Something old, something new - all are borrowed, and one makes me blue!

---

Marko over at the munchkin wrangler (who, for all of his talent, still hasn't figured out what the caps key is for) has penned another winner: "tales from a gun-free society." It's a personal look at the societal effects of wide scale disarmament. (My general rule is that if Marko wrote it, it must be worth reading. This is yet another validation of that rule.)

---

If the name "Gecko45" means nothing to you, then you've missed out on one of the funniest things on the 'net - the rise of the Mall Ninja. Sadly, the original postings on GlockTalk that led to the coining of the term are long gone, and the mallninja.com site is no more; luckily for us, someone recognized the historical importance of Gecko45.

His (her?) whole posts - along with some good background and explanations - can now be found at Lonely Machines. If you're new to the Mall Ninja phenomenon, it's a must-read. If you remember the original, it's a hilarious blast from the past. In either case, go. Read. Laugh.

---

Gecko45 is a classic, no doubt. It's hard to beat such comedic genius, and how many people can lay claim to inspiring a new term? Well, Larry Correia's got a candidate of his own: the original "HK: because you suck. And we hate you." essay. You can read it - along with his hilarious followup - at this link. (If you're a rabid HK fan, it's guaranteed to raise your blood pressure. If you're not, it'll make you squirt milk out your nose.)

---

Happy Monday!

-=[ Grant ]=-

...quite the opposite, in fact.

A client sent me this link to the Washington, DC Metropolitan Police Department's FAQ regarding handgun ownership. As you know, the recent Supreme Court decision in the Heller case struck down the handgun ban in DC. However, it did not address the ban on semiautomatic handguns in the District, which still stands.

The result is that the only handgun DC residents will be allowed to own is a revolver.

As you are no doubt already aware, I'm a big fan of revolvers. I'm on record as saying that there is no job a good revolver can't do; I originated the phrase "the world isn't flat, your gun shouldn't be either." I believe that owning a revolver displays innate good sense and good taste, and an appreciation of the finer things in life.

Still, people shouldn't be forced to own one by limiting their freedom to choose something else.

It's great that the District's residents may now own a handgun; it's not so great that they won't get a choice in what kind of handgun. I'm hoping that someone will take the District back to court and have that part of their ineffective laws struck down. At that point, residents will be able to decide for themselves what they'd like to own.

If you're in DC, I support your right to decide for yourself which to own: a beautiful, graceful, efficient revolver - or an ugly, ungainly, unreliable, ill-fitting, bottom-feeding, ground littering, reciprocating monstrosity.

(Not that I'm biased, you understand!)

-=[ Grant ]=-

The Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) will announce their decision in the District of Columbia v. Heller case tomorrow morning, commencing at 10:am EDT. The best place to follow their announcement is the SCOTUS Blog, which has live coverage of every Court decision.

Regardless of which direction the Court takes, tomorrow will be groundbreaking in the history of the Second Amendment.

-=[ Grant ]=-

...from the normal gun-centric topics we cover here. This, however, is important enough that I think it deserves your attention.

Tam and Marko continue to be bright spots in the individual rights blogosphere. They have a clarity of communication that is a marvel to me. (I tend to be a little long-winded, and sometimes less than succinct. They don't suffer from those problems. I'm claiming that it's because I have more work to do than they. Yeah, that's the ticket!) Their respective blogs have percolated to the top to become the first two I read every morning.

Today, though, Tam has outdone herself. I've been harping about the evils of the 17th amendment for years, but have never found a cogent and concise way to explain my concerns. Tam does it in only a thousand words, and still manages to make the (admittedly dry) subject readable and engaging.

Highest recommendation. Read it, memorize it, bookmark it, forward it.

-=[ Grant ]=-

From Kim du Toit comes this gem.

Heh.

***
Everyone with access to a keyboard is blogging about Heller v. D.C. today. The level of insight varies from brilliant to "yesterday I couldn't spell blogger, today I iz one."

Lest I be thought in the latter category, I will refrain from commenting on the proceedings. I will, however, leave you with this quote from Gun Law News:

No matter what the outcome from the Supreme Court, the Brady Campaign and the Violence Policy Center will declare victory. Then they will initiate fund raising based upon their "victory".

That, folks, is the only certainty in this whole case!

-=[ Grant ]=-

This Reuters story about "normal" gun owners has been getting a lot of attention in the blogosphere - as well it should. The condescension in the text is palpable, as if the reporter really wanted to do a hit piece but couldn't come up with the slimmest of excuses to do so.

Need proof? How about this quote:

The owners are not just urban criminals and drug dealers.

Yeah, that's objective.

Check out the comments over at Say Uncle.

-=[ Grant ]=-

---

Every once in a while, Tam hits one out of the park.

This is the country where we're supposed to be leading ourselves, not waiting for solutions to be handed down from on high.

Read the whole thing - it's good.

---

SayUncle alerts us to this story. Predictable Euro-socialist hand-wringing and whining commence.

(Yes, I would generally agree that brandishing a weapon is both a tactical and legal no-no - but then again, if you're an old, frail lady and someone strange is standing in your yard, refusing to leave, perhaps you are justified.)

---

I missed this until Michael Bane pointed me to it. Hilarious!

---

Happy Monday, everyone!

-=[ Grant ]=-

I usually don't get into politics in this blog (I don't feel it's appropriate to the subject matter I cover.) But, since the future occupant of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue will have a direct impact on 2nd Amendment issues, I'd like to address the upcoming primaries, both "D" and "R". I keep hearing that this election is about "change." Call me a curmudgeon, but I just don't see where shifting from one overspending, big-government candidate to another overspending, big-government candidate is "change."

---

Here in the Pacific Northwest, it seems that those who want to "protect and serve" don't handle firearms very well. Just the other day a former Marine and aspiring police officer shot and killed himself at a New Year's Eve party. Though the news accounts played up the "alcohol is involved" angle, in a television interview his girlfriend said that he simply believed that he had unloaded the pistol, and wanted to assuage his guest's fears by putting the gun to his head and pulling the trigger.

Sound familiar? Once again, the problem is that people treat guns they believe to be unloaded differently than those they don't.

---

I've been installing Bowen "Rough Country" rear sights on Ruger GP100s for a while, and the clients are very happy with them. The stock Ruger front sight, though, is very indistinct - rounded corners, irregular serrations, and sometimes uneven top surfaces. The Bowen front sight is a great alternative, though pricey - it is an expensive part, and has to be fitted and machined to desired shape. However, if you want the best sight picture possible on a Ruger, it is the way to go.

---

It's a new year, and still no Dan Wesson .357 revolvers from CZ-USA. I'm wondering if they're going to show the shop-worn prototype at the SHOT show next month, and once again claim that they're "coming real soon now!"?

-=[ Grant ]=-

Well, I enjoyed my little vacation. While I was out, the emails and snail mails piled up - it's going to take the rest of the week to get through everything!

In my post-vacation hyperactivity, I've decided to rearrange my shop's layout to make it a little more efficient. My parts cabinet, for instance, has always been across the room from my workbench. That's an oversight that has annoyed me for years. It's not a trivial task to fix the problem, as a) the cabinet is quite heavy, and b) lots of other things need to be moved to make the appropriate space. I'm doing it anyway.

In gun news, I found this expose on one of CeaseFire Pennsylvania's board members. I've always marveled at the difference in mental attitudes between pro- and anti-Second Amendment people, wherein the latter tend to focus on hyperbole and emotion, and the former tend to cite facts and scholarship. It comes as no surprise, then, that one of "their own" believes in such non-rational things as crop circles and extra-terrestrials. This is the "mainstream support" they're always bleating about?

Now if you'll excuse me, I need to go answer the mail. I anticipate some long keyboard sessions!

-=[ Grant ]=-

The Supreme Court of the United States has agreed to hear the case of District of Columbia v. Heller (the case is better known as Parker v. District of Columbia, wherein five other D.C. residents seek to join Mr. Heller's suit. Heller, then, is the base decision that we are most concerned with.)

There is much hand-wringing about this case. A certain segment of the firearms fraternity (I'll call them the Not Ready Alliance, or "NRA" for short) doesn't want the case to be heard, because "we might lose, and then what will happen?!?" The other side, which I'll call "Gung-ho Order of Allegiance" ("GOA", in case you don't get the joke) is proclaiming "this is GREAT! Now we'll get rid of all those unconstitutional laws all over the country! Let's go get 'em!"

My position? Simple: sooner or later, the SCOTUS is going to hear a Second Amendment case. That much is sure. It might as well be this one.

From my standpoint, it's best if they hear Heller and not something else. Why? Because we are unlikely to find another case anytime soon that has a better chance of coming out on "our side." It is as close as to a "slam dunk" as we will probably ever see, and I'd rather they look at Heller than some other, less solid, case.

What's more, this court is probably the best relative to individual rights that we'll have in a long time. Don't get me wrong: this court is no friend of the Constitution, and has shown so time and again, but it's about as good as has existed in my lifetime.

(Given the field of likely Presidential nominees - of either party - they aren't going to get any better, either. Only one candidate holds out hope of real change in this matter, and unfortunately he's not getting a lot of support from the "gun culture." More's the pity.)

Again, it's not about the downside if we lose or the upside if we win; it's about timing. This battle has always been inevitable, and the smart warrior chooses to engage when he is strongest and his opponents are weakest. For us, that is now.

Let the chips fall where they may.

-=[ Grant ]=-

Ever run across someone who does something so much better than you, that you are simultaneously awed and angered?

I get that way when I read Marko's blog "The Munchkin Wrangler." His writing positively sparkles; he's able to relay conceptual topics in an elegant and concise manner that is so much better than my lame attempts.

His latest missive deals with the idea that one should simply "give criminals what they want and they'll leave you alone." It's so good, it should be required reading for everyone - whether they carry a gun or not.

Don't miss it.

-=[ Grant ]=-

I've always assumed that readers of this blog are probably NRA members; I'm sure more than a few are GOA or JPFO members, as well. Like many of you, I've belonged to the NRA for some time, and appreciate the work that they do.

That doesn't mean, however, that I'm in lock-step with the NRA, nor do I believe that supporting them means that I should turn off my brain. I criticize them when they need to be criticized, because if that didn't happen they would morph into an organization that none of us could support.

When they've caved on important issues or made odd political endorsements, I've been critical. I think that is part and parcel of responsible membership.

Say Uncle has a good post on this topic. I agree with him.

-=[ Grant ]=-

Let's clean out the ol' noggin:

-- Neat little "preaching to the choir" site called What kind of person supports gun control?

-- I've been thinking that the reason revolvers don't seem to capture much attention any more is because no "high speed low drag" kind of people use them. Unfortunately, pointing out that France's GIGN used to issue revolvers probably isn't going to have the desired effect!

-- Ruger's QC continues to be hit-and-miss. Just this week, I got in a new 3" GP100 with the barrel screwed in too far (canted to one side), and a 4" example that didn't time correctly. I continue to recommend them as good base guns for custom projects, because once they're sorted out they make a superb custom - and you'll never wear one out. Probably best, though, to buy in person, and inspect carefully.

-- I get an unexpectedly large number of inquiries as to what I use as a bore cleaner. I've used the homebrew Ed's Red formula for years, and have found nothing else that I like more. (I do use Hoppe's 7.62 formula for jacket fouling removal, however.)

-- The number of Detective Specials that are still in use as police backup and off-duty guns amazes me. Hardly a week goes by that I don't get at least one email or call from a LEO who is still using one in a secondary role. I've said it before, I'll say it again: S&W is missing a big market for the small 6-shot revolver. (Colt, of course, is missing out too - after all, they hold the designs for the Magnum Carry, but they don't want to make revolvers any more.)

-- I'm working on pictures for a new entry on the Recent Projects page. I won't divulge any more than it is, for once, not stainless. Stay tuned.

-- A non-relevant entry: got the latest versions of iLife and iWork last week. Verdict: Pages is finally a heavy hitter, Numbers is really cool, and the latest version of iPhoto is worth the cost all by itself. It's a great time to be a Mac user!

That's it for today. Boy, am I glad to get all of that out of my head!

-=[ Grant ]=-

Saw this on the news last night, and my very first thought was "that can't happen - handguns are banned in the UK!" Guess it just shows the true futility of such laws. (Check the comments, though - apparently some people think that they're not going far enough. There are those in this country who think the same way. Even when they admit the laws won't work, they pass them anyway.)
---

Say Uncle alerted me to this...c'mon, you know you've always wanted to shoot a propane tank, just to see what happens.
---

Finally, this isn't really gun related, but is just too funny to ignore. Further comment would seem unnecessary.

---
-=[ Grant ]=-

On this, the celebration of our country's birth, I wish for everyone a safe, happy, and inspiring holiday.

I don't usually make political statements on this blog, as I generally find unsolicited discussions of politics and religion to be impolite. After all, if you wanted to read about such things you'd go to a blog dedicated to those topics! However, since our Second Amendment rights are inexorably tied to the political landscape, I think that it would not be out of line to make a comment on this occasion. I hope you'll indulge me for just a minute or so!

Think ahead to the coming elections; at this point there is only one candidate for the highest office in the land, from the major parties, who espouses the principles espoused by our Founding Fathers. (I'll leave it to you to figure out who that person may be, as the individual personality isn't the point of this little diatribe - it's the concept I want to focus on.)

Oddly, many in this country won't vote for such a candidate because they feel those principles are "too radical" or "anarchist." Sad, isn't it, that we have become so fearful of freedom in the last 231 years that we would actively avoid the kind of real personal liberties that our Constitution guarantees!

So far, none of the gun bloggers - even the most rabid advocates of the Second Amendment - have come out in support of such a candidate, preferring instead to focus their endorsements on those who don't challenge the status quo, except in the shallowest manner.

I fear that Patrick Henry is, at this very moment, rolling in his grave.

Freedom - real freedom - is a messy, scary, imprecise thing. Back in 1776 they understood that it isn't always pretty or "fair" (by whatever definition of that word you care to use.) Any attempt to impose order or "fairness" will result in a reduction in freedom, and there is just no way around that. That is just what we've been doing for the last couple of centuries, and you can see the results. Can anyone out there honestly say that they're happy with this?

Here's a little experiment: ponder, today and come November, where your personal intersection of freedom and comfort lies - then vote a little to the freedom side of that line. Push yourself. Encourage your friends and neighbors to do the same. In that way, little by little, we might be able to make some headway against the forces who stand for prohibition, limitation, and collectivism.

End of sermon. That wasn't so bad, was it?

-=[ Grant ]=-

SayUncle alerts us to a new Connecticut law requiring law abiding gun owners to report firearms thefts immediately or face the consequences.

He says one insightful thing:

Punishing the otherwise law-abiding is easy. After all, they don’t shoot back. And going after people who do shoot back is hard.

Yep, that would explain it.

-=[ Grant]=-

One of my favorite blogs is Marko's "The Munchkin Wrangler." Marko is yet another prolific and intelligent blogger from Tennessee whose interests include firearms and Second Amendment rights.

He wrote an interesting piece a while back, titled "Why the Gun is Civilization." While one could (and some do) argue that his premise is not fully developed, I found it thought provoking. It's worth reading, if only to get you thinking more abstractly.

It seems that I'm not the only person who liked that little essay, as it has apparently been turning up in various guises and attributed to someone else. This is my little contribution to helping the cause: if you see his writing under someone else's moniker, or even unattributed, do your part and let people know who wrote it.

It's a karma thing.

-=[ Grant ]=-

Some great stuff (like always!)

The Second Amendment Carnival

(Hopefully my plumbing nightmare is over...full report later this week.)

-=[ Grant ]=-

At first, I wasn't going to comment on the sad crime perpetrated on the campus of Virginia Tech this week. I figured that everyone, everywhere, was going to do so (with varying degrees of erudition and insight.) I decided there wasn't anything I could add. Until...

Listening to the news on the radio, I heard an interview with two students who said that they were in "the room where he was shooting." According to these people, students and faculty were hiding under and behind anything in the room that they felt would provide them some protection, or flat on the floor in the absence of same.

It's what they said next that prompted me to comment: as the gunman shot, he naturally ran out of ammunition, and had to stop to refill his magazines. After taking the time to refill then reload his weapon, he continued his unfettered spree.

He was out of ammunition, and had stopped to reload - why didn't someone, anyone, in the room take that golden opportunity to tackle the murderer? At that point the criminal couldn't shoot anyone, and the risk even to the person who would choose that course of action would have been relatively minor compared to letting him get his firearm back up and running.

The answer is as obvious as it is sad: our society has fully inculcated the victimhood and helplessness mentalities into the last several generations of people. They didn't do anything because they have been taught their entire lives to rely on someone - anyone - else for their safety and well being.

This is what the nanny state has given us. This is what our Founding Fathers, I think, understood when they listed the natural right to keep and bear arms in their Constitution: yes, it's about the ability to resist tyrannical governments. More importantly, though, is the choice inherent in the right.

You see, it's not the exercise of the right in and of itself that matters; it's the existence of the choice to exercise the right that is so very important. Even if one chooses not to exercise the right, in making the choice one has experienced the self-actualization that leads to great inner strength and a heightened sense of self-worth. The very personal decision - no matter what the decision itself is - is what makes for citizens who are self reliant, who can think for themselves, and cannot be corralled like sheep.

When the "transaction cost" of the individual choice is raised - when the ability to decide for oneself is restricted or controlled in any manner - the choice is made not by the individual, but by someone else. The benefits of making the decision are denied the individual, and he/she learns (bit by bit) how to be a subject rather than a sovereign individual. Given long enough, an entire people is conditioned to be subordinate themselves to authority figures; when the "badge" of "authority" is the firearm, the people will prostrate themselves to anyone who wields one. Even a crazed killer.

Milton Friedman was right.

-=[ Grant ]=-

You've probably heard of the recent DC District Court decision that confirms what we all know: the 2nd Amendment is an individual right. Definitely good news, and the result of a lot of hard work on the part of the lawyers involved in the case.

Now you probably think that the NRA was in the thick of the legal proceedings, defending our rights and bankrolling the costly fight, just as their countless solicitation mailings claim.

Think again.

-=[ Grant ]=-

Sorry if this post is more "linky" than "thinky", but there's a lot happening very quickly...

It all started last Friday, when Jim Zumbo - a long-time Outdoor Life writer and Outdoor Channel contributor - wrote a piece on his Outdoor Life blog which opined that "assault rifles" weren't used by "legitimate sportsmen" and, essentially, were evil and should be banned. I learned about it from Michael Bane's blog, where he called for Zumbo to apologize.

It didn't take long for the word to start making the rounds, and even the people at the Brady Campaign (the professional gun-grabbers) linked to it as "proof" that assault weapons should be banned. This, just after the resurrected Assault Weapons Ban was re-introduced in Congress last week.

Zumbo, realizing that he was in deep doo-doo, started backpedaling and dropping names of the anointed in an effort to seem as though he's really "one of us." His editor, John Snow, tried to deflect the growing firestorm by posting that Zumbo was really a nice guy, and that people can agree to disagree, and other soft-shoe obfuscation.

Apparently the noise got to the folks at Remington, who have been big sponsors of Zumbo over the years. On the weekend, their CEO, Tom Milner, posted on Bane's blog that Remington would be severing their relationship with Zumbo first thing Monday morning. Though the authorship was in question, David Codrea was able to verify the courageous act yesterday, and come this morning the official Remington website added a statement to this effect.

Tam elated, vows to spend more money.

(Whew. Original content would have been easier!)

-=[ Grant ]=-

This from an article in the Frederick News-Post in Maryland:

Seized from Vaisman's residence were a broad range of weapons including assault handguns. Among the weapons were at least one Colt Cobra and at least one Colt Diamondback.

If a Cobra and a Diamondback are "assault handguns", what does that make a Python?? It seems that the old saw about stupidity and hydrogen being the most common things in the universe has been proven true in what used to be known as the "Free State."

Thanks to SaysUncle for the heads-up.

-=[ Grant ]=-

When I meet new people (who are not clients), I am often very circumspect about revealing what I do for a living. Paranoia on my part? Perhaps, and I sometimes think that working and corresponding with (and being married to) fellow gun owners has warped my view of the non-gun owners amongst us.

Have I adopted an "us vs. them" attitude? Though loathe to admit it, I think I have - at least, the germination of that mindset is definitely underway. My more naive associates sometimes accuse me of being a bit too sensitive, telling me that just because someone chooses not to own a gun for themselves doesn't mean that they think less of me for doing so.

I almost believed them. Until this article in the Seattle PI got printed. This may be the single most sickening such opinion piece I've seen, for it attacks not the article itself - a strategy that has been increasingly ineffective - but the very mindset of the gun owner.

Thanks to the View From North Central Idaho blog for alerting me to this tripe.

-=[ Grant ]=-

First, there was this article on the decline of hunting in Newsweek. Great article, and poignant - surprising treatment from the mainstream media.

However, we must also realize the necessity of divorcing the subject of hunting - whatever we make think of it - from the topic of Second Amendment activism. As this article on Michael Bane's blog reminds us, the 2nd "ain't about duck hunting" - or any other kind of hunting, for that matter.

Great reading.

-=[ Grant ]=-

Now that winter is coming, most of us (except for those in the southern part of the country) will find our opportunity for shooting activities sharply reduced. If you can't be out shooting, the second best thing is reading about shooting!

The Gun Blogs bills itself as the "online community for gun bloggers." You'll find a number of bloggers who write about guns, politics, and hunting on a regular basis. Definitely worth checking out!

-=[ Grant ]=-

The Carnival of Cordite, that is!

That's right, once again you can get your fix of the best gun blogs on the net. This is a great one - lots of links. Take a look!

-=[ Grant ]=-

I hate to keep harping on Californians, but come on people - a sunny climate really can't be worth these continuing assaults on your constitutional liberties, can it? Are you really so fond of your upwardly mobile lifestyles that you're willing to voluntarily surrender your freedoms by continuing to live there?

Read about the latest raids here.

-=[ Grant ]=-

I'm not a fan of Garrison Keillor; personally, I just never got his appeal, in the same way I never understood why people thought Seinfeld was funny. Guess I'm just humor impaired.

Nevertheless, I recently ran across this piece that he wrote for The Salt Lake Tribune, on airline security. He's got a funny bit about allowing people to carry guns on board, and I have to agree with his final question:

The way to stop terrorists on planes is to encourage passengers to bring loaded firearms aboard: guys in orange vests sitting in exit rows with deer rifles on their laps, ladies with Mr. Colt in their purses, kids with peashooters. Somebody wake up the NRA. Does the Second Amendment say ''The right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed except on commercial airliners''? Where is the right wing when you really need them?

-=[ Grant ]=-

If you haven't, remedy that situation right now!

Gun Facts is a free e-book that debunks common myths about gun control.  It is intended as a reference guide for anyone interested in restoring honesty to the debate about guns, crime, and the 2nd Amendment.

Divided into chapters based on gun control topics (assault weapons, ballistic finger printing, firearm availability, etc.), finding information is quick and easy. Each chapter lists common gun control myths, then lists a number of documented and cited facts that directly dispute the gun control claim.  Thus when a neighbor, editor, or politician repeats some slogan propagated by gun control advocacy groups, you can quickly find that myth and set them straight!

This is an absolute must-have, folks!

-=[ Grant ]=-

A tip of the Revolver Liberation Alliance ball cap (now available here) to Tamara K., who blogged this CNN story over at the View From The Porch.

So, let's see if I've got this straight: the British police, enforcers of some of the toughest gun laws in the world, busted a gun running operation whose pipeline originated in New Jersey - home of some of the toughest gun laws in the United States? What's wrong with this picture? I'll give you three guesses, and the first two don't count...

(Oh, and a fat raspberry to Associated Press, who just had to point out the American flag hanging over the porch at the offending house in Britain - a "large" flag, as the article made sure to mention. That, people, is what we call a "cheap shot.")

-=[ Grant ]=-

Here's another great firearms link carnival: from the Free Constitution blog comes the fourth installment of the Second Amendment Carnival. Check it out - lots of great links!

-=[ Grant ]=-

The California Senate has passed a bill that requires "microstamping", which imprints each fired case with a unique identifier from gun in which it was fired.

As usual, Tamara K. at The View From The Porch has a great analysis of the situation. Check it out.

I hate to sound harsh, but how long are all you California gun owners going to put up with these kinds of gun control plans? Haven't you figured out that they just don't want you in their state?

-=[ Grant ]=-

2008 is shaping up as the battle of the Republican anti-gunner versus the Democratic anti-gunner. If only I could afford my own island...!

-=[ Grant ]=-

Tamara K., over at her blog The View From The Porch, says this:

"For what it's worth, I don't carry a gun to protect me from muggers at the mall. I don't even carry a gun to protect me, period. I carry a gun every day despite living in an area where I'm more likely to be hit by an asteroid than attacked by a mugger as a symbol of my refusal to buy into this culture of teat-sucking victimhood for one day longer. I carry it because I can."

Recite this, word for word, next time some busybody asks (with the inevitable sneer) why you need to carry a gun.

-=[ Grant ]=-

This is one of the few sites I check regularly. The Gun Law News website is an easy way to keep up on firearm news, legislation, and court proceedings.

Yes, they have an RSS feed!

-=[ Grant ]=-

As you may remember, I'm a fan of Tamara K.'s "View from the porch" blog. She's got a new post up, and it's spot-on.

It reminds me of occasions when I've been goaded into discussing gun control with an anti-freedom activist (usually when I'm in a masochistic mood.) I've often been told that "people can't be trusted with guns because they'll go out and shoot their neighbors."

I've been known to respond "why do you want to shoot your neighbors? Are you unstable?" It usually ends that line of argument very quickly.

It's a great read - be sure to check it out.

-=[ Grant ]=-

The New York Times ran this article on getting a concealed weapons permit in Texas. What's surprising is the relative lack (for the NYT, of course) of fear-mongering, class bigotry, or gratuitous put-downs.

Does this mean they've come over to our side? Nawww, but maybe some of their on-the-fence readers will!

-=[ Grant ]=-

Politicians are starting to figure it out...well, at least their lapdogs in the media are.

According to the U.S. News & World Report, gun control legislation is a big loser on Capitol Hill these days. Hooray! But, if history tells us anything, it's that gun owners will squander their current strong position. We need to go on the offensive and build on the gains we've made.

Michael Bane has an interesting FIve-Point Plan for Consolidating Our Current Successes. Though I'm not entirely sure about the first item (we shouldn't make additional legislation, we should insist that the Constitution be upheld - but I understand his point), the rest is spot-on. Pass it along!

(Obligatory revolver content: the US News article illustration is of several Ruger GP-100 revolvers!)

-=[ Grant ]=-

If you're looking for a job, it's probably not a good idea to put firearms related items on your resume. In today's America, it's acceptable to discriminate on politically incorrect factors.

-=[ Grant ]=-

It's become apparent that the U.S. government has lost trillions (not millions, not billions, trillions) of dollars that were taken out of our (yours and my) pockets.

The recriminations are pathetically predictable; the Democrats point fingers at how President Bush "squandered" a non-existent 'budget surplus', while Republicans chastise the democrats for their 'tax and spend policies'.

The trouble is that they are equally at fault. The only things politicians do, in the final analysis, is write intrusive laws and spend money like drunken sailors. Anyone remember the story of the turtle and the viper?

-=[ Grant ]=-

A friend pointed out this article to me. Seems that the total number of legally owned firearms in America is now approaching 290 million, while our population is right around 298 million. We're close to having one firearm for every person in America! (If only they were all revolvers...)

While you're reading that article at Say Uncle, subscribe to their RSS feed. Lots of good gun news comes out of that site!

-=[ Grant ]=-

Remember Lee Paige, the DEA agent who shot himself in the foot in front of a class of school kids - not to mention a video camera? Well, he's back - and suing the government because, well, because it's a sure way to get rich.

Favorite quote: "He also notes that he is no longer permitted or able to give educational motivational speeches and presentations."

No kidding?!?

-=[ Grant ]=-