If you’re reading this, you’ve probably had a conversation with someone in the last few days who asked, “Why do ordinary law-abiding people need those semiautomatic firearms with magazines that can hold more than ten cartridges?”  There are lots of sound answers.

For one thing, defensive firearms are meant to be “equalizers,” force multipliers that can allow one good person to defend against multiple evil people.  To allow one good person to defend against a single evil person so much stronger and/or bigger and/or more violent than he or she, that the attacker’s potentially lethal assault can be stopped.  History shows that it often takes many gunshots to stop even a single determined aggressor. Most police officers have seen the famous autopsy photo in the cops-only text book “Street Survival” of the armed robber who soaked up 33 police 9mm bullets before he stopped trying to kill the officers.  Consider Lance Thomas, the Los Angeles area watch shop owner who was in many shootouts with multiple gang bangers who tried to rob and murder him.  He shot several of them, and discovered that it took so many hits to stop them that he placed multiple loaded handguns every few feet along his workbench.  That’s not possible in a home, or when lawfully carrying concealed on the street: a semiautomatic pistol with a substantial cartridge capacity makes much more sense for that defensive application.

Semiautomatic rifles? Consider this heart-breaking, fatal home invasion in Florida  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murders_of_Byrd_and_Melanie_Billings and ask yourself if it might have turned out differently had the homeowners been able to access and competently deploy something like, oh, a Bushmaster AR15 with 30 round magazine.  I teach every year in Southern Arizona, and each year I see more Americans along the border with AR15s and similar rifles in their ranch vehicles and even their regular cars.  There have been cases where innocent ranchers and working cops alike have been jeopardized by multiple, heavily armed drug smugglers and human traffickers in desert fights far from police response and backup.  A semiautomatic rifle with a substantial magazine capacity can be reassuring in such situations, as seen here: http://azstarnet.com/news/local/border/risk-of-violence-keeps-ranchers-on-alert/article_adb7ca9a-14a3-5d63-8788-34bef7e77220.html

In the last twenty years, we have seen epic mob violence in American streets. During the Rodney King riots in Los Angeles, Korean storekeepers armed with AR15s kept their stores and livelihoods – and lives – from the torches of inflamed crowds because the mob feared their force multipliers. Read this, for a survivor’s account: http://www.seraphicpress.com/jew-without-a-gun/.  There have been bands of roving, violent predators as lately as this year during the Sandy storm. And the “flash mob violence” phenomenon of recent years has left many urban dwellers picturing themselves as the lone victim of a feral human wolfpack.

And, if you will, one more stark and simple thing:  Americans have historically modeled their choices of home protection and personal defense handguns on what the cops carried.  When the police carried .38 revolvers as a rule, the .38 caliber revolver was the single most popular choice among armed citizens.  In the 1980s and into the 1990s, cops switched en masse to semiautomatic pistols.  So did the gun-buying public.  Today, the most popular handgun among police seems to be the 16-shot, .40 caliber Glock semiautomatic.  Not surprisingly, the general public has gone to pistols bracketing that caliber in power (9mm, .40, .45) with similar enthusiasm. The American police establishment has also largely switched from the 12 gauge shotgun which was also the traditional American home defense weapon, to the AR15 patrol rifle with 30-round magazine…and, not surprisingly, the law-abiding citizenry has followed suit there, too.

The reasoning is strikingly clear. The cops are the experts on the current criminal trends. If they have determined that a “high capacity” semiautomatic pistol and a .223 semiautomatic rifle with 30-round magazines are the best firearms for them to use to protect people like me and my family, they are obviously the best things for us to use to protect ourselves and our families .

1 COMMENT

  1. It’s not just Guns also hunting. I use to Hunt a lot to help feed my large family but sense i now have bad heart i don’t get to as much any more i still want the right. people oh it just guns and hunting no big deal. but do think that is all they want? ask your self do i want Washington to wipe their collective ass on the Constitution and the Bill of Rights we need to get involved and stop The Idiots who are in Washington. The People are out of Control. there are Employees but they continually take more an more control of are lives, We need to wake up, I don’t want to live in a Nanny State Cradle to grave The Government Dictating what I do or say. How about you what we are leave are children. they make laws that kill jobs not create them. The Gun Industry makes 100;s of 1000’s jobs good jobs that support other jobs, the same Hunting. Stores,Hotels, Restaurants, gas stations, you name it. The point is can we afford to lose more jobs!! and if you think what can I do just Remember

    WE THE PEOPLE OF UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
    ( for you young people that never had to take a civics class it the first line the Constitution of the United States Of America. see and you thought that civics was a little cars from japan ha ha)

    My rant for the Day.

    remember ( The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants)

    ( Thomas Jefferson)

  2. Guns were given to citizens as a way of creating a citizen army against the British Invasion. Now we have a military. Time to give up your guns. We have no need for them you paranoid redneck fucks.

  3. It is quite clear that our government will never be able to take our guns. They have no idea truly who owns and who doesn’t.
    It is also clear that there is an over abundance of ignorance, and manipulation when it comes to people trying to implement gun control. The term “assault rifle” is really being used to persuade us to their ideas, or the person has no idea what a true “assault rifle” is. Whether it’s because they don’t want to know or they are just repeating someone elses ignorance.
    An “assault rifle” is only available to police, military and civilians with special federal permits. Not just anyone can buy them. These are full auto and special burst style weapons. The weapons anyone can buy are only semi-automatic.
    Semi-automatic weapons are what all these crimes in the news have been committed with. Again manipulation to think their way comes to play and ignorance of not knowing the difference when the crimes are reported. They use the words “assault rifle” because of it’s similarity in appearance to a true assault rifle. In these news reports they never talk about the gunmen that were shot by someone with a gun and kept them from committing a bigger crime. That would totally contradict the gun control thought process they want you to have.
    You can say what you want about the AR and AK rifles. People for years have always had a fasination for guns. Some for hunting and others just for sport.

    Thanks,

  4. “Since you seem to want to deal in real world situations, at what point in your life have you been confronted by multiple attackers? Were you part of the LA riots? Should we base our laws on the 1/100k rule, or be more reasonable? Whatevs. The world goes on while you sit in your basements with your cold steel and empty lives.”

    Gil: so in your world, ownership of “scary black rifles” and “large capacity clips” is predicated on whether or not you’ve been lucky enough to survive multiple attackers? This argument is nonsensical. I own because I can. I make sure I have enough ammo in enough magazines to ensure that I can stop any number of attackers should the need arise. Any other questions?
    I’d also like to know what the 1/100k rule is. Google can’t seem to make heads nor tails of it.
    Finally, your last sentence makes it clear as to what side of the debate you’re on: the one that has to rely on ad hominem attacks to make its point. FAIL. But thanks for playing.

  5. Mas Ayoob does a good job of presenting the fundamental concepts and arguments that we all of us who really respect the 2nd amendment know about, and adds the depth of knowledge and event history that he has amassed in decades of law enforcement and analysis of real-world defensive shootings. I agree with Ayoob that our defensive firearm choices have closely followed law enforcement for many years for completely valid reasons. Why should I expect to be relegated to anything less than what police use in order to protect themselves and do their mostly reactive shooting. I am law-abiding, and do not shoot in an offensive manner, but I DO expect to prevail in the event that I am forced to defend against an unknown level of force that threatens me, my family and neighbors, and home & country. Telling me how many rounds that will take, what type of gun is permissible for the task, and postulating on how many drug-crazed and numbed assailants I should expect to encounter in an invasion or mob action does not sit well with me, or other responsible citizens. I do not have the luxury of calling for backup while being attacked, and I would expect to not have convenient cover during which I can reload using lower-capacity magazines. I am a member of a police family, but fully understand that the police are not obligated to put themselves in harm’s way to stop a threat against me.

  6. Old Fezzywig has it right. Its all about power. Everything else is just a distractor from the real issue: POWER. The more people who are vested the better. That is why laws are being proposed that do not address the problem, to grab more power, by enacting more laws that do not address the stated out come. Its smoke and mirrors. The more people become vested, the more who have a stake in the game, the stronger our base.

    To the issue of price gouging. Our dollar buys 1/4th of what it did just a few years ago. It buys half of what it did just 4 years ago. Use the base price of metals to compare.

  7. Just remember……………………..When seconds count, the cops are only MINUTES away. Stay safe by staying prepared. Thirty round mags? Yes sir. Jim

  8. To Senator McCaskill: you are an idiot. The “assault rifle” was not used in the attack. He used handguns. People like you who have no idea what was or was not used need to keep your ideas to yourselves. Guns are not the problem Government is the problem. We as citizens do not deserve to have our rights taken away by certain fools, likely government sponsored attacks, and people who think they can get rid of problems by writing words on paper to make things illegal. The truth is simple tell your cronies in government to quit poisoning the people and killing innocent children.

  9. @TNT-
    You are the epitome of ignorance. To say that the 2nd amendment is outdated is appalling. “The right of the people to keep and bare arms, being necessary for the security of a free state, shall not be infringed.” The military’s purpose is to support and defend the constitution of the United States and protect America’s people and her interests. As a 10 year combat disabled veteran, I feel more than qualified to tell you to get bent. It is the people’s responsibility to keep our government in check. I will take up my so called “assault rifle” if need be. You may choose words as your weapon, good luck with that when that boot heel is crushing your larynx. Just call them a redneck fuck as well, I’m sure that’s all the weapon you need and really the only weapon I’d trust you with.

  10. As usual you have hit the nail squarely on the head, it’s gonna take one hell of a big sledge hammer to drive it home tho.
    Take care and stay safe

  11. TNT….The fact that we do have an armed military is one reason i will keep my weapons. Also, you can come back and tell us we don’t need guns after you have been robbed, raped, assaulted, or killed. You dumb liberal fuck.

  13. Both sides of the debate are welcome here; I believe natural, mutual discussion will help sort out who’s right and who’s wrong.

    However, the Backwoods Home Blogs are intended to be “family friendly.” I’m asking both sides to leave the “F-bombs” out of the discussion. It doesn’t add any credibility to either side.

    Thanks,
    Mas

  14. The shooting of innocent children is terrible to say the least. But the real problem is not guns. The liberals use this opportunity for their communist agenda. The real problem is the drugs that 80% of these school shooters were given while attending school. Check out the records of how many kids the schools have put on these drugs. If the military finds out you have taken them, you can not join WHY this is a bigger problem than guns. The LAW worked he was denied 5 times from buying a gun. He killed and stole the guns no law will prevent that. What about the guy in Thailand who slit the throat of 20 some kids. Sick people will kill. Wait till they start using bombs. What of the guy awhile back who drove his car into a crowd standing on the sidewalk. The liberals are using everyone’s emotions which by the way is sick in its self to pass laws to further their communist plans of total take over. Give up your gun, give up your life. The constitution has served us well keep all of it. And by the way saying a prayer now and again helps. Maybe forsaking GOD and a society with no morale’s or belief in the ten commandments just might have something to do with it. I mean just look at what Clinton did. They made him a icon in the democratic party. Where was the women’s lib over that one. Instead women idolize that disgusting excuse of a man. We have lots of problems and the gun is not it.

  15. 1. 30-rd. mags for HD won’t wash! The cops NEED to carry out “offensive maneuvers” when opposing heavily armed thugs. All we as citizens need to do is hold on until the police arrive. I have encountered some punks in my time, and in my experience; “when the going gets tough, the punks get going”. If, God forbid, I have to shoot at two/three intruders, I honestly doubt the second guy is going to go;”man, you shot my friend, I’M GONNA GET YOU!” Far more likely is, “Oh shit, the crazy asshole has a gun. I’M OUTTA HERE!”
    2. If semi-auto battle-style rifles weren’t available AT ALL for the civilian market, just how many would be sold to the criminal market by LEO’s or NG/Reserve personnel? Where would they get them? When the shotgun was the PD’s long arm, a criminal with a .45ACP was considered very well armed. The criminals just got people with clean records to buy their firepower for them. The kook in New York had his neighbor get his murder implement for him, the system would’ve caught him.
    3. Guns for HD, I have a few, but no military-style. I carried on for a long time, and know what they can do and what they can’t. Of course we should have arms if we want, we just have no business with military-implements.
    4. If Lanza has only 10-rd. mags, one wonders if some of the kids might have had a chance to run, or someone to tackle him during a magazine change. That’s how they got Laughner, he shot nine people before running out of 32 rounds. How many might have run away successfully if he had to change mags after 10?

  16. No AR15 was used the gun in his mothers car was a Saiga 12 ga semi auto. Wake up, it’s a fact that they are just using this to attack so called assualt rifles. Something we in Texas call modern sporting rifles. Probably one in ten pickup trucks has one in it. You don’t hear about them being used cept on coyotes and hogs. Don’t fear the firearm, fear the on that wants to take yours from you.

  17. ” The cops are the experts on the current criminal trends. If they have determined that a “high capacity” semiautomatic pistol and a .223 semiautomatic rifle with 30-round magazines are the best firearms for them to use to protect people like me and my family,…”

    The cops don’t carry that kind of firepower to protect the people,

    They carry it to Protect Themselves !!

  18. Obama on Gun Control: Resistance is Futile
    Posted on December 30, 2012 by Dan Zimmerman
    Excerpt from President Obama’s interview on Meet The Guy Who Broke the D.C. Law on Standard Capacity AR-15 Magazines But Wants More Gun Laws, via apnews.myway.com:
    “I am skeptical that the only answer is putting more guns in schools. And I think the vast majority of the American people are skeptical that that somehow is going to solve our problem . . . Will there be resistance? Absolutely there will be resistance. The question then becomes whether we are actually shook up enough by what happened here that it does not just become another one of these routine episodes where it gets a lot of attention for a couple of weeks and then it drifts away. It certainly won’t feel like that to me. This is something that – you know, that was the worst day of my presidency. And it’s not something that I want to see repeated.”

  19. For the most part, I am a M1 Garand/bolt rifle/1911/12 ga. pump fan and strive to maintian competency with those. I do not worship on the altar of magazine capacity nor rifle type. When the Critical Incident occurs, it will usually not be at a time or place of your choosing.

    Most Police Officers can and do call for backup when they answer a call of trouble. An Armed Citizen does not always have that option. Therefore, the Armed Citizen needs the best equipment and must take the responsibility to train well with it to be as competent as they can be. Where I live, dial 911 and 20 minutes is considered a reasonable response time.

    However, I am a strident believer in the Slippery Slope philosophy; rooted in Pastor Neimoller’s statements. Giving an inch to these folks will lead to disaster for all of us. Remember Gun Control is not about Guns, it is all about Control.

  20. confused. msnbc reported that the sandy shooter was found with 4 handguns near his body and his mother ar style rifle in his mother’s car. which was parked outside the schools entrance. so the attacks on ar or msr (modern sports rifles) is unfounded in this case. while it makes the horror of the killings are no less terrible….grandfather of 5 with 2 on the way. 1, 2, 3, 9, and 11.

  21. Mas,
    Thanks for the really excellent summary in the last paragraph of your post – clear and concise, as usual. My siser asked me that very question during our Christmas get-together and I wish I’d had your “short version” answer then.

    Her husband is from England and is now talking about getting a rifle or shotgun for their farm near Chicago. He gets really upset with US bureaucracy – this should be quite an “education” for him!

    Hope you have a Happy New Year (inspite of the antics of Obama)!

  22. I have them and will keep them until they pry them from my dead hands, I will not surrender mine to anyone.
    This is exactly the reason we had our first Revolutionary war. How Germany started two world wars, how North Korea, The Soviet Union and China got to be where they are.
    Those who say the fed.gov will protect us need to remember Wounded Knee, Ruby Ridge, Waco and Kent State . . . who protected them from our .gov
    If we can’t protect ourselves who will? Even the SCOTUS has ruled we are not to expect the police to protect us 24/7 Castle Rock vs Gonzales

    worth reading http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,162325,00.html

  23. ” the entire faculty of every school in the nation should be required to carry concealed and trained, this will send a extremely strong message to would be gunmen this is not going to be like shooting fish in a barrel.”

    You going to pay for this training/guns? Or the pay raise to teachers for protecting your children with thier lives? Educate yourself on contract hours for teachers and how many hours they acually put in, or the supplies that they buy because parents wont buy their own kids supplies, but hey, buy the teachers a gun and let them fend for 20 kids and pray they hit their target and not your kid. Put more guns in schools will make it safer…Moron.

  24. Hmmm . . . not a definite argument, but just some random observations.

    The people who post about needing firearms to defeat a tyrannical government; I well whole heartedly agree that politicians need to be kept an eye on, and that a healthy scepticism about “The Great & Good” is, well, healthy.

    But . . .

    Some of the posts – to me anyway – give the impression – hopefully a false impression – that gun-owners are people who enjoy having paranoid fantasies about the time when they have an excuse to shoot their fellow Americans. As I said that’s just how some of the posts come across to me.

    As to high-capacity magazines, I suspect that their desirability for self-defence is inversely proportional to the possibility of their being banned.

    Jeff Cooper (or at least it was attributed to him) once said, “High capacity magazines are only any use if you plan to miss a lot.”

    And I think it was Massad Ayood who in ‘Guns and Weapons for Law Enforcement’ (Again I think) who told the anecdote of two cops, one old and one young, whose agency had recently changed from revolvers to high-capacity autos. They had a lethal encounter; the youngster got off fourteen rounds and missed with all of them, while the old-timer got down and got off one round which solved the problem.

    And it was definitely Mas who pointed out that in the Aurora cinema murders it would have only taken *one* shot to have stopped the, high-capacity magazine toting, murderer. (Of course since the murderer was – apparently – wearing body armour it does give an excellent case for revising the ‘Law Enforcement Only’ policies about the sale of “armour-piercing” ammunition.)

    OTOH I have always thought that the obvious comeback to the (alleged) Cooper quote would be:
    “Well small capacity magazines are only any use if you plan to hit every target first shot every time.”
    “Well that is exactly what I plan to do.”
    “Well do things always go to plan in a gunfight?”

    And to my way of thinking if you find yourself in a gunfight, then it’s very likely that things are NOT going to plan . . .

  25. I love reading Mas’ blog; it’s informative and instructive when it comes to issues regarding self-defense.

    I like the comments section for the same reason. There are quite a number of people who have valuable information to share regarding self-defense. Their opinions on economics, however, leave something to be desired.

  26. Whew! What a ride through the comments. I need a shower.

    But what I do remember is “Americans have historically modeled their choices of home protection and personal defense handguns on what the cops carried….The American police establishment has also largely switched from the 12 gauge shotgun which was also the traditional American home defense weapon, to the AR15 patrol rifle with 30-round magazine…and, not surprisingly, the law-abiding citizenry has followed suit there, too.”

    OK Mas, I’m ready for Part 2!

  27. Senator McCaskill of Missouri misses the point of the 2nd Amendment. It is not about hunting, or the shooting sports. The 2nd Amendment exists specifically to give we the people the means to fight an oppressive and tyrannical government. Such as the one we currently have.

  28. Due to the recent events at Sandy Hook elementary school we now face renewed threats to our Constitutional rights. While I understand how painful the loss must be for those touched by this tragedy, blaming firearms or their owners and punishing them is not the answer to the challenges we face as a nation.

    We already have laws that were violated by a man who was likely psychotic and heavily medicated. This man was stopped by the mandatory background check from purchasing firearms. He then decided to murder his mother and take her legally owned firearms to commit this tragedy.

    If your true goal is to protect our children, then enact legislation that will do that. Banning firearms that are rarely used in crime (less than 1% of the time) is not going to stop such tragedies, that was proven in 1999 when the Columbine shooting took place under the 1994 ban. Do something meaningful, please. Make committing the insane easier. Put armed security guards in our schools. But do not strip us of our rights and property by passing additional anti-gun laws that have historically had no positive effect on crime in our nation or others.

  29. I will give you all examples where people should be allowed to own semi autos and have magazines with more than 10 rounds.
    I am a retired Law enforcement officer and have had several attempts on my life over the years by person(s) I previously arrested. The assault weapon ban punishes me for serving my community honorably I have to defend myself with 10 rounds or less and in one instance they came to my home all armed with four individuals.
    Say what you want the assault weapons ban does not keep guns away from criminals and only disarms honest law abiding citizens even retired law enforcement who need to have access to these type of weapons even after their retirement date.

  30. To the multiple people insisting that no AR was used in the Newtown incident:

    You are relying on very early reports that proved incorrect later. When a story is breaking, you can count on journalists to get stuff wrong as they rush to be the first to get information out, and the chaos of this type of event amplifies this. This was one such instance.

    Do you remember all of the reports that came at us during 9/11? A bomb on the helicopter pad at the Pentagon, a bomb at the State Department… For crying out loud, the early reports said it was a small commuter plane that hit the first tower.

  31. it’s ironic that your argument that we need these guns, that they can kill a bunch of people quickly, is the fucking reason you had to write this terribly stupid article in the first place. oh, but some murderers are good guys. of course.

  32. Great perspective as always, Mas. My (somewhat overlapping) two cents:

    In America, we don’t set the bar for liberty based on the horrible acts of a few criminally insane people. After 236 years, we aren’t going to start now.

    There is a plethora of regulatory measures that can be enacted that are certainly well within the confines of the second amendment, but banning most ubiquitous rifle in the land that’s owned by literally millions of law abiding Americans isn’t one of them.

    The Supreme court in Heller vs DC tells us that the type of arms that the 2nd amendment protects are those in common use at the present time. There is no more common rifle than the AR15-pattern, semi-automatic rifle. No matter what you may read to the contrary, it is widely employed for literally every known lawful purpose for which a rifle can be used.

    Common sense tells us that if the 2nd amendment is to serve any purpose, then the arms it protects must be equal or greater in their performance characteristics than the arms that the citizens may lawfully confront.

    Only if terrorists, cartels, gang members, and any future tyrannical governments can no longer access 30 round magazines would an argument for banning them have even a rational basis.

    What, after all, should a small arm that’s designed to protect the security of a free state look like, if not EXACTLY like a semi-automatic only, civilian version of the very rifle placed in the hands of every eighteen year-old capable of signing his or her name on recruitment papers?

    Even if there was any weight to the absurd argument that the only purpose of AR15 pattern rifles is to kill as many people as possible, then why does every police department issue or authorize their use for their officers? Doesn’t that fact perfectly illustrate that a weapon can equally benefit both evil and good?

    If we truly believe that the 2nd amendment is an anachronism, then there is a means within the constitution to change it, if we dare. Knee-jerk legislation that throws the constitutional baby out with the bath water serves only to weaken a document that sets this country apart from any other in history in the preservation of human dignity, liberty, and self-government.

  34. What a bunch of hypocritical socialists…..complaining about free markets.

    Seriously? Failing to plan is planning to fail. Why didn’t you buy your guns/mags/spare parts BEFORE we re-elected Obama? You SERIOUSLY didn’t see this coming? Romney’s record was no better on gun control. You should have been stocking up prior to the election b/c this was foreseeable.

    It’s supply and demand. Don’t like the price? Don’t buy. It’s that simple.

    Don’t blame the market for your unwillingness to be prepared.

    Time to learn an important LIFE SAVING lesson here. When the food shortages come, you had better have been more prepared and have some on hand or you’ll be “gouged” to keep yourself alive.

    This isn’t really even a by product of free markets. After all, there wouldn’t be a price spike if the US Government honored the Bill of Rights and followed the 2nd Amendment’s “shall not be infringed” language. OUR GOVERNMENT is to blame for the increase in prices by market manipulation.

    What if your livelihood was about to be done away with by tyrannical governmental legislative fiat? You’d need to charge more for your wares in order to survive the next few years in this horrible economic environment while tooling up to do something else…..yet you begrudge the industry that is facing the same dilemma.

  36. There is nothing that is not true about this subject. Everything is true to some degree. What I don’t see, however, is one word about security. In Washington state, there is no state sales tax on a gun safe. That is a baby step in the right direction. How about our federal government? What can it do to promote security? Cost of a gun safe tax deductable? The non shooting public is not looking for miracles, but baby steps to show a good attitude. This would be a well received baby step.

  37. Good to see that the “drive by posters” from the anti-gun side are limited to F-bomb epithets and cries of “moron” when they face logical discussion. Kinda proves who’s on the right side of the debate. That’s one reason I allow posts to appear here, you know…:-)

  38. Mas with all due respect, what the hell is a “COPS ONLY TEXTBOOK “? Under what authority is a freaking BOOK somehow banned from civilians (whatever that is)? Is that really what you meant?

  39. Police around here REGULARLY fire numerous rounds into – or at – one individual in shootouts or other deadly-force incidents. One memorable one a mile or two from here involved 16 rounds fired by one or more officers at a bank robber – and only four rounds hit him.

  40. I like the post, as far as it goes, but with all due respect, Sir, we have a Bill of Rights. It is not a Bill of Needs. Wrong premise.

    We do not have to justify our choices in keeping and bearing arms, so let’s not play along when our rights are questioned.

    The ideal behind the second amendment is that power is vested in the people, as individuals, and not in government. It is about power balance. The millisecond that someone in government starts to question our rights, they are out of line and need to be called on it. They are advocating criminal behavior.

    Reference; 18 USC 241 and 18 USC 242

  43. Long Island Mike, the Street Survival textbook was sold to “cops only” as a policy of the publisher, Calibre Press. I knew most of the authors, and the original publishers, and had to respect their wishes for their product. That said, there are many retired cops who’ve put their copies up for sale on EBay and Amazon.

  44. To those bashing the article because it uses many “1/100k” stories, aren’t the gun grabbers doing the same? As soon as the school shooting happened the libtards jumped at the oportunity to bring up gun control. Senator frankenstein said herself that she has been working on her new assault weapons ban for over a year. So why has it just come up after a shooting?

  45. Why does someone need a sports car that goes well over 100mph when the speed limit is 70mph? Because we live in America and good men died so we could live free that’s why! Why do we need so many good reasons when you have the best reason the 2A! Why do so many what to pick and choose what parts so the constitution they want to stand behind like freedom of speech! And for the love of God why do people not look at the fact that gun control does not work http://www.gunfacts.info/ has lots of proof.

  46. I wrote my congressman and noted that as terrible as the Newtown shooting was, that also on that day, and each and every other day 27 people (average) are killed as a result of drunk drivers. That’s almost 10, 000 every year!!! Yet there are no background checks to purchase a vehicle, alcoholic beverages are available on every corner, and drinking games have not been removed from Spencer’s at the local mall. Wanna save some lives?? help the states keep drunk drivers off the road!

  48. Law-abiding people use guns to defend themselves between two and two and a half million times each year. Denied a means of self-defense they would add massive numbers to the crime rate.
    I, thankfully, was only needed a firearm once (in this country). Many years ago I was traveling with my young wife and baby when we were approached, and a highway rest stop area late at night, by three predators. I didn’t need to fire a shot; it was sufficient for me to rack the slide of my P-38 to cause them to determine that their presence was required elsewhere.
    As I said, I only needed a gun once. But, without it we’d have been murdered or scarred for life forty-six years ago.
    Individual defense, incidentally, is not the reason the Founders championed gun ownership. The ability of citizens to be victimized by tyrannical government was uppermost in their minds.
    So, I only needed a gun once – so far.

  50. Mas, great blog post as always.

    @Sean, regarding: “Seriously? Failing to plan is planning to fail. Why didn’t you buy your guns/mags/spare parts BEFORE we re-elected Obama?”

    You beat me to the comment and I couldn’t have said it better.

    All: great points and good restraint in replying to the drive-by liberals that resort to personal attacks when confronted with logic. I fear that we are outnumbered though; logic is no longer valued by the majority of Americans or Obama wouldn’t have been re-elected. I’m afraid we, as a country, need a re-boot of the system. Perhaps going off the fiscal cliff, as painful as that will be, is what is needed to make people realize that hard work and resourcefulness is what made this country great and is what is needed to keep it great.

« Older Comments Newer Comments »