The Story Behind National-Parks Carry: Thanks to a new federal law beginning
February 22, people who can legally carry concealed handguns according to
state law can also carry within National Parks and Forests in that state,
too. While this may help protect visitors from the parks' burgeoning crime
problem, the story of this law's journey through Congress provides a lesson
in campaign contributions and anti-Liberty special interests. Previous
research uncovered a correlation between pro-gun control voting and campaign
contributions by lawyers, and trial lawyers and large law firms standing to
benefit from gun control. The same is true of public employee unions -
government employees - because restrictive gun laws result in job growth and
security in the public sector. Even though both industries contribute
primarily to Democrats, these correlations persist within parties. For
example, incumbent Democrat congressmen endorsed in 2008 by the pro-gun
control Brady Campaign received larger portions of total campaign
contributions from lawyers and public employee unions than did NRA-endorsed
Democrats: 67.9% and 158.1% more, respectively. Greater percentages of total
funding equals greater influence on grateful representatives, with the 378
re-elected representatives receiving payment for services rendered in
previous terms of office. This special interest spending had an almost
humorous effect upon the final House vote on the credit card bill. (The
Coburn Amendment that overturned the ban on loaded firearms in national
parks was attached to Big Brother's must-have Credit Card Reform Act. Thus,
it is somewhat disingenuous to trumpet that Big Brother actually signed an
expansion of the RKBA; he had little choice as he would have lost a
showpiece bill in order to veto it. Nemerov corrects his initial description
of the law as a concealed-carry measure; effective tomorrow, carry in
national parks is legal in whatever manner it is legal in the surrounding
state.)

http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/national-parks-are-safer-with-right-to-carry-la
w/?singlepage=true

Tangentially Related: Here is a brief breakdown of the [credit card] reforms
and how they might affect your wallet.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/02/19/AR2010021905
952.html
---

Update on the Bloomberg-Luntz Poll: On Dec. 11, 2009, we noted that a poll
paid for by anti-gun politician-activist Michael Bloomberg, claiming to show
that NRA members support gun control, was conducted by a pollster who has
been reprimanded and censured by two professional polling organizations
[emphasis added], and who (of course) doesn't have access to NRA's
confidential member list. Since then, gun control supporters have cited the
poll in numerous newspaper editorials, opinion columns, and letters to
editors, all attacking NRA's opposition to gun control. Recently, however,
Bloomberg's pollster, Frank Luntz, admitted how he gets polls to turn out
the way his employers want. In a "Penn and Teller" interview posted on
YouTube, Luntz says, "The key in survey research is to ask questions that
people care about the answers [sic], and to ask the question in a way that
you get the right answer." He added, "[W]ith just a single change of
wording, you'll get a very different reaction in terms of how they think and
how they feel." Thanks, Frank, for making it easier for us to write letters
to newspapers pointing out why no one should take your "poll of NRA members"
seriously.

http://www.ilaalerts.org/UM/T.asp?A1.2.5884.9.3827746
---

DC Right-to-Carry Plaintiff Profiled: .As one of the plaintiffs who sued the
District for the right to keep handguns in the home, Palmer has one notch on
his belt. Now he's suing the city again, this time for the right to carry
firearms in public. Palmer, a 53-year-old fellow at the libertarian Cato
Institute, says he thinks he has the Constitution on his side. The Second
Amendment guarantees Americans the right to "keep and bear arms," and
"bear," he says, "means to carry." On the street in his Kalorama
neighborhood. To the grocery store, the mall, the movies. But not
everywhere: "There are all kinds of reasonable restrictions that can be
established," he says. "But a blanket ban on carrying them does not seem to
sit well with the Constitution itself." .So the group that could make it
legal to carry a loaded firearm through the streets of the nation's capital
includes a self-employed tax accountant from American University Park, a
communications lawyer from Adams Morgan, and a law student who lives in
Nashville and was arrested for driving through the District with a gun in
his car. And then there's Palmer, who says carrying a gun saved his life.
(Note that this was a typical incident in which merely drawing the gun ended
the threat.)

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/02/20/AR2010022003
376.html?hpid=topnews
---

Interesting Position for a Libertarian: One local libertarian leader has an
idea that would save the state more than $1 million a year - have the
federal, not state, government run background checks for people buying
firearms. Independence Institute President Jon Caldara is proposing that the
state eliminate the Colorado Bureau of Investigation's Insta-Check program,
which scans more than six local and federal databases for background
information on prospective gun buyers. Caldara thinks the state should
instead rely on the Federal Bureau of Investigation's background check.
Handing over background check duties to the FBI would save the state
annually about $1.7 million. But supporters of the Colorado Bureau
Investigation's Insta-Check program say the department's $1.7 million budget
dramatically improves safety for Colorado. The background check conducted by
the state is more thorough than the FBI's background check, they say. For
instance, the Insta-Check program forbids people with protective orders
filed against them from purchasing a firearm, while the FBI's background
check does not search for protective orders filed in the state's judicial
system.

http://www.thedenverdailynews.com/article.php?aID=7348
---

Another Look at the Ruger SP101: .There are a lot of snub nosed revolvers
out there to choose from, but out of them all the Ruger is unique. It is
arguably one of the strongest of the breed of small framed snubbies.
Strength is important even in a small gun. But with that strength comes a
little extra weight. Trust me, this is a good thing. Have you had the chance
to fire off one of these ultra-air-light-feather weight pocket revolvers?
Using a full house .357 Magnum load? If you haven't, do this; put your
Concealed Carry Magazine down, stand up, walk outside to your car or truck
and open the hood... and then slam it down on your firing hand. Quite
unpleasant. The SP101 is made of good old fashioned honest to goodness
stainless steel, not something NASA mills space sprockets out of. The SP101
feels like a real gun when you pick it up, and when you fire it, it isn't
going to punish you for doing it. You can actually enjoy going through a
whole box of ammo in one shooting session. Amazing. The SP101 isn't even
what I would call heavy. The two and a quarter inch barreled example weighs
only twenty five and a half ounces. Not enough to displace your spine from
wearing it on your hip all day, or pulling a shoulder out of socket if you
carry it in your purse; but enough to give you courage when you hear your
door being pounded on after midnight. (The SP101 definitely requires some
work when it comes out of the box - contact me for details if you wish to do
it yourself. I agree with the arguments in favor of the added weight,
particularly if you go with the three-inch barrel, which has become my
favorite length for carry revolvers. While its trigger stroke will not
likely ever achieve the elegance of one on a well tuned S&W revolver, for
the new user of a small-frame revolver, the SP 101 may be less intimidating
to shoot.)

http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=35600
---

The US Army Marksmanship Unit: In this time of war there is no room for
second rate shooting. Exceptional marksmanship that was once expected of the
elite, Special Operations and Infantry Sharpshooters, is now expected of
every soldier. Today's United States Army is considered the most lethal army
the world has ever seen, and it is largely due to a more lethal Soldier who
has undergone the most effective training in history. Training is the
backbone of good shooting. And at the heart of marksmanship training in the
US Army is the US Army Marksmanship Unit (USAMU). Through "train the
trainer" workshops, direct training of experienced units, recruiting
assistance and community outreach, the USAMU acts as a "force multiplier"
for the Army, and it is considered one of the most unique units in the
entire US Army.

http://forums.gunsamerica.com/yaf_postst18_The-US-Army-Marksmanship-Unit--US
AMU--Home-of-the-Champions.aspx
---

Rule Two, Rule Three Reminder: Pankaj Kishore Karotia, 21, was just about to
claim his new bride and take her from a wedding reception to her family home
when his uncle drew his licensed handgun to fire a final shot in
celebration. As he was loading it, it fired accidentally and hit his
newly-wed nephew in the head. The reception party was almost finished when
the tragedy happened. His new bride was waiting for him in the car as he
died. The groom's father said the uncle was "eager and excited" about the
wedding and wanted to fire another shot to make the end of the celebrations.
A police spokesman said "the bullet made a hole in the brain" and confirmed
the uncle had been arrested for culpable homicide. Gunfire has become an
increasingly popular celebration custom at lavish Indian weddings in recent
years. (Rule Two: Don't le the muzzle cross anything you're not prepared to
shoot. Rule Three: Keep your finger out of the trigger guard, up on the
frame, until your sights are on the target and you[re prepared to fire.)

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/india/7271134/Groom-shot-dead
-at-wedding-by-uncles-stray-celebratory-bullet.html
---

The "Center Mass" Myth: Surviving a gunfight isn't what you think it is.
Don't let conventional wisdom get you killed.  A well place round to "center
mass" in your attacker may not take him out of the fight. Lots of people
stay in the fight after "center mass" hits, and some even win it.  If you
expect to win your gunfight, you have to make sure that you have effectively
ended the threat of your attacker.  One, two or even several well placed
"center mass" shots may not do what you think it will, and learning to
recognize this before you gunfight may save your life. There is a well known
video in training circles in which a Highway Patrol officer shoots an armed
subject 5 times "center mass" (this is not my assessment but the statement
of his immediate supervisors which are interviewed on the full version of
the hour long tape) with his 4" .357 Magnum revolver firing hollow point
ammunition. All 5 hits failed to do the job and the subject was able to fire
one round which struck the officer in the armpit. That round wondered around
in the chest cavity and found his heart. The officer unfortunately died at
the scene and his attacker is alive today. ("Center mass" or "center of
mass" is a misnomer when referring to the chest area; the center of mass of
the human body is usually about three inches below the navel. I think
Higginbotham may misunderstand the concept of aiming for the pelvis - it is
not a technique to end a gunfight but one to end mobility. If an assailant
is threatening you with a contact weapon, he can't use it if he can't reach
you. It certainly is possible to shoot from a prone position, a supine
position or any position in between. However, it is not easy to track a
target moving laterally at close ranges from such a position, meaning that
if you have taken a gunman off his feet, you need to be moving laterally and
preparing your next shot. Consider the now-overturned conviction of Hal
Fish, in a self-defense shooting of a man who charged him on a hiking trail.
The prosecutor made an issue that Fish had shot Kuenzli three times in the
chest, with a pistol "more powerful than those carried by police." A shot to
the pelvis from the 10mm Kimber pistol would likely have dropped Kuenzli,
leaving Fish to evaluate if further shots were in order.)

http://forums.gunsamerica.com/yaf_postst14_The-Center-Mass-Myth-and-Ending-a
-Gunfight.aspx
---

Ten Critical Habits for Winning a Gunfight: After wrapping up a recent
Airsoft training day in which officers encountered role-players in
increasingly complex shoot / don't shoot situations - in both on-duty and
off-duty settings - Farnam reflected on what he most often sees trainees
learning from such scenario experiences. "There are certain lessons officers
report over and over again," he told PoliceOne. In his mind, these comprise
critical habits you need to develop and continually drill in order to win on
that fateful day when you face a determined armed adversary for real.
Stopping and standing still is a frequent reaction to scenario attacks,
Farnam reports - "just the opposite of what's desirable." To maximize his
chances of a successful attack, "a predator needs to get you stopped in a
particular place. The longer you stay in one spot, the more likely his plan
will progress to completion. "Get off the X. When you sense danger, move
laterally to the threat. When you move forward or backward in a straight
line, your relative positioning doesn't really change. "Keep moving until
you're behind cover, when it's available. Your moving will cause your
attacker to continually reset his plan and keep you harder to hit. (You will
probably fight as you trained. Most famous schools and most police academies
have students stand flat-footed in place on a firing line, not just while
shooting but while scanning after shooting. I don't know if access to this
very useful article is restricted. I have copied it into a Word document. In
the event that you are unable to access the article online, ask me for a
copy.)

http://www.policeone.com/patrol-issues/articles/2005634-10-critical-habits-f
or-winning-a-gunfight/
---

NRA-ILA Alerts: List members are encouraged to check the alerts for the
week, posted on the NRA-ILA website.

http://www.nraila.org/GrassrootsAlerts/read.aspx
---

Gun Self-Defense Counter Web Widget: I believe I have mentioned this before
but, if you have a website, you may want to post this automatically updating
counter that compares and contrasts the numbers usually cited by the
prohibitionists with the numbers of deaths from poisonings and the estimated
number of the use of firearms in self-defense each year.

http://actionamerica.org/guns/gun-web-widget.shtml
---

From John Farnam:

17 Feb 10

This expression of concern from a college professor and student:

"I know you've done a Quip or two in the past about the role metropolitan
and campus police play in citizen/student protection, but I wish you'd cover
the  topic again, particularly in light of the current contestation
regarding  concealed carry at my campus, CSU (Colorado State University)."

Very well.  Here is the deal:

Police are charged with a "general duty" to investigate suspicions
circumstances and identify, apprehend, and charge criminals, once a crime
has been committed.  We also  have a "general duty" to answer calls in a
timely manner and patrol the  community in a good-faith effort to deter
crime.  Of course, all this must be done within the constraints of our
resources.

In some cases, courts are empowered to issue "restraining orders," but, as
we know, the "restraint" is not physical.  The court-order is merely a piece
of paper.  Who ompulsively commit violent crimes are seldom deterred.

So, "citizen protection" is, and must remain, a general term.  Police do the
best they can, but we are never tasked with a specific duty to provide
absolute protection to any particular individual at any particular time nor
place, nor are we required to respond to calls within a specific amount of
time.

And, we get paid the same, regardless of outcome!

Logical conclusion: You're on your own!

Colorado citizens, including students attending universities (assuming they
are twenty-one or older), can own and even carry (with appropriate permits)
guns for their own, personal protection.  Guns, ammunition, and accessories
are generally available via any number of commercial, retail sources.
Competent training is also available through a number of accomplished
instructors.

Keep in mind that guns, like alcoholic beverages, are highly regulated, and
thus technical violations of confusing and poorly-written ordinances,
arbitrary  "rules," as well as randomly-enforced political agendas, will
always make it  impossible to anyone to know is he is "law-abiding" or not!

My suggestion is that every citizen/student look squarely at his personal
security situation, and then make appropriate decisions.  However, such
decisions should be made based on facts and reality, not some
self-deceptive, mythical notion of "police protection."

Violent death is one thing you can't "do over!"

/John

18 Feb 10

The "VSCV" Factor, from a friend and colleague:

"There is a critical difference between being injured as a result of an
accident, as opposed to an act of criminal violence.

When I fall off a ladder and break my leg, although in pain, I'm laughing at
my clumsiness the next day.  Conversely, when I suffer the same injury as
the result of some two-bit thug who first pistol-whipped me, and then shot
me before departing with my wallet, I will forever curse myself for allowing
a  scumbag to terrorize me and my family.

The critical difference is the 'Voluntary Submission to Criminal Violence'
factor.

That is the part that scars victims for life, the realization that they, for
whatever reason, willfully allowed themselves to be vulnerable, and that
someone would be evil enough to perpetrate such a malignant act.

Victims of violent crime experience genuine terror, and it never ends!  They
don't laugh at themselves the next day, nor any day!  They forever blame
themselves for being weak, naive, self-righteously stupid, and intentionally
unprepared.  No amount of rationalization eases the pain!  They vainly long
for the opportunity to 'do it over,' but it is forever denied them!

And, past-tense 'justice,' at long-last meted-out by the criminal-justice
system, is ever of scant consolation!

The exception is the select few of us who regularly go armed and are trained
and prepared to use deadly force when necessary.  When confronting violent
criminals, we may be inconvenienced, even hurt physically, but we are not
psychologically ruined.

The next day, we are apprehensive and anxious, but we have a
deeply-satisfying sense of personal pride for being able and willing to
boldly, and successfully, stand up to depraved felons.

We are more apt to feel like wounded warriors, than raped sheep."

Comment: I don't thick that represents much of a choice!

They're not getting me without a fight!

/John

18 Feb 10

1911s in LA!

LAPD's new Chief, Charlie Beck, has just approved the 1911 pistol for
duty-carry by LAPD Officers!

Approved brands are Colt, Kimber, and Springfield Armory.

No word on ammunition yet, nor is there any word on which specific models
are on the Approved List.

The Academy has already put together an Orientation Course and is running
the first groups of officers through.

No guesses yet with regard to the exact percentage of officers who will
exercise this new option, although I suspect it will be a minority, at least
in the short-term.

This represents a bold move for any big-city PD!

/John

(I guess one can argue that stepping back 99 years is a bold move.
Preferring double-action Smith & Wesson revolvers, I like to joke that I see
no need to use 99-year-old technology for self-defense when I am perfectly
comfortable with the 111-year-old technology of my wheelguns. However. When
the Los Angeles Sheriff's Department followed LAPD's lead in authorizing
optional .45-caliber pistols, the top brass did so because it was the only
way they could see to get deputies willingly to reduce the number of rounds
they could fire before reloading. In their minds were the then-recent
controversial high-volume shootings of Amadou Diallo, in New York City, and
Tyisha Miller, in Riverside CA. Now consider that LAPD officers, for several
years, have had the option of carrying  .45-caliber Glocks, with the safety
mounted on the face of the trigger and a higher ammunition capacity than a
1911. The latter design includes both a grip safety and a thumb safety.
Admittedly, a 1911 with a single-column magazine may allow an officer with
small hands to use a .45, when a Glock with a staggered-column magazine may
be too thick. Somehow, I don't think it is those officers who will be lining
up to qualify to carry 1911's. De gustibus non est disputandum.)
--
Stephen P. Wenger, KE7QBY

Firearm safety - It's a matter
for education, not legislation.

The tactics and skills to use a firearm
in self-defense don't come naturally
with the right to keep and bear arms.

http://www.spw-duf.info

Fairfax, Va. -- An Arizona man who spent nearly three years in prison for justifiably shooting a man in self-defense is now free and clear of all guilt in his case. This week the Arizona Supreme Court let stand the state appellate court’s decision to overturn Harold Fish’s second-degree murder conviction. The National Rifle Association provided assistance in this case. NRA’s Office of General Counsel advised Fish’s defense counsel, and the NRA Civil Rights Defense Fund provided financial aid for Fish’s defense.

Chris W. Cox, executive director of NRA’s Institute for Legislative Action said, “We are pleased that justice has finally prevailed for Mr. Fish in this case that was clearly justifiable self-defense. We wish the best for Mr. Fish and his family in the future.”

In 2006, Harold Fish was convicted of second-degree murder in the shooting death of Grant Kuenzli. Fish encountered Kuenzli and his vicious dogs while hiking on a trailside in Coconino County in May of 2004. After Fish fired warning shots at the aggressive dogs, Kuenzli tried to attack him, and Fish was forced to shoot him in self-defense. At the time of the shooting, current self-defense laws in Arizona -- which put the burden of proof on the prosecutor instead of the defendant -- did not exist. During Fish’s trial, the jury was not allowed to hear evidence that Kuenzli had acted violently in similar situations in the past. In June, an Arizona appellate court overturned Fish’s conviction, acknowledging the jury should have heard this evidence and also saying the jury was not instructed properly on the meaning of “unlawful physical force.” Attorney General Terry Goddard had asked the Arizona Supreme Court to review the appellate court’s decision, and this week they declined.

Fish’s case spawned two laws in Arizona strengthening the rights of gun owners to use a firearm to defend themselves and their loved ones. SB 1145, passed in 2006, put the burden of proof back on the state, saying that those who use firearms in self-defense are to be considered innocent until proven guilty. This year, Governor Jan Brewer signed SB 1449 into law, making retroactive SB 1145, which effectively allowed Fish and others in similar positions the right to a new trial, as well as to be considered innocent in the justifiable use of force unless the state proves otherwise.