AR-15 vs. Shotgun

I know the rest of the gunblogs have gone off on this.

It's my turn.

I rarely watch cable news anymore. When I do, it's usually for a short period because I simply cannot stand it.

Monday evening, we watched for a while after dinner. I legitimately wanted to know more about what happened at the Washington D.C. Naval Yard and figured it was no longer a "breaking" news situation as Aaron Alexis had been dead for more than 8 hours.

I was wrong.

In the 20 minutes or so I could stand to watch the Erin Burnett program on CNN, we heard that Alexis used an AR-15 at least a dozen times. It sounded as if this AR-15 is a terribly dangerous gun and certainly not what my father or his father would use for a noble purpose such as hunting.

Then, Tuesday happened.

Alexis used a shotgun. Not an AR-15. Not the weapon the media has come to "know" and hate.

So. I'll turn to alternative ammo media to present a story about 5.56 and how it may be the "greatest caliber ever made"!

All jokes aside, prayers with those who lost loved ones and those who are still recovering from Alexis' paranoia-filled attacks. I certainly wish the men and women who spend their lives working hand-in-hand with our military the best.

Open Carry AR/long gun protest in Detroit

From the ARs in the pictures, I see a POF P415 in the hands of the guy-with-the-flamboyant-shoes.  There's many folks though with ARs and a few with .22 rifles and shotguns, and of course there's one guy with a pistol strapped into a $12 crappy nylon holster.  Why spend $500+ dollars on a quality handgun only to wrap it into such a contraption?  Someone is going to make fun of you, so stop it.

A summary of the protest comes from the arrest of an 18 year old man who was carrying an M1 carbine on his back as the only means of legal armed defense.  From what I've read, the police and prosecutor are bending over backwards to make an example of this guy, who broke no laws, and the locals are showing how they feel about it.  Here's a thread with the details.  Be happy knowing that a new term has been coined out of this: Long Gun Open Carry, or LGBT LGOC for short, as what we definitely need in this world right now is one more acronymn that sounds like so many others.

My take on this is that if you expect the masses to follow statutes and codes to the letter, than you have to expect those who enforce said codes to follow them as well.  It's obvious it doesn't work out that way very often, but as you can see there are some folks out there who take it seriously, and it wouldn't profit to get them all worked up over what will amount to a mediocre funding stream from an 18 year old.  The law of diminishing returns still holds water last I heard.

Vigilance to stop gun violence

My advice to stop violence is to be a responsible man and prevent it from happening in the first place:

Then said he unto them, But now, he that hath a purse, let him take it, and likewise his scrip: and he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one. - Luke 22:36

I decided to bend the rules tonight and go with a lamp instead of a candle because it puts out much more useful light. In that regard I also decided not to add another picture of a handgun, but instead a picture of the most useful and deadly tool that I have ever owned: my Marlin Glenfield Model 25, which has honed my shooting skills since I was six. I have shed more critter's blood and fired more rounds with this rifle than all the others combined. Easy. If given just one weapon to walk this world with for the rest of my life, there wouldn't be any hesitation, the Marlin it is.

Besides the rifle and accessories and book, the table is just as it was sitting where my kids play. I thought it was appropriate to use, stickers and dinosaurs and all, as on it rests an inert tool that know I can use with purpose to defend their lives. I keep a handgun for general defense, yes, but the Marlin is fairly capable and light, and would do the job if asked. More importantly, I could feed my family with it for several months with just one $3 box of cartridges, and that matters the most to me.

First remove the beam from your own eye

Andy notes that many "gun control" states that pride themselves on strict gun laws aren't comparing so well to states with a bit more freedom. Maybe New York City Mayor Bloomberg should take a break from bashing Virginia and tend to his own issues.

Survey says. . . . . .

YES!! Women should carry handguns for personal defense!

Oh, what do I win?!?!

An aptly named county for such a Sheriff

Wright said,"Liberals call me and tell me the chain-gang form of justice isn't working. Well, let me inform you, your form of justice isn't working either."

He said Lance should not have had the right or opportunity to "violate a good, upstanding woman."

***

Wright said, "It's too bad someone with a concealed weapons permit didn't walk by. That would fix it." He said people are tired of doing the right thing and criminals
getting away with their actions.

He said several times, "I want you to get a concealed weapons permit."

It's a start. There's plenty more where that came from, from a Sheriff that seems to have his heart and mind in the right place. He seems to genuinely understand that his town will be a better, safer place if the good folks at large are able to stop scumbags with something that works much faster than a cell phone.

I understand his anger, too; there have been two more attempted abductions in my AO since my last post on the matter, and police don't believe any of them are related. That would mean there are lots of twisted creepys running around, not one. This place is saturated with wonderful kids that need to be protected, and hopefully the community is up to the task.

Women like guns? Who knew?

An article on the book "Chicks with Guns," with a few illustrations. The mom holding her baby son on her left hip with an heirloom double barrel shotgun in her right hand is particularly striking.

Consumer backlash

This one has nothing to do with the normal host of things posted here, but hit close to home since I've been screwed over by car salesman more times than I can count:

PORTSMOUTH — Unhappy that a Lafayette Road car dealer wouldn't take back the van he bought on Monday, David Cross drove "the lemon" back after the dealer closed on Tuesday and crashed it into six cars parked on the lot for sale.

"I hit the first $25,000 car I could see," Cross told the Herald. "I didn't hit a car under $20,000. Then I moved a van that they wouldn't come down on the price for. I moved it with the lemon they sold me. I just held it to the floor until I couldn't move it anymore. I took out seven vehicles, including my own."

I'm not condoning behaviour like that, as the only thing it solves is the need for short term gratification of one person, but I can feel the guy's pain; car salesman have the potential to be genuine scumbags, and have left people completely hosed over an expensive item.

I've never lost it like that and destroyed property, but one time many years ago my brother and I were bored and broke, and he was wondering out loud about how to finance a car. I had been there and done that before with the scars to prove it, so we swung into a local car dealership and I went through the entire process -- test drive, bartering; right up until the yellow sales sheet was cut. We had been there for about four hours before we walked out. It wasn't the righteous thing to do, but it sure did feel good, and years later my wife and I were screwed over pretty good by the same dealership. . . .twice, so I guess I had it coming.

Very recently my lady and I bought a mini van to better shuttle our growing tribe, and the salesman that we dealt with was brand new on the job, was a Vietnam veteran, and was as honest as the day was long. I told him as much, and that I was thankful to deal with someone who had not acquired the sleazy aura that car salesman often do. Being real has a value all on its own.

Sometimes gun owners impress me

The other day I was pointing out how gun owners can be complete fuckwads and eat their own, but today I was pleased to see that less judgmental gun owners can be extremely generous.

The gun owner I was defending in the first link carries a Smith & Wesson Sigma pistol, which some folks commented was a giant piece of shit and that he should just not carry it. The more logical commenters defended his pistol choice, and several have even gone as far as to provide the capitol for the OP's (Assault-Rifle-City) choice of handgun from a local FFL. Mr. Assault-Rifle-City is currently on active duty protecting our country, so the offer is especially warranted. Others are chipping in to provide ammo and holsters and stuff.

A success story, if you ask me. Good hearted gun owners not only came to his defense, they helped him overcome a major financial hurdle in the acquisition of a new handgun.

Thanks for your service, Assault-Rifle-City!

Sometimes gun owners depress me

A Soldier (call him OP) posted in the ARCOM General Discussion thread about a run in he had with law enforcement while open carrying a handgun with his wife at a restaurant. The cop obviously did not know the law, or that OP was open carrying because that is the only lawful means he has to carry a firearm, and threatened to charge him with brandishing. This happened in Kentucky, which allows for open carry, and from some of the commenters on the thread has no known statute for brandishing.

The result of the encounter ended well enough, with the cop going on his merry way when OP stood on his rights. The result in posting the encounter on a pro-gun forum ended up attracting some of the most ignorant so-called gun owners who not only gave the OP shit about open carrying, and also attacked his equipment and gun choice, they go on to suggest that he break the law and carry concealed. This is out of the belief that open carrying takes away your element of surprise, and offers nothing in return.

It should be said that the OP was open carrying because he is not yet 21, and cannot apply for a concealed handgun permit. He followed the letter of the law and carried his gun the only way he could, but that is lost to many who commented on his post. There is one particular commenter who openly admits to breaking laws that he does not agree with, and then tries to ply the OP to do the same based on a belief that open carry shouldn't be allowed because. . . . well, that's not at all clear.

Sometimes gun owners are our own worst enemy. We see that from time to time.

One trench at a time

A small town victory in Fairfax, Virginia where air gun legislation was addressed in order to bring it down to something less insane. It appears that despite media hype, there was no opposition to my fellow Virginians who stood in front of the Board of Stupervisors and supported the bill. VCDL President Phillip Van Cleave gives a down to earth statement about what it all means here in this video, and the reporter does a balanced job of covering the issue without butchering the facts.

Wish I had been there.

Pro gun win in Ohio

CHICAGO (Reuters) – Ohio lawmakers on Wednesday passed a bill allowing gun owners in the state to carry concealed weapons into bars and other establishments where alcohol is served.

The General Assembly passed the bill, which also eases restrictions on how guns can be transported in vehicles, in a 55-38 vote.

Good for Ohio. The last sentence in the article mentions that opponents think mixing guns and alcohol would be bad for the public, but they must not have read the law thoroughly as it explicitly states that guns and alcohol cannot be lawfully mixed. The same thing was argued here in Virginia when a similar law was passed, but the opponents didn't read the fine print apparently.

Global control

The U.N. is trying to pry into US gun laws again with the usual list of stuff like bans on semi-auto firearms and an international gun registry. If they fail, there's always next year. . . .

All the cool kids are doing it

Nancy at Excels at Nothing is enjoying the comforts of open carrying (OC) a firearm while out in public. To her surprise, the local SWAT team didn't show up, and the gun didn't crawl into her ear and lay eggs in her head causing her to go berserk and make the streets awash in blood.

Here in the Old Dominion, South of Fairfax of course, the carrying of your gun openly will pretty much get you no attention whatsoever. Everyone is used to seeing it to the point where it's no big deal. I used to OC all the time, but not so much anymore with the growing popularity of pocket carry. I mean, even if I strapped the Kel-Tec on my belt for the world to see, who's going to notice that little thing?

Aside from the usual politics and arguments of whether OC or concealed carry gives you an advantage comes the understanding that OC gets the nod for being more comfortable. You don't have to modify your wardrobe to conceal your piece, and that is significant as far as I'm concerned. Belt holsters that are not made to squish your all steel firearm tightly against your skin will feel much better at the end of the day. Trust me. And to those I know who carry in a shoulder rig, they report to me that that's the most comfortable way for all day carry, and also note that it's way more convenient to take on or off than a belt holster. Utility is a wonderful thing.

Guns off campus

DC can't seem to keep their scumbags in order. With armed home intruders robbing Georgetown students at will, it's a wonder that students aren't offered shortcuts through the red tape to own a firearm for home protection. Students have quite enough on their plate already without having to worry about reading the Study Guide on how to properly jump through all the legislative hoops needed to own a gun. I think fear qualifies as a significant distraction to study these days, so maybe it's time something is done about it.

Pew? Like a whiffy Pew, or like. . . . .

I'm not really sure what they're talking about. See for yourself:


The story is titled "Packing Heat in the Pews," like citizens have a Star Wars lunchbox full of handwarmers with them when they go to church. How about a title that isn't despicable for once? Sure, "Citizens Request Clarification Of Equivocal State Code In Order To Not Be Fined/Ostracized While They Peacefully Assemble To Worship While Withholding The Means Of Self Defense" probably won't fit too well in the headline, but come on. You media types can at least show a little bit of neutrality every now and then. I swear, it's like you're walking around with you balls showing, and everyone can see them but you do nothing about it, wandering around with a huge smile on your face.

Anyways, Jim Snyder of the Virginia Citizens Defense League was interviewed, and I guess his clip got past editing because he didn't get his gun rights on. He chose instead to point out the obvious, that really nice Virginians want a silly statute clarified. That's why he gets paid the big bucks.

Also, the two people interviewed saw Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli's (my buddy Ken!) legal opinion as a good one. Of course, interviewing a huge white guy with a shaved head and long goatee in front of a Wal-Mart in Deliverence county, Virginia was bound to yield an opinion favorable to gun rights, so maybe the reporter wasn't so biased. I swear though you could here him curse under his breath when the nice looking woman said that she understood why people wanted to be armed in church; you have to take the bitter with the sweet. The opposition came in the form of a pastor at some church where, presumably, there had been several armed madmen hell bent on mayhem that were stopped cold at the door because they feared incurring a fine for having a firearm during the murder they were about to commit. So I can see his point about churches being places of safety and refuge.

So now churches are "talking" about whether or not to allow their flock to have a few sheepdogs within their doors. Good. If they have a problem with it, then they can clearly post their doors and let everyone know what the deal is. I find gun owners in general to sometimes wield their purse at issues that affect their rights; and from what I'm hearing about ATMs and credit card services in church to keep those notes out of default, the pastors might want to consider not cutting out some of their most loyal base. They may also want to consider that having half a dozen sheepdogs in the congregation would prove worthwile if a random madman got past the lunatic forcefield that protects the church and storms in with a shotgun.

Protection is personal

This morning I wanted to give a shout out to Ken, (Can I call you Ken? I feel like we need to be friends or drinking buddies now) aka Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli, over his recent legal opinion on what constitutes "a good and sufficient reason" to carry a weapon to church, to wit:

Cuccinelli wrote that the self-defense is at the heart of the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which guarantees the right to keep and bear arms.

The statute Cole questioned is in the penal, or criminal code, section of state law, and because of it must be “strictly construed against the Commonwealth and in favor of a citizen’s liberty,” Cuccinelli wrote.

Because of that, he said, “I conclude that lawfully carrying a firearm for self-defense and personal protection constitutes ‘a good and sufficient reason’” under the law.

Telling it like it is! Way to go! Hell, I like you. You can come over to my house and. . . . .oh, wait. . . .well, I can't give you my sister; she's already taken by a Good ol' Boy with an affinity for having his own weapon pointed at him - but I promise you that if you stop by we will smash into the Stella Artois or Woodford Reserve, your choice.

Now, it should be known that this legal opinion is not codified law, but it might as well be. Virginia has made it known that they like to do things their own way - for better or for worse - and the weight of the state's Attorney General is on the side of gun owners on this one. Regardless, there are some (like you know who) who are very butt-hurt over the idea of someone discreetly carrying a modern self defense tool to church without accruing a $250 fine:

“Places of worship don’t need loaded guns brought into them,” Malte said. “The way Attorney General Cuccinelli states it, it looks like he’s giving an opening to guns in churches, and we oppose that.”

Well, Mr. Malte, to the best of my knowledge, churches don't have the funds these days to spend on spree-shooter forcefields to keep the lunatics out; so if you look at things in that regard, nothing has changed. Instead of having one or two churchgoers in the congregation carrying their heaters because they value their gift of life, there will now be like five. Why don't you jump up and down while holding your breath?

This opinion is common sense squared. There is simply no good cause in fining non-violent people for an act that hurts no one. Also, Ken Cuccinelli is my hero.

Missouri women want equality

Experts cite two main reasons for the increase. First, they say most women want to take their protection into their own hands. And now with concealed carry laws, it makes it easier for them to do that.

Who knew? It surprises me that this short article doesn't harpoon the idea of women using common self defense tools like so many other news articles. American media is usually opposed to the idea of woman using guns, because somehow woman are way more sophisticated or something, and don't need to stoop to that level. Equal pay, but not equal might. I think we're finally coming past the dark side of the moon when news stories show favor to armed women.

Guns on campus

In Arizona, the House passes a law allowing guns to be carried on college campuses. It's now up to Governor Jan Brewer to sign. I'm counting down the days till we see all the blood on sidewalks state wide like in Utah.

DC gun ownership up

By this surprisingly non-hostile article at the Washington Post, since DC's handgun ban was ruled unconstitutional over 1,400 guns have been registered in the district. Take into account though that there is only one place for DC residents to claim ownership of their purchased firearm due to DC not having any gun stores. In order for a US citizen to lawfully purchase a firearm, they have to buy it in their state of residence; DC is no different even though it's not a state, and the one fellow who is licensed to make transfers of guns in the district charges $125.

The gist of the article is that only the more affluent residents are buying guns, and when you consider that a Glock handgun - not expensive as far as handguns go - is between $550 and $650, and on top of that you have to pay for the $125 transfer fee, you can see why it's something that only the more well off can afford.

Someone needs to tell the guy in the caption on the article to keep his finger off the trigger. Just sayin. And Alan Gura gets quoted a few times in the article, showing in one part that he's a realist:

Police said they could provide no data on registered guns being stolen, misused or used in self-defense, nor could they cite any specific incidents.

"Oh, I'm sure there's been some misuse," said lawyer Alan Gura, who successfully argued against the ban before the Supreme Court. "People steal and misuse stuff every day, whether it's guns or cars or kitchen knives. It's no surprise that people steal stuff and do bad things. That's the ordinary course of life."

Too bad the anti-gunners aren't such realists.