If you live in Washington - HELP

Hell even if you Don't live here - HELP anyway.


We have two bills I-591  Good, it stops the government from confiscating weapons in a state of emergency.

Bill I-594 - BAD   This is a Bloomberg bill to register guns - which is how they're going to take them away when they declare a state of emergency - say when we have the next earthquake?  Who Knows.

"Ah come on - no one wants to take your guns."   Really?  Are You Serious?  (you realize I can go on like this for hours right?)

Call, write letters, write emails,  send money.    They have 3 MILLION Dollars out there trying to screw us, We have about 1.  They have the media and Bloomberg,  We have the NRA - oh wait, no we don't they seem to be missing in action.

GO READ THIS - NOW!    THANKS Barron!

We do have the following


Gun Owners Action League of Washington (DONATE HERE)

CCRKBA

CCRKBA (Donate HERE)

And Washington Arms Collectors

Starbucks

I'm not really surprised, but I am disappointed.  Howard Schultz posted an open letter which basically says:

Please don't bring your guns to Starbucks.

It's not a ban, it's a request. I suspect it was really an attempt to get people to stop using Starbucks as a rallying point for their gun agenda (pro or anti). He states that part very clearly, and I agree completely.  Starbucks appreciation is one thing, slinging an AR across your shoulders to piss-off anti's wasn't useful, nor was it much appreciated by Starbucks - I suspect it wouldn't be appreciated by any business.  If you normally strap an AR to your back, well then - good for you.  But I've been around a few years, and I've NEVER seen it happen.  Around here, I'd have to say it' a rare thing.  Having the store full of people doing open carry as a planned even - also not useful.     

As such it's a good idea, the problem was the wording.  He specifically requested that we not bring guns to Starbucks, rather than reaching out to the gun community and asking them to please stop using his business as a political tool.  Which I suspect we'd have complied with, I would have done so happily -  Sadly, what it's going to do, is alienate gun owners, and it's not going to make the anti's any any happier at all.   The upside if there is one, will be for people in the middle, those who just wish we'd both go away.  The end result will be for a lot of gun rights activists to eventually find some other place to buy their coffee.

I am one of those. Not because I'm mad at Mr. Schultz, I'm not, just a bit disappointed.  I'll stop going there because he very politely asked me to. Given the choice of having to handle my gun in the parking lot, or finding another coffee shop, there's really only one sensible choice.

I've been a Starbucks customer for a long time, not particularly because I like their coffee, there's really only a couple blends I really like.   I'll be canceling my Starbucks card, hopefully I'll be able to get the cash back.  There are lots of other coffee's quite a few I think are noticeably better than Starbucks

Because only the cops should have guns

My deepest sympathy to the family and friends of Andrea Rubello

from The Blaze

MINEOLA, N.Y. (TheBlaze/AP) — Authorities say a police officer’s bullet killed a New York college student during the response to a home invasion at an off-campus home.

A young N.Y. woman was taken captive by Smith a large black male criminal on parole from a first degree robbery conviction.   

Smith, of Hempstead, Long Island, had been arrested for robbery in the first degree in 1999, promoting prison contraband in the second degree in 2000, robbery in the first degree in 2003, assault in the second degree in 2003 and robbery in the second degree in 2003, police said.

Given his record one might wonder what sort of MORON would parole him, let alone a group of MORONS  But then we're talking about N.Y. where creating victims is the goal.
 
So in the target rich environment of  Gun Free New York where only the cops should have gun, The gun toting cop rushes in to the rescue. Smith, using the girl as a shield apparently aims a gun at the cop.

But Wait - he's a criminal, on parole, with a GUN oh my god we need more GUN control.  Because obviously letting violent career criminals out on parole is the correct course of action.   Just think how bad this would have turned out if the people in the house were armed, I mean the home invader would have undoubtedly taken those guns and used them against the victims home owners.  Must be a gun control problem.  Everything is a gun control problem.  

So, the home invader points a gun at the cop, and the cop in typical N.Y. fashion starts shooting.   Now I don't know how many shots were fired but given the 85% miss rate which seems typical of N.Y. cops, I'm betting it was more than the 7 that hit Smith and the ONE that killed the girl.  Ah, did you notice (see quote at the top) that it was a bullet that killed the girl and not a gun? Because cop guns don't kill people, bullets do. It wasn't the cop, it was the Bullet.

Now you have to wonder at the wisdom of shooting at a man who is using a woman as a shield, but at 15 feet or less, I'd have probably taken the shot.  Shot - not 8+ shots.   I don't want to second guess someone in a situation that stressful, but training kicks in - or at least we're told by cops, the military, and professional trainers that it does.  So I suspect if you've trained to empty your magazine every time you pull the trigger and you're only concerned with hitting a Silhouette Target, then perhaps this outcome was inevitable.  Given the statistics of New York's finest when the guns come out, emptying the magazine - and we're not talking about what they let the citizens use - where talking about the 18 round type - is the norm.   I suspect the cop feels worse than I've ever felt in my entire life.  This is where I believe we need to make the people responsible pay the price for their actions.

The parole board who let that SOB out should be facing charges, not being a lawyer I'm not sure what those charges should be, but criminal negligence, and contributing to the death of citizen should be close.  The cop should be looking at involuntary man slaughter with extenuating circumstances, and the NYPD should be looking at criminal negligence in training.  The Bloomberg and the rest of the politicians should be facing charges for turning the honest citizens of N.Y. into victims.

Moral to the story:
Don't count on the cops to save your ass - you're just another target.
Carry a Gun - the criminals do.
A masked person breaks into your house, Shoot Them BEFORE they or the cops shoot you.
Practice - Small Targets.   Don't rush, just like driving - slow is smooth, smooth is fast.  Fast comes with repetition.   Practice with hostage targets, Practice with small targets, and when your done, practice some more. 
(Yeah I know practice is particularly difficult right now, since ammo is so friggen hard to come by.   So practice with Dry-Fire.)

It's not really about that.

There are all sorts of proposals in the wake of EPS1 attack on Aurora.   There's one by Lautenberg and McCarthy that will supposedly make it harder for ciminals to anonymously purchase ammo on-line.   Bitter over at Shall Not Be Questioned has more info.

Normally I agree with those guys 99+%

This time I'm going to take exception; minor, but and exception.

It's not about Gun Control - it's about CONTROL.  They're not trying to control guns, or ammo, they're trying to control people.  That's what governments do - if you let them.   They eventually reach a point where they control every aspect of your life.   Every law is there as a means of controlling people.  If you control the people you win.  Granted it's a long term loosing proposition, but folks like Pelosi and Obama are incapable of seeing beyond they're own desires.  Hell most politicians are incapable of even realizing they're short sighted.

At times it seems like they do it because they think we're too stupid to make our own decisions. I've got to admit having elected Obama - they may have a point - a lot of people are apparently too stupid.  On the other hand, my internal Wookie says: "It's their life to screw up, we must allow them to make their own bad decisions."  Then the Objectivist voice in my head says - but they're inflicting their stupid decisions on me!

Sad but true - it's the way we let the system evolve.  The reality is worse I think.   They know if they tell the right lies, and scare people enough, the people will beg them to take control.  And they will, every chance we give them.  Doesn't matter if it's about Guns, or Finance, or Freedom of Speech.  They want to control it.

The laws aimed at guns are really just the most insidious of the lot, the ultimate goal is to remove our ability to defend ourselves, which makes us nothing more than another dependent of the system.

An interesting approach

Sebastian pointed this little gem out.    The approach seems to be: Find an example of someone doing it wrong and use that as an argument to invalidate the law.

So:

We have someone speeding - which is against the law.  Obviously the law doesn't work and needs to be eliminated.

Someone murders someone - which is against the law.  Guess  we need to eliminate that law too - since it didn't work.

Hmmm....

A Caliber Problem

Too many that I like - not enough sefl control - that's my problem
I suppose next to Tam, I'm a bit of a piker so there's that.

I've improved over the years, but I'm slipping again.
At one point I'd tried to get down to just .45acp and .308 But .308 is too expesive to blow though 500 rounds every few months. (well so is 5.56 but you have to practice right?) I'd almost made it but I couldn't give up the 9x23 and I couldn't give up the 5.56 and the 45-70. So I have 3 guns I'll probably sell this month - a .380, a .40S&W and at Win Model 92 in .44mag

The smart thing to do would be - sell everything except the 5.56 - and buy 3 M&P 9mm.
Since 2 is 1, and 1 is none the correct number would be 3 of each right? Would be cheaper than what I'm doing that's for sure. Even so, it's not going to happen.

Current Pistol:
.45ACP (for the 1911's and the XD)
.40 S&W (1 double stack 1911 compact)
.380 for the PPK that I really need to sell
9x23 for Burns Custom 1911 9x23 (I LOVE this round)

Rifle:
.44 Mag (For the Model 92)
5.56
.300 AAC (new and I'm sort of tempted to replace the 5.56 with it --- but.....)
.308 WIN
.45-70

Shotgun (only 12ga) Yay!

I'm set up for reloading all of theses except the .44mag

I'm seriously considering adding 9mm

Adding 9mm would cut my ammo expenses for classes, and practice down a $100 - $150 / case, more if I used Wolf ammo. I suspect the real reason is that I keep looking at this M&P 9mm that my local crack (ahhh gun) dealer has and I kind of want it. I also want a second 9x23 (with perhaps a 9mm barrel I can swap in/out)

I've always had a talent for rationalizing gun purchases - part of which is I've never lost money on a gun. It's just that I'm thinking about spending 600 bucks on a gun to save myself maybe $300 bucks on ammo over the next couple years. Does this qualify as an addction?

From a TEOTWAWKI point of view I can see reasons to hang on to the ability to use 5.56 and 9mm - as I suspect those are the two most common (in terms of quantity) rounds in the U.S.A. at the moment. They're also cheaper to reload - so even better
Maybe I should sell the XD if I get the M&P......

See there I go again - it's a friggen disease. I'm really starting to envy those people who were smart enough to not go down this path - you know those of you who started with a 9mm Glock, then added an AR-15 - WAY smarter. I guess my excuse is I've had 40 years to get here, and when I started there were no Glocks - come to think on it - there was no AR-15 either.



- Posted from the pad

Picking a new gun.

I've been going around and around on this.

I want a lighter gun for every day carry.   My full sized .45's - even my 9x23 are too heavy to be comfortable.  

I've thought about using my PPK but .380 just doesn't fill me with confidence.   I've looked at a number of pocket 9's like the Kahr P9, or the Ruger LC9.   Which I think would do the job, but I don't own a 9mm, and I got rid of my .40S&W's.

Ideally I'd like to build a commander size 9x23 on a titanium frame, which I can do - using a Caspian Recon Titanium frame, and a 4.25" slide.  Probably a ramped barrel - although my 5" Burns 9x23 doesn't use one.   Why 9x23?   Easy, I get 10 rounds in a single stack - I don't like fat guns in general (small hands).  The ammo is lighter, and it's got the stopping power of a .357Mag which is every bit as good as a .45 ACP.    I've been thinking about building it myself but if I screw up, the frame is about $630 (with options), the slide is another $300 (with options), about $250 for the barrel.  And then there's all the little parts like the bobtail mainspring housing, grip safety, safety, slide release, etc.     All said and done - if I do it all myself with out screwing anything up I'm looking at close to $1400.00.   If I have a smith do it - well OUCH.  

Or I can suck up the bit of extra weight (not much) and go with a Smith & Wesson SW1911SC  Like this - SWEET    Except, for some reason - NO ONE has these - you'd think S&W had given up making - Did they?

I considered a Kimber Ultra Carry Pro but, I've not been all that happy with the last couple of Kimbers I had, every one of them needed work.    Think I'd rather have a Ruger LC9.

News bias and Conspiracy Theories

I havent' read this book yet, but it's on my list - hard to resist a free book.   Well free after the price of a kindle (and I'm on my 4th - really have to stop bouncing them off the cement).

Matt Braken's Novel Enemies Foreign and Domestic

Read This  - Then on March 1, go get your free book.   Why do I care?  Let's just say that there are a few (very very few) conspiracies theories that I think might be true and the DOJ attempting to kill the 2nd Amendment is one.

There is only one reason to disarm the people - and that's to convert them from citizens to subjects.   Any other reason you might have heard is just smoke screen.

I don't get my news From FOX - don't have Cable,  I get my news from various sites - some domestic, some foreign (completely different view points).  I do listen to NPR.  The trick is not finding an unbiased source - no such critter, the trick is knowing what the bias is.

Scary Movies

I came across this on another blog - I'm more than just a bit worried about the fallout from this.   My gut is telling me that we have too many people too close to the edge and some of them are going to see this and think - gee what a great idea.    The film won't get blamed, the people might get blamed but guns will get blamed.   Just watch - some asshat is going to copy cat this and there will be much media outcry about how it's all the fault of guns.

Guns are not what drove the characters in the movie over the edge - that was the Media - Media Kills - Ban the Media!

Oh - wait - First Amendment - never mind.

On the other hand, why not ban the media - hell it feels like they only air sensational crap they get from twitter and never bother check facts.   I think Journalism is mostly dead - some time in the 80's it bit the dust and we were too busy being shocked and amused to notice.