Minimum Age to Carry

Dusting came up with a handy map.  New Hampshire and Alaska are is 16?  I didn’t know that.  Gang ridden crime havens those two states are.  I also didn’t know MD and DE were 18, even though you can’t get a license to carry in Maryland. But Delaware does issue CCDW permits, but since it’s may-issue I don’t know if they’d actually issue to an 18 year old.

The Heller Pessimism is Back

With the Supreme Court ready to hear the next case in what’s going to be a long stream of Second Amendment litigation, the pessimists are coming back again.  Both here in my comments and at SayUncle. I can’t say I really understand it, and still stand by Heller being a significant victory.

One of the things I’ve noticed about gun owners is that there’s a certain characteristic about many that make them revel in victim hood. To some degree, I can understand this, because for a large part of the last century, we spent it on the defensive, and there have been a lot of cultural changes in the country that many gun owners haven’t been happy with. But I don’t think that’s a reason for continuing pessimism and victim hood.

Are we going to get machine guns down at the corner hardware store for all? Probably not without a titanic shift in public opinion on the matter. But we can probably get a pretty broad Second Amendment right. There is no constitutional right that is absolute. Not having any restrictions at all on guns was never in the realm of possibility. But if you had told me at the beginning of this decade that the Supreme Court, out of the gate, would throw out a safe storage law, and that DC’s handgun ban would be history, I would have said you were nuts. If you had told me Chicago’s handgun ban would be in serious jeopardy by the end of the decade, I would have said you were a wild eyed, cheery optimist. But that is now the reality we live in.

It would have been nice if the Supreme Court had just ruled “It’s an individual right suckas, and for the states too! Machine guns for everyone!” but that wasn’t even going to happen. What did happen was pretty good, and better than I would have imagined was possible. It’s time for gun owners to stop wallowing in the victim hood mentality. It accomplishes nothing except disabling us from pursuing further victory. You’re declaring defeat before we’ve even begun this stage in the fight. Heller offers us a lot we can use to expand Second Amendment rights. Far more than it offers the other side. That the other side would grasp on to the few morsels that were left in there for them is understandable and predictable. But we won that day. They didn’t. They know that too, but can’t admit that much in public. I think we will win the day again. We’re not victims anymore. We’re winning our rights back.

Like You and Me, Only Better

Or maybe not. Even city council members can become victims of the City’s bureaucracy. Seems back in 2005 City Council member Rick Mariano went up to the city hall tower and started acting oddly. It would seem he was upset about a pending federal indictment. Family decided it would be best if the Philadelphia Police took his guns, including the 9mm he apparently liked to wear on his ankle.  Only problem is, they sort of accidentally melted his guns down:

“It’s obvious this wasn’t supposed to happen,” said Lt. Frank Vanore, a police spokesman. “It looks to be just an error.”

Vanore said he was not aware of anyone’s being disciplined because of the error.

Mariano’s recourse? Vanore said the department told the family it could file a claim with the city and would be reimbursed for the destroyed guns, which included a Romanian AK-47 rifle. Vanore had no estimate of their value.

But it is LYMOB, because if that had been anyone else, they would have told them “Sucks to be you.” and made you sue them. I’ve heard of more than a few cases of people unable to get guns back from the city when the city had no lawful authority to hold them, and having to file lawsuits. And these are people who are found to have broken no law. Mariano is a prohibited person now.

Rotating Carry Ammo

Justin throws a post into the ring on the hand load carry round question, and talks about rotating ammo:

Here’s where I air my dirty laundry: I’m a dunderhead when it comes to picking carry ammo. It’s just not something that I dwell on. I don’t even rotate it out every 6-12 months. I’ve carried with factory ammo that’s over 4 years old. I buy some, run a few magazines through the gun and if it works, which it always has, I’ll keep it around far longer than any gunny would think proper.

I have tended to rotate my ammo every six months to a year, but mostly just because it seemed like good practice. Ammo does last a long time, on the shelf. But carry ammo is not ammo that’s sitting in a safe or a foot locker, in its factory container, often sealed. You’re carrying it around with you. You sweat, you extrude oils, salts and various proteins, which get on the ammo when you handle it, and are on the dust particles your skin and clothes give off and end up in your gun. Every time you chamber and unload, you’re putting stress on the ammunition components.

Now, I will say, I’ve never had a round misfire or jam in my gun, even when I’ve shot carry ammo I’ve carried for a year, and then had in my foot locker for two more. So I don’t think the folks who said they don’t rotate are risking that much. But there’s another reason I’ve always thought rotating was a good idea.  When you run your 20 or 50 rounds of carry ammo through it gives you a good idea that your gun and magazine will still feed it reliably. A good rule of thumb is that you should run a hundred or so rounds of carry ammo through your gun before relying on it. I will admit that I have not always been good about doing that, but I also carry a common gun and carry common loads, so I’m pretty confident any feeding problems a Glock 19 has with any common carry load are well known. But I still think it’s a good idea to dump a few full magazines every now and then of your carry ammo just to check everything out.

The Ideal Carry Load for 9mm?

Choice choices. Having considered whether to hand load your own carry ammo or not, I decided against it. The hypothetical downsides to hand loading carry ammo are just that, and I think the odds of it becoming a factor are very remote. But we carry firearms to ward off the possibility of an incident which is itself remote, and even though I think it’s terribly unlikely to end up having to explain your load in court, I also think the upsides to using hand loads are too trivial to risk even this remote possibility. As best I can tell, you save money, and if you’re a good reloader, get something that’s about as reliable as factory carry ammo. To me that’s not enough upside.  Plus, I’d have to take time to develop a load I feel confident in.

So now it’s back to factory ammo. Traditionally I have carried Cor-Bon DPX, in 115gr.  But it’s expensive. I decided to give Speer Gold Dot a try, because it’s cheaper. That round is probably carried by more police agencies than anything else, so I can’t imagine it has an awful reputation. But what load is ideal? I carry a 9mm Glock 19, which means I have a choice between 115 gr. GDHP, 124gr GDHP and 147gr GDHP.  Velocities on those are 1210fps, 1220fps, and 985fps, with energies of 374ft/lbs, 410ft/lbs, and 317ft/lbs.  The 124gr load is +P.

Now, if you look at Cor-Bon loadings, their 115gr is their most energetic load, at 466ft/lbs, but it achieves this with a velocity of 1350fps.  Since energy is 1/2mv2 you get a lot more out of speed than mass, energy wise. But it’s regarded that momentum, which is just mass times velocity, has more relation to stopping power than energy, which means a slow, heavy bullet will stop an attacker more readily than a light, fast one. Light, fast bullets also have the disadvantage of penetrating farther. But it takes speed to get a jacketed hollow point bullet to expand reliably, so there are tradeoffs.

I think the 124gr Gold Dot is probably the best offering from Speer. Even though I’ve carried both the 115gr Cor-Bon JHP and 115gr Cor-Bon DPX in the past, I think Speer’s heavier offering is better than their lighter one. I don’t want to seem like I’m religious about loads, because I’m not. Load differences isn’t going to amount to much if your shots are poorly placed. But if I do, heavens forbid, have to use my firearm in self-defense, I’ll need all the help I can get.

What do you think? Please leave a comment.

15,000 Rounds of Ammo Stolen

The Dallas Police Department are hunting one of their own who walked away with more than 15,000 rounds of ammunition. Ouch! In times like this, that really hurts the bottom line – to the tune of nearly $5,000. Only a handful of people had access to the room, and they are reviewing tapes to see if someone took it out a box or two at a time. However, tapes will only take them so far. It appears that the security camera on the locker was recently moved. (Via The Outdoor Pressroom)

Tim Pawlenty Steps up for 2012

According to Jim Geraghty, Minnesota Governor Tim Pawlenty is really stepping up the pace on potential presidential ambitions. He has signed many top GOP consultants and created a new PAC to support other GOP candidates across the country this year and next year. Jim does have a few concerns about Pawlenty’s charisma, and it’s a fair concern given the rhetorical skills of Obama.

All good stuff, of course, but I was reminded of a conversation I had a few months ago with a top strategist for one of the Republican candidates of last year. He liked Pawlenty, but said he couldn’t describe himself as a believer: “Do you see Tim Pawlenty being the guy who gets up on a stage in fall of 2012 and rhetorically wins an argument against Barack Obama? No matter how hard I try, I just can’t see it.”

As he points out, as much as Hillary and the GOP mocked his lofty rhetoric and pointed out the real problems of policies, Obama still won the primary and the election.

During the 2008 election, Gov. Pawlenty came to Pennsylvania as a surrogate on sportsmen’s issues. He warned about Obama’s history on gun rights when he helped kick off the Sportsmen for McCain coalition.

Whether you’re a gun owner or not, Pawlenty would be a huge improvement over the HopeChange we’ve got now.

Quote of the Day

The Brady Campaign reacts in a predictable fashion:

“The Chicago case is unlikely to have much practical impact on most gun laws regardless of how the Court rules.   Even if the Court were to hold the Second Amendment applicable to states and localities, such a ruling is unlikely to change the crucial holding by the Supreme Court in Heller that a wide range of reasonable gun laws are presumptively constitutional, and that the Second Amendment right is narrowly limited to guns in the home for self-defense. Since the Heller decision, the gun lobby and criminals have brought at least 170 challenges to gun laws or to block criminal gun prosecutions. With only a handful of exceptions, those challenges have failed.”

You keep right on reading Heller the way you want to. If all you manage to get is that the government can keep guns out of the hands of criminals, I’m OK with that. The other amusing thing, and you can bet Helmke knows this, it doesn’t matter if desperate defense attorneys with criminal clients and Hail Mary Second Amendment claims fail 100% of the time. All that matters is that we win the right cases. This case the Supreme Court has agreed to take is one of those cases.

The stakes are high. The Brady Campaign is pretending the stakes are low. No reasonable observer can really believe that. By downplaying the significance, it gives you a pretty good idea of what they think their chances are. They are already acting like they lost.

A Stinker of A Study

The Joyce foundation has funded a study showing that you’re stupid if you carry a gun.  You can see the PDF here, but just giving it a cursory look, it has flaws. Let me outline. From the “Methods” section:

Gunshot assault cases caused by powder charge firearms were identified as they oc- curred, from October 15, 2003, to April 16, 2006. The final 6 months of this period were limited to only fatal cases. We excluded self- inflicted, unintentional, and police-related shootings (an officer shooting someone or being shot), and gun injuries of undetermined intent.

Why limit to only fatal cases in the final six months? It’s legitimate to exclude accidental and self-inflicted wounds. But why is it legitimate to exclude police from this? Police carry firearms for self-defense, the same as ordinary citizens. If your premise is that carrying a firearm makes you more likely to be assaulted, it’s not legitimate to exclude police use.

We excluded individuals younger than 21 years because it was not legal for them to possess a firearm in Philadelphia and, as such, the relationship we sought to investigate was functionally different enough to prompt separate study of this age group. We excluded individuals who were not residents of Phila- delphia as they were outside our target pop- ulation and individuals not described as Black or White as they were a very small percentage of shootings (<2%).

It’s legitimate to exclude people under 21 who carry guns, but why is it assumed that anyone over the age of 21 was a legal gun owner? It’s illegal to carry a firearm on the streets of Philadelphia without a License to Carry firearms. Why did the study not exclude people who were carrying firearms illegally? Could it be because you needed people involved in dangerous illegal activity to get the results you wanted? Why exclude people who are not residents of Philadelphia? They are more likely to carry a legal firearm. Why the racial exclusion?

This study is comparing apples and oranges, which is interesting, but not really that useful, and can’t be used to come to the conclusion that an ordinary, law abiding person, who is not involved in the illegal drug trade or involved in gangs, is taking a risk by carrying a gun to defend himself.