Bill's Blog - HCA's Editor Speaks

Handgun Defined

2011-09-08T11:58:00.000-07:00

Many people claim that a handgun isn't necessary for self-defense with today's technology. They claim there are viable alternatives to using a handgun (indeed, they'll blindly apply it to any firearm). They will tell you about pepper sprays, stun guns and the Taser as examples.

I recently had a run-in with a local resident here in California who held these kinds of views. It was his assertion that these technological marvels have replaced the lethal force of the handgun. I decided to ask him what a handgun was and he gave me a dictionary's definition. I found that definition somewhat lacking as far as describing the useful attributes of a handgun, so I invented my own.

Webster's dictionary:
A firearm (as a revolver or pistol) designed to be held and fired with one hand.

Bill's Definition:
A reliable, concealable, all-weather, multi-purpose defensive weapon which can operated with one hand, usable by a wide variety of people from young to old, small to large in defense of their lives and those of their families because it is capable of effectively engaging multiple targets over both long and short distances, and/or can often be used to prevent a violent criminal act by its mere presence and its ability to inflict great bodily injury or death.

What do you think? Did I miss any attributes?

I think it'll be a long, long time before handguns are replaced as a defensive weapon of choice.

Want Some Salsa With Your Chips?

2011-07-31T15:16:00.000-07:00

Recently there was an article about Chiappa Firearms plans to put RFID "chips" on its firearms. Once that information was loose the New World Order and conspiracy theory types immediately began screaming that the sky was falling. Big brother could drive by your house and know how many guns you have!

Good grief!

Our friends at Ammoland.com put out a brief message regarding this silliness. As Sheriff Buford T. Pusser said, What we have here is a failure to communicate. Seems someone's translation of Italian was less than flawless. The common RFID tag was interpreted as a "tracking chip" and thus, panic was created.

As the Ammoland folks explained, the RFID system cannot transmit anything by itself. It requires an external reader than beams a coded radio frequency (RF) signal. The RFID tag uses the very low power provided by the RF signal to do only one thing -- send a very low power RF signal back that represents a number. By itself, this number usually doesn't mean anything. You need a computer and a database too. That low power "reply" signal, by the way, requires a sensor to be within close proximity - less than 2 feet and typically within 6 inches.

I've worked with RFID systems in the I.T. business for several years in inventory management, freight management and retail systems. Most likely, so have you. If you've ever purchased certain products, like an expensive digital camera or high-theft items like DVD's or game joystick controllers you may have seen the cashier put the item into a "tub" after bagging and then press a button. This deactivates the "anti-theft" RFID tag that those door scanners pick up.

You can walk past those door scanners carrying the "live" RFID tags without triggering the alarm. Only when you pass through the "focused" signal will the tag respond. In this case, any response triggers the alarm.

On a production line, a handgun frame tagged with an RFID tag makes inventory easier. Instead of counting each frame, a reader is used to record each ID tag which corresponds to one frame. If the tags are issued in sequence any gap in the sequence indicates a missing frame that needs to be located. This can happen long before the frames acquire a serial number and aids in preventing "inside theft".

As I said, the RFID tag replies to a reader with "a number". That number can be controlled by the company when tags are ordered. Suppose the tag replies with the number 5567783. Once the frame acquires a serial number like AJ84995, a worker enters the serial number on a computer, then scans the tag, associating 5567783 with the serial number. Later, when the gun is boxed up, the shipping department can "scan" the closed box and read the tag's number -- 5567783. The reader asks the computer's database for the serial number which it displays on the scanner's LCD screen. This allows the shipping clerk to confirm the serial number matches the one on the box and release it for shipping.

There are "chip" style RFID tags too. Some people have them implanted in the ear of their pets so that animal shelters can identify them from strays. Sometimes they can even get the owner's name from a national database.

An RFID expert once told me that the signal put out by an RFID chip, at 6 feet is about one third the singal strength that NASA receives from the Galileo probe near Jupiter, almost 400 million miles away. But if you're worried about some kind of scanner detecting your Chiappa firearm, just remove the RFID unit from the gun. It's that easy.

If you still think this is some kind of nefarious scheme, I can get you a great deal on tin foil -- cash and in small bills.

Just Thinking

2011-07-31T13:15:00.000-07:00

Drug Cartels, Money & Guns

I really am wondering if we're all being fooled.

A news article caught my eye today. Seem the Hondurans discovered drug smugglers using a fiberglass "submarine" to smuggle up to $500 million worth of cocaine along the coast. That's over 7 tons of the stuff. In the past, drug smugglers have used airplanes to smuggle up to one ton loads across the gulf into the southern states.

Now, let's think about this a moment. The drug producers and smugglers can afford to buy an airplane and are now using semi-submersible submarines. These are not cheap toys. A twin engine airplane will set you back $200,000 or more. A working "submarine" may not cost that much (no certifications of course) but it will still cost at least $100,000 by the time you outfit it with an engine, pumps, nav gear, etc. Smugglers have ditched their planes (and loads) at sea, letting them sink to avoid prosecution. The same goes with these "subs" -- in the last few years two were scuttled off the Pacific coast.

Now, we're dealing with an outfit that can afford to "write off" a $250,000 airplane or $100,000 submersible, plus its cargo and still stay in buisness. And many do this several times a year. So my question is why do drug cartels need to buy guns in American gun shops? With millions of dollars at their disposal, they can afford to procure even brand new guns via the black market. Or brand new fully automatic weapons.

One suspect in Operation Fast and Furious reportedly bought over 300 guns while the BATF picked its collective nose and watched. At an average of $600 each, that's $180,000 for 300 semi-automatic rifles. If reports are correct -- that 2,500 guns were "walked" into Mexico -- a combination of AR's and AK's plus numerous pistols the average price for these would come to around $750 or $1.75 million. That's chump change when you compare that against the hundreds of millions the drug trade rakes in every year. In cash.

We know they're buying black market goods -- grenades, C4 plastic explosives, RPG's, fully automatic weapons, even a few mortars. One shipment of cocaine can easily reward these animals with $100 million. Paying $1.75M for civilian rifles is like handing your nephew $1.75 out of a $100 bill to buy a slurpee. So why would cartels buy American guns under American laws when they could purchase equivilant guns on the black market and probably for less?

Operation Fast & Furious - The White House Connection

Much is being made over a memo from Phoenix BATF office chief William Newell to Kevin O'Reilly, Director of North American Affairs of the National Security Council, which reports to the White House. O'Reilly asked about guns going to Mexico and Newell provided some information in an e-mail, saying "You didn't get this from me."

Newell says that O'Reilly is a long time friend and makes it seem that he was, essentially, doing a friend a favor. But as Dave Codrea says, we can rephrase the question thusly;

Why are ATF field office management communications about Fast and Furious with NSC’s North American Affairs Director significant?

The best explanation comes from Mike Vanderboegh of the Sipsey Street Irregulars blog as he describes the relationship of the National Security Council to the Executive branch.

The President, Vice President, Secretary of Defense, and Secretary of State are considered to be statutory attendees of NSC meetings, but they are also regularly joined by the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the Director of National Intelligence, the National Security Advisor, and other executive officials. The NSC conducts its meetings in the White House Situation Room, and the National Security Advisor’s presence in the West Wing provides the President with direct access to research, briefings, and intelligence related to all aspects of national security. During times of crisis, the National Security Advisor is also responsible for operating out of the Situation Room in order to provide the President and other members of the NSC with regular updates pertaining to the situation at hand.

What this means is twofold. First, it provide congressional investigators with a nexus between the White House staff and Operation Fast and Furious. It helps to show that there was recognition at the highest levels of the administration that Phoneix was a "key player".

I also suspect that with Newell's caveat that "you didn't get these from me" means that (a) he didn't want the ATF/DOJ to find out he'd provided the information "outside of normal channels" and/or (b) he didn't want to end up verifying the information in the Oval Office should someone question the information. This would imply that the President didn't know all the details of the operation or was deliberately being kept out of the lop on th details.

The most important factor here is that the NSC did know that Phoenix was a key element regarding gun smuggling into Mexico and it shows that the Oversight committee has access to more documents than previously believed. In the end, it's likely they'll find Fast and Furious was National in scope, violating the laws and constitution wholesale.

That's when the big fireworks will begin.

Weekend Recap

2011-07-25T22:11:00.000-07:00

Not letting any tragedy slip away unexploited, the Brady Campaign issued a press release today that shows just divorced from reality they are. They refuse to see the truth in front of their faces when it comes to crimes of violence. For example:

"The staggering toll of young lives taken by a gunman at the Utoya youth camp reminds us all, once again, that guns are the enablers of mass killers"

Right... unlike, say box cutters or perhaps car bombs which are never used by mass killers, right? The Brady bunch completely overlooks how easy it was for some nutjob in Oslo to obtain tons of ammonium nitrate fertilizer to make a massive car bomb. It was just as easy for a guy named Tim McVeigh to load a Ryder truck with several tons of the stuff and blow the bejesus out of the Oklahoma federal building. This guy in Oslo is an amateur compared to the 168 people McVeigh killed.

The other statement was obviously issued for the thinking impaired.

"The shooting in Norway is neither a reason to condemn Norway's strong gun laws, nor to celebrate our own."

Hold on here! Aren't these the same people who, claim "our guns laws aren't strong enough! We need stricter controls" every time there is a tragic shooting? So here is a country with stronger laws that ours and they weren't enough. That begs the question of what is enough gun control? Unfortnately we know what their goal is and it's lethal.

"Whereas 84 shooting deaths in a single day is a historic event in Norway... 84 dead is essentially the everyday toll of fatal gun violence in America," the Brady Campaign said.

The Brady campaign knows very well this is a misleading comparison. Forget the cultural differences (the Brady's ignore that already). Norway has a population of 4.9 million (1.64% of ours) in a land area of 148,000 square miles. In essence, spread the population of Alabama out across Louisiana, Alabama and Mississippi. There are huge differences between the two countries that account for the level of violence in each.

Missed Truths
The Brady boobs are completely blind to the truth of life's lessons. They want a nice, safe world where no one can do them harm, yet set themselves and others up as victims. To wit:

Trust needs to be earned. The people who wet themselves in panic at the sight of a peaceful armed citizen will not even bat an eye at the presence of an armed man in a uniform. If guns somehow make people killers, then uniforms magically turn them back into "responsible" people. You really have to worry about these folks.
You can't always run and hide from evil. No one on the island was able to stop this madman. They were too helpless to fight back. No, what stopped his killing spree was the presence of other armed men who took him into custody. In fact, as soon as he was confronted, he surrendered. How many lives might have been saved from this jackass if just one student pointed a big-bore muzzle at his forehead?
Killers prefer weak, defenseless victims. If some nutjob wants to slaughter people like cattle the defenseless are easy prey. In Norway, their culture can barely fathom the idea of someone being so evil. As a result, by law and by their culture, adults at the youth camp were totally unprepared to defend anyone, especially the youngsters under their care.
Reliance on others for your protection is a fatal mistake. It took police almost one hour to respond because they couldn't get to the island "in force". When seconds count, police are only ~~minutes~~ hours away.
More laws can fix it. Gun control proponents will decry existing laws as "too lax" and demand more laws that can be broken almost as easily. Anyone bent on killing knows their life will be forfeit if caught, so will it really matter if he broke 17 laws instead of 16?

The Brady bunch continues to exploit the victims of tragedies and mislead the public.
I really wish they'd just go away.

Criminal Police Officers, Corruption and More Gunrunning!

2011-07-22T16:05:00.000-07:00

It's almost unbelieveable what has been cropping up in the last few weeks. It's mind boggling and makes me wonder if we still live in the USofA anymore. Just a couple of examples.

First up - Criminal Police Officers

This is a long, 17 minute video of an encounter a new CCW holder had with the Canton, Ohio police. In the video, police pull up on a stopped car that's "suspicious" to them. In the car is a white male driver and a black male in the back seat. Outside is a young white woman whom a police officer declares is a prostitute.

Watch in amazed disgust as I did as these cops easily violate their training on car stops, unlawfully search the back seat of the car, threaten the woman with a beating, handcuff and detain the black male for no apparent reason. The worst comes after about six minutes. Ohio law requires you to notify police "promptly" that you're carrying. Yet this officer hardly lets the driver say much before going ballistic when he can finally tell the cop he has a carry gun.

Warning - Graphic language!

Feel free to post your comments below. Easy on the profanity please.

Corruption and More Gunrunning!

To recap, early this year, David Codrea and Mike Vanderboeh broke the story of how ATF was letting guns "walk" into Mexico. It focused on Operation Fast and Furious out of the Phoenix, Az, ATF office and up to 2,500 guns the ATF avoided interdicting before they reached Mexico's cartels. A congressional investigation has been stonewalled for months by the DOJ, parent org for the ATF. Recently the acting director of the ATF told congress bluntly that Eric Holder's DOJ was obstructing Congress and refusing to allow others to cooperate.

If that wasn't bad enough, In early July word leaked out of another "fast and furious" operation possibly being run out of the Tampa, Florida office, sending guns to Honduras in Central America. Why Honduras? Honduras is a way-stop for cocaine on the way to Mexico and the USA. Cartels are reportedly planning to bring in the raw cocaine at a cheaper cost per kilo, the process it themselves before shipping to the U.S. That means higher profits for them by a factor of at least 3 times. They need the guns to help set up local gang leaders as processors with their own "protected" turf.

State Department Joins the Corruption Network

A new report from Pajamas Media says that the State department has been selling guns, via the foreigh commercial sales program, to the Los Zetas cartel. The Zetas are the most ruthless cartel in Mexico. Originally published in the El Paso Times, it appaears the Zetas formed a corporation and purchased guns "legally", then exported them to Mexico.

Before selling the guns, State needs documents that say the company is a legitimate concern. This usually requires permission from the host country to allow the company to purhcase arms. If the company is in the U.S.A., export licenses to move arms to Mexico would be required along with Mexican documents allowing the company to sell guns to a government approved entity. PJ media asks, How, then, did a drug cartel purchase weapons through this program when it is neither an international organization nor a government?

Good question. Could this be some kind of Robert Ludlum-esque plot to supply arms to both sides, then let them kill each other? Given that warped sense of morality, one would wonder where the CIA fits in.

Guns, Gold and Silver

2011-07-18T15:58:00.000-07:00

Some thirty-five years ago, when I was younger, slimmer and less sophisticated, I engaged my shooting buddies in a game of "what if". What if... we had an economic collapse? At the time, the question was barely plausible. Sure, we were in the "rust belt" years of Jimmy Carter's administration (if you could call it that). But no one realistically thought our economy could just collapse overnight.

Rather than a "Mad Max" scenario, we painted one like the Great Depression. Too many people without jobs, driven to beg, driven to menial jobs for food and driven to steal to survive. We called these conversations our "Round Table & Beer" sessions because most took place at a Round Table Pizza parlor over pizza and beer.

One of my friends, Ron, had read a report the government did in the late 1960's that showed almost any American city was no more than 7 days from starvation. The suppositions were that after some catastrophe (i.e. a nuclear strike) if a city was cut off from regular supplies, it would take only 7 days for most people to begin starving. It would be worse in the summer if there was no electricity to preserve food by refrigeration. One of the most significant items was that every grocery store would be completely emptied of any useful items at the end of 3 days.

Today, I think that government report was optimistic. Computers have allowed the industry to shift to just-in-time (JIT) supply-chains where products arrive "just in time" to replenish the shelves. Run that concept through the entire supply-chain and one interruption can disrupt a huge portion of business. It gets worse if multiple disruptions occur and no substitutes are available. In the event of a catastrophe, especially one that takes more than about 3 days to come to a head (remember the Cuban missile crisis?) people would put a huge demand on supply lines. I'll predict that once things go from crappy-looking to toilet-flushing, grocery stores (along with hardware stores, automotive, camping goods and gun shops) will be empty within 2 days.

Remember in 2008, when our current President was merely running for office, between October and December, the firearm supply chain was sucked dry. Ammunition for common calibers dried up quickly. Finding any kind of AR/AK rifle, a 1911, Glock or other quality 9mm pistol was almost impossible. Propane and Butane vendors reported a surge in sales as people "topped off" their tanks on rural properties and stored extra. Generator sales jumped too, though to a lesser extent.

And this was because it was merely likely we were going to elect an anti-gun socialist-minded candidate as president. Imagine if the "catastrophe" was a comet that might hit earth. How quickly would the supply chains dry up today?

Now we have people in the mainstream like Robert Kiyosaki, author of the very successful Rich Dad, Poor Dad books suggesting that food shortages, inflation or hyperinflation and economic collapse are not the stuff of fantasy. He's even suggesting that people buy a gun in the event of an economic collapse. That's getting scary.

In my youth, we figured with a gun and some supplies we'd muddle through. But until 1999, I had no concept of just how much stuff you have to stockpile just to make it through one winter. In modern terms, that's stuff like propane for stoves & heating. Gasoline for a generator and rarely used car. That's half a ton of food stuffs, canned or otherwise if two people eat twice a day. It's having a supply of (heavy and hard-to-move) water for drinking and sanitation. Bathing we can do twice a week. With gray water. And this was calculated with a 1200 calorie diet per person/day, calculated out by the weight of food. And in a California winter. You'd need lots more calories and propane in Minnesota or Buffalo NY.

Gold and silver are not money. Not according to Ben Bernanke at the Fed. They're assets. So is a gun. So are bullets. So is a shovel. But gold and silver are always looked at as useful metals for trade. Where someone is selling, gold and silver are usually acceptable when the value of government money is questionable. I'm planning to expand my assets a bit now. But it may be too little, too late.

Gold is good. It's compact. It's easy to work with. It carries a high value-to-weight ratio. People know gold is valuable. Silver is almost as good, though it's not as highly valued as Gold. Most of my asset expansion will be in silver for several reasons. It's cheaper for one, and if its value rises significantly, it's as good as gold for an investment. Silver is a good industrial metal for several reasons and it's cheaper than gold for that purpose. It means goods containing silver are easier to sell. And Silver looks something like lead. In fact, it can be alloyed with lead easily. I'm already hoarding lead in the form of ammunition. Buying some ingots for casting is another good idea.

Guns, Gold and Silver. A good combination investment. The guns allow you to defend your gold and silver (plus yourself, loved ones, home and food). You can carry silver in small enough quantities to buy things you need (e.g. $120 worth of silver = 4 coins) whereas one ounce of gold is over $1,500. Who'll be able to give you change for a $100 purchase? In theory, if you have Guns, Gold and Silver (and a supply of useful lead-tipped products) you can get what you need. One way or another.

ATF Scandal: A Growing Cancer in DOJ

2011-07-08T18:31:00.000-07:00

Gunrunning Scandal Widens

Where to begin? Over the July 4th holiday, ATF acting director Melson met with members of the House Oversight committee, along with his personal attorney. Melson accused DOJ of obstructing the Congressional investigation, specifically newly confirmed Deputy Attorney General James Cole.

Melson said he notified the Office of the Deputy Attorney General (ODAG) at the end of March that the department needed to re-examine how it was responding to requests for information from Congress. He also said the Justice Department officials directed the ATF senior team not to respond to Congressional inquiries, and Justice took full control of replying to briefing and document requests from Congress. The result is that Congress only got the parts of the story that the Justice Department wanted them to hear.

Robert Ludlum, Please call your office

One of the "big fish" targets the ATF was allegedly building a case against was an FBI confidential informant. The informant was a drug dealer deported by the DEA that the FBI converted into an informant. The FBI's stake was information related to information about "dirty bombs" and any Al Qaeda suspects moving across the border. It's reported that this informant was paid by the FBI and was using the money to finance gun buys in Arizona. The FBI knew of the ATF investigation but never told the agency of the informant's status. Not only was the U.S. government indirectly using taxpayer dollars to fund the gun buys, but their "big fish" would never be indicted because he was an FBI "asset" in Mexico. This is like something out of a Robert Ludlum novel!

Spreading like a Cancer?

Following on the heels of Melson's "interview" with the House Oversight committee comes word that "Fast and Furious" has spread to the Tampa, Florida field division!

Source say that the Tampa ATF field division was walking guns into Honduras using techniques and tactics identical to Operation Fast and Furious. Dubbed Operation Castaway, it was run by Special Agent-in-Charge (SAC) Virginia O’Brien. O'Brien was previously the Special Agent in Charge of the Phoenix Field Division, was later promoted to the Deputy Assistant Director (DAD) of ATF, but then "stepped down" to the position in Tampa.

Reportedly, there are emails in existence where O’Brien has advised those involved that Tampa does not have to report their walked guns because Tampa field division is not a part of Southwest Border or Project Gunrunner. Sipsey Street Irregulars has a good write-up on "why guns to Honduras?"

As of Thursday, insider sources say that the Tampa Field division is in a "melt down" and shredders are working overtime. SAC O'Brien's partner in the bungle was ASAC Scott McCampbell, who went along with O'Brien when they decided to keep Castaway going to "get more" against the advice of their field employees and the number of walked guns got out of control. O'Brien is terrified that her intentional concealing of her walked guns is going to do her in since she disregarded orders to report to DOJ and Congress. The new player is DAD-East Julie Torres. She took O'Brien's old DAD job when O'Brien went to Tampa and has given OB carte blanche to do whatever she wants with little oversight.

This little revelation shows that the "Fast and Furious" program wasn't simply a case of one "rouge" ATF office. This plan is national in scope. Reporting from the Dallas/Houston region is sparse, but there's plenty of reason to believe they were doing the same thing.

Rep. Allen West (R-FL) has called for Holder to be removed from office and a special investigator appointed to delve into the Fast & Furious scandal. "This is just another sad chapter in the Eric Holder book of ineptness and incompetence," West said. "Eric Holder needs to be brought before an investigative committee and if those charges are warranted he needs to be held accountable.

We are seeing this debacle reach out to infect the DOJ, FBI and DEA. It's only a matter of time until this thing connects to the other alphabet-soup agencies -- DHS, ICE, CBP, et al. Expect that the "most transparent administration ever" will turn out to be just the reverse.

Read the entire scandal timeline at Handgunclub.com

Comments? Opinions? E-Mail me!

Happy July 4th!

2011-07-03T13:00:00.000-07:00

Celebrate Independence Day (while you still can)

It seems to me that our historical celebration of Independence day has taken away from us, like many other rights and privliges, under the guise of "safety". To be sure, there are some compelling reasons to limit fireworks sales to those 18 and older. But many cities, especially throughout California, have banned the sale, possession and use of fireworks altogether. The "company line" is if you want to enjoy fireworks, go see a city or county-sponsored display. In a sense, this is like telling us you don't need a gun for protection, just phone the police. It's the government usurping what was once a citizen's proud tradition.

Yeah, kids do stupid things with fireworks sometimes. When we were kids, some were fired off into the air with slingshots. Our biggest worry wasn't setting fire to a house, but landing one on old (he was 55) Mr. Roberson's house and his reaction! But none of us had any serious accidents and no one was maimed or burned (much). I like to think of those days an a IQ test. If you weren't smart enough to figure out a simple chemical-thermal reaction and it's consequences, you deserved to get burned or hurt.

Now, budget cuts and shortfalls are causing even the government to give up fireworks displays. One town in California said it could no longer afford it and cancelled their 25 year tradition. However, when several businesses stepped up to subsidize the display, the city rejected their offer, then rejected their attempt to get a permit at the city's traditional location. The city had decided there just would not be any display at all. The government taketh and the government prohibits. Kiss another American tradition good-bye.

Whitewash at the Washington Post

It's no news that the Washington Post acts almost as a PR sheet for the Democrat party. So it was no surprise to see them run a whitewash article on ATF's Fast and Furious. Noted plagiarist Sari Horowitz wrote her hit piece, praising Rep. Elijah Cummings (D-MD) for his report on our "weak gun laws" and trying to pass the blame off on Congress and the NRA.

Cummings interviewed gun control advocates and a couple of ATF agents (a redundant statement to be sure) then published a wish-list of gun control laws on the Brady Campaign's Christmas list. Cummings, of course, did not hear from any gun-rights witnesses.

Titled “Outgunned,” the 26-page report recommends stronger penalties for “straw purchasers” who illegally buy guns for others and a reporting requirement for multiple purchases of long guns, such as AK-47s. Cummings will hold a forum on the report Thursday on Capitol Hill.

This is the amazing part. "Stronger penalties" for a straw-purchase? Current law says you can be fined up to $250,000 and given 10 years in jail. That's pretty damn severe. But obviously it's not much of a deterrent if people are still committing the crime. But wait. It gets better.

Larry Alt, a lawyer and senior ATF field agent, testified that “we don’t get traction with the U.S. attorney’s office. They don’t follow through. They don’t want to prosecute cases.”

So, even if the penalties were stiffer, no one gets prosecuted because the U.S. Attorneys fail to prosecute? Unless I miss my guess, it's not the law which is "toothless" here. It's the spineless U.S. Attorneys installed by the Obama administration who can't be bothered to enforce the laws. Even if we made it a capital punishment crime, there's no deterrent if few are ever prosecuted for it.

ATF proposed a multiple long-gun reporting scheme earlier and it was pointed out that they lacked the authority to do so. Such reporting would need to be mandated by Congress, not by a regulatory fiat order from ATF. But even if we had put such a program in place, how would that have helped? C'mon now, the gun dealers were calling ATF about straw buyers and it was ATF itself that authorized the sales to proceed. How would another piece of paper stopped these crimes when ATF is an accomplice to the crime?

Agents also said their efforts to combat the cartels would be strengthened with a federal statute criminalizing gun trafficking.

I sure hope they meant illegal gun trafficking. There are already laws against exporting firearms from the U.S. without a license or permit from the State Department. So, that means a statute against trafficking across the US-Mexican borders would be redundant.

So what would constitute illegal trafficking? That would be some kind of "illegal" movement of firearms within the U.S. So, if you legally purchase 5 AR-15 rifles in Arizona the week before you move to, say Missouri, is that then "trafficking"?

Obtaining arms illegally - straw buys, from illegal dealers and theft - are already illegal acts. So is selling them without a license. All these acts have substantial penalties attached. So, why is it we need yet another law to combat trafficking?
The Cummings "forum" and his report are simply political propaganda intended to push for more ineffective and useless gun control laws. Cummings should be ashamed of jumping on this bandwagon to divert the attention of the public from the ATF scandal. The fact is that people died because of the ATF's screw up and those responsible should be held accountable. Cummings report focuses on the deaths of Mexican soldiers, political figures and journalists in Mexico. But he ignores the more than 150 innocent Mexican citizens (the figure is probably several times that number) and then jumps to the number of American citizens killed in Mexico. I can thus infer that Cummings doesn't give a rat's ass about the average Mexican, unless he is a government employee like Cummings.

Representative Cummings should be ashamed of himself. He should be called to task for this whitewash of ATF's illegal activities and his disregard for the suffering of Mexican citizens.

Comments? Questions? Your opinion? Email me here.

Scatter shots

2011-06-30T14:57:00.000-07:00

Latest Gunwalker Scandal Update

House Oversight Committee chairman Darrell Issa has returned from Mexico. There's little word on what transpired as sources are being tight lipped. Issa was attempting to gain Mexico's cooperation in the House investigation. Word is, however, that Mexican officials are extremely pissed off about the whole thing. They have not dropped their options to charge and try to extradite those involved for violating Mexican laws. How much, if any, cooperation Mexico gives remains to be seen. I have to say that Issa has a pair of brass one's for traveling to Mexico at a time like this. Gotta tip my hat to the man.

Partisan Politics Being Played

We now know that Rep. Elijah Cummings (D-Md) is going to hold Democratic meeting on “Project Gunwalker” Thursday (today). But before you get warm and fuzzy thinking that the Democrats are finally getting it, take a look at Cummings (stacked) "witness" list.

Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) a completely anti-gun Senator
Paul Helmke, current President of the Brady Campaign
Kristen Rand, Legislative Director of the Violence Policy Center
A former ATF agent and...
"Other gun control advocates."

Well, I'm certainly glad Cummings is going to be "fair and balanced". He'll give Charles Schumer a chance to repeat his call to "hammer guns on the anvil of a relentless legislative strategy. We`re going to beat guns into submission" and otherwise pollute the air in D.C.

And Paul Helmke will tow the company line, that Fast & Furious is the fault of the NRA and Congress for not giving ATF more funds, power and tighter gun laws. I'm sure Ms. Rand will tell us that the world will turn pink and rosy, plus we'll solve the middle east violence if only we ban assault weapons and close the gunshow loophole. Other gun control advocates are expected to be just as daft and looney.

ATF Retaliation?

Darrell Issa sent a letter to ATF deputy director William Hoover, warning him not to retaliate against the whistleblowers. Such actions would be unlawful. So what does ATF do? Why, they fire one of the whistleblowers, of course. Special Agent Vince Cefalu was given his termination papers on June 23rd. Typically, the ATF thinks it can violate the law with impunity. This isn't going unnoticed.

Jon Stewart Nails Gunwalker

It's probably unintentional that Jon Stewart really hits the satire mark on Fast and Furious in a recent episode of The Daily Show. He manages to hit many salient points head-on. His most recent send-up, unfortunately, makes fun of those of us who think there was a conspiracy to pad ATF's numbers. You can see Stewart's video here.

Political Cartoons

Oh my! The political cartoonists have discovered the Gunwalker scandal too. Day-by-Day has a great send up of the President's answering machine here. Day-by-Day also did a great satire using Sergio Leone's The Good, the Bad and the Ugly as the setting. See that one here.

Investor's Daily - Was Gunwalker a Gun Control Plot?
Now we have a business investor's news sheet asking if Gunwalker scandal was a plot to advance the call for more gun control. When business analysts are seeing the possibility you can bet others did too. See their editorial here.

Dick "Dumbass" Durbin Strikes Again

Senator Dick Durbin once again proves that some U.S. Senators are not smarter than a fifth-grader. In pushing the DREAM act, a program to permit illegals to stay in this country the Democrats brought in an audience of illegals to the capitol. Not just a few, but almost two hundred.

Durbin, looking at this audience spoke to the future, saying "I see America's future. Our doctors, our teachers, our nurses, our engineers, our scientists, our soldiers, our Congressman, our Senators and maybe our President."

Great flatulent flamingos! Even a fifth-grader knows that the president must be a natural born citizen of the United States to qualify for office, under Article 2, Section 1, Clause 5 of the Constitution. We should expect more from the flamin' Majority Whip in Congress, don't you think? It's likely that Durbin hasn't paid attention to the whole "birther" issue, or read that pesky document that enumerates the powers of his job.

Comments? Suggestions? Flames? Email me here.

And apparently DHS madam-fuhrer Janet Napolitano looked the other way as the illegals filed through the Capitol building while TSA continues to grope children and harrass 95 year old cancer victims.

Fast And Furiouser

2011-06-29T14:02:00.000-07:00

Chicago's Top Cop Plays the Race Card

Chicago's new top cop, Garry McCarthy, played the race card at a Chicago church recently. If you listen to the speech it almost makes sense. Especially if you're black. But a little analysis shows that McCarthy's diatribe was a classical piece of propaganda. I was utterly disgusted. If you want to read why I think McCarthy (as well as Chicago's government) should be ashamed, read Of Racism and Gun Control on the Handgun Club website.

Fast and Furious picks up speed

This week things are moving along with the ATF "Fast and Furious" scandal - aka "Gunwalker". This is the scandal by which the Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco and Firearms allowed over 2,500 weapons to be puchased and smuggled into Mexico and delivered to the ultra-violent drug cartels.

House Oversight committee chairman Darrell Issa went to Mexico over the weekend to seek their cooperation in his investigation. Mexico is rightfully pissed off about the ATF scandal. Not only did it provide guns to their worst violent groups, those guns likely killed hundred of Mexican citizens. ATF guns were found to be involved in the brutal torture killing of the brother of the Jalisco state attorney general.

Word now is that Kenneth Melson won't quietly let the Obama administration throw him under the bus. Insiders say that the acting director has said he wasn't going to be "the fall guy". This, of course, implicates someone higher up in DOJ was pulling his strings.

The good news is that Senator Patrick Leahy, chair of the Senate Judiciary committee, wrote a letter to Eric Holder on behalf of Senator Chuck Grassley. In the letter he urged Holder to allow Melson to testify and for DOJ to release the documents Grassley has requested. In return, Grassley would lift his blockade on three DOJ nominees. This has been done and Melson is expected to testify in July.

Developing story: ABC-15 News is Phoenix is reporting that some of the ATF "Fast and Furious" guns are showing up in local crime now. This is new and would indicate that not every gun purchased by the straw-buyers went across the border. So now the ATF has also allowed US criminals to obtain weapons in violation of US gun laws. A follow-up story is due to be aired on Thursday.

Just For Fun

Ageless Darrell Issa?

This is just for fun. While looking at several photos of Rep. Darrell Issa (D-CA) who chairs the House Oversight Committee, I kept thinking he looked familiar somehow. I mean, that I'd seen him someplace else. Well, a little relaxation time helped. I'd put in a DVD of the 1960's TV show Combat! which was always well written and acted. And sure enough, that led me to looking a little closer at Darrell Issa.

Here is a composite comparison photo of Mr. Issa and actor Rick Jason, who played Lt. Gil Hanley on Combat for five seasons. Mr. Jason was born Richard Jacobsen and described himself as "second-generation nouveau riche" and a born romantic. He was an outdoorsman, hunter and marksman with a rifle. Sadly, Rick died of a self-inflicted gunshot wound in 2000. He was 77 years old.

Perhaps it's just me, but I see a striking resemblance between the two men. The noses, shape of the face, eyebrows, even the eyes.

Is it possible that Mr. Issa is related to Rick Jason? Mr. Issa is of Lebanese descent so it's quite possible there is some kind of family relation, however remote. Or could Darrell Issa be one of Robert A. Heinlein's "Howard Family" members from Time Enough for Love?

Like I said, this is just for fun. I happened to notice the resemblance between the two. But you can be the judge here and decide for yourself.

Comments? Questions? Suggestions? Email Me!

Things are Popping in D.C.

2011-06-21T22:15:00.000-07:00

Project Gunrunner / Operation Fast & Furious

Word on the hill it that acting ATF director Kenneth Melson will resign under pressure sometime this week. Melson is a former U.S. Attorney so he has some allegiance to DOJ. Just how much he may have to Eric Holder might be tested in coming weeks.

While Melson's ouster is hopefully only the first victory for us, the bad news is who Obama may place in Melson's chair. Andrew Traver currently heads the Chicago ATF office and, like Holder and Obama, is staunchly anti-gun. He's worked closely with the anti-gun Joyce Foundation and helped the news media deliberately blur the distinction (see video) between civilian rifles and fully automatic weapons. Of the civilian-bought AK variant bought for the linked article above, Traver said "You just pull the trigger and you can mow people down". As he loaded a 30-round magazine, Traver told NBC news "It'll empty this entire magazine in about 3 seconds." Further, he said the weapon "is so difficult to control, their bullets often get sprayed beyond the intended targets".

Of course, the video shows that Traver didn't demonstrate a semi-automatic civilian AK model, but a Class-III fully automatic AK. So, certainly it is going to be difficult to control by someone who has never fired a full-auto weapon before. And it's going to mislead the public into thinking anyone can walk into a gun shop to buy a machine gun.

Meanwhile, ATF agents commented on CleanupATF.org on Traver. One agent described him as a mediocre bureau chief and another said he never had an original idea or thought. Others described him as a lightweight, someone who curries favor to get ahead rather than solid performance on the streets. This is the kind of man Obama wants leading the ATF. This does not bode well for gun owners, dealers or the industry.

Write, phone, fax or e-mail your congress critter and demand they refuse to confirm Traver. Not because the NRA doesn't like him, but because Traver lacks the qualifications to stop the abuses of the ATF and reform the agency.

Now Do I Have Your Attention?

You may think you're looking at a rifle, but you're not. It's classified as a pistol. To be exact, it's a lever-action pistol from Rossi called the Ranch Hand. Based on the famous Winchester 1892 action, this one features a cut down stock and a 12-inch barrel! Just the thing for those close-quarters situations. Rossi makes this little beauty in .38/.357, .44 Magnum and .45 Colt. Just the kind of thing I want hiding behind my leg when I answer the door! The shortened magazine tube allows for a 6+1 capacity and the gold bead front sight should be easy to find in quick engagements. MSRP is $536. Y'know, I think this might just fit in the umbrella stand by the door.

So Ugly It's a Modern Art Masterpiece¹

Taurus brings us yet another new polymer framed revolver, like the Ruger LCR and S&W's new Body- guard .38. In terms of beauty, it ranks second behind the Chiappa Rhino for ugliness. But for many, it might be a worthwhile purchase.

The Model 85-PLYB2 is a 5-shot .38 Special +P revolver that tips the scales at 18.2 oz. Sights are fixed, of course and the hammer semi-shrouded for pocket carry. The 2.5" barrel gives a little more velocity than typical snubby .38's. With the MSRP set around $445, this gets you a small revolver with a street price under $400. I'll let you know when I get my hands on one how it performs.

¹ Apologies to R. Lee Ermy and the cast & crew of Full Metal Jacket.

Book Suggestion

There are a thousand and one gun books and videos out there. But I'm going "off track" slightly due to the interest in our "survival bag" article. If you are at all worried about some kind of survival scenario or major collapse, you need to read this book:

One Second After - by William Forstchen

This book details the after effects of a real and plausible disaster. One which, frighteningly enough, almost no one is prepared for. The book follows a family in the southeastern U.S. after America is attacked by electromagnetic pulse weapons. With high-tech electronic circuits burned out, civilization comes to a stop. The book is a realistic portrayal of what one man and his family have to face in order to survive. How their local community reacts and what kinds of edicts can be expected. There are lots of hints at the kinds of things you'd need to survive and some of the social upheavals you probably wouldn't think about.

Something on your mind? Drop me a line here.

Last Week's Recap

2011-06-19T12:14:00.000-07:00

Project Gunrunner

The second Project Gunrunner hearing was held on the 15th. It looked as if Democrats, led by Elijah Cummings (D-MD) tried to push the hearings into a debate on the need for more gun control. Gerry Connolly (D-VA) tried to blame the NRA as "obstructionist" for pointing out that the BATF has no statutory authority to require reporting of multiple long gun sales and Carolyn Maloney (D-NY) called straw-purchaser laws "toothless". Fortunately, House Oversight chairman Darrell Issa cut that tactic off quickly, declaring it was outside the scope of the hearings.

The DOJ was reported to be in "panic mode" just before the hearings. This is an odd report if we believe Obama's statements that neither he nor Holder authorized the program. Indeed, if Holder was out of the loop and it was really Melson and his lackey's in ATF to blame, then a few swift replacements, a press conference announcing a new director to "restore integrity" to the ATF would be sufficient. Yet, Justice is in a panic, so what is it they are afraid will be uncovered?

The Wall Street Journal is paying attention ... almost. A Saturday article titled Head of ATF Is Likely to Go states the obvious -- that acting ATF director Melson will be "sacrificed" to protect those higher up on the food chain. Such a move might placate most of the lamestream media, however I'm hoping that Issa's Oversight Committee has a larger appetite and won't be fooled.

Flash Mobs
Back in March of this year, I reported on flash mobs as the new 21st Century Crime fad. A recent report on Fox News suggest this is getting much worse. Young people are using social media technology (Facebook, Twitter, et al) to organize "raids" against retailers. As they discover that merchants are helpless (what can one or two clerks do against a mob of 20 or more?) they are getting more brazen.

Someone is going to get seriously hurt.

So far, injuries have been limited to assaults where people are robbed for their iPhones or other devices by smaller groups in public areas. When they storm a retail store and make off with thousands of dollars of goods it will only be a matter of time before steps are taken to prevent them from fleeing -- like electrically locked doors. Then what? That mob will turn ugly and assault the store staff or break windows to get out. Police are trying to monitor social media sites to stop this trend, but that'll be like spitting against the tide.

Legal Self-Defense - Where is the line?
I see a huge problem here for licensed CCW's caught in the midst of one of these "flash mob" robberies. As noted in the Fox News article, even smaller shops, like a T-shirt shop are not immune. So what happens when you're in some small shop and 20 or so teenage thugs take it over and start looting the store? Since the group entered the store with the intent to commit a felony (grand theft) they are considered burglars not robbers who use force or the threat of force to accomplish their crime. If you rightfully attempt to stop it (or someone else does) and they are physically assaulted, does that now make it robbery?

I would love anyone who has legal credentials to give me their opinion.

To send me your comments or questions, click here.

Project Gunrunner Timeline

2011-06-11T14:07:00.000-07:00

The ATF's Project Gunrunner is developing into a scandal that reaches the highest levels of government. Like any government scandal, it's hard to follow and difficult to understand unless you have some kind of "road map". Fortunately, we have one.

Thanks to intrepid souls and gun rights advocates David Codrea and Mike Vanderboegh, the two people most responsible for bringing this into the public light, we have a decent timeline. Reading the events in chronological order can really help you understand the issues.

What is Project Gunrunner?
In short, it was originally a plan to catch gun smugglers moving guns into Mexico. That's what it was doing from 2005 to 2009. However, in late 2009, under the Project Gunrunner umbrella, the ATF embarked on Operation Fast and Furious which was neither fast nor furious. Fast and Furious used the concept of allowing some guns to "walk" across the border so ATF could identify higher-level drug smugglers in the drug cartels, then nab them for prosecution. There were several problems with this strategy.

Allowing firearms to "walk" across the border meant they would end up in the hands of the notoriously violent drug cartels. That meant people would probably die. It ignored at least one treaty with Mexico which prohibited unilateral "investigations" by US agents within Mexico. Lastly, arming any criminal or insurrectionist group in another country could be considered an act of war against that country.

We might understand if the ATF allowed a shipment of 6, 12 or even 24 guns to "walk" in order to make their arrest. But this wasn't the case. The ATF allowed thousands of guns to cross the border. The exact numbers are elusive, but it's known to be at least 1,900 and possibly over 2,500. This includes several .50 caliber Barrett rifles. Worse, two U.S. Law Enforcement agents are dead and guns "walked" across the border were found at the scenes of their deaths.

Gun Control Link
Remember in early 2009 when both Hillary Clinton, as Secretary of State and Attorney General Eric Holder claimed 90% of the guns seized in Mexico came from U.S. "border gun shops" and they called to re-instate the Clinton-Brady Assault Weapons Ban? That sound bite was quickly trashed by astute observers noting that the real percentage was less than 18%.

Not only that, but an ATF Inspector General's report said the number of guns traced to the U.S. was declining. This deprived the politicians of statistics to justify an even greater, more encompassing gun-ban. In late 2009, Operation Fast and Furious was born. If you can't find the evidence to support your claim, then you can plant it by allowing thousands of guns to cross the borders, get seized after Mexican gun battles or police raids, then use them to support the "need" for more gun control.

Had it not been for a few whistleblowers and two gun rights activists, by now we might be seeing "proof" that gun smuggling to Mexico is a huge issue that warrants banning "military-like" firearms altogether (except for the usual suspects - the police and military).

Project Gunrunner Scandal Timeline
We've put together a time-line of the scandal so you can see why this has the potential to reach into the highest levels of government. It could result in the impeachmenet of the President (though politically, that's unlikely given certain realities). It might, at the very least, kill the careers of the Attorney General, Secretary of State, Head of the DHS and the acting head of the BATF. Certainly some U.S. Attorneys and ATF managers will be blamed. But international conspiracies aren't initiated by GS-14 employees without some major CYA taking place.

You can find the Project Gunrunner Timeline on the HCA website. It is a .PDF file so you can either read it online or download it and share it with family, friends and non-shooters. I suggest you share it with any "liberal" friends you have to get their reactions.

We'll keep you up to date as events unfold. House Oversight Committee hearings begin on Monday the 13th. Chairman Darrel Issa (R-CA) plans three phases of hearings, the last of which will be the main feature where Attorney General Holder has to tap dance on the head of a pin to save his behind.

Comments? Questions? Flames? Email me: editor@handgunclub.com

Jihadist Beware! Americans can shoot back!

2011-06-04T17:21:00.000-07:00

New Al Qaeda Video: American Muslims

Should Buy Guns, Start Shooting People

That's the headline in a recent ABC News article describing the latest propaganda from Al Qaeda. In a sense, Al Qaeda is trying to worry us that we'll see armed conflicts and mass shootings on our own soil.

The video message features American-born al Qaeda spokesman Adam Gadahn, a former California nutjob and a convert to Islam (the "religion of peace" of course). In his message, he urges Muslims in the U.S. to carry out deadly one-man terrorst acts using fully automatic weapons purchased at gun shows, and to target major institutions and public figures.

"Let's take America as an example. America is absolutely awash with easily obtainable firearms. You can go down to a gun show at the local convention center and come away with a fully automatic assault rifle, without a background check, and most likely without having to show an identification card. So what are you waiting for?"

While ABC News describes him as Al Qaeda's expert in western media, it's obvious that he's bought into the Brady Campaign's own propaganda about so-called "assault weapons". Taken in by the Bradys hook, line and sinker, Gadahn thinks it's as easy to acquire an AK- 47 in Chicago as it is in Afghanistan.

"What are you waiting for?" asks Gadahn in English, and then adds that jihadis shouldn't worry about getting caught, since so many have been released. "Over these past few years, I've seen the release of many, many Mujahideen whom I had never even dreamed would regain their freedom."

The upside of this plan is Americans can shoot back. We now have 44 states with some kind of concealed carry laws. Over three million people carry concealed in these states and most will be prepared to intervene against a terrorist or rampaging mass killer. I can't speak with certainty for every American, but if I believe that any terrorist who runs into a reader of this column whilst on a shooting spree will have long odds against his recovery.

Americans defending their families are not even going to think about "subduing" a terrorist for trial or detainment in Gitmo. Hopefully they'll shoot to slidelock then lather, rinse, repeat.

Comments, questions or a better idea? Email Me.

More Great Guns

2011-06-04T12:03:00.000-07:00

The Big Bores

Let's get it out of the way first, shall we?

The 1911 is arguably one of the world's greatest guns. Ol' Slab Sides is in it's 101st year and the Colt 1911 pattern automatic has been made in at least 7 different calibers, not to mention wildcat cartridges. It served as our country's standard military sidearm for over 70 years and has equipped thousands of police officers around the nation.

Today there are more makers of the 1911 style pistol than you can shake a stick at. Armscor (Rock Island/Hi-Standard), Baer, Colt, Ed Brown, Kimber, Para-Ord, S&W, Springfield, Sig-Sauer, Wilson and more. The genius of John Moses Browning keeps living on and on. There is no question it's one of the most recognizable pistols in the world.

GLOCK 23

As much as I dislike combat tupperware, the Glock 23 has earned it's place as a Great Gun. It's exceeded only by the Glock 30 in .45 ACP. The .40 S&W Glock 23 beats out it's sub-compact sibling, the Glock 27, only because it can be carried as both a duty gun and a carry gun. Like the entire Glock line, it is incredibly reliable and functional. All it lacks is beauty.

Ruger Super-Blackhawk

When it comes to sheer power and durability, the Ruger Super Blackhawk is hard to beat. This

single-action six-gun can take down almost any game on our continent. It's a favorite for hunters looking for an accurate and powerful handgun. It's natural pointing ability makes it a winner in fast shooting with .44 Specials and it rides nicely in a western style hip holster. Coupling the single-action revolver with the nearly atomic-fired .44 Magnum was a masterful marketing coup. It combined the popular .44 Magnum with the traditional single-action look and feel.

Smith & Wesson Model 29

It's obvious that the large Smith & Wesson needs to be here. It rode to fame in the movies with Clint Eastwood's portrayal of Dirt Harry in the 70's and has remained popular ever since. Based on S&W's large "N" frame, the S&W Model 29 is the double-action choice over the single action Ruger Super Blackhawk. It's been made with barrels from 3" to 8 3/8" and even in stainless steel as the Model 629. It's a hunting gun or, due to the double action trigger and swing-out cylinder for faster reloading, it can be a self-defense gun too.

Colt and S&W Models of 1917

During the first World War, the U.S. came up short of sidearms for officers and other soldiers who didn't need to carry the 1903 Springfield rifle. The Colt 1911 production could not

supply our troops with sidearms. The military contracted for a revolver as a "stop gap" which led both S&W and Colt to produce similar revolvers. These large frame revolvers were equipped with a 5-inch barrel and a lanyard ring. The guns used half-moon clips to secure the rimless pistol cartridges. These sturdy revolvers were popular with those who carried them and many prefered them over the new 1911 pistol.

Many of the 1917's still in inventory when WW-II came upon us were issued to the British commonwealth countries.

In both post war periods, surplus guns were purchased at low prices and "customized" by bobbing the barrel or removing the hammer spur to make a big-bore carry gun. This historical revolver was popular enough that Smith & Wesson re-issued it in 2005 in its original configuration, with optional nickel and color case-hardened frame finishes.

If you have your own favorite great gun, let me know by using the email link below. Tell us why it's a great gun.

Also, if you know of a gun that's a real "sleeper" -- a gun you bought that far exceeded your expectations, please drop me a line about it too.

Comments or questions? Email Me.

Great Guns

2011-05-21T15:00:00.000-07:00

There are a lot of good handguns available today. The questions we get at HCA usually involve asking which gun is "best" or which guns someone should look at. Realize that the answer to that will differ for each person and will boil down, in many cases, to subjective factors. Asthetics, feel and balance are a few of these factors we can't quantify.

Here are some of my picks and how I'd categorize them for "appropriate" uses.

.22 LR handguns
For small game, target shooting, training & practice or just plain fun, the .22 is hard to beat.

Ruger Mk III .22 Semiauto

Ruger Mk III

No matter how hard you try, it's hard to beat the Ruger MK-III for reliability and durability. Ruger offers this model in various barrel configurations, including a heavy "Bull" barrel. Adjustable sights on some models make it a great long range critter-getter.

Prices are still reasonable on the Ruger, though they have gone up considerably in recent years. A 4-inch blued Ruger Mk-III will cost you in the neighborhood of $260 while the stainless steel, similar to the one pictured, will start around $330. Quite reasonable by anyone's standards.

The one downside to the Ruger pistol is that it can be a little tricky to take down and reassemble for a good cleaning. Make sure your gunsmith or gun dealer shows you how to field strip and reassemble the gun before you take it home. The Ruger makes a great field pistol for anyone who wants to spend a lot of time in the outdoors.

Ruger Single-Six Convertible

There's no doubt in my mind that if I were looking at a .22 to pack as a survival companion, the single-action Ruger Single-Six would be the one. Sturdy, rugged and no magazines

to lose. Plus it has a .22 Magnum cylinder to give you the extra power for larger critters. Dressed up with adjustable sights (a necessity when switching between .22 LR and the magnum) with a 5-1/2 inch barrel it weighs in at only 33 ounces. The smaller frame is easy for even youngsters and ladies to handle.

Available in the low $400 range, this is an excellent revolver for hunting small game. The stainless versions will cost you about $50 more and might be worth the low maintenance cost to you. Willy-nilly as I am, I just like the looks of a blued revolver much better.

S&W Model 617 - The Stainless Masterpiece

Well, Smith & Wesson calls it their "new" masterpiece in keeping with tradition of the older K-Frame Model 17 K-22 Masterpiece. I disagree. The full-lug barrel makes it heavy for a .22 and while that may be good for keeping the muzzle on target, it makes the gun less agile. It's a lot of weight to lug around for "just a .22" as well. And that's the 4-inch model. The 6-inch model is heavier and less responsive to swift changes of direction when trying to bag a rabbit or squirrel.

The good news is this thing is a tack-driver. Literally. After my first range session I returned a few days later with some thumbtacks. Spaced on the target I managed to hit 18 of 20 orange thumbtacks at 20 yards. The two I missed were my own fault. The 10-round chambers aren't too tight -- a problem encountered on some previous S&W 22's -- and are easy to reload, if somewhat time consuming.

9mm Pistols

The vast majority of 9mm pistols on the market today are much better than those of 30 years ago. Lighter, more capacity, less expensive and lower recoil thanks to new designs. Deciding between one model and another should come down to what you want it to do -- home duty or CCW -- and how it fits your hand. Here are some models I'd suggest anyone look at.

Glock 17/19 Pistol
Love 'em or hate 'em, the Glock is a reliable companion. They're about as handsome as a hammer and just about as tough. The Model 17 is the "service" model while the Model 19 is a more compact model for CCW. Truth is, I've carred the Model 17 just as easily as the Model 19 and like the extra muzzle weight of the longer 17. Either will serve you

well. These utilitarian pistols rarely have functional issues and are as safe as the user. I don't recommend these as someone's first semi-auto pistol however. The lack of an external safety means absolute trigger discipline is a must.

Lots of people dislike the grip angle of the Glock and I find that it's not perfect for me. It doesn't quite point naturally for my grip, angling slightly high for me. But this is correctable if you use the sights (or have time to use them). At close quarters, this barely matters, but a natural pointing ability means there's less chance of missing under stress.

Beretta 92FS / USA M9

The Beretta Model 92FS or it's Military version, the M9, makes a great defensive arm. It's too large to easily CCW, being as large as a G.I. 1911 but fatter, the Beretta is just comforting in the hand. It sits low in the hand and the sights are generously wide, a big benefit for older eyes. The

open-top slide means you'll probably never see an empty case get stuck in the slide. Accuracy is excellet, in part due to the sights and recoil is mild. The mild recoil is due to how low the gun rides in the hand. Best of all, they're relatively attractive (as if the Italians would deliberately make an ugly gun).

One thing that is surprising is that Berettas sell in the mid $500 range. That's comparable to the CZ P-01 pistol. It would be difficult to choose between the two, though for home defense or a full-size service pistol, I prefer the Beretta. It's traditional DA/SA is smooth and the double action trigger is lighter than most. The safety is slide-mounted.

Compact 9mm's
When it comes to compact 9mm pistols, I'm biased in favor of single-stack magazine guns. First because they're thinner and easier to cover up. Secondly, they're lighter because you're shaving off at least 5-7 rounds of weight and the extra weight of a wider grip. Last but not least is reliability. Single stacks don't seem to have anywhere near the feed issues of double-stack guns.

S&W 908 - Compact
The 3.5" Smith & Wesson 908 was intended to be a bargain-priced 9mm pistol for people who wanted a solid performer without spending a lot of money. It featured a single-stack grip, Novak sights and a bobbed hammer to prevent snagging. It is the less expensive version of the firm's popular 3913 Ladysmith without the embellishments and slightly trimmer lines.

Purists will point to it's bore axis being higher than more modern designs and thus subject to more muzzle rise. Others point to the silly magazine disconnector or slide-

mounted safety. Yet somehow we managed to get along perfectly fine without these changes for fifty years. This is an aluminium alloy framed gun of proven design and durability. Accuracy is very good out to 25 yards and it's quick handling makes it a good choice for CCW on a budget. Alas, S&W stopped producing the 908 in the last few years, but you can probably find one lightly used for around $399.

CZ-75 P-01
From the Czech Republic, the CZ name has always meant well built, quality firearms. If you have larger hands, the CZ-75 line might work for you. My hands are "medium" sized and for some

reason I find the reach to both the trigger and safety lever a tad too long. Not so with their recent P-01 model. The P-01 is a redesign that moves the safety/decocker to the rear of the frame, much like the 1911. The trigger is still a hair further forward than I'd like, but workable.

The P-01 Compact is a traditional DA/SA 9mm pistol with a 3.9" barrel and a 10+1 capacity. Priced in the low-to-mid $500 range, it sits well in the hand and points well. The 3-dot sights are generous enough to allow quick alignment.

Next time I'll talk about big bore autos and revolvers that are great guns.

In the meantime, if you have your own favorite great gun, let me know by using the email link below. Tell us why it's a great gun.

Also, if you know of a gun that's a real "sleeper" -- a gun you bought that far exceeded your expectations, please drop me a line about it too.

Comments or questions? Email Me.

Attorney General Holder Must Go

2011-05-08T11:51:00.000-07:00

Incompetent or Complicit?

Either Way, Holder Must Go

11 May 2011 - Attorney General Eric Holder is on the hot seat over the Project Gunrunner scandal. Two congressional committees are investigating whether the DOJ and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (BATF) allowed weapons to be smuggled into Mexico.

Under questioning before Senator Chuck Grassley's (R-IA) committee, Grassly challenged Holder as to the whereabouts of some 1,300 guns that the BATF allowed suspected gunrunners to purchase during the Operation Fast and Furious offshoot of Project Gunrunner. Holder could not answer.

“I’m not in a position at this time to answer that question,” Holder said. “I don’t know.”

Holder's response strains his already thin credibility. Holder denies knowing about the project and that guns were allowed to cross the border. He must think the public is tremendously stupid.

He asserts that the Attorney General was totally unaware of a program in which firearms would be sold to gunrunners or drug cartel members and could conceivably end up in a foreign country. The BATF has been under the umbrella of the DOJ since 2003, making the Attorney General the Cabinet level member who reports to the President for all DOJ matters.

By claiming ignorance of the program, Holder automatically indicts acting BATF chief Kenneth E. Melson. One of these two men had to be aware of an operation where weapons might cross the border. Holder is responsible for everything that happens within DOJ and duty requires that he inform the President any time the DOJ conducts operation involving foreign countries. Failing to do so is gross incompetence.

If Eric Holder were the Chairman of a U.S. corporation that was found providing a foreign country with arms or equipment that are illegal in the foreign country, he would be facing a federal indictment for complicity in that crime. Even if it only involved a couple of overly aggressive sales people.

Regardless of whether he is incompetent in his office or complicit in running guns into Mexico, Eric Holder should be ousted as Attorney General. Holder has to go. We can not afford to promote any policy that allows more death and carnage just south of our border.

Holder is no ally of the Second Amendment as expressed by his desire to reinstate the failed "assault weapon" ban. He was also deputy Attorney General under Janet Reno, possibly one of the worst AG's of the 20th century.

Rumors abound that the Gunrunner project was intended to increase the number of U.S. produced and sold firearms "found" at Mexican crime scenes and bolster support for a new Assault Weapons ban. There is not any credible support for this assumption — yet. But given the lengths to which BATF and DOJ have been going to avoid congressional scrutiny, we begin to wonder.

Florida Doctors Upset over Gun Bill

2011-05-06T10:46:00.000-07:00

Doctors in Florida are upset over a new gun-rights bill that would prohibit doctors from asking patients if they own guns. The purpose of the bill, according to supporters, is to prohibit doctors from questioning patients and having their responses recorded by insurance companies. It's also an invasion of your personal privacy and when done routinely, has nothing to do with your medical needs.

"We feel that physicians will be reluctant to ask about guns in the home as a result of this legislation. As a result we expect that, unfortunately, there will be an increase in injury and death of children and adolescents due to improperly stored guns," said Dr. Louis St. Petery, a pediatrician in Tallahassee, Fla., and executive vice president of the Florida Pediatric Society.

I've long known that doctors seem to be risk-adverse people and view any activity with a hint of dangers are "high risk behavior". Surfing, scuba diving, backpacking, motorcycling and anything involving guns are classed as "risky". The AMA is staunchly anti-gun, as are most other medical associations. This pushes many doctors to adopt their strategies and propaganda campaigns.

This bill does not prohibit doctors from offering advice. It only prohibits them from making inquiries about gun ownership. Nor does it prohibit doctors from advising patients and care givers that certain medications may cause depression, mood swings and thoughts of suicide and users of the drugs should be watched and kept away from guns, knives and tall buildings.

Let's suppose you're a concerned doctor who follows this law. Nothing will prevent you from placing educational pamphlets (AMA propaganda) in your waiting room. Nothing will prevent you from advising the family of a suicidal teen to lock up guns, sharp objects and medications. Nor are you prevented from saying "This drug can cause mood swings and if you have firearms around, it would be best to lock them up while taking it."

Why all the hub-bub about doctors asking? Doctors collect information for insurance companies so the bills are paid. If the insurance company wants to know if the person is single or married, the doctors will record that. Likewise with guns. The more insurance companies know about your life to more opportunity (excuses) they have raise your premium rates.

If your doctor checks a box that says "smoker" the insurance companies may raise your rates. If you tell your doctor you own guns, the insurance company can claim a "higher risk" and raise your rates. Under a national healthcare program, it could be so expensive to own firearms that you can't afford it. All neatly done to discourage ownship.

And that's the real goal

.

The Politics of Fear

2011-05-06T09:52:00.000-07:00

The anti-gun lobby is busy trying to convince people that the evil gun companies and the much hated NRA are driven by paranoid fears of criminal violence. Violence Policy Center hack...er...vice president Dennis Henigan devotes about 500 words to this idea in his opinion piece here in The Huffington Post.

Talk about the pot calling the kettle black!

The anti-gun lobby has often led the pack with hysteria-based claims that "hundreds of children" were dying daily or weekly by guns. Another favorite of theirs was that "people will shoot each other over fender benders or parking spaces! There will be blood in the streets", when Florida was debating "shall issue" concealed weapons laws. Each time a citizen has successfully defended themselves or their property, we can count on a quote from the anti-gun lobby that such escapades are "the rare exception". According to the anti-gun lobby "people are more likely to get hurt or have the gun taken from them".

That's a load of pig crap.

Fear as a Marketing Tool
Besides, fear is a well-used marketing tool. From the fear of "ring around the collar" to the embarrassment of yellow teeth or foot odor. How do condom manufacturers stay in business? Fear of unwanted pregnancies and diseases.

How does the NRA raise millions for its lobbying efforts? By reminding you that there are people working to strip you of your civil right to own a firearm. By keeping you updated on the serious threats to your rights. And certainly they play on fears of registration, prohibition and denial of our rights.

The anti-gun lobby however, touts the idea that any gun on the hip of a citizen, due to the God-like power it contains, will magically transform him into some kind of Terminator-like killing machine. Their literature historically claims that armed citizens will be unable to resist pulling the trigger over trivial matters, like a parking space or fender bender. Or that a mere argument will automatically escalate into a homicide. Their message is clear - Citizens with guns cannot be trusted not to go on a killing spree!

Yet, their logic crumbles when that same civilian puts on a uniform or pins on a badge. If citizens are so emotionally unstable, as they claim, why don't bus drivers go on deadly rampages with their 10-ton bludgeons? Why don't gardeners attack clients or passersby with their chainsaws or hedge trimmers? Why aren't we seeing mass slaughter in restaurant kitchens when chefs wield those carefully honed sharp knives?

Because most Americans are good people. Regardless of the tools they use, most people don't get angry enough to actually kill another person over trivial matters. Therein lies one of the principle differences between the anti-gun lobby and gun owners.

The anti-gun lobby believes no citizen is trustworthy without government-issued credentials. Gun owners believe in the inherent decency of their friends, neighbors and others. The anti-gun lobby's culture might be a little bit safer, but I believe our vision would be much more comfortable to live with.

Gun Control is not on the back burner

2011-05-05T10:25:00.000-07:00

Gun control is not on the back burner for the 112th Congress. The usual suspects are working to circumvent not only your right to bear arms, but your right to due process.

The usual suspects read like a list of gun-banning congressional idiots. Senators Lautenberg, Boxer, Durbin, Feinstein, Franken, Kerry, Levin, Menendez, Reed, Schumer and Whitehouse.

The Senate Bills introduced by Lautenberg are:
S. 32 - Large Capacity Ammunition Feeding Device Act
S. 34 - Denying Firearms and Explosives to Dangerous Terrorists Act of 2011
S. 35 - Gun Show Background Check Act of 2011

The House has its own versions of these bills, of course. Two introduced by Carolyn McCarthy who is infamous because when asked what a "barrel shroud" was, she said "I think it's the shoulder thing that goes up." In short, she knows nothing about guns and only does what her handlers tell her to do.

In the house, Representative Carolyn McCarthy has introduced:
H.R. 308 - Large Capacity Ammunition Feeding Device Act
H.R. 591 - Gun Show Loophole Closing Act of 2011

New York's Peter King has introduced:
H.R. 1506 Denying Firearms and Explosives to Dangerous Terrorists Act of 2011

Of these, the "Dangerous Terrorists Act" is the most offensive. It gives the Attorney General the authority to deny a gun purchase to anyone known or suspected to be a terrorist. This means the AG can use the "No-Fly List" to make deny your right to purchase a firearm!

The problem here, of course, is that you could be denied a fundamental constitutional right because some bureaucrat put your name on a list. No trial. No jury. No lawyers. And the list is not public. While there is an "appeal" process, don't count on it working. The AG can simply dismiss your appeal and say that any hearing would "endanger national security".

Imagine for a moment being accused of a crime, then being told that because you're on a terrorist no-fly list that you do not have a right to a jury trial. Or that no lawyer would be appointed for you. Would you be screaming to the news media? You betcha.

Most of these bills are still in their respective chamber committees. However, I'd still suggest you write, fax or make phone calls to members of the Senate Judiciary Committee and the House Committee on the Judiciary to kill these bills in committee.

The ban for "high capacity magazines" (anything over 10 rounds) includes a provision to require serial numbers on magazines and a date of manufacture. Yet, the bill grandfathers in existing magazines (watch the prices of hi-caps skyrocket if this bill gets to a floor vote in either chamber). This ban would include rifles, pistols and shotguns that hold more than 10 rounds while exempting "law enforcement" (including the Federal alphabet soup agencies), military, retired police officers and others. Just no exceptions for you, not even if you have only one hand and dozens of death threats.

As for the gun show "loophole", I don't like the idea of needing the government's permission before selling a piece of personal property. Why aren't we requiring car dealers and rental companies to do a background check to prevent repeat DUI's from driving? After all, driving is not a right, it's a privilege you pay for with your registration fees and taxes.

These bills have been introduced every year for the last three years. Let's make sure they continue to get quashed before going anywhere.

A bigger worry is what the Obama administration is working on "under the radar". That's what he told Sarah and Jim Brady of the anti-gun Brady Campaign lobby a couple of months ago. Was that project Gunrunner? Or is it something even more evil?

First Responders

2011-04-26T18:20:00.000-07:00

Everyone has it bass-ackwards

Almost every day we see or hear the term "First Responders" used incorrectly. The media, the government and even most people use the term completely wrong. Actually, the term is the product of the bureaucratic mind.

The term Certified First Responder means someone with advanced emergency medical training. Someone who is more trained than just the basic Red Cross First Aid & CPR programs, but who is not an EMT or physician. Even here, the media and often the government forget to use the qualifier "certified" in daily talk.

The true first responder to any crisis, disaster or life-threatening event is you. It will be you who first responds when a man or woman collapses in the mall. It will be you who responds when a child starts choking on a happy meal. You, the ordinary citizen will be first on the scene long before some government paid, bureaucratically anointed citizen arrives.

In terms of crime, you will be the first responder if you're the victim of a crime or you are at the scene when the crime goes down before your eyes. It will be you who decides what to do next. In this context, you hold your own fate in your hands, or the fate of others. Will you decide properly?

Our response to stressful incidents almost always falls back to our training. If we have no training, our response is likely to be undisciplined, chaotic and unfocused. If we have some form of training, it may take a moment to kick in. The more training we have that is similar to the event, the more likely our response will be swift and sure.

Do you know CPR? Why not? It is a relatively easy life-saving technique that can be applied by almost anyone. It could save the life of your spouse, parents or children just as readily as that of a stranger. It may not guarantee survival of a heart attack victim, but it gives them a fighting chance to survive.

Do you know how to use a gun? Why not? The same arguments apply here as for CPR. In the event of a life-threatening crime, like robbery, rape, kidnapping, murder, mayhem, knowing how to respond quickly and effectively can make the difference between life and death. That gun, like CPR, could save the life of your spouse, parents or children just as readily as that of a stranger being attacked.

You can't easily give yourself CPR, but you as the first person on the scene can save a life. During a crime against a person, there is always a first responder present. The police call them a victim. How they respond can make a huge difference, not only in the outcome of that crime, but of all crime.

Imagine for a moment that we have managed to rid ourselves of idiotic school administrators possessing the bureaucratic "zero tolerance policy" mentality towards small knives. Little pocket knives with blades under three inches. Now imagine the child molester who tried to grab little Suzie Sweetness off the sidewalk while she's walking home. If Suzie is prepared, taught by her parents, she uses that little knife, along with kicking and screaming to get away from the child molester. Repeat this a few hundred times and child molesters will have to become wary. They'll have to spend more time selecting the time, place and child. That makes them vulnerable to detection, interdiction and arrest.

You are the first responder. The governmental agencies all respond after the crime has occurred. They aren't there to protect you. They are there to document what they think happened. They'll collect evidence, leave fingerprint powder and crime scene tape and go find the perpetrators. They owe you nothing. Not protection, not security, nothing.

Any time a victim can disrupt the criminal's plans and thwart a crime, it is a victory for society. The little girl who stabs her abductor in the wrist or the armed citizen who isn't harmed because he drew his firearm reduces crime. Instead of a kidnapping and a robbery, we have attempted crimes. Crimes without victims suffering or dying in terror.

The next time you renew your CCW, consider taking or updating your CPR skills. That way you'll have two ways to save lives.

BATF Gunrunner Scandal

2011-04-25T15:57:00.000-07:00

The BATF Gunrunner fiasco continues to grow into a full-blown Watergate style scandal. Now the news media is sniffing around, scratching at the surface like they always do, asking the wrong questions.

You can read all about it on the HCA website here: ATF Scandal - Project Gunrunner.

The latest information is that Rep. Darrell Issa (R-CA), chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform committee gave BATF and DOJ until March 30th to provide documents and information to his committee. When that deadline expired without a response from DOJ, Rep. Issa issued a subponea demanding DOJ respond by April 16. As of Easter, the 24th, the DOJ has blown off Issa's inquiries and the subponea. Issa plans to press forward with contempt of Congress charges against DOJ officials.

Let's hope he goes for the big fish. He should be turning the thumbscrews on acting BATF director Kenneth Melson and dragging DOJ's lawyers through the mud for giving bad advice.

Mexico To Sue U.S. Gun Makers?

More stupidity from the politicians. Mexcian President Felipe Calderon’s government has hired U.S. trial lawyers to investigate possible litigation against U.S. gun makers and firearms retailers, seeking to hold these lawful companies responsible for the criminal misuse of firearms in Mexico.

Well, ain't that special? I had no idea that the Brady Campaign employed anyone who could speak Spanish. It sounds as if the Brady's, the VPC and Bloomberg's Mayors Against Illegal Guns are now advising Mexico to stir up the pot. I'm sure we'll hear the same old discredited arguments. The gun industry makes their guns more available along the border so they'll be sold to any Tom, Dick or Juan who comes in with a paper sack full of cash (with BATF approval of course). Thus, by flooding the region with guns, they support Mexico's drug cartels. If it's not that theory, it'll be one just as retarded.

Look at it this way. I've seen some photos of the drug cartel gunfights. After a gunfight, the cartel members escape in vehicles. Perhaps Calderon should be suing U.S. carmakers because their lawful products are misused by the drug cartel.

Let's look at some real facts here. Remember that number Mr. Obama and Attorney General Holder tossed around a while back? That 90% of the guns traced originated in the U.S.? That number is now thoroughly discredited. Subsequent analysis shows...

* 80% of guns recovered in Mexico do not come from the U.S.

* An indpendent study by STRATFOR, show less than 12% of the guns seized in Mexico came from the US

* ATF traces on recovered guns showed most guns were sold at retail on average, 14 years ago.

* ATF inspected more than 2,000 dealers along the border.

* No criminal charges were filed against the dealers, not even for gun running.

* Out of 2000 dealers, two had their liceneses revoked (0.01%) for unspecified violations.

During the time of the ATF dealer inspections as many as 150,000 Mexican soldiers defected to work for the drug cartels, bringing their American-made service-issued firearms with them.

It would seem that the two biggest suppliers of firearms to Mexico are the BATF and our DEA anti-drug efforts. Uncle Sam is providing more guns than the cartels could buy in a year.

Why is it that politicians seem to believe that holding a manufactuer responsible the criminal misuse of a produce he made a decade-and-a-half ago is "reasonable" or "common sense"? Wouldn't that mean Chevrolet is responsible for many drive-by shootings in LA, Chicago, D.C. and even in Mexico?

What about the makers of knives? Should Gerber, Kabar, Chicago Cutlery and Onedia be held responsible for stabbing deaths and injuries? After all, don't they all make those deadly "stabbing weapons"?

BATF Scandal - Project Gunrunner

2011-03-05T23:21:00.000-08:00

BATF Arms Drug Cartels,

Aids Arms Flow to Mexico

In one of the most boneheaded plans to ever come out of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (BATF) the agency allowed known straw-man purchases to cross the border into Mexico. This means the BATF has armed the drug cartels with almost 2,000 firearms.

Dubbed Project Fast and Furious inside the BATF, the plan was to allow straw purchasers to acquire weapons and the BATF could track them to Mexican drug cartels. In theory, the BATF was responding to an inspector-general report that criticized the agency for focusing on "small time straw purchasers" and not major gunrunners. The operation was supposed to lead them to major players.

Instead of being fast and furious, the operation bogged down and continued for fifteen months. Local agents protested that weapons were crossing the border and they were told to let it happen. By the time word of the operation leaked out, BATF had let almost 2,000 firearms disappear into the hands of questionable buyers.

The accusations first arose on a BATF-insider Internet forum called www.CleanUpATF.org, where suggestions of these possible misdeeds were characterized as rumors, speculation and "word on the street." The forum is a gathering place for current and former BATF employees frustrated with BATF management and aimed at rooting out waste, fraud, abuse and managerial malfeasance.

Accusations against the BATF officials consist of four separate but connected events.

That BATF intentionally arranged to have hundreds of firearms "walked" across the U.S. border into Mexico.
The BATF instructed U.S. gun dealers to proceed with questionable and illegal sales of firearms to suspected gunrunners.
BATF intentionally withheld information about U.S.-sanctioned gun smuggling from the Mexican government.
One of the guns BATF allowed or helped to be smuggled into Mexico was involved in the death of Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry.

Many field agents questioned the decision by their supervisors. At times, the discussions became heated, with one agent reminding his superiors that the guns could be used to kill U.S. law enforcement officers. Still, the project was continued, despite the risks to civilians and L.E. personnel.

There is the remote possibility that the BATF was allowing guns to enter Mexico so that when they were recovered, they could bolster their claim that "90 percent" of the guns recovered come from American sources. Whether that was really the managerial goal or not, allowing vicious drug cartels to acquire firearms smacks of the Machiavellian tactics the BATF has long been known for.

History of Abuses

The BATF has a long history of abuse and legal deception. Repeated examples of botched raids, raids on wrong addresses, bad shootings and wrongful prosecutions were brought out in congressional testimony in the late 1970s, resulting in budget cuts from outraged members of Congress.

The BATF was also responsible for the twin tragedies of the Branch Davidians in Waco and the death of Vicki Weaver and 14-year old Sammy Weaver at Ruby Ridge.

BATF is now in damage-control mode as evidenced by their PR memo to their field offices. They want to play up positive stories about the agency and point to their successes.

Senator Charles Grassley (R-IA) is investigating the claims even though he's been "blown off" by not only BATF directors, but also by Attorney General Eric Holder. The CCRKBA, Gun Owners of America and NRA (albeit a bit slower) are calling for investigations. Arizona papers are describing the current BATF responses to queries as a "cover-up".

What to do: Call your elected officials and ask them to support Senator Grassley's investigation. We can not afford to have a federal agency so lacking in oversight that it is actually allowing arms to be delivered to vicious drug cartels.

This is outrageous. Those who approved and managed this plan must lose their jobs, even if that includes the Attorney General. How many people will die for some boneheaded idea? How many innocent Mexican -- or American -- citizens will die in terror because of BATF incompetency?

Follow this link for a journalist's guide to the scandal.

Search the web with keywords ATF, Gunrunner, Gunwalker and scandal to find lots more.

Comments? Feedback? Click Here!

21st Century Crime

2011-03-04T13:43:00.000-08:00

Flash Mobs

Have you head the term "Flash Mob" yet? If not, you soon will. It's one of the latest fads. It is also the latest in crime. Strangely, they're not both. And right now you're wondering if I'm nuts.

Flash mobs originate by teens and young adults using Facebook and/or Twitter to meet at a certain location. The legitimate groups meet at the location at a specified time and then.... break out into song, dance, pillow fight or some other innocuous activity. A good example is shown in the video from Chicago in 2010.

But not all Flash Mobs are equal. It now seems the less savory elements in society are using the same technology to commit crimes. Texts are sent to meet up at an area and then the youthful offenders all enter a store at the same time. Convenience store, department store it doesn't matter. In a few minutes they can push over merchandise displays and disrupt the store, intimidating the patrons and staff while they steal merchandise. Worse, as shown in the video below, they can create an "instant riot" in the streets.

Even what starts out to be something "playful", such as a snowball fight, can turn into a violent or destructive mob. That scenario played out at a Philly Macy's when the youths ran through Macy's, spilling merchandise on the floor, throwing shoes and signs and creating general mayhem.

The primary concern for all of us, of course, is self-defense in these situations. I wonder how long it will be before some "flash riot" in the streets involves a citizen getting pulled from his car by a mob and he opens fire with his CCW. Or someone inside a store who gets beaten and resorts to self-defense against a "mob".

I'm certain we'll hear from teary relatives that their deceased child was "gunned down in cold blood" because he'd never do such a thing (despite being involved). Or city leaders claiming that shooting someone for "minor theft" isn't appropriate. Of course they won't tell you about the thousands of dollars of hospital charges the unfortunate beating victim.

Modern technology is a wonderful tool. Just like your firearm. But it can be misused by those with greed or anger. Our response should be heightened awareness of our surroundings (sound familiar?) and getting out of the danger zone quickly.

And if you're a parent, watch your child's texting and notify authorities if you see something suspicious. You might save a life.

Comments? Want to sound off? Click here!

Join the Flash Mob Discussion in our Forum here.

Back in the saddle again

2011-02-21T14:10:00.000-08:00

Back in business

After 27 years in the same place, I've spent the last few months moving. Unlike previous moves, this was a move "back home" to take care of my elderly mother, 88, who is now legally blind . I also did most of the move alone this time, discovering that I can't move the same furniture by myself like I did when I was 30. I also discovered I can live without a lot of things but not without guns, or a computer. So now that things are settling down, I'm getting back into the saddle to talk guns and thoughts about guns.

The Shape of Things to Come

A year ago, this section would have been more pessimistic. I might have talked about the increasing debt, taxes, inflation, etc. or doom & gloom forecasts for our country. Instead, recent developments in the Middle East give us hope that some form of Democracy might take hold. Fewer dictators, more dialogue and perhaps better relations might result.

But maybe not. It is possible that "the people" of these countries may align with fundamental Islamic ideals and we could see the rise of an Islamic bloc in the region. I tend to doubt it, as evidenced by the unrest spreading from Tunisia to Egypt, Libya, Yemen and even into Iran. People are tired of being poor and supporting regimes living in luxury. People are tired of secret police, oppressive laws and high crime. Maybe there is hope yet.

Government Budget cuts - hidden dangers
We all know that all governments are facing budget woes. The cuts needed to close the budget shortfalls are huge and most are struggling to find ways to keep going. We've seen the ruckus being raised in Wisconsin where unions are screaming about cuts and changes to reduce the burdens to government.

Many cities are closing fire stations to save money or staffing them every other week. Some are cutting deeply into police staffing too - San Francisco may lose 500 officers this year. What do these kinds of cuts mean to you?

What do you do when 911 won't respond? This is already a reality. In Seattle, bus riders reported a youth being roughed up by thugs for his Northface jacket. But callers were told no police would be sent unless the victim called. Police claim the citizens were reporting a "theft" instead of clearly saying it was a robbery. Bovine cookies. Sure, budget cuts have forced police to resort to taking theft reports over the phone instead of sending an officer out to write it up. But when two or more people on a bus report a crime is in-progress and they won't even attempt to come to the victim's aid? Sad.

Imagine leaving a restaurant at night with your family when four thugs start harassing you, making suggestions about your attractive wife (and/or daughter!) and coming closer. Your wife dials 911 but in her breathless excitement reports there are "some guys harassing and threatening us", instead of saying "I think we're about to get robbed and beaten by a gang."

In the former situation, the police say to leave the area and they'll send a car by to check them out. In the latter case, they dispatch two units with lights and sirens. That could make the difference between shooting them in the parking lot and holding them at gunpoint for the police.

In some counties, a deputy's beat can be 30 or more miles across. If budget cuts reduce staffing to one car per district, that deputy could be more than 30 minutes away. Just two calls for assistance in adjacent areas could mean a wait of an hour or more for help. Are you prepared?

Imagine you've barricaded your family in the bedroom and the door begins to open. You warn the intruder and then fire through the opening door. Minutes later, you peer down the hall with a flashlight and see -- nothing. Did you hit him? Is he still in the house? How long do you wait for the police to show up before venturing out? Are you ready for that? Is your family ready for that?

Would a handgun be effective in a crisis?

We all know that in terms of power, a rifle or shotgun far outclasses a handgun. Yet, in the event of some disaster or lawlessness, a handgun becomes an excellent defensive tool. Remember that during these events your state's statutes are not suspended, so walking about with a shotgun or rifle can get the unwanted attention of overworked, over-stressed police.

A handgun can be concealed on your person or simply worn, low-key, in a holster. Some can fit in a pants or jacket pocket easily. Discrete carry means getting less hassle from anti-gun pacifists, macho types and authorities. It can also be a real surprise to a thief.

Which one is the best one? There's no magic formula to arrive at one answer. The one you shoot the best. Or the one you and your spouse can both shoot well. For some, a Ruger Single Six might be sufficient or it might be a Beretta 92 with 15 rounds. For others, an inexpensive but reliable Hi-Point 9mm in their supply bag will do the trick. Remember that the laws still apply and you should use it only as a last resort.

Comments? Send 'em in here.

Hodge Podge

2010-08-30T04:54:00.000-07:00

The end of August already? This has been a busy month and a half here. And a sad one. In June, my brother underwent surgery and had to go back in July after some complications. And all this while his wife was dying of cancer. Liz lost her battle in early August, much later than anyone expected. We held a wake for the Irish side of the family and it was the first time in over 25 years I saw my brother get totally hammered.

During this trip down memory lane, I was coerced into retelling a story from years past about a handgun hunt with some friends. Mostly this was for the nephews and friends met since then. It's odd how you put things out of your mind until something like this brings it up again.

Two friends of mine had purchased .44 Magnums, a Ruger single-action and a S&W Model 29. After a month or so, another friend, Mike, who is an experienced hunter, suggested we take our magnums deer hunting. I was the "odd man" here, having a S&W Model 57 .41 Magnum. Mike said he knew the perfect place too, nestled in the Sierras. Hookay, we go.

The place really was perfect. A meadow about two football fields in size. Wide open space with lush grass and few trees. Beautiful spot to take deer coming down the hill on their path from more wooded lands.

The four of us dressed in ghillie suits and took positions in the shade of a few trees inside the meadow. It was a beautiful morning, a nice 53 degrees, no snow on the ground. When we took our positions we could spot each other by looking hard. We had a sort of curved line in the field, no crossfire. All of us were about 30 yards from each other in shade.

It was almost 8:30 when we settled in. According to Mike, it'd take the deer a while to drink from a nearby stream and wander down the path about 1/2 mile to the meadow. Since he'd hunted here before, we followed his lead.

No more than 30 minutes later come these three hippies. Two guys and some spacy girl. They come over the rise behind us, walk within about 10 yards of me and stop. It's a pretty meadow, I grant you, but...

"Go away." I said in a deep voice, just loud enough for them to hear.
They jumped. "Who said that?"
"I did."
"Who are you? Where are you?"
(Time for some fun.) "I'm the tree. Go away."
"Why?"
"They're coming. Go away."
"Who's coming?" (frantic heads-on-swivels)
"The deer. I'm hungry. Now go away."
"You eat deer?"
(Note, at this point, I can visibly see Mike's concealed form, 30 yards away, heaving in silent laughter. Ron later said he had tears running down his face from holding it back.)
"Go away. They're almost here."
"We want to watch!"
"No." (I was running out of ideas.)
"What if we stay anyway?"
"We will consume you."
"Huh? Who's we?"
Mike pulled it together and said, "Bolarc, make them leave. I am hungry too."
It sounded like it came from the pine tree he was near.
All three screamed like little girls and ran right past us over the rise and kept going.

We gave up the hunt for the day. Our sides hurt too much. We'd just start laughing and couldn't stop.

Do you have a funny hunting story? Send it to me and I'll publish it here.

The EPA Lead Ammo Ban Defeated
Five environmental groups wanted the EPA to ban lead in ammunition and fishing tackle, arguing that millions of animals are dying from eating lead-shot pellets or carcasses contaminated by lead.

Millions of animals? That'd be quite a mess anywhere.

The groups backing the petition included Center for Biological Diversity (an anti-gun/anti-hunting group), Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (another hunting-hostile group), and Project Gutpile, for whom I could find only 2 names.

The EPA's decision to accept the petition for review and comment caused something of a firestorm of protests. Especially once the NRA's grassroots alerts went out across the nation. Despite the public face (or spin) put on this proposal, it was nothing more than an attempt to make gun ownership and hunting more expensive or difficult.

Here in California there is a lead ammo ban in certain areas of the state that are "California condor habitat". The premise is that the endangered Condor will consume lead shot or bullet fragments in dead game, thus getting lead poisoning. The law bans the use of lead ammo while hunting in the condor habitat. Ammo used for target shooting and self-defense is supposed to be legal.

Last year the Fish and Game Department proposed new rules expand the ban, without legislative authority, to include .22 rimfire and lead shot. The NRA and California gun rights groups teamed up to defeat this proposal.

The U.S. EPA lead ban, however has been defeated. EPA, last Friday, publicly stated that they lacked the authority to ban lead ammuntion under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA). The EPA will still consider banning the use of lead fishing sinkers, however.

The anti-hunting and ant-gun lobbies are pushing these backdoor proposals not out of ecological nobility, but to ensnare unknowning gun owners into violating obscure laws. Remember that I said here in California that lead ammo is fine for target shooting and self-defense, even in a designated Condor range? It seems some on DF&G aren't ready to believe that.

We've heard a few reports from California residents who say DF&G officials warned them that a hunting license in your wallet along with that .22LR on public lands equates to the intent to hunt. This could result in arrest and seizure of your guns even if you're just shooting paper targets.

This is why we must be vigilant about these kinds of backdoor regulations. It also points out why attempts to attack ammo supplies must be stopped.

Comments? Questions? Send me an e-mail.

America

2010-07-12T17:03:00.000-07:00

Krista Branch - I am America

Just play it.
(Use the small play button on the control bar)

And now a few words from our founders on
the Second Amendment
Perhaps the Chicago City council needs to see
this at their next meeting.

Music: Theme from The Patriot (2000) from Columbia Pictures

2010-07-09T13:23:00.000-07:00

Kagan Supreme Court Nomination
See what constitutional scholar David Kopel says about the nomination of Elena Kagan to the Supreme Court. He makes clear the concerns of gun owners nationwide about putting her on the high court.

Kennedy to remain on high court.
Justice Anthony Kennedy made remarks to friends and family that he'll "stick around at least until 2013." That means he'll wait to see who takes the White House after the current Obama administration.

Justice Kennedy is often the "swing vote" that oscillates between siding with the four conservatives and the four liberals on the bench. This makes his opinion all-important to garner in Supreme Court cases. In both Heller and McDonald, Kennedy sided with the conservative court in their narrow 5-4 decisions. Just that one vote going "the other way" could have had devastating results to the RKBA. With Kagan's appointment all but locked in by a Democrat controlled congress, if any of the conservative justices retires or falls ill, we could lose some of our rights once again.

Liberals and the Second Amendment
That gun owners tend to be politically "conservative" and the anti-gun lobby tends to be made up of "liberals". But if you consider yourself "liberal" or you are solidly a Democrat, you'll know that's not always true. But you should read Kali Joy Gray's opinion about why Liberals should love the Second Amendment. Then you should send it to friends and relatives who don't support the Second Amendment.

Gun Rights Important to Americans
Pew Research is reporting that for the week of Jun 28 thru Jul 2, 28% of the news links in the blogosphere were cheering the McDonald victory. This one of the highest ratings for a Supreme Court decision in over a year. And one other interesting tid-bit from Pew research.

Gun control advocates opposing the decision seemed almost completely absent from the online conversation according to Pew Research.

I'll take that to mean the Brady Bunch is licking its wounds and trying to figure out a new strategy. No doubt their new strategy will be to attack obliquely by redefining terms like "prohibited person" or "unusually dangerous". Watch for them to try to sneak in misdemeanor crimes or even previously having had a warrant or restraining order issued (even in error).

More Guns, Less Crime
Borrowing the title from Dr. John Lott's book is an apt description for what's happening in Texas. The news says that 15 years after adopting shall-issue CCW's, crime in the Lone Star state is down. Since 1994, the amount of murders and other violent crimes in Texas has actually decreased, despite the fact that there are six million more people living in the state now than there were 15 years ago states the article on MyFox Houston. And that's what matters. Not that there were fewer "gun crimes" but that all violent crimes were down.

NRA Sues Chicago - Again!

2010-07-07T14:37:00.000-07:00

Daley Administration Thumbs Nose

at Supreme Court

Just days after the Supreme Court decision that incorporated the Second Amendment against the states, Chicago passed new restrictive gun laws. When the new laws were announced in Chicago, Alderman Mary Ann Smith thanked "everyone who has worked to try and create as restrictive a tool as possible.”

Chicago to The Supreme Court - "Screw off! We'll do as we damn well please."

To prove that point, the Chicago donkeys enacted a new series of draconian and Machiavellian laws to prevent Chicago residents from legally obtaining firearms. That the city aldermen and mayor have publicly stated their intent is to make exercising what is now a fundamental civil right as difficult as possible opens them up to a civil rights lawsuit.

I'll go one further. Such an agreement amongst the city's leaders amounts to a conspiracy to violate the civil rights of Chicago residents and/or to delay the intent of the constitutional guarantee of those rights. Such a conspiracy is a federal felony and should be investigated by the FBI and an independent prosecutor.

The new NRA lawsuit, Benson v. Chicago, details how Chicago's new laws are designed to make it impossible for Chicago residents to exercise their rights. Consider the following provisions of the new law.

● To have a firearm requires a Chicago firearm permit.

● You must be 21 in order to obtain a permit.

● 18-21 years olds, need a parent or guardian's permission.

● The parent or guardian must be eligible for a firearms permit.

So right away, Chicago wants to license a right to possess a firearm. But adults between 18-21 years must have a parent or guardian, who could qualify for a permit themselves, grant permission. So, in Chicago, an 18 year old can be a U.S. Marine, qualified on the M9 pistol, M16 rifle, M240 SAW, and Browning M2 .50 Caliber machine gun, but must get his Mama's permission to buy or own a gun in Chicago? And the law doesn't even address those poor souls who have no living parents and are living independently.

Outrageous Implication

Most disgustingly is the implied punishment by blood provision. If your sole living parent committed a single crime when he or she was just 18, Chicago will punish the offspring for the parent's offense by denying them a constitutional right. The same thing happens if that parent is the only one willing to sign the consent form.

But wait... There's more draconian bullshit ahead.

● A training certificate w/at least 1 hour of range training

● Prohibits shooting a gun "except in lawful defense"

● The above makes it illegal to fire on a shooting range.

● But that's okay, because Chicago bans gun stores and shooting ranges within Chicago.

● Can't keep more than 1 "operable" firearm in the home.

● Can't buy more than 1 gun per month.

● Prohibits licensing an "unsafe" handgun as defined by the Superintendent of police.

● Vague safety criteria allows banning almost any handgun.

● Chicago permit is only valid at the address listed on the permit.

So let's get this right. To get a permit you first have to get training. But that training has to be held outside of Chicago because the city has banned shooting ranges. You will also have to buy your gun outside of Chicago and find a way to store it there for up to 4 months while Chicago processes your permit. Once you have your permit and gun at home, you can't shoot it or train with it anywhere within Chicago because that would be illegally discharging the firearm. Yet again, you must go outside of Chicago to practice. You can't possess your firearm at a address not on the permit, so you can't take it to your parents home overnight when local thugs threaten them.

On top of all that, after spending between $500 and $1,000 for your gun, the city can later declare it an "unsafe" gun by whim of the police superintendent. Since permits cannot be issued for an unsafe hangun, if the superinendent decides that any or all GLOCK models are "unsafe", in theory, your permit becomes invalid. Yet there isn't any notification provision for the city to notify residents who own a GLOCK that their permit isn't valid anymore.

One can easily imagine Otis McDonald, a senior citizen and retiree, attemping to allocate the funds to do all of this. He must pay a permit fee, a registration fee, a fingerprint fee, pay for mandatory "training", plan a trip outside Chicago for the training, a trip out of the city to buy the gun, pay for storage outside the city for up to 4 months, make another trip to bring his gun into the city after obtaining his permit. All to exercise a fundamental right guaranteed by the consitution.

This is about equivilant to requiring Chicago voters to drive to Springfield in order to register to vote and to vote in elections. (Which might at least deter the dead voters in Chicago from voting.)

Can it get worse? Sure. The jackasses that call themselves representatives of the people have prohibited use of a firearm for lawful self-defense outside the home. By that, these clueless morons have said the home does NOT include the following;

● Any garage on the lot, even an attached garage.

● Any space outside the dwelling unit.

● Specifically any external stairs

● Specifically any porches

● Or any back, side or front yard areas

● Or any common areas.

Got all that? This means that if your elderly mother is bedridden and on 24/7 oxygen support upstairs, you cannot shoot the gangbanger in your front yard as he prepares to throw a molotov cocktail at your home. Hell, you can't even shoot him if he comes up onto the front porch to throw it through the window.

McDonald's Estimated Cost to accquire:

Training class w/range time: $75

Training class ammunition: $25

Chicago Gun permit fee: $100(ea 3 yrs)

Chicago Registration fee: $15 (ea 3 yrs)

Police Fingerprinting fee: $15

Storage fee outside city: $12/mo x 4

30 mile trip for training: $24 @40¢/mile

30 mile trip to buy a gun: $24 @40¢/mile

30 mile trip after permit: $24 @40¢/mile

Approximate total expense: $350

This does not include the cost of the firearm, sales taxes, a lockable transport container, lock, ammunition, cleaning kit or other supplies.

Want to comment?

Click here to send a comment

McDonald Follow Up and Random Tidbits

2010-07-06T22:56:00.000-07:00

McDonald Case Follow Up

After decades of news articles and opinion pages denouncing firearms, it seems that many media outlets are making a slow U-Turn. Across the country, here and there, slowly we are seeing editorials favoring gun ownership. Some still advocate certain restrictions and conditions, but it seems the tide is turning.

Rose Russel, associate editor at The Toledo Blade, agreed with the opinion by Justice Thomas in her July 3rd editorial. Her final line in the editoral was "[t]oday, that right is essential to the preservation of life as well - when the weapons are in the right hands." This is a good first step.

The New York Post actually says guns are not the problem in their July 3rd editorial How Judges Kill. This is one of those cases that infuriates most Americans and it's a good example of how some judges lose sight of justice.

Even the über-liberal Huffington Post carried an article by Dennis Santiago praising the "long overdue victory for civil rights" in the McDonald decision.

But all is not rosy with all the media. The Sacramento Bee, the California capital's pro-gun control newspaper, finds something to whine about when our freedoms are expanded. The Bee's editorial complains of "more work for justice system" because the high court didn't specify how lower courts should interpret 2A rights. Suffice it to say that most appellate court judges are not stupid and will carefully read the decisions and use strict scrutiny if they don't want a spanking from Scalia or Alito.

And NPR gushes forth with an article about suicides being all too easy with a handgun. They quote the Lake County, Illinois coroner, a man who, at age 17, had to cope father committed suicide by handgun. NPR, or the coroner, shamelessly omit statistics that show most people attempt suicide several times before ultimately succeeding. Instead, they say it's an "impulse decision" when evidence suggests otherwise.

Chicago's Utopia
Yet another headline screams 3 dead, 13 wounded in overnight violence in Chicago. You might remember that in June, 8 people were killed and a whopping 52 wounded in Daleyland. What's the difference between living in Chicago and living in Iraq during the war? At least in Iraq, Americans could be armed and shoot back.

Random Tidbits
The joint Federal/Ruger .327 Federal Magnum cartridge may be getting a new lease on life. Ammunition is starting to show up on the shelves (finally) as Federal begins to catch up with some ammo production. Not only that, but there is a fair selection of revolvers from which to lauch the .327 Mag. S&W has 2 models of the 632, Ruger has their SP-101, Blackhawk and GP-100 (7-shots) chambered for the .327. Charter Arms makes at least one .327 snubby and Taurus is listing a .327 snubby too.

But some companies are still missing the boat. One customer at a local shop asked when we might see Ruger's polymer LCR chambered for the .327. That'd make a nice, lightweight carry gun. Others are disappointed Ruger hasn't offered it in their Single Six. I'm suggesting that S&W bring out a lightweight K-Frame (a model 316?) with a 3-inch barrel, round butt grip, night sights and maybe 7-shots for the .327 as a near-perfect carry gun.

Friend and gun-rights activist Jim March is not alone in wondering if Marlin will get a clue and offer the .327 Magnum in one of their lever rifles to compliment the utility of the single-action .327's. This would be an excellent combination for home defense, especially for rural and small ranch owners.

Colt's Lightweight DAO Government Model

I'm still waiting for Colt to release their new DAO lightweight Government model. Think of your favorite full-size 1911 offered in a lightweight alloy frame. Ummm, sounds good. But I want to check out their DAO model to see if it's as nice as the one they had at the SHOT Show earlier this year. With no single-action hammer notch, that eliminates the grip safety and the thumb safety as requirements. Like the Kahr, Sig, HK and other pistols, it'll mean a faster draw and quicker first shot with a little practice.

Bab Boxer Babbles
Senator Barbara Boxer (D-CA) sometimes just has to prove she's as vacuous as House Speaker Pelosi when it comes to people's rights.

"After the Supreme Court ruling, my focus is on ensuring that California's [unconstitutional] common-sense gun laws that ~~protect~~ [deny the rights of] our families and law enforcement officers are allowed to remain on the books. These California laws include the [unconstitutional and illegal] state ban on assault weapons and [non-existent] armor-piercing bullets, the prohibition on carrying guns in a[n unidentified] school zone, and the law that allows law-abiding citizens who feel they need a concealed firearm for protection to get a permit from their local police or sheriff [by begging, bribing or using lawsuits]."

If Boxer thinks citizens of California can obtain a CCW for protection, I'll offer her a great exercise in using Federal dollars to uncover discrimination, bias and corruption in her state. All she has to do is let her office front the application fees for five (5) California citizens who work outside the government to obtain a CCW permit. Each of those citizens will put down "lawful self defense" as their "good cause" reason. And each will be rejected -- except the one to which Ms. Boxer provides $3000 to donate to the local sheriff's campaign. If this is her idea of "common sense" gun laws or a free America, then I'll personally take out a loan to fly her to Moscow.

Want to comment?

Click here to send a comment

McDonald Victory - Chicago remains Stupid

2010-07-02T14:28:00.000-07:00

McDonald Decision

By now, you should have heard that the U.S. Supreme Court (or SCOTUS for short) handed down a decision on Monday that says the 2nd Amendment applies to state and local governments too. The 5-4 decision involved the same players as the 2008 Heller decision (with the "wise Latina" on the losing side in David Souter's place).

Justice Alito wrote the majority opinion which summarizes the history and purpose of the 14th Amendment. He discusses why the Freedman Bureau act wasn't enough and how racist Confederates were literally robbing blacks of their arms, then shooting them. Southern "black codes" singled out blacks for special laws. Laws that forbade them to make contracts, serve on a jury, speak out publicly and, of course, own or buy firearms.

Alito handsomely shreds the municipal arguments and tosses them out the window as confetti. As an example, one of the arguments pushed by the city was that the 2nd Amendment wasn't covered by the due process clause. They suggested that due process protects only those rights “‘recognized by all temperate and civilized governments, from a deep and universal sense of [their] justice.’”

In the decision, Alito points out that many of our rights are unique to the American experience. Such things as our right to a jury trial, to have an attorney appointed, and our right to self-incrimination are distinctly American. If these were necessary, says Alito, then it would follow that the United States is the only civilized Nation in the world.

What it all means

This decision says that the 2nd Amendment also acts as a limitation on State & local powers. Since most states have a right to keep and bear arms in their own constitutions, not much will change in those states unless they have used the "collective right" argument to justify gun laws.

States like California that have no equivilant to the 2nd amendment in their constitutions will now have to recognize the federal constraint. Draconian state laws that severely limit gun purchases and ownership will face serious challenges.

One way to look at some of the laws is to simply ask if they could be applied to the 1st, 4th, or 5th amendments. If it would not make sense to limit one of the other rights using the same law, then it's likely unconstitutional when applied to the 2A.

One easy example is the one-gun-a-month laws. It is obvious that the government couldn't pass a law restricting you to attending church once a month. Or limit your ability to publicly speak to once a month. Why should any other fundamental right be so limited?

This actually plays towards the anti-gun lobby's side. In the next few years, our associations will have to spend large sums to challenge gun laws built up over decades. The anti-gun lobby can provide minimal help to the states, knowing they will fund the defense of those laws. Meanwhile, they can spend their money "experimenting" by lobbying for new laws or changing the definition of "prohibited persons".

Now is the time to give to gun-rights organizations so they can continue to fund legal challenges. I'm contributing to the Second Amendment Foundation (SAF) but you can contribute to whomever you prefer.

Chicago Remains Stupid

Maybe it's in the water at city hall

All of the history and legal justification was lost on Chicago's number one bonehead, Mayor Daley and the city's cadre of anti-civil rights aldermen. As promised, his royal pomposity, the mayor, pushed through a new set of laws to keep Chicago residents from obtaining guns. Pushing through the bill was no problem for Daley -- the vote was 45-0 by city aldermen - and a new set of rules will apply in Chicago.

This group of brainless dolts voted, in a rush, to pass a new package of laws that requires Chicago residents to first get a permit -- which the laws says the police can take 1/3 of the year to approve - take 5 hours of training and pay registration and permit fees.

So Chicago believes it can delay the exercise of a right, require you to obtain the city's permission (permit) to exercise the right, pay to exercise your right and mandate you pay for government-approved (and likely limited availability) training before exercising your right. None of which are constitutional.

Chicago newspapers should be screaming about the competency of the lawyers the mayor is using. Any second year law student should know that rights cannot be regulated like car ownership or owning a business.

I don't know if there is such a charge as "contempt of the Supreme Court", but if there is, Mayor Daley and Chicago's alderman should be facing it. It is arrogance second only to a dictator to say that Chicago will continute to enact unconstitutional provisions against gun owners.

Want to comment?

Click here to send a comment

Chicago - Deathville USA

2010-06-21T16:20:00.000-07:00

8 dead among 52 shot across city over weekend

Thus scream the headlines of the Chicago Sun-Times. Eight people dead and 52 wounded over a single weekend in Mayor Daley's gun-free utopia of Chicago. This sounds more like an after-action report from Afghanistan or some other war zone.

So far, in 2010 there have been 206 homicides in Chicago. Statistics from the Chicago Tribune show that 81.5% of these homicides were by firearm. But get to the truth, one has to dig deeper. And the truth is ugly. It is not something that the media tells you. It gets buried as an inconvenient truth about the homicide rates in our major cities.

In Chicago this year (so far), 78.6% of the homicide victims were African-American. Just 20% were whites and the rest were other racial groups. Of the 162 African-American men killed this year, 138 (85%) were fatally shot with a firearm. While I haven't confirmed by neighborhood, prior reporting by Chicago area newspapers indicates the majority of these shootings take place in the poor neighborhoods. The ones occupied by mostly African-Americans in low wage jobs. The poor, the unskilled and uneducated. The drug users, ex-felons, the gangs.

Looking at Chicago's statistics, 48.5% of the shootings take place on the streets,, sidewalks, alleys and front residential yards of Chicago. Just 21% occur in apartments, residences or the porches & hallway of these buildings. The streets of Chicago are indeed mean.

Homicides in Chicago, like Baltimore in 2008, occur primarily in the "hot spots" for crime. The "bad neighborhoods". The police know where these places are. So do the city's politicians. Yet, because of "the numbers" and sensationalized headlines, those like Mayor Daley want to curtail the Second Amendment rights of everyone in Chicago.

The sad truth is that politicians see the homicide numbers as useful tools to demand that citizens give up more rights to the government to "solve" the homicide problem. The politicians don't care that it's mostly young, black males who are dying in war-zone-like conditions. The money used for "fighting crime" isn't directed into these areas to help reduce black male argument violence. It isn't going to the single-parent families in these troubled areas. Nor is it going to creating jobs to give some of the younger people hope of an honest life, free of gangs and crime.

Sadly, it's the same in many U.S. cities. The poor are mostly ignored and money is poured into politically favored programs by the bucket load. Counties will spend hundreds of millions to expand an airport to handle eight more flights per day. But ask for some fraction of that money to support the poor or struggling single parent and it seems there is no money to be had. That's because those crime rates are reported for the whole city. Thus, money can be justified for new police officers, equipment, courts and other government infrastructure projects.

The truth is ugly. I warned you. And I'm not specifically picking on African-American young men. But the truth is that most of the homicides in our larger cities are gang-related. The demographics might change -- one would expect more Hispanics to be involved in homicides in Salinas, California than blacks -- but the basic facts remain. Our whole concept of dealing with violent crime should change to focus on those areas where crime occurs and those who commit those crimes.

I don't have all the answers. But I do know that so-called "gun control" efforts have failed. None have lived up to their media promises to lower crime or prevent homicides. We need to a new approach to combatting violent crime.

Want to comment?

Send your comments

Misfires - News and Odd Stories

2010-06-18T15:21:00.000-07:00

Kagan, the KKK and the NRA
Did Elena Kagan, Obama's Supreme Court nominee, compare the NRA to the KKK? It sure seems so. The National Review online contains an article detailing the documents that raised this question. We're already sure that Kagan is not friendly towards the notion of the second amendment. The fact that she would consider the 139-year-old organization as "bad guys" in terms of national volunteerism says more about her view of the constitution than almost anything else.

NY Microstamping Bill Withdrawn
Despite a 32-30 Democrat party advantage in the legislature, the NY microstamping bill was withdrawn from consideration when it was obvious it lacked the votes to pass. Three Democrats from conservative districts did not back the measure. Only one Republican, Sen. Frank Padavan of Queens, voted yes.

“By blocking commonsense gun control, Senate Republicans showed they care more about gun industry profits than the safety of their constituents,” the party’s state Chairman Jay Jacobs said. “Democrats understand what Mayor Bloomberg and law enforcement agencies across the state know from experience: linking bullets with the criminals who fired them would save lives and wouldn’t interfere with the rights of law-abiding gun owners.”

Riiight. Other than making felons out of otherwise law-abiding gun owners when their microscopic stampings wear out or become illegible. Or the extra costs it would add to gun makers having to not only manufacture, but perform detailed record keeping at every step of the supply chain.

Gun Purchases and the No Fly List
"It's no surprise that (Republican Carly) Fiorina is attacking me," Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-CA.), wrote in a recent fundraising pitch, "because she's so out of touch with California voters. ... She supports allowing people on the no-fly terrorist watch list to buy guns."

Oh the horrors! How could voters actually nominate someone so out of touch that she actually follows the constitution? Perhaps it's Boxer who's out of touch or didn't she get the memo about the U.S. Supreme Court Heller decision? For Ms. Boxer's further edification, the Constititution also provides that no one can be "deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law." Being put on a secret government list doesn't qualify as due process. Especially since there isn't any way to force the government to remove your name.

Why should we deprive a U.S. citizen with a common name like Robert E. Lee, Brian Smith or even Mohammed M. Mahazi from purchasing a firearm based on name alone? Last I remember, my 6th grade civics class told us that "guilt by association" was not permitted in America. One had to be guilty based on facts that showed a crime was committed.

If Boxer wants to play the guilt-by-association game, she had better look around at her colleagues in Congress. Hell, even Teddy Kennedy was on the no-fly list.

In the You Can't Make This Up dept...
Austin police report that a man tried to rob a gas station - with a caulking gun. This crack-smoking sorry waste of oxygen fled when his victim fought back and "the suspect fled the scene in the company of a transgender prostitute". Nope. You can't make this kind of thing up, not even in Hollywood.

Gun Slinging Megan Fox?
Spreaking of Hollywood... Actress Megan Fox (Transformers, Hope & Faith) gave an interview to MTV News to promote her new gun-slinging Western film, Jonah Hex. During the interview, she said she's been shooting guns since around the age of five, starting with her father's shotgun."He taught me how to shoot a shotgun," she said. Fox is big on gun safety and supports the NRA's Eddie Eagle program to teach gun safety in schools.

ATF Sting Store Leaves Questions Unanswered
The headline reads "Criminals fell for fake store" on Albuquerque's KRQE TV website. But a reading of the story leaves many questions unanswered. Federal agents set up a bogus "thrift store and pawn shop" and let it be known they'd buy black-market guns. Criminals, of course, took the bait. During the one year it was in operation, claims U.S. Attorney Kenneth Gonzales, the shop took in 230 guns, including (gasp!) a machine gun. Warrants were issued for 25 people, of which 22 are in custody.

The unasked questions involve putting a perspective on this "sting". Some 230 guns were taken in - that's about 4.5 per week. This would average out to about 9.2 guns sold to the Feds by each suspect. ATF agents said the guns were either stolen, unregistered or had their serial numbers removed. Thirteen of the people arrested are convicted felons who will face additional charges for possessing firearms. ATF agents plan to test fire the guns and compare ballistics to see if any of them are connected to unsolved crimes.

So, why did the feds wait almost a year to obtain warrants for people who were selling illegal guns? How many were stolen between the time the store opened and arrests were made? Wouldn't maintaining a "fence operation" encourage more burglaries of firearms while these criminals were let alone to run amok? And how many burglaries? Why were known felons allowed to bring in multiple guns instead of being arrested after their first or second visit? And why the delay in testing the firearms for use in other crimes? Won't that result in violent criminals running free while ATF fumbles around running their cute little store?

And only one (1) machine gun - certainly a high-priced commodity even on the black market - turned in. Were any others, especially legally registered ones, stolen? What is ATF doing about those?

Americans Favor Gun Ownership
A recent Harris Poll shows Americans believe people should be able to own rifles and shotguns (80%) and handguns (74%). The poll results and even the questions asked by the pollsters are posted here. It makes for some interesting reading. One thing is for certain, we still have a long way to go in convincing people that gun ownership is a right - like the right to vote.

Have something to say?

Send me your comments

Another British Mass Killing

2010-06-12T14:01:00.000-07:00

The media in the UK is having quite a time with their latest mass-murder spree. A taxi driver went off the deep end and killed 13 people, including himself. And this is despite the toughest gun-control laws in any western democratic country.

In the wake of the 1996 Dublane shooting when Thomas Hamilton murdered 16 primary schoolchildren the UK made gun ownership an ordeal for the few limited types of guns not banned. Indeed, some stories inquire why the current shooter's firearms license wasn't revoked when he was fired from a job after being accused of stealing building materials.

Think about that. The mere accusation and being sacked over it results in the police revoking your ability to have a firearm. No trial. No legal findings, just your employer firing you with an allegation of theft. Makes me very glad to live in the United States.

At least one comment in the news coverage suggested that mass-shootings were an American phenomena. That made me wonder if that was really true. Then I ran across this article by John Lott which shows that, relatively speaking, these mass shootings are as common in Europe as they are in America.

To summarize - The worst K-12 school shootings have not happened in America, but Europe.

18 dead - 2002 - Erfurt, Germany, high school students
16 dead - 1996 - Dublane, Scotland, Kindergarteners and a teacher.
15 dead - 2009 - Winnenden, Germany, High school students, teacher and others.
13 dead - 1999 - Columbine, Colorado, USA - High school students & teachers
11 dead - 2006 - Emsdetten, Germany

A historical look at shootings in Europe shows that the phenomena of mass shootings is not new.

2002
Feb 19: Freising, Germany: Three people killed and one wounded.
Mar 27: Nanterre, France: A man kills eight city councilors after a city council meeting.
Apr 26: Erfurt, Germany: A former student kills 18 at a secondary school.
Oct 1: Madrid, Spain: A man kills two employees and wounds another at a company that he was fired from.
Oct 15: Turin, Italy: Seven people were killed on a hillside overlooking the city.

2006
Nov 20: Emsdetten, Germany: A former student murders 11 people at a high school.

2007
Nov 7: Southern Finland: Seven students and the principal were killed at a high school.

2008
Sep 18: Naples, Italy: Seven dead and two seriously wounded in a public meeting hall
Sep 23: Kauhajoki, Finland: 10 people were shot to death at a college.

2009
Mar 11: Winnenden, Germany: A 17-year-old former student killed 15 people, including nine students and three teachers.
Mar 19: Lyon, France: Ten people injured after a man opened fire on a nursery school.
Apr 10: Athens, Greece: Three people killed and two people injured by a student at a vocational college.
Apr 11: Rotterdam, Netherlands: Three people killed and 1 injured at a crowded cafe.
May 24: Vienna, Austria: One dead and 16 wounded in an attack on a Sikh Temple.
Dec. 31: Espoo, Finland: 4 killed while shopping at a mall on New Year's Eve.

2010
Jun 2: Cumbria, England: 12 people killed by a British taxi driver.

Totals: 18 shootings. 131 dead, 43 wounded.

These mass killing sprees have nothing to do with how "easily" someone can get a gun or how many guns exist in the country. We should be firm with anti-gun arguments that these killing sprees are primariliy American or due to the easy availability of guns.

Have something to say?

Send your comments

CCW and Armed Citizens

2010-06-11T18:18:00.000-07:00

You don't need too many statistics to show that guns save lives. The anti-gun-lobby likes to talk about their guns bans in terms of if it only saves one life, it's worth it. Well then, the opposite must be true too. If gun ownership saves just one life, all the effort is worth it. Right?

If you don't agree, just ask these folks who had legally carried handguns with them.

Ambushed Florida Father Fights Back with CCW.
(June 2010) Three armed robbers ambushed a Florida father in the parking lot of his own apartment by shooting first. The father fought back, firing his CCW.

ATM Customer Thwarts Robber
(March 2010) - A routine stop at the ATM turns into a robbery attempt. But the robbery victim was armed and legally carrying his CCW. Surprise!

Those with a CCW can find themselves literally walking (or driving) into trouble. As the stories above show, the criminals are the ones looking for trouble, not the citizens. The criminals get to choose the time, place and method of the attack, even when it's in your own home. The following stories illustrate the point.

Wheelchair-bound Does Not Mean Defenseless
(December, 2009) Just because you're confined to a wheelchair doesn't mean you have to be defenseless. The anti-gun lobby would have forced Mr. Wroblewski to rely on a spray can of spicy seasoning to ward off his attackers.

Elderly Disabled Man Defends Home.
(April 2010) - Despite being 76, a diabetic and having Parkinson's disease, Vern Grant fought back and shot a "wild crazy man" who broke into his home and almost killed him.

Children and guns - The anti-gun lobby claims we should keep children away from guns until they are old enough to join the Marines. Despite the anti-gun claims, the following stories show that our kids can make good decisions in a crisis situation. Where the anti-gun groups sell kids short, reality shows that our kids really can use guns correctly.

Shot Boy 11, Shoots One, Drives Off Three Home Invaders
(January 2010) Despite the attempt of the newscasters to spin the story, many families would find nothing unusual about their own 11-year-olds knowing how to shoot an intruder in the home. This "little boy" in Texas can stand tall because he showed courage under fire.

Young Boy Defends Self, Sister from Home Invaders
(July 2009) - A 10 year old boy defends his sister and himself from two hard-core criminals during a home invasion robbery. From now on, this youngster deserves to be called a young man.

The news media plays up stories where a pre-teen calls 911 for help. What we used to call being level-headed is now "heroic". But these two young men showed true heroism by standing up and protecting family members.

Email us your comments.

Random Roundup

2010-06-10T01:17:00.000-07:00

New York

It seems California doesn't have a monopoly on whacky legislatures. Consider the news out of New York's capital recently. After the controversial police shooting of Sean Bell, legislators decided the current rules favored police far too much.

A bill, sponsored by Brooklyn Assembly Members Annette Robinson (D-Bedford Stuyvesant) and Darryl Towns (D-East New York) shows utter incompetence violent encounters involving law-enforcement.  This new bill would require police to use their weapons "with the intent to stop, rather than kill" a suspect. They would be mandated to "shoot a suspect in the arm or the leg."

Assemblyman Joseph Lentol, the Codes Committee chair from Fort Greene and Williamsburg, said that the bill is well-intentioned but that the language may need changing.

Ya think?

U.S. v. Skoien
Oral arguments have been heard en banc in a Seventh Circuit appellate court case that promises to be crucial to future Second Amendment cases. The Skoien case challenges the constitutionality of 1996 Lautenberg Amendment on Second Amendment grounds.

Specifically, it argues that the courts should use a standard of review called strict scrutiny. The original three judge panel of the Court of Appeals used intermediate scrutiny review standard instead.

Under intermediate scrutiny, the government must establish only that the law is related to an important government interest and in a way that is substantially related to that interest.

On the other hand, strict scrutiny requires a compelling governmental interest, that any legislation enacted to address that interest must be narrowly tailored to achieve that goal or interest and it must be the least restrictive means for achieving that interest.

The audio of the oral arguments can be heard here.

LA-LA land moves to Chicago
For decades, Los Angeles (or "LA") has been known as LA-LA land for it's wierd trends, bizzare styles, off-beat characters and goofy politics. But there must be some kind of migration going on from southern California to Chicago. Almost every week we hear some kind of whacky, goofy political story out of the Chicago area.

By now, you've heard about the 80-year-old Korean war veteran who defended himself, his wife and his great-grandson inside his from a violent predatory intruder with a 13-page rap sheet.  After previously being victimized, the veteran, who uses a walker to get around, obtained a handgun in violation of Chicago's gun ban. But when the predator couldn't break open a door at 5:20am, he fired two shots through the man's bedroom window. The veteran returned fire and with one shot ended the criminal's career. Yet, the comments from Chicago's Mayor Daley almost tax credibility.

I understand the situation and I understand. What I'm saying is all of us have to understand that guns is [sic] not the answer to problems we see in homes and on the streets of America. It's just has simple as that.

Besides the bad grammer in saying "Guns is not the answer", it is obvious that Daley doesn't see the appropriateness of the senior citizen's actions. Daley must believe that an 80-year-old man and his 83-year-old wife should somehow be capable of fending off an armed 29-year-old felon with a 13-page rap sheet full of drug & weapons convictions. Or maybe he expects their 12-year-old great-grandson to engage the man.

Of course the resident's handgun was confiscated and he'll probably never see it again. Adding to the absurdity is Mayor Daley pretending he doesn't know if the resident will be prosecuted. When asked about the possibility of charges, the mayor ended a news conference he had called about summer curfew in the city.

"I don't know. Thank you very much," Daley said and stepped away from the microphone.

Shame on Daley. He knows full well that the resident cannot be charged. Illinois state law prohibits his prosecution under the so-called "Hale DeMar Act" – named for a Wilmette, IL resident who shot a burglar with a handgun, a violation of Wilmette's handgun ban. Yet Daley has several times said he didn't know if charges would be filed or referred questions to the Chicago Police Department.

It's not a crime if Mayor Daley says it!
I noted on May 22 that Mayor Daley threatened to stick a rifle (with bayonet!) up a reporter's posterior and pull the trigger when the reporter asked if Chicago's handgun ban really worked. Daley was quoted saying "If I put this up your—ha!—your butt—ha ha!—you’ll find out how effective this is! If I put a round up your—ha ha!”

This press conference so outraged San Jose, Ca. resident Christopher Fox that he called the mayor's office to give Daley a piece of his mind. Saying Daley's comments were "grossly inappropriate" Fox, 39, says he asked him 'How would you feel if somebody did that to you?'" in the 45-second phone call. He also admits he did toss in a few profanities too.

According to a criminal complaint signed on the mayor's behalf, Fox's message contained "a threat to shoot with a firearm Mayor Richard M. Daley." He is being held without bail on suspicion of making telephone threats against a public official, according to Chicago police and jail booking records.

On May 28th, Fox was being held in the Santa Clara County jail, charged with making "terroristic threats" to a public official. A plumber who lives with his mother in San Jose, Fox says he doesn't have a bus, plane or train ticket and isn't a flight risk. Yet his incarceration was a no-bail one - the same as used for murder suspects.

I'm upgrading Mayor Daley's "Buffoon of the Week" award to Buffoon of the Month. I'll accept any suggestions for what kind of image should appear on his plaque.

Murder up 3.8% in Chicago
More bad news for the "gun free utopia" of Chicago came when crime statistics were released earlier this week. Despite a 5.8% overall drop in crime, homicides were up 3.8% over last year and auto-theft jumped 20.4%. The release touted successful police efforts to seize weapons. Police took away 3,513 weapons in the month of May, 189 more than in May of last year, a 5% increase. Of the weapons seized in May, 130 were assault weapons - or if you prefer, 96.7% were not assault weapons.

Yes, the Chicago gun ban really does seem to be working. It's keeping law-abiding citizens from obtaining guns while criminals are increasingly better armed.

Kahr Arms Purchases Magnum Research
In another consolidation in the firearms industry, Kahr firearms added the Magnum Research brand name to its product line. Kahr Arms also owns Auto Ordnance, maker of the Thompson and .30 M1 Carbine rifles and a 1911 pistol. If you've been holding off buying a Desert Eagle, Baby Eagle, BFR or their other products, I'd suggest doing it now. Any time a company changes hands there are good odds that guns made before the buyout will be more desireable and collectable than afterwards.

Chicago's Mayor Daley A Complete Embarrassment

2010-05-22T12:50:00.000-07:00

Two news headlines caught my eye this week and both involved Chicago's Mayor Daley. It's not bad enough that Chicago is known to be an inherently corrupt government. No. Daley has to prove that he cares more about quashing our civil rights than fixing his city. The first article, from the Los Angeles Times, had this headline:

Chicago Mayor Daley offers to shoot reporter to prove gun ban works

It happened at a news conference to discuss Chicago's gun ban and the Supreme Court's pending ruling on the issue. A reporter from the Chicago Reader asked him if the ban was effective. Here's how the exchange went:

"Since guns are readily available in Chicago even with a ban in place, do you really think it’s been effective?" asked Mick Dumke.

“Oh!” Daley said. “It’s been very effective!”

He grabbed a rifle, held it up, and looked right at me, Dumke said. He was chuckling but there was no smile.

“If I put this up your—ha!—your butt—ha ha!—you’ll find out how effective this is!”

“If I put a round up your—ha ha!”

Dumke said the room became "very, very quiet" before reporters realized he was joking.

As bad as this is, what is worse is Daley's comment about the Supreme Court. In referring to the court's likely decision to overturn the Chicago gun ban, Daley commented:

"Maybe they'll see the light of day," Daley said. "Maybe one of them will have an incident, and they'll change their mind overnight, going to and from work."

Now, I have to wonder at Daley's sanity, his mental capacity or possibly his hearing. His response to the question did nothing to answer it. In fact, he seemed to be showing that firearms were actually effective (which is the obvious reason to ban them). On top of that, had a city official been the recipient of such a "joke" by a Chicago citizen, Daley's henchemen in blue would charge him with aggrivated assault and confiscate the weapon. Daley, of course, was not charged with anything.

But for the mayor of a major city to say he hopes that one of the Justices (or one of their family members) could be assaulted and injured in a mugging, is just idiotic.

The second headline, from the Chicago Tribune, to catch my attention was simply ironic.

Police officer slain as mayor embarrasses himself and city

Thirty year-old Thomas Wortham IV was a victim of a robbery, shot down outside his boyhood home in the staunchly middle-class Chatham neighborhood, his body dragged 100 feet or so by the getaway car. Thugs tried to steal his motorcycle, a gift to himself upon his return from a second tour of duty in Iraq as a first lieutenant in the Army National Guard.

By all accounts, Wortham was leader, a good soldier, a dedicated police officer who tried to help others reclaim their neighborhoods. He was a man of service, giving his time to serve his city to make it a better place to live said family friends.

Ironically, however, in Mayor Daley's "gun free utopia" where his anti-gun laws are "effective", the criminals had guns and shot Wortham to death. Apparently it never bothered Daley that the death toll in Chicago was higher than the one in Iraq for two years.

Worse yet, Wortham's homicide occurred just as Mayor Daley was giving the above-mentioned press conference and threatening to shoot a reporter. How ironic and tragic is that?

Daley seeks ways to circumvent Supreme Court Decision

This ABCNews video reported on the likely legal changes that Mayor Daley would promote if the Supreme Court overturns the Chicago gun ban. Daley said they'd probably model their statutes along those draconian D.C. measures, plus requiring special liability insurance for gun owners. Why? Daley says it's for the protection of first responders, as if no one else anywhere in the country has had to deal with this alleged problem.

This is on top of Daley's call two weeks ago for an international court to decide an internal U.S. Constitutional matter. You can read about Daley's international ploy here on our website.

The question that I'd like to see answered, by a legal expert, is what prevents someone from charging Mayor Daley with violating his oath of office to uphold the constitution? Or charges of conspiracy to deprive 2.8 million people of the constitutional rights.

Elena Kagan Not Supreme Court Material

2010-05-14T13:54:00.000-07:00

That Barack Obama is the most anti-gun president we've ever had in the White House is an obvious worry. His previous selection of controversial "wise Latina" Sonia Sotomayor for the court raised eyebrows because her views on guns are relatively unknown. Nevertheless, we'll know shortly when the McDonald v. Chicago decision comes out in the next month or so.

Not so with Elena Kagan. Her thinking is apparently in line with the anti-rights crowd, as evidenced by her history.

In 1987, she was a law clerk to Justice Thurgood Marshall. At that time, she said she had no sympathy for the claim of a man that his 2nd Amendment rights were violated. The case involved a man convicted for carrying an unlicensed pistol in Washington D.C.

She was in the Justice Department during the Clinton administration and according to records at the William J. Clinton Presidential Library in Little Rock, Ark., she also drafted an executive order restricting the importation of certain semiautomatic assault rifles.

There’s more evidence of hostility to gun rights on her part. The Times also reports that “gun-control efforts were a hallmark of the Clinton Administration. Kagan had already been involved in an executive order that required all federal law-enforcement officers to install locks on their weapons.”

There is a high probability that Kagan also worked on legislation to effectively close gun shows.

Today, Kagan serves as Solicitor General, whose job it is to argue the government point of view in important legal cases before the Supreme Court.

When the Supreme Court considered its last Second Amendment case, the landmark 2008 District of Columbia v. Heller, then-U.S. Solicitor General Paul Clement filed a brief in the case, then requested and received time to argue the federal government’s position in that case as to the meaning of the Second Amendment.

When the McDonald case was argued before the Court on March 2 of this year, current Solicitor General Kagan argued… Nothing. Not only did she not ask for time during oral argument, she didn’t even file a brief (which the solicitor general routinely does in important constitutional cases—and the McDonald case is monumentally important).

Normally, we'd expect the Solicitor General to argue the government's view of the case. However, today that would require acknowledgment of the Heller decision that individual Americans have a right to keep and bear arms. The Solicitor General could argue to narrowly define the right or to support the case against Chicago.

However, it appears that Kagan has little desire to be forced into the position of acknowledging the Heller decision in the first place.

In the spring of 1995, Kagan wrote a book review of Stephen Carter’s The Confirmation Mess. “When the Senate ceases to engage nominees in a meaningful discussion of legal issues, the confirmation process takes on an air of vacuity and farce, and the Senate becomes incapable of either properly evaluating nominees or appropriately educating the public,” Kagan wrote.

So we, as gun owners, must write our representatives in Congress and demand they hold Kagan up to her own standards. She should not be allowed to weasel her way around direct questions about Second Amendment issues. Support of "most of" the Constitution is not acceptable.

The 1968 Gun Control Act

2010-05-14T12:23:00.000-07:00

Life Before GCA '68

In 1966, just as anti-Vietnam War protests were starting to take off, I was not yet an adult. However, at a nearby discount store where my mother shopped every other week, they had something I just longed to have.

It was a Remington Nylon 66 .22 rifle. This thing was the epitome of cool. It was sleek, light and had a really snazzy looking front sight. Best of all, the price tag was $49.95! Every week I counted up my earnings and saved it all in a small bank I had. Finally, I reached $50.36. Der Tag at last!

I had planned to slip away while mom shopped. She knew she could find me either in sporting goods or by the book section. I had planned to buy the rifle and wait for her by the comic books and present her with a fait accompli.

Unfortunately, excitement got the best of me and I spilled the idea in the parking lot as we walked towards the store. My head was filled with visions of how cool that rifle was and how all my friends would envy me.

Only Mom said no.

When she said it the way she did that day, I knew there was no arguing with her. I asked my father who said I should ask my mother. In trying to pin him down, he talked to her, heard her answer and said, "Not yet." I was crushed. I was bitter. I was just 12 years old.

Dad walked me into our suburban back yard and showed me why a .22 wasn't such a good idea. The BB gun I'd received at age 10 and worn out in just over a year had only once sent a BB between the fence boards. At that, I'd been lucky because Mrs. Hawkins had been watering her plants at the time and she was a rather... large target. But now dad was telling me that .22's could go through the fence and keep going.

If you've read this far, depending on your age, you may be wondering how a 12-year old boy could have bought a rifle by himself. Well, the truth is, in most states it was legal.

Get up off the floor.

I'm serious. Yes, it was legal for a 12 year old boy, heck even a 10 year old, to purchase a rifle if he had the cash, could reach the counter top and could carry it out of the store. Heck, some stores would forgo everything but having the cash. Of course a some stores might ask for a parental note or call the parents, just to be sure.

In fact, I recall going into a Conoco station in Ft. Worth with my father and seeing a small display case with western-style revolvers inside and some ammo stacked along one edge. The local hardware store was more fun as they had a wall of fishing gear and guns with a long display case full of handguns of all kinds. Just leave me there, looking, and I'd dream of owning one someday.

Believe it or not, you could order a rifle or pistol through the mail! Yep. Places like Numrich Arms (now http://www.e-gunparts.com/) could legally sell complete guns via mail order. Right to your door. No paperwork at all.

Sellers of guns did not need a special license to sell guns. They were considered just another product to sell. You'd find guns for sale in places like gas stations, hardware stores, Auto parts stores, Sears, Montgomery Wards and sometimes in beauty parlors. The latter were usually small purse guns like .25 Autos and .32 revolvers.

It was literally no different than buying a Black & Decker drill or a pair of pants. No forms filled out. Cash and carry. If you had the money to buy five guns at once, they'd ask you if you wanted help out to your car.

Heck, some states didn't even have prohibitions on felons owning guns.

True, some states had some age limits. As I recall, you had to be at least 12 to buy a rifle in Colorado and in other states 16 to buy a handgun. In some of the rural and good hunting areas, nobody looked twice if a youngster had an old .30-40 Krag Jorgensen strapped to his handlebars a week before deer season opened. Heck the school principals would keep them in racks in their offices until after school.

Some high-schools had ROTC rifle teams or their own regional rifle teams. Sure, many fired .22 rifles, but there were also .30 caliber leagues too. And problems with these students were minimal. I find it ironic that when guns were plentiful and as easy to acquire as buying a pipe wrench, there were fewer problems with them.

Those days are probably gone forever though. Too many kids today do not receive the kind of discipline and parental oversight as kids growing up much earlier decades. Too many kids today think violence makes them "tough guys" or more like adults. Our role models were guys like Roy Rogers or Audie Murphy. Their role models are flashy rappers with pimped out Escalades.

In early 1967, even in California, it was not against the law to carry a loaded handgun in the glovebox of your car. In an era when cars had no seat belts, kids weren't confined to car seats, and dashboards were made of painted steel, we managed to survive even having a handgun in the glovebox.

When we drove to California from Ft. Worth, times were certainly different. Mom tells me that my brother and I were asleep in the back seat when dad was pulled over in New Mexico for speeding. During that trip, dad kept a loaded S&W Victory Model in the glove box of our '57 Ford sedan. The N.M. troopers had seen the Texas plates of course. Walking up to the car they probably saw two young boys asleep in the back amongst the ice chest and pillows and relaxed somewhat.

Now, the reason I say life has changed is that the glove box was open so mom could rest her cold water there while she unwrapped a sandwhich for my dad. One trooper simply said, "Ma'am, would you mind closing the glovebox for me? We get a little nervous when folks have guns within reach." And that was that.

Amazing, isn't it?

Are there any parts of the U.S. that are still this relaxed about guns? I tend to doubt it, unless you know the officer involved. Perhaps Arizona and Nevada tend to be more relaxed since open carry is legal in many areas.

Now, I don't think I'd advocate a sudden, abrupt turnaround to those days. While it would be nice, I don't think it is really workable. Too many wanna-be tough guys out there who have no clue. And too many 15-18 years olds today don't know what responsibility means.

One thing is certain to me though. The so-called "Gun Control Act of 1968" has neither controlled crimes in which guns are used nor reduced the number of them. We've had over 40 years of these laws adding extra cost to the price of guns, burdening dealers with strict regulations and limiting our rights. And it doesn't work. It's time to revoke these laws.

More from the 2010 SHOT Show

2010-02-03T19:20:00.000-08:00

Kel-Tec brought out their new PMR-30 at the 2010 SHOT Show. The PMR-30 is designed around the .22 WMR (.22 Magnum) cartridge. The 30 round double stack magazine gives you plenty of magnum rimfire power. That's also the meaning behind the “-30″ designator in the name.

The light-weight Kel-Tec PMR-30 (only 13.6 ounces) has many of the features shooters like -- an accessory rail and a frame mounted safety (sweep down to fire.), fiber optic sights, (front is green, red rear).

Kel-Tec states the 4.3″ barrel will yield 1230 fps with a 40 grain bullet (134 ft/lbs). While it's certainly no bear gun, I'm sure a lot of varmints will fall to the PMR-30.

Kel-Tec indicates the PMR-30 will begin shipping in the 2nd quarter with an MSRP of $415. At a street price of just under $400, Kel-Tec should sell a boatload and increase the demand for .22 WMR.

Taurus

Taurus showed their polymer "Judge" that fires a .45 Colt or 2.5" 410 shotgun shell. The model 4510PLYB2 features a lightweight polymer frame, adjustable sights, a target-style trigger, and a red fiber optic front sight. The 4510PLYSS2 shown above has a bobbed hammer and stainless steel cylinder. It's probably good that there are only 5 rounds to shoot out of these 27 ounce revolvers.

.38 Polymer Protector

Taurus showed another polymer revolver in, .38 Special at the SHOT Show. Called the “Polymer Protector”, it is a polymer framed revolver and blued steel cylinder and barrel insert. Streamlined for concealed carry, the hammer is shrouded, but can still be cocked for a single action shot. The grips are wood-colored polymer. The new Taurus revolver only weighs 18.2 ounces and is rated for +P ammunition. No official shipping date has been set, but a Taurus representative was heard saying 4Q2010. Look for it around October.

No word yet when Ruger, S&W and Taurus will have a ugliest new revolver contest.

GunVault

GunVault introduced the NanoVault, a compact, secure and affordable handgun storage safe solution. Available in two sizes the NanoVault is perfect for home, travel or concealed-weapon permit holders. The NanoVault meets TSA airline firearm guidelines and fits discreetly in a bag, briefcase, desk or under a vehicle seat.

The NanoVault uses a key lock system, 21-gauge steel construction and 1.25-inch thick memory foam interior. Each unit comes standard with a 1,500-pound test security cable. When the cable is wrapped around any fixed object and slid over the lock receiver inside the security box, both the NanoVault and any valuables will be securely attached. MSRP $29.99 (NV100) and $34.99 (NV200).

Dan Wesson Guardian 1911 Pistol

The Dan Wesson Guardian 1911 pistol is a commander-sized 1911 chambered in 9mm. The Guardian features a forged alloy frame with CZ's black “duty” finish, a bob-tailed grip for easier concealed carry and fixed tritium three-dot sights.

It is heavier than similar sized, polymer framed pistols, but that extra weight should make the 9mm recoil feel like you're shooting mouse farts. Weight is listed as 1.8 pounds (about 28.8 ounces).

That's it for now. As always, if you want to comment or have questions, drop me a line at editor@handgunclub.com.

2010 SHOT Show Part III

2010-01-21T22:51:00.000-08:00

SHOT SHOW Day 3

I spent entirely too much time at the Sig-Sauer booth, getting briefed about their P250 modular system. This was mostly because they had chairs so we could sit down! The P250 uses a modular action that can essentially be moved from frame to frame. If you purchase a full-size pistol, you can obtain an X-CHANGE kit to allow you to swap the action into a smaller frame. This conversion can be in the same caliber or your choice of 9mm, .357 Sig, .40 S&W or .45 ACP. This means that you have the same trigger from one size gun to the next. In addition, the P250 features a reversible magazine catch and ambidextrous slide release for lefties, DAO action with a 6.5 lb trigger pull. There are three different grip sizes to fit any hand (2 sizes for the subcompact frame).

Sig offers .22 LR conversion kits for the P220, P226 and P229 pistols too. These kits include a slide, barrel, recoil spring and magazine. Conversion is accomplished through a simple field stripping operation. Kits are also available for caliber swaps between the popular centerfire pistol cartridges. In theory, your P226 could be purchased in 9mm and you could have a .22LR conversion kit AND a .40 S&W conversion, giving you three calibers you can use.

LaserLyte now offers laser sights that fit Glock, XD’s, Ruger’s SR9 and the S&W M&P series pistols. The laser module replaces the rear sight set and aims the laser from on top of the weapon. It’s a neat, clean solution, but you only get 1 hour of solid run time from the four #377 watch batteries. The sights are extremely rugged and water resistant. Installation simply uses the existing dovetails

Talo Distributing is offering what they call the 21st Century Commander 1911. When I see that a pistol’s main claim is that it was designed by a gun-writer, in this case Wiley Clapp, my first impulse is to approach it very cautiously. This 21st Century gun has a lot of 20th Century designs, including the 70-series action, small safety, standard slide lock, flat mainspring housing. In fact, the only “21st Century” items are from the late 20th Century – front & rear serrations, Colt’s new style beavertail grip safety, Novak dovetail sights with an extra-wide notch and bead front sight. Custom grips are added with a taper to aid your grip. It’s advertised as “Everything you need and nothing you don’t.” Aside from the sights, grips and front serrations on the slide, this isn’t much different than your Grandfather’s Commander.

Olympic Arms has resurrected the 1950’s designed Whitney Wolverine .22 LR pistol. This time they’ve used a polymer frame and vent rib barrel. Lightweight, fun to shoot, ergonomic grip angle with a 4.625” barrel, optional adjustable sights, 10 round magazine. MSRP is only $294

Beretta’s new Model 92A1 and 96A1 pistols represent Beretta’s commitement to the world famous 92FS pistol and the Beretta 90-Two. The –A1 platforms both models feature high capacity magazines,17 rounds in 9mm in the 92A1 and 12 rounds in 40 S&W in the 96A1, and are completely interchangeable with other 92 family magazines. An internal recoil buffer increases service life by reducing stress on the receiver created by the more powerful .40 S&W caliber ammunition. Each pistol includes three magazines.

The frame of the 92 and 96A1’s have an integral MIL-STD-1913 rail for rapid attachment of tactical lights and laser aiming devices, removable front sight allows the user to easily replace a damaged sight or replace it with an accessory sight. The rounded trigger guard reflects updated styling to conform with current pistol gripping practices.
That’s it for now. No posts on Friday as that’s when I’ll be driving back home after a partial day at the show.

2010 SHOT Show Part II

2010-01-21T07:33:00.000-08:00

Shot Show – Day 2 – Wed 1/20

Today I went through the show visiting as many handgun makers as possible. After, all, isn’t that what you want to know about? What’s new, what’s changed and what’s better? Me too. And there were enough new things around that I could get as confused as a baby in a topless bar. So, let’s start with some of the new stuff.

Colt Firearms

9mm Defender – Colt’s 3-inch barreled Defender model should take off with the 9mm version available starting in April 2010. It’s identical to the .45 ACP Defender and points just as well.

A good sized crowd gathered around other new models. These include some that will really appeal to the 1911 fans out there.

First is a Lightweight Government Model. Yes, you heard that right. For those who like to carry the full size 1911, Colt now makes a lightweight version (specs to follow). There is also the Double Action Government model giving the user a 2nd-strike capability and eliminating the grip safety. At least one DAO Lightweight Commander was shown too. These will be released between February and "early summer" according to the Colt rep.

9mm DAO New Agent – Spurning the polymer craze, Colt brings us a 9mm New Agent with a DAO firing system. This eliminates the need for the grip safety. The hammer is bobbed for concealed carry and the trigger is clean, stacking somewhat just before releasing the hammer. This should compete nicely with the current crop of Springfield XD’s, Glocks, S&W M&P pistols and similar.

Ruger Firearms

Ruger has beaten S&W to a medium frame, 7-shot, .327 Federal Magnum with a full-length 6-inch barrel. This will boost the velocity of the 100 grain JSP to over 1600 fps!

A Ruger rep said they were reasonably happy with the attention the .327 round is getting with their SP-101 and with others doing conversions of older guns. When whether we'd see a Single Six rechambered for .327 Federal the rep said it was questionable if there was enough metal on the gun for safety. But then he smiled and suggested if I was a single-action shooter it might not be too long before I was "happy". Vaquero anyone?

SR9C - The SR9 Compact
The SR9C is a compact version of the Ruger SR9 high capacity 9mm. Features include an accessory rail to mount lights and lasers. Unlike other compact pistols that use fixed sights, the same adjustable, high-visibility 3-Dot sight system as its full-sized predecessor. It comes with two flat-bottom 10-round magazines, with a removeable finger extension. The larger magazine with the grip adapter holds 17 rounds. This magazine is shown in the photo below.

Rasberry for the LCP .380

The LCP .380 is also available from Davidson’s Distributing with a rasberry receiver for those of you looking for something colorful. And before you say it, it actually doesn't look too bad. A nice gift for a daughter moving away from home or even for your own pocket if you are tired of "tactical black". I didn't get the word from the Davidson's folks, but I believe these will be exclusive to dealers who deal with Davidson's.

USFA in the last few years has branched out from offering only Single Action Colt replicas to building copies of the 1911. Now they have introduced copies of the beloved Colt Woodsman .22 semiauto. Available in both 4 and 6 inch barrels the fit and finish of these is excellent. Though I think the bluing on the older Colts is much deeper. I expect steep retail prices on this one in the $800 range. However, that may be worth it, if you consider inflation rate since 1954 is almost 700% and guns from that era are still going strong.

Lew Horton Distributing was showing off some special-edition Colts. The ones that caught my eye were the Sam Colt Signature Series .45 and the "God Created Man, Col. Colt Made Them Equal" version. Both of these are 1991 Series .45 Autos embellished with engraving and gold inlay. These are in the "if you need to ask..." price range.

SMITH & WESSON

The Bodyguard changes shape and goes polymer!

This year, S&W announced two new “Bodyguard” models. The first is their .38 +P rated new model Bodyguard .38. The other is a small .380 auto, both with factory-installed lasers.

The Bodyguard .38 - Instead of the distinctive “hump back” look of previous bodyguards, this model is really a concealed hammer Centennial model. What makes it distinctive are it’s completely redesigned frame and unique lock-work. The frame is a combination aluminum alloy upper mated to a polymer lower frame

in a manner much more eye pleasing than the Ruger LCR. The first thing that you notice is the integral laser unit mounted high on the right side of the frame. Next to it is the cylinder release which has been moved from the left size to the top of the frame. It recalls the flavor of the older top-break models when you reach up to release the cylinder. The cylinder still swings out to the left, but oddly enough, the cylinder turns clockwise instead of counterclockwise. Opening the cylinder reveals that the engineers have heavily tinkered with the lock-work. The cylinder hand has been eliminated and a new method of turning the cylinder using a center-mounted “star”.

The Bodyguard .380 Auto is a compact and ergonomic, pistol that features a high-strength polymer frame with a black, Melonite® coated stainless steel slide and barrel. The new Bodyguard 380 is standard with a 2 ¾-inch barrel, which contributes to an overall length of 5 ¼-inches and an unloaded weight of only 11.85 ounces. It features a double-action system, giving the shooter a second-strike capability and a smooth trigger

pull. It’s one of the few polymer guns with a manual thumb safety and an external take down lever and slide stop. On the lower portion of the frame, the pistol has been fitted with an integral INSIGHT laser, which is easily operated by both left and right-handed shooters. The BODYGUARD 380 is standard with a 6+1 magazine capacity.

.22 Caliber

S&W’s Model 43C is a new 8-shot Centennial J-frame .22LR with a 1-7/8” barrel tipping the scales at a mere 11 ounces. S&W also offers the more potent .22 Magnum version as the Model 351C with a 7-round capacity. Both models come with S&W boot grips. The Model 48 returns and purists will like that it retains the original 6-shot capacity in both the 4-inch and 6-inch barreled versions. The stainless Model 63 now sports a 3-inch barreled version with adjustable HI-VIZ sights and an 8-round cylinder.

.38/.357 J-frames
Three of the Airweight models get a new 21/2” barrel. The 637, 638 Bodyguard and 642. All three are .38 Special + P rated. This includes models with plain or Crimson Trace laser grips. As a bonus S&W includes a package of 2 Tuff brand “Quick-Strips” speed-loaders. The lightweight Model 360 gets a 3-inch barrel.

The Pro Series 442, 642 and 640 all now have moon-clip capable cylinders. A slightly different 640 (SKU 178044) has fixed night-sights dovetailed front and rear. Notice the absense of the lock in the sideplate.

In addition to the 632Carry Comp, S&W’s Pro series introduces the 632 Centennial model (178046) with dovetailed night-sights and a fluted 2-1/8” barrel. MSRP is $918 which translates into a street price in the $779-$799 range. It looks very similar to the 940 shown at left.

More Scandium revolvers show up this year. In .357 Magnum, the lightweight 386 with a 6” barrel called the 386 XL Hunter. It’s companion model is the 329 XL Hunter .44 Mag. Both feature PBD coating on the stainless cylinders to give the Scandium alloy revolvers a uniform matte black finish.

Performance Center Guns include a Model 627, 629 and 657 with flat-sided 2-5/8” barrels, Performance center action, ball detent lock-up. The 627’s cylinder is cut for 8-shot moon clips.

Automatics

The M&P 40 now features a 5-inch barrel version with Novak fiber optic front sight. The M&P 40 is also available with a 4.25” barrel and night-sights. The M&P 9 mirrors the .40 S&W version with the same features. Finally, the SW1911 line gets a 9mm, albeit in a 5-inch “Government” model. S&W also now offers a 3-inch SW1911 compact model.

Machine Engraved

S&W has created “inexpensive” engraving for four handguns. The 442, 640, 29, and PPK/S. All of these models come with a mahogany presentation case. If you have ever priced engraved firearms, you know that engraving usually adds $1,000 to the cost of the gun. S&W’s machine engraved models will certainly cost you more, but more like $300-$400 more, including the mahogany presentation case. I’m certain some retiring police officers and others will receive these, as well as those who like fine-line engraving.

Sig firearms has finally delivered their P238, announced last year. This is a small .380 pistol about the same size as the S&W/Ruger pistols. One of the more attractive models features a slide with a rainbow coloring.

Stay tuned there's more to come tomorrow.

2010 SHOT Show - Day One

2010-01-20T05:45:00.000-08:00

From Las Vegas

If there is one word to describe the annual SHOT show, it’s the word BIG. This thing covers an entire convention center. Last year someone estimated it contained 19 miles of walkways between the vendor booths. I arrived midday on the first day after spending 9 hours driving through torrential rains from California to a cool and partly-cloudy Las Vegas. As tired as I was, I managed to peruse one hall of the show.

One of the first things to catch my eye was a copy of the Baby Browning .25ACP from Precision Small Arms. While I’m not usually a fan of the .25 caliber pistols, these are very well made under license from Fabrique Nationale (FN) in Belgium. If you appreciate the genius of John M. Browning’s 1911 and Browning High Power, this might be another pistol to add to your collection.

At an average of about 8oz (1/2 lb), the Baby Browning is a single action, 6+1 self-loading blow-back semi-auto pistol. A mere 4.11 inches long, 2.88 inches high and only .88” wide. Trigger pulls are set to 5.25 pounds out of the box. For those wanting a truly “deep cover” gun, it’s hard to find something smaller. Retail prices for these quality “pocket pistols” will run between $525 to $575.

For those of you who looking for a .380 pistol, Task Firearms of Miami is importing a Turkish made copy of the venerable Beretta Model 84. Named the Fatih 13 (yes, that is spelled correctly) .380 ACP pistol, it holds 12+1 rounds of .380 just like the Beretta 84. What you compromise on is the fine polished blue finish. The Fatih 13 has a matte blue finish with durable black plastic grips. Retail pricing will save you anywhere from about $225 to $300 over the Beretta, starting around $500-$525.

This first half-day didn’t yet touch on the main firearms vendors. But stay tuned for tomorrow’s visit. That’s when I plan to hit up S&W, Colt, Ruger, Sig-Sauer, SA, Taurus and the other major players.

Bad Humor

2009-11-25T01:49:00.000-08:00

Evaluating "Pro Gun" Humor

Every once in a while someone e-mails me some kind of funny pro-gun humor. Sometimes they can be funny. Often they are sarcastic or reflect a cynical humor about the state of legal affairs. But some are funny only on their face and less funny if you're truely law abiding.

This particular item is making the rounds and was forwarded to me by a former coworker. She thought it was funny. So did I, at least on the surface. But there's a serious problem with it that should be obvious.

This Ad Was Posted to
Craig's List Personals:

To the Guy Who Tried to Mug Me in Downtown Savannah night before last.
Date: 05-27-09, 1:43 A. M. EST.

I was the guy wearing the black Burberry jacket that you demanded that I hand over, shortly after you pulled the knife on my girlfriend and me, threatening our lives.

You also asked for my girlfriend's purse and earrings. I can only hope that you somehow come across this rather important message.

First, I'd like to apologize for your embarrassment when I drew my pistol after you took my jacket. The evening was not that cold, and I was wearing the jacket for a reason.

My girlfriend had just bought me that Kimber Model 1911 .45 ACP pistol for my birthday, and we had picked up a shoulder holster for it that very evening. Obviously you agree that it is a very Intimidating weapon when pointed at your head, wasn't it?

I know it probably wasn't fun walking back to wherever you'd come from bare footed since I made you leave your shoes, cell phone, and wallet with me. [That prevented you from calling or running to your buddies to come help mug us again].

After I called your mother, or "Momma" as you had her listed in your cell, I explained the entire episode of what you'd done. Then I went and filled up my gas tank as well as four other people's in the gas station on your credit card. The guy with the big motor home took 150 gallons and was extremely grateful!

I gave your shoes to a homeless guy outside Vinnie Van Go Go's, along with all the cash in your wallet. [That made his day!]

I then threw your wallet into the big pink "pimp mobile" that was parked at the curb ... after I broke the windshield and side window and keyed the entire driver's side of the car.

Later, I called a lot of phone sex numbers from your cell phone. Ma Bell just now shut down the line, although I only used the phone for a little over a day now, so what's going on with that?

Earlier, I managed to get in two threatening phone calls to the DA's office and one to the FBI, while mentioning President Obama as my possible target. The FBI guy seemed really intense and we had a nice long chat (I guess while he traced your number, etc).

In a way, perhaps I should apologize for not killing you ... but I feel this type of retribution is a far more appropriate punishment for your threatened crime.

I wish you well as you try to sort through some of these rather immediate pressing issues, and can only hope that you have the opportunity to reflect upon, and perhaps reconsider the career path you've chosen to pursue in life.

Remember, next time you might not be so lucky.
Have a good day!
Thoughtfully yours,
Alex

P.S. Remember this motto.
An armed society makes for a more civil society!

At first blush, it's mildly funny that the street thug gets his "just desserts" by becoming a victim of the same kinds of crimes he [and others] would perpetrate against you and me. It's the old an eye for an eye kind of biblical justice.

But let's look at it from a more legalistic viewpoint. When threatened with robbery, our intrepid citizen could have defended himself with his Kimber .45 pistol. And it would probably have been ruled justified.

If he had forced the thug to drop his knife then leave behind his wallet and cell phone and used the thug's cell phone to call police, his actions could be deemed defensible. The knife is evidence, perhaps with fingerprints on it. The wallet identifies the thief and taking the cell phone prevents him from calling his "buddies" to retaliate.

Instead, our citizen turns criminal. He keeps the thug's money and then gives it away. He illegally uses the thug's credit card for purchases, makes threatening phone calls on the cell phone and damages another person's car. By the time he's done, I figure he's chalked up one federal felony, four state felonies and about five misdemeanor crimes.

This kind of behavior is not in keeping with our "law abiding" image as gun owners. It is certainly not the image we want of CCW permit holders! The premise is certainly funny and gratifying for anyone who's been robbed or had their identity stolen.

I think the correct response to this kind of "humor" is that such actions are unlikely by most gun owners or permit holders. But it does point out to the potential thief what could happen if they were given a dose of their own medicine. Fortunately, the vast majority of our citizenry would rather see the thug in jail than commit illegal acts as retribution.

Want to add your comments?

Send to: Editor@handgunclub.com

Terror at Ft. Hood

2009-11-19T09:37:00.000-08:00

Islam, Psychiatry and Political Correctness

It has taken me days to learn some details about the Fort Hood, Texas shooting and the man responsible. I will confess to originally having a rather visceral reaction to whole affair. Having sorted out my thoughts a bit better, I find that my anger towards Major Hasan isn't anywhere near as strong as my anger towards those who push "political correctness".

The "executive summary" of the Fort Hood incident is that a U.S. Army psychiatrist, Major Hasan, is also a Muslim. He completed his studies at Walter Reed Hospital but was considered a mediocre student. His duties would be to help soldiers cope with the traumas of war. During his studies, however, he voiced his objection to the Iraqi and Afghan wars as "crusades against Muslims" and equated suicide bombers to U.S. soldiers who fall on a grenade to save their fellow troops.

He was transferred to Ft. Hood in preparation for deployment to Iraq. During the months he was in Texas, he found a great conflict between his duty as a Muslim and his sworn duty as a soldier. This conflict led to his choosing Islam over his military duties and on November 6th, he opened fire on the base, killing 13 and wounding over two dozen more.

Lessons Learned

Islamic indoctrination for most Muslims begins at as soon as they can understand speech and continue for most of their lives. The rules and lessons of Islam are enforced with harsh (and sometimes brutal) efficiency. Islam denies that any other religion is valid. To non-believers (infidels) it denies them basic rights even if they convert under duress - such as a sword at your neck. But most of all, Muslim faith requires its followers to put Islam above all else. This includes any laws or rights others have. It includes violating any oath you voluntarily took.

If your religious beliefs are so strong that you place them "above all else" then swearing an oath means little. Swearing an oath to any organization can be negated by showing it is contrary to Islamic law or rule.

In England, Muslims have challenged long standing English laws by proclaiming them superceded by Muslim Law. In otherwords, that which Islam permits is always legal, everywhere for Muslims. This has been used to make child beatings and child murders a "family matter" not subject to the courts. So far, it hasn't worked.

Political Correctness is self-defeating. It has been established there were "warning signs" exhibited by Hasan in the months leading up to the shooting. His outbursts of anti-war sentiments, his praise of jihadists and calling the conflicts genocide against Muslims. Several of his concerned classmates - officers in the U.S. Army - talked to their superiors about Hasan's views. But when it came down to making a formal complaint, they all declined.

Why? Because, no one wanted to appear racist. Without a formal written complaint little could be done to look into Hasan's rantings or his mental state. Despite the concerns and fears of his fellow doctors, the fear of being called "racist" or "anti-Islamic" won out. Thus, political correctness becomes de facto thought-control. We are afraid to voice our concerns lest we be marked with scarlet letter "R" for racist.

Mass shootings depend on defenseless victims. Once again this serves as a prime example of the defenseless being targeted. Even though a military base like Ft. Hood has thousands of weapons present, they are kept secured. Only authorized military police may carry weapons routinely. Soldiers qualifying at the range are strictly supervised and weapons returned to the armory.

There is no doubt that Major Hasan knew this. It is standard protocol on U.S. Bases in this country. This policy serves the interests of the military and I am not criticizing it. However, it does show us that even the presence of thousands of weapons cannot deter someone, if those weapons are unavailable when needed. Killers may be deranged, but they aren't stupid. They deliberately select locations that are unlikely to have firearms or people who can defend themselves.

Seek, engage, destroy. These are the newest tactics to handle public shooting events. Rather than waiting for superior numbers or the arrival of a SWAT team, officers are being trained to aggressively seek out and engage the shooters to save lives. This was demonstrated to us by the outstanding performance of Sergeant Kimberly Munley (pictured) of the Ft. Hood civilan police agency. Munley engaged Hasan and shot him several times, despite being shot in both legs and her right hand.

Munley, stands barely five feet tall and is described as "petite". Armed only with a handgun, she showed the world that it doesn't take a big, burly male soldier or police officer to stop such an attack. Anyone with solid firearms training and maintaining their focus should be able to do the same. Of course, such actions require training ... and lots of courage. Munley's performance tells us she has the courage of a squad of soldiers.

Psychiatry is still a primitive medicinal practice. When compared to other forms of medicine, it sometimes seems no better than visiting a witch doctor. Too much is subjective, based on opinions and indirect inferences. And this case points out how even a "qualified" psychiatrist can not diagonose his own mental instability.

There have been sufficient cases of one individual being declared dangerous or incompetent by one psychiatrist only to be pronounced utterly sane by another. This is one reason I am always suspicious of any psychiatrist. Plus one always wonders about what kind of personal biases and prejudices the psychiatrist brings into the diagnosis.

Political correctness, inflexible Islamic teachings, psychiatrists who are not, themselves, subjected to "analysis" and defenseless victims all contributed to this tragedy. It is doubtful the military will change its policy of unarmed soldiers on U.S. bases due to safety concerns. Islam is unlikely to change either. But we can strive to choke off political correctness and make sure psychiatrists are more stable than their patients.

Do you have comments?
Want to add your voice?

Send comments to: editor@handgunclub.com

Firearms and Psychiatry

2009-11-17T12:18:00.001-08:00

Psychiatric Myopia

An article on the Psychiatric Times website shows the narrow-minded myopia with which the medical community views gun ownership.

The referenced article is titled Firearms and Mental Illness, written by Donna M. Norris, MD and Marilyn Price, MD. A good, unbiased psychiatrist might have a field day dissecting their article.

They first bolster support for their idea that "restrictions" on gun ownership extend back to the 18th century. However, back then there were "common sense" rules, like telling Martha not to store the 2 pound keg of black powder near the fireplace and no firearms in the courthouse.

In fact, the first page and a half claims that State and Federal laws require more reporting of "mental illness" histories, but are still lacking. The second page contains three long paragraphs about suicide and firearms. Their most significant fact is 46 people a day committed suicide with a firearm daily in 2005 or 53% of the total. Of course, they don't tell you that a whopping 70.7% of those suicides also involve intoxication with drugs and/or alcohol. It would seem that drugs and alcohol are much more of a problem for depressed people.

As I read this article, I noticed that both early in their article and later, these doctors denied there was a confirmed link between "mental illness" and mass shootings or acts of violence. In the first paragraph, they state:

While violence is often portrayed in the media as related to persons with mental illnesses, there are limited research data to support this idea.

Later, as they turn to the topic of suicide, they make the curious statement that ...

Persons with mental illnesses and/or substance abuse disorders are frequently perceived by the public to be dangerous, and their inclusion in the NICS data bank is controversial.

Apparently the psychiatric field doesn't "perceive" the mentally ill or those with substance abuse as "dangerous". Or they are saying public perception is wrong, I'm not quite sure. I was expecting them to claim that public policy was in error to include the mentally ill in NICS checks. But, there's more of course.

I continued reading and expecting them to discuss how the entire handling of mental illness and firearms ownership has been overplayed or overblown. Especially when they said ...

the vast majority of violent events are not perpetrated by persons with mental illness. However, there is a well-documented correlation of violence for individuals with substance abuse disorders. Thus, it is unclear whether a database of mentally ill persons is a deterrent.

Admittedly, if we take every violent act in the country, we might agree. However, it is the repeated violent acts of rapists and mass murderers that get our attention.

But these doctors ignore evidence as plain as their noses. In the first few postal shootings in the 80's, three of the four suspects were being "treated" for depression and other mental disorders. The Columbine killers had been taking psychiatric drugs. The Virgina Tech shooter is another example. In other shootings we have heard the person was "in therapy" or had "stopped taking their medications".

The article even touched on Federal requirements for a "relief from disabilities". In theory, this allows you to get your 2A rights back when you're put onto the NICS prohibited list. While this is true, we've also seen how Congress can de-fund such programs, which allows them to claim there is "a process", with no one to administer it.

Their "conclusion" is much like today's practice of psychiatry in that it falls far short of being effective. In short, it's nothing more than a very general warning for doctors to know what the state laws require and that attesting to a patient's "cure" ...

may impose potential legal liability for a patient’s future acts.

So, instead of examining the real issues with modern psychiatry, the laws and public perceptions, we get an article that appears to support more restrictions, calls for more reporting of "mental illness" interventions and a warning that doctors may face liability for releasing a patient from a "prohbited person" status.

First, let me say that true mental illness affects a great many people. I'm not talking about those with a fetish for washing their hands or always lining up eating utensils perfectly, but those who are mentally ill and dangerous to themselves or others. These folks need and deserve treatment. Their rights should be carefully guarded and the opinions of their doctors challenged.

Next, if you are ever in a situation where authorities are called and want you to get a "psychiatric examination", never force them into making it an involuntary commitment. Not even for one of those 24 hour holds in the county hospital. Once it is involuntary, it gets reported. This is not always the case for voluntary check-ins. An involuntary stay might effect your ability to purchase firearms in the future.

Doctors want to reduce the stigma associated with the term "mental illness" so that people are less afraid to seek help. However, at the same time, they still advocate having the ability for a doctor to deprive a free man of his rights with just a signature. And once that is done, it can be frightfully difficult and expensive to reverse it.

We should re-examine whether mandatory reporting is necessary or even desireable if we want more people to seek help. Unfortunately, from what I'm hearing, most so-called psychiatrists are nothing more than dispensers of happy-pills.

Many people have episodes of depression that are perfectly normal. The loss of a loved one, family breakups, financial losses, etc. Sometimes the emotions are severe enough to warrant seeking help. Other times folks just need some advice on keeping their sense of perspective.

If the medical community is serious about expanding mental health care services, they will re-examine their prejudices against firearms ownership. In addition, they will work with legislatures to ensure people can be released from prohibitions once they have passed through a crisis point. But I won't hold my breath for these changes. Not when so many psychiatrists themselves have a prejudice against firearms.

Have something to say? Want to disagree?
Send comments to: editor@handgunclub.com

Guns & The Media - Bias Gives Way to Lies

2009-09-25T04:32:00.000-07:00

The Story That Wouldn't Die
MSNBC Blatantly Distorts Gun News

In 1997 a Media Watch study concluded the media was biased against guns. The study found there were 87 stories favorable to the gun control lobby to every 4 stories favorable to gun rights. To anyone who has watched media reporters mutilate the English language and firearms terminology to dramatize a news story involving guns, this is old news.

Today, while reporters still flaunt their complete ignorance (my second favorite is San Francisco's KGO radio reporter Holly Kwan's description of a semi-automatic machine gun) some media outlets have cast truth in jouralism aside entirely.

That's exactly what MSNBC did regarding a recent story of an armed man at an Arizona healthcare meeting. I commented on it a few days later in this blog entry. But I never expected MSNBC to blatently lie about the entire thing.

Even the Washington Times ran an editorial about it, entitled False Reports About Guns. I've watched the replays of the MSNBC report and I can tell you that I was seriously outraged at MSNBC's distortion and lies.

In short, here's what happened. An African-American gentleman showed up at an Arizona healthcare event while legally carrying both a pistol and an AR-15 rifle. The media predictably focused on the gun and when police declared the man's actions legal they speculated for many minutes on his "apparent motive".

But MSNBC, in revisting the "anger" at townhall meetings over healthcare, showed a snippet of "a man with a rifle" with the man's race intentionally obscured. Their on-air personalities then painted the armed man as a white racist angry about a black president and national healthcare. It was almost one hundred percent likely that they know the protester was black, not white.

Watch a clip of this "news" segment using this YouTube link and tell us what you think.

In my opinion, this is the same kind of yellow journalism that resulted in the firing of CBS Anchor Dan Rather. This is the kind of distorted "news" one would expect to see in a movie like 1984. There are plenty of video sources that showed the rifle was carried by a black man and from several angles. MSNBC had to work hard to focus on a short snippet that obscured the man's race. And the hosts of that program either knew what they were doing or are simply incompetent to be journalists.

On Ted Kennedy's Passing

2009-08-27T14:55:00.000-07:00

Ted Kennedy - The End of Camelot

First, let me extend my sympathies to the Kennedy family, his personal and political staff and those who were close to him. I know many people liked him and thought of him as a champion for certain causes. If it is any consolation, he is no longer in any discomfort and he may know peace at last.

However, as someone who grew up in a home with parents who were independent voters and a father who was born about the same time as Joseph Kennedy Jr., I cannot say that I'm terribly saddened by Mr. Kennedy's passing. My father had some contact with the Kennedy family before the Second World War and those experiences shaped his opinion of them. And, he didn't have many kind words for them. In fact, he voted for Richard Nixon over JFK, if that'll give you an idea of how he felt.

The Brothers
Almost unknown today, Joseph Jr. was a Navy Lieutenant during WW-II. He was killed on August 12, 1944, at age 29 when the PB4Y (B-24 Liberator) he was piloting as part of Operation Aphrodite exploded near the English Channel. He was the first of the four brothers to die in service to his country.

The loss of Teddy's brother, John F. "Jack" Kennedy in 1963 shocked the nation. We'd had presidents assassinated before (four of them), but never had it been caught on film. Worse was that Jack's charisma was very strong and many that initially resisted him came to like him personally. People mourned for their "Camelot" president.

Five years later, with America embroiled in the increasingly unpopular Vietnam War under President Lyndon Johnson, Robert F. "Bobby" Kennedy ran for president. Both he and Johnson were Democrats but Bobby ran on a popular platform appealing to the younger crowd. Then, on June 6, 1968, just after winning the California Primary, a young Palestinian man wielding a .22 caliber revolver assassinated him in the kitchen of the Los Angeles Ambassador hotel.

Edward Moore "Ted" Kennedy was the last of four brothers. That he might also one day run for president was obvious. But first, he joined with others in Congress to support the 1968 Gun Control Act (or GCA-'68). This act forced gun sellers to be licensed by the government, prohibited felons, drug users and non-citizens from buying guns and required the registration of ammo sold. With two brothers assassinated, I think we could easily understand his desire to tighten up on firearms.

Teddy - Mr. Anti-gunAny aspirations Teddy had for the White House were dashed in the infamous 1969 Chappaquiddick incident in which Mary Jo Kopechne died in Teddy's car. As a result of this incident, he never ran for President. Instead, he supported every anti-gun measure to come before the Senate.

Kennedy supported many various causes over the years, from civil rights, immigration reform, health-care bills, anti-war legislation, campaign finance reform and many others. The problem many people had with his politics was that Kennedy pushed social program over many primary needs of the nation.

Rather than address crime, it was always guns. Rather than address illegal immigration, it was always immigration reform. Rather than create jobs for the poor, he wanted to build them housing. He would often publicly excoriate those who opposed him with an acerbic tongue.

I'm told that Kennedy was the backroom force that required a no gun ownership clause inserted in Federal Housing laws to prevent the poor from owning firearms for self-defense. He supported Diane Feinstein when she made her infamous statement about banning every gun in the country ("Mr. & Mrs. American, turn 'em all in").

A man who wanted to ban every firearm in the country, yet his personal bodyguards were well armed, sometimes carrying weapons which would be illegal in many states were it not for his political clout. It rarely occurred to him that most of his constituents could not afford to hire personal bodyguards for a trip to the airport or another country. Nor that few of them lived in gated "compounds" with armed security guarding the gates. Not that he really gave a damn about it either.

In 1993, when Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan wanted a 10,000 percent tax on 9mm JHP ammo, Kennedy reportedly supported it quietly and tried to convince others to support some sort of massive tax increase on ammunition. Moynihan's absurd tax proposal would boost the cost of 9mm Black Talon (now Ranger) ammo to $1,500 per box (except for police & military uses of course).

No, I will not mourn the passing of Senator Kennedy. Neither will I celebrate his death nor his life. Once the media has had enough of the tearful farewells and the citizens rightfully stop Congress from pushing "KennedyCare", I'll forget all about Teddy Kennedy.

Lastly, I'll sleep better knowing he's not planning more anti-gun stupidity.

Have a comment? editor@handgunclub.com

Guns Near Obama

2009-08-27T14:08:00.000-07:00

Armed Men Show at Obama Rally
(Nothing Happens)

The above headline is one you won't see on any mainstream media outlet. Even though it's truthful and describes exactly what occurred, they don't dare run such a headline.

In Arizona, a gentleman showed up at one of Obama's appearances in business attire, openly carrying a semi-automatic pistol and an AR-15 rifle slung over his shoulder. I should point out that Arizona is an open-carry state and you need no permit to do so.

Police checked him out and, finding that he was doing nothing illegal, was cooperative and not making any threats, they let him be. Sure, they and the Secret Service kept an eye on him as he moved around in the crowd outside the venue. Most important, he didn't cause any problem.

But the one thing some media outlets tried hard not to mention was that this man was African-American. Why? You be the judge. It could be that people like Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) claimed that healthcare protesters who were "too nicely dressed", like this man, were "Republican activists" and heaven forbid this man could be Black, Republican and a gun enthusiast without doing something illegal.

Incidents in Tennessee and New Hampshire were also mentioned. In New Hampshire, a man with a legally carried and holstered pistol held up a sign. I've seen two quotes of what the sign read. Either it asked, "Is it time to water the tree of Liberty?" or it said "It is time to water the tree of Liberty". Both are references to Thomas Jefferson's famous quote that the tree of liberty must be watered with the blood of tyrants from time to time.

Liberal commentator David Sirota's recent column tries to claim that by exercising our 2nd Amendment rights at a political rally it becomes "intimidation" or "coercion" and thus "terrorism". While this is typical of most media nitwits, he goes further to try to tie these incidents to the old south and the "Jim Crow noose".

Is this the liberal's idea of "terrorism"? Quoting the founding fathers on a protest sign, at a political event (exercising the 1st Amendment) while legally carrying a holstered handgun (exercising the 2nd Amendment). I want to vomit when I see unadulterated pig excrement like that.

No laws were broken. No one was hurt. Firearms stayed in their holsters where they are safely secured. The rifle remained slung over the man's shoulder. There's no news here. None at all. Not unless it's manufactured.

And, that's just what it is. People who fear guns and fear others who have guns have manufactured a story. Stories like Sirota's claim the mere presence of a gun, legally and responsibly carried, while trying to exercise one's first amendment rights is like... The KKK intimidating blacks. Or like car bombs near voting booths. Or it is like a mob holding a noose to lynch a man.

Which would be funny, if they weren't so serious about it. You can bet some half-brained idiot will try to get his or her congresscritter to pass a law prohibiting people from having guns anywhere near a political event.

I looked up another event where armed men arrived in at a state capitol building and caused an uproar. Step back to May 2, 1967. Ronald Reagan was in his fifth month as Governor of California. The Watts riots were less than 2 years old. And the Black Panthers, who called for a revolution and Socialist takeover were a "radical" group.

You can see the headlines at right. The major difference between the reporting on May 2, 1967, when armed Black Panthers briefly occupied the California Capitol building and events in 2009, is that the Panthers received more sympathetic coverage.

The real purpose of these recent displays are not to intimidate or frighten people. They are to remind the American public that our rights are being trampled and that a citizen trying to fully exercise his rights is a target for government or public harassment and scorn. Exercising the 1st and 2nd Amendment together is, to the media pundits like Sirota, somehow now verboten.

Why is it that these same folks aways loudly proclaim "It's My Right!" when it comes to their bodies, the use of drugs, violent and lurid lyrics in music and other such pursuits? But it suddenly becomes a "public safety issue" or a "societal issue" when a person simply exercises their right to own or carry a firearm? Why is a woman's right to choose, which is not found in the constitution - an inalienable personal right while her right to keep and bear arms, which is expressly written in the constitution, is not?

I guess it is inconceivable to some people that we can exercise all of our rights all the time!

Post Script: These protesters obviously researched their state and local laws before proceeding. I am not advocating anyone do the same thing without consulting a local attorney. You don't want to end up in jail for violating some law you were not aware of.

Have a comment? Editor@handgunclub.com

More on Gun Control

2009-08-04T15:10:00.000-07:00

VPC Director takes on Jan Libourel

Josh Sugarmann is the director of the Violence Policy Center, an organizational spin-off of the old Handgun Control, Inc. He is also the "promoter," if you will, of the phrase assault weapon precisely because it is misleading.

On July 9th, he wrote a column in the Huffington Post (apparently one of the few regular outlets for his propaganda) quoting Gun World editor Jan Libourel. He tried to portray Libourel as a "Quisling" or another Jim Zumbo. And why, you may ask, did Sugarmann make this comparison? Because Libourel wrote an editorial piece in which he said "Nobody but a madman would oppose some sort of gun control laws."

Sugarmann tries to latch on to this as somehow supporting the anti-gun lobby's notion that all guns must be heavily restricted. This is, of course, so much bull manure. He points out that Libourel goes on to question the whole concept of heavily armed people fleeing to the hills, living off the land and defending themselves in a sort of Mad Max post-apocalyptic world.

Now, as much as I dislike government interference in our lives, I'll say this. Jan Libourel is absolutely right. There really are certain "gun control laws" that we should have. There are some laws that should exist, and would be constitutional, however they would be to control misuse of firearms. Not the mere possession of them, not outlawing them by "evil features" or even prohibiting them to an entire simple class of individuals.

Under such "gun control" laws, it would be unlawful to misuse your firearm in certain ways. Firing live ammo into the air, for example. Or using a firearm to willfully commit a crime of violence against another person (Assault, robbery, rape, kidnapping, etc.) would all be just as illegal as they are today. The fact is, most states already have statutes that make misuse of a firearm a crime.

Most of the so-called "gun control" laws deal with the delivery, sale and record keeping of firearms. In more restrictive states there are limitations on what guns the State considers "safe enough" to own. And some states claim that certain combination of features makes a gun "banned", while removing just one feature might make it "suitable" for civilians to own. Most of these laws are nothing more than either incremental steps towards ensuring a government monopoly on effective weaponry or politically motivated self-promoting legislation.

Note that we are talking conventional arms here. Not nuclear, chemical or biological weapons. If you want to own a 105mm howitzer and have the cash, go right ahead. But I would suggest that laws restricting the storage of explosive munitions, like artillery shells, would pass muster for public safety and fire-prevention reasons - much like storing kegs of black powder away from densely populated areas. You might have to rent space in a "public munitions storage" area for your shells.

I'd agree with Libourel that you'd have to be a madman yourself to oppose a "gun control" law that prohibited possession of firearms by those adjudicated in court as insane or mentally incompetent. I might even support the concept that convicted felons, after serving their sentences and any parole, could earn back their right to have a firearm by not getting into further trouble with the law for some period - five or six years for example. And that may be limited to only your first offense. Or only to non-violent offenders.

As to the notion that in a disaster or collapse of "civilized" society we will head to the hills and live off the land -- that's twaddle. The only people who will do that are the ones who already have their homes situated in the mountains or rural areas. The rest of us will be stuck in traffic when the other 1.2 million city dwellers decide to relocate. And if tens of thousands of people "head for the hills", you can bet that game animals will become scarce in short order.

Much more likely, I think, would be civil disorder in the larger cities. For two reasons. Larger cities have close-packed people which assists in anger, outrage or protests reaching "critical mass" and also because larger cities usually have TV news stations that will be useful idiots in spreading their message.

In the case of the Los Angeles "Rodney King" riots, some Korean business owners defended their stores (a.k.a. their livelihood) using guns that California now heavily restricts. In New Orleans, several residents guarded their own homes and abandoned neighbor's homes while the authorities floundered with the refugees and arrested old women in their homes to confiscate a revolver.

In the aftermath of a major disaster, when the power has failed and maybe also the water supply, the main interest of people will be in protecting their families and what little supplies they have. Most folks, I think, will be willing to barter and share with their neighbors for the short seven to ten days it might take for things to settle down. In the meantime, good citizens banding together to protect their neighborhood from predators will likely be a fairly common sight.

While I'm on the subject, police officers should take notice that they can be their own worst enemies in the aftermath of a disaster. If you find armed residents guarding their own apartment buildings or condo complexes, trying to charge them for violating local or state laws will certainly get negative reactions from those you're supposed to be helping. Even (or especially) if your mayor is an idiot who demands arresting anyone "displaying" a firearm, holstered or not. Use your legal discretion to determine whether the person is protecting or engaging in predatory activities.

Comments? Questions: editor@handgunclub.com

OUTRAGE!

2009-07-14T07:12:00.000-07:00

Couple who adopted 12 children slain

That was the CNN headline of a news story that caught my eye. The more I read about this story, the more outraged I became. The story isn't finished either. Three suspects were arrested over the weekend and more are still at large, says Escambia County Sheriff David Morgan.

What Happened
On July 9th, just around 7 p.m. three men dressed in black were seen on surveillance video approaching the home of Byrd and Melanie Billings in a late 1970s or early 1980s red van about 7 p.m., authorities say. Their home in Beulah is about 17 miles northwest of Pensacola.

Just before 8 p.m. the police received a call of shots fired at the address. When they arrived, they found both Byrd and Melanie Billings dead. Both had been shot to death, one of the couple had been shot in the head.

The Billings have 16 children, twelve of whom are adopted. At the time of the killings, eight of the children, ages from infant to about 11 years-old, were asleep in the home. Police are still searching for the three men and the red van. As yet, the public doesn't know the motive for the killings.

The Family
That Byrd and Melanie Billings were a very special couple is evident. Byrd was a successful business man and the couple owned a number of local businesses, including Worldco Financial Services and Purshu Autos. Their home has nine bedrooms and sits back off the street at the end of a long driveway for the safety of their children.

In a special Christmas story, published Christmas day, 2005, the Pensacola News Journal profiled the Billings family as a story of love and commitment.

They were the proud parents of 16 children. Twelve are adopted -- among them, children of drug users, children who were sexually abused and children with developmental disabilities. Six of the 12 have Down syndrome. Two have died.

In the article, The Journal said: The Billingses' life is paved with challenges, a journey they never expected. But if they could do it all over again, it's the only path they would take.

"Our life, our children, is about choices we have made," said Byrd, 63.

"Holidays are so special." said Melanie, 40. "You never know when you won't have this time," she said.

Today, those words sound almost prophetic.

The children do not wear hand-me-downs. Their bedrooms are suites with bathrooms lighted by chandeliers and with walk-in closets. Byrd and Melanie give their children only the best. To them, all their children are perfect.

Thoughts and Commentary
So we have this very loving couple who have dedicated their lives to caring for children others don't want. They give them a first class home with two parents, a caretaker who helps out and the children are treated like the Billings' own.

Then, in the span of less than an hour, three sociopaths enter the home, one with eight children inside and, before they leave, they kill two extraordinary people. The only good thing is that none of the children were injured.

We can only surmise what happened for almost an hour inside that home. The criminals were likely looking for money or valuables in such a large home. It is likely that they were not gentle or polite in their demands either. Suffice it to say, that those who were there were probably subjected to an hour of terror at the hands of these three men.

It would be easy to sit here and say something stupid, like suggesting if either adult had been armed they might be alive today. That's simplistic and not realistic. With that many children in the home, many of them with Downs Syndrome or autistic, you'd most likely keep any firearms strictly secured for everyone's safety.

It would be equally stupid to say that if guns were banned this incident wouldn't have happened. Such a myopic view ignores the myriad ways three men could arm themselves with axes, machetes and other items to commit the same acts.

No, what I'm going to say is that this incident really proves a point that I have argued with anti-gun zealots for years. And that is that the concept of compliance and non-resistance can be fatal to the victim. Anti-gun lobbyists and police will point to statistics that say compliance is the safest thing to do.

But I posit that non-resistance and compliance puts you at the mercy of the criminal. What if that criminal has no mercy?

That's the big drawback. You may not know until it is too late. The person you are facing is a criminal, someone who does not feel bound to honor the laws of society. If he doesn't feel bound by laws against theft, robbery, rape, murder, et al, then neither are we bound to believe a word he says about us "not getting hurt" or letting us go.

Too many criminals today exhibit sociopathic tendencies. Big, burly 20-somethings that'll beat down a 101 year old woman for the $33 in her purse show their contempt for anyone but themselves. Recently a 20-year-old thug in our bay area beat up and robbed 12-year-old girl. But before walking off with the $9 she had, he used a rock to smash her teeth. Yeah, there are real men for you -- beating up the elderly and children.

The three thugs in the Billings case are another example. If there was even an ounce of empathy or consideration in their souls for other people, they would not have deliberately orphaned those children. But they lack any compassion for others and mercy, to them, is a weakness.

These guys are running a close second to Richard Allen Davis, the perverted sociopathic career criminal who kidnapped, raped and killed 12-year-old Polly Klaas in 1993. Davis was the poster-boy for California's 3-strikes law. Davis also told Klaas he wasn't going to hurt her.

I don't care what color these people are. I don't care what religion they follow (if any). I don't care if they were disadvantaged children. Nor do I care if their parents absused them. Killing the parents of so many children and knowing that they're going to orphan those kids is beyond comprehension.

Sheriff Morgan tells the media that this is a hum-dinger of a case and it has twists and turns worthy of a Hollywood movie. One media outlet surmised that because one suspect turned himself in, he must feel some remorse about the killings.

And, I don't care.

No child deserves to lose both their parents. Not like this. Especially children used to the patient love that comes from those rare few who can handle so many special needs children. Life is hard enough for these kids already. Depriving them of the love they've known is simply an act of sadistic cruelty.

I can think of a lot of creative ways that these three men could meet their maker. So far, the leading candidates are the 3,000-ft helicopter high-dive and being towed behind a boat as alligator bait in the Everglades. But I'm sure the Billings', being good and kind people, would have said the proper thing to do is let justice slowly grind along and do its job.

Condolences to the Billings family and requiescat in pax Byrd and Melanie.

One thing is for sure, though. More people will be willing to show mercy to these killers than they showed the Billings' family.

Comments? Suggestions? editor@handgunclub.com

Gun Shop Aggravations

2009-07-11T12:49:00.000-07:00

How Gun Shops Lose Customers

Time to rant a little.

Walk into any store that sells high end merchandise and ask to see something. Watch how the sales person handles their products for a good clue as to their education and experience with the products. Also watch carefully and see how some will abuse products right before your eyes.

Several year ago, while shopping for a new truck, one dealer had plenty of nice shiny Ford diesels several thousand dollars cheaper than any other dealer. But I adamantly refused to buy anything from that dealership.

The reason was simple. The salesman offered a test drive, then promptly showed his ignorance of diesel products and abused the machinery. He insisted on revving a cold diesel engine. Worse was that he kept running the diesel up almost to the redline before shifting.

It's the same when I enter a gun shop and see really sloppy handling of guns. I'm especially annoyed by two things clerks do, it seems, in too many gun shops. Any time I see these behaviors, I know it's unlikely I'll buy a gun from that shop.

First, with a semi-auto pistol, watching a clerk drop the slide from it's locked-open position to the closed position just grates on my nerves. Without the resistance of a cartridge, habitual slamming of the slide can peen the barrel hood or the breechface.

The second especially alarming thing I've seen is a crop of younger guys who've never handled revolvers, emulating old movie scenes by flipping the cylinder open or shut instead of closing it by hand. Not only does this risk springing the yoke (the arm holding the cylinder) but can burr the center pin that locks the gun closed.

Recently a friend of mine scratched a southern California gun shop off his list because every time the idiot clerk removed a gun from the case, he had his finger on the trigger, violating rule #2 of safe handling. If that wasn't bad enough, when my friend remarked that the trigger of a certain Ruger was too heavy, the clerk took the gun back and, without checking to see if it was loaded, pulled the trigger with the gun pointed at my friend! There is no excuse for such poor discipline. He complained loudly to the store owner, but he'll never be back.

Yet another thing that annoys me and loses customers for gun shops - elitism. Not long ago, I wanted to check out a CZ P01 pistol. I like CZ's, but their traditional safety is too far forward for my thumb to reach without altering my grip. The P01 has a decocker right where the 1911 safety would be. Perfect.

The shop has a dozen CZ pistols and I ask if they have a P-01. Do I get an answer? No."Y'know, the CZ's are cheap guns made on beat up Russian machines." says the shop owner. "If you're looking for a quality 9-mike, you should be looking at this Sig 229. It's quality in every part, not just the ones one the outside." I nod and tell him I'd really like to look at the P-01. Even after I tell him that Sigs feel like a piece lumber in my hand, he won't let up on selling me on a Sig. Thanks a lot, moron!

Then there are the gun-shop ballistics experts. The ones that tell you that you that the nine milly-meter will "just go all the way through" an opponent without slowing him down. Or that a .357 Magnum will "make an exit wound the size of a softball". Neither are true of course, but it's part of the "lore" around handgun ammo.

My pet peeve are the .44 Magnum bigots. For these masochists, for whom heavy recoil is like being kissed by Angelina Jolie, nothing short of a full-bore .44 Magnum load is worthy of the term "Magnum". If you want a gun to hunt deer, cougars, ram or pigs or protection from bears & wolves, their favorite gun is a one-size-fits-all solution. I've even had them tell me it's good for shooting gophers and rabbits! Or home protection in an apartment. C'mon guys, get a clue!

Speaking of one-size-fits-all, let's talk about the Glockophiles. If you want a pistol for any purpose, well, just buy a Glock. Any Glock. While I am an ardent fan of Smith & Wesson products, I don't limit myself to that single brand when recommending a gun for someone else. I watched a younger fellow, who had a list of features he wanted (external ambi-safety, DA/SA, adjustable sights, etc.) at a gun shop and several gun shop commados were trying to convince him how superior Glocks are. Never mind that the Glock doesn't fit his requirements - just by a Glock. I just pointed out a nice FN Hi-Power to him and let him make his decision (he bought it without any urging).

Do you have any pet peeves when it comes to seeking gun advice or shopping in gun shops? I'm sure you do. Let's hear from some shop owners too. I'm positive we'll hear some really bizzare customer stories as well.

Comments? Questions: editor@handgunclub.com

Ballistics 101

2009-07-09T01:51:00.000-07:00

Power by the Inch

Ever wonder how much velocity and energy you give up if you select a 2-inch barrel over a 4-inch barrel? We all know that the longer the barrel, the more velocity we can get out of a cartridge. We also know that shorter barrels are the less velocity and power we get.

But have you ever wondered how much you're really giving up by selecting a 2-inch revolver or a 3-inch 9mm? What about using a 3-inch .45 instead of a 5-inch Government model? Well, now you can find out some real-world examples.

In years past, gun writers have promoted, as a rule of thumb, that you lose 50 fps per inch of barrel. As it turns out, that's not quite true, depending on the load's construction. For example, for a selection of 9mm rounds in barrels between two to six inches long, the average variation ranges from 41 to 81 fps.

This information is at your fingertips, thanks to four very inquisitive guys. Jim Kasper, Jim Downey, Steve Meyer and Keith Kimball took it upon themselves to find out and document the question of how barrel length affects velocity. And they've done an outstanding job with their results posted at their Ballistics by the Inch.com.

These gentlemen used a Thompson-Center Encore pistol as their platform and commissioned a gunsmith to make 18-inch barrels in various calibers. From there, after each round of testing, the barrels were cut back by one-inch, recrowned and returned for the next series of tests. This gives us direct comparisons based on the same barrel with the same characteristics as the previous length.

It takes a little more work than just reading their charts to understand the data, however. For instance, how much do you lose by choosing a 3-inch concealable 9mm pistol over a 4-inch "service" pistol? The answer, depending upon cartridge ranges from 99 fps to only 49 fps. The average is 69 fps.

Think your .40 S&W round is plenty no matter what barrel length you're using? If you're using Cor-Bon's 135 grain JHP, you're losing a whopping 100 fps per inch (103 to 138 fps) between a 5-inch barrel and a 3-inch tube.
This type of data is there, but you still have to work it out on your own. The good news is that you can directly cut and paste their data tables into a spreadsheet like Microsoft Excel. That allows you to crunch your own numbers if you're familiar with spreadsheets.

In preparing this article, I used Excel to help analyze some of the data. Since we're handgun oriented, I focused on the two to six-inch barrel figures. When I looked at .38 Special data, some intriguing things stood out. Something unexpected.

It seems that the losses when dropping from a 4-inch gun to a snubby 3-inch or 2-inch are much higher than losing an inch between four and five inches. In fact, for the ammo listed, the drop from a 4-inch barrel to the shorter barrels was the highest loss of velocity. This indicates that revolver cartridges are optimized for 4-inch and longer barrels.

Most surprising to me was that some .38 Special cartridges actually gained velocity when the barrel was cut from 6-inches to 5-inches! Both Cor-Bon 110 and 125 grain loads showed this behavior. Now, this could be some quirk of the barrel used, or it could be some odd error with the chronograph, but it remains interesting. Overall, the least loss in the .38 Special occurred by cutting a six-inch down to five-inches. Makes me appreciate my 5-inch S&W Model 10 just that much more.

Check it out for yourself. Look up your favorite cartridge and see what you're giving up by using that shorter barrel. Or perhaps you'll find you won't lose very much velocity by moving from that 5-inch Gov't model to a 4-Inch Commander. They've listed the sixteen most popular calibers, including .357 Sig, 10mm, .41 Magnum and .45 Colt. Even the new .327 Federal Magnum is included.

Ballistics by the Inch

Your comments are welcome: editor@handgunclub.com

Guns Work. Gun Control Doesn't.

2009-06-15T22:15:00.000-07:00

Guns Work to Save Lives
Gun Control Does Not

You've no doubt heard that a crazy white supremacist walked into the Holocaust Museum in Washington D.C. and opened fire, killing security guard Steven Johns. However, unlike other public shootings, this one ended quickly when other security guards returned fire, downing the gunman and preventing him from shooting anyone else.

This hateful bigot intensely hated Blacks and Jews. It is unknown how many people he might have killed in the museum. Considering that the museum is generally busy with visitors, many of them Jewish and school-age children learning about the Holocaust, how many people would a Jew-hating bigot kill if he was unchallenged? How many children might have died? From past history, all we can say is "many more."

This event is similar to the 1991 Luby's Cafeteria massacre in Killeen, Texas. There, another madman entered a crowded public place (using his truck as a battering ram) and began shooting people. This was before Texas had a shall-issue CCW system in place, so the patrons inside were all unarmed. In the twelve minutes it took police to arrive, George Hennard shot 23 people to death and wounded 20 others. It's an easy guess that James Von Brunn could have exceeded that number in D.C.

It is also similar to the August 1999 shooting in a Jewish day care center in which Buford Furrow Jr. shot three children, a receptionist and a sixteen year-old counselor before leaving and killing a postal carrier because he wasn't white. In that case, Furrow told investigators he aborted his planned attack on another day care center when he saw armed security personnel. On that day, the mere presence of firearms saved lives at one day care center.

Yet, the anti-gun lobby ignores the obvious when Paul Helmke, President of the Brady Campaign says, "It is dangerous to force more guns into places that American families expect to be gun-free and safe. It shows that having even more guns in more places is the wrong answer to America's gun violence problem."

Helmke, the Bradys and other members of the anti-gun lobby groups forget that Washington D.C. already has strict gun-control laws. Laws that forbid possessing unregistered guns, the carrying of loaded firearms in public and concealing them on your person. So, easily, the museum killer broke those laws without much concern.

There's more. Von Brunn, is a convicted felon. Thus, he broke other laws prohibiting him from possessing or buying any firearms at all. He obtained his rifle illegally, yet another violation of the so-called gun-control laws. Up to the point just before he fired, Von Brunn had violated at least five laws, probably many more by crossing state and local jurisdictions.

If we followed the advice of Paul Helmke and his ilk, the other security guards at the museum would not have firearms and would have been early casualties. The bottom line is that it was men with guns who shut down Von Brunn's terror attack on the museum.

Your comments are welcome: editor@handgunclub.com

Gov. Rendell Piles it higher and deeper

2009-05-06T12:20:00.000-07:00

A lesson in nonsense

Pennsylvania Governor Ed Rendell showed up on CNBC's "Swawk Box" show recently in a segment titled "Gun and Ammunition Sales Spike". (click see the video.) Unfortunately, the purpose of his appearance was not to talk about why people were buying up guns and ammo, but to push bringing back the so-called "assault weapons" ban.

Before pursuing his comments, let's all remember that this so-called "assault weapons ban" has been modified from the earlier ban. It is much more inclusive about which weapons it bans.

Worse, some of the wording is intended to make it apply to "generic" (unnamed) guns with certain features. Adding certain accessories to a semi-auto rifle could turn it into an evil gun and you'd face felony charges. In addition it names new guns that were never banned -- the venerable M1-Carbine, the Ruger Mini-14, any rifle used by the U.S. military.

It has little to do with safety and everything to do with keeping the government in control of firearms that are the most effective in a serious battle.

The Governor's comments should give everyone pause. It's an excellent example of deliberate, decietful misinformation and political arrogance. But I trust readers can judge for themselves; the video speaks volumes.

Rendell claims, in his own words, that firearms like the AR-15 and AK rifles are at once;
- Difficult to operate
- Jam easily
- Fire at short range
- Are not effective (for home defense)
- Put out a ton of fire all at one time
- Are very powerful
- Bullets will "blow through" a police car from over a block away
- Have only one purpose; to kill and to maim

And my favorite part is that after he says all this, he then says these guns belong "only in the hands of the police and military." Say what?

Is Rendell saying he wants police to have rifles that are only good for killing and maiming people? That's what he wants for his police officers? If their only purpose is "to kill and to maim" then why in the hell are we saying these are okay for police to use on civilians?

Or is Rendell saying that only police and military personnel should have to suffer with a complicated, hard-to-use rifle that frequently jams, isn't very effective but is powerful enough to blow right through a police car? Why is Rendell allowing his state to even purchase crappy guns like this?

Do politicans think we are all this stupid? You have to believe that the rifle fires a lot of "short range" bullets, but those bullets have enough energy to "blow through" a police car from a block or more away. Or that police agencies from NYPD to LAPD and their SWAT teams intentionally picked a difficult to use and jam-prone rifle?

What this really points out is that politicians, and many gun control proponents, are clueless when it comes to firearms. It also points out that politicians, like Rendell, will say almost anything to paint a frightening image of firearms to the public.

We get our share of truely idiotic statements here in California from the lamestream media. We have politicians who repeat the tired, discredited Brady Campaign talking points.

What can we do about it?
This is the easy part. Whenever you see or hear misinformation about guns in the media, complain! Write to the media outlet. Write a brief but polite "feedback" comment taking the source to task. Brief, easy to read comments that get the point across are better than long winded diatribes or personal attacks on the speaker.

The reason for doing this is that there are a lot of folks who will read the comments left for a particular on-line newspaper article. More comments we create that refute and discredit the misinformation, the better chance we have of changing public opinion.

Your comments are welcome: editor@handgunclub.com

2nd Amendment Applies to States

2009-04-21T16:29:00.001-07:00

Landmark Decision by 9th Circuit Court

April 20 - SAN FRANCISCO - A landmark decision by the U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco today said that the Second Amendment applies to the states as well as the federal government. Previously, the courts held that the amendment was a barrier to only federal laws, not state laws. The decision is a major victory for gun-rights advocates.

The 3-0 decision by judges Alarcón, O’Scannlain, and Gould in Nordyke v. King will have far reaching effects on state and local gun laws. The decision puts many state and local laws under the magnifying glass in the same way as laws limiting free speech or searches and seizures. The ruling currently affects only the nine states in the 9th Circuit – Alaska, Arizona, California, Hawaii, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, Oregon, Washington.

The court found that the right to own firearms was "deeply rooted in this Nation’s history and tradition" which allows it to be applied to the states and local governments through the 14th Amendment's due process provisions.

Nevertheless, the decision also upheld the ban at the county fairgrounds, saying that governments may impose restrictions on "sensitive places" such as courthouses and schools.

The decision may play a part in a challenge to restrictive gun laws in Illinois by the Second Amendment Foundation, the NRA and other gun groups. That case is still in progress in the 7th District Court and today's decision could influence its decision. Today's decision may add weight to the pro-2A arguments in the Chicago case and bring about incorporation in the 7th district. Any disagreements between circuit courts would have to be resolved by the Supreme Court.

Second Amendment constitutional law is still in its infancy, much like First Amendment laws were at the beginning of the twentieth century. This decision will result in more challenges to state and local laws to define the scope of the amendment's protections against government intrusion.

# # #

What does this mean to me?

This is only the first step in a long process. Eventually the Supreme Court will have to resolve the conflict between the 9th Circuit's decision and other circuits that have different opinions. Until the high court makes that determination (or another circuit agrees with the 9th), only the nine western states in the 9th Circuit can have their gun laws challenged under the 2nd Amendment.

Within the last year, we have won two major victories. The Heller case defined the Second Amendment right as a fundamental individual right, like that of free speech or the right to a lawyer. The Nordyke case says that the 2nd Amendment also applies to the states because it is deeply rooted in the history and tradition of the Republic. This integrates the 2nd Amendment into our legal system the same as your other constitutional rights - at least in nine western states.

Since both Heller and Nordyke find that the right is fundamental, challenges to state and local gun laws can be challenged on a "strict scrutiny" basis. If we challenge certain gun laws in this manner, the government must show a compelling government interest that is crucial and that the challenged law is both narrowly tailored and the least restrictive to the rights of citizens.

For instance, the Illinois firearms owner ID (FOID) card might be challenged as not being narrowly tailored and least restrictive. This is because the intent of the card was to stop criminals from obtaining firearms through legal channels. Yet, repeated studies show the majority of criminal firearm acquisitions are made illegally through black-market "street" sales. Thus the argument that forcing law abiding citizens to not only maintain documents to exercise their rights but pay an annual (or periodic) fee to do so, is not the "least restrictive".

Other laws that may be challenged are those that delay the exercise of your rights. One-gun-a-month laws can be likened to limiting free speech in the same manner. Waiting periods could also be compared to having to wait several days to obtain a lawyer or read a newspaper.

Don't expect huge, sweeping changes to occur overnight. It's taken 40 years for the anti-gun crowd to get this far. Our duty is to tread carefully with each challenge to keep building up our rights. We can anticipate it will take more than just a few years to overturn some of the worst legislation.

Your comments are welcome: editor@handgunclub.com

Ammo News and Sales

2009-04-01T20:00:00.000-07:00

Sellier & Bellot Sold
On April 1st, CBC announced the acquisition of the 184-year-old Sellier & Bellot ammunition company in Vlašim, Czech Republic. CBC or Companhia Brasileira de Cartuchos (Cartridge Company of Brazil) also owns Magtech in the USA and MEN – Metallwerk Elisenhütte GmbH in Germany. CBC was founded in 1926 and sells ammunition in over 70 countries worldwide. The Magtech and Sellier & Bellot companies will continue to operate under their own management and brands, CBC said.

ATK Purchases Eagle Industries
Alliant Techsystems, Inc. said it has acquired Eagle Industries Unlimited Inc., a maker of tactical nylon gear for military and law enforcement customers. Privately-owned Eagle, which is based in Fenton, Mo., will add more than $80 million to Alliant's sales in fiscal 2010 and be a slightly positive addition to its annual earnings. Terms of the deal weren’t disclosed. Most readers of this column will know ATK better as the owner of Alliant powders, Federal Cartridge and CCI/Speer. ATK's government arm includes makers of solid-rocket propellants and other products. Eagle makes gear such as weapon holsters, bags, rappelling equipment and vests.

Ammo Shortage?
We've heard from everyone that there is a shortage of ammo going on. And if you have been out looking for ammo, you know that the shelves in many of your normally reliable suppliers are as bare as Mother Hubbard's cupboard. Even the Internet sellers are having a hard time.

I did a survey of seven (7) on-line ammo sellers. The results are almost frightening! I checked all calibers from Ammoman, Ammunition To Go, MidwayUSA, Cheaper-Than-Dirt, Natchez, Outdoor Marksman and Midsouth Shooter's Supply. One of my favorites, Ammunition to Go has most of the popular calibers in stock, but the type and quantities may be limited.

In the survey, I didn't include specialty ammo such as Glaser Safety Slugs, Air Freedom fragmenting or Magsafe. These are available to those who want them, but their extreme cost is almost prohibitive for stocking up.

If you own a .380 ACP, forget it. I couldn't find any ammo for it, even on some other sites. Excluding Ammunition To Go, the hardest to find of the common cartridges are:

.32 ACP (only at Ammo to Go)
.380 ACP (almost none available)
.38 Special (limited supplies and loads)
.357 Magnum (limited supplies and loads)
.45 ACP (very limited supplies)
.45 Colt (almost none available)

What's Available?
For those of you shooting "oddball" calibers, there is some good news. You can still get ammo. Although you may object to the price, it's still out there. In small calibers, .25 ACP, .30 Luger, 7.62 Nagant and 7.62 Tokarev are still well stocked.

In the midrange calibers, .38 Super and .357 Sig are still available and some locations have 10mm. And when it comes to Big-Bores the news is generally good. Except for .45ACP and .45 Colt, the .44 Special through the .500 S&W Magnum are generally easy to come by. It seems that .45 GAP is sitting on shelves along with 5.7x28mm.

The Reasons
First and foremost, it seems the election of Barack H. Obama and Joe Biden is the primary driving force. Both politicians are staunchly anti-gun, despite the rhetoric they support the 2nd Amendment (a dubious claim).

Industry sources say that between July and September of 2008, sales of pistols and revolvers were up 23.6% and ammo sales rose 8.4% over the same period the year before.

This trend has continued right up through February. Using background checks as a benchmark, firearm sales compared to the same month in the prior year, jumped 42% in November, 24% in December, 29% in January and 23.3% in February.

And it follows that those who buy new firearms will want some ammunition for them. Maybe lots of it. And that's apparently what is happening in the real world.

National Shooting Sports Foundation senior vice president Lawrence Keane, when interviewed by AP, said "We've heard from all across the country that there is a tremendous shortage of ammunition. From the manufacturers, that their customers are calling them trying to get supplies for inventory, and that the manufacturers are going full-bore, pardon the pun."

The buying of firearms over the worry that the Obama Administration would move to limit gun sales and the subsequent buying of ammo and components has led to shortages. And for some, a new president coupled with a sudden shortage of ammo spurs panic buying in large quantities. The current demand is so huge, manufacturers can't keep up.

We're probably selling ammunition right now at a 200 percent increase over normal sales," said Richard Taylor, manager at the Firing Line in Aurora, Colo. "We've probably got over 4,000 cases of ammunition on back order currently. But we just don't know when we're going to receive that," Taylor told KMGH. "Y2K was just like a little blip on the radar screen compared to this. I mean, it's just phenomenal."
Rich Wyatt, owner of a firearms shop and training facility outside of Denver, told Human Events' columnist Kaminsky that even "old ladies and young people and liberals" have been buying ammunition from him.

Wyatt's position seems to be that the new president sparked the ammunition buying frenzy with careless words from the campaign trail, such as when he said small town folks in Pennsylvania "cling to guns or religion" during hard economic times. "Barack Obama is right about one thing," Wyatt said. "We are clinging to God and our guns, and I defy him to try to take either one from us."

Thanks, Rich. I couldn't have said it better myself.

Resources for on-line ammo sales:
Ammoman
Ammunition To Go
Cheaper Than Dirt
Midsouth Shooters Supply
Midway USA
Natchez Shooters Supply
Outdoor Marksman

Your comments are welcome: editor@handgunclub.com

Learning From History

2009-03-22T20:54:00.000-07:00

German Chancellor Calls for Raids on Homes

This headline reads like something out of the 1930's or 1940's. But sadly, it is a modern headline, highlighting the frightening parallels between the early 20th Century and today. The German Chancellor's remarks were in response to a school shooting in Germany earlier this month that left 15 people dead. The headline comes from Peter Neidek's Dissent Blog on PrisonPlanet.com.

Monday, March 16, 2009 - Today, German Chancellor Angela Merkel demanded even tougher gun control measures relating to storage of firearms and ammunition in Germany. With an audacity that defies belief the former East German communist also called for unannounced raids on homes and offices of registered firearm owners. In an interview with the Deutschlandfunk Merkel said: “We must do everything to prevent children’s access to firearms.” As a further consequence of the recent mass shooting in Germany Merkel wants citizens to be more alert and pay particular attention to young people.“

Although Merkel characterized these raids as "unannounced visits by state authorities" I have no doubt that the German media of the 30's would portray a visit from the Geheime Staatspolizei in a similar manner.
German firearms laws are some of the most restrictive in Europe. Before even applying for a firearms permit you have to have a perfect attendance at a gun club for a year. The permit also requires guns stored to be locked up and the access to the guns controlled by the owner. If you actually use your firearm in defense, someone had better be bleeding first. Profusely.
Such home visits are diametrically opposed to the basic principles of a free and Democratically run government. In such governments the citizens are to be left alone unless there is a reason to believe they are involved in some crime. How much harder would it be for Merkel to call for these "visits" to be confiscations?
Also keep in mind that German law does permit "inspections" of the permit holder's storage of his firearms, but refusing such an inspection is grounds to revoke the ownership permit. To be fair, such visits are usually arranged a few days ahead of time, but the law does not require such. Imagine a sleepy-eyed resident answering his door at 3 a.m.
"Guten morgen, Herr Hoffmann." Says the policeman with a smile. "You vill show us your guns now, ja?" Of course, the police can make a swift inspection or they could decide to take their time and check each serial number and inspect each firearm.
Such invasive tactics are precisely why gun owners in America have consistently been against forced registration and government record keeping of firearms owners. In Germany, such a list is literally just a computer-command away. In the United States, such capability is supposed to be difficult. Although, as I pointed out in an earlier blog post, Illinois Senator Bobby Rush has introduced H.R. 45 that would repeal the prohibition on creating a gun owner database.

Have a comment? Email us at: editor@handgunclub.com

2009-03-16T13:27:00.000-07:00

New Challenge May Have
Far Reaching Consequences

Civil rights attorney Alan Gura, the attorney who successfully argued the Heller case, has filed a new federal lawsuit against the District of Columbia. The lawsuit seeks relief from D.C.'s onerous and odious handgun registration scheme on behalf of three DC residents. Under the statute adopted by the DC Council last December, D.C. now bans many ordinary and common handguns based upon silly criteria such as the color of the gun.

The district's modified handgun registration scheme specifically uses the California Roster of Handguns Certified for Sale as a scheme to limit the types of guns district residents can own. Using the California scheme, a handgun bought today, which is on the list, may be unavailable to district residents if the manufacturer fails to pay a fee to extend the "certification" beyond it's expiration date.

The California roster requires certification of all handguns sold by "model." California has interpreted that to be the stocking-number (SKU) of the gun. Thus, two otherwise identical guns except for one wearing finger-grooved rosewood grips versus plain walnut are "different" guns and each must be approved separately. Guns with different finishes can be allowed, but only if the manufacturer submits a form attesting that both guns are identical except for the color of the finish.

Which brings us to plaintiff Tracy Ambeau Hanson, who tried to register her Springfield XD-45, only to be told by District bureaucrats that "her gun was the wrong color."

"Americans are not limited to a government list of approved books, or approved religions," Gura said. A handgun protected by the Second Amendment doesn't need to appear on any government-approved list either. "The Springfield XD-45 is approved for sale in Washington," Gura noted, "so long as it is black, green, or brown, but her bi-tone version is supposedly 'unsafe'."

In another ironic twist, Paul St. Lawrence's gun was rejected, even though it is the same model gun owned by Dick Heller for whom the Supreme Court ordered DC to issue a registration certificate less than a year ago. And Gillian St. Lawrence found that her gun was rejected merely because the manufacturer decided not to pay a fee to keep the gun on the California list.

The requirement to register guns is a constitutionally suspect prior restraint of the right to keep and bear arms to begin with, but to add restrictions based on cosmetic features, such as color, smack of arbitrary and capricious laws. The kind that led to the American Revolution.

If the handgun roster scheme is struck down as unconstitutional, it will impact not only Washington D.C.'s 580,000 residents, but the over 33 million Californians who are currently choked by the same law.