Magazines, Weapons & Violence: Words Have Meaning

By

-

February 19, 2020

(from relevantmagazine.com)

We are in a culture war in which the enemy is using words in ways that are dishonest. Let’s set at least part of the record straight.

Magazine capacity is a false flag. The arguments against standard capacity magazines that are issued along with police handguns have the same benefit for honest citizens in the same circumstances that police need them. Current statistics reveal that violent home invasions are more frequently perpetrated by larger numbers of assailants than in the past. Honest citizens cannot be expected to defeat multiple attackers without using the same tools that we think the police should use in similar situations.

“Assault rifles”: There is no military definition of an “assault” weapon. There were full automatic firearms that the German Forces of WW 2 called (in translation)“storm guns”. There are semiautomatic and select-fire firearms in various configurations.

The military describes the AR 15 and M16 class of weapons as “minor caliber”. Any firearm projectile can produce damage. The damage is proportional to projectile mass, configuration and velocity for a given target at a given distance. In Washington State .223/5.56 caliber firearms are not allowed for hunting anything larger than coyotes due to lack of effective lethality. Heavier and faster bullets are required to hunt deer and other game animals. There are cartridges for revolvers that have more energy than the .223/5.56, which are actually classified as .22 caliber cartridges.

In all cases, it makes no difference in effect if the cartridge is fired from a break action single shot tool, a manual bolt action tool or a semi-automatic tool which still requires a separate trigger press for every round fired. Thence arises the question: why are semi-automatics needed? The answer is that criminals do not want to prey on victims who are stronger than they are.

Functionally impaired individuals, whether elderly, injured or physically less capable deserve to be able to fulfill their basic human right of self-defense as well as others can. Terrorists, as in San Bernardino, did not hesitate to break laws and murder innocent victims who were forced into defenselessness by California prohibitions.

Only honest citizens obey the law, because laws do not prevent crime. Laws proscribe an activity and provide a penalty if caught and convicted of that activity. SCOTUS has ruled that law enforcement do not have a duty to protect individuals, but rather to serve society after the fact.

Nonetheless, AR-type rifles are issue items for many police departments nationally and internationally. We call them “patrol rifles”. These are the tools brought to the scene when police presence is required. It is intellectually bankrupt to require citizens to call for police assistance and yet deny them the same tools for use in their own self-defense. In a home invasion or a criminal attack outside the home, it is not law enforcement who are the “first responders”; rather it is the intended victims who must respond and then await second responder assistance.

“Gun violence” (like “assault rifle”) is an emotion-laden but semantically invalid, intellectually dishonest, morally corrupt and politically divisive terms used by those who want to disempower honest people to the benefit of criminals and terrorists. Tools do not take actions by themselves.

In Washington State for the latest full year available, more people were killed with hands or feet, as well as by other blunt instruments than by all long guns combined. More people died from injuries in motor vehicle accidents than firearm associated suicide and criminal homicide combined. Yet we do not speak of “hand violence” or “hammer violence” or “car violence”.

It is also intellectually and ethically reprehensible for legislators, executors and jurists to take an oath to . . . support and defend the Constitution of the United States . . .” and pass, execute and validate laws that violate the Second, Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments to the Constitution, as well as 18USC.

In jurisprudence (stare decisis) precedence is generally given to the most recent rulings. Yet the Fourteenth Amendment prohibits states infringing on previously accepted recognition of citizen rights. Such infringing laws cannot reasonably be construed as lawful nor should rulings violating such rights.

In the real world, criminals and terrorists do not obey the laws. Laws limiting legal rights only make life hazardous for honest people.

.

—Robert A. Margulies, MD, MPH, FACEP, FACPM is an emergency medicine specialist, retired Navy Medical Corps captain, sworn peace officer, and firearm trainer with multiple certifications from the NRA and the Massad Ayoob Group.

All DRGO articles by Robert A. Margulies, MD, MPH

One-of-a-kind Vortex® Razor® HD Gen III 1-10x to be auctioned, benefiting Fisher House Foundation

By

Keith Finch

-

February 18, 2020

Since its January 2020 announcement, the Vortex Optics Razor^® HD Gen III 1-10x FFP has been a hot topic of conversation within the shooting industry. While not officially available until April, one generous bidder can get their hands on a Razor^® HD Gen III FFP before the official release, all while benefiting a worthy cause.

vortex razor hd gen III 1-10x lpvo rifle optic — Even me… I didn’t get to keep this one and mine won’t ship until April.

From Monday, February 17 at 3 p.m. central time, to Monday, February 24, at midnight central time, GunsAmerica will host an auction for a one-of-a-kind Razor^® HD Gen III 1-10x FFP with custom packaging, with 100% of the final bid donated to Fisher House Foundation, an organization dedicated to keeping veterans and their families together when it matters most.

Since 1990, Fisher House Foundation has helped more than 400,000 military and veterans’ families, saving them more than $451 million. Dave Coker, President of Fisher House Foundation, said, “Fisher House Foundation thanks Vortex Optics for its continued support. Their support continues to help bring military families together at a critical time – when loved ones are receiving care in VA and military hospitals.”

While Fisher House Foundation’s main mission is to build comfort homes where military and veterans’ families can stay free of charge while a loved one is in the hospital, the Foundation goes even farther, providing more than 12,000 students in military families with more than $24 million in scholarships and giving over 70,000 airline tickets to the families of veterans and active duty military so they can be near their loved ones during medical treatment.

Vortex^® has worked with Fisher House Foundation in the past, and they are thrilled to have the opportunity to try something new in service to the Foundation. “The charity auction format is one we’ve been wanting to do for some time, but needed just the right product – we knew the Razor^® HD Gen III 1-10x FFP was the right choice,” said Jimmy Hamilton, Chief Media Ambassador at Vortex Optics. “This new optic will be capable of accomplishing some amazing things in the hands of recreational, competitive, and professional shooters. But first, we look forward to it doing amazing things for our nation’s veterans and their families.” Check out this quick video to learn more about the auction.

To auction off the one-of-a-kind Razor^® HD Gen III 1-10x FFP, Vortex^® needed a partner they could rely on, and GunsAmerica was the perfect fit. If you’re interested in bidding on the custom Razor® HD Gen III 1-10x FFP, follow this link. Learn more about Fisher House Foundation at www.fisherhouse.org.

About Vortex Optics: American owned, Wisconsin-based Vortex Optics designs, engineers, produces and distributes a complete line of premium binoculars, riflescopes, spotting scopes, tripods, and related accessories. Dedicated to exceptional quality, value, and unrivaled customer service, Vortex backs its products with its unconditional, transferable, lifetime VIP warranty.

Grounded… HB 961 in Virginia Shelved for a Year.

By

Keith Finch

-

February 17, 2020

The Commonwealth has a lot to celebrate today as the onerous HB 961 was shelved by the Senate.

The legislation set to ban ‘Assault Firearms’, suppressors, and magazines of any reasonable capacity was tabled by Senators of both parties who kicked that can down the road with a promise that the State Crime Commission would further study the issue.

That can suspiciously looked a lot like a Molotov or live grenade but we will see.

The 22,000 who showed up to make their displeasure displeasure known clearly struck one of the right cords with the Senate and have bought Virginians time to fix their representation to persons more aligned with the rights of their citizens and not the agenda of a certain 5′ 8″ New York billionaire who bought Virginia’s election.

If you don’t know who I’m talking about watch YouTube for like… 6 seconds, I’m sure he’ll pop up.

The fight is not over though. The issue is shelved.. not rejected.

Your Doctor and Your Guns

By

DRGO

-

February 17, 2020

(from fixthisnation.com)

[Ed: Dr. Edeen delivered this address (as “Education not Intimidation”) at Florida Carry’s 3^rd Annual Camping Event at Rainbow Springs State Park in Dunnellon, Florida on February 8, 2020. We hope to obtain video and post it on our DRGO YouTube channel, too. Slightly edited for clarity.]

What do you do when your doctor asks if you own a gun?

You are at the pediatrician’s office for a routine well child visit. Maybe you just moved to a new town. The nurse hands you the standard paperwork with the questionnaire pertaining to your child’s health. You start filling out the form and right there . . . question number 14 . . . “Do you have a gun in the home?” It’s right after the question about swimming pools and right before the one about household cleaner storage. What do you answer?

First, the presence of this question is no accident. In the 1980s and 1990s professional medical organizations declared a culture war on gun ownership. This includes the American Medical Association, American College of Physicians and the American Academy of Pediatricians.

The incoming AMA president in 2001 stated, “What we don’t know about violence and guns is killing us…researchers do not have the data to tell how kids get guns, if trigger locks work, what the warning signs of violence in schools and at the workplace are and other critical questions due to the lack of research funding”.

The AAP’s 2012 position statement is typical. It advocates removing guns from homes and communities. It advocates for the strictest possible legislative and regulatory approach to prevent firearms injuries and deaths. It recommends counseling patients about the dangers of allowing children and adolescents access to guns in and out of the home. It advocates for safe storage and gun locks but preferentially recommends complete removal of firearms from the home.

They state that the presence of firearms in the home increases the risk of lethal suicidal acts among adolescents. They advise counseling parents to remove or restrict access to guns, especially when children with mood disorders, substance abuse or prior suicide attempts reside in the home. They further advocate consumer product regulation regarding child access, “safety” and firearm design. They also advocate that law enforcement track legally owned firearms.

They further push for regulations aimed at illegal sales to minors. They claim that evidence supports the effectiveness of regulation of firearms that limit the access to children. They also want decreased destructive power of handguns and ammunition, “smart gun” technology and safe storage. They encourage legislative actions including waiting periods, closure of the “gun show loophole”, mental health restrictions and background checks. They also want the “assault weapons” ban restored. The AAP is pushing for the funding of research aimed at prevention of firearms injury. They also encourage the education of physician and professionals interested in the effects of firearms and how to reduce morbidity and mortality associated with their use.

It is important to note that the establishment public health and medical communities fail to account for the up to 2.4 million defensive gun uses annually. They also inflate the number of “gun violence” deaths by 200% by including suicide by firearms. They typically ignore the research of the criminologist and economist community. Also, much of what the AAP is asking for is already law. Unfortunately, the medical community will be unable to answer the question of “gun violence”. Their focus is on the gun and not the violent actor. They can urge passage of all kinds of restrictions and laws that affect law-abiding citizens, but they are naïve to think that the criminals will obey their laws and obtain firearms via supervised legal channels. Thus, the aim of gun control is not the gun but control.

The AMA, ACP and AAP have aggressively campaigned for doctors to advise patients to get rid of guns. We must understand some very important facts:

Doctors receive absolutely no training about firearms safety, mechanics or tactics in medical school or residency.
Gun ownership is a civil right. A doctor’s abuse of his position of trust to pressure you to give up that civil right is professionally and morally wrong. You DO NOT have to tolerate it.
As a consumer, you have great power in the physician-patient relationship. USE IT.

This type of unprofessional behavior by some physicians led to Florida’s Firearm Owners Privacy Act in 2011. This law was enacted to stop physicians from misusing their position to push a political agenda. This abuse of authority is called an “ethical boundary violation”.

The 2011 FOPA forbade physicians from pressing patients to give up their firearms or otherwise propagandizing using the doctor-patient relationship.
It precluded routine documentation of firearm ownership.
It did not preclude inquiring when relevant to patient care, safety concerns or unstable person’s access.
It did not forbid doctors to provide general information.

Unfortunately, the 11^th U.S. Circuit Court overturned the law in February 2016. The only provision upheld was that gun owners cannot be treated differently simply because they are gun owners. Also, no patient can be turned away when seeking medical care because the doctor does not approve of his answers to gun ownership questions.

In response to this, David Codrea, in his February 22, 2017, Ammoland article, “Pro-Gun Owner Physicians Decry ‘Docs vs. Glocks’ Ruling” introduced us to his Firearms Safety Counseling Representation: Physician Qualifications and Liability Form. The form was developed in collaboration with the late Joe Horn, LA County Sheriff’s office, Retired, Risk Management Specialist.

In Part One: Qualifications, it asks physicians to list their specific courses of study and certification/accreditation for giving firearms safety advice in the home. It asks physicians to certify that they have reviewed the applicable scientific literature pertaining to defensive gun use and beneficial results of private gun ownership. They are also asked whether they have reviewed other relevant home safety issues with the patient including: electricity, drains, disposals, compactors, garage doors, driveway safety, gas, broken glass, stored cleaning chemicals, buckets, toilets, sharp objects, garden tools, home tools, power tools, lawn mowers, lawn chemicals, scissors, needles, forks, knives, etc.

The doctor is then asked to state:

“I represent that I have sufficient data and expertise to provide expert and clinically sound advice to patients regarding firearms in the home.

OR

I am knowingly engaging in home/firearms safety counseling without certification, license or formal training in Risk Management, and have NOT reviewed applicable scientific literature pertaining to defensive gun use and beneficial results of private firearms ownership.”

Part II: Liability asks physicians to document whether their malpractice insurance covers such counseling and to accept liability for any injury or death that results from patient following their advice. A “Yes” to either question is highly unlikely.

DRGO’s advice is as follows:

Politely refuse to answer the question.
If the question appears on your health plan questionnaire, file a formal complaint with the health plan.
If the heath plan responds with the excuse that their questions about your guns are standard medical practice that they must follow, file a complaint with the state agency that regulates health plans.
If the doctor persists in asking intrusive questions about guns in your home, you can file a complaint against him or her with the health plan.
You can rate the physician on an internet rating site such as Yelp.com, Healthgrades.com etc.
Medicare and insurance companies will often tie reimbursement rates with patient satisfaction surveys. You may have an impact if you report the unethical behavior regarding your guns to the payor.
If the conduct is especially offensive, you can submit a complaint to the State Medical Board for an ethical boundary violation. This is a serious accusation and will be addressed by the Medical Board.

However, I have some advice myself as well:

You can choose to lie or shade the truth. “I don’t own ‘a’ gun”, Tom Gresham of Gun Talk radio has said numerous times. “It is not a sin to lie to somebody who doesn’t have the right to know the truth.” Remember, in the age of electronic medical records, the government and who knows who else have access to your records. They can and eventually will be used as a backdoor gun registry.
Have David Codrea and Joe Horn’s Liability Questionnaire handy when you go for a medical appointment.
You have the option to fire the doctor and seek care elsewhere. DRGO has a matching service for helping find Second Amendment friendly providers. It is called 2Adoc.com and is free and confidential.
You can report the anti-gun zealots to their State Medical Boards for their Ethical Boundary Violations.
Please visit DRGO.us to find more resources regarding this and other Second Amendment related medical topics.

.

—Dr. John Edeen is a pediatric orthopedic surgeon in San Antonio, TX and is active in seeking the right to carry for qualified hospital staff. He is DRGO’s Membership Director.

All DRGO articles by John Edeen, MD

Binx Reviews: The Beretta Field Patrol Bag

By

Keith Finch

-

February 17, 2020

Hello!

My name is Binx. I am a cat. And I am a Bag Expert.

Naturally of course, as I am feline, bags are of particular note and relevance to my interests.

Ah yes, this is certainly a fantastic bag!

No.. don’t question why. If you do not know then you would not understand.

Anyway, I am here to speak on the account of Beretta.

Among the oldest companies in existence, some 3,458 years in feline reckoning, Beretta is an asset rich and diverse holding with many wondrous things to offer a discerning cat.

Or… you all too, I suppose.

I must give them all the praise in the world for the production of the Field Patrol Bag. An item I have thoroughly tested and found quite satisfactory.

Field Patrol Bag

Why was I asked to complete this review?

I wasn’t, I have deemed that I shall review this thing and so I shall. My person keeps muttering, “…always in the way” and that sounds a lot like that Mandalorian phrase so undoubtedly he appreciates my efforts.

Now, the Field Patrol Bag that Beretta has laid out is a 49L, 13.75″ L x 10.25″ W x 22.5″ H, 600D Nylon setup with velcro, MOLLE, and pockets galore. It’s designed to be a “sling bag” rather than a backpack and definitively catering to integrate into daily life.

beretta field patrol bag ready to go by the door — Grab and go.

“Field Patrol” is ultimately just two buzzwords crammed together and thrown onto the bag to make it sound all bugaloo.. or boogout.. or whatever it is when I zip away when the doorbell rings.

What? It’s scary, okay! Moving on.

The Field Patrol is, more realistically, a superbly designed “3 Day” bag. The MOLLE and velcro patches allow you to add tactical accoutrements and ancillary as you might want but the heart of the bag is a weekend travel/urban “survival” kit. ‘Field’ and ‘Patrol’ are words that will hit well on the Google.

Clothes for 3 days. Secure storage for a computer and ancillary power. Bathroom supplies. Basic warming layers, sweatshirts, jackets. Medkit with easy boosts for pain, mild fever, and exposure. The bag is perfect as a grab and go weekend ready kit for a last minute trip of most varieties, a loss of power or utilities, or any number of other events. What you add to the bag will determine what it can do for you as a base unit.

It is an every day ‘ready bag’. Stocked to go across or out of state on short to no notice and arrive with everything to function comfortably when you get there. An easy grab bag carrying extra supplies from within a vehicle, be they medical, ammunition, restraints, warming layers, or what have you in a known layout.

It is not a bag designed for the rigors of a reconnaissance patrol, raid, movement to contact, or anything else so actively exciting. I know.. I know.. the name says so but it it is not. False advertising? Ha! Hardly, it’s just playing to a name and then it delivers as a useful bag. Just like most useful bags of any catchy name.

Detailed endurance testing in progress… Firebase: Vacation

Anyway, if you’re in the market for travel type ‘go bag‘ then here you go. Just go find it under bags.

What? Don’t give me that look.

Whitmer Appoints Anti-Gun George Heartwell to MI NRC

By

Keith Finch

-

February 17, 2020

Via the Michigan Coalition for Responsible Gun Owners

In 2013, then Grand Rapids Mayor George Heartwell founded the Coalition for Gun Control in an attempt to keep legal gun owners from carrying at city meetings and in voting places despite being told that such a move would be illegal. Heartwell passed a city ordinance to that effect but it was blocked by the state. Members of MCRGO, Michigan Open Carry, and other gun owners attended a city council meeting and offered to work with Heartwell to discuss his concerns. He responded that he wasn’t interested in compromise. Heartwell said. “We keep looking (for ways to ban guns).”

In a shock to Michigan’s hunters and without consulting the Michigan Senate, this month Governor Whitmer appointed Heartwell to chair the Natural Resources Commission, the body that oversees the Michigan DNR and determines hunting & fishing rules and other policies regarding state land. Heartwell now claims he supports the Second Amendment but says “I think that people have taken my stand on guns in public meetings and conflated that to assume that I’m opposed to all guns, or that I’m opposed to hunting. I’m not.”

As chair of the Natural Resources Commission, Heartwell could prevent the use of modern sporting rifles and pistols for hunting. He would also be in a leading role to push for a ban on licensed concealed carry on state land overseen by the MDNR including state game areas, state forests, state parks, harbors, & recreation areas. Heartwell has responded “I do not come to this with an anti-gun agenda or an anti-hunting agenda,” he said. “I think that’s a label that’s been unfairly placed on me.”

Under state law, the Michigan Senate has 60 days to turn down Whitmer’s appointment of Heartwell by a majority vote. The Michigan Senate offered Whitmer a chance to pull Heartwell’s appointment in exchange for approving another Whitmer appointment to the commission. Whitmer rejected the Senate’s attempt at compromise. If you believe that the Michigan Senate should dismiss Heartwell from serving on the Natural Resources Commission, you can contact your state senator HERE.

“I do not come at this with an anti-gun agenda”

Forgive this poor Michigander for doubting you, Mr. Heartwell, but you illegally banned firearms on Grand Rapids city premises in defiance of Michigan’s established preemption statutes.

You blatantly violated the law to restrict the rights of Michigan citizens to forward your agenda. It callously violated Article I Section 6 of the Michigan Constitution, which expressly states the defensive nature of bearing arms, and the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.

Whitmer is a known anti-gunner, as is Heartwell, and their records speak the volumes that their words try to mute. So if you’re a Michigander or if you know a few, get onto telling the Senate to reject Heartwells seat.

9-Hole and the Bren 2 (CZ 806): The Final Czech

By

Keith Finch

-

February 14, 2020

Having just completed their account of the 805, the transitional rifle of the Czech Republic’s logistic integration into NATO, Josh and Henry take on the newest service rifle out of CZ.

The Bren 2 (sometimes referred to as the 806, the successor to the 805 project) is essentially the rifle CZ wanted to deliver with the 805 project combined with recommendations from end users of the 805. The Bren 2 rifle system was a ‘blank slate’ development and truly multi-caliber where the 805 was scaled to just 5.56 to simplify logistics.

Better rail system, M-LOK integration, non-reciprocating charging handle, upgraded bolt lock and release system. The Bren 2 is a true modern service rifle and is, in many ways, more advanced than the M4A1 (exceptions being the URGI and other SOCOM variants, which are peer) and the stock FN SCAR Mk. 16/Mk. 17 rifles.

The US is unlikely to surpass many of the smaller nation’s service rifle programs until the NGSW comes to fruition just due to the sheer volume of a service wide adoption on the scale of the U.S. Military. The U.S. will need hundreds of thousands of rifles to even cover most of its combat arms troops, an order larger than most smaller nations entire uniformed service.

The Goofy, the Weird, and The Ugly

By

Travis Pike

-

February 14, 2020

Weird guns are a dime a dozen. Weird guns come from odd companies, and that’s fine. What’s a little more interesting is when a standard company makes a weird gun. I’ve gathered five of my favorites that these big companies would rather you forget.

Mossberg 590DA

The late 90s and early 2000s were a weird time for guns. A lot of companies seemed to be experimenting just for the sake of it. We still see that to this day, but nowhere near the level of the Mossberg 590DA. Remember, at the time, striker-fired guns were taking over, but weapons with long double-action triggers like the Beretta 92 were still kicking around.

The Mossberg 590DA was an attempt to make the Mossberg 590s trigger like a double-action trigger. The trigger pull became more substantial and more prolonged. The idea was it would prevent negligent discharges or something like that. It was an apparent training issue someone was trying to solve with a mechanical solution.

Reports vary on the trigger’s quality. Some said it was bad enough to disturb sight picture and tire the hand. Others described it as a smooth, but the long trigger. Forum posts vary descriving it, but official reviews don’t seem to exist. The worst part was while the trigger was longer and heavier, you didn’t get the benefits of a double-action trigger like restrike capability.

The 590DA didn’t last long, and I can only find a single poorly photographed ad and the official manual.

Remington Model 700 EtronX

Continuing our exploration of the weird early 2000s leads us to America’s other shotgun maker, Remington. However, we aren’t talking about shotguns but the Remington Model 700. In 2000 Remington produced the EtronX. This was an electrically primed rifle that replaced the firing mechanism and trigger of a Remington 700 with electronic components.

The firing pin became an insulated cathode, and the gun required a 9V battery to function. The EtronX utilized special ammo with a unique primer that added as a resistor that would heat up and ignite the smokeless powder.

What’s the benefit you ask? Well, you eliminate the time between the trigger being pulled and the round being fired. This is called lock time, and the EtronX eliminated it! However, no one cared. No one wanted the rifle, or to buy specialty ammo, and the gun was quietly pulled from the catalog in 2003.

Marlin M2

If I say, Marlin, you probably picture a fish. If I say Marlin guns, you probably think of the model 336 lever action rifle or the Marlin Model 60 rimfire rifle. You likely don’t picture a submachine gun. However, they produced a wood and metal monstrosity called the M2.

It was designed by George Hyde, and Marlin was contracted to produce the gun for the United States military. The M2 was developed to be a cheaper submachine gun compared to the Thomspon. It was the gun that popped between the M1 Thompson and the eventual M3 Grease Gun. The weapon used Thompson magazines and fired the 45 ACP round.

It weighed only 9 pounds! That’s 2 pounds lighter than the Thompson, which is sad for an SMG. Marlin was a traditional company and still remains one. It was a weird time, man. The M2 was an odd stop along the way for Marlin. If you look hard at it, it looks just like a wooden Hi-Point carbine.

The M2 wasn’t a bad gun, but Marlin had issues producing it, and eventually, the M3 was developed, and the M2 was nothing more than a weird time for Marlin.

USFA ZIP 22

So far, all these guns have been weird entries into long-running companies. These guns were mere speed bumps along with storied legacies. The USFA ZIP 22 actually killed a company. It took USFA out back and gave it the Old Yella treatment.

USFA was known for making excellent Single Action revolver, specifically Colt clones. Their guns were very well made, affordable, and popular with SASS members. The owner of USFA decided to invent the ZIP, a unique 22 LR bullpup handgun that used Ruger magazines and sold for dirt cheap.

USFA threw all their money behind the gun, even selling the machinery that produced the Colt clones to fund the ZIP. The ZIP could’ve been successful. It was weird for sure, wasn’t very ergonomic, but it was cheap, and 22LRs are un. However, the ZIP sucked. It was terribly unreliable, often making it through very few rounds before it jammed.

The company folded, and the ZIP is now a

Colt 2000

How did this gun fail? How? Colt may kind of suck at making anything outside of 1911s or AR 15s, but they didn’t design this gun, Reed Knight and Eugene Stoner did. Reed Knight, as in Knight’s Armory and Eugene Stoner, the inventor of the AR 15. According to Reed, the original aluminum models were good to go when built as he and Eugene designed them.

When Colt took over, they produced polymer frame models of the Colt 2000. Apparently, those polymer frame models are junk. Colt was trying to compete with Glock but failed in just about every way you could.

The Colt 2000 was a wonder 9 with a 15 round magazine that was built between 1992 and 1994. The aluminum models numbered right around 3K, according to Reed Knight, and polymer frames numbered in the tens of thousands.

It was a unique gun with a rotating barrel and roller locking mechanism from old French weapons. The weapon wasn’t reliable, or even accurate and now exists as a collector’s item. It turns out that you can polish a turd if you put a prancing pony on it.

The Weirdly Weird

Weird guns are the most fun guns to me. I love them, own quite a few of them, and will continue to do so. It’s always exciting when a major company brings out something a little weird. Sadly, weird guns rarely last very long, and none of these lasted very long, either. One even killed a company. The one thing about weird weapons is that we never know when a bizarre weapon will become the new standard HK produced the first polymer-framed pistol, and now they’re the standard. The same goes for the Winchester 1897 and pump-action shotguns. We only call it weird when it doesn’t become revolutionary.

SilverFire Survivor Stove

By

Dr LateBloomer

-

February 13, 2020

SilverFire disaster and recreation products are the makers of a variety of off grid stoves – from backpacker size to cabin size. I’m going to tell you today about the “Survivor” Rocket Stove.

I visited SilverFire at the SHOT pop-up event in 2019, and was intrigued enough to give their Survivor Rocket Stove a try. But I didn’t get around to ordering one until December. Yeah, I know – life takes over sometimes.

SilverFire advertises that their gasifier stoves run on “biomass” rather than commercial fuel. The advantage to this type of stove and fuel source is that it will run on virtually anything that burns – you aren’t limited to dragging around bottles of propane or bags of charcoal.

I also purchased SilverFire’s specialized pot – called the Dragon. The Dragon pot is skirted, which allows heat/flames to contact more pot surface area for faster heating. As a home test I wanted to see how long it took to boil a quart of water

The Dragon pot and a quart of water for the test.

This stove, although not as small as the backpacker version, is still quite portable for camping and tailgate parties in addition to weather emergencies and power outages. The stove has carry handles and is about the size of a kitchen scrub bucket.

To be clear, this isn’t a “warm yourself” kind of stove. This stove is designed so that the majority of the heat is retained and directed to the cooking surface – not out into the environment. What it is designed to do is rapidly cook food or boil water using a minimum of fuel and produce a minimum of ash waste in the process.

Because there is secondary combustion, this stove also produces minimal smoke – in case you are worried about things like advertising your location in a crisis (or in case your team loses at the tailgate and you are avoiding the guy you made a bet with).

For my test fuel, I had a bucket of yard waste that I saved to simulate the “biomass” that would be available after a storm. Pretty much any storm that is strong enough to take out power and basic services would also result in an abundance of blown down branches, pine cones, and other potential fuel sources. For variety I tossed a few busted-up pieces of warped wooden drink coasters in the bucket as simulated “storm debris”. I even added a few cornstalks and dried weed stalks left from my summer garden for an “other than wood” fuel source to try. In other words – I wasn’t going to be using traditional firewood to fuel this rocket stove test – and that was exactly the point.

Testing was performed on my front stoop (because the snow had melted off of there, but not in the backyard). I was gobsmacked with the results.

Cornstalks and twigs ignited and ready to cook.

With nothing but a few bits of paper, twigs, and cornstalks for fuel, starting the timer from the drop of the match (it only took one), I had a quart of boiling water in 8 minutes! It happened so fast that I didn’t even have time to get to the other simulated debris! I was thinking that 15 minutes would be a decent result, but it took barely half that time! I was so impressed I could hardly speak.

Eight minutes from match drop to boiling!

The Dragon pot atop the Survivor stove, boiling away and using up the final bits of twig.

I ran and got another quart of water and dumped it in the dragon pot on top of the boiling water. Without adding any more twigs, just the continued burn down got the additional water to a light simmer before stalling out for lack of more fuel. I was impressed again.

The top of the stove appears to be cast iron and retained heat for quite some time after I removed the dragon pot – while the fire burned to ash. So I was technically incorrect about the “warming yourself” part. The cast iron did give off some radiant heat. I just wouldn’t recommend it for your sole source of bodily warmth.

I let the remaining fuel exhaust itself, then checked the stove to bring it back inside. It took about 30 minutes to completely cool down, and then I shook out the ash. My experiment resulted in less than a half-cup of very fine ash, which I sprinkled over my compost. When you think about the ash debris from an actual campfire – or even a couple of charcoal briquettes – there is absolutely no comparison. I was impressed yet again. I boiled water with nothing but yard debris and was left with a mere handful of powdery fluff as waste. Take that, disposable propane bottles!

That’s all the ash that was left after the test.

Although I bought the specialty Dragon pot (and its performance showed it to be worth every penny), SilverFire says that almost any type of cookware can be used on their Survivor stove. I tried a Lodge cast iron skillet on for size and it fit perfectly.

I’m not going to wait for an emergency to use this stove again. My next weekend off I’m going to see how many twigs it takes to make myself a bacon and egg breakfast!

The Survivor Stove by SilverFire surpassed all of my expectations and is going to stay in regular rotation at my house. Who knew that I could cook and get rid of yard waste all at the same time? I may never buy propane again.

The Non-Stoner Armalites. AR-18/AR-180

By

Keith Finch

-

February 13, 2020

Brownell’s has relaunched the AR-180 with the much lauded BRN-180 line of products. But where did this niche Armalite originate?

Initially launched as complete uppers that would fit on AR-15 standard lowers, the line expanded to include AR-180 “inspired” lower receivers too.

These are AR-18/AR-180 receivers cosmetically only. The stamped metal of the inexpensive Armalite ventures have been replaced with forged or billet aluminum that take advantage of a myriad of modern products like those of the Sig Sauer MCX, the folding adapters for stocks being the most obvious additions.

The lowers themselves use AR-15 internal and fire control groups for ease of access but the aesthetic is maintained, and let’s all be honest… It’s the aesthetic and the gas piston system that we like, we couldn’t care less about it being a stamped lower.

I would love to see Brownell’s put a few of these together as machine guns with SSF triggers but maybe that’s just me.

Now, if you’re sitting there saying to yourself, “That sure does look like an MCX or a…” you’re probably right. It’s one of those situations where there is nothing ‘new’ in the gun industry, just certain things done better.

Most short-stroke piston, multi-lug rotating bolt rifles in service today have features that relate back to the AR-18/AR-180 because, while the rifle itself never picked up in popularity, design elements of it certainly did.

Operating group parts all in the receiver? Folding stocks? Short-stroke adjustable gas piston? It’s describing a standard suite of modern service rifle features, and nearly every one that isn’t an AR-15 or AK is an AR-18 derivative.

Ian goes over many of them in the video, as well as who built the AR-18/180 and during which time period. All fun and games as I watch a school bus get hauled out of a ditch through my window.

Virginia Advances the Egregious HB 961 to the Senate

By

Keith Finch

-

February 12, 2020

HB 961, one of the most ambitious gun control efforts we have seen, has passed the Commonwealth of Virginia’s House to be sent to the Senate. Despite vocal and vehement opposition, like the sanctuary movement, it is now one step closer to the Governor’s desk where Northram will almost certainly sign it…

HB 961

Expands the definition of “assault firearm” and prohibits any person from importing, selling, transferring, manufacturing, purchasing, possessing, or transporting an assault firearm. A violation is a Class 6 felony. The bill prohibits a dealer from selling, renting, trading, or transferring from his inventory an assault firearm to any person. The bill also prohibits a person from carrying a shotgun with a magazine that will hold more than seven rounds of the longest ammunition for which it is chambered in a public place; under existing law, this prohibition applies only in certain localities. The bill makes it a Class 6 felony to import, sell, transfer, manufacture, purchase, possess, or transport large-capacity firearm magazines, silencers, and trigger activators, all defined in the bill. Any person who legally owns an assault firearm, large-capacity firearm magazine, silencer, or trigger activator on July 1, 2020, may retain possession until January 1, 2021. During that time, such person shall (i) render the assault firearm, large-capacity firearm magazine, silencer, or trigger activator inoperable; (ii) remove the assault firearm, large-capacity firearm magazine, silencer, or trigger activator from the Commonwealth; (iii) transfer the assault firearm, large-capacity firearm magazine, silencer, or trigger activator to a person outside the Commonwealth who is not prohibited from possessing it; or (iv) surrender the assault firearm, large-capacity firearm magazine, silencer, or trigger activator to a state or local law-enforcement agency.

The bill further states that any person who legally owns an assault firearm on July 1, 2020, may retain possession of such assault firearm after January 1, 2021, if such person has obtained a permit from the Department of State Police to possess an assault firearm in accordance with procedures established in the bill. A person issued such permit may possess an assault firearm only under the following conditions: (a) while in his home or on his property or while on the property of another who has provided prior permission, provided that the person has the landowner’s written permission on his person while on such property; (b) while at a shooting range, shooting gallery, or other area designated for the purpose of target shooting or the target range of a public or private club or organization whose members have organized for the purpose of practicing shooting targets or competing in target shooting matches; (c) while engaged in lawful hunting; or (d) while surrendering the assault firearm to a state or local law-enforcement agency. A person issued such permit may also transport an assault firearm between any of those locations, provided that such assault firearm is unloaded and secured within a closed container while being transported. The bill also provides that failure to display the permit and a photo identification upon demand by a law-enforcement officer shall be punishable by a $25 civil penalty, which shall be paid into the state treasury. The bill also requires the Department of State Police to enter the name and description of a person issued a permit in the Virginia Criminal Information Network (VCIN) so that the permit’s existence and current status will be made known to the law-enforcement personnel accessing VCIN for investigative purposes.

“Assault firearm” means:
1. A semi-automatic center-fire rifle that expels single or multiple projectiles by action of an explosion of a combustible material with a fixed magazine capacity in excess of 10 rounds;

2. A semi-automatic center-fire rifle that expels single or multiple projectiles by action of an explosion of a combustible material that has the ability to accept a detachable magazine and has one of the following characteristics: (i) a folding or telescoping stock; (ii) a pistol grip that protrudes conspicuously beneath the action of the rifle; (iii) a thumbhole stock; (iv) a second handgrip or a protruding grip that can be held by the non-trigger hand; (v) a bayonet mount; (vi) a grenade launcher; (vii) a flare launcher; (viii) a silencer; (ix) a flash suppressor; (x) a muzzle brake; (xi) a muzzle compensator; (xii) a threaded barrel capable of accepting (a) a silencer, (b) a flash suppressor, (c) a muzzle brake, or (d) a muzzle compensator; or (xiii) any characteristic of like kind as enumerated in clauses (i) through (xii);

3. A semi-automatic center-fire pistol that expels single or multiple projectiles by action of an explosion of a combustible material with a fixed magazine capacity in excess of 10 rounds;

4. A semi-automatic center-fire pistol that expels single or multiple projectiles by action of an explosion of a combustible material that has the ability to accept a detachable magazine and has one of the following characteristics: (i) a folding or telescoping stock; (ii) a thumbhole stock; (iii) a second handgrip or a protruding grip that can be held by the non-trigger hand; (iv) the capacity to accept a magazine that attaches to the pistol outside of the pistol grip; (v) a shroud that is attached to, or partially or completely encircles, the barrel and that permits the shooter to hold the pistol with the non-trigger hand without being burned; (vi) a manufactured weight of 50 ounces or more when the pistol is unloaded; (vii) a threaded barrel capable of accepting (a) a silencer, (b) a flash suppressor, (c) a barrel extender, or (d) a forward handgrip; or (viii) any characteristic of like kind as enumerated in clauses (i) through (vii);

5. A shotgun with a revolving cylinder that expels single or multiple projectiles by action of an explosion of a combustible material; or

6. A semi-automatic shotgun that expels single or multiple projectiles by action of an explosion of a combustible material that has one of the following characteristics: (i) a folding or telescoping stock, (ii) a thumbhole stock, (iii) a pistol grip that protrudes conspicuously beneath the action of the shotgun, (iv) the ability to accept a detachable magazine, (v) a fixed magazine capacity in excess of seven rounds, or (vi) any characteristic of like kind as enumerated in clauses (i) through (v).

“Assault firearm” includes any part or combination of parts designed or intended to convert, modify, or otherwise alter a firearm into an assault firearm, or any combination of parts that may be readily assembled into an assault firearm. “Assault firearm” does not include (i) a firearm that has been rendered permanently inoperable, (ii) an antique firearm as defined in § 18.2-308.2:2, or (iii) a curio or relic as defined in § 18.2-308.2:2.

Creepy Uncle Joe’s Word Salad

By

Dr LateBloomer

-

February 12, 2020

Question: If your cousin is driving across Missouri at 35 mph, and the International Space Station is orbiting over Russia, how many llamas would it take to paddle across Lake Michigan if the only thing on TV was the Oscars?

Answer: Purple – because Armadillos can’t use snorkels.

If none of that made any sense to you, rest assured that it still makes way more sense than when Joe Biden tries to talk about firearms.

Yes, Creepy Uncle Joe is at it again. He’s in New Hampshire blabbering about having 50 clips in your gun and gibbering about F-15’s and Hellfire Missiles against your AK-47. That’s on top of calling an erstwhile supporter a “Lying dog-faced pony soldier” the other day. Ummmm, what?

For a supposed major presidential candidate Biden seems to have the self-awareness of a rutabaga. Seriously, he’s acting like some demented old guy yelling at the clouds. Yeaaaahhh, I’m going to hand over my guns to THIS clown? Ummmmm, no.

In case anyone has forgotten, Biden is the one who in previous years brought us home defense gems like shooting a double barrel shotgun in the air off your back deck to scare burglars away. Mr 2A he’s not – but it’s getting to the point where he’s just gabbling word salad. And that is rather insulting.

Put another way – the guy doesn’t even care enough about your rights to understand what he himself is saying – let alone what the Constitution says. He apparently doesn’t feel that he owes you even an attempt at a logical argument. Any old Whargarrbal will do to keep the proles in their place.

So, are semiautomatic rifles “weapons of war” as the left seem to hysterically label them? If so, why are they now being called “useless” in a war against the government? Seems to me that Creepy Joe is already fantasizing about becoming a tyrant and telling us it’s useless to resist.

It’s kind of the equivalent of “Hey little lady, what do you want that Big Gun for? You’re just going to get yourself hurt with that. You better give it to me while I’m busy sniffing your hair.”

Talk about insulting.

It’s not just Creepy Joe either. Who was the guy that threatened gun owners with nukes a few months ago? Oh yeah – Eric Swalwell. No secondhand subtle aggression there or anything.

Like Dorothy’s ruby slippers in the Wizard of Oz, firearms seem to generate an awful lot of grabbiness and secondhand aggression for something that supposedly won’t do us a damn bit of good against the government in a war.

To paraphrase Glinda the Good Witch , “Their magic must be very powerful, or Biden wouldn’t want them so badly”.

Maybe Biden would have better luck speaking armadillo. At least it would be more entertaining than the gibberish we’re getting from him currently.

Virginia — The Fight Goes On

By

DRGO

-

February 11, 2020

(from theepochtimes.com)

HB 916, the Virginia House of Delegates’ version of Governor Northam’s scary gun ban bill, was heard by the Public Safety Committee Friday February 7. This bill would ban the sale of “assault weapons”, including AR-15 and AK-47 platform rifles, and makes the possession of suppressors and magazines greater than 12 rounds a felony. (Why 12?)

Despite the bill’s wide-ranging ramifications, commentary was limited to six minutes per side. Only industry representatives and lobbyists were able to speak, forcing the vast majority of the audience to remain silent.

After the bill passed 12 to 9, several audience members yelled out. Although no threats were made, the Committee Chairman motioned to the Capitol Police, who assembled in front of the audience and told all of us that we had to leave the room or be arrested for trespass.

Trespassing in the peoples’ forum? The cowardice and ineptitude of these delegates were beyond the pale. So I wrote to tell them we will not back down:

Dear Chairman Delegate Hope and Vice Chairman Delegate Bourne,

I attended last Friday’s House Public Safety Committee hearing on HB 961, Governor Northam’s scary gun, magazine, and accessories ban, and I was disgusted by your management of the hearing in your capacities as Chair and Vice Chair.

In the audience with me were people who had travelled several hours to attend the hearing. One gentleman was a business owner from a rural county who knew all too well that reliance on law enforcement to protect him in time is impossible. Another was a retired officer of the Inspector General who told me that law enforcement recognizes the best deterrence to crime isn’t law enforcement, but an armed population. As a forensic psychiatrist, I know that psychiatrists are the medical specialists most likely to become homicide victims. We each have unique reasons to be armed, and because of that, will exert our time, talents, and treasure to preserve our rights.

Even with its current amendments, HB 916 will turn us three into felons overnight for possession of standard-capacity magazines and already heavily federally regulated suppressors purchased lawfully for lawful purposes. It shouldn’t surprise either of you that your proposing this bill is morally repugnant to us, especially when your party voted down both Project Ceasefire and bills calling for increased penalties for criminals who commit rape at gunpoint. Your party is giving criminals a free pass, is insulting victims, and is targeting all of us.

Adding to our outrage were the incredible lies told during that hearing. One needn’t be a lawyer to understand that the Heller decision protects our right to keep “weapons in common use.” The items this bill bans are all in common use.

Vice Chairman Bourne, as a former member of the Attorney General’s staff, why were you unable to correct Delegate Levine when he said that the Supreme Court of the United States upheld these bans? What stopped you from pointing out that only federal Circuit Courts have ignored Heller, and that the Supreme Court has not yet ruled on these bans that it already outlawed? You allowed Delegate Levine to continue demonstrating ignorance and buffoonery when he pantomimed his laughably mistaken ideas about what constitutes an “assault weapon”.

Furthermore, Vice Chairman, when you said that these weapons and magazines were made for the military and should only be present on battlefields, were you aware that the Capitol Police present at the hearing carry Sig Sauer P320 pistols with 16 round magazines? Are the Capitol Police there to wage war? Are they planning to turn the Capitol grounds into a battlefield? Now that your party has made the Pocahontas Building a gun free zone, even for those of us with concealed handgun permits, why do they continue to need “military-grade” firepower to keep the peace? If these magazines are so intrinsically dangerous why should Capitol Police have them at all?

Chairman Hope, given the historic significance of this bill, it is shocking that it wasn’t first heard in a sub-committee, and it is completely unacceptable that only six minutes were allotted for public input. It was perfectly obvious that dissenters outnumbered supporters many times over. The just and decent thing to do, prior to turning those dissenters into felons, would be to let them speak.

We came to change hearts and minds, but most of the committee members apparently arrived with orders from the Governor, who in turn appears to be taking orders from an out-of-state billionaire. We came to participate in government as our Founders intended. You presided over a deliberate affront to the four hundred years of the history of our Assembly. As our representatives, you should have been willing to listen as long as necessary to ensure that every voice was heard.

How great is the urgency to eliminate our rights that you couldn’t be bothered to listen to us? Had the two of you allowed those in attendance to speak, there would have been no “disruption” at the end. By refusing to hear them formally, you essentially baited them into speaking out when they could.

This monstrous bill is in for the fight of its life. You rushed HB 961 through to get this to the Senate before next week’s crossover. It is unlikely to pass the full Senate as is, so it will have to survive the wrangling of a conference committee. At each juncture, the few sane liberals in your party will have the opportunity to listen to their constituents and kill this bill.

Even though you wouldn’t let us speak in committee, we won’t stop exercising our rights. Background checks for gun purchases doubled in the Commonwealth last month, and ammunition sales even in deep-blue Arlington are up 339% compared to one year ago. Do you think Virginians are only filling ten round magazines?

This bill, and its progenitor SB 16, gave birth to the Second Amendment Sanctuary movement in Virginia. These bills mobilized thousands of citizens who could not stand politics to become involved because, to their amazement, rather than focusing on criminals, you chose to focus on them and their rights.

I can assure you and every member of the Assembly that we will not back down and that we have the support of gun owners throughout the United States. The Second Amendment, our Commonwealth’s Constitution, the positive facts of civilian gun usage, and the Heller decision are all on our side, not yours.

When Secretary Moran greeted Philip Van Cleave (President of Virginia Citizens Defense League) and I at the NRA’s January 13th lobby day, he said he’d see us on the floor of the Assembly. I replied that we’d see him in court.

The highest court in the nation appears ready to restore the rights that have been wrongfully infringed upon by those of you who target the law-abiding and give aid to criminals. There is no shortage of your constituents who would happily become plaintiffs in [N.] v Commonwealth of Virginia to set this right.

.

–Dennis Petrocelli, MD is a clinical and forensic psychiatrist who has practiced for nearly 20 years in Virginia. He took up shooting in 2019 for mind-body training and self-defense, and is in the fight for Virginians’ gun rights.

All DRGO articles by Dennis Petrocelli, MD

The TEC 9 – A History of Infamy

By

Travis Pike

-

February 11, 2020

In the deep, dark hallways of gun history, there are several guns worthy of their own highlighting article. Unfortunately for you, I didn’t choose any of these decent guns to write about. Instead, I went with the TEC 9.

The history of the TEC 9 is quite convoluted. The TEC 9 has lived and died by many names. These names include the original Interdynamics MP-9, which was a submachine gun designed for military forces. The simple blowback SMG found no military buyers and was soon marketed to the American populace as a rather sizeable 9mm pistol. George Kellgren, the man behind Kel-Tec, originally designed the gun and teamed up with Carlos Garcia of Miami, Florida, to form Interdynamic USA and market the weapon to the American civilian market.

The first model was called the KG-9 and was an open bolt pistol. KG stood for Kellgren and Garcia. The open bolt design was effortless to modify to a full-auto configuration, and this drew the ire of the Federal Government.

If you’ve ever heard the gun store gossip or the bubba lore that all you have to do is “file down the disconnector” to make a gun full auto. It came from the KG-9, because it was true. A little file work, and you could quickly turn a KG-9 into a full auto weapon. The ATF wasn’t pleased about this and demanded Intratec to convert the weapon to a closed bolt configuration. This became the KG-99.

The KG-99 was even advertised with a forward “assault” grip for a period of time before the ATF eventually came in and said ‘stop that’ once more. A KG-99 equipped with a forward grip would be an AOW and subject to the same NFA provisions as a machine gun.

What’s in a Name

George Kellgren eventually left the company, and Interdynamics USA became Intratec, and the KG-99 became the TEC 9. Along the way, the company became Navegar but still did business as Intratec. Outside of the TEC 9, Intratec produced a TEC-22, a derringer, and a series of cheap automatic handguns in more traditional variations.

The TEC-9 had already become famous in and out of the gun world. Your traditional hobby or professional shoot dismissed the weapon quickly. They were cheaply made, not very reliable, and ammunition picky. Plus, they were huge and rather useless as far as guns go. They offered no practical advantage over something like a Glock 17 with an extended magazine.

In pop culture, the gun was quite famous. It appeared in tons of television shows. It has an intimidating appearance, made it stand out as a bad guy gun. Miami Vice, in particular, loved to arm the villains with legally converted KG-9 machine guns. Numerous TEC 9 models showed up the famed Walker Texas Ranger television series too. The TEC 9 also showed up in two of my favorite movies, Big Trouble in Little China and Falling Down.

TEC 9’s popped up in dozens of rap songs over the years, and a rapper even took the mantle Tech N9ne. The gun’s appearance in rap songs, and being wielded by bad guys in movies and television shows gave the gun a shining criminal appeal.

Something similar has happened with Draco’s too.

The Criminal Controversy

The TEC 9 had long been a target for gun control efforts. Not for any real reason beyond the gun looked scary. The SMG style design, with the aggressive barrel shroud, and the long forward of the trigger magazines made it quite distinctive. Washington D.C. passed a law stating firearms manufacturer’s can be held liable for the use of their weapons, and specifically named the TEC 9.

Intratec merely laughed off the idea that you can be sued for how their guns are used by name and just renamed it. They also moved the sling keeper to the rear of the gun. That’s all they changed and the TEC 9 became the TEC-DC9. There is some speculation over what DC stands for. Some claim it stands for Designed for California. Others claim it’s the DC from Washington DC and was poking the federal bear. Mr. Garcia claimed DC stood for defensive carry when he testified in front of a Connecticut court when he challenged their assault weapon’s ban.

The firearm remained controversial due to its appearance in several high profile crimes.

Life impersonating art is nothing new, but criminals using the same gun in movies and TV as in real life is a bit of an odd one. The TEC 9 became infamous in real life for its use in several high profile shootings. In these shootings, the TEC 9 proved to be quite unreliable. In several of these shootings, the guns were found jammed, with very few rounds dispensed. This included the Columbine shooting and the 101 California Street shootings.

The primary reason the gun was popular with criminals is simple. It was cheap. Roughly 250 bucks a pop. Second, it had an intimidating appearance. Criminals are just as vain as the rest of us, and a criminal looking gun wouldn’t certainly appeal to them. The thing is, I’d much rather a criminal be armed with a TEC-9 than a Glock, or any other traditional firearm. At least I know the gun is unreliable, unwieldy, and the sights blow.

The Advertisements

One major controversial element of the TEC 9 was its advertising. Supposedly one advertisement claimed that TEC-KOTE that covered the weapon was ‘resistant to fingerprints.’ I can find lots of TEC 9 advertisements but I can’t find any that make this claim.

Others include the TEC 9 advertised as,” As tough as your toughest customer,” Again this is another advertisement I can’t seem to find. I can find others showing a variety of TEC 9s with different finishes and options as well as some other Intratec pistols. I can’t seem to find any of the controversial advertisements. It would seem these would be preserved, but alas they are not.

I can find advertisements from esoteric guns from the 1950s, but nothing on these 1980s and 1990s advertisements. Even anti-gun websites that look like they were created in the 90s seem to have documented these advertisements. I’m wary that they ever existed, and if any of our readers know where to find them please let me know.

Oddly enough, in the 2003 film Runaway Jury, the fingerprint resistance of a firearm is mentioned in the film during a court case against a firearm manufacturer.

The Clinton AWB Kills the TEC 9 (Not really.)

If you ever read the Clinton Assault Weapon’s Ban you’ll see a section on pistols. It was written in such a way that it appeared as if the TEC 9 was the basis for most of the language banning “assault pistols.”

The TEC 9 simply became the AB-10. AB stands for After Ban and complied with the AWB. Like many times before the TEC 9 continued to thrive. It seemed like Carlos Garcia was an astute businessman who wasn’t afraid to take advantage of the controversy to further market his pistol. His marketing director told a New York Times reporter, “I’m kind of flattered. It just has that advertising tingle to it. Hey, it’s talked about, it’s read about, the media write about it. That generates more sales for me. It might sound cold and cruel, but I’m sales oriented.”

They also took advantage of the politician’s dismay for their weapon. They created a sense of urgency in their marketing by constantly detailing the weapon’s numerous bans across the United States. In a story as old as gun laws the more the gun was banned the more they were capable of selling. Reportedly up to a quarter-million of the various TEC 9s were produced and sold.

The TEC 9 – Behind the music

I actually just found a TEC 9 for sale at my local gun store. Technically it’s a TEC-DC9 mini. The mini variant has a very short barrel and comes with a barrel shroud that attaches or detaches with ease. It was on consignment and rather cheap so I jumped on it just for fun.

I took it out to the range and fired a few rounds. Not a few hundred, or a few dozen, just a few because it’s horribly unreliable. It jams, fails to extract, and only eats 124-grain FMJs. The gun is just as bad as I had always heard. The sights suck, the ergonomics suck, the guns massive bolt and blowback design creates a lot of recoil. It’s a crummy gun overall.

Luckily, I bought it as a collectible item since Intratec and Navegar shut their doors in 2001. It may never be worth a dime, but it’s an interesting gun with a fascinating history.

I didn’t realize how convoluted and controversial the gun was in its time. Even now I’m not sure what’s fact and what’s speculation. I did my best to derive the truth, but when it comes to the TEC 9 the truth might be a bit relative.

On Drugs and Guns

By

Keith Finch

-

February 11, 2020

APhA Statement on Firearm Related Injuries, Deaths in U.S.

The American Pharmacists Association Board of Trustees is issuing the following public statement calling for more proactive steps to address this important public health and safety issue. CDC data indicate that nearly 40,000 Americans in 2017 died from firearm related incidents — more than the number who died in traffic accidents but fewer than deaths related to opioid use. In 2018 and 2019, the use of firearms against healthcare professionals and community members led to discussions by APhA leadership, as well as by other healthcare organizations. The safety and well-being of pharmacists, student pharmacists, pharmacy personnel, and patients is of paramount importance to APhA. The U.S. public policy debates surrounding firearm related injuries and safety have wide‐ranging implications for pharmacy practice and the services pharmacists offer.

So, our legal drug dealers are calling to weigh in on firearm policy. They acknowledge that guns (not their lane of expertise) are less lethal than opioid abuse (their lane of expertise) but surpassed traffic related deaths (not their lane of expertise) so they have decided to make a statement on opioids… I’m sorry, they’ve decided to make a statement on firearms.

Because I guess they have a plan for the larger opioid problem already… or something.

APhA recognizes firearms related injury and death as a public health crisis. As such, the Association:

recommends a public health approach to the prevention of firearm injuries and deaths.
calls for the funding of research related to firearm injuries and injury prevention, including use of personalized gun technology, to better understand the problem and to implement effective firearm injury prevention strategies.
supports the engagement of pharmacists in the development of public policy to address firearm related violence and the prevention of firearm injuries and deaths.
supports strengthening and enforcing state and federal laws to prohibit individuals convicted of crimes of violence from purchasing or possessing firearms.
supports the classification of pharmacies as healthcare entities included within state and local laws which address “gun-free” or “concealed weapon” zones.
supports the inclusion of pharmacists, student pharmacists, and pharmacy personnel as healthcare workers protected under state and local laws related to assault of a healthcare worker.
supports the availability of education and information for pharmacy personnel regarding firearm violence prevention.
encourages pharmacists and other health care professionals to have information accessible to patients and caregivers regarding the risks of having unsecured firearms in the home, and ways to mitigate the risks associated with having a firearm in the home.
recommends pharmacists and other health professionals be trained to recognize and respond to individuals in crisis who might be at risk of injuring themselves or others.
supports the enactment of extreme risk protection order (ERPO) laws which allow family members and law enforcement officers to petition a court to temporarily remove firearms from individuals who are determined to be at imminent risk of harming themselves or others while providing due process protections.
supports training requirements on proper handling and use of firearms for anyone owning or operating a firearm.
supports efforts to improve firearms to make them as safe as possible, including the incorporation of built-in safety devices (such as trigger locks and signals that indicate a gun is loaded).

Hmm, let’s go through these since, unlike the Pharmacists, this is my lane.

recommends a public health approach to the prevention of firearm injuries and deaths.

Vague and unsubstantive rhetoric trying to relate suicide, crime, and negligence all under one banner of public health.

calls for the funding of research related to firearm injuries and injury prevention, including use of personalized gun technology, to better understand the problem and to implement effective firearm injury prevention strategies.

A vague appeal to valueless “smart gun” technology that has proven a non-starter time and time again. I’m all for research, however ignoring the giant pile of it we have already that suggests upping our whole cultural familiarity with firearms would contribute to their safe use seems to mean that the pharmacists want a certain type of research with certain recommendations already picked.

No thank you.

supports the engagement of pharmacists in the development of public policy to address firearm related violence and the prevention of firearm injuries and deaths.

With what expertise?

I would trust a pharmacist’s opinion on pharmaceuticals. I would believe them if they handed down recommendations on what drugs can and cannot be mixed. I would listen to which emerging drugs get them excited about new treatments and preventative medicine. I won’t put stock in their equal understanding of weapons and a weapon’s legitimate role in society. That isn’t their lane.

supports strengthening and enforcing state and federal laws to prohibit individuals convicted of crimes of violence from purchasing or possessing firearms.

Specifics, please. “Strengthen” is one of those broad and nebulous buzzwords that doesn’t mean anything. Enforcing would be nice, keeping enforced by not releasing convicts of those crimes would be a great step also. But what do I know? This is my lane.

Go on, oh wise drug dealers.

supports the classification of pharmacies as healthcare entities included within state and local laws which address “gun-free” or “concealed weapon” zones.

Because “Gun Free Zones” have proven so effective? You’re counting on one of the most repeatedly failed policy systems in history to protect pharmacies from robberies and violence when you have high value substances in your inventories?

I question your reasoning and problem solving skills, APhA… I question them deeply.

supports the inclusion of pharmacists, student pharmacists, and pharmacy personnel as healthcare workers protected under state and local laws related to assault of a healthcare worker.

Hey! Look at that, one we can agree on.

I have no problem legally identifying pharmacists as healthcare personnel for legal protections. Pharmacists are, by the nature of their employment, at greater specific risk for assault/robbery than other professions because they deal in valuable, regulated, and addictive substances. They can be targeted for illicit financial gain or to satisfy a personal addiction, both are possibilities that someone like an accountant does not face as a threat.

supports the availability of education and information for pharmacy personnel regarding firearm violence prevention.

Does that information include building security practices and the option to carry while at work should the pharmacist so desire? If not you are doing a disservice to those you are trying to help by denying options that are effective, you just don’t like those options.

encourages pharmacists and other health care professionals to have information accessible to patients and caregivers regarding the risks of having unsecured firearms in the home, and ways to mitigate the risks associated with having a firearm in the home.

Basic firearm safety practices are always good information, but do the pharmacy personnel have any greater understanding to help patients and caregivers make informed decisions on this topic? On safes, locks, education of other household members, strategies for children, etc. This isn’t a topic for a pamphlet, it requires a foundation of basic understanding to be of value.

recommends pharmacists and other health professionals be trained to recognize and respond to individuals in crisis who might be at risk of injuring themselves or others.

Especially being in the medical field, the likelihood of a pharmacist coming into contact with someone in crisis is much greater than average. Knowing methods of helping these individuals and the paths to get them the help they need are valuable tools.

But I suspect what AphA wants is just a ‘Red Flag’ easy button without liability. Because, like doctors, pharmacists do not want to be held responsible (liable) for infringing upon someone’s rights without cause or understanding while under the auspices of ‘helping’. What should be a gravely regarded topic, someone’s rights as a free person, is given none of that attention.

supports the enactment of extreme risk protection order (ERPO) laws which allow family members and law enforcement officers to petition a court to temporarily remove firearms from individuals who are determined to be at imminent risk of harming themselves or others while providing due process protections.

There we go. There’s the easy button. I’m glad they at least give written lip service to due process being observed, despite the fact that ERPO’s are largely extrajudicial exercises that are subject to no active due process.

supports training requirements on proper handling and use of firearms for anyone owning or operating a firearm.

Requirements is that nasty word which makes it a government obligation to provide it’s access. Which the government will not. When you make a right require a significant and difficult financial and time output for indeterminate gain it is no longer a right.

This could have instead been written as ‘supports holding negligent individuals liable for the damages caused by their irresponsible actions’ and it could have wide support. Negligence is a due process standard that must be established.

supports efforts to improve firearms to make them as safe as possible, including the incorporation of built-in safety devices (such as trigger locks and signals that indicate a gun is loaded).

Firearms are, already, very safely built devices. The problem is that you are trying to merge safe operation with the idea that firearms are weapons and weapons are by their very nature, dangerous. We need firearms to be dangerous, we need them to be effective at projecting force at sudden emergency need, that is their purpose as sure as an opioid painkiller’s is to make an agony more sufferable.

You cannot legislate a purposefully dangerous implement into safety. We cannot legislate unpurposefully dangerous implements into safety. Vehicles are not safe. Opioids aren’t safe.

Life.. is not safe.

But what do I know… this is my lane.