TSA Bully Tactics: Making Travelers Violate Federal Law

This is legal if you pay attention to the rules. Don't let TSA agents bully you in to breaking the law,

This is legal if you pay attention to the rules. Don’t let TSA agents bully you into breaking the law,

When you’re the fastest growing federal bureaucracy in history (that’s NOT a good thing by the way) you get to do pretty much whatever you want, regardless of what the law says. After all, they’ve got uniforms, buy lawyers by the pallet load, and if all else fails, have Eric Holder on their side of the kickball team.

In the case of flying with firearms in checked baggage, the law is short, sweet and intolerably (apparently not for the TSA however) clear. Here it is, as written in the Code of Federal Regulations:

Title 49: Transportation, Part 1540 – Civil Aviation Security: General Rules, Subpart B – Responsibilities of Passengers and Other Individuals and Persons, 1540.111 (c) (iv) – The container in which it is carried is locked, and only the passenger retains the key or combination.

Title 49: Transportation, Part 1544 – Aircraft Operator Security: Air Carriers and Commercial Operators,  Subpart C – Operations, 1544.203 (f) (iii) The container in which it is carried is locked, and only the individual checking the baggage retains the key or combination;

While the emphasis above is mine, the TSA can’t seem to figure out what might be the shortest and simplest federal law on the books, so I added the bold to help them out. I’ve written about this a number of times (here and here for example) in hopes that fellow subjects citizens will know how to travel with firearms according to the law.

Previously, I mentioned that the security folks in the Bend, Oregon airport force travelers to violate the law by surrendering their gun case keys to an agent who inspects the contents of your firearms case in a back room where you are not allowed. More recently, my home airport of Charleston, South Carolina has assumed the same practice. Perhaps the TSA has sharing days at CiCi’s Pizza to swap ideas amongst each other?

Here’s the problem. You are not allowed to surrender your keys or combination to your secure gun case, period. No exceptions are stated for surrendering your key ring to federal employees either. You, and you alone, are responsible for making sure your hard travel case remains locked and under your absolute control. Any variation from that and you are in violation of the law.

Would you care to guess who would win in Judge Judy’s courtroom should something happen with your guns after the TSA opened your case out of your presence? I’ll give you a hint, if it comes to a he said / she said legal argument between the feds and you, you’ll go down faster than Piers Morgan’s ratings.

As I’ve written about before, the law as written rules out use of TSA locks, since by very definition, tens of thousands of people have the “key” to your TSA locks. That’s the entire purpose of TSA locks. They have a “master key” so pretty much anyone can open them.

Back to Charleston. Not long ago, when declaring firearms at the ticket counter, the agent would call downstairs to TSA and request an agent. The TSA agent would walk up a flight of steps to inspect your gun case (in your presence) then allow you to lock it back up. That’s exactly how it’s supposed to work.

Now, TSA no longer wants to walk up the steps or maybe they just prefer to rummage through your gun case in private. They want you to send your keys downstairs, while you wait upstairs, so they can do whatever it is they do. No thanks. I love those spiffy TSA uniforms and all, and nothing makes my day like getting groped in the privates, but as much as I like those folks, I’m not going to violate federal law for them.

What do do?

Leave for the airport early in case you have to have a polite discussion with the agents. Quote the law mentioned above. Better yet, print it out. If you’re not making any headway, request an airport law enforcement officer and explain it to them. It’s a pain. You might miss your flight. But if you don’t start pushing back against abuse of power, you might find yourself resisting involuntary cavity searches before the next season of The Bachelorette is canceled.

You Might Be A Gun Control Activist If…

Gun-Control-911

You might be a gun control activist if…

You think Shannon watts makes a lot of sense if people would just listen to her.

You think that Shannon could deliver her message more effectively if she talked slow and loud, like you do when visiting foreign countries.

You’ve had a pot luck supper at Michael Bloomberg’s house.

You’ve smoked pot with Michael Bloomberg.

You think that the FBI has fudged crime statistics data for the past 20 years because Wayne LaPierre takes them out for CiCi’s pizza every Tuesday.

You’ve ever said “If it could save just one life…

You’ve never used the phrase “If it could save just one life” when it comes to drunk driving, swimming pool drownings, or car accidents.

You’ve ever uttered the words “If it could save just one life” while drinking a glass of wine by your swimming pool.

You’re convinced that law abiding citizens, who take a class, submit fingerprints, get probed by the FBI and wait months for a permit, are the root cause of drive by shootings.

You have to believe that guns in the hands of law-abiding Americans are more of a threat than nuclear weapons, terrorism and the unchecked spread of Shake Weight use.

That millions of Americans who knew how to shoot didn’t make all that much difference when it came to winning World Wars I and II. Everyone knows the French turned the tide in our favor.

You believe that Riker’s Island inmates are more scared of “No guns allowed” signs than clowns, Freddie Kreuger or Rosie O’Donnell.

You choose not to remember that the biggest, baddest assault weapons in existence were owned by private citizens when the 2nd Amendment was written.

You believe you are 937 times more likely to die by spontaneous combustion or killer bunions if you have a gun in your home.

You think that the people with the least amount of relevant knowledge have all the great ideas.

Read the rest at AmmoLand!

Pro-Gun Policy Will Fail Because There Were No Nuclear Wars

 

Cold War strategy sucked

Some gun control mantras make my head explode – and they don’t even use the phrase “for the children!” I’ll venture a guess they will cause you equal frustration. So go find a roll of duct tape. Then wrap your head with it. Done? Good. Now wrap an extra couple of layers, because I’m going to repeat the argument here loved by gun control groups like Moms Demand Alimony From Tyrannical Little Elitist Socialist Mayors with Napoleon Complexes (MDAFTLESMNC).

Concealed carry doesn’t stop mass shootings! There aren’t any examples of mass shootings where a concealed permit holder citizen stopped a mass shooting!

If you read this one slowly while moving your lips and concentrating really hard, you’ll detect some broken logic. The logic flaw boils down to this:

If someone is there to stop (or even disrupt) a mass shooting, the event never has a chance to become a mass shooting in the first place. The whole point is about the benefits of prevention, like blocking Anthony Weiner’s texting plan.

Buying into the exact same logic construct would mean that the Cold War failed. The whole point of the Cold War strategy of Mutually Assured Destruction is to prevent either side from throwing a pre-emptive nuclear missile haymaker. If you decided to evaluate the success of the mutually assured destruction strategy by counting the number of nuclear wars, then you would be well qualified to calculate unemployment numbers for the government.

“Hey! Our Cold War strategy sucked! You can’t name a single example of a nuclear war that was ended by the cold war strategy! Nyah, nyah, nyah! Now go get me a copy of the New York Times.”

Most studies define mass shootings as events where more than four people are deliberately killed in a single incident at a single location. Unless you develop the number using common core math, in which case you get an answer of -17.9 apples. But I digress. So, stick with me here, because the logic gets complex.

If a killer is stopped before they manage to harm four or more people, then it’s not a mass shooting.

See where I’m going here? If someone like, oh, say a concealed carry permit holder, is on the scene to disrupt a shooter’s plans, then they never get the opportunity to harm four people, so the event is not classified as a mass shooting, and like nuclear wars that never happened, it doesn’t factor into Emperor Mikey and Queen Shannon’s statistics.

The whole point of concealed carry is that first responders to an event – that would be you, not the police – have the right and responsibility to protect themselves. Rather than allow a homicidal maniac to proceed with their plans uninterrupted, an armed first responder – again that’s you – can disrupt the event as soon as it starts, so it never has the opportunity to become a mass shooting.

Let’s talk about the importance of disruption for a minute. Something sheeple don’t understand is that mass shooters are not highly trained Delta Commando Para Spetsnaz Seals. They’re psychopathic killers, but in terms of tactical skill, not so impressive. They rely on a docile and unarmed target environment in order to succeed. Rarely are special tactics are required to disrupt a mass killing plan. And disrupt is the keyword here. That’s all it takes. Disruption may, in fact, stop a killer cold or it may slow and delay their plan. Both are better scenarios that allowing them continue uninterrupted.

You don’t have to look far to find examples where armed citizens did, in fact, prevent mass shootings. The key word here is prevent, as the whole idea is to keep a criminal event from ever becoming a mass shooting in the first place.

In fact, you only have to look back as far as last week. Right here on Bearing Arms, you might have read about a doctor who stopped an armed killer in a medical facility. Unfortunately, one person was killed before the citizen was able to stop the killer. According to police, the armed doctor saved a lot of innocent lives.

Another classic example of the power of legally armed citizens occurred within one week of the tragic school shooting at Sandy Hook. A 22-year-old shooter, who I will not name, entered the gun free zone of Clackamas Mall On December 11, 2012 and started shooting random people in the vicinity of the food court. A concealed carrier on the scene, Nick Meli, drew his Glock 22 on the killer, but held fire out of concern for innocent bystanders behind the shooter. When the shooter saw an armed Mr. Meli, he ran into a stairwell and ended his own life with this final shot. The shooter claimed two innocent lives and was surely intent on causing a tragedy of epic proportions. Only because a citizen on the scene disrupted the shooter’s plans, was a tragedy and “mass shooting” prevented.

Clackamas is a perfect example of the benefit of armed citizens. Mall customers, armed or unarmed, were the first responders. Our citizen first responder only had to disrupt the killer’s plan to save the day. It’s that simple.

Like mutually assured destruction, concealed carry is about preventing war in the first place.

Make sense?

Be sure to check out Tom’s latest books!  They are ON SALE now for a limited time!

12 Reasons I Carry A Gun

Call-911-you-dont-need-a-gun

1. A fire extinguisher is a lousy self defense weapon.

No one seems to have an issue with folks keeping a fire extinguisher in the house, right? I mean, people don’t question your paranoia level even though there are fire departments just about everywhere. So I thought about just carrying a fire extinguisher for self defense too. I figured I could foam at least three people in the face before it emptied, and then it becomes an excellent impact weapon. After discovering that finding a concealed holster was near impossible, I gave up.

2. I don’t know when I might need it.

While crime rates continue to fall over the long haul, there’s still plenty of evil behavior to go around. Read any paper and you’ll see that crimes happen all over, not just in “high risk” places. Speaking of high risk places, if I ever thought I was going somewhere I might need to use my gun, you can be darn tootin’ sure I wouldn’t be going there in the first place.

3. Because 186,873.

According to USA Carry, that’s the number of warrants outstanding for felons across the US. They walk among us.

4. An Abrams tank gets horrible gas mileage.

Before you write off this idea, think of the benefits. Although a tank has great offensive weaponry, you probably wouldn’t ever need it. You’re pretty well protected from just about anything other than rust. Just drive it into your garage and be sure to shut the garage door with your clicker before exiting the hatch. Be sure to lower the main gun barrel first.

Read the rest at Beretta USA!

 

Which Foot Is Legal?

gun free zones

One foot in this photo is in a legal concealed carry zone, while the other is in a gun free zone.

Make sense to you? Me neither.

Useless, pointless, ineffective and ill-conceived legislation gets people killed.

Write your congress leech.

Gun Crime, Pabst Blue Ribbon and Mikey on the Hamster Wheel

New York Safe ActGun Crime makes me sick.

But just the “crime” part, not the “gun” part.

If I hear someone say “gun crime” or “gun deaths” one more time, I’m gonna start puking up bearded Llama puppies. (Tweet This) Do you call the little ones puppies? I’m not sure, but I’ll be ejecting them from my mouth none-the-less.

The whole “about to vomit” thing comes from the fact that I can’t get my laparoscopic adjustable gastric band around the fact that…

People believe that if you remove the “gun” part, the crimes won’t happen. Poof! They disappear! Kind of like Benghazi witnesses. (Tweet This)

To me, that’s like believing you can wave a magic scepter to vanquish all of the Pabst Blue Ribbon DUI’s. Do you think this would reduce the number of drunks on the road? Seriously? At best, it would simply improve the “quality” of drunkenness. More people would be drinking beer of better repute once PBR has been removed from the supply chain.

If you were paying attention to the PBR analogy, you probably figured out what happens when Pabst becomes extinct. People drink other types of beer. Like National Bohemian. Some might even switch to hard cider if they’re feeling really rambunctious.

Of course you could ban all the cheap beers, and cider too. But folks would simply start drinking the hard stuff.

Heck, some people might even drop those little umbrellas in their cocktails – and that would be tragic indeed.

Do you see where this is going? It’s an endless game of trying to remove objects associated with bad behavior, while blissfuly ignoring the fact that behavior is, well, a behavioral problem. You can ban one object, only to have the problem continue with different objects. It reminds me of a dog chasing it’s tail. Or Harry Reid continuing to insist that people love Obamacare.

I like to picture a miniature Michael Bloomberg (yeah, I know, he’s kind a Napoleonic mini-tyrant anyway) running in one of those hamster wheels. He runs, and runs, but never accomplishes anything. Run Mikey, run!

And therein lies the problem.

Drunk driving is a behavioral problem. Removing one type of drunk juice from the equation solves nothing. Heck, we tried to remove all the drunk juice from the equation and that was a miserable failure. Can you say Prohibition? The behavior never went away.

Crime is also a behavioral problem. Removing guns, or placing restrictions on them does not remove evil intent from the hearts of darkness.(Tweet This)

You can ban all the guns you want, but nothing positive has ever been accomplished by that. Australia did it. Crime went up. The UK did it. Crime went up.

I think the primary argument of the gun ban crowd is based on this flawed assumption. If you remove guns, then any crimes previously associated with guns will simply not happen.

This flawed assumption smacked me upside the head with a recent discussion with Phil the Australian. Phil seems to be a really nice guy, and I enjoyed a very polite and civil discussion with him online. I’d like to meet him over a good Australian beer. I hear they don’t really like Fosters over there — apparently it’s for tourists or something — so if we ever meet in person, I’ll trust him completely on his selection of beverage.

The basic gist of my part of the discussion was this.

Let’s suppose we live in Obama-Topia, a place with 100 murders per year, and 70 of those murders involve guns and 30 some other murderous weapon. Now, we get smart, and use our disappearing gun ray to remove all the guns. Yet, we still have 100 murders a year, but none of them involve guns. Yay! Zero gun deaths! But the people who have been “death-ed” by some means other than guns really don’t feel much better, do they?

My point is, both Australia and the UK have had either unchanged, or in the case of the UK, INCREASING murder rates since their major gun control initiatives. Guns or no guns. In fact, in the UK, the “gun related” murder rate has actually gone up since their gun ban. And of course their overall murder rate has gone UP since their gun ban. Australia’s has stayed relatively flat before, during and after.

By the way, things like assault and forcible rape are 2 to 4 times more likely in the UK and Australia, respectively, as the US. Just sayin’ you know.(Tweet This)

Another side note, gun ownership in Australia is essentially back to where it was before the 96/97 buyback, yet the murder rate really hasn’t changed as a percentage. Huh? If you’re going to make major changes, you would expect the crime rates to change as a result, no?

So, if crime, murder, rape, assault, armed robbery et al. do not change regardless of the tools used, who cares?

I want CRIME down. Not gun crime. Or electric stapler crime. Or Silly Putty crime.(Tweet This)

The only thing that’s relevant is the overall crime rate.

If I’m to be murdered, I certainly won’t consider it a moral victory if I’m murdered with something other than a gun. If I’m the murderee, then a gun control policy that ensures I was murdered with something other than a gun really doesn’t help me.

The flaw in the gun ban argument is that if you remove the guns (or knives, or electric staplers) then those types of crimes go away. They don’t.

That. Has. Never. Happened. Ever.

Because you can’t solve a behavioral problem without addressing the, ummm, behavior.

Grab a copy of my free eBook, A Fistful of Shooting Tips. It will help make you a better shooter and the envy of your range in no time.

The Seven Deadly Sins of Concealed Carry: Not Carrying

Piece be with you! But if it's at home, and not with you, it won't do you a whole lot of good.

Piece be with you! But if it’s at home, and not with you, it won’t do you a whole lot of good.

The fourth deadly sin of concealed carry is… not. Not carrying, that is.

Crazy has roamed the earth for about 65 million years – several decades before Joan Rivers’ first plastic surgery. Consider that we live in a world where  people proudly claim they are “Beliebers“, faux celebrities name their cute babies North West and despotic Korean dictators have family members executed for missing a Black Friday Blu-Ray player sale. The scary part is that the current level of human crazy barely makes the nightly news.

So forgive me if I disagree when people tell me they aren’t carrying for reasons like this:

  • “I’m just running to the store.”
  • “I’ll only be out for a few minutes.”
  • “I won’t need my gun.”
  • “I won’t be in any bad areas.”

It’s an insanity-filled world out there and there is no such thing as a perfectly safe public outing. If you were really able to predict when and where you might be a victim of violent crime, why on earth would you ever be there in the first place, armed or not?

While the cause of spontaneous and violent crazy might be bath salt dessert parties, crystal meth fueled enthusiasm or just plain evil intent, you never know what’s going to happen out there. A quick look at news stories will tell you exactly why you must carry all the time if you carry at all.

The big news is frequency. According to the FBI, a violent crime of some type occurs in the United States every 26 seconds. A murder occurs every 35.4 minutes; a forcible rape every 6.2 minutes and a robbery every 1.5 minutes.

Zombies? Yeah, they’re the rage on TV and shooting accessory products, but I’m talking about the real kind. A Miami man permanently maimed another with just his teeth before being killed by a responding officer. A Texas man attacked friends and neighbors before eating the family dog. Admittedly, the odds of becoming the victim of a zombie attack are similar to Honey Bo Boo editing the Harvard Law Review. But it’s a classic example of the need to expect the unexpected.

Read the rest at OutdoorHub!

Be sure to check out our latest book, The Rookie’s Guide to Guns and Shooting, Handgun Edition. It’s available in print and Kindle format at Amazon:

The Rookie's Guide to Guns and Shooting, Handgun Edition

The Rookie’s Guide to Guns and Shooting, Handgun Edition

5 Reasons Concealed Carry Laws Are Ridiculous

I’ve started another new venture and am writing regular columns for Bearing Arms. It’s a great source of news, opinions, and how-to info for all things shooting and Second Amendment related. You can find them on Facebook also. Here’s this weeks rant…

Gun free zones

Every day there’s something in the news about someone or other campaigning to restrict concealed carry.

For example, the newly-formed group MDASININE (Moms Demand Action Supporting Irrelevant Nonsensical Insane Nanny-like Edicts) is frequently on the warpath to shame businesses, who want nothing more than to just sell stuff, into the gun debate.

And they’re not the only ones. Federal and state officials – you may know them as bamboozlers in training – are constantly dreaming up new restrictions, laws and public proclamations. All these rules are just as ‘guaranteed’ to make us safer as the rock-solid ‘guarantees’ that health insurance will be cheaper and we can keep our own doctors.

Restrictions vary by geography. If you have a fast enough computer, you can calculate the number of restrictions by multiplying the number of politicians by the number of media microphones within a radius of 97 miles. Some examples of “no carry” restrictions include…

Restaurants. Churches. Public bathrooms. Sporting events. New York City. Political conventions (think about the number of criminals per square foot there!) Medical facilities (even though doctors kill far more innocent people than guns.) Post offices. Buffalo Wild Wings. Staples – or maybe not Staples. Schools. Movie theaters. The St. Louis Mass Transit System that delivered most people to the NRA Annual Meeting. 7-11 stores? Canada. Military bases. My house. Ha! Just kidding with ya.

I can’t for the life of me understand the logic behind restricting concealed carry to reduce crime. To believe that, you also have to believe that those who carry concealed are the root cause of crime. There’s no other way around the logic.

Not surprisingly, the concealed carry community has been proven over and over again to be the safest measurable population group around. More so than priests, active duty police officers, Hollywood intelligentsia, politicians and Amanda Bynes. The crime rate of Mayors Against Illegal Guns membership (sorry, I meant Mayors Against Legal Governing) is orders of magnitude more than that of concealed carry citizens. I can’t prove this, but I hear you have to provide photographic evidence of extortion, fraud or preschool fight club gambling to become initiated into the exclusive MAIG crime syndicate.

A number of states have compiled data on the lawfulness of concealed carry holsters. For example, in Texas, the average citizen is 7.7 times more likely to commit a violent crime than a concealed carry holder, and 18 times more likely to commit a non-violent crime than a concealed permit holder.

Read the rest at Bearing Arms!

 

Be sure to check out our latest book, The Rookie’s Guide to Guns and Shooting, Handgun Edition. It’s available in print and Kindle format at Amazon:

The Rookie's Guide to Guns and Shooting, Handgun Edition

The Rookie’s Guide to Guns and Shooting, Handgun Edition

President’s Gun Control Order Will Reduce Street Crime

New Gun Control Executive Orders to eliminate corporate jackings. Photo: FoxNews.com

New Gun Control Executive Orders to eliminate corporate jackings. Photo: FoxNews.com

The shooting community was stunned by two Executive Orders from the Obama administration earlier this week.

One of the proclamations effectively closes a secret loophole commonly used by street thugs, gang members, and the Reverend Al Sharpton. Under current law, legally formed corporations and trust officers are able to purchase restricted firearms such as short-barreled shotguns, automatic rifles and sound suppressors. The new Executive Order mandates finger prints, background checks and local law enforcement approval of officers and trustees before these legal entities can apply for special permits from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives. Although the process is cumbersome, federally controlled and takes 6 to 12 months to complete, administration officials are convinced that low lifes and gang bangers are taking advantage.

“Fo shizzle!” whined one Crips member who declined to be identified. “I was planning a couple of jackings for sometime next spring or summer. I figured I would need to be strapped for that,  so I had my mouthpiece at the law firm of Rutherford, Collingsworth and Davenport drawing me up a Subchapter S Corporation. You need that to begin the application process for restricted firearms ya know. Obviously the benefits of limited financial liability of the partners and flexibility of taxable income distribution will benefit my fellow bangers too. Besides, the Bloods all use Limited Liability Corporations, so we didn’t want to go that route.”

Most gang members we spoke to were still in a state of shock, wondering how they were going to acquire restricted weapons now that the corporate and trust loophole is being closed. Many top 100 law firms are already planning for losses in billable revenue. “Losing thug life business is really going to hurt” moaned Commerce Winthorpe, Esquire, founding partner of the prestigious firm Winthorpe, Winthorpe and Fiddy Cent PeaceOut!, LLC. “We’re definitely going to have to cut back on complimentary mint juleps on Friday afternoons.”

Administration officials expect the measure to eliminate virtually all crime resulting from the loophole. “Today’s street thugs have gotten pretty sophisticated” explained an anonymous official. “They’ll plan a mugging 6-12 months in advance to allow time for setting up a corporation, completing the BATFE application, and waiting for agency approval to get a suppressed double deuce. The days of spontaneous jackings are long gone.”

While insiders won’t comment, many expect the next Executive Order will close the notorious non-profit museum loophole, believed to be the root cause of cannon, flintlock and gatling gun crime.

It’s Time To Stop ‘Thinking’ About Gun Control

Gun Control in the mainstream mediaIt’s time to stop thinking. About what might happen with or without new gun control measures.

The 24 hours news digital sphincter spasm continues to slather us all with lots and lots of thoughtless thinking and careless conjecture. Think what might happen if… I think… Most Americans think… I think I’ll have another beer… What is the NRA thinking… The United Nations thinks… I think Dancing with the Stars is on tonight… Most of our representatives in Washington think… No wait, I think we ought to scratch that last one. Most of our representatives do not think much past the next “So You Think You Can Smile!” audition.

Why are we still thinking about things?

I think there’s no place for guns in schools!

  • We know that Utah allows guns in schools.
  • We know that Utah is still waiting on its first mass school shooting.
  • We know that over 200 colleges and universities already allow lawful concealed carry on campus.
  • We know that none of those institutions have suffered catastrophic attacks like the ones in Newtown, Columbine, or Virginia Tech.
  • We know that all mass shooting incidents in the past 50 years, except one, have happened in areas where guns are not allowed.

I think it’s a bad idea to arm teachers!

  • We know we don’t want to force all teachers to be armed. We simply want those who choose to defend themselves and their students not to lose that fundamental right when they enter school property.
  • We know that Israel has had some percentage of armed teachers since 1974.
  • We know that most Israeli schools have armed security.
  • We know that is has kept their students safer in perhaps one of the most dangerous neighborhoods on planet earth.
  • We know that attacks on Israeli schools have been attempted by trained terrorists, not cowards that almost always end their own life as soon as they are challenged.
  • We know that challenging these cowards immediately almost always stops them immediately.

I think we shouldn’t have to live in a world where people have to have guns.

  • We know that we do in fact live in a world like that.
  • We know that there are sick and evil people out there.
  • We know because we hear about them on the news every single day.
  • We know they continue to do evil things regardless of laws.
  • We know that the very definition of “criminal” is one who breaks laws.
  • We know that burying our heads in the sand and hoping things will be better because they should be will not save one single life.

I think that some sort of gun ban is a good idea.

  • We know the last one didn’t lower crime at all.
  • We know that crime didn’t increase when it expired.
  • We know that there is not one example of gun control policy lowering violent crime.
  • We know that the most recent countries to implement drastic gun control have suffered serious increases in violent crime.
  • We know that women are 2 times more likely to be raped in the UK than in the US.
  • We know that women in Australia are 3 times more likely to be raped than women in the US.
  • We know that total murders in the UK have increased since the gun ban took effect in January 1997.
  • We know that in only 1 year have there been fewer murders in the UK after the handgun ban than before the handgun ban.
  • We know that the UK has a violent crime rate 3.5 times greater than that of the US.
  • We know that folks in the UK are having serious discussion about banning kitchen knives because the guns bans have not reduced crime.
  • We know that banning kitchen knives will make English food even worse.
  • We know that one definition of insanity is trying the same thing over and over again, but hoping for a different result.

I think magazines ought to be limited to 5 rounds.

  • We know that law enforcement officers, military personnel, and citizen survivors of gunfights have found that hyped-up bad guys don’t necessarily feel compelled to stop doing what they’re doing after 5 shots have been fired towards them.
  • We know bad guys doing bad things don’t travel alone.
  • We know more and more bad guys are wearing body armor to protect themselves against unarmed or lightly armed victims.
  • I know that if my home is invaded in the middle of the night that I will want a 2,530,371 round magazine handy. And a couple of spares.
  • We know that our soldiers have complained that actual Assault Rifles don’t have enough power to reliably stop enemy combatants.
  • We know that limiting magazines to some arbitrary capacity based on perceived need is about the stupidest suggestion ever.

I think we need to address gun violence!

  • We know we need to address violence. Not gun violence. Violence.
  • We know we are not somehow better off or morally superior if we are killed with a knife, bat, or fist as compared to a gun.
  • We know we are equally dead no matter what the cause.
  • We know that the term “gun violence” is a deliberate attempt to misrepresent and mislead from the very real, and hard to solve, issues of societal evil.
  • We know that violence is a difficult thing to solve so people tend to want to take shortcuts in order to consider things “fixed.”

I think you’re crazy if you think more guns is the answer to violence!

  • We know that record numbers of Americans are buying guns for protection.
  • We know that there are almost 300 million guns in the United States.
  • We know that violent crime, measured by the FBI as incidents per 100,000 people, has fallen 50% in the past 20 years.
  • We know that murder, measured by the FBI as incidents per 100,000 people, has fallen 54% over the past 20 years.
  • We know that these massive and steady decreases in crime have happened while more and more Americans are buying guns.
  • We know that simply blaming guns is deliberate shirking from the harder problem of addressing the real causes of crime.

I don’t think anyone needs a high-powered Assault Weapon!

  • We know that there is no such thing as an assault weapon.
  • We know that if you ask an “assault weapon ban” proponent what an “assault weapon” is, that they will not be able to tell you.
  • We know, again according to the FBI, that many times more murders are committed with simple beatings than rifles of any kind.
  • We know that banning mythical “assault weapons” will not stop murders by beating.
  • We know that banning mythical “assault weapons” will not save lives. The largest mass murders ever had nothing to do with mythical “assault weapons.” People do bad things with or without mythical “assault weapons.”

I think armed citizens are going to act like vigilantes and cause even more harm!

  • We know that lawfully armed citizens are among the most law-abiding groups of people measurable.
  • We know that the crime rate for concealed carry permit holders is 14 times less than that of the general population.
  • We know that lawfully armed citizens are 5 times less likely to commit a violent crime than the average citizen.

I think I have an irrational fear of guns and want a simple and immediate fix to the problems of violence.

  • We know. We want to continue to reduce violence also.
  • We know there is no simple fix.
  • We know that we don’t fear guns. They’re just tools that protect someone from crime and/or violence between 1 and 2.5 million times per year – just in the US.
  • We know that we kind of like the direction of the crime trend over the past 20 years and want to continue that. We just want to be smart about how we do it.

It’s time to stop thinking about what might happen.

It’s time to know what does happen. 

P.S. I know I’m going to vomit if I hear one more talking head tell me what they think without considering what we already know.

Legal Disclosures about articles on My Gun Culture