If Worms Had Guns, Birds Wouldn't Fuck With Them

'This Is My Rifle, This Is My Gun' Category Archive

« Prev | Next »

BB Gun = Copious Progressive Bedwetting

December 22nd, 2009 by Kevin

It\’s times like this I really wish I understood the \”progressive\” mindframe

An Eagan principal who let a parent shoot balloons with a BB gun in the school gym called his decision \”unwise\” on Monday after questions about the incident led to a school district investigation.

The balloon-popping took place after a ceremony held the evening of Dec. 8 for students graduating from a drug-awareness program at Red Pine Elementary. The kids got certificates, cake and helium balloons — some of which floated up to the ceiling. To get the balloons down, Principal Gary Anger let a parent volunteer bring a BB gun from home to pop them while a few people finished cleaning up the gym.

The BB gun troubled some adults in the school district, where students caught with weapons have been expelled. After Star Tribune reporters learned of the incident and started asking questions on Monday, officials in the Rosemount-Apple Valley-Eagan District said they were investigating it.

My brain gets to \”…..ok, so what??\” and then seizes up because I can honestly not fathom what the problem is. Balloons in the rafters, parents comes up with a fairly clever idea to get them down.  Nobody is ever in even a remotest possibility of danger.  Why are some \”adults\” supposedly \”troubled\”?? Or have they gotten so completely insane that simple the sight of something resembling a firearm causes them to wet themselves.

Even the Star&Sickle admits that no laws were broken, but that doesn\’t stop them from having an emotional breakdown over the incident.

So to all that find alarm in this story, this is for you:

Calm the hell down and get ahold of yourself.  We\’re trying to have a civilization here.  Firearms have been, and remain, an important tool in building and maintaining that civilization.  If you\’re going to wet yourself every time you\’re within three states of something that resembles on we\’re gonna be constantly cleaning up your piddle and that\’s just no way to do things.  So either put on some pampers or get a hold of yourselves.  That is all.

[H/T Andrew]


Email This Post Email This Post | Print This Post Print This Post
Posted in This Is My Rifle, This Is My Gun | 7 Comments »

Gun Lovers Anthem

December 21st, 2009 by Kevin

[H/T Dee]


Email This Post Email This Post | Print This Post Print This Post
Posted in This Is My Rifle, This Is My Gun | 1 Comment »

I Don\’t Have A Few Minutes

December 11th, 2009 by Kevin


Email This Post Email This Post | Print This Post Print This Post
Posted in This Is My Rifle, This Is My Gun, YouTube | 7 Comments »

Switzerland Also Has One Of The Lowest Crime Rates

December 3rd, 2009 by Kevin

Sure correlation doesn\’t equal causation but according to gun control activists guns cause crime without any need of human influence.

[H/T Pat]


Email This Post Email This Post | Print This Post Print This Post
Posted in This Is My Rifle, This Is My Gun | 2 Comments »

Ten Commandments Of Carrying A Firearm

October 15th, 2009 by Kevin

As many know, I have a carry permit (not conceal&carry) for Minnesota (and other states) and frequently choose to exercise my right to protect myself from harm that hopefully never materializes. I\’ve carried for awhile now but by no means am I an expert, for that you can read the writings of some who are. However, I did feel up to the task of review an article titled 10 Commandments of Concealed Carry, because while it\’s generally a good article, I feel there are some parts that are incorrect, or at the very least need clarification.

First though, I want to address a pet peeve of mine in the very title of the article, although to be fair this pet peeve is very Minnesota-centric. In Minnesota, we do not have a \”Concealed Carry\” permit. We don\’t have a \”Concealed Carry\” law. In fact nowhere in any legislation will you find \”Concealed Carry\”. We simply have the Minnesota Personal Protection Act of 2003, which in summary, gives permitted citizens the right to carry a firearm in public places. No concealment is required, it is purely optional. But it\’s amazing how many people, including some permit holders and even instructors tend to forget that.

Okay that rant aside, on with the article.

If You Carry, Always Carry

Or so says the article…and quite simply I have to passionately disagree.

It\’s a personal choice and it\’s entirely up to the person, and depends on the situation. Quite simply there are some situations where one could make a very informed decision not to carry. For example, during the RNC I mingled with the protesters and kept an eye on their doings, dressed up as a fellow protester. Now was there a chance I could face personal danger, especially if \”outed\”. Certainly. Would a firearm have helped me in a crowd of people? No. Could it have made things worse? Sure. Firearm stayed at home that day.

Now to be fair to the author, Massad Ayoob, do I personally think carrying every day is a good idea? Sure. As he quite rationally states it:

The armed citizen, the intended victim, does not know when or where that attack will come. Therefore, he or she must be constantly prepared and constantly vigilant.

You never know when trouble will find you, even if you do your best to avoid it. Most people if they know they are going to need a firearm if they go someplace, elect to stay at home. So almost by definition, danger will find you in a place you don\’t expect it. Are you ready? If not, remember you are the defenseless sheep depending on the sheepdog.

Don’t Carry If You Aren’t Prepared To Use It

Eh, I\’m sure most of my objections come down to semantics, because in more words I think he does dance around my objection. Nobody goes out looking for a gunfight. Someone who does probably isn\’t going to bother with the hassle of getting a carry permit anyway. And I doubt anyone is truly prepared to use a firearm in a hostile encounter, for normal-minded folk it\’s simply not in our nature to harm others.

I\’d argue don\’t carry if you don\’t think you\’d be able to use it even in the protection of your own life.

And even phrased like that, you shouldn\’t interpret that to mean that you shouldn\’t draw your weapon without firing it. In some 99% of encounters involving a defensive use of a firearm, the situation was resolved without shots being fired. Criminals may be dumb, but they aren\’t stupid. They can weight pros and cons just as well as the rest of us. Faced with potential victim who has just revealed themselves to be armed versus finding a more vulnerable potential victim is not a huge logical hurdle, even for a criminal.

Although again, that doesn\’t mean to draw your firearm at the slightest provocation.

However, I\’d say he\’s spot on with this:

The irony: The person who is prepared to kill if he or she must, is the person who is least likely to have to do so.

Don’t Let The Gun Make You Reckless

Is what he writes wrong? No. But in generally it\’s advice in search of a problem. Gun control advocates thought for sure that permit holders would turn every argument in the OK Corral. Every fender bender would be a gun fight. It hasn\’t happened, ANYWHERE in the United States.

I don\’t know that I\’ve met anyone that considers a carry permit a Junior Police Officer badge. For one, the legal ramifications of using your firearm are financially and legally prohibitive, even if you\’re legitimately defending yourself. Going out looking for trouble isn\’t something any one is going to be done….nor have they.

Instead, the weight on your hip, or wherever you carry, is a constant reminder of the need to be vigilant. Many who carry refer to this as Condition Yellow. I\’ve found rather than being reckless, I\’m more tuned into my surroundings. More aware of others in my vicinity and their behavior. I\’ve taken precautions to avoid even every day mundane situations, because I know that if they were to escalate, my behavior is held to a much higher standard.

Get The License!

Ayoob is completely correctly and while this seems like a \”Well Duh!\”, I know of several people who feel it\’s not the government\’s place to tell them whether they can protect themselves or not. Which means I also know of several people just asking to go to jail.

Do I agree with their rationale? Sure. Do I agree with the logical conclusion to that line of thinking? No. The world isn\’t perfect, neither is our government. Work to improve that, but in the meantime if you\’re going to carry do it legally.

Know What You’re Doing

Well sure, although that\’s good advice any time. In Minnesota, you\’re required to take a class to get your carry permit. Most of the instructors in Minnesota are very good at their job and do an excellent job of explaining how is and what is not allowed, most of them can be found here. That said there are also some not so go instructors such as Joe Penaz and Gary Shade, from whom you will likely receive lots of bad information that may end you up in jail, or worse. So it remains good advice.

Concealed Means Concealed

This is the eternal debate amongst many in the carry community. Whether to open carry or not. First my disclaimer. Do I open carry? No. Do I have any desire to open carry? No. Do I generally think it\’s a good idea? No. Have I opened carried? Yes, at an open carry event.

All that said, do I think Ayoob is wrong here? Yes. Is open carry always a bad idea and something you shouldn\’t do? Absoluteley not. There are reasons both tactically and politically to open carry in certain situations.

Most of Ayoob\’s disagreement is that it freaks people out. Sure but that\’s only because they aren\’t used to seeing normal law-abiding every day Joes openly carrying. How do you fix that? Well if they start seeing people carrying and the street doesn\’t immediatly erupt into a bloodbath, they start to get used to it.

So open carry has it\’s time and place. Some choose to open carry all the time, and that is fine for them. Granted they experience more hassles from the police, although the police are slowly learning. But they also are more likely to engage in conversations with people and have the opportunity to educate them. Nothing wrong with that, admirable even.

But if you do carry concealed, just understand, your style of dress my dictate how you carry. In some cases you may need to slightly modify your style of dress to accomodate concealment.

Maximize Your Firearms Familiarity

Absolutely, although I think this can be summarized as \”Train, Train, Train\”. Waiting until a life threatening situation presents itself is not the time to learn how to use your weapon or fire accurately. Moreover, Ayoob doesn\’t mention, you may not be physically capable of doing so due to the Tachy Psyche Effect, otherwise known as the \”Fight or Flight\” response of the body. Symptoms vary from person to person, but common side-effects are narrowing of vision, loss of dexterity, loss of higher brain functions (such as math), slowing of time, etc.

Now you can minimize all of these effects if you recognize them for what they are, expect them and account for them. Mostly that comes down to training, so that when the adrenaline starts flowing your body already knows what to do, even if your brain is freaking out. You\’ll know how to clear a jam without thinking about it. You\’ll hold the weapon properly right away. Sight alignment will come naturally without conscious effort.

Plus, even in a non-life threatening situation, you\’ll be safer if you know what things like a \”hammer release switch\” is for and how to use it. Or that just because you\’ve ejected the magazine from your semi-auto doesn\’t mean it\’s unloaded (although to be safe no gun is ever unloaded).

Practice with the firearm you intended to carry, and practice often, once a month minimum.

Understand The Fine Points

Yeah, this can\’t be emphasized enough. And very quickly this part will come to either annoy your or intrique you. And it\’s a large part of the reason I stay involved in the carry movement, because even someone who has carried for awhile and has stayed educated on the latest happenings still comes across situations every no and again where the legal action isn\’t immediatly obvious.

For example, can you carry in a store that has one of those silly signs banning firearms?? Sure, until you are asked to leave, although if you\’re carrying concealed what\’s the liklihood they will? Can you carry in public areas at a public university?? If you\’re a non-student sure and they can\’t do much about it. If you\’re a student or staff, the University can put limits on what you can do. Okay what about grade schools? Generally no, but you can in the parking lot. However, if the principal and/or administrator gives you written permission, you can carry in that school. Churches? Sure Bars? Sure, although you\’re limited to a BAC of 0.04, although most firearm owners already know firearms and alcohol don\’t mix.

Already dizzy? Yeah, it\’s only the start, but there are overall themes which eventually you\’ll catch onto. And then you\’ll just scratch your head at the really puzzling ones, like can you carry in church if your church is also a school?? Answer, it depends.

Carry An Adequate Firearm

Hopefully you\’re asking the same question I had, \”What\’s Adequate?\” The answer to that is \”It depends\”.

Is a .50 caliber Desert Eagle adequate? Sure. Is a .22 caliber adequate? It might be. Is an 8-round magazine big enough? Probably.

Let\’s just get this part out of the way, is bigger better? Not necessarily. Shot placement is a lot more important that the size of the hole. If you\’re a petite woman, perhaps a big ass hand cannon is not the best for you, as you may not be able to control it\’s recoil. Even if you\’re a large framed man, some simply can\’t shoot a revolver, but do just fine with a semi-auto, or vice-versa. Is the recoil of a .45 too much? Try a .38. Find something you can shoot accurately.

Part of that can also be the firearm itself. Find something that fits comfortably in your hand. Find something that when you raise it, your natural motion brings the firearm up level. If you don\’t even have to consciously line up the sights that one less thing for you to worry about.

Plus consider that firing this firearm isn\’t going to be it\’s primary or even secondary usage. Most of the time it will be sitting quietly in a holster. It\’ll be heavy. It\’ll be uncomfortable. And it doesn\’t get less heavy or uncomfortable as the day goes on. So if you\’re a thin, slightly built woman are you likely to carry a .50 caliber Desert Eagle more than once? Doubtful. Instead you should consider firearms that you will feel comfortable, both physically and psychologically, carrying on a daily basis if that is your intention.

Caliber in my opinion is way over-rated in the determining factor of choosing a carry weapon. In the end, I choose a .40 because it was a larger caliber that I could still comfortably control, yet it still allowed for a reasonable amount of rounds in a standard magazine. Remember, larger the round, the more space they take up, hence less round in a magazine.

And no you don\’t need a twenty round magazine. You might want to consider two 10-round magazines though. Let\’s be realistic, a gunfight you get into isn\’t going to be a drawn out affair. You don\’t need a packmule to carry a sufficient amount of ammunition. However, you might want to carry a second magazine or a speed loader, especially if you are using a semi-automatic. In a semi-auto if you have a jam, most can be clearly be ejecting the magazine and inserting another one. On the other hand, if you carry jam a revolver, you clear the jam by pulling the trigger again.

All important things to consider.

Use Common Sense

I would argue you\’ve already demonstrated Common Sense by deciding to carry, but I\’m biased. And here I don\’t think I could have phrased it better than Ayoob,

The gun carries with it the power of life and death. That power belongs only in the hands of responsible people who care about consequences, who are respectful of life and limb and human safety. Carrying a gun is a practice that is becoming increasingly common among ordinary American citizens. Common sense must always accompany it.

Well said.


Email This Post Email This Post | Print This Post Print This Post
Posted in This Is My Rifle, This Is My Gun, True North | Comments Off on Ten Commandments Of Carrying A Firearm

Firearms Cause Crime

October 11th, 2009 by Kevin

From Mark Clifton, a science fiction writer (1906-1963):

The Dread Tomato Addiction
by Mark Clifton

Ninety-two point four per cent of juvenile delinquents have eaten tomatoes.

Eighty-seven point one per cent of the adult criminals in penitentiaries throughout the United State have
eaten tomatoes.

Informers reliably inform that of all known American Communists, ninety-two point three per cent have
eaten tomatoes.

Eighty-four per cent of all people killed in automobile accidents during the year 1954 had eaten
tomatoes.

Those who object to singling out specific groups for statistical proofs require measurements within a total.
Of those people born before the year 1800, regardless of race, color, creed or caste, and known to have
eaten tomatoes, there has been one hundred per cent mortality!

In spite of their dread addiction, a few tomato eaters born between 1800 and 1850 still manage to
survive, but the clinical picture is poor—their bones are brittle, their movements feeble, their skin seamed
and wrinkled, their eyesight failing, hair falling, and frequently they have lost all their teeth.

Those born between 1850 and 1900 number somewhat more survivors, but the overt signs of the
addiction\’s dread effects differ not in kind but only in degree of deterioration. Prognostication is not
hopeful.

Exhaustive experiment shows that when tomatoes are withheld from an addict, invariably his cravings will
cause him to turn to substitutes—such as oranges, or steak and potatoes. If both tomatoes and all
substitutes are persistently withheld—death invariably results within a short time!

The skeptic of apocryphal statistics, or the stubborn nonconformist who will not accept the clearly
proved conclusions of others may conduct his own experiment.

Obtain two dozen tomatoes—they may actually be purchased within a block of some high schools, or
discovered growing in a respected neighbor\’s back yard!—crush them to a pulp in exactly the state they
would have if introduced into the stomach, pour the vile juice and pulp into a bowl, and place a goldfish
therein. Within minutes the goldfish will be dead!

Those who argue that what affects a goldfish might not apply to a human being may, at their own choice,
wish to conduct a direct experiment by fully immersing a live human head* into the mixture for a full five
minutes.

———————-
* It is suggested that best results will be obtained by using an experimental subject who is thoroughly
familiar with and frequently uses the logic methods demonstrated herein, such as:

(a) The average politician. Extremely unavailable to the average citizen except during the short open
season before election.

(b) The advertising copywriter. Extremely wary and hard to catch due to his experience with many
lawsuits for fraudulant claims.(c) The dedicated moralist. Extremely plentiful in supply, and the experimenter might even obtain a bounty on each from a grateful community.

Remember this story the next time you hear someone explain why firearms cause crime.  Their \”logic\” is either the same, or very similar to what is employed above.  Yet it doesn\’t occur to people because it involves firearms instead of some obviously inert object.  Although to be fair a firearm is also an inert object unless acted upon by a person just as could be done with any object….including a tomato as we see above.

[H/T Andrew Rothman]


Email This Post Email This Post | Print This Post Print This Post
Posted in This Is My Rifle, This Is My Gun | 1 Comment »

What Comes After Incorporation?

October 1st, 2009 by Kevin

A little over a month ago, I wrote how the US Supreme Court was considering three different cases that would again address the Second Amendment, this time on the issue of incorporation.  Today we get word that SCOTUS has officially agreed to hear one of those cases, McDonald v. Chicago (Docket # 08-1521).

Taking on a major new constitutional dispute over gun rights, the Supreme Court agreed on Wednesday to decide whether to apply the Second Amendment to state, county, and city government laws.

The Court had three cases from which to choose on the Second Amendment issue — two cases involving a Chicago gun ban, and one case on a New York ban on a martial-arts weapon.  It chose one of the Chicago cases — McDonald v. Chicago (08-1521) — a case brought to it by Alan Gura, the Alexandria, VA., lawyer who won the 2008 decision for the first time recognizing a constitutional right to have a gun for personal use, at least in self-defense in the home (District of Columbia v. Heller).

In this case, SCOTUS will finally solve the question of whether incorporation applies to the Second Amendment, like it does for every other right listed in the Bill of Rights.  This would mean that the same restrictions placed upon the federal government by DC vs Heller, would also apply against state and local governments.

So what\’s the likely outcome?  While nothing is certain, it seems increasingly likely that SCOTUS will rule that the Second Amendment is incorporated against the states by the Fourteenth Amendment.  All the other rights have been explicitly incorporated already, so there is little reason that the Second Amendment should be either.  Sotomayor\’s addition to the court shouldn\’t present much of a change.  She replaced Souter who already would have voted against incorporation.

Already the Brady campaign is openly accepting that the Second Amendment is likely to be incorporated.  Instead, the contention seems to be falling along the same lines as Heller did.  Both sides are conceding the fundamental question and are instead debating the details, basically what consists of reasonable regulations.

Essentially this case will take the two extremes of the debate out of the equation.  Outright bans and unrestricted ownership/possession will be out.  Even Scalia in Heller noted that while outright bans were certainly unlawful, reasonable regulation had to be allowed.  That same standard will likely apply.  It will come down to the question of what regulation is reasonable.  Essentially what is the Second Amendment equivalent of shouting \”Fire!\” in a crowded theatre.


Email This Post Email This Post | Print This Post Print This Post
Posted in SCOTUS, This Is My Rifle, This Is My Gun | 2 Comments »

A Cash For Klunkers I Can Support

September 17th, 2009 by Kevin

Now here\’s a Cash for Klunkers I wish I could take advantage of…

SIG SAUER – Gives you $200 \”CASH For your KLUNKER* Handgun\”

Purchase a new SIG SAUER® P220®, P226®, P229®, 1911, SIG556 pistol, or SIG556 rifle from your dealer’s inventory from September 7th through November 30th, 2009, and SIG SAUER will give you $200.00 for your old KLUNKER* pistol or revolver.

To receive your $200.00 payment, simply send your old KLUNKER* with a copy of your form 4473 and proof of purchase of your new Classic pistol (no later than Friday, December 4, 2009) to:

SIG SAUER, Inc., 18 Industrial Drive, Exeter, NH 03833, ATTN: CK-1

Only problem is I have a personal policy, I only buy/receive firearms, I never give any up for any reason.  Now let me trade in a vehicle for a couple firearms and I\’m all over it.  My neighbors only use their vehicle every other day anyway.


Email This Post Email This Post | Print This Post Print This Post
Posted in This Is My Rifle, This Is My Gun | Comments Off on A Cash For Klunkers I Can Support

Incorporation Of The Second Amendment On The Horizon?

August 27th, 2009 by Kevin

Without a doubt Heller vs DC was a pivotal case for the Second Amendment.  Really for the first time the Supreme Court confirmed that the Second Amendment was an individual right rather than a collective right.  Which permanently put an end to that silly \”militia = National Guard\” argument.  But as important as Heller was, it was also somewhat limited, in that it primarily applied to Federal laws.  Unlike every other right in the Bill of Rights, the Second Amendment has never been \”incorporated\” against the states via the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

In fact on the issue of incorporation, there is a circuit split, with the ninth deciding in favor of incorporation and the second and seventh deciding against.  Incorporation essentially states that the restrictions on actions of the federal government, also apply to state and local governments.  Technically while DC cannot ban guns, the state of  Minnesota could, since DC is under federal law, while Minnesota is it\’s own state.  Incorporation would place the same restrictions on all the states.

Incorporation is the next step in the battle for the Second Amendment, as arguably just as critical, if not more, than Heller.  And we may get to see it decided in this next term of the Supreme Court.  There are three separate cases essentially regarding the same issue currently on the Supreme Court docket.   National Rifle Association v. Chicago and McDonald v. Chicago both challenge the Seventh Circuit Courts decision that incorporation does not apply against the states for the Second Amendment.  Maloney v. Rice challenges the same decision by the Second Circuit Court.

Interesting factor is that Sotomayor has already ruled on the Maloney vs Rice case, when she was part of the Second Circuit court so she would be required to withdraw from the case.  However, the same requirement does not hold for the other two cases, which makes the selection of which cases to consider an important decision for Chief Justice Roberts.  Although, since Sotomayor replaces Souter, who was part of the dissenting opinion on Heller, it\’s unlikely her addition to the court will make much of a difference.

Whether incorporation is likely is up for extreme debate.  On one hand, in the most recent case, Heller, they stated that the Second Amendment represented a pre-existing individual right to possess and carry firearms, a right not dependent upon the Constitution.  On the other hand, there are a long string of court cases, Miller v. Texas (1894); Presser v. Illinois (1886); United States v. Cruikshank (1875), that argued against incorporation.  However, in all of those cases different standards for incorporation were applied and the court makeup, while much different from 1894, is essentially the same as it was for Heller.

There also exists the potential for the Supreme Court to offer an opinion on what exactly defines a reasonable gun control regulation, an issue that Heller barely touched, which has made the battle over DC\’s gun control laws drag on to this day.

Lately the NRA has been rather inept in the promotion of their cause.  Let\’s hope that they\’ve simply been keeping their powder dry for this absolutely critical battle in the courts.  Our Second Amendment rights may very well depend on it.


Email This Post Email This Post | Print This Post Print This Post
Posted in SCOTUS, This Is My Rifle, This Is My Gun, True North | 2 Comments »

Why I Carry?

August 12th, 2009 by Kevin

Why I Carry a Gun

My old grandpa said to me son,\’ there comes a time in every man\’s life
When he stops bustin\’ knuckles and starts bustin\’ caps and usually it\’s
When he becomes too old to take an ass whoopin\’.
I don\’t carry a gun to kill people.
I carry a gun to keep from being killed.

I don\’t carry a gun to scare people.
I carry a gun because sometimes this world can be a scary place.

I don\’t carry a gun because I\’m paranoid.
I carry a gun because there are real threats in the world.

I don\’t carry a gun because I\’m evil.
I carry a gun because I have lived long enough to see the evil in the
World.

I don\’t carry a gun because I hate the government.
I carry a gun because I understand the limitations of government.

I don\’t carry a gun because I\’m angry.
I carry a gun so that I don\’t have to spend the rest of my life hating
Myself for failing to be prepared.

I don\’t carry a gun because I want to shoot someone.
I carry a gun because I want to die at a ripe old age in my bed, and
Not on a sidewalk somewhere tomorrow afternoon.

I don\’t carry a gun because I\’m a cowboy..
I carry a gun because, when I die and go to heaven, I want to be a
Cowboy.
I don\’t carry a gun to make me feel like a man.
I carry a gun because men know how to take care of themselves and the
Ones they love.

I don\’t carry a gun because I feel inadequate.
I carry a gun because unarmed and facing three armed thugs, I am
Inadequate.

I don\’t carry a gun because I love it.
I carry a gun because I love life and the people who make it meaningful
To me.

Police Protection is an oxymoron. Free citizens must protect themselves.
Police do not protect you from crime, they usually just investigate the
Crime after it happens and then call someone in to clean up the mess.

Personally, I carry a gun because I\’m too young to die and too old to
Take an ass whoopin\’.


Email This Post Email This Post | Print This Post Print This Post
Posted in This Is My Rifle, This Is My Gun | Comments Off on Why I Carry?

« Prev | Next »