Archive for the 'Guns' Category



In Greenville, S.C., No Issues As Gun Owners Dine Out With Guns

BY Herschel Smith
20 hours, 58 minutes ago

Greenville News:

Marina Lambrou, owner of the Boston Pizzeria on Woodruff Road, said she knew some of her customers had permits to carry concealed weapons before the law changed in February to allow permit holders to take their guns into establishments that serve alcohol.

Lambrou chose not to prohibit guns, and she said the issue hasn’t been a problem.

“I don’t prohibit and I don’t encourage it,” she told The Greenville News. “I just feel this is a free nation, and if someone feels like they need the extra protection, then God willing, let them do it.”

State law enforcement and restaurant officials say they know of no problems since the law went into effect seven months ago. The law allows permit holders to take guns into places that serve alcohol but allows businesses to prohibit guns and doesn’t allow permit holders to consume alcohol.

Erin Dando, leader of the South Carolina Chapter of Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America, a gun reform group, said more businesses would prohibit guns but the new law requires the signs banning guns be 8 by 12 inches with 1-inch lettering.

“Frankly, the size requirement is alarming for business owners and it’s prevented some from putting them up,” she said. She said one business that has posted a sign has heard negative feedback from members of a gun rights organization.

Gun owners said on The Greenville News‘ Facebook page they are voting with their feet if restaurants choose to ban weapons.

“Only a couple of the restaurants where I have eaten decided to post signs after the new law went into effect,” posted Stephen Combs. “Their food wasn’t exceptional enough for me to feel the need to disarm and patronize them.”

“If there have been any incidents, I’m not aware of them,” said Jerrod Bruder, executive director of the South Carolina Sheriffs Association.

He said the organization’s concerns about the changes in the law had to do with training and education. The new law still requires training of permit holders but has dropped the number of mandatory hours of training.

Thom Berry, a spokesman for the State Law Enforcement Division, said he wasn’t aware of any incidents involving concealed weapons permit holders and businesses that serve alcohol under the new law.

Sgt. Jennings Autrey, a spokesman for the Greenville County Sheriff’s office, also said he wasn’t aware of any such incidents.

Board members of the South Carolina Restaurant and Hotel Association said they think the new law hasn’t produced any problems.

My goodness.  Is that what we have to do to make an informative news report?  Ask everyone and their cousin too about it?  How about my dog?  Wonder what Heidi thinks about it?  Does she know of any issues resulting from the law?

No, there aren’t any issues.  There won’t be with concealed carriers, and the next step is to get open carry passed in South Carolina, over the objections and opposition of communist State Senator Larry Martin.  Martin opposed recent attempts at legalization of open carry in S.C. because those horrible Negros down around Charleston might open carry and thus affect the tourism industry in South Carolina.  Yes.  Seriously.  Really.  I wouldn’t be able to make this up if I tried.  That’s why he opposed open carry.

But open carry worked as well in Mississippi as I said it would.  My readers in South Carolina might want to tell Larry what you think about him – one way or another.

Notes From HPS

BY Herschel Smith
21 hours, 13 minutes ago

David Codrea:

An Ohio woman used her lawfully-carried handgun to prevent a pair of men armed with a baseball bat from abducting her, WBNS 10TV Columbus reported Friday. Per the account Dinah Burns of Lancaster gave to the police and to reporter Jeff Valin, producing her concealed handgun induced the men to stop approaching her and flee.

[ ... ]

Not, as colleague Kurt Hofmann noted in a recent JPFO Alert, rights should be dependent on such number-crunching – but what is significant here is the antis always couch that argument by saying more people are killed with guns than kill their assailants with guns. Those who do are intentionally steering the conversation away from the relevant argument. That’s because, as this incident reflects, good people often resolve such situations with the mere presentation of a gun, without firing a shot.

Besides, statistics only matter when you consider yourself part of the collective and subsume your rights under the umbrella of whatever is best for the collective, decided, of course, by the rulers.  As for the woman, good for her, although I would have shot enough times to kill the would-be assailant.

Via Say Uncle, here is Hunter the no-hands shooter.

Here is his Facebook page, and more about him.  Okay, I promise never to complain about anything at the range ever again, except when someone muzzle flags me.

Apparently, British writers haven’t been beaten on enough (I am seeing a lot less of this among American writers).  Someone tell this writer that there is no such thing as a semi-automatic assault rifle.

The shirtless, homoerotic megalomaniac has boasted that he could take Kiev in two weeks.  Well, here’s a prediction short boy.  Try it.  I say that occupation and the resultant insurgency would be your worst nightmare.

Guns Tags:

Notes From HPS

BY Herschel Smith
5 days, 20 hours ago

David Codrea:

The group, which has not endorsed Republican challenger Tom Foley at this writing, understands he is a far cry from a perfect candidate on guns. The choice they face is to decide which of their two options available to them — allowing a committed gun-banner to re-secure political power without significant opposition, or sending a message to anti-gun politicians that there is a price for undermining rights by supporting a moderate — is preferable.

This is the question we all face in so many upcoming elections, isn’t it?  I’m not a single issue voter, but if I look first to a candidate’s position on guns, I’m generally able to find out in short order whether they are progressive or constitutional.  Whatever else one might think, Connecticut is a rough place to be if you believe in the constitution.

Kurt Hofmann:

John Lott, Gary Kleck, and others are noted researchers, vastly more knowledgeable about statistical analysis than I will ever be, and have sold a great many books trying to provide that proof, or at least compelling evidence–and frankly, I don’t really care.

I don’t care because fundamental human rights–and the right to self-defense must be seen by any rational, ethical person as chief among those–cannot legitimately be held hostage to a requirement for a favorable statistical outcome.

Good for Kurt.  Statistical outcomes.  It’s the same way the collectivists argue when they tell you facts and figures about how it is more likely that you’ll commit suicide than ever use a gun in self defense.  First of all, I doubt those “facts,” and second, I don’t care what the collective does with weapons.  I’m not the collective.

From Matt Bracken.  All they’ve done is provide me with a target-rich environment.  Double tap — double tap — double tap — etc., reload, repeat.

Guns Tags:

Christian Leaders Say No To Christian Militia

BY Herschel Smith
6 days, 19 hours ago

I have previously attempted to explain and rebuke the pacifist sickness that affects the Christian Church, but it seems that the examples of said sickness are sadly numerous and still surfacing.  Apparently, many Christian leaders would rather see their parishioners and congregants beheaded than defended.

The Kurdish government wants to give weapons to Iraqi Christians so that they can defend themselves, but there are (not surprisingly) Christian leaders who are actually against the giving of arms.

The lending of guns to the Christians is desired by President Masud Barzani of the Autonomous Region of Kurdistan, who said he is willing to commit to the idea. But Chaldean Patriarch Louis Raphael Sako I responded that the idea of weapons to the Christians would be destructive, saying “the forces of the state should take charge of this defense” and that such a diversity of militias “can destroy Iraq”.

Lebanese Maronite Patriarch Bechara Boutros Rai also gave his objections to the idea of a Christian militia, saying that it would be “illegitimate” and that it would result in “law of the jungle and an increase in crime.”

Both Catholic and Evangelical voices objected to the protest of the Patriarch on giving weapons to the Christians. Kishore Jayabalan, Rome director of the Catholic organization, Acton Institute for the Study of Religion and Liberty, said

I understand why the patriarch doesn’t want to see Christian militias in place of the state’s protection of all its citizens, as it is a fundamental duty of a state to do so… But the problem is that [state protection] isn’t happening, and something has to be done to stop the gruesome attacks of the Islamic State.Jayabalan also made it clear that a militia is the only choice for the Christians because no nation is helping them:

What authority can they appeal to? Western governments won’t act effectively because they fear being seen as sectarianEvangelical pastor Michel Youssef, an advocate of armed Christian civilians in Iraq, said:

only way to protect our families and friends from attacks, because we are tired of waiting for an action from the government, which is preoccupied with politics and never looks after us.Benjamin Harnwell, founder of the Catholic Rome-based think tank the Dignitatis Humanae Institute, said

The right to defend oneself is a clear doctrine; it’s a fundamental human right, an inalienable right, and people lend the exercise of that right to the state…The first duty of the state is to protect the people, but if the state is unable to fulfil this, then the right to defend oneself reverts to the person, because such a right cannot ever be taken from that person — and nor can it ever be given away; it cannot be ‘alienated.’ This is literally what we mean when we say the right to defend oneself is inalienable … The fact that the state is unable to defend its citizens means there is already the law of the jungle in operation — it’s the perfect example of lawlessness… And preventing minorities who are being systematically wiped out from defending themselves will only work in favor of the aggressor.

One source close to the Vatican even said that the objections toward a Christian militia was a sign of appeasement and acquiescence to ISIS.

Christians definitely need to form a militia, under the liberty of God and the natural law of man, they must become militant.

But sadly, they won’t.  They have waited too late to “weapon up.”  And witness what happens without self defense.  Pat Dollard links a Live Leak video in which ISIS fighters promise a “Christian” (I have no idea if he really was a Christian) converting to Islam that Allah is merciful and he will be spared.  The man converts, and the ISIS fighters promptly behead him anyway.

There is one thing in particular that needs to be corrected in the perspective cited above, and it is that “The first duty of the state is to protect the people, but if the state is unable to fulfil this, then the right to defend oneself reverts to the person, because such a right cannot ever be taken from that person …”

No, and a thousand times no.  It is not either-or, it is both-and, and the order is wrong.  The state is responsible, to be sure, for protecting nations against invasion, and our pitiful nation refuses to meet even the simplest of responsibilities like this by securing the Southern border.

But let’s be clear.  The first duty to protect rests with a man and his home, not the state protection for the man or his family.

Do you understand?

Notes From HPS

BY Herschel Smith
6 days, 20 hours ago

David Codrea:

“I know Gillespie and I will not support him or vote for him,” a frequent correspondent active in Virginia Second Amendment promotion and support told me. Part of that may be due to Gillespie’s refusal to personally commit to the issue, as illustrated by his failure to return a Virginia Citizens Defense League Candidate Survey. Part of it may be due to his consummate insider loyalties to the GOP establishment as a former Bush White House staffer and head of the RNC. Part of it may be that he established a “bipartisan” lobbying firm with a Democrat partner, and a former White House Counsel to Bill Clinton at that. And the big part is that there was a better candidate that the establishment did not want..

Another survey Gillespie failed to answer is the one on immigration put out by Numbers USA, where he rates “indecisive” on the question of amnesty for illegal aliens …

Read the rest of David’s analysis.  When I see that there was a so-called “tea party” candidate running against an establishment candidate, and the establishment brought in the power brokers and dollars to run the tea party candidate out of the race, I won’t go to the polls on election day to vote for the establishment candidate.  Thus, I will not be voting for Thom Tillis in my own state.

This is entirely a personal choice, and I am not advocating that you make it too.  I’m saying that I’m not a prostitute and won’t whore my vote out to the highest bidder (or in this case, the least progressive candidate).

Dave Workman:

Contrary to what the gun prohibition lobby would have the public believe, the firearms community is hardly a monolithic voting bloc that thinks and talks alike on every issue. Gun owners argue amongst themselves about all manner of subjects, and the disagreements can get downright brutal. Such can certainly be said about the past 72 hours with the discussion and debate over the JPFO/SAF controversy.

And I’m sure there will be more to come.  My expectation is that good folk who work for JPFO will keep us informed of the vicissitudes of their labors there.

Kurt Hofmann:

Both Reid and Horsford appear to be arguing that the fact that sometimes law enforcement agencies do indeed abuse the power of certain firearms should not mean that agencies that do not engage in such abuses be forced to get by with lesser guns. Does the same logic somehow not apply to the rest of us?

Of course not.  Consistency is the hobgoblin of small minds, and Reid certainly has a small mind.  I suspect he is thinking about how his jack booted thugs at the BLM were stood down by boys toting rifles that looked the same as his thugs.  Awe … did your son not get rich selling out America to Chinese business partners because of AR-15s, Harry?

Guns Tags:

Changes To California Gun Laws: Will Smith & Wesson Continue To Sell To Law Enforcement?

BY Herschel Smith
1 week, 1 day ago

I ran across this fairly informative podcast late last week.  If you want to listen to it I encourage you to do so.  It is just short of twenty minutes.  If not, I will summarize for you.

The law passed several years ago in California forced all new firearms to be microstamped with laser etching right at the time of firing, with spent cartridge casings showing the serial number of the firearm used – ridiculous technology that no professional engineer would seal (this is my judgment, not that of the podcast).  It would be too expensive, it wouldn’t last, and it would be subject to removal by anyone.

The law stipulated that the law becomes effective when the attorney general deems that the technology exists.  The attorney general of California is a liar because she deems the technology to exist even though it doesn’t.  Therefore, all new firearms sold in California must include this technology which doesn’t exist.

Here is the operative phrase: new firearm.  Gun makers can continue to sell existing firearms if they have previously been approved by California, including the silly limited capacity magazine.  But because a new firearms is defined as any firearm that has had any change at all made (part tolerance, alloy specification, gun color, etc.), and because even small changes routinely made by manufacturers would be included in that list and necessarily involve approval which included microstamping (which doesn’t exist), gun manufacturers are no longer selling guns in California.

We’ve discussed this before in slightly less detail, and noted that Smith & Wesson will continue to sell to law enforcement (or at least, they won’t commit to me that they won’t), thus providing weapons to LEOs that other citizens can’t have.

You can let Smith & Wesson know how you feel about this.  I have.  At the same time, remind them that it is way past time to remove themselves from the communist state in which they are ensconced and come South like most other gun manufacturers.

Their customer base is watching – carefully.

Ms. Elizabeth Sharp, VP of Investor Relations (Lsharp@smith-wesson.com)

Confidential Report On Army Carbine Competition

BY Herschel Smith
1 week, 4 days ago

Washington Times:

A competing rifle outperformed the Army’s favored M4A1 carbine in key firings during a competition last year before the service abruptly called off the tests and stuck with its gun, according to a new confidential report.

The report also says the Army changed the ammunition midstream to a round “tailored” for the M4A1 rifle. It quoted competing companies as saying the switch was unfair because they did not have enough time to fire the new ammo and redesign their rifles before the tests began.

Exactly how the eight challengers — and the M4 — performed in a shootout to replace the M4, a soldier’s most important personal defense, has been shrouded in secrecy.

But an “official use only report” by the Center for Naval Analyses shows that one of the eight unidentified weapons outperformed the M4 on reliability and on the number of rounds fired before the most common type of failures, or stoppages, occurred, according to data obtained by The Washington Times.

[ ... ]

Sen. Tom Coburn, Oklahoma Republican, fought a long battle with the Army to persuade it to look at other carbines. He said Army National Guardsmen back from the wars told him the gun was unreliable and jammed frequently. All of Mr. Coburn’s work crumbled last year when the inspector general essentially sided with the Army by giving it a justification to cancel the Improved Carbine competition.

The probable takeaway from all of this is that the Army is in a sloppy love affair with Colt, and nothing will ever replace it.  Colt lost the contract for M4s almost two years ago, and due to pressure from various lawyers, government entities (GAO) and others, they reopened the bidding and testing process.

Then it closed, with no selection of a new firearm.  You know what I think about H&K (their attitude to customers, “you suck and we hate you“).  I really don’t care much for who won the competition because I think it was badly framed to begin with.

Phase one has had nothing to do with evaluating test prototypes, but instead has focused on weeding out companies that may not have the production capacity to make thousands of weapons per month. This has become a bitter point of contention that has driven away some companies with credible names in the gun business.

“I’m not going to dump half a million to a million dollars for them never to review my rifle,” said Steve Mayer of Rock River Arms, standing amid his racks of M4-style carbines at Shot Show, the massive small-arms show here that draws gun makers from all over the world.

But you, dear reader, can have whatever you want for the right price.  The government doesn’t (yet) have the authority to tell you not to buy a Rock River Arms AR-15, or LaRue Tactical, or whatever you want.

And let’s try to keep it that way.  Weapons are best vetted and tested in the civilian market anyway.  The Army and Marine Corps uses what they’re given.  We have the right to use what we want.  We are the most picky users who give the best feedback.

If some reader wants to pick at this issue until he gets hold of this report, we would all be interested to read it.

Notes From HPS

BY Herschel Smith
1 week, 5 days ago

Mike Vanderboegh: Police shoot and kill an Ohio dad, 22, holding a BB gun in Walmart.  I say prosecute them for murder.  If I did that I would be in the state penitentiary.  They should be too.  One long term solution is to legalize open carry everywhere, at all times.

Matt Bracken has an outstanding piece up at WRSA on The Islamic Jihad Conquest Formula.  Matt hits the nail on the head.

David Codrea:

“A citizen will lose his appeal if the Attorney General can prove, by a preponderance of the evidence, not that the individual poses a risk, or that the person is a terrorist, or even that the person is under investigation; rather, the Attorney General must only demonstrate that the person has been placed on a terror watch list,” Titus continued.

“Once that has been proven, a process which affords the citizen no due process, no right to appeal, nor guarantees any reasonable notice or information to the actual fact that the citizen is on a terror watch list, the appeal is over and the citizen loses his Second Amendment Right to Bear Arms,” Titus elaborated. “The individual will not have a chance to introduce evidence of mistaken identity, abuse of Executive discretion or mount any other meaningful defense.”

Oh my.  This seems like more inside-the-beltway rulemaking gone awry.  Perhaps they put this in the federal register, perhaps not.  Perhaps they kept it out with approval of the rubber-stamp FISA courts.  Either way, you can bet that this is more infringement.

And speaking of David, he says he doesn’t like to go around link-whoring his articles.  He isn’t posting to Facebook anymore, but that’s fine with me because I make WoG a stop several times a day to see what David is saying.  David is a nice guy so he doesn’t like to link-whore.  I’m not, and I don’t mind it at all.  Traffic means that even if it is a poor article, my Google page rank increases, sending more traffic and increasing my voice of advocacy.  I do this for advocacy, not for ego (or at least, so I say).  I don’t really care what you think about me, but I want you to listen to my views because I want to change your mind.  But for David, he deserves to make a living at this, and I ask that you stop by every day to see what you can do to send him traffic.

Kurt Hofmann:

Frum notes that about 42 percent of police deaths this year were by gunfire. Whether that statistic is intended to justify the shooting death of unarmed Michael Brown, or the outrageously heavy-handed efforts to quell the unrest (a task now being handed off by the heavily militarized police to the actual military, as the National Guard is brought in), we can only guess.

Frum also asks if anyone thinks that “things [would] be better in Ferguson if the demonstrators were armed.” Well, some of the brutalized demonstrators might.

Perhaps the most chilling of this series of tweets was his observation about the supposed law enforcement need for heavy body armor:

Fewer guns in hands of the policed ==> less need for body armor on those who do the policing …

Oh good grief.  We just can’t get away from Frum can we?  Visit Kurt’s piece to see his full analysis.  As for my comments, I think that David Frum is an idiot.  And I think he’s chicken little.  And I think he should feel bad about himself.

Even the NYT is asking Who Will Stand Up For Christians?  Well, not the Christian church.  As I have pointed out, they don’t give a damn.

Mississippi Open Carry Not The Wild, Wild West

BY Herschel Smith
2 weeks ago

Remember when I said this?

The judge should be impeached, and as for the claim that Mississippi would turn into the Wild, Wild West, I think that the fear is exactly the opposite.  I think that everyone knows that nothing untoward will occur, and thus Mississippi will become an example to the rest of the states (e.g., Texas, South Carolina, etc.) that have not been traditional open carry states but choose to change that …

In the end, this stolid judge’s day in the sun will soon go away, guns will be openly carried in Mississippi, the Wild, Wild West will not obtain, and LEOs like Chief John Miller will be ridiculed for their fear mongering.

And everything will be made right.

There is this report from the Clarion-Ledger:

About this time last year, there was furor about state House Bill 2, the “open carry” bill.

HB 2 allows someone to openly carry a firearm. It caused an uproar, and litigation to block it, even though the state constitution already had given Mississippians such a right since 1890.

In late August last year, with opponents warning it would bring “chaos” and “the wild West” and with no-guns-allowed signs popping up everywhere, the state Supreme Court upheld the law.

Since then, I’ve noticed … nothing. I’ve seen two people who I suspected were just citizens and not law enforcement wearing holstered pistols. Neither caused an uproar, and neither of their pistols jumped out of their holsters and committed a crime.

“A year later, we don’t have the wild, wild West,” said HB 2′s author, Rep. Andy Gipson, R-Braxton.

Ken Winter, director of the Mississippi police chiefs’ association, last year had voiced serious concern about HB 2. Last week he noted he still has concerns but, “It’s kind of been a non-issue.”

“Personally, I haven’t seen anybody carrying,” Winter said. “I live just outside a small town here in north Mississippi, so I figure if people would be swinging hoglegs anywhere it would be here.”

So it would appear gun-owning Mississippians were granted a right (again, one they already had) and — lo and behold — the vast majority appeared to be sensible and law-abiding about it.

Anyone over about 30 might remember when Mississippians practiced this right years ago, with gun racks in most every pickup. That stopped because criminals were stealing them, even though there were laws against auto burglary and larceny.

That’s the thing about gun laws and restrictions. Short of total bans, they’re not effective. They apply to and restrict the rights of law-abiding citizens.

And thus am I ridiculing Chief John Miller, Judge Winston Kidd, Jody Owens of the Southern Preposterous Lie Center (who said “We’re looking at a Wild West scenario”) and all the other fear mongers.  And everything has been made right on this issue in Mississippi.

Now the next step is to end the machinations of communist South Carolina State Senator Larry Martin and bring constitutional carry to South Carolina.

Police Departments Weigh In On The Use Of Military Gear

BY Herschel Smith
2 weeks, 1 day ago

LA Times:

The department has posted the list, complete with pictures, on its SPD Blotter website. It includes floatation vests and binoculars, signage and gloves, pistol holders, a radiation detector and rifle sights “used by the approximately 130 officers who have passed the department’s rifle-certification program.”

“We have equipment that we feel is necessary for a city of our size,” Whitcomb told The Times. “The equipment we have serves a police purpose. Our No. 1 priorities are protecting people’s lives and looking after their well-being. Our second most important is looking after possessions and property.

“The gear that our department employees use … is primarily defensive in nature,” Whitcomb said. “Our equipment is police specific. We don’t have any military weaponry. The weapons we do own are specific to our profession. … No rockets, no predator drones, no cannons, no tanks.”

The department’s SWAT team does use a BearCat – an armored truck for situations where there may be gunfire, Whitcomb said, but such a vehicle is standard operating procedure for modern police departments.

“It’s used to get our personnel in and out safely, so we can rescue people and evacuate if necessary,” Whitcomb said. “You cannot do that in a sedan. Though we have put some armored plating on the doors in our cars. We also have purchased ballistic shields. It all goes back to the problem of gun violence in our country. … But ultimately we are a police service. We are not the military.”

This is a red herring.  Only seven percent of all SWAT deployments are for hostage, barricades or active shooter situations.

So here’s the deal.  To the Seattle Police Department, you are liars.  I don’t believe you since you invoked a rarely used justification for having SWAT.

What you really want to do is use SWAT to save evidence by busting in doors and invading homes.  Frankly, I don’t give a damn about your evidence collection.  Find another way, including the old fashioned use of detective work.  Or in other words, be thinking men and women rather than knuckle draggers.

You promise me that you’ll never use SWAT in incidents unless it involves hostages or active shooters, and I’ll take back my charge that you’re liars.

Any takers among the PDs who read these pages?  I’m waiting.

And by the way, that picture of the police “sniper” shows it to be absolutely the goofiest setup on a rifle I’ve ever seen.  I certainly wouldn’t use that setup.  You can read more here if you wish.  I’m just not interested enough to elucidate the details for you.  Readers may wish to weigh in.  And I wonder how the U.S. Marine Corps feels about this jerk wearing MARPAT?


26th MEU (10)
Abu Muqawama (12)
ACOG (2)
ACOGs (1)
Afghan National Army (36)
Afghan National Police (17)
Afghanistan (675)
Afghanistan SOFA (4)
Agriculture in COIN (3)
AGW (1)
Air Force (28)
Air Power (9)
al Qaeda (83)
Ali al-Sistani (1)
America (6)
Ammunition (13)
Animals in War (4)
Ansar al Sunna (15)
Anthropology (3)
AR-15s (36)
Arghandab River Valley (1)
Arlington Cemetery (2)
Army (34)
Assassinations (2)
Assault Weapon Ban (25)
Australian Army (5)
Azerbaijan (4)
Backpacking (2)
Badr Organization (8)
Baitullah Mehsud (21)
Basra (17)
BATFE (44)
Battle of Bari Alai (2)
Battle of Wanat (15)
Battle Space Weight (3)
Bin Laden (7)
Blogroll (2)
Blogs (4)
Body Armor (16)
Books (2)
Border War (6)
Brady Campaign (1)
Britain (25)
British Army (35)
Camping (4)
Canada (1)
Castle Doctrine (1)
Caucasus (6)
CENTCOM (7)
Center For a New American Security (8)
Charity (3)
China (10)
Christmas (5)
CIA (12)
Civilian National Security Force (3)
Col. Gian Gentile (9)
Combat Outposts (3)
Combat Video (2)
Concerned Citizens (6)
Constabulary Actions (3)
Coolness Factor (2)
COP Keating (4)
Corruption in COIN (4)
Council on Foreign Relations (1)
Counterinsurgency (214)
DADT (2)
David Rohde (1)
Defense Contractors (2)
Department of Defense (114)
Department of Homeland Security (9)
Disaster Preparedness (2)
Distributed Operations (5)
Dogs (5)
Drone Campaign (3)
EFV (3)
Egypt (12)
Embassy Security (1)
Enemy Spotters (1)
Expeditionary Warfare (17)
F-22 (2)
F-35 (1)
Fallujah (17)
Far East (3)
Fathers and Sons (1)
Favorite (1)
Fazlullah (3)
FBI (1)
Featured (160)
Federal Firearms Laws (14)
Financing the Taliban (2)
Firearms (249)
Football (1)
Force Projection (35)
Force Protection (4)
Force Transformation (1)
Foreign Policy (27)
Fukushima Reactor Accident (6)
Ganjgal (1)
Garmsir (1)
general (14)
General Amos (1)
General James Mattis (1)
General McChrystal (38)
General McKiernan (6)
General Rodriguez (3)
General Suleimani (7)
Georgia (19)
GITMO (2)
Google (1)
Gulbuddin Hekmatyar (1)
Gun Control (188)
Guns (525)
Guns In National Parks (2)
Haditha Roundup (10)
Haiti (2)
HAMAS (7)
Haqqani Network (9)
Hate Mail (7)
Hekmatyar (1)
Heroism (4)
Hezbollah (12)
High Capacity Magazines (11)
High Value Targets (9)
Homecoming (1)
Homeland Security (1)
Horses (1)
Humor (13)
ICOS (1)
IEDs (7)
Immigration (32)
India (10)
Infantry (3)
Information Warfare (2)
Infrastructure (2)
Intelligence (22)
Intelligence Bulletin (6)
Iran (169)
Iraq (377)
Iraq SOFA (23)
Islamic Facism (33)
Islamists (37)
Israel (17)
Jaish al Mahdi (21)
Jalalabad (1)
Japan (2)
Jihadists (71)
John Nagl (5)
Joint Intelligence Centers (1)
JRTN (1)
Kabul (1)
Kajaki Dam (1)
Kamdesh (8)
Kandahar (12)
Karachi (7)
Kashmir (2)
Khost Province (1)
Khyber (11)
Knife Blogging (2)
Korea (4)
Korengal Valley (3)
Kunar Province (20)
Kurdistan (3)
Language in COIN (5)
Language in Statecraft (1)
Language Interpreters (2)
Lashkar-e-Taiba (2)
Law Enforcement (2)
Lawfare (6)
Leadership (5)
Lebanon (6)
Leon Panetta (1)
Let Them Fight (2)
Libya (11)
Lines of Effort (3)
Littoral Combat (7)
Logistics (47)
Long Guns (1)
Lt. Col. Allen West (2)
Marine Corps (229)
Marines in Bakwa (1)
Marines in Helmand (67)
Marjah (4)
MEDEVAC (2)
Media (22)
Memorial Day (2)
Mexican Cartels (20)
Mexico (24)
Michael Yon (5)
Micromanaging the Military (7)
Middle East (1)
Military Blogging (26)
Military Contractors (3)
Military Equipment (24)
Militia (3)
Mitt Romney (3)
Monetary Policy (1)
Moqtada al Sadr (2)
Mosul (4)
Mountains (10)
MRAPs (1)
Mullah Baradar (1)
Mullah Fazlullah (1)
Mullah Omar (3)
Musa Qala (4)
Music (16)
Muslim Brotherhood (6)
Nation Building (2)
National Internet IDs (1)
National Rifle Association (13)
NATO (15)
Navy (19)
Navy Corpsman (1)
NCOs (3)
News (1)
NGOs (2)
Nicholas Schmidle (2)
Now Zad (19)
NSA (1)
NSA James L. Jones (6)
Nuclear (53)
Nuristan (8)
Obama Administration (204)
Offshore Balancing (1)
Operation Alljah (7)
Operation Khanjar (14)
Ossetia (7)
Pakistan (165)
Paktya Province (1)
Palestine (5)
Patriotism (6)
Patrolling (1)
Pech River Valley (11)
Personal (17)
Petraeus (14)
Pictures (1)
Piracy (13)
Police (104)
Police in COIN (3)
Policy (15)
Politics (134)
Poppy (2)
PPEs (1)
Prisons in Counterinsurgency (12)
Project Gunrunner (20)
PRTs (1)
Qatar (1)
Quadrennial Defense Review (2)
Quds Force (13)
Quetta Shura (1)
RAND (3)
Recommended Reading (14)
Refueling Tanker (1)
Religion (73)
Religion and Insurgency (19)
Reuters (1)
Rick Perry (4)
Roads (4)
Rolling Stone (1)
Ron Paul (1)
ROTC (1)
Rules of Engagement (74)
Rumsfeld (1)
Russia (27)
Sabbatical (1)
Sangin (1)
Saqlawiyah (1)
Satellite Patrols (2)
Saudi Arabia (4)
Scenes from Iraq (1)
Second Amendment (136)
Second Amendment Quick Hits (2)
Secretary Gates (9)
Sharia Law (3)
Shura Ittehad-ul-Mujahiden (1)
SIIC (2)
Sirajuddin Haqqani (1)
Small Wars (72)
Snipers (9)
Sniveling Lackeys (2)
Soft Power (4)
Somalia (8)
Sons of Afghanistan (1)
Sons of Iraq (2)
Special Forces (22)
Squad Rushes (1)
State Department (17)
Statistics (1)
Sunni Insurgency (10)
Support to Infantry Ratio (1)
Survival (9)
SWAT Raids (48)
Syria (38)
Tactical Drills (1)
Tactical Gear (1)
Taliban (167)
Taliban Massing of Forces (4)
Tarmiyah (1)
TBI (1)
Technology (16)
Tehrik-i-Taliban (78)
Terrain in Combat (1)
Terrorism (86)
Thanksgiving (4)
The Anbar Narrative (23)
The Art of War (5)
The Fallen (1)
The Long War (20)
The Surge (3)
The Wounded (13)
Thomas Barnett (1)
Transnational Insurgencies (5)
Tribes (5)
TSA (10)
TSA Ineptitude (10)
TTPs (1)
U.S. Border Patrol (4)
U.S. Border Security (11)
U.S. Sovereignty (13)
UAVs (2)
UBL (4)
Ukraine (2)
Uncategorized (38)
Universal Background Check (2)
Unrestricted Warfare (4)
USS Iwo Jima (2)
USS San Antonio (1)
Uzbekistan (1)
V-22 Osprey (4)
Veterans (2)
Vietnam (1)
War & Warfare (210)
War & Warfare (40)
War Movies (2)
War Reporting (18)
Wardak Province (1)
Warriors (5)
Waziristan (1)
Weapons and Tactics (57)
West Point (1)
Winter Operations (1)
Women in Combat (11)
WTF? (1)
Yemen (1)

about · archives · contact · register

Copyright © 2006-2014 Captain's Journal. All rights reserved.