Today Caleb’s joined by 3 gun shooter and firearms industry insider Kenzie Fitzpatrick also known as @3GunKenzie as she talks about some of the brands she represents and why 3 gun is the best shooting sport. It’s not, but whatever. – Caleb
3 gun is awesome and so is outlaw 2 gun, Caleb can stop his hateful hatery – Keith
I like the one where we rob the drug dealer! – Jack
The proceeding commentary is parody – Jack’s Lawyer
I chase down numerous firearms qualifications shot by the military and police forces around the world. I love seeing how the blue and green sides train and what their expectations are. With that in mind, many of these police and military forces use a specific target with a specific scoring system. That requires a very specific target. With that in mind, I’ve looked at a wide variety of targets, and I’ve assembled some of my favorite military and police targets.
I’ve chosen these for a few reasons. Most are versatile targets that force proper shot placement and go behind just hitting a target and calling it a win. These military and police targets help create realistic training demands for defensive shooting skills. With that in mind, let’s dive in and look at some of the best targets on the market.
The FBI doesn’t adopt a realistic target in terms of how it looks. The Q, often known as the Coke bottle target, does create a real challenge for shot placement. The Q is vaguely person-shaped but greatly reduced to represent the vitals of a human threat. The target doesn’t post hands or arms to make the target wider. Modern versions of the Q have a chest and head target, and others have reduced the Coke bottle to just the chest and head.
The Q is easy to see and easy to score. There are no ‘did it break the line’ arguments that decide if the shot scores four or five points. It’s simple and works well for observing accuracy as well as doing things like patterning a shotgun. The Q provides a simple but useful target for all your training needs.
The BT-5 target series is fairly popular and consists of a vague silhouette of the chest, shoulders, and head of a threat. Inside sits several rings with various numeric characters for scoring. It’s good, but the El Dorado DA version is better. The numbers are gone. Instead, we have three colors, black, grey, and red.
Black is the majority of the target. Grey is a large portion of the chest and spine to the head. The heart area and brain area are red. It’s a visual signifier that tells you where the shots are supposed to go. Red means dead, and there isn’t a numerical score that matters if the threat isn’t down.
The New Mexico Dept. of Public Safety Police Target isn’t just one target but a series of targets. While the external difference varies, what is on the inside counts. These targets feature different prints of various people, men, and women, some obvious threats with the gun pointed at you and others less obvious with their guns pointed downward.
Inside each of these prints is a thin line that marks the various hit zones of the threat. The zones of these police targets get smaller as they get closer to the vital parts of the human body. This trains you to recognize and identify threats and helps you put rounds where it matters.
The Department of Energy’s security forces is very well trained with everything from handguns to light machine guns. When they train, they use a specific target that I’ve grown fond of. It’s a simple green silhouette vaguely representing the outline of a person. For their training, it makes sense to learn to identify the silhouette of a threat because no one should be snooping and pooping near nukes by mistake.
Additionally, inside the silhouette sits two squares, one inside the other and one smaller than the other. In the head is a small circle. Your shots often don’t count if they don’t land inside these smaller internal targets. It’s another target that really wants you to ensure you know proper shot placement.
I love this target…not just because it’s a good target. It’s the model. He’s the most Wisconsin man I could have ever pictured. He perfectly represents the state. Beyond the mustachioed cheese head sits a very well-designed target. Most of the target is rather plain, but the chest and head feature an internal outline. Beside the guy’s beautiful mustache is a scoring key.
The outline highlights the vitals and provides a sharp accuracy standard. While visible for scoring, it’s not super visible on the range. This makes you think and relate to a real target while having to use a little vital anatomy knowledge to make successful hits. This is probably my favorite police target.
Finally, it’s not that I think this target is very handy for most of us, but I love it, so it’s a bonus target. Admittedly not everyone will find it handy, but as a Floridian and Miami Vice fan, I might be able to sue it. What makes it great? Well, look at it.
It’s a boat engine! Wooo, and guess what? The target even uses ovals descending in size to ensure you have proper shot placement on the target. This is a great target just because it’s so weird.
Do you need a specific target to train? Not really. A B-8 works well for most tasks. However, using man-sized targets does help you mentally prepare to engage a man-sized target. Using properly designed silhouettes can help establish a mental game plan for engagements. When it comes to patterning shotguns, these man-sized targets really help you visualize the threat and how your gun engages that threat. I do like these military and police targets are starting to focus on proper shot placement rather than just hitting a target. It’s always nice to see the armed professionals move towards better and more efficient training.
In a 29 page update filed today, the Protect Illinois Communities Act (PICA) was halted by District Judge McGlynn,
Plaintiffs have satisfied their burden for a preliminary injunction. They have
shown irreparable harm with no adequate remedy at law, a reasonable likelihood of
success on the merits, that the public interest is in favor of the relief, and the balance
of harm weighs in their favor. Therefore, the Plaintiffs’ motions for preliminary
injunction are GRANTED. Defendants are ENJOINED from enforcing Illinois
statutes 720 ILCS 5/24-1.9(b) and (c), and 720 ILCS 5/24-1.10, along with the PICA
amended provisions set forth in 735 ILCS 5/24-1(a), including subparagraphs (11),
(14), (15), and (16), statewide during the pendency of this litigation until the Court
can address the merits.
A choice piece from the injunction should put each and every state with an assault weapon ban on notice too.
It is also
uncontroverted that many of the banned modifiers, including but not limited to pistol
grips, protruding grips, flash suppressors, and shrouds, have legitimate purposes
that assist law-abiding citizens in their ability to defend themselves. The other side
is less clear – there is no evidence as to how PICA will actually help Illinois
Communities. It is also not lost on this Court that the Illinois Sheriff’s Association
and some Illinois States Attorneys believe PICA unconstitutional and cannot, in good
conscience, enforce the law as written and honor their sworn oath to uphold the
Constitution.
In no way does this Court minimize the damage caused when a firearm is used
for an unlawful purpose; however, this Court must be mindful of the rights
guaranteed by the Constitution. While PICA was purportedly enacted in response to
the Highland Park shooting, it does not appear that the legislature considered an
individual’s right under the Second Amendment nor Supreme Court precedent.
Moreover, PICA did not just regulate the rights of the people to defend themselves; it
restricted that right, and in some cases, completely obliterated that right by
criminalizing the purchase and the sale of more than 190 “arms.” Furthermore, on
January 1, 2024, the right to mere possession of these items will be further limited
and restricted. See 735 ILCS 5/24-1.9(c). Accordingly, the balance of harms favors the
Plaintiffs. –Pg. 27 & 28
No longer are courts allowing the burden to be shifted around and treat the 2nd Amendment like a 2nd class right of the people, subject to the alleged whims and greater good of anti-gun politicians. Regulators wishing to ban firearms are having to put up evidence or shut up, and they don’t have the evidence.
The ole 5.7x28mm gets a lot of flack. Some of it was valid, some not. Yet, it seems to only be growing in popularity. PSA, Ruger, FN, and now S&W make some form of 5.7x28mm handgun, and Diamondback, FN, CMMG, and Ruger also make carbines for the caliber. It’s certainly one of the more interesting rounds on the market and falls into that odd category of not really a pistol round and not really a rifle round.
While some may claim it’s just an expensive .22 Magnum, I think we are all capable of firing up the Google machine and seeing that that’s not true. At the same time, those folks are right about ammo price. That crap is expensive. In a realm where the 5.56 and 9mm rule, it can be easy to toss 5.7x28mm aside due to the price alone. What’s the purpose of such a caliber in the civilian world?
Everything has a niche, right? The 5.7x28mm turns out to be a great gun for urban areas and specifically for property defense. Most 5.7 handguns are fairly large because they need a good bit of barrel to make the round worthwhile. They tend to be tough to conceal, but for business and home defense, they can be just right.
The great debate between rifles, shotguns, and handguns for home defense has no winners, just educated users. It’s easy to see why the handgun wins sometimes. It’s lighter and smaller, well suited for close-range fights. It’s easiest to use with one hand, and that might be a serious consideration. If you are considering a handgun for home defense, then you’ve discovered a niche that the 5.7x28mm handgun fits well.
Plenty of rifles and carbines exist in 5.7x28mm. These guns are great for home defense, but unless you suffer from a disability that makes an AR in 5.56 too heavy, you’d likely be best suited with an AR in 5.56. With handguns, the main weapon of choice is likely a double stack 9mm. That’s a great choice, but for some, the 5.7x28mm might be a better choice.
I’m not trying to say 5.7x28mm from a handgun is better than 9mm on a ballistic front. Both calibers can reach the proper depth of penetration to matter. The 9mm does offer substantial expansion, but the 5.7’s advantage comes from overpenetration, or the lack thereof.
One of the big reasons we like 5.56 for home defense is that the light but fast projectile tends to lose a lot of speed when it hits a wall, even drywall. This limits the round’s potential to over-penetrate. 5.7x28mm uses the same fast-moving, lightweight projectile, and when it strikes drywall, it also loses energy rapidly and tumbles.
This makes it a great option if you choose to use a handgun for home or even business defense in a densely populated area. If you live in the suburbs, or an urban apartment or condo, then the 5.7x28mm is a great choice to prevent overpenetration. The same goes for your work environment. We are often crowded in these environments, and if you can tote a big 5.7x28mm pistol, it might be worth the stress.
The 5.7x28mm’s benefits do not end at a reduced penetration through walls. There are numerous benefits to the round. One of the more important benefits is a higher overall capacity. The little rounds are rather small, and 20-round magazines are standard, with slightly extended magazines offering substantially more ammo than most handguns of a similar size.
While the round is quite loud from a handgun, the recoil is minimal. It’s a very smooth shooting system. The S&W M&P’s gas-operated variant is the smoothest of the three I’ve fired and likely the smoothest overall due to smart design.
Finally, most of these guns are also really easy to rack. If you have reduced hand strength, these might be a great solution for you.
This is a niche use case, and it’s not like that’s the only reason to have a 5.7x28mm handgun. They are certainly solid little guns that are flat shooting and very fun to shoot. If ammo prices were to drop, I bet we’d see a substantial increase in ownership of these handguns. Don’t disregard the 5.7 as an expensive .22 Magnum. It’s quite capable and has its own advantages.
Pant rise is important: For those unfamiliar, “rise” is the distance from the waistband to the crotch of a pair of pants. “Wait, you mean to tell me they’re not all the same?!?!?”. Well no, in fact they’re not, nor is one type universally effective. Depending on your build and the length of your torso, standard (high) or mid-rise pants might be more appropriate for you. The most common mistake that most guys make (again, especially those with the “successful lifestyle body”) is that they wear their pants too low. This can negatively impact your concealment by causing the gun to ride too low and/or create hot spots and discomfort. Your natural waist is typically at the level of your belly button, possibly down an inch or two. Most guys wear their pants on their pelvis, which is too low. The other issue is that wearing pants with the wrong rise too low can impede movement. The crotch of the pant is now lower than it should be, which means your legs are joined further down than they are naturally.
Shoe selection matters! Dressier shoes tend to have leather soles. Leather soles tend not to have the best traction. Traction is kind of important if you’re having to physically manage another person. You’re probably thinking “Well that’s an easy fix. I’ll just wear nothing but rubber soled shoes then!”. While that will work, I’ve yet to see a rubber soled shoe that actually looked like it belongs with a suit or dress pants. Thankfully there are some hybrid options out there, where rubber studs or sections are built into a leather sole, giving you better traction without looking like you’re wearing orthotic shoes or a uniform duty oxford.
Get friendly with your tailor: Most clothing off the rack doesn’t really fit anyone all that well, it just fits a lot of people okay enough that they’ll buy it. A good tailor can help tweak and adjust any garment to serve a specific purpose for you, and make sure your clothing is working for you instead of against you. And, speaking of tailors, there are a few specialty adjustments you can have your tailor make to your wardrobe:
Reinforcing your waistbands: Most of us carry guns and other support gear on the belt line. Other than work wear and denim, most slacks and suit pants are more delicate and not well suited to supporting weight. Having your tailor reinforce the waists of your pants will help to prevent sagging, and have the added benefit of more material that will keep your holster clips and other gear from wearing holes in your pants.
Extra belt loops: Along the same line as a reinforced waist, you may find it beneficial to have extra belt loops added to your trousers. This helps more evenly distribute weight across your belt, and prevent the waistline of your pants from sagging. Very important for any tools carried along the mid-line or in the pockets.
I liked my Tavor SAR, I miss that rifle. I know Administrative Results enjoys his also, he says as much.
What people confuse though when the look at the SAR and call it dated is when the rifle was developed compared to when it came to the US market. The rifle’s development starts in 1995 and production in 2001. Our views on service rifles has changed a great deal since 1995. They’ve changed since 2007 when I first picked up an M16A4. The SAR came here in 2013. So to say that the features on the SAR are a bit dated makes sense, they are. Over a decade of war time experience made for changes.
But dated platforms still do work. The FAL, the AK, a 20″ AR-15 with fixed stock, and yes the SAR can all be efficiently run and serve their intended purposes. But they are going to fall short on some efficiencies that later platforms capitalize on. When I started service, an “ambi” gun was considered unnecessary. Today ambi is standard. For 1995 the SAR was very forward thinking, as were the ACR and SCAR developed near that time period, but by 2015 our wants on rifles had changed. While the SAR joining the market was a great thing the desirable performance envelope had moved on.
Thus the X95 quickly joined the market offerings with several improvements. The US market has several preferences that differ from the international market and the aftermarket pushed the SAR and X95 along too. The X95 has had several in unit production upgrades and if you have an older rifle, the parts will be different than on newer models.
We have two distinct versions of the Tavor that grew out of updated needs. We saw several iterative improvements to both of them. At a certain point in time it becomes time to shelve a design. SIG has shelved two MCX versions already and that rifle started in 2015.
Do we see the Tavor continue to evolve?
Yes. We still are in the aftermarket currently with places like Manticore and BLK LBL continuing to add options and aesthetic.
The SIG 556 was one of SIGs early post-AWB attempts at entering the exploding 5.56 STANAG rifle market. M4’s were in. M4’s were hot. But the market was and is still fairly hungry for non-M4’s. We here in the US love variety, we love choice. We like a wide variety of foods, booze, entertainment, so naturally firearms too.
The 556 also swung at the desire to reinvigorate the 55X series of rifles which had a popular following and small batch of owned models here in the states from the very limited import. They were considered sophisticated and premium, despite their performance envelope being on par with other rifles of the era, including the M16.
What we got instead was… not what we had hoped for and SIG eventually shelved the line in favor of their M400 and M516 AR’s and developed the MCX line as a forward looking venture. The MCX met with far greater success than the 556 or the 2nd attempt at the 556, the 556xi. That one didn’t go anywhere either and was very quickly shelved too. The MCX was their gun and they’ve had three variants in its 8 year history.
But, we do like our retro looks these days. Here’s 9-Hole reviews talking SIG 556. Give it a watch an avoid work for 35 minutes.
I’m the type to fully embrace the future or whatever amalgamation of it presents itself. This includes the field of firearms. I love tech and how it can be implemented into the firearms training world. With that in mind, this morning, I discovered an app called The Range buddy. You can find it on the Google Play store, and there are a few apps using the phrase Range Buddy. Look for the one developed by Atriarch Targets.
The premise is simple. The app is free to use and free to download. You can choose to subscribe to donate a thing or two to the developer. The plans are 99 cents a month, 2.99 a month, or 8.99 a year. I went with the 8.99-a-year program because I’m not a cheapskate and like supporting our community. If you choose not to donate, you can use the entire app for free, but you’ll get the pop-up every time you start up the app.
A small price to pay, in my opinion. If you have Netflix or Hulu, or whatever, you can afford to support this app if you choose to use it.
I’ll get off my high horse now. The Range Buddy is an app that catalogs various shooting drills and programs from a wide variety of sources. The drills are quite varied and range from classics like Jeff Cooper’s El Pres and Mozambique to more modern drills like the Herron Bill Drill. There are a ton of drills in the system, and the app creator is promising to add more.
There are even several police quals, and I might reach out to the developer to send more. I have an entire Google Doc I’ve used to catalog dozens of police quals from Fed, State, and municipal police forces. I even have some security guard quals if they want them. The app catalogs these drills in various ways.
The most obvious is that it divides the drills up by target offer IDPA, USPSA, Homemade, steel targets, and more. Select the target you have or are using, and it will give you several drills and how the target is used for those drills. Obviously, most of these drills can be modified to use whatever target you have, so if you’re new here, don’t feel stuck to one type of target.
Speaking of being new, you can also look at drills in accordance with their difficulty level. You can search for beginner, intermediate, and advanced drills, as well as drills that require movement to achieve. You can also just use the search function to find the drill you are looking for.
Once you find the drill you want to shoot, you give it a click to get a detailed summary of the drill. A small preview will give you the range and rounds required. A click gets you deeper information. The in-depth overview gives you the basics, the target type, and a small explanation of the purpose of the drill.
From there, it dives into how to setup up the stage, and the requirements, alongside the course of fire. Finally, we have scoring and related drills if you want to do something similar to the drill you fired. You can use the next page to keep track of your shooting. You can enter time, accuracy, gun type, and notes and even upload a video and picture.
There is even a leaderboard to drive competitive shooters to keep trying and getting faster and faster. The video verification will certainly help regulate some of the more obvious crazy claims that will surely pop up.
The Range Buddy is a super neat app that has a lot of promise. There are a few bugs that are being ironed out, but it’s just got released. By the time this is published, they might be gone. I hope to see it supported and to see more development. While plenty of websites list tons of drills, the Range Buddy provides a range-friendly option to quickly look up drills and to spend more time shooting and less time reading.
Aero Precision, the well known AR component manufacturer housed in Washington State, has joined the growing and energized list of plaintiffs who have filed against Jay Inslee’s new law.
From Aero,
Tacoma, WA – Due to the passage of House Bill 1240 by the Washington Legislature and Governor Jay Inslee signing it in to law on 4/25/23, Aero Precision has filed a lawsuit in conjunction with several other plaintiffs to combat this overreaching legislation, seeking temporary and permanent injunction based on the unconstitutionality of this law.
The case was filed on 4/25/23 in the Eastern District of Washington, U.S. District Court. Plaintiffs include Aero Precision LLC , Amanda Banta (2012 Olympian Sport Shooter), Sharp Shooting Indoor Range & Gun Shop, The Range LLC, and the National Shooting Sports Foundation. The complaint is filed against defendants Robert W. Ferguson, Attorney General of Washington State, and John R. Batiste, Chief of the Washington State Patrol. “We do not agree with this law and we do not think it is constitutional,” said Scott Dover, CEO of Aero Precision. “HB1240 bans some of the most common firearms and parts available. It impacts the lawful ownership of products we manufacture and sell to thousands of our customers in the State of Washington. It also restricts the rights of the individuals, Aero Precision employees, who make these parts. We will fight this law in the courts and are confident in the outcome given the clear rulings in multiple Supreme Court cases, including Heller and Bruen.”
Aero Precision is a firearms manufacturer based out of Tacoma, WA. Aero Precision has been in business in Washington since 1994, originally starting in the Aerospace industry. Today, Aero Precision is the largest firearms manufacturer in Washington, employing roughly 650 employees in Washington and over 200 in other areas around the US. Aero Precision manufacturers AR Parts and Components, Bolt Action Rifles, Suppressors and more.
Read the full text of the suit here.
Starting on May 1st 2023, the United States Practical Shooting Association (USPSA) will be adding a new provisional competitive division to its categorical lineup: the Limited Optics division. This means that a 9mm Luger Staccato P cut for a slide mounted red-dot sight is now kosher at a local match without having to be under Open division. For slightly more serious Level 2 events, it would depend on the specific match whether to allow them or not for the duration of 2023. For Level 3 matches, this new division will not be open until next year, in 2024.
The biggest and most obvious difference between the regular Limited division and the new Limited Optics division is the fact that slide mounted electronic red dot sights are allowed. (Having an optic on a mount fastened to the pistol’s frame would still require it to compete under Open division). In other words, this new division is basically Carry Optics meets Limited. All guns will be scored as minor guns and all guns will still be subject to the 141.5 millimeter magazine length restrictions. 9mm Luger is the minimum allowed caliber, and basically the only logical choice given its extreme popularity these days. With all guns being scored as minor and having magazine length limits be the same as Limited or Carry Optics, this new division just sounds like Carry Optics with extra steps.
It’s no doubt that the new crop of NRA B-8 shooting double stack 1911/2011 owners have been the butt of some jokes that poke fun at this new USPSA division. However, the fact of the matter is that 9mm Luger chambered double stack 1911 style pistols have surged in popularity and are becoming reliable and durable enough for everyday carry and duty use. The same goes for slide mounted red dots, these are more popular than ever before, with the industry catering to shooters at every price point and sophistication level (exactly like double-stack 1911s). I can entertain the fact that excluding these new guns “in common use” from the Carry Optics realm and forcing them to compete solely against 9mm Major Open race guns is maybe silly. On the flip side, with the sophistication available in non 1911 high performance designs, like the CZ Shadow 2 series or many of the new metal framed striker guns–could it be that the line between high performance 1911 type pistols and their non 1911-style counterparts has become very blurry? Maybe it doesn’t even matter that much. It’s the Indian, not the arrow, right? As for me, I plan to keep shooting Limited or Carry Optics until I can afford a double-stack 1911.
Maybe it’s because I’m a Florida man, and maybe it’s because I love Miami Vice, but I love shoulder holsters. I go back a long way with them. As a teenager, I was known to rip and tear through the family property with an ATV, and an Uncle Mike’s nylon shoulder rig secured the water mocassin killing machine that was my Heritage Manufacturing Rough Rider. I still occasionally carry with a shoulder holster, which forces me to occasionally practice my shoulder holster draw.
Recently my kids had spring break, and we headed over to St Augustine, Florida, to see how the Eastern Florida folk live. It was several hours’ drive, and I put on my Galco Miami Classic 2 and my SIG P365 for the road trip. Say what you will, but driving with a shoulder holster is 1000% more comfortable than driving with an appendix rig. As a big guy in a small car, it’s also much easier to draw.
As I practiced my dry fire draws with my chosen rig and gun, it occurred to me that most people might not know the skinny on shoulder holsters and a safe draw. Shoulder holsters aren’t popular these days and are quite niche. Most education and information around seems to come from movies and TV, and trust me when I say they get it wrong. Let’s dissect the shoulder holster draw.
Let’s break down what it takes to wear a shoulder holster as a concealed carrier. You need one that fits properly and is easily hidden under your arm. A cover garment is always necessary, and then we seemed to spring back into winter this year. It wasn’t an issue. A light shirt does it. To effectively draw the gun, you need to defeat the garment.
That’s nothing new in concealed carry, but the method you do so can be tricky. For waist carry, you can typically grab the top of the shirt and yank upward. With the shoulder holster draw, it’s wise to reach higher on the cover garment. I reach right below above the gun sits. I’m reaching just above my red dot sight to draw the gun.
If you watch movies and tv, the shoulder holster draw is just as easy as reaching into your coat. That doesn’t work well, so clear the garment and grab the gun. When you clear the garment, you want to pull it upward. How high? Well, higher than ever. Have you ever seen one of those Jersey Shore dues show his abs? Pull your arm up that high.
Literally, pull it up nice and high toward the neck. It might not quite be neck high, but close. You want the elbow in line with the wrist. The idea is that when you draw your gun, you aren’t flagging yourself as you turn the gun and point it at the threat. This is where most people get the draw wrong. They seem to forget they are flagging themselves on the draw.
The same goes for when it comes to reholstering the gun. Although, you don’t have to reholster it quickly, so you can take your time, get the gun out of your way, and holster the gun. When you practice the draw, I suggest exaggerating the elbow going up and getting it higher than necessary. I always think of it as a chicken wing, and I’m in a fight-or-flight situation.
The thing is, a chicken is a flightless bird, so I’m flapping one wing while the other moves to fight.
Washington becomes the 10th state to restrict semiautomatic possession through a stupid feature list.
The House concurred with a floor amendment to House Bill 1240 that was added in the Senate, voting 56-42 to approve it on April 19. The amendment will allow gun manufacturers to sell inventory already in stock prior to Jan. 1, 2023, and only to out-of-state clientele for 90 days after the bill goes into effect. So vendors aren’t totally hosed, just mostly.
The bill does not ban the possession of assault weapons and allows for ownership by law enforcement and military service members, with an exception in cases of inheritance. So the guns already there can apparently stay, meaning the risk profile in the state doesn’t change at all.
In state and national organizations like the NSSF have vowed to challenge the bill in court, arguing the ban violates the second amendment. The Second Amendment Foundation filed a federal lawsuit on Tuesday challenging the ban, asking for preliminary and permanent injunctions. Assault weapon bans are still under federal scrutiny in the courts and with federal court momentum who knows how long this will remain enacted. Illinois is currently facing several suits and its fate is unknown too, the Chicago led state passed theirs in January.
“The state has enacted a flat prohibition on the manufacture, sale, import and distribution of many types of firearms, inaccurately labeled as ‘assault weapons,’ which are owned by millions of ordinary citizens across the country,” Second Amendment Foundation founder and Executive Vice President Alan Gottlieb said in a prepared statement. “In the process, the state has criminalized a common and important means of self-defense, the modern semiautomatic rifle. The state has put politics ahead of constitutional rights, and is penalizing law-abiding citizens while this legislation does nothing to arrest and prosecute criminals who misuse firearms in defiance of all existing gun control laws. It is absurd.”
From the FPC,
LINCOLN, NE (April 25, 2023) — Today, Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC) announced that Nebraska Governor Jim Pillen signed the FPC-supported LB 77 into law, enacting permitless carry in the Cornhusker State. Nebraska is now the twenty-seventh state to enact such legislation.
Under the new law, which will take effect 3 months after the legislative session ends, Nebraskans and non-residents 21 and older will no longer need a license to carry concealed, though individuals must still be legally eligible to possess handguns. Carry licenses will still be available to eligible individuals who wish to acquire one for various purposes, such as compliance with federal law prohibiting firearm possession in school zones (18 U.S.C. § 922(q)(2)) and reciprocity with other states.
“After years of effort, Nebraska is now the latest state to restore the fundamental right to carry a firearm without needing a government-issued permission slip,” said Richard Thomson, FPC’s Vice President of Programs. “We look forward to restoring this right in the minority of states that still require a permit to carry. Additionally, we look forward to restoring the right for ALL adults in states that still ban 18-20 year olds from carrying.”
Individuals who would like to Join the FPC Grassroots Army and support important pro-rights lawsuits and programs can sign up at JoinFPC.org. Individuals and organizations wanting to support charitable efforts in support of the restoration of Second Amendment and other natural rights can also make a tax-deductible donation to the FPC Action Foundation. For more on FPC’s lawsuits and other pro-Second Amendment initiatives, visit FPCLegal.org and follow FPC on Instagram, Twitter, Facebook, YouTube.
Firearms Policy Coalition (firearmspolicy.org), a 501(c)4 nonprofit organization, exists to create a world of maximal human liberty, defend constitutional rights, advance individual liberty, and restore freedom. FPC’s efforts are focused on the Right to Keep and Bear Arms and adjacent issues including freedom of speech, due process, unlawful searches and seizures, separation of powers, asset forfeitures, privacy, encryption, and limited government. The FPC team are next-generation advocates working to achieve the Organization’s strategic objectives through litigation, research, scholarly publications, amicus briefing, legislative and regulatory action, grassroots activism, education, outreach, and other programs.
FPC Law (FPCLaw.org) is the nation’s first and largest public interest legal team focused on the Right to Keep and Bear Arms, and the leader in the Second Amendment litigation and research space.
Constitutional Carry, or permitless carry, is the current best legal acknowledgment of the right to bear arms. If you are permitted to own them, you are permitted to carry them. You can own a pistol, you can carry a pistol. Are there ‘restrictions still?’ yes.
This does not undercut and should rather further encourage carriers to seek out good training to carry properly, but it removes a tedious legal barrier which is ultimately what a permitting scheme is.
David French over at The New York Times delivers us a classic piece of ‘Pro-2A But-ism’ in the form of a gun owner against other gun owners. Why? Simple, he does not like their behaviors. On that point, I can agree with David. I think the behaviors he is pointing out are clownish. But the case for guns is not being destroyed by these behaviors as the majority, the behavior set he describes in the beginning of his piece, are fundamental and foundational reasons.
Now, there is more nuance and I honestly think French gets very close to a couple of good points in his piece. But in his ninth paragraph, after eight establishing his bonofieds as a responsible gun owner and pro-2A-ish, he makes his error. It’s a common error.
But the gun rights movement is changing. In many quarters of America, respect for firearms has turned into a form of reverence. As I wrote in 2022, there is now widespread gun idolatry. “Guns” have joined “God” and “Trump” in the hierarchy of right-wing values. At the edges, gun owners have gone from defending the rights of people to own semiautomatic rifles like AR-15s to openly brandishing them in protests, even to the point of, for example, staging an armed occupation of parts of the Michigan Capitol during anti-lockdown protests.
David. Mr. French. You’re missing the why for the hollow shell of the what. I’m from Michigan, I was here when that happened. While that was annoying, and in another incident several luke-warm IQ types were plotting (with government agency encouragement as it would turn out) to kidnap the very same Governor Whitmer and smuggle her to the foreign shores of… Wisconsin… to hold a trial for her crimes against the people of Michigan. Very dramatic, highly stupid. Only two of that crew actually got any prison time and you can delve into all the reasons that case got weird on your own. Let’s merely say they don’t let criminal masterminds out of prison time and criminal convictions for entrapment.
You are correct though. The gun rights move is changing, but if you look at how you’ll see that the two most dramatic segments the have changed and become more pro-ownership are minorities and women, the two examples you cite vehemently in your opening as legitimate pro-2A reasoning. You’re looking at the meme grade farcicle response and seeing seriousness where it is largely parody. The ‘reverence’, as you say for gun ownership, is a response to a stimulus.
That stimulus was, is, and continues to be the absolutely unhinged actions of the anti-gun crowd and their shameless use of exaggeration and hyperbole to demonize anyone, including you Mr. French, who own firearms. The firearms community has been under attack for decades, they’ve been told the mere possession of a firearm makes them the problem, makes them evil or criminally negligent, and they are tired of it. So they’re clowning the left. They’re becoming the parody characters and pointing out the glaring holes in anti-gun rhetoric.
The Virginia Jan 20th, 2020 armed protest is an excellent example of protests done peacefully, even though they were absurdly well armed. We’ve seen other examples of protests that didn’t go as well. NFAC seems to make negligently discharging a weapon within their group at events a regular occurence. We’ve seen other examples of antagonistic and reckless open carry with less than stellar results.
But again, Mr. French, you went from pointing out valid reasonable and personally relevant reasons for gun ownership, that you support, to painting with the broadest brush possible while missing the point that these behaviors are often reactionary. These gun owners aren’t just acting out to act out, it is a response to unreasoned proposals by ignorant anti-gun agitators. They are the result of the clownish antics of anti-gunners being clowned and the side effect of that is an emboldened fringe. The “left” experiences the same thing when they see clownish behaviors associated with the right. They in their turn clown on the expressed attitudes as ignorant and their fringe act out wildly too.
But we’re now facing something worse than gun idolatry. Too many armed citizens are jittery at best, spoiling for a fight at worst.]
One is too many. But this is the life we live, not the one we would like to live. Using
[In recent days we’ve seen a rash of terrible shootings by nervous, fearful or angry citizens. A young kid rings the bell on the wrong door and is shot. A young woman drives into the wrong driveway and is shot. A cheerleader accidentally tries to get in the wrong car and is pursued and shot, along with her friend. A basketball rolls into a man’s yard, and a neighboring 6-year-old girl and her father are shot.
I admire the point you are looking at, that over reactions are problematic, however what is being missed is an effect similar to when it looked like we were having so many train derailments after Palestine Ohio. Attention brings out the actual rates. There are, on average, three or four train derailments a day and many trains haul chemicals and substances that would be less than ideal to spill. But train derailment became hot after the Ohio incident, for obvious reasons, so any derailment became news as opposed to something that happens once somewhere in the country every six hours. They were always happening, they just weren’t in the news until they were. The same goes for suboptimal firearm misuses where someone somewhere shoots when they shouldn’t.
These ‘gEt oFf MY LaWn!’ type incidents, where the 16 year old was shot by the elderly homeowner or the six year old and her father were shot by the felon who somehow had a gun, are the unfortunate super minority of firearm possession where the firearm is in the hands of someone who probably should exist unsupervised in any capacity anyway, but they do.
All of these episodes occurred over the course of just six days.
Yep. These episodes exist among the current aggravated assault rate in the nation.
Some of these aggressive acts are more serious or inexplicable than others, people are a weird bunch and not all sunshine and good vibes just because we’d like them to be that way. Even with that many aggravated assaults in total, not just with firearms, that still leaves a roughly 2% chance that any given American would be assaulted in any given year. That estimate accounts for none of the other socioeconomic factors involved in violent crime and is therefore flawed, the number is lower for many and much higher for a few based on risk metrics, but in general that is how the math works out.
But apparently this variant of aggravated assault with barely understood motivations isn’t egregious enough is it, Mr. French?
Yet even worse than such shootings, which occurred because of fear or sudden rage is the phenomenon that begins with a person who seems to want to fight, who deliberately places himself in harm’s way, uses deadly force and then is celebrated for his bloody recklessness. Take Kyle Rittenhouse. At age 17, Rittenhouse took an AR-15-style weapon to a riot in Kenosha, Wis., to, he said, “protect” a Kenosha business.
Pause.
Mr. French, you are misplacing a great deal of context. I happen to agree with you that what Rittenhouse did was reckless and naive. But it is absolutely in line with the sort of value set we use to recruit police, military personnel, and most other first responder professions, the defense of the community. Rittenhouse was a participant in junior programs that lead to those fields. We also had already experienced several highly destructive riotous events where people were severely injured or killed and property was destroyed. Politicians and left leaning media seemed indifferent to these acts. In fact, the perception bordered on encouragement in many instances. This resulted in more clowning from those who, rightfully, mocked the concept of a “mostly” peaceful protest while the city burned behind the reporter.
Are there a segment of the population that have a sort of doomtopia fantasy, where society collapses in some fashion and they get to go use their ‘skiilz’ to survive? Their ‘skil’z usually consisting of gun ownership, not proficiency, and a partial and substantially lacking understanding of what someone like Mike Jones said one time.
The Capitol Hill Autonomous Zone in Washington, and several other similar incidents around the nation, set the stage for a response where citizens took protection into their hands as the government had been seen failing to step up and put a hard stop on violent protests while protecting the peaceful ones. Kyle Rittenhouse was not some basement dweller waiting for the opportunity to hunt people in a lawless zone, he was the product of the perception of inaction and indifference from people who are supposed to handle violent crime and they didn’t.
Like the open carry marchers, and other bombastic acts, Rittenhouse is a responsive symptom from a perception. That perception was that the government would not stop rioters from hurting, looting, and killing people because of evidence from previous riots in other cities. The actual on the ground events from police didn’t matter as much as the perception that they were standing back and letting the city burn. Urban spaces were seen to be at the whim of an angry mob when one was to inevitably form.
Into that, Rittenhouse went to ‘do something’ and to suppose his motive for doing so was a dark desire to hunt people and get away with it is as childish as his belief that going to Kenosha armed was a good idea. But enthusiastic untempered idealism is a trait of the young, older and cooler heads see it is a bad idea but there would be little convincing a motivated young person. For a different look at untempered youthful enthusiasm outweighing experience and understanding, look at Greta Thunberg.
When you travel, armed, to a riot, you’re courting violent conflict, and he found it.]
To be fair, when you travel unarmed to a riot you are courting and finding violent content, that is the nature of a riot.
[ He used his semiautomatic weapon to kill two people who attacked him at the protest, and a jury acquitted him on grounds of self-defense.]
What else would you wish it to be classified as when a convicted pedophile twice your age, who was threatening to kill and maim anyone who he caught alone from an opposing faction in Kenosha, chased you, cornered you in a parking lot in the dark, and attempted to take the firearm on your person? A.) You don’t get to answer, “He shouldn’t have been there.” He was there and that is the situation. Poor judgement is not illegal.
[ But the jury’s narrow inquiry into the moment of the shooting doesn’t excuse the young man’s eagerness to deliberately place himself in a situation where he might have cause to use lethal violence.
Are you certain about your assertion that Rittenhouse wanted to get into a fight? That seems like a projection to me, a response to a circumstance that was avoidable but that the use of force in full context was legal and likely saved his life. The two additional people who attacked him were also valid threats to his safety and he did well given the situation he was in. The hindsight, the making of the situation can upset us but it wasn’t and shouldn’t be made illegal as it undermines self defense.
We can level the same criticism at the people who attacked Rittenhouse. Why were they there? What were their actions at this riot? Why did they attack someone who was overtly armed and not shooting at them even as they chased him? Why did the angry unhinged pedophile threaten everyone he came across all day and then chase someone armed with an AR into a corner? There is plenty of criticism to go around. Don’t reserve your ire for Rittenhouse alone.
And what has been the right’s response? Rittenhouse has gone from defendant to folk hero, a minor celebrity in populist America.
Yes. He isn’t the only one. He won’t be the last one of questionable origin. His defense was well documented and if it hadn’t gone the way it did, self defense as a concept would again be undermined severely. We cannot judge the legality of a defensive incident based upon whether we like what was going on tagentally around the incident or not. Should we bring up George Floyd, who almost certainly should have been handled differently than he was during his arrest but who suddenly became a saintlike folk figure when he had a well documented violent past and was committing an additional crime when he was arrested?
I think the better example out of recent events is certainly Elijah Dicken, who stopped the Greenwood mall mass shooter in Indiana at a tremendous distance and with clear discipline. But we can also still respect what the Rittenhouse trial meant, the clear trauma that trial brought to him as a young person, and that the situation was avoidable and that ideally should have been the course taken.
Or take Daniel Perry, the Army sergeant who was just convicted of murdering an armed Black Lives Matter protester named Garrett Foster. Shortly after the conviction, Tucker Carlson effectively demanded a pardon.]
So? Carlson’s just another media talking chucklefuck like you and I, David. His opinion is broadcast widely, but its just his opinion like this is yours.
[ Gov. Greg Abbott of Texas responded the next day, tweeting that “Texas has one of the strongest ‘Stand Your Ground’ laws of self-defense that cannot be nullified by a jury or a progressive District Attorney.”
The situation is as politically charged as many involving the protests and riots, what will be interesting in that particular case is whether or not the board recommends him for a pardon.
Yet Abbott ignored — or did not care — about the facts exposed at trial. Perry had run a red light and driven straight into the protest, nearly striking Foster’s wife with his car. Witnesses said Foster never pointed his gun at Perry. Even Perry initially told the police he opened fire before Foster pointed his gun at him, saying, “I didn’t want to give him a chance to aim at me.”
Why are we not treating Foster with the same contempt as Rittenhouse? There are plenty of people who wanted exactly what happened to Foster to happen to Rittenhouse, why is Foster exempt from courting violence by bringing his rifle to the protest. I, for the record, don’t believe either of them did something wrong by being armed, unwise perhaps but not wrong. I believe there were absolutely things both of them did that was unwise, and people ended up dead in both situations.
But the story gets worse. In social media messages before the shooting, it was plain that Perry was spoiling for an opportunity to shoot someone. His messages included, “I might have to kill a few people on my way to work they are rioting outside my apartment complex” and “I might go to Dallas to shoot looters.”
That, in this day and age, is probably a stretch. Now, courts and lawyers call this ‘discoverable’ and will thank you to NOT post these things, even if you are irritated with the current local circumstances.
That is not a man you want anywhere near a gun. Kyle Rittenhouse is not a man you want anywhere near a gun.
What about Foster? He’s on video essentially saying fuck around and find out too. Should expressing your distaste for an unruly situation invalidate your firearm rights? Have you, Mr. French, ever publicly made statements that would be suspect if something violent were to have occurred? Do you have any tweets, posts, etc. that would make you look like you were spoiling for a fight? You and your wife bought and trained with guns after merely being sent photos, photos aren’t dangerous in and of themselves right? Were you hoping someone would break into your home so you could shoot them?
I am, of course, using exaggeration and hyperbole to as is tradition in these discussions. The point being that you cannot tell someone their actions are “wrong” merely based on the fact you find them distasteful. Saying Perry or Rittenhouse is not a man you want anywhere near a gun when Perry is a serving member of the military and Rittenhouse is highly disingenuous when you can find concurrent attitudes among a vast swath of our serving police and military members, they tend not to like riotous and chaotic groups who are trying to be just violent enough and anonymous enough to not end up dead or arrested for a severe charge.
Our nation’s gun debate is understandably dominated by discussions of gun rights. But it needs to feature more accountability for gun culture.]
If and when accountability is also featured in anti-gun culture, but so long as the hyperbolic caricatures and outright falsehoods are allowed to pass for meaningful discussion from them it is unlikely to stop from the pro-2A side.
[ Every single feasible and constitutional gun control proposal]
There aren’t any constitutional gun control proposals, but that’s like my opinion as a comment on your opinion.
[ — including the red flag laws that I’ve long advocated (which allow law enforcement to remove weapons from people who broadcast deadly intent or profound instability)]
That, is the crux. To enforce something you must define it. How do you put a solid definition on ‘broadcast deadly intent’ or ‘profound instability’? What is the liability on the police if they don’t enforce it and something happens? What is the liability if they do enforce it against someone who it shouldn’t apply to and it severely negatively impacts their life, or even ends up with them killed unable to protect themselves? The least liable answer is for the police to stay out of it unless there is enough actionable evidence for actually putting someone into custody. That is a more easily definable standard, doesn’t deprive them of a constitutional right while not charging them with a crime, and avoids a bunch of other legal issues about freedom, representation, and property. They’ve been arrested for a crime or taken into protective custody for mental instability, that isn’t a vague ‘we will just take your guns just in case’.
[ — will still leave hundreds of millions of American guns in tens of millions of American hands.
So the constitution is satisfied if enough people still have access to a right. Should we do this for voting, maybe with a literacy or poll test or something? Enough people will still be able to vote right, tens of millions of them.
I shared the account at the beginning of this piece to help explain to opponents of gun rights that there are times when a firearm can be the only thing that stands between profound evil and the people you love. I also share it to tell my gun-owning friends that I get it. I understand. I’ve faced more threats in the last few years than they might experience in 10 lifetimes.
Mr. French, you get some of it. You do not have the whole perspective, agree or disagree with said perspectives.
But this I also know: Gun rights carry with them grave responsibilities. They do not liberate you to intimidate.]
Brandishing or intimating you will use a firearm on someone is illegal and not a part of gun rights.
[ They must not empower your hate.]
Their lack certainly doesn’t disabuse anyone of hate either, that is an independent emotion.
[ They are certainly not objects of love or reverence.]
No, they are tools. They are fun too, they can be recreational. You might also rail against the love of cars or the love of alcoholic drinks and claim the deaths attributed to those are due to our over reverence of them.
[ Every hair-trigger use, every angry or fearful or foolish decision, is likely to spill innocent blood.
This, again, can be applied to the foolish use of anything. We continue to treat guns differently than we should because we have this weird bridge we cannot mentally cross.
That bridge is that a weapon, something designed to cause harm, is a valid societal tool and always has been. That there are and will always be legitimate times and reasons to harm another person. The fact those times are all responses to threats on your life or the lives of others does nothing to change the fact that weapons are valid societal tools. That is the concept that cannot be agreed upon by the anti-gunners, they cannot accept the fact that weapons are valid tools. It goes against their worldview. They are convinced they can somehow, some way, invalidate the bad use of weapons without negatively impacting their legitimate use instead of accepting the reality that the legitimate and necessary existence of weapons in society will always risk their misuse and constitute the unwilling acceptance of a misuse amount.
This is not tantamount to accepting misuse, it is an acknowledgment of the fact that misuses and questionable uses will happen. The best we can do is the best we can do, we can encourage proper use the same way we encourage proper driving, drinking habits, safe work practices, and so on, but we cannot remove the human choice to do the wrong things without removing human choice.
We need to stop clinging to the illusion that we can.
Moreover, every one of these acts increases public revulsion of gun ownership generally. The cry for legal and moral reform will sweep the land. America will change and gun rights will diminish. And the gun owners and advocates who fail to grasp the moral weight of their responsibility will be to blame.
That… doesn’t seem to be the direction things are going. For as loudly as gun controllers are crying and as many rules as have been recently passed, the gun rights movement has more momentum than the gun control movement. They have that moment in the legal places that matter, the courts, and they have effective paralysis in the legislatures that are not extremely stacked left leaning. Sure, Washington State just passed an AWB and Michigan passed UBC and ERPO legislation, that doesn’t change the fact that AWB and Magazine bans are on life support in the courts and that when those judgements come down, just as with shall issue concealed carry in Bruen, these rules will be null and void. Taken out like the trash antics they are to pretend to do something about violence.
Mr. French, I believe you and I would agree on many things. I genuinely do. I believe we could have productive and meaningful discussions. But your piece here fails to take into account the reactionary perspective that gun rights proponents are coming from. They are not acting in a vacuum free of stimulus, they are reacting to overreactions from the people who believe that you and I should be barred from owning firearms based on their worldview and not reality.
