Addition to the armory

I went shooting last week with one of the trainers from HGR Firearms. He was interested in testing out the 1911 style of pistols. He's a Glock shooter, and a damn good one at that. I took out my Kimber Ultra Raptor and my Kimber Pro CDP shown here with her new Kimber magwell for faster reloads


The Ultra series from Kimber is their ultra short 3 inch series, the Pro series are the 4 inch or Commander style of 1911. I tried the Ultra series for concealed carry, but I like using a 230 grain load. A nice big heavy show bullet. That round coming out of a 3 inch 1911 is...snappy is the only word I can use to describe it. By the end of the session, both of us agreed that a 3 inch 1911 isn't for us, so it went into the "trade in" file. We went back to the retail area and I started looking. I was interested in a railed 1911 for home defense. If you've got a pistol setup with a light, that's one less thing you've go to grab if something goes bump in the night. I looked at a HK USP Tactical model with ambidextrous controls, a Sig Sauer Elite P220 and a Springfield Operator. Al in .45 all railed pistols. Now, I've owned HK,s Sigs and Springfields before so they're all good pieces. I couldn't make up mind to save my life...so I left empty handed. I thought about it all night, but couldn't make a decision.

I went back out Friday and ran a few service calls...then back to the shop to make up my mind. Guns and Leather in Greenbriar TN is also a authorized dealer for Nighthawk Customs; a manufacturer of HIGH END custom 1911s. I walked in the door and what do I see but a used Nighthawk Customs Talon II 1911. Someone had ordered it with a bobtail, custom diamond black finish, and a ambidextrous safety. The previous owner took it home, put her in the safe and never touched her again until he traded it in for a Browning over and under shotgun. she had never been fired;so to me it was new as new can be. They have had it for a while, but I never thought about buying it..until Friday. the only thing it was missing was the rail...butr my HK is railed..so that requirement was already filled. i quickly filled out the forms, paid for her and waited for the TBI to do their magic..and waited...and waited. Tennessee has what they call the Instant Check system. It works very well...when the servers aren't overheating. We got all that figured out and down to the range again.


For those who don't shoot; it's a great stress release. No matter what kind of day I've had, a good session of punching holes in paper makes it better. Doing that with a custom 1911 makes it that much more relaxing. 100 rounds out of a new pistol is usually OK, nothing to brag about. I expected it to be a bit worse than usual actually seeing as the new piece was a bobtail. I've never shot a bobtailed pistol before. It feels completely different in hand. I expected this to be a hindrance; it wasn't. The bobtail makes a 1911 point even more naturally for me. Right out of the holster, right on target without trying. I am not a bullseye shooter. I don't try to put all my rounds in a single hole. If the groups are too tight, then you're shooting too slow. I go for COM (center of mass) shots. If they're all COM on the target I'm happy. with the Nighthawk COM double taps are almost too easy. The trigger reset is quick and easy to feel; the steel frame is a bit beefier than the CDP but not too bad. I've been carrying her all day today around the house with no real problems. I didn't pay sticker for her, but I could have bought two Kimbers for what I paid for her. But...she's as close to affordable 1911 perfection that I've found so far.

I need to vent a little bit

What else is new :-)
I went by the post office Friday to check my PO box...as I do every day. There was a frail little lady who (much to my horror) driving herself around. I was in the middle of a email on my Treo, when I glanced up and saw her stuck in the door. She had lost her hold on the door and she was stuck between the door and the sill. I started to get out of my car and see if I could help, and saw a man walking towards the door rather quickly. I sat back for a moment, and watched him walk AROUND her to another door and go in the building. I ran over and helped her get out of the door before she fell and got really hurt. It took everything I had not to go into the counter area and beat the jerk around his thick skull. I can't believe this person would actually go out of his way to walk around this poor little lady just to go stand in line at the damn post office.

Idaho Teens Tote Loaded Guns Around Town Legally

These two kids have the right idea. The very last line of the article makes it worth repeating...
Idaho Teens Tote Loaded Guns Around Town Legally
Sunday , May 20, 2007

POST FALLS, Idaho —
Two home-schooled teenagers in this northern Idaho town say they are carrying loaded guns to the library, grocery store and other public areas for self-defense, as a crime deterrent, and to educate others about their rights.
Zach Doty, 18, carries a loaded Glock handgun on his hip. His 15-year-old brother, Steven, carries a .22-caliber rifle in a sling on his back.
Police have been called on several occasions to question the teens but have not found the teens to be in violation of the law.
In Idaho, residents 18 and older can openly carry a firearm in public. And those ages 13 to 17 who have parental permission can carry a rifle in public.
"I certainly don't anticipate that I'll need to use it, but I'd rather have it and not need it than to not have it and need it," Zach told the Coeur d'Alene Press. "There's no reason for me to hide a weapon."
Zach was stopped April 17 on his way to Bible study. On Friday, police again responded when someone reported the brothers with guns in a park. But police left after confirming it was the Doty's.
Zach has also been approached by others.
"There have been good opportunities to speak to people," he said. "I make sure they know that open carrying is legal, why I carry and I encourage them to consider doing so themselves."
The brothers carry their weapons to parks, the library, grocery stores and other places. They can't have their guns with them on school property, courthouses or jails.
Not everyone is comfortable with armed teenagers in the neighborhood.
"I turned back so that my wife could verify what I saw," said James Rebal, who called police after seeing Zach with his gun. "He was very nicely dressed and I saw nothing to be concerned about other than the weapon. It's not something you see in Idaho. Virginia Tech was fresh in my mind, and I thought it was better to err on the side of concern."
A lone gunman killed 32 people and himself last month at Virginia Tech University.
John Dunlap, commander of the American Legion Post 143, said he asked Zach to leave the Legion at a recent lunch because Zach was carrying his gun.
"He left and came back the next day (without the gun) for soup," said Dunlap, who described the brothers as "well-mannered."
Ed Santos owns Center Target Sports in Post Falls and is a gun safety instructor. He said the Dotys came to his shop but he doesn't sell handgun ammunition to people under 21.
He said that just because the Dotys are carrying guns in public doesn't mean they're not responsible with them, but questioned the need to carry them in town even though it was legal.
"My advice for them is the same as it is with adults — yes it's your right and yes it's legal, but why draw unnecessary attention to yourself just because you can?" Santos said. "I believe the intent (of the law) was to allow it more for hunting and recreation."
Zach said he's not paranoid or a radical.
"If I was an extremist, our founding fathers would all be extremists," he said. "Without them, we wouldn't have our independence. We'd be a disarmed British system of feudal subjectivity."

News Two lets it bias slip

The local ABC station here in Nashville ran a story claiming that we wanted to be able to carry guns on bars now. That's NOT what the law is intended to do. Its to allow lawful carry into places that serve beer and alcohol (in TN they are different)
the way they presented the story made no mention of restaurants , just bars. They made it look like bubba wants to pony up to the bar with his hogleg and toss back a few. Nothing could be further from the truth. These are the proposed laws:

SB 0023*
Jackson
HB 0702
McCord CRIMINAL LAW: Possession of firearm where alcohol is served. Permits a person who has a permit to carry a handgun to carry gun in place where alcohol is served for consumption on premises if person not consuming alcohol or is not otherwise prohibited by posting provisions.
TCA Secs. 39-17-1300; 39-17-1305
SB 1651
Jackson
HB 1118*
Buck CRIMINAL LAW: Possession of handguns where alcohol is served. Allows a person holding a handgun permit to possess a handgun on premises where alcoholic beverages are served, so long as said person is not consuming alcohol and so long as the owner of the premises had not posted a notice prohibiting such possession.
TCA Secs. 39-17-1300; 39-17-1305
Senate Status: Set for Senate Judiciary Committee 05/15/2007.
House Status: Referred to House Judiciary Criminal Practice Subcommittee.
SB 1885
Jackson
HB 1143*
Buck CRIMINAL LAW: Firearms allowed in restaurants. Allows any person with handgun permit who is not consuming alcoholic beverages and is not under the influence of alcohol or controlled substances to carry a handgun in a restaurant where alcoholic beverages are served.
TCA Secs. 39-17-1300; 39-17-1305
Senate Status: Set for Senate Judiciary Committee 05/15/2007.
House Status: Referred to House Judiciary Criminal Practice Subcommittee.

Notice the parts I highlighted in red. Why would you want to carry into a bar when you CAN'T LEGALLY DRINK WHILE CARRYING. The way the law is currently written, there is some discussion on the point that is doesn't allow uniformed police officers to carry unless they are performing official duties. How many times have you been in a local bar and grill and there sits a cop in full uniform laving lunch. That isn't what you'd call "official duties" if anything, he's off the clock. The way the law is currently written, he's breaking the law by not leaving his weapon in his car. The law needs to be changed...sooner rather than later. The owners can still post their property to stop people from carrying their guns...at least then I'll have a choice of where to have dinner.

***UPDATE***
From the anchor, Allison Hatcher:

Danny,

I apologize if my deliver on the “guns in bars” story was offensive. I certainly did not mean for it to come across that way. In fact, it is my goal to remain neutral on most stories (with the exception of stories where showing opinion is appropriate).

What you might have sensed was my feeling about the lawmaker opposed to the idea. I’m sure you remember hearing about the lawmaker who felt “the only reason a person would need to carry a gun… is if that person were looking for a trouble.”
Personally, I find that idea little unfair! It’s quite obvious the reason gun owners want to be able to carry a weapon is to be able to ***protect** themselves from trouble. But it’s my job to make sure my opinion – whether “for” or “against” an idea – does not come through at the wrong time. I obviously missed the mark last night and for that I apologize.

Truly,

Allison Hatcher

I'm famous...but not in a way I want

I jumped on the Tennesseans web site this morning only to find a link to a searchable database of ALL CCW holders in Tennessee. Great...a shopped list provided by the local liberal rag once again showing their true colors. I don't understand what the HELL they thought they were going to accomplish with this little stunt. I don't really hide the fact that I carry a gun. I don't go around telling everyone within earshot HI!!!! I HAVE A GUN. My family and friends know I carry. I'm discrete about it for the most part. Regardless it's a rather private issue to have thrown about willy nilly like that. Evidently the database didn't exist very long due to outrage and hundreds of phone calls their front desk deceived. Now...there are two schools of thought. It can be argued that it's a "don't go to that house to rob" list or a "lookie..that house has guns" list for the local scumbags. I want to know what that list is public record? I can't look up who just bought a car, a ton of jewelry, or someone who made a large cash withdrawal. The simple fact that any asshole can find a record of which houses have guns in them is rather stupid. Can I pull prescription records to find out who just refilled their pain killer prescription?

Again and again...the lack of forethought and planning by our elected officials surprises me.

Why do they keep electing these idiots?

Evidently the smallest amendment to the US Constitution is too complicated for these morons to understand. ANYONE who lives in Chicago should be on the horn to their representatives, the mayors office, hell...standing on their rooftops screaming their lungs out over this crap. ANYONE who thinks this will do anything but INCREASE crime against law abiding citizens of the Peoples Republic of Chicago is either living in their own little fantasy world...or a complete drooling on themselves utter dumbass. Why someone doesn't take these buffoons to court is beyond me. Daley should be thrown from office, impeached, recalled, fired, sued, laughed at, mocked openly in public...whatever it takes to get the point across. I'd bet his bodyguards are still armed. He's one of the elitist scum who believe that THEIR personal protection is needed...you...a lowly VOTING peon can't be trusted to defend yourself so the nice police..who are taking away YOUR GOD GIVEN RIGHTS are good enough to protect you. Only problem is...they CAN'T. What are you going to do once you're beaten and robbed blind Chicago? Go crying to Daley and his goons? It's too late then. NOW is the time to demand a stop to the abuse of power.

Confiscation of Registered Guns Begins in Illinois
Chicago Anti Gun Enforcement (CAGE) unit. This elite squad, operated jointly by the Illinois State Police, the Chicago Police Department, and the Cook County State's Attorney's Office, supposedly exists to identify illegal gunrunners. However, information gained by the ISRA makes it clear that the CAGE unit is targeting law-abiding citizens, not criminal gunrunners.

The Chicago Police Department and the Illinois State Police have teamed up to make good on Mayor Daley's pledge that, if it were up to him, nobody would have a gun. Daley and his elite "CAGE" unit are apparently taking advantage of gun privacy loopholes to pinpoint certain individuals for inclusion in the confiscation program.

The ISRA is following up on leads in one case that has disturbing implications. An elderly first-generation Chicago resident was recently paid a visit by an Illinois State Police trooper. After asking to come inside the man's home, the trooper asked if the man owned a gun - to which he replied yes. The trooper then directed the individual to surrender the firearm. The man complied with the officer's demand and the trooper left with the gun. And the story gets better...

The gun in question was purchased legally by the man in the 1970s shortly after he became a U.S. citizen. When Chicago's infamous gun registration scheme went into effect in the early 1980s, the man registered the firearm as per the requirement. However, over the years, the fellow apparently forgot to re-register the firearm, and forgot to renew his Illinois FOID Card.

So...what does this all mean?

In the last edition of The Illinois Shooter, we reported on the activities of a shady taskforce known as the Chicago Anti Gun Enforcement (CAGE) unit. This elite squad, operated jointly by the Illinois State Police, the Chicago Police Department, and the Cook County State's Attorney's Office, supposedly exists to identify illegal gunrunners. However, information gained by the ISRA makes it clear that the CAGE unit is targeting law-abiding citizens, not criminal gunrunners.

Thanks to a ruling by a liberal federal judge, the CAGE unit now has the name of every single person in the United States who, since 1992, lawfully purchased more than one handgun in the period of a week. The CAGE unit also has all the makes, models and serial numbers of those guns. In essence, the Chicago Police Department is now registering guns and gun owners nationwide.

The ISRA has also learned that the CAGE unit has compiled a list of families where more than one person in that family holds a FOID card. Acting on that information, the CAGE unit is now contacting gun shops where those families have shopped, and is illegally registering all guns purchased by those families.

Now, it appears that the CAGE unit is scrubbing Chicago's gun registration list against the list of FOID card holders. Indications are that folks who have let their registrations and FOIDs lapse will have their guns confiscated. We have to wonder how long it will be until state troopers show up at the doors to confiscate the guns of non-Chicago residents who have let their FOIDs expire.

More later as this story develops.

It bears repeating

I found this on another site, but it deserves to be anywhere and everywhere.

Mistakes We Make in the Gun Culture, or
How to Be a More Effective Advocate for Freedom
By John Ross

http://john-ross.net/mistakes.htm

Copyright 2003-2005 by John Ross. Electronic reproduction of this article freely permitted provided it is reproduced in its entirety with attribution given

This is a piece I wrote a couple years ago, and I still get regular requests for it. Might as well put it on Ross In Range.

One of the biggest mistakes that freedom advocates make is we often fail to take the moral high ground on freedom issues, and we let our enemies define the terms. This is a huge mistake. Never forget: We are in the right on this issue. We are on the side of the Founding Fathers. They are on the side of Hitler, Stalin, Mao Tse-Tung, Pol Pot, Saddam Hussein, and every other leader of an oppressive, totalitarian regime.

Let me give some common examples I’ve often heard when Second Amendment advocates debate gun control supporters:


THEY SAY: “We’d be better off if no one had guns.”

WE SAY: “You can never succeed at that, criminals will always get guns.” (FLAW: the implication here is that if you could succeed at eliminating all guns, it would be a reasonable plan.)

WE SHOULD SAY: “So, you want to institute a system where the weak and elderly are at the mercy of the strong, the lone are at the mercy of the gang. You want to give violent criminals a government guarantee that citizens are disarmed. Sorry, that’s unacceptable. Better we should require every citizen to carry a gun.”


THEY SAY: “Those assault rifles have no sporting purpose. You don’t need a 30-round magazine for hunting deer--they’re only for killing people.”

WE SAY: “I compete in DCM High Power with my AR-15. You need a large-capacity magazine for their course of fire. My SKS is a fine deer rifle, and I’ve never done anything to give my government reason not to trust me blah blah blah.” (FLAW: You have implicitly conceded that it is OK to ban any gun with no sporting use. And eventually they can replace your sporting arms with arcade-game substitutes.)

WE SHOULD SAY: “Your claim that ‘they’re only for killing people’ is imprecise. A gas chamber or electric chair is designed for killing people, and these devices obviously serve different functions than guns. To be precise, a high-capacity, military-type rifle or handgun is designed for conflict. When I need to protect myself and my freedom, I want the most reliable, most durable, highest-capacity weapon possible. The only thing hunting and target shooting have to do with freedom is that they’re good practice.”


THEY SAY: “If we pass this License-To-Carry law, it will be like the Wild West, with shootouts all the time for fender-benders, in bars, etc. We need to keep guns off the streets. If doing so saves just one life, it will be worth it.”

WE SAY: “Studies have shown blah blah blah” (FLAW: You have implied that if studies showed License-To-Carry laws equaled more heat-of-passion shootings, Right-To-Carry should be illegal.)

WE SHOULD SAY: “Although no state has experienced what you are describing, that’s not important. What is important is our freedom. If saving lives is more important than the Constitution, why don’t we throw out the Fifth Amendment? We have the technology to administer an annual truth serum session to the entire population. We’d catch the criminals and mistaken arrest would be a thing of the past. How does that sound?”


THEY SAY: “I don’t see what the big deal is about a five day waiting period.”

WE SAY: “It doesn’t do any good, criminals don’t wait five days, it’s a waste of resources blah blah blah.” (FLAW: You have implied that if waiting periods did reduce crime, they would be a good idea.)

WE SHOULD SAY: “Shall we apply your logic to the First Amendment along with the Second? How about a 24-hour cooling-off period with a government review board before the news is reported? Wouldn’t that prevent lives from being ruined, e.g. Richard Jewell? And the fact that this law applies to people who already own a handgun tells me that it’s not about crime prevention, it’s about harassment. Personally, I want to live in a free society, not a ‘safe’ one with the government as chief nanny.”


THEY SAY: “In 1776, citizens had muskets. No one ever envisioned these deadly AK-47s. I suppose you think we should all have Atomic bombs.”

WE SAY: “Uh, well, uh...”

WE SHOULD SAY: “Actually, the Founders discussed this very issue--it’s in the Federalist Papers. They wanted the citizens to have the same guns as were the issue weapons of soldiers in a modern infantry. Soldiers in 1776 each had muskets, but not the large field pieces that fired exploding shells. In 2005, soldiers are each individually issued M16s, M249s, etc. but not atomic bombs. Furthermore, according to your logic, the laws governing free speech and freedom of the press are only valid for newspapers whose presses are hand-operated and use fixed type. After all, no one in 1776 foresaw offset printing or electricity, let alone TV, satellite transmission, FAXes, and the Internet.”


THEY SAY: “We require licenses on cars, but the powerful NRA screams bloody murder if anyone ever suggests licensing these dangerous weapons.”

WE SAY: Nothing, usually, and just sit there looking dumb.

WE SHOULD SAY: “You know, driving is a luxury, whereas firearms ownership is a right secured by the Constitution. But let’s put that aside for a moment. It’s interesting you compared guns and vehicles. Here in the U.S. you can at any age go into any state and buy as many motorcycles, cars, or trucks of any size you want, and you don’t need to do anything if you don’t use them on public property. No license at all. If you do want to use them on public property, you can get a license at age 16. This license is good in all 50 states. No waiting periods, no background checks, nothing. If we treated guns like cars, a fourteen-year-old could go into any state and legally buy handguns, machine guns, cannons, whatever, cash and carry, and shoot them all with complete legality on private property. And at age 16 he could get a state license good anywhere in the country to shoot these guns on public property. Sounds great to me.”

FINAL COMMENT, useful with most all arguments:

YOU SAY: “You know, I’m amazed at how little you care about your grandchildren. I would have thought they meant more to you than anything.”

THEY SAY: “Hunh?”

YOU SAY: “Well, passing this proposal won’t have a big immediate effect. I mean, in the next couple of years, neither George W. Bush nor Hillary Clinton is going to open up internment camps for Americans like Roosevelt did sixty-odd years ago. But think of your worst nightmare of a political leader. Isn’t it possible that a person like that might be in control here some time in the next 30, 40, or 50 years, with 51% of the Congress and 51% of the Senate behind him or her? If that does happen, do you really want your grandchildren to have been stripped of their final guarantee of freedom? And do you really want them to have been stripped of it by you?

Let me know if any of these points make you more effective the next time a "gun control" advocate starts in on his favorite subject.