Educating Gun Owners

Every once in a while, gun owners actually get a bit social and talk to the other folks on the range. Rarely are they happy with the result of any conversations that turn to politics. Such was the result of several conversations in New Jersey, according to the experience of Cemetery. Unfortunately, Cemetery’s own ‘About Me’ page illustrates the difference between him and the Average Joe gun owner:

A few years later, I’m still here. Constantly learning about my guns, other guns, and doing my best to fend off information overload.

Most folks, not just gun owners, try to fend off information overload, but not because they are compensating for learning so much. Unfortunately, most have a maximum limit for how much they are even willing to learn about guns and the gun issue. It’s great to meet an activist who knows pretty much every anti & pro-gun bill in their state, along with the relevant federal issues. Alas, they are rare because most gun owners have no interest in learning that much. Sure, they’ll bitch after a bad bill becomes law, but they have little interest in becoming informed.

Anyone who has ever talked to me about my activist recruitment days knows that I had my share of days pulling my hair out with these folks. But when you start to feel that way, it’s important to remember that these folks are just being normal. We probably have more activists in the gun issue than most other political issues, and that’s something you have to keep in mind when you get frustrated. Activists are special because they aren’t normal. By default, it means they will be harder to find.  If you spend enough time trying to find and cultivate them, your standards run the risk of sinking to defining an activist as anything with a pulse who has a basic understanding of major political issues.  It can be pretty sad sometimes. :)

Another risk for activists who spend enough time talking to other gun owners is frustration that stems from two distinct types of “head-in-the-sand” gun owners.  The first is the type of gun owner who simply feels comfortable with his head buried.  There’s a comfort in just not knowing.  If they don’t know, they don’t have to worry.  The others are similar to the guy who left the comment Cemetery profiled:

If you can’t defend your yourself, your property, and your family with a double barrel 12, there’s something wrong with you. If someone breaks into my house, they’re getting a face full of 00 buckshot. In fact, I would prefer a shotgun to a sissy little 9mm. So, until they start coming after my rifles and shotguns, I really don’t give a crap.

This person belongs into another camp.  Instead of having their head in sand because it’s just more comfortable that way, I wouldn’t even classify them as gun owners.  They will not only turn in their own guns, they will tell the authorities about their buddies who own guns.  There really is no educating these guys because they don’t care about owning guns or any serious threats to the right.

Unfortunately, it’s not easy to pick the gun owners receptive to your messages out of a crowd.  It means that you will run into these two types regularly, and in a state like Jersey where there are few activists to balance it out, it can be overwhelming.  In New Jersey, the gun owning population has reached such a low level, and finding the signs of life in the grassroots can seem nearly impossible.  That’s why I believe that New Jersey gun owners have an obligation to try and rebuild some of the gun traditions.  Education and outreach needs to be an absolute priority.  The upside to having oppressive laws is that those you recruit now are likely to be appalled and might be better sources for future activists.

Really, the only solution is to keep trying, and figure out when to cut a contact loose.  If you find they are outright hostile, just walk away.  If they just like keeping their heads in the sand, only fish around long enough to figure out if there is an issue that might get them to at least look up.  If not, cut them loose.

The Bill Corzine is Pushing

Here’s a copy of the New Jersey Microstamping bill.  It’s bad.  Really bad.  There’s a big distributor over in New Jersey, Sarco, that will be put out of business by this bill, as it makes it unlawful to bring any non-microstamped firearm into the state with the intent of selling it or transferring it, even if it would be to an FFL out of state.  Here some other stupidity at work:

  • Revolvers?  Need to have those microstamped. Can’t have criminals carrying around non-stamped casings in their wheel guns, you know.
  • No exemption for air guns, meaning air guns will have to be imprinted with the required microstamp, or will be illegal to sell or transfer in New Jersey after the date of this act.
  • There is no exemption for police.  This will apply to police departments too, since they procure either from dealers or distributors.
  • If you work for someone who is a “manufacturer, wholesale dealer of firearms, retail dealer of firearms” you will be guilty of a felony for transporting an air pistol into the state if it does not have the requisite microstamping on it.
  • It does not demand that the imprint be on the primer, but rather on the case.  Again, this applies to air guns too.

This law is beyond stupid.  But much like the one-gun-a-month law, which the legislators were told was badly written, and apparently did not care, I would not be surprised for this to pass.

UPDATE: Just noticed there’s no exception for antique firearms either, so muzzle loaders will need to be microstamped to imprint on the non-existent casing.

The Punching Bag Comes Back Out

Governor Corzine seems to be bringing the old punching bag back out.  Governor Corzine’s punching bag being, of course, law abiding gun owners.  Get this quote here:

Corzine called for the mandatory microstamping of new semi-autmoatic handguns, an emerging technology in which lasers inscribe numbers on firing pins. That means spent casings show a serial number that law enforcement can trace.

This bill has been languishing in committee since March.  I would expect Corzine’s puppets in the legislature to start it moving now.

A Divided House: The Case Against Federal Intervention, Part II

Reading Sebastian’s introduction to his position on the case of federal intervention on concealed carry, it reminds me why my position isn’t strictly against the concealed carry reciprocity, it’s best described as being torn. From the legal standpoint, I don’t disagree. I am not naive enough to believe that the feds aren’t already involved in gun laws. I realize that they are, and I realize there are problematic gun laws at every level. I also don’t disagree with the power of Congress to address the issue from a legal standpoint. My hesitation is based on the political and practical concerns

However, concealed carry has historically been an issue where we’ve kept the battles in the states and been largely successful. Think about it, we only have two holdout states with no concealed carry and a handful with may issue, and an even smaller number that abuse the discretionary powers. The status quo is pretty good considering most of it happened in my lifetime and was largely established by the time I became an activist in the movement in college. It’s not like we’re losing on that front.

I am also sympathetic to the argument that a cure for gun laws as restrictive as New Jersey’s may only be found through Congress rather than the courts. We have more sway with Congress and the courts are more likely to examine only individual gun laws rather than the state’s framework as a whole. However, by keeping these issues on the state level as much as possible, we still have choices. Sebastian himself has noted that every time New Jersey creates a gun rights activist, they want to leave. If we create open a door for increased federal regulation of carry, then we no longer have that option.

Another concern I have is that increasing federal power on the issue of concealed carry may actually cost us the opportunity to advance in the states. Consider that even with our remaining holdout states, we’re making progress. Concealed carry has actually passed in Wisconsin, we’re just waiting to get the Governor out of office or get a legislature with members who will listen to their constituents instead of party leaders who want to help the Governor save face in a veto fight. In Illinois, there is slow progress toward getting enough votes together for some kind of carry option. If the Bryan Millers of the world walk into those state houses and lean on neutral or only slightly-pro-gun legislators with the fact that they are opening their borders to any Vermont nutcase who just hasn’t been caught yet (aka another version of Cho who could buy guns even though he was nuts because the state didn’t have their records together), we’re likely to lose a few precious votes.

So even if we don’t make things worse for the vast majority of gun owners who live in friendly states with relatively few carry restrictions, how do we defend the vote to a Wisconsin gun owner who will face years of no more carry rights in his own hometown because we wanted to cross the river to Jersey for a beer without stopping to drop off guns at home?

There are political costs with every move, and I think the greatest debate on this issue is what costs are acceptable given the likely reaction of other lawmakers. A three-branch approach is needed to fix gun laws and continue advancing the cause, but perhaps the legislative fight is best kept to the state level when it comes to issues like carry. At least for now…

The 6.8SPC Experience

A reader asked me to relay my experience with the 6.8 Special Purpose Cartridge, since I shot the high-power match at my club with the 6.8 upper.  I bought the upper a few years ago at the Gun Blogger Rendezvous, because Uncle had brought it out on behalf of Ko-Tonics (who are no longer in business).

I shot a high-power match this weekend with it, since I had plenty of 6.8x43mm loaded up, and didn’t feel like loading up any 5.56.  We had a Garand match first.  Shot decently with that, with a 250 out of 300.  Shot awful with the 6.8 AR, but that was my fault, not the gun or the cartridge.  My impressions of 6.8:

  • The recoil is heavier than 5.56x45mm, but it’s not nearly as much as a 7.62x51mm.  On the loads I use, it only has about two more grains of powder than the 5.56 loads I make with the same powder.
  • Shooting a match out to 200 yards, like we do at my club, there’s no perceptible difference between 5.56x45mm and 6.8x43mm.  I think you’re probably at a disadvantage because of the heavier recoil of the 6.8x43mm.
  • Shooting out to 400 yards, I can’t say I have much experience with the 6.8, but when I’ve had the opportunity to do it, the 6.8 seems to hit more reliably at that distance than 5.56x45mm.
  • Past that distance, you’re really beyond what an intermediate cartridge is meant for without using specialized bullets and loads.  High-power shooters that shoot a full 600 yard match use special loads and bullets that are too long to even be loaded into a magazine properly, which is fine for slow-fire stages.
  • The 6.8 SPC round would be effective at hunting medium sized game, if that’s what you’re interested in.  The bullet you use is identical to the .270 Winchester, although it’s not as powerful a round as would be used in deer hunting, but at distances you’d typically take a deer from, it would be effective.

I think 6.8SPC would make a good round for replacement of the 5.56×45, if the military ever decides to go the route of a larger caliber intermediate cartridge.  I’m more skeptical of its utility in high-power competition, because I’m not sure what advantage it offers over 5.56.  Keep in mind that my club only goes out to 200 yards, so others who might have more experience with longer range shooting might have a different impression.  I can’t speak to it’s performance vs. 5.56x45mm out past that distance, because I just don’t have much experience with it.

If you’re interesting in getting yourself a 6.8 SPC upper, or making yourself a complete 6.8 AR, Bison armory is a good supplier.