[gallery]

everydaycivilian:

crysomemoar:

everydaycivilian:

Please Follow EveryDayCivilian for SHOT Show 2014 Coverage. January 13th-17th. Show Floor Pictures and Videos!

My final IWI Tavor build.

The run down:

Right handed 16.5” IWI Tavor
Blackhawk Single Point Sling
EOTECH XPS2-0
45 Degree Back-up Irons
1” offset Flashlight mount
Streamlight Polytac Flashlight

a rifle with two sets of iron sights……….

It’s actually one and a half sets. The front sight is not accessible. The Bullpup design makes it extremely easy to cant to use the 45 degree iron sights. The EOTECH co witnesses perfectly with the rear peep sight.

I’d love a chance to try out a Tavor. I just can’t wrap my head around offset iron sights (on any rifle), but I suppose with some optics, it’s the only choice if you don’t want flip-ups.

[gallery]

everydaycivilian:

The Sig MPX…….nope, it’s the CZ-USA Scorpion EVO 3 S1. Simple but rugged Blow-Back bolt, mags drop free with ease, 30 round mags are $19.95, muzzle brake can be removed with your fingers, and it’s actually been released. Your move Sig Sauer! You have quite the competitor.

I’d take either one. Quality pieces, both.

If we’re to take the “collective right” explanation on its face, then the Second Amendment created a right that the states are powerless to execute, that the Federal government has no duty to provide, and that would be useless and oxymoronic if the latter did so anyway. If one spends five minutes thinking about the “collective right” theory, it quickly becomes apparent that the individual right is the only one that can possibly function appropriately, and is thus the only right that the amendment was ever intended to protect. To put it bluntly, the “collective right” approach makes no sense.

[gallery]

[gallery]

There is one big truth that used to hold from sea to shining sea and is now most keenly apprehended here: an argument against the individual right to bear arms is an argument that the average American is incompetent to contend with the most fundamental moral questions of life, death, and justice. It is an argument that assumes ordinary people cannot be entrusted with democracy.

Who are the militia? Are they not ourselves? It is feared, then, that we shall turn our arms each man against his own bosom. Congress have no power to disarm the militia. Their swords, and every other terrible implement of the soldier, are the birthright of an American. …[T]he unlimited power of the sword is not in the hands of either the federal or state governments, but, where I trust in God it will ever remain, in the hands of the people.

Laws that forbid the carrying of arms … disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes… Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man.

[youtube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NK8gKaEGSQ0?feature=oembed&enablejsapi=1&origin=https://safe.txmblr.com&wmode=opaque&w=250&h=141]

Yet one more reason I love SIGs.

And yes, I really want one of these.

[gallery]

This is pretty much how I feel whenever someone wants to talk about how dangerous firearms are.

"A strong body makes the mind strong. As to the species of exercises, I advise the gun. While this gives moderate exercise to the body, it gives boldness, enterprise and independence to the mind. Games played with the ball, and others of that nature, are too violent for the body and stamp no character on the mind. Let your gun therefore be your constant companion of your walks." --Thomas Jefferson, letter to Peter Carr, 1785

John Farnam, "Huh?"

Who are these people?

The VCA who murdered four police officers in Oakland, CA last Saturday had been incarcerated since 2002, but had been recently released on parole.

The sentencing report in the 2002 case that put him in prison described this VCA as a "...cold-hearted individual, who has no regard for human life," and went on to insist that his permanently residing in prison was the "only way to rein-in this man's proclivity for violence."

Now there's a real recommendation for parole!

That report was surely available to the Parole Board who let him out.

Perhaps, between shrieking for the end to the private ownership of guns in America and the need for higher taxes, the media might find the time to ask why such remorseless, violent, unstable sociopaths are paroled in CA! ["VCA" = Violent Criminal Actor/Attacker. --R]

"Laws that forbid the carrying of arms ... disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes... Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man." --Cesare Beccaria, On Crimes and Punishment, quoted by Thomas Jefferson in Commonplace Book, 1774-1776

"The right of the citizens to keep and bear arms has justly been considered, as the palladium of the liberties of the republic; since it offers a strong moral check against usurpation and arbitrary power of the rulers; and will generally, even if these are successful in the first instance, enable the people to resist and triumph over them." --Justice Joseph Story, Commentaries on the Constitution of the United States, 1833

[Wave of the phin to Jack on the World_SIG list.]

...that it might be time to do a little shopping.

Here's a bit of trivia I didn't know: my favorite firearms company began life in the 19th century as a wagon factory.

In 1853, Friedrich Peyer im Hof, Heinrich Moser and Conrad Neher began what they thought would become a successful wagon factory above the Rhine Falls in Switzerland. Little did they know then, that their company would become one of the world's most renowned manufacturers of small arms. Just seven years after constructing an industrial plant for building the most sophisticated wagons and railway cars, the three ambitious owners undertook a more serious venture. In part to a challenge from Switzerland's Federal Ministry of Defense, the Swiss Wagon Factory entered the competition to develop a state-of-the-art rifle with the hopes the Swiss Army would adopt it. Four years later, the award went to the Swiss Wagon Factory for its Prelaz-Burnand rifle. At this point, the Swiss Wagon Factory, with an order for 30,000 muzzle loading Prelaz-Burnand rifles in hand, changed the name of the company to the Swiss Industrial Company - Schweizerische Industrie-Gesellschaft, known worldwide as SIG.

So the Toad directed my attention to a rant by Kim du Toit on how the ATF views law-abiding gun owners, in light of quotes from Gerald Nunziato, the former head of ATF's National Tracing Center. I think it's pretty clear how this government bureaucracy views gun owners, simply from the name of the agency. After all, we're just a bunch of beer-swilling, tobacco-chewing or cigarette-smoking rednecks who like to go blow holes in highway signs, aren't we?

A U.S. Marine, Staff Sgt. Steve Reichert, has scored a kill shot while engaging the enemy in Iraq, and the shot was over a mile away. For his actions, Staff Sgt. Reichert has been awarded the Bronze Star for Valor.

In the after-action report, the platoon leader made a remarkable account: that Reichert made the shot from 1,614 meters – about a mile away. His accuracy was the deciding factor in the outcome of the firefight. For the math-impaired, 1,614 meters translates in to 1765.0918662 yards. There are three feet in a yard, so that number times three yields 5,295.2755986 feet. Staff Sgt. Reichert scored a kill shot at fifteen feet beyond a mile. Boys and girls, that's a long, long way for a rifle shot.

Tell that to Barbara Gesell and her daughter Theresa, who used her .45-caliber handgun to subdue the purse snatcher who attacked the elder Gesell, 83, in her garage as she arrived home.

"A man has attacked us in our house, and we are fighting him in the yard," Theresa Gesell said to the 911 dispatcher.

As the struggle moved down the street, a neighbor -- whom Theresa Gesell identified as "Hershall" -- stopped to help. Theresa then grabbed her .45-caliber pistol and continued running after Campbell -- despite the dispatcher's plea for her to drop the handgun.

"I am going to go get my .45 ... you all are too slow," she said.

As the call continues, the dispatcher asks Theresa to get rid of the weapon. However, after the suspect tried to escape along a creek bed, Theresa and Hershall used the pistol to make sure he didn't leave.

"You can go put that gun up now," the dispatcher said.

"No sir," Theresa replied. "We have the gun pointed at him ... he must have been a city fellow because he didn't know anything about the woods."

Seconds later, police arrived and arrested Campbell. With Hershall's help, the Gesells retrieved Barbara's purse. So let's do the math: 1 purse snatcher attacking an 83 year-old woman + 1 daughter with firearm = subdued criminal who would have escaped before police could arrive on scene. Now imagine that the criminal in question was after more than a purse, and you can see why firearms save more lives each year than they take. You just don't hear about all of those live-saving events on the nightly news. [Emphasis added. --R]

The Toad reports on a new long-distance sniping record in Iraq, by a U.S. Marine sniper. I like Brian's thought:

I wonder what goes through the minds of terrorist scum...when their fellow thugs are being systematically plucked out of the gene pool from that distance. Indeed, snipers are extremely effective psychological weapons of war. Not to mention, the most cost-effective weapon available on the battlefield, even with their expensive training. A well-trained sniper with a few missions under his belt is worth his weight in gold, silver, platinum, and any other precious metal. Combined. For the math-impaired reading the story linked above, a thousand yards is more than half a mile.

SuperToad has redesigned the Pond, giving up his home-baked PHP model for a site generated by PostNuke. At least this way, his PHP knowledge doesn't go to waste. Now if I could just talk him in to another font for his logo... ;-)

At least in New York, Brooklyn to be specific. Ronald Dixon discovers an intruder in his son's room, going through drawers. Intruder rushes Mr. Dixon, screaming to go upstairs with him. Mr. Dixon fears there may be others in the house that intend to harm him, his wife, and his children. Mr. Dixon shoots intruder twice, wounding him. Mr. Dixon legally obtained his 9mm pistol in Florida, before moving to New York. New York requires all firearms to be registered. (Why? To make it easier to trace them back to criminals, presumably. To make it easier to confiscate, at worst...) Mr. Dixon made an attempt to comply with the law and register said firearm, but was unsuccessful. Mr. Dixon was able to plead down to a charge of disorderly conduct, but he could still spend up to a year in jail; at least he won't have a criminal record when he's done. An anonymous letter to the Brooklyn D.A. sums it up pretty well:

"If you were in the same position that Mr. Dixon was in, I would be willing to wager that you would also use whatever means you had on hand to defend your loved ones, as any of us would.

"By prosecuting Ronald Dixon on spurious charges, you are sending a very dangerous message to the residents in your jurisdiction: Defend your family, go to jail. You are also sending an equally dangerous message to the criminal element, who would realize that law-abiding citizens would now be hesitant to defend themselves for fear of criminal prosecution, and therefore make prime targets for violent crime." A naturalized citizen, Mr. Dixon immigrated from Jamaica, and served in the U.S. Navy for three years. He works two jobs seven days a week to provide for his family. And now his American dream has been crushed by an anti-gun, anti-personal protection, anti-liberty district attorney. Kudos, D.A. Hynes.

Back on 15 September 1998, then-House Majority Leader Dick Armey (R-Texas) held his weekly meeting with Capitol reporters. When a reporter provided him an opening by inquiring what he would do if he were in President Clinton's shoes, the Los Angeles Times captured the conference's atmosphere: bq. ...the jam-packed room burst into raucous laughter as one reporter prefaced a question about the Lewinsky scandal by saying, "If you were in the president's position..." Armey didn't miss a beat. "If I were, I would be looking up from a pool of blood and hearing my wife say: 'How do I reload this thing?'" The situation would be similar in my household; except my wife knows how to reload! (Thanks to Ricky and Snopes.)

Brian has a good analysis and links of the infamous 9th Circuit Court's refusal for a full court hearing on California's "assault" weapons ban. By definition, an "assault" weapon is one capable of fully automatic fire; full-auto firearms are illegal to own anywhere in the U.S. unless you have a Class III Federal Firearms License. The fact that a firearm may look like an "assault" weapon doesn't make it one, despite how the news media continues to call semi-automatic (one squeeze of the trigger, one shot) firearms "assault" weapons. I hope and pray that the Supreme Court does hear this case, and rules it as the individual Constitutional right it is. Yes, the fact is that the Second Amendment is an individual right. Read your Federalist Papers; all of the Founding Fathers believed this to be so. Why would they place a state right within nine other individual rights? And place it so highly in status? The Second is for individuals, not the states, and not for the state.