The Gun Blogs

LearnAboutGuns.com

Firearm related politics and information, from a pro-firearms perspective.

What scares me the most is the total disregard of empirical evidence that abounds in our government, schools, places of business, and those whose opinions (for whatever reason) seem to matter to people. I cannot believe that the "data" can be misconstrued to point to more gun control as the answer; therefore it must be that the "data" is being purposely ignored or vilified so the average person can't morally defend what they know is right. I have run into this problem repeatedly, where I'm put into the emotional "evil" slot. People just don't want to hear that it is about a lot more than hunting. That it is a defining aspect of being American. They don't have the intellectual honesty or capacity to understand a abstract (to them) concept when a emotional travesty has occurred. It is sad to think that we, our society, is in decline and in not to many years from now we, all of us, will be as Rome or Athens......
Great....I just depressed myself. See ya'll.

Okay. What now? As I see it, McCain is going to be the Republican nominee and he "Aint our kind of people" as my Great Grandma use to say. What can we do to turn this to our favor? I for one don't have any ideas other than having the NRA and other pro-rights groups put pressure on him which I don't see as having any effect (if it hasn't happened yet, why would it happen now?). I'm open to ideas.

Through Insty comes these links to new Second Amendment research:

Stephen P. Halbrook, "St. George Tucker's Second Amendment: Deconstructing 'The True Palladium of Liberty,'"

The article also points out deficiencies in Saul Cornell's treatment of Tucker; Cornell has a tendency to quote Tucker's analysis of militia issues as if the analysis were about the Second Amendment, and to gloss over what Tucker actually wrote about the Second Amendment.

"What Does 'Bear Arms' Imply?" Working Paper by Clayton Cramer and Joseph Olson.

Cramer and Olson show that "bear arms" never had an exclusively military connotation, either before ratification of the Second Amendment, or in the following decades.

"Pistols, Crime, and Public Safety in Early America" is another Working Paper by Cramer and Olson.

The authors show that the governments of Founding Era were familiar with handguns, and never regulated them differently from long guns.

Good stuff, there.

Brady Campaign says we should give Acting ATF Director a chance!

Between this, and Ted Kennedy's endorsement, is there any doubt Michael Sullivan is going to be BAD,BAD,BAD for gun owners?

More information here.

The GOA has a form letter to mail/e-mail to your Senators here. Just click on the Issues and Legislation tab on top, then find Current Action Alerts, then click on Senate Close To Confirming A Ted Kennedy-style Liberal To BATFE, and take it from there.

Two people writing about guns, neither being what I would call a "gun person".

First is Mayer Spivack, who writes Guns Have Three Ends. Nice attention getter, eh? Here's some of what he has to say:

We all know that guns have two ends, the pointy end, the one with the hole in it and the blunt end where the shooter is. There is really a third end on every gun, and that is what I want to point out. But to do that I will have to discuss a bit of psychology.

What follows is psychology (I guess), but it sounds to me like the same old anti-gun rhetoric dressed up with psychobabble. Stuff like this:

The pointy end deals death and pain. The blunt end is an anesthetic for the old chronic psychological pain within the shooter.

Or maybe a small wiener?

Healthy first-time gun handlers feel fear, even at the sight of a real gun.

Here's some psychobabble for ya - "projection".

Within a few minutes, even healthy people experience thoughts, memories of movies and TV, associations, and perhaps are aware of some hints of their own anger. Once the hand is accustomed to holding the gun, after perhaps five minutes (that’s all it takes), then the third ‘point’ takes effect.

In other words, the gun possess their very soul. Sheesh

The gun-holder knows that if he or she is careful where the gun is pointed, then he or she is absolutely safe and one hundred eighty degrees out of harm’s way on the painless blunt end of the gun.

It figures. The only salient point in the whole piece, and it's wrapped up in anti-gun BS.

Now, here's someone else, Nancy Reyes writes on Gun control and the right of self defense. Funny how one would think this to be the anti-gun hit piece. It's not. It's a well reasoned piece with a bit of "anti-gun conversion" thrown in for good measure.

I was always in favor of gun control, at least until I was a missionary in Africa, when we noticed the criminal gangs/freedom fighters (the groups, as is usual in the third world, overlapped) started attacking missionaries, in cars, in missions, and in hospitals.

They tended to hit places with nuns, because the veils were easier to identify, and unlike the businessmen’s wives, nuns didn’t have security guards or pack an Uzi

Talk about your reality-based viewpoint. She covers a few more topics in that piece, go check it out.

In comments here I take David U. to task for this:

I am a member of NRA, I pay only the annual membership fee because I believe in the Proper interpretation of the 2nd Amendment. I own Guns, including personal Handguns and I have a concealed carry lic. in Tex. That said, I have complained to Mr. Lapierre (no reasponse) re: the stand on the Assault Rifle
...
Assault weapons are for Combat, I don’t see the need or the use for them in any other venue. If it is for Gun Collections and/or plinking, well, there are ways to enjoy that activity without owning full auto weapons.
...
I just have a problem with weapons designed specifically for combat ( i.e. FULL automatic weapons and those that can be changed to full auto. ) being in the hands of the general public, that is not personal protection, that is something else.

It's like he never heard of Zumbo. Or Jackson.

UPDATE Oh, great, my comment hasn't shown up yet. I'll keep an eye on it.

UPDATE the Second: It's up! Here's some of it:

I’m in the NRA too (Life Member), and what you have to understand is this: Once the gun-grabbing politicians get my “assault weapon”, how long will it be before they come for your “high-powered sniper rifle” aka Grandpa’s 30-06 with the 4x scope? Add to this the fact that urban sprawl and environmental groups are taking hunting lands away at an alarming rate, do you really want to alienate a large portion of the gun owning community by throwing them under the bus, just to save your part of the hobby?

You’re more than welcome to come to my blog and discuss this. Making arguments like yours helps no one.

Related material from Sebastian.

Ya know, at first I didn't realize that was Greta Van Susternenenen's blog. =)

I'm holding an informal competition for gunbloggers (and gunblog readers). The idea is: take as many "newbies" to the range as you can. My hope is to espouse the education of fence-sitters, and maybe even some anti-rights folks.

Here are the rules and current tally. I'll try to keep it up to date. Anything I find myself, I'll put up, but I'd prefer if you shoot me an email with your range report.

HERE's a good read from W. Scott Lewis of SCCC, who reminds us of days past:

On the morning of Aug. 1, 1966, few people had ever considered the possibility that they might die in an indiscriminate shooting spree. But shortly before noon on that fateful day, a 25-year-old former Marine climbed to the top of the University of Texas bell tower and created a worldwide reference point for such fears.

....

Seeing that something had to be done, students quickly retrieved hunting rifles from dorm rooms and fraternity houses, took up defensive positions throughout the campus and returned fire.

....

Once the shooter could no longer lean over the edge and fire, he was much more limited in what he could do. That's why he did most of his damage in the first 20 minutes.

This wouldn't happen today. Damned if I can figure out what happened to this country during my lifetime.

Hat Tip to Laura Morales of Memoirs From a Young Conservative

Here is a list of Campus Leaders for SCCC. Here's a sample:

Tennessee

East Tennessee State University - Jay Adkins
Tennessee Technological University - Andrew Hicks
Tennessee University - Serpent Lucas
Vanderbilt University - Reed Williams

Good luck to these and all the other students who are sticking up for their rights to safety and self defense.

This should be interesting:

Empty Holster Protests Coming to a College Campus Near You

Organized by Students for Concealed Carry on Campus (SCCC), a nation-wide "empty holster" protest is planned for the week of October 22-26.

Details here
.

Click on the banner at the top of that page for even more info.

Looks like some schools are already threatening disciplinary action for any students who participate. FIRE better get ready.

It's funny how the reaction to Joaquin Jackson's comments (which I talk about here) has moved more to the function and purpose of the NRA than to Mr. Jackson's statements.

That's a good thing.

I let my membership lapse after the 1994 AWB went into effect, figuring the NRA had let me down. Hindsight being what it is, maybe the NRA didn't let me down as much as I thought it had.

Yes, it was a federal ban on guns that looked cool, and it was totally unconstitutional. However, the political climate at the time was very anti-gun, and without the sunset provision, we'd be listing the AWB along with all those other things in the right sidebar we feel need changing. The NRA got that provision in the bill, and in a "big picture" sense, it was the right thing to do.

When Jackson story first broke, Sebastian warned everybody: let’s not get unhinged over this. Good advice. Truthfully, I haven't read anything I'd call "unhinged" outside of JG's silly trolling comments (no link there, no way), but there's a good discussion on the NRA's roles/responsibilities/shortcomings.

A few things that got me thinking:

In comments to this post KdT makes a good point:

...and without the “absolutist” GOA and JPFO, the NRA would be like the NRA of Great Britain—yelping about “hunting” issues because that’s all there’d be left to yelp about.

That's true. While we can call them "extremists" or "absolutists", they have a genuine focus on the issues and can lend valuable insight. Also, if the British NRA has been reduced to hunting issues, they're losing ground (Fox hunt? Not anymore, old chap).

This brings me to a comment in a post by Sebastian by David Codrea (emphasis mine):

I agree that the ‘extremists’ need to join NRA, not leave it, and also think that much of the complaining comes from people who, by not doing this, have sidelined themselves from being able to effect change.

Face it–if we can’t even generate the clout to affect an NRA election, how can we expect to be effective on a larger political scale?

That last comment was, for me, a reality check. I mean, I can sit here and blog to my heart's content, but other than that, I'm powerless. I always tell people to gripe about politicians "If you didn't vote, don't gripe.", and now I find myself in the same boat.

Does that mean I'm joining the NRA? No, not at this time.

It does mean I'm considering it.

Well to start off I will say that I am not very impressed with the way the country is heading right now. But that’s that.

My Story

I was convicted of Domestic Violence in 2000 for grabbing my EX-wife’s purse. I know there is two sides to every story but just for the sake of this article take my conviction for what I say it is. I am in the process of going through the legal process in Virginia to get my conviction expunged. This is not an easy task especially after the Virginia Tech Shooting. Of the 100,000+ people who are convicted each year of domestic violence most of them are scumbages. With that said there are small percentages that are not guilty. The hopefully EX women in their lives utilized tactics which have been developed over year by women to manipulate the system.

Now that I am married again to a wonderful woman I look back and realize what an idiot I was for getting married the first time. My lovely wife is at home alone most weeks because as an IT consultant I travel a lot. I specifically provide IT security services for large Fortune 500 companies. One of my preaching points to these companies is Defense in Depth. In essence having multiple layers of security is the only way to defend your network against an attack. I'm sure you are wondering where I am going with this....

I apply the same principal to my home. The last line of defense mainly for my wife would be a use of a firearm. My wife is able to purchase a firearm but I have been advised that she could face charges if she brings a gun into the house.

I find it hard to swallow that my wife cannot protect herself if needed because of my conviction. I had one lawyer asked “Who would attack you? I don’t like guns and having heavily armed civilians is dangerous to society” I responded to his question and statement by saying “I don’t know but ask the victims at the police station they will be able to give you that answer” additionally I stated “Hamas is heavily armed, Al Quiada is heavily armed. American who own guns are just prepared and do not rely on the system for their safety”.

So here is the question I pose to the readers of this blog. Why does my wife have to limit her ability to defend herself because she is married to me? Additionally, how can a person be expected to defend them self and their family if this gun ban in place.

Well, another shooting at a school. When are people going to learn? Now, everybody's going to be yelling more gun controll and we need better gun laws. ever woundered how a single person can walk into a room and blow away 30 people? What do you think would have happened if he walked into class and shot the teacher and then turned and looked at the class only to see most of the class was pointing a gun at him just before they blew him away. IF YOU WANT MORE GUN CONTROLL, HAVE EVERYONE BUY A GUN AND KEEP IT ON THEM AT ALL.I think the good people who go by the law far out numbers the bad people. Then it would be just a matter of time before all the bad guys are done in. I do know this, You would never hear of anyone killing 30 + people. I know that after they shot one person, SOMEBODY is going to shoot them. Think about it? Woodzman

By woodzman

A take on what the proposed (now-dead) assault weapon ban SB.43 would have meant in Maryland.

Over in one of the forums I'm active in - MissouriCarry.com a member recently posted a very nice piece on "Things CCW Has Taught Me". With his permission I'm cross-posting it here to get it a wider audience.

Saiga308 is the author, I'm just the delivery guy. If you want to let him know what you think about this, click here to go to the thread over at MoCarry.

-----------------------

Things CCW Has Taught Me

After almost 3 years of continuous carry of a Glock 19 or 26 on my body except for sleeping (in a safe next to the bed), showering (in the shower on a nail), or at work, here are a few of my own random observations.

1) CCW is not just putting a gun on your hip….it is a lifestyle. A lifestyle that changes how you dress, and what you look for in your clothing. You plan your day out every morning when you put your clothes on. What are your activities that day? Where you are going to be, and what is the best method of concealment? Am I going to be at a friends house with small kids wanting to wrestle and play? Am I going somewhere that has “huggers”, or am I going to be going to a store only and then home.

2) People like to doubt the actions of anyone who is armed, whether it be police, or military, a CCW holder or Uncle John out in the back 40 with his deer rifle. There is a tendency to automatically question their actions if a firearm is involved. The pressure is always there to make sure that your actions each and every day are safe and legal.

3) As a CCW holder you are more aware of what is going on around you for the simple fact that someday your actions maybe questioned in a court of law, and since nobody wants to end up in that situation, awareness of your surroundings might give you a heads-up to avoid the problem all together.

4) The pistol is only one of the tools you carry everyday, the others include a cell phone, folding knife, mace, wallet and keys. Each items will have its own pocket that it stays in, whether in your coat or jeans or vest.

5) More important than what kind of holster you have or what brand of belt or smartcarry (as long as they are well made) is that you wear it the same way every time. If the first rule is to have your pistol, then the second rule should be that it’s in the same place on your body as it was the last time. When you need it is not the time to think , “Where did I put it today?”.

6) Gun Magazine writers are about as honest as a used car salesman.

7) .380, 9mm, .40 S&W, 45ACP, .45GAP, .357SIG, .357mag……They all hurt, and I don’t want to get hit by anyone of them, I am guessing that the Bad guys feel the same.

8) A good tactical pistol class (or two) are worth their weight in gold. Take good notes, because if it was done right you find yourself looking back at them again and again. There is so much info that you end up thinking about the class for months after.

9) I have ended up with a 3 holster system. An Avenger style OWB, a CTAC IWB (set up to place the handle at the exact same spot as the Avenger), and a Smartcarry for deep concealment. I use a G26 and G19 because the mags are interchangeable and my better half also carries a G26. That way what we carry can support each other. I carry a Double mag holder OWB always, and have a G17 and G19 mags loaded with the same ammo. So far I have never had any problems with this setup, I am by no means saying that it is perfect or better than anyone else’s, but so far this has worked fine for me.

10) This is the last thing that I have noticed, CCW Holders are for the most part educated, opinionated, fiercely loyal and independent at the same time. They are the type of folks that you want answering the door when its 11PM, and your car breaks down out in the boonies, and you walk to the nearest home for help. Because by their very nature, they will try to help, no strings attached (unless you have a Hilary 2008 sticker on your bumper!). The world needs more of them, and I am proud to count myself in their ranks.

Quote of the Day:

.... this attitude of "just let them take those ugly, black guns" is common among hunters and competitive shooters. Anyone with that attitude is a fool.

Tom Gresham

Edit - Link provided

Man, I took the weekend off (away from the internets) and a major shitstorm blew in and out before I knew it!

We shooting enthusiasts can and should consider this an opportunity. Go over to Mikey's place and check THIS post-Zumbo posting, it's worth it.

I think we're at a watershed moment, and it's up to us to make that moment count. I am profoundly sorry that it was Jim Zumbo who fell under the bus, but every one of us who writes for a living understand that we live and die by those words we write.

So very true.

I'll say it again: it's up to us to make that moment count.

I have another blog, which has rather long posts, and most are extremely political. If you would like it's location, it is at:

http://www.freewebs.com/rattattat/

TITLES:
The Liberal Customized Magical Emotion Wand...
Gun Buyback Nonsense...
Speakout or Lose...
Merry Christmas...
Oprah and Chicken Little...
What Is Your Read?...
Bait and Switch...
Books of Interest...
Party Over Country...
Kerry...
Cartoons the Liberal Press Avoids...
Do People Really Vote Single Issues?...
How Are We Being Affected?...
The Fully Developed Cult of Political Lying...