Monday - May 14, 2012
Oh Deer, Drew Redesigned Another One
There is nothing new under the sun in the firearms world, not even this idea.
It’s a .22 rimfire rifle with a special coaxial double barrel on it, that uses concrete nailgun blanks to shoot hollow crossbow arrows at impressive velocities.
Looks awesome, but does it work? Two different vendors for what appears to be the same product: one made by LaRue Tactical and the other, called the “Airrow” by Swivel Machine, both say they can be fit to your Ruger 10/22 or 77/22 rifle in minutes, and will shoot 305 grain 16” arrows at an astonishing 425 feet per second.
These things are still firearms, called “arrow rifles”, but they claim tremendous accuracy (1” groups at 50 yards) and power. If you screw off the arrow’s target point and screw on a broadhead, do you now have a nearly silent short range deer killing machine? Could be. I’m not sure how the game wardens would classify this one for regular hunters, but for the guys who work as suburban deer assassins this could be a real solution.
Here’s how they work. The arrow has no nock in the back; it’s open. The rifle has an outer barrel tube and a very thin inner barrel tube. The arrow slides down over the inner tube in a moderately tight friction fit. The arrow uses plastic vanes instead of feathers, and they fold mostly flat inside the outer tube. A special chamber is on the breech end of the barrel to hold the concrete nailer blank cartridge. Pull the trigger and the blank goes off, pressurizing the hollow inner tube and applying force to the arrow from the inside, right behind the head. It’s like when you were a kid and used to blow the paper cover off your soda straw in the lunchroom. The hollow arrow rides straight on the outside of the inner barrel, and perhaps gets a little guidance from the inside of the outer barrel. It pops off the end and goes zooming away. Spin a new arrow down the barrel, load in a new blank cartridge, and you’re ready to shoot again.
It doesn’t take much skill to use. You don’t have to spend years pulling a bowstring and becoming Robin Hood to know how to do it. Load, point, fooop, harvest. That simple. The arrow rifle packs more wallop than even the strongest bow or crossbow. In theory.
And theory is the problem. A 305 grain arrow is awfully light. Sure, it’s only 16” long, just like a crossbow bolt, but it’s a good 25% lighter than a typical hunting arrow. That means it will shoot faster, but it will have very limited range. How limited a range do you really need to harvest deer in suburbia? I’m not sure. I drove down to Flemington last night at about 10:30, and the deer were everywhere. In my 12 mile drive I passed 8 small herds of them, some right out in the middle of the road just standing around, and several single deer on their own. I’m pretty sure I saw 50 deer, and even blowing the horn on my car (which they ignore) I passed within 15 feet of them. In a car. How many more were in the fields 50, 80, 100 yards away? Probably thousands. Hunterdon County is plagued with the rotters. They’re everywhere.
Lots of areas are like ours, and many towns have hired deer assassins. They don’t call them that, oh no. They call them “intrusive wildlife management experts” but they’re deer killers, plain and simple. Around here the deer are so inured to people you could probably hunt them with a hammer. You can just about walk right up to them before they’ll startle and run. But that isn’t always the case. Sometimes you need to shoot them from a bit more than arm’s length. Sometimes you need to shoot them from halfway across a meadow, or at the far end of somebody’s acre-plus backyard. And that range might be a bit more than what you can do with a modern bow.
The limited range idea is a good one. You don’t want arrows or bullets flying for a thousand yards, shooting through walls and bad stuff like that. Thunderous booms that shatter windows and frighten the neighbors. Bad. But I’m not sure this particular rig has the power to do the job at 75 yards. And I’m not even certain that it will suffice at 50. It’s range might be too limited. So let’s build a bigger one that will do the job, no matter what.
For starters, I think the arrow should weigh quite a bit more. Call it 435 grains, a full ounce. A nice thick shaft and a full size broadhead, to cut the biggest deepest hole and have the retained inertia to do it, no matter what the angle to the target is. At a distance a bit beyond what regular bowhunters would consider. 80 yards, or 100. How to go about building one of those?
Pretty easy to solve that one. Just use a bigger blank. And a gun with a locking action, ie the Ruger 77/22 bolt action rifle, instead of recoil operated semi-automatic like the Ruger 10/22. Lock the action closed to get every last bit of oomph from your cartridge. With a good steel inner barrel, chamber pressure won’t be anything to worry about, especially since the “chamber” will be 15” long, all the way down the barrel to the back of the arrowhead. Even in .17 caliber, that’s still a fair amount of volume, and that reduces pressure. A lot.
Running the numbers with the archery formula, (KE = M*V*V/450240; use the same KE for a different arrow weight M to solve for velocity V) a bow that can push a 305 grain arrow at 425fps should be able to push a 435 grain arrow a 285fps. That’s very close to what the best modern compound bows will do, and they shoot hard and flat enough for 50-60 yard deer hunting. Take it up two notches, since arrows are not really all that aerodynamic, and build one that will shoot the same 435gr arrow at 440fps. In a gun. Now you’ve got a 100 yard weapon for sure. And it can be done with a blank cartridge smaller than a .22 WMR, something halfway between a .17 Hornady HMR and the smaller .17 Mach 2; one only 20mm long. That’s more than you’ll get from even the strongest concrete nailer blank, but we are talking special purpose. And even my daydream “super magnum” arrow rifle won’t make as much bang as a firecracker. foop.
For short ranges you could always use a smaller blank. A put a hit on smaller deer. We have lots of those here too.
http://www.laruetactical.com/ruger-10-22-deluxe-arrow-conversion-kit
http://www.swivelmachine.com/html/rimfire.htm
h/t to John Jay
Posted by Drew458
on 05/14/2012 at 02:02 PM
Filed Under: • Guns and Gun Control •
• Comments (3)
•
Trackbacks(0)
Permalink • Sunday - May 13, 2012
a nationwide ban on lead ammo? some say yes.
I don’t think you’ll be surprised but it’s interesting to note how they word things with this subject.
It’s a bit long so I’ll only post an edited version.
For all of it for those interested, as always see the link below.
‘An attack on country sports’ ...anger at Wildfowl Trust’s bid to ban lead shotBy VALERIE ELLIOTT
A leading conservation charity is at loggerheads with its pro-shooting president, Prince Charles, after launching a campaign calling for a nationwide ban on lead shot.
The Wildfowl and Wetlands Trust (WWT), which also has the Queen as patron, is calling for a ban on the shot used in game shooting – despite the risk of offending members of the Royal Family who enjoy this traditional country sport.
The move has revived tensions in the countryside, seven years after the foxhunting ban.
Chef Marco Pierre White is among many people convinced it is an attempt to attack game shooting.
The British Association for Shooting and Conservation and the Countryside Alliance have been angered by the move and insist there is no scientific justification for a lead shot ban.
They claim it would harm an industry worth almost £2 billion to the national economy.
Farmers are also concerned the higher price for non-lead shot will drive up the cost of controlling rabbits, foxes, pigeons and rooks on farmland.
A typical pack of 25 cartridges filled with lead shot costs about £7 while a pack with non-toxic shot made of the metal bismuth costs about £34.
Cheaper steel shot is sold for about £5 a pack – but this high-velocity ammunition is not suitable for many older guns because there is a risk the barrels could explode.
The controversial WWT strategy is revealed in papers leaked to The Mail on Sunday.
It has triggered particular anger because the charity is widely supported in the shooting community.
The WWT was established by conservationist Sir Peter Scott in 1946 at the Slimbridge nature reserve in Gloucestershire and now has eight sites in the UK.
Mr Pierre White, a keen shooter, said: ‘People have been shooting with lead for generations, why would you want to change it?
‘If you want to talk about pollution, let’s talk about petrol and industry. The bottom line is that they are trying to ban shooting.’
Posted by peiper
on 05/13/2012 at 12:22 PM
Filed Under: • Guns and Gun Control • UK •
• Comments (2)
•
Trackbacks(0)
Permalink • Tuesday - April 24, 2012
Granny Get Your Gun
Unlike the dickless UK, us’n ‘Mericans have a simpler solution
Georgia granny thwarts 2 would-be robbers in shootout
Authorities in Georgia say a grandmother foiled a robbery attempt by two armed men by getting into a shootout with them, injuring one man.
Police told The Telegraph that Lulu Campbell just dropped off her grandson at her daughter’s house early Saturday morning when someone demanded money outside her car, threatening to shoot her.
Campbell says the man fired at her, missing. The 57-year-old fired back, striking him in the chest. Her truck sustained eight bullet holes in the hood, one in the grill. Both front side windows were destroyed. The second man fled after she shot at him.
Campbell, who owns convenience stores and gas stations, always is armed.
Police say 32-year-old Brenton Lance Spencer has been hospitalized and was charged with aggravated assault and attempted armed robbery.
That’ll teach ‘em to pick on poor defenseless old ladies!
My hat is off to Miss Lulu. Stood her ground and returned fire accurately while the perps blazed away without effect. Outstanding.
And she’s a successful business person, owning a string of stores. A regular All American in my book.
But to be fair, at only 57 she probably doesn’t look a thing like Granny Clampett. She probably looks more like this lady, only perhaps minus the hat.
Posted by Drew458
on 04/24/2012 at 11:11 AM
Filed Under: • Crime • Guns and Gun Control •
• Comments (5)
•
Trackbacks(0)
Permalink • Thursday - April 19, 2012
Ann is 75% right
Ann Coulter’s latest, Negroes With Guns:
We don’t know the facts yet, but let’s assume the conclusion MSNBC is leaping to is accurate: George Zimmerman stalked a small black child and murdered him in cold blood, just because he was black.
If that were true, every black person in America should get a gun and join the National Rifle Association, America’s oldest and most august civil rights organization.
Apparently this has occurred to no one because our excellent public education system ensures that no American under the age of 60 has the slightest notion of this country’s history.
After the war, Democratic legislatures enacted “Black Codes,” denying black Americans the right of citizenship—such as the rather crucial one of bearing arms—while other Democrats (sometimes the same Democrats) founded the Ku Klux Klan.
For more than a hundred years, Republicans have aggressively supported arming blacks, so they could defend themselves against Democrats.
There is not one word or idea in her essay that is wrong. I give her a 75% grade because she doesn’t address the sticky side of the problem: aside from this instance in Sanford Florida, the vast majority of gun crimes are committed by black people. Against everyone. And that’s the rub. And it’s not all black people at all; most of it is done by a small segment, a precise demographic in age, gender, and locale. A very tight Venn diagram. And I don’t see any kind of legal solution in sight, especially not when a very large part of that gun crime committing group attains their firearms outside of the control of the law. I’m not even saying that this is illegal, because in some instances it isn’t, although in most instances it is. I’m just sticking up my head, waiting to be hit with the “racist” whack-a-mole mallet, pointing out that no laws, new or old, are going to stop this portion of our population from acquiring firearms. I’m also not sure that I can condemn those people from ignoring the laws in order to arm themselves.
But I can condemn the use of those arms. Using your gun to commit a crime. Being so unstable and irresponsible that you “pop a cap” in someone because they got in your way or looked at you funny? That’s insanity. Depravity. Because someone was critical of your behavior? “They dissed me!” Really? What makes you think you were deserving of kowtowing respect in the first place? Was it your fashion sense, with your bottom hanging out of your ill fitting pants?
I agree with Ann: Gun Control is Black Control. Always has been, always will be. And the vast majority of it comes from the Left. It is not the solution. The solution is Self Control. Self respect. Morals. Ethics. Honesty. Family values. Parenting skills. Enlightenment through education. Membership in a beneficent faith, not one that calls for violence against non-believers. Tolerance.
The best way to avoid violence is to not be among violent people, and to not share their way of life but to abhor it. It all boils down to knowing the difference between right and wrong, and having the drive for self improvement (character as well as financial). That’s what civilization is all about.
Even barbarian cultures know right from wrong. They have a whole set of tribal values that say Do This, Don’t Do That, honor the clan, this is what makes a boy a man, a girl a woman, this is how we raise our children, and so forth. It’s only mindless animals that use wanton violence against anything and everything, including their own. And it takes generations of concerted effort to destroy cultures, religions, family values, the drive for self improvement, the pride of self reliance, and the education system that results in degrading people to the feral level. I’m pretty sure President Johnson called that his Great Society Plan.
I’m hoping Ann now writes Part Two and fills in the gaps, earning the “A” she is more than capable of.
Posted by Drew458
on 04/19/2012 at 12:20 PM
Filed Under: • Guns and Gun Control •
• Comments (1)
•
Trackbacks(0)
Permalink • Sunday - April 08, 2012
Fair And Balanced?
I can’t say if Fox News is getting on the gun control bandwagon again, or if they’ve decided to report more stories of violent crime in the wake of the Treyvon story, or if it’s just been a busy week for the shooters, but I did notice that today’s news has quite a lot of these stories. Maybe it is a good thing, maybe not. Depends on how you want to spin it. But people shoot each other every day in America, for a variety of reasons; some groups of people are more violence prine than others seemingly, and some areas are far more violence prone than others, no question about it. Perhaps if Fox were to just report them all, it would open everyone’s eyes to the reality. Raise their awareness. The stories are out there, locally. And many could be written if reporters made a tiny bit of effort. Perhaps it would be best not to categorize them at first, and just let a pattern emerge. You can see it already if you know how to read between the line a little: “Police in Gary are looking for a purple PT Cruiser and a white Cadillac involved in the shooting.” Gangs and ghettos and felons, oh my. And crazy psychotic evil people.
5 Detroit men charged with kidnapping, torturing, killing 2 women.
Texas flash mob beach party shooting, 1 dead, 3 wounded.
Shot dead in the street for his sneakers.
Father dies as human shield shot many times, protecting his 8 year old son Tre.
violent felon Nakwon Foxworth shoots 4 cops in Brooklyn shootout.
AZ Taco Bell drive-through customer shoots special needs pedestrian.
Possibly hispanic guy in hoodie robs Walmart, shoots and kills manager.
and the list goes on. And on. Albert Rodriguez Arias stabs his elderly father 6 times with knife, turns himself in. Maybe it’s high time the news groups started running the stories. There is a lot more crime going on than most of us realize; don’t just report the most sensational cases.
Speaking of sensational ...
Taking it up a notch? Florida prostitute borrows idea from “McNuggets hooker”, will have sex for 2 double cheeseburgers. And a $40 tip. Busted!
No word on what she’d do for fries and a Coke.
Posted by Drew458
on 04/08/2012 at 10:47 AM
Filed Under: • Crime • Guns and Gun Control • Media-Bias • News-Briefs •
• Comments (0)
•
Trackbacks(0)
Permalink • Saturday - March 17, 2012
Circular Linkage and Brittania Rules
If I link to him, and he links to me, does that set up an infinite loop that fractures the time/space continuumuumumm and flushes the intertubes? I’ll just have to risk it.
Yay Me, I got linked from Summer Patriot, Winter Soldier. When I spoke the other day about playing guns online, this is what I was talking about. John Jay over there is bringing the .280/30 back to life, or a close approximation of it, and it looks like he’s actually going to build the thing. And it’s awesome that I was able to help by running a bunch of calculations for him to help prove his idea had merit.
The .280 British, and it’s slightly later and larger variant the .280/30, were both early assault rifle cartridges that predated the 7.62x51 NATO (aka the .308 Winchester). In the post-WWII world the Brits were miles ahead of the Americans in prophesying the battlefield of the future, and developed a great mid-powered cartridge and an amazing little “bullpup” rifle to use it. Unfortunately they were under the thumb of the Americans at that point, who were - as usual - behind the times and wouldn’t budge for any cartridge less potent than the .30-06. So the .280 British never got off the ground, and the 7.62 NATO came about, and it turned out to be way too much gun for full-auto, and then a little more than a decade later the Yanks did an about face and signed on for the 5.56 poodle shooter. And history bears out my “as usual”: the US military was one of the last to switch from flintlocks to percussion fired guns, was one of the last to adopt a metallic cartridge firearm (Springfield 1873 “trapdoor” in .45-70), was one of the last to go to a repeating rifle (the Krag), was one of the last to get on the spitzer bullet bandwagon, etc, ... but somehow was one of the first to adopt a semi-automatic battle rifle, the M1 Garand. Although it’s debatable whether the 8mm Mauser or the .30-06 was the better cartridge, both were far more than what was called for after 1945. So the 7.62 NATO was adopted, and it matched the .30-06 in terms of military performance, but did it with a cartridge 1/2” shorter and somewhat lighter. But the .280 British was nearly as potent, was 3/4” shorter and even lighter, and would have made a tremendous intermediate range combat cartridge, solidly effective to 600 meters. Too bad that politics killed it. It took the Americans almost 50 years before they came back around to the idea of light, short rifles of intermediate power (FN SCAR) and we still may not be there yet.
Here’s a link John sent to a great old newsreel clip now on video. Look how little recoil the .280 generates in that backwards built bullpup gun. Fantastic.
And I’d rather just ignore the fact that all of these rounds were reinventing the wheel to a great extent, and any number of shorter cartridges of somewhat smaller calibers and somewhat shorter lengths had all be around since about 1905 or thereabouts. Truly, there is very little new in the gun world. Most of it has been kicking around for more than 100 years now. Almost all the advances since then have been in metallurgy and propellants, although we’ve come up with some new ideas about case taper, shoulder angle, and neck length that have all aided accuracy.
So hats off to the “.280 JJ” or whatever Mr. Jay calls his creation once he makes it work. He’s not looking to get any government to adopt it, but it ought to make a dandy deer hunter for moderate distances. And it might just fit into the AR platform, just to smack the hoplophobic argument that “black rifles are only for war, not for hunting” as it so richly deserves. Awesome.
Posted by Drew458
on 03/17/2012 at 02:46 PM
Filed Under: • Guns and Gun Control •
• Comments (0)
•
Trackbacks(0)
Permalink • Thursday - March 15, 2012
So where were we?
Peiper is taking a couple days off to deal with some issues. He will return when he can.
I’m a bit late posting this morning. I was playing guns with another blogger, designing a couple more mid-power military assault rifle cartridges. It’s easy to do based on .308/.30-06 cases, although scrunching them up to fit into the AR rifle platform really limits performance. It can be done though. One thing that I don’t like is the tendency to cram a “big” bullet deep into the cartridge case to try and make it fit into some arbitrary overall length (OAL), like the 2.25” OAL that the AR rifles are limited to. Here’s an example:
This is the 6.5 Grendel cartridge, an excellent lower-mid-power design that is no longer trademarked as of last month. It is shown with a large bullet seated way into the main body of the case. I don’t like this. In an optimum world, I don’t think any flat based bullet should be seated so that the heel is beyond the base of the neck, or a boat tail base bullet seated deeper than the boat tail being past the end of the neck. This is shown by the purple and aqua lines, respectively. Doing so makes it almost impossible to utilize a full charge of powder without compressing it or smashing some of the grains when you force the bullet in. A full charge - what shooters call 100% load density - not only keeps the bullet from shifting backwards under recoil, it also maximizes potential accuracy. In my opinion, if you’re forced to use such a large bullet to get the BC and SD you want (Ballistic Coefficient [aerodynamic drag] and Sectional Density [a measure of mass to diameter that is usually directly proportional to penetrating ability]) and have to seat it like this, then your cartridge design needs some work. Large for their caliber bullets are of course heavier than normal, and that heaviness gives you a bit more inertia at both very short and very long ranges, which increases killing power. In theory. Personally I think you’d be better off seating them to optimum depth and then working up the powder charge to get the velocity/pressure/powder burnt percentage/muzzle flash you want. Unfortunately that can’t be done when you’re trying to retrofit a bigger cartridge into an existing weapon platform, and that’s what this is all about: finding a more potent round for the AR rifles than the 5.56 NATO poodle shooter. The 6.5 Grendel is a great choice for this, in my opinion better than the 6.8 SPC from Remington. Both cartridges are significantly more potent than the 5.56 NATO cartridge, and both fit into the AR rifle with only a small loss in magazine capacity. Both generate more recoil, but I don’t see that as a real issue. The recoil they generate is quite light, less than half of the 7.62 NATO/M14 cartridge and rifle, but it’s still more than the finger tap level of recoil that the 5.56 makes in an M16/AR15 rifle.
My cartridge design is a bit more potent than either of these. I call it the .270 Savage Short because I based it on the old .300 Savage, which itself was a shortened .30-06 developed a few years after WWI. A .270 is the same caliber as a 6.8mm; both use bullets .277” in diameter. With a light 115 grain bullet my design makes a potent 400 yard military assault weapon with very little recoil, and with a heavier 130 grain bullet it becomes a 600 yard battle rifle with only a bit more recoil. Unfortunately it would need a rebated rim cut to fit the largest possible AR bolt face, though with a cartridge body just a couple hundredths bigger than the Grendel’s (.470” vs .445") magazine capacity will be the same or perhaps 1 or 2 rounds less. And my design produces much more velocity from a short barreled gun too. A calculated 2800fps with a 115gr bullet in a 20” barrel, all powder burnt, with reduced muzzle flash and lowered noise, and only 10lbs of recoil in a 7lb rifle. 2700fps with a 130gr bullet and 12lb of recoil. Certainly manageable.
Armchair cartridge design. It’s a fun way to play and you can talk about your creations for hours. All you need is the software. Actually building the cartridge would cost a few hundred. Add in another thousand for the custom barrel, and 10 or 20 thousand for professional pressure measurement, which you’d need if you wanted to bring the thing to market. So doing on the computer is much cheaper, even if it’s only 95% realistic.
Posted by Drew458
on 03/15/2012 at 10:12 AM
Filed Under: • Daily Life • Guns and Gun Control • Military •
• Comments (2)
•
Trackbacks(0)
Permalink • Saturday - March 10, 2012
This Doesn’t Work In Philadelphia Either
For a while there it seemed Philly was passing it’s own set of gun laws every year, only to have them, um, shot down by the state Supreme Court. Cities can’t make laws that go beyond state law. Now it’s Seattle’s turn to lurn. How come this kind of thing never works in New York City? Gun law-wise, the place is a nation unto itself.
The Washington State Supreme Court put an end Thursday to the city of Seattle’s efforts to impose a gun ban at city parks.
Attorneys for the city had asked the high court to overturn a lower court ruling that the gun ban violated state law. But the Supreme Court justices declined to even look at the case, reaffirming that the gun ban is illegal.
The National Rifle Association cheered the ruling, saying that it represents a “final victory” for Seattle gun owners.
The case began in 2008, when the city of Seattle and then-Mayor Greg Nickels enacted a rule that banned firearms from city parks, community centers and other city properties.
...
In 2009, the city added another rule that banned guns from parks where children were likely to be present.
In October 2009, the NRA and the Second Amendment Foundation asked a King County Superior Court judge to strike down the rules as a violation of a state law prohibiting localities from enacting this type of ban on guns.
In response, the city replied that the ban was permissible because it was acting in its interest as owner of the park properties.
In 2010, a King County Superior Court judge struck down the gun ban, and the state Court of Appeals later confirmed that ruling. By declining to review the appeals court ruling, the state Supreme Court reaffirmed it, and the gun ban is now history.
Beat the leftist nanny-staters down with a hammer again and again until they give up or die. Preferably both.
Hell, they knew they were full of beans in 2008 when they passed the first law, and their AG told them so:
In October 2008, Attorney General Rob McKenna (R) issued an opinion, which put the city and Mayor Nickels on further notice that Washington cities may not enact local laws prohibiting possession of firearms on city property or in city-owned facilities.
In 2010 the King County court threw out their bans:
The rule banning firearms in Seattle parks was tossed out Friday by King County Superior Court Judge Catherine Shaffer, who said the city cannot pre-empt state law.
The city now has 30 days to remove the 116 metal signs, which are about 1 by 1-½ feet in size and show a handgun inside a red circle, with a red line crossing out the gun. In all-capital letters there is the warning: “FIREARMS PROHIBITED.”
Assistant City Attorney Gary Keese said, “We will comply with the court order and are weighing with the mayor and City Council the options for appeal.”
I’m not a lawyer, but I don’t think “but we don’t like the decision” is sufficient grounds for appeal. Nevertheless ...
In 2011 the State Court of Appeals threw out their appeal:
The Washington state Court of Appeals affirmed this week that a gun ban in Seattle’s parks is illegal. The decision comes more than a year after a King County judge sided with several area gun owners, the NRA and the Second Amendment Foundation, and the city of Seattle appealed.
In this week’s ruling, which affirms the trial court’s decision, the Court of Appeals panel wrote: “We hold that under the plain language of RCW 9.41.290 and RCW 9.41.300, the City’s attempt to regulate the possession of firearms at designated park areas and park facilities open to the public by adopting the Firearms Rule is preempted by state law.”
So my guess is that Seattle will now try and appeal their refused appeal of their denied appeal of their denied appeal of the decision that said the same thing as their own AG’s original opinion to the 9th Circuit clowns, and then the US Supreme Court, which will both ignore them as well. As long as the taxpayers are footing the bill, the leftists simply will not take no for an answer. It’s for the chiiiiildren you know.
Posted by Drew458
on 03/10/2012 at 02:18 PM
Filed Under: • Guns and Gun Control •
• Comments (2)
•
Trackbacks(0)
Permalink • Tuesday - March 06, 2012
GUNS AND THE TSA? NO. A PURSE AND ONE SILLY AGENT
Gotta wonder sometimes, well actually all of the time, if even one TSA officer is this stupid, how good is the agency that employees her.
I ask you. Is this going a bit far?
The story is a year old but I never saw it on BMEWS or anywhere else before a few minutes ago, while searching for something.
I found a site called Opposing Views which is quite interesting. There were a ton of short articles about teachers (women) committing the high crime of abuse of boys as old as 14 and 15. When I was young and innocent and you were too, I think it was called pleasure. But we were never that lucky. So I’m following all these stories wondering how come these ladies aren’t smarter in view of the pc world we live in and all the attention and jail time already dished out in previous years, when I found this article. Which is more interesting then teen sex with teachers.
Submitted by Mark Berman Opposing Views on Dec 5, 2011
First the TSA allegedly strip searches a feeble old lady, now a teenager misses her flight because of a gun-themed purse. What is going through the minds of these supposedly well-trained agents?
Vanessa Gibbs was trying to board a flight in Norfolk, Virginia to her home in Jacksonville, Florida recently when she was stopped at security. It seems her purse emblazoned with a tiny, hollow gun was literally a federal offense.
“She (the TSA agent) was like, ‘This is a federal offense because it’s in the shape of a gun,’” Gibbs News4Jax.com. “I’m like, ‘But it’s a design on a purse. How is it a federal offense?’”
The genius agents finally figured out the gun was just a design, but they still told Gibbs it could not be carried onto the plane. It would have to be checked. But by this time she had missed her flight.
As it always does, the TSA stands by its actions, saying replica guns have been banned on planes since 2002.
“Security checkpoints may be impacted or closed because replica weapons like toy guns, novelty grenades, fake bombs and other items appear similar to the real thing when viewed through an X-ray machine,” TSA spokesman Greg Soule told CNN. “Checkpoint closures cause significant delays, which can be avoided if passengers don’t bring these items to the airport.”
Gibbs pointed out that she has taken the purse on several flights without incident, including the flight down to Virginia.
Posted by peiper
on 03/06/2012 at 12:38 PM
Filed Under: • Guns and Gun Control • USA •
• Comments (2)
•
Trackbacks(0)
Permalink • Monday - March 05, 2012
I Hope NJ , NY, CA, CT, and Washington DC are listening
Wow, there is at least one federal judge with a functioning brain. Outstanding.
“A citizen may not be required to offer a good and substantial reason why he should be permitted to exercise his rights. The right‘s existence is all the reason he needs.”
A federal court ruling in Maryland, that the Second Amendment right to bear arms extends beyond the home and that citizens may not be required to offer a “good and substantial reason” for obtaining a concealed carry permit, is a huge victory, the Second Amendment Foundation said today.
Ruling in the case of Woollard v. Sheridan – a case brought by SAF in July 2010 on behalf of Maryland resident Raymond Woollard, who was denied his carry permit renewal – the U.S. District Court for Maryland ruled that “The Court finds that the right to bear arms is not limited to the home.”
U.S. District Court Judge Benson Everett Legg noted, “In addition to self-defense, the (Second Amendment) right was also understood to allow for militia membership and hunting. To secure these rights, the Second Amendment’s protections must extend beyond the home: neither hunting nor militia training is a household activity, and ‘self-defense has to take place wherever [a] person happens to be.’”
“This is a monumentally important decision,” said SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb. “The federal district court has carefully spelled out the obvious, that the Second Amendment does not stop at one’s doorstep, but protects us wherever we have a right to be. Once again, SAF’s attorney in this case, Alan Gura, has won an important legal victory. He was the attorney who argued the landmark Heller case, and he represented SAF in our Supreme Court victory in McDonald v. City of Chicago.”
“Equally important in Judge Legg’s ruling,” he added, “is that concealed carry statutes that are so discretionary in nature as to be arbitrary do not pass constitutional muster.”
At issue in the case is the Maryland statute which says that the Secretary of the State Police can issue a carry permit if the applicant “has good and substantial reason to wear, carry, or transport a handgun, such as a finding that the permit is necessary as a reasonable precaution against apprehended danger.” Md.Code Ann., Pub. Safety § 5-306(a)(5)(ii).
In today’s decision on the merits, the “good and substantial reason” requirement was ruled to violate the Second Amendment. The court held that the Second Amendment right is not limited to self-defense in the home. It also includes the militia and hunting. None of the Second Amendment rights can logically be confined solely to the home: “In addition to self-defense, the right was also understood to allow for militia membership and hunting. To secure these rights, the Second Amendment‘s protections must extend beyond the home: neither hunting nor militia training is a household activity, and ‘self-defense has to take place wherever [a] person happens to be’.”
Washington DC seems to think your Second Amendment rights stop at your front door. New Jersey is one of those supposed “may issue” states for Concealed Carry (CCW) and requires a “proof of justifiable need”, though in reality the only permits ever issued are to retired police, and the rare rich and politically very well connected. Even being kidnapped by biker gangs out on bail and threatened with death is not “justifiable need” according to the state, but creating a big enough lawsuit IS. The other “may issue” states have laws with their own wording, but it generally boils down to either proving your need or being on a very short list of approved people decided by the local or county law enforcement types. Today’s decision by the United States District Court puts a huge dent in the “prove your need” argument. Unfortunately, it ain’t over yet ...
The case is headed to the Fourth Circuit, which has a mixed record on Second Amendment issues. From there, Woollard could be the case in which the Supreme Court chooses to tell recalcitrant lower federal courts that Heller and McDonald really do mean what they say: that the Second Amendment includes the right to carry, albeit not in “sensitive places,” and the government may, if it wishes, require that carry be open rather than concealed.
Hey, I’ve got nothing against open carry. I’d just need to buy a cowboy hat to go with the Wild West look.
From the decision:
A law that burdens the exercise of an enumerated constitutional right by simply making that right more difficult to exercise cannot be considered “reasonably adapted” to a government interest, no matter how substantial that interest may be. Maryland’s goal of “minimizing the proliferation of handguns among those who do not have a demonstrated need for them,” id. at 40, is not a permissible method of preventing crime or ensuring public safety; it burdens the right too broadly. Those who drafted and ratified the Second Amendment surely knew that the right they were enshrining carried a risk of misuse, and states have considerable latitude to channel the exercise of the right in ways that will minimize that risk. States may not, however, seek to reduce the danger by means of widespread curtailment of the right itself. “[E]ven the most legitimate goal may not be advanced in a constitutionally impermissible manner.”
Woolard had also sued that Maryland’s law violated his 14th Amendment rights, ie “may issue” is not exactly what you’d call Equal Protection. The judge, having decided that the 2A violation was sufficient, did not venture into 14A territory.
Please be aware that Maryland does not currently see a difference between open carry and concealed carry. In that state, it is the right to carry PERIOD that was under question. Most of us understand “open carry” to mean having a gun in a holster at your side, visible; “concealed carry” means having a gun hidden on your person or in your effects (glove compartment, purse, coat pocket). “brandishing”, a term not used in this case, is considered by some (the Right) to be the act of pointing a gun at somebody in a threatening manner, while others (the far Left) consider a child making a crayon drawing of some stick figure making “finger guns” to be an act of brandishing sufficient for arrest, psychoanalysis, a scholastically enforced regime of mind altering drugs, and perhaps arrest of the parents as well. Thus they show Zero Tolerance for your natural rights.
Posted by Drew458
on 03/05/2012 at 04:50 PM
Filed Under: • Guns and Gun Control •
• Comments (5)
•
Trackbacks(0)
Permalink • Friday - February 17, 2012
The DC Firearms Follies
via SondraK
A 30 part series by Emily Miller, writer for the Washington Times, on jumping all the hurdles to legally buy a pistol in Washington DC. Unbelievable. $465 in fees, training classes, and paperwork. 4 months worth of hassle. Most of a week of work lost. Follow her story from the beginning to the end, with several stop-overs to interview the GOP candidates on their Second Amendment views, a few TV news appearances, a trip to Berretta USA, plus a visit to the NRA and some range time. And a bit of testifying to some council in DC that the process is beyond idiotic. Which we all already knew, right?
The whole series is here, but start at the bottom of page 2 and work your way up and back to the top of page 1 to read everything in order.
I want a gun. I don’t feel safe living in Washington, D.C. and want to protect myself. I’m starting today by going down to City Hall to find the gun permit office to tell them, “I want a gun.” This series will follow me as I navigate the city bureaucracy and outdated rules in order to legally buy a firearm.
In my quest to obtain a legal gun in Washington, D.C., I’ve gone to the registry office, taken a 5-hour course, filled out paperwork and met with the city’s only dealer. I’ve now fulfilled any requirements that can be done before giving the city the serial number of my new gun, so it is time to decide what to buy.
(You might think I’m close to the end, but that’s not what happens on this side of the Potomac. After I buy, there will still be 10 more steps before I can take possession of my gun.)
In a truly free country, the process of buying a gun is 1) save up the money or have room on your credit cards, 2) go buy a gun. In a somewhat free America, the only thing that ought to be added to that is step 1b) Pass the NICS check.
Did you know that it is against the law in Washington DC to possess live ammunition of a caliber different than any firearms you are registered as owning? Surprise! I’m pretty sure that’s also illegal in New Jersey, where the pistol purchasing process is only half as complex.
I think her next series ought to be “Emily Joins the Tea Party”.
petite Emily comes to grips with the mighty .454 Casull. And does her best shooting of the day. Sweet.
Posted by Drew458
on 02/17/2012 at 02:59 PM
Filed Under: • Guns and Gun Control •
• Comments (3)
•
Trackbacks(0)
Permalink • Canada Tastes Reality, Québécois Offended
Even the mad socialists finally figured out what we told them a decade ago.
The Conservative government says its MPs will celebrate after a historic vote to end the long-gun registry Wednesday evening, despite vehement opposition to the move in Quebec and much of urban Canada.
Public Safety Minister Vic Toews told reporters Wednesday, hours before the vote, that the government’s actions are long overdue.
“It does nothing to help put an end to gun crimes, nor has it saved one Canadian life,” he said.
No, really?
“It criminalizes hard-working and law-abiding citizens such as farmers and sport shooters, and it has been a billion-dollar boondoggle left to us by the previous Liberal government.”
The federal law will end the requirement for lawful gun owners to register their long guns, and it relaxes rules around selling or transferring guns. Gun licences for individuals will still be required, and the registry for restricted and prohibited firearms such as handguns will be maintained.
So what this means is that our cousins to the north now have a tiny bit of freedom, but still not very much at all. Baby steps in the right direction. But wait, there’s more. It gets better. Part of the bill demands that all the secret data that the authorities (the RCMP) have been keep on citizens and their guns will be purged. Well, the info about non-restricted firearms at any rate. That IS a blow for freedom, which is why the rabid jackbooted thug Socialist left (48% of Canadian government) is demanding that this data be preserved. Must be able to round up the citizens at 3am whenever we feel like it, don’t you dare toss this info that tells us where every single gun and round of ammunition in the country is!
Michael Patton, a spokesman for Public Safety Minister Vic Toews, said the gun registry’s central database is located in an RCMP headquarters in Ottawa. Since only data for non-restricted guns will be removed, the officials are still deciding how to carefully sift out what to delete and what to keep. He said he could not predict exactly how long the deletion of all long-gun data would take.
...
Once the bill is finally passed into law, Quebec will immediately seek an injunction from the courts to halt the destruction of the registry data.
Jeff Larivee, whose wife was killed in the 1989 Montreal massacre, is a spokesman for the Coalition for Gun Control. He said he and many other Quebecers feel outrage at the Harper government’s determination to dismantle laws that, for many, serve as a memorial.
Law as a memorial? Assuage your grief by restricting other people’s freedoms? Classic far left behavior; the world view of a 12 year old. “I’ve suffered, so now everyone else must pay.” Get your noggin to the shrink Jeff, and try and deal with your belligerence and find some closure. Stop blaming society for the acts of one murderer.
More than two billion dollars pissed away for a program that was utterly and completely worthless from the beginning. Which they knew, because we told them often enough. But it made the lefties feeeel all warm and fuzzy, and that’s what national debt is for, right? Hosers.
Posted by Drew458
on 02/17/2012 at 07:53 AM
Filed Under: • Canada • Guns and Gun Control •
• Comments (8)
•
Trackbacks(0)
Permalink • Tuesday - February 14, 2012
We’re Working On Something Under The Radar
An essay by Chris Cox, the head of the NRA/ILA
Last Thursday, U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder appeared before the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee to answer questions about his role in the deadly “Fast and Furious” gun-running scandal.
...
In a rash attempt to deflect attention away from himself and his own irresponsibility, Holder let Congress know that the Obama administration is still working toward the day when it can reinstate former President Bill Clinton’s so-called “assault weapons” ban. According to Holder:
This administration has consistently favored the reinstitution of the assault weapons ban. It is something that we think was useful in the past with regard to the reduction that we’ve seen in crime, and certainly would have a positive impact on our relationship and the crime situation in Mexico.
Eric Holder’s Justice Department oversaw this illegal operation, but all Holder is willing to do is call for gun bans on law-abiding Americans, withhold critical information from Congress, and pat himself on the back for a job well done. As Holder told Congress on Thursday: “I’m proud of the work that I’ve done as attorney general of the United States, and looked at fairly, I think I’ve done a pretty good job.”
I don’t disagree with Mr. Cox, but I don’t think he sets his sites low enough. Holder is out to ban more than just scary looking evil plastic black rifles.
Posted by Drew458
on 02/14/2012 at 10:29 AM
Filed Under: • Guns and Gun Control •
• Comments (0)
•
Trackbacks(0)
Permalink • Friday - February 10, 2012
I Hate Being Patronized
The Fast and Furious story broke early last summer. It’s now nearly Valentine’s Day, and the news story, among the networks who even consider this news, is that a former agent says more government agencies were involved than LLPO Eric Holder admits to (LLPO = Liar Liar Pants On Fire). Well, no kidding. Tell us what we don’t know, m’kay?
While criticism surrounding Operation Fast and Furious has so far focused on the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms, three other federal agencies knew about the operation and some of their agents tried to stop it, according to the former chief of the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration in Tucson.
Tony Coulson, the DEA’s agent in charge of Southern Arizona during Fast and Furious, says many federal field agents knew the ATF was walking guns to Mexico, but supervisors told them to back off when they objected.
Coulson’s remarks jibe with what is already known about the operation. The DEA, the FBI and ICE, also known as Immigration Customs and Enforcement, all played roles in the investigation.
Coulson said those agencies share the blame since top officials knew, but did little to stop, the gunrunning effort. Coulson is among the first senior public officials, current or former, who admit knowing about the botched operation.
This is really annoying. And patronizing. Because anybody who can think and who realizes what a Velcroed clusterfuck of buck passing ass coverers the federal government is, can immediately see that this “revelation” is still not even half true. FBI, DEA, ATF, ICE involved? Sure. And the list goes on ...
Gun shops being strong-armed to make bulk sales to strawmen. That’s the ATF.
Guns sold to criminals. That’s the FBI.
Guns along the Rio Grande. That’s DHS.
Guns walking across the border? That’s ICE. And the Border Patrol perhaps, though so far it looks like they may have been patsies.
Several other similar programs, some in the Caribbean islands. That’s CIA and State.
Guns sold to criminal gangs of drug dealers. That’s DEA.
Gangs that are big enough and well armed enough to be a threat to the government of Mexico? Absolutely CIA and State. Can you say “junta” without a who?
Six or more law enforcement agencies working together? You know damn well DOJ is in it up to their eyeballs.
And who do they report to? No guesses necessary. The top end of the Executive and Legislative branches. Which means The White House, and probably several super select committees in Congress. It probably also involves some Spy Boys and their Costly Toys too, but that will never surface.
This stink sting operation was running in several states, so it’s a no-brainer to realize that any number of state law enforcement agencies and elected state officials were also in the know, at least to some extent.
And not one reporter ... reporters who orgasmically splooge themselves over those Watergate movies, look how we the Press connected the dots and brought down a president ... wants to lift a pen to connect dot one to dot two.
Not one of them has looked at the weapons themselves, and followed that lead. Were they actual fully automatic M16s? If they were, and they were new ones, then who approved the production run for several thousand for private sale? Machine guns are almost as tightly controlled as the Ebola virus on Plum Island. Were they military issue weapons? If so, then from where? Actual surplus, or did they “walk” off base in the middle of the night? That would bring the services into it, and yet another criminal element if those were current military guns that had been stolen from several bases. Hidden behind all the smoke and mirrors is the ugly fact that it wasn’t just guns, fully automatic or not, that walked. Grenades were involved too, and anti-aircraft weaponry. How does that not drag in the military? Is there some special branch of government that watches over the war munitions and isn’t in uniform?
This is one of the biggest boondoggle in American history, with dirty tentacles spread everywhere. In a just world it would bring down the government. No, not just Obama, but the heads of the House and Senate, the top levels of a dozen major agencies, a boxful of judges perhaps, perhaps some top military brass, and a truckload of state officials. And an army of pencil pushers and badge flashers. It would be Purge Time In Moscow, 1937, all over again. Only with real trials for good reason, in public, and the screaming hordes of citizens with torches at the gates. Because F&F is blatant proof that a secret cabal existed. A hidden government within the government, out of sight and above the law, with secret political intentions. And the housecleaning ought to be horrendous. My point is that everyone knew, from the very top to the bottom, and not one of them had the integrity or the common sense to speak up. And for that, they should all fry. ALL OF THEM.
Instead, all the average Joe Stupid on the street knows is that poor old Eric Holder is getting hassled by some committee all the time because he’s black.
Posted by Drew458
on 02/10/2012 at 05:19 PM
Filed Under: • Democrats-Liberals-Moonbat Leftists • Corruption and Greed • Guns and Gun Control •
• Comments (2)
•
Trackbacks(0)
Permalink • Five Most Recent Trackbacks:
LAAR She Blows! Part One
(2 total trackbacks)
Tracked at Planes Ideas Blog
[...] CABLY SUBMIT TO THE JURISDICTION OF THE AMERICAN COURTS. IF ANYTHING ON THIS WEB [...]
On: 07/12/11 01:57
The Tactical Cowboy
(1 total trackbacks)
Tracked at Sights Service Blog
[...] E LAWS APPLICABLE IN ANY OTHER COUNTRY, THEN THIS WEBSITE IS NOT INTENDED TO BE [...]
On: 07/10/11 08:30
Nasty Dirty Money
(1 total trackbacks)
Tracked at Money Reviews Blog
[...] ONS WHO ARE SUBJECT TO SUCH LAWS SHALL NOT BE ENTITLED TO USE OUR SERVICES UNLES [...]
On: 06/17/11 08:31
Amazing aerial images taken by daring Allied pilots on secret missions during WW 2
(1 total trackbacks)
Tracked at Hookers and Booze
peiper over at Barking Moonbat EWS found some absolutely kickass aerial photos from WWII. I grabbed this one because I’m a big fan of the movie A Bridge Too Far.…
On: 11/23/09 04:14
Clear Thinking and Straight Talk
(1 total trackbacks)
Tracked at baldilocks
Let Them Fight or Bring Them Home Read all of it--and tell every American you know to do so. (Thanks to BMEWS) UPDATE: The author of the above blog is…
On: 10/02/09 09:29
DISCLAIMER
THE SERVICES AND MATERIALS ON THIS WEBSITE ARE PROVIDED "AS IS" AND THE HOSTS OF THIS SITE EXPRESSLY DISCLAIMS ANY AND ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, TO THE EXTENT PERMITTED BY LAW INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF SATISFACTORY QUALITY, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, WITH RESPECT TO THE SERVICE OR ANY MATERIALS.
Not that very many people ever read this far down, but this blog was the creation of Allan Kelly and his friend Vilmar. Vilmar moved on to his own blog some time ago, and Allan ran this place alone until his sudden and unexpected death partway through 2006. We all miss him. A lot. Even though he is gone this site will always still be more than a little bit his. We who are left to carry on the BMEWS tradition owe him a great debt of gratitude, and we hope to be able to pay that back by following his last advice to us all:
It's been a long strange trip without you Skipper, but thanks for pointing us in the right direction and giving us a swift kick in the behind to get us going. Keep lookin' down on us, will ya? Thanks.
- Keep a firm grasp of Right and Wrong
- Stay involved with government on every level and don't let those bastards get away with a thing
- Use every legal means to defend yourself in the event of real internal trouble, and, most importantly:
- Keep talking to each other, whether here or elsewhere
THE INFORMATION AND OTHER CONTENTS OF THIS WEBSITE ARE DESIGNED TO COMPLY WITH THE LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. THIS WEBSITE SHALL BE GOVERNED BY AND CONSTRUED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND ALL PARTIES IRREVOCABLY SUBMIT TO THE JURISDICTION OF THE AMERICAN COURTS. IF ANYTHING ON THIS WEBSITE IS CONSTRUED AS BEING CONTRARY TO THE LAWS APPLICABLE IN ANY OTHER COUNTRY, THEN THIS WEBSITE IS NOT INTENDED TO BE ACCESSED BY PERSONS FROM THAT COUNTRY AND ANY PERSONS WHO ARE SUBJECT TO SUCH LAWS SHALL NOT BE ENTITLED TO USE OUR SERVICES UNLESS THEY CAN SATISFY US THAT SUCH USE WOULD BE LAWFUL.
Copyright © 2004-2008 Domain Owner
Oh, and here's some kind of visitor flag counter thingy. Hey, all the cool blogs have one, so I should too. The Visitors Online thingy up at the top doesn't count anything, but it looks neat. It had better, since I paid actual money for it.
RSS 2.0 
Atom 
