Quote of the Day – Freiheit (2/15/2013)

I got about halfway through this and realized that if a damn whitetail deer can run 150 yards after being plugged by a .30 cal rifle bullet then why should I expect a bad guy to stop and drop dead after a single hit from a handgun round?

Freiheit – Comment to Let’s Talk Terminal Ballistics 3 – The Myth of Handgun Stopping Power

February 14th, 2013

[First if you haven’t been reading Tim’s series on Terminal Ballistics, I recommend you do.  There are a lot of myths out there and many of them are stubborn and have serious trouble dying despite evidence and science to the contrary.

Second, this is exactly why magazine capacity limits are total crap.  Go read this section most importantly and then ask yourself, “Why wouldn’t I want to carry as much ammunition in a single magazine as I could?”

There is no magic bullet, well maybe a 50 BMG, but still the idea of a person stopping magically merely because it was God’s own caliber is a myth.  Especially with regards to pistols.  That isn’t to say, as Caleb rightly points out, there are reasons to prefer one caliber over another, but it’s not for the reasons many throw out there. -B]

Well Said Sir!

This is by far one of the best speeches I’ve seen directed towards the petty tyrants attacking our rights.

Good to see I’m not alone in getting angry for much the same reasons, and honestly has more of a reason than anyone else to be angry.

And yes, I was grinning as he called those representatives tyrants.

Along the same lines we need more people in politics like this mayor.  If you haven’t seen this video, I suggest watching it to the end.

I like how the mayor called out the two petty tyrants at the end.  Hopefully that ass who walked out is recalled from office.

Quote of the Day – A Girl and Her Gun (2/4/2012)

This giveaway is not about gun ownership (which is cool by itself). It is about trying to help empower a woman to see herself in a new and powerful light and it is about encouraging her to take positive steps in her own life to help her be more free, more in control, more peaceful, more safe.

A Girl and Her GunA New Focus

February 1st, 2013

[That right there in a nutshell is the leading reason I am so willing to fight so hard on this side of the fence.  It is the foundation for Why I Get Angry.

So A Girl is doing another give-away.  The details on the give-away can be found here.  If you qualify and would like to participate, you can also use this handy form.

There’s a reason I love this community and this is a great example of it. -B ]

Why Would You Ever Need a Magazine With More Than 10 Rounds

Lately people have been throwing around the need argument.  It is an argument that honestly doesn’t really matter.  Drunk driving kills how many people every year and does anyone need to drive?  Why not just use public transportation?  Why does anyone need to drive themselves from point A to B?  But again, the argument doesn’t matter, it’s pointless.  Does law enforcement limit themselves to 10 rounds? What about the military?  But they’re different I hear you cry?  Are they?  Do they really need 30 round magazines that turns their guns into mass killing machines?  They should just reload like the rest of us!


Image by Oleg Volk.

As I am writing this I am coming down off a serious adrenaline dump.  I had wrapped my knee for the night and was dressed in such a manner as not to rapidly exit my door grabbing my weapon and having nothing more than was on the belt of my pants.

Let me start at the beginning.  My local neighborhood gun shop is a block away.  The owner is quite literally my neighbor.  I wave hi to him and his wife on my way to work every morning, we are literally on the same street.  I am merely an additional 100 yards from his business than he is from his house.  Due to my proximity, my willingness, and the fact I hang out and help because one of his sons is my age and he’s a cool guy I’m basically on the business roster.

Early this month they had to attend their buy show in Vegas along with SHOT show.  The shop owner closed up and he and the regular employees headed down for a “business vacation”.  While gone I was put on the alarm system call list, still am actually.  If any of the sensors goes off, they called the shop followed by my phone.

Tonight the alarm went off.  I missed the call and rolled out after my voicemail buzzed.  The shop owner was ahead of me and I texted his son immediately I heard the voice mail and head out.  They were finishing up clearing the building as I walked in the front door.  I had my side arm and a few other tools but I was brining up the rear so bad I wasn’t too worried.  We met up, did some debugging, notice that some of the sensors use batteries and we replaced all of them.  We reactivated the system and went home.

After the first adventure, I figured my night was over, went to a Robb life style of “Pants Free” and wrapped up my left knee.  Two hours later, my phone rang again.  I was out of the house in under 2 minutes, with my pants on, rifle, side arm, and knife.  I merely had the immediate possessions I was able to grab.  I went flying out of the house and flew down my road at about 60 mph flew into the parking lot and slid to a stop just before the front door.  I slipped past the front door, unlocked it, and proceeded to clear the building carefully and methodically. Nothing was out-of-place, nothing was wrong other than the alarm had gone off again.


Image by Oleg Volk.

I bring all this up because I want to emphasize a point.  I left the house with merely the equipment I could grab.  I wasn’t tossing on magazine carriers.  I wasn’t tossing on multiple weapons.  I grabbed one weapon that total gave me 61 rounds to put on target.  I grabbed one weapon that could I could accurately and easily manipulate in the variety of conditions seen within the shop.  I had my side arm on my belt which gave me an extra 13+1 should my primary weapon fail.  If I had not left my firearm clipped to my belt, it would have been left at home.

Now some would say, I didn’t need to go down there, or go inside.  Police response where I live is 30-45 minutes if we’re lucky.  Further the cost of a false alarm is expensive and best dealt with.  Yes it could be considered a high risk maneuver, so is letting the criminals inside steal firearms and ammunition.  I’m comfortable entering that environment, I’m familiar with it, I know the layout, I know where I can find cover and concealment, and I know the better ways to get around to avoid kill zones.

Even more than that some would say, it isn’t my business so it isn’t my problem.  To them I would say, stay in suburbia, stay in the city, and leave those of us who like rural life to live among our like-minded neighbors in peace.  I would help my neighbor as he would help me.  Our community as a whole would be shamed by an event like this, and I will be damned if I will let the, “Let someone else deal with it” and “Not my problem” attitude take over.  The owner felt bad it interrupted my night, but in the end I told him I don’t care, doubly so because if anything was happening I don’t care if he’s on site first or I’m on site, the bottom line is the security of the business and the weapons inside.  I would rather them call me so I can give immediate support than have him out numbered in a worse situation waiting for the eventual police arrival.

The whole point of this  though is I was limited to what I could grab and head out the door with.  In this case my AR-15 and my side arm.  In the middle of the night someone is limited to what they can easily grab by their nightstand.  Be it a XDm 9 with a 20 round capacity or an AR-15 with a 30 round magazine. The point is any citizen deserves to be able to take as much fight with them as they possibly can at the drop of a hat.  Criminals do not call ahead or provide advanced notice and they will not give you a chance to go get more ammo.  Why do people like normal capacity magazines, because it’s less you have to worry about when something goes bump in the middle of the night.  It’s less you have to fiddle with.  No one has ever come back from a gun fight and said, “Damn, I wish I hadn’t brought so much ammo.”

*I have two 30 round magazines attached together like this in my rifle.  It was this that allowed me to quickly deploy with 61 rounds in hand.  I have a second set that will be taped up in the near future and relocated to quickly grab.

Quote of the Day – A Girl and Her Gun (01/02/2013)

Unless you are planning on using your gun to kill or giving it/selling it to someone who is, your buy back is nothing more than another thing to make you feel good. Listen closely to what has been said a million times by a million smart folks…your feel good move WILL NOT make a flying flipping bit of difference in terms of keeping your kid, my kid, any kid safe in schools, movie theaters, banks, parks…

(Emphasis mine)
A Girl and Her Gun – I Got Your Buy Back…
January 1st, 2013

[Most of the clamoring I’ve heard recently, including the BS being introduced in congress is the same old song and dance we’ve always heard.  It’s the classic, “Do it again but only harder.”

What’s the definition of insanity again?  It happens to be the same as futility.

 The act of doing the same thing over and over expecting a different result.

As Joe has so rightly pointed out though we need an orthogonal solution.  The problem is, they are unwilling to accept any solution but that which they want.  To them that is the only answer to the problem, their problem as defined by them.  Both sides of the debate admit there is a problem and want to find a solution.  One side of this debate doesn’t want to debate though, they want to lecture and do what they want.

Currently I’m sick of the BS being spouted by that particular group and as far as I’m concerned can be run out of the discussion.  We had the discussion on their talking points and they lost.  If they don’t want to grow up and actually discuss things like a reasonable and rational person, difficult given the prevalence for Peterson Syndrome, they can go sit at the kids table and eat while the grownups talk.

Ultimately A Girl’s conclusion is right:

So when another attack happens because no effective change took place I hope you are still feeling good about yourself. As for me, I prefer to do what at least has a chance of working. You will not be getting my gun. Not for 200 bucks or for $500 or for $1000 or…you get the picture.

Another attack will happen, it is an inevitability.  The choice of tool by the killer may change, but this tragedy will happen again as long as we keep redoing the same failed solutions.  China has had a string of similar incidents where a knife was used instead of a firearm.

For those of you who think that we can negotiate and retain some of our rights.  What happens when the next attack occurs? Or the one after that?  They will come and nibble again and again, stripping your rights away.  Ultimately to the point where they are trying to outlaw kitchen knives.

We stand to gain nothing by negotiating with the enemy on this front, instead we stand to lose everything.  Now is the time to stand up and fight.

If you haven’t contacted your reps, do so now.  That link will allow you to contact all your reps in one shot.  I spent some time last weekend and wrote individual personalized letters to each of my reps.  If you have the time, do it.  Don’t let the work of the past 19 years undoing the damage sink and fade into the darkness. -B]

The Mass Shooting that Wasn’t

Title ripped off from Uncle.

Let me start by saying this was originally a comment to Uncle’s post but eventually I turned it into a post because honestly this needs to be out in front.

Antu says the man headed toward the theater and shot a male in the lot. The age and condition of the victim wasn’t immediately known, but Antu says his injuries did not appear life-threatening.

The gunman entered the theater, Antu says, where he fired a shot but did not hit anyone. An off-duty sheriff’s deputy working security then shot the gunman.

Now why would I make a post out of this?  Because last night on Facebook, god knows where at this point, someone left a comment along the following lines:

That was because it was an off duty officer! They’re tested so such a high standard that no mere citizen could qualify. That’s why this armed individual was able to stop this criminal!

For those who don’t feel like clicking the link, here’s the video shown in that post, which gives more details:

So lets bust this whole thing open shall we?  First up we have statistics showing police vs. civilian response.  14.3 deaths during a police response to 2.3 deaths when armed civilians response.  Admittedly a limited sample pool given you’re more likely to be struck by lightning.  Moving forward though there’s the argument that an armed citizen will more likely hit bystanders than the police.  Lets compare and contrast two videos shall we?

NYPD score, 1 bad guy, 9 innocent civilians.  A block of “highly trained” individuals.

Old guy with a CCW score: 2 injured assailants, no civilian casualties.

Again, why do we want more than 10 rounds in a magazine?  The idea of a one shot stop is a myth.  The idea that police are some how superior is a myth.  The idea that a gun free zone will some how make you safe is a myth.  The idea that an armed citizen cannot take care of themselves is a myth, one easily disproven I might add.

Why is it one side of this debate consistently argues myths instead of facts.  The reason the national news doesn’t cover this is because it doesn’t fit their narrative of myths.

And here come the Fudds…

So already I’ve seen comments and even got an email from a friend about a particular comment that was left, below is what the comment said (emphasis mine, spelling his).

We all here want to feel safe and do what we can to protect our families & loved ones: we are parents to our children, wives to our husbands, true friends to our friends. More than this we are neighbors and members of our community, in church, club, workplace and park.

I honor the Bill Of Rights and welcome the freedom the Second Ammendment gives me. I also recognize that this was written 221 years ago against the backdrop of our emerging nation. At this sad time and remembering past atrocities I will now seek a complete ban on assault riflesI will continue to proudly keep and carry my little Ruger.
While I dont know many of you here I know that you are no different to my own neighbors; good people living in difficult times. We all need to do the right thing and show leadership.

Here’s the thing folks, you either have a right to arms or you don’t.  There is no negotiating on this, we did that in 1994 and look what happened.  Further the current atrocity pulling at everyone’s heart strings happened within a state with an assault weapons ban!

If the ban didn’t stop him there what makes you think it would somehow work in the future?  Please inform me how “just one more law” would have altered the course of events given the litany of laws he broke before he even started shooting children.  Explain to me how the law-abiding gun owners are at fault and the sacrifice of their rights will somehow make the world a safer place.  Even law-makers admit that an assault weapons ban wouldn’t have changed anything, you must know something the rest of us don’t.

But lets destroy your BS regarding 221 years ago shall we?  At the time people owned cannon, artillery, and during the American Revolution the Kentucky Long Rifle was the AR-15 of the era.  Read that again, the Kentucky Long Rifle was the AR-15 of the era.  It was a military arm that was quite excellent at striking targets at long distances.  By todays standard our bolt-action rifles could be compared with muskets.  Muskets, lacking rifling, were less accurate but quicker to reload.  So there’s a trade-off yes, overall the technology was quite similar, however there was a considerable difference between the two.

Lets move forward not even 100 years to the civil war and the advent of the henry repeating rifle as well as the percussion-cap revolver.  Both of which greatly increased the available firepower of a single individual, yet by your argument we should have nothing more than what we had 221 years ago when it was written.  So no revolvers, no repeating rifles, this destroys cartridge firearms, thus kiss your bolt-action rifles and shotguns good-bye seeing as they couldn’t have conceived of this 221 years ago.

Because they couldn’t conceive of the advances in technology 221 years ago, because they didn’t see the immediate benefit of the printing press, you argue for a complete ban on an inanimate object, that you don’t use, thinking that will somehow stop evil. You are however more than happy to continue carrying your “little Ruger” which, by your argument, should be outlawed since we should only take into account what they had at the time.

So if you want to carry a defensive pistol and you want to carry on this argument, you will carry nothing more than a single shot flint-lock pistol.  For you see, you should only ever need one round!  If you need more than one, obviously you need to practice your aim more!  No one needs a 10 shot magazine, the size of the Ruger LCP, or even a six shot revolver, for our fore-fathers survived on 1 shot flint locks and that is what they had in mind when they wrote the 2nd Amendment, at least that’s what you claim.  You cannot have it both ways, you cannot just embrace technology you like and throw away that you dislike.

Our opponents would be happy to take away every semi-automatic pistol, who needs them right?  You can carry a revolver, it has six rounds, more than enough for anything you might encounter!  Then one day someone goes on a spree, reloading while the response takes 20 minutes and you hear cries that we need blanket revolver ban.  It’s a slippery slope my friend and the first assault weapons ban proved that along with another important fact.

The federal assault-weapons ban, scheduled to expire in September, is not responsible for the nation’s steady decline in gun-related violence and its renewal likely will achieve little, according to an independent study commissioned by the National Institute of Justice (NIJ).

“We cannot clearly credit the ban with any of the nation’s recent drop in gun violence. And, indeed, there has been no discernible reduction in the lethality and injuriousness of gun violence,” said the unreleased NIJ report, written by Christopher Koper, a professor at the University of Pennsylvania.

Now you could say I’m over stepping and taking this too far to which I would reply, how do you set the bar then?  George Washington didn’t cross the Delaware to get to his duck blind and by god the Second Amendment was not written with the aspect of hunting in mind.  No, at the time the American public maintained it’s own supply of military arms and while some would say that is no longer necessary, I would point out that to this day the United States has an unorganized militia that can be called upon to defend her.  As well as the fact that our government has committed atrocities against her own people and you wish to give that same government a sole monopoly on force.  Merely ensuring that her own citizens cannot resist if they feel it necessary to do so.

Lastly your argument for an assault weapons ban also completely ignores the fact that the majority of the features banned are purely cosmetic and safety related.  Tell me, what good does it do to ban a collapsible stock?  You know that thing that allows you to adjust the length of pull for different sized shooters.  That thing you adjust to make sure the shooter doesn’t get scoped, or otherwise suffer injury.  The pistol grip, which is quite beneficial for disabled shooters allowing for a more natural grip angle and thus preventing further damage to the wrist because of recoil.  Also my personal favorite, banning a barrel shroud.  Really!? Banning an object who’s sole purpose is to prevent the user from burning themselves.  That’s like banning suppressors, because we all like hearing damage!

Your statement above is nothing but pure hypocrisy no matter how you cut it. You either support the individual right of self-defense, including their right to choose what they think is the best arm for them, or you don’t.  You cannot just say, well I don’t like evil black rifles so their bad but leave my pistols alone.  What happens to the disabled woman who cannot easily deploy a pistol but can a rifle?  Must she be stuck with a bolt-action rifle that she cannot effectively operate the bolt on?  Ok, so you’ve left semi-auto rifles now with the necessary features to aid in ease of use.  Now are you going to limit her to 10 rounds?  That operator as I said lacks normal dexterity so while you can quickly and easily reload a magazine you’ve still limited the disabled shooter.  And for what?  It’s not like the magazine bans really matter to a determined individual:

Remember it was 20 minutes for the police to respond, so short of banning metallic cartridges, people can reload guns, again and again, using them for evil.  The answer is to step up and stop evil when it appears, that is best done by allowing people to retain the best tools for doing so.  That is not done by banning the otherwise law-abiding and turning them into felons overnight.  I find it ironic though that you claim we should do the right thing and show leadership and you do so by blindly following the talking heads.  The right thing is stepping up and doing what needs to be done, even if it seems difficult.  The right thing is protecting the rights of others despite the actions of a lone mad man.  By the way sir, you lead from the front, not from the rear as you kiss the boots of your future masters begging forgiveness for something that wasn’t your fault.

In the words of Samuel Adams:

If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace.

We ask not your counsels or your arms.

Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you.

May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.

Quote of the Day – A Girl (12/18/2012)

When I was mugged I blamed only 2 people. My attacker and myself. I can’t control him, so I looked at myself to figure out what I could do to put myself in a better position for survival should the element I couldn’t control decided to come after me again. I took responsibility. I didn’t blame the cops or the grocery store parking lot or even my parents. They had some influence as did society, but it was me who stood there and did nothing. It was me. I did not come after you or anyone else. I didn’t go to congress and ask for new laws to protect my lack of action. I took action. Law abiding, legal action and I took responsibility for my part in that day. I can tell you none of it felt good. I didn’t feel good after I picked myself up off the ground, I didn’t feel good as I hid in the bathroom and took care of my scraped up arms and back. I didn’t feel good when my so called friends turned their backs on me. I didn’t feel good when my daughter looked me in the eye and told me she didn’t feel safe because I didn’t stop the and guy. It didn’t feel good when I showed up in the park to learn how to defend myself. I felt anything but good. I felt sad and lonely. I felt lost and broken. I felt ashamed and confused. I felt scared and and hopeless. And I fought all of that everyday for over a year in order to take responsibility. In order to feel good again.

A GirlFeeling Good
December 18, 2012

[First, go read the whole thing, it’s worth it and there were a few other quotes I almost put up first till I hit that one.

Now when I read that my immediate thought was, “No one ever said doing the right thing was the easiest route.”  I did a previous rant in the immediate wake and honestly her post and mine are intertwined together.

Feelings are driving the conversation for a lot of people right now, they want to do something, anything.  As I said before:

They want to be able to look at a physical object and blame it for what as happened.  They want to destroy the physical object and blame it for their grief.

They don’t want to admit that ultimately there was a person behind the gun.  They don’t want to admit no matter how hard they tried, they wouldn’t be able to control him.  They don’t want to admit all the efforts they took in advance to feel good in the wake of things like Columbine and other mass shootings in the end did nothing.  Not only did they do nothing, but the may have made it worse.

To them though that last thought is an impossibility   It is impossible that the actions they took to satisfy their feelings could have been counter productive.  How could they?  Their responses felt right to them in a previous time of emotional tragedy.

People currently forget that 11 years ago a group of men brought this country to its knees with a set of box cutters.  The tool is a tool and nothing more.  It’s use for good and evil rests entirely with the person holding the tool.

The principal, Dawn Hochsprung, gave her life ultimately trying to protect her students.  She was forced, by law, to be unarmed in that encounter.  The aggressor however broke numerous laws and had to actually steal the firearms to carry out his crime.  Think about that for a second, objectively.  We, as a community, trusted that woman, as well as the staff with the care and protection of our children.  We trusted that they would do what is necessary to keep them safe and educate them for the future.  We trust them enough to send our children there for a decent part of their young lives.  Yet we refuse to allow them the choice of carrying a firearm to defend our children should evil come before them.

We refused to allow the people immediately on the scene to respond to the threat posed against the children.  Instead the shooter was given 20 minutes to perpetrate his crimes.  He was given 20 minutes with defenseless victims.  Victims who were in the charge of responsible adults.  Those responsible adults, responsible for the children in their charge, were forcibly disarmed under the law.

The law in this case guaranteed the outcome.  We will never know what the outcome would have been had just one teacher been able to choose to be armed.  We can hypothesize given previous events, such as the Pearl High School incident in 1997.  But we can never actually know, all we can do is wonder.

It’s time to stop passing laws based on irrational emotion and examine a very simple and harsh fact.  When evil finally shows up, how can we react.  We focus too much on stopping evil out right and preventing it from ever happening.  While definitely a worthy goal, it is almost impossible to achieve since you cannot actually control the aggressor.  All you can do is react as quickly as possible and try to minimize damage.   What you can control to achieve that goal is yourself and your response, except in many cases the law has neutered that ability from the victims. -B]