|
|
August 2nd, 2015
Forum member XmarksSpot has been shooting a wicked fast varmint cartridge that has broken the 5000-fps barrier using Berger 30gr varmint bullets. That’s some serious velocity! The parent case is a 6mmBR, which is then improved and necked down to .224 caliber. XmarksSpot reports:
Some people think 5000+ fps is mythical. Well just thought I’d let you guys know that I got 5239 fps a couple weeks ago shooting 30-grainers with my 224 McDonald, a wildcat cartridge based on an improved 6BR case necked down to 224. (This case is very similar to a 22 Dasher.) The bullet used is the 30gr Berger. (The 40s run fast too — about 4800 fps.) The rig is a Rem 700 with a 30″ Hart barrel. Below is the case before and after forming. As you can see it has a 40° shoulder and far more case capacity than a 22 BR (a 22 Dasher case holds about 41.0 grains H20). My most accurate loads are with 50-52gr bullets, with bugholes the norm at 4200 fps. The 40gr bullets will do 4800+ fps.
This 224 McDonald wildcat was originally developed by Charles McDonald. He has been developing and chambering custom cartridges for years. Editor’s Note: Many folks may not be aware of the little .224-caliber 30gr Berger varmint bullet, Berger item # 22301. This bullet is not on Berger’s current production list but some vendors may still have “old stock” inventory. The little 30-grainer has an 0.119 G1 BC and will work in 1:15″ or faster twist barrels. For more info, visit BergerBullets.com.
Share the post "5000+ FPS with 22BR Improved and 30gr Berger Bullets"
July 5th, 2010
In McDonald v. Chicago, the U.S. Supreme Court determined that the Second Amendment applies to State and Local goverment actions, not just to Federal laws and activities. In so ruling, the High Court established that State and municipal laws can be challenged on the grounds that they violate a citizen’s individual right to “keep and bear arms”.
This landmark decision was the focus of the July 4th edition of Gun Talk Radio, when host Tom Gresham interviewed Attorney Alan Gura, lead counsel for Otis McDonald and other plaintiffs. Gura was also the lawyer who successfully challenged the District of Columbia gun ban, in D.C. v. Heller.
If you missed the July 4th broadcast, you can still hear what Gura has to say about the Supreme Court rulings in the McDonald and Heller cases. Gun Talk Radio archives its past broadcasts. Just right click on the Podcast icon below and “Save As” to download an .mp3 file with the Alan Gura interview. This is a very thought-provoking interview. We strongly recommend you listen.
Guntalk 2010-07-04 Part A
Hour One – Guests Alan Gura, Attorney
and U.S. Senator Jim Inhofe, R-OK
Share the post "Lawyer Alan Gura Talks about Landmark Supreme Court Second Amendment Cases: McDonald v. Chicago, D.C. v. Heller"
June 29th, 2010
To celebrate the U.S. Supreme Court’s 5-4 ruling in McDonald v. Chicago, Creedmoor Sports is offering a special, one-day 54¢ Shipping Sale. For today only, June 29th, ANY Creedmoor Sports order, no matter how big, will ship for just $0.54. (Ammunition and bullets excluded!) To get your discounted shipping visit CreedmoorSports.com, and Use Coupon Code: 5-4VOTE.
Conditions: Sale today 6/29/2010 only. Not subject to prior sales. Shipping coupon excludes ammunition and bullets. These items will be charged shipping before the order is processed.
Share the post "Creedmoor Sports Offers One-day 54¢ Shipping Promotion"
March 3rd, 2010
Those interested in the landmark McDonald v. Chicago Second Amendment case can now read the complete transcript of the Oral Arguments conducted yesterday before the U.S. Supreme Court. We added the link to the transcript late in the day on Tuesday, so you might have missed it. (FYI, the written opinion in this case is not expected until June, 2010).
CLICK HERE for transcript of Oral Argument
(PDF file, 77 pages, 342kb).
To learn more about the plaintiffs in this case, click the link below to read a profile in the Chicago Magazine website. The ‘name’ plaintiff is Otis McDonald, a 76-year old retired maintenance engineer (and grandfather). The son of sharecroppers, McDonald grew up in Louisiana, then moved to Chicago at age 17. Now he simply wants the right to have a handgun to defend himself in his home.
Chicago Magazine Story on McDonald v. Chicago Plaintiffs.
Share the post "Transcript of Supreme Court Argument is Available"
March 2nd, 2010
 Lyle Denniston, reporter for the Scotus (Supreme Court of the United States) Blog, attended the oral argument in McDonald v. Chicago (Docket 08-1521) this morning. Analyzing the comments and questions of the Justices, Denniston concluded that the High Court is very likely to extend the Second Amendment to state and municipal actions, on the basis of the Due Process Clause of the 14th Amendment. However, the Justices were skeptical of the argument that “incorporation” of the Second Amendment was likewise mandated by the “privileges and immunities” section of the 14th Amendment.
CLICK HERE for transcript of Oral Argument
(PDF file, 77 pages, 342kb).
Denniston writes: “The Supreme Court on Tuesday seemed poised to require state and local governments to obey the Second Amendment guarantee of a personal right to a gun, but with perhaps considerable authority to regulate that right. The dominant sentiment on the Court was to extend the Amendment beyond the federal level, based on the 14th Amendment’s guarantee of “due process,” since doing so through another part of the 14th Amendment would raise too many questions about what other rights might emerge.”
During the course of the oral argument, the Justices disagreed as to the scope of the Second Amendment — whether it should be limited to a “core right” of self-defense or whether it could be applied much more broadly in future cases. The Scotus Blog explained: “The liberal wing of the Court appeared to be making a determined effort to hold the expanded Amendment in check, but even the conservatives open to applying the Second Amendment to states, counties and cities seemed ready to concede some — but perhaps fewer — limitations. The eagerly awaited oral argument in McDonald, et al., v. Chicago, et al. found all members of the Court actively involved except the usually silent Justice Clarence Thomas. And, while no one said that the issue of “incorporating” the Second Amendment into the 14th Amendment had already been decided before the argument had even begun, the clear impression was that the Court majority was at least sentimentally in favor of that, with only the dimensions of the expansion to be worked out in this case and in a strong of likely precedents coming as time went on.”
We recommend that those interested in Second Amendment issues read the full Scotus Blog Entry, which includes detailed explanations of the key arguments, and analyses of how individual justices stand on the question of how the Second Amendment should be applied to the States — i.e. whether broadly or narrowly.
CLICK HERE to read SCOTUS BLOG re McDonald v. Chicago.
Share the post "After the Argument — Supreme Court Appears to Favor Extension of Second Amendment"
March 2nd, 2010
Today, the U.S. Supreme Court is hearing oral arguments in McDonald v. City of Chicago, a major Second Amendment case that will determine whether cities and states must honor the Constitutional Right to keep and bear arms, set forth in the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. It will be argued that the protections of the Second Amendment should extend to state and local government activity, based on the provisions of the 14th Amendment.
The key words from the 14th Amendment are “No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law . . . . ”
You can consider McDonald v. City of Chicago as the sequel to the 2008 landmark case — the District of Columbia v. Heller — in which the Supreme Court reaffirmed that the Second Amendment is an “individual” right to keep and bear arms. The Court’s decision, however, applied only to areas regulated by the federal government, such as the District of Columbia. As a result the Heller decision inspired further legal attempts to clarify how the right to keep and bear arms applies to citizens nationwide.
After Heller, many lawsuits were filed to overturn municipal and state laws that prevented individuals from owning handguns. In Chicago, several residents brought suit challenging the city’s long-standing gun ban. These residents, among them 76-year-old Otis McDonald, wanted a handgun to protect themselves and their families. McDonald, interviewed by ABC News, lives in a crime-ridden neighborhood and wants a gun to defend himself in his home: “If I’ve got a gun, and if others have guns in their homes to protect themselves, then that’s one thing that police would have to worry about less.”
How broadly or narrowly the Second Amendment will be applied to state regulations is the key question in today’s hearing in McDonald v Chicago. Today, one hour has been set for oral arguments. Attorney Alan Gura, who won the Heller case, will argue for the petitioners Otis McDonald, et al. Former U.S. Solicitor General Paul Clement will argue for the NRA, which is also a party to the case. Chicago’s defense will take up the remainder of the time.
Final Decision is Months Away
Legal experts will attempt to predict how McDonald v. Chicago will be decided, based on the questions/comments of the Justices during oral argument. However, we will have to wait many months before the Supreme Court’s actual written ruling. In a case of this significance, we can expect a lengthy written opinion (with dissents), that may not be issued until summer 2010.
Report and Photo Courtesy NSSF
Share the post "High Court Hears "McDonald v. Chicago" Today"
|
