The Truth

Sometimes self-defense turns out fairly happy for everyone involved, and sometimes its really scary. But either way, I'm proud of both of these ladies and you should be too.

Too Good to Leave It. . .

Just had to second this post by the blogger of "The Smallest Minority."

This scenario seems to be a textbook example of what's right and wrong with the gun debate....

Right: The young man is still alive, acted responsibly, will likely have deterred further crime in his neighborhood (thereby being a good citizen), had no apparent criminal record, etc.

Wrong: The response of others to his brave, cool-headed actions was to fret and worry because they weren't as safe as they thought -- rather than wake up and talk about how they were going to fight for carry on campus rights.

Bullet Counter Points

The folks running this blog have not responded to my most recent posts in a few debates.. . So, I'm going to make some points here.

Panic/Chaos/Accuracy Argument

This argument attempts to explain that ordinary citizens should not have firearms at because they will be in a state of panic, chaos will ensue, and they will not be able to accurately put bullets where they want them. It seems obvious to me that non-police accomplish this quite frequently. What about the aggressor? They seem to be able to put bullets where they want them quite often, and are experiencing the same rush of hormones, level of chaos, and (often) lack of formal police training. In addition to this, they must often keep track of many people who would like to stop them in their endeavor, while a law-abiding citizen must only keep track of a few attackers (often only one). I say that if the bad guy can do it, so can I.

Britain

I hear a lot of comments about how Britain has a much lower crime rate than other countries and this is ostensibly due to their laws regarding gun control.

However, all is not as it seems



http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/6960431.stm

And, on top of that, it seems some powerful folks in Britain are lying about the situation.

School Shootings

Here's the data with Name, Year, and Lives Taken. The frequency has increased in spite of various gun control legislation at various times.

University of Texas at Austin 1966 17
Orangeburg 1968 3
Kent State 1970 4
Jackson State 1970 2
California State University 1976 7
Cleveland Elementary School 1979 2
Parkway South Junior High School 1983 2
Cleveland Elementary School 1989 6
University of Iowa 1991 6
Lindhurst High School 1992 4
Simon's Rock College of Bard 1992 2
Richland High School 1995 2
Frontier Junior High 1996 3
Hetzel Union Building 1996 1
Bethel High School 1997 2
Pearl High School 1997 3
Heath High School 1997 3
Westside Middle School 1998 5
Parker Middle School 1998 1
Thurston High School 1998 4
Columbine High School 1999 15
Heritage High School 1999 0
Buell Elementary School 2000 1
Santana High School 2001 2
Granite Hills High School 2001 0
Appalachian School of Law 2002 3
Red Lion Area Junior High School 2003 2
Case Western Reserve University 2003 1
Rocori High School 2003 2
Fairleigh Dickinson University 2004 1
Red Lake High School 2005 10
Campbell County High School 2005 1
Pine Middle School 2006 0
Essex Elementary School 2006 2
Platte Canyon High School 2006 2
Weston High School 2006 1
Amish school 2006 6
Virginia Tech 2007 33
Delaware State University 2007 1
SuccessTech Academy 2007 1
Louisiana Technical College 2008 3
Mitchell High School 2008 0
E.O. Green School 2008 1
Northern Illinois University 2008 6

I hate that these people were killed like lambs at the slaughter. Let's do some things to deter these events, and to give some folks the ability to stop this kind of chaos after it starts by letting law-abiding folks, who are properly licensed, shoot back in defense. Let's also be good citizens by reaching out to people in pain and see that they get the help they need before they resort to this type of action.

Concealed Carry Classes are Weak

Most anti-gunners have not attended a concealed carry class. These folks should take the class. When I tell them that I learned to shoot accurately in a matter of minutes, their pride usually causes them to be quiet or change the subject. So, if the problem is not enough or adequate training, then why aren't they trying to get folks to go for more or adequate training?

Correlation Does Not Mean Causation

The most common problem I have found with the arguments of anti-firearms folks is that they have confused correlation and causation. In other words, just because I stop eating vanilla ice cream when the price goes up at the ice cream store, does not mean that I quit eating vanilla ice cream because the price went up. I might have a newly discovered food allergy, or be tired of it, etc. This often gives psychology and sociology students headaches -- just ask them!

My point is that I have heard time and time again about how folks in the US have higher rates of homicides by firearms than say Britain (where there are "tough gun laws"). But in this case, Britain's rates were lower before these laws were established. How many other countries' lower rates may be due to something other than "tough gun laws?"

My advice is: Make sure that any figures you come across on your journey to prove one side or the other truly support your position, and aren't easily explained or refuted due to some other cause.

Lies about recoil.

I'm always amused when I tell someone that I carry a .45 and they ooh and ahh about what a large caliber it is and what a kick it must have. I get the feeling that they are only saying that because I'm a 5'1" female of 117 lbs. I have noticed that small people in general and females can get that reaction quite often. Why? I haven't the foggiest idea.

Recoil is usually blown way out of proportion regarding smaller folks. While I have no desire to fire a 12 ga locked breech shotgun again anytime in the near future (because it hurts), it's nowhere near powerful enough to lay me on my ***.

My advice for other little people? Fear no ammo less powerful and including 22ga, 30-30, or 44 mag. For ammo more powerful than that, give it some consideration -- but don't worry yourself about it until you get up to 12ga, etc. I have found that the best way to get an approximate idea of what a particular gun will feel like is to look at a calculated value of recoil energy (RE) chart.

Here's links for:
Rifle, Rifle 2 (more extensive, but not sorted by RE)
Shotgun
Handgun (not sorted - anyone find a better chart?)

I wish people would be more realistic about what does and doesn't "kick", when giving advice. I've heard big guys talking about how a 12 ga is no big deal, but then they get bruised like everyone else if they're not used to it and fire more than a few rounds. They're lying to look cool. On the other hand, I've had some folks act mystified when hearing about what I like to carry. . . . as if it's a problem. They're lying to themselves to feel better about the caliber they carry.

Part of the irony is that I really don't care if you're a 6' tall man who weighs 280 lbs and you like a 9mm. It doesn't make me think you're less of a man. It's easier for you to conceal? I say "Good for you." Shoot what you like. But don't patronize me for liking my .45.

Posting in Gun Forums

I had an interesting experience of being labeled as a possible danger on a gun forum today. What was the problem? Well, I was asking about the second amendment to the US Constitution. I wanted to know how far this set of pro-gunners wanted to go with the interpretation of this law. What types of arms should be allowed and where?

I was considered suspicious and several forum members were thinking I might be asking in order to bait some of the less informed readers and posters. I can't help but wonder at the paranoia. People need to hear both sides of the issue and make their own informed decision. I don't like it when pro-gunners won't listen to a mother whose child was shot to death and I don't like it when someone says they are anti-gun, but has never shot one. The pro-gunner can say that they don't need to hear the mother because they already know that it was not simply due to privately owned firearms. The anti-gunner can say they don't want to shoot guns because they already know they are evil and don't want to participate in evil activities.

But the truth is that some folks are just scared that they might change their mind.

So far, I've only met people who went from being anti-gun to pro-gun. And most of the pro-gunners that I interact with regularly are not easily intimidated by anti-gunner rhetoric. In other words, they don't get easily offended or rude.

Let me encourage you to refuse to be intimidated by either side, or to think you're a "bad" person for exploring why people on the other side of the issue think the way that they do.

If you're a pro-gunner, please understand that being paranoid and rude only makes you look easily intimidated.

And, if you are an anti-gunner and you've never shot a firearm. . . please try it for yourself at a reputable firing range. Because quite frankly, until you do, you do not have enough experience to be respected by pro-gunners on this issue.

To Militia or Not to Militia?

A friend and I were talking about the recent overturning of lower court decisions that interpreted the second amendment as only applicable to persons who are members of organized militias. GOD bless Robert Levy and the Supreme Court's little hearts.

The second amendment states simply that "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

However, most of the people that I know who are against individual ownership of "arms" would be even less pleased if the ACLU's interpretation of the second amendment was strictly enforced.

Regardless of whose definition of "well regulated" was applied, these folks are failing to foresee a growth in the number of groups like the Michigan Militia if the government made an attempt to strictly enforce this interpretation. Find anti-militia information here.

"arms" hmm. does this mean I can have that A-10?

Look here for more irritation regarding possession of guns in the homes of Washington DC.