I Love My People…

Erin Palette writes a powerful post.  Short excerpt:

God bless the Internet. Online, people judge you by the quality of your output, and not by appearance. They get to know your soul before they let the prejudices of the eyes and the flesh influence their judgement. It was on the internet that I finally found not just acceptance, but solace: people liked me for me, and they weren’t looking at me or judging me. I was safe. I had found my armor, my mask, my perfect little seashell, and I polished its interior until, shining like a mirror, I could fool myself into thinking my social prison was boundless and infinite.

A mirrored cage is still a cage.

Thus I toiled, happy in my self-induced solitude, until I stumbled upon the world of the gunblogs. All it took was for me to say “Hey, I like shooting too!” and suddenly I was one of you. It didn’t matter what I looked like or who I wanted to have sex with; I was part of the Tribe of the Gun. That I could write well only made me popular, but it didn’t make me any more likable.

And that’s when I noticed the walls of my cage were keeping me from meeting people who wanted to meet me, and that made me ache in ways I thought were no longer possible. I had rediscovered loneliness.

Slowly… very, very slowly… I started to come out of my shell. I decided to take a chance on people who seemed like good sorts, expecting that every time I made myself vulnerable that I would be hurt beyond my capacity to recover.

This never happened.

RTWT.

As Breda once said on an episode of Vicious Circle:

I’m one of those people – I like people, I’m personable, but I don’t really have “friends” friends, because I just don’t connect to people really that well. But then blogs happened, and I found a whole group of people that I fit in with because I’m weird and they’re weird in kinda the same way, and yea for our mutual weirdness. So, thank you for being weird with me.

Can I get an “AMEN!”?

Rendezvous!

The eighth (8th!) annual Gun Blogger Rendezvous is coming up, September 5-8 in Reno, Nevada.  Each year the Rendezvous is sponsored by several manufacturers and distributors of firearms and firearm accessories, along with gun rights and advocacy groups:

Allchin Gun Parts
Brownells
Cabelas
COMP-TAC
Crimson Trace
Dillon Precision
Front Sight Academy
Gunbroker.com
Hi-Point / MKS Supply
Lucky Gunner
NRA
NSSF
SAF
Tactical Solutions
Burris Optics
GunAuction.Com

True Blue Sam did a little video of some of last year’s sponsors:

[youtube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mPUxmaCZOYM?rel=0]
Trust me, the swag is worth the $30 registration fee alone, and this year the sponsors will be feeding us breakfast Friday and Saturday, and dinner Saturday as well.

S&W team shooter “Millisecond” Molly Smith and her family will be joining us again this year, and for the first time we’ll have a bowling ball mortar at one of our shoots:

[youtube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bQvTIEH0H7I?rel=0]

Bowling ball mortar courtesy of new GBR sponsor Gunauction.com.  If I did the math right, a 22 second hang-time corresponds to a peak altitude of approximately 1950 feet AGL. Impressive.  If you come to GBR-VIII, I’ll tell you the story of the bowling ball mortar at the second big AR15.com Southern Arizona shoot….

114 Days

That’s how long it took for my Arizona CCW permit renewal from the day I mailed it until it came back to me.

Nice to be all legal again.

Still pretty much on hiatus.  Sorry ’bout that.

So Gun Control is Ascendant, Eh?

At least, that’s what The New Republic is spouting.  Well, they’re saying the NRA is finished, which amounts to the same thing.

Of course, our side is pooh-pooing the idea.  That’s because we understand that the NRA is not the pro-gun movement.  It is, of course, the 800-lb. legislative gorilla, but it’s not the driving forceculture is.

Back in December, Salon cooed over the cancellation of Discovery Channel’s reality-themed shows American Guns and Ted Nugent’s Gun Country:

In the wake of the devastating school massacre in Newtown, Conn., on Dec. 14, Discovery has canceled two gun-themed shows.

On Monday, the network announced that “‘American Guns’ concluded earlier this year,” adding, “Discovery Channel chose not to renew the series and has no plans to air repeats of the show.” Yet Deadline notes that Discovery is conspicuously not airing reruns of the show as well. The network is likewise bidding adieu to “Ted Nugent’s Gun Country,” with a confirmation that Nugent will not be returning any time soon.

They did allow, however:

Discovery has also recently 86′ed “Dirty Jobs” and “American Chopper.”

The New York Times also proclaimed in December of last year, Gun-Focused Reality TV Shows Get New Scrutiny After Newtown Killings. So where are we with “gun-themed” TV shows today, after Tucson, Aurora, and Newtown?

Add to that “reality shows” where everyday firearm use is normal:

And this list doesn’t include specialty “sportsman” channel shows like the Outdoor Channel’s:

and about a dozen others. But that top list? Discovery, History Channel, CMT, Animal Planet, Arts & Entertainment Television.

The re-normalization of America’s good gun culture proceeds apace. Which is why we have grassroots support and they have to get along with astroturf.

DECLINING GUN OWNERSHIP!!

OK, I’ve covered this topic before, but since it seems to be one of the Democratic Talking Points™ being parroted widely these days, time to take it up again.

A recent survey announced (and was touted by the media):

The share of American households with guns has declined over the past four decades, a national survey shows, with some of the most surprising drops in the South and the Western mountain states, where guns are deeply embedded in the culture.

The gun ownership rate has fallen across a broad cross section of households since the early 1970s, according to data from the General Social Survey, a public opinion survey conducted every two years that asks a sample of American adults if they have guns at home, among other questions.

The rate has dropped in cities large and small, in suburbs and rural areas and in all regions of the country. It has fallen among households with children, and among those without. It has declined for households that say they are very happy, and for those that say they are not. It is down among churchgoers and those who never sit in pews.

The household gun ownership rate has fallen from an average of 50 percent in the 1970s to 49 percent in the 1980s, 43 percent in the 1990s and 35 percent in the 2000s, according to the survey data, analyzed by The New York Times.

And again:

The number of US households with guns has dropped 15 percent since the 1970s, from 50 percent the population’s households to 35 percent, according to a new survey.

And again:

All the stories about people rushing out to buy guns after recent mass shootings may give the impression that more Americans have guns at home. Yet a survey reveals that the percentage of U.S. homes with a gun has been in steady decline over the past four decades, with a surprisingly sharp drop in the South and Western mountain states. Whereas an average of 50 percent of households owned a gun in the 1970s, that number declined to 35 percent in the 2000s, with 34 percent of households reporting gun ownership in 2012, notes the New York Times.

And again:

When we see attendance at gun shows and reports of brisk gun sales at gun stores, it’s easy to get the impression that a larger percentage of Americans are choosing to purchase firearms. There is, however, ample evidence to the contrary — even as gun sales go up, the percentage of households with guns goes down.

ad infinitum. As goes The New York Times, so goes the world they say.

The Wall Street Journal had, I think, the most balanced opinion piece on the subject, Guns Present Polling Conundrum. I recommend you read the whole thing, but here are some pertinent excerpts:

Press clippings over the last 25 years show reported counts of gun owners fluctuating from 44 million up to 192 million, with dozens of different figures cited, some in the same year, and some — such as the 192 million figure — the result of confusing estimates of guns in American households with counts of gun owners, some of whom own more than one gun.

The polling discrepancies have baffled pollsters.

Michael Dimock, director of the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press, said he also expected question wording to explain the difference: “I was sure we’d find the answer there.” However, Dimock said “you don’t see those things having a consistent effect” — some ask very similar gun questions and get very different estimates. “It’s certainly to me one of the biggest polling puzzles I’ve come across in the last few years.”

“Nobody’s really explained why they come up with such dramatic differences,” Aaron Karp, senior consultant to the Geneva-based Small Arms Survey and senior lecturer in political science at Old Dominion University in Norfolk, Va., said of pollsters.

Who answers the phone in the household could affect responses. “We know that in a survey where respondents are randomly selected from adults in the household, a household headed by a married couple is substantially more likely to report guns in the home if the husband is selected than if the wife is selected,” said Philip Cook, an economist and gun-violence researcher at Duke University.

Also, some gun owners may be reluctant to tell researchers they own guns, because of legal and political considerations, which makes the question more like behavioral or attitudinal questions than like questions that ask basic facts about respondents. “This is an unusual demographic-type question,” said Frank Newport, editor-in-chief of Gallup.

I’m reminded of the Slate piece by Emily Yoffe, the “human guinea pig,” in her piece Guinea Get Your Gun: How I learned to love guns:

So anathema are guns among my friends that when one learned I was doing this piece, he opened his wallet, silently pulled out an NRA membership card, then (after I recovered from the sight) asked me not to spread it around lest his son be kicked out of nursery school.

Lest his son be kicked out of nursery school. Yeah, there’s real incentive to admit gun ownership!  (Do read that whole piece.  Her experience is what scares the piss out of The Other Side™ – guns ARE fun!)

The Gallup poll they reference is this one – Self-Reported Gun Ownership in U.S. is Highest Since 1993, which concluded in 2011:

Forty-seven percent of American adults currently report that they have a gun in their home or elsewhere on their property. This is up from 41% a year ago and is the highest Gallup has recorded since 1993, albeit marginally above the 44% and 45% highs seen during that period.

That’s just a hair below the 50% Gallup reported in 1991. And it adds this tidbit:

The new result comes from Gallup’s Oct. 6-9 Crime poll, which also finds public support for personal gun rights at a high-water mark. Given this, the latest increase in self-reported gun ownership could reflect a change in Americans’ comfort with publicly stating that they have a gun as much as it reflects a real uptick in gun ownership.

So we have one side insisting – and I quote: “More guns, fewer homes,” and “Number of US households with guns drops 15 percent,” etc., etc., but what do the numbers actually say? Well, if we take the General Social Survey results at face value, the percentage of households containing a firearm has dropped from 50% in 1970 to 35% in 2012. According to this site, the NUMBER of U.S. households has increased from 63.5 million in 1970 to 114.8 million in 2010. That’s a net increase in households containing firearms of 8,430,000. If Gallup is right and the percentage has declined from 50% in 1991 to 47% in 2011, then the total number of households containing a gun has increased by – again – just over eight million, but in a much shorter period. The discrepancy between the two estimates is right at 13.8 million households.

Either way, there were apparently eight million more households in 2011-12 with firearms than there were at some time in the past.

And yet violent crime, homicide, suicide AND accidental deaths by firearm have declined year-by-year for over a decade.

Now, when I walked the floor at the NRA convention in Houston last weekend, I took time to speak with several vendors and some people I saw walking the show, asking them how business had been for them.  One such vendor was Aaron Ludwig of Action Target, the company that recently rebuilt the indoor range at NRA headquarters in Fairfax, VA.  I asked Mr. Ludwig how business had been doing for Action Target year-on-year.  He informed me that when he joined the company ten years ago, annual sales were $15 million.  Last year the company did $100 million in sales.  Robert Lewis of EAR Inc. said they’d just had their best year ever.  I stopped Susan Rexrode and Natalie Levasseur of Shooting for Women Alliance as they were walking down an aisle in front of me because they were both wearing vests with “Instructor” embroidered on them.  SFWA has, they informed me, trained over 10,000 women since its inception.  They’ll train men, too, but the men MUST be accompanied by a woman.  Business has been so good they are planning to expand this year. I’ve already quoted Kathy Jackson of The Cornered Cat on her training business’s success. Jeff K. of Magpul Industries of course reported that they’re selling everything they can make.  Their shipping department has grown from four people to ten, and they still can’t keep up.  The CCI representative for their ammunition manufacturing division stated the same concerning ammunition – demand has been steadily increasing until the recent overwhelming demand – and no, the .gov isn’t actually buying more ammo than they normally do – at least not from CCI/Speer.

I personally know two people who recently went into business making holsters for a living.  They’re doing well, too.

The NRA Annual Meeting and Exhibits increased its floorspace this year to 440,000 square feet from 340,000 square feet last year.  I believe them.  I walked the whole thing.  Attendance was up, too, from 70,000+ last year to over 86,000 this year.  I believe that too – it was wall-to-wall people all day Saturday.  I cannot imagine where they all parked.  Membership has reportedly surged as well, to 5 million.

And then, on top of all of this, comes the undeniable fact that guns are being sold at record rates, and have been for several years.  Yet we’re supposed to believe that the number of people who own guns is declining?

On what planet?

Quote of the Day – Compromise Edition

Michael Z. Williamson wins today’s Quote of the Day with this beauty from his Facebook page:

I am the counter to the extreme “no guns” camp. I am the “legalize nukes” camp. Somewhere in the middle is a bargaining point. As long as it includes machine guns and cannon, I’m willing to compromise on nukes.

What I am not willing to do is say, “We gave up nukes, arty, machine guns, so let’s compromise on rifles.” Because that is NOT compromise, it is piecemeal surrender, with nothing given in return.

In exchange for compromising on nukes, I expect the CMP to not only sell weapons to civilians, but to furnish a crate of ammo per buyer every 5 years, to support its Congressionally mandated charter of equipping the militia–all able bodied adults.

See? Compromise. 🙂

Bullet Hose Patrol Carbine

Back in 2003 the Violence Policy Center produced a “study” entitled Bullet Hoses: Semiautomatic Assault Weapons—What Are They? What’s So Bad About Them? in anticipation of the 2004 sunset of the 1994 Assault Weapon Ban (that wasn’t). Here are the “10 Key Points” from that paper:

1. Semiautomatic assault weapons (like AK and AR-15 assault rifles and UZI and MAC assault pistols) are civilian versions of military assault weapons. There are virtually no significant differences between them.

2. Military assault weapons are “machine guns.” That is, they are capable of fully automatic fire. A machine gun will continue to fire as long as the trigger is held down until the ammunition magazine is empty.

3. Civilian assault weapons are not machine guns. They are semiautomatic weapons. (Since 1986 federal law has banned the sale to civilians of new machine guns.) The trigger of a semiautomatic weapon must be pulled separately for each round fired. It is a mistake to call civilian assault weapons “automatic weapons” or “machine guns.”

4. However, this is a distinction without a difference in terms of killing power. Civilian semiautomatic assault weapons incorporate all of the functional design features that make assault weapons so deadly. They are arguably more deadly than military versions, because most experts agree that semiautomatic fire is more accurate—and thus more lethal—than automatic fire.

5. The distinctive “look” of assault weapons is not cosmetic. It is the visual result of specific functional design decisions. Military assault weapons were designed and developed for a specific military purpose—laying down a high volume of fire over a wide killing zone, also known as “hosing down” an area.

6. Civilian assault weapons keep the specific functional design features that make this deadly spray-firing easy. These functional features also distinguish assault weapons from traditional sporting guns.

7. The most significant assault weapon functional design features are: (1) ability to accept a high-capacity ammunition magazine, (2) a rear pistol or thumb-hole grip, and, (3) a forward grip or barrel shroud. Taken together, these are the design features that make possible the deadly and indiscriminate “spray-firing” for which assault weapons are designed. None of them are features of true hunting or sporting guns.

8. “Spray-firing” from the hip, a widely recognized technique for the use of assault weapons in certain combat situations, has no place in civil society. Although assault weapon advocates claim that “spray-firing” and shooting from the hip with such weapons is never done, numerous sources (including photographs and diagrams) show how the functional design features of assault weapons are used specifically for this purpose.

9. Unfortunately, most of the design features listed in the 1994 federal ban—such as bayonet mounts, grenade launchers, silencers, and flash suppressors—have nothing to do with why assault weapons are so deadly. As a result, the gun industry has easily evaded the ban by simply tinkering with these “bells and whistles” while keeping the functional design features listed above.

10. Although the gun lobby today argues that there is no such thing as civilian assault weapons, the gun industry, the National Rifle Association, gun magazines, and others in the gun lobby enthusiastically described these civilian versions as “assault rifles,” “assault pistols,” “assault-type,” and “military assault” weapons to boost civilian assault-weapon sales throughout the 1980s. The industry and its allies only began to use the semantic argument that a “true” assault weapon is a machine gun after civilian assault weapons turned up in inordinate numbers in the hands of drug traffickers, criminal gangs, mass murderers, and other dangerous criminals.

And the summation:

The plain truth is that semiautomatic assault weapons look bad because they are bad. They were designed and developed to meet a specific military goal, which was killing and wounding as many people as possible at relatively short range as quickly as possible, without the need for carefully aimed fire. In short, they are ideal weapons for war, mass killers, drug gangs, and other violent criminals.

So, to emphasize the VPC’s assertions and conclusions:

1. There is no difference between semi-automatic and fully-automatic versions of the same weapon, except somehow the semi-automatic civilian versions are “are arguably more deadly than military versions”. (Someone should inform the Pentagon. And Congress. We need the 1986 ban on new machine guns lifted, since they’re safer than semi-autos.)

2. The sole purpose of these weapons is “killing and wounding as many people as possible at relatively short range as quickly as possible, without the need for carefully aimed fire”

3. There is “no place in civil society” for these weapons.

So why does pretty much every police officer in the country have one in his vehicle?

 photo Patrol_Rifle.jpg
I saw that this morning at the Circle K. From the looks of it, not only is it one of those eeeeevil “bullet hoses,” but it’s a short-barreled bullet hose, one that we mere civilians cannot own without jumping through a bunch of legal hoops. I couldn’t tell if it was one of the less-lethal fully-automatic bullet hoses, as the safety was obscured by the locking mechanism that keeps it secured to the motorcycle, but I wouldn’t doubt it.

I don’t get it – if bullet hoses and high-capacity magazines are so damned dangerous, why don’t we restrict our police departments to six-shot revolvers? I mean, if they really need something terrifyingly lethal, why not follow Joe Biden’s advice and get a double-barreled twelve gauge shotgun?