How Silly Can You Get?: To the little boy's mother, it was just a 6-year-old boy playing around. But when Mason Jammer, a kindergarten student at Jefferson Elementary in Ionia [MI], curled his fist into the shape of a gun Wednesday and pointed it at another student, school officials said it was no laughing matter. They suspended Mason until Friday, saying the behavior made other students uncomfortable, said Erin Jammer, Mason's mother. School officials allege Mason had displayed this kind of behavior for several months, despite numerous warnings. "I do think it's too harsh for a six-year-old," said Jammer, who was previously warned that if Mason continued the practice he would be suspended. "He's six and he just likes to play." Jammer says her son isn't violent, and there are other, more effective ways of teaching him not to make a gun with his hand. "Maybe what you could do is take his recess away," suggested Jammer, adding her son doesn't have toy guns at home. He's only six and he doesn't understand any of this." (I'd rather see kids learn to use real guns responsibly than to play with toy ones but, I suspect, if he had the chance to do one of the two, it might help solve the problem at school.) http://www.mlive.com/news/grand-rapids/index.ssf/2010/03/ionia_kindergartener_suspended.html --- Bringing a Computer Monitor to a Gunfight: A man who police said tried to attack an older relative with a computer monitor was shot by the older man Tuesday in northeast Oklahoma City. Oscar Jerome Blakely, 30, of 828 NE 69, was taken to OU Medical Center in critical condition after the 5 a.m. shooting, police Master Sgt. Gary Knight said. The name of the man who fired the shot was not released by police. James E. Blakely is the co-owner of the house where the shooting happened, according to the Oklahoma County Assessor's Web site. A man standing outside the house Tuesday afternoon said Oscar Blakely is a grandson of the man who fired the gun. The shooting appears to have been in self-defense, Knight said. When Blakely is released from the hospital he is expected to be jailed on complaints of assault and battery with a dangerous weapon and domestic abuse, Knight said. Blakely was in critical condition late Tuesday, an OU Medical Center spokeswoman said. http://newsok.com/oklahoma-city-police-describe-relatives-shooting-as-self-defense/article/3443485?custom_click=lead_story_title --- Rule Two, Rule Three Reminder: A mishap with a loaded handgun has left a 19-year-old Chandler man dead. Police say Mark Martinez went with a friend to Jose Sandoval's home on Saturday. Martinez asked Sandoval to see his gun and Sandoval agreed. After displaying the gun, Sandoval was putting it back into the holster when the gun fired, hitting Martinez in the chest. Martinez was taken to a local hospital where he died. Police say the 58-year-old Sandoval was arrested on suspicion of negligent homicide. (Rule Two: Don't let the muzzle cross anything you're not prepared to shoot. Rule Three: Keep your finger out of the trigger guard, up on the frame, until your sights are on the target and you're prepared to fire.) http://www.azdailysun.com/news/state-and-regional/article_6ba96eea-6ebe-5832-8f76-9cf979d04891.html --- Is the Glock Inherently Unsafe?: ...The Glock's specific design for clearance in the generously sized chamber promotes feed reliability. The light trigger and soft recoil afforded by the modified Browning action also enables new shooters to quickly master the gun or simply to qualify with it. Glocks are also relatively inexpensive (and may cost less in today's dollars than they did when initially introduced). They are also inexpensive to manufacture... As we will see, the factors that contribute directly to the Glock's success are also the root causes of the Glock detractors' criticisms. Let us succinctly list the alleged dangers of the Glock as posited by critics: 1. Glocks have too light of a trigger. 2. Glocks do not have a manual safety. 3. Glocks do not have a magazine disconnect. 4. Glocks suffer more "kabooms" than other handguns... (The biggest problem with Glock pistols is that they often end up in the hands of NDP's (Non-Dedicated Personnel). It's easy for those who are dedicated pistoleros to point out that most of the issues are violations of The Rules but I have had two associates who have had to train large groups of security officers, many of whom had barely been competent with double-action revolvers, to use .40-caliber Glocks, simply because someone higher up made a decision to "upgrade." This article, which is worth reading in its entirety, minimizes the fact that the "generously sized chamber," which works fine in 9x19mm, predisposes to "kaBooms!" in larger calibers. It also barely mentions the issue of how many people have shot themselves pressing the trigger in the disassembly process. Recognizing that most of them seem to work fine, anyone who wishes to challenge my skepticism about the Glock in .40 caliber should take a look at this thread: http://www.stoppingpower.net/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=11118, which, as I type this, has run from March 18, 2006 to February 7, 2010.) http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=35805 --- S&W Key Locks: The integral key locks on most current Smith & Wesson revolvers have been controversial, with many people fearing that they could engage spontaneously. Reports of this occurring have been infrequent and have usually involved lightweight or ultralight revolvers firing heavy-recoil loads. Recently, a list member furnished me with a very credible account of two such occurrences with the same Model 625-8, an N-frame revolver with a five-inch full-underlug barrel that fires .45 ACP cartridges inserted into "moon clips." This is by no means a lightweight gun and, in both cases, the rounds being fired were Winchester USA "white box" 230 gr. FMJ. This is a standard load for the caliber, with a nominal muzzle velocity of 835 fps. --- Ruger LCR Reviewed: ...The Ruger designers used an eccentric cam system in the fire control mechanism to lighten the overall feel. Like all double-action revolvers, the LCR requires a full trigger reset motion to fully engage all the mechanisms that rotate the cylinder and bring the hammer to full cock. The feature noticed readily by all who shot the LCR test revolver is the surprisingly light recoil. Firing five rounds of 158 grain +P in a brand "S" aluminum framed revolver will make your hand sting, even with the best rubber grips. The slightly lighter Ruger LCR is conspicuously softer in recoil. The soft, Hogue boot grips help dramatically in the recoil reduction equation, especially with an even softer-than normal cushion where the grips hit the web of your firing hand, between the thumb and first finger. The Hogue grips also have a blue-colored inner layer of a different density material where the polymer peg of the LCR's "frame" pushes rearward into the one-piece grip. Ruger and Hogue teamed up to tame the traditionally sharp recoil of a lightweight .38, and they did their job well. The only fly in the heavy-load ointment is a rather sharp inner edge on the trigger guard which can abrade the outside of your trigger finger when the revolver torques around to the right in recoil. The Brand "S" snubbie chews my trigger the same way with heavy loads, but the sharp edge on Ruger's polymer trigger guard can be smoothed out with a little fine grit sandpaper - not pretty, but practical... (I'm not partial to very lightwieght guns but the LCR seem to show promise to those who are. I'd still give it a full year before buying one. I have seen one report of one going back to the factory after the trigger "locked up.") http://www.policeone.com/police-products/firearms/handguns/articles/2010527-Product-Review-Ruger-LCR-Double-Action-Revolver/ --- Balancing Marksmanship with Reality-Based Training: ...This is something Richard Fairburn touched on in his recent column, 21st century deadly force training for police. It's something Gregory Morrison, who wrote the book on the Modern Techniques and now teaches at Ball State, lectures about. Morrison, you may recall, had taught at the Gunsite Academy in Arizona, thus his authoring the book on the Modern Technique for Jeff Cooper. It's something that John Meyer (formerly Vice President of Sales and International Training at HK and currently the President of Team One Network) and I have discussed privately for some time... But even with the very rudimentary scenarios we ran at the time, too many of these amazing "performers" would completely fall apart when forced to actually do battle with and against the same guns with which they had so convincingly acquitted themselves "in class." Even then, this made me think that the "classroom" (range) environment should perhaps be expanded to more regularly include the application of the gun in ways beyond the stressors we were including in 1990... http://www.policeone.com/police-products/firearms/articles/2009465-Five-ways-to-blend-marksmanship-and-reality-based-training/ --- From Force Science Research Center: "Excessive" shots and falling assailants: A fresh look at OIS subtleties A new look at why officers often fire controversial "extra" shots after a threat has ended has been published by an independent shooting reconstructionist and certified Force Science analyst. Researcher Alexander Jason reports that even under benign experimental conditions brain programming compels roughly 7 out of 10 officers to keep discharging rounds after being signaled to stop shooting. "In a real gunfight, under extraordinary stress and threat of death, an even much higher percentage would likely deliver extra shots," Jason asserts. On average, additional findings show, officers may "reasonably" fire 6 rounds or more into suspects who initially are standing and then begin falling and who, in fact, may already be mortally wounded. And that's 6 rounds per officer involved in the confrontation. "Understanding why this occurs can be critical in shooting investigations and in criminal proceedings and civil lawsuits that allege excessive force by officers for firing 'too many' shots," says Dr. Bill Lewinski, executive director of the Force Science Institute. "As Jason explains, so-called 'extra' shots are generally beyond an officer's control. They're more likely to be an involuntary reaction under stress than a conscious decision with malicious motivation." About 7 years ago, Lewinski performed widely cited experiments in Tempe, AZ, that documented the tendency of officers to "over-shoot," that is to discharge 1 or more additional rounds after perceiving a stop stimulus during rapid-fire discharges. (Click here to read about the study.) Jason's work, conducted in California, essentially confirms some of the Tempe factors and adds important new elements. His full report appears in the current issue of Investigative Sciences Journal, a peer-reviewed professional quarterly, and can be downloaded free of charge in pdf format at www.investigativesciencesjournal.org. Click on the paper, "Shooting Dynamics: Elements of Time & Movement in Shooting Incidents." Background A crime scene analyst specializing in shooting analysis and reconstruction, Jason heads the Anite Group in Pinole, CA, and has been involved in a number of high-profile cases, including New York City's Sean Bell incident in which a prospective bridegroom was killed shortly before his wedding in a fusillade of 50 rounds fired by undercover and plainclothes officers. Jason, formerly with the San Francisco PD, told Force Science News that he has sporadically conducted research tests related to officers and shooting dynamics across a number of years, but decided to compile and publish a summary of results only after graduating last year from a certification course in Force Science Analysis. He included his latest experiment, performed just a few months ago, on how long it takes a human body to fall from a standing position. This is a subject that the Force Science Research Center is also investigating. Time to Stop The core of Jason's paper is his research on how long it takes an officer in rapid-fire mode to stop shooting once he perceives that he should do so. The test subjects were 32 officers (30 of them male), ranging in age from 23 to 56, with the median age 33. They averaged nearly 11 years' service, but ranged in experience from less than a year to more than 2 decades. Using the semiautomatic pistols and leather gear they normally wear on duty, they one at a time faced a "hostile man" target at a distance of 5 ft. Hands at their side, they were told to draw and "start shooting at the buzzer. Shoot as fast as you can," and stop shooting when 2 100-watt spotlights pointed at them flash on. An electronic shot-timer provided the start signal and the "stop" lights came on at random intervals, after a minimum of 4 intended shots. "Most of the officers were unable to immediately stop shooting at the stop signal," Jason reports. Indeed, 69% fired at least 1 "extra" shot, with 17% firing 2 extra and 8% firing 3. Fewer than 1/3 were able to stop fast enough to prevent discharging surplus rounds. Although the shooters "reacted as quickly as they could," Jason writes, most continued to pull the trigger past the stop signal "because the brain-to-trigger finger impulse was still 'in motion.' " In other words, they could not perceive the light signal, transmit that perception to the brain, have the brain interpret it, and send back a "stop" command before the trigger finger was already proceeding with subsequent shots based on the mental program that had been put in action by the start buzzer. Benchmark findings by other researchers, cited by Jason, suggest that as a rule of thumb the brain may need about 3/10 of a second to evaluate an incoming stimulus, and then at least 16/100 of a second minimum to "inhibit (cancel) an anticipated action (like firing the next shot)." Such reaction times, of course, vary among individuals. And if an officer does not instantly see a stop signal because his visual attention is narrowed and intensely concentrated on his sights and/or the target, the delay in responding can be much longer, Jason explains. Extra Shots on the Street Jason writes: "It is important to compare and note the different effects on performance between the conditions facing a shooter in [the] safe and relatively stress-free [experiment] with an urgent, life-threatening and highly stress-inducing situation [of] a real-life shooting incident. "The shooters in the test only had one, clearly defined stimulus to stop firing.... A shooter in a genuine shooting incident will [experience] both a higher level of physiological arousal (stress) and additional choices (Should I take cover? Is the target person no longer a threat? Should I look around for other threats? Are there others who may be exposed to my gunfire?, etc.). "Human performance research has determined that as the number of choice alternatives increases, reaction time (including perception, decision, and action) will increase. The elevated arousal and multiple-alternatives effect will likely cause the shooter to fire additional 'extra' shots--more than [were] measured in this test study." Lewinski found in the Tempe study that the more motivated a shooter was to shoot, the longer it took before he was able to stop shooting. "And an officer firing to save his life is about as 'motivated' as a human being can be," Lewinski says. "Once the human dynamics of ceasing shooting under stress are understood, the less sinister the connotation of 'extra' shots generally will seem." Time to Fall In his most recent study, Jason measured the amount of time required for a person to fall to the ground from a standing position and explored the implications of shots fired by officers at the falling figure, whether those shots are deliberate or involuntary because of reaction time. During a confrontation with a standing armed offender, "the most commonly understood and accepted indication that the [suspect] is no longer a threat is when that person either releases the gun from his hand(s) and/or drops to the ground" from being shot, Jason states. He asked 5 volunteers (4 males, 1 female) to stand "erect with hands out in front, as if holding a gun" and, upon verbal command, to drop to a padded mat "as quickly as possible." This, he concedes, was an imperfect attempt to mimic a rapid collapse ("dropping like a sack of potatoes") such as would occur from "a significant disruption of the central nervous system or sudden loss of consciousness." Genuine collapses from such causes, of course, cannot be tested in an experimental environment. Thirty-five drops were recorded with a digital video camera and later analyzed on a computer. Timing began "at the first detectable motion initiating the movement of the body" toward the ground and ended when the upper torso was on the mat and "horizontal to the ground." On average, the subjects took 1.1 seconds to fall down. During this amount of time, Lewinski's research has shown that "4 shots could be fired by an 'average' police officer," Jason writes. "A crumple fall [going to the knees first, then down] will take more time and could result in several more shots fired during the movement. Additional shots could also be fired until the shooter perceives that the person is no longer a threat and is able to interrupt his shooting sequence." In all, Jason writes, "the total number of [rapid-sequence] shots fired at a person standing then going to the ground could reasonably be a minimum of 6 shots: 1 or more before the [suspect] begins to fall; 4 shots during the fall; 1 or more as the body contacts the floor" during the time required for the brain to recognize and process that the threat has ceased. "In situations with more than one shooter firing, the total number of reasonable shots could be 6 x Number of Shooters; i.e., if 3 officers were firing simultaneously, then 18 shots (6 x 3) would be expected....etc." Depending on a suspect's positioning through the fall, at least some of these shots may end up entering through his back, Jason points out, deepening the illusion that the shooting was an unjustified "execution." In his paper, he includes graphics showing how "posterior entries" can innocently occur under these circumstances. Further Considerations Apart from the reaction-time phenomenon, a falling assailant may invite continued gunfire because a collapse or crumple can be an ambiguous movement. Falling from incapacitating wounds cannot always be "distinguished from a deliberate tactical maneuver of someone who has decided to go to ground to avoid being shot or to assume a less exposed position while returning or preparing to return gunfire," Jason writes. "Even a mortally wounded person can fall to the ground and fire one or more shots before becoming incapacitated and/or unconscious." Moreover, because of the nature of bullet wounds an officer may not know whether his rounds are hitting his assailant--another motivation to keep shooting. Jason explains: "There is no significant momentum or 'push' from a bullet strike. This means that there would be no significant...motion effect of a bullet striking a standing or falling person.... Also...unlike the shootings seen in dramatic films and TV shows, it is most often not possible to visually determine if a shot has actually struck a target person. Bullet entry holes do not project large amounts of blood and the defect in the skin--always smaller than the bullet diameter--may not be visible at all if the shot was fired through clothing, particularly loose or layered clothing." In short, Jason concludes, police shootings can be complex occurrences. For persons untrained in forensics and the science of human behavior to jump to conclusions in judging an officer's actions can lead to grave misinterpretations and injustices. "Jason is to be congratulated on his work," Lewinski says. "More research is starting to be focused on street-level law enforcement issues, and with every effort our understanding of the dynamic interplay between officers and their assailants becomes that much clearer." [Alexander Jason can be contacted at ajason@alexanderjason.com or through his website: www.alexanderjason.com] ================ (c) 2009: Force Science Research Center, www.forcescience.org. Reprints allowed by request. For reprint clearance, please e-mail: info@forcesciencenews.com. FORCE SCIENCE is a registered trademark of The Force Science Research Center, a non-profit organization based at Minnesota State University, Mankato. ================ --- From John Farnam: 1 Mar 10 Lost Flower Children? "Washington Ceasefire," another dreary anti-gun group, has stated publically that allowing guns (open carry) in coffeehouses robs local residents of "societal-sanctuaries." "People go to Starbucks for an escape, so they can get peace, but people walk in with openly-carried guns, and tranquility is destroyed," say them. I wonder if openly-armed police officers, who also frequent Starbucks, "destroy tranquility" in the same way! Apparently, concealed guns are not the issue here. These detached neurotics seemingly have no trouble with guns being present, so long as they don't see them, and can thus serenely pretend they are not there. The real question is: Do coffee-house customers have the right to insist that everyone around them cooperate in the maintenance of their self-manufactured fantasies? Put another way: Is there a Constitutional Right to enforced "Myth-Maintenance?" Heaven forbid anyone would ever get upset! /John 4 Mar 10 Emergency tip from a friend in Chile: "We've all came through the event okay, and we're fine for now. Our only immediate issue is a shortage of cash! The earthquake instantly converted all of Chile to a 'cash-only' society! Checks, and even credit cards, are currently worthless here and of absolutely no use. Some items can be bartered, but, right now, cash is king!" Comment: Something to keep in mind! Most of us, myself included, are way too dependant on credit cards. A reserve of cash is an important component of all emergency plans. I'm fully aware of our inflationary issues in the Country, but, in any emergency, an adequate supply of Greenbacks will come in mighty handy, at least in the short term! /John 5 Mar 10 More on Cash: Friends have pointed out: Items normally used for "investment," because of their potential for growth in value, are usually poor for barter. "Future value" is of little meaning, when no one thinks there is going to be any kind of "future" that anyone is going to recognize! Thus gems, gold, real estate, stocks and bonds, et al may represent great investments, but they make poor barter. Conversely, toilet paper, ammunition, medicine, food, and cash, while currently poor "investments," become extremely valuable for barter when disaster strikes. Of course, paper currency can become worthless script, and has many times in the past. But, in the short term, it is going to be invaluable for Barter, Bribes, and Bail-money, the three "Bs" of disaster planning! /John (Barter is generally defined as trade where one commodity is exchanged for another so I fail to see how paper currency plays a role in it. John clarified to me that the inclusion of bribes was intended primarily in the context of travel abroad; bribery is standard practice in many countries. I have seen Asian immigrants carry suitcases full of cash into a sheriff's station, to bail out relatives; I don't think most of us are in a position to keep sums on the order of $50,000 available in cash. My view? Stockpiling non-perishable commodities for barter is wise. I have seen wide swings in the prices of precious metals in my lifetime so I am shy of making large investments in them. For those who can afford it, small-denomination foreign gold coins are a good way to store a little wealth in small packages. If gold goes to $1,500 an ounce and you need to use a one-ounce bullion coin for necessities, what will you take for change? Pre-1965 US coins are 90% silver, making them good barter items for small exchanges. It's also a good idea to keep enough cash for a few weeks of expenses handy if you can afford it [most merchants now verify credit cards electronically in order to complete a transaction, something they won't be able to do if the internet crashes] but I'm not sure about the wisdom of carrying large amounts of cash abroad. John's comments fail to distinguish between personal checks, which I can see becoming as worthless as credit cards in a disaster, and traveler's checks, which are generally recommended for loss protection. Having spent my youth in Mexico, I can easily see losing large amounts of cash to customs and immigration officials in the mere process of entering or leaving some countries, not to mention risks of robbery, burglary of hotel rooms and encounters with local police.) -- Stephen P. Wenger, KE7QBY Firearm safety - It's a matter for education, not legislation. The tactics and skills to use a firearm in self-defense don't come naturally with the right to keep and bear arms. http://www.spw-duf.info .