Facebook Instagram Twitter Youtube
Advertisement

Here Are 8 Stubborn Facts on Gun Violence in America

By
DRGO
-
(from dailysignal.com)

[Ed: This is a piece from March 14, 2018 in The Daily Signal by John G. Malcolm, vice president of the Institute for Constitutional Government and director of the Edwin Meese III Center for Legal and Judicial Studies at The Heritage Foundation. It remains highly relevant and is republished for educational purposes per The Daily Signal‘s copyright policy.]

In the wake of the tragic murder of 17 innocent students and teachers at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida, students, educators, politicians, and activists are searching for solutions to prevent future school shootings.

As emotions morph from grief to anger to resolve, it is vitally important to supply facts so that policymakers and professionals can fashion solutions based on objective data rather than well-intended but misguided emotional fixes.

Are there ways to reduce gun violence and school shootings? Yes, but only after objectively assessing the facts and working collaboratively to fashion commonsense solutions.

Here are eight stubborn facts to keep in mind about gun violence in America:

  1. Violent crime is down and has been on the decline for decades.
  2. The principal public safety concerns with respect to guns are suicides and illegally owned handguns, not mass shootings.
  3. A small number of factors significantly increase the likelihood that a person will be a victim of a gun-related homicide.
  4. Gun-related murders are carried out by a predictable pool of people.
  5. Higher rates of gun ownership are not associated with higher rates of violent crime.
  6. There is no clear relationship between strict gun control legislation and homicide or violent crime rates.
  7. Legally owned firearms are used for lawful purposes much more often than they are used to commit crimes or suicide.
  8. Concealed carry permit holders are not the problem, but they may be part of the solution.

Each of these facts is firmly based on empirical data. Here’s a deeper look.

1. America is relatively safe, and the trend is toward becoming safer.

  • According to the National Crime Victimization Survey, violent crime has been declining steadily since the early 1990s.
  • The 2011 homicide rate was almost half of the rate in 1991, and according to the Pew Research Center, the 2013 gun-related death rate was half of the rate in 1993.
  • The number of nonfatal firearm crimes committed in 2011 was one-sixth the number committed in 1993.
  • In the past few years, there have been minor increases in certain types of violent crimes, mainly in large metropolitan areas. However, these increases are nowhere near those seen in the 1990s and are largely related to gang activity.
  • It should be remembered that it takes at least three to five years of data to show true trend lines. It appears that the collective homicide toll for America’s 50 largest cities decreased modestly in 2017 after two consecutive years of increases.

2. The principal public safety concerns are suicides and illegally owned handguns.

  • According to the Pew Research Center, almost two-thirds of America’s annual gun deaths are suicides. Since 1981, when the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention began publishing data, gun suicides have outnumbered gun homicides. In 2010 alone, 19,392 Americans used guns to kill themselves.
  • Most gun-related crimes are carried out with illegally owned firearms—as much as 80 percent according to some estimates.
  • The FBI’s Uniform Crime Reports prove that the overwhelming majority of gun-related homicides are perpetrated with handguns, with rifles of any kind accounting for less than 3 percent of gun-related homicides. In 2013, 5,782 murders were committed by killers who used a handgun, compared to 285 committed by killers who used a rifle. The same holds true for 2012 (6,404 to 298); 2011 (6,251 to 332); 2010 (6,115 to 367); and 2009 (6,501 to 351).
  • More people are stabbed to death every year than are murdered with rifles.
  • A person is more likely to be bludgeoned to death with a blunt object or beaten to death with hands and feet than to be murdered with a rifle.

3. A small number of factors significantly increase the likelihood that a person will be a victim of a gun-related homicide.

  • Where do you live? Murders in the United States are very concentrated. According to the Crime Prevention Research Center, over 50 percent of murders occur in 2 percent of the nation’s 3,142 counties. Moreover, gun-related homicides are heavily concentrated in certain neighborhoods within those counties: 54 percent of U.S. counties had zero murders in 2014.
  • Who is your partner? According to a recent scholarly article in the Hastings Law Journal, people recently or currently involved in an abusive intimate relationship are much more likely to be victims of gun-related homicide than is the rest of the population, especially if the abuser possesses firearms.
  • Are you in a gang? According to the Department of Justice’s National Gang Center, particularly in urban areas, significant percentages of gun-related homicides (15 percent to 33 percent) are linked with gang and drug activity. Gang-related homicides are more likely to involve firearms than non-gang-related homicides are.
  • Are you a male between 15 and 34? The majority of standard gun murder victims are men between the ages of 15 and 34. Although black men make up roughly 7 percent of the population, they account for almost two-thirds of gun murder victims every year.
  • Women and children are more likely to be the victims of mass shootings and homicide-suicide shootings than they are to be the victims of a “typical” gun-related homicide.

4. The perpetration of gun-related murders is often carried out by predictable people.

5. Higher rates of gun ownership are not associated with higher rates of violent crime.

  • Switzerland and Israel have much higher gun ownership rates than the United States but experience far fewer homicides and have much lower violent crime rates than many European nations with strict gun control laws.
    • While some will argue that the guns carried by Swiss and Israeli citizens are technically “owned” by the government in most cases, this does little to negate the fact that many citizens in those countries have ready access to firearms.
  • Canada is ranked 12th in the world for the number of civilian-owned guns per capita and reports one of the world’s lower homicide rates—but even then, some provinces have higher homicide rates than U.S. states with less restrictive laws and higher rates of gun ownership have.
  • Although many gun control advocates have noted that “right to carry” states tend to experience slight increases in violent crime, other studies have noted the opposite effect.
  • Higher rates of concealed carry permit holders are even more strongly associated with reduction in violent crime than are right-to-carry states. The probable reason for this is that right-to-carry studies often include “open carry” states, which have not been shown to correlate with more people actually carrying or even owning firearms. Rates of concealed carry permit holders are better indicators of the number of people who actually possess and carry firearms within a given population.
  • Further, as with most correlations, there are many other factors that can account for increases in concealed carry permits—including the fact that people who live in already dangerous neighborhoods seek out means of self-defense. The Huffington Post noted that the rate of concealed carry permit requests in Chicago has soared in recent years after the city loosened restrictions, in large part, according to the Chicago Tribune, because law-abiding residents are increasingly worried about rising rates of violent crime in the city.
  • The rate of gun ownership is higher among whites than it is among African-Americans, but the murder rate among African-Americans is significantly higher than the rate among whites.
  • Similarly, the rate of gun ownership is higher in rural areas than in urban areas, but urban areas experience higher murder rates.

6. There is no clear relationship between strict gun control legislation and homicide or violent crime rates.

  • The Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence ironically makes this clear with its ratings for states based on gun laws. “Gun freedom” states that score poorly, like New Hampshire, Vermont, Idaho, and Oregon, have some of the lowest homicide rates. Conversely, “gun control-loving” states that received high scores, like Maryland and Illinois, experience some of the nation’s highest homicide rates.
  • The Crime Prevention Research Center notes that, if anything, the data indicate that countries with high rates of gun ownership tend to have lower homicide rates—but this is only a correlation, and many factors do not necessarily support a conclusion that high rates of gun ownership cause the low rates of homicide.
  • Homicide and firearm homicide rates in Great Britain spiked in the years immediately following the imposition of severe gun control measures, despite the fact that most developed countries continued to experience a downward trend in these rates. This is also pointed out by noted criminologist John Lott in his book “The War on Guns.”
  • Similarly, Ireland’s homicide rates spiked in the years immediately following the country’s 1972 gun confiscation legislation.
  • Australia’s National Firearms Act appears to have had little effect on suicide and homicide rates, which were falling before the law was enacted and continued to decline at a statistically unremarkable rate compared to worldwide trends.
  • According to research compiled by Lott and highlighted in his book “The War on Guns,” Australia’s armed and unarmed robbery rates both increased markedly in the five years immediately following the National Firearms Act, despite the general downward trend experienced by other developed countries.
  • Great Britain has some of the strictest gun control laws in the developed world, but the violent crime rate for homicide, rape, burglary, and aggravated assault is much higher than that in the U.S. Further, approximately 60 percent of burglaries in Great Britain occur while residents are home, compared to just 13 percent in the U.S., and British burglars admit to targeting occupied residences because they are more likely to find wallets and purses.
  • It is difficult to compare homicide and firearm-related murder rates across international borders because countries use different methods to determine which deaths “count” for purposes of violent crime. For example, since 1967, Great Britain has excluded from its homicide countsany case that does not result in a conviction, that was the result of dangerous driving, or in which the person was determined to have acted in self-defense. All of these factors are counted as “homicides” in the United States.

7. Legally owned firearms are used for lawful purposes much more often than they are used to commit crimes or suicide.

  • In 2013, President Barack Obama ordered the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to assess existing research on gun violence. The report, compiled by the Institute of Medicine and the National Research Council, found (among other things) that firearms are used defensively hundreds of thousands of times every year.
  • According to the CDC, “self-defense can be an important crime deterrent.” Recent CDC reports acknowledge that studies directly assessing the effect of actual defensive uses of guns have found “consistently lower injury rates among gun-using crime victims compared with victims who used other self-protective strategies.”
  • Semi-automatic rifles (such as the AR-15) are commonly used as self-defense weapons in the homes of law-abiding citizens because they are easier to control than handguns, are more versatile than handguns, and offer the advantage of up to 30 rounds of protection. Even Vox has published stories defending the use of the AR-15.
  • AR-15s have been used to save lives on many occasions, including:
    • Oswego, Illinois (2018)—A man with an AR-15 intervened to stop a neighbor’s knife attack and cited the larger weapon’s “intimidation factor” as a reason why the attacker dropped the knife.
    • Houston, Texas (2017)—A homeowner survived a drive-by shooting by defending himself with his AR-15.
    • Ferguson, Missouri (2014)—African-American men protected a white man’s store from rioters by standing outside armed with AR-15s.
    • Texas (2013)—A 15-year-old boy used an AR-15 during a home invasion to save both his life and that of his 12-year-old sister.

8. Concealed carry permit holders are not the problem, but they may be part of the solution.

  • Lott found that, as a group, concealed carry permit holders are some of the most law-abiding people in the United States. The rate at which they commit crimes generally and firearm crimes specifically is between one-sixth and one-tenth of that recorded for police officers, who are themselves committing crimes at a fraction of the rate of the general population.
  • Between 2007 and 2015, murder rates dropped 16 percent and violent crime rates dropped 18 percent, even though the percentage of adults with concealed carry permits rose by 190 percent.
  • Regression estimates show a significant association between increased permit ownership and a drop in murder and violent crime rates. Each percentage point increase in rates of permit-holding is associated with a roughly 2.5 percent drop in the murder rate.
  • Concealed carry permit holders are often “the good guy with a gun,” even though they rarely receive the attention of the national media. Concealed carry permit holders were credited with saving multiple lives in:

.

.

Robert B Young, MD

— DRGO Editor Robert B. Young, MD is a psychiatrist practicing in Pittsford, NY, an associate clinical professor at the University of Rochester School of Medicine, and a Distinguished Life Fellow of the American Psychiatric Association.

All DRGO articles by Robert B. Young, MD

Pay It Forward… The When and Why

By
Keith Finch
-

From Jase Winner

One of the things that scares me most about my life in this community is not being able to pay forward all that I have received. That I won’t be able to put in as much as I have taken out. That the phrase, “just pay it forward later,” I’ve been trying to piece together for the last three years will forever be prevalent. I will never be able to pay it all forward, because I have received a LOT over the years.

“Just pay it forward later”. It’s taken me about 3 years to finally start to grasp this concept. Which when you think about it, that means I was 13 the first time someone told me to pay it forward later. That also means I was just 13 the first time somebody in this industry helped me out. Through these last 3 years I have only grown and expanded my reach… which means catching more attention. This also means more help. Which means a lot of paying up to do. I’m not complaining, I am super thankful for all that I have received, but I’m also conscious of it too. I think that’s a good thing.

When I was but a wee little lad I thought “later” meant when I was 40 or something. But to my surprise it turns out “later” really means anytime that’s not this second. Paying it forward means helping someone else out, like someone had done for you. For example: It’s showing Sally how to safely handle a firearm, helping little Billy out with some gear to start his journey into the world of shooting, or just being a good American and EDUCATING someone about the 2nd Amendment. Repaying the kindness of others to someone else… There’s a million ways to pay forward the opportunities or materials afforded to you. It’s about capitalizing on those opportunities when you are in the position to do so.

If you know the circle of friends and associates I keep, you can understand how it often feels like I’m walking amongst giants. These giants have helped me, giving me resources, advice, and knowledge to make me a better shooter as well as a better person. How am I supposed to live up to their expectations of me? How am I supposed to pay back all that these folks have given to me? Carefully… or not? And therein lies the challenge. I don’t have a solid answer for you, but I can certainly try.

Throughout my short life, I have found that I dislike handouts. As my dad so eloquently put it, I have “a natural allergy to handouts”. Fun little side story that’s totally related, my disdain for handouts is how the JWSS T-Shirt brand got started. When I was just starting out in this world of shooting I started a Go-Fund-Me to help pay for registrations, ammo, and travel costs. The problem I always had was that I didn’t want to promote the GFM and thus be asking for money. So in response to my allergy, I designed some T-Shirts, because at least with a T-Shirt you receive something in return for your investment in me. I felt waaay more comfortable promoting for T-Shirt sales than my GFM. I no longer felt like I am taking without giving (especially because my T-Shirts are pretty freaking cool)

This article comes from a conversation I had with my dad about why I find it so difficult to ask for things. I feel like every time you take out of the jar of life, you must put something back in; this is one of the principals I have ingrained in my life. That life is a give and take. So when I ask for something I feel like I’m taking something out, and I fear that I will never be able to put in as much as I have taken out. Just like paying it forward… How do you give more than you take?

From what I’ve heard and what I’ve somewhat seen, taking out more than you put in is a problem in this industry. I’ve heard plenty of horror stories of “influencers” and “good guys” taking out of that jar, more and more, until the jar is empty. They take a little here and there until they’ve ruined not only their own reputation, but a good thing for plenty of other people too. I don’t want to be that guy. 

When the opportunity arises, just take a few minutes out of your day to pay forward what you have received, and I’ll try to do the same.

This industry, or better yet this country and world if you really want to get into it, would be so much better off if everybody saw how screwed up it is to take more than you give.

To be clear, I’m not talking about just freebies either, I’m talking about the “good guy discount”… taking without giving back.  I’ve had a lot of folks that I’ve met, offer me “Industry Guy” pricing on various things. Items that I both want and need. But I’m hesitant to take folks up on their offers.  I don’t want to be the guy that asks for too much, or ruins a good thing for others.

For example, I want to rebuild my training class rifle.  My competition rifle is a Midwest Industries and it’s perfect, but my tactical rifle is a Franken Gun that we put together when I first got into 3-Gun.  I have a long list of wants and needs for the rebuild, but how to go about taking people up on their offers is a challenge for me.

How do I say “Hey Bob, you said to contact you if I needed _______?” That just seems like a tenuous way to maintain a relationship, you know what I mean? Even if I was a “somebody” in this industry I’d still feel bad about that email or phone call because there’s no way of knowing whether or not they are getting the proper return on hooking me up. A proper return on their “investment” in me. That’s what it is too, an investment, and if someone hooks you up it’s your job to make good on that investment.

I’m no whizzbang shooting star and I’m not a leader of the social media world, I’m just Jase.  I’m just a dude who genuinely appreciates those who have helped me get where I am, the friendships and contacts I’ve made along the way.  Trying to navigate how/when/why to reach out to any of my contacts is a conundrum. It’s a challenge we must each figure out, not just in the Industry, but in life.

At the end of the day, I know I’ve got some phone calls and emails that need to happen.  I just hope there is enough balance in the give and take, that I can feel good about it and those who have offered me the hand of friendship and support.

In conclusion, Pay It Forward and don’t take more than you give. Do the right thing and try to put in just as much, if not more, as you have taken out. Always be thankful for what you have, and above all, don’t be the douchebag that empties the jar, no one likes you, because you’re a douchebag. The shooting/firearms/equipment industry isn’t a bottomless pit of freebies, or deeply discounted good guy pricing.  Those things all cost money, money that comes out of a company’s bottom line if it isn’t coming out of a consumers pocket. As patrons of the industry it is our place to support these companies, and emptying their jar isn’t the way to do it. We all need to find those moments in our lives when we can pay it forward and capitalize on our good fortune to help others… It’s part of being a good person!

Now in the meantime before the next article here’s a list of things to do:

  • Read a book- I’d recommend Violence of Mind by Varg Freeborn or Black Knight Squadron by John Chapman
  • Go to a class (especially medical because I’m sure plenty of you are overlooking that part of your training, check out Dark Angel Medical)
  • And if all of those other options fail you, just find a nice peaceful place outside to take a nap, cause I don’t care who you are, a nap sounds amazing!

Until my next moment of introspective brilliance,

-Jase

#AlphaholicsAnonymous

Peltor Sport Tactical 500 Ear Protection

By
Dr LateBloomer
-

This spring I had the opportunity to try out some new ear and eye protection – The Peltor Sport Tactical 500 and 3M SecureFit safety eyewear 400 series.

I took these products through their paces over the past month or two and am very pleased with what I found. I’ve been using a lower level set of Peltor ear protection since last year, and loved them, but THESE are a whole other set of awesome!

Power wise, the Peltor 500 electronic earmuffs take two AA batteries, which is a feature I love. AA batteries are always easy to find. No running around trying to find odd size batteries right before a match. I’ve got a bunch of half-used lithium AA batteries left from when I swapped them out of my game camera, so this is a good way to use them up and ought to keep me powered for years. These muffs also have a USB rechargeable battery pack option, if you are a “rechargeable” kind of person. I personally tend not to be proactive enough for that, but if you are – this jam’s for you.

Also in the power department, I like that there is a “battery low” warning that signals the wearer every ten minutes. That’s an advantage at a match. It’s nice to have some warning to replace the batteries before they just cut out on you mid-stage. There is also an auto shut-off feature with options of two hours or four hours. This is helpful for those of us *Ahem* who forget to turn off our ear protection before dropping them into the range bag.

The Peltor Tactical 500’s are also Bluetooth compatible. This will be extremely helpful for me when I am on-call while at the range. Pairing to my iPhone was a snap and there was an audible “Bluetooth Connected” voice confirmation.

I tested this feature out on the range recently while someone else was shooting. I listened to a variety of my favorite music. I’m a fan of a cappella and close vocal harmony, so my choices sometimes challenge cheaper speakers.

The audio quality from these Peltors was wonderful and did not interfere at all with the noise suppression from the gunfire. I also tried a phone call to myself and this worked very well too.

Additional features of these great electronic muffs include:

-Clear Voice Tracking Technology – which seeks voice tones out from background noise to help make conversation (and range commands) clearer.

-Adaptive Suppression Time – which sets suppression time to the measured energy in the gunshot.

-Dosimeter – allows for increased audio input volume in noisy environments.

-Limiter – sets audio input maximum sound pressure to a level of 82 decibels.

All of the above features can turned on or off via the setup menu.

The on/off button on these ear muffs is easy to find by feel, and gives an audible “Power on”/“Power off” voice confirmation. The volume controls are also easily palpable on the right ear cup while the muffs are being worn. I like that I don’t have to take them off in order to fumble with buttons. Having to take your muffs off to mess with them kind of defeats the purpose of ear protection, ya know? No worries with this design.

The control “buttons” are easy to feel.

The Peltor Tactical 500 cushioned ear cups provided a comfortable fit and excellent sound suppression when using my Aero Precision AR 308 (the loudest gun I own). I tested this not only from behind the trigger, but also from behind and to the side of another shooter using a muzzle brake. I felt the concussion from the brake in my chest, but it did not have the same effect on my hearing. The noise suppression was very effective. The Peltor Tactical 500 earmuffs  have a listed Noise Reduction Rating (NRR) of 26 decibels with proper fit and use.

The 3M SecureFit safety glasses are easily my favorite range glasses. Unlike virtually every other kind of eye protection I have worn over the years, these do NOT give me a headache. The temples are soft and flexible and do not dig into my scalp under pressure from my ear muffs. The nosepieces are soft and comfortable also.

The temples and earpieces are very soft and flexible.

Mine came in a 3-pack with lens colors of clear, sunglass “shaded”, and a smoky gray “indoor/outdoor”. This gives me options for days when the weather starts out cloudy but brightens up as the afternoon wears on.

These range glasses are listed as blocking 99% UV and are impact resistant with an ANSI Z87.1 rating. The sunglasses version is cool-enough looking for non-dorky street wear, too. This is a plus for travel. Why pack another set of sunglasses for the drive to the match when you can just wear your SecureFits on AND off the range?

In the same vein, I’ll be flying to Texas for a hunt in November, and I plan to use my Peltor 500’s as in-flight audiobook listeners. Why pack another set of earphones when these will be in my carry-on anyway? Multi-use for the win!

I heartily recommend both the Peltor Sport Tactical 500 Earmuffs and the 3M SecureFit 400 series safety eyewear if you are looking for high quality and functionality in your personal protective equipment. I think they are the bees knees.

Democrats Introduce Bill to Remove Commerce Protections in the Firearms Industry

By
Keith Finch
-

Because nothing says “this will curb violent acts” like making people who were not involved pay more of the price. Commerce protections were passed in 2005 with the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act. This prevented frivolous suits against firearms industry companies just because their product was involved in an incident.

You don’t get to file a lawsuit against Ford if you get hit by an F-150 unless something failed in the F-150 that caused the incident. You don’t get to sue Ford if you’re deliberately hit with an F-150. Someone straight murdering a bunch of people with a vehicle is not grounds for a lawsuit of the vehicle manufacturer on the grounds they “knew” their car could be used to kill.

Lawsuits are about negligence, if the company did something wrong and you got hurt. They do not cover the deliberate acts of people outside of that company’s control. Drunk driving and vehicular homicide are not the fault of Ford, Toyota, Budweiser, or the friggin’ Easter Bunny.

From NPR

House and Senate Democrats introduced legislation Tuesday they say will allow victims of gun violence to have their day in court.

With the shooter right? The direct perpetrator of the violence and accomplices. No?

Nope, the company who happened to make the gun, whether it was purchased legally, stolen, or what have you…

The Equal Access to Justice for Victims of Gun Violence Act aims to repeal federal protections blocking firearm and ammunition manufacturers, dealers and trade groups from most civil lawsuits when a firearm is used unlawfully or in a crime.

Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., one of the bill’s co-sponsors, said since PLCAA became law, state and federal courts have “dismissed numerous cases against the gun industry,” adding that other cases were likely not brought at all.

Schiff, surrounded by members of gun violence prevention groups including Moms Demand Action, Brady and March For Our Lives, said the purpose of the legislation was to “correct the error Congress made” nearly a decade and a half ago.

“Responsible actors in the gun industry don’t need this limitation on liability. And the irresponsible ones don’t deserve it,” Schiff told reporters at the announcement of the bill.

Because no one would ever bring a frivolous lawsuit against anyone else, right? Why don’t “responsible actors” need this limitation? All it will take is an activist judge or sympathetic jury. Some idiot like the prosecutor in Chicago who let Smollett walk from leading the Chicago PD on an entirely fabricated hate crime hoax, an imbecile of that caliber will absolutely let a suit stand just because Smith & Wesson or Glock built a gun.

Lawrence Keane of the NSSF echoed my earlier point.

“You would no more charge or blame Ford or General Motors for drunk driving accidents,” Keane said, adding that the current law is “working exactly how Congress intended it.”

But… that isn’t a good reason for everyone.

“All we’re doing through this proposal is giving victims of gun violence their day in court,” said Sen. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., a co-sponsor of the Senate version of the bill. “Every other industry has to pay punitive damages if it intentionally and purposefully violates [a] standard of care” toward the community.

What standard of care are you alleging the firearm industry is violating? *cough* guns existing *cough cough*

“That will provide a powerful incentive as it has done in tobacco, in automobiles, in pharmaceutical drugs, for safer products,” Blumenthal added.

“Safer Product” is the deceptive misnomer they want to grind as Democrats remove commerce protections for the firearm industry. The tactic is obvious, they will argue that guns themselves are not safe at all. They will then, as done in California, impose impossible standards and idiotic technology additives to firearms that objectively do nothing but cannot be met by gun makers. Defacto the product becomes illegal because it is ‘unsafe.’

This won’t be a case where a firearm injured someone by malfunction or a dealer illegally transferred a gun they should not have. Those scenarios are already fully criminally and civilly liable. There is no protection for a faulty product or breaking the law.

What Democrats are alleging here is that somehow there is some extra magical protection. ‘Something’ exists for firearms makers that the manufacturers of other potentially dangerous products like farm equipment, vehicles, or power tools don’t have. They do not have any such ‘get out of liability free’ card.

If I pickup a drill and use it per directions and the gears bind, injuring me, I can sue the manufacturer. Same thing with a firearm. If the gun grenades in my hand I can go after them if that was their fault. If I get my knee drilled by a mafia thug looking to collect money I don’t get to sue Makita. If I get my knee drilled by a 9mm from a Smith & Wesson from the same mafia thug it isn’t Smith & Wesson’s fault. Mafia thug and the Mafia who employs him, yes they’re at fault. If Smith & Wesson had run a series of ads saying that using their product line to solve road rage incidents or collect money was the intended use, that could absolutely make them at liable.

I’ve seen some damn goofy advertising in this space…

Via TFB

But illegal violence has not been on that list of marketing topics.

The Equal Access to Justice for Victims of Gun Violence Act is a shameless bloody shirt waving attack on 2nd Amendment rights disguised with a pretty title. SAFE Act 2.0? This isn’t about justice. Justice is perpetrators convicted and imprisoned. Justice would be empowering people with the means for their own protection.

A political capital grab for Democrats? Yep, this that certainly is.

Review: “Crime Signals: How to Spot a Criminal Before You Become a Victim” by David Givens

By
DRGO
-
(from armedcitizensnetwork.org)

[Ed: This book review is reposted with permission from the Armed Citizens’ Legal Defense Network‘s June 2019 Journal. It is written by Gila Hayes, ACLDN’s Operations Manager and Journal Editor. Crime Signals is out of print, but copies are readily available , e.g., on Amazon.]

“Crimes rarely go unannounced, without prior notice, clues, or warnings,” David Givens, an anthropologist and specialist in nonverbal communication, writes in Crime Signals. “Murderers, sexual predators, terrorists, and thieves all emit telling cues before their misdeeds.” These include poor eye contact called “gaze avoidance” and other cues. With terrorism and crime on the rise, citizens are warned to remain alert to suspicious behavior, but what they should notice instead “is really anomalous behavior,” he explains.

Anomalies might include someone with an obviously weighted-down backpack inside an upscale shopping center, a car with lots of able-bodied passengers pulling in to a handicapped parking space near a store entrance, customers all standing motionless inside a convenience store, a person in running clothes smoking a cigarette beside a parked van and more. All of these anomalies suggest that the person is acting out a pretense to obscure what is really planned. Rarely is the acting perfect.

“What,” Givens introduces, “do their bodies say when they lie?” He details how “hands, shoulders, lips, and eyes” will tell the truth, despite words to the contrary. Later chapters detail how skilled liars manipulate eye contact, illustrating that presence or absence of one “sign” alone isn’t proof positive. Aggressively pointing index fingers or complete absence of gestures, vehement assertions of innocence, aggressive displays of anger or a flat, unemotional, disconnected demeanor can all support a conclusion of untruthfulness.

Conversely, truth telling is often accompanied by “raising the eyebrows, lifting the toes while seated, and rising up on the toes while standing—to add emphasis at the end of their sentences,” he quotes FBI profiler Joe Navarro. Still, the study of faces, as illustrated by wife-killer Scott Peterson’s emotionless face or a rage-filled abusive spouse as seen at other murder trials, alone is not enough. Predicting who will or identifying who has killed relies on a confluence of anomalies.

Just as we’re taught to watch the hands to detect danger, Givens notes that, “Hands are such incredibly gifted communicators that they always bear watching, especially in matters of truth or falsehood.” Likewise, touching one’s lips with hands or objects such as a pencil or pen can signal lying. Infamous news images of documented lies illustrate shoulder shrugs, palms-up gestures called “hand shrugs,” averted gazes and thin, tight-lipped expressions.

Givens notes that gaze behavior is culturally-dictated and can be faked by one skilled and experienced in deception. Likewise, clever con men learn to charm and convince through “body language, facial expressions, and posturing.” Touch, dramatic or flamboyant gestures, conspicuous charm, and repetitious rituals can all serve to beguile victims. Watch and understand what people do, as that’s more truthful than what people say, he later stresses.

Intermittent explosive disorder, attacks to derail a perceived trap and territorial aggression are discussed as triggers that “may quickly ignite into violence.” Givens explains that the study of proxemics, popularized by Edward Hall in The Silent Language was particularly insightful, since, as Givens notes a bit later, because silence when talking is ordinary is “one of the most commonly recognized danger signs.”

Givens discusses facial expressions–both intentional and unintentional–beginning with eyes that are narrowed or extraordinarily wide (which he dubs flashbulb eyes and names a “visceral sign of emotion”), blinking, and the constriction or enlargement of the eyes’ pupils as dictated by the sympathetic nervous system, drawing examples from news photos of prominent criminals like Charles Manson.

He details “assault warnings afforded by facial sweating, skin color, pulsing arteries, biting movements, flashbulb eyes, and rapid blinking, visible and audible changes…in the way we breathe.”

Nonverbal cues given off by sexual predators are discussed at length, including watching and testing for submissive victims, forward through additional stages into physical abuse. Lists of warning signs are useful not only to avoid victimization but also for family members and friends who wonder if a loved one is falling victim to a predator.

Visual indicators given off by terrorists is the subject of an interesting chapter in which Givens addresses use of color and symbols, and physical behavior that has tipped off immigration officials, airline staff, and others who have interdicted terrorists. “Anxiety is a telltale sign that something is wrong. Eyes widen, fingers fidget, voices tremble, foreheads glisten with sweat,” he details. While one anomaly alone might not set off internal warning sirens, several in tandem certainly should.

An engaging aspect of Crime Signals is the author’s use of notorious evil-doers as examples to help readers envision the gestures and expressions that reveal a truth obscured by words. He talks about analyzing the motions and content of a TV network interview with Saddam Hussein, as one example that will be remembered by many. The OJ Simpson trial, the trial of Martha Stewart, Bill Clinton and priests convicted of sexual molestation illustrate other points.

Gang clothing, hair styles, tattoos and jewelry, gestures, swaggering gait and even dances all communicate messages the watcher ignores at his own peril but each comes with subtle distinctions to separate the genuine from the imitation. “Recognizing how the body language of gang members differs from wannabes who mimic their actions is a good way to protect yourself from harm,” he writes. His discussion of criminal gangs explains how group unity is communicated through appearance and gesture.

Givens then draws interesting comparisons between gang leaders and corrupt corporate moguls. One leading trait is bullying. “Psychologists identify bullying as one of the most stable of all human behaviors. It may begin in childhood and continue as an adult coping style. 

‘Bullies turn into antisocial adults,’ Hara Marano wrote in Psychology Today, ‘and are far more likely than nonaggressive kids to commit crimes, batter their wives, abuse their children—and produce another generation of bullies,’” Givens quotes.

He details one disgraced executive who had a “hair-trigger temper, publicly belittled people in meetings, and launched aggressive tirades at critics and colleagues alike.” While some use “confrontational body language and strident tones of voice,” others use gifts with strings attached to exert control. “Anthropologists today agree that when accepted, gifts incur strong obligations. Accepting a gift carries an implicit obligation to reciprocate in kind,” he writes.

Body language of thieves is dissected. The strategy of acting like people with good reason to be in a location lets thieves work in plain sight, but a robber working the streets relies on catching you unawares or lulling you into unmerited trust, he writes. Detecting an intended home invasion uses unintentional cues an innocent-looking decoy gives away that their clothing and physical features conceal: “If their body language seems abnormally tense or anxious, it’s because they’ve arrived on your porch fully primed for action. You will see adrenaline-charged demeanor, men standing taller, moving faster, showing tense hand gestures. That they lean forward and crowd your doorway telegraphs eagerness to come in. They poise to spring forward should you barely crack open the door,” he writes.

Givens theorizes that crime is basically theft, so closes his book synopsizing, “Crime—whether violent, conniving, or petty—is almost never completely unpredictable. Nonverbal signs betray criminals throughout their misdeeds. As we’ve seen, crime signals are best decoded prior to unlawful acts.” Crime Signals was entertaining reading that also contained useful lessons for the reader who wishes to be more alert to impending danger. I enjoyed it.

.

.

Robert B Young, MD

— DRGO Editor Robert B. Young, MD is a psychiatrist practicing in Pittsford, NY, an associate clinical professor at the University of Rochester School of Medicine, and a Distinguished Life Fellow of the American Psychiatric Association.

All DRGO articles by Robert B. Young, MD

XD-S, A FIST FULL OF HARDBALL

By
The Armory Life
-

Ever since I was a kid, I’ve been fascinated with small pistols. Whether it was a .45 caliber cap and ball “Philadelphia Derringer,” a two-shot cartridge firing over/under Remington .41 caliber rimfire, or a semi auto AMT Backup in .45ACP. I’ve always thought compact guns, whether pistol or rifle, were practical firearms to own. As long as you stay within the practical and realistic expectations placed on the chosen firearm, you are good to go.

I’ve owned an AMT Backup .45 for about 20 years. I owned a Star Firestar in 9mm for years before that, and I still have a Keltec PF-9, 9mm. These days my Springfield Armory XD-S 45 (the original) is my go to. I have found my XD-S 45 to be accurate, very compact, and easy to control.

Springfield Armory Inc. recently sent me a “Mod.2” XD-S 45 to try out and I must say, all the improvements that were made were favorable. Let’s discuss some of those improvements.

The Grip

The first and most visibly noticeable modification / improvement is the grip texturing. Although I have no problem with the texture of the original XD-S I already own, I like the smoother and more refined Mod.2 grip texture better than the original. Along with the grip texture, is the extended beavertail above the web of the firing hand which, incidentally, places your grip higher in relation to the bore’s axis, and thus improves control of the pistol.

The Sights

The XD-S Mod.2 is now available with a “Pro-Glo” tritium front sight from Ameriglo. Although I like the fiber optic on my original XD-S, a tritium front sight is a great option to have on a factory pistol. Couple this with the “One-handed, Rackable” steel rear sight (a squared off shelf meant to catch on a belt or other hard edged surface), it is a great improvement over the original. 

Shooting Impressions

I will say that, for me, the Mod.2 shot and performed no better than my original XD-S (which does really well)…

Click here to read the rest with our friends at The Armory Life

Barnett Predator Flash Sale!

By
Keith Finch
-

Yep, that simple. Barnett has their flagship crossbow discounted to $799.99. The Barnett Predator Flash Sale is live now.

The Predator boasts a 430 feet per second bolt velocity with 156 foot pounds of kinetic energy. With archery seasons across the nation open or opening to crossbow use this is a great opportunity to slide into the market for well under normal retail.

I’m not the one to speak on this bolt launcher, mine isn’t here yet, so here’s what Barnett is saying.

It’s not just a predator, it’s THE Predator® – the very top of the food chain. For hunters who want the biggest hits possible, the Predator harnesses 430 feet per second backed by 156 foot-pounds of kinetic energy. We complemented that power with a Carbonlite™ riser that removes extra weight and adds balance. The unique RUCS System unfolds for further balance, pushing the back of the bow up while gravity weighs the front down.

This behemoth bow comes packaged with Barnett’s most advanced scope, featuring seven layers of multi-coated polarized lenses. It also includes three arrows, a side-mount quiver, rope cocking device and lube wax. If all these add-ons aren’t enough, four picatinny rails make sure you can outfit the Predator with everything else imaginable.

The Frictionless Release Technology™ creates a free-floating roller between the sear and the trigger – offering a smoother, lighter trigger unlike anything else on the market. Nock sensors and anti-dry fire give you peace of mind for double the safety, and a three-pound, zero-creep release gives you confidence to make the shot. Once you go TriggerTech, you’ll never go back.

Sale is right here guys!

Comrade Thumb: Mike takes on the AKM

By
Keith Finch
-

The AKM is the most widely produced assault rifle in the world. Often mislabeled as its predecessor, the AK 47, the Soviet designed 7.62x39mm rifle armed most of the Union (the main exception was the Czechoslovakian designed VZ 58). Mike “GarandThumb”, one of our favorite gun guys in plaid, gives a fantastic overview of this well aged rifle.

The AKM, like the AR will be a legacy weapon that lasts a century or more. It’s obsolescent phase will be a long one, drawn out by the fact the core rifle works so well. My Galil ACE is a direct descendent with a slew of ergonomic improvements around a largely unchanged internal. The X95 and PWS ARs uses the long stroke piston that makes up the heart of the system.

AK vs M16A1 image via Wikipedia
Vietnam War
Laotian Civil War
Portuguese Colonial War
Rhodesian Bush War
Cambodian Civil War
Nigerian Civil War[1]
The Troubles
Angolan Civil War[2]
Yom Kippur War[3]
Lebanese Civil War[4]
Ethiopian Civil War[5]
Cambodian–Vietnamese War
Chadian–Libyan conflict
Sino-Vietnamese War
Soviet–Afghan War[6]
Nicaraguan Revolution
Iran–Iraq War[7]
United States invasion of Grenada[8]
Kurdish–Turkish conflict
LRA insurgency
First Liberian Civil War
Persian Gulf War
Rwandan Civil War[9]
Somali Civil War[10]
Georgian Civil War[11]
Algerian Civil War
Yugoslav Wars
First Chechen War
Second Chechen War
Second Liberian Civil War
War in Afghanistan (2001–present)
Ivorian Civil Wars
Iraq War
War in Darfur[12]
Mexican Drug War
Russo-Georgian War
Boko Haram insurgency
Libyan Civil War
Syrian Civil War
Central African Republic Civil War (2012–present)[13]
War in Donbass
Iraqi Civil War (2014–2017)
Yemeni Civil War (2015–present)

A long list of conflicts from the 60’s until today have the AKM at its heart. The AK has history. It’s legacy is effectiveness. It is often on every side in a conflict, so many exist. List via Wikipedia

It’s quite the statement of success for a device. It’s wielders are not always benevolent, but such is true of any technology that can project power.

The AKM

Florida Arms First Responders

By
Keith Finch
-

In response to deliberate attacks on paramedics, Florida Governor Ron DeSantis has signed into law a bill that will allow first responders to be armed.

TALLAHASSEE, Fla. — A new law in Florida will allow paramedics to carry firearms when responding to shootings, drug raids and other high-risk situations.

Gov. Ron DeSantis signed the measure Friday, June 7. It says paramedics don’t have to retreat and are justified in using force to defend themselves or others bodily harm.

The law takes effect July 1.

It identifies other such instances as dealing with an armed suicidal person and hostage situations.

Medical professionals carrying firearms are required to complete annual firearm safety training and tactical training, the measure says. – Fox 6

It’s not a unique circumstance. Paramedics and Firefighters are often at risk from persons not in their right mind.

Kansas and Ohio already have these laws on the books, allowing emergency personnel to defend themselves in the event someone makes an already dangerous situation far more so. Tennessee, Mississippi, and Virginia are considering the measures.

An ambush against first responders is an act of cowardice but it does guarantee headlines. Attacking the emergency personnel who are not there to deal with a violent threat, but a medical or environmental one, falls into the same train of thought as attacking an unarmed school.

I hope to see more states take these steps and allow FR’s to protect themselves as they are a proven target.

Concealed carry with several parameters makes sense. Having an accessible secure weapon on the rig to counter an attack. Secure so that a patient cannot access it, only the certified crew. This isn’t a situation where “just let them carry” is an easy fix, patient and FR crew safety must be accounted for on weapon access. Done properly this is a very viable tool.

SCOTUS Turns Down Suppressor Challenge

By
Keith Finch
-

Yesterday the Supreme Court of The United States (SCOTUS) rejected a challenge from Jeremy Kettler and Shane Cox that could have removed suppressors/silencers from the National Firearms Act.

A little background. In 2013 Kansas passed a law that exempted any item built in the state and that remained in the state from Federal firearms laws… allegedly. So in theory, under that law, a Kansas resident could build otherwise NFA controlled items in compliance with state law as long as the items were only transferred within the state.

So Cox made silencers.

After Kettler purchased a silencer from Cox and put it on Facebook the ATF got involved. Both Kettler and Cox were arrested, charged and convicted of violating the NFA, despite the Kansas law. Cox thought he could make them under the Kansas law and Kettler thought he could purchase them. The ATF disagreed.

Kettler and Cox appealed but…

But the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled the Second Amendment does not protect silencers, as they are not “bearable arms.” A gun suppressor, the Denver-based appeals court said, is a “firearm accessory; it’s not a weapon in itself.”

Umm.. that’s bullshit there 10th Circuit.

Silencers are Title II weapons under the National Firearms Act.

They are serialized and tracked in the NFA registry. They go on a 4473 form like any other firearm transfer. Legally, in all facets, they are weapons. They are more restricted than the average firearm. “Accessories” aren’t subject to any of those transfer requirements. Grips, stocks, magazines, triggers, and just about anything else you can accessorize a firearm with are not legally firearms and do not go through that process. But silencers do. So silencers are “accessories” when it is legally convenient for them to be and NFA firearms when it is legally convenient for them to be.. got it.

I’m not arguing what Kettler and Cox did didn’t violate the NFA. It did. I do agree the NFA is an egregious breach of the 2nd Amendment.

And the logic applied by the 10th Circuit is a steaming pile. No other “accessory” is handled like a silencer, not one.

There has been speculation that the President’s recent comments on a possible silencer ban influenced this ruling. While possible I don’t know if that was it. Combined with Virginia Beach shooting the optics would certainly look horrific, deregulating an item used in an attack like that would earn the full measure of undeserved ire. Announcing the NFA was open to new machine guns would have been just as impossible right after Las Vegas…

This sucks. That’s all there is to it. I think Kettler and Cox got hosed. I think the 10th Circuit used bullshit reasoning. And because of Virginia Beach and the President’s comments I think Kettler and Cox are staying hosed…

Shotgun Mini Shells – A Realistic Look

By
Travis Pike
-

In 2017 I saw the first Mossberg Shockwave at SHOT show. I got some time behind the gun and fell in love. It’s a fun gun. However, more importantly at SHOT they were loading it full of mini shells. This combined with the Opsol Mini Clip gave us a 12 gauge shotgun with a 14-inch barrel that could hold 9 rounds and cycle perfectly. These mini shells were fascinating to me and since then I’ve purchased and played with buckshot, slugs, and birdshot in the mini shell variety.

The two main producers of mini shells are Aguila and Federal. Federal entered the mini shell game earlier this year and was polite enough to send me both the bird shot and slug varieties of ammunition. Unfortunately, the buckshot wasn’t ready just yet. I also have some Aguila slugs and buckshot

I’ve shot a lot of this ammo and I feel I can give you an accurate assessment of mini shells.

Shotgun Compatibility

You can go ahead assume semi-autos are off the table, as are any mag-fed shotguns. However, what about pump shotguns? Will they work? Well…. Sometimes.

Any pump gun can run mini shells, however, they may not run reliably. Reportedly they work perfectly in the Kel-Tec KSG, and with the Opsol Mini Clip they run 100% in Mossberg 500 series shotguns. However, in most guns, they tend to hang up. They can flip, and slide, and make it impossible to cycle reliably. The Opsol works with the Mossberg because of the skeletonized shell lifter.

The Opsol In Action

I’ve had them run in Winchesters and Remington, but you have to run the pump very hard and very fast. Even then it’s still spotty as to whether they will work or not.

Single and double barrel shotguns eat these things up with zero issues. At the end of the day a Mossberg 500 series with the Opsol Mini Clip, or a break barrel gun are what I’d suggest. The Mossberg Shockwave can be a challenge to shoot, but with these shells, it’s light recoiling, and easy to control.

Home Defense and Mini Shells?

I have to say no when it comes to any kind of home defense or duty use. Yes, in a pump gun with a magazine tube it will increase your capacity a lot. However, you are giving up the main feature of a shotgun, that devastating single shot power.

The Opsol makes it Run in Mossbergs

Of course these are still lethal, don’t mistake. The slugs are hitting as hard as a 44 magnum. That’s a lot of force for sure, but a regular 2 3/4″ shotgun shell is going to hit even harder. Plus, in a home defense scenario buckshot is often preferred. The spread of shot as it strikes the body making multiple wound channels simultaneously, a regular shell has more shot at a faster velocity.

Plus, the reliability aspect is always present. Federal advertises these are sporting rounds for the range, not as defensive loads.

Survival Preparation

Here is a serious task these shells can excel at. Shotgun ammo is big and heavy, but shotguns are incredibly common and very versatile. This ammo will allow you to carry more shotgun ammo. At close ranges, these are great hunting rounds. Especially when we look at the slugs.

Six Rounds in a gun that normally fits three

The birdshot loads are more than capable of taking small game at close range too. Even if it’s less than half the size of a standard shell it won’t have issues taking small game and birds.

In a pinch, these could be a self-defense choice if your main rifle is down.

Training

Here is another excellent task for these shells. If you only own a 12 gauge shotgun and want to teach new shooters mini shells are excellent. These shells will allow you to teach new shooters the basics of a shotgun without the fearsome recoil. They can learn how to load, shoot, and use shotguns without nearly the risk of injury or scaring themselves.

Hunting

Outside of a survival situation, I would still take 2 3/4 or 3-inch shells for hunting deer and hogs. It is more powerful and more humane to use the proper ammo. You’ll get better range, better penetration, and loads designed for hunting. In a survival situation, things are a little different.

Bird, Buck, and Slugs are Available

Mini Shells For Fun?

Here is where these shells really shine. When paired with a Mossberg Shockwave these shells are an absolute blast. They make it easy to handle, and fun to shoot without the control challenge standard shells have.

Ringing steel at 50 yards with the slug mini shells is pretty damn fun. It gives you a real sense of pride and accomplishment. If you have the ability to I also suggest trying to hit some clays with the mini shell birdshot.

Ultimately Mini shells are like any other shotgun load out there. They have their place and are a tool to put in the box. The shotgun is a versatile weapon and these provide one more option for shotgunners. Be it for prepping, for fun, or for small game hunting.

Why Does the Second Amendment Refer to “The People”?

By
DRGO
-
(from sigsauer.com)

Madison’s draft of the Second Amendment declares that “the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed”.  He could have left out “of the People” without loss of meaning if he intended to guarantee that natural right to all.  Alternatively, he could have defined the class of protected persons with some other term.  For example, the Third Amendment pertains to “the Owner”.  The Fifth Amendment reads “No person . . . “ The Sixth Amendment refers to “the accused”.  

Consistency in constitutional interpretation precludes assuming any word to be happenstance. And, of course, the ratifying generation accepted this limitation of right to “the People”.  Regardless of whatever might have been on anyone’s mind in the 18th century, the Second Amendment was written and ratified with this constraint which we may not sweep under the rug.

Today, the debate concerning “the People” is focused on whether the right was intended to be limited to the militia.   Instead, I wonder who Madison and the founding generation understood would be excluded from the class “the People”.  (On occasion, the militia included a few individuals who would not have been construed to be full-fledged members of the political community.)

A 16th century perspective would imply that native Americans would be excluded from the class “the People”.  However, this hypothesis is unpersuasive in that, by the 18th Century, it was clear that a policy of “no guns for Indians” was unnecessary and impractical.  Hostile Indians had been driven far from territories well populated by colonists.  Belligerent Indians on the frontier were being supplied with arms by French and other traders beyond the control of the English colonies.  A 19th century perspective would imply that slaves and free blacks might  be excluded from “the People”.  While obviously true, it’s difficult to imagine that this consideration was high in the founders’ minds.  Slaves were under the absolute control of their masters. Few Blacks were free and these were not deemed any threat in the 1780’s.  

What was fresh in the minds of the founding generation was the Revolutionary War.  Only 1/3 of the population were thought to have favored independence.  Another 1/3 were indifferent.  The remaining 1/3 were Loyalists and most of them were still around in the 1780’s.  Revolutionaries disarmed Loyalists without the slightest compunction.  

The hypothesis in this essay is that the right to arms was reserved to “the People” to preserve the majority’s power to disarm any who might not be loyal to the Constitution. This seems plausible for a federal government intent upon preserving and defending the Constitution.  It seems incongruous to believe that the founding generation intended to allow an ambitious government to undermine the Constitution by disarming the People who ordained and established that document.

Today, as in the early 20th Century, there is a struggle for power between factions we may call “Radicals” and “Reactionaries” on opposite sides of the political spectrum. Control over our government shifts back and forth, or so it seems to partisans in the struggle.  What is objective fact and what is perception is difficult to discern in politics.  But it is clear that perception drives sentiment.

According to the Marbury v. Madison doctrine of Constitutional interpretation, the advocate able to persuade a majority of a Court’s justices prevails in the debate.  Imagine if Reactionaries captured a majority of seats on the Supreme Court, along with both houses of Congress and the White House.  The question might arise as to the Constitutionality of a law disarming seditious inhabitants of the United States.  Judges might be authorized to ask suspects: “Are you now, or ever been, a member of any Radical organization?”  And, thereupon, issue an Extreme Risk Confiscation Order stripping any such suspect of his arms.

Such was the problem faced by abolitionists and Republicans before and after the Civil War.  Supporters of Southern interests sought to outlaw concealed carry, or any carry for that matter, in part to prevent free blacks and political opponents from being able to defend themselves against extra-legal violence.  As Karl Marx wisely implored his readers, “the workers must be armed and organized. The whole proletariat must be armed at once with muskets, rifles, cannon and ammunition, and the revival of the old-style citizens’ militia, directed against the workers, must be opposed.” Likewise, Chairman Mao declared: “Political power emerges from the barrel of a gun.”  

To return to contemporaneous usage, Progressives, as well as Communists and Democratic Socialists, see their political-economic visions as the inevitable course of history.  Nevertheless, the dialectical ebb and flow of political power causes the “inevitable” to be reversed at times.  Those committed to gun control advocacy should bear in mind that it is not inevitable that they will always be in control.  

When Conservatives hold power, the interpretation of “the People” in the Second Amendment could shift the balance of power against Progressive objectives.  Once accomplished, history shows that such change is not easily reversed.  

The only policy that would be intrinsically resistant to power struggles among factions seeking to rule over an unarmed majority would be universal arms ownership, as is mostly the practice in America, Switzerland and Israel. In reverse order, Israel has near universal conscription of both men and women.  While off-duty, those in service often carry their arms.  After completing service, they are often licensed to carry government-owned arms.  Switzerland has universal male conscription with a long period of reserve status.  After military service is completed, veterans are permitted to keep their rifles.  And, of course, in America we take the “right to keep and bear arms” as a badge of citizenship.  Some judicial or quasi-judicial act is prerequisite to losing this right.

There is an important distinction between rights and privileges.  A right is held generally by members of a class, e.g., citizens inhabiting a state enjoy the right to vote.  A privilege is granted to specific individuals.

The line between a right and a privilege is often obscure.  A privilege is often identifiable by the prerequisite of a license in the form of a certificate. Even so, the right to vote has traditionally been evidenced by a voter registration card.  We speak of the privilege of operating a motor vehicle on public roads as evidenced by a driver’s license.  

We can say with a high degree of confidence that holding a “right”, like the Second Amendment assures, precludes most tests or qualifications prerequisite to lawfully keeping and bearing arms.  Constitutionally, one could be obliged to evidence membership in the class “the People” (however that broad term is defined). For example, one could be obliged to evidence having reached the age of majority, whether that might be defined as 16, 18 or 21. But on meeting the definition, one should enjoy the “the right” of “the People” without additional tests.  

A citizen may be “dis-abled” of a right by law upon conviction of certain crimes or if adjudicated incompetent.  Any such act of government must be held to strict standards of legal due process.  We would not find it acceptable to strip an adult citizen of either the right to vote or to keep and bear arms based on a conviction for jay-walking or having an IQ below 123.  We must be concerned with the propensity of government to excessively limit the standards for exercising the rights of citizenship.

People with felony convictions account for 8% of the population, that is, one-twelfth of “the People” can be denied their rights to vote or keep arms on this criterion of dis-ablement.  That figure is small enough, and for a generally accepted reason, not to be alarming.  However, 33% of Black males are felons.  What if those convicted of  misdemeanors subject to sentences of 2 or more years in jail and domestic violence crimes were added to that figure?  The fraction of dis-abled members of this minority group might exceed 40%.

When should we begin to wonder whether this minority constituency would become unfairly deprived of their sovereign rights? As Thomas Jefferson put it: “[W]henever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.”

The foregoing may illuminate some of the implications of the Second Amendment’s reference to “the People”.  It should be out of the question for rights, such as to keep and bear arms, to be limited to arbitrary sub-classes such as those formally enrolled in state militias, sworn police officers, those privately employed in protecting the wealthy, or those who are left-handed.

The Supreme Court held in Heller v. D.C. that “the enshrinement of constitutional rights necessarily takes certain policy choices off the table.” Thus, the only truly politically correct approach to Second Amendment rights is near universal, even-handed, natural qualification with very limited exceptions. That requires, essentially, a “shall-issue” approach to the right of all qualified Americans to keep and bear arms.  

.

.

—‘MarkPA’  is trained in economics, a life-long gun owner, NRA Instructor and Massad Ayoob graduate. He is inspired by our inalienable rights to “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness” and holds that having the means to defend oneself and one’s community is vital to securing them.

All DRGO articles by ‘MarkPA’  

HOG HUNTING WITH THE XD-M

By
The Armory Life
-

Pigs have become invasive throughout much of the United States, damaging farm land and running off native wildlife that many land owners would rather not see leave. What has been one man’s problem has conversely become another man’s pursuit. The sport of hunting pigs is a burgeoning one with ever more hunters looking to fill tags and their freezers.

For folks from much of the Midwest like myself, we thankfully have not been overrun by pigs, but still would like the thrill of that type of hunt, and honestly, who doesn’t love bacon? So I booked a hunt with the good folks from Big Oak Elk Ranch in West Union, Iowa so I could bring home the bacon, too!

Gear Load-Out

To do a pig hunt where you are on the confines of a game farm, yet dealing with a wild animal, I did not want to bring the entire kitchen sink with me on my hunt. I decided to challenge myself by using a handgun for the hunt. Beyond that, three decisions for gear had to be made: firearm, holster and ammunition.

Firearm: Springfield Armory XD-M 5.25″ Competition Series Model 10mm

Holster: Galco Silhouette High Ride Belt Holster

Ammunition: Federal Premium 10mm Auto 180 Grain Trophy Bonded Bear Claw

I chose the Springfield Armory XD-M Competition 10mm because of its sighting radius, match barrel, magazine capacity, and stopping power. “Which is the best handgun pig cartridge?” could be argued until the cows come home, but there is no denying the strength of the 10mm Auto. The Galco holster was something well-worn that I already owned, and the Federal ammo was a no-brainer for its 650 ft-lbs of energy.

Preparation for the Hunt

The recoil of a 10mm is likely more than most of us who constantly shoot 9mm or .22 LR are used to, myself included. However, it is something very manageable in the Springfield Armory XD-M Competition 10mm. I shot roughly 50 rounds of American Eagle FMJ to refamiliarize myself with the recoil and to sight-in my XD-M out to 20 yards. I made this a slow, concerted exercise and felt very confident leading into the hunt.

Read the whole hunt with our friends over at The Armory Life

“Anybody can buy any weapon … without much, if any, regulation,” including “machine guns.”

By
Keith Finch
-
Image via Foundation for Economic Education

-President Barack Obama, 30th May 2019

Mr. President, that is news to me.

Allow me to be the first to forward your comments to the Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco Firearms & Explosives and they should be able to release my pending tax stamp and refund me my $200.00 because those regulations do not exist. I’m certain that conversation will go splendidly. I really do want my X95.

I can also go off and find a full auto trigger system for several of my rifles and handguns, right? One of those Wish switches should do the trick for a Glock. There are no legal repercussions because there are no regulations. I can buy whatever I want!

Right? ATF? Why am I going away in handcuffs!?

Reality

While our former President may feel like our system is fast and loose the reality is a vastly different matter. As a current example, I’ve been chasing a rifle that I need delivered through FedEx for 3 days now because it must be delivered to a Federal Firearm Licensee… all because of regulation.

1. Anybody can buy a weapon.

Except…

  • Under 18 years old for any firearm
  • Under 21 years old for a handgun from a licensed dealer
  • Felon. Any felony, no tie to violence required. Alabama: residents commit unlawful bear exploitation if they purchase, possess, or train a bear for the purpose of bear wrestling. It’s a Class B felony, punishable by a fine, confiscation of the bear, and restitution to a humane society for animals. In Montana, derailing a train or stopping it with sheep also carries this prohibition.
  • Use Marijuana.. at all for any reason.
  • Under any Personal Protective Order
  • Dishonorably Discharged from the Armed Forces
  • Conviction for Domestic Violence, Misdemeanor

These are just the Federal restrictions. States may impose further restrictions such as possession of a license in order to purchase or a Firearm Owners Identification Card or FOID.

So no, not “anybody can buy” a weapon legally.

2. Any weapon

Nope.

Starting with only the two different age requirements between handguns and rifles, this is not accurate. Add to that a myriad of state restrictions and variations on things like magazines, “assault weapons”, and specific item/device or firearm type bans and “any weapon” vanishes quickly into a quagmire of legal problems.

The National Firearms Act alone with its Title I and Title II classifications on firearms and devices puts even nearly identical guns into vastly different legal boxes.

Buying a Title II Firearm, which I’m in the middle of. Here’s the “regulation free” process thus far to “buy any weapon”.

  • IWI X95 Short Barrel Rifle, factory model. (Characteristics are the same as just about every 5.56x45mm rifle or pistol)
  • Start – Early December 2018
  • IWI must submit the serial number # to the ATF as being manufactured into a Short Barreled Rifle. ATF Form 1
  • ATF must approve and send back that the serial number and characteristics are recorded in the NFA registry. ATF Form 1 approval.
  • IWI must ship the rifle to my NFA item approved dealer, a certification beyond a standard Federal Firearms License known as an Special Occupational Tax (SOT).
  • IWI applies to ship the firearm with the ATF going from themselves to the NFA approved dealer. ATF Form 3.
  • The ATF approves the transfer and the serial number is moved from IWI to my SOT holding FFL. ATF Form 3 approval.
  • FFL completes a minor business restructure, changes official name. Must get an entirely new FFL and SOT (cannot be applied for simultaneously to the best of my knowledge, FFL must be complete first to issue a number to tie the SOT into)
  • FFL must have the ATF transfer all his current NFA inventory back to himself under the new official business name, FFL license number, and SOT. Many ATF Form 3’s…
  • ATF approves all the items to still be in the possession of the FFL under the new license numbers. ATF Form 3 Approvals.
  • Keep in mind any typo on any one of these forms results in the process, at best, pausing to get the information entirely accurate. A variance as minor as typing 13″ or 13in into the length column of the barrel length descriptor when the ATF Form 1 only says 13 can result in the entire process halting and a new form being required.
  • Get two passport photos and two full FBI fingerprint cards done up (the ATF already has me on file. I own another NFA applicable rifle, also in the DoD and DoJ databases for employment. None of that matters)
  • Submit an ATF Form 4 costing a $200 tax and in triplicate to transfer the rifle serial number to me as owner. April 2019. Average approval time from this point is about 320 days, with the lowest at 67 days out of 2,949 records.

Likely 18 months of regulation free regulations right there for a rifle with the same basic capabilities as a “Firearm”, a Title I classification, that I built. The parts are just in slightly different spots.

“Firearm” wait time: When I finish it.

3. Machine Guns

Ha! Haha! Hahahaha!

The National Firearms Act makes buying a machine gun the same process I am currently going through with my X95. The Firearm Owners Protection Act signed May 19th, 1986 closed the sale of new production machine guns to the public. Anything made after May 19th, 1986 and not on the NFA registry as a transferable firearm cannot be sold. Period.

And that, ladies and gentlemen, is the surface of the United States of America’s “regulation free” firearms market. We’re basically Bakaara over there in Mogadishu.

The ARC by PHLster

By
Keith Finch
-

The team over at PHLster and Steve Fisher of Sentinel Concepts have been teasing us with this little device for awhile now. This morning PHLster pulled back the curtain.

For years, serious shooters have been executing DIY modifications to their WML switches. Using JB Weld, putty, or epoxy, shooters have been improving their speed and consistency of WML activation by building up the small switch nubs on their lights. Drawing on those years of end-user experience, PHLster is excited to announce the launch of their ARC Enhanced WML Switches.

Shipping as a set of three pairs of switch enhancements, the ARC allows users to decrease the distance between activation fingers and switches, optimize their light for right or left handed use, improve speed and consistency of activation based on their preferred method, and reliably engage the WML switches with gloved or wet hands. Each set of switch enhancements includes a Large, Extra Large, and Extra Large Blank set of switches. The L and XL are both aggressively textured and the XL Blank allows users to shape, carve, and stipple the switches to fit their specific requirements, while remaining within a holster-friendly dimension.

If you have short fingers, are tired of compromising your grip to activate the WML, dislike grip switches, need more reach to activate the switches when installed on certain pistols, or just want to make WML activation faster and easier, the PHLster ARC is a necessary upgrade.

Switch installation is easy and requires no permanent modification. The stock switch nubs are easily removed with pliers or a small screwdriver and the enhanced switch endcaps press on to the switch armature bar. And, the ARC switch enhancements fit pretty much every decent WML holster on the market, including Safariland and many, many others.

At launch, the ARC is available at PHLsterHolsters.com and BigTexOutdoors.com for $24.99.

1...293294295...398Page 294 of 398
© All rights reserved © 2023 GAT Daily. Designed by GAT Marketing