The FBI has warned Chicago-area law enforcement that nearly three-dozen street gangs “have formed a pact to ‘shoot on-site any cop that has a weapon drawn on any subject in public’,” reports ABC7.
According to an August 26 ‘situation information report’ from Chicago-based FBI officials, “members of these gang factions have been actively searching for, and filming, police officers in performance of their official duties. The purpose of which is to catch on film an officer drawing his/her weapon on any subject and the subsequent ‘shoot on-site’ of said officer, in order to garner national media attention.”
Alerts based on police intelligence, no matter how unspecific, are frequently distributed to law enforcement agencies according to investigators, especially when they involve threats to officers. The FBI’s “Potential Activity Alert” is from “a contact whose reporting is limited and whose reliability cannot be determined.” That could mean the information came from a police street source, a cooperating witness in an ongoing case, or from discussions overheard on a wiretap or other surveillance recording. –ABC7
According to CPD Superintendent David Brown, there is an overall “sense of lawlessness” felt by local police, and the ‘danger to police officers is real and increasing.’
“I think it’s bigger than a suggestion,” said Brown. “I think 51 officers being shot at or shot in one year, I think that quadruples any previous year in Chicago’s history. So I think it’s more than a suggestion that people are seeking to do harm to cops.“
The alleged pact comes amid national protests over several high-profile incidents between black suspects and police officers which has resulted in arson, looting, murder and other violent acts in cities across the country sparked by the death of George Floyd – a black suspect who died in police custody after an officer knelt on his neck for over eight minutes.
As ABC7 notes, the warning comes after 54 people were shot in the windy city last weekend – including two Chicago PD officers who are expected to live, while 10 victims died according to the report. That said, there is no indication that the officers were targeted as part of the alleged gang assassination pact described in the FBI alert.
The FBI alert, headlined “Pact Made by People Nation Gang Factions to ‘Shoot On-Site’ Any Police Officer with a Weapon Drawn” lists street gangs that have become well-known in Chicago the past five decades, from the Latin Kings and Vice Lords to the El Rukns and Black P Stones.
Supt. Brown said on Monday the spike in attacks on police makes it clear to him that “people are seeking to do harm to cops.”
“We need police officers and as community members we need to push back fervently against lawlessness,” Brown said. –ABC7
DARPAtv live-streamed AlphaDogfight Trials Competition on Thursday (Aug. 20), which featured an AI-controlled virtual fighter jet beating a human pilot in a series of simulated dogfights.
The AI-system, developed by Heron Systems, a Maryland-based defense contractor, beat one of the Air Force’s top General Dynamics F-16 Fighting Falcon pilots, reported Breaking Defense.
Fully-autonomous fighter jets are years away, but the Air Force and DARPA appear to be honing in on the possibilities of integrating artificial intelligence systems into combat flying machines. The live event was streamed on several platforms, including YouTube and Zoom, which shows AI systems have the ability in 2020 to operate an aircraft with skill and in a one-on-one combat scenario, out-gunning a human pilot, even though it was in a simulation.
One of the hosts during the simulated dogfight noted the AI system has “superhuman” shooting capabilities that produced an edge over the human pilot.
Video: AlphaDogfight Trials Final Event…
Timothy Grayson, director of the Strategic Technology Office at DARPA, described the simulation as successful and said it’s a victory for humans and machines to team up for combat:
“I think what we’re seeing today is the beginning of something I’m going to call human-machine symbiosis… Let’s think about the human sitting in the cockpit, being flown by one of these AI algorithms as truly being one weapon system, where the human is focusing on what the human does best [like higher order strategic thinking] and the AI is doing what the AI does best,” Grayson said.
While fully autonomous fighter jets conducting dogfights are years outs, if not at the end of the decade, what’s more, plausible, in the next five years, is AI integrating into the flight systems of fighter jets, especially stealth ones, to assist pilots during complex combat situations.
Difficult times are impacting the firearm industry, especially the ammunition segment. Don’t expect relief anytime soon.
It is important to understand that ammunition pricing is not set by what the ammunition costs to produce, rather it’s determined by what the next batch is going to cost to produce. The profit margin is a set percentage that’s typically going to remain constant as long as production costs remain constant. An important factor in production are labor costs, which are similarly constant unless demand increases or decreases and affects long-term projections. As you can imagine during this unprecedented event, costs are fluctuating dramatically.
Due to factors beyond the control of the ammunition companies, the cost of components and raw materials has more than doubled within the last two weeks. Fiocchi and Vista Outdoors, for example) are two major ammunition manufacturing brands I’ll discuss. Fiocchi is shut down for commercial business and operating with minimal staffing for their military customers. Vista Outdoors is up and running, but they are fervently working to catch up to an unstable market that went berserk. Even with a redirection of resources and a recent price hike to cover it, it’s going to take time before covering their adjusted costs with respect to their actual output stabilizes.
It’s also worthwhile to consider how Covid-19 is affecting the smaller small arms and ammunition providers. Turkey, home to the manufacture of much of the imported shotguns and handguns has been getting frisky with Syria. Even if Turkey’s munitions factories could bear some of the production output in support of their American clients, the shipping ports are generally closed. The same applies to our allies in the Czech Republic. The Czechs could be sitting on mountains of propellant powder, but there is no way to get it to us. Russian-sourced ammo and components are also affected.
In a best-case scenario, it takes more than 20 days for a shipping container to arrive to the U.S. from any of those locations. If cargo has to arrive on the west coast, shipping can take more than 30 days. Plus, a typical minimum of five to 10 days is required to embark and disembark on each side of the trip. So, once the ports reopen, a realistic time frame to see supply levels return to normal is two months — just to get the ammo to U.S. distributors. And that’s if those foreign manufacturing continue to manufacture their product and have them crated, bonded and stocked. According to Fiocchi, that that’s not likely. So figure another 15 to 30 days to get return to manufacturing again if they have the raw components, which they may not because closed ports affect obtaining raw materials, too.
To add to the delay, gun owners are looking at empty shelves, which require massive orders in order to restock. Those orders don’t get processed or ship to retailers all at once, and the same people who are stocking up now are going to continue swooping in once the first shipments of popular loads become available. Folks, we’re looking at a return of the Obama-era run on ammunition where we saw people fighting each over boxes of rimfire.
Prepare yourselves to stay calm. This is going to be a tough slog, likely for the better part of a year. But here’s the thing, friends: We can make this easier on all of us as a community. Don’t hoard ammo that you’re not likely going to need. Of course, be neighborly and make sure your friends have some. Society will be fine because the core our country is strong. Stretch your supplies by incorporating more dry practice, at home laser training and emphasizing marksmanship over shredding targets with bursts of rapid fire. Let’s help one another out.
Textron Systems’ AAI Corporation, an aerospace and defense development and manufacturing firm, located in Hunt Valley, Maryland, announced last week the delivery of its initial Next Generation Squad Weapon-Technology (NGSW-T) prototype demonstrator to the U.S. Army Combat Capabilities Development Command (CCDC) Armaments Center and Joint Services Small Arms Program (JSSAP), the company said in a statement.
“Moving from contract award to delivery of a revolutionary, next-generation weapon in just 15 months not only demonstrates the maturity of our Cased-Telescoped technology, but also the project execution excellence our team possesses to rapidly fill critical warfighter needs on schedule,” said Textron Systems Senior Vice President of Applied Technologies & Advanced Programs Wayne Prender.
“Our Cased-Telescoped weapons and ammunition offer the growth path to a true next-generation small arms weapon for U.S. warfighters, including increased lethality at longer ranges, while also delivering significant weight reductions to the warfighter.”
In development since 2004, AAI’s NGSW-T offers increased lethality and weighs 40% less than current standard issue light machine guns. The weapon chambers a telescoped round between 6.5mm and 6.8mm and is expected to be the future replacement for the M16 rifle, M4 carbine, and M249 light machine gun.
In October, the Army selected the 6.8mm, next-generation round as the official requirements for the NGSW-T. The new bullet is designed to penetrate the world’s most advanced body armor at a range of up to 600 meters.
The Pentagon’s current shift from urban warfare in Iraq and Syria to the mountains and open terrain of Afghanistan have been the driving force behind modernizing standard issue weapons for infantry units. While standard rifles are well-suited for close combat in cities like Mosul and Raqqa, it lacks the range to kill adversaries in open stretches.
The Army is expected to test AAI’s NGSW-T weapon at firing ranges this summer. If the weapon meet’s the Army’s requirements for NGSW-T, then AAI could get a large contract to send the gun into series production to produce more than 250,000 units and 150 million rounds. The expected field date could be as early as 2020.
The Army has selected its first subcompact weapon in more than 50-years.
Brügger & Thomet’s APC9-K (Advanced Police Carbine) was chosen over Sig Sauer and four other firearm manufactures that submitted their prototypes last year to the Prototype Opportunity Notice (PON), which asked companies for a “highly concealable [Sub Compact Weapon] system capable of engaging threat personnel with a high volume of lethal force while accurately firing at close range with minimal collateral damage.”
The APC9-K uses standard 9×19mm and .45 ACP (Automatic Colt Pistol) rounds. It is already in use with law enforcement around the country.
The submachine gun can fire in both semi- and full-automatic modes, has a collapsible stock and Picatinny rail for laser sights.
A Production-Other Transaction Agreement (P-OTA) worth $2,575,811.76 was awarded to Brügger & Thomet for 350 guns and accessories such as spare parts, slings, and manuals. The Army has the option to purchase 1,000 additional weapons under the terms of the contract.
“The P-OTA is awarded based upon successful completion of the prototype project proposed by B&T USA LLC. in response to Sub Compact Weapon (SCW) Prototype Opportunity Notice: W15QKN-18-R-032M, evaluation of testing results, and subsequent updated proposal request letter for Follow-on Production Award. The purpose of this P-OTA is to purchase 350 SCWs, with an option for additional quantities of up to 1,000 SCWs, with slings, manuals, accessories, and spare parts.”
Here is a diagram of the APC9-K, and other variant models:
Brügger & Thomet confirmed their selection to Army Times but noted that they weren’t at liberty to comment beyond the information published on FedBizOpps.
The Army previously stated that the contract fulfillment period starts five to seven months after the award date (April 1), which means the service could receive their first submachine gun in more than five decades this coming fall.
The CEO of Dick’s Sporting Goods has admitted that the company’s anti-gun stance has negatively impacted business to the point where they are considering closing their Field & Stream stores in order to reduce overheads and save the whole business from going under.
Earlier this year, the sporting goods store submitted to pressure from liberal activist groups and raised their minimum age requirement for firearm purchases from 18 to 21. They also banned the sale of all assault-style weapons in their stores.
Now, after alienating their customer base by attempting to placate big-city liberals who do not even shop in their stores, Dick’s Sporting Goods is teetering on the brink of financial collapse.
Dick’s share price has dropped more than 4 percent since they adopted their anti-gun stance. Store growth has stagnated to the point that CEO Edward Stack has admitted they will likely be closing stores.
Edward Stack speaking at a conference held by Goldman Sachs in September, claimed that he anticipated the negative consequences of the company’s gun ban.
“Well I think it’s definitely a factor, and it’s nothing that we didn’t anticipate,” Stack said of the loss of business. “As we put out kind of our guidance for the year and our earnings guidance for the year, we knew this would happen when—we’ve made some decisions on firearms in the past and we’ve had a pretty good idea of what these consequences were going to be.”
Western Journal reports:
It’s definitely not a good business tactic to intentionally do something that will hurt business. Of course, Stack justified it by saying it’s “the right thing to do.”
“We felt that was absolutely the right thing to do. We would do the same thing again if we had a mulligan, so to speak, to do it again,” Stack said.
Stack can try to spin the company’s decline as some kind of moral crusade but it won’t matter if the company ceases to exist.
Investors don’t want to hear about the company doing “the right thing” if it causes significant losses.
Dick’s anti-gun crusade also soured their relationship with gun vendors.
“So, we’ve had some vendors who’ve decided based on our decision to not sell the assault-style rifle that was used in the Parkland shooting that they wouldn’t sell us any longer,” Stack said. “So, as you know, there’s been some people who said we’re not going to sell you any firearms anymore. We’re not going to sell you our product.”
It seems like the company’s gun ban has turned into a crisis. Both customers and vendors won’t do business with them anymore. It won’t be long until more investors start dropping them as well.
In an attempt to salvage their crumbling company, Dick’s is considering closing down all 35 of their outdoor-focused Field & Stream stores.
“My sense is that we can either take a look at closing that store, that concept, or re-conceptualizing it into a more of an outdoor-type concept,” Stack said.
It’s not surprising that customers want to take their business elsewhere. By taking such an anti-gun stance, law-abiding gun owners feel disrespected. Millions of Americans own guns and Dick’s told them to take their business elsewhere.
Dick’s turned its back on customers and they are paying the price.
We know TFB readers and viewers have watched a John Wick film and thought, “dang, I wish I could shoot like that.” Fortunately, James Reeves has your back: James and the TFB crew went out to Taran Tactical Innovations to meet and train with living legend Taran Butler – the man who trained Keanu Reeves for his role in the John Wick series of films. And while normally you’d have to fly out to Los Angeles, star in a movie, and get your studio to bankroll your training with Taran, TFBTV and Taran Tactical are teaming up to show you how to shoot like your favorite silver screen hitman for absolutely free. Save your gold tokens for ammo.
According to Russia Today, Putin visited the Kalashnikov Concern’s shooting range and tested the company’s brand new sniper rifle in Kubinka on Wednesday. After inspecting the experimental samples of the rifles, Putin shot five times with an SVCh-308 (Chukavin sniper’s rifle) rifle at a target from a distance of 600 meters. Three of the president’s shots successfully hit the target. According to Kalashnikov, the SVCh-308 rifle is designed to engage the enemy’s manpower at small and medium distances. It can be used in conditions of combined arms combat as well as for keeping a cover. The rifle’s small dimensions allow the shooter to do without additional weapons, which increases mobility. The SVCh was initially called SVK. Recently, Kalashnikov has renamed the rifle to include the designer’s last name (Chukavin) into the designation of this firearm and revealed more details. Now the rifle is called Chukavin Sniper Rifle or SVCh (Снайперская Винтовка Чукавина – СВЧ) wrote the Firearm Blog.
SAS Sargent lands kill shot on ISIS Commander from “almost” 1.5 miles with M2 (here)
to entertainment’s greatest…
The U.S. and Russia are the world’s largest weapons dealers. Will Geary , @wgeary mapped the flows of arms exports leaving the U.S. and USSR/Russia from 1950 to 2017 to produce this fascinating video…
This won’t end well.
The strategy of tension relies upon a fear of threat to control people.
Somethings gotta give and it’s not gonna be me.
A gunman approaches a group of moms picking up their kids from a private school in Sao Paulo, Brazil.
But he didn’t figure on one of the moms being an off-duty military police officer — 42-year-old Katia da Silva Sastre.
Swift as lightning, she shoots the punk who falls to the ground.
The gunman, Elivelton Neves Moreira, 21, was shot three times and died in the hospital, thereby saving taxpayers the expense of a trial and prison.
Paradigm Shift noun UK /ˈpær.ə.daɪm ˌʃɪft/ US /ˈper.ə.daɪm ˌʃɪft/ formal – a time when the usual and accepted way of doing or thinking about something changes completely – Cambridge Dictionary
I need to start this review off by saying, I am no SIG fanboy. But facts are facts, and I always give credit when it is due. The new P365 is a game changer for concealed carry guns, and there are no two ways about that. I have seen and shot a lot of CCW guns in my day, and this one sets a new bar for excellence.
As I write this, I am having trouble figuring out exactly why. On paper, the gun looks impressive, but not that far beyond its peers. It holds 10+1. Big deal. Other guns in this category hold 9+1, which isn’t that far off. It’s tiny. Well, so is a Glock 42. It has legitimate sights. That may be unusual, but it isn’t unique. The trigger breaks at 5.5 pounds, again not that far from the pack, if any. The difference is, the SIG P365 shoots like Wyatt Earp’s ghost is running the trigger, and I can’t tell you with certainty how that is possible. From just looking at the specs of the gun, it makes no sense. But this thing runs like a prairie fire fueled by a tornado. For the moment, let’s just attribute that to magic, which is as plausible an explanation as anything else.
The P365 is tiny. Here you can see what it looks like in the author’s hands.
When I first saw this gun at SHOT Show, I liked what was on offer. At first glance, I would have called it a G-42 double stack, which would still be a pretty neat gun. The secret to SIG having a tiny profile, but managing to cram 10 rounds in the magazine, comes from its tapered design. The magazine is actually a pyramid, with a long taper up to the round that feeds out of the top. SIG could have gotten more capacity by going with a wider body, but they hit the sweet spot of grip size and bullets and stopped. Bravo. The result is that the SIG is 3mm wider than a Glock in the grip, and fits 4 more rounds.
The SIG, for me at least, also hits the grip circumference size where it is extremely comfortable to shoot. At the slide, the SIG is 1mm wider than the Glock, which also makes it nice to tuck in your pants.
The sights on the P365 are big enough to use, with a nice wide rear notch. The front features an oversized bright green ring, which is perfect for daylight use. They are actually hard to miss, at least if you are looking for them. When the lights go out, 3 tritium dots take over, and they are sufficiently bright for any night use as well. The rear sights have a shelf for one-handed manipulation, should the need arise.
The controls are very well laid out, and sized with thought put into them. I like oversized magazine releases on race guns, but not on ones I stick in my pants. The P365 has a magazine release that is almost recessed, you won’t drop a mag without trying. This makes reloads a little more difficult, but it does prevent accidental magazine release in the holster. I have had that happen with carry guns, and it would really suck to start a firefight with just the round in the chamber. Very nice design, I count the SIG work here as a positive. The slide release is exactly the balance needed of big enough to hit, but small enough not to inadvertently lock the slide.
The magazine release is designed for concealed carry. It’s recessed so that it’s not accidentally depressed on holstering, drawing, or during daily activities.
The trigger is the biggest mystery of the pistol. My trigger gauge says it breaks a 5.5 pounds. My finger says it is actually better than my P320X5, which before today was the gold standard in striker fired triggers. That doesn’t make sense, but it reflects in shooting as well. There is a small bit of takeup, then a clean break. The trigger geometry must include unicorn horns, or the SIG Engineers filled it with voodoo. I have no idea why, but the trigger feels a lot lighter than that when you shoot it. I was actually going to call them out for putting a 3 pound trigger in a carry gun before I gauged it. Whatever the reason, it makes the P365 run both extremely fast, and group very accurate.
Reliability wise, the P365 has that in spades too. I ran 500 rounds through the gun with no hiccups. And for most of that, I was also running my thumb on the side of the slide. It ate hollow points and ball, as fast as I could shoot them. I heard some rumors about reliability, so I actually took the P365 further than I needed to. I also fed it a box of Tula steel case, the worst ammo I have ever seen outside of the third world. The bangs might not have all sounded the same, but every round went off and ejected.
Recoil is extremely manageable in this gun as well. Using full power 9mm, I can barely tell the difference between the P365 and a full sized gun. That is also without explanation. If you watch my video, you will see the gun stays very flat throughout shooting. The grip has enough texture to help, but not enough to explain this alone. The recoil system is a dual spring design, but the slide feels no harder to manually rack than any other CCW gun. The bore axis is low, but not the lowest in class. That has the side benefit of not giving you slide bite as well.
I have long advocated using a CCW gun that is big enough to hang onto, and at first glance, this would not have fit the bill. But somehow, in use, it does. The gun points well, like an extension of your arm. The only odd part for me now is the draw, as I am looking for a tiny grip to lock up on. With training time, that will go away too. I never thought I would say this, but the P365 isn’t just a good carry gun. It is a good do anything gun. With the capacity on board and a potential of 12+1 with extended mags, there is no reason it can’t. This gun is literally good enough to run 6 plate racks or compete in IDPA, and still be your gas station carry piece. I have never seen a pistol more worthy of fitting the EVERYTHING GUN description.
Let us not forget, a CCW gun is part of a system. The other parts of that system are holsters, magazines, and other daily carry items. Holsters can be a bear to find for a new gun, and we are always looking for the next great thing. With the P365 coming up, I made a discovery of excellent holsters that I can highly recommend. I put in a call to Detroit Holster, and I was very happy with the results. I opted to order two models, the 8 Mile, and the Dix.
The Detroit Holster 8 mile is an IWB holster, kydex, with a belt clip. The cant is optional for 15 degrees forward, 30 degrees forward, or straight up and down.
The Dix is a minimalist holster, that covers pretty much just the trigger guard. A loop of 550 secures the holster to your belt, and a simple pull frees your weapon.
Both showed attention to detail that is way above par, such as kydex wings to cover the mag release, keeping it from dropping free in your pants. It is apparent from examination and use, Detroit Holster is run by people that carry guns. Thought has gone into every detail, and the holsters are amazingly comfortable.
8 Mile and Dex.
The fit is perfect for the gun, a sign of excellent craftsmen. I am very surprised I haven’t heard of Detroit Holster before, and I thought about keeping this to myself to keep my wait times down. Whatever your carry gun, this shop is one you want to check out.
The holster partially covers the mag release to help prevent the mag from getting dropped during carry.
The front sight features an oversized bright green ring, which is perfect for daylight use.
The rear sights have a shelf for one-handed manipulation, should the need arise.
Following the February 14th mass shooting at the Stoneman Douglas School in Parkland, Florida, a newly impassioned debate has erupted, as follows every mass shooting in the US, about how to prevent such events from reoccurring.
One side focuses on easy civilian access to military-style guns, such as the AR-15 semi-automatic rifle. The other focuses on the individuals who perpetrate these acts, in particular their mental health.
We wanted to contribute to the conversation by analyzing the gun manufacturers, to understand: how many such guns are being produced, how much revenue and profit is generated from their sale.
We found there are currently at least 23 different models of AR-15 available for civilian purchase in the US, from 18 different manufacturers. Of these, 15 are private companies, while 3 are publicly-traded. We found no clear correlation between mass shootings and changes in the gun manufacturers’ share price. Two of the three companies have diversified into outdoor products, and changed their corporate names to deemphasize their firearm brands.
In the most deadly 12 mass shootings in the US in the past decade, a total of 270 people were killed. In 8 of these shootings, an AR-15 style semi-automatic rifle was used.
The most commonly used AR-15 was the Smith & Wesson M&P15, manufactured by American Outdoor Brands Corporation, used in 3 of the shootings. The next most commonly used AR-15 was the Bushmaster XM-15, manufactured by Remington Outdoor Company used in 2 of the shootings.
We examined financial filings of the public gun manufacturers to understand how many such rifles are produced and how much money is generated from their sale.
Public Firearms Manufacturers – Key Data
The table shows that all 3 of the public gun manufacturers have a stock market value less than $1 Billion, and all three have experienced declining stock market value, sales and profits during the past year.
Since the launch of the March for our Lives movement, it will be interesting to see if demand for firearms increases, stoked by fears among gun enthusiasts that stricter regulation may be ahead.
The largest US gun manufacturers
Previously named Smith & Wesson Holding Corp, the company rebranded as American Outdoor Brands in 2017.
American Outdoor Brands Corporation, Net Sales, 2015-17 ($ millions)
AOBC’s Long Guns revenue doubled from 2015 to 2017. In 2017, AOBC shipped 420,000 Long guns, of which 93% were to Consumers and 7% to the Professional channel such as law enforcement. From these figures, we calculated that AOBC generated an average of $428 per long gun shipped. The company employed 2,204 people as of May 2017, an increase of 19% from May 2016.
Vista Outdoor was incorporated in 2014 as a combination of Alliant Techsystems and other brands and businesses, which were combined into two business lines — Shooting Sports and Outdoor Products.
Vista Outdoors, Net Sales, 2015-17 ($ millions)
In Outdoor Products, Vista has 35 brands including Camelbak, Serengeti, Bollé and Eagle. In Shooting Sports, it has 12 brands including Savage Arms, which makes the MSR-15 semi-automatic rifle. Approximately 54% of its 2017 sales were in Firearms.
Sturm Ruger was founded in 1949 and manufactures rifles, pistols, revolvers, accessories and castings, including the SR-556 semi-automatic rifle. Unlike AOBC and Vista who have diversified into Outdoor Products, Ruger is a pure-play firearms manufacturer.
The company had 1,838 employees as at December 2017, a reduction of 13% from the previous year.
While not public, Remington publishes financial filings because it has publicly issued debt. Remington was founded in 1816 and manufacturers Modern Sport Rifles under the Remington, Bushmaster and DPMS brands, as well as Ammunition, and Outdoor Products.
Remington; Net Sales, 2014-16 ($ millions)
On March 25th, 2018, Remington filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy, allowing it to restructure its $700 million debt while continuing its operations. Its owner Cerberus Capital Management reportedly plans to cease ownership of the company following the restructuring. As at March 30, 2017, Remington had approximately 3,500 employees, and is headquartered in Madison, North Carolina.
Shareholders in the leading gun manufacturers
This table aggregates the largest 5 shareholders in each of the 3 public gun manufacturers.
From this we see, there is a very high concentration of ownership in a small number of shareholders. For example, the top 5 shareholders in Vista Outdoors own 53% of the company. In Ruger, the top 5 hold 47%, and in AOBC the Top 5 hold over one third of the company. Across all 3, BlackRock, the largest asset manager in the world, holds 13% of the combined shares of these 3 companies, while Vanguard holds 9%, and Fidelity 7%. The 10 shareholders above hold 45% of the entire sector.
Share Price Movements Following Mass Shootings
We looked to see if there was any discernible pattern in gun manufacturer share price following the 12 most deadly mass shooting incidents of the past decade. We compared each company’s share price 1 day prior to the mass shooting to its share price 5 trading days after.
Across the periods, the median 5 day share price change was +6% for AOBC, +3% for Ruger and -1% for Vista. In total, 19 of the movements were positive and 11 were negative, roughly a 2:1 ratio of positive share price movements to negative. One possible theory is that high profile shootings spur consumer demand for guns, due to fears that the events may lead to stricter gun controls, and increased future demand then results in higher share prices.
The gun manufacturers’ view
Following the Stoneman Douglas shooting, the largest shareholder in American Outdoor Brands Corporation, BlackRock, sent written questions asking about AOBC’s response to the shooting, in which one of AOBC firearms, the Smith & Wesson M&P15 was used.
AOBC published a response reaffirming its role in preserving the Second Amendment of the Constitution, and emphasizing that it is a fully law-abiding organization, which obeys each of the hundreds of regulations that apply to it at the Federal, State and Local levels. AOBC wrote:
“While the vast majority of our products are used lawfully, we are aware that sometimes people engage in horrible, criminal acts with our products. However, calls for us to monitor the illegal use of our firearms are misguided, since doing so would be ineffective in preventing such misuse. In addition, such monitoring by us is not realistic or feasible. As a practical matter, it is no more realistic or feasible for us to monitor whether our legal firearms are used in criminal ways, than it is for a car manufacturer to monitor how often a drunken driver causes a tragic accident with one of their vehicles, or for a mobile phone company to monitor whether its mobile devices are used in terrorist activities.”
“We firmly believe that the best way to stop the criminal use of firearms and the violence associated with it, is to enforce the laws that already exist, and to focus stronger efforts on prosecuting those who break them.”
The vision of firearm manufacturers focuses on the fully legal use of their products for hunting, sport shooting and self-defense. When it comes to criminal usage, the manufacturers believe deeply that they are not responsible.
Following the Stoneman Douglas massacre, the March for our Lives movement has renewed calls for two laws in particular: to ban weapons designated “assault weapons” including AR-15 style rifles, and large capacity magazines. While media attention has focused most heavily on the NRA on one hand and gun control advocates on the other, we hope it has been helpful to examine the commercial organizations relevant to the debate, namely the companies that manufacture these firearms.
In this video I demonstrate how a box stock cheap .22 single action revolver can fire faster than a semi automatic pistol and perform the “two shots as one” trick.
Those on the left end of the political spectrum are constantly attempting to push the “Smart Gun” as if it’s some sort of magical device that will end all violence. It isn’t, of course, and you can easily fire any locked smart gun and it’ll only cost you $15.
Much to the chagrin of gun control activists everywhere, for the first time, a skilled hacker has taken a deep look into the security mechanisms of one leading example of a “smart gun.” A smart gun is one of those authenticated firearms, meaning only its owner may actually fire the weapon. The argument for the smart gun has been in the pockets of hoplophobes for years. But now, one hacker has found that if smart guns are going to become a reality, they’ll need to be much smarter than the one he hacked.
At the Defcon hacker conference later this week, a hacker who goes by the pseudonym Plore plans to show off a series of critical vulnerabilities he found in the Armatix IP1, a smart gun whose German manufacturer Armatix has claimed its electronic security measures will “usher in a new era of gun safety.” Plore discovered, and demonstrated to WIRED at a remote Colorado firing range, that he could hack the gun with a disturbing variety of techniques, all captured in the video. –WIRED
The IP1 purports to limit who can fire it by requiring that the shooter wears a special Armatix watch. If the gun and the watch can’t connect via a short-range radio signal that extends just a few inches, the gun won’t fire. But Plore shows how anyone can get around the simple technology. Plore showed that he can extend the range of the watch’s radio signal, allowing anyone to fire the gun when it’s more than ten feet away. But that’s not all.
Plore was able to jam the gun’s radio signals to prevent its owner from firing it even when the watch is inches away and connected. He also showed that he can mechanically disable the gun’s locking mechanism by placing some cheap magnets alongside its barrel, firing the gun at will even when the watch is completely absent.
Plore says that the politicized debate over smart guns hasn’t examined the far more basic question of whether they actually provide the security they promise. “If you buy one of these weapons thinking it’ll be safer, it should be,” Plore says. “In this case, it was so easily defeated, in so many ways, that it really failed to live up to its side of that bargain…Misplaced trust is worse than no trust at all.”
But what does one expect when those who hate guns and seek violent government policies to control those who own them get involved in things they know little about? It stands to reason that the market will continue to find ways around the left’s insistence on more laws.
Delivered by The Daily Sheeple
“Any person who from January 1, 2001 to December 31, 2016 inclusive, lawfully possessed an assault weapon that does not have a fixed magazine as defined in Penal Code … including those weapons with an ammunition feeding device that can be readily removed from the firearm with the use of a tool (commonly referred to as a bullet-button weapon) must register the firearm before January 1, 2018,” the State of California mandated in a May regulation notice.
It’s grand of them to finally share that with us, particularly after an earlier notice advised “The draft regulations are not open for public comment due to the exemption set forth in [the] Penal Code … Per the stated exemption, the Department is not required to provide further clarification.”
It would not have been surprising had they added “So there.”
Still, as the antis often ask us about guns, how many so-called “assault weapon” bans does “the Golden State” need?
They already had a 1989 ban on specific firearm models. A follow-up ban 10 years later on cosmetic characteristics inspired The New York Times to proclaim, “California enacts the toughest ban on assault guns.”
“This is a prototype for reasonable gun-control legislation,” the measure’s sponsor, State Senator Don Perata (holder of an elite “may issue” concealed carry permit), said at the time. “And if it can be done in California, I would argue that it can be done in the United States as a whole.”
That, of course, is one of the goals, along with promoting rabid gun-grabbers as the arbiters of what is “reasonable.”
As for the new edict, assuming a firearm was ‘legally acquired on or before December 31, 2016” and other qualifiers are met, there are all kinds of other hoops gun owners will be required to jump through. That includes typical and expected registration stuff, like name and identifying information for both the owner and the gun. They have to know who you are, what you’ve got and where they can find it (and you). “Common sense gun safety” and all.
Not content with just that, the gun-haters in Sacramento are also requiring “joint registration,” and I’m not talking about for legalized weed (see “A Mess of Pottage,” October 2016 issue). This decree applies if you want to be able to share enjoyment of your property with qualifying family members, and requires a “primary registrant” along with “acceptable forms” of “proof of address for each joint registrant.”
As an aside, compare that to “progressives” objecting to Voter ID laws because they claim proving you are eligible to vote “disenfranchises minorities.” You’ll note they never pull that argument when it comes to gun ownership requirements.
Imagine the cow they’d have if those voters were also required to have Internet access, because that’s also a mandate.
“Assault weapon registrations must be filed electronically using the Department’s California Firearms Application Reporting System (CFARS)” the order specifies.
That shows nothing if not bureaucratic zeal, and the motivation appears to be gloating, in-your-face harassment. Because half-a-year in, California gun owners are still unable to comply with the new “law’s” requirements. The utility to register isn’t working yet. At this writing, this language still appears on the California Department of Justice website in bold red letters:
“UPDATE AS OF Thu Jun 01 2017 15:10:35 GMT-0400 (Eastern Daylight Time) : The ability to register an Assault Weapon … is not yet available… Assault Weapon registration regulations must be effective before any registrations can take place. At this time, the regulations are still pending, however they should be effective in the very near future. Please continue to check the Bureau of Firearms website for updates.”
But wait, there’s more!
Because now imagine those “disenfranchised voters” also being required to own a digital camera. Gun owners are required to provide “Clear digital photos of firearms listed on the application.
“One photo shall depict the bullet button-style magazine release installed on the firearm,” the regulations order. “One photo shall depict the firearm from the end of the barrel to the end of the stock if it is a long gun or the point furthest from the end of the barrel if it is a pistol. The other two photos shall show the left side of the receiver/frame and right side of the receiver/frame.
“These locations are typically where firearms are marked when manufacturing is complete,” the instructions elaborate. “At the discretion of the Department the last two photos shall be substituted for photos of identification markings at some other locations on the firearm.”
“Discretion”? How? When? It’s like they’re trying to create compliance violations based on applicants not knowing what the … uh … heck they want.
For a “Firearm Manufactured By Unlicensed Subject (FMBUS),” there’s a department-issued serial number that needs to be taken in to a “Federal Firearms Licensed Manufacturer (type 07),” who is “under no obligation to perform this work.” Alternatively, “Persons who have manufactured their own firearm may also use non-licensed parties to apply the serial number and other required markings, however, the owner of the weapon must not leave the firearm unattended with an unlicensed party in violation of firearms transfer and/or lending laws.”
Then there are the fees, “$15.00 per person per transaction.” If you want “a copy of the original registration disposition letter,” that’ll be another 5 bucks. And they’ll only accept payment via credit or debit card.
Again, think of those “disenfranchised” voters.
Then think of something else. Think of the Second Amendment. Think of “shall not be infringed.” Think of the Founders who envisioned an armed citizenry capable of meeting “enemies foreign and domestic” with equivalent weaponry.
Here’s what it boils down to: Those of us who believe government exists to serve the people believe we have a right to keep and bear arms. Those who believe people exist to serve the government believe we do not.
The California Rifle and Pistol Association, with the backing of the National Rifle Association Institute for Legislative Action, filed a lawsuit in April challenging the new ban. It will go through the courts for years. When it reaches the “liberal” Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, expect them to cite precedent and side with the state. When that’s appealed to the Supreme Court, all they need do for the law to stand is… nothing. If they decline hearing the case, the law will stand. And even if they hear it, there are no outcome guarantees.
In the mean time, gun owners have been dictated the terms of their unconditional surrender. Obey or be declared a criminal, and suffer all the penalties the state can bring down on your head to make an example of you to everyone else. Or flee to another state; one of those Don Perata envisioned exporting his “reasonable” disarmament to.
Let’s work toward reclaiming our right to keep and bear arms, heeding Patrick Henry’s warning to “guard with jealous attention the public liberty.” And let’s hope the Supreme Court ends up doing the right thing.
If they don’t, you’re going to have to ask yourself “What would Captain John Parker do?” If you don’t know who he was, you probably ought to make it a point to find out.
President Barack Obama has forgiven 107 federal inmates who were convicted of gun crimes during his administration while at the same time pushing for stricter gun controls, according to a story in The Washington Times.
According to the Times report, of those 107 who were either pardoned or had their sentences commuted, their dealings with a gun included:
Yet this is the President who repeatedly calls for reform to keep guns out of the wrong hands.
“This is the most incredible hypocrisy,” Erich Pratt, executive director of Gun Owners of America, told the Times. “The president has commuted the sentences of dangerous criminals who were convicted of gun-related charges. But then, he does everything in his power to block law-abiding gun owners from purchasing firearms.”
The Times reports Obama has forgiven a total north of 600 federal inmates, more than his nine predecessors combined. And just last week gave this explanation as to why.
“Our focus really has been on people who we think were overcharged and people who we do not believe have a propensity towards violence,” the Times quoted Obama.
Apparently 107 felons who carried guns while selling drugs don’t count as having a propensity for violence.
“On one hand, the Obama administration is attempting to limit law-abiding Americans from exercising their Second Amendment right and protecting themselves from harm,” Sen. Richard C. Shelby, R-Ala., told the Times. “On the other hand, the president will let criminals with firearm-related offenses off easy.”
“Irish Democracy,” the phenomenon by which the general members of a polity resist the mandates of their would-be rulers by simply refusing to comply with them. It is a low-cost form of civil disobedience, but one that can be very effective at times: Mohandas K. Gandhi was entirely correct in his famous declaration to the British powers that they would eventually be forced to simply pack up their tiffin pails and go home, because 300,000 Englishman could not control 300 million (at the time) Indians if those Indians didn’t cooperate.
One way of considering the radical potential of simple noncompliance is the “10 percent synchronous subversion factor,” the proposition that if 10 percent of the U.S. population refused to (for instance) pay taxes or answer jury-duty summonses, then the rules would have to change, because they would be unenforceable: There aren’t enough tax agents, constables, slots on court dockets, or jail cells to enforce the rules against 32 million Americans if they should decide to refuse to comply with a given law.
For example, the prospect of local-yokel police going door to door anywhere in California, Fallujah-style, trying to collect nonconforming firearms from people on unconstitutional alphabet .gov agency no rights lists is humorous to contemplate. In kind, contemplating the same sort of development in Texas or Wyoming is rather less amusing, because at that point the model of resistance would stop being Irish democracy and almost certainly would mutate into something a lot more like Lexington and Concord. No decent, patriotic person wants to see that.
Nor does one relish the idea of police forces being obliged to choose between attempting to enforce an illegal and unconstitutional order and ceding the interpretation of constitutional law to mob-ocracy. Even for those of us who understand why the Second Amendment exists and who endorse the reasoning behind it, trusting in the prudence of large, armed crowds of 21st-century Americans requires an act of faith well in excess of the evidence.
The hallmark episode of Irish democracy in the American setting is Prohibition, which is a cautionary tale — and not only for the would-be modern prohibitionist. Prohibition demonstrated several things to the American public, which took the lesson to heart: Politicians are entirely capable of making stupid laws when in the grips of voguish thinking; the American people are more than capable of ignoring and subverting those laws; that subversion often is met with ruthlessness and brutality on the part of law enforcement, but enforcement is by no means even-handed; hypocrisy, like alcohol, is a useful social lubricant in moderation but debilitating in excess; social tensions reveal who has political power and who doesn’t, casting a harsh bright light on Lenin’s fundamental question — “Who? Whom?”; and law enforcement is just as corruptible as any other institution. Prohibition did a lot of damage by providing an enduring model of organized crime, but it also undermined Americans’ faith in the rule of law as such: Favoritism in enforcement, bribery, and institutional incapacity severely damaged the law’s prestige. We have never really quite recovered.
Our new prohibitionists are a lot like the old ones. The nice corduroy-clad liberals in places such as Georgetown and the Upper West Side use guns as a stand-in for the sort of people who own guns in much the same way as the old WASP prohibitionists used booze as a stand-in for the sort of people who drank too much: Irish and other Catholics, especially immigrants, and especially poor immigrants. The horror at “gun culture” is about the culture — rural, conservative, traditionalist, patriotic, self-reliant or at least aspiring to self-reliance — much more than it is about the guns. It’s the same sort of dynamic that gets people worked up about Confederate flags or poor white people with diabetes who shop at Wal-Mart. A little dose of Irish democracy is an excellent thing in response to that, especially when it is coming from California and Connecticut rather than Oklahoma and Alabama. But winning the fight on gun rights while losing the fight on the rule of law is the very definition of a Pyrrhic victory. It is necessary that we also prevail politically and legally, which we have been, thanks in no small part to the efforts of the NRA and affiliated groups, as well as the increasingly sensible view of the American public that what’s wrong with mass shooters has more to do with the mental-health system — and that what’s wrong with Chicago has something to do with that, too, inasmuch as the inmates are running that particular asylum.
The Supreme Court has been more than clear, on more than one occasion, that the Second Amendment says what it means and means what it says. We also have a long legal and constitutional tradition that prohibits stripping people of their civil rights — including their Second Amendment rights — without due process, generally in the form of an indictment and a trial and a conviction. If the Democrats want to do away with the Second Amendment, let them begin the amendment process and see how far they get. We should challenge them to do so at every opportunity. In reality, the Democrats have declared war on the First Amendment, voting in the Senate to repeal it; they have declared war on the Second Amendment at every turn; they also have declared war on due process and, in doing so, on the idea of the rule of law itself, beginning with the notion of “innocent until proven guilty.” That isn’t liberalism — it’s totalitarianism. That’s a winnable fight, and we should welcome it.
There are now more non-military government employees who carry guns than there are U.S. Marines, according to a new report.
Open the Books, a taxpayer watchdog group, released a study Wednesday that finds domestic government agencies continue to grow their stockpiles of military-style weapons, as Democrats sat on the House floor calling for more restrictions on what guns American citizens can buy.
The “Militarization of America” report found civilian agencies spent $1.48 billion on guns, ammunition, and military-style equipment between 2006 and 2014. Examples include IRS agents with AR-15s, and EPA bureaucrats wearing camouflage.
“Regulatory enforcement within administrative agencies now carries the might of military-style equipment and weapons,” Open the Books said. “For example, the Food and Drug Administration includes 183 armed ‘special agents,’ a 50 percent increase over the ten years from 1998-2008. At Health and Human Services (HHS), ‘Special Office of Inspector General Agents’ are now trained with sophisticated weaponry by the same contractors who train our military special forces troops.”
Open the Books found there are now over 200,000 non-military federal officers with arrest and firearm authority, surpassing the 182,100 personnel who are actively serving in the U.S. Marines Corps.
The IRS spent nearly $11 million on guns, ammunition, and military-style equipment for its 2,316 special agents. The tax collecting agency has billed taxpayers for pump-action and semi-automatic shotguns, semi-automatic Smith & Wesson M&P15s, and Heckler & Koch H&K 416 rifles, which can be loaded with 30-round magazines.
The EPA spent $3.1 million on guns, ammo, and equipment, including drones, night vision, “camouflage and other deceptive equipment,” and body armor.
When asked about the spending, and EPA spokesman said the report “cherry picks information and falsely misrepresents the work of two administrations whose job is to protect public health.”
“Many purchases were mischaracterized or blown out of proportion in the report,” said spokesman Nick Conger. “EPA’s criminal enforcement program has not purchased unmanned aircraft, and the assertions that military-grade weapons are part of its work are false.”
“EPA’s criminal enforcement program investigates and prosecutes the most egregious violators of our nation’s environmental laws, and EPA criminal enforcement agents are law enforcement professionals who have undergone the same rigorous training as other federal agents,” Conger continued.
Other administration agencies that have purchased guns and ammo include the Small Business Administration, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the Department of Education, and the National Institute of Standards and Technology.
The report also highlighted that the Department of Health and Human Services has “special agents” with “sophisticated military-style weapons.” Open the Books also found $42 million in gun and ammunition purchases that were incorrectly coded.
“Some purchases were actually for ping-pong balls, gym equipment, bread, copiers, cotton balls, or cable television including a line item from the Coast Guard entered as ‘Cable Dude,’” the report said.
Open the Books appealed to both liberals like Bernie Sanders—who has called for demilitarizing local police departments—and conservatives in its report.
“Conservatives argue that it is hypocritical for political leaders to undermine the Second Amendment while simultaneously equipping non-military agencies with hollow-point bullets and military style equipment,” Open the Books said. “One could argue the federal government itself has become a gun show that never adjourns with dozens of agencies continually shopping for new firearms.”
Update June 23, 10:15 a.m.: Following publication of this article, Adam Andrzejewski, the CEO of Open the Books who wrote the report, pushed back against the EPA’s statement, and provided contract data to back up his claims.
“How can the EPA spokesperson deny hard facts from their own checkbook?” he said. “Alongside our oversight report, OpenTheBooks.com also released a PDF of all raw data. This line-by-line transactional record from the EPA’s own checkbook on page 113 clearly shows that in 2013 and 2014 the EPA purchased tens of thousands of dollars of ‘Unmanned Aircraft’ from Bergen RC Helicopters Inc which on a net basis amounted to approximately $34,000.”
“All of the assertions in our oversight report are the quantification of actual spending records produced and reported to us by the federal agencies themselves,” Andrzejewski said.
Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is coming for your guns.
Oh, don’t expect her to say that during a campaign speech covered by the media or in an op-ed in The New York Times. But when she’s among friends and doesn’t realize she’s being recorded, she’s apparently a little more open about her plans.
The Washington Free Beacon recently obtained an audio recording of Clinton’s remarks to what was obviously a liberal, anti-gun crowd at a “small private fundraiser in New York” — which is the only kind of crowd to be found at a Clinton fundraiser in New York, most likely.
Clinton told donors that the Supreme Court was “wrong on the Second Amendment.”
“And I am going to make that case every chance I get,” she added.
Clinton must have felt right at home with the enthusiastic crowd and her Greenwich Village host, convicted felon John Zaccaro. Perhaps after her remarks she sought his advice as to which minimum security federal prisons had the best cafeterias, but that’s only speculation.
Clinton has expressed support in the past for a ban on “assault weapons” similar to the largely ineffectual ban passed by Congress and signed into law by her husband, President Bill Clinton. That ban was allowed to expire under President George W. Bush.
“I was proud when my husband took (the National Rifle Association) on, and we were able to ban assault weapons, but he had to put a sunset on so 10 years later, of course, Bush wouldn’t agree to reinstate them,” said Clinton.
That’s because Bush knew that such bans do little more than impinge upon the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding Americans — something Clinton, despite her constant claims to be the “experienced” candidate for president, doesn’t appear to have figured out yet.
Clinton also criticized the NRA and promised to work to counter the lobbying influence of the organization.
“I’m going to speak out, I’m going to do everything I can to rally people against this pernicious, corrupting influence of the NRA,” she said. “And we’re going to do whatever we can.”
“The idea that you can have an open carry permit with an AK-47 over your shoulder walking up and down the aisles of a supermarket is just despicable,” Clinton added.
What she didn’t explain was “why.” Why, exactly, is this idea “just despicable”? How many gun owners have legally carried an AK-47 or similar weapon into a supermarket and committed a crime? Have there been 100 such crimes? A dozen?
And if the answer is none — and one would think she’d be spouting examples left and right if she had any examples to spout — then what exactly would the point of a ban on such behavior be?
I think we all know the answer to that question, but you can listen to her comments here (if you can stand it) and decide for yourself:
One of your key advantages over online sellers and big-box retailers is that you can provide face-to-face service. Teaching your customers how to properly zero and run optics is a great opportunity to show customers your expertise and provide some extra value that your online competitors can’t. There are at least two common ways to properly zero a scope — the “mash” method and the “math” method.
The “mash” method involves firing a carefully aimed shot at a target downrange, then realigning the sights with the original point of aim. A partner “mashes” the rifle into the sandbags or supports, holding the rifle so the crosshairs are perfectly on the original aiming point. The shooter adjusts the windage and elevation turrets until the crosshairs are centered on the actual impact point. The “mashing” part is important, as the rifle cannot move while the shooter is adjusting the scope. In theory, this method is a way to zero a scope with one shot, but I don’t think it’s particularly precise or convenient.
The “math” method involves a little teaching that you can do right in your store to help your customer understand the basic principles of how scopes and turret adjustments work. I’m convinced this is an area of great educational opportunity, as I see shooters at the range going through boxes of ammo while furiously spinning adjustment dials until they finally leave in frustration with a still un-zeroed optic.
The first step is to make sure the optic is properly mounted and with the correct amount of torque on both ring, screws and bases. Mounting a scope is in itself a great service opportunity for your store, as doing it right will require a couple of pieces of equipment that most customers won’t have readily available — a torque wrench and perhaps a ring lapping kit if you want to get fancy. If you do decide to provide optic-mounting service for customers who buy scopes from your store, it will be worth your while to invest in a bit of equipment. Most optics and ring vendors will specify their preferred mounting torque, but if not, tightening scope rings to 25 inch-pounds is a good rule of thumb. That will hold the scope steady without bending the tube.
Once the scope is properly mounted, it’s time to plan out the zeroing strategy. Most scopes are consistent enough with their elevation and windage adjustments that you can plan the required adjustments on paper after firing a couple of shots. The actual results after the theoretical adjustment will be close to the desired result. The theoretical calculation is fairly easy, as every modern scope I’ve seen has units of adjustment printed right on the windage and elevation dials. The most common measurements seem to be ¼-MOA-per-click, although I frequently see ½-MOA-per-click and .1-Mils-per-click adjustment increments.
A minute of angle (MOA) is an angular measurement that translates to just over 1 inch at 100 yards. Since angular measurements are proportional, you simply adjust for any other distance. If one MOA is 1 inch at 100 yards, then one MOA is ½-inch at 50 yards, since 50 yards is half the distance of 100 yards. Likewise, one MOA is ¼-inch at 25 yards and 2-inches at 200 yards. Understanding the concept of minutes of angle is critical to easy scope zeroing and use, as it allows you to easily match the actual point of impact with the crosshairs of the scope at any distance. The best part is that you can educate your customer on this in the store using their new scope as a teaching aid.
I recommend firing a three-shot group at a target 100 yards downrange. Why three shots? As you’re giving advice in the store, you really can’t evaluate the shooting skill of your customer. Are they a hunter who pulls the trigger a half dozen times a year or a competitive shooter who fires thousands of shots per month? A carefully fired, three-shot group will establish an average position that shows the difference between the point of aim and point of impact.
Once the initial three-shot group is fired at 100 yards, it’s time to evaluate how far the center of the group is from the aiming point. The easy way to do this is to use sighting targets with 1-inch grid patterns. If the center of the group is two squares above and one square to the left of center, that tells you that the scope needs to be adjusted 2 inches down and 1 inch to the right. Be sure to sell sighting targets in your store!
Now that we know how far the point of impact is from the point of aim, it’s time to implement the math. Going back to your example, suppose the bullets hit 2 inches high and 1 inch left. Now it’s time to correlate that difference in point of impact with the effect of each click of the windage and elevation dials. If this scope is a ¼-MOA-per-click variety, then each click will move the point of impact ¼-inch at 100 yards. We’ll need to spin the elevation dial enough to move the point of impact down 2 inches. Since each click is ¼-inch, that would be eight clicks down. We also have to adjust 1 inch to the right, or four clicks to the right using the windage dial.
Remember, the directional arrows on scope dials and turrets imply the direction you want the bullet to move. If the windage turret has an arrow pointing counter-clockwise and marked with an “R,” then each click in that direction will move the bullet impact to the right.
Once the theoretical adjustment has been made, it’s time to shoot another three-shot group. Odds are pretty good that the new group will be just about right at the point of aim. If there is a slight variance, then just redo the math, make click adjustments as needed and retest the group.
Is it possible to zero a scope with fewer shots? Absolutely — but remember, you’re giving instruction to a shooter of unknown experience and skill in your store and you won’t be at the range to help. Your best bet is to educate the customer on the process and underlying science in order to improve their chances of success at the range.
‘Gun violence restraining order’ law raises questions from pro-gun groups and lawmakers about civil liberties and how effective it will really be.
The statute allows for law enforcement or ‘immediate family members’ to ask a judge for a restraining order if they feel that someone is a danger to themselves or others. Photograph: Julie Dermansky/Corbis
A California gun statute going into effect on 1 January gives the police or family members the option to petition the courts to seize the guns and ammunition of someone they think poses a threat, the first law of its kind in the country.
But the “gun violence restraining order” law, passed last year, has raised concerns from lawmakers and pro-gun groups about civil liberties and questions about how effective it will really be.
Modeled after firearms prohibitions in domestic violence restraining orders, the statute allows for law enforcement or “immediate family members” to ask a judge for a restraining order if they feel that someone is a danger to themselves or others. The order would also bar the person from purchasing a firearm by placing them on the state’s do-not-buy list.
Former California assemblywoman Nancy Skinner introduced the bill, AB 1014, in 2014, just two days after a 22-year-old man, Elliot Rodger, went on a murderous rampage in Isla Vista, California, killing six people and then himself.
“The shooter’s mother and his father were aware that this man was basically threatening violence,” Skinner, a Democrat, said this month. “They did everything they felt they had the ability to do to try to intervene to stop their son from doing something violent, but they didn’t have any tools.”
Republican assemblywoman Melissa Melendez said she voted against the bill because she believed it violated due process by seizing guns without a hearing for 21 days. She did successfully amend the law’s language to allow for a gun owner to sell or store their guns with a licensed firearms dealer.
To request a firearms restraining order, a petitioner has to tell the court why they believe someone presents a danger to themselves or others because they are in possession of a gun or intend to get one. The petitioner also has to explain why a restraining order is necessary to keep the subject of the order from harming anyone.
If the order is granted, a judge can issue a temporary firearms restraining order within 24 hours. The subject would then be served with the order and would have to surrender their guns and ammunition within 24 hours.
Before the order expires, a judge decides at a hearing attended by both parties whether to terminate the order and return the subject’s firearms and ammunition, or extend the order for a year.
Before the order expires, a judge reviews evidence – which can include written witness testimony, photos, damaged property, threatening messages – and decides at a hearing attended by both parties whether to terminate the order and return the subject’s firearms and ammunition, or extend the order for a year.
“It’s really designed so that if you really feel that the person you’re concerned about is really making credible threats of violence to themselves or others that you can get the police to act very quickly,” Skinner said.
But you “still have a due process so that if the person feels like that was acted on maliciously and they can demonstrate that they’re not really a threat or they’re not at risk – they can get their weapons back in a pretty quick period of time if that’s the case,” she added.
It will become clearer after petitions begin to flow through the California courts what kind of evidence, minimally, could result in the issuance of a temporary firearms restraining order.
If the order is extended for a year, a gun owner may petition the courts once to get their weapons back during that time. After that, they may petition again if the restraining order is renewed for a second year.
“Every once in a while, there will be a case where a family knows that someone needs serious help and shouldn’t have guns,” said Adam Winkler, a UCLA law professor and author of Gunfight: The Battle Over the Right to Bear Arms in America. “But it’s not going to be a panacea.
It’s not going to radically change the number of mass shootings or even slightly change the number of mass shootings. And it’s not going to likely have significant effect in reducing gun violence just because it’s going to be used only exceptionally.”
Still, for some pro-gun groups any gun control is too much regulation, and an infringement on second amendment rights.
“In California we have no more loopholes. They have already tried and done everything regarding gun control,” said Sam Paredes, executive director of Gun Owners of California. “It’s a knee jerk reaction that would do nothing to prevent the incident that inspired it.”
The term “immediate family member”, according to the new law, includes a range of relatives, blood ties or not. It also includes anyone who has “within the last six months, regularly resided” in the same household.
Additionally, court documents state that even if you don’t have the necessary relationship, you may notify law enforcement of a potential problem, and an officer could investigate and file a petition for the order.
According to the California department of justice, as of 11 December 2015, there were 13,305 people actively prohibited from owning or possessing a firearm.
Posted 2nd Amendment-Right To Bare Arms, The Arms Trade Treaty – UN Office for Disarmament Affairs, U.N. The Arms Trade Treaty (ATT), United Nations Disarmament, United Nations Institute for Disarmament Researchin
– First Arms Trade Treaty Conference of States Parties Concludes in Cancun.
A quiet development, which has escaped the attention of both the American people and the media, comes with the a warning to all gun owners: Disarmament.
Conventional arms – The right to own, buy, sell, trade, or transfer all means of armed resistance, including handguns, ammunition/munitions, can be denied to civilians by the the U.N. Arms Trade Treaty (ATT) which will enter into force on 24 December 2015.
The U.N. is hailing the ATT as a new chapter in collective efforts to bring responsibility, accountability and transparency to the global arms trade.
This last summer, at a resort in Mexico, representatives of the U.S. government met with delegations from other countries to gauge just how far America is willing to go in letting the United Nations repeal the right of Americans to keep and bear arms.
The First Conference of States Parties (CSP) to the Arms Trade Treaty was held from August 24 to 27 in Cancun, Mexico. Attendees promulgated rules for future meetings, set budgets for enforcement of the terms of the treaty, and, perhaps most importantly, established procedural rules that will determine how much power agencies of the international body will have over future domestic enforcement mechanisms.
In a statement issued at the conclusion of the conference, representatives of the European Union praised Mexico for taking leadership in the effort to eradicate “illicit arms” from the globe and promised that the EU would “actively contribute” in the enforcement of the terms of the treaty worldwide.
It is ironic that Mexico would assert itself into the arms control controversy given that the country is notoriously dangerous and is known as the home of some of the region’s bloodiest violence, most of which is perpetrated by gangs who live in defiance of existing gun laws and would undoubtedly feel no compulsion to comply with any additional attempts to squelch the shooting. Mexican globalists insist that there is an “urgent need” to ramp up enforcement of the disarmament treaty as the guns being bought, sold, traded, and manufactured by their northern neighbor — the United States — could and has easily worked their way into Mexico and the only way to prevent that potentiality is to eliminate civilian access to weapons in America.
Assistant Secretary of State Thomas M. Countryman (shown above) represented the United States at the conference. He made it very clear in his official statement that he was on board with accelerating the move to give teeth to this globalist gun grab.
“We are here to take foundational decisions to operationalize this Treaty, to turn it from mere words on the page into a reality that makes a difference around the world. We are here to breathe life into this Treaty by standing up its international operation,” Countryman declared.
Calling the agreement “a tool that we can use, energetically and effectively,” Countryman committed the United States to “continue its commitment to the Arms Trade Treaty.”
As of today, the United States Senate has not ratified the treaty, but Congress and the Obama administration seems set on changing that before the president leaves office. There is little to no time left to completely disengage the United States from this U.N. multinational morass and unconstitutional mass confiscation of firearms.
Perhaps knowing a few of the ATT’s key provisions will convince more Americans to join the fight to protect the Second Amendment, or, it might be too late.
First, the Arms Trade Treaty grants a monopoly over all weaponry in the hands of the very entity (government) responsible for over 300 million murders in the 20th century.
Furthermore, the treaty leaves private citizens powerless to oppose future slaughters.
An irrefutable fact of armed violence unaddressed by the UN in its gun grab is that all the murders committed by all the serial killers in history don’t amount to a fraction of the brutal killings committed by “authorized state parties” using the very weapons over which they will exercise absolute control under the terms of the Arms Trade Treaty.
For those unfamiliar with the text of the UN’s Arms Trade Treaty, here’s a brief sketch of the most noxious provisions:
Article 2 of the treaty defines the “Scope” of the treaty’s prohibitions. The right to own, buy, sell, trade, or transfer all means of armed resistance, including handguns, is denied to civilians by this section of the Arms Trade Treaty.
Perhaps the most immediate threat to the rights of gun owners in the Arms Trade Treaty is found in Article 5. Under the title of “General Implementation,” Article 5 mandates that all countries participating in the treaty “shall establish and maintain a national control system, including a national control list.” This list will “apply the provisions of this Treaty to the broadest range of conventional arms.”
Article 12 adds to the “Record keeping” requirement, mandating that the list include “the quantity, value, model/type, authorized international transfers of conventional arms,” as well as the identity of the “end users” of these items.
In very clear terms, ratification of the Arms Trade Treaty by the United States would require that the U.S. government force gun owners to add their names to the national registry. Citizens would be required to report the amount and type of all firearms and ammunition they possess.
Section 4 of Article 12 of the treaty requires that the list be kept for at least 10 years.
Finally, the agreement demands that national governments take “appropriate measures” to enforce the terms of the treaty, including civilian disarmament. If these countries can’t get this done on their own, however, Article 16 provides for UN “International Assistance,” specifically including help with the enforcement of “stockpile management, disarmament, demobilization, and reintegration in programs.”
Reading these details along with Assistant Secretary of State – Thomas Countryman’s enthusiastic, full-throated call for enforcement of them should be enough to encourage all Americans to unite in defeat of the proposed disarmament.
However, there’s as much to fear from American threats to liberty as from those coming from the United Nations.
Despite the desperate state of the situation, there remain many self-described “gun rights groups” that believe that the government has the right to give and take away the right to own firearms depending on whether the person has complied with “reasonable” federal guidelines. This is treachery!
Although Americans have allowed this right to be redefined by Congress, (ya, you!), the courts, and the president, the plain language of the Second Amendment explicitly forbids any infringement on this right that protects all others.
In fact, the reason for inclusion of the Second Amendment in the Bill of Rights had little to do with the British and more to do with future attempts by an out-of-control, all-powerful central authority disarming the American people as a step toward tyranny.
Take, for example, theses statements by our forefathers regarding the purpose of the passage of this amendment:
In commenting on the Constitution in 1833, Joseph Story wrote:
The right of the citizens to keep and bear arms has justly been considered, as the palladium of the liberties of a republic; since it offers a strong moral check against the usurpation and arbitrary power of rulers; and will generally, even if these are successful in the first instance, enable the people to resist and triumph over them.
In his own commentary on the works of the influential jurist Blackstone, Founding-era legal scholar, St. George Tucker wrote:
This may be considered as the true palladium of liberty…. The right of self-defense is the first law of nature: in most governments it has been the study of rulers to confine this right within the narrowest limits possible. Wherever standing armies are kept up, and the right of the people to keep and bear arms is, under any color or pretext whatsoever, prohibited, liberty, if not already annihilated, is on the brink of destruction.
Writing in The Federalist, Alexander Hamilton explained:
If the representatives of the people betray their constituents, there is then no resource left but in the exertion of that original right of self-defense which is paramount to all positive forms of government, and which against the usurpations (usurpation means taking someone’s power or property by force) of the national rulers, may be exerted with infinitely better prospect of success than against those of the rulers of an individual state.
Arguably, the Arms Trade Treaty would become the law of the United States if the Senate were to ratify the treaty.
Deadline for initial report: click here | Deadline 1st report: May 2016
As of November 2015, 78 states have ratified or acceded to the ATT, including five of the world’s top 10 arms producers (the United Kingdom, France, Germany, Italy and Spain). Twenty-one ratifying states provisionally applied articles 6 and 7 of the treaty, pending its entry into force.
The information is from the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute.
|2014 rank||Supplier||Arms exports|
Signature (UN) 25 September 2013
Signature (OAS) 14 November 1997
(NaturalNews) The legal argument of gay marriage proponents is that because gay marriage is legal in a majority of states, that “right” cannot be infringed by the remaining states which opposed gay marriage. The U.S. Supreme Court, in granting this new, nationwide right to gay marriage, cited the Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution, Section 1, which states:
No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
The actual ruling text of the SCOTUS decision makes it clear that its “equal protection” logic would apply universally to concealed carry gun rights which already exist in a majority of states:
(1) The fundamental liberties protected by the Fourteenth Amendment’s Due Process Clause extend to certain personal choices central to individual dignity and autonomy, including intimate choices defining personal identity and beliefs… When new insight reveals discord between the Constitution’s central protections and a received legal stricture, a claim to liberty must be addressed. Applying these tenets, the Court has long held the right to marry is protected by the Constitution.
Similarly, the right to keep and bear arms has also long been protected by the Constitution and affirmed in multiple Supreme Court decisions, as early as last year. “In District of Columbia v Heller (2008) — the SCOTUS ruled that the 2nd Amendment rights were ‘fundamental’ in and of themselves as well as ‘fundamental to the Nation’s scheme of ordered liberty'” writes Hawkins at Breitbart.com.
If this right to keep and bear arms (and to carry concealed firearms) is already recognized in some states, then by the Supreme Court’s own precedent on gay marriage, that right cannot be denied in ANY state!
The Supreme Court, in other words, appears to have just nullified gun control laws all across America.
As Bob Owens writes on BearingArms.com, “By using the Constitution in such a manner, the Court argues that the Due Process Clause extends ‘certain personal choices central to individual dignity and autonomy’ accepted in a majority of states across the state lines of a handful of states that still banned the practice. The vast majority of states are ‘shall issue’ on the matter of issuing concealed carry permits, and enjoy reciprocity with a large number of other states.”
I’ll be driving through the District of Columbia, Maryland, New Jersey, and New York in several weeks, places that until yesterday I did not have a legal right to concealed carry. As of today, with this decision, it would seem that these states and the District must honor my concealed carry permit, or violate my constitutional rights under the 14th and Second Amendment.
AWR Hawkins, writing for Breitbart.com, adds:
When the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) ruled that every state must recognize same sex marriages, they used a basis for judgement that will not easily stop at same sex marriage. In fact, it is a basis for judgement that should offer itself to national reciprocity of concealed carry permits and permit holders.
The fascinating part of the SCOTUS decision on gay marriage is that it sets a precedent of a principled interpretation of the Fourteenth Amendment which must now be applied to everything.
The Supreme Court, in other words, just made the argument for nullifying most gun control laws across America. As explained again by Bob Owens in another article on BearingArms.com:
…[I]f there is any intellectual and logical consistency in the Supreme Court’s arguments at all, the ‘due process’ argument must be applied as equally to state and local gun laws, sweeping them aside entirely, and reaffirming the clear command in the Second Amendment that, ‘A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.’
All, state and local on concealed and open carry would seem to be invalidated, and citizens should be allowed to carry firearms, either openly or concealed, anywhere they want to go.
Dare the Court dare claim that the 14th Amendment’s due process clause only applies in specific and narrow instances?
That’s the thing about court decisions, you see: we can’t just pick and choose where they apply. A powerful new principle of “equal protection” must now be interpreted across all issues, not just the narrow issue of same-sex marriage.
As Marc Greendorfer explains in his amicus brief to the court:
One day, the Court will have to explain how sweeping restrictions on every aspect of firearms ownership and use can be upheld yet traditional and long-standing regulations on marriage cannot be tolerated in any form or in any jurisdiction.
In other words, if the Court is to have any logical consistency at all, it will have no choice but to declare nearly all gun control laws nationwide to be null and void, in precisely the same way it just declared all “marriage control” laws to be null and void. After all, “equal protection” must be equal, or it has no meaning at all (and the Supreme Court itself becomes a total joke).
You can’t discriminate against people based on their personal beliefs, you see. So if gay couples’ right to be married must be universally recognized across all states, then gun owners’ right to carry firearms must also be universally recognized across all states. That’s the way freedom works: once a principle is affirmed and set into the history of interpretation of law, it must be applied universally.
I can already see the comedic bumper stickers from all this: IF YOU GET TO MARRY, WE GET TO CARRY!
In essence, the U.S. Supreme Court just handed the NRA the very argument it might now use to nullify gun restriction laws everywhere. The NRA merely needs to file suit in a lower court, cite the Obergefall decision, and kick the lawsuit all the way back up the chain to SCOTUS. There, the Court must decide in a manner consistent with the same-sex marriage “rights,” or else it will cease to carry any real authority at all.
The realization of all this, of course, will drive many of the same-sex marriage lobbyists absolutely insane. They did not see this unintended consequence of “equal protection” being applied to other topics. But that’s how equality actually works, isn’t it? Equality means the principle is equally applied to other contexts.
You might be surprised, by the way, to learn that there is a group of gay gun rights advocates who must now be double-thrilled to learn the implications of all this. The group is called the Pink Pistols, and this list of local chapters shows they have members all across the nation, from New York to Texas. Their slogan? “Armed gays don’t get bashed.” Gotta love it!
Anyone who believes in universal freedom, not selective freedom, should support both the rights of people to be gay as well as be armed for self defense. If you happen to both gay and armed, check out the Pink Pistols.
Chris Harper Mercer, the gunman who killed at least 10 people at UCC Community College in Oregon was a Satanist into the occult and Aleister Crowley Magick who specifically targeted Christians in his rampage and hoped the Devil would welcome him to Hell.
The mainstream media has been covering up what really happened because this doesn’t fit into their narrative that white Christian gun owners are the biggest domestic terrorist threat in America. Of course, many people in the conspiracy community believe he was an Illuminati mind controlled CIA MKULTRA assassin who was brainwashed by the government to commit this atrocity to be used as a pretext to end the second amendment and roll out more gun control laws.
Birth Certificate Name is: Christopher Sean Mercer – 07/26/1989.
Mother: Laurel Margaret Harper – 04/05/1951
Dad: Ian Bernard Mercer – 05/15/1960
Divorced in 2006
On the left is the selfie Christopher Mercer uploaded to his social media. On the right is how *CNN presented the same selfie in broadcast stories about him. Why did CNN need to change the complexion (color) of their broadcast? Why is no-one showing pictures of mom, Laurel Margaret Harper.
[ NOTE: *Since the original discussion thread was posted on Friday October 2nd, the comparative image above has become the matter of some controversy. On Thr/Fri a twitter acct (we did not record who) posted a video vine on showing a CNN broadcast (TV) including that image. Additionally the same source posting a side-by-side as above. We captured the side-by-side image and shared it – as shown. We did not create the image, we copied it from a twitter feed. According to various comments posted: CNN denies attribution. Absent our ability to return to source origination for further inquiry, the comparative side-by-side image should be considered suspect, and quite possibly false. ]
Why change to hyphenated name? Real name is Christopher Sean Mercer. Media using Christopher Harper-Mercer and Chris Harper-Mercer.
Several months ago we shared the story of Eric Sheppard Jr. a radical “Black Lives Matter”, “F**k The Police” and Islamic radical who used a philosophy of black supremacy similar to the New Black Panthers. Sheppard gained brief notoriety when he held a U.S. Flag Stomping event at Valdosta State University.
After his public exposure, and after the police filed a warrant for his arrest on firearms violations, and after he mailed a racist manifesto to a local Georgia Newspaper – while on the run, he was finally arrested in Tampa Florida by U.S. Marshals.
Eric Sheppard’s story disappeared from the headlines and never resurfaced.
Yesterday, while reviewing the social footprint of Oregon shooter Chris Harper-Mercer, (aka Chris Sean Mercer) an almost identical world-view to Eric Sheppard Jr. was evident in Mercer’s social media history.
Chris Harper-Mercer, a mixed-race angry 26-year-old, was essentially the mirror image on social media as Eric Sheppard Jr.
Mercer held sympathetic words and thoughts for the Virginia shooter Vester Flanagan, and similarly raged against white people, and expressed sympathy toward the Black Lives Matter movement. (Example Below):
However, today almost all of that social media history is GONE -> Example Here. It is either removed entirely, and/or edited for content. How it could be edited is a mystery unless there is some other issue at hand.
In addition, as several researchers have noted, anyone who held attachment to Mercer appears to be deleting the content of their association. Including Umpqua Community College itself.
From the cache Centerstage Theatre at UCC
Please join me in congratulating the team for our Fall show! This is going to be an awesome comedy to start out the year. This British comedy comes with witty language and spooky effects. We are especially delighted to feature our local star who is now based out of NYC, Josh Carlton!
BLITHE SPIRIT, by Noel Coward
Presented by UCC Theatre Arts Oct 30-Nov 8
CHARLES: Josh Carlton
RUTH: Rebecca Miles
EDITH: Abby Dooley
DR. BRADMAN: Devin Barnett
MRS. BRADMAN: Alexandra Duvall
MADAME ARCATI: Rachel Fitzhugh
ELVIRA, the Blithe Spirit: Chloe Quinn
Understudy for DR. BRADMAN: Benjamin Jacobsen
Directed by Stephanie Newman
Assistant Director: Aaron Carter
Stage Manager: Anna Mae Whatley
Production Assistants: Alex Frier, Joel Macha, Mary Chitwood, Chris Harper-Mercer, Isaac Guerrero, Ashley Jakubos
Lighting Assistant: Devin Barnett
Special Effects: Jim Smith, Keith Weikum
Program/Ads: Fred Brenchley
Marketing: Travis Newman
Other Volunteers: YOU! Get involved and have some fun!
Being part of an Umpqua college production class and performance etc. would run counter to the seemingly preferred media narrative of Chris Harper-Mercer being a loner, no?
Indeed if you were to look for information about Chris Harper-Mercer even being enrolled as a student at Umpqua you might even find contradictions and obfuscations about it. It seems rather odd that only foreign publications even make note of this fact:
“But he was listed as a “production assistant” in a Facebook post promoting a performance of a Noel Coward play by the school’s drama group” (link) ~ British
“Police think Mercer may have been a student at Umpqua because he was found with a receipt from the campus bookstore showing he had purchased textbooks.” (link) ~ Canadian
While generally there will always be a “fog” about events, as something happens and people rush around trying to identify the full story, one would think it would be really easy to determine if Mercer was a student, and what classes he was specifically enrolled for.
Then there’s this little snippet which might clear all of this up:
Stacy Boylan said his daughter told him the man “gave somebody a box, somebody who lived, and said, ‘You gotta deliver this.’ Somebody has a box. I don’t know what that’s about.”
Law enforcement officials familiar with the investigation told CNN that the gunman handed his writings to a survivor, telling that person to give it to police, but the sources could not confirm the writings were inside the box. (link)
So apparently Mercer has given a “manifesto” (another similarity to E. Sheppard Jr) to a surviving student of the shooting.
Summary: The immediate on-line web history of Chris Harper-Mercer showed him to be a mixed-race, angry young man in general alignment with various radical racially aligned groups such as Black Lives Matter, Fuck The Police and Fuck Yo Flag – all of which carry a sentiment of favorability and ideological alignment with Islam which was similarly evident in the Ferguson protest movement.
[ Against this backdrop shooting “White” “Christians” makes sense. ]
However, in the course of several hours (one media cycle) – the media narrative is selling a profile of a loner, mentally disturbed individual without any mention of his previous writings (deleted/changed), behaviors (hidden) and social tendencies (ignored).
Perhaps the answer lies within the response to the shooting from the White House where President Obama took quickly to the microphones to decry another school shooting without fully understanding the motive and intent.
Mercer’s possible motive and intent would now represent a political embarrassment against the backdrop of Obama’s speech if it aligns with something other than needed.
In a 21-14 vote Thursday, the republican-controlled Senate approved L.D. 652, “An Act To Authorize the Carrying of Concealed Handguns without a Permit.”
The bill would allow members of the public “not prohibited from possessing a firearm to carry a concealed handgun without a permit.”
Pro-gun politicians hailed the bill’s passage as a major step forward in securing the rights of law-abiding gun owners.
“This is a great day for the Second Amendment and a great day for Mainers,” Senate Majority Leader Garrett Mason said, according to MaineSenateGOP.com. “Maine has a strong and proud tradition of supporting the right to bear arms. Passage of Constitutional Carry cements and protects that right.”
The bill’s sponsor, Senator Eric Brakey, also remarked on how the “commonsense proposal” strengthens the protections enshrined in the Bill of Rights.
“Currently in Maine, you can carry a gun on your person, but once you put on a jacket that covers up that gun you’re carrying illegally if you don’t have a permit. It just doesn’t make sense,” Senator Brakey said. “This legislation changes that, and in doing so protects our Second Amendment Rights and lessens the burdens on local governments for permitting.”
Major gun control groups, including former New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s Everytown for Gun Safety and Moms Demand Action, as well as members of the Maine Chiefs of Police led an effort to derail the bill, with Portland Chief Michael Sauschuck arguing it would “ultimately [hurt] the safety of our communities.”
“When we roll into a scene, we’re looking for weapons,” Sauschuck said last month. “Common sense would say, why wouldn’t you have a permitting process before allowing someone to conceal a firearm in the community?”
The GOP contends, however, the controversial bill would only affect local permits and would not altogether eliminate the state permit system “so that citizens can enjoy reciprocity with other states.”
The bill must next overcome a House hurdle before heading to Governor Paul LePage’s desk, who has a strong history of endorsing pro-second Amendment proposals.
If passed, the bill would repeal the state’s century-old concealed permit law, making Maine the sixth state, alongside Alaska, Arizona, Kansas, Vermont and Wyoming, to not require permits for concealed carry.
An outrageous cell phone video captured in Georgia features an armed man turning the tables on a carjacker, holding him at gunpoint until police arrive.
Hashim Fannin, a resident of an Atlanta suburb, walked out of a Family Dollar store yesterday to find an unfamiliar person inside his vehicle.
“I asked him to get out the car, probably not in those exact words,” Fannin told WSB-TV News.
Fannin proceeded to draw his pistol and ordered the would-be carjacker, 61-year-old Edgar Horn, on to the pavement.
“I told him, “No, there’s no leaving, leaving was before you hopped into my car … at this point there is not leaving,’” Fannin said.
“Just stay there and wait for the police,” the armed man can be heard telling Horn in the video.
“Thought you were just gonna take my shit,” Fannin tells the man lying face down on the ground. “You picked the wrong mother fucker to try to rob today.”
Fannin is seen placing his gun on a nearby curb just as officers arrive on the scene, indicating to them he is not a threat.
One officer walks over to Fannin and shakes his hand, thanking him for protecting the community.
“Honestly, I look at it like this. That is one less guy I got to worry about bothering my mom when she’s out grocery shopping,” Fannin said.
In Georgia, both concealed and open carry of a handgun is permitted with a valid Georgia Weapons Carry License.
The director of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives resigned suddenly on Friday, 3/20/15 while the agency is still reeling from its failed “backdoor ammo ban” of the popular 5.56 M855 bullet.
It is unclear if B. Todd Jones’ departure is at all related to that proposed ban. A statement released by the agency only said that he will resign effective March 31 to pursue opportunities in the private sector. ABC News reported that Jones will take a job in New York City, possibly with a professional sports league.
Whatever the reason for his departure, the 57-year-old Jones leaves the agency on a sour note after the ban attempt.
With backing from the Obama administration, ATF sought to prohibit the sale of the M855 — the so-called “green tip” — out of fear that they pose a risk to police officers since they can pierce bullet-proof vests. Green tips were approved by the ATF in 1986, and have become more popular for use in AR-15 pistols.
The agency offered a comment period from the public, but did not advertise the proposal.
Gun rights groups such as the National Rifle Association and numerous lawmakers pushed back heavily on what was characterized as a “backdoor ammo ban.”
That outcry forced ATF to temporarily table the idea.
But Jones did little to assuage those groups’ fears after the ban was shelved. Last week he told the Senate Appropriations Committee that all 5.56 rounds pose “a challenge for officer safety.”
That statement was interpreted by many as an indication that the Obama administration has plans to ban more than just the M855.
Jones has served as director of the agency since July 31, 2013. He was nominated by President Obama in January of that year after serving as acting director since August 2011.
“ATF employees are hard-working, dedicated individuals who serve the public to make our nation safer every day,” he said in a statement. “I have seen firsthand their extraordinary commitment to combatting violent crime, ridding the streets of criminals, and leveraging all available resources to keep our communities safe.”
Jones will be replaced by current ATF deputy director Thomas Brandon. He’s been with the agency since October 2011.
“Throughout his tenure as Director of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, Todd Jones has cemented his reputation as an exemplary leader, a consummate professional, and an outstanding public servant,” Attorney General Eric Holder said in a statement.
Holder also said that Jones “has made bold changes, advanced forward-looking policies, and taken innovative steps to strengthen ATF’s investigative capabilities—including ballistic imaging technology that recently played a critical role in the investigation of the shooting of two police officers.”
Midlanders with an itch for silencers and automatic weapons — and who need help acquiring them — can now get them at the recently opened S&K Arms store.
Located across from Grub Burger off Midland Drive, S&K Arms has been open since Christmas Eve, but finally had its grand opening on Feb. 23 after store officials got tired of people telling them that they didn’t know the new gun store was there.
“Grub Burger is probably responsible for 90 percent of our business, and, until this event, we hadn’t done any advertising, and we still had a ton of business,” said assistant manager Danny Anderson.
Customers milled about as Anderson explained how S&K offers high-end guns, suppressors, machine guns and general advice. Walls made out of wood paneling are racked with 30-odd guns of varying types.
“When we first opened we wanted this to be like a sushi place like, ‘Hey! We’re glad you’re here,’” Anderson said of S&K’s philosophy. “We wanted not only to cater to the high-end person who wants unique boutique stuff, but also the person who’s never bought a gun before. We don’t want them to feel intimidated. We just really wanted to give people the level of customer service that they expect when they walk into any other place; why should you put up with less than helpful employees?”
Founder Kane Kolisek started the company a few years ago in Crane, selling suppressors out of the back of his parent’s home health store. The new store features not only silencers, but also automatic weapons, with a .50-caliber machine gun in the center of the store and a well-kept World War I-vintage machine gun on a coffee table.
Anderson also explained that S&K offers help acquiring suppressors and automatic weapons, including how to negotiate the seemingly daunting National Firearms Act (NFA) that is the framework of regulations used by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (ATF). He said that the staff helps clients with their paperwork, and that, while the wait time might be long (the NFA applications take the ATF four and six months to process), the duration is much shorter than the year it took the ATF to process the paperwork in early 2014.
An NFA application can be filled out by an individual, but Anderson said each person would have to provide their fingerprints, a passport photo, and a signature from a chief law enforcement officer such as Sheriff Gary Painter or Midland Police Chief Price Robinson.
Anderson suggests that if someone wants to buy a suppressor or automatic weapon that they set up a trust with a lawyer, which means that they would not have to provide the previously mentioned information. It also means that when the holder of NFA items passes away, the handover process involves less hassle.
“Every time it (the NFA item) gets transferred, you have to pay a $200 tax, which is why the trust is better because, let’s say you pass your suppressors down to your kids, they don’t get transferred to the kids, they stay in the trust and you can do whatever you want with them,” Anderson explained.
If a trust is not set up by a an owner of NFA items, things for their family can go south fast.
“When you die, you have a safe full of suppressors, and as soon as you die, those things get transferred and everybody’s committing felonies all of a sudden,” Anderson explained of what can happen to NFA items not in a trust. “On top of that, to be legal, your estate has to handle all the paperwork all over again, and a $200 tax on each individual item all over again. So it can get expensive and you can end up surrendering a lot of stuff to the federal government.”
Anderson attributed a growth in demand for suppressors to the falling wait time, which he believed meant that the ATF is getting better at processing the applications. But if you want to buy a gun, ogle some nice ones or just talk shop, S&K officials believe they have created a store for you.
Today, it’s legal. Tomorrow, it might not be.
By executive fiat, the Obama administration intends to eliminate one of the most common types of .223-caliber ammunition, used by the AR-15 and other general-purpose rifles.
Why? Ostensibly because there’s a new type of handgun that is also capable of shooting the so-called “armor-piercing” or “green-tipped” rounds traditionally fired only by rifles.
The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives announced on Feb. 14 a proposed ban on the manufacture, sale or importation of a popular form of ammunition used by thousands of law-abiding gun owners. Within hours of the announcement, the prices on the green-tipped .223-caliber rounds started skyrocketing.
The rule change affects the Gun Control Act of 1968 as amended by Congress in 1986. Under pressure from the law-enforcement lobby, Congress in 1986 inserted language into the law designed to prevent so-called “cop killer” bullets from being used by pistol-toting criminals.
The law was never intended in its original form to affect ammunition for rifles, as it was a given that rounds from any high-powered hunting rifle could penetrate the soft armor worn by officers.
“This is just another example of the Obama administration using executive authority to attack the rights of gun owners,” said Alan Gottlieb, founder and executive vice president of the Second Amendment Foundation. “Obama thinks he is ‘dictator in chief’ and can go around Congress to ban ammunition and punish legitimate gun owners. The Obama administration has doubled down on their war on gun owners.”
Jerry Henry, executive director of GeorgiaCarry.org, was equally outraged by the announcement.
“This move is nothing less than this administration taking the law into their own hands, bypassing Congress and their constitutional duties of writing and passing legislation,” Henry told WND.
As was the case with amnesty for illegal immigrants, Obama is using executive action to adopt a controversial agenda that lacks support in Congress or among the American people, Henry said.
“This administration has failed to pass gun-control legislation through the constitutional process. They have failed at the polls to pass meaningful gun control, and they have failed to win in the courts,” he said. “The only way left is through illegal processes and backdoor regulations. The American people have spoken to the gun-control antics of this administration, but this administration refuses to listen.”
Henry said the “master-servant” relationship between American citizens and those who hold the reins of government power is slowly being reversed. The people, who used to be the master, are now becoming the servants of those in government.
“If this is not stopped and stopped now, this administration will continue to push their agenda to disarm the American citizens with the goal of making them slaves to the U.S. government,” he said. “Citizens have the right to be armed. Slaves to the U.S. government will have no such right.”
The bullet in question is the ubiquitous M855 ball ammunition, which would be reclassified into the realm of “armor-piercing.” Currently, the M855 ball, .223-caliber round is under the exemption from the “armor piercing” category because it is “primarily intended for sporting purposes.”
The National Rifle Association said in a statement the M855 ball should have never been classified as “armor piercing” to begin with.
The original rule defined armor piercing as “a projectile or projectile core which may be used in a handgun and which is constructed entirely … from one or a combination of tungsten alloys, steel, iron, brass, bronze, beryllium copper, or depleted uranium.” Because there are now handguns capable of firing M855, it “may be used in a handgun.” It does not, however, have a core made of the metals listed in the law; rather, it has a traditional lead core with a steel tip, and therefore should never have been considered “armor piercing,” the NRA said.
More executive actions coming?
The decision continues the Obama administration’s use of his executive authority to impose its agenda and bypass Congress.
It also illustrates the government’s expert use of incrementalism. First, the Congress and then-President Ronald Reagan banned “armor piercing” bullets in 1986, with certain exceptions. Then a later president comes back decades later and removes one of the most common exceptions.
“If he gets by with this, I believe he will not stop in his efforts to disarm us via regulations,” Henry, of GeorgiaCarry, told WND.
The NRA also noted the trend.
“It isn’t even the third week of February, and the BATFE has already taken three major executive actions on gun control,” according to the NRA statement. “First, it was a major change to what activities constitute regulated ‘manufacturing’ of firearms. Next, BATFE reversed a less-than-year-old position on firing a shouldered ‘pistol.’ Now, BATFE has released a ‘Framework for Determining Whether Certain Projectiles are ‘Primarily Intended for Sporting Purposes’ Within the Meaning of 18 U.S.C. 921(a)(17)(c),’ which would eliminate M855’s exemption to the armor-piercing ammunition prohibition and make future exemptions nearly impossible.”
Dan Cannon of GunsSaveLives.net said online prices for affected .223-caliber ammo started soaring within 48 hours of when the government’s proposed rule change was announced. That’s if you could even find an online vendor that had the rounds in stock at the new “low” price of 50 cents per round.
“Online prices are up to around $0.50/round shipped, although very few vendors still have ammo in stock at that price. Other vendors are charging upward of $1.00/round shipped,” Cannon wrote in his blog Sunday. Before the rule was announced on Friday night, M855 could be found “fairly readily for about $0.34-38/round if you bought a full case,” Cannon said.
Gottlieb said his guess is as good as anyone’s as to where Obama will strike next in his war against gun ownership. But he has proven one thing: He doesn’t need Congress.
“Obama will use his executive powers to do as much damage as he can get away with,” he said. “This is not the end of his attack on Second Amendment rights.”
And ordinary American gun owners are beginning to take notice.
Paul Glosser, a captain at the Marion, Ohio, Fire Department, posted on the Facebook site of Guns Magazine, that concerned gun owners should contact their members of Congress and ask them to “defund” the Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco and Firearms.
“Get on the phone, write/email your senator(s)/rep, make sure your voice is heard,” Glosser posted. “Ask them to defund ATF and to passing legislation that either permanently exempts M855 or better yet clarifies the AP law as intended to include only rounds designed for use in handguns (per intent).”
Once the new rule goes into effect, the Bureau says it will grant the “sporting purposes” exception to only two categories of projectiles:
Category I: .22 Caliber Projectiles
A .22 caliber projectile that otherwise would be classified as armor piercing ammunition under 18 U.S.C. 921(a)(17)(B) will be considered to be “primarily intended to be used for sporting purposes” under section 921(a)(17)(C) if the projectile weighs 40 grains or less AND is loaded into a rimfire cartridge.
Category II: All Other Caliber Projectiles
Except as provided in Category I (.22 caliber rimfire), projectiles that otherwise would be classified as armor piercing ammunition will be presumed to be “primarily intended to be used for sporting purposes” under section 921(a)(17)(C) if the projectile is loaded into a cartridge for which the only handgun that is readily available in the ordinary channels of commercial trade is a single shot handgun. ATF nevertheless retains the discretion to deny any application for a “sporting purposes” exemption if substantial evidence exists that the ammunition is not primarily intended for such purposes.
How to file public comment
ATF said in its announcement it “will carefully consider all comments, as appropriate, received on or before March 16, 2015, and will give comments received after that date the same consideration if it is practical to do so, but assurance of consideration cannot be given except as to comments received on or before March 16, 2015.”
Submit comments in any of three ways (but do not submit the same comments multiple times or by more than one method):
ATF email: APAComments@atf.gov
Fax: (202) 648-9741.
Mail: Denise Brown, Mailstop 6N-602, Office of Regulatory Affairs, Enforcement Programs and Services, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives, 99 New York Avenue, NE, Washington, DC 20226: ATTN: AP Ammo Comments.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Denise Brown, Enforcement Programs and Services, Office of Regulatory Affairs, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives, U.S. Department of Justice, 99 New York Avenue, NE, Washington, DC 20226; telephone: (202) 648-7070.
A federal judge declared the federal government’s ban on the interstate sale of handguns an unnecessary infringement on rights guaranteed by the Second Amendment.
US District Court Judge Reed O’Connor said the ban did not date to the time of the founding, was not tailored to address the problem the government intended to address, and was unconstitutional.
“The Court concludes that Defendants have not shown that the federal interstate handgun transfer ban is narrowly tailored to be the least restrictive means of achieving the Government’s goals under current law,” O’Connor said in the ruling. “The federal interstate handgun transfer ban is therefore unconstitutional on its face.”
Besides being unconstitutional on its face, O’Connor said the law was unconstitutional in how it was applied to the plaintiffs.
On June 21, 2014, Andrew and Tracy Hanson tried to buy two handguns from Texas-based gun dealer Fredric Mance. Since the Hansons are D.C. residents, a legal sale, under the interstate handgun transfer ban in the Gun Control Act of 1968, requires a D.C.-based gun dealer be involved in the transaction. The Hansons did not want to pay the hundreds of dollars in costs associated with involving a D.C.-based gun dealer in the transaction, and Mance lost the sale.
Ths Hansons and Mance, supported by the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms and Second Amendment Foundation, filed suit in federal court over the ban.
“Our lawsuit strikes at the heart of a debate that has been ongoing for several years, since the creation of the National Instant Check System,” Second Amendment Foundation founder Alan Gottlieb said in a press release. “With the advent of the NICS system, it makes no sense to perpetuate a ban on interstate transfers of handguns.”
Gottlieb said the ruling “could have far-reaching ramifications.”
“It is bizarre and irrational to destroy the national market for an item that Americans have a fundamental right to purchase,” the plaintiffs’ attorney Alan Gura said. “Americans would never tolerate a ban on the interstate sale of books or contraceptives. And Americans are free to buy rifles and shotguns outside their state of residence, so long as the dealers respect the laws of the buyer’s home state. We’re gratified that the Court agreed that handguns should be treated no differently.”
The Department of Justice had not responded to a request for comment by publishing time.
Download the Ruling at the link below
Lage Manufacturing has been working on this for some time now, and after a few years of development and field testing they have finished their final product. Due to the costly process Lage Manufacturing used to produce this single weapon, they will not be making any for commercial use.
The M-41A pulse rifle is actually not a rifle at all, but a sub-machine gun that is chambered in 9mm, and a short barreled 12 gauge shotgun made to imitate the famous rifle from the Alien movie franchise. The sub-machine gun components of the M-41A are made up of a NFA registered SWD M11/9 with an Anthony Smith styled Suomi (Thompson) upper receiver and a non-modified M11/9 lower receiver. As for the under slung shotgun component, it is an NFA registered Remington 870 AOW/SBR.