“An ISIS attack against the West is [only] a question of timing,” CIA head Gen. Michael Hayden” told cnn.com. In fact, “The FBI and Homeland Security have warned police forces across the country to be on the lookout for terrorist threats as a chilling note was posted online warning that Chicago could be an ISIS target,” dailymail.co.uk reports. “The federal agencies sent a bulletin to law enforcement agencies warning them to be on the lookout for terrorism. Although no specific threats have been identified, they could not guarantee no future attacks, the federal agencies said.” And there you have it: the feds (read: police) can’t guarantee your safety. Especially when we’re talking about these . . . animals. So, are you upping your own plans to protect you and yours? Avoiding large crowds? Upping awareness in malls? Prepping? Anything new or same-old-same-old?
SPOILER ALERT! So, wikipedia tells us that “Shortly before the publication of From Russia, With Love in 1956, Fleming received a fan letter from an author and gun collector, Geoffrey Boothroyd. He told Fleming that he admired the Bond novels apart from the hero’s choice of weapon. Boothroyd felt the Beretta was ‘a lady’s gun’ with no real stopping power. He also objected to the choice of holster. Boothroyd proposed that Bond should use a revolver like the Smith & Wesson Centennial Airweight. It had no external hammer, so it would not catch on Bond’s clothes. The Smith & Wesson could be kept in a Berns-Martin triple draw holster held in place with a spring clip which would decrease Bond’s draw time. Boothroyd also said the suppressors Bond occasionally used were rarely silent and actually reduced the gun’s stopping power . . .
“If you don’t want to get shot, tased, pepper-sprayed, struck with a baton or thrown to the ground, just do what I tell you. Don’t argue with me, don’t call me names, don’t tell me that I can’t stop you, don’t say I’m a racist pig, don’t threaten that you’ll sue me and take away my badge. Don’t scream at me that you pay my salary, and don’t even think of aggressively walking towards me.” – Sunil Dutta, I’m a cop. If you don’t want to get hurt, don’t challenge me. [via washingtonpost.com]
The UTAS-15 12-gauge shotgun is no looker. In fact, if I had a dog with a face like that I’d shave its butt and make it walk backwards. OK, the UTAS doesn’t have a face. And I’d rather have one than not if I needed one. A practical point that raises that whole “beauty is as beauty does, who cares if a GLOCK is as sexy as a brick” deal. But with so many dead sexy heaters waiting for homes at your local gun store, why would you buy an ugly gun? And yet, people must. Otherwise none would be made, right? Anyway, what gun do you reckon is the world’s ugliest? Hi-Point 995TS 9mm carbine? Chiappa Rhino snubbie.
This one comes straight from nj.com. “This question is being posed after a large amount of weapons were found in domestic dispute case in Saddle Brook. A man was stabbed by his wife, and she was charged. The police found the husband’s gun collection and confiscated it in accordance with protocol. He may be charged for the massive amount of gunpowder in his possession. Does the man’s large gun ammunition collection pose a threat to others? Some feel that his gun collection is no different than any other collection. As long as he isn’t using the guns or gunpowder to harm anyone, he should be allowed to have it. Others are concerned about the man’s intentions – what is the man’s reason for having such a huge amount of ammunition in the first place? Should there be a limit to how much ammunition a person can own?” Go get ‘em tiger!
“CNN broadcast a report Friday that showed the house, including the street number, of the Ferguson police officer who police say shot Mike Brown,” thegatewaypundit.com reveals. “The officer has been in hiding due to death threats since the shooting last Saturday. His name, Darren Wilson, was just released Friday morning. Another news outlet apologized for broadcasting video of Wilson’s home while others have virtually drawn a map to Wilson’s house for those bent on vengeance. Yahoo News named the community Wilson where Wilson resides and published a photograph of the officer. The UK Daily Mail also named the community, posted photos of the officer and gave a description of the house. USA Today also named the community and reported a local police presence. The Washington Post named the street where Wilson lives.” Etc. Are these media outlets right to ID Wilson’s 10-40? What public interest is served here?
“Alaska Republican Senatorial candidate Joe Miller said granting legal status to a large number of illegal immigrants would lead to more Democratic voters, who would in turn enact more gun restrictions and promote more anti-gun judges,” theblaze.com reports. “’If 20 million illegals vote, you can kiss the Second Amendment goodbye,’ a recent Miller campaign mailer [above] says. During a Republican debate, Miller also made the correlation between the two issues, the Alaska Dispatch News reported . . .
“A disgruntled ex-cop carrying a loaded gun [not shown] bypassed metal detectors at a federal building in Philadelphia and entered the FBI’s office there this week after flashing a fake police badge and his inactive ID card, according to sources and court records obtained by ABC News. The FBI ultimately took the man’s gun after becoming suspicious, but ‘he could’ve shot up half the office by that point,’ as one law enforcement expert put it after reading the court records.” I reckon security checkpoints make people complacent. Strike that . . .
Back in 1998, the University of Chicago Press published economist John Lott’s book More Guns, Less Crime. A lot of people bought it. Not many read it. No surprise there. Saying MGLC is a stat-heavy tome is like saying that anyone who attempts to knock a pregnant woman unconscious for the sheer bloody hell of it deserves ballistic disincentive. Yes, there is that [as above]. But here’s the thing: not many Americans carry a gun. Percentage-wise, you can round it down to zero. What if more people packed heat? Would there be less violent crime? If that’s true, where’s the tipping point? Ten percent? Twenty percent? And given that inter-gang warfare accounts for a large chunk of “gun violence,” would legal carry have any effect on inner city violent crime? One more thing: would open carry be more effective at reducing/preventing violent crime than concealed?
The legallyconcealed.com vlogger above is as unequivocal as he is taciturn: warn any home invaders that you’re armed and the cops are on their way. Makes sense to me. Especially if you’ve called 911 and put the phone down, so the service will record everything you say, for use in your defense. Only…is it possible that you’d want to ambush one more bad guys coming to rob, rape or kill you and/or your loved ones? What if you’re not in a defensible position? Do you really want to sacrifice the advantages of speed, surprise and violence of action? I say it depends on the situation; that you don’t want to commit to ANY default course of action. Have a plan but know that it probably won’t survive first contact with the enemy. What say you?
“Shaneen Allen faces 3½ years in prison because she made an honest mistake, followed by a mistake of honesty,” Jacob Sullum opines at nypost.com. Yes, that New York Post. The Murdoch-owned bird cage liner that constantly, hysterically, hyperbolically promotes civilian disarmament. In case you missed the backstory, “Allen, a 27-year-old phlebotomist who lives in Philadelphia, drove to Atlantic City with a gun in her purse, thinking her Pennsylvania carry permit would be respected in New Jersey. Then she told a state trooper about the gun when he pulled her over for a traffic violation . . . Her trial, scheduled for Oct. 6, will pit New Jersey’s draconian gun laws against compassion and common sense.” Is this The Big One? The case that will show-up NJ’s tyranny and signal a shift firearms freedom fence-sitters’ attitude towards lawful carry? [h/t DD]
Whenever I give the National Rifle Association grief (e.g. an admonition for their recent decision to pull Dom Raso’s “guns for the blind” video) I try to remember that the NRA plays politics. That game requires long-term thinking, back-room dealing and, for us, unpalatable compromise. So when I read Gun lobby’s campaign donations drop in NY since passage of SAFE Act at nydailynews.com (excerpt after the jump) that the NRA and National Shooting Sports Foundation have cut contributions to New York’s pro-gun pols, I tried to think why they’d do such a thing. Lack of funds? Ha! No one worth supporting? That’s not hardball. A lost cause? That doesn’t seem possible but . . . what do you reckon? . . .