The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersiSteve Blog
How Deadly Were Rifles in Baltimore in 2019?
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeThanksLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

Do you remember the distant past when it appeared that there might be grounds for compromise on gun control: urban gun control advocates wanted to reduce the availability of handguns to urban criminals while the National Rifle Association advocated for rifles and shotguns to be available to hunters and target shooters?

But nowadays urban liberals are most worked up over white men with their rifles.

And yet, the statistical logic of the old position remains valid. For example, the police department of Baltimore has just released a preliminary analysis of 2019’s 348 known homicides in Baltimore, which since the moment of the Black Lives Matter riot over Freddie Gray on April 25, 2015 has contended five years in a row for the worst murder problem in America:

The Baltimore cops have only closed 35% of 2019’s homicide cases so far, but they do know the type of weapon used in all of them (with the exception of the currently Missing who will turn up in shallow graves and the like over coming years, which is why annual homicide counts are disconcertingly unstable for analysts: they tend to rise slightly over time).

So, in Baltimore, which has had America’s worst murder problem during the half decade of Black Lives Matter and the End Mass Incarceration campaign among American elites, the demonized long guns accounted for only 2.6% of all homicides, while handguns were responsible for 87.1%.

But because long guns are seen as white guns and handguns as black guns, most of the energy is aimed at banning long guns.

By the way, Baltimore is off to quite a start in 2020:

 
Hide 143 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. Charon says:

    The fact that most gun crime is committed with illegal guns is something that simply cannot be processed by the enemies of the Second Amendment.

    • Replies: @bigdicknick
    , @Anon
  2. pirelli says:

    What’s the evidence that gun control advocates today are less focused on handguns than they used to be? Genuinely curious — I haven’t noticed this.

  3. Dr. X says:

    But because long guns are seen as white guns and handguns as black guns, most of the energy is aimed at banning long guns.

    They want to ban handguns, too, but the Supreme Court specifically stated that the Second Amendment grants the right to own a handgun in D.C. vs. Heller.

    But the main reason they want to ban rifles is because they plan to cram a progressive/socialist/communist agenda down the throats of whites. The mercenary cops on the SWAT teams who are going to enforce it will be driving MRAPs and will be clad in Level IV body armor. They’ll simply laugh as handgun rounds bounce off before they kill you. But if you have a rifle… well, now it’s a two-way fight. Beyond that, most politicians today have tight enough security that nobody can get within handgun range of them. Rifles, on the other hand, can reach out and touch someone.

    Gun control has never been about reducing the urban black homicide rate. It’s always been about protecting the elites and their agenda.

    • Thanks: Bill Jones
    • Replies: @istevefan
    , @Twinkie
    , @Anonymous
  4. midtown says:

    I think you are right about this. Many liberals are surprised to see the pistol/rifle discrepancy. And rifles are more in line with the purpose of the 2nd Amendment: to be a check on governmental power.

  5. anon[324] • Disclaimer says:

    The data is the same as it ever was. Notice that more murders were committed via “blunt force / beating” than “shotgun / rifle”. The FBI used to classify this as “feet and/or fists”.

    For 30 – 40 years of FBI crime reports, “feet / fists” were more likely to be murder methods than rifles / shotguns. Somehow nobody ever proposes banning hands and feet, though.

    “Gun control” isn’t about crime. It’s about disarming the populace. Always has been. The facts show that. Gun-control freaks use facts the way a drunk uses a wall – something to lean on. It’s all emotional, never factual.

    • Replies: @Bill Jones
  6. To be fair, beyond Baltimore and on the national level isn’t it more that anti-gunners believe (aptly) that since far fewer people have long guns (whites *and* blacks have handguns), it’s easier to get rid of them first?

    • Replies: @Jus' Sayin'...
  7. bomag says:

    Can we credit libs with playing the long game here: “first get YT’s long guns while he’s down and getting pummeled by swinging legs; then we can mop up the handgun lobby”?

    I suspect libs see all guns as equally evil; so take out what you can now, and roll the rest up later.

    • Replies: @JMcG
  8. “So, in Baltimore, which has had America’s worst murder problem during the half decade of Black Lives Matter and the End Mass Incarceration campaign among American elites, the demonized long guns accounted for only 2.6% of all homicides, while handguns were responsible for 87.1%.”

    This doesn’t even take into account total shootings, which would likely drop long gun incidents to less than 1%.

    In Chicago in 2019, 461 people were shot and killed, but another 2,293 people were shot and lived. So out of the 2,754 people shot, only 17% actually died. Hey Jackass does not have the type of firearm used, but it’s reasonable to assume the handgun to long gun ratio is similar to Baltimore’s. Similarly, while 312 people were shot and killed in Baltimore, it’s reasonable to assume another 1800 people were shot but lived.

    I’m not sure this info changes any perceptions about what is considered effective gun control, but it pretty well illustrates how much more shooting blacks do then just the murder by firearm rate suggests alone.

  9. Lot says:

    The peaceful people of Mexico turned a 2,165 murders in their top city in 2019, a major improvement over 2018.

    https://www.latimes.com/world-nation/story/2020-01-07/tijuana-drug-violence

    By comparison, Spain and Portugal put together have about 430 murders per year.

    “National Rifle Association advocated for rifles and shotguns”

    The easy wins for 2nd Amendment advocates after Heller are overturning extreme gun control laws passed in urban areas, often a long time ago.

    Recently NYC repealed such a law rather than lose a court case.

  10. They’ve been after “assault rifles” since California started the ball rolling in 1989, several other states quickly followed suit, and then the feds in 1994. (Slight hiccup encountered after 1994 at the federal level due to Gingrich Revolution, powered in part by gun people resenting the ban and the Brady Bill.) But the AR-15 hate does seem to have picked up steam after the federal ban expired in 2004, after most states went to systems of allowing people without criminal records to carry concealed pistols without undue paperwork or permission-begging (much of that legislative and lawfare work occurring between 1995 and 2010 or so), and after Mr. Obama gave social license to the critical race theory crowd.

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
  11. prosa123 says:

    A few years back the American Medical Association commissioned a research report on the deadliness of various firearms calibers. Their researchers looked at all 183 firearms homicides that took place in Boston between 2010 and 2014 for which calibers were known, and compared these to an equal, randomly selected number of nonfatal shootings. What was relevant to the present question is that all but one of the fatal shootings, and all of the nonfatal ones, involved handguns. The one exception was a fatal shooting with an AK-47 in 7.62×39.

    Something else interesting: the victims in the Boston gun homicides had an average of 12 prior arrests.

    Also: why would the Baltimore authorities have a separate category for “sword?”

  12. Anon[899] • Disclaimer says:

    I think the energy is behind banning long guns because that is what ordinary whites use to protect themselves and their families with. The media would love to see millions of ordinary whites be killed, but obviously cant come out and say it, but would love to disarm whites so it could be facilitated next time they decide to stir up racial tension and get non-whites mad at whites.

    • Replies: @Kronos
  13. Liberals don’t really give a crap about inner city black on black violence, and even if they did, nobody has any idea about what to do about it. But not only do they fear Bubba and his “assault weapons”, but they are determined to f**k with the Deplorables any way they can, just to show who is boss.

    See this David Gelertner quote on VMI in the 1990s. “The elite hated VMI, and no doubt VMI hated the elite”, another even match-up, except that, when it occurred to the elite one afternoon on the way to the water cooler that VMI’s way of life ought to be wiped out (just a casual notion, inasmuch as the likes of VMI hardly matter to the elite one way or the other), it was duly wiped out. The old VMI was crushed like a beer can under a tank tread and the Institute is now, needless to say, co-ed.”

    https://www.takimag.com/article/the_cruelty_of_the_overclass_john_derbyshire/

    • Replies: @Pickle Rick
  14. How many of the nine murders attributed to the “shotgun/rifle” category were committed by the dread “assault rifle,” which is supposed to be the No. 1 threat to the life of every American.

    • Replies: @prosa123
    , @prosa123
  15. nymom says:
    @prosa123

    This kind of goes to the theory that a good number of the murders taking place in urban areas are retaliatory murders for various crimes that go unpunished by our police departments.

    I, for instance, witnessed a near riot on U-tube when a man received only a 5 year sentence for murder. The victim’s family had to be restrained from attacking him and various court officers defending him.

    Upon his release in about 2.5 years on parole he will spend his life looking over his shoulder if he returns to the same neighborhood/community.

  16. @prosa123

    why would the Baltimore authorities have a separate category for “sword?”

    Yeah, you’d think death by sword would be counted under the “sharp objects” category. My guess is that listing swordplay as a separate offense is somehow related to the fact that the official state sport of Maryland is jousting.

  17. @anon

    ” Gun-control freaks use facts the way a drunk uses a wall – something to lean on.:

    I prefer the traditional “Like a Lamppost, for support rather than illumination.”

  18. … it appeared that there might be grounds for compromise on gun control: urban gun control advocates wanted to reduce the availability of handguns to urban criminals while the National Rifle Association advocated for rifles and shotguns to be available to hunters and target shooters?

    No, not to me it didn’t. There is to be no compromise to Amendment II.

    A) It’s written in plain English: “… shall not be infringed“.

    B) Compromising with the left results in a loss. They don’t really want compromising – they want to eliminate your rights, one “compromise” at a time.

    As far as this specific compromise, even disregarding the above, there are plenty of inner city people who really need a pistol for self-defense, most particularly OUTSIDE the home. There are plenty of rural (and urban) people who understand that the 2nd Amendment is not about duck hunting. The left would love to pare down the long guns to only specific bird guns and plinking guns.

    Those Virginia Sanctuary Counties have the right idea!

    • Agree: Twinkie
  19. prosa123 says:
    @Hypnotoad666

    California’s Attorney General publishes an annual report on specific firearms used in homicides and in other serious crime, based. It is a rather flawed report because with the exception of the city of San Francisco, only crimes occurring in rural parts of the state are included. This is because the report uses data from the statewide crime lab, and all of the larger cities and counties have their own labs and except for San Francisco don’t submit data.

    In 2017, of the 35 firearms used in homicides, there were 29 handguns, four rifles and two shotguns. While there’s no caliber breakdown for homicides, of the 329 firearms used in all major crimes there were 14 rifles and nine shotguns, the remaining 306 being handguns. These are broken down by caliber, and of the rifle-only calibers there were six in .223 (the most common AR-15 caliber) and four in 7.62×39 (the standard AK-47 caliber). The four remaining rifles presumably were in one of the 15 calibers marked “other,” or may have been in a handgun caliber, which are occasionally chambered in rifles.

    https://oag.ca.gov/sites/all/files/agweb/pdfs/publications/firearms-report-17.pdf

  20. prosa123 says:
    @Hypnotoad666

    California’s Attorney General publishes an annual report on specific firearms used in homicides and in other serious crime, based. It is a rather flawed report because with the exception of the city of San Francisco, only crimes occurring in rural parts of the state are included. This is because the report uses data from the statewide crime lab, and all of the larger cities and counties have their own labs and except for San Francisco don’t submit data.

    In 2017, of the 35 firearms used in homicides, there were 29 handguns, four rifles and two shotguns. While there’s no caliber breakdown for homicides, of the 329 firearms used in all major crimes there were 14 rifles and nine shotguns, the remaining 306 being handguns. These are broken down by caliber, and of the rifle-only calibers there were six in .223 (the most common AR-15 caliber) and four in 7.62×39 (the standard AK-47 caliber). The four remaining rifles presumably were in one of the 15 calibers marked “other,” or may have been in a handgun caliber, which are occasionally chambered in rifles.

    https://oag.ca.gov/sites/all/files/agweb/pdfs/publications/firearms-report-17.pdf

  21. Tulip says:

    A hand gun is easier to use for self-defense purposes in close quarters in a residence, and due to muzzle velocity, you are more likely to shoot through a wall and harm innocent bystanders with a rifle. Besides, there are forms of ammunition designed to minimize wall penetration.

    The liberals don’t like assault rifles (basically semiautomatic, civilian-equivalents to military weapons) because all the nutters who shoot up whitey at the synagogue or the garlic festivals use assault rifles. They just believe what they see on TV. They don’t go down to MLK Boulevard, and if they have to, they drive as fast as they can, so black-on-black homicide barely registers.

    Sports shooter types like rifles, but they aren’t stalking deer with an AK-47. It’s your gun-nut, prepper people worried about “urban mobs” appearing at their Idaho compound when SHTF that want the AK’s.

    I think it partly depends on whether you fear “zombie” looters showing up at your farm, or whether you fear some methed-up wing-nut shooting up your synagogue. But more generally, support for the Second Amendment probably scales linearly with your residence’s distance from MLK Boulevard. There does seem to be too many crazies, too many crazy drugs, and not enough Norman Rockwell America left to keep the Second Amendment viable much longer.

    • Replies: @Twinkie
    , @Prof. Woland
  22. @prosa123

    “Also: why would the Baltimore authorities have a separate category for “sword?”

    Why deny the Saudi’s their place in the Baltimore Sun?

  23. @Jim Don Bob

    Governor Northam was a graduate of VMI. Apparently the VMI can produce little elite Bolsheviks quite well all on its own…

  24. @Wilmingtonian

    Some commenters under A.E. have been giving the NRA a hard time, but the story below is due to a lot of work by the NRA and NRA members:

    • Agree: Lot
    • Replies: @Wilmingtonian
    , @Twinkie
  25. Only 9 shotgun deaths, hmmmmm…. I guess since Omar done got kilt, it’s mostly Glocks doin the talkin.

  26. anon[179] • Disclaimer says:

    Gun control nuts are like Goldilocks. One year rifles are “too big”, the next year handguns are “too small”. Rifle calibers are “too powerful” for safe use, pistol calibers are “too weak” to be really useful. Bait & switch or motte & bailey goes on.

    There’s never any consistent logic, because it’s always down deep a purely emotional argument. In the end, every single time it comes down to what the late Senator Howard Metzenbaum (D – Ohio) once said: “I don’t care about crime, just want to get the guns!”.

    Why? Ask Chairman Mao.

    • Replies: @Twinkie
  27. @anonwatcher

    The inclusion of “aptly” in your assertion that “… anti-gunners believe (aptly) … far fewer people have long guns … ” suggests that you believe that fewer people have long guns than pistols. This is incorrect. The most recent production figures for civilian firearms shows that production of long arms exceeds that of pistols https://www.npr.org/2016/01/05/462017461/guns-in-america-by-the-numbers. It’s impossible to find a good estimate of the total number of firearms in civilian hands by firearm type. Production figures probably understate significantly the excess of long arms over pistols, One can assume this working from production figures and doing a stocks and flows analysis. But also prior to the increasingly stringent gun control laws enacted since the mid 1950s, long guns definitely predominated in the stock of civilian firearms, which was far more focused back then on hunting.

    • Replies: @kaganovitch
    , @anonwatcher
  28. @prosa123

    Also: why would the Baltimore authorities have a separate category for “sword?”

    I’m guessing that the majority of these are the deadly super swords, manufactured in Wakanda, and imported into America’s inner cities due to lax border control.

    • LOL: M_Young
  29. anonymous[139] • Disclaimer says:
    @pirelli

    The first thing that they try to do when given the opportunity to advance any gun control is to push bans on various classes rifles and features of rifles, rather than say the old priorities of the Brady campaign which were focused on handguns.

    • Agree: M_Young
  30. @Achmed E. Newman

    Absolutely. There’s plenty to criticize about the NRA and its top management, but when you get right down to it, those five million members are real people, most of them care a lot about this issue, many of them have an above-average degree of understanding of the issue, and tons of them have the ability and the willingness to do the electoral blocking and tackling that your high school civics class said is how democracy works. The gun control side is vastly more Astroturf than grassroots, reliant on rent-a-protesters like the rest of the left, but able to raise money from rich and/or corrupt liberals and to get good press because aligned with the leftist power structure.

    That difference drives a lot of the dynamic. Facts and policy aren’t really relevant to the panic of the week, it’s just one more front in the war of attrition between the SPLC and the Deplorables. Which is how our democracy actually works.

  31. JMcG says:
    @bomag

    Exactly. Defeat in detail.

  32. JMcG says:

    It’s harsh but true. Guns don’t kill people, black people kill people.

    • Agree: Jim Don Bob
  33. @Charon

    No, they understand it. They don’t care about crime. They care about imposing their vision of the future and eliminating the greatest threat to it: white men.

    • Replies: @Charon
  34. Kronos says:
    @Anon

    That’s partially correct.

    They try to ban long guns so people with illegal handguns (typically blacks and the occasional white tweaker) can make moving in a lot easier. The burning pressure for every urban metro is to dump black underclass denizens (high cost/liabilities) into distant suburban areas. Liberal urban whites have been eating the shit sandwich which is black welfare costs for decades. Imagine how much money could be saved if they were simply relocated somewhere else? It was one of the reasons they voted for the “Gentrifier in Chief” Barack Obama. So he could play population transfer games via the HUD Department. With gentrification being disguised as fighting racism. By encouraging blacks to move to white suburbs, white urban liberals could retake the inner cities. Thus, they were seriously butthurt when Trump won in 2016. Phase II with Hillary was placed on hold.

    https://www.forbes.com/sites/adamandrzejewski/2019/07/31/baltimores-81000-public-employees-cost-taxpayers-5-billion-and-cant-save-their-own-city/#2612ac1519a3

  35. istevefan says:
    @Dr. X

    But the main reason they want to ban rifles is because they plan to cram a progressive/socialist/communist agenda down the throats of whites.

    I get your sentiment, but let’s be honest. They have already crammed a leftwing agenda down the throats of Whites without a gun ban.

    First, they have demographically upended Whites in their own nation without banning guns. Never before in history has a such a massive group been so demographically replaced without some sort of war, famine, plague, etc. being the root cause. They flipped a nation of 200 million in the relative blink of an eye without taking any guns.

    Second, they altered Whites’ view of marriage in under two decades erasing what had been about 2000 years of history without taking any guns.

    Third, they altered Whites’ view of who may use which restroom in a similar way. Once again it was done without taking a gun.

    One could continue to add to this list. The bottom line is the worst thing they could do is to try to take guns. That might be the only thing that would engender serious resistance. Seems to me they are making plenty good progress doing it the way they have been.

    Besides once they reach demographic triumph, they could simply pass an amendment to revoke the 2nd Amendment. If this is done LEGALLY, I doubt there will be many who refuse to cough up their weapons. It’s like how conservatives are totally for immigration so long as it is LEGAL. Conservative Inc. will be telling you to comply because they followed the Constitution.

    • Agree: Kronos, Thomas
    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar
  36. Whiskey says: • Website

    The whole point of gun control is a final solution for White people. Well White men anyway.

    • Replies: @istevefan
  37. istevefan says:
    @Whiskey

    final solution for White people.

    So who is behind this? How do you propose to oppose them?

    • Replies: @J.Ross
  38. J.Ross says:

    There was a New Orleans morgue worker who claimed that the overwhelming majority of shot cadavers he received were felled by .380 ACP. He was claiming this to an internet forum of .45 ACP fans. Now, .380 ACP is something like a smaller 9mm facilitating “pocket pistols” like the Walther PPK, or its Argentine cousin the Bersa Thunder. The claim might seem counterintuitive, but of course all calibers are equally potentially deadly. The reason a pocket pistol caliber was turning the most grass green was because it was probably/also the caliber most in use in that area; if dedicated Eastwood fans insisted on .44 magnum, their victims would hardly survive more.
    Everyone who thinks about it for ten seconds can understand why criminals prefer weapons which can more easily be hidden, and that’s well before they realize the infrequency and deep unnaturalness of the media-celebrated school shooting phenomenon, which is the entire reason why Bloomberg employees like “Moms Demand Action” are concerned with Armalites. To go away from gun control a bit, the clearest tell of a bad legislative push (left or right) is hysteria over something that almost never happens, and it can only be worse if it ignores something which does happen a lot. The warped sensitivities of our newsmedia — hyping the comet and censoring the hourly street crime — are therefore part of the process of misgovernance, whether they were planned that way or accidental.

    • Replies: @prosa123
  39. J.Ross says:
    @istevefan

    We must become Jabotinskies [ties small LEHI flag into a blue and white hachimaki and mispronounces Hebrew words].

    • Replies: @kaganovitch
  40. Twinkie says:
    @Dr. X

    Level IV body armor. They’ll simply laugh as handgun rounds bounce off

    Can I put you in a “level IV body armor” (double up on plates if you’d like) and have you “simply laugh” as I run some Mozambique drills on you? The first two rounds that bounce off the plate are going to be mighty amusing to you as I fire the third shot.

    Always good to die with a smile!

  41. @Twinkie

    Yes, your dick is very, very big. But that is irrelevant to the fact that forces in combat body armor and plating are tougher targets than unarmored humans.

    • Replies: @Twinkie
    , @J.Ross
  42. Twinkie says:
    @Tulip

    A hand gun is easier to use for self-defense purposes in close quarters in a residence

    I don’t know what you mean by “easier,” but it’s always more difficult to score hits with handguns than long guns ceteris paribus.* The one advantage of handguns in CQB is retention, as long guns are much easier to disarm, esp. from corners.

    Centerfire long guns also pack orders of magnitude greater stopping power/tissue damage than handguns do. With prompt medical intervention, most people shot with handguns survive. With long guns the odds of survival drop considerably.

    *My wife’s HD gun for a very long time was a 20 gauge autoloading shotgun. Recently, we switched it to a suppressed pistol-caliber carbine. Mine is a suppressed gas-piston AR-15.

    • Replies: @Jim Don Bob
  43. Twinkie says:
    @Achmed E. Newman

    Disagree. The NRA is an access-based organization (i.e. a swamp creature) and has been a long while. Much of the work for the wave of shall-issue handgun concealed carry was done by state and local grassroots groups, not the NRA.

    I have personal knowledge of the NRA and its top leadership – it has been a piggy bank for the latter for years (which is pretty normal for most national level, access-based conservative groups). I’m surprised it took this long for the mainstream media to report on the corruption, self-dealing, and financial malfeasance of the NRA leadership, given its bogeyman stays witchy the left.

    • Replies: @Thomas
    , @Twinkie
  44. Would be great to do a study about the level of firearms training that these Inner City (TM) youths receive before they go into action against each other. Seriously. Do they just get handed a 9MM from a car trunk or pawn shop and a few rounds stolen from WalMart, to plink with at emptied Colt 45 bottles in back alleys?

    Inner city kids aren’t going to care about or know about weapons maintenance. They point and shoot once or twice if they’re lucky. Really, this is a lesson for us all. A goatherder’s son in some far-off place is an analog. They die in their hundreds but they occasionally hit and kill.

    • Replies: @Kronos
  45. M_Young says:
    @Twinkie

    I saw that episode of Magnum PI too!

  46. prosa123 says:
    @J.Ross

    In the Boston AMA research report I mentioned earlier, the 9mm accounted for 35% of firearms homicides. That’s not too surprising, as it’s by some considerable margin the most popular handgun caliber.
    Starting in the 1970’s, the 9mm was the most popular police round in the US, but its use dropped way off following the 1986 Miami Shootout, in which its performance was blamed – largely unfairly – for the deaths of four FBI agents. Police departments throughout the country switched to the slightly more powerful .40 S&W, although in recent years the 9mm has had a bit of a revival.

    Now, if you want a really powerful round, here’s one I’d sell my soul to own:

    • Thanks: MBlanc46
    • Replies: @anon
    , @Kibernetika
  47. @Jus' Sayin'...

    Production figures probably understate significantly the excess of long arms over pistols,

    Also probably %90 of 80percent lowers – a market that is not tracked at all to my knowledge-are bought for long guns.

  48. Charon says:
    @bigdicknick

    They definitely like crime. Unless it’s white on black, which is what usually happens on TV and in movies.

  49. Twinkie says:
    @anon

    In the end, every single time it comes down to what the late Senator Howard Metzenbaum (D – Ohio) once said: “I don’t care about crime, just want to get the guns!”

    One modification – “gun owners,” not “guns.”

    These days the left seems no longer content to just ban guns, but seem intent on criminalizing gun owners. It’s the politics of personal destruction writ large. We are their enemies and they want us destroyed.

    • Replies: @Thomas
    , @John Johnson
  50. Anon[119] • Disclaimer says:
    @Charon

    I’m pro gun, but the fact is, illegal guns begin their lives as legal guns, that are then stolen or illegally transferred. Over a sufficiently long period of time banning legal guns would eventually get rid of illegal guns also.

    • Replies: @anon
    , @Bert
    , @J.Ross
  51. Dr. X says:
    @Twinkie

    Level IV is designed to withstand a hit from .30-06 AP M2 doing 2775 fps. It may fracture after multiple hits. If the ceramic plate is worn in conjunction with Level II soft armor, though, a pistol will be ineffective against it.

    • Replies: @Twinkie
  52. M_Young says:

    The Baltimore data pretty much reflects the national data put out by the FBI. Pointy, blunt objects, sometimes even ‘personal weapons’ (hands/feet) beat out longguns in homicides.

    At the same time, long guns seem to be used relatively more often in the sort of random attacks that might affect liberals (their little cherubs getting shot up at school, for example). Of course, the second most deadly mass school shooting, and second most deadly mass shooting, was committed with pistols. By an Asian immigrant. Interestingly, Asians are about twice as likely to be mass shooters (by the FBI/Mother Jones criteria) than their share of the population.

  53. JMcG says:
    @Twinkie

    There was an article today in the Daily Mail about the first Korean American astronaut. Harvard trained doctor and Navy Seal. I have to admit, you’re the first person I thought of.

    • Replies: @Twinkie
    , @Piglet
  54. Come on, Steve. Think of all the Gangsta Rap lyrics urging young minds to reach for the AR-15!

    Not to mention John Travoltas with itchy fingers on handguns!

  55. Twinkie says:
    @Cloudbuster

    Yes, your dick is very, very big.

    Why, is yours really really small?

    But that is irrelevant to the fact that forces in combat body armor and plating are tougher targets than unarmored humans.

    Is the sky blue?

    I was mocking the idea that the evil black rifle-banning was driven by cops’ sense of invulnerability toward handguns, “because rifle rounds can penetrate body armor and handgun rounds can’t.”

  56. @J.Ross

    Nah, Jabotinsky was founder of Irgun. Lehi was more militant breakaway led by Avraham Stern. Lehi split from Irgun 2 weeks b4 Jabotinsky died.

  57. J.Ross says:
    @Cloudbuster

    I don’t want to be this guy, but you’re x-raying those ceramic plates between uses, right?

    • LOL: Twinkie
  58. anon[108] • Disclaimer says:
    @prosa123

    It takes practice to get that second shot off quickly. Practice on the .600 Nitro is expensive. How expensive? If you have to ask, you can’t afford it.

    • Replies: @kaganovitch
  59. Twinkie says:
    @Dr. X

    Unless you were planning to put that plate on your head…

    Mozambique drill: https://www.shootingillustrated.com/articles/2017/5/18/the-mozambique-drill-a-history-and-how-to/

    Nobody laughs as rounds are bouncing off his plate. If that were to happen, something has gone very very wrong.

  60. anon[108] • Disclaimer says:
    @Anon

    Over a sufficiently long period of time banning legal guns would eventually get rid of illegal guns also.

    lol. People make their own guns in prison using hand tools and a smuggled cartridge or two.

    75 years ago the British made STEN submachine guns – full auto 9mm – in converted toy factories and auto parts plants. IBM and Underwood typewriter plants were converted to making M1 carbines.

    Revolvers, semi auto pistols & rifles, and machineguns are all technology from the late 19th century.

    Remember “Breaking Bad”? Meth chemistry is a bit more complicated than making cheap pistols. Both can be done in a converted RV.

    • Replies: @eugyppius
  61. @Tulip

    The liberals don’t like assault rifles (basically semiautomatic, civilian-equivalents to military weapons) because all the nutters who shoot up whitey at the synagogue or the garlic festivals use assault rifles.

    Liberals don’t like assault weapons because they are a proxy for white men. If feminists and blacks started buying them they would become hip and trendy. They also hate them because what is the point of controlling government if you cannot get gibs me dats? Liberals don’t just want to be free from white men, they want to control them.

    • Replies: @Tulip
  62. @prosa123

    A few weeks ago I tried out a big-bore hunting rifle that I hadn’t zeroed in a few years. At many hundred yards the first shot knocked the big-assed steel plate off of its hangar. Couldn’t see it anymore from the bench with binoculars and I felt guilty and embarassed 😉

    Had to go out there and fish the plate out of the mud and set it back up. My least favorite rifle.

  63. Twinkie says:
    @JMcG

    Thanks, but I was never that driven or hardworking.

    • Replies: @reiner Tor
  64. @istevefan

    They have already crammed a leftwing agenda down the throats of Whites without a gun ban.

    It was only crammed down the throats of northeastern whites. Whites in the rest of the country happily marched down to the polls to endorse it. Check out the history of the Sixteenth and Eighteenth Amendments, and the New Deal.

    First…

    …John Lansing and Robert Yates stormed out of the Constitutional Convention. But their side, the Antifederalists, lost and, as Bill Kauffman said about losers in US history, they were thrown down the memoryhole.

  65. @anon

    Practice on the .600 Nitro is expensive. How expensive? If you have to ask, you can’t afford it.

    It’s 45-50 bucks a round. Not a box, a round.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  66. @Twinkie

    …as I run some Mozambique drills on you?

    If they involve motor vehicles, aim at the starboard side. Mozambicans drive on the left.

    • Replies: @duncsbaby
  67. Anonymous[427] • Disclaimer says:
    @Dr. X

    But the main reason they want to ban rifles is because they plan to cram a progressive/socialist/communist agenda down the throats of whites. The mercenary cops on the SWAT teams who are going to enforce it will be driving MRAPs and will be clad in Level IV body armor. They’ll simply laugh as handgun rounds bounce off before they kill you. But if you have a rifle… well, now it’s a two-way fight. Beyond that, most politicians today have tight enough security that nobody can get within handgun range of them. Rifles, on the other hand, can reach out and touch someone.

    Gun control has never been about reducing the urban black homicide rate. It’s always been about protecting the elites and their agenda.

    Some truth to this.

    The Founding Fathers specified an armed populace as a deterrent to would be tyranny. Even then no one thought in terms of “overthrowing the government”, but rather in making it expensive for a tyrant to try. That is still the case: depeditation and pension denial, rather than decapitiation are realistic goals. Everyone from Solzhenitsyn to 1970s survivalist/prepper types and sci-fi authors to Harold Covington understood this.

    Shotguns are little threat to tyrants; that’s why in cucked Britain even today a shotgun certificate is not particularly tough to get if you can afford to shoot somewhere and they sold the crude but serviceable Baikal double shotguns in GUM in Moscow. My uncle had one an airline pilot friend bought there at around the time Francis Gary Powers was being tried for spying and the gay pianist from Texas was being feted by them. Brought it back through Idlewild (as it was then) customs with no questions asked.

    Concealable handguns of reasonable power and rifles capable of accurate hits at medium ranges are what really scares them. The “assault rifle” bafflegab is just that, it sounds scary to women and nebbishy urbanites, but they really want Joe Sixpack disarmed. The wealthy will always be able to comply with whatever bullshit they come up with unless they go Full Singapore, and criminals will always have guns no matter what laws are passed. Joe Sixpack’s mind is what really needs controlling and that is easier to do when he doesn’t have a rifle or a pistol readily available to him.

    Very serious long range sniper rifles are not especially worrisome because they are only a threat in the hands of someone with considerable experience and usually formal training: otherwise they are just bigger and bulkier, more awkward deer rifles. Those people are likely to have something buried somewhere, but they are few in number and mostly are well known to the authorities, because most are the veterans of specialized military or LE school, and if not, they spend a lot of time on the range and everyone knows them from there.

    Most politicians and court officers are not VVIPs with Secret Service level protection, and except those of independent wealth with private security and a few people assigned extra security because of real or imagined credible threats, could be ‘gotten to’ pretty easily. Indeed, in the past few years there have been shootings, such as Giffords and Scalise. So far the shooters have all been clear-cut crazies, but fears by certain politicians of an armed populace are not wholly without foundation. If you piss enough people off bad enough or scare enough people enough, someone might do something.

    • Agree: Thomas
  68. The British experience demonstrates that the Left will continue to whittle away at the gun ownership no matter what limitations it has already placed on it, and even the strictest limitations cannot prevent “gun crime” and large-scale massacres.

    Britain always had much stricter gun laws than the United States, but the laws were tightened dramatically after two horrific massacres, one at Hungerford and one at Dunblane.

    In 1987, in what is known as the Hungerford massacre, a man armed with two semi-automatic rifles and a 9mm pistol killed 16 people. The Firearms (Amendment) Act of 1988 was passed in the wake of the incident, banning the ownership of semi-automatic centre-fire rifles and restricts the use of shotguns with a capacity of more than three cartridges.

    In 1996, a man armed with two 9mm semiautomatic pistols and two .357 magnum revolvers committed a massacre at the Dunblane Primary School, killing 16 children and one adult. As a result, the Firearms (Amendment) Act was passed in 1997, banning all modern handguns with the exception of .22 calibre single-shot weapons. Within the year, the remaining .22 rimfire handguns were banned as well.

    Nevertheless, gun crime continued to increase, most of it committed with handguns.

    There was another mass killing in Cumbria in 2010, when a taxi driver killed 12 people and injured 11 with a legally owned double-barreled shotgun and bolt-action .22 rifle, two firearms about as innocuous as a firearm could be.

  69. Anonymous[427] • Disclaimer says:
    @kaganovitch

    Generally you have to reload your own ammo if you have such a rifle. However, in addition to the cost, the recoil of these things is pretty brutal and generally you won’t be shooting it very much. These very large Nitro Express rifles- the .577 and .600 NE-were not elephant hunting rifles but rather elephant stopping rifles, to be carried by the gunbearer for the professional hunter as backup for when the paying customer (who had a bolt gun in .375 H&H or a smaller double, .470 something usually) whiffed and the beast charged. I have handled a couple of these monsters which had considerable field wear from decades of carry but which had less than twenty rounds fired through them total. The smaller doubles of similar vintage show less carry wear but have often been rebarreled or rebored and regulated from substantially more shooting.

    The range of these things is not especially impressive either.

    • Replies: @anon
    , @kaganovitch
    , @prosa123
  70. PaceLaw says:

    I can only imagine the murder rate in Baltimore to keep going up-and-up-and-up for the foreseeable future. The city is close to being 70% black, which is all that you need to know! Politicians consistently placate and pander to the black/female voters, who carry every election in this city. These voters do not want their sons/nephews/cousins incarcerated, so they consistently go soft on crime, even though their city is being ravaged by their sons/nephews/cousins. Rinse and repeat every year. Sad.

    • Replies: @houston 1992
  71. anon[108] • Disclaimer says:
    @Anonymous

    These very large Nitro Express rifles- the .577 and .600 NE-were not elephant hunting rifles but rather elephant stopping rifles, to be carried by the gunbearer for the professional hunter as backup for when the paying customer (who had a bolt gun in .375 H&H or a smaller double, .470 something usually) whiffed and the beast charged.

    Also for stopping Cape buffalo, using solids.

    For really big game, get a bigger rifle. For reallly big game….get a really bigger rifle.

    What time is it? It’s time for Burt’s rec room!

    • Replies: @JMcG
  72. @Anonymous

    Generally you have to reload your own ammo if you have such a rifle.

    That’s true, factory rounds are hard to come by. Even hand loads are going to run close to $20 a round. The unprimed cases are more than 10 bucks ,the bullets $4-6 etc.

  73. @PaceLaw

    Johns Hopkins university needs to maintain safety near its campus so JH will lobby to protect its interests.
    Bloomberg graduated from JH, and even if he fails to win the presidency , he may want to spend capital to save JH

    • Replies: @PaceLaw
  74. You’re tiptoeing up to it Steve, but as other commenters point out: rifles hold ground. This is about Power, pure and simple. You should read Borzoi’s essay about humiliation rituals.

    One sniper can make things hell, worst if he has a spotter. A two man fire team with the skills of say, someone who places in the middle of his division at a 2gun is going to liquidate your average PD. Combine the two and you’d need SWAT in a Bearcat to avoid becoming a casualty, and it’s a massive assumption they haven’t thought about that too and have molotovs in a potato gun ready to go.

    The mask didn’t just slip, it fell to the floor when the Dems raised hell about civil rights concerns regarding the use of gang databases for red flag laws. The Left thinks Process alone is good enough, and ignores purpose. For all their faults, the Athenians didn’t believe voters possessed some magical wisdom that made them wise, but that the voters had sword arms. The Left forgets the voters have trigger fingers at their own peril. Virginia is going to be interesting. Buckle in.

    • Replies: @The Wild Geese Howard
  75. Thomas says:
    @Twinkie

    I’ve been predicting for months that Wayne LaPierre and several people close to him are likely to face criminal prosecution within the next year or two. They had plans to make out like bandits turning the NRA from an advocacy organization into a for-profit business with the “Carry Guard” concealed carry insurance scheme (which they ripped off from the US Concealed Carry Association) and expanding “NRA TV” into another conservative media outlet like Fox or OAN. But it’s all blown up in their faces and is threatening to take down the entire organization. The Wall Street Journal has done a lot of the journalistic legwork documenting what’s gone on. Democratic officials in New York, who have really been feeling their oats weaponizing their investigatory and criminal justice agencies in the Trump era (see, e.g., the various investigations surrounding Trump and the witch hunt against the Proud Boys), are auditing the NRA, which is chartered in New York, and Governor Andrew Cuomo and the state attorney general, Letitia James, have openly declared their intention to destroy the NRA. And Michael Bloomberg is essentially underwriting the gun control movement now state by state with a blank check (he’s responsible for at least half of their nationwide funding now, based on disclosures I’ve seen).

  76. Thomas says:
    @Twinkie

    One modification – “gun owners,” not “guns.”

    Another modification: goys, not gun owners.

  77. Thomas says:

    That gun control has become just another example of what Z-Man memorably calls a “Jim Snow law,” intended to harass whitey, is evident based on the fact that ordinary law enforcement has fallen out of favor among Democrats and the left, even to the point of calls to abolish policing altogether. (https://www.city-journal.org/abolish-police-call-to-action) Soros has shoveled a lot of money into local district attorney elections, and those determine who makes the decisions about who goes to jail or not. I think we can be assured though, as we’ve seen, e.g., with James Alex Fields in Charlottesville, the Proud Boys in New York City, any time someone is prosecuted for a “hate crime,” or the current vogue for “red flag laws” (which bypass the ordinary criminal justice process altogether), that #woke criminal justice will retain its full force and vigor when it comes to getting us baddies, and I’m sure that gun control will be no exception.

  78. prosa123 says:
    @Anonymous

    I actually saw a .600 Nitro Express double rifle at a gun show a year or two ago. It was in a glass case, and according to an information label had been custom made in Germany shortly before World War I. And it was on sale, if you had $18,000 to spend.

    Here’s a short video of a woman firing a .500 Nitro Express double, a step down from the .600 but still extremely powerful, and accidentally setting off both barrels at once. Somehow, she remains on her feet:

  79. Twinkie says:
    @Twinkie

    given its bogeyman stays witchy the left.

    Weird auto-correct! I meant “given its bogeyman status with the left.”

    • Replies: @Harry Baldwin
  80. @prosa123

    Someone once showed me their elephant gun. What I was told is that you place your weight on your front foot and then rock back when the gun is fired. Made sense to me.

  81. eugyppius says:
    @anon

    Homemade guns are not overwhelmingly prevalent in countries with firearms restrictions (i.e., most of Europe). There, the big sources are still legally manufactured weapons that have a) been acquired illegally (i.e. through theft from legitimate owners), or b) been deactivated to serve as stage props before being reactivated and illicitly sold.

    Also, the meth analogy fails. The problem is not the complexity of the manufacture but the availability of precursors, which are tightly restricted in the US. Domestic labs can no longer scrape together enough pseudoephedrine for much more than personal consumption. Thus the vast majority of methamphetamine for sale is produced in Mexican laboratories, where precursor restrictions are easier to evade.

    Precursor restrictions have proven effective in driving the majority of domestic US meth labs out of business, and firearms restrictions coincide with far lower rates of gun ownership.

    • Replies: @Thomas
    , @anon
    , @Anonymous
  82. duncsbaby says:
    @Reg Cæsar

    Mozambiquens may drive on the left but from the photo it appears they cluster on the fuck.

    • LOL: Rob
  83. JMcG says:
    @anon

    I just patterned a new shotgun with my duck loads. 3 inch number 3 shot. That’s enough for me. I have to imagine that detached retinas are a real possibility every time you let loose with one of those big doubles.

  84. Kronos says:
    @Kibernetika

    I believe the chances of them hitting innocent bystanders is higher than killing the intended target.

  85. @Twinkie

    I can usually puzzle out a typo, but that was beyond me.

  86. @prosa123

    Actually looks like she loses her feet.

  87. @Jack Henson

    One sniper can make things hell, worst if he has a spotter.

    I wonder if there are any folks with those sorts of skills in say….the 2A sanctuary counties of Virginia.

    • Replies: @Jack Henson
  88. 35% “closed” is misleading as a percentage of the “closed” are the murderers who got murdered. Well worded, “closed” and not “cleared” by arrest.

  89. Tulip says:
    @Prof. Woland

    Nah, your biggest gun control people are everybody’s wine aunt, who lives in suburbia, works as a college administrator somewhere, and is more worried about pussy-grabbers than gibs me dat. Vote for Pete, he won’t grab your pussy!

  90. Thomas says:
    @eugyppius

    The “precursors” for firearms would be steel, aluminum, and plastics. We’re living in the age of CNC machine tools and 3D printers, tight control over the supply and manufacture of firearms isn’t really possible. Also, another reason the meth analogy fails: drugs are a constantly-consumed commodity. Firearms are durable goods. And there are more than 400 million of them already in circulation, a supply that would take centuries to dry up even if you were to outlaw firearms possession and start confiscation today.

    • Replies: @eugyppius
  91. It must be the unseasonably warm weather accounting for the quick start to 2020.

  92. anon[213] • Disclaimer says:
    @eugyppius

    Homemade guns are not overwhelmingly prevalent in countries with firearms restrictions (i.e., most of Europe).

    Shifting your goalposts so soon?
    Please be specific about the firearms restrictions of “most of Europe”; compare and contrast Swiss law with Swedish law with Slovakian law, for example.

    There, the big sources are still legally manufactured weapons that have a) been acquired illegally (i.e. through theft from legitimate owners), or b) been deactivated to serve as stage props before being reactivated and illicitly sold.

    Or one of the many WWII firearms stashed away 70 years ago. Yes, those still exists. Or smuggled in. That’s how the grenades in Sweden generally show up. You are aware of the increasing number of attacks with hand grenades in Sweden, of course.

    Precursor restrictions have proven effective in driving the majority of domestic US meth labs out of business, and firearms restrictions coincide with far lower rates of gun ownership.

    Cite required for your claim regarding firearms.

    • Replies: @eugyppius
  93. anarchyst says:

    Quite often, firearms owners are their own worst enemies.

    The duck hunters don’t like the AR-15 “black rifles” so they see no problem if attempts are made to ban them.

    The traditional rifle owners don’t like machine guns, so they have no problem with them being legislated out of existence.

    Some pistol owners see nothing wrong with certain long guns being outlawed just as some rifle owners would have no problem seeing pistols banned.

    [MORE]

    You see, anti-gunners want them all. They will chip away a little at a time until their goal of civilian disarmament is complete. They have an excuse for banning every firearm.

    Scoped bolt-action rifles are defined by anti-gunners as “sniper rifles” because they are “too accurate”.

    Magazine-fed weapons are suspect because of high (actually normal) magazine capacity.

    Handguns are suspect because they are “easily concealable”.

    The gun grabbers want them all and have made (flimsy and suspect) excuses for banning every type of firearm. They don’t care how long it takes. and will use incrementalism to their advantage.

    Friends, ALL firearms advocates must “hang together” and realize that an assault on ANY means of firearms ownership and self-defense is an assault on ALL forms of firearms ownership and self-defense.
    There is absolutely NO ROOM for complacency among ANY Second Amendment supporters. An attack on one is an attack on ALL…

    ALL firearms laws are unconstitutional on their face.

    Imagine the hue and cry if “reasonable” restrictions were placed on First Amendment activities, especially with the “mainstream media”. The Second Amendment is clear–what part of “shall not be infringed” do politicians and the media not understand…of course, they understand full well…it’s part of their communist agenda…

    Even the NRA bears some responsibility for capitulation on matters concerning firearms. The NRA failed when it allowed the National Firearms Act of 1934 to stand without offering opposition, the 1968 Gun Control Act, the NICS “instant check” system, the “no new machine gun for civilians” ban in 1986, the so-called “assault weapons” ban in 1994, and other infringements of the Second Amendment. Let’s face it.

    What better way to increase membership than to “allow” infringements to be enacted and then push for a new membership drive. Yes, the NRA has done some good, but its spirit of “compromise” will only lead to one thing…attempted confiscation.

    If the NRA is to be the premier “gun rights” organization, it must reject ALL compromise…

    • Replies: @Brutus
  94. @pirelli

    What’s the evidence that gun control advocates today are less focused on handguns than they used to be? Genuinely curious — I haven’t noticed this.

    Banning AR-15s is openly one of their key goals and the mainstream media puts out an article supporting such a ban about every other week.

    The gun control movement started as anti-handgun and was really an intellectually dishonest reaction to Black crime in urban areas. AR-15s weren’t on their agenda for decades.

  95. anarchyst says:

    One favored method for mass disarmament of a citizenry is to make high-profile arrests of those who are vocal about their firearms “rights”.

    Another way is to enlist the “help” of the communist “mainstream media” to demonize anyone who has an interest in firearms, allowing the media to be present at “raids” and in general use “loaded” terms such as “arsenals”, “weapons of mass-destruction”, “weapons of war”, “machine guns” and other sensational terms, to inflame the non-knowledgeable public, introducing them to their “unstable” neighbors who are being (illegally and unconstitutionally) raided.
    It’s all about perception, which the left uses to good effect, utilizing tactics from jew communist Saul Alinsky’s “Rules for Radicals. The “mainstream media has always been dishonest and against firearms rights.

    [MORE]

    High-profile raids will push the firearms owning public underground. Those who choose to “fight back” will be regarded as “terrorists” and “enemies of the state and good order” by the mainstream media, who will fan the flames of hysteria, attempting to get the general public on their side—supporting mass disarmament. If and when they are murdered by “law enforcement” very little, if anything, will be mentioned about the illegality of these “raids”.

    All one has to do is look at how firearms owners are treated presently by the mainstream media-looked upon as “pariahs” and other unstable types.

    The “key” to resistance may be to “cache” your firearms, leaving a few firearms accessible both for protection and as “bait” to “feed” the gun-grabbers if and when the raids come.

    The left is expert at using “incrementalism”, chipping away at rights a little-bit at a time. From arbitrary classification of firearms, declaring certain “features” illegal, to specifying barrel lengths, magazine capacity, to outright banning the production and ownership of newly-manufactured machine guns, the left has been busy.

    There are no easy answers to the situation we are presently in, but surrendering one’s rights is never the answer.

    A good read, “Unintended Consequences” by John Ross, about our present situation and possible “solutions” was written in 1995 and is still available in print and as a free pdf. This book is a good reference, history lesson, and comes up with possible solutions to the assault on our freedom.
    This book was considered so volatile when it first came out that sellers were routinely harassed by FBI, ATF, and DEA types for displaying and selling it.

    To quote Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn:

    And how we burned in the camps later, thinking: What would things have been like if every Security operative, when he went out at night to make an arrest, had been uncertain whether he would return alive and had to say goodbye to his family? Or if, during periods of mass arrests, as for example in Leningrad, when they arrested a quarter of the entire city, people had not simply sat there in their lairs, paling in terror at every bang of the downstairs door and at every step on the staircase, but had understood they had nothing left to lose and had boldly set up in the downstairs hall an ambush of half a dozen people with axes, hammers, pokers, or whatever else was at hand. The Organs would very quickly have suffered a shortage of officers and transport and, notwithstanding all of Stalin’s thirst; the cursed machine would have ground to a halt . . .
    — Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, The Gulag Archipelago

  96. anarchyst says:

    The problem is, we have allowed the anti Second Amendment crowd to define the terms.

    A firearm is a tool which possesses no evil intent on its own. Assigning intent to an inanimate object is the epitome of insanity. Demonizing a weapon on looks alone also marks the accuser as an unstable individual who is also insane. Call them out on their illogic and insanity.

    Another dirty tactic the anti-Second Amendment crowd uses exposes children to potential and actual harm by putting them in gun-free zones. These people care not one wit about children, but uses them for their own nefarious purposes.

    We need to TAKE BACK the argument

    –When the antis blame the firearm for the actions of a criminal, state that: a firearm is an inanimate object, subject only to the intent of the user. Firearms ARE used to preserve life and make a 90 lb. woman equal to a 200 lb. criminal”.

    –When the antis attempt to justify their gun free zones counter their misguided argument with “you mean, criminal safety zones or victim disarmament zones”.

    –State that we protect our money, banks, politicians and celebrities, buildings and facilities with PEOPLE WITH GUNS, but protect our children with gun-free zone signs.

    –When the antis criticize AR-15s in general, counter with: you mean the most popular rifle of the day, use able by even the smallest, weakest person as a means of self-defense. Besides, AR-15s are FUN to shoot. Offer to take them to the range and supply them with an AR-15, ammunition and range time. I have made many converts this way.

    –When the antis state that: You dont need an AR-15 to hunt with, counter with AR-15s ARE used for hunting, but in many states, are prohibited from being used to take large game because they are underpowered.

    –When the antis state that: AR-15s are high powered rifles, correct them by stating that AR-15s with the .223 or 5.56mm cartridge are considered medium-powered weapons-NOT high-powered by any means.

    –When the antis state that: you don’t need and AR-15, counter with, Who are YOU to consider what I need?

    –When the antis state that: the Constitution was written during the time of muskets, and that the Second Amendment should only apply to weapons of that time period, state that: by your logic, the First Amendment should not apply to modern-day telecommunications, internet, television, radio, public-address systems, books and newspapers produced on high-speed offset printing presses. Only town-criers and Benjamin Franklin type printing presses would be covered under the First Amendment.

    –When the antis state that only law enforcement and government should possess firearms, remind them of the latest school shooting, as well as Columbine, where law enforcement SAT ON THEIR HANDS and cowered in fear while children were being murdered, citing officer safety, afraid to challenge the shooter, despite being armed to the hilt. The government-run murderous sieges at Ruby Ridge and Waco are also good examples of government (mis)use of firearms.

    This tome can be used to counter any argument against any infringement of our Second Amendment.

  97. @Twinkie

    These days the left seems no longer content to just ban guns, but seem intent on criminalizing gun owners.

    Liberals at the higher levels know their plans for Black areas have failed and simply want to disarm Whites.

    They know that White areas can have high levels of gun ownership along with low levels of crime and it drives them crazy since it goes against their theories.

    I suspect they are also quietly expecting a Brazil style economy where wealthy liberals live tucked away in enclaves and the poor kill each other in the streets. They don’t want Whites having rifles since revolutions can’t be started with handguns. In fact I believe most wealthy White liberals are in fear of both right and left revolutions led by Whites. They are fully aware that liberalism requires lying to Whites and are afraid of what might happen in the wake if the lies no longer work. Their fears are correct as history shows that lying to White people is usually a bad idea.

  98. @The Wild Geese Howard

    Deer hunting and man hunting share a lot of overlap. “Holler” is Scots Irish “you go in you dont come out”.

  99. Brutus says:

    Read
    That Every Man Be Armed: The Evolution of a Constitutional Right, Revised and Updated Edition
    Halbrook, Stephen P.

    JOURNAL ARTICLE Review: Of Genocide and Disarmament
    https://www.jstor.org/stable/1144011?seq=1

    Commentary by Paul Harvey:

    “Are you considering backing gun control laws???”

    Do you think that because you may not own a gun, the
    rights guaranteed by the Second Amendment don’t
    matter?

    CONSIDER THIS…
    In 1929 the Soviet Union established gun control.
    – From 1929 to 1953, approximately 20 million
    dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded
    up and exterminated.

    In 1911, Turkey established gun control.
    – From 1915-1917, 1.5 million Armenians, unable to
    defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

    Germany established gun control in 1938.
    – From 1939 to 1945, 13 million Jews, gypsies,
    homosexuals, the mentally ill, and others, who were
    unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and
    exterminated.

    China established gun control in 1935.
    – From 1948 to 1952, 20 million political dissidents,
    unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and
    exterminated.

    Guatemala established gun control in 1964.
    – From 1964 to 1981, 100,000 Mayan Indians, unable to
    defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

    Uganda established gun control in 1970.
    – From 1971 to 1979, 300,000 Christians, unable to
    defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

    Cambodia established gun control in 1956.
    – From 1975 to 1977, one million “educated” people,
    unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and
    exterminated.

    That places total victims who lost their lives because
    of gun control at approximately 56 million in the last
    century.

    Since we should learn from the mistakes of history,
    the next time someone talks in favor of gun control,
    find out which group of citizens they wish to have
    exterminated.

    It has now been 12 months since gun owners in
    Australia were forced to surrender 640,381 personal
    firearms to be destroyed, a program costing the
    government more than $500 million dollars.
    – The results Australia-wide; Homicides are up 3.2%,
    Assaults are up 8 %, and Armed robberies are up 44%.
    In that country’s state of Victoria, homicides with
    firearms are up 300%.

    Over the previous 25 years, figures show a steady
    decrease in armed robberies and Australian politicians
    are on the spot and at a loss to explain how no
    improvement in “safety” has been observed after such
    monumental effort and expense was successfully
    expended in “ridding society of guns.”

    It’s time to state it plainly; Guns in the hands of
    honest citizens save lives and property and, yes,
    gun-control laws only affect the law-abiding citizens.
    Take action before it’s too late, write or call your
    delegation.

    Paul Harvey

    Brutus

  100. Brutus says:
    @anarchyst

    Even the NRA bears some responsibility……

    The NRA is not your Friend. They were taken over by the opposition long ago when Harlon Carter died and Neal Knox got disposed. Their view was to consider every gun law enforced in the worst way by your worst enemy. They gave no quarter. He was replaced by Charleston Heston and later a pretty boy with good hair who neutered the organization. They channel the energy of the gun owner like the tea party channels the energy of the Patriots.

    Brutus

    • Agree: anarchyst
    • Replies: @John Johnson
  101. Anonymous[934] • Disclaimer says:
    @prosa123

    Eighteen thousand is reasonable for a German gun, although I’m surprised they made any in that chambering. A British gun from a better house would be ten times that, more with a provenance from a professional hunter of note.

    Ninety percent of buyers of a .577 or .600 NE fire it either once or not at all.

    The various .450 and .470 NE rounds and the rimmed German analogs are much more usable. I know a farmer who uses a Westley Richards droplock in .470 to dispatch all sorts of game off his combine. The gun cost him about what he paid for the combine, but he feels this is reasonable since it is cheaper to maintain and insure.

  102. I am disinclined to describe the shottie as a long gun. It’s range is less than many a pistol, and it can easily be modified into a short gun. Not that that would be legal, but murder is not legal.

    • Replies: @anon
  103. Anonymous[934] • Disclaimer says:
    @eugyppius

    Most of Europe is chock-a-block with old pistols from the unrestricted days of pre-WWI, the two unpleasantnesses and the Cold War. That’s why Euro ammo houses still make all those oddball pistol cartridges. They can’t actually sell them over there but people buy them on holiday to the US or the Middle East or they are diverted from legal chains in actual Latin countries.

    The French still made pinfire cartridges up until the 1960s or early seventies. Pinfire was obsolete by 1870, roughly.

    They made the larger rim fire rounds such as for the Remington derringer until the tooling wore out, and indeed still make 9mm rim fire for garden guns.

  104. @Brutus

    Even the NRA bears some responsibility……

    The NRA is not your Friend.

    The real problem with the NRA is that they are afraid to engage on race.

    This lets the gun control side use intellectually dishonest comparisons to Europe or Canada which then dupes the public into believing that our lack of gun laws causes crime.

    In fact the NRA rarely uses data in their arguments. They seem to think that even implying there might be a problem in Black areas will hurt their image.

    The NRA has also been too stubborn with laws aimed at curbing sales to street dealers.

    What they should have done is compromise on universal background checks. The majority of gun owners support them. There really is a problem with Black criminals going out of state to buy handguns through private sales.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  105. @Twinkie

    Mine is a suppressed gas-piston AR-15.

    How do you suppress it legally?

    • Replies: @Twinkie
  106. Tulip says:

    In a low trust society, you don’t really know your neighbors, you don’t trust them, and you certainly don’t want them possessing guns. I don’t see how America morphs into a low trust society without the judges evaporating any meaningful sense of the Second Amendment. Its not like the Billionaires won’t be permitted to employ private security guards with guns, after all.

    • Replies: @John Johnson
  107. anon[323] • Disclaimer says:
    @james wilson

    I am disinclined to describe the shottie as a long gun.

    In the context of “murders in Baltimore” it is a “long gun” because US Federal regs.

    It’s range is less than many a pistol, and it can easily be modified into a short gun.

    It’s not difficult to hit a deer-sized target at 100 meters using slugs. Sight radius matters.
    Getting hits with a pistol at 100 meters requires more practice.

    • Agree: Twinkie
    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
  108. Long guns are better at resisting government tyranny and has more military uses. That’s why they want to ban rifles. So there will be less opposition when they come to put you in re-education camps.

  109. @Tulip

    White people have low homicide rates regardless of trust levels.

    Chicago Whites have a lower homicide rate than the French.

    I don’t see why White people should have to give up their guns just because Democrat plans for Black areas have failed.

    • Replies: @Twinkie
  110. @anon

    A shotgun is a long gun in the sense that you can’t easily carry it concealed that way you can carry a handgun concealed into, say, a bank you want to rob. On your way in, witnesses will notice your suspicious behavior making it more likely you’ll be tracked down by the cops.

    • Replies: @anon
  111. potential situation in Virginia now. it’s possible Northam is looking to run the standard leftist playbook on physical protestors, but this time, on 2A demonstrators, not on random, utterly obscure internet protestors like all the street skirmishes between 2016 and 2019 in other states.

    Northam has declared a State Of Emergency, and also declared all firearms illegal in the state capital.

    the purpose possibly being, allowing the 2A protestors to show up, but forcing them to be disarmed by law, so that antifa can show up with bats and clubs, and beat them down, while Virginia state police stand by, making sure antifa doesn’t get hurt and no 2A people can defend themselves.

    suddenly all these minor, irrelevant alt right and antifa street skirmishes might become actually relevant.

    an elected governor laying a standard issue Sam Francis, anarcho tyranny trap for law abiding Second Amendment protestors is how conflict starts.

  112. agree that NRA has been one of the only effective rightist organizations for decades, but over the last 10 years, 5 year especially, it has started to slip. as an outsider it’s harder to say exactly what’s going on inside there, but NRA is deviating from it’s stated mission. that’s certain.

    what the power struggle inside NRA looks like exactly is a he said she said situation, unless you have inside information. all we know for sure is that some of the leadership isn’t interested in fighting the political battle anymore, are trying to cash out, and use NRA for profit.

    this means that the only explicitly rightist, explicitly political organization directly engaging leftists, is effectively in limbo, and could possibly dissolve. at the worst possible time.

  113. Piglet says:
    @JMcG

    There was an article today in the Daily Mail about the first Korean American astronaut. Harvard trained doctor and Navy Seal.

    To simplify this as much as possible:

    Seal = water critter
    SEAL = member of a US Navy Sea, Air and Land team.

    There is a difference. Just ask a seal or a SEAL.

    • Replies: @JMcG
  114. anon[243] • Disclaimer says:
    @Steve Sailer

    A shotgun is a long gun in the sense that you can’t easily carry it concealed that way you can carry a handgun concealed into,

    That really depends on the shotgun. I won’t link to the vid, but that shooting in the church in White Settlement, Texas started with the intruder pivoting a shotgun with a pistol grip out from under his jacket. As far as I can tell, no one in the vid saw it coming until it was out of concealment.

    Or I could link to Miami Vice, where Tubbs carried a sawed off double barreled 12-gauge.

    Neither of these will be very easy to shoot beyond 7 yards / meters, but that’s not their purpose.

    • Replies: @J.Ross
  115. Twinkie says:
    @John Johnson

    White people have low homicide rates regardless of trust levels.

    You haven’t been to West Virginia or the Balkans, I see.

    • Replies: @J.Ross
  116. J.Ross says:
    @Twinkie

    >trust levels
    >the Balkans
    No.
    >West Virginia
    West Virginia has a place with a homicide rate like Chicago, Detroit, or Baltimore?

    • Replies: @Twinkie
  117. Anonymous[294] • Disclaimer says:
    @John Johnson

    The NRA was originally founded specifically to campaign against the disarmament of former slaves in the defeated south.

  118. J.Ross says:
    @anon

    >a shotgun becomes shorter if you saw half the barrel off.
    Well yeah, and Uzis and Mauser broomhandles become pistol caliber carbines with the stock attachment.
    But shotguns are generally the last thing gun grabbers will let you keep, and if you saw it off, you might as well be putting a twisted length of coat hanger in an AR.

    • Replies: @Twinkie
  119. PaceLaw says:

    Baltimore! Baltimore! Baltimore! What a sad, dying city.

    The below link relates to a mid-day shooting/murder in downtown Baltimore (touristy/white/business area). If the nice, touristy areas can’t be defended then what is left??? I know of people who are even afraid of going to Orioles games at Camden Yards these days. Also, something tells me that something other than a rifle or long-gun was used in this murder.

    https://www.baltimojresun.com/news/crime/bs-md-ci-cr-shooting-royal-farms-arena-20200115-20200115-ts6tfrpclfarrpvwjpwovyqmy4-story.html

  120. Twinkie says:
    @J.Ross

    West Virginia has a place with a homicide rate like Chicago, Detroit, or Baltimore?

    So any place with lower homicide rates than “Chicago, Detroit, or Baltimore” has “low homicide rates” now?

    At one point in the early 2010’s, Beckley, WV, deep in the coal country, had a peak annual homicide rate of 34 per 100,000 people and almost 120 rapes per 100,000 residents (in the recent years, the homicide rate has settled down to 15-20 per 100,000 a year while the rape rate has climbed to 140+ per 100,000). And this is not a large city or even a large town. It only has 16,000 or so residents.

    I am in no way arguing that whites are more violent or criminally-prone than blacks and Hispanics (because that would be utterly counterfactual and stupid), but saying that whites have universally low violent crime rate is equally as ridiculous as saying that Asians have universally low violent crime rate.

    Race is a very important variable (perhaps the most important variable in something like this), but it’s not everything – many other factors affect phenomena such as violent crime rates.

    Race is also not magic that makes people just so. If you stick white people who descend from reevers and cattle thieves in a poor hill country and give them nothing but dirty, backbreaking work, there is going to be murdering and raping… even among white people.

    • Replies: @John Johnson
  121. Twinkie says:
    @J.Ross

    Well yeah, and Uzis and Mauser broomhandles become pistol caliber carbines with the stock attachment.

    No. Unless the barrel is lengthened, there is no velocity (and kinetic energey) gain for the projectile. Real PCCs deliver more wallop than pistols of the same caliber (not to mention creating reliable expansion in hollowpoint ammo).

    But shotguns are generally the last thing gun grabbers will let you keep

    And outdated doctrine from the days when armies duked it out long range with artillery and machine guns… and heavy, large caliber “battle rifles.”

    Shotguns are pretty handy in trenches and urban fighting – and much of fighting these days is in “built-up terrain.” I, of course, prefer a carbine even in CQB, but shotguns are no joke in CQB. Double ought buck is pretty devastating firepower in close range.

    • Replies: @J.Ross
    , @Johann Ricke
    , @anon
  122. eugyppius says:
    @anon

    Shifting goalposts? The anon to whom I responded appeared to be arguing that manufacture of guns is so trivially easy that legal restrictions won’t impact the prevalence of weapons. Well, we have something approaching a natural experiment, in the form of countries that restrict access to firearms. All EU countries from Switzerland to Slovakia as well as some others adhere to the minimum standards of the Firearms Directive:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Firearms_Directive

    Even these minimal standards are far more restrictive than American law. So, do populations make up the gap by brewing their own guns in the back of their RVs, or not?

    The truth is that they don’t. For obvious reasons it is hard to know but some published reports suggest that improvised firearms are more common in the US, where manufactured guns are easy to acquire and improvised guns are generally legal; than they are in countries like France and Germany, where improvised arms are prohibited and access to manufactured weapons is restricted.

    Or one of the many WWII firearms stashed away 70 years ago. Yes, those still exists. Or smuggled in. That’s how the grenades in Sweden generally show up. You are aware of the increasing number of attacks with hand grenades in Sweden, of course.

    Thank you for extending my point. Improvising a gun in practice is not so trivial that it is a common means of coming by firearms. Europeans who want guns get them instead by stealing a legally acquired hunting weapon or reactivating a stage prop or smuggling munitions from the Bosnian/Kosovo wars of the 1990s (the main source of the Sweden attacks according to reports).

    It is widely observed that first-world nations with firearms restrictions have lower rates of gun ownership than the US, where they are unrestricted:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Estimated_number_of_civilian_guns_per_capita_by_country

    Like it or not, government restrictions have a meaningful impact on firearms ownership. Improvising guns is in practice less common than smuggling guns or stealing them, so it is not that trivial and prohibitions have an impact. This is presumably why Americans oppose leftist efforts to restrict firearms ownership, because they know it will matter.

    • Replies: @eugyppius
    , @anon
  123. eugyppius says:
    @Thomas

    tight control over the supply and manufacture of firearms isn’t really possible

    Of course, but in practice improvised firearms are not nearly as prevalent as manufactured ones. In places like England where there are actually not that many guns (<5 per 100 people), gang violence features a lot more stabbings; and, according to police, stolen (erstwhile legitimately owned) and reactivated props are the most common illegal firearms.

  124. eugyppius says:
    @eugyppius

    Small correction: Switzerland is obviously not an EU country but they adhere to the firearms directive nonetheless, as does Norway.

  125. JMcG says:
    @Piglet

    Thanks! There I was, sweating over “astronaut.”

  126. @Twinkie

    I am in no way arguing that whites are more violent or criminally-prone than blacks and Hispanics (because that would be utterly counterfactual and stupid), but saying that whites have universally low violent crime rate is equally as ridiculous as saying that Asians have universally low violent crime rate.

    It’s not ridiculous if you are making a general assessment. There are in fact global correlations that undermine arguments from gun control advocates that argue the guns themselves increase homicide rates.

    Race is also not magic that makes people just so. If you stick white people who descend from reevers and cattle thieves in a poor hill country and give them nothing but dirty, backbreaking work, there is going to be murdering and raping… even among white people.

    You are implying that poverty causes crime when in reality it’s not that simple.

    The White homicide rate during the depression remained lower than the Black homicide rate today.

    Sexual crimes dramatically increased for all groups after the 60s cultural changes.

  127. J.Ross says:
    @Twinkie

    You’re right about barrel length but the ATF doesn’t want you to put a stock on a Skorpion.

    • Replies: @Twinkie
  128. Bert says:
    @Anon

    Right, just as making certain biochemical substances (“drugs”) illegal eventually got rid of them in this country. LOL. Banning guns would do nothing but provide another product for smugglers. Pro-gun, LOL. Troll.

  129. @Twinkie

    I, of course, prefer a carbine even in CQB, but shotguns are no joke in CQB. Double ought buck is pretty devastating firepower in close range.

    Have you ever used a suppressor for a shotgun? If so, did you venture to do it without ear protection?

    • Replies: @Twinkie
  130. J.Ross says:
    @Anon

    This is complete gibberish. It’s like atheists trying to disprove Chistianity by not understanding a bible verse, then turning around and commanding Christians regarding another misunderstood verse. It doesn’t help you that Bloomberg’s astroturfers made “I am a gun owner but” a copyrighted proprietary phrase. The opioid crisis, for example, started as a legitimate palliative practice universally accepted by highly educated professionals. It gets worse when you look at trying to ban it because it turns out that these drugs are insanely cheap, easy, and quick to make. And there’s the fact that your babble is incompatible with any grasp of history.
    Let me help you with this, you paid shill working off a script: to be what you say you are actually entails philosophical, spiritual and legal identities which you aren’t even trying to fake, the lack of which which lets everyone see you glow. The whole point of this issue isn’t to “have guns” like they do in Australia, England, France, Germany, Canada and for that matter Mexico and Brazil. This is about having a certain kind of society guaranteed by a certain mind-frame regarding how law works and what is the proper role of government. I don’t want to “have guns,” I want to live in a certain kind of society under a certain kind of government, and lawful gun ownership which by right precedes government is the physical crystallization of that idea.

    • Agree: Nicholas Stix
  131. anon[340] • Disclaimer says:
    @eugyppius

    Shifting goalposts? The anon to whom I responded appeared to be arguing that manufacture of guns is so trivially easy that legal restrictions won’t impact the prevalence of weapons.

    Read more carefully.

    Here is the original claim

    Over a sufficiently long period of time banning legal guns would eventually get rid of illegal guns also.

    “Sufficiently long period of time” is conveniently undefined. The simple counter argument is obvious: the underlying assumption is “banning legal guns” means no new guns enter the geographical area, however fabrication of firearms such as STEN guns, M3 “grease”guns and others is not difficult.

    You went off on a long detour around various places, dueling various strawmen, but never dealt with the underlying assumption.

    Another question that can be asked: how long will it take before Mexico’s de facto ban on legal guns gets rid of illegal ones? What is the “sufficiently long period of time” required in the case of Mexico? Bear in mind that the cartels don’t just use AK’s and M16’s, they also possess and use Rocket Propelled Grenades.

    The deeper underlying assumption is magical thinking, totemism: the “gun” object carries with it some kind of mana or voodoo or evil spirit that causes otherwise sensible young men, men who are getting their lives together and about to go to college where they will be aspiring rappers, to without any reason shoot up the neighborhood and kill some rival. It must be the voodoo in the object, the deodand that must be punished, because the Holy Blank Slate (Peace be unto it) insists that all young men are exactly the same in all biological ways until acted on by the evil spirit / voodoo / mana / etc. inherent in a piece of metal and plastic. Therefore “guns cause crime”, because all people are the same.

    Does this clear things up for you? I do hope so.

  132. “But because long guns are seen as white guns and handguns as black guns, most of the energy is aimed at banning long guns.”

    This is surely true, though ‘tis a puzzlement why the Communist, er, Democrat Party is so fixated on them.

    September 18, 2013:

    Then again, the murder weapon that mass murderer Adam Lanza used at Sandy Hook Elementary in Newtown, CT (December 14, 2012) wasn’t an “assault rifle,” either. Lanza left it in his trunk, and did his evil with a semi-automatic pistol. The “assault rifle” fairy tale was later concocted by Connecticut’s political hack Chief Medical Examiner, H. Wayne Carver II. Thus, the Daily News and other MSM outlets were piling one lie on top of another.

    https://nicholasstixuncensored.blogspot.com/2013/09/gotcha-same-gun-different-slay-gun.html?m=0

    Initially, local police reported that Lanza had left the long gun in the trunk, and committed all of his murders with a semi-automatic pistol. However, a week or two later, the state Chief Medical Examiner, H. Wayne Carver II, came to Newtown to deliver a speech, in which he lied, and asserted that Lanza had committed all of his murders with an AR-15.

    If America had a free, independent press, there would have been a scandal. Alas, Alex Jones didn’t help by announcing that the whole shooting was a hoax, carried out by crisis actors. But Jones had nothing to do with the AR-15 hoax.

  133. anon[321] • Disclaimer says:
    @Twinkie

    Shotguns are pretty handy in trenches and urban fighting

    Something the Supreme Court was unable to notice for, er, reasons in hearing US vs. Miller, so the NFA-34 was left intact. Then multiple lower judges didn’t even bother to read the decision but just made up some stuff and pretended it was real…and here we are, today.

    An 18.5″ barrel works well enough, but a 14″ is handier for some tasks. It just costs more and has a bundle of red tape attached.

    By the way, I’ve never met a fan of gun control who has actually read US vs. Miller. Not one. It’s not a complicated read, either.

    • Agree: Twinkie
  134. @Twinkie

    I found the same article, and though a few things didn’t match (he seemed younger etc.), I also immediately thought of you.

  135. Twinkie says:
    @Johann Ricke

    Have you ever used a suppressor for a shotgun?

    No. That’s silly.

    • Replies: @Johann Ricke
  136. Twinkie says:
    @J.Ross

    Get a pistol brace. Works as a stock.

  137. @Twinkie

    No. That’s silly.

    Seems to me that if you’re gonna use a shotgun for home defense, a suppressor might be a good thing for preserving your hearing. That’s assuming you don’t want to have to stock a bunch of ear muffs and remind your family members to put them on before firing at the assailants coming at you. The shotgun suppressor I had in mind was the following:

    https://www.silencershop.com/silencerco-salvo-12.html

    Not cheap, but I assume that for most people, their eardrums are worth more than $1000.

    • Replies: @Twinkie
  138. Twinkie says:
    @Johann Ricke

    If you have to use a firearm for home defense, preserving hearing is not a first order of things. Shotguns are already long, heavy, and unwieldy, especially for those with a small stature (i.e. women and children). Attaching a suppressor for one makes it even more so. There are other issues with suppressing a shotgun, but that reason alone makes it less than ideal for social purposes.

Current Commenter
says:

Leave a Reply - Comments are moderated by iSteve, at whim.


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments become the property of The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Steve Sailer Comments via RSS
PastClassics
How America was neoconned into World War IV
The “war hero” candidate buried information about POWs left behind in Vietnam.
Our Reigning Political Puppets, Dancing to Invisible Strings