Firearms Friday: For Whom Are You Really Voting?

This is how we started the year... how will it look in four years? 

Well, the campaigns are now in full swing and it seems like every other commercial is sponsored by the Clinton campaign (or some associated group). There are also the various campaign spots from local politicians filling the screen as well but that is another topic for another day. Back to the national campaigns… so far I haven’t seen much regarding the qualifications of Hillary Clinton being ‘promoted’ in these advertisements rather they have been going out of their way to attack Donald Trump and some of his statements which have been clearly taken out of context.

Heck, even my wife has been disturbed by this trend. But this shouldn’t really be a surprised for those of us who have put some thought into the presidential race as there are no ‘qualifications’ or ‘accomplishments’ to be found in her record that would, in any way, support her candidacy. After all, an ad buy promoting Obamacare, Benghazi, and private servers wouldn’t really be part of a winning strategy. It is actually rather pathetic the lack of concise information present to support her rather than simply opposing Trump.

However, I digress. What I really want to bring to the fore is what is of utmost importance in this election cycle. It isn’t Obamacare or the economy. It isn’t race relations or military operations. It isn’t international relations or the national debt. While these are all important in their own right they are not of primary concern this time around. In fact, it really isn’t about who is occupying the White House. It’s about the Supreme Court not the Presidency!

In addition to the seat left vacant upon Antonin Scalia’s death this past February, there are likely to be three other appointments which need to be made by the next president. After all, there are currently three associate justices who are 78, 80, and 83 years old respectively. For those of you interested, below is a list of the current court with ages and by which president they were appointed:

John Roberts (Chief Justice), 61, George W. Bush

Anthony Kennedy, 80, Ronald Reagan

Clarence Thomas, 68, George H. W. Bush

Ruth Bader Ginzburg, 83, Bill Clinton

Stephen Breyer, 78, Bill Clinton

Samuel Alito Jr, 66, George W. Bush

Sonia Sotomayor, 62, Barak Obama

Elena Kagan, 56, Barak Obama

The Supreme Court is the body that will determine the direction of this nation not the individual in the oval office. Whomever wins this election and takes office in January will determine the course of this country for the next generation not the next four or eight years. Personally, and I know I am not alone in this thinking, I would prefer a conservative court that upholds our rights (especially the second amendment), limits the power held by those in Washington, and, most importantly, support and defends the Constitution. It is scary to think about the possibility of a court where five of the justices where appointed by a Clinton and two more where appointed by Obama. That is a future that none of us can afford.  

Firearms Friday: Fulfilling A Request

Following my previous Firearms Friday post, I received a request from a friend on Facebook. This is someone who has demonstrated time and again an even temperament regarding a variety of topics whether or not they agree with the stance that I am taking. It is because of this thoughtfulness and willingness to discuss various issues that I am honoring their request for the Firearms Friday post this week. Their request was as follows:

“I fully accept your premise that mental health is significantly lacking, however I don't believe focusing solely on mental health with solve the problem of gun violence. (Some people really are just are evil.) I would be happy to support legislation that limits evil people's ability to do harm with fire arms, while still allowing gun owners to own fire arms. As a non gun expert I can only guess. I've been thinking in terms of limits on clip sizes, the rate at which bullets could be fired, or the maximum force behind the bullets. My requested topic is this: As a gun expert, how would you make firearms safer so that if they were to fall into the wrong hands they would do less damage?”

They later added the following:

“Fundamentally all I care about is a reduction in gun violence. Propose something I can get behind and I'll happily advocate for that when I call my representatives, otherwise I'm forced to stick to the generic "do something!" plea… We may not always agree, but I appreciate the effort. Our end goals are the same. The best polices come from listening to people on all sides of the aisle.”

Again, they were reasonable and respectful in their approach so my response was rather simple… ask and you shall receive. Of course, I made sure to point out that there it is likely that they will not agree with my response but I can't expect everyone to agree with me. In the end, we all have our own views. Sometimes we agree and sometimes we don't. So, here is my response…

First of all, it is very important to note that I am by no means a firearms expert. This is an enjoyable hobby and a means to defend myself and my family. I enjoy and respect this right. I may have more knowledge in this field than others but I am by no means an expert. 

Second, the concept of "making guns safer" is simply an impossibility. Capacity is a moot point when you watch people dedicated to the sport conduct speed reloads. The same can be said regarding rate of fire when you consider the capabilities of the British Army conducting "Mad Minute" drills during World War I. Of course it should be noted that while the media and politicians may use the term "automatic weapon" we are really talking about semiautomatic firearms that fire one round per pull of the trigger. Finally, regarding lethality of the projectile, I wouldn't even consider this as plausible because while I can understand the perspective of the questioner I also have to consider the fact that, if put in a situation to defend myself and/or my family, I don't want to question the lethality of the rounds I am using... I just want to eliminate the threat. 

That being said, I will do my best to address the larger subject at hand. 

The sad fact of the matter is that there is no way to stop all violence committed with firearms. Bad and/or evil people will always find a way to get them and thinking just because something is illegal that criminals will stop using them is lunacy. Evil people will find a way to commit evil acts and the most recent Terrorist attack in France is a prime example of that fact. This is the world in which we live, like it or not.

As I previously mentioned, mental health is the primary means of further decreasing the number of crimes committed with firearms in this country. I specifically used the term “further decreasing” as PEW research shows the steady decline since the early 1990’s. Unfortunately, the media coverage of “gun violence” has not only distorted public opinion but also has offered a tremendous incentive to those looking to commit such a heinous crime… fame. What further sickens me is the fact that the individual who committed this act, the one responsible for the death(s), is seen more as an accomplice rather than the perpetrator… the ones “found guilty” are gun owners in general. As I have said before:

“…The most commonly used of which was a quote from then Governor Ronald Reagan when he addressed the Republican National Convention in Miami Florida on July 31, 1968 amid a time of tremendous racial turmoil which erupted in riots. The excepted says simply “We must reject the idea that every time a law's broken, society is guilty rather than the lawbreaker. It is time to restore the American precept that each individual is accountable for his actions.”” 

What I am getting at is that there needs to be a drastic shift in the mentality of the American people. We can’t glorify violence on a daily basis and we can’t assign blame to those who had nothing to do with the crime. We have to return to a society that accepts individual responsibility and promotes self-reliance. Too often, people are blaming others for crimes, addiction, health issues, financial situations, living conditions, and limited employment opportunities. We need to take responsibility for our own lives.

Education is fundamental to a healthy and thriving society but the idea that institutionalized settings are the only place that offer this is a misconception that is continuously perpetuated in every political circle. In this instance, on this topic, people need to be familiar with firearms and have at least a basic understanding. This used to be part of growing up and it was slowly strangled from the consciousness of the schools. We need to teach children and adults not just about how a firearm operates but also, and more importantly, proper gun safety. Firearms should be respected not something that should be feared or, even worse, painted as an innocuous piece of video game memorabilia.

These things would take time but, per the request above, what can be done NOW? My stance is rather simple in this regard. What we need to do is enforce the volumes of laws that are already on the books before any other measures should even be considered. Besides, overzealous kneejerk local laws work so well, right? Additionally, we need to spend the money allocated, through legislation, to improve the NICS system. By the way, it was signed into law by President Bush. Here is an overview that I previously wrote:

“Lastly, the other part of this whole equation that is being overlooked is the fact that even when bills are passed, they are not being enforced and/or the funding is not being spent (i.e. The National Instant Criminal Background Check System). The NICS Improvement Amendment Act was signed into law by President Bush on January 8, 2008 with the explicate mission to improve the background check system in this country. The law, endorsed by the NRA by the way, allocated Congress $1.3 Billion to improve record keeping in states which would allow greater transparency and improve the Federal gun background check system. To date nearly 90 percent of funding has never been spent and the Obama administration will further reduce spending from its peak in 2015 of $78 million down to $55 million in the President’s 2016 budget request.”

This is something that really bothers me as it seems as though the intentional “spenddown” is being leveraged to paint a completely different story about the system and the way it should be working. Again, even the positive actions taken are spun to accommodate a political objective. After all, if you improve the system you can’t blame it and try to pass additional legislation.

The final “recommendation” I would make is that we need to increase the penalties associated with crimes (violent or nonviolent) with a firearm. I’m talking decades not simply years. Basically, instead of the mandatory minimums for drugs, why don’t we change things up and have mandatory minimums for these crimes. This would also apply to those using something (i.e. a toy) to misconceive people in thinking they had a firearm. Those found guilty of straw purchasing (including members of the media) should be brought up on criminal charges. Those found in possession of a loaded firearm while intoxicated need to be penalized as well.

Lastly, we need to eliminate gun free zones. They have been proven time and again to be ineffectual. In fact, rather than offering real protection they have presented wicked people with targets of opportunity. In addition to the multitudes of accounts, police reports, and stories about firearms being used to stop crime even the CDC has noted in one of their own studies that the use of firearms in “Self-defense can be an important crime deterrent.” Again, we need to be more self-reliant and willing to take control of our own lives in every situation rather than relying on the faux fairy dust sprinkle around certain places in the community.

So, let us review.

What is the current situation that we find ourselves in?

• Violence is a Part of the Real World
• PEW: Gun Violence in Decline
• CDC: Self Defense is an Important Crime Deterrent
• Mental Health Resources are Lacking
• Government is NOT Spending Allocated Funds on NICS
• Firearms Education is Lacking
• More Gun Laws are Ineffectual

What needs to be done to address the problems crippling our society?

• Increased Focus On Mental Health
• Firearms Education (with Particular Focus On Safety)
• Reintroduce Self Reliance and Self Sufficiency
• Stop Assigning Blame to Others
• Acknowledge and Refute Media Bias
• Use The Funds Allocated To Improve NICS
• Increase Penalties for Crimes Committed with Firearms
• Eliminate Gun Free Zones

Of course, these are just some of the thoughts that came to mind over the past week since being presented with the original question. Again, I didn’t say that they would necessarily agree with my perspective on the topic but I hope that I have been able to answer their question. If you have a question or request, on this topic or others, please feel free to contact me or comment below. You never know, I may end up writing on that topic.

Firearms Friday: Upgrades and Contributions

It is no surprise that recent events have put a greater strain on our rights with particular focus on the second amendment. I am actually surprised that the tragedy in Turkey hasn’t filter back into the debate more than the occasional mention. Thus far, the right decisions have been made overall but this debate and the attempted infringement is by no means concluded. It is because of this simple fact that we have continued to be vocal about our rights and, when able, we have contributed to this fight in a variety of different ways.

It really comes down to the individual. Some have more flexibility in their schedule than others and can be in attendance at events, campaign, and volunteer their time to one or more groups. I have had many opportunities to do this but, as of yet, I have been unable to find any free moments that could be dedicated to this endeavor. Maybe in the future but I am really not holding my breath on this one.

Others apply their efforts in the few minutes stolen from each day to write blogs, letters, article, and other means of communication, dissemination, and advocacy for our rights. This is where my efforts are applied because while there is no way that I am able to set aside hours or days to dedicate to a particular endeavor, I can find the minutes scattered throughout my day between various projects and assignments to write letters, emails, articles, and blog posts such as this. A lot can be done with this found time and this defense of our freedom needs every minute that each of us can spare.  

And, of course, there is the financial means of support of which we are all very familiar. This is especially true now as the campaign calls have increased over the last couple of months driven by recent events and the natural progression of the campaign season. This is an area where I do what I can. Lately, I have been looking more at transitioning from annual to life memberships and, in other situations, upgrading my life membership. Thankfully, the extended payment options for most of the major second amendment organizations is very reasonable and financially possible for most members.

There isn’t a cut and dry answer that one can give when asked “how can I contribute or make a difference?” What works for me may not work for you and vice versa. In the end, we all have to figure out how we can support our second amendment rights and we all must be willing to stand our ground. That is how one goes from contributing to making a difference.

Firearms Friday: A Time Of Contradiction

In the wake of the mass murder at the Pulse nightclub in Orlando this past weekend I didn't want to simply react to the tragedy but rather take the time to think and give the space to honor the memory of those who lost their lives. This is not a partisan issue, we should all be mourning their loss. After all those people who were murdered were human beings and fellow citizens of this county and should not be assigned or limited to a specific group or label. To me, right or wrong, it really is that simple. While there have been various halfhearted comments, disgusting accusations, and ludicrous statements made to date from a wide variety of groups and individuals, I have found the most succinct responses to this tragedy to be that of The Pink Pistols and that of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.  

What we should be doing now is not placing blame on any party, person, or group of people unrelated to the actions of the individual who committed this heinous act. These psychotic actions and other mass murders that have become and an unfortunate part of our collective conscious aren’t going to be cured by the rhetoric that is currently being bandied about. We will never truly know why these person did what they did. The fact of the matter is that we are facing an unprecedented crisis regarding mental health in this county.  

Those who wish to ascribe blame on these rampages on firearms are completely off base in their assertions as the PEW Research Center already noted that the “nation’s overall gun death rate has declined 31% since 1993. This total includes homicides and suicides, in addition to a smaller number of fatal police shootings, accidental shooting deaths and those of undetermined intent.” Additionally, nonfatal gun victimizations has dropped from 725.3 per 100,000 in 1993 to 174.8 per 100,000 in 2014. Max Ehrenfreund at the Washington Post noted that “Much of the decline in violence is still unexplained, but researchers have identified several reasons for the shift.” He subsequently listed five very plausible reasons for this decline which included more police officers on the beat, police using computers, decreased consumption of alcohol, decreased exposure to toxic lead, and an improved economy.

However, while overall gun violence has experienced a precipitous drop, the FBI has noted a marked increase in the number of active shooter incidents from 2000-2013 with the average number of incidents increasing from 6.4 from 2000-2006 to 16.4 from 2007-2013. This is in direct contrast to the decrease in the violent crime rate reported by the FBI which noted a 27.1% decrease in violent crime from 506.5 per 100,000 in 2000 to 369.1 per 100,000 in 2013. Consequently, questions must be asked as to why we have such a chasm between the two stats and why the numbers going down with regard to crimes committed with firearms and violent crime as a whole but active shooter incidents and mass killings are on the rise?

The truth is that firearms know no race, gender, age, height, weight, economic status, political viewpoint, national identity, immigration status, or sexual orientation. Firearms are inanimate objects that require the user to impose their will. This is why, despite the aggressive and illogical accusations of some to the contrary, the National Rifle Association’s slogan is indeed true: “Guns don’t kill people, people kill people.” Contrary to what many zealots may suggest, the increased frequency of these heinous acts has nothing to do with firearms or the politics related thereof.

The crisis that this country faces is that of mental health which has always been a matter of public safety since the first patient was admitted to the Public Hospital for Persons of insane and Disordered Minds in Williamsburg, Virginia in 1773. The sad fact of the matter is that care for the mentally ill is not a priority in this country today. While a touch dated, the evidence is clear that the mentally ill are not receiving the care that they need because the care simply isn’t available in the United States.

This is in large part due to various deinstitutionalization policies that have been wreaking havoc on the system for the past 60 years. A staggering statistic to exemplify this point is that “in 2005 there were 17 public psychiatric beds available per 100,000 population compared to 340 per 100,000 in 1955” which translates to a 95 percent reduction in the number of the beds in 2005 compared to 1955. For those unfamiliar with the term, The Treatment Advocacy Center defines it in the following way:

“Deinstitutionalization, the name given to the policy of moving people with serious brain disorders out of large state institutions and then permanently closing part or all of those institutions, has been a major contributing factor to increased homelessness, incarceration and acts of violence.”

Note the last part of that sentence. Further proof of that point in particular can be found in our prison system as a 2004 study, as reported in Mother Jones, suggested that “approximately 16 percent of prison and jail inmates are seriously mentally ill, roughly 320,000 people. This year, there are about 100,000 psychiatric beds in public and private hospitals. That means there are more three times as many seriously mentally ill people in jails and prisons than in hospitals.” Later in that same timeline, it is also noted that “In the aftermath of the Great Recession [2010], states are forced to cut $4.35 billion in public mental-health spending over the next three years, the largest reduction in funding since deinstitutionalization.”

The further reduction in funds has had a significant impact on the mental health system in this country which was noted in a report from The Treatment Advocacy Center titled “No Room at the Inn: Trends and Consequences of Closing Public Psychiatric Hospitals”. The reality we currently face is that there was an additional reduction in the number of beds available between 2005 and 2010 by 14 percent with the current per capita falling to a level not seen in this country since 1850 at 14.1 beds per 100,000 with additional decreases having been experienced since then. To put this is further perspective, the consensus target for providing minimally adequate treatment is 50 beds per 100,000 (the ratio in England in 2005 was 63.2/100,000). This has resulted in “states that closed more public psychiatric beds between 2005 and 2010” to experience “higher rates of violent crime generally and of aggravated assault in particular.”

There is plenty of blame to go around, in both political parties, across decades, as to the insufficient mental healthcare system that we have in place today. And, at this point, I would like to make it very clear that while the institutional system is by no means perfect, it clearly makes a difference regarding the evil acts that are perpetrated by the mentally unstable. And the degradation of this system and the care available overall to the mentally ill population is something that we need to address if we are truly motivated to change the climate in which we live. In the end, the slaughter of innocent people was committed by an individual who was clearly mentally ill and motivated, by self-proclaimed during his 911 call, by a group that preys on the mentally malleable. That is where your finger should be pointing.

Firearms Friday: New Products For The Wish List

This past weekend the NRA held their annual meeting in Louisville, Kentucky during which a number of manufacturers announced new products… or at least had the first iterations of current innovations on display. It is one of those times in the year, along with Shot Show, when I look through the reports and reviews from the event, as well as those announcements from the beginning of the year, and slowly build a list in my head of all the new items that I would like to buy. Unfortunately, this is pretty much where things end as I am not one to run to the store and spend thousands of dollars to have the latest and greatest that the industry has to offer.

That being said there are a number of new firearms that pique my interest and I am curious to see what the reviews will be like and it they gain in popularity over the next year. If you take into account all the new firearms hitting the shelves this would be an absurdly long post so, for the sake of brevity, I will focus on the handguns that caught my attention. This year, that list includes full size versions of the Canik TP-9, Sphinx SDP Standard (accepts Glock 17 magazines!), and the competition ready CZ 75 TS. Of course, there have also been some brand new pistols that I am eager to see in my local shop which include the relaunch of the Llama 1911, Heizer Defense PKO, Honor Defense 9 mm, SCCY Industries CPX-3 (the .380 version of the popular budget pistol), the Schmeisser SLP-9, and, of course, the Smith & Wesson M&P Shield in .45 ACP.

Magnum Research will also have a light weight Desert Eagle in .357 magnum available this year but I am choosing not to expound upon that mistake. Oddly enough, the ones that I am most curious about are the Llama, Sphinx, Heizer, Honor Guard, and Schmeisser. Given those four, here are some of my thoughts:

• The Llama was always a budget friendly option in the past that offered descent quality and I want to see if that has been carried over into this current incarnation of the, some would say, venerable line.

• Heizer is bringing to market a semi-automatic firearm that has evolved from the success of their derringer style handguns… this could be a huge success or completely miss the mark.

• Schmeisser is a completely new company to me and I am always fascinated to see what the adoption of a new manufacture is early on and the level of quality that they are able to provide during their first few years on the market. At first glance, the pistol seems to be a hybrid between many of the striker fired handguns currently thriving in the market. The question is whether this is the right combination of features from those popular pistols. The Honor Defense 9mm would also fall into this with a slightly different look which combines the features and aesthetics from other manufacturers.

• Sphinx continues to have a great reputation and they have definitely earned it with the quality firearms that they have produced. However, they remain well above average with regard to price point and I am curious to see what kind of deterrent that will continue to be in the marketplace. That being said, there is a luxury afforded to the owner about being able to use standard Glock magazines and one that can potentially save the shooter a good deal of money in the long run.

In the end, it should be another interesting year for the firearms industry (not including the presidential race) and one that could provide some notable developments as well as returns to prominence. And while most of us can’t afford the $4.5 million dollar price tag of the Cabot Guns meteor 1911s, there are plenty of affordable options new to the market as well as some interesting new incarnations that will provide us with some different and sometimes unique range experiences. Whether or not these new products will be a success is an entirely different question altogether. Of course, the most important thing to remember this year is that our right to enjoy this sport, our right to self-defense, our right to own these tools is more important than ever and this industry will not thrive without our support, activism, and willingness to defend our rights.

Firearms Friday: I Am The 90%

It is interesting to think about the changes in my life especially over the past year. This is especially true when considering the places where my wife and I have lived in the past compared to the community in which we live now. Well beyond the considerations of considerably reduced congestion and the open space which we now enjoy, there is a different reality which we are now a part of which I have welcomed opening into our life.

It comes down to simple percentages… for the most part, criminals know that in the suburbs of Philadelphia 90% of the houses will not have a firearm inside. This has been the reality that we lived with for many years. However, for the most part, the opposite is true where we live now. Criminals know that there is about a 90% chance that there will be a firearm in the house. When they reach this realization they tend to head toward the more populated areas around the city. This isn’t to say that we live in rural utopia but it does lend some peace of mind… I feel safer knowing that this is our reality.  

The other difference was concisely surmised a few months ago when I had the pleasure of speaking with many of our new neighbors at a party. When the conversation turned to one of those not in attendance shooting their rifle in the back yard the response was a little different than what I have heard on the main line in the past but one that I completely agree with… well, it is there property and as long as they a shooting in a safe direction I have no problem with it. This is exactly the reaction that we should hear everywhere but, for me, it took loving to a different county before I heard those words coming from someone else.

Bear in mind that these observations are from a county that (tri county area actually) that still has a majority of registered voters aligned with the Democrats while, at the same time, with an active voter base that heavily favors Republicans. Of course, the subject at hand is about individual rights which should be supported by all people regardless of party affiliation. It is rather unfortunate that there are so few pockets of the population where rights still have value and personal responsibility is expected such as where we live now.

In this interesting dichotomy I am both part of the minority and a part of a significant majority. It is this interplay between affiliation and beliefs that will make politics where I live particularly interesting this year and, while I am fairly certain as to what the results will be, I am curious to see how the percentages settle. Something else that I have to get used to… people actually voting based on the candidate rather than party affiliation. Hopefully the 90% come through!

Firearms Friday: Membership Considerations

Anyone in the firearms community is familiar with the breadth of options when it comes to various firearms and second amendment groups and associations. For many of us, we hold multiple memberships in various groups at any given time and we receive regular correspondences from the others asking for donations and dues. This is one area where we have to be mindful of the total costs of these memberships and we must weigh the options both of becoming members and what kind of membership do we want to have in these various groups.

The first group with which everyone is familiar is the National Rifle Association (NRA). This is essentially your foundation on which I believe all your other memberships and donations should be structured around. The dues that we pay go toward supporting the rights that we all enjoy and the financial commitment, regardless of level, should be considered a necessary expense. However, from the basic annual membership there are other levels including life, endowment, benefactor, patron, golden eagles, etc. This determination is something that each member has to figure out for their self but, for me, I have found that becoming an endowment member has allowed me to focus on some of the other organizations while not having to worry about the annual commitment.

Once the foundation is in place other organizations can be explored such as Gun Owners of America (GOA), Second Amendment Foundation (SAF), Citizens Committee for the Right To Keep and Bear Arms (CCRKBA), National Association for Gun Rights (NAGR), Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership (JFPO), and many other national and local organizations. Keep in mind that many of these and other groups are far more aggressive than the NRA and you should take a look at each before determining whether or not you wish to support them and their message. And, once again, when you have made your decision you must also determine what level of support to which you wish to commit.

My level of support varies from organization to organization depending on both the messaging and the financial commitment that each requires for membership. In some instances, I have chosen life memberships over the annual option as it made financial sense. In other cases, there were some overly aggressive messages that I couldn’t fully back with the extra finances so I either kept my membership at the lowest level or ceased supporting them altogether. In the end, it is a balance that is up to the individual but definitely a process that needs to be considered by every supporter of the second amendment. After all, without the work being done to protect the second amendment, your rights will slowly become nothing more than a memory.

Firearms Friday: A Rambling Summary

Those of you who have been following this blog for any significant length of time pretty much know where I fall on a variety of political issues especially with regard to the second amendment. However, I still get questions from time to time regarding where I stand on a variety of topics so I have decided to dedicate a couple of posts to summarizing those views. Of course, given the day that I am posting this, it is only right that I start with the topic that seems to garner the most support and criticism… Firearms ownership.

Simply put, I believe that law abiding citizens, in accordance with the second amendment, have the right to own firearms. In fact, I believe that many of the laws in force overstep the boundaries of government and should be revoked particularly as it pertains to those that fall under the purview of the ATF. Generally speaking, restrictions and registrations are infringements upon our rights and should deemed as such.  

‘Gun free zones’ are an insane propaganda piece to promote a false sense of safety when, in fact, they merely ensure limited if any resistance ensuring targets of opportunity for those who wish to commit evil acts. This is why you are seeing so many shootings in these shocking areas. Not because we have a ‘gun problem’ in this country but because we instill a false sense of security and ignore the evil that exists in this world.

However, there are many laws in place that I support as it relates to firearms ownership as I believe a basic background check has the potential to be an effective tool should the necessary implementation of existing laws and technology be applied. I have seen too many posts noting that NICS is down and we already know that the system has not been optimized. In the end, NO other legislation should be passed until the existing measures are fully operational.

As it pertains to those who break the law I firmly believe that those who commit a crime with a firearm should be given sentences longer than those who commit the same crime without the use of a firearm. Those who unlawfully purchase or sell a firearm should also be given harsh sentences. In the end, the individual should be punished for what they did not the entire community.

Basically, people should not rely on the authorities to keep them safe when we are capable of doing so ourselves. For the great work that they do, they can’t anticipate what is going to happen, they are limited to responding to situations. We need to protect ourselves. The government can’t solve our problems… we must be self-reliant and self-sufficient and acknowledge the limitations that should be placed on government.

Firearms Friday: Time For Competition?

For the past two years I have been interested in participating in one of the many competitions that can be found at ranges throughout the area. It is one of those things where I just want to see how well I would do against not only others but against myself. This is especially true now since it has been way too long since I have gotten in any significant range time and while I am certain that I can be effective I would be much slower and not as accurate (I am not hitting the ten ring at speed at this point).

With no real significant plans in the books for the summer it might be possible to practice a bit and spend the day at a competition somewhere nearby but there aren’t any real long term certainties these days. And, at this point, given the limited opportunities that I have to get on the range would it be time well spent to dive right into a competition or would it be to simply feed my curiosity. The more practical option would be to spend the time practicing and also doing a few range tests on some firearms.

This year will also be the time to get back to building as there are several projects that I would like to complete with one of them being to outfit my 5 inch Smith & Wesson M&P 9 Pro CORE. I’m not talking about any major changes as the items that I will be adding include extended base plates, extended magazine release, co-witnessing optic, and maybe a new trigger. With the exception of the trigger, I have everything ready to go. It should be pretty nice by the time everything is complete and I am really looking forward to taking this competition gun to the range. Maybe some friendly, informal, match ups with friends are in order.

Moving forward it is all going to come down to time management with regard to this sport. Practice comes first, builds and maintenance second, and competitions are third. That is the general prioritization that I have to work with now that life has become full of interesting events, unique experiences, and once in a lifetime opportunities. Competitions would be nice as I could test my limited skills and maybe travel a little but, in the end, it wouldn’t be worth the time as, given my schedule, it would have to replace something else. Now if I were paid to compete, that would be a different story altogether… but I don’t see that happening in this lifetime.  

Firearms Friday: NRA Decals

And we all have the pin to match our car!

One of the interesting things for me when my wife and I lived in Bala Cynwyd was the looks on faces when people would see the NRA sticker prominently displayed in my window. While they may have been appalled and had their liberal sensibilities offended, I remained entertained by their hoplophobia and had to keep myself from chuckling at their wide eyed stares. Having moved out to the country, that is no longer an issue but there is another entertaining aspect to the proud displays around me.

These days, rarely will I come across a car without an NRA decal or some other means of supporting the second amendment. This lack of decoration is usually accompanied by a New York or New Jersey license plate. Actually, looking around the difference is much more drastic than those previous experiences. Now, there is a variety of NRA stickers on display and there is clearly a pecking order to the cars in the parking lot of the local Turkey Hill.

Seldom will I come across a car with a single, basic, sticker. It seems as though the basic rule of thumb is that one should put a sticker in their window for each year that they are a member of the NRA. I guess you could say that this is the hillbilly equivalent of a beach tag collection. Some have about half a dozen while others clearly don’t care about seeing out through the side windows of their car. That is your basic membership level.

From there you have a number of other options. I probably see more Life Member stickers than any other kind on a daily basis. This is usually the people that put a lot of miles on their car and need the visibility. At some point, we all look at the annual cost of membership and realize that it make more sense to wait for one of the discounts offered on life memberships.

The next level up is the Endowment Member. It is pretty much guaranteed that if you see a car with an endowment member sticker, the person getting out will be wearing some piece of NRA clothing. This is also where you find the Golden Eagle members. Basically, this is the double down category of NRA members where multiple levels of membership apply. The same basic trend applies to members at the Benefactor and Patron levels the primary difference being the base price of the car to which it is affixed. And, yes, I am one of these Endowment Members.  

In the end, what is important is that we all have our membership and support for the second amendment in common. We also all have the same look on our faces when that New York plate pulls into the lot for a cup of coffee. And, of course, we all have the same smile when that person gets out of the car with their wide eyes and their panties in a bunch. You’re not in New York anymore and I’m not on the Main Line anymore!

Firearms Friday: Executive Orders

This past week was an interesting one to say the least as the President postured in front of the media looking to continue to falsehoods of a decades old failed policy. In a press conference filled with a flood of forced tears, the President announced a series of executive actions regarding gun control. And that last word is key to this whole equation as the posturing and proclamations are all about control which was again driven home by the “Guns in America” town hall that was held last night two days after his speech.

While the discussion that night was more evenly distributed between those on both sides of the issue… the highlight for many was the statements made and questions asked by Taya Kyle, widow of Chris Kyle, who, in part, said, “The laws that we create don't stop these horrific things from happening. That is a very tough pill to swallow," This was in addition to her additional statements stating that criminals would not be stopped from getting guns even if background checks were expanded. 

However, the moment when she truly shined, far brighter than the president, was when she posted her response to the town hall event the following day on CNN. The paragraphs that stood out to me are as follows:

Cars are tools that is involved in about as many deaths as guns. If you are a driver prone to drinking and driving, should we only allow you to drive an ultracompact car? Not an SUV which could kill more people? No, we take away the drunk driver's access to legally drive any car. This is about freedom to do as you like until you prove incapable of showing good moral judgment.

In this country, we give freedom and take it away once you prove to be unworthy of the freedom we have given you. Nobody suggests taking away cars or going through a battery of tests to determine whether or not you might be a drunk driver one day.

My congressman, Representative Joe Pitts, also made his thoughts known at the end of the week following the President’s statements and actions. A portion of his weekly email newsletter read as follows:

On Tuesday, President Obama announced a series of executive actions he would take, as well as proposals for Congress to consider, on the regulation of gun ownership. The President is proposing to spend more money on mental health, though he has not said where that money will come from. From now on, the background check system will be operating 24 hours a day, seven days a week, rather than normal business hours. Doctors will be allowed to tell law enforcement about mentally ill individuals, but only until they have completed treatment.

The largest change will be expanding the scope of federal background check requirements. Federal law requires a federal firearms license for firearms dealers.  Under the President’s new rule, you would need a license and must conduct background checks if you repetitively buy and sell firearms with the principal motive of making a profit, even if that’s not your livelihood.

I am a strong supporter of background checks, and I have voted that way. Two years ago, I voted to increase funding for the background check system by 20 million dollars. But I have also sworn an oath to support the Constitution, and that includes the Second Amendment. It is also important to note that these actions would not have actually stopped any of the most horrific mass shootings that have occurred in recent years.

The last paragraph is or particular note in this who smoke show by the White House. Funds to improve background checks in general and the NICS system in particular have been voted upon and passed many times over in Congress. This is a non-issue. The focus should actually be on two parts of the actions that the President would like to take… patient confidentiality should not be something that is breached. While I can see the need to know those who are mentally unstable this should also be seen in the same way that it is in the legal system… sane until proven otherwise.

However, here is the most troubling aspect of the announcements made on Tuesday night… restricting gun sales and requiring a FFL for those who sell firearms for a profit. In the end, the FFL requirement through the ATF can potentially be used as a means to restrict sales well beyond the broad brushstrokes that the president likes to paint. There is nothing happy about these trees:

Thanks to a carefully drafted statute enacted in 1986, the president had relatively little room to maneuver in this regard. Those reforms were part of the NRA-supported Firearm Owners’ Protection Act. They were enacted specifically in response to abusive practices by the ATF, which included treating occasional sales of personal firearms as unlicensed “dealing” or seizing private firearm collections, on the pretext that they were the “inventory” of illegal “dealers.” 

At the end of the day, the administration’s big move on background checks was, instead, a 15-page brochure or “guidance” which explains the relevant federal statutes and regulations concerning firearms dealing and summarizing its view of the controlling case law.  Even though the president cannot unilaterally expand the law, he can still instill fear in gun owners and intimidate them into believing that private transfers are now illegal.  ATF can take his directive push the envelope with marginal cases that would be ignored in a less agenda-driven administration. They may well be looking to “make an example” of somebody, especially in the realm of sales advertised online. 

Obviously, chilling otherwise lawful firearms transfers could be just as effective as restricting such activity with passage of a new law or regulation.  There can be little doubt the president knows this and why he and administration officials have repeatedly said, “even 1 or 2 sales” can make one a dealer.

Based on evidence from past practices, the administration will likely try to have it both ways – revoke licenses for “dealers” who don’t sell a “sufficient” number of firearms, but prosecute those who sell a small number of firearms without a license.  In the 1980’s for example, there was evidence of ATF revoking the FFL of a person because he only sold three guns during the year, while simultaneously prosecuting another person for selling three guns that year without a license. And during the Clinton administration, after ATF had forced low-volume private sellers to become FFLs, the agency then aggressively reduced the number of FFLs for lack of business activity. 

There is a lot of posturing by the President as he concludes his second term in office. It is almost as if he really doesn’t care about the facts or what is right, he just wants to feel the warmth of the spotlight for as long as possible and try to grab as much power and control as he can before heading out the door. Sadly, the events this week are only the beginning to a very long year… hopefully we can get things back on track by the time November comes around.

Firearms Friday: Adding Security

It is no secret to anyone that has read this blog that I am a strong supporter of the rights to own and carry a firearm as well as an advocate for those choosing to own a firearm for self-defense. It is something that I choose to do as a means to protect my family. However, let me be clear, it is a last line of defense in maintaining the safety of my family. Contrary to some misguided opinions that I have read, your firearm should not be your only means of defending your home and your family.

While I have no qualms about doing everything in my power to defend my wife and son, it is with that aforementioned point in mind that I called ADT shortly after settling on the house, had the consultation on moving day, and had the system installed this past weekend. In addition to the security and peace of mind that it provides (and the hard evidence as we have video surveillance) whether we are home or away, it also serves as a warning system should someone continue with their devious motivations and enters our home while we are asleep. Even if it is only a few seconds, that is enough time for me to prepare and make ready to eliminate the threat to my family’s well-being.

As I have written about before, there are other steps that need to be taken as well including making sure that the firearms that you do have in the house are secure. The last thing you want to happen is for a child to gain access to your firearm(s). The second to last thing you want to happen is for someone to break in and have access to your weapon. In addition to a decent safe in a more secure area of the house, you should also have some kind of quick access vault in your bedroom should something or, more accurately, someone go bump in the night.

I also recommend having a second quick access vault in areas of the house where you spend the most time. Remember, not all break-ins will occur in the dead of the night. They should be in places that are easily accessible and would be considered obvious to those who know where they are because you are not trying to hide, you are trying to conceal and defend. It is the last thing that you want to have to reach for but you never know when you might need it. Again, this is not something anyone wants to have to do and it should be a final not a first act but at least this was you can ensure that your family is safe at all times.

Firearms Friday: Taking Over The NRA?

It really isn’t a surprise, especially with the campaigns in high gear, that following another incident of evil there are numerous politicians taking aim at gun owners and the NRA. This has been a potent topic for years and was particularly prominent during the first Democratic debate this week with Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton continuing to be a vocal proponent of gun control. Oddly enough, this was in direct contrast with Socialist Senator Bernie Sanders who has a long record of voting against such legislation. Of course, that kind of stance never lasts with a socialist leader so I don’t give much credence to his past performance. Basically it doesn’t matter who ends up being the nominee for the Communist party, the rights of ALL law abiding citizens will be a particular point of contention between the parties.

While all of this back and forth was happening on the national debate stage, there were also a few headlines being grabbed by a New York State Senator, Liz Kreuger, who is advocating her fellow rights abolitionists to join the NRA and force a change in stance on the issue of gun control from the inside. As was reported by the New York Daily News, “Krueger first raised the issue at a roundtable on gun violence issues hosted by Rep. Carolyn Maloney (D-Manhattan) after someone suggested meeting with the NRA to try to find common ground on a gun control law, the New York Observer reported.” Yes, this is how far and how demented their ideas have become.

First of all, as was noted in the same article, Thomas King, president of the state Rifle and Pistol Association and an NRA board member, “the NRA has more than five million members and scoffed at the suggestion there are enough "anti-gunners" to make an impact on the organization.” This is true, and those of us who are proud members would not stand for that kind of drastic “change” in policy… that is not why we donate our hard earned money. We choose to support and strengthen our rights be fighting those who wish to continue limiting our freedom.

Secondly, keep in mind that the same people who support this kind of radical action are the ones that would be filing suit if every Republican in this country were to register as a Democrat in order to change the party and support candidates that would oppose those policies that they currently hold so close to their empty hearts. Either action should be seen simply as perpetuating a fraud against those who support the basic principles of the organization. And what they are underestimating is that by proposing such actions they are actually galvanizing support for the NRA by the current membership (especially those of us who are life members), including me, which is why I have decided to join the NRA Golden Eagles. 

Firearms Friday: Blame

Once again, we end the week looking back on another cowardly tragedy committed by a clearly unstable individual. Unfortunately, it was also no surprise that the shooting was politicized before the suspect was even found… the calls for more gun control range out louder than the shots fired early on Wednesday morning. Another heinous act blamed on inanimate objects and those who own them rather than the individual who committed the crime.

It wasn’t long before posts from my liberal friends on Facebook began filling my feed and with quotes posted my conservative friends following this initial deluge. The most commonly used of which was a quote from then Governor Ronald Reagan when he addressed the Republican National Convention in Miami Florida on July 31, 1968 amid a time of tremendous racial turmoil which erupted in riots. The excepted says simply “We must reject the idea that every time a law's broken, society is guilty rather than the lawbreaker. It is time to restore the American precept that each individual is accountable for his actions.” Essentially, violence is an individual act and must be treated as such… the idea of railing against a group of people because of the acts of an individual must be rejected.   

Yesterday, the coverage continued and, of course, the calls for more laws intensified. While there was plenty of political banter, the quote that really crystallized the debate for me was that of Senator Marco Rubio who was quoted by the New York Times at a campaign stop in New Hampshire having said “It’s not the guns, it’s the people who are committing these crimes. What law in the world could have prevented him from killing them?” And that is what this all really comes down to… we must hold individuals accountable for their acts especially those with premeditated plans who would have followed through with this act regardless of means. In the end, this is why there are more knife attacks and beatings in the UK… people find a way to accomplish their goals regardless of whether they are good or evil.

Lastly, the other part of this whole equation that is being overlooked is the fact that even when bills are passed, they are not being enforced and/or the funding is not being spent (i.e. The National Instant Criminal Background Check System). The NICS Improvement Amendment Act was signed into law by President Bush on January 8, 2008 with the explicate mission to improve the background check system in this country. The law, endorsed by the NRA by the way, allocated Congress $1.3 Billion to improve record keeping in states which would allow greater transparency and improve the Federal gun background check system. To date nearly 90 percent of funding has never been spent and the Obama administration will further reduce spending from its peak in 2015 of $78 million down to $55 million in the President’s 2016 budget request.

Why don’t we focus on the real issues at hand instead of the hype and politicization of tragedy? Instead of the hundreds of millions of dollars being spent by gun control groups (keep in mind that I am well aware of the money spend by gun rights advocacy groups in response to various proposals and campaigns calling for the stripping away of our rights), what if we focus and put our money elsewhere that would really have an impact on the issue at hand. What if we committed hundreds of millions of dollars to mental health? What if we actually improved NICS and spent the $1.3 billion? We don’t need more laws and we definitely don’t need to prosecute and entire group of people in this country. We need to improvements in mental health in this country and we need to improve the effectiveness of the background check systems already in place. This is not a debate… this is the solution!