User:Dennis/notes
stuff for future reference:
|
|
default link ccode is #0033cc
|
|
- Evidence that Trolley Square Mall in Utah occurred in a "gun free zone"
- Gamil Garbi Coroner's report
|
|
|
|
Contents |
Debating Gun Control Laws
Washington, D.C.: Professor Lott -- in a situation like Virginia Tech, when police arrive on the scene, if other students had been armed how would the police tell who was the shooter and who were the defenders? It seems like a recipe for a larger shootout.
John R. Lott: Excellent question and it is one that is very easy to answer. Forty states have right-to-carry laws and states have had these laws for as long as 80 years. Eight other states have much more restrictive rules, but can allow people to carry guns. We have a huge amount of experience with this question. Despite this concern you raise, it simple hasn't occurred.
Some states post detailed information on whether permit holders lose their permits and why they may do so. It gives one some idea of whether people are behaving responsibly or not. Since Florida's concealed-carry law took effect in October 1987, about over 1.4 million licenses have been issued. Only 156 of these (about one hundredth of 1 percent) were revoked because of firearms-related violations. But even this statistic overstates the risks, as almost all of these cases apparently resulted from people simply accidentally carrying a gun into a restricted area, such as an airport. The experience in Texas was similar. From 1996 through 1999, the first four years of Texas' concealed handgun law, 215,000 people were licensed. Data from the Texas Department of Public Safety showed that permit-holders were convicted of a crime only 6 percent as often as other adult Texans.
Fairfax, Va.: Do any state or local law enforcement agencies support your position?
John R. Lott: What is interesting is how even police departments that opposed right-to-carry laws have changed their minds after minds after the laws have been enacted. Soon after the implementation of the Florida law, the president and the executive director of the Florida Chiefs of Police and the head of the Florida Sheriff's Association all admitted that they had changed their views on the subject. They also admitted that despite their best efforts to document problems arising from the law, they have been unable to do so. The experience in Kentucky has been similar, as Campbell County Sheriff John Dunn says: "I have changed my opinion of this [program]. Frankly, I anticipated a certain type of people applying to carry firearms, people I would be uncomfortable with being able to carry a concealed weapon. That has not been the case. These are all just everyday citizens who feel they need some protection." This occurs time after time.
As to other general gun issues, a 1996 mail survey of 15,000 chiefs of police and sheriffs conducted by the National Association of Chiefs of Police found that 93 percent believed that law-abiding citizens should continue to be able to purchase guns for self-defense. Similar later surveys have indicated almost the same estimates.
The 11,000 member Southern States Police Benevolent Association surveyed its membership during June 1993 (36 percent responded) and reported similar findings. 96 percent of those who responded agreed with the statement that "People should have the right to own a gun for self-protection," and 71 percent did not believe that stricter handgun laws would reduce the number of violent crimes. A 1991 Law Enforcement Technology Magazine national reader survey found that 76 percent of street officers and 59 percent of managerial officers agreed that all trained, responsible adults should be able to obtain handgun carry permits. By similarly overwhelming percentages, these officers and police chiefs rejected claims that the Brady Law would lower the crime rate.
I don't have the latest numbers at my fingertips, but they have either stayed the same or even gone up some depending on the question.
Princeton, N.J.: Would you please comment on the experience of Australia?
John R. Lott:
Here is a discussion for some countries including Australia. As discussed before the key question is who is going to be disarmed. The other point to make is that these are island nations, which are supposedly the ideal place for gun control to be enacted because their boarders are so easily defended.
-- The British government banned handguns in January 1997 but recently reported that gun crime in England and Wales nearly doubled in the four years from 1998-99 to 2002-03.
-- Australia's 1996 gun-control regulations banned many types of guns and the immediate aftermath was similar. While murder rates remained unchanged, armed robbery rates averaged 59% higher in the eight years after the law was passed (from 1997 to 2004) than in 1995.
-- The Republic of Ireland banned and confiscated all handguns and all center fire rifles in 1972, but murder rates rose fivefold by 1974 and in the 20 years after the ban has averaged 114% higher than the pre-ban rate (never falling below at least 31% higher).
-- Jamaica banned all guns in 1974, but murder rates almost doubled from 11.5 per 100,000 in 1973 to 19.5 in 1977, and soared further to 41.7 in 1980.
Does this mean that in Britain or other countries that these bans caused crime rates to rise? No, not necessarily by any means. In Britain, I think that a lot of the problem is the rise in drug gangs (a similar very important problem that we have in the US). But just as drug gangs can bring in the drugs that they want to sell they can also bring in the guns that they need to protect their valuable drugs.
Of possible interest, I will also mention the former USSR, a country with a complete gun ban size the communist revolution and a totalitarian country willing to go to great extremes to enforce the law, still had a murder rate 50 percent higher than the US, I would agree with that also.
Evans City, Pa.: I don't think many criminals really worry about whether their intended victim has a gun or not. It may impact on how they go about their criminal activity. If I'm a robber with a gun, I would look to catch the victim by surprise. I can see where it could stop a home invasion situation but not many others. For the 2 million instances a year where criminals are deterred by victims having guns, are these cases of just stupid extra stupid criminals? It seems like the intended victim needs time to be ready to deter a crime.
John R. Lott: Criminals are motivated by self-preservation, and handguns can therefore be a deterrent. When I was the chief economist at the United States Sentencing Commission, I must have read a thousand transcripts of court cases and time after time it was clear that criminals went after victims that they thought would be the weakest and would give them the least trouble.
While you note the possibility of deterrence regarding the home, let me make it explicit by pointing to the different rates of so-called "hot burglaries," where a resident is at home when a criminal strikes. In Britain, which has tough gun control laws and bans, almost half of all burglaries are "hot burglaries." By contrast, the U.S., with laxer restrictions, has a "hot burglary" rate of only 13 percent. Criminals are not just behaving differently by accident. Convicted American felons reveal in surveys that they are much more worried about armed victims than they are about running into the police. The fear of potentially armed victims causes American burglars to spend more time than their foreign counterparts "casing" a house to ensure that nobody is home. Felons frequently comment in these interviews that they avoid late-night burglaries because "that's the way to get shot."
The point is not much different for other crimes. In my books, I find that letting people defend themselves causes some criminals to leave the area, others to switch to crimes where they don't come into contact with victims (switching from robbery to larceny), and some to stop committing crime.
As to your last point, the proof is in seeing what actually happens and the National Crime Victimization Survey by the Bureau of Justice Statistics finds that having a gun is by far the safest course of action. See this.
When the federal assault-weapons ban expired on Sept. 13, 2004, gun crimes were predicted to surge dramatically. Sarah Brady, a leading gun-control advocate, warned it would "arm our kids with Uzis and AK-47s" and "fill" our streets with the weapons. Sen. Charles Schumer ratcheted up the rhetoric, labeling the banned guns "the weapons of choice for terrorists."
Not only would murder rise, but especially firearm murders. Murder and robbery rates should have gone up faster than other violent-crime rates since they are the crimes in which guns are most frequently used. Only states with their own assault-weapon bans would escape some of the coming bloodshed.
Well, what happened? On Oct. 18, the FBI released the final data for 2004.
It shows clearly that in the months after the law sunset, crime went down. During 2004 the murder rate nationwide fell by 3 percent, the first drop since 2000, with firearm deaths dropping by 4.4 percent.
The data show the monthly crime rate for the United States as a whole during 2004, and the monthly murder rate plummeted 14 percent from August through December. By contrast, during the same months in 2003 the murder rate fell only 1 percent.
Curiously, the seven states that have their own assault-weapons bans saw a smaller drop in murders last year than the 43 states without such laws. States with bans averaged a 2 percent decline in murders. States without bans saw murder rates fall by more than 3.4 percent. Indeed, that, too, suggests that doing away with the ban actually reduced crime.
And the drop in U.S. crime was not just limited to murder. Overall, violent crime also declined last year, according to the FBI, and the complete statistics carry another surprise for gun-control advocates: Murder and robbery rates fell by 3 percent and 4.1 percent, while rapes and aggravated assaults rates fell by only 0.2 and 1.5 percent.
I am not going to claim for sure that ending the ban was responsible for these drops in crime, but it is very clear that the large predicted increases in crime did not happen. Indeed, there was no increase in crime.
Other stuff
- 611 homicides 1.674 860m 14h20m
- 723 attempted murders 1.980 727 12h7m
- 32,281 robberies 88.441 16 0h16m
- 58,269 serious assaults 159.641 9 0h9m
- 21,483 sexual assaults 58.858 24 0h24m
- 5,142 kidnappings 14.088 102 1h42m
- 3,912 "other violent criminal code violations"
60*24= 1440
Remington 700 safety stuff: http://www.cnbc.com/id/39554936?__source=vty%7Cremingtondoc%7C&par=vty
Math for the CACP So, that's... $3,100,000.00 CAD to start off with 15% in bills ($465,000 CAD) = $2,635,000.00 CAD/yr 52 weeks a year = $50,673.08 CAD/wk 40 hours a week = $1,266.83 CAD/hr ~$45/hr (after bennies) juicy gov't job wage = 28.15 or 28 employees Let's pretend everybody's on the phones; no managers, no sups, no janitor. We gots... 7,000,000 guns in the registry (let's pretend that's all there is in Canada) assume only 1 in 5 guns changes hands = 1,400,000 guns 28 employees = 50,000 guns/yr for each drone each drone works 50wks/yr = 1,000 guns/week 5 days a week = 200 guns per day 7.5hrs a day = 26.67 guns/hr, 2:15/gun One registration change every 2:15, IF everybody's doing ONLY that job and nobody EVER calls in sick, etc etc ad nauseam
Rogers & Spencer Percussion Revolver
BACKGROUND
The Rogers & Spencer Percussion Revolver was originally manufactured in Willowvale, NY about 1863-65. In January 1865, the United States government contracted with Rogers & Spencer for 5,000 of the solid frame pistols. Delivery on the contract was made too late for war service, and the entire lot was sold as scrap to Francis Bannerman and Son in 1901. Bannerman then sold the pistols throughout the first quarter of the 20th Century. Many original Rogers & Spencer revolvers are seen today in excellent, near mint condition.
The Rogers and Spencer Army Model Revolver was actually an improvement of earlier pistols produced by the firm - the Pettingill and Freeman revolvers. The Pettingills were produced in the late 1850's and early 1860's, and were double action revolvers. The Pettingills were ahead of their time, being designed as hammerless pistols, which were popular in the last decade of the 19th Century, but certainly too avant garde for Army purchasers. The Navy Model was a .34 caliber, of which less than 1,000 were produced. The Army Model was a .44 caliber, and only about 3,400 were produced in the early 1860's. The Freeman Army Model Revolver was a solid frame .44 caliber pistol with a round 7 1/2" barrel, of which 2,000 are believed to have been produced in 1863-64, and in appearance the Freeman resembles a Starr Revolver.
The Rogers & Spencer is an improved Freeman, with a less severe grip style, a heavier frame and a stronger octagon barrel of identical 7 1/2" length. Interestingly, the Rogers & Spencer design is eligible for N-SSA competitions because the contract was consummated before the end of hostilities.
The current reproduction of the Rogers & Spencer Army Model Revolver is produced in Italy and available from several merchants who deal in blackpowder pistols.
SHOOTING
The Rogers & Spencer is a heavy framed pistol capable of providing excellent service for many years. My own Rogers & Spencer was purchased from Dixie Gun Works at the end of Ronald Reagan's second term, and still works like a clock. The Rogers & Spencer has the largest chamber capacity of any .44 caliber blackpowder revolver on the market, but you don't need all that much powder to break clay pigeons and shoot paper.
I tested several loads that are popular at the Pistol Range at Ft, Shenandoah and elsewhere. A lot of R&S shooters like to shoot 18 grains of FFF blackpowder. Still others prefer a little bit more push, and shoot 20.5 or 21 grains of FFF. More than a handful go to the bench with a lighter load for 25 yard work, and shoot only 12 grains of FFF blackpowder. Loads in the 12 to 15 grain range are based on the old "10 percent rule," where the weight of the propellant is equal to ten percent of the payload. I prefer a heavy load of FF blackpowder in my Rogers and Spencer, and a favorite load of mine is 28 grains of FF blackpowder.
The chart below provides the technical data for all four loads tested. The information was gathered using two different cylinders for the Rogers & Spencer, so I have confidence that the average velocities are in the neighborhood where a Rogers & Spencer will push a .454 round ball.
Load Average Velocity Standard Deviation Group Size # of hits 4" circle 12 gr FFF 430.2 16.49 40 sq.in. 4 18 gr FFF 614.1 17.94 21 sq.in. 5 20.5 gr FFF 624.7 18.41 48 sq.in. 5 28 gr FF 711.3 19.82 42 sq.in. 4
I look for three things in a pistol load - consistency, group size and number of hits in a team size target circle, about 4 inches. Group size is computed with a square, and is the product of the width times the height of the group. The results are listed in the chart above.
Naturally, these loads are starting points for your own load development, and point of impact and group size with each individual Rogers & Spencer are certainly as important as velocity and standard deviation. If you like a light load, the 12 grains of FFF is certainly capable, and if you want to impress the team shooting four positions on either side of you, the 28 grains of FF is a real wave maker.
The problem with shooting reduced target loads in a percussion revolver is filling the empty space in the cylinders. Blackpowder is NOT like smokeless powder, and an airspace underneath a roundball is an invitation to trouble. Additionally, the closer the ball is to the end of the cylinder, the less sizing occurs in the chamber. Some chambers are tapered, and the lower you seat the ball the more reduced the ball gets, and it might not engage the rifling in the barrel when fired. The answer, then, is an inert filler that will compress the blackpowder back by the nipple and keep the ball up near the barrel. I use time-tested Cream of Wheat for my filler material, and it works just like we want. It doesn't weigh much, so it won't effect ballistics, and it doesn't combust when exposed to the fire of the discharge.
I load the blackpowder charge, then place a WonderWad on top of the powder. Seat the WonderWad with a dowel or pencil, then pour in enough Cream of Wheat to fill the cylinder within 1/4" of the top. When you seat the ball, the charge will compress. The WonderWad behind the Cream of Wheat helps clean out the barrel each shot.
A loading tool, as seen in the picture above, is a real handy tool to have when revolver loading. It will help you seat each ball equally, which will result in consistent performance of whatever load you eventually pick. Anyone handy with tools could work one up, but I got mine for $19.99 from Cabela's catalog (item no. XL-21-3433, Cabelas, One Cabela Drive, Sidney, NE 69160, 1-800-237-4444, www.cabelas.com).
CLEANUP
After shooting the Rogers & Spencer, remove the wooden grips and place in a pail of hot soapy water. After a short soak, use your pistol cleaning kit and .45 bore brush and clean the barrel and each cylinder. Pulling the cylinder is an easy task. Rotate the loading lever retaining screw, just under the lever in front of the cylinder, one-half turn. Now, by dropping the loading lever and pulling the cylinder pin forward, the cylinder is freed. Placing the revolver on half-cock makes the job easier. Try to wipe off all of the surfaces while the pistol is still warm from the hot bath, and apply a light oil liberally. Use a bore mop to get down in each cylinder and clean thoroughly. Any extended use, more than the 18 rounds of a Team Match or 20 rounds of 25 and 50 yard individuals, may require a disassembly and cleaning and oiling of all internal parts, which is a good annual task anyway.
I hope to see everyone at the 101st National Skirmish from May 17 through 21, and wish all of our readers a successful summer of skirmishing. Until the next time, promote safe sport shooting, shoot safe and have fun.
© 2000 by Tom Kelley
One gun armory
For the Survivalist on a limited income or possibly looking to keep things simple to travel light after tshtf, the one gun armory has its merits. This “one gun” will need to be capable of taking both small and large game and for use as a defensive weapon if need be.
Though the .22 has been used to take game animals both large and small it is sorely lacking as a combat round. Because of this, I would look elsewhere for a one gun battery.
I will also rule out center fire rifles as they just are not practical enough to hunt different types of game animals efficiently. For the Survivalist bugging out and possibly living off the land for a short period of time the center fire rifle does not offer enough versatility for taking of game, especially small game.
For the one gun armory the Survivalist must look no further than the 12 gauge shotgun. With the option of different barrel lengths, many stock options and removable chokes to change shot patterns there is not much that cannot be done with these guns out to 100 yards and possibly beyond depending on load selection.
There are many different loads to choose from for the 12 gauge. There are a variety of slugs (solid projectile) to choose between for hunting game, such as bear and deer out to 150 yards. These same slugs can be used to turn any shotgun into a very formidable weapon.
Where the shotgun really shines though is in the large variety of shot sizes it has available to it. Shot shells containing a load of shot (made up of many pellets rather than a solid slug) can be used for hunting small game and migratory game birds. Some larger shot sizes such as Buckshot can be used effectively on large game animals and is a top choice for a defensive round.
Most Patriots seem to gravitate towards pump action shotguns, probably due to there low cost and high reliability. The Remington model 870 and Mossberg 500 lead the pack for pump shotguns in America. Both companies make quality pump shotguns and have a very devoted fan base for each model. I do not think you can make a bad choice between the two.
Read more: http://www.articlesbase.com/hobbies-articles/you-need-only-one-gun-to-survive-a-riot-or-a-society-collapsing-type-situation-1682664.html#ixzz19p1AuPA3
Under Creative Commons License: Attribution
