Water Cistern Facts, by Rex X.

Cisterns have been used for water storage for thousands of years and continue to be used today.  A cistern is a large water storage container that is often underground.  Many of you will remember Masada where the Roman Legion had the Jews besieged.  This mountain top fortress was able to hold out for as log as they did, in part, because of the large cisterns where they stored rain water.  In fact without cisterns this would have been nothing other than another uninhabited mountain.

These water storage tanks can range up to thousands of gallons, or liters if you prefer.  The size of your cistern should be determined by your water usage and the water source.  If your water source is seasonal then a large enough capacity to get you through the dry spell would be real nice.  A cistern can be above ground, below ground or partially buried.  This storage is something of a midpoint in you water system sitting as it does, between the collection and distribution systems.

I grew up in a community where thousands of homes collected their water off the roof and stored it in a cistern.  I have seen, used, and built many different cisterns.  The first one I actually put together was an inexpensive above ground pool.  We made a level spot near the eve of the roof and ran the down spouts from the gutter into the pool.  While today I might question whether the plastic liner was appropriate for potable water, back then the question never came up.  We drank from that pool for years and it didn’t affect me… affect me… affect me.  Actually because of the price and ease of installation this type of cistern became fairly popular around the community for a couple decades.  While they will last for a few years the plastic eventually deteriorates in the sun or the thin metal sides rot out so this is not a permanent solution.  In a SHTF scenario your down spouts could be run to your in ground pool to collect what ever rain you do get and replenish what you have consumed.  If this becomes part of your plan you might want to secure and store adequate downspout and/or pipe.

Another popular way to build a cistern is with a ten foot length of culvert.  The suppliers would nest these starting with an eight foot culvert inside a larger and larger culvert till the largest was about twelve feet across. This greatly reduced shipping cost.  Since the freight company cubes something like this you are essentially paying freight for only the largest culvert.  The culverts need to be manufactured in such a manner as to have water tight seams.  Delivered laying on its side  it could be transported on the road with little problem.  When placed on a low trailer the twelve foot height would fit under the power lines and the ten foot width was legal.  The process is to dig a flat spot larger than the culvert to a depth that the top of the culvert will be lower than the eve of the house.  You then make a form for your concrete and place reinforcing inside the form.  Pour and level your concrete.  Tip the culvert into the wet concrete and vibrate it to create a seal.  The culvert should set so that it is four to six inches into the concrete.  After a week or so the concrete has cured enough to start filling your tank.

The tank off an old water truck was a quick answer in that it only required a flat spot.  I would expect an old milk truck tank to work as well.  A local mill had been serviced by a four foot diameter wooden water line. We wound up with a twenty foot section and built ends in it.  

A friend of mine built a tank out of plywood and put a plastic liner in it.  He started with eight sheets of plywood.  Standing up two on each side he attached 2X6’s every foot from the bottom past midway up then spaced them further apart.  The 2X6’s were laid on their side, run past the plywood and bolted to the intersecting 2X6’s.  This is a relatively inexpensive tank but be aware that eight feet of head generates quite a bit of pressure at the bottom so do quality work.  Stringers tying the bottom sides together are essential as well as the top.

The newer systems often choose the plastic tanks made for that purpose.  The largest of these are cylindrical.  A buddy of mine had room to place two, five thousand gallon tanks behind his house.  There was a small ledge on the hillside next to these that allowed him to place another two thousand gallon tank.  With twelve thousand gallons available they can go quite a while without rain.

My personal favorite is to build the cistern as part of a concrete foundation.  This requires a foundation of at least four feet tall to get adequate volume.  A full basement would be even better.  If this is the way you go I strongly suggest that you design the house so that no sewer lines run above the water tank.  This leaves your entire water system accessible inside the house and protected against freezing.  

One of the problems with outside water storage is the possibility of freezing.  I had an eighteen hundred gallon plastic tank freeze solid one winter with no apparent damage.  It was not in current use and had been filled without my knowledge so I did not know to empty it.  This tank had also been sprayed with four inches of insulation so it took over a month for it to thaw completely in the spring.  Insulating a tank can help as can putting it in a shed.  Two or three wraps of PEX pipe around the outside near the bottom before you spray the tank works well if you have a boiler.  Your outside water storage could then be another zone off the boiler.  My outside tank has seen -40°F with no problem.  Okay, maybe a few problems but I worked them out.  

 If you do not have really severe winters a heat tape on a Hula Hoop will keep your tank from splitting.  Just a heat tape on the water line will leave an open passage that allows the water to escape out the top if the ice expands reducing pressure on the tank walls.  You still lose that volume of water that turns to ice.  At least until it warms up.  We had a particularly long stretch of cold weather this year and a neighbor of mine ran the water from his water heater back into his tank to melt some of the ice and reclaim some of the lost volume.  You can also put a purpose made electric heater in your tank.  If the bottom of the tank is buried below the frost line freezing problems are greatly reduced.  These are some of the heat sources at your disposal if you opt for outside storage.  

You might also want to consider PEX for your water line especially outside or any other place that is likely to freeze.  PEX has a memory and will return to its original shape after it thaws.  Copper will stretch until it ruptures, usual between the first and third freeze.  Not only is it expensive to replace water lines but the time required is a factor as well.

If you collect rain off your roof the roofing material is an important part of the system.  Metal roofing is the best as it sheds water faster and does not retain as much as other materials.  Three tab works but it holds a surprising amount of water and in a light misty rain it takes a bit before it starts dripping, where a metal roof might shed some water in a fog or when a frost thaws.  Some three tab shingles are also built with chemicals that I am uncomfortable with but most of the roofs that I have seen collect drinking water are of this type.  Cedar roofs are of particular concern.  Cedar is toxic so special care must be taken with a cedar roof.  I lived in an area with heavy rain.  Those people who wanted to collect from their cedar roof waited for over a year with a new roof to allow the rain to flush most of the oil from the surface of the wood.   This community is in the middle of a rain forest with thousands of homes collecting rain water.  

While I have run into people who look at me like I have a third eye, when I discuss drinking rain water, I consider rain water generally safe.  What I like to call God distilled water (rain) is generally free of contamination with some rare exceptions.  Were I down wind of a frisky volcano or a forest fire I might redirect my down spouts for a while. City water can become contaminated as well.  How many times have you heard news reports where the community has been told to boil their water.  I worked with a man who was replacing his copper water lines because his wife was having a reaction to the copper.  As long as reasonable care is taken with the construction, material selection, and maintenance rain collection and a cistern is a viable option in many climates.  

I have seen cisterns filled by wells and wind mills.  If you had a hill above your house you could also place your cistern at a useful height to provide water pressure for your home.  If you have a stream on the property you could use a hydraulic ram pump/water hammer pump (clacker) to fill your cistern.  This system could give you water and suitable water pressure with no electricity. 

If you decide to haul your water in a large tank in the back of your truck or on a trailer make sure the tank is full.  If your vehicle won’t haul the weight of a full tank get a smaller tank or larger truck.  Most tanks are built without baffles and when you get the weight of the water slamming back and forth you can have all sorts of problems so it is best to travel with a full tank.

We used bleach about once a year to kill what ever might be growing in the cistern.  The chlorine smell for the next two or three days was a bit much, but it worked.  I preferred in the summer when we ran low and a truckload of city water was purchased.  This was already chlorinated so the tank was sterilized but with far less odor.  

While a gravity collection system is preferred I have put smaller collection containers (50 to 200 gallons) under the down spouts and then used a sump pump to fill the larger tank.  This method is most often incorporated when adding an out building to the collection system or when the tank can’t easily be placed below the roof line.  I’ve seen the power go out and pumps get old but somehow gravity keeps working so that is my preferred method whenever possible.  

Letter Re: Gasoline Available in a Pinch at the Big Box Store

Hi James,
I was recently at the chainsaw shop and saw cans of something called TRUFUEL. It is basically one quart metal cans of gasoline, with most versions premixed for 2-stroke engines.  However, they also have a 4-stroke version that my chainsaw dealer tells me is simply 92-octane gasoline with stabilizers and other additives that would be perfectly suitable for running a car or other vehicle.  Haven’t tried it myself yet, but if plausible, big box hardware stores, power tool dealers, and some auto parts stores could have fuel available in a pinch (and I imagine for only a short time) if gas stations were out of fuel or out of service.  The company web site lists several big hardware stores that carry their products. Relying on it for any significant amount of fuel is going to cost you anywhere from $25-$35 a gallon, but under the right conditions, that might be worth it.  On the upside, the web site says that it has a two-year shelf life, although my chainsaw dealer indicated five years. Something in between is probably the real number.  For the record, I have no financial interest in TRUFUEL nor any connections to the company or their products. – Sean B.

Three Letters Re: Why Civilian Disarmament in the U.S. is Just a Statist Fantasy

Mr. Rawles, 
I love the SurvivalBlog site and what you do. Many thanks to you and all contributors! I have some remarks on the letter: A Call to Action: The Impending Weapons Ban, by James M.
I agree on the fundamental points made regarding firearms, but it does sound like a re-hash of the red-herring debate from ’91 with the only “Call to Action” being that Congress should ban something else.  Maybe they should ban Murder. Oh, wait that’s been done…
 
I personally don’t think our Congressional leaders should really be banning anything at all, and when the subject of mental capacity & banning comes up together (within the context of forced medication or incarceration), my main question/concern becomes,….  who gets to determine which of us is mentally ill or unstable?   I already know that everyone is somebody else’s weirdo, and apparently we preppers are all completely nuts.  But, on the serious side I have a problem with limiting anyone’s rights based on thought crime or any interpretive means where there is no victim (especially where the result would be forced medication or detainment for “potential” criminal activity).

So, an interesting scenario to consider based on my perspective described above.    Let’s say some Psychologist/government agent convinces city council or some judge that Christianity is a mental illness.  You are now required by law to take powerful medication that most likely would ruin your quality of life.  That kind of control over anyone’s life is a terribly bad idea, because we all know that  it is unethical and wouldn’t stop there.
 
I also am getting frustrated with people saying our rights are granted by the Constitution.  That is completely wrong.  Our rights are God given and don’t change regardless of what the Constitution says (The document may still fail to list them all in some cases).  It was simply written to generally explain and provide a reminder to elected officials of what the people already have and what cannot be infringed upon.  In the case of slavery and women’s rights, I believe it was errant of the original crafters of the Constitution to have not recognized these as inherent rights for all people at that time.  So again, the “document” is just an imperfect representation of what God has already provisioned.
 
“There are certain principles that are inherent in man, that belong to man, and that were enunciated in an early day, before the United States government was formed, and they are principles that rightfully belong to all men everywhere. They are described in the Declaration of Independence as inalienable rights, one of which is that men have a right to live; another is that they have a right to pursue happiness; and another is that they have a right to be free and no man has authority to deprive them of those God-given rights, and none but tyrants would do it. These principles, I say, are inalienable in man; they belong to him; they existed before any constitutions were framed or any laws made. Men have in various ages striven to strip their fellow-men of these rights, and dispossess them of them. And hence the wars, the bloodshed and carnage that have spread over the earth. We, therefore, are not indebted to the United States for these rights; we were free as men born into the world, having the right to do as we please, to act as we please, as long as we do not transgress constitutional law nor violate the rights of others… Another thing God expects us to do, and that is to maintain the principle of human rights… We owe it to all liberty-loving men, to stand up for human rights and to protect human freedom, and in the name of God we will do it, and let the congregation say Amen.” – John Taylor, 1882,
 
The best thing for Congress to do in this case is nothing at all.  The only change needed is to allow the free responsible peoples of the USA to provide for their own defense – as was intended by God.  (Current rules apply with regard to all levels of assault, making threats with a firearm, etc.),  which would simply serve to reinforce responsible fire arms use by those who choose to carry.
 
IF, our leaders are serious about the value of a Gun ban, then I suggest they set the example and demand that their personal security force switch to Mace as their primary means of defense.  Lead by example or shut your mouth!
 
IF, a ban is passed we still have options:  Our judicial system was meant to provide protections from such unjust law, so we would still have the Sheriff (elected), Judges (also elected) and the jury (free peoples), who can respectively;  1) refuse to enforce, 2) refuse to try, 3) refuse to convict.  If that message is made clear in local government no State prosecutor would dare bring a case in the first place. [JWR Adds: All Americans should familiarize themselves with the details of jury nullification. This may prove crucial, in the near future.[

“Unjust laws exist: shall we be content to obey them, or shall we endeavor to amend them and obey them until we have succeeded, or shall we transgress them at once?” –  Henry David Thoreau
 
You can only voluntarily give up/refuse to partake of your God given right (or blessing, but you can never ethically take away someone else’s (that is infringement/tyranny).
 
Thank you, – D.P. in Pittsburgh

Mr. Rawles,
The Letter Re: Why Civilian Disarmament in the U.S. is Just a Statist Fantasy written by Michael W. is a perfect example of the insidious nature of government over-reach.  They will take our guns the same inexorable way they stole the purchasing power of the dollar. And they will continue to press the gun issue until they succeed – even if it takes a hundred years.  Our inability to recognize and stop the fed over the last century, portends a similar outcome for weapons. – BigTexMarine

 

Jim:
To make sense of this issue, consider the following in support of the percentage of compliance that can be expected if the Feinstein ban bill is enacted:

This is not The Truth. This is not even ‘back of the envelope’.

The following contains a bunch of assumptions, whose justification is feeble at best. Since almost all ‘assault weapons’ are rifles, I will ignore shotguns and handguns that bother CA.

Suppose, for discussion, that Californians bought rifles (that the state erroneously defines as ‘assault weapons’) in a number proportional to the share of the US population. Since this is just a guess, might as well use the current value: 37 million of 310 million, 12%. There’s no reason to believe this is true – California gun owners may actually buy more or fewer, and the distribution of the kinds they buy may be different from other states or the national average. And the year-to-year proportions may be very different. (I can easily get the CA/US proportion for all the years, but with such poor guesses, there’s no value to being more precise.)

And suppose the bulk of those were purchased between 1970 and 2000, when SB 23 did the ‘ban by feature’. I picked 1970 because the M16 went into service in 1963, so maybe 1970, just post-Vietnam for a lot of servicemen, would be a good place to start. Years that end in ‘0’ attract the eye.

I cannot easily find import numbers just now, so I’ll ignore them; they’re no doubt significant with AKs and FALs and HKs and such.
ETA perhaps Bloomberg is not entirely useless. There is a document giving some info on imported rifles here: www.mayorsagainstillegalguns.org/…/Commerce_in_Firearms_2000.pdf, “Commerce in Firearms in the United States”. Imported rifles total a bit under 10 million 1970 – 1999. I suspect I could eventually get the export data by country, but I won’t bother.

ATF has the US manufacturing reports on line at the AFMER page. For each of 1998, 1999, and 2000 the manufactured number of rifles was about 1.5 million. Total long guns includes shotguns, and that adds about a million a year, so about 60% of long guns are rifles in those 3 years.

Kleck has numbers from the same source; the ‘net addition to stock’ for long guns is about 2.5 million per year, 1980-1994, so again, it is not entirely unreasonable to guess that about 40% of those were shotguns. 1970-1979, the numbers were over 3 million per year

So, for 31 years 1970-2000, something like 77 million rifles were manufactured in the US. (Some were exported – let’s ignore that detail, too.)

Using that 12% proportion, around 9 million of those might have gone to California [to match their proportion of the national population].

But, what proportion of those rifles were not lever actions and bolt actions and semi-autos that did not meet “Assault Weapon” (AW) standards?

I’m going to make a further guess by using the 1998 AFMER data. Toss out Winchester and Remington and Marlin and Weatherby and Ruger – but not Colt, oh, no! – and guess that most of the rest could have been AW types, and take that proportion. Very shaky, but anyway…

Throwing out those big non-AR-type manufacturers covers about 900,000 – about 60% of the 1.4 million in 1998. Let’s use the remaining 40% as the maximum possible proportion of the US production of rifles that might be AW types. That’s surely too high a proportion, but for a guess it’s a nice even number. (Again, numbers that end in ‘0’.) (I could look at more AFMER reports, but the recent proportion of AW types seems to me to be increasing, so the more recent data would seem to skew the results even more than I am certain they are already.)

Now, guess how many were ‘assault weapons’ if California definitions might be applied — 40% of 9 million rifles in California is 3.6 million. Only 166,000 are known to be registered.

Around 4.5% actually registered might be a supportable number.

With an estimated 10 million total imports, 12% for California is 1.2 million. 40% of those as ‘assault weapons’ (Too high? Too low? No information!) is 480,000. 166/4,180 is still only about 4% registered.

Economics and Investing:

Peter Schiff: Even if you raise taxes to 100%, we couldn’t pay it off. We’re going to default.

Dr. Gary North details the latest legislative travesty in Illinois, the Land of Lincoln Obama: A Bill to Register Buyers of Gold and Silver Coins. Just as with guns, they have it down to a science: they register, they tax, and then they confiscate.

Federal Reserve May Pause Quantitative Easing. JWR’s Comment: Yes, and your local crack head may try to kick his habit by going cold turkey. They’ll both have about the same chance of success.

Hedge funds face suspicious activity reporting requirement

Items from The Economatrix:

Cracking The 2013 Tax Code

Gold and Silver Prices Are Down – So What, Buy More: Peter Schiff

Rising Wages A Balm For US Workers Facing Payroll-Tax Shock

Odds ‘n Sods:

Blog readers in Florida should plan to attend the Life Changes Be Ready Preparedness Expo and Gun Expo on Saturday January 19, 2013. I will be a guest speaker, via teleseminar. The event will be held at the Volusia County Fair and Expo Center in DeLand, Florida.

   o o o

Randy K. came across a series of YouTube videos by a young woman who made a comprehensive switch to a homesteading lifestyle. Randy describes it as “…quite lively and entertaining. Unlike some of the run-of-the-mill stuff out there, she makes these videos personal and shares little bits of herself and family history. I thought you might be interested in seeing how she goes about doing things. What I’m personally finding very interesting is how she does sourdough. Just getting into bread making myself, her description of wild yeast capture took me quite by surprise. I’m looking forward to starting a ‘mother’, and seeing how long I can keep her going. On a more serious side, we are transitioning to making all of our breads and pastas. With a store of various grains, we can wean ourselves off the commercial garbage and into healthy carbs done at our pleasure. Her travel into that realm has me amped.”

   o o o

Matt Bracken: Dear Mr. Security Agent. (Thanks to Clark H. for the link.)

   o o o

Two readers (H.M. and M.U.) both wrote to mention that Old Grouch Surplus still has German surplus aluminum alloy G3 magazines in good condition for $4 each. The folks at KeepShooting.com are presently sold out, but they tell me that they have another 150,000 G3 mags due to arrive in March.

   o o o

The long march to justice: China set to abolish forced labour camps. Finally? Really?

Jim’s Quote of the Day:

“Collectivists believe in collective guilt, unsurprisingly. They believe this as deeply and unquestioningly as any Bolshevik commissar or medieval inquisitor. They reveal themselves when they say the NRA ‘refuses to accept blame for the Sandy Hook massacre.’ The people manning the solar observatory at Sacramento Peak also refuse to accept blame, or would if asked, and rightly so. Absent evidence the perp had accomplices, or was under direct and actual control of others, blame attaches to the shooter alone. The proposition is simple and of unassailable provenance. As with all crime, guilt lay with the perpetrator. Hence the term, perpetrator. What would those who blame “society” for crime have us do instead, arrest cab drivers in Toledo and call it a good start?” – Ol’ Remus, The Woodpile Report

Notes from JWR:

I was shocked to hear that Keith Ratliff, the manager of the video blog FPS Russia was recently found murdered in Carnesville, Georgia. His relatives sound dubious about the reported details.

You’ve probably seen some of the very popular YouTube videos featuring Keith’s buddy Kyle Myers demonstrating various exotic weapons. (In the videos, Kyle mimics a Russian accent and uses the stage name Dmitri Potapoff.) FPS Russia is reportedly the third most popular video channel on YouTube.

His death comes as very strange news. If it was indeed a robbery (as some claim), then why were so many guns found in the same room? Perhaps the GBI autopsy will provide some answers about the circumstances of his death. Please keep Keith Ratliff’s family in your prayers.

—

Today we present another entry for Round 44 of the SurvivalBlog non-fiction writing contest. The prizes for this round include:

First Prize: A.) A gift certificate worth $1,000, courtesy of Spec Ops Brand, B.) A course certificate from onPoint Tactical. This certificate will be for the prize winner’s choice of three-day civilian courses. (Excluding those restricted for military or government teams.) Three day onPoint courses normally cost $795, and C.) Two cases of Mountain House freeze dried assorted entrees in #10 cans, courtesy of Ready Made Resources. (A $350 value.) D.) a $300 gift certificate from CJL Enterprize, for any of their military surplus gear, E.) A 9-Tray Excalibur Food Dehydrator from Safecastle.com (a $300 value), and F.) A $250 gift certificate from Sunflower Ammo. and G.) A $200 gift certificate, donated by Shelf Reliance.

Second Prize: A.) A Glock form factor SIRT laser training pistol and a SIRT AR-15/M4 Laser Training Bolt, courtesy of Next Level Training. Together, these have a retail value of $589. B.) A FloJak FP-50 stainless steel hand well pump (a $600 value), courtesy of FloJak.com. C.) A “grab bag” of preparedness gear and books from Jim’s Amazing Secret Bunker of Redundant Redundancy (JASBORR) with a retail value of at least $300, D.) A $250 gift card from Emergency Essentials, E.) Two cases of Meals, Ready to Eat (MREs), courtesy of CampingSurvival.com (a $180 value) and F.) A Tactical Trauma Bag #3 from JRH Enterprises (a $200 value).

Third Prize: A.) A Royal Berkey water filter, courtesy of Directive 21. (This filter system is a $275 value.), B.) A large handmade clothes drying rack, a washboard and a Homesteading for Beginners DVD, all courtesy of The Homestead Store, with a combined value of $206, C.) Expanded sets of both washable feminine pads and liners, donated by Naturally Cozy. This is a $185 retail value, D.) A Commence Fire! emergency stove with three tinder refill kits. (A $160 value.), and E.) Two Super Survival Pack seed collections, a $150 value, courtesy of Seed for Security.

Round 44 ends on January 31st, 2013, so get busy writing and e-mail us your entry. Remember that there is a 1,500-word minimum, and that articles on practical “how to” skills for survival have an advantage in the judging.

A Call to Action: The Impending Weapons Ban, by James M.

The massacre at Sandy Hook Elementary was as profound a tragedy as one can imagine; period. In light of this and similar events we need to have a national discussion about the real causes of mass murder. Contrary to what we will hear in the coming days and weeks, guns were not the cause of the Sandy Hook murders. Nevertheless, local, state, and national leaders, lead by California’s Senator Dianne Feinstein, will use this awful event as a rallying call to push for the most serious infringement of our Second Amendment rights ever proposed in this country’s history. They will ignore the familial and societal factors that actually compel these mass murderers to carry out their awful missions. They will ignore the connection between these horrible acts and the increase in the use of prescription psychiatric drugs on our children and youth, reductions in mental health services and incarcerations, increased exposure to violent images in mass media and games, and mandated removal of faith and morality from many aspects of our daily lives. Some of these representatives will be motivated to act out of a legitimate desire to preclude a recurrence of this type of event. Others, like Senator Feinstein, will seek to use this awful event to push long held personal agendas; an incremental step towards completely banning private ownership of the types of firearms which can best effectuate the intent of the framers of our Constitution.

We need to demand that our representatives do something that might have a real effect on reducing the occurrences of mass murder in American society. We must demand that they undertake action to understand the real factors that cause people to do these terrible things and then demand that they have the courage to actually address the root causes of the problem rather than its tragic manifestation. And we must do this without allowing the decimation of our Second Amendment protections.

The primary focus of this editorial is to briefly restate the intent of the founding fathers when they drafted the Second Amendment and then illustrate, with facts, the futility of passing laws regulating firearms and magazines in the hope that doing so will prevent criminal behavior.

Those who will argue for a new “assault weapons” and “high capacity magazine” ban will claim that there is no legitimate “sporting purpose” or self defense need for these types of weapons and accessories; as if sporting or self defense use were the intent of the Constitutional guarantee of our right to keep and bear arms. In its entirety the Second Amendment reads, “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” There is no mention of this being a protection of the right to have guns for sporting purposes, or as some will claim, solely for self defense purposes. The intent of the language could not be clearer, the right to bear arms was much more militaristic in nature and was to ensure that the recently acquired free status of the several newly united states, individually and collectively, could be defended against, and not subjugated to, a new tyrannical rule imposed by the creation of a federal government. Thomas Jefferson confirmed this understanding saying, “No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms. The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government”.  More recently the late Hubert Humphrey, not known as a bastion of conservative or right wing political thought, said, “Certainly one of the chief guarantees of freedom under any government, no matter how popular and respected, is the right of citizens to keep and bear arms.  This is not to say that firearms should not be very carefully used and that definite safety rules of precaution should not be taught and enforced.  But the right of citizens to bear arms is just one more guarantee against arbitrary government, one more safeguard against a tyranny which now appears remote in America, but which historically has proved to be always possible.”

That protection against tyranny was the intent of the Second Amendment was acknowledged by the U.S. Supreme Court in its decision in the case of District of Columbia v. Heller. Writing for majority Justice Scalia recited that the history of “[T]he debate with respect to the right to keep and bear arms, as with other guarantees in the Bill of Rights, was not over whether it was desirable (all agreed that it was) but over whether it needed to be codified in the Constitution. Justice Scalia indicated that the founding fathers knew “[T]hat history showed that the way tyrants had eliminated a militia consisting of all the able-bodied men was not by banning the militia but simply by taking away the people’s arms, enabling a select militia or standing army to suppress political opponents.” The conclusion of the Court was that the Second Amendment’s guarantee of the right to keep and bears arms was a personal, not corporate, right; that it guaranteed the right to keep and bear those types of firearms typically possessed by law-abiding citizens for lawful purposes for use in personal defense as well as a deterrent against tyranny.
Those that support a proposed assault weapon/high capacity magazine ban would deny the populace the very civilian arms best suited to fulfill the constitutional intent of the Second Amendment. The AR-15 rifle, which fires a .223 caliber cartridge and is capable of being used with 30 round magazines, is one of the primary targets of any proposed assault weapons ban and is the best selling type of rifle in America today. These and other, similar rifles are owned and used by millions of Americans for clearly lawful purposes. The internationally known firearms and self defense expert, Massad Ayoob, recently wrote in Backwoods Home magazine,  “The cops are the experts on the current criminal trends. If they have determined that a “high capacity” semiautomatic pistol and a .223 semiautomatic rifle with 30-round magazines are the best firearms for them to use to protect people like me and my family, they are obviously the best things for us to use to protect ourselves and our families.”

The ban supporters will, no doubt, argue that the loss of this fundamental right is worth the benefit that will accrue as a result of its implementation. They will claim that their restrictions will result in a reduction in violent crime. Evidence worldwide and here at home refutes those claims.

There are two truths that are obvious to me. The first is that laws only proscribe the behavior of law abiding citizens. By definition, criminals ignore the law. Every mass murderer violates numerous laws in the commission of their heinous act and none of those laws stop the horror. Secondly, if banning anything worked, America would be a teatotaling, drug free society and Chicago and Washington D.C. would have the lowest murder rates in the country. We aren’t and they don’t.

I have heard it said that the definition of being crazy is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result. There is plenty of evidence that stricter gun laws do not reduce violent crime. Yet more gun control is always the answer when a tragedy like Sandy Hook occurs. 

Each year the Brady Campaign for the Prevention of Gun Violence, an organization ” . . . devoted to creating an America free from gun violence, where all Americans are safe at home, at school, at work, and in our communities . . .”, ranks states based upon the strength or weakness of their gun laws. The following is a comparison of FBI statistics for the ten states which the Brady Campaign says have the strongest gun laws (the top ten) and those of the ten states with the weakest gun laws (the bottom ten) according to the Brady Campaign. Connecticut, scene of the Sandy Hook shootings, is in the Brady Campaign top ten; ranked fifth in 2011 for having strong gun control laws. The cited standings and statistics are for 2010 or 2011, the most recent information available. The FBI has reported that, in 2011, the violent crime rate in the top ten states was 376 violent crimes per one hundred thousand residents versus 350 per one hundred thousand in the bottom ten. The reported rates for murder and non-negligent homicide, unrelated to the instrumentality causing death, in the top ten states was 4.31 per one hundred thousand population versus 4.15 in the bottom ten states. Focusing just on murder rates for firearm related murders, FBI statistics show that the murder rate for all murders committed with any type of firearm was approximately 2.5 per one hundred thousand residents in the top ten states and 2.4 in the bottom ten. California, which tops the Brady top ten list, has 3.2 firearms murder per hundred thousand. The murder by handgun rate was 2.0 in the top ten states and 1.8 in the bottom ten. Again, the stricter gun control states fare marginally worse than those with weaker gun laws. The only anomaly is found in the murder by firearms other than handguns rate which was 5.1 deaths per thousand in the top ten states and 5.9 in the bottom ten. The obvious conclusion from all of these statistics is that stricter gun control laws do not reduce the rates of violent crimes, homicides, or gun related murders. Equally obvious is that there are other factors which actually cause violent crimes and murders other than the relative ease with which one can or cannot obtain a firearm or the type of firearm that is available. Nonetheless, stricter gun control will be touted as the solution to preventing school shootings. It won’t be a solution, simply because gun control doesn’t work.

I suspect that ban supporters will also claim that the state statistics are flawed because we don’t have a nationwide firearms ban. But nationwide bans, even in modern western democracies, don’t reduce violent crime. Both Britain and Australia banned most gun ownership, nationwide, in 1997 and implemented buy-up programs. In both societies, violent crime rates rose.
We’ll also be told that gun control will work this time because we’ll control “assault weapons” and “high capacity” magazines. Again, the historical evidence doesn’t support the proposition. This country had an assault weapons ban from 1994 until 2004. While we will hear Senator Feinstein claim that the ban resulted in a 6.7% reduction in murder rates, the study she cites acknowledges that the data is for one year of the ten year period and that the data set was too small to conclude that the apparent reduction was connected to the assault weapon ban. The Brady Campaign says, “Connecticut has strong gun laws that help combat the illegal gun market, prevent the sale of most guns without background checks and reduce risks to children”. Despite having strong gun control laws and an assault weapon ban, Connecticut was still the scene of the Sandy Hook murders. Proponents of a new ban will assert that both the Connecticut and 1994 assault weapon and magazine bans were not comprehensive enough; that we need a bigger, broader, more restrictive ban. And besides, we have to do something to protect the children.

Make no mistake about it, Senator Feinstein’s new assault weapon and magazine ban is not about protecting the children. If she was truly concerned about child safety she’d address the real threats to children.  Depending on the information one looks at, during the last thirty years on average, ten to twenty children are killed each year in school related shootings. Yes, each child’s death is itself a tragedy. But statistics show that many more children die annually as the result of other causes. Eighty to one hundred children die each year by drowning in swimming pools and spas, one hundred to hundred and fifty in bicycle accidents, and more than two hundred are killed annually at the hands of drunk drivers. Where are Senator Feinstein’s cries to ban pools, spas, and bicycles? Where is the demand that cars be made that preclude their operation by intoxicated drivers? Those cries are inaudible. That is because Senator Feinstein wants to ban guns; end of story. In 1995, in a CBS interview, Feinstein said, “If I could have gotten 51 votes in the Senate of the United States for an outright ban, picking up every one of them . . . Mr. and Mrs. America, turn ’em all in, I would have done it. I could not do that. The votes weren’t here.”

We have a fundamental constitutional right to keep and bear arms. Once that right is lost we will never ever regain it. And without that right, every other one of our constitutionally guaranteed rights is in jeopardy. Do not allow our politicians to trade that sacred right for the hollow, ineffective promise of reduced crime through a restriction of that right. We must heed the admonition of Benjamin Franklin who said, “Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.”

Letter Re: Advice on Washing Military Utility Uniforms

Sir:
What would you recommend when washing military uniforms at home? I was wondering if soap nuts are a wise choice since they have no optical brighteners. What do you use? Thanks, – Brian X.

JWR Replies: I’d recommend using Atsko Sport Wash. Not only does it not have any brighteners, but it is also unscented. Dogs and even people with sensitive noses can smell detergent scents and perfumes, which could reveal your position if you are in a close ambush situation. Laundry scents also overwhelm your own sense of smell, making it less likely for you to smell your opponents’ cooking and tobacco odors. And since your camos will likely be doing double duty as hunting clothes, using an unscented detergent is crucial. (Deer and elk reportedly have a sense of smell that is even more acute than that of hounds.)

Letter Re: Why Civilian Disarmament in the U.S. is Just a Statist Fantasy

James,

The Internet is replete with potential gun confiscation scenarios. Many people voice the opinion that this confiscation will take the form of armed troops going house to house searching for guns. This would be a potential source of revolution, would demonstrate the true nature of government and would result in the deaths of many of the regimes ostensible supporters.
I’ll make the assumption that The Powers That Be are not stupid (evil, probably, but stupid, no). Since they are not stupid, and can foresee the difficulties with house-to-house searches, they will use other methods. Let’s explore some of these methods.

Before we start that, we should be aware of the massive data gathering efforts that many government agencies have undertaken, and the abilities they have gained, in recent years. I don’t think it is unlikely that the government knows, or can know quickly, with varying degrees of reliability, who a majority of gun owners in this country are. It is true that most of
the actual records of who own what are in the form of 4473s in individual gun shops. It is possible for the BATFE and related agencies to swoop down on gun stores and confiscate these records and, while it would take significant effort, convert them to electronic records. These records, when combined with all of the other data and methods that the Business Intelligence community has developed over the years, would create a database of gun owners with a pretty high reliability in my estimation. Even without the 4473s, combining credit card information (remember when you bought those M1 Garand bandoleers with your MasterCard a couple of years ago?), the intact database of background checks, explicit firearm owner databases (as in Illinois), State Police concealed carry information and the plethora of other data stores that exist, a comprehensive set of firearm owners could be put together. It does not have to be perfect! It doesn’t even have to be that close. It will be your responsibility to prove that you don’t have any firearms, not the other way around.

Now that the government has this information, what should they do? Ship in troops from West Africa and start invading peoples’ homes? No way. Firstly, the demonization of gun owners will continue. Unabated. It will intensify and become part of our daily lives. Guns are bad. Gun owners are sick. Mentally ill. Crime is their fault. They endanger all of us. Continuous,
methodical, overwhelming messaging from all corners of the media.

The actual ‘confiscations’ will begin pleasantly enough. Guns (or some overwhelming subset of guns) will be made illegal (whether by actual congressional bill or executive order, it doesn’t matter). ‘Take you guns to the local police station and have them checked off the list’. No questions asked. Easy. Many people will simply comply. A letter in the mail asks nicely for you turn in the Ruger SP101 you bought on X date at Y gun store in Z city. Ruger sent it back after a repair to this address in 2008…yada yada yada. More compliance.

When the initial turn in period ends, penalties will begin. More friendly letters in the mail. Fines assessed. Jail time threatened. More compliance. Then, an amnesty. Turn them in, no questions asked. More compliance. Then maybe a so-called ‘buy back’. Free gas cards, gift cards, cash. Who knows?

In parallel to all this, of course, are the exhortations to the public to turn in non-compliant gun owners. Turn them in for rewards. Turn them in for reduced prison sentences. Turn them in for a pat on the head. Your civic duty and all that.

See, now that you are demonized in the eyes of the public, and an actual criminal in the eyes of the government, then all of governments resources can be applied to you with impunity. No one except other criminals will stand up for you. And no singular event will affect many people at once, never enough to cause more than a few to take an actual stand. Anyway, who
would you stand up to? Who would you shoot? When a law is passed making it illegal for banks to engage in any transaction with suspected gun owners, what will you do? Shoot a teller when your account is closed and your funds confiscated? Your mortgage called? How about when they assess a fine of, say, $250,000 and require employers to garnish all wages until the fine is paid. You going to shoot someone in HR for complying with the law? What about when Child Protective Services abducts your kids right out of their public school? Your kids go to school one day, then, poof, they’re gone. You want them back – no problem – turn in your guns. Electricity turned off at your house? Yup, new law enacted. How long can any of us operate with no income, no bank accounts, while attending to an eviction and attempting to get your kids back? What will you do to get your kids back? Remember, it will be your job to prove that you don’t have any guns or ammo. “C’mon, prove it, let us search your house, tell us who your buddies are”….you get the idea.

You see, there are countless ways that the government can make us ‘voluntarily’ give them up. The pressure will be overwhelming and, given how long they have been considering this, probably much more expeditious than I am making it sound.

In any case, the VERY LAST THING they will try will be the midnight raids. Everyone and anyone will be your enemy before that occurs. There will be no one individual to strike out against. The giant, gray miasma of society will be your enemy. Ignorance, lethargy, apathy. How do you fight that?

And government has all manner of resources, time, people, money, to address this problem.

My two main points are these: First, if the government has people who are even reasonably smart (they do) and they are earnest about solving the problem of identifying gun owners (they are) then the technology to do this should not elude them. Second, busting down doors is expensive, risky and provocative, and they will use all of the tricks at their disposal to avoid it. – Michael W.

Economics and Investing:

H.L. sent: Silver Prices in the Event of a Comex Default

Jim W. suggested this article about the underground economy: My Name is Cash

A Graphic View of How Shale Gas Could Change the Future

Obamacare Guarantees Higher Health Insurance Premiums — $3,000+ Higher

Items from The Economatrix:

It’s Not Too Early To Worry About The End Of Fed Easing

Economy Adds 155,000 Jobs In December:  “It’s A Slow And Steady Recovery”

Social Security: It’s Worse Than You Think

Odds ‘n Sods:

Kevin S. recommended the very informative (link-heavy) web site of ham radio operator Ron Herring (W7HD.)

   o o o

Kevin also mentioned this from the Family Research Council: Hunger, Plenty, and Population

   o o o

Peter Ferrara of Forbes sums it up well: ‘Assault Weapon’ Is Just A PR Stunt Meant To Fool The Gullible. (Thanks to J.B.G. for the link.)

   o o o

F.G. suggested this video: Sight In Your Rifle in Two Shots

Notes from JWR:

January 8th is the birthday of the late Algis Budrys (born 1931, died June 9, 2008.) He was the Lithuanian-American science fiction author who wrote the classic survivalist novel Some Will Not Die.

—

We are pleased to welcome our newest advertiser: StatGearTools.com. They are the makers of the T3 Tactical Triage & Auto Rescue Tool. Anyone who commutes or drives for a living (truck drivers, bus or taxi drivers, etc.) should carry one of these tools. It may help you save a life!

—

Today we present another entry for Round 44 of the SurvivalBlog non-fiction writing contest. The prizes for this round include:

First Prize: A.) A gift certificate worth $1,000, courtesy of Spec Ops Brand, B.) A course certificate from onPoint Tactical. This certificate will be for the prize winner’s choice of three-day civilian courses. (Excluding those restricted for military or government teams.) Three day onPoint courses normally cost $795, and C.) Two cases of Mountain House freeze dried assorted entrees in #10 cans, courtesy of Ready Made Resources. (A $350 value.) D.) a $300 gift certificate from CJL Enterprize, for any of their military surplus gear, E.) A 9-Tray Excalibur Food Dehydrator from Safecastle.com (a $300 value), and F.) A $250 gift certificate from Sunflower Ammo. and G.) A $200 gift certificate, donated by Shelf Reliance.

Second Prize: A.) A Glock form factor SIRT laser training pistol and a SIRT AR-15/M4 Laser Training Bolt, courtesy of Next Level Training. Together, these have a retail value of $589. B.) A FloJak FP-50 stainless steel hand well pump (a $600 value), courtesy of FloJak.com. C.) A “grab bag” of preparedness gear and books from Jim’s Amazing Secret Bunker of Redundant Redundancy (JASBORR) with a retail value of at least $300, D.) A $250 gift card from Emergency Essentials, E.) Two cases of Meals, Ready to Eat (MREs), courtesy of CampingSurvival.com (a $180 value) and F.) A Tactical Trauma Bag #3 from JRH Enterprises (a $200 value).

Third Prize: A.) A Royal Berkey water filter, courtesy of Directive 21. (This filter system is a $275 value.), B.) A large handmade clothes drying rack, a washboard and a Homesteading for Beginners DVD, all courtesy of The Homestead Store, with a combined value of $206, C.) Expanded sets of both washable feminine pads and liners, donated by Naturally Cozy. This is a $185 retail value, D.) A Commence Fire! emergency stove with three tinder refill kits. (A $160 value.), and E.) Two Super Survival Pack seed collections, a $150 value, courtesy of Seed for Security.

Round 44 ends on January 31st, 2013, so get busy writing and e-mail us your entry. Remember that there is a 1,500-word minimum, and that articles on practical “how to” skills for survival have an advantage in the judging.

Accurizing a Precision Rifle on a Budget, by Mike L.

“Only accurate rifles are interesting.” – Col. Townsend Whelen

We all know when we are shooting a super accurate rifle; when everything just “clicks” and the shooter, cartridge, and rifle come together to make great groups. But what are the variables involved in making a rifle accurate? And more importantly, how can we control some of those variables ourselves?

One of the keys to accuracy, perhaps the most important one, is consistency. We know that, as shooters, we need to be very consistent to become good marksmen. We mount the gun the same way every time, control our breathing and even our pulse to release the shot at the same interval within our “wobble area.” We press the trigger the same way, and use the same place on our trigger finger to release it. We adjust the parallax out of our scope and adjust optics for best focus of reticle and target. All these things help make our shots more consistent.

Well, the combination of rifle and the cartridge it fires are very dependent on consistency as well. Let’s consider just a few of the important items.

Stock bedding
If your rifle action moves around in the stock, it will never shoot consistently. Each time you shoot, the rifle will recoil, and potentially land in a different place in the stock. The most accurate rifles typically are glass bedded within a CNC-machined aluminum bedding block, in a synthetic stock. Synthetics are great, because they aren’t affected by temperature or humidity. Classic wood stocks are beautiful, but they can swell or warp. Laminates work well, because they are relatively immune to environmental factors.  There are synthetic or laminated stocks now available for nearly any semi-automatic or bolt action rifle suitable for survival situations. Many of these are available in semi-finished form at a very reasonable price; these require mostly work with a few simple hand tools and the application of a durable finish to make an excellent finished product. Instructions and supplies for glass bedding these stocks are available from suppliers like Midway and Brownell’s.

You might have heard of “pillar bedding.” Basically, this involves embedding a couple of aluminum or steel spacers in the stock, through which your action bolts run to bolt the action to the floorplate (aka “bottom metal”). In the olden days, people would cinch down these action bolts tightly enough to start crushing the wood of the stock. Do this long enough and often enough, and the stock starts getting loose on the gun and accuracy suffers. Pillars prevent this crushing. For best accuracy, you can even use a torque wrench to always tighten your action bolts to exactly the same torque (about 65 inch-lbs is often used). Pillar bedding is also a project that is well within the capabilities of a moderately skilled woodworker. You can buy the aluminum pillars pre-made, or if you’re handy with a lathe or drill press, can easily make your own from round aluminum bar stock. Again, instruction is available through gunsmithing suppliers, or you can find detailed instructions by a simple internet search.

Free Floating the Barrel
“Free floating” the barrel is also an accuracy enhancer for most rifles. The action is bedded behind the locking lug to provide a full-contact fit between the action and stock. There is also a small area of the action and barrel glassed in just ahead of the receiver, but most of the barrel is not in contact with the stock. With a properly-floated barrel you can slide a couple sheets of notebook paper between the barrel and stock almost all the way to the receiver.

Now why do this? When you fire a shot, the barrel basically rings like a bell, doing a complex set of oscillations before, during, and after the bullet’s departure. If you free float the barrel, nothing will interfere with these oscillations, and they will occur consistently. If a portion of the stock touches, the harmonics may or may not occur consistently. And remember, we’re striving for consistency here. Some barrels actually do a better job with a carefully engineered bearing surface near the muzzle, but for most barrels, free float is where it’s at.

Barrel Attachment
Most barrels screw into the receiver on bolt action rifles and many centerfire semi-autos. There are some exceptions – AKs (not legendary in the accuracy department), HKs, and a few other battle rifles have pinned barrels. But for the average guy wanting the most accurate rifle at a reasonable price, a bolt action with screwed in barrel is what you’ll end up acquiring. It stands to reason that you’d want all the surfaces of the barrel and action to mesh up perfectly when you screw them together at the proper torque. But in fact, that doesn’t always happen. If the barrel and action are not in perfect alignment, the barrel might be slightly cocked in the action, and the bore axis won’t align with the action. Or, even if they are aligned, if the bearing surfaces don’t mate exactly, when a shot is fired (remember that “ringing like a bell”?) the barrel might move minutely with respect to the action.

How do you fix this? By truing all the mating surfaces, much like “blueprinting” a big block Chevy engine. This can be done on a lathe, and/or by using specially made lapping tools to make sure all the surfaces line up, that the threads are true, and that the axes of action and barrel are properly aligned. This work requires a bit more expertise in machining – if you use a lathe.

However, if you use truing tools available for use by hand, the tools basically self-align with the part being worked on and the surfaces are almost guaranteed to be true. These tools are available through outfits like Midway, and though relatively expensive, can be purchased by a group and used to accurize many rifles of the same action type.

Bolt to action fit
Now we have a barrel that fits precisely to the action and the barreled action is securely bedded into a stable stock. The action screws are tightened snuggly and consistently, and the barrel is free-floated. What else can we do?

The bolt is the next thing to consider. If the bolt face isn’t aligned to the bore properly, it will hold the cartridge at a slight angle to the bore when the shot breaks. The bullet will actually leave the case at a slight angle to the bore axis, it will engrave the rifling unevenly into its jacket, and it’ll never really recover from this indignity. The result will be yet another inconsistency and poor groups. The answer to this problem is to lap the bolt face so that it is exactly perpendicular to the bore axis, and each cartridge will be held precisely in the same place. You can buy a tool for this operation as well, using your power drill and lapping compound (the barrel has to be removed from the action to do it, though). With a lathe, it’s a pretty straightforward task to build your own bolt face lapping tool.

Now, the bolt also won’t stay properly aligned if it doesn’t lock up consistently. This is the result of the engagement of the bolt locking lugs with the matching recesses in the receiver. Take a look at the rear of the lugs on the bolt in your favorite rifle. If all of the lugs show the bluing is evenly worn off, and each lug shows about 80% engagement, you’re golden. More likely, none of the lugs show this much engagement, and in a worst case, one lug is taking all the load of firing, with the other lug just hanging free in space. As you might guess, this will allow the bolt to cock with respect to the bore, your poor bullet gets abused again, and inconsistency is the result.

This condition can also be rectified by lapping. You don’t even have to have a tool to do it, but a spring loaded tool that presses the lugs against the bolt does make the job easier. Smear some lapping compound on the rear of the lugs (strip the bolt first), insert the bolt, pull back on it to maintain good contact between the bearing surfaces, and just work the bolt multiple times until the surfaces are well matched up.
                 
Where are we now? Let’s see – bolt is square to the receiver, holding the cartridge in perfect alignment with a bore that is also aligned to the receiver. The barrel is seated against a trued action; it isn’t going to move upon firing. The action is securely held in a stable stock. The barrel is free to vibrate at its harmonic frequency.

Barrel Crown

The very last influence your rifle will have on that speeding bullet is as it exits the muzzle. That’s why the muzzle crown is of primary importance. If the crown is dinged or uneven, as the bullet exits, expanding gas behind the bullet will leave the bore unevenly. This can move the bullet out of  alignment, imparting a lopsided spiral motion to it. You want the bullet to leave the bore in perfect symmetry. Why are there so many crown shapes? Mostly to protect that crown by recessing it away from potential dings. A perfectly straight crown, perpendicular to the bore axis, will do just fine, and can be accomplished with a high quality square and a file. But it’s easier to do it with lapping tools or a lathe. A freshly cut crown will often do astounding things to improve the accuracy of an old rifle.

Lock time
Military rifles, like the Mausers that are well-suited for accurizing, were designed for reliability under battle conditions. They have a striker that hits the primer with ferocious intensity, driven by a heavy duty spring. Unfortunately, that mechanism is really heavy. Weight equates to inertia – when you press the trigger, it take a while for all that mass to get up to speed. This is called lock time. Ideally, you’d press the trigger and the bullet would exit the bore immediately, with no lock time at all. A long lock time (like in a Mauser action) gives you more time to wiggle around between the time that you press the trigger and the primer ignites the powder. More contemporary commercial actions (Remington, Sako, etc.) have greatly reduced lock time. Remington even invented an electronic trigger and electrically fired primer (Etronix) to virtually eliminate lock time, but it never really caught on. For the Mauser, you can buy a “speedlock” inner bolt assembly that’s made of aluminum and titanium to significantly reduce lock time. They are available for other rifles as well, and you can even buy a titanium firing pin for your AR-15 that will cut down its lock time as well. There’s a balancing act though – if the firing pin is too light, it might not reliably detonate your primers, so beware.

Optics mounts
This is an easy one. If the optics (scope or iron sights) are loose, they will bounce around from shot to shot. This is more common than you might think. It’s pretty common to see a hunter at “sight in days” shooting up an entire box of ammo trying to zero his rifle. He’ll be fine for elevation, but a shot will hit to the left. He dials in some right. The next shot is far to the right. He dials in left to correct. Now the shot is far to the left. He scratches his head, shoots again. Next shot is to the right! What? What is probably happening is that he has a loose scope mount, that’s just bouncing to the limits of its travel with each shot. Or it could be a scope with loose internal parts. Or it might be that the hunter should hit the range more frequently than once a year. You can’t blame the equipment for everything!

The solution here is easy. Buy good quality bases and mounts, install them correctly to the proper torque, and check them periodically!

What else?

That about covers the rifle components and interfaces that contribute to accuracy. Of course, an expensive Shilen or Lilja match barrel will be more accurate than a shot out WWII barrel. The most accurate benchrest rifles have special actions that are super stiff, to remove any hint of flex that might cause inconsistent performance. But, you might be surprised at how a bit of tuning can up the performance of even a modest barrel.

The benefit of this basic tuning is that it improves the accuracy of the rifle without harming the reliability for situations where the rifle simply must function properly, all the time. A survival rifle is no place to try out fancy gimmicks that may fail when the chips are down – simple, reliable, and tested techniques like the ones described here will often turn a reliable clunker into a tack driver. Just refreshing the barrel crown might take a rifle that can’t shoot less than a 6 inch group at 100 yards and reduce that group to 2 inches.