>Stephen Hunter – Why 33 Rounds Makes Sense in a Defensive Weapon

>Writer Stephen Hunter – Hey! I was just talking about him the other day! – explains why an extended magazine makes sense for a self-defense weapon:

(E)xtended magazines are rarely featured in crime – and that awkwardness spells out the magazine’s primary legitimate usage. It may have some utility for competitive shooting by cutting down on reloading time, or for tactical police officers on raids, but for those who are not hard-core gun folks it’s an ideal solution for home defense, which is probably why hundreds of thousands of Glocks have been sold in this country.

But that’s not why I’m linking to his article. Forget Hunter’s subject; admire his style. Here’s why I like him as a novelist, as a movie reviewer, as a columnist:

Guns were the software of the 19th century; the most dynamic age of development was roughly 1870 to 1900, when the modern forms were perfected. Two primary operating systems emerged for handguns: the revolver, usually holding six cartridges and manipulated by the muscle energy of the hand, and the semiautomatic, harnessing the explosively released energy of the burning powder to cock and reload itself. Since then, design and engineering improvements have been not to lethality but to ease of maintenance and manufacture, or weight reduction. A Glock is “better” than a Luger because you don’t need a PhD to take it apart, nor a fleet of machinists to produce the myriad pins, levers, springs and chunks of steel that make it go bang. Moreover, you can lose a Glock in a flood and find it six months later in the mud, and it still will shoot perfectly, while the Luger would have become a nice paperweight.

>I, Sniper – Book Review

>I’ve long been a fan of former Washington Post movie reviewer Stephen Hunter – I link to one of his reviews in this post – so you’d think I would’ve picked up one of his Bob Lee Swagger novels before I, Sniper and you’d be right. I’d read one of his several years ago and wasn’t impressed enough to continue with the series. As a thriller writer, I thought, Hunter made a great movie reviewer. But I see he’s gotten along quite well without me and his series has grown and I can’t ignore him anymore, not if I’m wanting to find another genre series to get immersed in.

I, Sniper’s a fine one to get re-introduced to the character. Hunter’s at the top of his form, much better than I remembered. Plenty of nuts and bolts about sniper guns and the manly art of sniping as well as a highly effective scene of waterboarding that reaches the height of art. And I’m not kidding. The Wikipedia article I linked to describes his prose as almost lyrical and though that might be strange for the thriller genre, I think it’s spot on. Overblown in parts, sure, but you can tell Hunter is passionate about his subject and I like passion. He takes a few sly potshots at the media and liberals, too, so that’s an extra bonus if you’re looking for that sort of thing.

Of course, the problem with entering a series in the latest installment is that the author has to bring new audience members like me up to speed with his character and, having done so, there’s little reason to read the prior books other than for the sake of completeness. Still, that doesn’t mean I might not visit those earlier books and get caught up on what I’ve been missing.