 7 yards. They are perfect for this use.
But we wanted to know whether they were also effective for this use. So we took three days of our time, and spent about $1,000 on ammo (plus other costs amounting to another $500 or so) to test a bunch of new ammunition types currently on the market.
Our testing is for velocity, which is one factor in the effectiveness of a bullet. We test over a range of barrel lengths (by literally chopping down a custom-made 18" barrel in one inch increments) to get 'ideal' performance, and then also test a number of actual 'real world' guns to show how they perform relative to this ideal.
And I think our results will surprise a lot of people who were skeptical about the effectiveness of this caliber in these very small guns. Yes, if you had to stop a determined attacker, you'd probably want something bigger and more powerful. But all handguns are a trade off, and I'd say that these small guns are a reasonable choice, particularly for someone who had small hands or cannot take the recoil from a more powerful gun. In other words, the type of people who are more at a disadvantage at the hands of someone who is stronger, larger, and younger.
Jim Downey