At increasing gun sales:

GUN ownership is on the rise in Queensland with evidence the tough restrictions introduced after the Port Arthur massacre nearly a decade ago are losing their effectiveness.

Despite bans on certain types of weapons and a successful buyback and amnesty, police figures show there are more firearms in the community now than three years ago.

Police Minister Judy Spence yesterday foreshadowed possible changes to the Weapons Act, to be reviewed this year, saying she was “aware of some operational suggestions from police and these will be considered as part of this review”.

Queensland police Weapons Licensing Branch manager, Inspector Mike Crowley, said gun ownership applications had increased 30 per cent since 2002. Up to 11,000 of last year’s 26,000 applicants were first-timers.

Defense Review has more quick hits from the SHOT Show. Leitner-Wise is making a gas piston operated AR-15 in 6.8SPC. Any word on the availability of ammo for that? I’m pondering eventually getting either a 6.8 or the 6.5 Grendel but my decision hinges entirely upon ammo availability.

And Arfcommer SMGLee has tons of pics.

Xrlq’s secret is out so I can blog about it now. In 2008, the Republican Presidential candidate will lose in California by one more vote. While he and I had dinner the other night, he asked how much savings there was in building your own AR-15 vs. buying one. I said considerable. His eyes lit up. Mine did too because every time an AR-15 is brought into this world, SayUncle smiles, an angel gets its wings, and one more of Diane Feinstein’s brain cells dies. I even recommended that he head on over to Coal Creek Armory on his way out in the morning and snatch up a Rock River Arms lower receiver for $109 (good price!). Then he said he’d do that if he was willing to go to jail. I said my understanding was that a rifle (not a handgun) could be purchased legally out of state.

Then, he got into a few issues that I figured I’d ask readers (particularly those that deal in firearms) about. Xrlq said he thought his residency was still California until he actually arrived in Virginia. A Californian in California cannot legally possess an AR-15 lower receiver made after the date their ban on weapons that look like assault rifles went into effect. So, my questions:

Can someone with a California residency (and I assume drivers’ license/ID) purchase said lower receiver in another state? I would assume they could but the law would be violated if it ever went to California. I recall reading it’s not uncommon for some Californians to have entire gun collections at friends’ houses in other states.

Assuming Xrlq was legally prohibited from buying said lower receiver as a California resident, at what point does he become a Virginian? He seems to think it’s when he enters Virginia with the intent to stay. In other words, he thinks that under Federal law he would have to go to Virginia with the intent to stay there then come back to Tennessee to legally purchase the lower receiver.

Any way, congrats to Xrlq and welcome to a free state.

What follows are a few things on my discussion of house guns. First, is that both my weapon choice and general attitude are specific to my situation. Tam, who is as gun nut as gun nut can be, says, for example:

I’m gonna fort up in my bedroom on one end of the house with the SureFire-equipped carbine and wait for the cavalry to arrive

She has much more. I concur with her situation. If I were single or it was just the Mrs. and I, I would have the same plan. I’d grab a weapon, call the cops and wait. However, I have a toddler whose bedroom is on the opposite side of the house. Her safety would be my number one priority. I am not willing to sit in my bedroom awaiting the arrival of the police. As such, I would become the aggressor. There’s simply no other viable option.

Some one emailed me a link to this post over at Crooked Timber about the great gun divide written from a leftist perspective. The post is worth reading. Seriously, go read it and come back. This shit will be here when you get back. But in the comments section there, I’ve had a little back and forth with some insightful folks and an idiot. As if to prove the point of the post about the gun divide, said idiot pulls out all the typical gun owner stereotypes including what I’d consider an accusation of racism; the implication that gun owners would be happy to pop a cap in someone and are eager to; and (my personal favorite) the small penis. And in the comments to my original post Tom says:

You sound eager to do it, is all I’m sayin’

There’s no eagerness just willingness. I concluded long ago what my reactions would be in such a situation. It’s something I need to be willing to do because it has to be done and not because I’m huge fan of it. It’s the same way I view exercise and taking out the garbage. And how my wife views sex, apparently. As reader RonW said:

When someone breaks in your house isn’t the time to begin the philosophical thought process of whether or not you will use deadly force.

I also, apparently, creeped out said idiot when I stated that if officers investigating such a scene were to attempt to confiscate my weapons (other than the one used for evidence, of course), they’d need to be prepared to deal with two shootings. I stand by that. The reason is simple: I have lines in the sand. Actually, I have several. I call it my cold dead hands list. I firmly believe that there comes a time when we all must draw a line in the sand on issues that are important. One of those is gun ownership. Another is my politically incorrect dog. Another is this blog. Another is my lawfully owned property. And there are probably more. I don’t expect this person to understand that because either there aren’t things that are that important to him or he’s British. But enough of that. On to more house gun stuff:

South Park Pundit, sporting new blog digs, has more thoughts on (and pics of his) house guns:

Uncle breaks the three camps of defensive weaponry up into Handgun, Shotgun and Carbine.

I have one of each dedicated to the task.

Porta’s Cat has a two parter on home defense firearms. Here’s part one and here’s part two.

And one other thing from Tam’s post:

Shotgun spread at in-home ranges is not enough to endanger the Rembrandt over the fireplace. Similarly, it is also not enough to overcome sloppy marksmanship.

I’m not much of a shotgun guy (I don’t even own one) so I’ll take her word for it.

More: Jay talks about them too:

What matters is that no matter what you choose to have as a home defense weapon, you train with it. Often.

Werd! And he has pics as well.

And T3rrible adds a new twist:

After reading a comment thread at uncles I have a few comments/thought of my own. I did not see anyone mention the fact that they can’t be home at all times and what does the wife/family do then? I cannot picture my small wife handling my 20 inch Mossberg 500.

Well, I also have a 75 pound bull dog. But excellent point. When I leave The Mrs., I usually leave her the Glock and I take the Sig with me. I leave to Glock because it’s a 45ACP and has better stopping power and, also, because the Glock has a lighter trigger pull. The Mrs. cannot comfortably pull the heavy double action trigger on the Sig.

AC, in an otherwise insightful post on marriage domesticating men, deduces I mean:

his wife keeps decent house and his shirts ironed, but I have to think that somewhere in his remark is an admission that his wife makes him a better man.

For the record, I do the ironing in this family. It’s not because of some hippie, tree-hugging sexual equality thing either. It’s because the Mrs. really sucks at ironing. But, yeah, she makes me a better man.

The latest is up at Jen’s. The Haiku edition.

The house gun is merely the gun you keep accessible at your home in case something goes bump in the night. I think there are generally three schools of thought on the house gun: handgun, carbine and shotgun.

My personal preference is for a handgun because it’s much easier to navigate narrow hallways with a smaller weapon. And since the likelihood is almost infinitely greater that the thug going bump in the night is of the tennis-shoed variety and not the jackbooted kind, stopping power is more important than penetration. Additionally, over-penetration can be bad in terms of accidentally shooting through your walls and into an occupied bedroom or, even, your neighbor’s house. My house guns are a Sigarms P229 in 9mm and a Glock 30 in 45ACP.

I suppose a short barreled rifle would function adequately as well but there is a danger of over-penetration of the walls (though 40 grain 5.56 Nato has been shown to penetrate less than a 40S&W). But a cop (and probably a jury) is likely to be more sympathetic to someone shooting an intruder with a handgun than with their ninjaed out, uber-tactical, M4 style AR-15. While an appropriate carbine may work well, I still prefer the handgun for these reasons. A carbine in a handgun caliber may work very well also.

Some folks swear by the shotgun for a house gun for a variety of good reasons. However, when I look at it, those reasons aren’t enough to sway me. One of the reasons they propose is that, awakened at 2:30 in the morning, you’re likely not going to be at your best in terms of aiming a weapon. Hence, the spray pattern of the shotgun is quite forgiving in terms of hitting something. Yes, it probably is. However, said pattern may not be forgiving to passers-by and other non-hostile targets, like furniture and pets. Also, one of the things people who favor shotguns say is that the distinctive kachink sound made when pumping the gun is intimidating and will scare people off as part of the Holy Shit! factor. My thoughts on this are that, simply, I will not warn invaders to my home. If you’re in my home uninvited rummaging through my belongings, I will lawfully assume that you mean me and my loved ones harm. You will be considered a hostile target. The only warning you will receive will be the 230 grain, jacketed hollow point piercing your flesh.

An important factor for a house gun is a light. There are a variety of flashlight mounts for shotguns, rifles and pistols. I prefer the handgun because you don’t really need a mount if you use the Rogers/SureFire technique. I’d recommend a Surefire flashlight (a Nitrolon can be had for about $30) because a blind goblin is better than a sighted one. I would even consider a laser sight on your house gun merely for the rapid target acquisition capability and the Holy Shit! factor.

Your thoughts?

Update: Sure it may violate the don’t use uber-tactical gizmos rule but I’m thinking a sound suppressor would be ideal on a house gun. After all, firing a weapon without hearing protection (particularly in close quarters) can cause temporary loss of hearing function and impact communication with your family. Conversely, the loud bang may scare off other varmints, assuming there is more than one going bump in the night.

Update 2: Bear in mind also that the gun you use in a self defense situation will likely be confiscated by the police as evidence. The gun’s return may take a while or may not even happen given police red tape. So, don’t use Dick Cheney’s $13,000 shotgun and have a second house gun.

I’m such a bad gun blogger. I’m unfamiliar with the lingo. Can someone tell me what the Hell BATFU is supposed to mean?

Zendo Deb has a must read on the subject.

Pro-Gun Progressive had a chat with an ATF agent. Interesting what they say.

Over at the arfcom Virginias board, they’re posting some of the statements made at the hearings.

V for Vendetta’s movie tagline is:

People should not be afraid of their governments. Governments should be afraid of their people.

Based on that, I’ll go see it.

Some good news:

In a rare display of unanimity that cuts across partisan and geographic lines, lawmakers in virtually every statehouse across the country are advancing bills and constitutional amendments to limit use of the government’s power of eminent domain to seize private property for economic development purposes.

The measures are in direct response to the United States Supreme Court’s 5-to-4 decision last June in a landmark property rights case from Connecticut, upholding the authority of the City of New London to condemn homes in an aging neighborhood to make way for a private development of offices, condominiums and a hotel. It was a decision that one justice, who had written for the majority, later all but apologized for.

The reaction from the states was swift and heated. Within weeks of the court’s decision, Texas, Alabama and Delaware passed bills by overwhelming bipartisan margins limiting the right of local governments to seize property and turn it over to private developers. Since then, lawmakers in three dozen other states have proposed similar restrictions and more are on the way, according to experts who track the issue.

Two bloggers walk into a bar

Last night, I met Xrlq. He came into town as part of his road trip and to settle an old debt. He owed me a beer based on a bet we made wherein I said I was willing to bet one beer that Bush would win re-election. Upon first meeting him, I asked Are you oddly spelled Jeff? After a while, I was satisfied that the Mrs.’ theory that Xrlq may have been an axe murderer was false. It also turns out, I got more than one beer. In fact, he not only bought me one beer, but bought me four beers, a bourbon and coke and a decent meal. Thanks!

While his online persona (like mine) is rather smug and condescending, in person (unlike me) he’s actually agreeable and down to earth. It’s always interesting to meet bloggers that I’ve read for a while to put a face with the name. We spent a lot of time talking about (gasp!) guns and gun laws.

Xrlq was a helluva guy. Good to meet him.

Bust Off at Subguns is looking for people with knowledge of sound suppressors to contact the Attorney General there.

Junior likes to play on the book shelf. For some reason, she always grabs this book. I’m in trouble.

Some time today, Spam Karma 2 will stop its 100,000th spam message to this site since I installed back in August 2005. For some reference on how much spam attempts to hit this site (yet to date only 2 have gotten through), check this out:

Total posts on this blog: 7,667
Total comments: 21,469
It’s an average of 513 spam messages per day.

Thanks to Dr. Dave for such an awesome program. And a big piss off to those spammers out there.

Tennesee bloggers: Michael Silence is giving you a chance to pimp your blog:

I am regularly asked by elected officials about blogs, where they are going and what kind of impact they are having. I usually tell them ignore them at your own peril. I would like to do a reader-driven post, or posts, on what blogs TN officials should keep up with, and why. I’d prefer to focus on TN-related blogs but that’s not a requirement. Post your thoughts in comments or e-mail me at silence(at)knews.com.

Regarding the ignore at your own peril part, I say it depends. After all, a small blog or two slamming some politico won’t result in much, no matter how insightful or truthful the site is. But if you get a big blog (like a Malkin, Instapundit or Kos) on you, you’re going to hear about it.

My note to Tennessee officials on which blogs to read: don’t read mine, you won’t like what I have to say. And I probably don’t like you.

With my own adjustments to the headline:

Bin Laden Vows Never to Be Captured [on video with any identifiable proof confirming that he is, in fact,] Alive

For a while, the anti-gunners were spreading misinformation about the FN FiveseveN then it went away. Well, now it’s back:

The department issued a safety alert to officers after two men were shot with the gun in Dorchester and Mattapan last week. The alert, obtained by the Globe, warned that the FN Five-Seven handgun fires the bullets at such a velocity that they ”will punch through your vest, PLATE included.”

Yesterday, officers of all ranks expressed concern that the weapon has surfaced in Boston.

”These aren’t recreational weapons,” Police Commissioner Kathleen M. O’Toole said in an interview. ”This is an example of a gun designed to kill people.”

Added one rank-and-file officer: ”The ability to go through a vest . . . it’s just way too dangerous. It’s real scary.”

Of course, the piece doesn’t mention that the FN’s armor piercing ammo is not available to the public.

David Porter notes the NRA’s silence on the Cheney shooting:

Yet I couldn’t find any official comment from the NRA on Cheney’s sloppy gun handling that led to the shooting. I called the NRA’s headquarters to ask if the organization issued a statement. The spokeswoman said no statement had been issued and didn’t know if the organization would have anything to say.

What Cheney did was embarrassing to himself and all responsible gun owners.

By avoiding criticism of Cheney, the NRA failed to meet one of its key missions: promoting hunter safety.

Tam says 2006 should be a pretty interesting year in the gun shop.

Sent by Mark. I hope it’s a photoshop.

If you can’t tell, hit more for the answer (and don’t buy a gun until you’ve had a class or two).
Read the rest of this entry »

In some backward-ass third world countries, it’s illegal to freely express yourself:

A right-wing British historian goes on trial Monday on charges of denying the Holocaust occurred — a crime punishable by up to 10 years’ imprisonment in this country once run by the Nazis.

No, I’m sorry. That’s Austria not the Middle East. Sure, he may be crazy or stupid or live in la-la land. But he should have a right to be crazy and say what he likes.

And shame on the media for equating Nazis as right leaning.

Policeman shoots self in leg. But not with a Glock:

Ted Arhangelsky was participating in a certification course when he shot himself with a .45-caliber semi-automatic handgun while at the Sheriff’s Office’s shooting range south of Hiwasse, according to Deputy Doug Gay, spokesman for the Sheriff’s Office.

There were several firearm instructors and two paramedics at the range when the accident happened, Gay said.

The firearm automatically cocks the hammer after each round is fired, and Arhangelsky started to holster the weapon after firing it, but without uncocking the hammer. Somehow, the trigger was pulled or the hammer was knocked down onto the round, causing it to fire, Gay said.

Not sure what kind it was but you can’t decock a Glock, without pulling the trigger.

Seen at AC’s:

But we don’t want to have any kind of debate about whether it’s constitutional or not constitutional.

~ Senator Mike DeWine on the NSA wiretapping program

Ya know, that might scare some folks.

Denise has a sharp looking Trailside!

Head looks at using alumahyde on AKMs. May have to get some of that stuff.

Good to see Knoxpatch updating again. Heh:

The talented Knoxville News Sentinel editorial cartoonist, Charlie Daniels, has upset residents of Hell with his February 15th cartoon showing a fictionalized discussion between two ‘devil’ creatures looking at a bill from TVA. One minion of Hell that wished to remain anonymous seemed exasperated and wished to stress to our readers the fact that Hell is NOT having difficulty paying utility bills. “That is simply misleading. We are not having trouble making payments, and heck, we hardly use any utilities anyway.

This poll was pleasantly surprising:

Does the U.S. need stricter gun control laws?

Yes 39%

No 52%

Update: 52 + 39 = 91. Does that mean 9% favor less strict laws?

Of course, I’d wager most Americans don’t know what current gun laws actually are. Also, this poll is interesting (but not as surprising):

A Gallup poll finds that Republicans are more likely to be gun owners and hunters than Democrats.

The poll found that 40 percent of U.S. residents say they live in a household with a gun in the home or on the property. Thirty percent say they own a gun personally while 12 percent say the weapon belongs to another member of the household.

A majority of Republicans, 55 percent, report living in a household with a gun, while only 32 percent of Democrats do.

Overall, equal numbers of gun owners use the weapons for protection, hunting and target shooting. But these numbers also have a partisan tinge, with Republicans more likely to give hunting and target shooting as reasons for owning a weapon.

The poll says that gun ownership has gone up and down over the years. In October, when the Gallup Organization conducted its most recent crime poll, it found that a smaller percentage of people own guns now than from 1959 to 1968 and 1989 to 1993. In 1999, only one in three households had a gun.

Does that mean there was an increase from 1968 to 1988 and an increase after 1999? David Hardy says yes. I recall reading where gun ownership rose quite a bit after 9/11, after the London bombing, and after Katrina. And, also at David Hardy’s, a commentator says:

I wonder how honest gun owners are when someone calls them up and says “do you own any guns?” If I got a call like that I’d hang up.