Is anybody else getting tired of this shopworn trope? It was trotted out again last week by a politician seeking a 50% tax on ammunition.
I’ve had the same line used on me for years in internet arguments with clueless anti-gunners. The line is invariably thrown into the discussion like a hand grenade. It destroys further discussion, because if you disagree with whatever they are proposing, then that must mean that you are in favor of needless death. It also paints the proposer in the saintly light of “savior” of whoever it is they think is in danger.
But let’s look more deeply at this sentiment, shall we? What other useful tools can cause death if used improperly? Sometimes even used properly there are accidents with commonly used items.
Let’s completely ban automobiles – because if we can prevent just one death it will all be worth it.
Furthermore, let’s completely ban travel by horse as well – a fall from a horse has killed many, many people over the millennia.
Bicycles? Nope – people die on those too.
Let’s ban bathtubs – adults slip and die and many children drown yearly in them.
Ban televisions and bureaus – because toddlers have been known to pull them over on top of themselves and be crushed to death.
Ban Tylenol – an overdose can cause slow death by liver failure.
Ban aerosol cans – because teenagers huff the propellant and asphyxiate themselves.
Ban lawnmowers – both children and adults are horribly killed by them every year.
That’s just a tiny sampling. Pointing this out to the “ just one-ers” can cause angry flouncing from the conversation however. But it illustrates an important point. Life is fatal. Just breathing can be dangerous. So the “Just one life” trope is virtue-signaling garbage. Millions of people use the above items safely every single day. Just like firearms.
The hoplophobes would have the public believe that firearms are somehow a special case of concentrated death, when in reality many commonly used items cause more accidental death and injury than firearms do.
As far as “intentional” death and injury goes – are we taxing nails at a 50% rate to prevent hammer murders? Just asking. If we could prevent just one death you know…
There are those who are entirely against the use of guns because they could cause violence in the wrong hands. On the other hand, there are people in favor of using guns as a means to protect themselves from criminals.
But there are also self-identified non-violent people who have guns. Why do they, if they are against violence in the first place? Here are four possible reasons:
Protection – The Main Concern
When you ask people why they own guns, one of the most common reasons given is for protection–and rightfully so. Although they may never be attacked, they could better defend themselves with one and that makes them feel generally safer.
The world we live in is not as peaceful as we would like; crime always seems on the rise, and nobody feels safe. While violence should not always be fought with violence, owning a gun could be the only way to keep you and your family safe.
In the event that you are attacked or a thief enters your house, a gun might come in handy even if the owner is usually not an exponent of violence. Firing it could prevent tragedy. Not only could you prevent the criminal doing something terrible to you, but you could also prevent him/her from doing it to other people.
Gun Bans Increase Murder Rates
This might come across as really weird considering it is “gun violence” we’re talking about, but it’s actually true. If guns were banned, murder rates would rise. The thought that a potential victim might have a gun can make criminals reconsider committing the crime. After all, they care about their own lives, so they wouldn’t take risks as readily if they knew you could protect yourself.
Having said that, if guns were banned, some people would be happier than ever, because they could more easily commit violence with much less risk. That would encourage them to commit crimes, as they are not at risk of being shot.
People Are More Likely to Die of Other Causes
People are too often afraid that guns increase violence, that everyone would just start shooting to solve their conflicts. They think guns increase the death rate.
However, this is not true. People are more likely to die from falls than by being shot. In 2007, there were 613 fatal firearms accidents, which was just one-half of 1% of all fatal accidents. You are much more likely to die by poisoning, drowning, falling or driving than being shot. [Must reference the statistics. Of course there are shootings every day somewhere, it’s homicides that are far rarer than MVA deaths; all gunshot deaths (including suicides) approach the number of all car accidents.] Shootings are not a common cause of death by a (pardon me) long shot.
Guns Stop Burglars
If you were a thief, would you continue packing that huge amounts of money and jewelry if someone in the house pointed a gun at you? Everyone fears for their lives, and bad guys don’t want guns pointed at them either. Some years ago, the CDC estimated that Americans used guns for almost 500,000 times to scare away thieves attempting to break into their homes. [Must have the reference for something so specific.]
Note that people don’t necessarily have to fire the guns–pointing them is enough to scare away most criminals, although you have to be ready to fire.
It’s Not the Gun That Is Dangerous
One of the things you’ve probably heard is that it’s not the gun that’s dangerous, but the individual holding it. Guns don’t fire by themselves. The person who owns the gun is the critical factor. If that person is nonviolent, then he/she won’t use it unless a dangerous situation leaves no other choice.
Gun Control Laws Don’t Increase Safety
There are people who are trying really hard to convince us that gun control laws will necessarily increase our protection. But that’s not actually true. Gun control laws can restrict the number of privately held firearms. Gun ownership discourages criminals while banning them would dramatically increase the frequency of crime.
Final Thoughts
Having firearms doesn’t mean that people will use them wrongfully. Guns may just make them feel safer, and even prevent something bad from happening to them. Nonviolent people are the least likely to use the guns in a bad way, because guns are only dangerous when they’re in the wrong hands. Being non-violent does not dictate being unprepared to defend against others’ violence.
.
.
—Jay Chambers is a Texas business owner, archer, shooter and survivalist. He believes in free speech, resiliency and self-sufficiency in an increasingly unpredictable world.
Walther has introduced an innovative program that shows how confident they are in their flagship model, the PPQ series of handguns. This program is called Shoot It. Love It. Buy It.
There are essentially two parts to this program.
First, a 30-Day Money Back Guarantee. Wherever you decide to buy a new PPQ, online or in- store, it is covered with this guarantee. If you don’t love it within 30 days, visit ShootItLoveItBuyIt.com and go through the “return your gun” process. Walther will provide the shipping label to have it sent back. Once received at Walther and inspected, they will issue a check for a full reimbursement of what the buyer paid for the PPQ. Including tax.
Second, a Try Before You Buy. At select dealers across the United States, which are listed on their website, you can take home a PPQ for 30 days with no money down. All you need to do is visit ShootItLoveItBuyIt.com and apply for a voucher. When you apply for a voucher, Walther will pre-authorize your card for $1000.00. This is not a charge, only to make sure you have a valid card. Once this happens, you will be emailed a voucher number. Take the voucher number to the closest participating dealer near you, pick out the model PPQ you want to try out, and give the dealer the voucher number. You will still need to fill out the standard 4473 background check paperwork. Once completed, you can take home the PPQ and shoot it as much as you like! If you love the PPQ, you will automatically be charged the dealers sales price 30 days from purchase. If you don’t love it, return the gun back to Walther through the ShootItLoveItBuyIt.com portal and your card will not be charged.
Chris Carlberg, VP of Sales for Walther Arms, Inc. says “This program will drive sales of Walther PPQ’s for our dealers to a whole new level. We’re excited to the first manufacture in our industry to offer a program that builds confidence in our brand via a 30-day money back guarantee and a try before you buy.”
Shoot It. Love It. Buy It. Is open from February 15 – June 30, 2019.
It is far past time for many in our country to take a stand on those things that are important, such as life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.
There are many, many folks out there who seem to love to exercise their freedom of speech and freedom of religion, even though their religion may be “none”. It is still their belief and they have the right to exercise it just as you and I do–whatever their “religion” may be or not be.
It has long been said that all that is required for evil to happen is for good people to do nothing. Perhaps too many of us have not been doing enough. There is huge pressure by “progressive” politicians in many cities and states for our country to go in a direction where almost all the people I know will not like where we end up .
We dearly value our freedom of speech and freedom of religion, but too many people, even those who are speaking contrary to what I think is right, do not understand that these two rights are hinged upon the presence of the Second Amendment–the right to keep and bear arms.
It is hard for me to understand people who do not seem to have ever heard about what plagued the world throughout most of the 20th century. Hitler, Stalin, Mao and others like them, were responsible for slaughtering scores of millions of people. In every situation of which I am aware, disarmament of civilians preceded all such tyrannical governments, making them unable to defend themselves against any aggressor.
It is especially challenging to my mind to try to understand why so many Jewish people are in favor of more restrictive firearm ownership and seem to have amnesia related to their ancestors, who were slaughtered by the millions in Europe less than one hundred years ago.
So now, even though we hear about “sensible laws for firearm safety”, the real goal of people like Bloomberg and the Gifford organizations are to make the entire country’s gun laws as restrictive as are the state of California’s. The majority of current legislators in California would like to make ownership of all firearms and ammunition illegal for essentially all people except those who are identified as “law enforcement”.
It is a fact of life that “Power corrupts. Absolute power absolutely corrupts.” So, when only law enforcement has access to firearms, who is left to prevent those with power and corrupt minds from becoming the “tyrannical government”? The answer is: “No one.”
A significant fact not mentioned by anyone of Leftist ideology and the Left-focused media, is that Mexico has among the highest violent crime, murder, homicide, and firearm death rates compared to any other country in the world. Mexico has gun controls in place that resemble those of California and New York. On the other hand, citizens of Switzerland have one firearm for every two people and they have virtually the lowest rates of violent death, murder, homicide, and deaths by firearms in the world.
Except for one event, all mass shootings since 1992 have occurred in areas, or zones, that were clearly identified as “gun free”. Texas has allowed school teachers to be armed for several years and there has not been one mass shooting in a school in which the school officials and or teachers were armed.
It is also very clear as more and more laws are passed, that the criminals and those who are insane and create mass homicides, do not have any concern about violating any of the massive number of current laws related to firearms purchase, possession or use. There are no mass shootings in which the shooter did not violate one or several of the laws currently in effect where he lived or where he killed people.
A statistic that is never promoted by anyone who leans even a little toward the left is that there are an estimated two million plus defensive gun uses per year in the United States. These events do not make the news, as few would be interested in a report saying “Four people were not injured today when the robber approaching them ran away on seeing that his intended victim was armed.” An event in which an armed citizen thwarts a criminal act is unlikely to make the news when there is generally no reason for a police report to be filed.
It is not rocket science to know this fact: “When seconds count, the police are only minutes away.”
Many of those high positions and in power are protected by armed body guards, but are opposed to you and I being armed. Is this hypocrisy or is this duplicity?
Shouldn’t we prioritize instead reducing the 110+ deaths every day in the United States due to exposure to second-hand cigarette smoke, or the 1,400 deaths every day due to the direct effects of cigarette smoke?
Another great place to focus would be to reduce the 200,000 to 300,000 deaths every year in the United States that occur in hospitals due to accidents, poor judgement, erroneous medical care, or the wrong drugs being given to people.
We physicians do need to heal ourselves, and stay out of the lane of knowledgeable Americans exercising their right to keep and bear arms.
.
.
—Cris McBride, M.D. is retired from a busy practice in rural Arizona. He purchased his first firearm at age 11 from a Sears catalog for $12. Dr. McBride is adamant about shooting for fun and self defense, and to prevent a tyrannical government from taking away our God-given rights.
From the Editor: Washington’s Attorney General, Bob Ferguson, has issued a ‘cautionary warning’ to the Chief LEO’s of the state. The public declaration by many of the state’s top cops, especially of the rural counties and municipalities who overwhelmingly didn’t support Initiative 1639 and felt dragged along by ignoramus urbanites, has caused legal pressure to come to bear in a civil disobedience light. The AG’s message is clear, enforce I-1639 or you’re on your own, liability wise.
Here’s the AG’s letter
In November 2018, Washingtonians overwhelmingly adopted Initiative 1639.
Numerous sheriffs and police chiefs have stated that they will not implement or enforce the initiative. I want to share my thoughts on this important issue, which affects both the safety of our communities and respect for the rule of law.
Like all laws passed by the people of Washington and their representatives, Initiative 1639 is presumed constitutional. No court has ruled that this initiative is unconstitutional.
I will defend Initiative 1639 against any legal challenge. My office defeated the legal challenge to the previous gun safety initiative passed by the people, and I am confident we will defeat any constitutional challenge to Initiative 1639 as well. Local law enforcement officials are entitled to their opinions about the constitutionality of any law, but those personal views do not absolve us of our duty to enforce Washington laws and protect the public.
I would like to focus on one component of Initiative 1639 in which you play a vital role, and have a legal obligation. Effective July 1, Initiative 1639 requires enhanced background checks for the purchase of semiautomatic assault rifles, which are identical to the enhanced background checks currently required for all handgun purchases in Washington state. Just like handgun purchases, local law enforcement officials are required to perform these background checks.
Local law enforcement has been performing these enhanced background checks for all handgun purchases in Washington state for many years. These enhanced background checks keep guns out of the hands of dangerous individuals who lawfully cannot own firearms because of a mental illness or criminal record. As far as I know, no Washington sheriff or police chief has refused to perform these enhanced background checks for handguns. Why refuse to perform them for semiautomatic assault rifles?
I am deeply concerned that the failure of local law enforcement to perform Initiative 1639’s background check requirement will jeopardize public safety in our state by allowing the sale of semiautomatic assault rifles to dangerous individuals not lawfully allowed to own a gun.
State law provides immunity to local law enforcement officers who run these checks “in good faith.” However, in the event a police chief or sheriff refuses to perform the background check required by Initiative 1639, they could be held liable if there is a sale or transfer of a firearm to a dangerous individual prohibited from possessing a firearm and that individual uses that firearm to do harm. In short, the taxpayers of your city or county assume the financial risk of your decision to impose your personal views over the law.
Outside your legal obligation to perform the background checks, you have discretion, of course, to prioritize your resources. This is a trust placed on you by the Washingtonians you serve. Enforcement discretion, however, cannot subvert the rule of law. All Washingtonians, including those of us in government, are equally subject to the law.
Analogies to marijuana and immigration law enforcement are misplaced. This is not a situation where the federal government is trying to force the state to enforce federal laws. Rather, Initiative 1639 was submitted to the people of Washington and was adopted as state law by nearly 60% of the people. No action by a city council or county commission can change this state law or the responsibilities and duties that the law vests in Washington’s law enforcement agencies.
I am personally deeply opposed to the death penalty, and have maintained reservations about its constitutionality for many years – but my personal feelings about the death penalty did not impact my duties as Attorney General. Last October, our State Supreme Court unanimously ruled in State v. Gregory that Washington’s death penalty was applied in an arbitrary and racially biased manner. Until the Gregory decision, however, my office continued to defend the death sentence in federal courts when death row inmates filed appeals, even after the Governor announced his moratorium. I did this out of respect for the rule of law. At the same time, I proposed legislation to the State Legislature to abolish the death penalty. If you personally disagree with Initiative 1639, seek to change it. Or file a lawsuit challenging it. But do not substitute your personal views over that of the people.
Under Article 1, Section 1 of the Washington State Constitution, “All political power is inherent in the people, and governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed, and are established to protect and maintain individual rights.” As public officers, our duty is to abide by the will of the people we serve, and implement and enforce the laws they adopt. I encourage you to do so.
Sincerely,
BOB FERGUSON Attorney General
The AG placed most of his emphasis on the new enhanced background check provision for assault weapons. He gives a concession of acknowledgement that if the LEO heads don’t use any of their discretionary resources to pursue other provisions of I-1639 that is their prerogative.
But any failure on the part of the LE organizations to properly complete background checks would not be protected by or backed by the AG and/or state from liability in the event someone chose to pursue a lawsuit against a municipality or county for an improperly completed background check that led subsequently to the commision of a crime.
Don’t ask me how that trail of liable logic works. Unless they somehow bring out evidence of a LE chapter just flatly refusing to run a NICS check when someone brought it to them, it seems to me that liability will nearly universally fall on the seller and not that municipality.
New for 2019, the SAINT Victor series of rifles and pistols from Springfield Armory are designed to give you everything you need on a premium defensive firearm, right out of the box.
Weighing in at 6.9 lbs, the lower receiver on the SAINT Victor rifle is Accu-Tite tension-bonded to a flat-top forged upper receiver and features a 16” CMV barrel that is Melonite® finished inside and out for the ultimate in corrosion resistance. The rock-solid, patent-pending M-Lok free-float 15” handguard protects the mid-length gas system and provides plenty of space for accessory attachment.
At the heart of SAINT Victor rifles is an M16 bolt carrier group that is also Melonite® finished, HPT/MPI tested, shot peened, and houses a 9310 steel bolt. With a fit, finish and feel superior to that of much higher priced AR options on the market, the SAINT Victor rifle is also available in a California-approved model for 2019, with a Strike Industries Featureless Grip and Magpul MOE fixed stock. An 11.5” SBR configuration is also available for LE and civilian use.
The SAINT Victor pistols are the most compact in the lineup, with many of the same features of the rifles, but in a stock-free, non-NFA pistol form with a 7.5” barrel in 5.56, and a 9” barrel in .300 BLK.
The 7.5” SAINT Victor pistol is equipped with an SA Forward Blast Diverter muzzle device, and the 9” pistol features an A2 flash hider, easily removed for suppressor use.
Built for CQB, the compact design of the SAINT Victor Pistol is an ideal choice for home defense and delivers rifle power in a small, fast-handling package. The rugged SB Tactical SBX-K forearm brace reduces size, stabilizes recoil, and enhances accuracy.
Just like the SAINT Victor rifles, the M16 bolt carrier group is precision-machined from 9310 steel, shot peened, HPI/MPT inspected and finished in super-hard Melonite®, as are the barrels, both inside and out. A staked receiver end plate features a QD mount for sling attachment.
The SAINT Victor series of rifle and pistols from Springfield Armory set a new standard for what you should expect from a defensive firearm.
The Victor is replacing the free float line with an upgraded feature set
I realized something startling in December while I was trudging alone through the woods on a solo deer hunt. I realized how “small” I really am. I’m only a novice hunter, but am a member of a tiny minority.
According to this article, the percentage of total U.S. population that hunts was less than 4% in 2016
According to the same article, 70% of those hunters are male.
If females make up 30% of the less than 4% of the population that hunts, that means that we female hunters are hovering in the 1%-and-change zone of the total population.
Only 1% -ish of the entire American population are female hunters. Think about that. One. Percent. Talk about being a “minority”. No wonder we find it hard to be taken seriously and find gear that fits us – we are virtually unicorns! And I’m just a novice. The experienced women hunters are an even smaller minority. Doing the mental math really puts things in perspective.
I’ve discovered from personal experience that learning the hunting arts mostly by myself can be a challenge – not impossible – but a definite challenge. I’m wondering how these other women manage it.
You see all these online videos of female hunters, and “some” are working solo, but many of them have audible voices of the male “support staff” in the background. It sure must be nice to have a husband or boyfriend available to help you install a heavy tree stand, to scout with you (or for you?), or to range for you while you are drawing back on that prize buck in the video. Meanwhile, there I was hanging out there all by myself during deer season.
The writer hunting alone, captured by her own trail cam.
Don’t get me wrong – I actually enjoy my “alone time” in the woods – but I do admit to feeling tired and discouraged at times. It makes me think that maybe if I had some help or more lady hunter friends it would be easier.
The NSSF has recently introduced a new website called Let’s Go Hunting with tips on how to get started. In my experience though, reading up is the easy part. It’s the logistics that are the killers. Things like having a place to hunt and knowing the boundaries, obstacles, and habitat of that place; having a vehicle suitable to get you there in all weather and to haul your game out; having the proper gear and proper firearm and ammo; having the time off work on the right days of the season; knowing the intricacies of the game law for what you want to hunt – all are part of the learning curve and logistical considerations. For details like that, having a knowledgeable mentor can be really helpful.
To assist in that mentoring department, there are now some “Women Hunter” websites that are popping up, there are state Becoming an OutdoorsWoman programs, and some organizations offering women-only hunts. Three of the women-only hunt groups that come immediately to mind are Calibered Events (my personal and local favorite), LACE (by Babes with Bullets), and Sisterhood of the Outdoors.
Admittedly, these ladies’ hunts aren’t cheap. In a perfect world, we could all learn to hunt on our own property from our own grandfathers without spending hundreds (or thousands) of dollars in the process. Hunting was originally about feeding your family “free” meat, after all. Alas, the world doesn’t work that way much anymore.
Nowadays it costs money to hunt – sometimes a LOT of money. And mentors can be difficult to find. I’m personally trying to find the happy medium. At this point, learning how to hunt deer, squirrels, and turkey seems much cheaper than coughing up $5000 (that I don’t have) to go on a guided “Ladies Alaskan Bear Hunt”. (That’s not even counting the specialized gear/clothing I’d need to buy.)
We’ll put that adventure on the “someday” list and concentrate for now on what I can learn to hunt locally in my Walmart men’s camo. The good news is that one of my daughters has made noise about wanting to learn about squirrel hunting WITH me!
I’m not even there yet myself, and already have my “plus one”! Yay!! Now to pick some of my mentors’ brains!
The latest version of ASP’s lightweight, all-weather polymer duty light ups the performance ante again, putting out 525 lumens with a range of over 200 meters. The polymer housing is molded around an aluminum core, for added strength and thermal management. ASP’s “Double Tap” feature drops the light down to a 15 lumen low setting, with just a quick second press of the tail switch. The “DF” designation stands for Dual Fuel—meaning the light can be powered by either the included 18650 rechargeable battery, or by two optional CR123A primary (disposable) cells. ASP’s trademark 3-position rotary tactical tail switch offers constant, intermittent and locked modes, and in-light recharging is monitored by an onboard charge status indicator. Finishing touches include an exclusive foamed-vinyl grip surface, flexible weather-sealed charge port cover, and removable pocket clip. The Poly DF is also compatible with ASP’s optional hands-free, rotating Tactical Light Case, available separately.
Although she is a deputy with the Boulder County (CO) Sheriff’s Office and a member of A Girl & A Gun Women’s Shooting League (AG & AG), Teri Javes does not describe herself as a firearms enthusiast. She is a mom to two daughters, a wife (they met in jail; he’s a deputy, too, not an inmate), a daughter, an animal lover, and never planned on working in law enforcement. She enjoys competing, so her husband encouraged her to try additional shooting sports. Teri could not have predicted that 3 Gun would one day help her survive an officer-involved shooting.
Intro to 3 Gun
In 2015, Teri and her oldest daughter attended AG & AG’s 3-Gun University in Raton, NM. The Boulder County Sheriff’s Office provides good firearms training; however, Teri recognized the value of the additional trigger time. “Our department shoots once every other month in addition to qualifying twice a year,” says Teri. “That translates to approximately 450 rounds in our handguns and 450 rounds through our rifles in a year, which is not much.”
Teri Javes learned 3 Gun strategies at the 2015 AG & AG 3-Gun University.
Teri competed in only three 3 Gun matches before her shooting skills were tested in the utmost way.
The Call
On August 10, 2016, at approximately 1700 hours Teri was clearing a call. She was getting ready to head back to the Sheriff’s Office headquarters to finish some paperwork and end her shift at 1800 hours. A call was aired about a man walking northbound on the southbound side of Hwy 287 with a gun in his waistband making threatening gestures to the oncoming traffic. Although Colorado is an open carry state, dispatch had received several calls about the aggressive and threatening behavior this man was demonstrating and there was significant concern.
“It wasn’t my district, but I was the closest unit on duty so I took the call,” Teri recalls. As she approached, she was flagged down by a passerby who told her that there was a man on the side of the road with a gun in his hand and he was flashing it while yelling at the cars that were driving by. Teri says, “The fact that he now had the gun in his hand instead of in his waistband told me he was getting more agitated and could be getting ready to use it.”
The last reported location of the suspect was much further south of Teri’s position. She drove forward and notified dispatch of this new information. She saw him about 60 yards away with a pistol in his hand. She updated dispatch with her location and that she was in contact, automatically activated her lights, and stopped approximately 50 yards from the subject.
“I opened my car door while pulling my handgun out of its holster. Exiting the vehicle I saw the man bring the gun up, point it at me as he continued walking towards me, and fire the gun,” Teri remembers. “The bullet from his gun shattered my driver’s side window as I stood behind it. I was able to fire one shot from my handgun as I ducked down taking cover and calling out ‘shots fired’ on my radio.”
Gunfire shattered Teri Javes’ driver’s side window as she stood behind it.
Teri looked up and saw the man still walking towards her, firing his gun at her again. She fired twice more, and then ducked down again, taking cover. She quickly peeked over the driver’s side door and through her shattered driver’s window, and discovered that the man was gone.
Teri was parked southbound on Hwy 287 on the shoulder of the road, so the only direction the suspect could have traveled was to the west or north. She could see that traffic was congested, but still flowing, and she could also see approximately two miles to the south in front of her vehicle. A farmhouse and barn, the only structures for miles, were to the west of where she was parked. She was afraid the suspect was continuing to move around to the west side of her vehicle to shoot her from behind.
“I moved to the back of the vehicle in a crouch to keep some sort of cover between us while I tried to locate him by looking through the bottoms of my vehicles windows,” says Teri. While moving she performed a tactical reload placing the partial magazine in her back left pocket. She was carrying a single stack 1911 .45, with mags that only held 10 rounds. “While backing up, I watched in front of me to make sure he didn’t pop up from hiding in front of my vehicle. Then I looked behind me as I cornered the back of my vehicle to make sure he didn’t circle around my vehicle. I peered out from the back of my vehicle on the passenger side, and saw the man was hiding behind a pillar in the driveway of the house approximately 45 yards from me.”
The suspect leaned out from behind the pillar and shot at Teri again. She was able to fire another shot before taking cover again. She tucked behind her vehicle and called out more information into her radio to dispatch. She peered out again and fired two more shots at the suspect, who returned fire and then ducked back behind the pillar.
Teri thought, “This is not working for me.” It was time to transition to her rifle.
She worked her way back to the driver’s side of the vehicle, in a crouch, telling dispatch that she was going to deploy her rifle. While trying to keep an eye on the assailant’s location and maintaining some sort of cover, she pulled her AR from the rifle mount located from between the two front seats of her patrol vehicle. She worked her way back around to the rear of the vehicle in a low crouching position to the passenger-side quarter panel of the unit. With her rifle at a low ready as to not telegraph her position, Teri peered out to the location where she last saw the suspect. He was no longer in sight.
Teri began loudly calling out commands, “Come out with your hands up!” “Show me your hands!” “Drop the gun!”
She kept looking to the west to make sure he was not coming around to her. After several commands and not getting any response Teri wanted to make sure he was still behind the pillar. She was concerned that he may have gone into the house, which could have created a whole different set of problems. She decided to use the scope to look for him, so she brought the rifle up, with a hasty C-clamp braced on the “D” pillar of her vehicle.
“I saw what looked like the heel of the suspect’s foot move from behind the pillar,” Teri recalls. At this point he had fired numerous (later determined to be six) rounds at her and towards one of the three busiest highways in Boulder County during rush-hour traffic, and disregarded her attempts of getting him to comply with her commands.
“I took a shot at his heel. This shot did not hit the suspect, but it did make him back up exposing his torso from his shoulders to his hips. I loudly called out more commands for him to come out with his hands up. He did not comply and was a continuing threat.”
Teri took two quick shots with her rifle braced off the “D” pillar of the patrol vehicle. One of the bullets hit the assailant in the lungs, nicking part of his heart, and the other shattered his pelvis. This caused him to lose all balance, falling backwards. Teri watched as the gun flew out of his hand and away from his body.
“With my rifle up and on target, I told him to keep his hands up,” says Teri. “While watching his empty hands in the air, I advanced on him giving further commands to keep his hands up and get on his stomach. While moving forward I contacted dispatch advising that the suspect was down, had been hit twice, and to send medical.”
The man eventually complied by rolling onto his stomach. Teri angled around him near his feet, keeping him at rifle point. She picked his handgun up off the ground and secured it. She told him to put his hands behind his back. She held her position as her backup arrived, screeching to a stop, and jumping out of his vehicle to assist her in handcuffing the suspect. Shortly after, the man was taken into custody and transported to the hospital, where he died due to his injuries. After a comprehensive investigation, the Boulder District Attorney’s office determined that the shooting was legally justified.
From start to finish the incident lasted only six minutes.
Skills Implemented
“My experiences in 3 Gun helped me survive my officer-involved shooting,” acknowledges Teri. “My comfort with my weapons, knowing their capabilities and mine, kept me calm and focused.” She credits 3 Gun competition with her ability to make efficient magazine changes because she was able to process that she had shot multiple rounds, knew that she would need a full magazine while moving to the next contact, and was able to perform the reload automatically.
Teri was also easily able to transition to her rifle after making the mindful decision that the handgun was not her best option at that distance, knowing that her rifle with a scope was needed for an accurate snapshot at a fleeting target at 45 yards. She credits Denise and JJ Johnson from Rocky Mountain 3 Gun for their training at AG & AG’s 3-Gun University on searching for small targets with her optic so that her sight picture was instinctive.
“Moving and shooting kept me alive,” says Teri. “The ability to see a threat/target and a secure brace against my patrol vehicle to make quick, accurate shots was imperative.”
The lessons learned from 3 Gun competition reinforced her mechanics and mindset, so that Teri was able to concentrate on the problem at hand, keep calm, communicate effectively with dispatch, and most importantly, stop the threat.
In 2018, Teri was awarded the Law Enforcement Congressional Badge of Bravery by the U.S. Attorney General in recognition of her courageous acts in the line of duty.
Teri participated in the 2018 AG & AG Back the Women in Blue Training Event.
That man is Rick Scott, Former Florida Governor. He signed the Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School Act in an effort to make Florida schools and communities a safer place.
His results, less than stellar and largely asinine, are still heralded by the under informed as somehow effective.
But let me rehash visually how gun control “prevents” violent crime.
Gun control vs ways to commit horrific acts of violence (colorized 2019)
But by all means, Florida Man, let us examine the brilliant law.
Ban gun sales to anyone under 21 and mentally ill
Hooray! We have denied the second amendment rights of legal adults for an additional three years past high school. On the off chance that one such individual might legally buy a gun to commit an illegal horrific act.
The supposition that somehow keeping a right legal and sacrosanct enables and encourages illegal horrific acts is fear mongering projectionism. It’s the same “logic” the concludes all gun owners want to kill someone deep down inside their soul.
Let’s not count the ways this can be circumvented… actually lets
The “angry” individual is over the age of 21 and has no criminal background and has never been committed a crime.
Theft
Use of any other implement of violence other than a firearm. Third world children can fashion IEDs. Yet we expect this is beyond the skills of a first world student out of some twisted sense of supposed decorum a mass murderer allegedly possesses?
There seems to be a mental dam in place when it comes to the topic of arms. That because weapons are weapons and inspite of complete inanimacy they operate under a different set of rules and motivations than improvised weapons of opportunity. This seems especially true of firearms.
Oh! And on the banning of sales to the mentally ill…
Congratulations on making illegal something already illegal. I’m certain the feeling of ‘must do something’ is highly satisfied.
Ban on accessories to make semi-automatic firearms fully automatic
“Florida lawmakers and Scott agreed to criminalize accessories that make rifles more automatic…” – Click Orlando
As an individual familiar with the law and the devices in question the vast technological misrepresentation here is infuriating…
SIG has made a splash with the release of their new SLMAG. The SIG LMG was at SIG’s range day during SHOT. I wish I could’ve attended just to see this gun run. If you can’t tell by the title I am a Marine Machine Gunner. The Marine Corps is unique in that they assign specific MOSes and have specific MOS schools for Heavy Weapons users. I served in a line company for 5 years as a Machine Gunner. I loved my job and I love machine guns so I keep an eye on new MGs. The SLMAG was at their booth at SHOT and I could make a few personal observations, and I’ve been paying close attention to the info as it leaks out.
The SGLMAG or SIG Light Machine Gun looks like a medium machine gun, but the terms seem to be flexible. The SIG LMG was made to potentially fulfill a SOCOM request for a gun lighter than the M240 but potentially more powerful. The SIG LMG at the SHOW was chambered in the potent 338 Norma Magnum, but also comes in 7.62 NATO and SIG is tooling up to make a version in a 6.8 caliber.
My Observations of the SIG LMG
From the outside looking in I see a few things I really appreciate and some I don’t understand. As you can see the gun is optic’s ready with a rail over the top of the receiver. That’s great, but can be tricky on belt fed weapons. The M240 has a rail, but the entire top of the weapon is the feed cover. The way it opens puts longer optics at risk of colliding into a potentially very hot barrel. Trijicon came up with a spring loaded top cover attachment for the M240 that would fling the optic to the side as the cover opened. It was terrible.
Overall I don’t like day optics on a machine gun outside of a red dot or holographic sight, but that’s a whole other rant. The SIG LMG has a much shorter feed tray and top cover that allows the majority of the top of the gun to be stationary when the cover is opened. You can mount optics without the risk of the optic hitting a hot barrel.
In terms of sights, the gun is optics ready but seems to lack iron sights. This is an odd decision, but will likely be remedied if the gun is to be adopted by the military. The placement of the safety and the fact that its basically an AR safety is a great idea overall. The pistol grip looks ergonomic a AR 15 grip, which works. Lots of AR 15 parts on a gun that doesn’t have a AR 15 lower receiver.
Courtesy of SIG Sauer
The folding AR stock seems to be a dumb idea. A machine gun needs stability to be worth a damn and the wider and bigger the stock is the more you can dig into it. The M240 stock is odd, but damn does it work. This isn’t an M4 and it needs a dedicated MG stock, especially for bipod only use.
Carrying It
I humped an M240 on foot in Afghanistan, in countless hikes in the states, and in training. Guess what? It’s not a fun weapon to carry. Not just because of the weight but because its sharp angles and being superbly awkward. Designers seem to make these guns with a “It’ll be mounted mentality,” and that’s dumb. The SIG LMG seems to have less sharp angles, but it still looks like a pain in the ass to carry. Such is life with belt feds.
Technical Details
From reading about the gun I see a number of features I can appreciate. The gun can be fed from the right or left hand side. They kept the gun weighing in at a trim 20 pounds, which makes it 8 pounds lighter than my beloved M240. The SIG LMG can swap the charging handle to left and right, the safety is also ambidextrous. This will be an easy gun for lefties to use.
The Army Times is reporting a drum will be developed and they make it sound like a magazine. I’m wondering if they meant a drum more like a cloth or plastic drum that just holds the belt rather than a magazine style. The gun can be easily suppressed and the gas can be adjusted for suppressor use. This will be great for maintaining control over the guns from a squad leader or platoon commander perspective. My MG team had an entire signal system in case things were too loud for issued commands.
The gun can be loaded with the cover either closed or not fully opened according to the Army Times. This is important for low profile and quieter loadings as well as using the gun in cramped environments where the top cover can’t be opened.
The Caliber
I’m no ballistician but the 338 Norma seems to be a pretty potent little caliber. The projectile stays supersonic out to 1,500 yards. The 7.62 NATO stays supersonic out to 1,040 yards. That’s a big jump and the Army seems to think a bigger caliber and more range is what machine guns need. I won’t complain about a more powerful round in a lighter platform.
According to Recoil Magazine the SIG LMG will have less recoil than the standard 7.62 NATO round. Supposedly felt recoil will be 4 foot pounds into the shoulder and that’s only twice as much as an M4 in 5.56. That’s great too, and this may make the use of a puny AR stock acceptable.
What About the Tripod?
This is all great, and the Army plans to toss a fancy optic on top. The combination of a new caliber, be it a 6.8 or a 338 Norma, and an optic will supposedly make this a long-range machine gun. Well theoretically this is true, but the problem is the caliber and optic won’t solve the problem with long-range machine gun engagement.
The effective range with a skilled gunner on just bipods is about 800 yards and a new round and optic isn’t going to affect that much. What would is a tripod, preferably a more modern model. It seems like the Army is pushing a ton of innovation into the platform and not into the gear needed to take advantage of it.
The M122 Tripod works, and proves a tripod will allow you to reach out beyond 1,000 yards. The problem is the M122 is essentially the same design as the tripod used with the Browning 1919 machine gun. You know, the machine gun we used nearly a century ago.
It works for defensive positions, but isn’t designed for the modern wars we find ourselves in. It’s heavy, hard to carry, slow to use, and it can’t keep up. I never carried one in country and never would. By the time we got it set-up the fight would’ve already moved.
A new tripod would make the most out of this gun. A lighter, easier to use tripod that’s just as stable as the M122.
The SIG LMG Final Thoughts
The SIG LMG is a good step forward for machineguns. The lighter weight, smaller controls, and top cover are all excellent additions to the machine gun world. I still think a proper buttstock would be better, but what do I know? The only gun I’ve ever built is a AR 15 with an 80 lower.
[Ed: We’ve reported on GVROs and Red Flag laws since 2015—how theyput gun owners at riskand aboutCalifornia’s lawin particular. With Senator Rubio promoting more ‘Red Flag’ laws, Dr. Vaughan’s warning is more timely than ever. You can download DRGO’s position paper on Firearm Confiscation due to Dangerousness here.]
‘Red Flag Gun Laws’, or ‘Gun Violence Restraining Orders’ are becoming increasingly popular among opponents of the right to keep and bear arms. Politicians from both major parties seem anxious to use these laws strip Americans of their right to armed self defense guaranteed by the Second Amendment, as well as their right to due process, guaranteed by the Fifth Amendment.
The premise of these laws is that individuals who are believed by others close to them to present an imminent risk for committing suicide or violence against others can be stripped of their right to have firearms. Typically, such action requires just a complaint, subject only to judicial review, without informing the subject of the complaint or allow him/her the opportunity to respond prior to firearm confiscation.
If approved by the judge, armed government agents are dispatched to seize firearms from the accused. Unsurprisingly, executing these orders can lead to violence and tragedy (as in Maryland recently). Unfortunately, these laws are misguided—or represent misdirection—and fail on multiple levels.
First and foremost, how such a scheme denies the accused’s right to due process is obvious. From the Fifth Amendment: “No person shall . . . be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law.” Subjecting these complaints to unilateral judicial review without allowing the accused an opportunity to hear the complaint and respond, or even be notified of the proceedings, before dispatching law enforcement amounts to glorified SWAT-ing.
Further, these ‘GVROs’ allow government intervention based on the suspicions and claims of laypersons. Even experienced professionals specializing in mental health have extremely limited ability to reliability gauge suicide risk—family and law enforcement officers with little to no training have even less chance of making accurate predictions.
Similarly, psychologically based violent behavior—as opposed to politically motivated violence, or the actions of those with a history of repeated criminal violent conduct—cannot be predicted reliably even by psychiatric professionals.
To be sure, there are potentially dangerous individuals roaming these United States—though the government has an extremely poor record of interceding proactively to defend law abiding citizens. Gun control laws in particular have a well-established history of endangering rather than protecting Americans from violent people.
To protect innocents from such individuals, we should have a legal framework in place which would allow intervention with high risk individuals prior to the commission of heinous irrevocable acts. But it must be done in ways that respect subjects’ right to due process and that insures the greatest likelihood of success—which highlights the most glaring problem with ‘Gun Violence Restraining Orders’.
While firearms, and handguns in particular, are the most commonly used weapons in the United States by those committing murder or suicide, about 1/3 of all homicides and about half of all suicides in this country are completed without the use of firearms. It defies common sense to claim that individuals present such imminent risk to themselves or others that emergency intervention must be undertaken, but that only minimally impedes their ability to complete an act of violence by denying them only one means.
If we even could reliably predict who is about to commit suicide or homicide, the only logical response would be to completely restrict all potential means for completing those acts.
The process to accomplish that is arrest and detention, with urgent psychiatric evaluation and treatment when indicated. In California, for example, prior to passage of a ‘Red Flag Law’ (AB 1014) in 2014, the state had already had a statute on the books for nearly 50 years allowing individuals deemed at extreme risk to be detained for evaluation for 72 hours (Welfare & Institutions Code § 5150, passed as part of the Lanterman-Petris-Short Act of 1967).
This incongruity begs the question as to why politicians’ and other gun-grabbers’ chosen remedy is to seize guns. The only logical conclusion is that their primary goal is not to protect people, but rather to use the excuse to confiscate firearms.
Legal standards for arrest and incarceration or other confinement are usually quite stringent. The vague concerns of disgruntled relatives are normally not considered sufficient—though politicians appear keenly interested in expanding the pool of eligible complainants. The California statute at least requires that such individuals, once detained, must be evaluated and adjudicated a danger or be released within a brief proscribed period of time. If at that point they are deemed a risk to themselves or others, restricting their Second Amendment rights would be in keeping with Heller.
Many politicians of both parties and other government officials would be happy to appear in a photo-op with a pile of what they claim are ‘guns removed from dangerous individuals’. However, ask them to line up with a group of falsely accused citizens, removed from their homes at gunpoint and incarcerated, subjected to mental health evaluations and/or charged with ‘Pre-crime’ by a star chamber consisting of a niece who thought they were ‘a little off’ and a judge who is likely to be more afraid of not looking ‘tough on crime’ than of trampling on the Bill of Rights. That glad-handing lineup is going to be pretty darn short.
If individuals in our society truly present an imminent risk to themselves or others, then a tightly controlled process—such as California’s 1967 statute—is needed that would allow for emergency detention and professional assessment. This would be a meaningful response that might actually avert tragedies.
If someone sends a letter to the local paper threatening to commit mass murder, I guarantee that local law enforcement response will NOT be restricted to collecting their firearms. That individual will also be detained, and law enforcement may not stop at arresting them—they may even confiscate guns from their relatives.
‘Red-Flag Gun Laws’ and ‘GVROs’ are lies. The real goal of these laws is not to protect anyone, except politicians whose fears center on re-election. They are predicated on a series of false premises:
that lay people can predict violent behavior,
that just taking guns away from dangerous individuals sufficiently mitigates the threat of suicide and homicide,
that such individuals cannot easily hide firearms already in their possession from authorities (or simply acquire new ones via the black market),
and, that there isn’t a more logical and effective way to address well-founded concerns about people who present a risk of imminent violence.
Most importantly, they are based on the false premise that government can protect society effectively by imposing such anti-liberty interventions.
This is the same government capable of twisting itself into such knots over an ill-conceived PR campaign that it failed to preempt a flagrantly dangerous individual whose home they had been called to dozens of times; government that then failed to follow up on a specific tip about him potentially attacking a school; government incapable that did not respond definitively when the same individual, known to on-site security as a ‘likely school shooter’, was seen on video carrying a ‘rifle case’ across a campus from which he had been barred; government that issued ‘stand down and wait’ orders to brave officers ready to rush in risking death for a chance to save children they didn’t know; government whose response to the multiple failures that contributed to such carnage was to reassert its lack of duty to intercede in such cases.
That government should instead be charged with operating a legalized SWAT-ing scheme to respond to ‘pre-crime’ without even the advantage of Phillip K. Dick’s ‘Pre-cogs’.
Too many Americans are ready and willing, even eager, to sacrifice their individual liberties for the illusion of security—but it is really someone else’s liberty they’re willing to sacrifice. And too many politicians—of both parties—see their own political careers as the only moral imperative, and view logic, Americans’ civil rights, and the U.S. Constitution as little more than inconvenient impediments.
.
.
—Tom Vaughan, MD is a neuroradiologist in private practice in Louisville, KY. He is a shooting enthusiast who believes in individual liberty and personal responsibility.
I went gun-shopping this past week. It’s always a fun adventure. I decided that my “armory” (liberal reporter term denoting a firearms collection greater than zero) was lacking in rimfire options – particularly .17 HMR. I had a great time at SHOT Range Day plinking steel with a rifle of this caliber and decided that I needed one of my own.
I did some reading online and “shopped” by looking at photos and prices and reading reviews. I even called around to local pawnshops hoping for an unexpected deal. But I eventually reached the point in my online shopping that I needed to actually handle the merchandise.
I have a shortish wingspan and sometimes need a compact stock length, so I like to shoulder and handle what I’m interested in before buying. I also wanted to check comb height for scope use. I already have one gun that has a duct tape and pipe insulation solution for that and I was looking to avoid the need for another such home remedy.
So I puttered on over to a local gun shop to have an in-person look. This wasn’t “my” local gun shop, as that one had closed due to the owner moving out of state. I liked that one and they knew me. I spent a lot of money there. They knew that I was familiar with firearms, wasn’t an idiot, and they greeted me when I came in the door. Not so with this other local shop.
At this other shop, I spent at least ten to fifteen minutes wandering around and looking in cases, with not a soul asking if they could help me. It wasn’t peak hours and and they weren’t busy. I thought about standing right in front of someone, clearing my throat loudly – so that they might be forced to acknowledge my presence – and demanding to know if they had any Ruger American Rimfire chambered in .17 HMR in stock. But I didn’t. I decided – screw them. I wasn’t going to beg them to let me give them my business. So I left.
Sheesh – I got better customer service over the phone from a pawnshop than I did in-person at that actual gun shop. That’s pretty sad.
I subsequently drove over to “large chain store”, where I spent approximately two minutes at the gun counter peering over at the rifles on the rack, while the staff guy served another customer. Two minutes. Not fifteen. Then he cheerily asked if he could help me. Why, yes you can!
Though they didn’t have the exact model I was interested in, they had similar models that the staff guy happily allowed me to handle – comparing the compact stock to the regular stock, comb height, weight, etc. He pointed out that if I wanted to order that model (heavy threaded barrel) online through the store’s website, I could pick it up there – probably within a week or so. And that’s exactly what I did. I then went to ShopRuger.com and ordered a compact stock module with raised comb to fix my LOP issues.
People complain about not giving local businesses a chance and that brick and mortar stores are losing large amounts of business due to online shopping. But situations like this are WHY.
In the internet shopping age the only advantage to a brick and mortar shop is your customers being able to handle merchandise first-hand, grabbing something they need right now, and CUSTOMER SERVICE. If you can’t provide those things – particularly customer service – then why are you operating?
If you are complaining that your shop can’t compete with large chain stores – what are you doing about CUSTOMER SERVICE? Are you greeting people as they enter – particularly women who may be a little intimidated? Are you answering questions without being condescending? Details like that are what keep people (particularly women, who tend to be loyal shoppers) coming back to your business.
Maybe I’ll give that other shop a second chance with a scope or magazines. But probably not. I tend to carry grudges and I’ll likely just order online.
The shipping tracker says my new Ruger is on its way, and I’m very excited. I’m a little disappointed that I couldn’t spend that money at someone’s private local shop, but oh well. Capitalism.
This review has been a long time in the making. I would sit down to put digital ink to the interwebz and I would get distracted and come up with something else to do with the sight.
As such, the HE515CT-GR had a lot of rounds go under its glowing green reticle. 5.56, 7.62, and 9mm.
The HE515CT-GR rode on an AK, a Galil ACE, a Zenith Z5, and is currently running tandem on an AR pistol with a magnifier. It’s been a trooper.
Dissecting the 515
The HE515CT-GR is one of the T1 body style 20mm micro dot sights.
The plethora of numbers and letters on all the Holosun sights can become a little overwhelming, so allow me to translate.
HE: Holosun Elite, the HE denotes the series the sight is in. HS is the standard line and HE is the Elite line that holds the higher IPX8 ratings against immersion and debris.
515: The number denotes sight model.
C: C denotes the sight has the solar panel power supplement.
T: Titanium sight body, non T sights use aluminum.
GR: Green LED reticle, RD denotes red, and there will be an amber/gold option coming this year
The 515 has the T1 base making it widely compatible with the selection of red dot mounts on the market, It ships with a standard AR co-witness height but feel free to place it in your favorite.
The 515 has two model styles, solar and battery only, The solar C models mount the battery in cell in a shelf below the sight body and will draw primarily from the solar cell for power if it can. This results in a 2-5 year battery life. Even on the non solar models a yearly battery change would be more than enough to keep the sight running without pause.
Personally… I don’t like the current shelf design. The tiny screws are subject to pulling a Houdini and vanishing while simultaneously requiring a special tool for battery replacement. Functionally I found no issue with conductivity or power supply but I want to see a more robust and, if possible, toolless method for battery change.
The control scheme is a simple two button design, + and -, and the windage and elevation turrets are capped and protected by the sight housing. The caps double as easy tools for adjusting the optic’s .5 MOA per click controls.
Rounding the package out is an included killflash and flip away caps. I generally eschew these immediately on every optic. They serve no function unless you’re going into a very austere environment with plenty of nasty. If/when I need them, they’re in the box.
515 On the Guns
Spoiler Alert/TLDR: It works.
The 515 has four features Holosun likes to highlight.
Solar Failsafe
Shakeawake
M.R.S. Multi-Reticle System
Green Super L.E.D.
They have a specs sheet too for those interested in the numbers.
The Sig Sauer M17 was a controversial win but a massive one for the arms giant.
They’ve been pulling out win after win with contracts, recently acquiring two optic contracts for US Army DMR’s and a SOCOM LPVO.
But the M17 is the new sidearm for ‘New Army’ and its expanding theory around using and carrying a sidearm. It’s integrating modularity, optics compatibility, and all hours operative considerations.
GarandThumb Mike is taking a look and since I want one, so am I.
