Discount for List Members: While it may not provide the highest level of security, for many years I used a "car safe," which consists of a locking box that is secured to the seat rail of a front seat by means of a looped cable, to secure my belt guns while working in hospitals where I could not carry them. In a vehicle, the box is then slid under the seat, out of sight. The system can also be used as an expedient while traveling, such as to secure a handgun to the U-trap of a sink in a hotel room, if one chooses to go swimming. List member Craig Brownell has offered a discount to list members, in the form of a 10% refund to your credit card, if you choose to purchase this item from him. The discount is only applicable to the Portable Pistol Safe and can be obtained by entering "spwenger" under comments, at the latter stage of the transaction. This offer is not intended to discourage anyone from using a more secure system that he may prefer. I have found that it is compatible with front "bucket" seats where access from the front is blocked by an adjustment bar - I merely reach between the seat backs and slide the cable-secured box in or out, under the rear of the front passenger seat. I receive no income from the sale of this product and initiated the discussion with Craig because this is one of the options that I recommend to my CWP students. http://www.shop.mnpistolclass.com/ --- The RKBA and Campaign Contributions: It has been averred that Congressional gun control deliberations often reflect support for gun rights because the "gun lobby" buys more votes. Open Secrets is the internet resource run by the Center for Responsive Politics (CRP), an organization that claims it is "the nation's premier research group tracking money in U.S. politics and its effect on elections and public policy." An article on Open Secrets explain this money-for-gun-votes thesis... http://www.examiner.com/x-2879-Austin-Gun-Rights-Examiner~y2009m9d13-Gun-control-and-campaign-contributions Lawyers and law firms have contributed over $1 Billion to federal election campaigns since 1990, placing it [sic] first in overall federal campaign contributions. In 2008, lawyers contributed over $233 million, with 76% ($178,706,835) going to Democrats... There is anecdotal evidence that pro-gun control voting correlates with lawyer contributions. For example, Congressional voting on the Disaster Recovery Personal Protection Act of 2006- - prohibiting federal officers and employees from confiscating legally-owned firearms during emergencies or disasters - showed that "Yea" voters (supporting prohibition) averaged $35,534 from lawyers during the 2006 election cycle, while the "Nay" voters (supporting future confiscations) averaged $51,665, 45% more... http://www.examiner.com/x-2879-Austin-Gun-Rights-Examiner~y2009m9d13-Gun-control-and-campaign-contributions-Part-2 Each election cycle, the National Rifle Association publishes a list of endorsements, highlighting Congressional candidates who have shown strong support for gun rights in their voting records. A grade of "A+" indicates... Not all candidates received a NRA grade. The NRA usually uses voting records to determine grades and endorsements. For candidates with insufficient legislative experience, a questionnaire was sent out. If the candidate did not respond, they were assigned a "?" grade... http://www.examiner.com/x-2879-Austin-Gun-Rights-Examiner~y2009m9d13-Gun-control-and-campaign-contributions-Part-3 --- FBI Study - A Reminder: ...The study involved a pool of more than 800 incidents from which researchers selected 40, involving 43 offenders (13 of them admitted gangbangers/drug traffickers) and 50 police officers. What researchers found was that handguns were used in the assaults on officers and all but one were obtained illegally. None of the firearms in the study was obtained from gun shows. None of the offenders pick a particular type of gun to use because he/she felt it would do the most damage... (I have shared this information before but it is worth the reminder as gun shows may be the first area where the prohibitionists will resume their legislative attack.) http://www.alphecca.com/?p=1728 --- NRA-ILA Alerts: List members are encouraged to check the alerts for the week, posted on the NRA-ILA website. http://www.nraila.org/GrassrootsAlerts/read.aspx --- Tangentially Related: The capital was rocked today by a taxpayer march and rally that could be the biggest protest ever - potentially dwarfing the Million Man March and the Promise Keepers Rally. Though crowd estimates vary from as low as 60,000 to 70,000 according to ABC News to a high of 2 million by London Daily Mail, photographs and videos of the march and rally demonstrate its enormity... The White House said Friday it was unaware of the rally. President Obama has traveled to Minneapolis, Minn., to promote his health-care plans at a rally there. But so many taxpayers showed up on Pennsylvania Avenue that the crowd ran out of room and the march was forced to begin early... (This article fails to mention the presence of a pro-RKBA contingent.) http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=109628 Time-Lapse Photographs of Crowd Assembling: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_sjvc6baor8 --- From John Farnam: 7 Sept 09 AR magazine-release button. This from a colleague in OK: "During a Carbine Class yesterday evening, a student's right index-finger slipped off the magazine-release button of his AR and landed on the trigger. An AD was the instant result! Luckily, his muzzle was properly directed at the deck to his front, as he had been trained. The total damage was a divot in the concrete three meters in front of him, and, of course, much astonishment and embarrassment. Like you, I've always believed the magazine-release button on the Stoner design is in the wrong place, mostly because of all the inadvertent dropping of magazines we see that result from shooters using the magazine-release button as a trigger-finger index while acquiring the register position. Although this particular species of AD is uncommon, we need to warn our students about it. From now on, I, for one, am going to!" Comment: I've seen this happen more than once! Every weapons system has issues. None are perfect. I wish Gene Stoner had located that magazine-release button somewhere else, but I wish lots of things, and we're probably stuck with it as it is, at least for the rest of the lifetimes of most of us! Urban Rifle students need to be warned about this. If I've been remiss in the past, I intend to correct the omission immediately! The second point to be emphasized is, once again, my admonition against light, "target" triggers on serious rifles! Any good, battle rifle will have a trigger pull-weight between five and eight pounds. Triggers under five pounds are a veritable invitation to an AD and are thus highly not recommended! /John (Back in my days with Defensive Combat Academy, we had a student fire a round into the ground, just ahead of her foot, when she placed her thumb or finger inside the trigger guard of her Ruger Mini-14, to deactivate the safety, and bumped the trigger. I regard the Garand-style safety on the M1, M14 and Mini-14 as a much riskier design than the placement of the magazine release on the Stoner rifles, which is on the same plane, above the trigger, where one normally places the finger in what John calls "register position." My beef with the Stoner magazine release is that it is not amenable to left-hand operation. The original M1 Carbine has a push-button safety about one inch directly behind the magazine release. Due to the risk of inadvertently dropping the magazine while attempting to deactivate the safety in the dark, the M2 Carbine replaced the push button with a rotating lever. This upgrade found its way onto many M1 Carbines after WWII and is worth considering on any M1 Carbine intended for serious use, not yet so equipped and not being kept in collector grade. I don't have a trigger scale but my barely used US GI M1 Rifle seems to have a trigger pull of four pounds.) 7 Sept 09 Courtroom Poker in CO. This from one of our Instructors who is also a well-known criminal-defense attorney: "Just handed down on appeal here in CO: The defendant had claimed self defense and appealed the judgment of conviction entered on a jury verdict that found him guilty of second-degree assault and conspiracy to commit second-degree assault. The judgment was just affirmed on appeal. Two important points: (1) Defendant contended that the Trial Court's jury instructions with regard to what constitutes legitimate self-defense were inadequate and incomplete. The jury should have been informed that the defendant had 'no duty to retreat' under State Law. But, the Appellate Court ruled that the Trial Court was not required to provide that specific information to the jury, sua sponte (without being asked to do so). Therefore, the Trial Court's omission does not constitute reversible error. (2) Defendant also argued that the Trial Court erred in permitting the prosecutor to argue that the defendant's flight in the aftermath of the incident demonstrated 'consciousness-of-guilt.' But, the Appellate Court indicated that such an argument on the part of the prosecutor was not improper and that it is indeed reasonable for the jury to infer that the defendant fled because he had a 'guilty conscience.'" Comment: I know there is a lot of legal mumbo-jumbo that comes out of every court action, but, from the foregoing, we all need to reconfirm. (1) Get a good lawyer! Not everyone with a law degree is someone your want representing your best interests during the fight of your life. This is no place for amateurs and incompetents! (2) When involved in a lethal confrontation, or a potentially lethal one, be the first to call the police! Don't run and hide and hope no one will find you. Get a safe distance away when necessary, but get to a phone fast and meet police at the scene, identifying yourself as "the one who called." Much guilt will be inferred when you spontaneously "flee," as we see! /John (Only a minority of attorneys routinely practice criminal-defense law. Of those, very few have ever defended an innocent client and may not have the specialized knowledge and skills to do so. As with a surgery, shop for someone who has experience in the job you need done.) 11 Sept 09 More sage legal advice, from a well-known trial-lawyer and student: "One is well-advised to quickly and discretely retreat in the face of dangerous threats, assuming retreat can be accomplished in relative safety. There are many practical advantages to extracting oneself from threatening situations. One is that no court has ever sent anyone to prison for retreating! From the standpoint of defending, in criminal court, the actions of my client, putting forth the tedious argument that he was legally entitled to majestically defend his position with gunfire, never giving an inch, is far from my favorite approach. I've been in this business a long time, and I promise you that wearisome, hair-splitting pedants do not successful trial-lawyers make! However, even when some sort of 'retreat' is required by law, but doing so will likely get you killed or seriously injured, then you're just going to have to deal with the situation as best you can, worrying about legal ramifications later. No law, anywhere that I know of, requires one to retreat, when doing so puts him, and/or other innocent parties, in peril. My best advice: (1) Adopt a personal lifestyle that deliberately avoids dangerous places and situations (2) Be alert and aware (3) Exit potentially threatening circumstances early on, when you can (4) Shoot (with precision), when you have no choice (5) Stop shooting when threats are clearly abrogated (6) Stay alert and get to a place of relative safety (7) Call police at your first practical opportunity (8) When police arrive, tell them just enough so that they understand whom you are and what role you played (9) Otherwise, politely insist that your lawyer be personally present before answering questions, and thereafter (10) Exercise your right to remain silent." Comment: In addition, understand that whatever you do, chose not to do, or fail to do, it won't be perfect! Everyone, from media commentators, to investigators, to judges, to lawyers, to plaintiff's experts will wearisomely point out where, and how, you could have done it better. And, to one degree or another, they'll be right! Fortunately, the law doesn't require you to be perfect. The law only requires you to be "reasonable," whatever that means! /John (The best way to win a fight is to avoid it. This is as true of a fight on the street as it is of a fight in a courtroom. While you may need to bring in an outside attorney if you go to trial, sometimes a local attorney, such as a retired judge with a part-time practice, may have the access and command enough respect to convince the prosecutor that the case should not go to trial.) 11 Sept 09 Observations from a noted Urban Rifle Instructor, and friend: "Every rifle and user must be matched, one to one. Each individual's eyes are unique, as is the exact way in which optical information is translated in his brain. A 'shared rifle' will thus never have the same POI for each user, with the result that no single user will ever have confidence in his zero. And, any rifle in which the user has compromised confidence is perfectly useless, except at close range. Don't assume that when you zero your red-dot and then adjust co-witnessed iron sights (BUIS) to coincide, or visa-versa, that the second system will be zeroed and independently operable. Each sight system, optic and BUIS, must be adjusted separately. There is enough light refraction by the optic to slightly alter the observed position of the front sight. Thus, when using co-witnessed BUIS through the optic, the position of the front sight will not be exactly the same as with the optic removed! So, first zero your BUIS with the optic off the rifle. Then, mount the optic, fold down the BUIS, and then zero the red-dot separately. Afterward, don't be surprised when you look through your optic, with BUIS deployed, and notice that the red dot is not sitting exactly atop the front sight post. With any serious rifle, upon which your life might well depend, re-confirm zero every chance you get! Shoot often and with serious purpose. Independently confirm both optic and BUIS. You have to be coldly confident that your rifle is going to put bullets exactly where you need them!" Comment: In Urban Rifle Courses, I ask students at some point to turn off their red-dots and use only BUIS (through the optic). Then, I ask them to take of optic off the rifle (when practicable) and continue to use BUIS. We are often surprised at the shift in POI! It is usually slight, but sometimes significant. These experiences, sometimes rewarding, sometimes frustrating, are a necessary part of training. A well-seasoned Rifleman/Operator knows how to use all sighting systems to his best advantage. /John ("BUIS" is "Back Up Iron Sights." I still carry revolvers and none of my firearms are equipped with any form of red-dot sights. I understand that others may see the need for them. Rumors are that testing is still running favorably with the double-aperture HexSite Sighing System [http://www.goshen-hexsite.com/] on certain military M4's. This system is the best I have ever seen for a buckshot-loaded shotgun, where it is adjusted to demarcate the pattern of the shot at whatever range one is aiming. On combat rifles, as on shotguns, it offers the advantage of requiring no batteries or adjustment of intensity when transitioning from bright sunlight to shadows. It is touted for assault-rifle ranges, not as a substitute for a telescopic sight for long-range sniping.) -- Stephen P. Wenger, KE7QBY Firearm safety - It's a matter for education, not legislation. http://www.spw-duf.info .