As just about everyone in the gun world knows right now, ammunition and even reloading components have been harder to come by than a good Lindsey Lohan movie.
To those of you who stocked up way ahead of time and are sitting on 20-30,000 bullets and 50# of powder... yes, I hate you :-)
For the rest of us, we're loading up everything we've got, running our stores of powder, bullets, and primers down to the bare shelf, and it's hurting a lot of folks' abilities to compete as much as we want, get in some quality live-fire range time, or attend training courses.
I've been able to scrounge bullets and powder here and there... but it ain't much and, worse yet, not in the caliber I really NEED to be loading for.
This year marks my first full season shooting in the USPSA Limited division, and the year is off to a GREAT start. I should be 2-3 more good classifiers away from making "B" and the new STI has been running better and better with each match. The only wrinkle??? I can't find .40 bullets to save my life! I'm down to just enough for this weekend's "Super-Classifier" match and then I'll be done shooting Limited until I can find and press together more ammunition.
What I HAVE been able to find has all been of the 9mm variety... and I've grabbed everything I could find. Plated, lead, JHP, 115gr, 124gr, 125gr, you name it. My ammo locker is starting to look like leftover casserole, and it means I bet I'll be doing a LOT of Production shooting in the bear future unless I can come up with a source for 1,000-2,000 more .40 caliber bullets.
...and a LOT of people I know are stuck in the same boat with me. Argh.
Oh, and to those of you holding onto those inventories of 20,000 bullets, be a buddy and consider kicking one loose to a friend in need (REAL need) every once in a blue moon. Your karma will thank you :-)
- Posted using BlogPress from my iPhone
Tuesday, April 9, 2013
...the Waiting Game
...is WELL underway for two new blasters, one of which would be restricted in my home state after July 1 and another that's so popular they're usually sold before the UPS driver's tracks have cooled off.
The first is the Smith & Wesson M&P Shield (9mm). I've had this on a list with our distributor since sometime around last June. Mrs. Normal wants it, I want it, and we've both been waiting patiently for it to come in. We got close last week... but it was available for all of 30 seconds and it was gone. Having shot the new skinny Smith, I understand why literally everyone is buying one. It's FANTASTIC! It conceals like a big .380, is incredibly easy to manage in 9mm form, and just plain feels great in my hand. I WILL own one, and soon. Or... whenever it comes in. Which could e a while.
The one I'm REALLY jazzed about would be my first scattergun - the Mossberg 930 JM Pro (10-shot). Tuned for action shooting competition, it will serve the homestead equally well as a defensive shotgun, bird hunting and clays gun, and hopefully let me try my hand at 3-gun sometime down the road. Sadly, the JM Pro has been about as difficult to find as the Shield, so while we're waiting I'm keeping my eyes open for a normal 930 which could be built and tuned up or maybe a 590 or Remington 870... Just to get into the shotgun game before Colorado's stupid and dangerous magazine ban goes into effect on July 1.
Say a prayer to the gun gods for us, friends... Mama Griz wants her Shield and Papa Bear needs a shotty.
- Posted using BlogPress from my iPhone
The first is the Smith & Wesson M&P Shield (9mm). I've had this on a list with our distributor since sometime around last June. Mrs. Normal wants it, I want it, and we've both been waiting patiently for it to come in. We got close last week... but it was available for all of 30 seconds and it was gone. Having shot the new skinny Smith, I understand why literally everyone is buying one. It's FANTASTIC! It conceals like a big .380, is incredibly easy to manage in 9mm form, and just plain feels great in my hand. I WILL own one, and soon. Or... whenever it comes in. Which could e a while.
The one I'm REALLY jazzed about would be my first scattergun - the Mossberg 930 JM Pro (10-shot). Tuned for action shooting competition, it will serve the homestead equally well as a defensive shotgun, bird hunting and clays gun, and hopefully let me try my hand at 3-gun sometime down the road. Sadly, the JM Pro has been about as difficult to find as the Shield, so while we're waiting I'm keeping my eyes open for a normal 930 which could be built and tuned up or maybe a 590 or Remington 870... Just to get into the shotgun game before Colorado's stupid and dangerous magazine ban goes into effect on July 1.
Say a prayer to the gun gods for us, friends... Mama Griz wants her Shield and Papa Bear needs a shotty.
- Posted using BlogPress from my iPhone
Saturday, April 6, 2013
The Barbie Doll Gun
I haven't really spent much time talking about the AR platform yet it's one I'm enamored with.
When I go to the range I see plenty of them and none of them are exactly the same. I love it!
Around 2009 Mrs. Normal gave 'corporate approval' to add one to the collection. At that time, Attorney General Holder came out and said the new President would be coming after "assault weapons" again and instantly created a run on black rifles.
A week later, we brought ours home - the last Smith & Wesson on the wall. It was a stripped down "optics ready" model and stayed very basic for quite some time. I shot the heck out of it and have loved it ever since.
Over the past few years I've made a few changes here and there. It went "brown" (Flat Dark Earth, technically) for a while. When the Angled Fore Grip hit the market, I HAD to run one on my rifle (Costa had one!)
Then, when it seemed like everyone was dressing 'em up in Magpul FDE furniture, I decided to turn it into a "not-Magpul" gun. I have nothing against Magpul anymore but wanted the challenge of setting it up with good gear everyone else wasn't running.
A call to Stark Equipment put a new grip in my hands (yep, their funky vertical pistol grip) and another to VLTOR soon sent their eMod stock. Both pieces of gear look a little weird but feel great.
With Magpul's MOE handguard up front and a garage-project chopped-down MOE foregrip, the gun looks a bit hodgepodge but fits me like a glove.
When the stock M&P safety snapped off it was time to call Battle Arms Development for their highly-regarded ambidextrous safety with user-configurable levers, which I think everyone should own :-)
Most recently, the addition of an Aimpoint Comp M4 and a reworked sling setup courtesy of Larue (two-point sling), Noveske (QD end plate), and Impact Weapons Components (2-to-1 tri-glide and low-profile QD forward mount) have rounded out what is now a VERY worthy and reliable rifle.
And I've still got plans for it...
It may never be complete but it's my "Barbie" and I've love every minute I've poured into building and shooting it.
- Posted using BlogPress from my iPhone
When I go to the range I see plenty of them and none of them are exactly the same. I love it!
Around 2009 Mrs. Normal gave 'corporate approval' to add one to the collection. At that time, Attorney General Holder came out and said the new President would be coming after "assault weapons" again and instantly created a run on black rifles.
A week later, we brought ours home - the last Smith & Wesson on the wall. It was a stripped down "optics ready" model and stayed very basic for quite some time. I shot the heck out of it and have loved it ever since.
Over the past few years I've made a few changes here and there. It went "brown" (Flat Dark Earth, technically) for a while. When the Angled Fore Grip hit the market, I HAD to run one on my rifle (Costa had one!)
Then, when it seemed like everyone was dressing 'em up in Magpul FDE furniture, I decided to turn it into a "not-Magpul" gun. I have nothing against Magpul anymore but wanted the challenge of setting it up with good gear everyone else wasn't running.
A call to Stark Equipment put a new grip in my hands (yep, their funky vertical pistol grip) and another to VLTOR soon sent their eMod stock. Both pieces of gear look a little weird but feel great.
With Magpul's MOE handguard up front and a garage-project chopped-down MOE foregrip, the gun looks a bit hodgepodge but fits me like a glove.
When the stock M&P safety snapped off it was time to call Battle Arms Development for their highly-regarded ambidextrous safety with user-configurable levers, which I think everyone should own :-)
Most recently, the addition of an Aimpoint Comp M4 and a reworked sling setup courtesy of Larue (two-point sling), Noveske (QD end plate), and Impact Weapons Components (2-to-1 tri-glide and low-profile QD forward mount) have rounded out what is now a VERY worthy and reliable rifle.
And I've still got plans for it...
It may never be complete but it's my "Barbie" and I've love every minute I've poured into building and shooting it.
- Posted using BlogPress from my iPhone
Monday, March 18, 2013
Competition Notes - Finishing In The Middle Is OK!
I learned a very valuable lesson yesterday at what was actually a great USPSA match - set realistic expectations for yourself.
Yesterday, I simply wanted to have fun, shoot well, and put down another solid classifier. With the exception of a pretty bad bobble on the classifier and checking out early (mentally), I had what I felt was a GREAT match! No mikes, shot 97% of available points while moving efficiently through stages, and got to watch a Limited GM ply his trade.
Then... the scores email comes out and I'm finding myself more than a little confused. I didn't shoot like a man possessed but I certainly didn't feel like it was good for 11th out of 20. What the heck!?!? I only blew up on one stage!
I looked hard at the Overall results for the day in Limited and made a rather humbling realization... I'm playing with the big kids now, a small fish in a very competitive pond.
There were 3 Grand Masters shooting in Limited yesterday. You read that right... 3 Limited GMs shooting a club match. What an awesome day!! Then, we had 2 A-class shooters burning up the scoreboard, followed by a deep core of solid B shooters, one insanely quick "U" (bet he won't be there for long), a couple of inspired C performances, then me. I shot better than most of the "C" shooters, held my own near the "B" ranks, and would have been in the thick of it had I cleaned my classifier instead of borking it.
This is my second really "serious" season in USPSA shooting and I achieved most of my 2012 goals. Most of those goals were individual challenges, not largely driven by the skill level of my fellow competitors. This year, I'm looking at the company I want to keep, and the folks I want to keep up with. I'm on track, with a lot of hard work, to make "B" in both Limited and Production this year and I want to make it in both.
"B" is where it starts getting serious. C-classified shooters are good, many are lifelong competitors and are accomplished marksmen (and women). I like to think of the B as the "deep end" of the pool. It gets real, and it gets live. Serious competitors all, and every one of us itching to take the next step up.
Check out the video below - THIS match is what "middle of the road" looks like in the USPSA Limited division. I ain't no slouch behind the trigger... there truly are some gifted shooters roaming the Front Range and I'm very proud to mingle with them, even if I'm just on the fringe for now.
Click Here For The Match Video
Yesterday, I simply wanted to have fun, shoot well, and put down another solid classifier. With the exception of a pretty bad bobble on the classifier and checking out early (mentally), I had what I felt was a GREAT match! No mikes, shot 97% of available points while moving efficiently through stages, and got to watch a Limited GM ply his trade.
Then... the scores email comes out and I'm finding myself more than a little confused. I didn't shoot like a man possessed but I certainly didn't feel like it was good for 11th out of 20. What the heck!?!? I only blew up on one stage!
I looked hard at the Overall results for the day in Limited and made a rather humbling realization... I'm playing with the big kids now, a small fish in a very competitive pond.
There were 3 Grand Masters shooting in Limited yesterday. You read that right... 3 Limited GMs shooting a club match. What an awesome day!! Then, we had 2 A-class shooters burning up the scoreboard, followed by a deep core of solid B shooters, one insanely quick "U" (bet he won't be there for long), a couple of inspired C performances, then me. I shot better than most of the "C" shooters, held my own near the "B" ranks, and would have been in the thick of it had I cleaned my classifier instead of borking it.
This is my second really "serious" season in USPSA shooting and I achieved most of my 2012 goals. Most of those goals were individual challenges, not largely driven by the skill level of my fellow competitors. This year, I'm looking at the company I want to keep, and the folks I want to keep up with. I'm on track, with a lot of hard work, to make "B" in both Limited and Production this year and I want to make it in both.
"B" is where it starts getting serious. C-classified shooters are good, many are lifelong competitors and are accomplished marksmen (and women). I like to think of the B as the "deep end" of the pool. It gets real, and it gets live. Serious competitors all, and every one of us itching to take the next step up.
Check out the video below - THIS match is what "middle of the road" looks like in the USPSA Limited division. I ain't no slouch behind the trigger... there truly are some gifted shooters roaming the Front Range and I'm very proud to mingle with them, even if I'm just on the fringe for now.
Click Here For The Match Video
Tuesday, March 12, 2013
Colorado Inches Closer to Idiocy
Unless there's a miracle in the House and we can get 2 or 3 more Dems to flip on HB-1224 (the bill to limit magazine capacity) now that it's been amended and passed through the Senate, there is just one hope left.
Veto by the Governor.
I would love to hear the moral dilemma playing out in Governor Hickenlooper's head right now.
On one hand, MAIG is elbows-deep in Colorado politics and God only knows what kinds of promises are being made to legislators and the Governor for supporting their agenda. Appointments in DC? Political clout in the national arena? Seven Minutes in Heaven with Janet Napolitano?? Rumors are the Obama administration and Bloomberg have been constant in their contact of Colorado Democrats.
On the flip side, our Governor is rumored to be a shooter himself. An avid sportsman and outdoorsman, he knows much of the state's revenue comes from tourists, hunters, athletes, and fishermen. While their chosen avocation may not involve firearms or be impacted directly by the new laws, their views on them may (and likely will) drive them to ski in Utah, fish in Montana, and hunt in Wyoming instead of bringing their money to Colorado. Many people who are self-avowed supporters of 2nd Amendment issues have pledged to vacation elsewhere and it's reasonable to assume they're going to follow through on their promises.
If the potential loss of tourism and recreation revenue is bad, this legislation also threatens to drive out a number of nationally-prominent companies which manufacture components affected by the new laws or are moving commerce to states which do not openly attack the law-abiding gun owner in the name of "little coffins."
Four very popular shows on the Outdoor Channel are produced in Colorado and will move to other more "friendly" filming locations if/when these bills become law. This will pull income tax revenue, sales taxes, permitting and use fees from the state's coffers. Potentially worse than that, however, will be the hosts - some of which are Coloradans - coming out on the air and repeatedly hammering home the point that Colorado, once a fantastically gun-friendly state, is no longer a safe haven where the safe, same, and legal use of firearms for hunting, sports, recreation, and personal protection has long overshadowed the two major active shooter massacres we've suffered in the last 15 years.
That will certainly cause damage to our state's reputation an our ability to draw outside recreation money. It pales in comparison, however, to one of the most publicly visible unintended consequences of these bills becoming law - the loss of Magpul in Colorado. Most folks in the gun universe are aware of their plans to move in order to remain in compliance with the law and to keep from funding a government hostile to its citizens. Governor Hickenlooper is going to have to look long and hard at each one of the jobs which will be lost if and when Magpul pulls most of its production and relocates to a "friendly" state. He would do well to look those 600+ workers straight in the face and sign their jobs away.
Now, I have a good friend who feels this socio-economic game of political chicken may be enough to get our Governor to flinch at the last second and jerk the wheel toward "veto" of at least that particular bill. I'm not as optimistic, but I still hope he'll see the light.
As it stands today, Colorado's law-abiding gun owners are going to be in for a long winter...
Veto by the Governor.
I would love to hear the moral dilemma playing out in Governor Hickenlooper's head right now.
On one hand, MAIG is elbows-deep in Colorado politics and God only knows what kinds of promises are being made to legislators and the Governor for supporting their agenda. Appointments in DC? Political clout in the national arena? Seven Minutes in Heaven with Janet Napolitano?? Rumors are the Obama administration and Bloomberg have been constant in their contact of Colorado Democrats.
On the flip side, our Governor is rumored to be a shooter himself. An avid sportsman and outdoorsman, he knows much of the state's revenue comes from tourists, hunters, athletes, and fishermen. While their chosen avocation may not involve firearms or be impacted directly by the new laws, their views on them may (and likely will) drive them to ski in Utah, fish in Montana, and hunt in Wyoming instead of bringing their money to Colorado. Many people who are self-avowed supporters of 2nd Amendment issues have pledged to vacation elsewhere and it's reasonable to assume they're going to follow through on their promises.
If the potential loss of tourism and recreation revenue is bad, this legislation also threatens to drive out a number of nationally-prominent companies which manufacture components affected by the new laws or are moving commerce to states which do not openly attack the law-abiding gun owner in the name of "little coffins."
Four very popular shows on the Outdoor Channel are produced in Colorado and will move to other more "friendly" filming locations if/when these bills become law. This will pull income tax revenue, sales taxes, permitting and use fees from the state's coffers. Potentially worse than that, however, will be the hosts - some of which are Coloradans - coming out on the air and repeatedly hammering home the point that Colorado, once a fantastically gun-friendly state, is no longer a safe haven where the safe, same, and legal use of firearms for hunting, sports, recreation, and personal protection has long overshadowed the two major active shooter massacres we've suffered in the last 15 years.
That will certainly cause damage to our state's reputation an our ability to draw outside recreation money. It pales in comparison, however, to one of the most publicly visible unintended consequences of these bills becoming law - the loss of Magpul in Colorado. Most folks in the gun universe are aware of their plans to move in order to remain in compliance with the law and to keep from funding a government hostile to its citizens. Governor Hickenlooper is going to have to look long and hard at each one of the jobs which will be lost if and when Magpul pulls most of its production and relocates to a "friendly" state. He would do well to look those 600+ workers straight in the face and sign their jobs away.
Now, I have a good friend who feels this socio-economic game of political chicken may be enough to get our Governor to flinch at the last second and jerk the wheel toward "veto" of at least that particular bill. I'm not as optimistic, but I still hope he'll see the light.
As it stands today, Colorado's law-abiding gun owners are going to be in for a long winter...
Monday, March 11, 2013
My Perspective on Gun Rights
...is fairly obvious.
Normally, I find myself borrowing my responses to "why do you think you need xx?" from a couple other bloggers:
Because GUN.
That's it. Simple. We have plenty of (unenforced) laws on the books making the bad things bad people do with guns, um, bad. Tons.
Why do I feel like my antiquated notion of security trumps their need to be socially comfortable?
Because GUN.
Bad guys (and gals) don't give two shits or a squirt about me, but they do care about my right to self-defense and the numbers support defensive carry as a general deterrent to crime.
"B-b-b-b-ut Mr. Normal, don't you think that if we could save one life, it's worth sacrificing a little freedom, right?"
HELL NO!
Those willing to give up liberty for safety deserve and get neither (thanks, Ben).
Furthermore, I believe responsible for my immediate security and the police are there to follow up.
So...until the cops get teleportation and the ability to read minds...
Because, GUN.
Gun is an equalizer. Gun is a deterrent. Gun meets lethal force in kind.
Gun is a manifestation of positivity, strength, peace, and the notion that I must be reasoned with, never bullied (thanks Uncle Ted). Gun is a symbol of independent freedom that carries heavy responsibility and I argue the moment we come to comfortably shoulder that load, life actually becomes more enjoyable as we realize it's NOT too heavy and the rewards of self-determination are incredible when set against the worn beige walls of the "gimme" mindset.
Gun is not a talisman. Gun is not a miracle pill. Gun is complex and complicated enough without politics entering the scene.
When it does, however, I will always keep a few things in the back of my head:
1 - will these measures do anything we're not already supposed to be doing under current law?
2 - will I be required to give up any of my natural rights to toe the line and get on board?
3 - are we protecting liberty or merely fluffing the pillows?
...and why?
Because, yes, GUN.
Normally, I find myself borrowing my responses to "why do you think you need xx?" from a couple other bloggers:
Because GUN.
That's it. Simple. We have plenty of (unenforced) laws on the books making the bad things bad people do with guns, um, bad. Tons.
Why do I feel like my antiquated notion of security trumps their need to be socially comfortable?
Because GUN.
Bad guys (and gals) don't give two shits or a squirt about me, but they do care about my right to self-defense and the numbers support defensive carry as a general deterrent to crime.
"B-b-b-b-ut Mr. Normal, don't you think that if we could save one life, it's worth sacrificing a little freedom, right?"
HELL NO!
Those willing to give up liberty for safety deserve and get neither (thanks, Ben).
Furthermore, I believe responsible for my immediate security and the police are there to follow up.
So...until the cops get teleportation and the ability to read minds...
Because, GUN.
Gun is an equalizer. Gun is a deterrent. Gun meets lethal force in kind.
Gun is a manifestation of positivity, strength, peace, and the notion that I must be reasoned with, never bullied (thanks Uncle Ted). Gun is a symbol of independent freedom that carries heavy responsibility and I argue the moment we come to comfortably shoulder that load, life actually becomes more enjoyable as we realize it's NOT too heavy and the rewards of self-determination are incredible when set against the worn beige walls of the "gimme" mindset.
Gun is not a talisman. Gun is not a miracle pill. Gun is complex and complicated enough without politics entering the scene.
When it does, however, I will always keep a few things in the back of my head:
1 - will these measures do anything we're not already supposed to be doing under current law?
2 - will I be required to give up any of my natural rights to toe the line and get on board?
3 - are we protecting liberty or merely fluffing the pillows?
...and why?
Because, yes, GUN.
Do or Die, Colorado.
Today's the day we find out whether my home State's Senate has any real gravitas, huevos, chutzpah, or balls.
Of the seven anti-gun-culture bills (make no mistake, this is a war over culture, not equipment) being debated in the Senate over the weekend, two have been killed by their sponsors while the five with actual teeth are moving to final reading and recorded vote today:
* HB-1224, a bill which would outlaw all removable magazines over 15 rounds and ban any shotgun made or modified to hold more than 28" of shells.
* SB 195 - a bill banning online CCW training certificates state-wide.
* SB 197 - a bill which would further ban domestic abusers from owning guns.
* HB-1228 - a bill which would establish a background check fee.
* HB-1229 - a bill which would mandate universal background checks for all firearm transfers at any level and redefines the nature of permitted possession as transfer.
And here's my take on why every one of them is fluff, bullshit, or will never save a single life:
With regard to the magazine ban, there is a grandfathering clause permitting those owned prior to July 1, 2013, but it requires the owner to maintain continuous possession. That means no handing a full mag of 9mm ammo for your Glock 17 to a buddy. No giving your friend a PMAG for his birthday, and no handing your "high capacity" shotgun to a trusted hunting or shooting buddy if you cross a fence. This is also the bill which will prevent manufacturers from building "high-capacity" magazines in Colorado - effectively driving off Magpul, a market leader employing (directly and indirectly) some 700-900 Coloradans and generating more than $80M in state tax revenue. And finally, the magazine capacity restrictions set forth in 1994 and remained in effect for a decade did absolutely NOTHING to prevent or deter criminal use of a firearm. It simply turned gun owners into outlaws or gray-market profiteers overnight.
Now, online CCW certification is a fairly new concept, driven by the insane demand for training and the Internet sales model promoted by "deals" websites. Well-meaning national firms have been charging to let folks take online webinar or PowerPoint training then submit their test results and obtain the required certificate of training. In Colorado, CCW licenses are issued by the county and not the state and, as long as the instructor meets statute and the county sheriff accepts it, online training is valid. Many counties have banned or prohibited applicants from using certificates of instruction from online companies. Given my personal stake in a local training company, I don't necessarily oppose the measure because I feel it to be important to have one-on-one time with students. I do oppose it as it strips the county sheriff of the right to administer his program within the terms of the Concealed Carry Act.
The proposed legislation to prevent domestic abusers from committing acts of gun violence is also fraught with pitfalls and legal peril. First, it requires a person under a protection order - NOT convicted of a crime - to relinquish property to the government or to sell or transfer it within 24 or 72 hours upon demand. The last time I checked, the Fourth Amendment protects free citizens (those NOT convicted in a court) from unreasonable search and seizure. And, given the number of domestic violence cases which may be initiated by a spiteful party who is actually committing acts of violence themselves, this is a powder keg bill just begging to blow back into the faces of its sponsors and supporters. Furthermore, I've seen nothing to suggest this will prevent further domestic abuse as a perpetrator will use whatever weapon is at hand to commit acts of violence.
Finally, the background check legislation currently being proposed is one of the sneakiest and most underhanded attempts at criminalizing free and legal behavior to-date, packaged under a tissue of "public safety" and "fiscal responsibility." It will require literally ANY transfer of a firearm between private individuals not currently at a shooting range to process (and pay for if the companion bill goes through) a Form 4473 with a federally-licensed gun dealer. To that end, the bill authorizing the state to charge for background checks is absolutely ludicrous. At the beginning of a previous legislative session, Colorado lawmakers tried to SAVE the state over $1M/yr by eliminating the CBI from the firearm background check process but that bill was killed in committee. Instead, now, a Democrat wants to increase government and charge us for something most other states rely on the ATF to provide. For free.
If these laws go through, not only can you sell your friend a gun you don't want anymore or gift a firearm to someone not your immediate family, you won't be able to do the following:
• handle a gun at a gun store before purchase unless that shop also offers gunsmithing services
• loan a gun to a friend out in the field on private property or land otherwise legal to use for sport shooting or hunting
• hand a firearm to a trusted friend or loved one (unless they live within the same household) to protect another or one's self from deadly force or great bodily injury
...there ain't a single good idea in there.
Of the seven anti-gun-culture bills (make no mistake, this is a war over culture, not equipment) being debated in the Senate over the weekend, two have been killed by their sponsors while the five with actual teeth are moving to final reading and recorded vote today:
* HB-1224, a bill which would outlaw all removable magazines over 15 rounds and ban any shotgun made or modified to hold more than 28" of shells.
* SB 195 - a bill banning online CCW training certificates state-wide.
* SB 197 - a bill which would further ban domestic abusers from owning guns.
* HB-1228 - a bill which would establish a background check fee.
* HB-1229 - a bill which would mandate universal background checks for all firearm transfers at any level and redefines the nature of permitted possession as transfer.
And here's my take on why every one of them is fluff, bullshit, or will never save a single life:
With regard to the magazine ban, there is a grandfathering clause permitting those owned prior to July 1, 2013, but it requires the owner to maintain continuous possession. That means no handing a full mag of 9mm ammo for your Glock 17 to a buddy. No giving your friend a PMAG for his birthday, and no handing your "high capacity" shotgun to a trusted hunting or shooting buddy if you cross a fence. This is also the bill which will prevent manufacturers from building "high-capacity" magazines in Colorado - effectively driving off Magpul, a market leader employing (directly and indirectly) some 700-900 Coloradans and generating more than $80M in state tax revenue. And finally, the magazine capacity restrictions set forth in 1994 and remained in effect for a decade did absolutely NOTHING to prevent or deter criminal use of a firearm. It simply turned gun owners into outlaws or gray-market profiteers overnight.
Now, online CCW certification is a fairly new concept, driven by the insane demand for training and the Internet sales model promoted by "deals" websites. Well-meaning national firms have been charging to let folks take online webinar or PowerPoint training then submit their test results and obtain the required certificate of training. In Colorado, CCW licenses are issued by the county and not the state and, as long as the instructor meets statute and the county sheriff accepts it, online training is valid. Many counties have banned or prohibited applicants from using certificates of instruction from online companies. Given my personal stake in a local training company, I don't necessarily oppose the measure because I feel it to be important to have one-on-one time with students. I do oppose it as it strips the county sheriff of the right to administer his program within the terms of the Concealed Carry Act.
The proposed legislation to prevent domestic abusers from committing acts of gun violence is also fraught with pitfalls and legal peril. First, it requires a person under a protection order - NOT convicted of a crime - to relinquish property to the government or to sell or transfer it within 24 or 72 hours upon demand. The last time I checked, the Fourth Amendment protects free citizens (those NOT convicted in a court) from unreasonable search and seizure. And, given the number of domestic violence cases which may be initiated by a spiteful party who is actually committing acts of violence themselves, this is a powder keg bill just begging to blow back into the faces of its sponsors and supporters. Furthermore, I've seen nothing to suggest this will prevent further domestic abuse as a perpetrator will use whatever weapon is at hand to commit acts of violence.
Finally, the background check legislation currently being proposed is one of the sneakiest and most underhanded attempts at criminalizing free and legal behavior to-date, packaged under a tissue of "public safety" and "fiscal responsibility." It will require literally ANY transfer of a firearm between private individuals not currently at a shooting range to process (and pay for if the companion bill goes through) a Form 4473 with a federally-licensed gun dealer. To that end, the bill authorizing the state to charge for background checks is absolutely ludicrous. At the beginning of a previous legislative session, Colorado lawmakers tried to SAVE the state over $1M/yr by eliminating the CBI from the firearm background check process but that bill was killed in committee. Instead, now, a Democrat wants to increase government and charge us for something most other states rely on the ATF to provide. For free.
If these laws go through, not only can you sell your friend a gun you don't want anymore or gift a firearm to someone not your immediate family, you won't be able to do the following:
• handle a gun at a gun store before purchase unless that shop also offers gunsmithing services
• loan a gun to a friend out in the field on private property or land otherwise legal to use for sport shooting or hunting
• hand a firearm to a trusted friend or loved one (unless they live within the same household) to protect another or one's self from deadly force or great bodily injury
...there ain't a single good idea in there.
Friday, March 8, 2013
Today is The Day Liberty May Fall
Today may forever be known in Colorado as The Day Common Sense and Freedom Died and was replaced with fuzzy-logic feel-good legislation which will likely get a legal gun owner killed at some point before its repeal.
The Colorado state Senate is voting on four bills the residents of this state do not support and will never support. Their vote in favor of passage will drive away a major employer, impose idiotic restrictions on law-abiding citizens, and shackle the rights of all in Colorado who use firearms for sport, personal protection, or hunting to the misguided East Coast sensibilities of those who seek not to lead us but make us their subjects.
This naked aggression should not stand. Bring on peaceful regime change in 2014!
- Posted using BlogPress from my iPhone
The Colorado state Senate is voting on four bills the residents of this state do not support and will never support. Their vote in favor of passage will drive away a major employer, impose idiotic restrictions on law-abiding citizens, and shackle the rights of all in Colorado who use firearms for sport, personal protection, or hunting to the misguided East Coast sensibilities of those who seek not to lead us but make us their subjects.
This naked aggression should not stand. Bring on peaceful regime change in 2014!
- Posted using BlogPress from my iPhone
Wednesday, February 27, 2013
Colorado Has Officially Been Sold Down the River
It's official. Governor Hickenlooper's journey to the Dark Side is complete.
For a moment, it looked like a tiny kernel of common sense may have bled through the wad of cash MAIG and the Bloomberg-Biden machine forcibly inserted into our state politics.
If he signs his into law, it will ring the death knell for one of this state's most well-regarded manufacturing icons in Colorado, kill hundreds of jobs, and kiss tens of millions of state tax revenue dollars goodbye.
And for what? Laws proven to be ineffective which only guarantee a growing population of criminals a tactical advantage and the law-abiding public will no longer be able to levy Unfair Advantage (Magpul's slogan) against them.
I feel violated.
click here for the gritty details
Magpul Industries' response? It may be a parting shot, but its a hell of a classy move. You read it here.
- Posted using BlogPress from my iPad
For a moment, it looked like a tiny kernel of common sense may have bled through the wad of cash MAIG and the Bloomberg-Biden machine forcibly inserted into our state politics.
If he signs his into law, it will ring the death knell for one of this state's most well-regarded manufacturing icons in Colorado, kill hundreds of jobs, and kiss tens of millions of state tax revenue dollars goodbye.
And for what? Laws proven to be ineffective which only guarantee a growing population of criminals a tactical advantage and the law-abiding public will no longer be able to levy Unfair Advantage (Magpul's slogan) against them.
I feel violated.
click here for the gritty details
Magpul Industries' response? It may be a parting shot, but its a hell of a classy move. You read it here.
- Posted using BlogPress from my iPad
Location:Corey St,Longmont,United States
Tuesday, February 26, 2013
New Carry Gun? Put Some Wear On That Thing!
With CCW training classes filled to the brim with folks waking up to the outright assault on our liberties, I'm seeing more new guns than ever cross our door and meeting more brand-new shooters come in for training.
What I would love to see, more than anything, is these folks step up to our next level training course with that same gun, only now it's got a few shiny spots from a couple thousand dry-fire practice draws from a broken-in holster.
If you're among the new shooters seeking CCW training, welcome to the life brothers and sisters! At some point today, go into your training space and do a few reps from the leather or Kydex you'll soon be wearing on a daily basis.
...and find a local IDPA or USPSA club nearby, Spring is right around the corner!
- Posted using BlogPress from my iPhone
What I would love to see, more than anything, is these folks step up to our next level training course with that same gun, only now it's got a few shiny spots from a couple thousand dry-fire practice draws from a broken-in holster.
If you're among the new shooters seeking CCW training, welcome to the life brothers and sisters! At some point today, go into your training space and do a few reps from the leather or Kydex you'll soon be wearing on a daily basis.
...and find a local IDPA or USPSA club nearby, Spring is right around the corner!
- Posted using BlogPress from my iPhone
Reasoned Discourse? Nope. Logical Superiority.
I'm sure you are all as tired as I am from hearing the bleating left demand a "reasoned, rational discourse" about the best ways to chip away the moral, logical, and fundamental base of every living being's right to protect himself or herself from injury, death, and tyranny.
I recently read a post on one of my favorite Facebook pages about engaging the other side on their turf with our well-stocked powder keg of legal precedent, Constitutional protection, and common sense. They advised those of us who walk through that looking glass to be polite, and to be professional.
My research into military / combat mindset and experience volunteering with law enforcement finishes that statement like this:
"Be professional, be polite, an have a plan to kill everyone in the room/car."
When I enter into a "reasoned" conversation with an anti-gunner, I am polite. I am courteous. And I just so happen to bring enough firepower to finish the fight. You should, too... just in case it gets ugly.
- Posted using BlogPress from my iPhone
I recently read a post on one of my favorite Facebook pages about engaging the other side on their turf with our well-stocked powder keg of legal precedent, Constitutional protection, and common sense. They advised those of us who walk through that looking glass to be polite, and to be professional.
My research into military / combat mindset and experience volunteering with law enforcement finishes that statement like this:
"Be professional, be polite, an have a plan to kill everyone in the room/car."
When I enter into a "reasoned" conversation with an anti-gunner, I am polite. I am courteous. And I just so happen to bring enough firepower to finish the fight. You should, too... just in case it gets ugly.
- Posted using BlogPress from my iPhone
Enforce Current Laws or Enact New Ones?
I'm reading all across the Intarwebs that the Obama Administration has prosecuted far fewer Federal gun law violations than his predecessor's, who worked to repeal useless the gun laws and enforce those that remained.
And, I memory serves, GeeDub didn't release thousands of illegal aliens back into the wild because we could to afford to keep feeding and housing them...
So, tell me again, why is it we should expect a new batch of gun laws, even more useless than the first, will automagically civilize the criminals, cure the insane, and turn Omerica back into the land of safety and plenty?
- Posted using BlogPress from my iPhone
And, I memory serves, GeeDub didn't release thousands of illegal aliens back into the wild because we could to afford to keep feeding and housing them...
So, tell me again, why is it we should expect a new batch of gun laws, even more useless than the first, will automagically civilize the criminals, cure the insane, and turn Omerica back into the land of safety and plenty?
- Posted using BlogPress from my iPhone
Monday, February 25, 2013
Background Checks to Registration to...
...confiscation.
Uncle sums it up quite well, click here.
I had an empassioned discussion at SHOT with my partners about universal background checks for private citizens. Morally, if it shuts down access to those on the "gray" fringes - strangers, the mentally ill, the questionable buyer, the under-21 purchaser of a handgun - who are going to commit a crime with it, then yes. I think we all agree that it merits debate.
However, the rate of crime by those who might prefer the legal private market over an FFL pales in comparison to the sheer volume of violence committed by criminals who bypass the legal marketplace altogether. It is THOSE guns we need to find a way to bring back under legal control, and no amount of legislation is going to stymie the transfer of legal guns between criminals - the DOJ's own statistics bear this out.
So, while the emotional argument tugs the hearts and minds of well-meaning gun owners, I do believe it's the wooden pony stuffed full of legislative Trojans sent in humble concession when in fact it will be hewn from the lumber of countless failed attempts to erode the enamel of the 2nd Amendment and may yet get them in behind our wall.
Currently, the background checks performed by FFLs are there only to verify eligibility and not feed a national registry. But, some legislators are raising the need for a national registry, which dovetails nicely with "reforming" the background check process. Hell, our side snuck carry in National Parks into a credit card reform bill... how hard do you think it will be for them to ramrod this through??
As Uncle mentions and links, there is one true goal is to get our names. Then, history shows what every government with such a list can do in times of "threat to national security" within its own borders.
Ask a Brit.
- Posted using BlogPress from my iPhone
Uncle sums it up quite well, click here.
I had an empassioned discussion at SHOT with my partners about universal background checks for private citizens. Morally, if it shuts down access to those on the "gray" fringes - strangers, the mentally ill, the questionable buyer, the under-21 purchaser of a handgun - who are going to commit a crime with it, then yes. I think we all agree that it merits debate.
However, the rate of crime by those who might prefer the legal private market over an FFL pales in comparison to the sheer volume of violence committed by criminals who bypass the legal marketplace altogether. It is THOSE guns we need to find a way to bring back under legal control, and no amount of legislation is going to stymie the transfer of legal guns between criminals - the DOJ's own statistics bear this out.
So, while the emotional argument tugs the hearts and minds of well-meaning gun owners, I do believe it's the wooden pony stuffed full of legislative Trojans sent in humble concession when in fact it will be hewn from the lumber of countless failed attempts to erode the enamel of the 2nd Amendment and may yet get them in behind our wall.
Currently, the background checks performed by FFLs are there only to verify eligibility and not feed a national registry. But, some legislators are raising the need for a national registry, which dovetails nicely with "reforming" the background check process. Hell, our side snuck carry in National Parks into a credit card reform bill... how hard do you think it will be for them to ramrod this through??
As Uncle mentions and links, there is one true goal is to get our names. Then, history shows what every government with such a list can do in times of "threat to national security" within its own borders.
Ask a Brit.
- Posted using BlogPress from my iPhone
Do NOT Listen to Joe Biden on Self-Defense
I cannot stress this hard enough.
Joe Biden is offering the most horrible advice - advocating criminally reckless behavior - when he suggested firing a shotgun off into the air to ward off an intruder.
The article below makes me wonder exactly WHEN using a gun to defend yourself in Virginia Beach won't get you arrested, especially since this guy followed Joe's instructions almost to the letter.
Link to the article - click here.
Let's break this down...
According to the report, the victim's dog (who is a fluffy fun security system ONLY on the best of days) starts acting goofy. He follows the dog to the bedroom where he sees two men in black masks crawling in the window. They're armed and tell him to close the door.
Instead of complying, he recognizes a deadly force encounter and retreats to retrieve his home defense firearm, then fires it through the door.
He then opens the door and continues discharging rounds toward the assailants, who flee. No injuries are reported, no additional damage is done, yet the victim is charged with reckless handling of a firearm.
Kudos to the resident for defending himself instead of turning into a puddle of helpless victim, but I can find two big errors in judgement.
"Be sure of your target and what lies beyond." is one of the cardinal safety rules we all must adhere to - without fail. Firing through his door, one could argue he didn't have a clear understanding of the room on the other side of it. The second is the act of going immediately through the door after unloading on it and anyone on the other side, continuing to blind-fire along the way.
However (Devil's Advocate time), if I've got two armed bad guys on the other side of a closed door in my house, they OWN that room and I might assume they don't intend to leave. Tough call, to be sure. Doors are VERY soft cover (if at all) and while it would be tempting to go Call Of Duty on their butts, that closed also offers me time and space to figure out where to go next.
After deciding I want that room back - again, a very questionable call since my stuff is insured - that first round through is very likely to scare a meter of feces out of the bad guys on the other side, if not do real damage.
Even with no duty to retreat, outnumbered and presumably outgunned 2:1 may not offer my best odds for survival or prevailing the fight. But if I go for it and send a curtain of lead their way after going through the door, I'm still responsible for making sure I'm not putting any one else at risk.
Insanely tough call... and what I might assume as an armchair quarterback to be the reason for the ticket.
Fortunately, nobody else was injured and the victim escaped a whole man with his life (and I assume his pooch).
In Colorado, I have no duty to retreat. I am permitted to use any measure of force I deem appropriate - up to and including deadly force - to stop someone who's made uninvited entry into my home and who is or I think may commit another crime and is hurting or is about to harm anyone in my house. I am protected under the law from civil and criminal prosecution for the use of said force.
Even then, barring a knock-down drag-out gun battle, I'm looking for my sights and I need to be sure of what I'm unleashing hell at, even if he or she is on the other side of the wall. Keep that in mind...
In this case (literally), I hope the resident acted inside whatever Castle Doctrine Virginia offers and hope the charges against him are dropped, as long as this story doesn't take any unscrupulous twists or turns. I also hope one or both of the intruders turns up - either through investigation or at a hospital getting pellets dug out of their hide.
- Posted using BlogPress from my iPhone
Joe Biden is offering the most horrible advice - advocating criminally reckless behavior - when he suggested firing a shotgun off into the air to ward off an intruder.
The article below makes me wonder exactly WHEN using a gun to defend yourself in Virginia Beach won't get you arrested, especially since this guy followed Joe's instructions almost to the letter.
Link to the article - click here.
Let's break this down...
According to the report, the victim's dog (who is a fluffy fun security system ONLY on the best of days) starts acting goofy. He follows the dog to the bedroom where he sees two men in black masks crawling in the window. They're armed and tell him to close the door.
Instead of complying, he recognizes a deadly force encounter and retreats to retrieve his home defense firearm, then fires it through the door.
He then opens the door and continues discharging rounds toward the assailants, who flee. No injuries are reported, no additional damage is done, yet the victim is charged with reckless handling of a firearm.
Kudos to the resident for defending himself instead of turning into a puddle of helpless victim, but I can find two big errors in judgement.
"Be sure of your target and what lies beyond." is one of the cardinal safety rules we all must adhere to - without fail. Firing through his door, one could argue he didn't have a clear understanding of the room on the other side of it. The second is the act of going immediately through the door after unloading on it and anyone on the other side, continuing to blind-fire along the way.
However (Devil's Advocate time), if I've got two armed bad guys on the other side of a closed door in my house, they OWN that room and I might assume they don't intend to leave. Tough call, to be sure. Doors are VERY soft cover (if at all) and while it would be tempting to go Call Of Duty on their butts, that closed also offers me time and space to figure out where to go next.
After deciding I want that room back - again, a very questionable call since my stuff is insured - that first round through is very likely to scare a meter of feces out of the bad guys on the other side, if not do real damage.
Even with no duty to retreat, outnumbered and presumably outgunned 2:1 may not offer my best odds for survival or prevailing the fight. But if I go for it and send a curtain of lead their way after going through the door, I'm still responsible for making sure I'm not putting any one else at risk.
Insanely tough call... and what I might assume as an armchair quarterback to be the reason for the ticket.
Fortunately, nobody else was injured and the victim escaped a whole man with his life (and I assume his pooch).
In Colorado, I have no duty to retreat. I am permitted to use any measure of force I deem appropriate - up to and including deadly force - to stop someone who's made uninvited entry into my home and who is or I think may commit another crime and is hurting or is about to harm anyone in my house. I am protected under the law from civil and criminal prosecution for the use of said force.
Even then, barring a knock-down drag-out gun battle, I'm looking for my sights and I need to be sure of what I'm unleashing hell at, even if he or she is on the other side of the wall. Keep that in mind...
In this case (literally), I hope the resident acted inside whatever Castle Doctrine Virginia offers and hope the charges against him are dropped, as long as this story doesn't take any unscrupulous twists or turns. I also hope one or both of the intruders turns up - either through investigation or at a hospital getting pellets dug out of their hide.
- Posted using BlogPress from my iPhone
Monday, February 18, 2013
Colorado's Magazine Ban is About to Pass
It's only a matter of time before the Colorado Legislature finally passes and the Governor signs the new magazine ban law into effect. What does that mean to us?
Magazines over 15 rounds in capacity will be illegal to own, possess, transfer, sell, or manufacture in Colorado once the law goes into effect.
I won't be able to feed my Limited pistol with full-capacity mags unless I had them before the ban went into effect.
I won't be able to procure STANDARD-capacity mags for my defense guns which were designed to hold more than 15 rounds.
It means my state government would rather only see criminals and cops armed with "what's in regular use" while I'm left restricted to what they feel is acceptable" for the protection of myself, my family, and my friends - and I would putting training up against any active patrol cop.
Now, as long as you own it as of the effective date of the law, you're good. And... That now means every gun owner in Colorado affected by this law is going to start stockpiling and hoarding little boxes with springs in them, adding to the demand and extending the shortage worse than before.
Expect a flood of people slamming all major retailers of magazines for "pre-Colorado-ban" - making an already out of control supply crisis even worse. I'm trying to pick up a couple more STI mags right now, very specialized items, and it's proving to be difficult, if not impossible.
It means an instant black market is going to pop up overnight for unmarked magazines which would be impossible to discern we're owned before or after implementation of the law.
Magazines wear out over long periods of time or with frequent use over a period of time. They're meant to be cared for and occasionally replaced.
Our opposition knows all this and knows that they are incrementally breaking us. Mark my words... this law is just the "lube."
"Maintain continuous possession" means you will never send a mag with a blown seam or out-of-spec feed lips for repair. It means you will never loan a mag to a friend at the range or at a match.
If you want to keep range or competition mags in spec, you're going to learn to tune then as maintain them yourself. And... When they're literally "priceless," you'd better learn quick.
All you have to do is look at the Internet Gun Universe to know that a major Colorado employer is about to pull the majority of their manufacturing business away from Colorado, potentially stripping a reported $80M from state tax revenue and axing up to 150 Colorado jobs because of this law. Why? because they make 20 and 30-round standard-capacity magazines. The Legislature forgot about Magpul. Way to go, assholes...
And, when all this is said and done, will one life be saved because the state just summarily and arbitrarily outlawed millions of legally-owned magazines? No.
Criminals don't give a single squidgy crap about whether or not the 17-round standard-capacity magazine in their Glocks are banned or not.
In fact, when lawful, legal gun owners like you and me are forced to face that criminal down, we now know we're going to be under-gunned when we do so.
And that is precisely what they want.
- Posted using BlogPress from my iPhone
Magazines over 15 rounds in capacity will be illegal to own, possess, transfer, sell, or manufacture in Colorado once the law goes into effect.
I won't be able to feed my Limited pistol with full-capacity mags unless I had them before the ban went into effect.
I won't be able to procure STANDARD-capacity mags for my defense guns which were designed to hold more than 15 rounds.
It means my state government would rather only see criminals and cops armed with "what's in regular use" while I'm left restricted to what they feel is acceptable" for the protection of myself, my family, and my friends - and I would putting training up against any active patrol cop.
Now, as long as you own it as of the effective date of the law, you're good. And... That now means every gun owner in Colorado affected by this law is going to start stockpiling and hoarding little boxes with springs in them, adding to the demand and extending the shortage worse than before.
Expect a flood of people slamming all major retailers of magazines for "pre-Colorado-ban" - making an already out of control supply crisis even worse. I'm trying to pick up a couple more STI mags right now, very specialized items, and it's proving to be difficult, if not impossible.
It means an instant black market is going to pop up overnight for unmarked magazines which would be impossible to discern we're owned before or after implementation of the law.
Magazines wear out over long periods of time or with frequent use over a period of time. They're meant to be cared for and occasionally replaced.
Our opposition knows all this and knows that they are incrementally breaking us. Mark my words... this law is just the "lube."
"Maintain continuous possession" means you will never send a mag with a blown seam or out-of-spec feed lips for repair. It means you will never loan a mag to a friend at the range or at a match.
If you want to keep range or competition mags in spec, you're going to learn to tune then as maintain them yourself. And... When they're literally "priceless," you'd better learn quick.
All you have to do is look at the Internet Gun Universe to know that a major Colorado employer is about to pull the majority of their manufacturing business away from Colorado, potentially stripping a reported $80M from state tax revenue and axing up to 150 Colorado jobs because of this law. Why? because they make 20 and 30-round standard-capacity magazines. The Legislature forgot about Magpul. Way to go, assholes...
And, when all this is said and done, will one life be saved because the state just summarily and arbitrarily outlawed millions of legally-owned magazines? No.
Criminals don't give a single squidgy crap about whether or not the 17-round standard-capacity magazine in their Glocks are banned or not.
In fact, when lawful, legal gun owners like you and me are forced to face that criminal down, we now know we're going to be under-gunned when we do so.
And that is precisely what they want.
- Posted using BlogPress from my iPhone
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)