http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=102738723&ft=1&f=1003
Senseless violence, with guns or not, has no place in the 21 century. Walking into a center where people are legally trying to obtain U.S. citizenship---wow? ! ? How Anti-American is that? The shooter is a coward and did it in the wrong order...he should have shot himself first.
Friday, April 3, 2009
Tuesday, March 31, 2009
Huh?
I suppose it makes sense that every time there is an Anti-gun law proposed, the NRA files a lawsuit that the Anti's would start filing lawsuits every time the Pro's make headway.
Federal Parks are public land. It is legal to carry a gun in most public areas. I fail to see the logic in banning guns in a public place, especially one where the possibility of being attacked by bears and wacko's are readily available.
http://www.nraila.org/Legislation/Federal/Read.aspx?id=4634
Concealed Carry in National Parks Suspended -- NRA Files Motion To Appeal
On Thursday, March 19, a federal district court in Washington, D.C. granted anti-gun plaintiffs a preliminary injunction against implementation of the new rule allowing law-abiding citizens to defend themselves by carrying a concealed firearm in national parks and wildlife refuges.
In Thursday's ruling, Federal District Court Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly issued the preliminary injunction against the Department of the Interior rule that took effect on January 9, 2009. The revised rule allowed individuals to carry concealed firearms for self-defense in national parks and national wildlife refuges located in states that allow the carrying of concealed firearms.
Today, NRA filed a notice of appeal in Federal District Court to oppose the preliminary injunction.
NRA-ILA Executive Director Chris W. Cox, said, "NRA is moving aggressively to protect this common sense rule and that's why we filed this notice of appeal today. Just as we did not give up the fight to change the old, outdated rule, we will not give up our fight in the courts to defend the rule change. We will pursue every legal avenue to defend the American people's right of self-defense."
Federal Parks are public land. It is legal to carry a gun in most public areas. I fail to see the logic in banning guns in a public place, especially one where the possibility of being attacked by bears and wacko's are readily available.
http://www.nraila.org/Legislation/Federal/Read.aspx?id=4634
Concealed Carry in National Parks Suspended -- NRA Files Motion To Appeal
On Thursday, March 19, a federal district court in Washington, D.C. granted anti-gun plaintiffs a preliminary injunction against implementation of the new rule allowing law-abiding citizens to defend themselves by carrying a concealed firearm in national parks and wildlife refuges.
In Thursday's ruling, Federal District Court Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly issued the preliminary injunction against the Department of the Interior rule that took effect on January 9, 2009. The revised rule allowed individuals to carry concealed firearms for self-defense in national parks and national wildlife refuges located in states that allow the carrying of concealed firearms.
Today, NRA filed a notice of appeal in Federal District Court to oppose the preliminary injunction.
NRA-ILA Executive Director Chris W. Cox, said, "NRA is moving aggressively to protect this common sense rule and that's why we filed this notice of appeal today. Just as we did not give up the fight to change the old, outdated rule, we will not give up our fight in the courts to defend the rule change. We will pursue every legal avenue to defend the American people's right of self-defense."
Thursday, March 19, 2009
Tuesday, March 17, 2009
Nit picking
The Obama Administration is starting its nit-picking of the 2nd Amendment. It is not likely to stop until all firearms are banished from all Citizens, regardless of current laws and Rights.
This seems so minor, but it leads to worse things. The government is no longer selling used brass to ammo makers to reload. This is going to dry up the surplus brass market for 9mm, 5.56, 7.62x51, and 50 Browning. This is going to seriously raise prices on future ammo in those calibers since the existence of reloaded ammo helped keep prices of new ammo reasonable.
Again, it's a small step that leads to worse
http://www.govliquidation.com
Dear Valued Customer:
Please take a moment to note important changes set forth by the Defense Logistics Agency:
Recently it has been determined that fired munitions of all calibers, shapes and sizes have been designated to be Demil code B. As a result and in conjunction with DLA's current Demil code B policy, this notice will serve as official notification which requires Scrap Venture (SV) to implement mutilation as a condition of sale for all sales of fired munitions effective immediately. This notice also requires SV to immediately cease delivery of any fired munitions that have been recently sold or on active term contracts, unless the material has been mutilated prior to sale or SV personnel can attest to the mutilation after delivery. A certificate of destruction is required in either case.
Thank you,
DOD Surplus
15051 N Kierland Blvd # 300
Scottsdale, AZ 85254
This seems so minor, but it leads to worse things. The government is no longer selling used brass to ammo makers to reload. This is going to dry up the surplus brass market for 9mm, 5.56, 7.62x51, and 50 Browning. This is going to seriously raise prices on future ammo in those calibers since the existence of reloaded ammo helped keep prices of new ammo reasonable.
Again, it's a small step that leads to worse
http://www.govliquidation.com
Dear Valued Customer:
Please take a moment to note important changes set forth by the Defense Logistics Agency:
Recently it has been determined that fired munitions of all calibers, shapes and sizes have been designated to be Demil code B. As a result and in conjunction with DLA's current Demil code B policy, this notice will serve as official notification which requires Scrap Venture (SV) to implement mutilation as a condition of sale for all sales of fired munitions effective immediately. This notice also requires SV to immediately cease delivery of any fired munitions that have been recently sold or on active term contracts, unless the material has been mutilated prior to sale or SV personnel can attest to the mutilation after delivery. A certificate of destruction is required in either case.
Thank you,
DOD Surplus
15051 N Kierland Blvd # 300
Scottsdale, AZ 85254
Sunday, March 15, 2009
Shotguns
I have a shotgun. It's a Mossberg, Model 500A. She's a 12 gauge. She came with a 28 inch barrel and a 18.5 barrel. I've shot the gun with both. I am not sure why people are so infatuated with shot barreled shotguns. They kick like mules and the recoil causes muzzle jump like you wouldn't believe.
In patterns with any kind of shot and with any kind of choke much better with the longer barrel. Trap/skeet is much, much easier with the longer barrel. Water fowl hunting will show you longer is better.
Endless debates rage about what barrel length is best. There is no clear answer, but I feel longer ones are more useful, overall. You won't see true hunters out in the field with a "security" shotgun. Newbies, might, but those in the know, bring the right weapon with the right hunting weapon..
Now, for home defense, the shorter barrel is superior, for easing around corners and doorways, but for anything else, go long.
In patterns with any kind of shot and with any kind of choke much better with the longer barrel. Trap/skeet is much, much easier with the longer barrel. Water fowl hunting will show you longer is better.
Endless debates rage about what barrel length is best. There is no clear answer, but I feel longer ones are more useful, overall. You won't see true hunters out in the field with a "security" shotgun. Newbies, might, but those in the know, bring the right weapon with the right hunting weapon..
Now, for home defense, the shorter barrel is superior, for easing around corners and doorways, but for anything else, go long.
Wednesday, March 11, 2009
Two crazies---One day
One kid in Germany and one ass in Alabama went on shooting sprees. More than 20 people are dead because two idiots went stupid. Ya know what, you asshats, how about you start your killing sprees by killing yourself. Leave the rest of us alone.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090311/ap_on_re_eu/eu_germany_school_attack
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090311/ap_on_re_us/south_alabama_shootings
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090311/ap_on_re_eu/eu_germany_school_attack
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090311/ap_on_re_us/south_alabama_shootings
Sunday, March 8, 2009
Arizona news
Faced with a choice between gun rights and property rights, a House panel sided Thursday with the former.
On a 6-2 vote the Judiciary Committee approved legislation to allow people to drive into privately owned parking lots with loaded weapons in their vehicles. The wishes of the business owner would become legally irrelevant.Faced with a choice between gun rights and property rights, a House panel sided Thursday with the former. On a 6-2 vote the Judiciary Committee approved legislation to allow people to drive into privately owned parking lots with loaded weapons in their vehicles. The wishes of the business owner would become legally irrelevant.
http://www.yumasun.com/news/house_48398___article.html/rights_parking.html
You still cannot carry the gun on your person onto private property.
On a 6-2 vote the Judiciary Committee approved legislation to allow people to drive into privately owned parking lots with loaded weapons in their vehicles. The wishes of the business owner would become legally irrelevant.Faced with a choice between gun rights and property rights, a House panel sided Thursday with the former. On a 6-2 vote the Judiciary Committee approved legislation to allow people to drive into privately owned parking lots with loaded weapons in their vehicles. The wishes of the business owner would become legally irrelevant.
http://www.yumasun.com/news/house_48398___article.html/rights_parking.html
You still cannot carry the gun on your person onto private property.
Thursday, February 26, 2009
The talk starts already
Holder is already proving himself an idiot. First of all, he is the AG of the United states and his statements about helping Mexico are not only inappropriate but offensive to me. I am a law-abiding citizen of the U.S. and do not need to be lectured to by a non-elected official how my legally owned guns are hurting Mexico. That's a load of crap. Let Mexico take care of their own crap.
He then goes on to say, "I think closing the gun show loophole, the banning of cop-killer bullets and I also think that making the assault weapons ban permanent, would be something that would be permitted under Heller." Again, you moron!!, there is no such thing as a "gun show loophole." Any American can sell their gun to any other American. just as they can have a garage sale or sell their car. There is no Federal law against me selling my car. How dare you tell me I can't sell any other of my other personal property.
Let's face facts, he's using scare-tactics. He's trying to create controversy where there isn't any. There's no such thing as a "cop-killer" bullet. It's a media creation. I don't like Holder, already.
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/story?id=6960824&page=1
Obama to Seek New Assault Weapons Ban
The Ban Expired in 2004 During the Bush Administration.
By JASON RYAN WASHINGTON, Feb. 25, 2009
The Obama administration will seek to reinstate the assault weapons ban that expired in 2004 during the Bush administration, Attorney General Eric Holder said today.
Wednesday Attorney General Eric Holder said that the Obama administration will seek to reinstitute the assault weapons ban which expired in 2004 during the Bush administration. As President Obama indicated during the campaign, there are just a few gun-related changes that we would like to make, and among them would be to reinstitute the ban on the sale of assault weapons," Holder told reporters.
Holder said that putting the ban back in place would not only be a positive move by the United States, it would help cut down on the flow of guns going across the border into Mexico, which is struggling with heavy violence among drug cartels along the border.
"I think that will have a positive impact in Mexico, at a minimum." Holder said at a news conference on the arrest of more than 700 people in a drug enforcement crackdown on Mexican drug cartels operating in the U.S. Mexican government officials have complained that the availability of sophisticated guns from the United States have emboldened drug traffickers to fight over access routes into the U.S. A State Department travel warning issued Feb. 20, 2009, reflected government concerns about the violence.
"Some recent Mexican army and police confrontations with drug cartels have resembled small-unit combat, with cartels employing automatic weapons and grenades," the warning said. "Large firefights have taken place in many towns and cities across Mexico, but most recently in northern Mexico, including Tijuana, Chihuahua City and Ciudad Juarez."
At the news conference today, Holder described his discussions with his Mexican counterpart about the recent spike in violence. "I met yesterday with Attorney General Medina Mora of Mexico, and we discussed the unprecedented levels of violence his country is facing because of their enforcement efforts," he said.
Holder declined to offer any time frame for the reimplementation of the assault weapons ban, however. "It's something, as I said, that the president talked about during the campaign," he said. "There are obviously a number of things that are -- that have been taking up a substantial amount of his time, and so, I'm not sure exactly what th. In a brief interview with ABC News, Wayne LaPierre, president of the National Rifle Association, said, "I think there are a lot of Democrats on Capitol Hill cringing at Eric Holder's comments right now."
During his confirmation hearing, Holder told the Senate Judiciary Committee about other gun control measures the Obama administration may consider. "I think closing the gun show loophole, the banning of cop-killer bullets and I also think that making the assault weapons ban permanent, would be something that would be permitted under Heller," Holder said, referring to the Supreme Court ruling in Washington, D.C. v. Heller, which asserted the Second Amendment as an individual's right to own a weapon.
The Assault Weapons Ban signed into law by President Clinton in 1994 banned 19 types of semi-automatic military-style guns and ammunition clips with more than 10 rounds. "A semi-automatic is a quintessential self-defense firearm owned by American citizens in this country," LaPierre said. "I think it is clearly covered under Heller and it's clearly, I think, protected by the Constitution."
He then goes on to say, "I think closing the gun show loophole, the banning of cop-killer bullets and I also think that making the assault weapons ban permanent, would be something that would be permitted under Heller." Again, you moron!!, there is no such thing as a "gun show loophole." Any American can sell their gun to any other American. just as they can have a garage sale or sell their car. There is no Federal law against me selling my car. How dare you tell me I can't sell any other of my other personal property.
Let's face facts, he's using scare-tactics. He's trying to create controversy where there isn't any. There's no such thing as a "cop-killer" bullet. It's a media creation. I don't like Holder, already.
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/story?id=6960824&page=1
Obama to Seek New Assault Weapons Ban
The Ban Expired in 2004 During the Bush Administration.
By JASON RYAN WASHINGTON, Feb. 25, 2009
The Obama administration will seek to reinstate the assault weapons ban that expired in 2004 during the Bush administration, Attorney General Eric Holder said today.
Wednesday Attorney General Eric Holder said that the Obama administration will seek to reinstitute the assault weapons ban which expired in 2004 during the Bush administration. As President Obama indicated during the campaign, there are just a few gun-related changes that we would like to make, and among them would be to reinstitute the ban on the sale of assault weapons," Holder told reporters.
Holder said that putting the ban back in place would not only be a positive move by the United States, it would help cut down on the flow of guns going across the border into Mexico, which is struggling with heavy violence among drug cartels along the border.
"I think that will have a positive impact in Mexico, at a minimum." Holder said at a news conference on the arrest of more than 700 people in a drug enforcement crackdown on Mexican drug cartels operating in the U.S. Mexican government officials have complained that the availability of sophisticated guns from the United States have emboldened drug traffickers to fight over access routes into the U.S. A State Department travel warning issued Feb. 20, 2009, reflected government concerns about the violence.
"Some recent Mexican army and police confrontations with drug cartels have resembled small-unit combat, with cartels employing automatic weapons and grenades," the warning said. "Large firefights have taken place in many towns and cities across Mexico, but most recently in northern Mexico, including Tijuana, Chihuahua City and Ciudad Juarez."
At the news conference today, Holder described his discussions with his Mexican counterpart about the recent spike in violence. "I met yesterday with Attorney General Medina Mora of Mexico, and we discussed the unprecedented levels of violence his country is facing because of their enforcement efforts," he said.
Holder declined to offer any time frame for the reimplementation of the assault weapons ban, however. "It's something, as I said, that the president talked about during the campaign," he said. "There are obviously a number of things that are -- that have been taking up a substantial amount of his time, and so, I'm not sure exactly what th. In a brief interview with ABC News, Wayne LaPierre, president of the National Rifle Association, said, "I think there are a lot of Democrats on Capitol Hill cringing at Eric Holder's comments right now."
During his confirmation hearing, Holder told the Senate Judiciary Committee about other gun control measures the Obama administration may consider. "I think closing the gun show loophole, the banning of cop-killer bullets and I also think that making the assault weapons ban permanent, would be something that would be permitted under Heller," Holder said, referring to the Supreme Court ruling in Washington, D.C. v. Heller, which asserted the Second Amendment as an individual's right to own a weapon.
The Assault Weapons Ban signed into law by President Clinton in 1994 banned 19 types of semi-automatic military-style guns and ammunition clips with more than 10 rounds. "A semi-automatic is a quintessential self-defense firearm owned by American citizens in this country," LaPierre said. "I think it is clearly covered under Heller and it's clearly, I think, protected by the Constitution."
Tuesday, February 24, 2009
And now, for the Swiss
http://edition.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/europe/02/24/switzerland.gun.army.referendum/index.html?iref=mpstoryview
The Anti's do not just reside in the U.S. They are also in Switzerland. In 2007 they passed an ammo ban for homes and now they are trying to get militia guns removed from homes. It is estimated that 1.5 million military weapons are in the homes of the Swiss military and militia.
"Switzerland's armed forces consist of just a few thousand permanent full-time staff, with the rest essentially a militia.
Service in the militia is compulsory for men aged between 19 and 31 and in between call-ups they store their weapons at home. There are currently around 220,000 conscripts."
The reasons promoted for this ban--to help reduce suicides. Yes, that's what they said. Not a murder problem, but suicides. In total, murders and suicides, 300 people are killed each year. Washington D.C. has a minute percentage of that number of guns and had at least 3 times that number in just murders last year.
Read the article. If the U.S. was in such "good" shape, there wouldn't be any anti's.
The Anti's do not just reside in the U.S. They are also in Switzerland. In 2007 they passed an ammo ban for homes and now they are trying to get militia guns removed from homes. It is estimated that 1.5 million military weapons are in the homes of the Swiss military and militia.
"Switzerland's armed forces consist of just a few thousand permanent full-time staff, with the rest essentially a militia.
Service in the militia is compulsory for men aged between 19 and 31 and in between call-ups they store their weapons at home. There are currently around 220,000 conscripts."
The reasons promoted for this ban--to help reduce suicides. Yes, that's what they said. Not a murder problem, but suicides. In total, murders and suicides, 300 people are killed each year. Washington D.C. has a minute percentage of that number of guns and had at least 3 times that number in just murders last year.
Read the article. If the U.S. was in such "good" shape, there wouldn't be any anti's.
Saturday, February 21, 2009
Prices and availability
There was a large gun show here in Phoenix this weekend. Lots of people...lots of guns. Prices were too high, as typical now, but there was plenty of ammo. Prices for 'black rifles" were $100 to $250 above where they were a year ago. Cheap AK's used to go for $300 to $450 and are now going for $500 and up.
Ammo prices are still high. Ammo, though, has been returning to Walmart and other sources over the past week or so. I bought a few 100 rd boxes of WWB and was told they had several cases :in the back."
I think the worst of the fear buying has passed. This is good. It allows prices to settle and people who were waiting on the fringes to come into the mainstream and buy what they have been on hold patiently for.
Ammo prices are still high. Ammo, though, has been returning to Walmart and other sources over the past week or so. I bought a few 100 rd boxes of WWB and was told they had several cases :in the back."
I think the worst of the fear buying has passed. This is good. It allows prices to settle and people who were waiting on the fringes to come into the mainstream and buy what they have been on hold patiently for.
Wednesday, February 18, 2009
A Soldiers View
I have never been a fan of the M-16 as a combat weapon. It's a great target shooter. It's a great varmint gun. It's just isn't an assault weapon. It's caliber isn't "intermediate." It's anemic for anything more then a rabbit or a fox.
It's reliability isn't good, either. It must be cleaned regularly. That isn't a bad thing, except that lubing a gun in sandy Iraq is just a way to attract even more sand in your gun and muck things up. Well..this argument has been run before..over and over....
Here's a Soldiers view of the AK, though.
Link to original article
I've never liked the AK. Nor did I have any use for the 7.62x39 cartridge, either. I always considered the Russian assault rifle to be crude, inaccurate and evil - the chosen weapon of the Chinese hordes or godless Soviets.
Other weapons were far more interesting.In my formative years in the US Army, I was busy shooting accurized rifles and pistols for a living. When civilian-style AK-47s started showing up in gunshops some years ago, I never had the urge to take one home, despite the early bargain-basement prices.
I'd handled and shot a few over the years, which only reinforced my negative opinion of the AK. It just wasn't able to do what I wanted at the time, which was to place tight groups into faraway targets while I was strapped into a leather sling.Fast-forward a couple of decades.
My time as a professional marksman was behind me and my usual soldier routine consisted of night defensive positions, daily combat patrols and dodging mortar attacks in my AO (area of operations). I was now an older reservist back on active duty, responsible for a team of young soldiers in a very hot combat zone. Every day I came in contact with AKs and, over time, a grudging respect developed. AK-47s were literally everywhere in Iraq.
I saw dozens of people killed and wounded with the 7.62 cartridge that I'd held in such contempt. Several times I was on the receiving end of hostile AK rounds launched in my direction. Accuracy was irrelevant here. The AK did what all combat rifles are supposed to do - function and kill.Two months into my tour I was digging through a pile of captured weapons at Camp Victory, looking for something interesting to play with.
I was hoping for a nice FN FAL or maybe a Sten gun. You never know what'll turn up in Iraq. I wanted something in either 7.62x51mm (.308) or 9mm because of ammo availability. I could then shoot often and look cool on patrol, too.Besides a couple of British SMLE beaters in .303, nothing in the pile caught my eye, except for a pristine AK folder bearing Egyptian markings. Nary a scratch it had, with a spotless bore and a web sling thrown in.
I claimed ownership, took it back to my trailer, cleaned it and looked forward to a range session after returning from the next combat patrol.Just after arriving in An Najaf Province, halfway through my tour, we received three brand-new, up-armored HMMWVs complete with protected gunner's cupolas.
Our primary crew-served MG (machine gun) was a 5.56mm M249 SAW, which isn't the best guntruck weapon. Since the rule (a very good one) was a minimum of four vehicles on patrol "outside the wire," I always added a fourth vehicle, mounting a .50 Browning for additional firepower.We scrounged AT-4s (anti-tank/bunker-busters), extra fragmentation grenades and lots of ammo.
For close-in defense, I acquired three more AKs, one for each of my vehicles, along with pistols for the SAW gunners. The SAW gunners were basically helpless close-in and needed something that worked well in tight quarters in case a bad guy walked up and tried to toss a frag into the open hatch. A pistol (usually a borrowed Beretta or a confiscated Makarov) and a folding AK filled the bill perfectly. I'd received two additional pistols from the helpful Blackwater folks (as well as a nice GI .45 for myself) and got my AKs from a well-connected Interpreter.
The Kalashnikovs were worn slung across the chest, over body armor, or hung upside down on the open gunner's hatch. Chambers were kept empty with safeties in the "off" position. Pistols were worn in low-slung tactical leg holsters that were easily accessible.I could sleep well now, knowing my little team was very well armed and ready for just about anything we'd encounter.
My soldiers, with the exception of my close friend and teammate Craig Taylor, had no experience with the AK-47. Craig (my second in command) and I set up a once-weekly training regimen of tactical exercises using live ammo in 120-plus-degree heat that overcame the lack of weapons experience quickly.
Usually we trained with the Blackwater Security people, who were all prior military and extremely competent and aggressive. We worked constantly on close-in defense, bailing out of vehicles, cover fire while in the rescue mode, etc. The folding AKs excelled in these scenarios. We also practiced basic marksmanship skills and constantly checked the zeros on our M16s.
During combat missions, my faithful Egyptian Kalashnikov, along with my 1911 .45, was always with me when I was out of my vehicle. It rode slung over my shoulder while I supervised my vehicles' tactical emplacement or inspected battle-damaged sites. My scoped M16A2 remained in the HMMWV, locked in its weapons rack. It was relegated to long-range engagement or extended trips away from the guntruck.
Probably the most important thing about the AK-47s that I observed was their utter reliability. We cleaned our issue weapons daily, but rarely got to the AKs (our "truck guns"), except to knock the dust off and dump the sand out of the magazines. They always functioned, though, no matter how much crud was inside.
Our AKs were treated roughly, bouncing around inside the vehicles or hanging by a strap onto the gunner's hatch door. More than once one of them fell off the top of a guntruck into the sand, was retrieved, dusted off and tossed back into the vehicle. When it was test-fired later (all our weapons were fired at least weekly) it always worked flawlessly.
The AK mags had a lot to do with reliability. Made of thick stamped steel with robust feed lips, you had to really try to damage them. AK mags were run over numerous times by our vehicles without apparent damage. We never lubed the guns, either. The general consensus was that oil would just attract more sand and dirt on a gun that wasn't cleaned daily. The AKs always cycled. They seemed to thrive on abuse. Its design is incredibly simple - an easy field strip without a lot of small parts to get lost, unlike an M16.
The proven piston operation is conceded to be more reliable than the gas tube of the AR family and is now being looked at for the follow-on US-issue service rifle.
Have I changed my mind about the AK-47? Of course. It fulfilled a very crucial need that wasn't being met by the weapons that we had on hand at the time. I still don't have any desire to own one, but an AK-47 on full-auto is a blast (especially with almost unlimited free ammo). I still consider it inaccurate and somewhat crude compared to an AR or even the newer, Russian-designed AK-74. But it deservedly is one of the world's great assault rifles.Its reliability is legendary, and a combat rifle that works, every time, in any environmental scenario is something that never reaches obsolescence.
With over 50 million produced, American forces will be facing them for many more years.
Do I prefer the AK over the AR-M16? No, and I'd feel handicapped if I only had an AK. My M16A2, equipped with a low-power telescopic sight, was accurate, reliable (I cleaned it daily) and killed well. The AKs we used complemented our M16s and weren't meant as a replacement.
On my next overseas tour I'll probably be armed with a Colt M4 and some kind of optical sight. It's smaller and mounts optics better than the M16A2 I was armed with on my first tour. An ACOG-mounted M4 would fulfill my needs perfectly next time "down-range." But I won't say no if a nice folding East-German or Czech AK with low mileage comes my way.
It's reliability isn't good, either. It must be cleaned regularly. That isn't a bad thing, except that lubing a gun in sandy Iraq is just a way to attract even more sand in your gun and muck things up. Well..this argument has been run before..over and over....
Here's a Soldiers view of the AK, though.
Link to original article
I've never liked the AK. Nor did I have any use for the 7.62x39 cartridge, either. I always considered the Russian assault rifle to be crude, inaccurate and evil - the chosen weapon of the Chinese hordes or godless Soviets.
Other weapons were far more interesting.In my formative years in the US Army, I was busy shooting accurized rifles and pistols for a living. When civilian-style AK-47s started showing up in gunshops some years ago, I never had the urge to take one home, despite the early bargain-basement prices.
I'd handled and shot a few over the years, which only reinforced my negative opinion of the AK. It just wasn't able to do what I wanted at the time, which was to place tight groups into faraway targets while I was strapped into a leather sling.Fast-forward a couple of decades.
My time as a professional marksman was behind me and my usual soldier routine consisted of night defensive positions, daily combat patrols and dodging mortar attacks in my AO (area of operations). I was now an older reservist back on active duty, responsible for a team of young soldiers in a very hot combat zone. Every day I came in contact with AKs and, over time, a grudging respect developed. AK-47s were literally everywhere in Iraq.
I saw dozens of people killed and wounded with the 7.62 cartridge that I'd held in such contempt. Several times I was on the receiving end of hostile AK rounds launched in my direction. Accuracy was irrelevant here. The AK did what all combat rifles are supposed to do - function and kill.Two months into my tour I was digging through a pile of captured weapons at Camp Victory, looking for something interesting to play with.
I was hoping for a nice FN FAL or maybe a Sten gun. You never know what'll turn up in Iraq. I wanted something in either 7.62x51mm (.308) or 9mm because of ammo availability. I could then shoot often and look cool on patrol, too.Besides a couple of British SMLE beaters in .303, nothing in the pile caught my eye, except for a pristine AK folder bearing Egyptian markings. Nary a scratch it had, with a spotless bore and a web sling thrown in.
I claimed ownership, took it back to my trailer, cleaned it and looked forward to a range session after returning from the next combat patrol.Just after arriving in An Najaf Province, halfway through my tour, we received three brand-new, up-armored HMMWVs complete with protected gunner's cupolas.
Our primary crew-served MG (machine gun) was a 5.56mm M249 SAW, which isn't the best guntruck weapon. Since the rule (a very good one) was a minimum of four vehicles on patrol "outside the wire," I always added a fourth vehicle, mounting a .50 Browning for additional firepower.We scrounged AT-4s (anti-tank/bunker-busters), extra fragmentation grenades and lots of ammo.
For close-in defense, I acquired three more AKs, one for each of my vehicles, along with pistols for the SAW gunners. The SAW gunners were basically helpless close-in and needed something that worked well in tight quarters in case a bad guy walked up and tried to toss a frag into the open hatch. A pistol (usually a borrowed Beretta or a confiscated Makarov) and a folding AK filled the bill perfectly. I'd received two additional pistols from the helpful Blackwater folks (as well as a nice GI .45 for myself) and got my AKs from a well-connected Interpreter.
The Kalashnikovs were worn slung across the chest, over body armor, or hung upside down on the open gunner's hatch. Chambers were kept empty with safeties in the "off" position. Pistols were worn in low-slung tactical leg holsters that were easily accessible.I could sleep well now, knowing my little team was very well armed and ready for just about anything we'd encounter.
My soldiers, with the exception of my close friend and teammate Craig Taylor, had no experience with the AK-47. Craig (my second in command) and I set up a once-weekly training regimen of tactical exercises using live ammo in 120-plus-degree heat that overcame the lack of weapons experience quickly.
Usually we trained with the Blackwater Security people, who were all prior military and extremely competent and aggressive. We worked constantly on close-in defense, bailing out of vehicles, cover fire while in the rescue mode, etc. The folding AKs excelled in these scenarios. We also practiced basic marksmanship skills and constantly checked the zeros on our M16s.
During combat missions, my faithful Egyptian Kalashnikov, along with my 1911 .45, was always with me when I was out of my vehicle. It rode slung over my shoulder while I supervised my vehicles' tactical emplacement or inspected battle-damaged sites. My scoped M16A2 remained in the HMMWV, locked in its weapons rack. It was relegated to long-range engagement or extended trips away from the guntruck.
Probably the most important thing about the AK-47s that I observed was their utter reliability. We cleaned our issue weapons daily, but rarely got to the AKs (our "truck guns"), except to knock the dust off and dump the sand out of the magazines. They always functioned, though, no matter how much crud was inside.
Our AKs were treated roughly, bouncing around inside the vehicles or hanging by a strap onto the gunner's hatch door. More than once one of them fell off the top of a guntruck into the sand, was retrieved, dusted off and tossed back into the vehicle. When it was test-fired later (all our weapons were fired at least weekly) it always worked flawlessly.
The AK mags had a lot to do with reliability. Made of thick stamped steel with robust feed lips, you had to really try to damage them. AK mags were run over numerous times by our vehicles without apparent damage. We never lubed the guns, either. The general consensus was that oil would just attract more sand and dirt on a gun that wasn't cleaned daily. The AKs always cycled. They seemed to thrive on abuse. Its design is incredibly simple - an easy field strip without a lot of small parts to get lost, unlike an M16.
The proven piston operation is conceded to be more reliable than the gas tube of the AR family and is now being looked at for the follow-on US-issue service rifle.
Have I changed my mind about the AK-47? Of course. It fulfilled a very crucial need that wasn't being met by the weapons that we had on hand at the time. I still don't have any desire to own one, but an AK-47 on full-auto is a blast (especially with almost unlimited free ammo). I still consider it inaccurate and somewhat crude compared to an AR or even the newer, Russian-designed AK-74. But it deservedly is one of the world's great assault rifles.Its reliability is legendary, and a combat rifle that works, every time, in any environmental scenario is something that never reaches obsolescence.
With over 50 million produced, American forces will be facing them for many more years.
Do I prefer the AK over the AR-M16? No, and I'd feel handicapped if I only had an AK. My M16A2, equipped with a low-power telescopic sight, was accurate, reliable (I cleaned it daily) and killed well. The AKs we used complemented our M16s and weren't meant as a replacement.
On my next overseas tour I'll probably be armed with a Colt M4 and some kind of optical sight. It's smaller and mounts optics better than the M16A2 I was armed with on my first tour. An ACOG-mounted M4 would fulfill my needs perfectly next time "down-range." But I won't say no if a nice folding East-German or Czech AK with low mileage comes my way.
Monday, February 16, 2009
Oh,. Come On !!
Can we start being logical for a moment?
Seriously, what the hell is wrong with people? Here is an honors student and drill team member with a fake, wooden gun who has been expelled from school.
http://washingtontimes.com/news/2009/feb/13/school-gun-case-sparks-cries-for-common-sense/
Student in hot water for mock rifles
Valerie Richardson Friday, February 13, 2009
GREENWOOD VILLAGE, Colo.
Marie Morrow, an honors student and drill-team commander in the Young Marines, isn't the kind of student who normally gets expelled.
But she's now awaiting the results of Thursday's expulsion hearing after leaving three rifle-shaped props, used for drilling, in the back of her car at Cherokee Trail High School in Aurora.
Colorado law mandates expulsion for any student found with a "dangerous weapon" on school grounds, which includes "a firearm facsimile that could reasonably be mistaken for an actual firearm."
The case has galvanized Coloradans as the details play out on talk radio, editorial pages and even the state legislature. State Sen. Kevin Lundberg, a Republican, said he plans to introduce legislation that would provide an exception to the law for prop weapons used by military-sponsored youth groups.
"There should be exemptions to this hard-and-fast rule so this type of thing doesn't happen again," Mr. Lundberg said in a statement. "I am outraged that a student faces expulsion for participating in a drill team."
Even a spokesman for one of the nation's leading gun-control advocacy groups agreed that the punishment didn't seem to fit the crime.
"We're not concerned about nonoperative rifles, and the facts in this case cry out for someone to exercise common sense," said Peter Hamm, a spokesman for the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence. "While officials seem to want to send an important message, which is fine, we don't want to see this young woman's life severely disrupted."
Miss Morrow's attorney, David Lane, acknowledged that the question isn't whether she'll be expelled, but for how long. Colorado law says the expulsion can range from one day to one year.
At the hearing Thursday morning at the Cherry Creek Schools district office, Mr. Lane asked an independent hearing officer to limit the expulsion to time served. Miss Morrow's expulsion began Feb. 6, the day after the prop rifles were found.
"Unfortunately, Marie's going to be expelled because that's the law, but hopefully it will only be for time served," said Mr. Lane, a well-known Denver defense lawyer who also represents former University of Colorado professor Ward Churchill. "Anything else would be absolutely unjust."
Miss Morrow, 17, likely will learn her fate Friday, district officials said. The Cherry Creek Schools superintendent, Mary Chesley, will make the final decision after receiving the hearing officer's report.
"I just hope that they give me the minimal punishment and then I can go back to school as soon as possible," Miss Morrow told reporters after Thursday's hearing.
Miss Morrow said that during drill routines she spins and tosses the nonoperative rifles, which are made of plastic and wood for drill use, are heavily duct-taped and never built to fire bullets. She had brought them to school Feb. 5 because she was preparing for a competition at the Air Force Academy in April and planned to attend a practice right after school.
Students who receive permission from the school or district can bring such facsimile weapons to school, but Miss Morrow said she was unfamiliar with the rule and didn't tell anyone about the prop rifles.
Some students, apparently on their way to a well-known smoking spot next to the parking lot, spotted the fake rifles through the back window of Miss Morrow's Dodge Durango and contacted school authorities.
Miss Morrow said she was initially told that the rifles would be placed in a police security van and that she could pick them up after school, but then she received a note telling her to go to the dean's office.
The dean and assistant principal told her that she would be expelled instead.
"They said they didn't want to do this, but it's the law and they have to follow it," Miss Morrow said on "The Peter Boyles Show," a Denver morning talk show that has championed her cause.
Callers to the show said the students who turned her in received as a reward coupons to Chik-Fil-A fast-food restaurant, a report Miss Morrow confirmed.
"That's the insanity of this - she's a student leader, a smart kid ... then they give the snitches Chik-Fil-A," Mr. Boyles said.
Even if the expulsion is limited to time served, Miss Morrow's supporters fear that the episode could come back to haunt her in her adult life. She has secured the recommendation from a member of Congress necessary to attend the Merchant Marine Academy.
Cherry Creek Schools spokeswoman Tustin Amole said students' records are destroyed after they graduate, and that there would be nothing in the district files to link Miss Morrow to the incident.
In an editorial this week, the Rocky Mountain News said the law needed more flexibility.
"The law should not be so rigid that it forces schools to expel any student who belongs to a military organization, a drum-and-bugle corps or any other legitimate extracurricular group and is simply transporting what amounts to harmless props," the editorial said.
Mr. Lane blamed Miss Morrow's plight on the "zero-tolerance" policy toward weapons, even fake ones, that has been adopted by many states and school districts.
"I hope the legislature decides that people in authority at schools are allowed to use their brains from now on," Mr. Lane said. " 'Zero tolerance' is a code word for 'No Brains Allowed.' "
Seriously, what the hell is wrong with people? Here is an honors student and drill team member with a fake, wooden gun who has been expelled from school.
http://washingtontimes.com/news/2009/feb/13/school-gun-case-sparks-cries-for-common-sense/
Student in hot water for mock rifles
Valerie Richardson Friday, February 13, 2009
GREENWOOD VILLAGE, Colo.
Marie Morrow, an honors student and drill-team commander in the Young Marines, isn't the kind of student who normally gets expelled.
But she's now awaiting the results of Thursday's expulsion hearing after leaving three rifle-shaped props, used for drilling, in the back of her car at Cherokee Trail High School in Aurora.
Colorado law mandates expulsion for any student found with a "dangerous weapon" on school grounds, which includes "a firearm facsimile that could reasonably be mistaken for an actual firearm."
The case has galvanized Coloradans as the details play out on talk radio, editorial pages and even the state legislature. State Sen. Kevin Lundberg, a Republican, said he plans to introduce legislation that would provide an exception to the law for prop weapons used by military-sponsored youth groups.
"There should be exemptions to this hard-and-fast rule so this type of thing doesn't happen again," Mr. Lundberg said in a statement. "I am outraged that a student faces expulsion for participating in a drill team."
Even a spokesman for one of the nation's leading gun-control advocacy groups agreed that the punishment didn't seem to fit the crime.
"We're not concerned about nonoperative rifles, and the facts in this case cry out for someone to exercise common sense," said Peter Hamm, a spokesman for the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence. "While officials seem to want to send an important message, which is fine, we don't want to see this young woman's life severely disrupted."
Miss Morrow's attorney, David Lane, acknowledged that the question isn't whether she'll be expelled, but for how long. Colorado law says the expulsion can range from one day to one year.
At the hearing Thursday morning at the Cherry Creek Schools district office, Mr. Lane asked an independent hearing officer to limit the expulsion to time served. Miss Morrow's expulsion began Feb. 6, the day after the prop rifles were found.
"Unfortunately, Marie's going to be expelled because that's the law, but hopefully it will only be for time served," said Mr. Lane, a well-known Denver defense lawyer who also represents former University of Colorado professor Ward Churchill. "Anything else would be absolutely unjust."
Miss Morrow, 17, likely will learn her fate Friday, district officials said. The Cherry Creek Schools superintendent, Mary Chesley, will make the final decision after receiving the hearing officer's report.
"I just hope that they give me the minimal punishment and then I can go back to school as soon as possible," Miss Morrow told reporters after Thursday's hearing.
Miss Morrow said that during drill routines she spins and tosses the nonoperative rifles, which are made of plastic and wood for drill use, are heavily duct-taped and never built to fire bullets. She had brought them to school Feb. 5 because she was preparing for a competition at the Air Force Academy in April and planned to attend a practice right after school.
Students who receive permission from the school or district can bring such facsimile weapons to school, but Miss Morrow said she was unfamiliar with the rule and didn't tell anyone about the prop rifles.
Some students, apparently on their way to a well-known smoking spot next to the parking lot, spotted the fake rifles through the back window of Miss Morrow's Dodge Durango and contacted school authorities.
Miss Morrow said she was initially told that the rifles would be placed in a police security van and that she could pick them up after school, but then she received a note telling her to go to the dean's office.
The dean and assistant principal told her that she would be expelled instead.
"They said they didn't want to do this, but it's the law and they have to follow it," Miss Morrow said on "The Peter Boyles Show," a Denver morning talk show that has championed her cause.
Callers to the show said the students who turned her in received as a reward coupons to Chik-Fil-A fast-food restaurant, a report Miss Morrow confirmed.
"That's the insanity of this - she's a student leader, a smart kid ... then they give the snitches Chik-Fil-A," Mr. Boyles said.
Even if the expulsion is limited to time served, Miss Morrow's supporters fear that the episode could come back to haunt her in her adult life. She has secured the recommendation from a member of Congress necessary to attend the Merchant Marine Academy.
Cherry Creek Schools spokeswoman Tustin Amole said students' records are destroyed after they graduate, and that there would be nothing in the district files to link Miss Morrow to the incident.
In an editorial this week, the Rocky Mountain News said the law needed more flexibility.
"The law should not be so rigid that it forces schools to expel any student who belongs to a military organization, a drum-and-bugle corps or any other legitimate extracurricular group and is simply transporting what amounts to harmless props," the editorial said.
Mr. Lane blamed Miss Morrow's plight on the "zero-tolerance" policy toward weapons, even fake ones, that has been adopted by many states and school districts.
"I hope the legislature decides that people in authority at schools are allowed to use their brains from now on," Mr. Lane said. " 'Zero tolerance' is a code word for 'No Brains Allowed.' "
Thursday, February 12, 2009
Law heading through AZ Senate
Currently, guns are not allowed in any bar or restaurant which sells liquor. There is a bill going through the Arizona Senate which might change that.
This should be interesting. I have seen some people who shoot drunk, which is stupid as hell. Most gun owners, though, are responsible, law-abiding citizens of this nation. Allowing people to decide
The bill makes sense, though. The owner of most establishments have the right to allow or disallow guns on their property. Why not restaurants?
http://ktar.com/?nid=6&sid=1041963
Bill would allow guns in restaurants
February 10th, 2009 @ 7:05am
by Bob McClay/KTAR
A bill that would give customers the right to take guns into restaurants which have certain liquor licenses has been introduced in the Arizona Senate.
Restaurant owners who do not want firearms in their establishments would be required to post signs about the ban.
Sen. Jack Harper, R-Surprise, said current law bans people from carrying a weapon into any business with a liquor license. He said his proposal is aimed at leveling the playing field.
"This should be up to the business owner to exercise their property rights to decide whether or not they want to allow a patron to exercise their Second Amendment rights," said Harper, who tried unsuccessfully to get a similar bill passed last year.
Harper said the main difference between last year's bill and the current version is that this year's proposal is limited to restaurants that have a Class 12 liquor license, which means they are allowed to sell just a low-volume or a casual amount of alcohol.
"If someone comes into a restaurant and they're not consuming alcohol, that's no different than them walking through a Wal-mart, K-mart or Target that sells firearms and has alcohol," Harper said. "If you're not consuming, there's no reason why the business owner shouldn't be allowed the decision to allow you to exercise your Second Amendment rights."
He added, "In every other business in this state, firearms are allowed as long as the business owner allows them. But, if the business has an on-site consumption liquor license, then the state government decides for the business owner that firearms will not be allowed, even if the patrol is not consuming alcohol."
Harper said the bill is backed by the National Rifle Association, which hopes it will be passed before the group's annual convention in Phoenix in the spring.
This should be interesting. I have seen some people who shoot drunk, which is stupid as hell. Most gun owners, though, are responsible, law-abiding citizens of this nation. Allowing people to decide
The bill makes sense, though. The owner of most establishments have the right to allow or disallow guns on their property. Why not restaurants?
http://ktar.com/?nid=6&sid=1041963
Bill would allow guns in restaurants
February 10th, 2009 @ 7:05am
by Bob McClay/KTAR
A bill that would give customers the right to take guns into restaurants which have certain liquor licenses has been introduced in the Arizona Senate.
Restaurant owners who do not want firearms in their establishments would be required to post signs about the ban.
Sen. Jack Harper, R-Surprise, said current law bans people from carrying a weapon into any business with a liquor license. He said his proposal is aimed at leveling the playing field.
"This should be up to the business owner to exercise their property rights to decide whether or not they want to allow a patron to exercise their Second Amendment rights," said Harper, who tried unsuccessfully to get a similar bill passed last year.
Harper said the main difference between last year's bill and the current version is that this year's proposal is limited to restaurants that have a Class 12 liquor license, which means they are allowed to sell just a low-volume or a casual amount of alcohol.
"If someone comes into a restaurant and they're not consuming alcohol, that's no different than them walking through a Wal-mart, K-mart or Target that sells firearms and has alcohol," Harper said. "If you're not consuming, there's no reason why the business owner shouldn't be allowed the decision to allow you to exercise your Second Amendment rights."
He added, "In every other business in this state, firearms are allowed as long as the business owner allows them. But, if the business has an on-site consumption liquor license, then the state government decides for the business owner that firearms will not be allowed, even if the patrol is not consuming alcohol."
Harper said the bill is backed by the National Rifle Association, which hopes it will be passed before the group's annual convention in Phoenix in the spring.
Wednesday, February 11, 2009
Dumb news cast
I am currently watching ABC Channel 15. They are talking about the 9 year old kid who shot his dad and dad's roommate in St. Johns, AZ. They spoke several times about the child's 22 rifle. They showed a picture of a bolt action 22 rifle.
Then, then showed a box of 17 HMR ammo !! WHAT? Are you serious? Can the new casters be that stupid?
I guess so.
Then, then showed a box of 17 HMR ammo !! WHAT? Are you serious? Can the new casters be that stupid?
I guess so.
Sunday, February 8, 2009
Another win in California
"The City of San Francisco itself legally stipulated that its ordinance banning gun possession on county owned or controlled property cannot be applied to the public housing properties." One by one the unconstitutional bans on law abiding citizens to defend themselves are falling.
http://www.nraila.org/Legislation/Read.aspx?ID=4347
Thursday, January 29, 2009
PUBLIC HOUSING OFFICIALS DROP ILLEGAL BAN ON FIREARMS POSSESSION IN PUBLIC HOUSING
An NRA-led coalition of self-defense civil rights groups including the Second Amendment Foundation and the California Rifle & Pistol Association (CRPA) has prevailed in a Second Amendment lawsuit challenging a ban on firearm possession in San Francisco public housing residences.
“This success is further vindication of the U.S. Supreme Court's Heller ruling upholding the Second Amendment as protecting a fundamental, individual civil right for all law-abiding Americans,” said NRA-ILA Executive Director Chris W. Cox. The San Francisco Housing Authority (SFHA) and the property management company that oversees San Francisco’s public housing projects have agreed to completely remove a lease provision banning guns in the residences.
The City of San Francisco itself legally stipulated that its ordinance banning gun possession on county owned or controlled property cannot be applied to the public housing properties, even though Mayor Gavin Newsom announced at a May 2007 press conference that the new city ordinance would ban gun possession there.
By excluding the application of the ordinance and removing the lease provision, the right of public housing residents to choose to own a gun to defend themselves or their families has been restored. The settlements bring a successful conclusion to the lawsuit, filed June 2008. The decision to repeal SFHA’s lease provisions banning firearms came despite initial claims by Mayor Newsom that the lawsuit would be “absolutely defended,” and comes after initial claims by the San Francisco City Attorney that the lawsuit was “frivolous” and that the City would seek sanctions. No sanctions were sought, nor could they have been.
The San Francisco concessions follow similar gun ban repeals by several Illinois towns that also faced NRA lawsuits filed immediately after the Supreme Court confirmed in late June that the Second Amendment protects an individual right to keep and bear arms. NRA-ILA and CRPA will continue to pursue other cases to resolve the incorporation issue.
In fact, a California case challenging a gun show ban ordinance that has been partially funded by the NRA for years (Nordyke v. Alameda County) was recently argued before the ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, and a decision is forthcoming. NRA is preparing additional legal challenges in San Francisco and Los Angeles regarding gun control ordinances that were not challenged in the current lawsuit. In fact, NRA’s lawyers have already placed San Francisco and Los Angeles on notice of pending litigation concerning several other gun banning ordinances.
The NRA-led coalition will likely also pursue civil rights actions against California itself as well as several other municipalities to challenge ill-conceived and unconstitutional state and local gun bans in the near future. "Today is an important victory and a step in the right direction for the residents of San Francisco and for the citizens of California," concluded Cox. “NRA will keep up the fight to make sure the Second Amendment is respected throughout the country." To view the stipulations and other related documents, please visit www.calgunlaws.com.
http://www.nraila.org/Legislation/Read.aspx?ID=4347
Thursday, January 29, 2009
PUBLIC HOUSING OFFICIALS DROP ILLEGAL BAN ON FIREARMS POSSESSION IN PUBLIC HOUSING
An NRA-led coalition of self-defense civil rights groups including the Second Amendment Foundation and the California Rifle & Pistol Association (CRPA) has prevailed in a Second Amendment lawsuit challenging a ban on firearm possession in San Francisco public housing residences.
“This success is further vindication of the U.S. Supreme Court's Heller ruling upholding the Second Amendment as protecting a fundamental, individual civil right for all law-abiding Americans,” said NRA-ILA Executive Director Chris W. Cox. The San Francisco Housing Authority (SFHA) and the property management company that oversees San Francisco’s public housing projects have agreed to completely remove a lease provision banning guns in the residences.
The City of San Francisco itself legally stipulated that its ordinance banning gun possession on county owned or controlled property cannot be applied to the public housing properties, even though Mayor Gavin Newsom announced at a May 2007 press conference that the new city ordinance would ban gun possession there.
By excluding the application of the ordinance and removing the lease provision, the right of public housing residents to choose to own a gun to defend themselves or their families has been restored. The settlements bring a successful conclusion to the lawsuit, filed June 2008. The decision to repeal SFHA’s lease provisions banning firearms came despite initial claims by Mayor Newsom that the lawsuit would be “absolutely defended,” and comes after initial claims by the San Francisco City Attorney that the lawsuit was “frivolous” and that the City would seek sanctions. No sanctions were sought, nor could they have been.
The San Francisco concessions follow similar gun ban repeals by several Illinois towns that also faced NRA lawsuits filed immediately after the Supreme Court confirmed in late June that the Second Amendment protects an individual right to keep and bear arms. NRA-ILA and CRPA will continue to pursue other cases to resolve the incorporation issue.
In fact, a California case challenging a gun show ban ordinance that has been partially funded by the NRA for years (Nordyke v. Alameda County) was recently argued before the ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, and a decision is forthcoming. NRA is preparing additional legal challenges in San Francisco and Los Angeles regarding gun control ordinances that were not challenged in the current lawsuit. In fact, NRA’s lawyers have already placed San Francisco and Los Angeles on notice of pending litigation concerning several other gun banning ordinances.
The NRA-led coalition will likely also pursue civil rights actions against California itself as well as several other municipalities to challenge ill-conceived and unconstitutional state and local gun bans in the near future. "Today is an important victory and a step in the right direction for the residents of San Francisco and for the citizens of California," concluded Cox. “NRA will keep up the fight to make sure the Second Amendment is respected throughout the country." To view the stipulations and other related documents, please visit www.calgunlaws.com.
Thursday, February 5, 2009
Go Arzona !!
I am proud of my state of Arizona. We scored a 6 on the Brady Bunch's list. This is a list of states which support the Constitution of the United States, in reverse order.
http://www.bradycampaign.org/xshare/pdf/scorecard/2008/2008_scorecard_rankings.pdf
The Brady Bunch pushes their agenda of eliminating all guns from all citizens of the U.S. that are not law enforcement or military. This means, only law abiding citizens will be disarmed. As they have found in England and Australia, when you disarms the good people, only the bad people have the guns. Gun crimes are up in England and Australia since the criminals know none of their prey have guns to defend themselves.
WAY TO GO to every state that failed this "test" and passed on Civil Liberties !!
http://www.bradycampaign.org/xshare/pdf/scorecard/2008/2008_scorecard_rankings.pdf
The Brady Bunch pushes their agenda of eliminating all guns from all citizens of the U.S. that are not law enforcement or military. This means, only law abiding citizens will be disarmed. As they have found in England and Australia, when you disarms the good people, only the bad people have the guns. Gun crimes are up in England and Australia since the criminals know none of their prey have guns to defend themselves.
WAY TO GO to every state that failed this "test" and passed on Civil Liberties !!
Tuesday, February 3, 2009
Beretta wins, again
Beretta won another Army contract. I am not sure how or why? The Beretta 92 is a decent enough weapon, but I feel to see how the won a contract for guns that are obviously more expensive then other just as reliable guns. I know some folks swear by their 92's, but I know more that swear at them. This must have been political..that's my guess. Beretta has factories in the U.S. and their must have been a requirement for the guns to be made in the U.S. and keep U.S. workers employed.
http://www.americanrifleman.org/BerettaPistolContract.html
Beretta Wins U.S. Service Pistol Contract
by John Zent, Editorial Director, NRA Publications
Beretta U.S.A. dropped a real show-stopper on the assembled firearms industry attending the 2009 SHOT Show in Orlando with the annoucement that it has received a U.S. Army contract to provide up to 450,000 Beretta Model 92FS pistol to U.S. military customers worldwide. It is the biggest handgun contract from the U.S. government since one awarded Colt during World War II, thereby extending Beretta’s run as our standard military pistol supplier.
"This contract will help ensure jobs for hundreds of U.S. workers in the Beretta U.S.A. factory in Maryland for years to come," said Jeffrey Reh, General Counsel and Vice-General Manager. "Beretta U.S.A. was awarded the contract to provide the Beretta 9mm Model 92FS pistol as the standard sidearm for the U.S. Armed Forces back in 1985 and we have continued to do so on a constant basis ever since. About three years ago, Beretta U.S.A. received 13 separate contracts to provide 9mm pistols and associated spare parts to the U.S. Armed Forces. This new, larger contract will continue our efforts by supporting foreign military customers of the United States."
The first of those foreign customers will be the Iraqi military, which has placed a delivery order for 20,000 pieces. In recent years the Army indicated an intention to conduct trials for a new standard service pistol and several prominent handgun makers had positioned themselves to compete for a chance at the prestigious contract. With this development, however, the Army has instead decided to stick with a proven commodity. During the announcement for the precedent-setting contract, company president Cav. Ugo Gusalli Beretta noted that during all the tens of thousands of test-firings of Model 92FS pistols there had been only one malfunction. "We are honored to see the quality and performance of the Beretta Model 92FS pistol continued to be acknowledged in this dramatic way," said Dr. Beretta. "It is clear that the Beretta 9mm pistol still sets the standard for military users around the world."
http://www.americanrifleman.org/BerettaPistolContract.html
Beretta Wins U.S. Service Pistol Contract
by John Zent, Editorial Director, NRA Publications
Beretta U.S.A. dropped a real show-stopper on the assembled firearms industry attending the 2009 SHOT Show in Orlando with the annoucement that it has received a U.S. Army contract to provide up to 450,000 Beretta Model 92FS pistol to U.S. military customers worldwide. It is the biggest handgun contract from the U.S. government since one awarded Colt during World War II, thereby extending Beretta’s run as our standard military pistol supplier.
"This contract will help ensure jobs for hundreds of U.S. workers in the Beretta U.S.A. factory in Maryland for years to come," said Jeffrey Reh, General Counsel and Vice-General Manager. "Beretta U.S.A. was awarded the contract to provide the Beretta 9mm Model 92FS pistol as the standard sidearm for the U.S. Armed Forces back in 1985 and we have continued to do so on a constant basis ever since. About three years ago, Beretta U.S.A. received 13 separate contracts to provide 9mm pistols and associated spare parts to the U.S. Armed Forces. This new, larger contract will continue our efforts by supporting foreign military customers of the United States."
The first of those foreign customers will be the Iraqi military, which has placed a delivery order for 20,000 pieces. In recent years the Army indicated an intention to conduct trials for a new standard service pistol and several prominent handgun makers had positioned themselves to compete for a chance at the prestigious contract. With this development, however, the Army has instead decided to stick with a proven commodity. During the announcement for the precedent-setting contract, company president Cav. Ugo Gusalli Beretta noted that during all the tens of thousands of test-firings of Model 92FS pistols there had been only one malfunction. "We are honored to see the quality and performance of the Beretta Model 92FS pistol continued to be acknowledged in this dramatic way," said Dr. Beretta. "It is clear that the Beretta 9mm pistol still sets the standard for military users around the world."
Monday, February 2, 2009
Sometimes, you just need to stand up
Sometimes, you just need to stand up for your rights...
http://transsylvaniaphoenix.blogspot.com/2009/01/parhump-nevada-when-citizens-make-stand.html
Saturday, January 31, 2009
Parhump, Nevada: When Citizens Make A Stand For The Second Amendment, Politicians Back Off
It started when the Pahrump NV. Town Manager Bill Kohbarger placed on the town board meeting agenda a proposition banning guns from the city property.However, Pahrump residents caught wind of what Kohbarger and his leftist gun grabbing acolytes were scheming and by the time the board meeting started, scores of angry citizens were already packing the town hall.
Read what happened next:Town withdraws effort to ban gunsBy GINA B. GOODThere was definitely a hot time in the old town Tuesday night, due in part to an item placed on the town board meeting agenda by Pahrump Town Manager Bill Kohbarger that would have barred firearms on town-owned property, in town-owned buildings and at town-sponsored events.Fired up residents braved the frigid winds blowing down from snow-capped Mt. Charleston as they streamed into the Bob Ruud Community Center 30 minutes early to ensure a seat for the meeting.By the time the meeting was called to order at 7 p.m., dozens of residents were standing in the back of the hall.
The board's first order of business after the pledge of allegiance was to permanently remove the firearms ban from the agenda, on advice from the town's attorney, Rick Campbell.He said, "My research shows the town does not have the legal right to enact these types of ordinances." That ended the matter for the board but didn't stop the 200 or so people in attendance from wanting to voice their opinions.
Residents waiting to address the board lined up behind the speaker's podium and around the back of the auditorium.Board Chairman Nicole Shupp tried to cut off the speaking, but attendees protested, wanting the board, and specifically Kohbarger, to know where they stood on the issue.A man stating he was from District 5 was first to speak. His name was lost in the noise of the crowd as they reacted to the fact they would not be able to speak on the matter. "The colors have been shown," he said. "We are not okay with this. We can see what's coming in this country. The government is getting out of control.
When it comes to gun rights and the Second Amendment, we can't give any more ground. We have zero tolerance on this issue."The speaker paused as the hall broke out in thunderous applause."I want get the people whose idea this is fired," he continued. "Gun restriction only hurts the honest citizens. Don't our elected officials recognize this fact?Referring to the recent murder of a convenience store employee, he added, "When you walk into a convenience store in Pahrump, do you know who's walking in behind you?"
As the woman next in line tried to ask the board a question, Shupp told the gathering, "We are moving on."The crowd reacted, with several people yelling out, "Let her ask a question."Shupp used her gavel to quiet the room, again saying the board would move on to the next agenda item, but a male voice from the back of the auditorium called out, "All in favor of hearing the question say 'Aye'.""Ayes" rang out in the community center.
Shupp was not swayed in her determination to move to the next item. She told those in attendance that the gun ban was permanently removed from the agenda but they were invited to come back and comment at the next regularly scheduled meeting. She said, "We'll be here until midnight if everyone in the room takes a turn at the podium."People shouted out they wanted to know why a gun ban was on the agenda in the first place, but no answer was forthcoming."You are not going to be re-elected madam," called out someone from the back of the hall.Harley Kulkin addressed Shupp and the board, saying, "If you don't have time to listen to the people who elected you, you shouldn't run for public office
."In a brief interview after the lengthy meeting, Kohbarger, who bore most of the blame from those in attendance, said two residents asked him to put the gun ban on the agenda."They didn't show up to back me up on their own item, but I've got broad shoulders," he said.He said he'd canvassed more than a dozen people after the item was proposed to him and came to the conclusion that guns carried in the open intimidated people.
Before the town attorney advised Kohbarger the town could not enact the ordinance, he'd planned to change the agenda item so those with concealed carry permits would not be prohibited from carrying their firearms, "because those people have training."CCW holders must pass a background check and weapon handling test.Residents react to ban idea"I am totally against this gun ban," said Mike Hickey, before the Pahrump Town Board meeting began on Tuesday.
"If this is the way the town manager thinks, he can go somewhere else. He is new in town and he's trying to flex his muscles. I don't know where he's from, but he can just head right on back there. I'm still a believer in the Constitution."His friend, Daniel Spooner added, "I'm here to find out what's going on and to put in my two cents worth if necessary. I want to know if a study has been done on barring arms by the town manager. If they take our firearms, only the crooks will carry guns and law abiding people won't. I believe in my Second Amendment rights."
Bill Aldrich agreed, "We have to do everything we can to stop this gun ban from happening."Donald Dial said, "Our rights are being taken away. This town has been like this for many, many years. What's the purpose for changing? Just because you make an ordinance to not carry a gun doesn't mean we don't have a right to carry. It's in the Constitution."Carol Bird commented, "My husband Steve and I are here in support of citizens' right to bear arms. I don't want the town to ban guns. In my job, I am in and out of public buildings almost every day. I don't want to remove my gun every time I go into a public building."Louis DeCanio said, "I know the elections are over so nobody has to listen to the people, but we have the right to speak."Donald Cox asked the board who put the item on the agenda. Kohbarger simply said, "I did.""Then you need to resign or be fired," said Cox.
http://transsylvaniaphoenix.blogspot.com/2009/01/parhump-nevada-when-citizens-make-stand.html
Saturday, January 31, 2009
Parhump, Nevada: When Citizens Make A Stand For The Second Amendment, Politicians Back Off
It started when the Pahrump NV. Town Manager Bill Kohbarger placed on the town board meeting agenda a proposition banning guns from the city property.However, Pahrump residents caught wind of what Kohbarger and his leftist gun grabbing acolytes were scheming and by the time the board meeting started, scores of angry citizens were already packing the town hall.
Read what happened next:Town withdraws effort to ban gunsBy GINA B. GOODThere was definitely a hot time in the old town Tuesday night, due in part to an item placed on the town board meeting agenda by Pahrump Town Manager Bill Kohbarger that would have barred firearms on town-owned property, in town-owned buildings and at town-sponsored events.Fired up residents braved the frigid winds blowing down from snow-capped Mt. Charleston as they streamed into the Bob Ruud Community Center 30 minutes early to ensure a seat for the meeting.By the time the meeting was called to order at 7 p.m., dozens of residents were standing in the back of the hall.
The board's first order of business after the pledge of allegiance was to permanently remove the firearms ban from the agenda, on advice from the town's attorney, Rick Campbell.He said, "My research shows the town does not have the legal right to enact these types of ordinances." That ended the matter for the board but didn't stop the 200 or so people in attendance from wanting to voice their opinions.
Residents waiting to address the board lined up behind the speaker's podium and around the back of the auditorium.Board Chairman Nicole Shupp tried to cut off the speaking, but attendees protested, wanting the board, and specifically Kohbarger, to know where they stood on the issue.A man stating he was from District 5 was first to speak. His name was lost in the noise of the crowd as they reacted to the fact they would not be able to speak on the matter. "The colors have been shown," he said. "We are not okay with this. We can see what's coming in this country. The government is getting out of control.
When it comes to gun rights and the Second Amendment, we can't give any more ground. We have zero tolerance on this issue."The speaker paused as the hall broke out in thunderous applause."I want get the people whose idea this is fired," he continued. "Gun restriction only hurts the honest citizens. Don't our elected officials recognize this fact?Referring to the recent murder of a convenience store employee, he added, "When you walk into a convenience store in Pahrump, do you know who's walking in behind you?"
As the woman next in line tried to ask the board a question, Shupp told the gathering, "We are moving on."The crowd reacted, with several people yelling out, "Let her ask a question."Shupp used her gavel to quiet the room, again saying the board would move on to the next agenda item, but a male voice from the back of the auditorium called out, "All in favor of hearing the question say 'Aye'.""Ayes" rang out in the community center.
Shupp was not swayed in her determination to move to the next item. She told those in attendance that the gun ban was permanently removed from the agenda but they were invited to come back and comment at the next regularly scheduled meeting. She said, "We'll be here until midnight if everyone in the room takes a turn at the podium."People shouted out they wanted to know why a gun ban was on the agenda in the first place, but no answer was forthcoming."You are not going to be re-elected madam," called out someone from the back of the hall.Harley Kulkin addressed Shupp and the board, saying, "If you don't have time to listen to the people who elected you, you shouldn't run for public office
."In a brief interview after the lengthy meeting, Kohbarger, who bore most of the blame from those in attendance, said two residents asked him to put the gun ban on the agenda."They didn't show up to back me up on their own item, but I've got broad shoulders," he said.He said he'd canvassed more than a dozen people after the item was proposed to him and came to the conclusion that guns carried in the open intimidated people.
Before the town attorney advised Kohbarger the town could not enact the ordinance, he'd planned to change the agenda item so those with concealed carry permits would not be prohibited from carrying their firearms, "because those people have training."CCW holders must pass a background check and weapon handling test.Residents react to ban idea"I am totally against this gun ban," said Mike Hickey, before the Pahrump Town Board meeting began on Tuesday.
"If this is the way the town manager thinks, he can go somewhere else. He is new in town and he's trying to flex his muscles. I don't know where he's from, but he can just head right on back there. I'm still a believer in the Constitution."His friend, Daniel Spooner added, "I'm here to find out what's going on and to put in my two cents worth if necessary. I want to know if a study has been done on barring arms by the town manager. If they take our firearms, only the crooks will carry guns and law abiding people won't. I believe in my Second Amendment rights."
Bill Aldrich agreed, "We have to do everything we can to stop this gun ban from happening."Donald Dial said, "Our rights are being taken away. This town has been like this for many, many years. What's the purpose for changing? Just because you make an ordinance to not carry a gun doesn't mean we don't have a right to carry. It's in the Constitution."Carol Bird commented, "My husband Steve and I are here in support of citizens' right to bear arms. I don't want the town to ban guns. In my job, I am in and out of public buildings almost every day. I don't want to remove my gun every time I go into a public building."Louis DeCanio said, "I know the elections are over so nobody has to listen to the people, but we have the right to speak."Donald Cox asked the board who put the item on the agenda. Kohbarger simply said, "I did.""Then you need to resign or be fired," said Cox.
Sunday, February 1, 2009
Gangs cause crime
So..the media cannot just blame guns for crime. Now someone has linked gangs with crime. DUH !!!
Gangs are a reason to own guns: Protection from gangs, that is. Read this article...
http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2009-01-29-ms13_N.htm
Gangs are a reason to own guns: Protection from gangs, that is. Read this article...
http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2009-01-29-ms13_N.htm
Friday, January 30, 2009
New shooters
Tomorrow morning, I am taking two new shooters out to the desert for some training. One of them says they shot a gun 14 years ago and the other has a gun, Glock 17, but has only shot once. I am always happy to help pass on gun knowledge, safety. and training to anyone who asks for it.
Only thing that concerns me is, the price of ammo these days. I am bringing 250 rounds of 9mm, 350 rounds of 22LR, 100 rounds of 40 S&W, 100 rounds of 45 ACP, 60 rounds of 7.62x39mm, and 200 rounds of 7.62x25mm. I expect we will probably blow through all of it, and maybe more that they brought. I estimate that for me to replace what I bring for all of them to shoot will cost me almost $200 to replace, at current prices---If I can find the ammo on the shelves to buy. That's also at Walmart prices, for what i can get from Walmart.
I hope they at least buy me lunch... Haha.
Only thing that concerns me is, the price of ammo these days. I am bringing 250 rounds of 9mm, 350 rounds of 22LR, 100 rounds of 40 S&W, 100 rounds of 45 ACP, 60 rounds of 7.62x39mm, and 200 rounds of 7.62x25mm. I expect we will probably blow through all of it, and maybe more that they brought. I estimate that for me to replace what I bring for all of them to shoot will cost me almost $200 to replace, at current prices---If I can find the ammo on the shelves to buy. That's also at Walmart prices, for what i can get from Walmart.
I hope they at least buy me lunch... Haha.
Thursday, January 29, 2009
Sorry, we are out
"Sorry, we are out," seems to be the words told over and over and over at firearms and ammo dealers in the U.S. I have been to many local places and found the same true. Maybe, just maybe, this is a sign of things to come during the President Obama reign.
It's also a sign of panic, not totally unfounded, though. People are afraid that new rules and regulations will cause ammo and guns to become scarce or worse, unavailable. "Buy now, while it's available," is what people are thinking.
Personally, I just want to buy enough ammo to shoot my guns. I am not hoarding and I do not want to, but if this keeps up, I will have to "get my share."
It's also a sign of panic, not totally unfounded, though. People are afraid that new rules and regulations will cause ammo and guns to become scarce or worse, unavailable. "Buy now, while it's available," is what people are thinking.
Personally, I just want to buy enough ammo to shoot my guns. I am not hoarding and I do not want to, but if this keeps up, I will have to "get my share."
Friday, January 23, 2009
This si bad
This is disturbingly sick.....
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090123/ap_on_re_eu/eu_belgium_stabbings
DENDERMONDE, Belgium – A young man with a gruesomely painted black-and-white face went on a rampage at a Belgian day care center Friday, stabbing two babies and a female worker to death and seriously wounding 12 others.
How f-ed up sick in the head do you need to be to commit a crime like this. Geezzz.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090123/ap_on_re_eu/eu_belgium_stabbings
DENDERMONDE, Belgium – A young man with a gruesomely painted black-and-white face went on a rampage at a Belgian day care center Friday, stabbing two babies and a female worker to death and seriously wounding 12 others.
How f-ed up sick in the head do you need to be to commit a crime like this. Geezzz.
Thursday, January 22, 2009
States Rights
Montana is telling the Feds to go screw themselves.
http://data.opi.mt.gov/bills/2009/billhtml/HB0246.htm
NEW SECTION. Section 4. Prohibitions. A personal firearm, a firearm accessory, or ammunition that is manufactured commercially or privately in Montana and that remains within the borders of Montana is not subject to federal law or federal regulation, including registration, under the authority of congress to regulate interstate commerce. It is declared by the legislature that those items have not traveled in interstate commerce. This section applies to a firearm, a firearm accessory, or ammunition that is manufactured in Montana from basic materials and that can be manufactured without the inclusion of any significant parts imported from another state. Generic and insignificant parts that have other manufacturing or consumer product applications are not firearms, firearms accessories, or ammunition, and their importation into Montana and incorporation into a firearm, a firearm accessory, or ammunition manufactured in Montana does not subject the firearm, firearm accessory, or ammunition to federal regulation. It is declared by the legislature that basic materials, such as unmachined steel and unshaped wood, are not firearms, firearms accessories, or ammunition and are not subject to congressional authority to regulate firearms, firearms accessories, and ammunition under interstate commerce as if they were actually firearms, firearms accessories, or ammunition. The authority of congress to regulate interstate commerce in basic materials does not include authority to regulate firearms, firearms accessories, and ammunition made in Montana from those materials. Firearms accessories that are imported into Montana from another state and that are subject to federal regulation as being in interstate commerce do not subject a firearm to federal regulation under interstate commerce because they are attached to or used in conjunction with a firearm in Montana.
So basically, if a gun or accessory is made in Montana, the weapon and parts are not subject to Federal laws. The state of Montana is going to abide by the Constitution of the U.S. and their own states laws.
http://data.opi.mt.gov/bills/2009/billhtml/HB0246.htm
NEW SECTION. Section 4. Prohibitions. A personal firearm, a firearm accessory, or ammunition that is manufactured commercially or privately in Montana and that remains within the borders of Montana is not subject to federal law or federal regulation, including registration, under the authority of congress to regulate interstate commerce. It is declared by the legislature that those items have not traveled in interstate commerce. This section applies to a firearm, a firearm accessory, or ammunition that is manufactured in Montana from basic materials and that can be manufactured without the inclusion of any significant parts imported from another state. Generic and insignificant parts that have other manufacturing or consumer product applications are not firearms, firearms accessories, or ammunition, and their importation into Montana and incorporation into a firearm, a firearm accessory, or ammunition manufactured in Montana does not subject the firearm, firearm accessory, or ammunition to federal regulation. It is declared by the legislature that basic materials, such as unmachined steel and unshaped wood, are not firearms, firearms accessories, or ammunition and are not subject to congressional authority to regulate firearms, firearms accessories, and ammunition under interstate commerce as if they were actually firearms, firearms accessories, or ammunition. The authority of congress to regulate interstate commerce in basic materials does not include authority to regulate firearms, firearms accessories, and ammunition made in Montana from those materials. Firearms accessories that are imported into Montana from another state and that are subject to federal regulation as being in interstate commerce do not subject a firearm to federal regulation under interstate commerce because they are attached to or used in conjunction with a firearm in Montana.
So basically, if a gun or accessory is made in Montana, the weapon and parts are not subject to Federal laws. The state of Montana is going to abide by the Constitution of the U.S. and their own states laws.
Set up for failure
I have been watching the inauguration proceedings and the events following President Obama being sworn in as the 44th President of the United States. The media circus leading up to his swearing and the following parties and events have been ludicrous. The media is treating President Obama as if he is the Second Coming of Jesus.
He is being set up for failure by the media and his supporters. He is being portrayed as the savior of the economy and the U.S. world image. All the talk of change and yet the majority of the people in his cabinet are old school D.C. people, many of whom are from President Clinton's administration.
Change, huh? Not too likely.
He is being set up for failure by the media and his supporters. He is being portrayed as the savior of the economy and the U.S. world image. All the talk of change and yet the majority of the people in his cabinet are old school D.C. people, many of whom are from President Clinton's administration.
Change, huh? Not too likely.
Friday, January 16, 2009
Too funny
I couldn't have said it better myself.
http://gatewaypundit.blogspot.com/2009/01/barack-obama-wins-gun-salesman-of-year.html
Barack Obama wins another prestigious honor...Due to unprecedented demand in firearms since the November election, Barack Obama was awarded the “Gun Salesman of the Year” by Outdoor Wire.
You guys should read this article. It's revealing and funny at the same time.
http://gatewaypundit.blogspot.com/2009/01/barack-obama-wins-gun-salesman-of-year.html
Barack Obama wins another prestigious honor...Due to unprecedented demand in firearms since the November election, Barack Obama was awarded the “Gun Salesman of the Year” by Outdoor Wire.
You guys should read this article. It's revealing and funny at the same time.
Thursday, January 15, 2009
Ruger's new revolver
In the past few years, Ruger has made a bunch of changes and added a lot of interesting items to their extensive stable of weapons. The latest of this new line is the LCR--Light Compact Revolver. http://www.ruger-firearms.com/LCR/
It's a slightly new twist on an old idea. Concealment pistols have always been smaller and lighter then the typical weapons.. The LCR is basically a polymer framed revolver. It's the same concept that HK, Glock, Springfield and S&W have done with their auto-pistols. The revolver weight a little over 13 ounces and hold 5 rounds of .38 Special. It's rated for +P ammo.
For those who are still on the revolver bandwagon for concealed carry, this may be a way to go.
It's a slightly new twist on an old idea. Concealment pistols have always been smaller and lighter then the typical weapons.. The LCR is basically a polymer framed revolver. It's the same concept that HK, Glock, Springfield and S&W have done with their auto-pistols. The revolver weight a little over 13 ounces and hold 5 rounds of .38 Special. It's rated for +P ammo.
For those who are still on the revolver bandwagon for concealed carry, this may be a way to go.
Wednesday, January 14, 2009
Holy Crap !!
Pun Intended
http://www.ksl.com/?nid=148&sid=5315514
Wow...that's bad. Really bad. I am sure he will be losing his CCW over this accident.
http://www.ksl.com/?nid=148&sid=5315514
Wow...that's bad. Really bad. I am sure he will be losing his CCW over this accident.
Sunday, January 11, 2009
We Are Marksmen
On pages 64 and 65 of the February 2009 Blue Press sales flyer is a very interesting article by Barrett Tillman.
http://www.bridleandbit.net/ebooks/bluepress/bluepressfeb09/feb09/object_files/main.swf
His article, which makes total sense, is that words are very powerful. The Anti's have taken our glamorization of the words Assault, Tactical, Shooters, and Gun Nuts to imply that the guys are wrong for civilians and that those who own guns are "nuts." Mr. Tillman credits Alan Korwin with creating the concept that we should call ourselves "Marksmen."
It's a simply term that implies we are able to shoot accurately. It almost sounds like a title, unlike the term "gun nut" which just makes us look foolish. Heck, even the term assault has a criminal connotation to it. It's a misdemeanor or felony, depending on how it is played in the courts. As Mr. Tillmans states, "Assault is a behavior, not an object." Yes, I know it comes from German roots, but the Anti's have made it a point to use that term to denigrate anything anything that shoots a bullet from a long barrel.
I think it's a good idea to call ourselves something like Marksmen. I know it's just semantics, but words are powerful. Words have real meaning and created meaning. Words created the power behind the Nazi uprisings in German...and look how that turned out. Words created the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution...and look how those turned out, after 230 years. Words are powerful.
http://www.bridleandbit.net/ebooks/bluepress/bluepressfeb09/feb09/object_files/main.swf
His article, which makes total sense, is that words are very powerful. The Anti's have taken our glamorization of the words Assault, Tactical, Shooters, and Gun Nuts to imply that the guys are wrong for civilians and that those who own guns are "nuts." Mr. Tillman credits Alan Korwin with creating the concept that we should call ourselves "Marksmen."
It's a simply term that implies we are able to shoot accurately. It almost sounds like a title, unlike the term "gun nut" which just makes us look foolish. Heck, even the term assault has a criminal connotation to it. It's a misdemeanor or felony, depending on how it is played in the courts. As Mr. Tillmans states, "Assault is a behavior, not an object." Yes, I know it comes from German roots, but the Anti's have made it a point to use that term to denigrate anything anything that shoots a bullet from a long barrel.
I think it's a good idea to call ourselves something like Marksmen. I know it's just semantics, but words are powerful. Words have real meaning and created meaning. Words created the power behind the Nazi uprisings in German...and look how that turned out. Words created the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution...and look how those turned out, after 230 years. Words are powerful.
Monday, January 5, 2009
Caroline Kennedy
The Kennedy Clan has long had a hand in U.S. politics. Much of it is not to the benefit of the country. While I will not spend time defaming the families history or character, I can tell you that if I was Governor of New York, I would completely avoid putting another Kennedy into office. She is a stereotypical leftist and makes the word Liberal sound good. She is a complete and total supporter of Obama's plan to push America into a Socialist state.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/21/nyregion/21platform.html?_r=2&hp
As an American, there are several things we both believe in, including her stance on illegal immigration:
Caroline believes all undocumented workers should be required to legalize their presence in the United States and that we must create a way for them to do so. Undocumented workers should pay a fine, learn English and go to the back of the line behind those who came here legally.
I firmly believe she is wrong in her stance on the 2nd Amendment, but with her families history both in front and behind guns, I can understand while she feel this way: Caroline Kennedy is a strong supporter of gun control. She supports New York City’s and New York State’s gun control laws. On the federal level, she support the Brady Law, and other measures to keep guns out of the hands of minors and criminals.
I understand her feelings on this issue, but I do not support it.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/21/nyregion/21platform.html?_r=2&hp
As an American, there are several things we both believe in, including her stance on illegal immigration:
Caroline believes all undocumented workers should be required to legalize their presence in the United States and that we must create a way for them to do so. Undocumented workers should pay a fine, learn English and go to the back of the line behind those who came here legally.
I firmly believe she is wrong in her stance on the 2nd Amendment, but with her families history both in front and behind guns, I can understand while she feel this way: Caroline Kennedy is a strong supporter of gun control. She supports New York City’s and New York State’s gun control laws. On the federal level, she support the Brady Law, and other measures to keep guns out of the hands of minors and criminals.
I understand her feelings on this issue, but I do not support it.
Friday, January 2, 2009
Another waste of money
When are politicians going to realize that most of the restrictive gun laws put in place only serve to hinder Law-abiding citizens. Let's face it, criminals are criminals because they have broken the law(s). All these hundreds of new gun laws being proposed don't stop bad guys from getting guns, they stop the good guys from getting guns. The good guys are using guns for hunting, protection, target shooting. The bad guys are using for shooting at people, hunting people, extorting and robbing people.
Millions and millions of dollars are wasted harassing good, honest law-abiding citizens with rules and regulations that serve no purpose. For example:
http://www.reason.com/news/show/130311.html
Baloney
Ballistics Gun databases fail
Brian Doherty REASON
January 2009 Seven years ago, New York started a database of "ballistic fingerprints" for all new handguns sold in the state. The bill's backers sold it as a crime-solving device, arguing that the state would now have a sample of a spent shell and bullet for every new gun sold. This, they said, would help police connect future evidence from crime scenes to specific guns.
Since then, the authorities have entered 200,000 newly purchased guns into the database and spent $1 million dollars a year on the system. Yet it hasn't led to a single solved crime. The only other state with such a database, Maryland, can attribute at least one conviction to the system since it was created in 2000-more than zero, but few enough that the state's own Police Forensics Division has suggested scrapping the program because of its demonstrated lack of benefits.
This hasn't come as a surprise to gun rights activists, who pointed to several potential problems when the databases were originally debated. Among them: The markings left by a gun are not guaranteed to be the same over the long term and can be deliberately changed with simple expedients such as filing inside the barrel; the vast majority of guns used in crimes are stolen or otherwise obtained in a black market, not used by their original legal owner; devoting so much record keeping to every gun sold guarantees wasted effort, since less than 1 percent of all guns sold will ever be used in a crime.
In 2003 a report from the California Attorney General's Office recommended against launching such a program because of its likely ineffectiveness in crime solving. And a March 2008 study from the National Research Council recommended against a national version of the New York and Maryland databases. In addition to noting the obvious ways in which such a program could be easily circumvented by criminals, the study said the theory behind the ballistics databases—that every gun marks shells and bullets in specific, stable, identifiable ways—has not been scientifically proven.
Millions and millions of dollars are wasted harassing good, honest law-abiding citizens with rules and regulations that serve no purpose. For example:
http://www.reason.com/news/show/130311.html
Baloney
Ballistics Gun databases fail
Brian Doherty REASON
January 2009 Seven years ago, New York started a database of "ballistic fingerprints" for all new handguns sold in the state. The bill's backers sold it as a crime-solving device, arguing that the state would now have a sample of a spent shell and bullet for every new gun sold. This, they said, would help police connect future evidence from crime scenes to specific guns.
Since then, the authorities have entered 200,000 newly purchased guns into the database and spent $1 million dollars a year on the system. Yet it hasn't led to a single solved crime. The only other state with such a database, Maryland, can attribute at least one conviction to the system since it was created in 2000-more than zero, but few enough that the state's own Police Forensics Division has suggested scrapping the program because of its demonstrated lack of benefits.
This hasn't come as a surprise to gun rights activists, who pointed to several potential problems when the databases were originally debated. Among them: The markings left by a gun are not guaranteed to be the same over the long term and can be deliberately changed with simple expedients such as filing inside the barrel; the vast majority of guns used in crimes are stolen or otherwise obtained in a black market, not used by their original legal owner; devoting so much record keeping to every gun sold guarantees wasted effort, since less than 1 percent of all guns sold will ever be used in a crime.
In 2003 a report from the California Attorney General's Office recommended against launching such a program because of its likely ineffectiveness in crime solving. And a March 2008 study from the National Research Council recommended against a national version of the New York and Maryland databases. In addition to noting the obvious ways in which such a program could be easily circumvented by criminals, the study said the theory behind the ballistics databases—that every gun marks shells and bullets in specific, stable, identifiable ways—has not been scientifically proven.
Thursday, January 1, 2009
I like this Sheriff
There used to be a law in Texas called, "Needs Killing." it's simple...you go before the judge and say, "Your Honor, that despicable ass needed killin'." It was a valid law for many years and may still be on the books.
I place of that, Florida has a Sheriff with brains and common sense. This is an old case and starts with a tragedy and ends well.
http://www.news24.com/News24/World/News/0,,2-10-1462_2006545,00.html
Miami - A fugitive gunman accused of killing a Florida sheriff's deputy was shot 68 times by SWAT team officers who found him hiding in the woods, according to post-mortem results.
Police fired 110 shots at Angilo Freeland, 27, the target of a massive manhunt in central Florida after the fatal shooting of Polk county sheriff's deputy Matt Williams on Thursday.
"That's all the bullets we had, or we would have shot him more," said Polk county sheriff Grady Judd to the Orlando Sentinel newspaper.
Judd said Williams was "executed" after Freeland was pulled over in a routine traffic stop on Thursday. Another deputy was wounded and a police dog killed.
Williams, 39, was shot eight times - one bullet fired at close range behind the deputy's right ear and another in his right temple, according to post-mortem results released on Saturday by the sheriff's office.
Sheriff's officials said SWAT team members found Freeland on Friday hiding under a fallen oak tree in a wooded area near where the deputies were shot and began firing when they saw a gun in his hand.
- Reuters
http://www.snopes.com/crime/cops/judd.asp
I place of that, Florida has a Sheriff with brains and common sense. This is an old case and starts with a tragedy and ends well.
http://www.news24.com/News24/World/News/0,,2-10-1462_2006545,00.html
Miami - A fugitive gunman accused of killing a Florida sheriff's deputy was shot 68 times by SWAT team officers who found him hiding in the woods, according to post-mortem results.
Police fired 110 shots at Angilo Freeland, 27, the target of a massive manhunt in central Florida after the fatal shooting of Polk county sheriff's deputy Matt Williams on Thursday.
"That's all the bullets we had, or we would have shot him more," said Polk county sheriff Grady Judd to the Orlando Sentinel newspaper.
Judd said Williams was "executed" after Freeland was pulled over in a routine traffic stop on Thursday. Another deputy was wounded and a police dog killed.
Williams, 39, was shot eight times - one bullet fired at close range behind the deputy's right ear and another in his right temple, according to post-mortem results released on Saturday by the sheriff's office.
Sheriff's officials said SWAT team members found Freeland on Friday hiding under a fallen oak tree in a wooded area near where the deputies were shot and began firing when they saw a gun in his hand.
- Reuters
http://www.snopes.com/crime/cops/judd.asp
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)