news

Guyer High School Re-writing the 2nd Amendment?

Posted on by Caleb

This morning, a link popped up in my social media feeds about Guyer High School in Texas using a new AP US history textbook to “re-write the 2nd Amendment.” Here’s a link to the story in the Liberty Crier (which is a thing, apparently):

Textbook version: “The people have a right to keep and bear arms in a state militia.”

Actual 2nd Amendment: “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”

Now, the implications are troubling to say the least, because if that’s an accurate representation of what’s in the textbook, then it obviously shouldn’t be used in any schools. Not because of potential political bias, but because that’s not what the 2nd Amendment says. It’s exactly the same as teaching a student that 2+2=5, because it’s quite simply wrong.

There is a problem, however. Namely, the sources for the article are…questionable in the best case. The Liberty Crier which we’ve linked to simply links back to the equally unsourced “Daily Paul” website, which you can probably guess the political orientation from the title. I’m not saying that it’s not true, but until it’s verified by a more credible website, we’ll withhold calls for action until then. To that end, I’ve contacted the Guyer High School administration, who at this time have not yet returned my emails. I’ll update this post through the day if I uncover more information on this as of yet unverified story.

Again, it’s important to not jump to conclusions. The websites that this story originally appeared on are about as credible as infowars (and share a similar readership) so before we saddle up the torches and frankenstein rakes, let’s make sure this is actually happening first.

Update 11:08 AM Central Time
Guyer High School’s Director of Communications, Sarah Cox responded to our request for information with the following email:

Mr. Giddings:
Thank you for your interest in our textbook.

The teachers and staff are aware of this “summary statement” in the U.S. History book for Advanced Placement history classes. It is what it states above the listing of the amendments – that it is a summary statement. Please be assured that the teachers in Denton ISD are disseminating the correct information on the Second Amendment.

So here are the facts that we have: Guyer High School in Texas is using a textbook which drastically misstates the purpose and summary of the 2nd Amendment. According to their Director of Communications, teachers are aware of the summary statement, and are teaching the “correct” information on the Second Amendment.

At this juncture, we’d encourage parents of children enrolled in Guyer to contact the school’s administration and ensure that the correct text and meaning of the 2nd Amendment is being taught in school. The statement from the school officials that the “correct” information is being taught isn’t strong enough for me to not worry about it, because it’s entirely possible that their definition of “correct” could differ quite wildly from the Supreme Court’s definition.

Again, if you are a parent of a child enrolled at Guyer, or know someone who is, please make sure that you’re getting in touch with the school’s administration to make sure that they’re teaching the 2nd Amendment as written in the Constitution and clarified by the Supreme Court in the Heller and MacDonald decisions.

Update at 1414 Central Time: The administration at Guyer has provided further clarification on the textbook as used in their class. Here is their clarification:

The main history book utilized in the Advanced Placement U.S. History classes for juniors in Denton ISD is titled: American Pageant. This is a history book that has had a strong reputation for historical facts for many years. The American Pageant, the official textbook, gives the exact Bill of Rights.

The book in question, U.S. History: Preparing for Advanced Placement Exams, is a supplemental instructional aid and not the official textbook for any history classes. In this supplement, it states – above the amendments – that the following is a “summary statement.” The teachers and staff are aware of this “summary statement” and are teaching the amendments from the classroom textbook, American Pageant.

The only approved textbook for these classes is American Pageant. All other materials are “supplemental.” Please be assured that Denton ISD history teachers are disseminating the correct information on the Second Amendment.

While not much more strongly worded than their initial clarification, this does point out that the text is used in a supplemental fashion and not as a primary source in the classroom.

self defense

Competition shooting is just like defensive training

Posted on by Caleb

A great post at pistol-forum is talking about the mental excuses that people make for their poor shooting, and Tam has spent some pixels talking about the saw “there’s no timer in a gunfight.” That discussion has actually been pretty well handled, so I want to talk about something that really bugs me.

Namely, the title of this post. In the pistol forum thread, here’s a direct quote from a dude who is pretty well respected in the training community:

What I say most of the time is that anytime you are racing a timer, stop telling me that you are training for real. I hear the “competition is just like the real thing”. (emphasis added) It isn’t……in my limited experience.

You can probably guess my problem with that sentence, but I’ll go ahead and spell it out. Who exactly in the competition shooting community is saying that? I’ve never heard anyone say it. I’ve never said it. I’ve been to hundreds of matches across the country and I’ve never heard anyone say that “competition is just like the real thing.”

IMG_00000038_hdr

If competition was “just like the real thing” 99% of the stages would consist of panic-drawing and firing while hastily backing up and digging for your phone/keys with your support hand. Most shooters would carry j-frames or LCPs, and stages would be a lot shorter. Seriously, I’ve come to believe that there is a Competition Shooter Sumdood out there, who goes around and tells tactical trainers that “competition is just like the real thing” to get them all riled up. I’ve never met the guy, but damn does he ever get around.

Competition shooters do say somethings about shooting matches as it relates to self-defense that I absolutely agree with. Here’s a sample:

  • Competition shooting makes you better at actually shooting your gun.
  • Competition shooting makes you better at gunhandling (reloads, malf clearance, draws, etc
  • Competition shooting makes you more attractive to the opposite sex because you get a cool jersey (this may be a lie)
  • Competition shooting allows you to practice shooting skills under a higher level of stress than training on a square range.

I’ve honestly never heard someone say that competition shooting will teach you tactics, or train you how to win in a dynamic critical fight on the Mean Streets where it gets real. And if you’re at a match and hear someone say that it will, take a picture of the guy and send it to me at [email protected] so I can hunt him down and punch him around a bit.

Seriously, tactical trainer dudes: no one is saying that competition is just like the real thing. Please stop repeating that nonsense.

rifles/VZ-58

VZ-58 Sporter project

Posted on by Caleb

The problem with sharing office space with a gun shop is that sometimes you do silly things. GunUp Gun Sales has had these VZ-58 Sporters in stock since the panic, and because it’s a 10-round gun with a thumbhole stock, haven’t been able to move them. So, I took one off their hands (there are still two left, btw) and now I have a VZ-58 Sporter. Obviously, the big difference between this and a “regular” VZ-58 is that this gun has only a 10 round magazine and cannot accept a 30 round mag without milling the receiver.

VZ-58 Sporter

So perhaps I’ve been watching too much Strike Back (where they use SBR VZ-58s), but I think this rifle is cool as hell. It’s not perfect, and I need to figure out what to do with it. Quick list of features that I like and don’t like to help establish a plan. First, I don’t really care that it only takes 10 round magazines, at least for now. I can get the 10 rounders cheap, and I’m not going to be operating in any operations with this rifle, so milling the receiver is probably a last priority. The iron sights don’t actually suck too badly, with a fairly wide rear notch. Plus, mounting optics on AKs and VZ-58s suck. Now, the one thing I do loathe is the thumbhole stock. It’s just bad. But it does have a sling swivel attachment right in the place where I’d want to put a sling. But it really is awful, so that’s going to go. I can’t decide if I’m going to replace it with a wood stock or an M4 style stock, that will be tbd.

There are really two directions I could go with this build – go with putting it back in the wood, or move it forward and use modern components. As I’ve been writing this post, the beginnings of a plan have formed in my mind, because in its current configuration this rifle weighs 7.4 pounds fully loaded. That’s about a pound and a half more than a fully loaded M1 Carbine. See where I’m going with this? The atrocious thumbhole stock is heavy, so if I could get rid of that and replace it with something lighter, I could get the total weight under 7 pounds. If it’s under 7 points, suddenly I have a lightweight, iron sighted rifle capable of engaging targets out to 100 meters chambered in .30 caliber. That’s actually pretty appealing, and even though it gives up 5 rounds to an M1 Carbine, 10 rounds of 7.62×39 is certainly nothing to sneeze at in a truck gun.

So, the next installment of the VZ-58 Sporter build will have me ditching the godawful thumbhole stock, and adding something new and interesting!

editorial/self defense

What are the odds?

Posted on by Tim

Human beings invest a lot of effort into trying to predict the future and protect against uncertainty. We spend billions on insurance to protect us against the uncertainties of tomorrow and billions more on research to try and determine what’s going to happen to our bodies and our bank accounts. When we begin to ponder the question of self defense we want the same sort of answers we ask of doctors, lawyers, and insurance agents and at some point we typically look to others who have more knowledge and experience to ask how likely it is that we’ll need to actually take violent action to protect ourselves from harm.

Unfortunately those we look to often don’t have any more actual information than the relative novice does. They may be familiar with more axiomatic groupthink than the novice, but that isn’t the same thing as having actual useful knowledge. If you wandered onto most web forums and blogs and asked about the likelihood of needing to use a firearm in self defense, doubtless several people would say that gunfights are pretty rare things and you don’t have to worry much about them.

I would make a very different argument. It’s true that gunfights (which I will define as a two way exchange of gunfire) involving law abiding citizens and violent criminal actors don’t show up prominently in a lot of statistics, but merely looking at the raw statistics on that matter doesn’t really tell the tale.

In their Uniform Crime Report for 2011, the FBI records 751,131 instances of aggravated assault for 2011. The crime of aggravated assault is defined by statute in all of the 50 states, but the FBI has a pretty good working definition: They define aggravated assault as “ an unlawful attack by one person upon another for the purpose of inflicting severe or aggravated bodily injury. The UCR Program further specifies that this type of assault is usually accompanied by the use of a weapon or by other means likely to produce death or great bodily harm.” We typically encounter this kind of language when discussing justification for the use of lethal force. Again for clarity: The events that the FBI describes as “aggravated assault” are typically going to present the factors necessary to justify the use of lethal force in self defense.

Someone who takes a baseball bat to another person’s head without killing them will often end up being charged with or convicted of aggravated assault. Renowned firearms instructor Tom Givens once encountered a fellow who threatened to bash Mr. Givens’ head in with a piece of steel rebar. Had that attack actually been carried out, it would have likely been written up as an aggravated assault. Of course, the criminal didn’t realize who he was threatening and had second thoughts about the matter once he was staring down the barrel of Mr. Givens’ pistol.

…and that gets at the heart of the matter. You often hear people comment on how rare “gunfights” are based on murder statistics, but when you start looking at the crime statistics there are an awful lot of other criminal acts that would justify getting a gun involved. I’ve only presented data from a single year, one in which the number of aggravated assaults was down by double digits from the previous year. Some time ago the Bureau of Justice Statistics put out a statistical analysis based on crime trends at the time which attempted to calculate someone’s lifetime risk of being the victim of a violent crime. The results were quite startling and I encourage you to read it for yourself. 

As is ever the case when it comes to making predictions based solely on statistics…well…here be dragons. Still, when we stop to consider these predictions in context with Gary Kleck’s research on defensive firearms use, and the number of crimes like aggravated assault which would justify the use of a firearm in self defense, the idea that it’s rare to find oneself in a situation where the use of a firearm in self defense would be justified starts to look pretty sketchy.

Social scientists with an anti-gun agenda tried to make the argument some time ago that firearms were more likely to be used as instruments of crime than as instruments of self defense. When I see people online or in gunstores arguing that you aren’t likely to ever need a gun to defend yourself I can’t shake the feeling that the pernicious propaganda has had the desired effect. Their research was typically very limited and failed to consider a great big glowing problem: The lack of good guys out and about their lives toting a firearm for protection. That’s why we don’t see a lot of gunfights…not because there’s a lack of criminal actors out there preying on the citizenry.

Most victims of violent crime are unarmed when they are attacked, and that’s not surprising given the relative scarcity of people carrying guns. My home state of Virginia has a population of a little over 8 million people and it’s estimated that there are a little over 300,000 people who hold a concealed carry permit in the Commonwealth. (Including out-of-state permits) Of that 300,000, the number of people who are armed 24/7 is probably pretty small. Even if we factor in off-duty police officers (many of whom do not carry) it doesn’t really add that many good guys out and about with a firearm on them. Thus the odds that the average street criminal is going to end up staring down the wrong end of a gun in a pretty pro-gun state with very good laws on self defense are still relatively tiny for a lot of violent crimes. If just 10% of the population got a permit and started carrying at every possible moment I’d wager Virginia’s already pretty low violent crime rate would plummet faster than Anthony Weiner’s poll numbers.

The Bureau of Justice Statistics tells us that in 2011 5.8 million people were victims of violent crime, and then goes down to break out the number of victims by the type of crime. Included in that number is rape/sexual assault, robbery, aggravated assault, and murder…all of which would present objective justification for use of lethal force in most states.

Crime is not evenly distributed and certainly lifestyle and circumstances play an important role in determining your individual risk of being the victim of violent crime. That being said, when you start looking at the numbers and stop to consider their significance it’s difficult to accept the idea that needing a gun to defend oneself is an unlikely event. It should also be noted that self defense with a firearm doesn’t necessarily mean having to actually shoot someone. You could find yourself confronting a dangerous individual on your property like Mr. Givens did in the example I mentioned earlier and yet not needing to shoot. When Mr. Givens responded to that criminal aggression with a preemptive draw and an apparent willingness to actually use the pistol he pulled, it put an immediate end to hostilities without a shot being fired. This is another glaring omission of the aforementioned agenda-driven research: When a good guy unexpectedly pulls a previously concealed handgun many criminals will immediately break off the attack and run for it, ending the encounter without gunfire and in many cases without any documentation of the use of the firearm in self defense.

While it would certainly be possible to successfully defend oneself from some of the attacks that show up in the statistics without using a firearm, the fact remains that resisting an act of criminal violence with a firearm gives the good guy the best chances of ending the attack without suffering serious damage.

My goal here is to provide some food for thought when trying to answer the “What are the odds?” question that all of us face on the subject of self defense. With my lifestyle and in my geographic location the statistics say that I have about as good a shot as anyone can of never being a victim of a violent crime. Yet not all that long ago someone actually did try to make me the victim of one. I almost went into that unarmed because as I contemplated putting the gun on I thought “What are the odds?”…but I figured with my luck merely asking the question guaranteed that the universe was gunning for me.

It’s possible that I could have successfully defended myself against the attempt without my pistol, but I don’t know what implements of mayhem the skeezy looking drifter could have brought to bear in a fight. I do know that once he figured out that the guy he intended to rob was pulling a gun he ran the hell away as fast as he could. It was a mutually beneficial decision since he got to stay alive and I didn’t have to go through an uncomfortable chat with the police about the final resting place of my hollowpoints.

What are the odds for you? Unfortunately I don’t know. If I had the kind of powers necessary to tell you, I wouldn’t be writing for a gun blog. I’d be on my private island with Warren Buffet and Vladamir Putin mowing my lawn and Charlize Theron serving me drinks. All I can really do is point you to the information and encourage you to look at it seriously and incorporate the knowledge into your assessment.

My opinion is this: While the oft-cited axiom about the rarity of law-abiding citizen gunfights has a grain of truth to it, finding oneself in circumstances where use of a firearm in self defense would be justified isn’t really all that rare, or is at the very least much more common than many believe. Therefore it behooves the defense-minded individual to believe that at some point in their life they will need to use a firearm in self defense and prepare accordingly.

 

 

news/Taurus

Taurus® Launches Their New Versatile CT9/CT40 Carbine Platform

Posted on by Caleb

(Miami, FL) – Taurus®, the global leader in revolver manufacturing, launches their new CT9/CT40 Carbine platform. The CT9 (9mm) and CT40 (.40 cal.) is a new close quarter carbine platform for Taurus, with a blowback-operated system that fires from the closed-bolt position. The CT Carbine’s upper receiver is constructed of aluminum with an integral full-length Picatinny rail with sights attached. The rugged rear flip up sight is elevation- and windage-adjustable and the square-post front sight has a protective hood. The convertible charging handle can be switched for right- or left-handed shooters. The CT Carbine incorporates a versatile polymer handguard that can accommodate 3 additional Picatinny rails in the 3-6-and 9 O’clock positions for the addition of accessories.

The lower receiver is comprised of polymer with steel reinforcing inserts. The CT Carbine has a skeletonized fixed stock, pistol grip and a very distinctive magwell that doubles as a forward grip, providing additional control. The ambidextrous fire/safe selector switch is located just above the grip for quick and easy operation. The magazine release is located near the magwell housing, protecting the magazine from inadvertent releases. Provided with the CT Carbine is a hard case, sling, cleaning brush and owners manual.

CT9/CT40 Carbine Specifications

CALIBER 9MM/.40
ACTION Semi-Auto
OPERATION Blowback
CAPACITY 10 ROUNDS (9MM) / 10 ROUNDS (.40)
BARREL LENGTH 16″
TWIST 1:9
OVERALL LENGTH 36″
WEIGHT 6.6 LBS. (without mag)
FRONT SIGHT Fixed
REAR SIGHT Fully Adjustable
REMARKS Accessory Rail Integrated in Upper Receiver (Picatinny MIL-STD-1913)
Ambidextrous Slide Catch and Magazine Release
Cleaning Brush
Carrying Sling (additional)
MSRP: CT9/CT40: $898

About Taurus®:
Taurus® is the global leader in revolver production. Taurus International Manufacturing, Inc. is proud to be the U.S. importer of all Taurus brand firearms manufactured in Brazil and to be the manufacturer of the model PT-22, PT-25 and PT-738 pistols made here in the U.S. Taurus International services all Taurus brand firearms under the LIFETIME REPAIR POLICY™ as well. For additional information about Taurus, visit www.taurususa.com. High-resolution images are available at www.taurusdownloads.com.