SCOTUS’ opinion in District of Columbia, et. al. v. Heller, is probably the most welcome official document in memory for gun owners’ rights activists. As such, it bears multiple re-readings.

Savor this, for example, from Justice Scalia’s majority opinion:

“By the time of the founding, the right to have arms had become fundamental for English subjects. See Malcolm 122-134. Blackstone, whose works, we have said, ‘constituted the preeminent authority on English law for the founding generation,’ Alden v. Maine, 527 U.S. 706, 715 (1999), cited the arms provision of the Bill of Rights as one of the fundamental rights of Englishmen. See 1 Blackstone 136, 139-140 (1765). His description of it cannot possibly be thought to tie it to militia or military service. It was, he said, ‘the natural right of resistance and self preservation,’ id., at 139, and ‘the right of having and using arms for self-preservation and defence,’ id., at 140;see also 3 id., at 2-4…Thus, the right secured in 1689 as a result of the Stuarts’ abuses was by the time of the founding understood to be an individual right protecting against both public and private violence.” (Pages 20-21 of the Heller decision.)

In his dissent, Justice Stevens wrote, “The Court would have us believe that over 200 years ago, the Framers made a choice to limit the tools available to elected officials wishing to regulate civilian uses of weapons, and to authorize this Court to use the common-law process of case-by-case judicial lawmaking to define the contours of acceptable gun control policy.”

Yes, Justice Stevens, the Court would have us believe the obvious truth, as confirmed by the vast majority of the substantial body of Constitutional scholarship that exists on the topic…

Editor Dave Duffy tells me this blog is getting a good response.  Being a Luddite who doesn’t know from blogs, I’ll take his word for it. 

            I’ve tried not to be intrusive to reader responses, and let everyone have their say. Lots of good stuff!  A few comments do cry out for response, though.

            Anyone interested in more on the Dillinger matter may find my reconstruction of his shooting death at the Biograph Theater in Chicago in 1934 to be of interest. It’s on the stands now, in the July/August issue of American Handgunner magazine, under the continuing “Ayoob Files” feature..

            I mentioned that I was teaching in Harrisburg when the Heller decision was announced, and Jason the Saj commented that he’s from that area, and he was sorry he missed it. No sweat, Jason, we’ll be doing it there again next year. Stay tuned for date announcement at the Lethal Force Institute website at www.ayoob.com.

            Speaking of Heller, Dex wrote, “Scalia’s trips to the metaphorical woodshed with Stevens and Breyer are the most entertaining part of the opinion.”  I’ll second that!

            In re: the discussion of the Hi-Point pistol, lots of folks made cogent comments about the value of low-price, entry level firearms. Armed Jew remarked, “I’d really like to see Mr. Ayoob put these critters through their paces on the range.”  Been there, done that, bro.  Found the most reliable (100% so) and accurate was Hi-Point’s .380 model. I’ve also noted here already, as did several who commented, that their 9mm carbine is particularly nice.  I can also tell you that, according to dealers I’ve talked to, Hi-Point customer service is second to none.

            When I sent in a dispatch from the Midwestern floods, Brogan was concerned about cops entering homes without warrants under those circumstances. He saw it as “…another Katrina wrapped in a different package.” I hear where you’re coming from, Brogan, but I have to say I didn’t see any trampling of rights here.  In life-threatening disasters, emergency service workers – including police – have not only the right but the duty to check apparently abandoned dwellings to make sure there are no injured or infirm people inside who need to be rescued.

            Lots of folks shared their personal thoughts on “grail guns,” and every one mentioned was a fine and desirable firearm.  I only saw one I could help with: Heavyduty wrote that he’d love to own a round-butt, four-inch barrel specimen of the Model 681, Smith & Wesson’s fixed sight  L-frame (.41-frame) .357 Magnum in stainless. Almost all those revolvers were produced with square butts. There’s hope, though: attached is a photo of one of my 686s, the more common adjustable sight version of the same fine revolver. This one had its grip-frame reconfigured to the round butt shape by ace gunsmith Bob Lloyd. I can’t find Bob’s address, but there are lots of good Smith ‘smiths who can do the same job on the still available (if increasingly hard to find) square butt Model 681. Some 686s in the 4”/round butt configuration were also produced by S&W for US Customs, and surface occasionally on the collectors’ market.

            And finally, darn it, the bobcat never did come back.  L

4” S&W 686 rebuilt to round butt configuration (grips are Hogue) by ace gunsmith Bob Lloyd, who also trimmed the cylinder latch, bobbed the hammer, and did an outstanding action job. This gun won the New Hampshire IDPA Stock Service Revolver state championship a few years ago.

In the Comments section under Part Two of “Reflections on Heller” in this blog, reader azasu writes, “Hey Mas, I was wondering if you were going to do a post or article on the whole Joe Horn thing in Texas. I’d be interested to hear your take.”

Joe Horn of Pasadena, Texas made national news twice. The first time was last year, when he shot and killed two illegal immigrants who were burgling his next-door neighbor’s house. The second was this past week, when he was no-billed by the Grand Jury. Since it was publicized as two unarmed, fleeing men being shot in the back, most of the public expected him to be indicted for Murder or at least Manslaughter. Some were shocked by the Grand Jury’s decision, and some pleasantly surprised. Since both of the deceased had long and ugly criminal records, there was not a great deal of sympathy for them in some quarters.

There are a lot of subtleties that haven’t made it into the mainstream media yet, azasu. Many have heard his 9-1-1 calls, in which the dispatcher advised him to stay inside and he excitedly replied that no, he was going to go outside with his shotgun. The tape picks up Horn saying “Move and you’re dead,” and then three shotgun blasts.

What many do not realize is that one of the burglars was armed with a crowbar, and that they had faced him at fairly close range and were moving toward him – on his property by now, not just the neighbor’s, Horn said – when he opened fire. News reports say both men were shot in the back, but I’ve seen several cases where the suspect broke off his attack in the instant he realized he was going to be fired upon, and his turn came faster than the shooter could react to the change in the threat level. The average adult male can make a quarter turn in a quarter second, and a 180-degree body turn in half a second. Reaction time to an unanticipated stimulus takes longer than that, which means that the initial aggressor is likely to be shot before the defender can react to the turn and halt a trigger finger that is already in action.

Horn was in his sixties, and the two men he shot were much younger and stronger. That constitutes disparity of force. The crowbar one allegedly held constitutes a deadly weapon under these circumstances. Lunging at Horn as if to disarm him, under these circumstances, can also constitute lethal force, and Horn’s unleashing his 12-gauge Magnum could thus be justified three times over by a good defense attorney. In his videotaped walk-through at the shooting scene, recently released by the police department, Horn told the lead investigator, “I thought they were gonna get me…if they got the gun away from me, I knew what they were gonna do.” Moreover, Texas law is the most forgiving in the nation of private citizens who use deadly force in protection of property as well as life. Grand Jury proceedings tend to be super-secret, and we do not know to what degree a backlash against crime (and illegal aliens) may have influenced the Grand Jury’s decision not to render the true bill that would have set the stage for prosecution.

In a great many jurisdictions – including some in Texas – a citizen who went out and shot these guys would be under indictment for Murder or Manslaughter by now. Joe Horn’s willingness to risk his life for his neighbor’s goods is commendable, but not necessarily a role model for the rest of us. He is out substantial legal fees already, and he has received death threats. While many see him as a hero, I doubt that he feels like one. His attorney has stated that if Mr. Horn had it to do over again, he would stay inside and leave his Winchester Defender Model 1300 shotgun silent. I suspect the rest of us can learn from that.

As more information becomes available, azasu, I might be doing a full-length article on this in my continuing feature, “Self Defense and the Law,” in Combat Handguns magazine. If you’re interested in a full-length treatment in my Backwoods Home column, let editor Dave Duffy know. He is very responsive to article suggestions from readers.

Best wishes to all for a safe and meaningful Independence Day.

It is fascinating to watch the many reactions to the Heller decision. Perhaps the most obvious is that various print and electronic media, notably CNN, are now suddenly discussing these matters under the umbrella of “gun rights” when they used to say “gun control.” It’s good to see a more correct term in the headlines.

In Washington, DC, the city has reluctantly begun some foot-dragging compliance. They’ve announced that they’ll begin gun registration for handguns (required by a city law untouched by the decision). Moreover, since the city apparently has another law that bans semiautomatic firearms, only revolvers (and, presumably, single shot pistols and two-shot derringers) will be approved. DC Metro Police are issued 18-shot 9mm Glock 17 semiautomatics to protect the citizenry, but to DC lawmakers, I guess that’s neither here nor there. The fact remains that there is no genuine gun retailer in the District of Columbia where law-abiding citizens of the city can purchase any sort of the handguns now allowed there by the SCOTUS decision.

Word is, there is exactly one FFL (Federal Firearms License, for dealers) in Washington, DC. It was issued to Josh Sugarman, a high-profile gun ban advocate, attached to the Sarah Brady-inspired Violence Policy Center. He may have acquired it to gain entry into the SHOT Show, the Shooting, Hunting, and Outdoor Trade Show that is the annual Big Event in firearms retailing. He may have acquired it to make some sort of obscure statement. He may have acquired it to allow his friends in the anti-gun movement to buy guns through him in the city, since that sort of hypocrisy is known to run rampant among those people. I honestly don’t know.

However, since the authority that issues and supervises FFLs, the Federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (BATFE) reportedly requires FFL holders to do transfers for law-abiding customers, there is a movement afoot among “real” FFL-holders to contact the agency and have Sugarman held to account and required to do so, on pain of losing his license. A “transfer” is what occurs when an individual legally acquires title to a firearm by paying for it in another state, whether in person or through an Internet purchase or auction. The gun is shipped by the seller to an FFL in the purchaser’s jurisdiction, and the individual purchaser then takes possession through the locally licensed dealer, filling out the 4473 form there, and paying a reasonable fee for the transfer. This is required since it is against Federal law for a private individual to purchase a handgun in another state, which is why the newly re-entitled DC residents can’t just drive to a gun shop in Maryland or Virginia and leave with a home defense revolver.

Will stubborn DC officials use such details in hopes of keeping their law-abiding citizenry disarmed? Well, do bears go potty in the woods? It will be interesting to see how this works out.

The Heller decision was certainly long overdue. When Morton Grove, Illinois became the first municipality to pass a law banning handgun possession, gun owners’ rights activists tried to take it to SCOTUS, and failed. Jervis Anderson, in his anti-gun treatise “Guns In American Life” (Random House, 1984) wrote, “The gun-control movement might also draw a measure of comfort from what the Supreme Court eventually decided about the case of Morton Grove…(after the US Court of Appeals in Chicago upheld the ban,) The Supreme Court remained silent on the matter, however. In October of 1983, it, in effect, dismissed the N.R.A. petition, by declining to rule on the opinion delivered in March by the United States Court of Appeals in Chicago.”

The Supreme Court of the United States has fixed that now.

Better late than never.

Ever since I was a kid, I was frustrated by clueless people who said, “The Second Amendment is about the National Guard or something.” Yeah, right…as if one of the most carefully crafted documents in the history of the human experience, devoted to individual human rights, would somehow have strangely included states’ rights to raise militias.

For decades, Constitutional scholars have again and again determined that The Second did indeed speak to an individual right. Our current President’s first Attorney General stated that in an official opinion. It was obvious to anyone who didn’t have an agenda.

Now, at long, long last, the Supreme Court of the United States has spoken. They have confirmed – hopefully once and for all – that the Second Amendment is indeed an individual “right to keep and bear arms.” It is truly historic, a genuine “landmark decision.”

The fallout was instantaneous. In Chicago, literally fifteen minutes after the SCOTUS decision was announced, the Second Amendment Foundation and the Illinois State Rifle Association pulled the trigger of an already cocked hammer, a lawsuit challenging the Constitutionality of Chicago’s long standing ban on law-abiding citizens’ ownership of handguns. Early indications are that the Heller decision, in shooting down (pun intended) Washington, DC’s similar ban, will make the termination of Chicago’s current, onerous law a slam-dunk. Chicago’s Mayor Richard Daley, raving against the decision, literally experienced a meltdown in his emotional press conference. The guy was practically babbling. Always a good thing to see in someone who has declared himself an enemy of you and your kind.

The decision came down on the first day of a Lethal Force Institute LFI-I class I was teaching in Harrisburg, PA. The 28 adult students literally cheered. Well, we had all waited a long time to hear this decision. The majority opinion written by Justice Scalia is said to be a model of logical, cogent jurisprudence.

Several of the students agreed that, to them, it would be one of those moments so pivotal to what they believed in, that they would always remember where they were when they heard the news.

Some of the more hard-core gun folks out there seem to consider the decision a failure, since it doesn’t automatically authorize everyone to carry a gun everywhere, nor allow the general public to buy machine guns the way they’d purchase a .22. These people have not figured out, apparently, that (a) none of those issues were on point to the instant case, and (b) the history of people who demand all or nothing is that they end up with…nothing. The simple fact is, the Heller decision is a landmark victory for the rights of citizens to protect themselves…a victory for civil rights of gun owners, and for the basic human right of self-protection.

I’ve been teaching more than ten hours a day, and doing class-related management stuff after hours, and have not yet had time to read the 157-page decision in all its detail. It can be found here.

We’ll be talking about this more down the line. It’s time to hear the opinions of the readers of this blog on the Heller decision.

What say you?

Mas was teaching this armed self-defense class when the Heller decision was announced.

Viewing the Mississippi flooding up close was awe-inspiring…in terms of the best of human values at work, as well as the majesty of nature. The pictures you see here were taken by significant other and I in Quincy, Illinois and Hannibal, MO.

Homes under water. Business districts under water. Bridges under water, and countless acres of farmland immersed.

But, also, an incredibly strong expression of sense of community. Neighborhood folks, military reserve personnel, Mennonite farm families, and local high school kids pulling together to fill, just in one medium size community, what a city official said was 1.3 million sandbags as they fought to keep the vast waters from spilling over the levees.

As many other commentators have noted: no riots. No looting. The National Guard coming in with shovels instead of M16s.

And, in perhaps the most whimsical picture, we observe that when their favorite watering hole happens to be a waterfront tavern, Americans don’t just abandon their regular routines…J

Says something about values in the Heartland, doesn’t it?

So here I am in Barry, Illinois, just finishing up filming my segments for the third season of Tom Gresham’s television program, Personal Defense TV, which has just switched from The Outdoor Channel to The Sportsman’s Channel. And I’m reminded again of how the world of the gun is so much like every other aspect of our world.

You know how a few minutes after an argument or a debate, we find ourselves thinking, “What I should have said was…”? And all those times where instead of “I should have said,” it’s “I should have done?”

Had a couple of those moments…

In eleven of the thirteen episodes, I was happy with the way things turned out. Several were done in only one take. There are a couple, though, that I wouldn’t mind doing over again…

One was a segment on why it’s a good idea to use a firm grip when shooting, particularly with powerful guns. We were filming at PASA Park, the outstanding shooting facility which hosts the Smith & Wesson Masters and the Single Stack pistol championships. PASA head Dick Metcalf, who also writes for Shooting Times and Guns & Ammo, lent me a Smith & Wesson Model 629 slicked up by our mutual friend, the late, great Fred Sadowski of 300 Gunsmithing Services in Denver. The ammo was powerful Hornady XTP .44 Magnum, using a 180 grain bullet that hits nearly 1600 feet per second muzzle velocity.

To illustrate that the gun can move in your hand upon recoil if you hold it too loosely, I let off one shot downrange with the camera in close-up on gun and hand. I pointed out that the revolver had started to roll back in my relaxed grasp, and that another round or two would have found the hammer blocked by the web of the hand. Then, with a proper hard hold, I ripped five more downrange rapid-fire. That’s a take! Cut, wrap, print…

Not until after the camera turned off did I notice that the light grasp had allowed the sharp edge of the cylinder latch to slice my thumb open, drawing blood. The gear was already being broken down to move to the next filming location, and an after-the-fact splice would have looked hokey. Damn…I had missed a perfect opportunity to show even better why you shouldn’t fire powerful guns with a wimpy grasp.

Another segment involved gun concealment options. With a light nylon windbreaker over my usual garb of cargo pants, shirt, and photographer’s vest, I proceeded in front of the camera to divest myself of two .45 automatics, two full size .357 Magnums, a couple of compact .22s and .32s, a trio of .380s, and so many snub-nose .38s that I lost count. When the camera stopped rolling, 25 pistols and revolvers had made it from concealment on my person to the table beside me. As they unhooked the body mike, I realized, “Dammit…I forgot a couple.” I had missed two short barrel Smith & Wessons, an all-steel .38 Chief Special and an AirLite .357. Well, there was no need for a second take – 25 makes the point about as well as 27 – but you know, I don’t think I’ll be as judgmental as I might have been the next time I read of some honest gun carrier getting arrested because he forgot he had a gun on when he went through a metal detector into a “gun-free zone.”

Woulda…coulda…shoulda…sigh.

Mas has just removed these 25 concealed handguns from the clothes he’s wearing. Vest is concealed by nylon windbreaker…and still hides two more revolvers.

All steel S&W Model 36 .38 Special and super-light S&W Model 340 .357 were literally forgotten in the inside breast pockets of concealment vest.

In my last blog entry, I talked about getting ready for a police combat shoot in New Hampshire. That match is history now, but as usual, I learned some things.

Driving to NH from the south, my adult supervisor and I stopped at the excellent Skip-J shooting range in Anderson, South Carolina to shoot in their annual Glock shoot under the GSSF (Glock Sport Shooting Foundation) system. I hadn’t practiced for the event and shot for the heck of it. Used a Glock 17 9mm and scored, well, “a gentleman’s C.” But then I entered the Major Sub event, and whattaya know…I won it.

“Major Sub” means large caliber subcompact pistol. I had my favorite Glock along, a G30. This is the carry-size, eleven-shot semiautomatic in caliber .45 ACP. However, it had a grip trimmed down to better fit my hand, and I’d forgotten that this feature was not allowed by GSSF rules in a stock gun category. An old friend lent me his G30SF, the new Glock .45 that is essentially the Glock 30 factory-produced with a gripframe that has a smaller than standard measurement front to back. His pistol was perfectly sighted in for me with Winchester 230 grain .45 hardball ammunition, and a high visibility Ameriglo front sight. Kewl! Sometimes, things just work out.

The NH shoot was another story. The course of fire was not announced until we were on the firing line. It was slower shooting than expected, and at longer range. I had been practicing for this particular tournament, but at a faster pace and on a bright, sunny range in the southland. A light rain was falling on match day, and the flat black target in the gray gloom did not give me good contrast between the front sight and the target…and I got sloppy. The first string of fourteen shots (seven, reload, and seven more with my department issue Ruger .45 auto) went to the right of point of aim. Decent group, but in the wrong place. The group was centered between the nine- and eight-point rings, and one drifted into the seven-ring. After we got in to the fifteen yard line, I only dropped one more shot out of the ten ring, and put a couple dozen into the tiny X-ring in the center, but that was too little too late.

I found a bright spot in the day, though. Rangemaster Russ Timmons announced that the overall winner was Stephanie Howland of the New Hampshire Department of Corrections (DoC). I can remember when Steph started shooting the match, a few years ago. She was not happy with her finish the first time. Instead of just slinking away, as so many people do when their first competition doesn’t find them at the top of the list, she resolved to train harder. Each succeeding year, she placed higher and higher.

And this year, she placed top overall, the first time a female officer has done so in the history of the Association, to my knowledge. She also led a DoC sweep, with her colleagues Perkins and Snyder winning the championship team honors. Congratulations, Stephanie!

Stephanie Howland’s perseverance, focus, and determination make her a role model for both genders. All things considered, I’ll take the inspiration she gave us all to a trophy, any day. Inspirations are a lot harder to come by than trophies.

Spent 9mm casing flies from the SIG P226 pistol of Ernest Perkins as he leads his team to victory at the NH Police Association state shoot of 2008. Fellow Dept. of Corrections shooter Stephanie Howland won the individual shooting championship.

Next week, my state’s fraternal association for police officers holds its annual conference, which will include a pistol match. It’s the de facto state championship for cops. It’s hosted by a different law enforcement agency each year, so the match is always different. Some years, the rules demand using the department-issue sidearm. Some years, the rules state that you can use any gun you are authorized to carry on duty.

For some, those are one and the same, but for those of us in more enlightened departments, it gives us some latitude. My agency’s standard issue sidearm for the last couple of years has been the Ruger P345 – the high-quality, low-priced .45 caliber semiautomatic that I recommended elsewhere on this blog to a reader who was looking for an affordable .45. Before that, since 1993, we had the same gun’s predecessor, the Ruger P90. I still have my “old” issue gun, so I can use either one if the rules turn out to be “standard issue only.”

My department is more liberal than some. We can carry a high quality double action .45 auto of another brand if it’s on the department-approved list. I have a SIG .45 that occasionally rides with me in uniform. Assorted high quality 9mm and .40 S&W caliber auto pistols are authorized for plainclothes and off-duty carry. For me, these include a Beretta 9mm that I’ve shot in at least three competitions in the past twelve months (won two, placed second in the other) and a .40 caliber Glock Model 22 with eight-pound New York trigger module with which I won the event I’m now preparing for in 2001, 2002, and 2003. Our department even allows cocked and locked 1911-style .45 automatics, if we can qualify at Master level with them. I wear one in uniform occasionally, and came in second at the “state shoot” with it in 2004.

I don’t know yet what the rules or the course of fire will be (they like to surprise us) but I’m told it will be a tough “qualification” course instead of the run-and-gun assault courses that have constituted the match for the past four years. Good news for me, since I “gun” better than I “run.” Since we probably won’t know the exact course of fire ‘til the morning of the match, I figured I’d take a few guns to the range and run them on “Course Seven,” the most challenging qualifier our state has on its books. Stuff like draw, fire three shots strong hand only, change hands, fire three more weak hand only, all in seven seconds. This would be easy with “qualification scoring,” in which the big oval “8-ring” of the police B27 target is counted as 5 out of 5 possible points, and a hit anywhere on the silhouette, even if it would have only pierced the bad guy’s earlobe or shot off his cuff link, counts for 3 out of 5 points. Unfortunately, at the match we use competition scoring, where the mark is a “10-X ring” that’s smaller than a business card, and some of the shooting is from 25 yards away. I can’t remember the last time I ever shot this course in “qualification scoring” with less than 180 out of 180 possible…and I have never shot a perfect 360 out of 360 possible on it in “competition scoring,” nor have I seen anyone else do so.

I ran the course with the Glock. Shot a 354 out of 360. That’s been good enough to win before. Shot it with my sleek 9mm Beretta: 352. The SIG P220ST? I used that gun for my personal best on this course, a 358, but can’t repeat that on demand, and today I got a 354. I tried the new and hotrock-popular Smith & Wesson Military & Police 9mm; I’ve been shooting the M&Ps since they came out, and they “like me,” but I got the same 354 score. Tried the old P90, that I’d won the state shoot with in 2000, but its blocky grip never fit my hand quite right, and I’d been away from it too long; I shot a 344.

Then I tried the currently issued “company gun.” The Ruger P345 gave me – you guessed it – a 354.

Aw, the hell with it…I’ll probably just shoot the match with the issue P345. That way, I’m covered even if the rules go strict and I have to use the gun the department gave me. But, you know, there were lessons in this morning’s experience.

The Ruger was the cheapest gun of the batch. Some of them had several hundred additional dollars of custom work in them, action slicking and such. The Ruger was literally out of the box. With some careful shopping you can buy a new one for $500 or less, and get an even better deal on a used one.

Lessons? 1.) A Chevy gets you just as far, just as fast as a Cadillac. 2.) Consistency is good, [though one could argue that consistency is also a key to mediocrity L]. 3.) As I constantly tell my students, it’s not so much about the gun so much as it’s about the shooter, and it’s not even about the shooter so much as it’s about consistent application of proven technique. It was the same guy and the same gun firing the 9-point hits on the 36-round course, as firing the 10s, whether the guns were plain or fancy. The imperfect hits came from the operator’s loss of concentration, not poor selection of tools.

I’ll let you know how it comes out. But in the meantime, tell the rest of us about your experiences in this vein.

The day you discovered that you hit just as many birds with an inexpensive Mossberg shotgun as with a Perazzi that costs more than some people’s homes. The day you realized the vegetables you raised economically in your garden tasted better than the finest high-dollar produce at the Food Boutique.

Validation of values, and lessons of life experience, sometimes come from unexpected quarters.

Left row, all .45s, from top: Ruger P345, Ruger P90, SIG P220ST. Left row, from top, Glock 22 in .40, 9mm Beretta 92, 9mm S&W M&P.

“Qualification scoring” is forgiving with the NRA B27 police silhouette target. Anything inside the competition 8-ring is 5 out of 5 points, “center mass”; 7-ring is 4 out of 5, and anything touching the black is worth 60%. In competition scoring, however, anything outside the 7/4 ring is scored as a miss…even a head shot, since the shooter has missed point of aim by a foot or so.

Competition-mode scoring demands more accuracy. Center oval is 10-X tie-breaker, next ring out is worth 10 points, then 9, etc. Anything outside the 7-ring is worth zero, and any late shot gets a minus-10 points penalty. Pistol is author’s department issue .45.

A reader who describes himself as a retired law enforcement officer writes:

“I did not vote for Clinton in either election, however, I do wish to correct a common mistake made by Mas Ayoob and the firearms proponents. While Clinton did enact the Brady Bill, limiting the magazine capacity and changing the form (the way they could look) of firearms, the ‘Assault Weapons Ban’ that Mas speaks of was enacted by George the First. Bush One banned more firearms with the stroke of a pen than Clinton did in eight years. I don’t know why firearms writers and proponents continue to credit this action to Clinton, he might have wished for it, but he did not father it. The Brady Law sunsetted a number of years ago and has not significantly changed the way Law Abiding citizens own or purchase firearms. I can still own my MAC10, buy ammo for it and get the magazines I need to keep it running. Bush One and Two have hurt my firearm experience more than Clinton ever did. At least under him, I could still buy cases of .45 ACP for under a hundred bucks. With the other two, I can no longer buy new DaeWoo rifles and other foreign made firearms or get ammo at prices that are affordable to shoot. Thanks for your time.”

Wow. I think some respectful corrections may be in order.

Going chronologically, the crackdown on full auto weapons that limited licensed civilian purchase to those already in the stream of civilian commerce in 1986 was not enacted during any of the above-named Presidencies. It goes back to that year, when Ronald Reagan was President.

George Herbert Walker Bush can indeed bear blame for banning the importation of “assault weapons,” but certainly not of all foreign made firearms. Gun owners saw it as a betrayal, and voted against him in sufficient numbers to give him a margin of defeat that ushered in the Bill Clinton years.

The Brady Bill involved waiting periods and background checks for purchases. It had nothing to do with banning any kind of firearm.

The Assault Weapons Ban was indeed a Clinton thing, and very much a pet project of both Bill and Hillary Clinton. I am as grateful as our reader that it reached its sunset, under the administration of George Walker Bush, who could have pushed to extend it, but didn’t.

Any number of foreign made firearms are still available in this country, of course. The current increase in ammunition prices, as I’ve mentioned in the pages of Backwoods Home, is due only in part to military ammunition needs fueled by the War on Terror. It comes more from grotesquely skyrocketing prices of materials such as lead, brass, and particularly copper due to massive construction projects in other parts of the world, particularly China. It’s not something that the current administration, or any other, had power to control.

We may respectfully disagree, bro, but thanks for taking the time to write. Thanks for your service to the public. I’m glad you made it to retirement.