How Stupid is This?.

Tom Gresham thinks the gun community needs a new term for the AR15 rifle:

The term “assault weapon” was coined by gun banners who knew they could confuse the public who doesn’t know the difference between a full auto and a semi auto. It worked, and we got the Clinton Gun Ban (aka, the “assault weapon ban”).

Of course, the AR-15 platform is the most popular model rifle being made, and people use them for hunting, self protection, plinking, informal competition, national match competition, and pretty much any other type of shooting, because these rifles are robust, rugged, accurate and fun.

So, I decided we need a better descriptive term. Jim Shepherd, editor of The Shooting Wire ( had a
suggestion. Jim Kenzie, producer of Tom Gresham’s Gun Talk had a good one — Utility Rifle. I like that one.

So . . . here’s your chance to vote. I’m putting several options on the Gun Talk web site in a sort of poll. I’m doing educational talks for the media on the AR-15, and I’d like to use a good, descriptive term that carries our idea of what this rifle is, and how it is used.

“Homeland Defense Rifle” was suggested by somebody a while back, but every time I hear the word “Homeland” (as in “Dept. of Homeland Security”) I expect to see people in black leather trench coats and knee-boots clicking their heels and giving stiff-arm salutes.

Anyway, if you’re interested go vote, but in my personal opinion they’re “semi-automatic rifles,” no different than a Remington 7400. And Tom? This is a “tactical rifle” too.


Reader Peet protests:

I have read your blog for a long time – been challanged and educated. But you have one MAJOR failing: As a dial-up user, I pray that, some day, you will learn something about image compression.

It is a minor problem for folks with fast connections, but it’ll be WEEKS before the huge images scroll off and I can read you again.

OK, how many of you out there are still on dial-up? I know loading the page can be slow, especially if Technorati or HaloScan are down, but should I start using thumbnails with links to the full-size image? You are the readership – I need to at least make the appearance that I’m trying to keep you happy!

Here We Go AGAIN!

Via Gun Law News, meet Joaquin Jackson, NRA Board member and gun bigot, reincarnation of Bill Ruger, er, Jim Zumbo, um, clueless idiot, ah! “Only One.”


He’s apparently an ex-Texas Ranger, so that explains the “Only Ones” mentality.

I personally believe a weapon should never have over a – as far as civilian – a five round capacity. If you’re a hunter, if you’re a hunter, if you’re going to go hunting with a weapon, you shouldn’t need only but one round.

This after stating:

I feel like if we lose the Second Amendment, then somebody will take the first, then they’ll take the third, and the fourth and there will be a domino effect….

His statement was made in an interview in 2005, and apparently the YouTube video is a recent post with no date. The NRA is now attempting damage control:

Recently, concerns have been raised in response to statements made by NRA Board Member Joaquin Jackson to Texas Monthly in 2005. We have received questions from NRA members who are seeking clarity as to NRA’s positions on the subject matter discussed in Mr. Jackson’s interview. To be clear, NRA supports the right of all law-abiding citizens to Keep and Bear Arms for all lawful purposes. We will continue, as we have in the past, to vigorously oppose any efforts to limit gun ownership by law-abiding citizens as an unconstitutional infringement on our Second Amendment freedoms. These efforts include opposition to any attempts to ban firearms, including firearms incorrectly referred to as “assault weapons”, and any attempts to place arbitrary limits on magazine capacity.

Mr. Jackson also attempts to defend himself on that page:

Recently, some misunderstandings have arisen about a news interview in which I participated a few years ago. After recently watching a tape of that interview, I understand the sincere concerns of many people, including dear friends of mine. And I am pleased and eager to clear up any confusion about my long held belief in the sanctity of the Second Amendment.

In the interview, when asked about my views of “assault weapons,” I was talking about true assault weapons – fully automatic firearms. I was not speaking, in any way, about semiautomatic rifles. While the media may not understand this critical distinction, I take it very seriously. But, as a result, I understand how some people may mistakenly take my comments to mean that I support a ban on civilian ownership of semiautomatic firearms. Nothing could be further from the truth. And, unfortunately, the interview was cut short before I could fully explain my thoughts and beliefs.

In fact, I am a proud owner of such rifles, as are millions of law-abiding Americans. And many Americans also enjoy owning fully automatic firearms, after being cleared by a background check and meeting the rigorous regulations to own such firearms. And these millions of lawful gun owners have every right – and a Second Amendment right – to own them.

As a hunter, I take great pride in my marksmanship. Every hunter should practice to be skilled to take prey with a single shot, if possible. That represents ethical, humane, skilled hunting. In the interview several years ago, I spoke about this aspect of hunting and my belief that no hunter should take the field and rely upon high capacity magazines to take their prey.

But that comment should never be mistaken as support for the outright banning of any ammunition magazines. In fact, such bans have been pursued over the years by state legislatures and the United States Congress and these magazine bans have always proven to be abject failures.

Let me be very clear. As a retired Texas Ranger, during 36 years of law enforcement service, I was sworn to uphold the United States Constitution. As a longtime hunter and shooter, an NRA Board Member, and as an American – I believe the Second Amendment is a sacred right of all law-abiding Americans and, as I stated in the interview in question, I believe it is the Second Amendment that ensures all of our other rights handed down by our Founding Fathers.

I have actively opposed gun bans and ammunition and magazine bans in the past, and I will continue to actively oppose such anti-gun schemes in the future.

I appreciate my friends who have brought this misunderstanding to light, for it has provided me an opportunity to alleviate any doubts about my strong support for the NRA and our Second Amendment freedom.

And I suppose you have a “wide stance” as well.

Sorry, Ranger Jackson, that doesn’t fly with me. As a former law enforcement official you were one of “the Only Ones” – and apparently liked it that way. Fully-automatic rifles were not mentioned – hunting was. (A five-round capacity for fully automatic weapons? How stupid do you think we are?) I will not accuse you of supporting a ban – you did not. You stated your personal opinion, and the word “ban” wasn’t mentioned.

But it was implied that you wouldn’t oppose one.

I sincerely hope that since that 2005 interview you’ve changed your mind on the topic, but this shuck-and-jive routine makes me think that you have not.

Quote of the Day, Pt. II

From Kenn Blanchard:

Guns are not the problem with the increase of violence in Washington, DC, Philadelphia, Detroit and New York. The problem is the community is waiting for someone else to fix the broken home, the un-parented child, the illiterate graduate, and the spiritually bankrupt. We collectively spend more attention and give more love to animals than we do our children. And then when they grow up into prostitots, thugs and mirror the images from People magazine we want to blame something. I have seen the enemy and it is us.

(H/t to PGP)

“Be consoled that you are winning the battle.”

(From that email from Laura Washington.) Want to know why we’re winning? Because we have turned away from the gun control path taken by the Brits. We have not allowed ourselves to be marginalized and politically silenced through the death-by-a-thousand-cuts.

And because too many people are willing to think for themselves about the question of guns and gun control. While anecdotes are not data, people like this woman pop up all over the country each and every week:

They’ve found a body in the woods. Again. Another missing girl, woman, sister, mother, friend strangled, stabbed, shot, raped, mutilated, dismembered and tossed in the brush, in a ditch, beside railroad tracks, in a dumpster, in the ocean like so much garbage. The details don’t really matter. They were all guilty of nothing more than perhaps smiling at the wrong man, speaking to the wrong stranger, being at the wrong place at the wrong time, not being wary enough while going about their daily lives, not realizing that they were prey, that someone was watching them, following them and thinking violent thoughts about them.

The photographs their loved ones give to the police are all eerily similar..a sideways smile, a dream behind the eyes. They could be me, or you, your best friend, your neighbor or your mother. And then the body is found and the coroner talks about needing dental records, about decomposition, about DNA. I can never get over the horror of it, those women, their thoughts and hopes and precious temples of flesh so quickly turned to nothing but scraps of meat and bones and if never found, nothing. Forgotten, except for the whispered hometown legends about the girl who got lost, disappeared without a trace.

How fragile we are.

Every time I hear another one of these stories, I decide that this will never happen to me. That I will not be a victim. A man will never understand the fear a woman has walking across a dark parking lot alone. How it may be a risky thing to take a walk by yourself around your own neighborhood. How no amount of judo or karate will make a difference if you are a small female person and there’s a large male person who’s running after you or, God forbid, has gotten close enough to put his hands on you.

I have two defenses. #1, listen to that internal warning alarm and pay attention to my surroundings and the people in it. #2, get my concealed carry permit. I’m halfway there.

“Abe Lincoln may have freed all men, but Sam Colt made them equal.”

Women, this is for you too. Don’t be afraid of protecting yourself. You really are worth it.

Every day people realize that they bear primary responsibility for their own protection, and that depending exclusively on the police or others is unrealistic. They consider the options, and then many of them consider a gun. Education is the key. People fear what they do not understand, and can be convinced of anything in their ignorance. Knowledge is empowerment:

I come from a long line of awesome women. Brave and bold and clever…and not the least of these my own mother. I took her shooting at the range today. She was tiny bit apprehensive at first and jumpy at the sound of the guy shooting the .357 next to us, but after a quick lesson on gun safety, loading, and lining up the sights, she got right in there and started shooting. After her first 10 shots, she put down the gun, turned around and had the most immense grin on her face. It was a beautiful thing.

I’ve decided that it is now my task to convince every girl I know to come to the range and and shoot with me. If my 60-something, breast cancer survivor mother can shoot (and hit the target!), anyone can. And should.

Amen! (H/t to Say Uncle for the initial link.)

Quote of the Day.

From Looking Iraqis in the Eye by Rocco DiPippo:

I am an American. I have never had to live in fear that something as harmless as a joke about my president could get me, my parents, brothers, sisters and cousins, tortured and murdered by my government. I had never lived in a place where a slip of the tongue could get me killed. My country is the United States of America, where just about anything goes, even when criticizing one’s government — where calling one’s president a liar, an idiot, a murderer or someone worse than Hitler is far, far more likely to get you a seat at the Oscars than a bullet to the brain.

That should leave a mark, but the intended recipients won’t acknowledge it. Commentary on the rest of the piece in the next post below.

Why Defeatism Matters

One of those people the Left decries as “economic mercenaries” writes about progress in Iraq, and how it is affected by the enemy loyal opposition here in Congress, the media, and the Left in general in Looking Iraqis in the Eye. I strongly recommend you read the whole thing, but here are a few choice excerpts:

Who can say that the morale of ordinary Iraqis and American soldiers was not damaged when one of the most powerful men in America, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, stood in front of the world and declared, “I believe… that this war is lost.” Who can expect them to ignore the defeatist postures of men and women like John Kerry, Richard Durbin, Edward Kennedy, John Murtha, Jack Reed, John Conyers and Nancy Pelosi? Who can forget the media deification of people like Cindy Sheehan and groups like International A.N.S.W.E.R and Code Pink, who are far more concerned with pushing a radical social and political agenda than they are with bringing peace and stability to Iraq?

Iraqis watch us, and they listen to us. What they hear from some of our politicians, political activists and cultural elites has made many of them reluctant to work with the Americans in bringing security to their country. Many Iraqis are afraid of what they are hearing from the Democratic Party leadership and their media shills – that America will abandon them. And as long as they are afraid, they will be reluctant to seize the initiative in their towns and villages and chase out those who are murdering their families.

That reluctance makes sense, since if the Americans leave now, as the Democrats are urging, the murderers will rule them. And the murderers will hunt down and kill anyone who ever worked with or cooperated with Americans.

I imagine they were none to happy to hear news reports that Barack Hussein Obama said that preventing genocide was not sufficient reason to keep American troops in Iraq. Nor will they be too happy to hear that the Iraqi government has failed to achieve the “benchmarks” set by our Congress in a self-fulfilling prophecy.

It is very easy to pass judgment and make flippant statements on the Iraq situation from the comfort and safety of American soil. It is even easier to push lies and misinformation from the newsroom while nestled amongst those in agreement with your world view, where there is near total disconnect between words written and their effects on the ground in Iraq. But who would push to abandon Iraq if they were face-to-face with Iraqis as I was? Would Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, Charles Schumer or Charles Rangel be able to listen to their frightful stories, to smell their fear, to feel their disappointments and still tell them that it would be right to leave them before delivering on our promises? Would you be able to look an Iraqi in the eye while saying that?

Now there’s a question I’d like to hear at the next Democrat debate.

Please, RTWT. Fortunately, most of my audience doesn’t need to hear it. Unfortunately, most people who do will never see it.

“Authorized Journalist” Misses the Key Facts.

Big freaking surprise.

A Keyboard and a .45 has the real scoop on how the legacy media once again allowed itself to be manipulated in the battle against those eeeevil guns, the giant gun industry and its all-powerful lobby that wants to see a gun in every child’s hand!

Hie thee hence. And maybe write a short letter to the editor when you’re done reading.

“You’re an American!!! We don’t do that sort of thing!”.

A reader sent me an email with a link to a really outstanding first-person account over at It seems a young American serving in the Israeli Defense Forces had an encounter with a couple of New Yorkers in Tel Aviv.

I imagine that couple counted themselves among those who have “been against violence and guns their whole lives.” I think he rocked their world a little bit.

Give it a read.

Thanks for the link, Chuck!