Dean Weingarten has a good find at Ammoland.
Judge Eduardo Ramos, the U.S. District Judge for the Southern District of New York, has issued an Opinion & Order that a ban on stun guns is constitutional. A New York State law prohibits the private possession of stun guns and tasers; a New York City law prohibits the possession and selling of stun guns. Judge Ramos has ruled these laws do not infringe on rights protected by the Second Amendment of the United States Constitution.
Let's briefly [read more]
The president of Ecuador, Guillermo Lasso, announced an authorization this weekend that allows civilians to carry and use guns amid surging crime in the country.
Reuters noted that crime has reached a point where it is hard to curtail, and Lasso hopes to find some degree of respite in allowing citizens to be armed for self-defense.
Lasso—a political conservative—announced the new policy, saying, “We have a common enemy: petty crime, drug trafficking, and organized crime.”
“We’ve modified the decree that allows the possession and carrying of guns,” he continued. “In other words, in general terms … the possession and carrying of guns for civilian use in personal defense is authorized, in accordance with the requirements of law and regulations.”
We’re obviously not against this. And you might say that America needs or even has something similar to this. But that’s not the direction I wanted to take. I was thinking about this the other day, and others have mentioned it. What if the government news outlets in America, let’s not even say breathlessly but matter-of-factly, reported the thousands of self-defense gun uses in America every month?
Yes, thousands of times every month, somebody uses a firearm for self-defense in the United States. This includes everything from showing a firearm to a would-be assailant to brandishing or muzzling and, least often but sadly, actually having to shoot an assailant.
We applaud the move by Mr. Lasso in Ecuador, but the president there should also direct the daily and weekly stats to be aggressively released to the public and broadcast along with any footage of justified self-defense. Once criminals see the effective use of guns in self-defense, crime will plummet.
America’s problem isn’t so much of a crime problem in most states. The U.S. problem is the government narrative that denies guns’ utility and constantly promotes restrictions and confiscations despite the majority of states requiring nothing but the attainment of age to carry and use a handgun in self-defense. If the U.S. government wanted to actually lower crime, they would broadcast every self-defense use and encourage people to report self-defense uses to be included in official releases and broadcasts.
Here is a video from Silencer Shop. This sounds like a nice idea, but at the expense of registering it with the ATF, not so much any more. You’re free to disagree. I see that they have designed the suppressors with different choke sizes in mind. That answered the only question I had before watching he video: what does this do to the shot pattern? I do wonder what this does to the weight distribution and balance of the gun though.
I find that using shotguns in particular reduces the need for any sort of suppression of the sound because of the comfort of wearing sound enhancing ear muffs (or electronic ear muffs). They work well with the lower comb of the shotgun and don’t interfere with getting a good cheek weld.
Rifles are a different story. With rifles the stock doesn’t have the same profile, and this is especially true of modern sporting rifles where the stock is along the same axis as the recoil. I find that electronic ear muffs do interfere with my cheek weld. The only option at that point is foam hearing protection for the ear canal.
The upshot of electronic ear muffs for hunting or other shooting sports is that, especially for a person who is somewhat hard of hearing like me, the muffs actually enhance the sound (other than the shot itself). I damaged my hearing by running power equipment for years before we thought about things like hearing protection. I always use hearing protection now. Thus, the last time I went quail hunting I had a regular conversation with someone with muffs on, and yet suffered no hearing damage from the shotgun. The downside of foam hearing protection is that no such conversation can be had.
I am a fairly well rounded engineer, and in addition to studying both mechanical and nuclear engineering, I have studied the physics of sound, including all of the OSHA regulations and the dumbed-down ways they force you to compute reduction in decibels (for example, when double protection is used). OSHA crafts its calculations for the simplest minded health and safety technician to use, not for the engineer.
But those regulations do provide worker protection. And while it can be said that OSHA has no jurisdiction over hearing safety for those other than workers, if the FedGov cared in the least about the health and safety of its citizens, OSHA would be in front of Congress lobbying for removal of suppressors from the NFA. Hearing loss is a human safety issue. There are no two ways about it.
The only conclusion one can reach is that OSHA doesn’t really care about you, any more than the federal government does. Because you engage in hunting and the other shooting sports, they hate you. It’s that simple. If they cared about you, they would have removed suppressors a very long time ago and allowed them to be sold at the local hardware store.
I dislike that the judge relied on the fact that no psychiatrist needs to be involved in the current New York law in order to seize firearms. The mere word of another person can do it. This law should have been overthrown because it’s clearly unconstitutional. But turning to the neighborhood witch doctors for the infallible word on your state of mind is a bad idea for too many reasons to list, not the least of which is the fact that only God knows the heart of man. Another problem is that one can trust due process only if they trust the process (this sounds like a tautology but it’s not). The ‘due’ part of due process relies on the truthfulness and viability of the justice system to administer justice. More often than not, justice is whatever wicked men want it to be.
But this is better than the alternative, which is that the law could have been found constitutional.
This video provides good basic instruction to those who would show friends and family how to start out. The entry questions are excellent for a very basic start in understanding somebody’s background. Too bad he didn’t film the initial interview. Perhaps in a later video, he’ll provide some tips on interviewing prospective shooters to get a feel for their experience and desires. I’ve done that too. Having a great first-time experience for new shooters is critical to wooing converts to the, um, shooting sports. Confidence is key for a new shooter to become a lifelong self-defense firearms carrier.
I recommend exactly what Mrgunsngear says, spend a couple of weekends renting everything. Also, go with an experienced and knowledgeable associate to help with understanding different firearm types, handling, and critical safety procedures. The goal in your home defense and carry gun purchase(s) is the ability to hit what you’re aiming at; that’s the gun for you.
Another classic gun type. Ruger is doing well with the Marlin line of rifles and has now offered a new wheel gun to its lineup. There’s just something agreeable about the old classics. Ruger Super Wrangler line, including MSRP. Pretty neat! The Bronze Cerakote option looks a lot better in the video than the picture on the Ruger page.
Video Review:
Source (appears to be a copy-paste of Ruger press info):
Sturm, Ruger & Company, Inc. is pleased to introduce the Super Wrangler family of single-action revolvers. Building on the success of the affordably-priced Wrangler line introduced in 2019, the Super Wrangler features a robust steel cylinder frame and ships with two cylinders, allowing you to convert between inexpensive .22 LR ammunition and powerful .22 WMR ammunition.
Built on the legacy of the popular Ruger Single-Six, the Super Wrangler complements Ruger‘s rich history of producing quality, rugged, reliable single-action revolvers. The attractive price, combined with the affordability of rimfire ammunition, make this revolver ideal for learning to shoot, introducing friends or family to the sport, or just experiencing the fun of single-action shooting.
With the introduction of the Single-Six in 1953, Bill Ruger pioneered the use of modern investment casting in firearms manufacturing to usher in a new level of affordability in single-action revolvers. Through the use of modern CNC-machining methods and lean manufacturing techniques, the Super Wrangler continues this tradition and sets a new bar for affordability while maintaining the rugged reliability that is the hallmark of Ruger firearms.
Initially offered in three attractive Cerakote models – black, silver and bronze – the Super Wrangler features an adjustable target sight and 5.5-inch barrel. The standard checkered black grip panels can be swapped for Single-Six panels, allowing for a variety of customized options. The Super Wrangler will fit in Single-Six holsters that accommodate 5.5-inch barrels. Cylinders are unique to the Super Wrangler, and are not interchangeable with standard aluminum-frame Wrangler or Single-Six Convertible cylinders.
Gov. DeSantis just signed a bill that allows people to carry concealed weapons without a permit, making Florida the 26th state to allow permitless carry. We spoke to Florida @SheriffMina who said this won’t make his state safer — in fact, just the opposite. https://t.co/ZfmG8sXOCmpic.twitter.com/fW0Ap7eqrF
— The Problem With Jon Stewart (@TheProblem) April 3, 2023
I won’t ask a copy what he thinks because it doesn’t matter what he thinks. He doesn’t determine my rights.
As for Jon Stewart (do you see the look of unction on his face?), he’s just a court jester wearing funny hats. He’s not the serious person he wants to be. It’s amusing, though, how easily alleged progressives flip to become totalitarians. That’s because in fact they are totalitarians.
The children of hippies believe in the state as god because their parents believed in nothing.
Cry all you want, it’s now the law in Florida. And open carry will happen eventually, so cops won’t have to wonder if there’s a gun stuck in the waist band for open carriers. For everybody else, they should assume people are carrying.
This drill is better described as a Course of Fire and comes via Active Response Training. It’s (was?) used by Texas DPS in their handgun training program.
It’s intended to be shot on the giant B-27 target [full-size man silhouette], scored like the Texas License to Carry test (8-9-10 rings score 5, 7 ring scores 4, on target but outside the 7 ring scores 3). To make it harder I’ve been shooting it using a Shoot Steel target center, where the B zone (center circle) scores 5, the C zone (roughly same size as the 8-9-10 ring on a B-27) scores 4, and everything outside the C zone scores zero (unacceptable hit). The images below are NOT to scale, since the B27 is 24″x45″ and the Shoot Steel target is 18″x24″.
The course measures the quality of shot placement in multiple situations, including switching hands, more than one body position, and several distances up to 25 yards. I don’t like the scoring system. I prefer a tighter scoring system with less allowance for poor shot placement in the time allotted. I’ve not shot this course or the Texas Carry Qual. It looks like a better challenge with the more difficult target (pictured above) that the author uses. It would be fun to run against buddies as a friendly challenge. Go to the link for more background and full instructions.
This article provides some good tips. I’ll quote a few of the points but read the short list for yourself.
I see a red flag when an instructor is more interested in selling their background and less interested in selling the quality of their classes. If someone is stuck talking about how awesome they are and not what their courses will teach you, they are likely more invested in their reputation than their instruction.
If your instructor believes that the specific way they do something is the only way to do something, then that’s a huge red flag.
Speaking of standards, does your instructor have any? Do they use a measurable, objective standard that allows you to see your improvement and track your progress? However, you should see some form of improvement from the beginning of the class to the end. Clearly defined standards also allow instructors to measure the progress of growth of their students and themselves. Are their students successfully improving in accordance with standards?