Category: Guns

I’ve added a link to the USA Shooting to help spread the word about our team during this year’s Olympics.
Unfortunately, my friend (who, unfortunately, I’ve been out of touch with recently) won’t be participating in the women’s shotgun event this year. Oh well. Maybe in four years?
Anyway, I’m aware the button is ugly, but such is life. After the Olympics I’ll keep the link but get rid of the image. They really need to hire a graphic designer.

Main Entry: martial law
Function: noun
Date: 1933
1 : the law applied in occupied territory by the military authority of the occupying power
2 : the law administered by military forces that is invoked by a government in an emergency when the civilian law enforcement agencies are unable to maintain public order and safety

Note the spelling.
It is not “marhsall law” unless there’s some guy named Marshall who’s running around enforcing the law.
If you’re going to get all paranoid and start blathering about how the UN, New World Order, and Black Helicopters are going to be cavorting around Anytown, USA in some attempt to take away our rights, at least learn how to spell “martial” correctly.
You might still be a crazy nutjob, but at least you won’t look like a total idiot.

The Tucson Rifle Club has extended its weekend hours. It normally closed at 5pm, but presently closes at 7:30pm on Friday, Saturday, and Sunday.
On a different note, I discovered that an annual membership is $40. I really should sign up for such a membership, as the range is about the same distance from my apartment as the National Forest, but is much better maintained.

Some days, I think comedy shows need disclaimers saying “this is a work of comedy, and not to be taken seriously”. Why? Because people like Nancy Giles might think such propositions are a good idea:

The comedian Chris Rock had a brilliant idea that I think both gun owners and gun control advocates could agree with (or “agree to”).
Instead of gun control, he says, “we need bullet control! I think every bullet should cost five thousand dollars. Because if a bullet cost five thousand dollars, we wouldn’t have any innocent bystanders.”
Sounds like a good start to me.

Really, Nancy? You think gun owners would agree to such a proposition? A 50-round box of .22LR currently costs about $2. You really think that we’d be willing to pay $250,000 for that same box? Doubtful.
Given my current budget, that single box of ammo would take a lifetime of savings for me to purchase, yet you think I’d agree that’s a good idea? I think not.
Chris Rock is a funny guy, but his idea was intended to get a laugh…not to be taken seriously.
Now, let’s play a game of what-if: What if this idea became a reality, and each cartridge cost $5,000? Like most other gun-control ideas, I’d posit that nothing good could come of it. Criminals would still be able to acquire ammunition without too much difficulty, and law abiding citizens would take the hit.
Consider this:

• With basic equipment, one can smelt lead fishing and wheel weights into bullets. One can make higher-quality ones with a source of pure lead (like commercially-made ingots), but I can make-do with scraps.
• Making jacketed bullets is only slightly more difficult.
• Smokeless powder may be a bit difficult to make, but black powder can be made with sulfur, charcoal and potassium nitrate. Sulfur is commonly available on the commercial market, charcoal can be bought anywhere, and potassium nitrate can be readily extracted from manure, guano, or urine.
• Even if one were to sell each bullet for $1, one would still be able to recoup the startup costs quite quickly.
• The US has thousands of miles of essentially undefended borders with Canada and Mexico, and thousands of miles of coastline. Ammunition is easily made elsewhere and smuggled in. In fact, it’d be easier than smuggling drugs, as you can’t detect lead bullets with a sniffer dog.
• Mister_V had an disturbing thought: even if all other sources of ammo were unavailable (no making ammo at home, no importation or smuggling, etc.), then it’d be likely that the murder of police officers would increase. If criminals could overpower a police officer and steal his duty gun, extra magazines, and backup gun, they could readily net over $250,000 worth of ammunition. That’s more than most robberies bring in, so it’d look quite appealing to criminals.
• Lots of people already have ammo, and the enactment of such a law may well be the straw that breaks the camel’s back.

Truly, such an idea would be doomed to fail immediately. Why anyone would ever entertain such a thought for even a moment is beyond me.

From this article:

And [DC v. Heller] will force liberals to focus on the real reasons for gun violence.
At some point, liberals and anti-gun folks will have to realize that it is failing families, schools and communities that lead to drug-related gun violence, not guns purchased by law-abiding citizens.

So, why do we do [gun “buyback” programs]? We do them because it allows incompetent politicians to feel as though they’re doing something. They want to be able to go back to their under-informed constituents and say, Hey! Look at me. I’m doing something about the 400 murders, on average, in Philadelphia yearly, or the five or six gunshot victims a day! When they really aren’t.

IN OTHER WORDS, guns don’t kill people – misguided, unloved, disconnected, uneducated, angry youth kill people. Youth without mentors and role models kill people.

By jove, I think he’s on to something. Read the whole thing; it gets better.

While I know that open carry of handguns is legal in Arizona, I haven’t been able to dig up any information on the open carry of rifles.
Now, before people get all flustered, I’d like to clarify: this would be in the context of carrying a slung rifle on my back to and from the range while riding my scooter.
I suspect that carrying my Pelican hard case might not work so well, hence the question.
I figure that motorists seeing a scooter rider with a slung AR on his back might change their mental classification of such riders. It might also increase my visibility, making my ride a bit safer too. 🙂

Dear Gun (and gun-related stuff) Store Owners,
I know that retail space is valuable and all, but could you please (pretty please?) stock at least a token few left-handed items?
It might not have to be big, expensive stuff like a lefty CZ 452 American (hint, hint), but it’d be nice if you had at least one lefty holster of each type you sold. Actually having lefty guns in stock (rather than having to order them) would be nice, but I understand why you don’t.
Sure, lefties might be only about 10% of the population, but lefty shooting products are still made, and it’d be really great for you to at least stock some stuff…
Sincerely,
AZR

From the VPC‘s post-Heller statement:

Thankfully, because the plaintiff in Heller did not challenge the District’s ban on “machine guns,” Washington, DC?s ban on most semiautomatic weapons, including semiauto handguns, should be unaffected.?

Er, what?
After reading further, this is because DC defines a “machine gun” as any gun ?which shoots, is designed to shoot, or can be readily converted or restored to shoot semiautomatically, more than 12 shots without manual reloading.” What a bizzare definition.
The VPC also claims,

In contrast [to semi-automatic handguns], revolvers hold only five to six ammunition rounds, fire more slowly, take time to reload, and represent only 27 percent of the handguns manufactured in 2006.

Jerry Miculek disagrees.