Thursday, January 31, 2013

New Walmart Ammo Policy

3 boxes per day per customer.
Nuff said.

Walmart Ammo Policy

In The News

Trying To Cut Out Sheriff Departments
Convicted Rapist Organizes Anti Gun Demonstration?
We Can Disarm Americans Within A Generation
No Better Critics - Women In Combat
1st Woman To Lead In Combat Thrilled With Change
Female Soldier Recounts Time Under Fire\
Stupid Military Cammo Patterns
Coed Combat Units
UN Climate Report Overstates Global Warming
Amazing Soldier Pics
Illegal Gun And Media Matters
Bloomberg Won't Disarm Bodyguards But Will Let Them Harass Journalist
Fake Pic Of Obama Shooting
Obama To Cut Healthcare Benefits For The Military
Marines & Army Being Cut
Why Women In Combat Is A Mistake
French Jobs Czar Admits Country Is Bankrupt - Walks Back Statement
Colin Powell Screaming Racism About Nothing
More Creative Editing From MSNBC - Sandy Hook Father Not Heckled
Same Heckling Story From Another Source
Fighter Jets Given To Anti American Muslims
Where 50,000 Guns Recovered In Chicago Came From

Concealed Carry Warning

 
 
  This was a short but worthwhile video from Yeager. Some of his stuff is really good and other vids leave you wondering WTF was he thinking. They're always entertaining though.
  I would guess that about a dozen people have asked me about concealed carry over the last month or so. Even people that I would never expect to have an interest in firearms are talking about buying guns. I hope they get some decent training and don't rely upon Uncle Bubba's advice or the guy next door that owns 20 guns but never shoots.
  Yeager made a very good point in his video. I've heard that warning about SOB carry in the past, but there are probably a large number of people getting into concealed carry that have not.
 
 The link below takes you to another important concern with CCW holsters. It's definitely worth reading and forwarding.
 
 
 
  Of course the same thing could have happened if the gun owner had been using a soft (or cheap) fabric holster. So long story short... use a holster that is stiff enough to stay out of the trigger guard and do not carry in the small of the back (SOB).



 


 

Wednesday, January 30, 2013

Anti Gun Arguments And A Lack Of Logic

 
 
  MrColionNoir makes a good point about anti gunners and their arguments. I've heard the nuclear weapon comment for many years. They also like to throw out ridiculous statements about owning tanks, fighter planes, and bombs. Eventually anti gunners get around to snidely saying that we can have all of the muskets that we want.
  That's very generous of them.
 
  Let's talk about a few of the points that anti gunners commonly attempt to make. MrColionNoir gave nukes a lot of coverage in his vid. That's a good place to begin.
  Nuclear warheads are weapons of mass destruction. They are not covered by the 2nd Amendment.
  The 2nd Amendment guarantees our right to possess small arms for both self defense and to guard against a tyrannical government. It doesn't guarantee the right to own WMDs. Hopefully Piers Morgan will get a memo on that argument, and stop wasting air time on such stupidity. Hell... It would be nice if MSNBC, CNN and the rest of those working for the Ministry Of Propaganda received an e-mail on that topic.
 
  OK, so what about bombs, grenades, and artillery shells? They're all classified as ordinance, and are not considered small arms. The rights of citizens to own ordinance is not guaranteed by the Constitution. Sorry if you disagree. I didn't write the document, or sit on the courts during firearms rulings. The 2nd Amendment guarantees your right to own an appropriate militia type weapon that an individual soldier might use. These weapons are what we refer to as "Small Arms."
 
  The antis enjoy twisting things around, and pretending that owning small arms as a defense against tyranny is the same as wanting tanks, fighter planes, etc.
  Guess what? We CAN own them. The vehicles have nothing to do with the 2nd Amendment though. You may not be able to buy the latest and greatest in military equipment, but you can own fighter planes (check out an airshow once in a while) and tanks.
  You can even possess the machineguns that go on these vehicles. Of course you must find them, pass the background check, jump through the NFA hoops, and raise the mountain of money required for these arms.
  The tank's main gun however is still a no no. We're getting back to talking about ordinance when discussing cannons.
  So if tanks and fighters are your thing, then go for it.
  I always laugh at the anti gunner somehow trying to compare a  Glock to a F16 fighter. They are an illogical bunch of people.
 
  Now for my favorite part... muskets. The antis love arguing that the Founding Fathers could never have envisioned rapid firing weapons like AKs, ARs, and other modern semi automatic weapons. They believe that since muskets (and rifles) were around during the 18th century, this is what we should be limited to owning.
  Doesn't that sound fair? 
 
  This point may take a while to address. Get some coffee.
 
  First of all, the Founding Fathers were well educated, and very intelligent. These gentlemen kept up on current events, and breakthroughs in science. As students of history they realized that both Europe and America were constantly in and out of wars. It's inconceivable that these men expected technology to stand still and firearms development to stagnate. After coming through the Revolution, they recognized the importance of firearms in civilian hands. It's foolish to believe that they never considered weapons evolving when writing the 2nd Amendment.
  Bear in mind that a rapidly firing rifle with a 20 round capacity  was available at the time of the Constitution being written. As this weapon was a major breakthrough, the odds are great that the Founding Fathers heard of it.  There were also breach loading sniper rifles on the battlefield during our revolution. Their rate of fire was much greater than the average musket. Our Founders would have known of these guns. The birth of our nation relied upon firearms. Those in power at the time surely took an interest in the topic.
 
  Some on the Left like to say that the early Americans needed firearms to protect themselves from the Indians. Supposedly that's no longer relevant and we can all just call 911 instead of protecting ourselves.
  I ask you. Who do you think would need a firearm more, an 18th century American living in Washington, DC or someone walking the streets of Chicago, DC, Baltimore, or Philly in 2013?
  BTW, the courts have ruled that the police actually do not have to protect you. I'll let you read about this case. It's an eye opener for those that think the, "To Protect And Serve" decal on the side of patrol cars really means something.
  Of course police officers officers will do everything possible to protect people when they're around, but most of their actions are reactive. They show up to take reports and string up crime scene tape. During the LA Riots, Hurricane Katrina, and Hurricane Sandy it's doubtful that was even done. American citizens were left to fend for themselves, and I'm sure that those owning firearms felt a lot more comfortable than the unarmed.
 
  Let's get back to semi autos not being covered under the Constitution since they didn't exist in the 18 century.
  Mormonism wasn't around at that time either. Does that mean that it's not covered under freedom of religion?
  Primitive printing presses were used during that time period. Does that mean that our freedom of the press doesn't apply to cable news networks and the internet? Are the print reporters using ink and paper the only ones protected as journalists?
  This list can go on and on. The core meaning in the "Bill Of Rights" remains the same. Restrictions are laid upon what the government can do, and our natural rights are listed. These individual rights are not granted by the Constitution. The are merely enumerated.
 
  This is the most popular question for gun owners. Some will ask "Why do you need an Assault Weapon or 30 round magazines (actually they'll say clips)?" 
  We have a "Bill Of Rights." It's not a "Bill Of Wants And Needs." If I choose to exercise my rights in regards to assembly, religion, firearms, etc. then it is my business. I do not have to justify what I do or purchase with a "Need."
  As long as I obey the laws of the land and do no harm to others, there is no just cause to infringe upon my Constitutional rights. We generally don't give up rights, and possessions because others might misbehave. Most of us believe in punishing the guilty and leaving the innocent alone. Those supporting big government are baffled by this thought.
  I will however answer the question about hi cap magazines and assault weapons. First of all, My life is worth at least as much to me as our President's is to him. My child is as valuable to me as his are to both him and his wife. If the agents guarding Obama and his family feel the need for 17 round mags in their pistols and 30 rounders in their M4's then I want similar weapons. If our local law enforcement officers feel that my county is dangerous enough to warrant having 15 round magazines in their handguns and AR15's in their trunks, then I want the same for my own protection. I suppose if our President authorizes lifetime Secret Service protection for myself and my family (as he did for himself), then I may bend a bit on the AR's. Until that time, I'll hold onto my weapons.
  
  We know what our country looks like in 2013. We do not however know what it will look like in 2023 or 2033. I don't know what kind of country my grandkids will inherit (other than obviously being in debt). There is clearly no need to take up arms against an oppressive government today, but who can say what the future may bring. Should things change for the worse, I'd prefer my XDM and M4(gery) over a revolver and a bolt action rifle.
   
  I am not a Constitutional scholar or a lawyer. I'm just a firearms enthusiast, and hobbyist. Every point I've made is common knowledge. Every statement has been repeated by others over the years. Very little that I wrote above is original, and none of it requires a law degree to figure out.
  We have a Constitutional scholar serving as our 44th President. He believes that the 2nd Amendment deals with the right to own duck hunting guns.  Perhaps he should consider suing Harvard for a refund, and spend more time doing independent reading.
 

Anti Gun People Can NOT Defeat This Video


Sunday, January 27, 2013

Biden On Gun Control

 
There's a lot of logic and common sense in this video. Unfortunately none of it comes from the man that is a heartbeat away from being President Of The United States.
 Give this video a look, click on the link to Sturmgewehre's YouTube page, and use the link provided.
 
 

Sunday, January 20, 2013

In The News

Obama - I Don't Believe People Should Be Able To Own Guns
The US Firearms Industry - Inside The Numbers
The 25 Most Effective Weapons In The US Arsenal
Tax Dollars For Gun Control
CNN Reporter Writes Obama A Letter Every Day
12 Year Old Girl Shoots Home Intruder
Americans Rally Nationwide Against Gun Control Measures
Jeep Production In China - Romney Was Right
Reminds Me Of Some People That I Know
Officials Lower Turnout Estimates For Inauguration
Yet Another General Gets Rushed Out
Fists Killed More Than Rifles In NY In 2011
Senator's Say That Obama's Gun Control Has Little Support
Want To Have A Neanderthal
Most Gun Violence Is In Dem Areas
Almost 8.4 Million Drop Out Of Labor Force In BHO's First Term
Who Owns The US Debt?
Suggestions For Dealing With A Law Enforcement Officer
How To Make Batteries From Spare Change
20 Facts About The Collapse Of Europe
40 Quotes From Winston Churchill

In The News

Do You Want To Scare A Baby Boomer
Obama's Past Views On Guns
House Bill Would Ban Internet Ammo Sales
3 Barrel Shotgun
Too Busy To Prosecute Those Breaking Gun Laws
Nice Pro Gun Argument
Sad But Interesting Stats
Bill Maher Actually Gets Something Close To Right
Mayor Nagin Indicted
Outstanding Infographic On Guns In America
Marines Return To Amphib Roots
Gang War In Oakland
NRA Membership Increases By 250,000 In One Month
.223 vs 5.56mm - What You Don't Know Could Hurt You
Egyptian Constitution Restores Slavery?
A New Currency War?
Welfare Spending Will Increase 80% Over Next Decade
Journalists Unwilling To Use Gun Free Zone Yard Signs
Boy Uses Assault Weapon To Repel Home Invaders
Poll Shows NRA Is More Popular Than Obama
The Slippery Slope Of Gun Control

NAA Mini Revolver


  This will be a little different from most of my reviews. I almost always sing the praises of whatever gun I'm reviewing. It's not exactly hard to figure out why. My money (like yours) is finite, and I do A LOT of research before spending several hundred dollars on a firearm. I'm usually at least reasonably happy with what I buy.

  But I didn't buy this handgun. The NAA Mini Revolver was given to me many years ago. It was a very thoughtful gift and greatly appreciated. I just never really figured out what to do with it.
  Let's get this out of the way. It's not a target gun, and it's too small to be an effective home defense gun.
  It's obviously intended as just a CCW gun. The problem is that it's not a great concealed carry gun. The caliber is nothing to brag about and you're pushing a .22lr out of a 1 1/8" barrel. I have my doubts about it's stopping power. The NAA Mini Revolver is a 5 shot single action so the capacity and speed of use is not that great. As a first line of defense it's kind of sad.

  Accuracy (or perhaps just my accuracy with it) is mediocre in my opinion.
  When shooting offhand, you really can't get much of a grip on the firearm. The recoil flips the gun up in your hand after every shot. It has to be readjusted  and obviously your grip changes every time you shoot it. None of this is conductive to accurate shooting. The standard grip panels can be changed to this folding holster grip , and that will no doubt help somewhat.
   I can keep all of my shots in the vitals at 7 yards... but it's kind of slow compared to other weapons that I use. I'm sure that some will shoot much better with the Mini Revolver than I do. I doubt that many people will adopt it as their first line of defense.


  The sights are about average for a CCW revolver. There's a bladed front sight (no serrations) and a notched rear. There's nothing to brag about, but there's nothing to really critique either.

  The trigger pull is about 6lbs and feels just a little heavy. That is probably a good thing with this particular gun. The trigger pull is very short. Obviously there is no trigger guard.


  The Mini Revolver must be disassembled to load or reload.
  To load the Mini Revolver:
1) Point the weapon in a safe direction.
2) Put the hammer on half cock.
3) Remove the cylinder pin and roll the cylinder out either side of the handgun. 
4) Drop 5 rounds into the chamber or if reloading, punch out the spent cases with the cylinder pin first.
5) Place the cylinder back into the frame.
6) Replace the cylinder pin.

  CCI and Winchester ammunition is recommended by the manufacturer.

  I'll let the manufacturer tell you about this gun's unique safety.
  BE VERY CAREFUL WHEN USING THIS SAFETY AND KEEP THE MUZZLE POINTED IN A SAFE DIRECTION WHEN LOWERING THE HAMMER.


  I view this gun as more of a novelty than as a self defense weapon. I've carried it now and then. While it's clearly easy to conceal, I have to wonder what good it would really do me. Personally, I would be afraid to take a shot with this gun in a crowded setting if the distance was more than 7 yards (no doubt some are more skilled). The rate of fire is very slow and I have my doubts about the stopping power of a .22lr round exiting a 1 1/8" barrel. To be honest... if a threat was that close I would probably be better off rushing it with my SOG Aegis (or retreating).

  It's possible that I'm being a bit too hard on this gun. If that seems to be the case, it's because I don't really have a use for it. The only role that it would fill for me is concealed carry, and I have much better choices available.

  For those that need something for DEEP carry, this might be an excellent choice. If I worked in an environment that dictated difficult clothing for concealed carry then this might be a good choice. If I needed to carry and absolutely had to keep others from knowing, then this gun might be a fine choice.
  You will be able to carry this weapon where no other firearm would conceal (hmm... that sounded kind of weird). The NAA Mini Revolver could be a last resort back up gun. I believe that it would serve well in that role. In my opinion it's not a good choice for a first line of defense, and I really have no need for a backup gun. Thus my lukewarm review.



  Most of what I said above was either negative or faint praise. There are some good things about this firearm.
  It's very well made. I wish that everything that I buy had this level of quality, and it's clear that a lot of pride went into the manufacture of this little gun. Despite the small size and low cost, this weapon doesn't scream "Cheap" like some inexpensive firearms do. The Mini Revolver feels like a quality handgun.

  The reliability has been 100% despite very sporadic cleaning on my part.

  All of the edges are nicely rounded.

  There are pretty good serrations on the hammer spur.

  The manufacturer has a great website full of useful information. I've never seen a company include ballistics info before. Kudos to NAA. Give them a look. They actually do have a model or two that would interest me if I still backpacked and wanted to keep my gear lightweight. I could probably find more of a use for some of their other models such as the Black Widow.
 There's a fair amount of accessories on the North American Arms site.

  So in conclusion, this is a cool little gun that I personally have no real use for. Sometimes you buy things that are interesting or kind of fun. This gun is both of those things in a package that runs about $200 (on Buds).
  At this time I don't really need a single action revolver for deep carry, or as a backup gun.  Others will believe that this gun fills their concealed carry needs. If you're one of those people then I think that you'll find this to be a quality firearm at a reasonable price.

  It's just not my cup of tea.

  I feel the need to say this again. Pay very careful attention to the manufacturer's instruction regarding how to put the weapon on safe.

And speaking of deep carry...
this wasn't what I meant.

Other Gun Reviews On This Blog

Taurus Model 85



  I had a chance to take this Taurus M85 to the range earlier this week. As this is not my firearm, I feel that it's worth mentioning that this will be more of an overall impression instead of a review based upon years of use.
  A relative loaned this .38 spl  to me for the day, and I'll be the first to admit that I only shot it for a few hours. This gun has been in the family for years but doesn't get much use. 100 rounds were shot by me this week. This Taurus now has a whopping 250 rounds through it. There have been no reliability issues thus far. The round count is ridiculously low, and I'd be very surprised if there were any problems. I'll call the reliability rating an 'Incomplete' until it gets at least a few hundred more rounds through it.

  BTW, this gun was purchased about 8 or 9 years ago. Taurus has since discontinued the Model 85, but I still see them a lot at the gun shows and LGS. They now average about $300 in my area. The only similarly priced revolvers are made by Charter Arms and Rossi (which Taurus now owns). Used M85's in the various configurations are easy to find.

  You'll notice that the gun is wearing wooden grips. When the Model 85 was purchased, it came with the standard rubber boot grips. The wooden hand grips were included in the package, and that was a nice extra from Taurus. The owner prefers these grips and has lost the rubber ones. I included a similar pair of rubber hand grips from a J frame S&W to use as a size comparison. Unfortunately they don't fit (they need a cutout on the inside) the Taurus despite being the same size.
  So let's talk about the grips shown in the picture above. They're OK. You can get a little more of your hand on them than with the standard boot grips. Most will not be able to get their entire hand on them. Instead of two fingers, I get two fingers and half of a pinky wrapped around the grip. The owner claims to be able to get all 3 fingers on the hand grip so obviously her hands are quite a bit smaller.
  The checkering is more decorative than useful. It was a cold and wet day at the range earlier this week. Despite shooting from under cover, quite a bit of mist coated the gun. I really didn't have any issues keeping a good grip on the gun even though these hand grips only provide mediocre traction.
M85 vs LCR
  It is nice that wooden handgrips do not cling to your clothing the way that rubber does. This will help your shirt drape over the gun when carrying concealed instead of bunching up. It may also help when removing the gun from a pocket if that's your carry method.  Pocket carry is more difficult with these wood grips in place. I prefer the standard rubber boot grips.

  I had a hard time using speed loaders with the walnut handgrips and eventually just used speed strips instead. The wooden grips need some kind of cut out. As both the gun and grips are out of production it doesn't really matter at this point. It is something to consider when shopping around for replacement grips for any revolver.

  I brought my Ruger LCR to the range as a comparison gun. Obviously the two handguns don't have much in common in regards to weight, and grips. There wasn't however a huge difference in felt recoil. I spent the day switching back and forth between .38's and never paid a lot of attention to the recoil. It was surprising since I expected the steel frame Taurus to have a bit less kick than the Ruger. The difference was slight.

  The Taurus was a little louder than the Ruger.  The amount wasn't huge, but it was noticeable. This was no doubt due to the 3 ports on either side of the front sight. I consider them next to useless for recoil reduction in a 2" gun.
  They're one of those features that look cool, and probably help sell more handguns. Taurus was offering that option on a lot of their Model 85's when this weapon was purchased. Most of their competitors were not. Porting probably helps a bit more when used with a longer barrel, but it was ineffective in reducing recoil on this handgun.
  (BTW, I have a chance to borrow a new S&W Airweight, and put it up against my wife's older version of the Airweight. As her gun is ported and the new model is not, it should make for an interesting test. I hope to get something up on that over the next couple of weeks).

  So let's recap on recoil. I used the lightest snub nosed .38 spl on the market (at this time) for a comparison gun (because that's what I have). I fully expected to see a big difference in recoil considering that the Taurus uses a steel frame vs. the polymer LCR frame. The Model 85 also has larger grips and the gun is ported. Despite these major differences, recoil wasn't really any harsher with the LCR. If I had to make an unscientific guess, I'd say that the Ruger had about 10% more felt recoil. I'll take that little bit of increased kick for the added ease of carry that the 13.50 oz  Ruger has over the 21 oz Taurus.
  I don't really think that carrying concealed is "Fun." It's usually somewhat uncomfortable carrying a handgun. Even though a CCW weapon is supposed to be "Comforting" instead of "Comfortable," I'll take the lighter weight gun any day. It's not that bad carrying the M85 around, but I'd prefer something that weighs less or gives me a larger ammo capacity for that weight.


  The fit and finish of this gun is very good. Cylinder lockup is tighter than that of my Ruger LCR and S&W Airweight. The blueing is attractive, and I couldn't find any blemishes or tool marks. The exterior is smooth and shouldn't shred your clothing.
  You'll notice in the large picture below that there is a small gap in between the frame and grips. This is about the only flaw that I can find in this gun's fit and finish.

  As you have probably noticed, this .38spl has a bobbed hammer. It's a great choice for concealed carry. Unfortunately you are limited to shooting double action instead of having the SA/DA option. Removing the hammer spur helps keep the revolver from snagging on clothing when the gun is being drawn. I prefer the version with the shrouded hammer, but there's nothing wrong with the bobbed M85. To each his own.
  There's one good thing about the bobbed hammer and being forced to only shoot double action. The shooter actually learns to shoot double action. I see people at the range ONLY shoot their revolvers as a single action because it's easier and more accurate that way. They get almost no practice shooting the weapon as they would in a defensive encounter.

  Extraction was equal to my S&W and Ruger. Nuff said on that.


Taurus M85
Ruger LCR
  Sights are generally nothing to get excited about on snub nosed revolvers. The Taurus sights are a little better than most. As usual, the front sight is serrated to reduce glare. If you like painting your front sight orange it's best not to bother. The paint will not last due to the porting, and the hot gasses covering the front sight after every shot.
  The rear sight is merely a groove cut into the frame. That is normal, but Taurus also cut a shallow groove behind the rear sight. This actually helps your sight picture. Pick one up, and compare it to some of it's competition.  The M85 has better sights than those on my LCR and Airweight. This is in spite of the Taurus currently selling for a little over $100 less.


7 yds
Damn flyer
  Accuracy is OK with this gun. I think that these groups could be cut down a bit with some more practice with this firearm. I consistently shot low with the M85.
 
  The trigger pull on the Taurus is much heavier than I'm used to on my revolvers. It's not a bad trigger overall, but it is heavy. It's relatively smooth throughout the pull, and I could easily get used to it with practice. As the LCR probably has the best trigger for guns in this category it was a bit of a difference bouncing from gun to gun. Of course the Ruger sells for over $100 more.



  Obviously it is a 5 shot. Most J-frame accessories will fit this revolver, and the aftermarket is pretty good.

  Did I mention that it has a lifetime warranty?

  It is also rated for +P ammo.


Um... sorry I got your gun wet.

  It's a shame that Taurus dropped this model from their current lineup. The M85 was one of the firearms in their catalog that had a reputation for reliability. I would purchase one without any reservations based on this gun and the many years that the M85 was on the market.

  If money was not any issue, I would prefer the Ruger LCR or S&W Airweight over the Taurus M85. This is based upon the weight of the gun and it's trigger pull.
  Many people are currently on a tight budget. That $100 (or so) difference between the Ruger, S&W, and Taurus could be a big deal to them. I think that this is a fine handgun for the money. You can do better, but then again you could do a hell of a lot worse.
  I would feel well armed with this handgun and a pocketful of speed strips in most situations. Should the owner ever decide to put this gun up for sale... it's mine. I have no problem recommending it with the usual warnings. If you're not a shooter then you'll hate snub nosed revolvers. I've seen too many people buy these little guns and put them away for years after shooting a box or two of ammo. If you plan on using a J-frame revolver for home defense (and not for CCW), I would suggest adding some larger grips such as these made by Hogue.
  Even though they've been discontinued, it is still easy to find them at most gun stores.


7 yds

Other Gun Reviews On This Blog
 

Obama Learns About The 2nd Amendment Advocates



This was hilarious. I hope that it becomes so mainstream that everyone quotes from it.
"Don't worry hun.... Glocks don't always blow up."
Just priceless.

Saturday, January 19, 2013

23 Executive Actions

  Here is the list of Obama's 23 Executive Actions on guns. At first glance, it doesn't seem overly harsh. I don't see any bans, registrations, forced buybacks, or an end to online ammo sales.
  I'm pleasantly surprised at the total lack of stupidity, and the concentration on mental health.
  It is however worth remembering that this came from Obama. I'll wait and see what these 23 items entail. I'm waiting for the fine print instead of the bullet points. This current Administration has a bad habit of saying something vague and meaningless. They then do something entirely different. Often it's illegal or as close to the edge as possible (Fast And Furious comes to mind. The war in Libya is another example).
  So I'll wait and see if there's bans and registrations buried deep in some of these orders.
  One thing that troubles me is all of the research that is supposed to be done under these "Executive Actions." The research can be done by non government agencies, and this is a way to use taxpayer dollars to fund anti gun groups for more junk science reports. Even when the CDC does the research it's often suspect, and the results are sometimes politically skewed.
  I do wonder a bit about all of the mental health actions on the list. Most support physicians being able to report those that are mentally handicapped and/or prone to violence. In the past there has however been a problem getting off of the government's list. There has been little or no means of redress.
  Some might say that's good, but I disagree. If you are depressed at the loss of a child then I don't think this should result in a lifetime ban. A serviceman or woman that suffers from PTSD today shouldn't be stripped of a right for the rest of their life.
  Good luck (in today's sue happy society) in finding a psychiatrist that will say that you are now sane enough to own a firearm. Do you think he wants to be legally liable (in civil court) for you and your guns over the next several decades?

Obama To Take 23 'Exective Actions' On Guns

What The Media Thinks About Gun Owners

Pro Gun Americans "Disgusting"

Apparently it's disgusting to point out the President's hypocrisy in regards to school security. It is however OK for the White House to use children in it's anti gun propaganda.
I swear, watching the news on American cable television is getting more and more like watching the media from some 3rd world dictatorship.


"We Need Obama To Save Us"

I don't know where to begin. This video was nothing but junk science, lies, and cult like devotion from a make believe journalist.

Friday, January 18, 2013

In The News

60% Of Young Americans Plan To Purchase Firearms
Newt Slaps Down Gun Control On CBS
"Junk Study" From West Point
Ammo Limits Explained
White House Goes 1 Yr Without Meeting With It's Jobs Council
DOJ Begs Court Not To Release Fast And Furious Documents
VA Dems Court Trash Vote
What Do The Readers Carry?
Lawmaker Calls For Retroactive Gun Bans - Confiscation
Male Jurors More Likely To Find Overweight Women Guilty
Jesse Jackson - Make Gun Manufacturers Responsible
Build Your Own AR Lower Reciever
Why States Should Reject Bans On Magazines
Getting Started With Reloading On A Budget
Legally Build An Unregistered AR15
Army Staff Sgt. To Recieve MoH
Gun Burlary Attempt Linked To Newpaper Map Of Gunowners
Current Drought Like "Dust Bowl" Days
Fat Boys In The Military
Typical Mindless Liberal Blather About Guns (From A Hot Chick)
Logistics For Afghan Withdrawal Flawed
How To Choose A Tactical Flashlight For The Home
Firing Warning Shots?
Jeeps Made In China
Impeachment Threatened For Executive Order On Gun Control
Interesting Little Fugly Guns

Firearms Save Lives

I just ran across this blog last night. I haven't had a chance to dig too deeply into the archives, but I've already found some interesting stuff. Give it a look.
This piece caught my attention. It seems especially relevant since some politicians seem unable to comprehend what the 2nd Amendment is intended for.

Firearms Save Lives

Tuesday, January 15, 2013

A Quick List Of New York's New Gun Laws - Our Nation's Future?

The article below gives a quick summary of the new gun laws that have recently taken affect in NY. Give it a read and ask yourself if you're willing to have this go nationwide.
No?
Then what have you done to prevent it? Have you joined the NRA or convinced others to do so? Have you written your Congressmen? Donated to pro gun groups?
Get into the fight.

The Slippery Slope Of Gun Control

Senator Tim Kaine was previously Governor of VA. As a long time anti gunner he naturally cut funding to the office that does our background checks. The checks that took 15 or 20 minutes then stretched to hours or half of a day after the cuts were enacted.
This was just for firearm sales.
You'll notice that NY now has a requirement for NCIS checks to buy ammunition. Can you imagine how much of an increase that will be on the system? Will they be adding staff and funding?
Doubtful.
I can easily imagine the state gov. letting the background check system get hopelessly backed up, and then adding a limit to how much ammo can be purchased per day. It would be easy to inconvenience many gun owners out of the shooting sports. Most of us work. How many people have time to wait around Walmart for a 2hr background check to buy a few boxes of 9mm?

Monday, January 14, 2013

Getting Started In Reloading

I recently ran across this excellent piece on reloading. If you're like me, you haven't gotten into reloading because of the start up cost, and what I believe is a huge lack of fun in the process. Basically ammo hasn't gotten expensive enough for me to look into alternatives, and reloading seems to be as interesting as watching paint dry.
But...
If I can get started for $250, it might be worth biting the bullet. It would give me a topic to blog about as well as saving a few bucks over the long term.
Sigh... $250.
That seems reasonable, but I tend to go overboard when starting a new project or hobby. I can easily see $250 worth of gear turning quickly turning into $1,000 worth of equipment.
The same people that are complaining about a lack ammo on the shelves are talking about having a hard time finding primers and powder. Reloading might not be the answer that some expect.
So we'll see how it goes.

Basic Reloading

Walmart Stopping Ammo Sales?

There was a story floating around about Walmart stopping ammo sales until after the current anti gun stupidity is settled. Actually the article/rumor was more about them cancelling their orders for more ammo.
Here is one of the articles:    Walmart Suspends Ammo Sales

Here is the latest story:      Walmart WILL Continue To Buy And Sell Ammo

Of course it's worth remembering that Walmart is a business and will most likely continue to do what makes them the most money, and help them in the future.

There was an interesting column released a few days ago about Walmart's meeting with Biden. It was suggested in an opinion piece that they might try to cut a deal on gun/ammo sales if the government helped them to keep unions out of their stores. This was all conjecture, and it would be a stupid move on the part of the retail chain. The current Administration is not known for keeping their word, and a deal made today is only good as long as it's convenient.
I'm glad to see that nothing changed regarding sales after last weeks meeting.

There are things that Walmart might do during this current period of panic buying. They may limit ammo sales after 10pm as some stores did in 2008/2009. Sales may be limited to 6 boxes of ammo again. I'm sure that other steps may be taken from store to store.
I recently read that one clerk tried telling customers that they would only sell two boxes of ammo at a time per Federal Law. Obviously this is false and she was corrected. No doubt other similar mistakes will be made and corrected.

Edit: Here is another source stating that a Walmart spokesman refuted the claim about stopping ammo sales.

Saturday, January 12, 2013

Contact Your Politicians

I have to give the firearms manufacturer, Ruger, credit for making it so easy to contact your legislators. The link below includes a form letter, and you can contact all of your politicians at the state and federal level automatically by merely filling in a couple of boxes.
I urge everyone to take advantage of this tool, and let your voice be heard.

Contact Your Lawmakers And Politicians

Two things:

Some might think that a form letter does little or no good. A lot of people might believe that it doesn't matter to the politicians receiving it. That's not true.
You can write the longest, most well reasoned, and well researched letter possible.
Guess what?
It's not going to be read by your Representative, Senator, Attorney General, Governor, etc. Some staffer is going to read enough of the letter's content to find out the writer's opinion. He'll then check a box on a form. They're just counting people, and their views on a topic. It doesn't matter if you send in a form letter, e-mail, or pro gun thesis. All that the staff members are going to do is count your letter once as a pro 2nd Amendment contact.
It's a numbers game. How many people say yea or nay on a subject.

I've been on the blogs, gun rights associations, and forums a lot lately. There have been comments from staff members on Capital Hill. They have stated that the Republicans and pro gun Democrats are willing to cave in on the 2nd Amendment rights. He'll we can see that from the vague letters that we get back after contacting them.
They are however, politicians.  Politician always judge the public's mood before holding their ground or rolling over.
We need to give them a reason to hold the line.
Contact your lawmakers.

Here's Another Link For Just Federal Officials

Friday, January 11, 2013

A "Must Read" For AR Owners

This should be a must read for owners of AR15s. The following article is one of the best that I've seen on reliability, steel cased ammo and wear on your rifle.
Get some coffee first.
It's a long piece.

Brass vs Steel Cased Ammo - An Epic Torture Test

In The News

One Million AR Magazines On Backorder (Just From Magpul)
Assault Weapon Saves Teenagers From Home Invasion
Fact Checking Piers Morgan
NRA - 100,000 New Members Since The Sandy Hook Shooting
NY Politician Wants Psyche Tests For Gun Owners
Facts About Guns, Schools & Violence That The Media Isn't Reporting
The Need For Semi Automatic "Assault" Weapons
Eric Holder - Gun Owners Should Cower In Shame
Short On Carriers - Longer Deployments For Sailors
The Russians Tell Us, "Don't Give Up Your Guns."
Pro Gun And Anti Gun Celebrities
Libtards Planning Anti Gun March On Jan 26
Massive 40,000 Round AR Ammo Test
Obama Supporters Lining Up Early For Inaguration
Where The Gun Murders Are
Wear A Hijab Or Get Raped
Obama Gives Himself Lifetime Secret Service Protection
75 Economic Numbers That Are Almost Too Crazy To Believe
Nationwide Ammo Shortage
128 Million Americans Get A Monthly Gov Check
10 Things You Need To know About Folding Knives
Obama Opposed Home Defense As A State Senator

Monday, January 7, 2013

FBI Homicide Table

FBI Homicide Table

It appears that our government is just as efficient as ever. More people are killed from clubs, hammers, etc, than rifles in the statistics that we're given. Hell... more people were killed from punching and kicking than with rifles in 2011.
"Assault Weapons," are not split off from the other rifles in the chart, so I'm sure that the numbers of crimes involving these firearms are much lower than the total number given.
According to the government's own crime statistics, "Assault Weapons" are not a problem. Yet, somehow we really need a ban?
Their efficiency is only matched by their honesty.

Thursday, January 3, 2013

Why Is Our Murder Rate Higher Than Great Britain's?

 
This is worth looking at just to hear his rebuttal as to why we have a higher murder rate than England.

Magazine Bans

 
Please forward this to as many pro gun friends and family members as possible. It's time to contact your Representatives, join the NRA, and get off of the sidelines.