On Scout Rifles and Scout Scopes

A recent GunsAmerica review of the new version of the Ruger Scout Rifle http://www.gunsamerica.com/blog/brand-new-rifle-ruger/ got me fired up about this type of rifle again and I think there is an issue that should be brought to the attention of those looking as a general purpose rifle.

I have been a fan and adherent of Jeff Cooper for more than two decades.  This nation lost a treasure when he passed.  It is not an exaggeration to say that his tome, “To Ride, Shoot Straight and Speak the Truth” is a life changing book.  If you have not done so, get a copy and as you read the first chapter, imagine what would have happened on 9/11/2001 if only a handful of passengers had read this book. 

There are very few things about which Col. Cooper wrote with which I disagree.  When I first read his description of the concept of a GP rifle, it made complete sense.  His solutions in terms of weight, length, sighting system, ammunition and sling seemed undisputable.  It was so convincing, that when I had the means, I built my first GP rifle using a Remington Model 7 as the chassis.  It wasn’t a true Scout because it lacked a few refinements but it did carry a forward mounted 2.5X Leupold Scout Scope and a 3 point Ching Sling. 

That first foray into the world of the GP rifle got me hooked.  When Steyr came along with a full blown Scout Rifle, I bought one.  Then, I bought another (got to have a back-up, right?) and then a third in .376 Steyr caliber just in case zombie lions ever began roaming the wastelands of Central Virginia. 

At the time, I was able to do a considerable amount of hunting and this is when I discovered the Achilles Heel of the Scout Rifle concept which I will get to in a moment.  First though, let’s review what was right with this gun.  For those unfamiliar with the Steyr Scout, it includes everything the beloved Colonel wanted in a GP rifle.  It was light and short.  It had a built-in rail upon which optics could be mounted forward of the ejection port.  It had a cleverly hidden bipod.  It had a detachable magazine with a double detent allowing for single feeding plus room in the stock to carry a spare magazine.  It had flush mounted sockets for a 3 point Ching Sling.  It had flip-up iron sights in case your scope ever failed.  It had a trigger designed by people who understood what a two stage trigger could be.  It was and is the ultimate GP rifle as defined by Jeff Cooper.

Over the course of several years in the field, I really learned the beauty of this rifle.  It is fast and accurate.  I’m talking lightning fast.  That is a combination of the sling, the size of the rifle but most of all, the forward mounted scope.  Until a person plays with this, it is impossible to understand just how amazing this feature really is. 

A 2.5X scope mounted forward of the ejection port allows the shooter to keep both eyes open while sighting and shooting.  That means the field of view is unlimited by the scope.  The shooter sees everything in front of him and only sees the crosshairs magnified on the target in the middle of that field of vision.  Because the magnification is only 2.5X, the human brain seems capable to accepting this. 

It really does work too.  On two different occasions, I encountered deer that were running and I chose to take a shot.  I swung the rifle like a shotgun, focusing on the deer until the instant before pressing the trigger.  My eye just saw the crosshairs in the middle of my vision and both times, the deer crumpled to the ground (one at nearly 100 years and the other at 75).  Pretty impressive stuff.

I also was happy with longer range and more traditional shots.  I shot one at 240 yards in a field.  Several more were taken at various ranges around the pastures where I hunt.

 

All of this was great until one day, I came over a rise and looked into a wooded valley.  I didn’t see anything at first but glassed ahead with my 8X binoculars.  I could see 5 deer gently feeding through the woods.  It was not a particularly thick section of woods and I had no problem seeing the deer in the binos but not with the naked eye.  Range was in the area of 150 yards.  I laid down and deployed the bipod legs of the Scout Rifle. 

For the life of me, I could not see those deer with the 2.5X scope.  I would pick up my binos and could see them perfectly but not with the naked eye nor with the Scout Scope.  The color of the fallen leaves given the deer just enough camouflage so it was impossible to get a shot. 

This is a problem.  A real problem.  A GP rifle needs to be usable in a wide variety of situations, not just when the target is standing in a field or at the end of a 300 yard range.  A GP rifle must allow the shooter to see the target when the target may be partially obscured by foliage.  The shooter needs to be able to see the target when the target blends into the background.  The Scout Scope just doesn’t allow for that.

So now what?  If we give up the forward mounted, low power scope, we give up speed and introduce complexity.  How much compromise is acceptable?  I knew some compromise was required because I could not accept a sighting system that relies on targets to be in open fields or silhouetted against a blank background. 

My first thought was to get a variable power pistol scope.  Leupold makes a 2-7X pistol scope and I considered this but rejected it.  Once you go beyond 2.5X, the eye relief becomes quite unforgiving.  I was also concerned with parallax in the higher magnifications.  Others may look at this and accept it but I wasn’t happy with it.

I instead opted to place a low power variable in a conventional mounting position.  I wanted to get something very rugged and durable and something unlikely to be damaged under heavy use.   I ended up getting the Leupold Mark 4 MR/T 1.5-5X M2.  It is a tough as nails scope with a 30mm tube encasing 20mm optics.  It has low profile target turrets and an illuminated reticle. 

The beauty of this scope is that it is nearly as fast on target as a Scout Scope.  When dialed in at the lowest magnification, I can keep both eyes open.  Although it is there, the scope body is barely noticeable in my field of view .  At 1.5X, it is very similar to an Aimpoint or EOTech but with crosshairs instead of a glowing dot.  However, at longer ranges, I can dial up to 5X and even at 300 yards, I can make out details that I just couldn’t with the Scout Scope.  At all practical ranges, I can see whatever I can shoot. 

The only downside to this scope is the weight.  At 18 oz, it is almost double a conventional XV3 of the same magnification.  The illuminated reticle likely adds some of this weight and that is another feature of questionable value.  I was imagining something akin to an Aimpoint but the lighting isn’t even close to that and on a bright day, you wouldn’t know it is there.  It does help at dusk and dawn to see the reticle though and I do like it.  Just remember to turn it off at the end of the day and keep a supply of batteries on hand.

The passing of Jeff Cooper still saddens me for a host of reasons.  I would have loved to ask him his opinion on this matter.  His distrust of variable power scopes likely would have precluded his endorsement of this solution.  After using the Scout Scope for several years in the real world, I came to the conclusion that it has no place on a true General Purpose rifle.  That means a compromise is needed and I am happy with my compromise.  What I have lost in speed is negligible and the added weight and complexity is within acceptable limits.  The increase in usable range is dramatic and really completes the GP rifle concept in my opinion. 

Maranatha Tour 2014 Kickoff Devotion

The following is a devotion delivered to the Maranatha Touring Choir at the kickoff to our 2014 tour.

I want to start this by asking if you have ever really considered the story of the Tower of Babel in Genesis Chapter 11.  This is one of those uncomfortable stories in the Bible as far as I’m concerned.  Up until just a few years ago, this is one of the stories that actually kept me away from Christianity entirely.  I found the whole concept of the story to be absurd and historically impossible and therefore, the Bible must be wrong.  At least that’s how I thought of it.  For me, the Bible itself was a stumbling block toward Christianity.  How scary is that!

The story of the Tower of Babel and a few others were serious stumbling blocks for me, until I had a long conversation with an Episcopal priest who said some things that totally changed how I look at the Bible.  This is not the right time or place to get into the specifics of that conversation but the bottom line is, he helped me see that the Bible is a guide to our relationship with God and a guide to our relationships with our fellow human beings.  He showed me that the Bible contains nothing but truth about those relationships and that is isnt necessary to look at the Bible as a history book. 

Do you know how freeing it is to study the Bible without worrying about the historicity?  The TRUTH of any story is about how we relate to God and our fellow humans.  Those truths are a lot more exciting when one stops questioning whether or not certain events are literal or not.  If you study the Bible this way, it doesn’t necessarily mean you don’t believe certain parts of it.  It just means you are reading the Bible to figure out what the point of the story is.  This kind of Bible study is extremely liberating.

Take the Tower of Babel in this context.  The biblical story is pretty short and light on details.  A first century historian named Josephus who specialized in Jewish history adds a lot of color to the story but it is still the same story.  The essential story is that descendants of Noah were feeling pretty powerful.  They all spoke the same language and because of that, were able to achieve just about anything they set out to do.  They decided to build a city and tower to reach the heavens.  They literally wanted to be on the same level as God. 

Josephus goes a step further by saying that it was Ham’s grandson, Nimrod, and he was certain of man’s prowess and felt it was man’s courage that brought happiness.  He didn’t ascribe any of man’s strength to God.  He was arrogant and prideful.  He directed the tower to be built in order to show the power of man.  He gave no credit to God. 

In response to this level of arrogance and pride, God didn’t destroy man as he had done just two generations earlier in the flood.  This time, he simply caused confusion by making them all speak different languages.  This led to a scattering of the people over the whole face of the earth.

So leaving aside any discussion of linguistics, anthropology, migration, culture or history in general, what is the “truth” of this story?  It is actually quite simple:

When we deny God, when we get full of ourselves, when we are blinded by arrogance and when we think we are superior, we are headed on a path of destruction.  The natural result of a loss of humility is that we can’t hear what others are saying.  Others may as well be speaking a foreign language because we just are not listening.  That really is the truth isn’t it?  When we decide we are right and everybody else is wrong, we stop listening to what others have to offer.  We also stop listening to God and we lose sight of what is important.

The story of the Tower of Babel is the story of the natural result of human arrogance.  That is truth and it is really that simple.

So what happens when we drop our pride and arrogance?  That is when we can hear our fellow man.  Right at the beginning of the story, it is pointed out that God realized that when people could understand each other, they could accomplish great things.  We can truly serve others and we can hear the voice of God telling us what he wants for us…  

…Which brings us to what we are doing here today.  Are we here to glorify ourselves?  As we hear in Pslam 139, you are “fearfully and wonderfully made.”  This week is about using our gifts, our time and our talents in serving and helping others to find God. 

Let’s focus this week on building up others and let God use us for His purpose.  Let’s not let our pride prevent us from hearing the needs of others.  Let’s figure out ways to better understand our fellow human beings and in the process, we will hear God.

On my Secret Saint form, I didn’t put a favorite Bible verse.  I put down the Prayer of St. Francis and as we depart, I want to share the words of that prayer.  I think it perfectly sums up what we are doing here and how we prevent ourselves from becoming like those that built the Tower of Babel.

Lord, make me an instrument of Your peace;

Where there is hatred, let me sow love;

Where there is injury, pardon;

Where there is discord, harmony;

Where there is error, truth;

Where there is doubt, faith;

Where there is despair, hope;

Where there is darkness, light;

And where there is sadness, joy.

O Divine Master, Grant that I may not so much seek

To be consoled as to console;

To be understood as to understand;

To be loved as to love.

For it is in giving that we receive;

It is in pardoning that we are pardoned;

And it is in dying that we are born to eternal life

Prayer Requests

Closing Prayer:

Almighty God, Father of all mercies, 
we your unworthy servants give you humble thanks 
for all your goodness and loving-kindness to us, and to all whom you have made. 
We bless you for our creation, preservation, 
and all the blessings of this life; 
but above all for your immeasurable love 
in the redemption of the world by our Lord Jesus Christ; 
for the means of grace, and for the hope of glory. 
And, we pray, give us such an awareness of your mercies, 
that with truly thankful hearts we may show forth your praise, 
not only with our lips, but in our lives, 
by giving up our selves to your service, 
and by walking before you 
in holiness and righteousness all our days; 
through Jesus Christ our Lord, 
to whom, with you and the Holy Spirit, 
be honor and glory throughout all ages. Amen.

Political discourse in the Episcopal Church

The following is an extract from a discussion I had on an Episcopal Church web site discussing political civility.

Yes, I am a conservative and an Episcopalian. It isn’t easy to be such. What is frustrating is that many within the ECUSA frame political debate within their version of morality and assume that view is shared by all. This is what stifles debate. When bishops, clergy and leaders of the denomination are unified that the only way to uphold baptismal vows is to adopt a certain political position, how can there be dissent? How can there be discourse? Disagreement about public policy becomes heresy.

Even as I write this, I am reluctant to even bring up specific political topics. From immigration to minimum wage to gun control and climate change, the liberals have browbeat conservatives into silence in the Church. This is done not by arguing the economic impacts or societal costs but rather, by using the bible and baptismal vows as a cudgel. Once that club is wielded, many of us are reluctant to defend our position. I don’t feel any desire to explain how my faith in my Redeemer is consistent with my belief in certain economic mechanisms that create stronger societies. It is safer to remain silent.

As a conservative, I don’t ignore Jesus’s words in Matthew 25:31-46 and I don’t appreciate the implication that I do. In fact, this is an excellent example of how discourse gets sidetracked when scripture is brought into the political arena. How does a government improve the lives of people? Is that any different from how the Church does it? Is it any different than how a parish or an individual does it? I would argue that it is very different. Each institutional level has unique responsibilities and attempts to combine those is a dangerous path. Does that make me a heretic? Is that un-Christian?

See what just happened there? I had to defend my belief in Jesus’s words in order to have a discussion about politics. Do you have any idea how uncomfortable that is? That is why conservatives have left this Church in such large numbers. Those of us who remain are marginalized and question why we are still here.

Why I Voted Against Eric Cantor

It seems that the whole world is talking about the Cantor election right now.  Well, I live in Cantor’s district and I voted yesterday.  I had a really hard time deciding who to vote for and I usually don’t.  This one was tough.

I didn’t do it over immigration.  I didn’t do it because he wasn’t conservative enough.  I generally like Cantor.  There was a letter to the editor in the local paper that almost convinced me to stick with him.  The LTE correctly pointed out that as Majority Leader, he has a lot of power and that power is good for the locals here in the 7^th district.  It is also cool to have a generally conservative guy with that much power and in line to become the next Speaker.  That almost got my vote.

But it didn’t and here is why.  Cantor has irritated me a number of times in the last several months.  He talks a good conservative game, but he and Boehner have missed several opportunities to hold Obama’s feet to the fire.  Yes, they have hearings, but that is it.  Where is the actual action against the Administration on the IRS scandal, Benghazi or the VA system?  It is all just hearings and bluster.  Nobody has been prosecuted and likely never will. 

So even with this, I was willing to hold my nose and vote for him.  I thought that maybe, he really did understand political realities better than me and that he was making decisions that while I didn’t agree with them, at least they were principled.

Then I got his campaign literature.  It was the most disgusting thing I have ever seen.  He suddenly decided to sound tough on these issues when I knew he wasn’t.  Worse yet, he called his opponent a liberal and implied that since he is a college professor that he must not understand how politics really works.  He used the terms “ivory tower” and “liberal” and none of it was true.  It was slimy and disgusting.  It was then that I realized that he really is the “establishment” that needs replaced.

I voted for a guy named Brat.  I know he will not be in a leadership position any time soon.  I can live with that.  I hope the GOP figures out what happened pretty quickly and don’t throw him to the wolves in the general election in November (they can’t be that stupid, can they?).

 

I didn’t so much vote for Brat as I did against Cantor.  I don’t want to be represented by a liar and by a person who can not or will not stand up to Obama on the IRS scandal or any of the other idiocy that we see today.  I am ready to be represented by a man of principle.  I hope that is what I get.