Lock and Load?

The New York Sun ^ | June 29, 2010 | Staff

[neverdem]

One of the most illuminating questions in respect of the Supreme Court’s ruling on the right to keep and bear arms is whether it should be applauded by the liberals or by conservatives — or both. The court, in a case called McDonald v. Chicago, followed a ruling two years ago, in a case called District of Columbia v. Heller, in which the court said that the federal government could not infringe the rights vouched safe by the Second Amendment. In the latest case it extended that logic, deciding that the Second Amendment does apply to the states and municipalities. As in Heller, it stopped short of saying there could be no regulation of guns. But it did say that the Second Amendment protects Americans from interference by all levels of government.

In this sense it continues a process known as incorporation, in which the Bill of Rights, which was originally intended to restrict only the federal government, is extended via the 14th Amendment to restrict the states and local governments from interfering with the people’s rights as well. But is that a right-wing idea or a left-wing one? After all, the idea of states rights is thought of as a conservative idea, and the process of incorporation uses the 14th Amendment to limit what the states can do. But McDonald is a case in which the four more liberal members of the court — Justices Breyer, Ginsburg, Stevens, and Sotomayor — all dissented and said that the second of the 10 amendments that make up the bill of rights should not apply to the states and that the states should be able to do what they want to.

In any event, what an astonishing thing to see Chicago warning residents not to exercise the rights the Supreme Court just...

[neverdem]

Lock and Load?

What's the origin of that bass ackwards statement? A round has to be loaded into the action of a firearm before the action can be locked.

[Joe Brower]

IIRC, it goes back to the old muzzle-loader days, where one would fully cock the action before reloading from the bore. Can't recall ever doing that myself with my old CVA .45 Kentucky rifle, tho'...

[I cannot think of a name]

I believe it also applies to certain types of rifles that can have the action cycled with the safety on. The idea being to “lock” the action and then “load” as a way to prevent accidental discharges.

[Max in Utah]

Probably refers to loading a magazine that is still in the weapon, by using stripper clips. The bolt must be locked back then the rounds pushed down into the mag.

I load my SKS in this way, one clip of ten rounds, remove clip, pull back on the bolt handle and release to let it go into battery.

[frogjerk]

In this sense it continues a process known as incorporation, in which the Bill of Rights, which was originally intended to restrict only the federal government, is extended via the 14th Amendment to restrict the states and local governments from interfering with the people’s rights as well.

Justice Thomas disagrees with this silly logic, with regards to the 2nd Amendment, and he disproves it fully in his brilliantly written opinion.

If we didn't need Clarance Thomas so badly on the Supreme Court I would nominate him to run for President of the United States.

[Redleg Duke]

Well, I don’t know where you took your basic, but we locked our M-14s (Put the safety on.) before we inserted a magazine into the mag well and then chambered a round.

[Redleg Duke]

Well, I don’t know where you took your basic, but we locked our M-14s (Put the safety on.) before we inserted a magazine into the mag well and then chambered a round.

[Yosemitest]

Watch this video, Loading and Shooting the M1 Garand.

.

This is the source for that saying.

"The second explanation is that
the phrase (as "load and lock") originated during World War II
to describe the preparations required to fire an M1 Garand rifle.
After an ammunition clip was loaded into the rifle
the bolt automatically moved forward in order to "lock" a round into the chamber."

Or ... this source.

"This imperative phrase originally referred to the operation of the M1 Garand Rifle, the standard U.S. Army rifle of WWII. Its meaning is more general now, referring to preparation for any imminent event.


The original phrase was actually reversed, "load and lock."
The phrase refers to inserting a clip of ammunition into the rifle,
"loading," and "locking" the bolt forward
thereby forcing a round into the chamber.


The phrase first appears in Gach's 1941-42 In the Army Now. It was immortalized by John Wayne (who else?) in 1949's "Sands of Iwo Jima," where the Duke reversed the phrase to the current "lock and load."

I SAY AGAIN ... Watch this video, Loading and Shooting the M1 Garand

.

[SJSAMPLE]

That sounds insane.
Why would you cock a rifle and then pour powder down the bore and then begin ramming in the ball, which could cause the action to trigger?

I think the original meaning was lost somewhere and people just apply it to the genre or weapon they’re familiar with.

With the M-16, I was told to “lock” (a magazine in the well) and “load” a round into the chamber.

[neverdem]

Probably refers to loading a magazine that is still in the weapon, by using stripper clips. The bolt must be locked back then the rounds pushed down into the mag.

I load my SKS in this way, one clip of ten rounds, remove clip, pull back on the bolt handle and release to let it go into battery.

Maybe it was a command during World War II on U.S. rifle ranges for the M1 Garand?

[Fido969]

fully cock the action

As a frequent black powder shooter, and shooter of period pieces and flintlocks, I will state you would never do that if you were loading properly, not in 2010, 1810 or in 1710. The piece has a "half cock" position for that.

Maybe you would lock into half-cock, then load.

[I cannot think of a name]

Actually I have seen muskets and other muzzle loaders that had a lock that could be applied specifically for loading or for carrying through heavy brush.

Also, there are many varieties of Mouser, as well as other bolt action rifles, that can have the action cycled with the safety applied. It is always recommended that the safety be applied (action locked) before cycling live rounds.

[Yosemitest]

"It was immortalized by John Wayne (who else?)
in 1949's "Sands of Iwo Jima,"
where the Duke reversed the phrase to the current "lock and load." "

Having fired the M1 GARAND myself, I can understand John Wayne's reversing this saying.

BECAUSE ... you have to "LOCK" THE BOLT "BACK"
BEFORE ... you "LOAD" A FULL CLIP OF AMMO into the weapon.
Hence ... "LOCK and LOAD."

[04-Bravo]

“Lock and Load”

When used as a range command, the word “lock” traditionally means to set the weapon on “safe.” The term was used with the 1903 Springfield, and maybe even before that.

The ‘03 Springfield range command was “load and lock”, meaning to load five rounds from the stripper clip into the magazine, close the bolt, then set the three-position safety to the “safe” position, which also locked the bolt closed. It was even called a “safety lock.”

When the M1 Garand came into service, the range command was reversed to “lock and load”, since the M1 could be set to “safe” before it was loaded with the en bloc clip. The M14 used the same type of safety.

The traditional term “lock” was kept when the M16 was brought into service.

[SJSAMPLE]

I understand a positive safety, but why would you COCK any muzzle-loader before loading it?

[neverdem]

Thanks for the link & comments.

[I cannot think of a name]

I'm no expert on that, however I have several friends that are big black powder shooters. One of them has a gun that I am absolutely certain had some kind of small handle device that locks the hammer at least part of the way back while he loading. Maybe to allow burnt powder to be pushed out of the charging hole? Next time I see him at the range, I'll ask.

[Joe Brower]

Heh. I knew that tossing out my, er, 'half-cocked' idea would inspire some informative comments. $;-)

I never liked the term "lock and load". Too much bravado in it with today's vernacular. I always use the term "Make Ready". More businesslike, and more widely applicable.

[Terabitten]

What's the origin of that bass ackwards statement? A round has to be loaded into the action of a firearm before the action can be locked.

Lock the magazine into your rifle, then load a round into the chamber.

At least, that's how my drill sergeant explained it to me lo these many years ago.

[!1776!]

Ignoring the semantic, and I must say useless "lock and load discussion, there is something more important here...

After all, the idea of states rights is thought of as a conservative idea, and the process of incorporation uses the 14th Amendment to limit what the states can do.

This is an example of the ignorance that the left uses to smear conservatives. Stated plainly - they want states rights, but they support removing states rights.

We need to be more focused on directing the discussion to the true issue - this isn't about state rights, this is about personal rights for which no government, federal, state, or local, has the authority to interfere with. Period. This is specifically stated in the Bill of Rights, no questions asked unless you want to contort and torture the plain reading.

I could care less what "lock and load" means to anyone. The subtle dig in the article is - conservative ideals and respect for the Constitution are not compatible.

We really need to get better at countering this kind of BS.

[Yosemitest]

Hence "LOCK and LOAD" in the sense of "be ready and prepared".

"The subtle dig in the article is
- conservative ideals and respect for the Constitution are not compatible."

Compatable with what?

I contend ...

compatable with Communists Goals.

[neverdem]

The subtle dig in the article is - conservative ideals and respect for the Constitution are not compatible.

We really need to get better at countering this kind of BS.

That's not true. I doubt that you're familiar with the editorial attitude of the NY Sun. They're quite conservative. They used to be a broadsheet on weekdays, IIRC. Now it's a weekly online, but it's still conservative. Check their homepage.

[reardensteel]

The 2nd:
“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.”

The 14th:
“No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States;...”

Can’t get much clearer than that once the “Militia” history is understood. In fact one can argue the 2nd amendment is sufficient - it’s hard to argue with “shall not be infringed”. Seems to me here in CA that telling me I can’t carry openly or concealed is infringing on my right to “bear arms”.

[calex59]

The expression isn’t about locking the action but to locking the safety. On old flintlocks you had to put the lock all the way down on the frizzen for safety in order to load until you got to the part of putting powder in the pan, or a cap on the nipple in the case of percussion arms, the lock was then put into the “half cock” position, which gave rise to the expression, “Don’t go off half cocked”. On most military long arms it is possible to engage the safety before loading the firearm. On the range the person in charge gives the order to “lock and load” at which time the shooters engage the safeties and then load the piece.

[!1776!]

That's not true. I doubt that you're familiar with the editorial attitude of the NY Sun. They're quite conservative. They used to be a broadsheet on weekdays, IIRC. Now it's a weekly online, but it's still conservative. Check their homepage.

You are correct - I am not familiar with the editorial attitide of this newspaper. And I want to thank you for making a point that encouraged me to re-read the article and think about it again.

Doing so - I still don't really like how the states rights versus conservative principles are briefly presented. That said, on second, and third reading - particularly with your help identifying a different perspective to view from, I am beginning to get a better appreciation of their point.

I am not too proud to admit that my first read, impression, and reaction might have been a bit lopsided in this case. Still not exactly sure if that is the case, but can better appreciate what might be better presented as an effort to provoke thought rather than an attack.

I appreciate your pointing this out - we are only as good so far as we are willing to fix our imperfections and challenge our opinions.

Take care.

[neverdem]

Still not exactly sure if that is the case, but can better appreciate what might be better presented as an effort to provoke thought rather than an attack.

That's why I changed my response as follows:

Initially, it was: "That's paranoid nonsense."

After second thought it was: "That's nonsense," with an explanation.

Finally, it was: "That's not true." I try to correct misunderstanding with an explanation when I can.

[neverdem]

Second Amendment Special - better late than never!

John Lott Jr.: Supreme Court Gun Ban Ruling Can Make Us All Safer

Thomas Sowell: Gun-Control Laws - The Supreme Court interpreted the Second Amendment correctly.

Democrats quietly cheer high court gun ruling

MCDONALD, OTIS, ET AL. v. CHICAGO, IL I haven't finished Alito's opinion.

P.S. I've received satisfactory explanations for the command, Lock and Load.

Some noteworthy articles about politics, foreign or military affairs, IMHO, FReepmail me if you want on or off my list.

[Enchante]

re: 14th Amendment and "incorporation"

I am no great constitutional scholar like Obozo (gag) but the 2nd Amendment does NOT limit itself to acts of the US Congress (whereas the 1st Amendment states that "Congress shall make no law...."). In the 2nd Amendment the language is unrestricted and should not require any fancy "incorporation" argument about the 14th Amendment to apply to every governmental entity in the US of A:

"...the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

[djf]

The whole idea of “incorporation” is somewhat of a fraud.

Outside of the original 13 States, any state that joins the union should accept the rules. And the rules are the Constitution and all the amendments.

[samtheman]

Thanks for the explanations. Very interesting.

[FreedomPoster]

The old retired DI who taught a bunch of us 12 year olds to shoot NRA smallbore used to say Load and Lock. Almost all of us were shooting single-shot .22 bolt guns.

That old program was a great thing. You’d get badges and medals at various points as your scores went up in the various shooting positions, and you’d get your mom to sew them on your shooting vest. Fun stuff.

[Condor51]

What's the origin of that bass ackwards statement? A round has to be loaded into the action of a firearm before the action can be locked.

I see you got your answer :-)

But let me add that 'Lock & Load also would pertain to a Bolt Action Mauser, like the K-98, or the 'Modern' Yugo 48 & 48A.

The Safety on the Bolt has three positions:

• Horizontal to the Left - Bolt is 'Locked' and can't pull trigger, its also 'Locked'
  
• Straight up - Bolt is 'unlocked', but Trigger is still 'Locked'. This is your loading position.
  
• Horizontal to the Right - Bolt and trigger Unlocked and ready to fire.

Pretty sure the 03 Springfield has the same 'Lock & Load' procedure. And many other bolt action Rifles. A lot was 'ripped off' the Mauser design.

And here's something I found on the 3 Position 'Mauser' Safety and its advantages:

Position One (Right) = boom!
Position Two (Up) = You can clear the chamber but the firing pin is still blocked from forward movement.
Postion Three (Left) = no boom, and and the action won't cycle, which is good because twigs and such can't pry your bolt open without you're knowing it. The firing pin is physically blocked from forward movement.

Paul Mauser was one smart dude, like Germany's John Browning.

[1010RD]

Justices Breyer, Ginsburg, Stevens, and Sotomayor — all dissented and said that the second of the 10 amendments that make up the bill of rights should not apply to the states and that the states should be able to do what they want to.

This ought to put the lie to Kagan's statements that politics shouldn't enter in to SCOTUS decisions.

How can some of the 10 Amendments (s/b capitalized) apply, but the 2nd not?

[1010RD]

We need two more Justice Thomsases, but for that we need a majority in the Senate.

Keep the eye on the prize, FRiend.

[1010RD]

Yes, the “reasonable” infringements argument is made up of nothing. It is utter nonsense.

They pretend we cannot read for ourselves. Sadly most don’t.

I’ve been reminding family and friends to read the Declaration and the Constitution, especially the Amendments this holiday. We’re doing it in our home.

Imagine if for the last several decades at least once a year every American read those two documents. We’d not be where we are today.

[Alamo-Girl]

Thanks for the ping!

[!1776!]

Finally, it was: "That's not true." I try to correct misunderstanding with an explanation when I can.

And you did it well.

[Jeff Head]

Always. One should always be prepared to defend one’s self, their family, their property, their treasury, their health and well bEing, their liberty, and their life against any criminal tyrant that would threaten thrum.

I do not care if the tyrant is a local criminal, a druggie, a foreign criminal, a foreign nation or terrorist, or rogues and marxists and their enablers in our own government at any level. That last one is really what the 2nd amendment is all about.

An unloaded gun in a locked footlocker will not be much good in the moment of crisis.

[neverdem]

Thanks for your comment. I hope you’re having a speedy recovery.