Conspiracy or Gross Incompetence – The Vegas shooting STILL STINKS.

I’m not a conspiracy theorist, but here we are, two months after the biggest Mass Shooting in history. 58 dead and 527 wounded – and barely any solid information being given to the public.

I’ve talked this over with many people, and right from the beginning things didn’t add up.  Which is to be expected in the first few days, but over time the questions continued to add up and the few (often changing) answers we got only ADDED to the confusion.

So at some point you have to ask, is there a cover-up, or is this gross incompetence on part of the law enforcement that is handling it. Or is it a mix?  Is it just the Political Hacks scattered through out the government and law enforcement in Vegas, trying to hide any inconvenient facts while they push for Gun Control? I bet if he had a NRA or FOX News sticker on his car – we’d know about it. But if he had ANTIFA posters on his walls and Obama’s Dreams of his Father on his nightstand, we would never know.

There are so many questions, it’s hard to pick a start.

How many People were Actually Shot?

58 dead and 527 wounded. How many were trampled or hurt? 22,000 people is a heckuva panicked stampede. Were all 58 shot to death? Were all 527 wounded from gun fire? How many were physically wounded in the frantic trapped frenzy of tens of thousands of people confined to a killing ground with only a few exits?

Where’s the Vegas Security Videos?

This is VEGAS. In a high rollers Hotel, and the best film footage we have of this bozo is him falling down in 2012. So you can find and release that, but you can’t show us any film of him lugging the “over ten suitcases” containing dozens of guns and tons of ammo through the front doors? He had to have shown up on dozens if not hundreds of cameras scattered around the area, and not a single one has been leaked to the press? It was mentioned they ‘suspect’ he used the freight elevator – How do you suspect and not know? It should be on tape!

Where’s Security Guard Campos?

There is so much stink on this guy, it’s ridiculous. The guy sneaks out moments before a press conference, disappears for DAYS, then reappears on a COMEDY SHOW to talk about what happened. On Ellen Degeneres… Seriously? Apparently you weren’t paid, were you or your Hotel Employer afraid of tough questions? Was a scripted setting needed?

Not to mention when he disappeared, he went to MEXICO after the shooting. We don’t know when, but we know he came back a week after the shooting.  WHY? What was down there? And why in the world would the Law Enforcement LET HIM LEAVE? Key Witness here, sure bub, go to Mexico where there’s a full blown drug war going on and piles of dead tortured bodies being found daily. Enjoy the margaritas – just be back when we need you.

Does anyone even know where this guy is anymore? Does he have anything he wants to say? In the Ellen Interview, she says he won’t speak of this again. Why not? Is the Hotel/Police banning him from making statements or is he refusing to answer anymore questions on his own?

And the Timeline:

And then there is the timeline, so no video footage shown of what went on in that hallway. Weird and unlikely. But should be solid proof of what the changing timeline was. First Campos gets shot during the spree and that’s what stops it. Second, he got shot less than a minute before the spree began. Third, he was shot SIX FREAKING MINUTES BEFORE the spree. Six minutes. In a CASINO hotel room. Where’s the Security? Where’s the police? How do you not get this correct when you report it to the media? Yeah, yeah, Fog of Post-War Chaos. But this is such a simple, standard thing to have ironed out.

Speaking of the Police and the Timeline:

I’ll give some credit here. You get a shooting report, you get some cops on site, then all hell breaks loose. You get swamped with hundreds of 911 calls from varying locations that makes it sound like a coordinated attack from multiple places.

Police arrived on the 32nd floor at 10:17 when the firing stopped at 10:15. Then they moved down the hallway clearing every room on the way with a master key, and not hitting the suite until last at 11:20 by breaching with explosives. Even though the room had already been pinpointed by outside officers, as well as Campos who I’m assuming – had eyes on the hallway the entire time he was laying in one of the doorways.

So why take so long to hit the room? Maybe just procedure. I don’t want to be a Monday armchair quarterback, but why not hit the room first since you knew a shooter was in there? This is just a little strange to me.

The Single Fired Shot:

So first the police say no shots were fired – only to come out over a month later and say “Well, actually, a law enforcement officer fired his weapon in the room.”

At WHAT? Shifty, gun smoked filled shadows? This is interesting since Paddock ‘shot himself in the head’. THIS is why there are conspiracy theories. Was he actually dead when the police entered the room? Why take your word for it? For weeks you said no one fired, then you said they did. This is such a SIMPLE thing to get straight at a press conference. Why did you not tell the truth of the matter? No one can blame the cop for being on edge after blowing open a mass murderers door after clearing rooms along a hallway that probably resembled buildings in Fallujah. So why not admit it?

This picture was leaked, supposedly of an interior door that’s been shot through. Who was being shot at inside? Is this the door between rooms? It doesn’t appear to be the hallway door. And why does he have a rifle on bipod in the bathroom/kitchen?


Leaked Photos:

Speaking of which – the Crime Scene photos? What. The Heck. This investigation is so tightly under wraps that not a single second of video has been leaked, but you managed to let a set of crime scene photos get leaked to the press, of the shooters face and a bunch of guns and ammo. That’s just strange.  Who leaked it? I’m sure you have a list of every single person who walked into that room, did you check their phones? Or was it an intentional leak to guide the narrative? There SHOULD be intense scrutiny for a crime scene photo of the shooter with a gunshot wound to the head being splayed out across the media as to who allowed it to leak. That’s the kind of stuff people get fired over.

The Missing Hard Drive:

This bothers me, at one point some talking head said that ‘maybe the laptop never had a hard drive in it’. Yes, Genius, in addition to lugging thousands of pounds of firepower and ammunition into a hotel suite, he lugged a DEAD LAPTOP so he could stare at it’s BLANK SCREEN.

Sheesh. Where is it? What’s being done to find it? Was it destroyed? What was thought to be on it?

The Note with Ballistic Data:

The shooter has a piece of paper with handwritten ballistic information on it that was near the smashed out window. Okay, let’s assume no wind was blowing through a THIRTY-SECOND floor window and the physics of that effect on a small piece of paper. (Especially when it’s so conveniently staged looking, with a roll of tape barely on top of it and pen next to it by his legs.)


Apparently he tried to buy a large amount of tracer ammunition from a dealer, but they were out. So he wanted to see where his rounds were hitting. This would have pinpointed the lone shooters location and further reduced his ability to escape. Also tracers tend to be inaccurate as well, as they burn up in flight and tend to zing off in random directions, the further you are shooting the less you are going to get hits.

So he writes down some ballistic data of wind, distance, and drop.

Well, assuming all his guns, including the AK, were in 5.56 or .308, you’ve got two different rounds coming out of different length barrels with different rates of twists and different sight systems(optics, iron sights, scopes, etc). That’s not taking into consideration the bullets themselves, is he using the same stuff? Or does he have a mix of various bullet weights and type?

All of this adds to variance. ESPECIALLY the sighting systems.

But shooting 500 yards into a large 22,000 crowd that covered several football fields, none of this was needed other than the range or hold over. (Aim above them and known that the rounds will hit below that) His killing field was MASSIVE.

To put the range in perspective, in the Marine Corps, we learned to make hits on man sized targets with IRON SIGHTS at 500 yards. Kids who have never shot before learn to make this shot after a couple of weeks at the range. That’s on a single target. Try 22,000 targets massed together. This guy had scopes, full auto, and thousands of rounds.

Ballistic Data has it’s use in accurate fire, but for his purposes it was unnecessary. He’s using a bump stock, which mimic’s full auto – Full auto by nature is less accurate than semi-auto. As we know, he was magazine dumping and firing as fast as possible which reduces his accuracy. He fired something along the lines of 1,100 shots in ten minutes. That ain’t a rate for accurate fire.

So why did he have it? Either he knows enough about shooting that he knows he doesn’t need it, or he knows nothing and assumes it matters but can’t properly apply it. Which is it? How did he get it anyways? Did he use his Laptop?  With the pen next to it, it looks like he wrote it at that spot. Did he copy it off something or write it down from memory – in which case, why write it down if it was memorized?

So – It gives off the impression of a staged prop. Or are they lying about the information on the note, and it’s actually a suicide/confession note they are keeping mum about it for investigation purposes? No solid answers, and the one we got doesn’t make sense. All we can do is speculate.

Was he Alone?

Numerous witnesses said there were multiple shooters. An audio analysis reports that he shot 280 rounds in 31 seconds at one point… If he was using Beta Mags, drums that hold 100 rounds, he reloaded twice and almost emptied three of them in under 31 seconds. Without a single jam/failure to feed/failure to extract. The things aren’t the most robust magazines ever, and it’s a lot of weight hanging off the magazine catch. Very unlikely, especially without melting the gas tube on an AR15.  But maybe he had three guns with one on each of them…? However, we had hundreds of vets in the killing field who were positive there was more than one shooter and many others who thought it was belt fed full-auto that sounded like ‘talking guns’. (When two belt fed guns/teams alternate firing to conserve ammo and keep from overheating the gun) How do we know for sure he’s the only one? Unfortunately, we can’t trust the information out of Vegas to clear this up because they are coming across as grossly incompetent. But CONVINCE US. Where they mistaken? Let’s talk about this.

Why TEN MINUTES and was there an Escape Plan?

Why did he stop? It wasn’t Campos or the Police. He had a TON of ammunition in there, he could have kept going and slaughtered hundreds before his room was breached. He had surveillance on the hallway, he knew there was no real effort to stop him.  Did he make any effort to escape? His car had tannerite, which is an explosive target plus ammonium nitrate which can be used to make bombs. But it wasn’t rigged to blow… What was the suspected purpose? Supposedly he had protective equipment in his car as well and a body armor/gas mask in his room. That sounds like he was ready for a confrontation and possibly attempt to escape.

The Door on the 32nd Floor:

Lots of misinformation was spread about this, originally the door was locked open, then closed, then open and closed.  But the Ellen interview cleared that up. Campos said he came up the fire escape stairs, and saw the door was blocked from opening. And called Security to send an Engineer up to look at it. Then he went back downstairs, and came up through the elevator on the opposite end, walked down the long hallway and saw metal brackets holding the stairwell door shut. He walked away and was fired upon about halfway down the hall. This makes sense, the shooter funneled any response to approach him from the hallway that leads directly to his door. But depending on the mechanism that was blocking the door, it seems like he didn’t have an escape plan in place. Unless he wanted to run to the only exit, the elevator on the far side of the floor.

The Surveillance of the 32nd Floor:

Of another note, we were told Paddock had cameras set up to monitor the hallway. And opened fire on Campos as he walked away from the Hotel Suite and locked door next to it. Where are these tapes? What’s on them? HOW was he viewing them? Was it through his disabled laptop? Or did he have a viewing monitor?

The Engineer and the Woman on the 32nd Floor:

At around the same time Campos gets shot in the leg and the guy is dumping magazines through the door, the Engineer sent to check on the locked door arrives through the same Elevator on the far side of the hotel. According to Campos this guy makes it halfway down the hallway before he yells at him to get back and the guy opens fire again, narrowly missing him(Or he never stopped firing, vague here).  His part in the Ellen Interview is pretty much limited to a couple sentences. He says he heard what sounded like a jack hammer that he figures was gun shots. But I’m assuming he wasn’t shot at until Campos yells at him to take cover. At which point, he ducks and bullets fly by his head.

So. Did the Engineer come up during the middle of the shooting into the concert? Or did Campos’s yelling/cameras alerted the gunman to start shooting at the Engineer? And why bother stopping shooting into a huge crowd to run to the other side of the room and focus on one unarmed guy walking down the hallway? How does this fit into the continuously changing timeline?

And Campos makes it sound like the firing was continuous, which it couldn’t have been. Unless the Engineer was oblivious to the dozens of rounds being fired straight at him down the hallway. I’m assuming this is a just miscommunication, and the shooter opened fire down the hallway twice.

But did he not notice the impact of bullets all along the hallway and into the far end by the elevator? Hundreds of rounds supposedly, how did he NOT see the bullet holes and damage? OR the shot up suite door at the far end of the hallway he was walking towards?

Don’t make no sense.

Now, a woman comes out of her room and almost walks into the gun fire at some point, and once again Campos saves her by yelling at her to get back.

So the Engineer and the Woman, two more key witnesses on the floor at the time of the shooting. We have a little bit from the Engineer on the Ellen Show, but what about the mystery woman? Did she see anything suspicious? Or notice anyone with Paddock? Did she ever interact with him and could state on his mental state at the time of their conversation? Silence.

The VIDEO in the Room:

Reports came out that he was filming himself shooting. Where is this footage? What’s on it? Does it show the before and aftermath of the shooting? Does it show the officers coming through the door and one of them firing the later-reported single shot? Does it show Paddock giving a statement or killing himself? Does it show anyone else in the room at any time who may have seen the stacks of guns and ammo?

The TWO rooms/TWO firing positions/And The Drilling:


Campos mentioned he heard what he thought was drilling. The County Sheriff said he was trying to drill next to the doorway, to either place a video camera or make a firing port. Well strange, cause once he shot through the door he pretty much made a firing port.

Then there is the two busted windows. Which leads credence to either two shooters, or why people thought there were two shooters. Did Paddock fire between the two? Did he only use one? Why did he make another port if he didn’t use it? This also brings up the question of were there sensors on the windows to report to security if one broke? And how long did it take to break the windows? I’ve never tried shattering a 32nd floor window with a baby sledge hammer, but I assume it isn’t easy.

But why two rooms? It appears that he could smash a window out a dozen feet away and have a similar vantage point for firing without having to run into another room. Was it to secure another possible entrance into his suite?

What was found in the other room? Anything? More guns and ammo? Possibility of another shooter?

Information would be nice to have.

The Girlfriend:

What does she know? Does anyone really believe she had no idea? She was conveniently out of country when the shooting was going down and beforehand he wired her $100,000. Which is an odd amount for a multi-millionaire who is about to commit mass murder and most likely die afterwards. So why limit it? Was that all he could legally send? And the narrative changes here, at first it was reported she was concerned for his mental health, later it was reported that she thought he was fine. Supposedly she was something of a ‘caretaker’, yet she was out of the country constantly. Why was she out so much? Was it to visit her mom? Or was she traveling to multiple foreign countries?

The ISIS connection:

ISIS claimed responsibility. This is rather odd considering nothing has come out about Paddock ties to radical Islamic terrorism. Sure, they may just be acting like the opportunistic vultures they are, grabbing on lone wolfs acts and saying they inspired it. But since this has no obvious connection, why would they say that? A rich white dude isn’t their normal killer type. But what about the traveling girlfriend? Any connection with her?


What was it? Was it mental duress? Accepting the sort-of-sort-of-not word from his Girlfriend, he maybe had some mental problems. His brother couldn’t think of any motive, he thought he was fine. Did he have financial problems he couldn’t overcome? The autopsy showed no brain abnormalities that would lead him to suddenly turn violent. People don’t do things without motives, especially life changing(and most likely ENDING) decisions.  Like committing mass murder with a high likely hood of being engaged and killed by police. We got a little information from a hooker, not being the most trusted of courses, that he was an angry white dude.

The Break in of the Paddock Residence AFTER the shooting:

A week after the shooting, Paddock’s house is broken into. And… nothing. Lots of mention of it in the news, and law enforcement investigating. And supposedly it was under security as a crime scene. But multiple intruders entered the building and their intent is unknown. Supposedly nothing was taken, well was anything planted? Match the crime scene photos taken after the raid on Oct 3rd with the after photos taken on Oct 11th when it was realized it had been broken into. And compare.

So, inside a retirement community development. No video, no information, no arrests or suspects, no motives.  Not a single follow-up report.

This is suspicious as hell.

Speaking of The House:

We know he had a bunch of guns and ammo.  Don’t get caught up in ammo count, the media loves to spazz out on that number. As if the higher the ammunition count owned, the more nefarious the person. But a single box of .22’s for $15 can hold 550 rounds.It’s not a big surprise for an average weekend shooter to have ten thousand rounds or more of ammo at a given time. Especially when it’s cheaper to buy in bulk or on sale, and they shoot a lot of little 22s. So a high round count rarely means anything.

But what else?  Did he have other planned information, escape info, another computer with a search history? What is on his emails? There should be a wealth of information here.

NOTHING. No news on what was found other than some guns and ammo.


Ultimately – I’m no loon. I try to be rational. But this thing STINKS, and the less answers we have that make sense the more we speculate. And no one seems to really CARE to answer them, and at this point, the only ones demanding answers are the victims families and survivors who are suing.  Perhaps when their case goes to court we will get details that make sense.


Two AWESOME things worthy of mention.

First, Black Friday sold over 203,086 guns. That’s enough to arm the entire glorious Marine Corps and the little Coast Guard, with some left over. Yet, strangely, we won’t witness 200,000 plus murders occur this week, or next month, or next year, or the next decade. So weird! I thought guns = mass murder?

Second, Congress has FINALLY passed a bill allowing military surplus 1911’s to be sold via Sweet! I hope mine has notches carved in it from all the dead Nazis and Imperialists it slayed in RIGHTEOUS 1940’s AMERICAN FURY!

A picture got put on the internet today from a bin of 1,500 guns that were being prepped for transfer to the CMP. They look pretty good, with some nice WWI 1911’s in the mix. So far, as you can read in the link below, the picture checks out as being authentic.

The first rumor I’ve seen is they are going for $900. Which seems steep considering that M1 Garands are almost all sold out, and Service Grade Garands are going for $730.  But who knows, the CMP doesn’t make much money anymore since Clinton took their public funding away because he hates guns and freedom and apple pie and his wife. (Can’t blame him on the last one.) So maybe they will be stupid expensive. It’s not like there is a lot of military surplus guns left that can legally be imported until we over-turn this annoying full-auto ban. At any rate, the super rare ones will end up in their auction going for lots of monies. So save your pennies.

Linky McLink to the Forum it was posted


Pew, Pew, and carry on.



If you like this site, if it entertains you, please share it to your friends and family, and even those of the opposite political persuasion who may be offended. Heck – SIGN THEM UP! (Christmas is coming up – What a gift of joy!) Bwhahahaha…. 🙂

There is a SUBSCRIBE option to the right, but you will get an email with my post content every single time that I post, so I apologize if I spam you. Either I limit myself to posting once a week, which limits the content I share, or your get a bunch of emails. It may be better to simply check in from time to time. Up to you.


After weeks of build up to an Antifa-Apocalypse, with the threat of millions of communists, fascists, and anarchists expected to turn out to overthrow our elected President, we were so stoked. Hundreds of thousands of Americans spent the 4th of November hoping to go out and do some patriot stuff.

Across the nation they loving selected their favorite rifles and pistols, loaded magazines to full capacity, made sure their American flag was unfurled and flying in the breeze, strapped on holsters and magazine carriers, fueled up their vehicles, and prepared for the righteous slaughter that was to come…

But sadly, all the ANTIFA fascists stayed at home.

Probably because their mom wanted them to clean up their room in the basement.  Or they were grounded. Or they had a test on Monday at Liberal Loser University in ‘Communist Theory’ and ‘Underwater Sign Waving’.

The “Revolution” turned out to be a fizzle and some poor guys made a lot of wasted signs and wooden bats then looked rather stupid standing among piles of unused makeshift weapons.

For us it was like hunters spending weeks in anticipation, only to find out the season has been canceled because there wasn’t any game to hunt.

Thanks guys – there is nothing as miserable as unloading magazines when we should have been sweeping up fired casings and planting American flags in mounds of your unwashed and uneducated corpses.

Anyways, go wash your face masks, put another coating of lacquer on your shield, and spray paint another cardboard sign. I’m sure you cowards aren’t finished being obnoxious yet.

I hear you guys have another planned protest tomorrow on the anniversary of Trumps election. You plan on collectively screaming at the sky in an attempt to ‘rouse a sleeping giant’.


Good luck with that.

We will be waiting on your violent revolution, and this poster below from Hellhound Apparel shows what our response will be.


And final word of this post goes to legendary Lt. Col Jeff Cooper:

“Let us reflect upon the fact that a man who covers his face shows reason to be ashamed of what he is doing. A man who takes it upon himself to shed blood while concealing his identity is a revolting perversion of the warrior ethic. It has long been my conviction that a masked man with a gun is a target. I see no reason to change that view.”


(For the record – I was out of town running a Spartan Beast race, and I never figured it would amount to anything anyways. But I did have my Glock and a few extra magazines, and a couple thousand pounds of motor vehicle to keep me safe during the ‘mass protests’. I’m told that getting a ‘pretty dunk wall’ picture is a big deal, well this is as pretty as it gets with me…)



EDIT – A fellow Marine just had his first article posted at Appalachian Tactical Academy, on Hardening Your Castle. It’s a great article and from everything I hear, ATA is a fine place to get tactical training for the Citizen-Warrior. Read the article, do some upgrades, then go get training.

An Opinion on Gun Control – Larry Correia

Here is the single greatest article you will ever need to read about Gun Control.

I’ve been thinking about writing on this for a week, and it’s exhaustive to think about even where to begin. So why bother rewriting Homer’s Iliad?

This is an older post, by Larry Correia – Author Extraordinaire of  the ‘Monster Hunter International’ series. (This is stolen from his blog) If you are tired of watching Horror/Monster movies that could be ended in five minutes with the proper application of a 12 gauge shotgun – his books are for you.

(Specifically with a Siaga 12 gauge, with silver tipped bayonet, 20 round drums of silver plated buckshot, and grenade launcher. His vampires don’t sparkle and romance teenagers – they rip them to shreds and eat their beating hearts.)

Fantastic stuff. But here, this is the article I pass on to people who are curious about gun control and my beliefs on the matter.




Everything I need to say about mass shootings has already been said in this post from December 2012. I wrote it in response to Sandy Hook. It went viral and was read by over a million people. I also did a segment on FOX News about it: I am reposting it here now because the original link has 2,600 comments, so the page often doesn’t load correctly.


I didn’t want to post about this, because frankly, it is exhausting. I’ve been having this exact same argument for my entire adult life. It is not an exaggeration when I say that I know pretty much exactly every single thing an anti-gun person can say. I’ve heard it over and over, the same old tired stuff, trotted out every single time there is a tragedy on the news that can be milked. Yet, I got sucked in, and I’ve spent the last few days arguing with people who either mean well but are uninformed about gun laws and how guns actually work (who I don’t mind at all), or the willfully ignorant (who I do mind), or the obnoxiously stupid who are completely incapable of any critical thinking deeper than a Facebook meme (them, I can’t stand).

Today’s blog post is going to be aimed at the first group. I am going to try to go through everything I’ve heard over the last few days, and try to break it down from my perspective. My goal tonight is to write something that my regular readers will be able to share with their friends who may not be as familiar with how mass shootings or gun control laws work.

A little background for those of you who don’t know me, and this is going to be extensive so feel free to skip the next few paragraphs, but I need to establish the fact that I know what I am talking with, because I am sick and tired of my opinion having the same weight as a person who learned everything they know about guns and violence from watching TV.

I am now a professional novelist. However, before that I owned a gun store. We were a Title 7 SOT, which means we worked with legal machine guns, suppressors, and pretty much everything except for explosives. We did law enforcement sales and worked with equipment that is unavailable from most dealers, but that means lots and lots of government inspections and compliance paperwork. This means that I had to be exceedingly familiar with federal gun laws, and there are a lot of them. I worked with many companies in the gun industry and still have many friends and contacts at various manufacturers. When I hear people tell me the gun industry is unregulated, I have to resist the urge to laugh in their face.

I was also a Utah Concealed Weapons instructor, and was one of the busiest instructors in the state. That required me to learn a lot about self-defense laws, and because I took my job very seriously, I sought out every bit of information that I could. My classes were longer than the standard Utah class, and all of that extra time was spent on Use of Force, shoot/no shoot scenarios, and role playing through violent encounters. I have certified thousands of people to carry guns.

I have been a firearms instructor, and have taught a lot of people how to shoot defensively with handguns, shotguns, and rifles. For a few years of my life, darn near every weekend was spent at the range. I started out as an assistant for some extremely experienced teachers and I also had the opportunity to be trained by some of the most accomplished firearms experts in the world. The man I stole most of my curriculum from was a Lieutenant Colonel in the Army Special Forces, turned federal agent SWAT team commander. I took classes in everything from wound ballistics (10 hours of looking at autopsy slides) to high-speed cool-guy door-kicking stuff. I’ve worked extensively with military and law enforcement personnel, including force on force training where I played the OpFor (i.e. I got to be the bad guy, because I make an awesome bad guy. You tell me how evil/capable you want me to be, and how hard you want your men to work, and I’d make it happen, plus I can take a beating). Part of this required learning how mass shooters operate and studying the heck out of the actual events.

I have been a competition shooter. I competed in IPSC, IDPA, and 3gun. It was not odd for me to reload and shoot 1,000 rounds in any given week. I fired 20,000 rounds of .45 in one August alone. I’ve got a Remington 870 with approximately 160,000 rounds through it. I’ve won matches, and I’ve been able to compete with some of the top shooters in the country. I am a very capable shooter. I only put this here to convey that I know how shooting works better than the vast majority of the populace.

I have written for national publications on topics relating to gun law and use of force. I wrote for everything from the United States Concealed Carry Association to SWAT magazine. I was considered a subject matter expert at the state level, and on a few occasions was brought in to testify before the Utah State Legislature on the ramifications of proposed gun laws. I’ve argued with lawyers, professors, professional lobbyists, and once made a state rep cry.

Basically for most of my adult life, I have been up to my eyeballs in guns, self-defense instruction, and the laws relating to those things. So believe me when I say that I’ve heard every argument relating to gun control possible. It is pretty rare for me to hear something new, and none of this stuff is new.

Armed Teachers

So now that there is a new tragedy the president wants to have a “national conversation on guns”. Here’s the thing. Until this national conversation is willing to entertain allowing teachers to carry concealed weapons, then it isn’t a conversation at all, it is a lecture.

Now when I say teachers carrying concealed weapons on Facebook I immediately get a bunch of emotional freak out responses. You can’t mandate teachers be armed! Guns in every classroom! Emotional response! Blood in the streets!

No. Hear me out. The single best way to respond to a mass shooter is with an immediate, violent response. The vast majority of the time, as soon as a mass shooter meets serious resistance, it bursts their fantasy world bubble. Then they kill themselves or surrender. This has happened over and over again.

Police are awesome. I love working with cops. However any honest cop will tell you that when seconds count they are only minutes away. After Colombine law enforcement changed their methods in dealing with active shooters. It used to be that you took up a perimeter and waited for overwhelming force before going in. Now usually as soon as you have two officers on scene you go in to confront the shooter (often one in rural areas or if help is going to take another minute, because there are a lot of very sound tactical reasons for using two, mostly because your success/survival rates jump dramatically when you put two guys through a door at once. The shooter’s brain takes a moment to decide between targets). The reason they go fast is because they know that every second counts. The longer the shooter has to operate, the more innocents die.

However, cops can’t be everywhere. There are at best only a couple hundred thousand on duty at any given time patrolling the entire country. Excellent response time is in the three-five minute range. We’ve seen what bad guys can do in three minutes, but sometimes it is far worse. They simply can’t teleport. So in some cases that means the bad guys can have ten, fifteen, even twenty minutes to do horrible things with nobody effectively fighting back.

So if we can’t have cops there, what can we do?

The average number of people shot in a mass shooting event when the shooter is stopped by law enforcement: 14. The average number of people shot in a mass shooting event when the shooter is stopped by civilians: 2.5. The reason is simple. The armed civilians are there when it started.

The teachers are there already. The school staff is there already. Their reaction time is measured in seconds, not minutes. They can serve as your immediate violent response. Best case scenario, they engage and stop the attacker, or it bursts his fantasy bubble and he commits suicide. Worst case scenario, the armed staff provides a distraction, and while he’s concentrating on killing them, he’s not killing more children.

But teachers aren’t as trained as police officers! True, yet totally irrelevant. The teacher doesn’t need to be a SWAT cop or Navy SEAL. They need to be speed bumps.

But this leads to the inevitable shrieking and straw man arguments about guns in the classroom, and then the pacifistic minded who simply can’t comprehend themselves being mandated to carry a gun, or those that believe teachers are all too incompetent and can’t be trusted. Let me address both at one time.

Don’t make it mandatory. In my experience, the only people who are worth a darn with a gun are the ones who wish to take responsibility and carry a gun. Make it voluntary. It is rather simple. Just make it so that your state’s concealed weapons laws trump the Federal Gun Free School Zones act. All that means is that teachers who voluntarily decide to get a concealed weapons permit are capable of carrying their guns at work. Easy. Simple. Cheap. Available now.

Then they’ll say that this is impossible, and give me all sorts of terrible worst case scenarios about all of the horrors that will happen with a gun in the classroom… No problem, because this has happened before. In fact, my state laws allow for somebody with a concealed weapons permit to carry a gun in a school right now. Yes. Utah has armed teachers. We have for several years now.

When I was a CCW instructor, I decided that I wanted more teachers with skin in the game, so I started a program where I would teach anybody who worked at a school for free. No charge. Zip. They still had to pay the state for their background check and fingerprints, but all the instruction was free. I wanted more armed teachers in my state.

I personally taught several hundred teachers. I quickly discovered that pretty much every single school in my state had at least one competent, capable, smart, willing individual. Some schools had more. I had one high school where the principal, three teachers, and a janitor showed up for class. They had just had an event where there had been a threat against the school and their resource officer had turned up AWOL. This had been a wake up call for this principal that they were on their own, and he had taken it upon himself to talk to his teachers to find the willing and capable. Good for them.

After Virginia Tech, I started teaching college students for free as well. They were 21 year old adults who could pass a background check. Why should they have to be defenseless? None of these students ever needed to stop a mass shooting, but I’m happy to say that a couple of rapists and muggers weren’t so lucky, so I consider my time well spent.

Over the course of a couple years I taught well over $20,000 worth of free CCW classes. I met hundreds and hundreds of teachers, students, and staff. All of them were responsible adults who understood that they were stuck in target rich environments filled with defenseless innocents. Whether they liked it or not, they were the first line of defense. It was the least I could do.

Permit holders are not cops. The mistake many people make is that they think permit holders are supposed to be cops or junior danger rangers. Not at all. Their only responsibility is simple. If someone is threatening to cause them or a third person serious bodily harm, and that someone has the ability, opportunity, and is acting in a manner which suggest they are a legitimate threat, then that permit holder is allowed to use lethal force against them.

As of today the state legislatures of Texas, Tennessee, and Oklahoma are looking at revamping their existing laws so that there can be legal guns in school. For those that are worried these teachers will be unprepared, I’m sure there would be no lack of instructors in those states who’d be willing to teach them for free.

For everyone, if you are sincere in your wish to protect our children, I would suggest you call your state representative today and demand that they allow concealed carry in schools.

Gun Free Zones

Gun Free Zones are hunting preserves for innocent people. Period.

Think about it. You are a violent, homicidal madman, looking to make a statement and hoping to go from disaffected loser to most famous person in the world. The best way to accomplish your goals is to kill a whole bunch of people. So where’s the best place to go shoot all these people? Obviously, it is someplace where nobody can shoot back.

In all honesty I have no respect for anybody who believes Gun Free Zones actually work. You are going to commit several hundred felonies, up to and including mass murder, and you are going to refrain because there is a sign? That No Guns Allowed sign is not a cross that wards off vampires. It is wishful thinking, and really pathetic wishful thinking at that.

The only people who obey No Guns signs are people who obey the law. People who obey the law aren’t going on rampages.

I testified before the Utah State Legislature about the University of Utah’s gun ban the day after the Trolley Square shooting in Salt Lake City. Another disaffected loser scumbag started shooting up this mall. He killed several innocent people before he was engaged by an off duty police officer who just happened to be there shopping. The off duty Ogden cop pinned down the shooter until two officers from the SLCPD came up from behind and killed the shooter. (turned out one of them was a customer of mine) I sent one of my employees down to Trolley Square to take a picture of the shopping center’s front doors. I then showed the picture to the legislators. One of the rules was NO GUNS ALLOWED.

The man that attacked the midnight showing of Batman didn’t attack just any theater. There were like ten to choose from. He didn’t attack the closest. It wasn’t about biggest or smallest. He attacked the one that was posted NO GUNS ALLOWED.

There were four mass killing attempts this week. Only one made the news because it helped the agreed upon media narrative.

Oregon. NOT a gun free zone. Shooter confronted by permit holder. Shooter commits suicide. Only a few casualties.
Texas. NOT a gun free zone. Shooter killed immediately by off duty cop. Only a few casualties.
Connecticut. GUN FREE ZONE. Shooters kills until the police arrive. Suicide. 26 dead.
China. GUN FREE COUNTRY. A guy with a KNIFE stabs 22 children.
And here is the nail in the coffin for Gun Free Zones. Over the last fifty years, with only one single exception (Gabby Giffords), every single mass shooting event with more than four casualties has taken place in a place where guns were supposedly not allowed.

The Media

Every time there is a mass shooting event, the vultures launch. I find it absolutely fascinating. A bunch of people get murdered, and the same usual suspects show up with the same tired proposals that we’ve either tried before or logic tells us simply will not work. They strike while the iron is hot, trying to push through legislation before there can be coherent thought. We’ve seen this over and over and over again. We saw it succeed in England. We saw it succeed in Australia. We’ve seen it succeed here before.

Yet when anyone from my side responds, then we are shouted at that we are blood thirsty and how dare we speak in this moment of tragedy, and we should just shut our stupid mouths out of respect for the dead, while they are free to promote policies which will simply lead to more dead… If the NRA says something they are bloodthirsty monsters, and if they don’t say something then their silence is damning guilt. It is hypocritical in the extreme, and when I speak out against this I am called every name in the book, I want dead children, I’m a cold hearted monster (the death threats are actually hilarious). If I become angry because they are promoting policies which are tactically flawed and which will do the exact opposite of the stated goals, then I am a horrible person for being angry. Perhaps I shouldn’t be allowed to own guns at all.

But that’s not why I want to talk about the media. I want to talk about the media’s effect on the shooters.

Put yourself in the shoes of one of these killers. One nice thing about playing the villain and being a punching bag for cops, soldiers, and permit holders is that you need to learn about how the bad guys think and operate. And most of the mass shooters fit a similar profile.

The vast majority (last I saw it was over 80%) are on some form of psychotropic drug and has been for many years. They have been on Zoloft or some serotonin inhibitor through their formative years, and their decision making process is often flawed. They are usually disaffected, have been bullied, pushed around, and have a lot of emotional problems. They are delusional. They see themselves as victims, and they are usually striking back at their peer group.

These people want to make a statement. They want to show the world that they aren’t losers. They want to make us understand their pain. They want to make their peer group realize that they are powerful. They’ll show us. The solution is easy. It’s right there in front of your nose.

If you can kill enough people at one time, you’ll be on the news, 24/7, round the clock coverage. You will become the most famous person in the world. Everyone will know your name. You become a celebrity. Experts will try to understand what you were thinking. Hell, the President of the United States, the most important man in the world, will drop whatever he is doing and hold a press conference to talk about your actions, and he’ll even shed a single manly tear.

You are a star.

Strangely enough, this is one of the only topics I actually agree with Roger Ebert on. He didn’t think that the news should cover the shooters or mention their names on the front page of the paper. So whenever the press isn’t talking about guns, or violent movies, or violent video games, or any other thing that hundreds of millions of people participated in yesterday without murdering anybody, they’ll keep showing the killer’s picture in the background while telling the world all about him and his struggles.

And then the cycle repeats, as the next disaffected angry loner takes notes.

They should not be glamorized. They should be hated, despised, and forgotten. They are not victims. They are not powerful. They are murdering scum, and the only time their names should be remembered is when people like me are studying the tactics of how to neutralize them faster.

Mental Health Issues

And right here I’m going to show why I’m different than the people I’ve been arguing with the last few days. I am not an expert on mental health issues or psychiatry or psychology. My knowledge of criminal psychology is limited to understanding the methods of killers enough to know how to fight them better.

So since I don’t have enough first-hand knowledge about this topic to comment intelligently, then I’m not going to comment… Oh please, if only some of the people I’ve been arguing with who barely understand that the bullets come out the pointy end of the gun would just do the same.

Gun Control Laws

As soon as there is a tragedy there comes the calls for “We have to do something!” Sure, the something may not actually accomplish anything as far as solving whatever the tragedy was or preventing the next one, but that’s the narrative. Something evil happened, so we have to do something, and preferably we have to do it right now before we think about it too hard.

The left side of the political spectrum loves it some gun control. Gun control is historically extremely unpopular in red state and purple state America, and thus very hard to pass bit stuff, but there’s a century’s accumulation of lots and lots of small ones. There have been a handful of major federal laws passed in the United States relating to guns, but the majority of really strict gun control has primarily been enacted in liberal dominated urban areas. There are over 20,000 gun laws on the books, and I have no idea how many pages of regulations from the BATF related to the production and selling of them. I’ve found that the average American is extremely uneducated about what gun laws already exist, what they actually do, and even fundamental terminology, so I’m going to go through many of the things I’ve seen argued about over the last few days and elaborate on them one by one.

I will leave out the particularly crazy things I was confronted with, including the guy who was in favor of mandating “automatic robot gun turrets” in schools. Yes. Heaven forbid we let a teacher CCW, so let’s put killer robots (which haven’t actually been invented yet) in schools. Man, I wish I was making this up, but that’s Facebook for you.

We need to ban automatic weapons.

Okay. Done. In fact, we pretty much did that in 1934. The National Firearms Act of 1934 made it so that you had to pay a $200 tax on a machinegun and register it with the government. In 1986 that registry was closed and there have been no new legal machineguns for civilians to own since then.

Automatic means that when you hold down the trigger the gun keeps on shooting until you let go or run out of ammo. Actual automatic weapons cost a lot of money. The cheapest one you can get right now is around $5,000 as they are all collector’s items and you need to jump through a lot of legal hoops to get one. To the best of my knowledge, there has only ever been one crime committed with an NFA weapon in my lifetime, and in that case the perp was a cop.

Now are machineguns still used in crimes? Why, yes they are. For every legally registered one, there are conservatively dozens of illegal ones in the hands of criminals. They either make their own (which is not hard to do) or they are smuggled in (usually by the same people that are able to smuggle in thousands of tons of drugs). Because really serious criminals simply don’t care, they are able to get ahold of military weapons, and they use them simply because criminals, by definition, don’t obey the law. So even an item which has been basically banned since my grandparents were kids, and which there has been no new ones allowed manufactured since I was in elementary school, still ends up in the hands of criminals who really want one. This will go to show how effective government bans are.

When you say “automatic” you mean full auto, as in a machine gun. What I think most of these people mean is semi-auto.

Okay. We need to ban semi-automatic weapons!

Semi-automatic means that each time you pull the trigger the action cycles and loads another round. This is the single most common type of gun, not just in America, but in the whole world. Almost all handguns are semi-automatic. The vast majority of weapons used for self-defense are semi-automatic, as are almost all the weapons used by police officers. It is the most common because it is normally the most effective.

Semi-automatic is usually best choice for defensive use. It is easier to use because you can do so one handed if necessary, and you are forced to manipulate your weapon less. If you believe that using a gun for self-defense is necessary, then you pretty much have to say that semi-auto is okay.

Banning semi-automatic basically means banning all guns. I’ll get to the functional problems with that later.

We should ban handguns!

Handguns are tools for self-defense, and the only reason we use them over the more capable, and easier to hit with rifles or shotguns is because handguns are portable. Rifles are just plain better, but the only reason I don’t carry an AR-15 around is because it would be hard to hide under my shirt.

Concealed Carry works. As much as it offends liberals and we keep hearing horror stories about blood in the streets, the fact is over my lifetime most of the United States has enacted some form of concealed carry law, and the blood in the streets wild west shootouts over parking spaces they’ve predicted simply hasn’t happened. At this point in time there are only a few hold out states, all of them are blue states and all of them have inner cities which suffer from terrible crime, where once again, the criminals simply don’t care.

For information about how more guns actually equals less crime, look up the work of Dr. John Lott. And since liberals hate his guts, look up the less famous work of Dr. Gary Kleck, or basically look up the work of any criminologist or economist who isn’t writing for Slate or Mother Jones.

As for why CCW is good, see my whole first section about arming teachers for a tiny part of the whole picture. Basically bad people are going to be bad and do bad things. They are going to hurt you and take your stuff, because that’s what they do. That’s their career, and they are as good at it as you are at your job. They will do this anywhere they think they can get away with it. We fixate on the mass shooters because they grab the headlines, but in actuality your odds of running in to one of them is tiny. Your odds of having a violent encounter with a run of the mill criminal is orders of magnitudes higher.

I do find one thing highly amusing. In my personal experience, some of the most vehement anti-gun people I’ve ever associated with will usually eventually admit after getting to know me, that if something bad happened, then they really hope I’m around, because I’m one of the good ones. Usually they never realize just how hypocritical and naïve that is.

We should ban Assault Rifles!

Define “assault rifle”…


Yeah. That’s the problem. The term assault rifle gets bandied around a lot. Politically, the term is a loaded nonsense one that was created back during the Clinton years. It was one of those tricks where you name legislation something catchy, like PATRIOT Act. (another law rammed through while emotions were high and nobody was thinking, go figure).

To gun experts, an assault rifle is a very specific type of weapon which originated (for the most part) in the 1940s. It is a magazine fed, select fire (meaning capable of full auto), intermediate cartridge (as in, actually not that powerful, but I’ll come back to that later) infantry weapon.

The thing is, real assault rifles in the US have been heavily regulated since before they were invented. The thing that the media and politicians like to refer to as assault rifles is basically a catch all term for any gun which looks scary.

I had somebody get all mad at me for pointing this out, because they said that the term had entered common usage. Okay… If you’re going to legislate it, DEFINE IT.

And then comes up that pesky problem. The US banned assault rifles once before for a decade and the law did absolutely nothing. I mean, it was totally, literally pointless. The special commission to study it said that it accomplished absolutely nothing. (except tick a bunch of Americans off, and as a result we bought a TON more guns) And the reason was that since assault weapon is a nonsense term, they just came up with a list of arbitrary features which made a gun into an assault weapon.

Problem was, none of these features actually made the gun functionally any different or somehow more lethal or better from any other run of the mill firearm. Most of the criteria were so silly that they became a huge joke to gun owners, except of course, for that part where many law abiding citizens accidentally became instant felons because one of their guns had some cosmetic feature which was now illegal.

One of the criteria was that it was semi-automatic. See above. Hard to ban the single most common and readily available type of gun in the world. (unless you believe in confiscation, but I’ll get to that). Then what if it takes a detachable magazine! That’s got to be an Evil Feature. And yes, we really did call the Evil Features. I’ll talk about magazines below, but once again, it is pretty hard to ban something that common unless you want to go on a confiscatory national suicide mission.

For example, flash hiders sound dangerous. Let’s say having a flash hider makes a gun an assault weapon. So flash hiders became an evil feature. Problem is flash hiders don’t do much. They screw onto the end of your muzzle and divert the flash off to the side instead of straight up so it isn’t as annoying when you shoot. It doesn’t actually hide the flash from anybody else. EVIL.

Barrel shrouds were listed. Barrel shrouds are basically useless, cosmetic pieces of metal that go over the barrel so you don’t accidentally touch it and burn your hand. But they became an instantaneous felony too. Collapsible stocks make it so you can adjust your rifle to different size shooters, that way a tall guy and his short wife can shoot the same gun. Nope. EVIL FEATURE!

It has been a running joke in the gun community ever since the ban passed. When Carolyn McCarthy was asked by a reporter what a barrel shroud was, she replied “I think it is the shoulder thing which goes up.” Oh good. I’m glad that thousands of law abiding Americans unwittingly committed felonies because they had a cosmetic piece of sheet metal on their barrel, which has no bearing whatsoever on crime, but could possibly be a shoulder thing which goes up.

Now are you starting to see why “assault weapons” is a pointless term? They aren’t functionally any more powerful or deadly than any normal gun. In fact the cartridges they normally fire are far less powerful than your average deer hunting rifle. Don’t worry though, because the same people who fling around the term assault weapons also think of scoped deer rifles as “high powered sniper guns”.

Basically, what you are thinking of as assault weapons aren’t special.

Now, the reason that semi-automatic, magazine fed, intermediate caliber rifles are the single most popular type of gun in America is because they are excellent for many uses, but I’m not talking about fun, or hunting, or sports, today I’m talking business. And in this case they are excellent for shooting bad people who are trying to hurt you, in order to make them stop trying to hurt you. These types of guns are superb for defending your home. Now some of you may think that’s extreme. That’s because everything you’ve learned about gun fights comes from TV. Just read the link where I expound on why.

I had one individual tell me that these types of guns are designed to slaughter the maximum number of people possible as quickly as possible… Uh huh… Which is why every single police department in America uses them, because of all that slaughtering cops do daily. Cops use them for the same reason we do, they are handy, versatile, and can stop an attacker quickly in a variety of circumstances.

When I said “stop an attacker quickly” somebody on Twitter thought that he’d gotten me and said “Stop. That’s just a euphemism for kill!” Nope. I am perfectly happy if the attacker surrenders or passes out from blood loss too. Tactically and legally, all I care about is making them stop doing whatever it is that they are doing which caused me to shoot them to begin with.

The guns that many of you think of as assault rifle are common and popular because they are excellent for fighting, and I’ll talk about what my side really thinks about the 2nd Amendment below.

We should ban magazines over X number of shots!

I’ve seen this one pop up a lot. It sounds good to the ear and really satisfies that we’ve got to do something need. It sounds simple. Bad guys shoot a lot of people in a mass shooting. So if he has magazines that hold fewer rounds, ergo then he’ll not be able to shoot as many people.

Wrong. And I’ll break it down, first why my side wants more rounds in our gun, second why tactically it doesn’t really stop the problem, and third, why stopping them is a logistical impossibility.

First off, why do gun owners want magazines that hold more rounds? Because sometimes you miss. Because usually—contrary to the movies—you have to hit an opponent multiple times in order to make them stop. Because sometimes you may have multiple assailants. We don’t have more rounds in the magazine so we can shoot more, we have more rounds in the magazine so we are forced to manipulate our gun less if we have to shoot more.

The last assault weapons ban capped capacities at ten rounds. You quickly realize ten rounds sucks when you take a wound ballistics class like I have and go over case after case after case after case of enraged, drug addled, prison hardened, perpetrators who soaked up five, seven, nine, even fifteen bullets and still walked under their own power to the ambulance. That isn’t uncommon at all. Legally, you can shoot them until they cease to be a threat, and keep in mind that what normally causes a person to stop is loss of blood pressure, so I used to tell my students that anybody worth shooting once was worth shooting five or seven times. You shoot them until they leave you alone.

Also, you’re going to miss. It is going to happen. If you can shoot pretty little groups at the range, those groups are going to expand dramatically under the stress and adrenalin. The more you train, the better you will do, but you can still may miss, or the bad guy may end up hiding behind something which your bullets don’t penetrate. Nobody has ever survived a gunfight and then said afterwards, “Darn, I wish I hadn’t brought all that extra ammo.”

So having more rounds in the gun is a good thing for self-defense use.

Now tactically, let’s say a mass shooter is on a rampage in a school. Unless his brain has turned to mush and he’s a complete idiot, he’s not going to walk up right next to you while he reloads anyway. Unlike the CCW holder who gets attacked and has to defend himself in whatever crappy situation he finds himself in, the mass shooter is the aggressor. He’s picked the engagement range. They are cowards who are murdering running and hiding children, but don’t for a second make the mistake of thinking they are dumb. Many of these scumbags are actually very intelligent. They’re just broken and evil.

In the cases that I’m aware of where the shooter had guns that held fewer rounds they just positioned themselves back a bit while firing or they brought more guns, and simply switched guns and kept on shooting, and then reloaded before they moved to the next planned firing position. Unless you are a fumble fingered idiot, anybody who practices in front of a mirror a few dozen times can get to where they can insert a new magazine into a gun in a few seconds.

A good friend of mine (who happens to be a very reasonable democrat) was very hung up on this, sure that he would be able to take advantage of the time in which it took for the bad guy to reload his gun. That’s a bad assumption, and here’s yet another article that addresses that sort of misconception that I wrote several years ago which has sort of made the rounds on firearm’s forums. So that’s awesome if it happens, but good luck with that.

Finally, let’s look at the logistical ramifications of another magazine ban. The AWB banned the production of all magazines over ten rounds except those marked for military or law enforcement use, and it was a felony to possess those.

Over the ten years of the ban, we never ran out. Not even close. Magazines are cheap and basic. Most of them are pieces of sheet metal with some wire. That’s it. Magazines are considered disposable so most gun people accumulate a ton of them. All it did was make magazines more expensive, ticked off law abiding citizens, and didn’t so much as inconvenience a single criminal.

Meanwhile, bad guys didn’t run out either. And if they did, like I said, they are cheap and basic, so you just get or make more. If you can cook meth, you can make a functioning magazine. My old company designed a rifle magazine once, and I’m no engineer. I paid a CAD guy, spent $20,000 and churned out several thousand 20 round Saiga .308 mags. This could’ve been done out of my garage.

Ten years. No difference. Meanwhile, we had bad guys turning up all the time committing crimes, and guess what was marked on the mags found in their guns? MILITARY AND LAW ENFORCEMENT USE ONLY. Because once again, if you’re already breaking a bunch of laws, they can only hang you once. Criminals simply don’t care.

Once the AWB timed out, because every politician involved looked at the mess which had been passed in the heat of the moment, the fact it did nothing, and the fact that every single one of them from a red state would lose their job if they voted for a new one, it expired and went away. Immediately every single gun person in America went out and bought a couple guns which had been banned and a bucket of new magazines, because nothing makes an American want to do something more than telling them they can’t. We’ve been stocking up ever since. If the last ban did literally nothing at all over a decade, and since then we’ve purchased another hundred million magazines since then, another ban will do even less. (except just make the law abiding that much angrier, and I’ll get to that below).

I bought $600 worth of magazines for my competition pistol this morning. I’ve already got a shelf full for my rifles. Gun and magazine sales skyrocket every time a democrat politician starts to vulture in on a tragedy. I don’t know if many of you realize this, but Barack Obama is personally responsible for more gun sales, and especially first time gun purchases, than anyone in history. When I owned my gun store, we had a picture of him on the wall and a caption beneath it which said SALESMAN OF THE YEAR.

So you can ban this stuff, but it won’t actually do anything to the crimes you want to stop. Unless you think you can confiscate them all, but I’ll talk about confiscation later.

One last thing to share about the magazine ban from the AWB, and this is something all gun people know, but most anti-gunners do not. When you put an artificial cap on a weapon, and tell us that we can only have a limited number of rounds in that weapon, we’re going to make sure they are the most potent rounds possible. Before the ban, everybody bought 9mms which held an average of 15 rounds. After the ban, if I can only have ten rounds, they’re going to be bigger, so we all started buying 10 shot .45s instead.

You don’t need an assault weapon for hunting!

Who said anything about hunting? That whole thing about the 2nd Amendment being for sportsmen is hogwash. The 2nd Amendment is about bearing arms to protect yourself from threats, up to and including a tyrannical government.

Spare me the whole, “You won’t be happy until everybody has nuclear weapons” reductio ad absurdum. It says arms, as in things that were man portable. And as for the founding fathers not being able to see foresee our modern arms, you forget that many of them were inventors, and multi shot weapons were already in service. Not to mention that in that day, arms included cannon, since most of the original artillery of the Continental Army was privately owned. Besides, the Supreme Court agrees with me. See DC v. Heller.

Well we should just ban ALL guns then! You only need them to murder people!

It doesn’t really make sense to ban guns, because in reality what that means is that you are actually banning effective self-defense. Despite the constant hammering by a news media with an agenda, guns are used in America far more to stop crime than to cause crime.

I’ve seen several different sets of numbers about how many times guns are used in self-defense every year. The problem with keeping track of this stat is that the vast majority of the time when a gun is produced in a legal self-defense situation no shots are fired. The mere presence of the gun is enough to cause the criminal to stop.

Clint Smith once said if you look like food, you will be eaten. Criminals are looking for prey. They are looking for easy victims. If they wanted to work hard for a living they’d get a job. So when you pull a gun, you are no longer prey, you are work, so they are going to go find somebody else to pick on.

So many defensive gun uses never get tracked as such. From personal experience, I have pulled a gun exactly one time in my entire life. I was legally justified and the bad guy stopped, put his gun away, and left. (15 years later the same son of a bitch would end up murdering a local sheriff’s deputy). My defensive gun use was never recorded anywhere as far as I know. My wife has pulled a gun twice in her life. Once on somebody who was acting very rapey who suddenly found a better place to be when she stuck a Ruger in his face, and again many years later on a German Shepherd which was attacking my one year old son. (amazingly enough a dog can recognize a 9mm coming out of a fanny pack and run for its life, go figure) No police report at all on the second one, and I don’t believe the first one ever turned up as any sort of defensive use statistic, all because no shots were fired.

So how often are guns actually used in self-defense in America?

On the high side the estimate runs around 2.5 million defensive gun uses a year, which dwarfs our approximately 16,000 homicides in any recent year, only 10k of which are with guns. Of those with guns, only a couple hundred are with rifles. So basically, the guns that the anti-gunners are the most spun up about only account for a tiny fraction of all our murders.

But let’s not go with the high estimate. Let’s go with some smaller ones instead. Let’s use the far more conservative 800,000 number which is arrived at in multiple studies. That still dwarfs the number of illegal shootings. Heck, let’s even run with the number once put out by the people who want to ban guns, the Brady Center, which was still around 108,000, which still is an awesome ratio of good vs. bad.

So even if you use the worst number provided by people who are just as biased as me but in the opposite direction, gun use is a huge net positive. Or to put it another way, the Brady Center hates guns so much that they are totally cool with the population of a decent sized city getting raped and murdered every year as collateral damage in order to get what they want.

Doesn’t matter. I don’t like them. We should ban them and take them all away like a civilized country.

Well, I suppose if your need to do something overrides all reason and logic, then by all means let’s ban guns.

Australia had a mass shooting and instituted a massive gun ban and confiscation (a program which would not work here, which I’ll get to, but let’s run with it anyway.). As was pointed out to me on Facebook, they haven’t had any mass shootings since. However, they fail to realize that they didn’t really have any mass shootings before either. You need to keep in mind that mass shooting are horrific headline grabbing statistical anomalies. You are far more likely to get your head caved in by a local thug while he’s trying to steal your wallet, and that probably won’t even make the evening news.

And violent crime is up in Australia. A cursory Google search will show articles about the increase in violent crime and theft, but then other articles pooh-pooing these stats as being insignificant and totally not related to the guns.

So then we’ve got England, where they reacted swiftly after a mass shooting, banned and confiscated guns, and their violent crime has since skyrocketed. Their stats are far worse than Australia, and they are now one of the more dangerous countries to live in the EU. Once again, cursory Google search will show articles with the stats, and other articles saying that those rises like totally have nothing to do with regular folks no longer being able to defend themselves… Sensing a trend yet?

And then we’ve got South Africa, which instituted some really hard core gun bans and some extremely strict controls, and their crime is now so high that it is basically either no longer tracked or simply not countable. But obviously, the totally unbiased news says that has absolutely nothing to do with people no longer being able to legally defend themselves.

Then you’ve got countries like Norway, with extremely strict gun control. Their gun control laws are simply incomprehensible to half of Americans. Not only that, they are an ethnically and socially homogenous, tiny population, well off country, without our gang violence or drug problems. Their gun control laws are draconian by our standards. They make Chicago look like Boise. Surely that level of gun control will stop school shootings! Except of course for 2011 when a maniac killed 77 and injured 242 people, a body count which is absurdly high compared to anything which has happened America.

Because once again, repeat it with me, criminals simply do not give a crap.

That mass killer used a gun and homemade explosives. Make guns harder to get, and explosives become the weapon of choice. Please do keep in mind that the largest and most advanced military coalition in human history was basically stymied for a decade by a small group using high school level chemistry and the Afghani equivalent to Radio Shack.

The biggest mass killings in US history have used bombs (like Bath, Michigan), fire (like Happyland Nightclub) or airliners. There is no law you can pass, nothing you can say or do, which will make some not be evil.

And all of this is irrelevant, because banning and confiscating all the scary guns in America will be national suicide.

You crazy gun nuts and your 2nd Amendment. We should just confiscate all the guns.

Many of you may truly believe that. You may think that the 2nd Amendment is archaic, outdated, and totally pointless. However, approximately half of the country disagrees with you, and of them, a pretty large portion is fully willing to shoot somebody in defense of it.

We’ve already seen that your partial bans are stupid and don’t do anything, so unless you are merely a hypocrite more interested in style rather than results, the only way to achieve your goal is to come and take the guns away. So let’s talk about confiscation.

They say that there are 80 million gun owners in America. I personally think that number is low for a few reasons. The majority of gun owners I know, when contacted for a phone survey and asked if they own guns, will become suspicious and simply lie. Those of us who don’t want to end like England or Australia will say that we lost all of our guns in a freak canoe accident.

Guns do not really wear out. I have perfectly functioning guns from WWI, and I’ve got friends who have still useable firearms from the 1800s. Plus we’ve been building more of them this entire time. There are more guns than there are people in America, and some of us have enough to arm our entire neighborhood.

But for the sake of math, let’s say that there are only 80 million gun owners, and let’s say that the government decides to round up all those pesky guns once and for all. Let’s be generous and say that 90% of the gun owners don’t really believe in the 2nd Amendment, and their guns are just for duck hunting. Which is what politicians keep telling us, but is actually rather hilarious when you think about how the most commonly sold guns in America are the same detachable magazine semiautomatic rifles I talked about earlier.

So ten percent refuse to turn their guns in. That is 8 million instantaneous felons. Let’s say that 90% of them are not wanting to comply out of sheer stubbornness. Let’s be super generous and say that 90% of them would still just roll over and turn their guns when pressed or legally threatened. That leaves 800,000 Americans who are not turning their guns in, no matter what. To put that in perspective there are only about 700,000 police officers in the whole country.

Let’s say that these hypothetical 10% of 10% are willing to actually fight to keep their guns. Even if my hypothetical estimate of 800,000 gun nuts willing to fight for their guns is correct, it is still 97% higher than the number of insurgents we faced at any one time in Iraq, a country about the size of Texas.

However, I do honestly believe that it would be much bigger than 10%. Once the confiscations turned violent, then it would push many otherwise peaceful people over the edge. I saw somebody on Twitter post about how the 2nd Amendment is stupid because my stupid assault rifles are useless against drones… That person has obviously never worked with the people who build the drones, fly the drones, and service the drones. I have. Where to you think the majority of the US military falls on the political spectrum exactly? There’s a reason Mitt Romney won the military vote by over 40 points, and it wasn’t because of his hair.

And as for those 700,000 cops, how many of them would side with the gun owners? All the gun nuts, that’s for sure. As much as some people like to complain about the gun culture, many of the people you hire to protect you, and darn near all of them who can shoot well, belong to that gun culture. And as I hear people complain about the gun industry, like it is some nebulous, faceless, all powerful corporate thing which hungers for war and anarchy, I just have to laugh, because the gun industry probably has the highest percentage of former cops and former military of any industry in the country. My being a civilian was odd in the circles I worked in. The men and women you pay to protect you have honor and integrity, and they will fight for what they believe in.

So the real question the anti-gun, ban and confiscate, crowd should be asking themselves is this, how many of your fellow Americans are you willing to have killed in order to bring about your utopian vision of the future?

Boo Evil Gun Culture!

Really? Because I hate to break it to you, but when nearly six hundred people get murdered a year in beautiful Gun Free Chicago, that’s not my people doing the shooting.

The gun culture is all around you, well obviously except for those of you reading this in elite liberal urban city centers where you’ve extinguished your gun culture. They are your friends, relatives, and coworkers. The biggest reason gun control has become increasingly difficult to pass over the last decade is because more and more people have turned to CCW, and as that has become more common, it has removed much of the stigma. Now everybody outside of elite urban liberal city centers knows somebody that carries a gun. The gun culture is simply regular America, and is made up of people who think their lives and their families lives are more important than the life of anyone who tries to victimize them.

The gun culture is who protects our country. Sure, there are plenty of soldiers and cops who are issued a gun and who use it as part of their job who could care less. However, the people who build the guns, really understand the guns, actually enjoy using the guns, and usually end up being picked to teach everybody else how to use the guns are the gun culture.

The media and the left would absolutely love to end the gun culture in America, because then they could finally pass all the laws they wanted.

Let’s take a look at what happens when a country finally succeeds in utterly stamping out its gun culture. Mumbai, 2008. Ten armed jihadi terrorists simply walked into town and started shooting people. It was a rather direct, straight forward, ham fisted, simple terrorist attack. They killed over 150 and wounded over 300. India has incredibly strict gun laws, but once again, criminals didn’t care.

That’s not my point this time however, I want to look at the response. These ten men shut down an entire massive city and struck fear into the hearts of millions for THREE DAYS. Depending on where this happened in America it would have been over in three minutes or three hours. The Indian police responded, but their tactics sucked. The marksmanship sucked. Their leadership sucked. Their response utterly and completely fell apart.

In talking afterwards with some individuals from a small agency of our government who were involved in the clean-up and investigation, all of whom are well trained, well practiced, gun nuts, they told me the problem was that the Indian police had no clue what to do because they’d never been taught what to do. Their leadership hated and feared the gun so much that they stamped out the ability for any of their men to actually master the tool. When you kill your gun culture, you kill off your instructors, and those who can pass down the information necessary to do the job.

Don’t think that we are so far off here. I recently got to sit down with some fans who are members of one of the larger metro police departments in America. These guys were all SWAT cops or narcotics, all of them were gun nuts who practiced on their own dime, and all of them were intimately familiar with real violence. These are the guys that you want responding when the real bad stuff goes down.

What they told me made me sick. Their leadership was all uniformly liberal and extremely anti-gun, just like most big cities in America. They walked me through what their responses were supposed to be in case of a Mumbai style event, and how their “scary assault weapons” were kept locked up where they would be unavailable, and how dismal their training was, and how since the state had run off or shut down most of the gun ranges, most of the cops couldn’t even practice or qualify anymore.

So now they were less safe, the people they were protecting were less safe, the bad guys were safer, but most importantly their leadership could pat themselves on the back, because they’d done something.

Well, okay. You make some good points. But I’d be more comfortable if you gun people were force to have more mandatory training!

And I did actually have this one said to me, which is an amazing victory by internet arguing standards.

Mandatory training is a placebo at best. Here is my take on why.

In conclusion, basically it doesn’t really matter what something you pick when some politician or pundit starts screaming we’ve got to do something, because in reality, most of them already know a lot of what I listed above. The ones who are walking around with their security details of well-armed men in their well-guarded government buildings really don’t care about actually stopping mass shooters or bad guys, they care about giving themselves more power and increasing their control.

If a bad guy used a gun with a big magazine, ban magazines. If instead he used more guns, ban owning multiple guns. If he used a more powerful gun with less shots, ban powerful guns. If he used hollowpoints, ban hollowpoints. (which I didn’t get into, but once again, there’s a reason everybody who might have to shoot somebody uses them). If he ignored some Gun Free Zone, make more places Gun Free Zones. If he killed a bunch of innocents, make sure you disarm the innocents even harder for next time. Just in case, let’s ban other guns that weren’t even involved in any crimes, just because they’re too big, too small, too ugly, too cute, too long, too short, too fat, too thin, (and if you think I’m joking I can point out a law or proposed law for each of those) but most of all ban anything which makes some politician irrationally afraid, which luckily, is pretty much everything.

They will never be happy. In countries where they have already banned guns, now they are banning knives and putting cameras on every street. They talk about compromise, but it is never a compromise. It is never, wow, you offer a quick, easy, inexpensive, viable solution to ending mass shootings in schools, let’s try that. It is always, what can we take from you this time, or what will enable us to grow some federal apparatus?

Then regular criminals will go on still not caring, the next mass shooter will watch the last mass shooter be the most famous person in the world on TV, the media will keep on vilifying the people who actually do the most to defend the innocent, the ignorant will call people like me names and tell us we must like dead babies, and nothing actually changes to protect our kids.

If you are serious about actually stopping school shootings, contact your state representative and tell them to look into allowing someone at your kid’s school to be armed. It is time to install some speed bumps.

Confiscated Guns from Criminals? Give them to the POOR!

Here’s a novel idea, let’s give confiscated guns to low income families for protection.

Common sense tells us that low income areas have higher crime rates.  Low income areas have a lot of problems that revolve around.. drumroll.. low income.  Civil services which rely on taxation to help fund them suffer.  But we’ll just focus on the law enforcement aspect of this.

I planned on going into law enforcement for a long time. I even got a Criminal Justice Degree.

I was going to get in gun fights for a living! Woohoo!  (I planned on winning them all by the way)

Then I got out of college and realized being a local cop doesn’t pay.  So I enlisted.

Yay gun fights but with GRENADES!


6 years of preparing to slay the enemies of freedom and no deployments.  I missed an entire war. (That’s another blog post right there.)

So cops right?  Low income areas are even worse.  You are paid miserably low, you probably have a family and are receiving food stamps, and you work in a high crime/high risk area where everyone wants to shoot you sitting in your car or stab you in the back.  On top of this, you have to worry about the legal/political ramifications of actually DOING YOUR JOB. Heaven help you if you shoot someone a different skin color.  You’ll be politically crucified and villainized until YOU have to go into Witness Protection.

So let’s help them out.

Arm the would-be victims. The more rapists, murders, thieves they slay in alleys and in your home the less of a burden placed on society. These are the people who have to dwell in such hell holes, scurrying about under constant fear of becoming a victim.

Since they don’t fear the law, we need to make them fear the victim!

Take Chicago, the ‘shining beacon’ of liberalism.

Under Democrat control for 86 years. You want a utopia without conservatives?  You get a festering, puss filled, puckered wound of corruption and immorality instead.

I think if you point a pointer finger at someone with your thumb sticking up you will go to jail for five years and come out a convicted felon for ‘causing hysteria of the public’ or some crap.

But last year 4,368 people were shot in Chicago.  This is in a city that has the strictest gun laws in the nation.  762 people were shot and killed in Chicago last year.  In comparison to Iraq, where 17 American military men were killed. Even if you take out the suicide, criminal on criminal violence, and all that fluff the left uses to skew their numbers – It’s a WAR ZONE.

Now there are some flaws that I can quickly address.

Background Checks – Yep. You gotta be legally allowed to own a firearm to get a firearm.  By the way, you’re gonna need an ID for that.  Sorry I’m not sorry about that. This ain’t VOTING! (Oh man, there’s another blog post to write)

Safety Class – Yep.  I’m not a fan of forcing people to jump through loops to be able to practice a constitutionally granted right.  However, Chicago has no gun culture anymore. I don’t even know if they have gun stores.

Gun Selection – They need to be gone over by a competent gun smith to ensure they are serviceable. But beggers can’t be choosers.  To those of you who get a cruddy Hi-Point. Sorry, try using it as a club?  To those of you who get a Glock – Welcome to the club! You got an M1 Carbine?  They helped defeat the Nazi’s.  You’re in good hands.  .22 bolt action rifle?  Let’s put a bayonet on it, because ain’t no such thing as over kill.  I promise you no one wants to get bayonetted in the modern age. The point is, make do with what you got.  Anything is better than being defenseless.

Gun Laws – 99% of them suck and should be over turned.  Murder, rape, assault, theft – It’s already illegal.  Stop making more potential victims with this crap.

Accidently Arming Bad Guys – It’s gonna happen.  But good people always outnumber the bad. Give it six months and I bet they’ll all be dead or fleeing to Chicago, D.C. or California where the victims are plentiful and the politicians favor the criminals.

“The poor misunderstood child rapist is the real victim here!  He wasn’t hugged enough!  The schools let him fall through the cracks!”

That’s crap.

Hang him so he can’t do it again and move on.

This is America and we got better things to do than coddle poor misguided souls who prey on their fellow man.  You made your choices, time to pay the piper with your life.

So write your congressman.  Tell them we need to start a ‘Confiscated Guns for the Poor’ campaign.

But don’t tell the Democrats, they’ll just make some garbage up about how it’s racist somehow.  Because white privilege means white people can’t be poor too. Then some turd burgling race-baiter like Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, or Obama will say something stupid and the riots will begin.

Then they’ll swarm the streets like opportunistic police car burning locusts and destroy the things other people bought or built with hard work.

Thus proving my point that not enough victims are shooting their attackers.

Riots show you how many people are actually crummy human beings. Who, if given the opportunity, will take advantage of their fellow man if they know the risk of law being enforced is low.

Hmm… Riots.  There’s another blog post I need to write about.