My Blog List

Showing posts with label Firearms Training. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Firearms Training. Show all posts

Sunday, March 4, 2018

#NeverAgain - The Practical And Non-Emotional Version

For your Oscar Party chit-chat between commercials.....  Originally posted at the BoomerPreps Facebook page:

The rich, pompous, protected-by-armed-guards Hollywood elites will flap their gums in mock righteous indignation at tonight's award ceremony (which I hope none of you are watching). Their rally cry will be #NeverAgain. Well, I've got some #NeverAgain items to add to your list that will actually stop or minimize the slaughter of our school children.

#NeverAgain will we be lulled into a feel-good false sense of security by putting up "Gun Free Zone" signs in an attempt to stop homicidal maniacs.

#NeverAgain will we put our trust in any bureaucracy to keep us safe. Background checks, visits by the police and tips to federal authorities all get overlooked, time and again. Our safety is our personal responsibility.

#NeverAgain will we make it legal for teachers, administrators or other school employees who have been properly trained and vetted, to be disarmed in the place where we most need them armed.

#NeverAgain will we allow the actions of a homicidal maniac to influence and restrict the access to firearms owned and used safely by millions and millions of law-abiding Americans.

#NeverAgain will we stand silent when the ACTIONS of an individual are ignored, and the blame is placed on the inanimate object he used for mass murder.

#NeverAgain will we allow Political Correctness and Social Engineering of school districts to prevent the arrest, suspension or expulsion of dangerous students from our schools. Your actions have consequences in the real world. Teach them that lesson while they're still young.

Share with your friends.

---
Share this post! Click the Twitter, Facebook or Google+ icon below, and let your friends know!
Copyright 2018 Bison Risk Management Associates. All rights reserved. Please note that in addition to owning Bison Risk Management, Chief Instructor is also a partner in a precious metals business. You are encouraged to repost this information so long as it is credited to Bison Risk Management Associates. www.BisonRMA.com

Thursday, February 15, 2018

Another Gun Free Zone Slaughter - And THE Solution

Yet another Gun Free Zone got all shot to shit, with 17 dead.  Apparently, only the Gun Grabbers are surprised by this with their immediate calls that, "Something must be done!!!".

This problem - Gun Free Zones becoming Free Fire Zones - is not going to stop until we do two things - one short-term, and one long-term.  Oh, and the Gun Grabbers and their ilk will not agree with either one of these.

First, let's get some points of agreement:

1.  Any place in the world that does not have a physical deterrent to bad guys is considered a "soft target" and will always be their first choice of attack.  This is why churches, schools, markets/malls, theaters, etc., are nearly always the targets of the attackers.  Lots of people and little or no defense against an attack.

2.  We're into at least our second generation of kids who have not been taught how to deal with adversity.

3.  You will never, EVER be able to stop all mass killings.  I don't care how badly you want to wish it away, humans are violent, have always harmed each other, and will continue to do so.  What we can do - must do - is minimize the damage from each individual event.
---  ---

The liberal, Gun Grabber Fix is wholly useless.  Their demand that background checks be done, and High Capacity (actually, regular capacity) magazines and the guns to which they're attached be banned, are both useless as tits on a bull.

In virtually every mass shooting, the guns were either purchased legally, or were stolen.  Duh.

So, the ones that were purchased legally - so far, without exception, through gun dealers that administered background checks - does nothing.  (This is, once again, the case with the current shooter).  Either the person was normal at the time, or The System fucked up and, even though they had the information that the buyer was not eligible for a purchase, approved the buyer anyways.  Death by bureaucracy.

And it's already illegal to steal shit, so making another Feel-Good law ("At least we did SOMETHING!!") making it even MORE illegal to steal guns, is again, useless.

It's akin to issuing a protective order against someone.  To someone intent on doing harm, a restraining order is as effective in stopping them as the paper it's written on.

So let's just ban the Evil Black Guns all together, m'kay?  How has that worked in Mexico?  Hell, guns are basically illegal yet Mexico has dead, bullet-riddled bodies stacked like cord wood in the streets.

And making the government the sole holder of weapons has worked out perfectly every time it's been done.  Just ask the people from Stalin's Russia, Hitler's Germany and Pol Pot's Cambodia.

And do you really think that law abiding American's are going to give up their guns without a fight?  Seriously?  There's a meme out there along the lines of, "There are a trillion rounds of ammunition and 200 million guns in private hands in America.  If there was a gun problem, you'd know about it!"  Try to confiscate those guns, and you'd know about it in short order.
---  ---

So how 'bout we do something that is actually effective in stopping - or at least minimizing - the carnage wrought by people with evil intent?

Short-Term Fix:  Physically Harden Our Society

This includes physical barriers to limit access, and a greater ability of citizens to physically defend themselves and others.  We're actually seeing progress on both of these things slowly happening, but the pace needs to quicken.

Physical barriers - I think it's very important that these barriers not have the appearance of a prison.  We're seeing some larger cities install those posts along roads where pedestrians are present that will stop a car or truck from just mowing down people.  They also make them look like tree pots.

For things like schools, you MUST limit the entry/exit points.  If schools need money, it needs to go here, and not into the pockets of the liberal teacher's unions.

Each school should only have AT MOST 2 or 3 access points where you can actually come in contact with students and staff.  And (here's the kicker) each of those points needs to be manned by at least two armed individuals.

Notice I said "individuals" and not "police officers".  I guarantee you that if individuals with Concealed Carry Permits were offered the opportunity to spend a few hours a day, one or two days a week to stand guard at each of the access points, you'd have a waiting list a mile long.

Why at least two persons per access point?  Because, if like the shooter in Florida, the bad guy shoots someone before they enter the campus, the back-up can sound the alarm, and then return fire.

And it wouldn't cost the school a dime, other than the time it takes for scheduling.

Along those same lines, if a teacher or administrator has their permit, encourage them to carry as well.

What the above mentioned items also do is to help build a sense of community.  Neighbors looking out for each other.

Now, the liberal response will be, "All of those guns around those children will make them less safe!".

Bullshit.

Right now, if a teacher, administrator, janitor or whatever employee wanted to shoot up a school, they could do it.  Nothing could stop them from wholesale slaughter right now, this very second, in every school in America.

Except another teacher with a gun.

In conjunction with this normalized gun policy, we absolutely MUST exorcise this concept of Gun Free Zones from America.  It is simply the liberal mindset of a Utopian society.

If we put up signs, or disallow guns via legislation, guns will never be present.  Kumbaya, brother.

Good God, that hurts my head.  Sorry, cupcake, your world doesn't exist and it never will.  What is so horrific in your world view is that to be safe, everyone must first be assumed to be guilty - or at least pre-disposed - towards hurting others.  We're taking away your rights for the Greater Good.  So, like the late-great state of California ( and NY, CT, MA, IL, et al), you take away the ability of good, decent citizens to arm themselves, because The Nanny State thinks them all to be threats.

And this, despite all of the evidence to the contrary in Shall-Issue states.  America needs to wake the hell up.
---  ---

Buckle up, comrades.  If the short-term fix caused you emergency Safe Space occupancy, the long-term fix will bring on a full-force melt-down.


Long-Term Fix:  Mentally Harden Our Society

If I had to put a date on when the tipping point occurred, I'd say it was October 1, 1993.  That was the day when Polly Klaas was abducted.  This sweet 12 year old girl was taken from her mother's home and strangled to death.

It scared the hell out of America.  The thought that Small Town America could have strangers entering homes and killing children spread panic throughout America.

The response was to smother your kids with protection and to micro-manage their lives ("helicopter moms").  This full-control ideology seamlessly flowed into the schools of America where, again, everything is managed for you.  If there's a bully, or if someone says or does something you don't like, it is actually against the rules to fix it yourself - you MUST have the (State) school do it for you.

The result has been kids growing up without the ability to solve problems on their own.  The message drilled into our children's heads is, "The State will take care of you."

I remember when my boys were in grammar school in the late 1990's, and they came home with a paper saying that if they were physically attacked at school - and subsequently defended themselves - both the aggressor and my child would be suspended.  The only acceptable response was for my child to turn tail, and find a teacher.

I damned near lost my mind.  I had a talk with them that was clear as rain:  If someone physically hurts you, you WILL defend yourself until they stop.  I told them that they would NEVER be punished by me or my wife for defending themselves.  Never.  I told them that I would take any heat that was dealt out by school officials, and if they were in fact suspended, I'd take the time off work and spend it with them.

(I also made it painfully clear that if they started the aggression, there would be hell to pay.  They believed me).

Around this same time is when the Participation Trophy came to prominence.  It didn't matter what activity mom signed you up for, even if you sucked at it, you got a pat on the head.  Performance was irrelevant.  Reward without effort.

The result of that is kids who expect to get recognition and recompense regardless of their actions or efforts.

Combine those two, and we now have a generation-and-a-half of humans who have been trained to never deal with adversity, and who expect a positive outcome for everything they do (or don't do).  Like a small child, they have been trained that if they throw a hissy fit, they will get attention and what they want.

So, if I've been trained that the State is going to take care of all of my needs, and then the State does something I don't like, what's the outcome going to be?

If I don't have any coping skills, and I'm now not getting the positive outcome I want, well, I'm gonna explode.  I'm gonna throw a tantrum.  If society is lucky, it will just be someone who has a meltdown in a mall, and they just get escorted away and a new prescription for happy drugs.  On the other end of the spectrum, we get a school, church, business or large gathering place all shot to hell, and people die.

Our Cupcake Du Jour - Nikolas Cruz - falls in the latter category.  He was expelled from the school he shot up, his parents recently died, and supposedly, there's a girl who scorned him.

In his eyes, society has shit in his Coco Puffs, and he's going to show them all who's boss the only way he knows how.

The fix for this is both simple and impossible:  We must allow and encourage our children to fix their own problems.  At home, at school, and eventually, at work.

It's never going to happen, though.  Why?  Because that means giving up control in the schools, and centralized control is the core of socialist ideology.  The socialist teachers and administrators will never just teach kids reading, and history, and math.  They see it as their obligation - their mission - to also show them their world view that obedience to authority is paramount.  Without solidarity there can be no society.  None of this individualism, personal excellence or grabbing for the brass ring nonsense.  Those are the ideas of the evil capitalists.

You must work for, and be subservient to the Greater Good.  We Are Borg.  If some kids get killed, or a theater or church gets shot up, well, that's just collateral damage in furtherance of the final goal.
One death is a tragedy;  one million is a statistic.
Joseph Stalin
You're nothing but cannon fodder for the socialists.  But they have the propaganda game down pat.

Hey, we'll fix your interpersonal problems.  We'll feed you.  We'll give you happy drugs.  We'll house and clothe you.  We'll give you some walking around money.  But we demand unwavering obedience.

If you take away the school's ability to make the child's life easier - by fixing their problems and filling their bellies - you take away their power to persuade.

So this is going to have to fall on the shoulders of the parents.  I am not optimistic.

The first batch of kids that were indoctrinated with this statist mentality are now parents.  Most don't know any better than to do the same with their kids.

Some are, gratefully, turning to home schooling.  It's a tough road to hoe, but many are doing it.  Not only are you paying the taxes for the drones in public school, but you've got to pay for the text books and study guides to teach your kid, plus give up a source of income of the parent who stays home to teach their child.

God Bless every home that is trying to get out of the grip of the State.  It's a horrible place to be.
---  ---

So, we're down to only implementing the short-term solution, and even that will be an uphill battle.  The money might be appropriated to reconfigure the schools to limit physical access, but there won't be wide-spread acceptance of armed citizens in schools.
We don't let them have ideas.  Why would we let them have guns?
Joseph Stalin
Disarmament is an important secondary goal of all good socialists.  If The Deplorables don't have guns, they can't resist when things get really sporty.  They sure as hell can't let some uncouth Red Neck look good saving kids in a school.  It goes counter to the propaganda that All Guns Are Evil.

The Central Committee says, "Nyet.  Not gonna happen."

Sleep tight, America, and say a prayer for the next batch of kids that will be shot up at another school in this land.  It's a foregone conclusion.


---
Share this post! Click the Twitter, Facebook or Google+ icon below, and let your friends know!
Copyright 2018 Bison Risk Management Associates. All rights reserved. Please note that in addition to owning Bison Risk Management, Chief Instructor is also a partner in a precious metals business. You are encouraged to repost this information so long as it is credited to Bison Risk Management Associates. www.BisonRMA.com

Wednesday, August 16, 2017

Wake Up - Charlottesville Is Just The Latest In A Long String

Gawd, I didn't want to do this post.

The whole Charlottesville deal.  In short, WHAT THE HELL?!

Before I get into the meat and potatoes of this thing, let's refresh our collective understanding of American speech and actions:

First:  There IS NO SUCH THING AS ILLEGAL HATE SPEECH in America.  The first amendment and a shit-ton of court cases say so.  You can be a loud-and-proud racist - like the KKK or The New Black Panthers - and no one can stop you from spreading your hatred.  You have two options when you hear speech with which you disagree:  You can leave and not listen to it, or you can protest the speaker by NON-VIOLENT MEANS.

Second:  Simply because you call someone a fascist, a racist, a misogynist, or a homophobe, DOES NOT MAKE IT SO.  That being said, even if the person you're labeling IS one of those things, tough shit.  They still have the right to say what they want, regardless of how hateful, painful, "unsafe" or just plain mean YOU think their speech is.

Third:  In broad terms, the only type of speech that is illegal is that which IMMEDIATELY incites violence against others ("Let's go beat that skinhead!"), places others in IMMEDIATE DANGER (yelling "Fire!!" in a movie theater), or slanderous speech which is directed towards an individual or group and which negatively impacts the reputation of the individual or group.
---

OK, I'm watching the whole thing unfold at my store on Saturday morning, Pacific time.  I'm thinking, "Where are the cops?"  There are people from both sides attacking each other with sticks, fists, newspaper machines, pepper spray and the like.  "Where the FUCK are the cops?"

Then, things turn for the worse.  Some Nazi-fuck runs down a crowd of counter-protesters, killing a lady and injuring around 20.  Cowardly, fucked up shit.

The president makes this statement about the violence:
“I think there is blame on both sides. And I have no doubt about it, and you don’t have any doubt about it either,” Trump told the media. “And if you reported it accurately, you would say it.”
Let the reaming begin!

Trump DARED to not blame the violent situation solely on the right-wing protesters.  He correctly placed blame and condemnation on ALL who participated in the violence.

The result was sickeningly predictable.  RINOs caved and chastised the president.  The left did what the left always does - claim victimhood and blame the president.  And the press, well, they soiled their shorts like they haven't soiled them in a very long time.

The four-hour Viagra time limit has clearly been exceeded.

It has been non-stop hyperventilation  about how we fought the Nazi's and what they stood for.  The maddening irony is that all of these supposed anti-fascist groups and media are actually practicing exactly what we fought against in World War II:  Shut down and silence the opposition through violence.

RINO-In-Chief, John McCain media-ass-kissingly heroically said there is no moral equivalence between Nazis and the myriad of left-wing groups.

The media soiled themselves again.  Kleenex, to the publisher's office, stat!

Trump, NOT ONCE, said the BELIEFS OR WORDS of any of the groups were morally equivalent (although I would challenge that when discussing the antifa and black nationalist groups).

The moral equivalence is not about what the various groups stand for, it's how they BOTH VIOLENTLY ATTACKED THEIR OPPOSITION.

It was Classic Alinsky - "If you push a negative hard enough, it will push through and become a positive." Violence from the other side can win the public to your side because the public sympathizes with the underdog.

Wait, what's this?  The bastion of liberal, alt-left-think, The Los Angeles Times - to their credit - ran an article where basically both sides in the Charlottesville cluster-fuck proudly stated that they and their groups, started the violence.  Seriously, both sides took credit!

Well slap my ass, and paint me a pinko!  Isn't that what Trump said?

Don't matter.  Queue crickets chirping.

---

OK kids, buckle up as we enter the Way-Back-In-Time Capsule, and let's visit Dallas, Texas in July of 2016 - one whole, long year ago - practically ancient history:
In July of 2016, an avowed black nationalist murdered five police officers during a Black Lives Matter demonstration in Dallas, Texas. The act of violence was well-planned and was motivated entirely by the hate-filled ideology of the shooter, Micah Xavier Johnson. 
With several officers dead by the hand of a committed black nationalist, one might think the Obama administration may have considered the assassinations domestic terror and launched an investigation into groups associated with this ideology. 
Not at all. 
Barack Obama condemned the shootings, but he did not call out or even allude to Johnson’s hateful views. He did, however, blame “powerful weapons” for the violence. 
In her statement on the shooting, then-Attorney General Loretta Lynch exploited the tragedy to push for gun control and praise the cause of Black Lives Matter. No mention of Johnson’s ideology or “hate” was made in her statement, but she did manage to directly name multiple cases of police-involved shootings — all after cops were the ones murdered.
Ah,  the old switcheroo!  "Wardrobe!  Bring in the Strawman!"

Don't blame the individual, blame the inanimate object.  That would be like Trump blaming the murder of the woman in Charlottesville on the car.

Trump would then have AG Sessions march out and chastise car makers for the death and destruction they've brought upon our fair land, then defend the Nazis for their good works and blaming the Jews for "being in the wrong place at the wrong time".

Except none of that happened.  Trump gets hammered and Obama gets his belly rubbed and told what a great guy he is.
---

The real world:

This shit is getting real.  We are seeing with disturbing regularity where police departments are ordered to stand-down when leftists riot and/or initiate violence.

Democrat-controlled cities will provide you no safe harbor.  You will not be allowed to speak of ideas and policies which are in opposition to the controlling narrative of the left.

The police in these cities have, uniformly, been instructed to "stand down", and they've followed those orders.  WITHOUT EXCEPTION, cities which have had left-wing violence directed towards right-wing speech - and where the police stood by with their hands in the tactical vest pockets - have been cities controlled by Democrats:  Berkeley (more times than I can count), Baltimore, San Jose, Ferguson, San Francisco, St. Louis, Seattle, Oakland, Washington DC, Portland, Sacramento,  and, oh yeah, Charlottesville.

Here's the thing:  I'm not suggesting you don't go to any damned rally or convention, or hear any speaker you want.  Not even close.

I'm just saying that you need to expect unchecked violence if the city in which you are attending the event is a Democrat-controlled city.

As a personal suggestion, get your CCW license if your state requires one to carry a gun, and get to the range on a regular basis.  It is a horrible thing to think of having to defend your life for expressing your political beliefs, but that's where we are.

Or don't, and get your head caved in by a bike lock being wielded like a mace, or baseball bat using your head for T-ball practice.  Your choice.

It would be more horrible to see our right of free speech and assembly violently taken away by these leftist fascists.

Hide your head in the sand, click your heels and wish it all away.  Pretend it's just a phase our country is going through, and "this too, shall pass".

Or do something, and prepare.

Here in Nevada, there's a whole lot of physical red state between me and Clark County (Las Vegas), and a decent amount between me and Washoe County (Reno).  On the down-side, those two counties account for 87% of the population of the state.  Clark County alone is around two-thirds of the state population.

Still, my wife will soon be picking up her CCW.  She regularly works in Carson City (the state capitol) and that's prime protest turf for the leftists.
---

As an aside, Reno in Washoe County is an interesting city.  Outside of the city proper, it's as red-state as you can get.  Seriously, it's surrounded on all sides by conservatives!  I've heard serious talk of partitioning the county just above Reno, and creating a separate, new county.  The folks that live in that area have absolutely nothing in common with the sanctuary city, leftist ideology of Reno.

Could be interesting.....

---
Share this post! Click the Twitter, Facebook or Google+ icon below, and let your friends know!
Copyright 2017 Bison Risk Management Associates. All rights reserved. Please note that in addition to owning Bison Risk Management, Chief Instructor is also a partner in a precious metals business. You are encouraged to repost this information so long as it is credited to Bison Risk Management Associates. www.BisonRMA.com

Tuesday, April 11, 2017

Getting Stressed Out On The Range

Last week, I had a wonderful lunch (wonderful because they're good folks, and the lunch was was on their dime!) with some friends in Reno.  Since I was up in that neck of the woods, I decided to hit one of the indoor pistol ranges.  It had been way too long since I'd done any sort of pistol training.

I brought 3 guns with me, a Glock 19, Glock 26 (my primary concealed carry gun) and a Smith & Wesson M+P Shield (my secondary concealed carry gun).

My regular routine is to run one magazine through them just to re-acquaint myself with the sights, then go into "stress mode" training.  More on this in a second.

Since it had been a while since I'd been to the range, I put two magazines through each pistol.  I did one at 7 yards and one at 10 yards.  Everything was in the bullseye or no further out than the 9-ring.

I'm all, "you a bad, bad man" thinking it had been so long since I was in the range, and I'm still tearing out the center of the target.

Well, that glow of self-congratulations didn't last long!

It's difficult - ok, impossible - to replicate the stress one would be under if you were using a weapon in self-defense.  The best you can do in an indoor range where you can't move around (because of the other shooters) is to add some timed "games" to your practice routine.

One I was using goes like this:  You set a timer on your phone for 5 seconds.  Your 2 x 3 foot target has 4 of the 6 inch "Shoot-N-C" targets - one placed in each of the 4 corners of the larger paper target.  If you're not familiar with these targets, they have a black background that shows your hits instantaneously.  As an example, here's one of their 12 inch targets I used to zero a rifle.


When the bullet tears through the target, it instantly leaves a yellow ring so you can see where you hit.

I load my magazine with 6 rounds.  I number the targets 1 through 4, starting with the upper left hand target, and going clockwise.

First time through, I've got the gun in my right hand pointed down range, I hit the "go" button on my phone with the left hand, and shoot all 4 targets in numerical order within the 5 seconds.  If I miss a target (no yellow ring), I must fire again, hitting the target before moving on to the next - and knowing in my mind I only have 2 extra shots.

Why do this - limiting myself to only two extra shots?  Getting in the habit of "spraying bullets" doesn't stop bad guys, and puts any potential bystanders at risk.  I want fast, accurate shots.

After successfully doing the shots in 5 seconds, I drop it to 4 seconds, then to 3 seconds.

I'll then mix up the order:  I'll do a "Z formation" - 1,2,4,3.  Then a reverse Z - 3,4,2,1.  Then an "X", then a reverse X - you get it.

OK, so I start off with my Glock 26, and get through the drills in fine fashion.  Yeah, baby... bad, bad man....

Next up is the Smith and Wesson.

"Humility has just entered the building!"

I take the first shot at target 1 and miss entirely.  WTF?  I take the second shot and hit low-left on the target.  I move to target 2, same thing, miss then low left.  Buzzer goes off.

WHAT THE HELL JUST HAPPENED?!?!?

I do the drill again, with virtually the same results.  It must be the gun, right?  Did I drop it, and mess with the sights?  No, no dropped gun.  Barrel must be dirty.

I bring in the target, and put on one of the 12 inch Shoot-N-C targets.  I load the magazine with 5 rounds, and shoot them all in rapid fire fashion.

All 5 are down at the 7 o'clock position - lower left side of the target.  And then it dawns on me:  I'm over-squeezing the  grips when I'm shooting under stress.

To see this for yourself, grab an empty pistol, or anything that is gun shaped, hold it out in front of you, and squeeze your grip.  You'll see the muzzle pull down and to the left.

Wait, wait, wait!  Pump them brakes there, cupcake!  How come this didn't happen with the Glock?

Hmmm, good question.

Well, it's all about the grip... and lack of practice.

First off, here are the two guns in question - Smith and Wesson on the left, Glock 26 on the right.



Size and weight wise, they're just about the same.  It's the differences that count.

The Smith uses a single stack magazine.  Each cartridge sits right on top of the one below it.  This gives you fewer rounds per vertical inch (which is a negative), but also gives you thinner grips (which is good or bad, depending on your hand size).

The Glock uses a double stack magazine.  Each cartridge is slightly offset from the one below it.  This gives you more rounds per vertical inch (good), but fatter grips (same good or bad as above).

The Smith can carry 8 rounds in the magazine (or 7 if you use the standard magazine) and the Glock holds 10.

Here's what they look like side by side - Smith on left, Glock on right -


It doesn't look like much of a difference, but in the hand, it's very noticeable.

There's a BIG difference how the grips fit in my hand.  First is the Smith -


And the Glock -



Notice that the back of the Smith grip nearly fills my entire palm, and the Glock stops at my "life line" (interesting.....).  At the front of the grips, my fingers fit well with both guns (it looks like my pinky is off of the Glock, but it is being held by the grip extension).

At this point, it seems as though the Smith should be giving me better control than the Glock, but the exact opposite is what's happening in the real world.

I think these pictures explain it.  Natural placement of my trigger finger on the trigger.  You want the center of the pad at the tip of the finger to be centered on the trigger.  First the Smith -



And the Glock -



First, compare the angle of the middle knuckle on each hand.  The Smith has a sharper angle - more distance between the inner finger surface and the side of the pistol - than the flatter angle of the Glock.

Then notice the angle of the knuckle at the end of the trigger finger.  The Smith is bent inwards, where with the Glock, the finger tip is flat.

So, aside from the better "fit and finish" of the Glock to my hand, I train like crazy with the Glock.  As this "stress test" showed, I must have NEVER done any rapid shooting with the Smith.  Just lobbing slow and easy shots down range.

This seriously pisses me off at myself.  I have been semi-regularly concealed carrying the Smith for the past few months ASSUMING I was proficient and accurate with it.  We all know about assumptions...

Accept The Challenge

Get thee to the range, and do some stressed out shooting.  The drills above are even better if you do them with a buddy where he/she randomly calls out the numbers rapidly after each shot.  You're getting both the stress of timed shooting AND competition with another person ('cause you KNOW you want to win!).

Obviously, you can do even more life-like exercises if you're at a range that allows holster draws (most indoor ranges frown on such things), or if you go out into public lands and set up IDPA-like drills.

More practice is more better!
---

Oh, and keep the targets small - no larger than 6 inches for pistols.  And keep the distances similar to "gun fight" distances - no more than 10 yards or so.

Lastly, if you're setting up a scenario, be sure that as you're moving from shot to shot, try and incorporate moving away from your targets, not towards them.  If you're getting closer to the bad guys, you're making yourself easier to hit.  No bueno.

---
Share this post! Click the Twitter, Facebook or Google+ icon below, and let your friends know!
Copyright 2017 Bison Risk Management Associates. All rights reserved. Please note that in addition to owning Bison Risk Management, Chief Instructor is also a partner in a precious metals business. You are encouraged to repost this information so long as it is credited to Bison Risk Management Associates. www.BisonRMA.com

Tuesday, January 26, 2016

Keeping Your Wits About You

A few years back, I was teaching an Introductory Pistol class at a local gun range and shop.  All of what happened below was going on not more than 20 feet from where me and my 6 students were in class.  Didn't hear a peep!

Normally, the place had two employees present when they were open, but for some reason, the other employee didn't get into work on time.

Shortly after opening the store, some guy comes into the store and starts asking about picking up some pepper spray for his girlfriend.  The employee came out from behind the counter to go over to the pepper spray display which was locked up.

As the employee is unlocking the case - with his back to the "customer" - he gets his head slammed into the wall, and the bad guy tried to pull out the good guy's open carry pistol.   Thankfully, the gun was in a Serpa Retention holster, so the guy couldn't get the gun out.

The good guy - a rather large gentleman - threw an elbow at the bad guy hitting him square in the face.

Here's the point to the story - The bad guy ran out of the store.  The good guy drew his weapon, got sights on the bad guy.... and re-holstered his gun.

Why?  He was no longer being threatened.

This story has a different ending.  In this case, the good guy got free from his ropes, got his pistol, and shot the bad guy.

As he was fleeing.
David Martinez, 38, was shot and killed on Sunday after he turned a Craigslist offer into an attempted armed robbery. His victim, bound inside his own home, managed to untie himself and fire shots as Martinez fled. Martinez, who had a long criminal history, crashed his vehicle and died at the scene.
Now, I'm not going to shed too many tears that this turd-of-a-human is dead.  What I am saddened by is that this victim likely turned himself into a criminal.

In his adrenaline-soaked state of mind, he saw bad guy and shot bad guy.  Even though he was no longer being threatened.

Training and mentally walking through different scenarios would have saved him from this grief.  Keeping his mouth shut after the shooting might have helped as well.  One of the first things the Second Call Defense program stresses is that after you call for 911 help, you call your pre-paid attorney.

Then shut the hell up.

At our precious metals store, we regularly discuss different scenarios where bad guys emerge.  Our response is always greater than the threat presented - including the use of deadly force - but it's not always the expected response.

For instance, if a gun or other deadly weapon is displayed, there is a very good chance you'll be shot before you get a chance to harm us.  If you grab some merchandise and flee, you'll be pursued and likely get your ass kicked, but use of deadly force is unlikely unless our lives are threatened.

Use your head.  Go through scenarios in your mind.  Don't hesitate in defending yourself, but practice identifying situations where the use of deadly force is justified.

And when it isn't.


---
Share this post! Click the Twitter, Facebook or Google+ icon below, and let your friends know!
Copyright 2016 Bison Risk Management Associates. All rights reserved. Please note that in addition to owning Bison Risk Management, Chief Instructor is also a partner in a precious metals business. You are encouraged to repost this information so long as it is credited to Bison Risk Management Associates. www.BisonRMA.com

Monday, January 4, 2016

They're Right In Oregon

This Oregon stand-off is a nice mess.  Below, I'll have a link that details the events that brought us to this point, but I want to go back a bit further in history.  Specifically, how is it that the feds are able to own and control such large chunks of land?

Most people - and all statists - just think that, well HELL, they're the federal government.  They can buy whatever the hell they want.

Uhm, not so much.

If we read the Constitution, we see the powers and prohibitions placed on the 3 arms of government.  I read the whole thing, and not one single article, section, paragraph or sentence mentions the feds ability to own and run national parks or wildlife preserves.  Nothing even brushes up against the idea.

There must be a loop hole somewhere.

So, I went to the National Park Service (NPS) and I found the explanation.  They hang their hat on two specific portions of the Constitution.

First, they discuss the authority granting their existence -
Under the Constitution, the federal government has limited powers [nice of them to acknowledge that  .ed]. The authority for creating national parks is found in the Constitution under the “Property Clause” (Article IV, Section 3). “The Congress shall have Power to dispose of and make all needful Rules and Regulations respecting the Territory or other Property belonging to the United States….”
Well all-righty then.  Seems pretty clear.  The long and short of it is that they get to make up the rules for the property they own, period.

They then bolster their legitimacy with this -
“Dispose of” is used in the sense of, “the act of transferring care, ownership or possession, or ownership to another”. Congress determined that it was “needful” to conserve certain lands unimpaired for the enjoyment of future generations. The authority for creating the National Park Service is found in The “Necessary and Proper Clause” (Article I, Section 8). 
“Congress shall have the right to…make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.”
Wait, wait, wait.  It says "dispose of" means to transfer to another.  Right there, they said it themselves!  They didn't dispose of it, they kept it!  Still, it doesn't say they MUST dispose of it, so I guess some twit at the NPS just got a bit verbose.

That "needful" thing makes me a bit uneasy - seems like it's opinion-based - but they then back it up with the Article 1 Section 8 stuff, and it seems pretty clear.  It's pretty much a re-statement of the Article 4 stuff.  Got it - they can do as they please with federal land.

But, unsurprisingly, they forgot one thing:  To read the whole Constitution.  Somehow, they managed to miss the paragraph directly before the Article 1 Section 8 citation.  Here, it goes like this -
To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of particular States, and the Acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United States, and to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings;
Oh.  Now that's embarrassing.  No mention of national parks, just forts 'n stuff.  It seems as though the founding fathers, all of the original states, and all subsequent states that joined the union - by accepting the Constitution as the supreme law of the land - decided that the land ownership of the federal government was to be restricted to land uses consistent with the powers granted in the Constitution.

Crazy thought, right?

Chief, Chief, Chief, you piece of crap "Natural Wonders" hater!  I suppose you want to turn Half Dome into a screen for a drive-in movie theater!

While that would be kinda cool, no, I don't.  The beauty of Yosemite Park is hard to describe and it should be preserved.

But by the state of California, not the federal government.

You see, there's another part of the Constitution everyone forgot to read.  It's called The Bill Of Rights, and the tenth amendment kind of clears up any questions -
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.
Since we've already established that the federal government was not delegated the power to create parks, and the states weren't prohibited from doing so, that means the states get first crack at it.  If they had no desire to establish and run the parks, then the people could do so - or whatever they wanted to do.

It's that very last part of the paragraph - "or whatever they wanted to do" - that Big Government uses to scare the little people into believing of the need to bend or break the Constitution.  Freedom of choice (as in land use) is a dangerous thing, and good ol' Uncle Sam will make it all better.

OK Chief, you constitutional Nazi, what about massive land purchases such as the Louisiana Purchase, or Alaska, huh?  What would you do there, smartass?

That IS a bit of a conundrum, as you'll see.  While the land was in its pre-state form (why else would the federal government purchase vast amounts of land other than to convert it into a state or to act as a political barrier/boundary?), they would be constitutionally restricted to using the land for anything other than the forts, et al.

Doing so would bring civilization and law to the vast wild expanses, which would encourage people to move there, and set the stage for statehood.

And that's exactly what we did with the pre-state territories after the revolutionary war, but before 1803.  We'd offer them protection and law, people moved west, and they became states.

Here's a fun fact, kids!  When one of my heroes - Thomas Jefferson - made the 1803 Louisiana Purchase - he was challenged on.... wait for it.... constitutional grounds.

What the f........?!

Yep, Ol' TJ bent the very rules he had helped to craft -
Before the purchase was finalized, the decision faced Federalist Party opposition; they argued that it was unconstitutional to acquire any territory. Jefferson agreed that the U.S. Constitution did not contain explicit provisions for acquiring territory, but he did have full treaty power and that was enough.
Wow, bubble burst.  I guess no one pushed back because it was such a great deal ($0.03 per acre).  Expediency at the expense of constitutionality.  Sound familiar?

I just threw up a little in my mouth.

Go back and read the Article 1 Section 8 paragraph, and sure enough, the feds are restricted to purchasing land ONLY from existing states.

Well, since we had already crapped on the Constitution, a little bit more poo-poo couldn't hurt, right?  No need to actually go back and do an amendment empowering the federal government to buy land to expand the United States.

BTW, with few exceptions (like Alaska and the 13 formed after the Louisiana Purchase), most states are on land we got after various wars.  I guess that when the Constitution was written, they figured that that was the only way we would ever acquire more land, so they neglected to include the "purchase of land" in powers granted to the feds.
---

THIS brings us back to the issue at hand.  The feds still unconstitutionally buy our land, but now it's done with a gun to the head of the sellers, and prison for those who resist.

As promised earlier, here is the link to the timeline of the Oregon mess.  Read it, and prepare to be enraged.

Then consider -
"What country can preserve its liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance. Let them take arms."
- Thomas Jefferson, letter to James Madison, December 20, 1787
THAT is why those guys are in Oregon.  What is so awesome about that quote, is that it was made before our Constitution and Bill of Rights were even ratified.  We have these men - our forefathers - who just challenged and beat the most powerful military in the world, and they forever guaranteed the right of every American to do it again if needed.
"I ask who are the militia? They consist now of the whole people, except a few public officers."
- George Mason, Address to the Virginia Ratifying Convention, June 4, 1788
They consist now of the whole people.  Wow.  Words to remember.

Your president - one of those "public officers" - when he makes his pitch in the next few days to restrict your right of gun ownership, should consider -
"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
- William Pitt (the Younger), Speech in the House of Commons, November 18, 1783
We're on to you, Barry.  You and your ilk.  Nothing you will propose would have stopped a single one of the horrific shooting sprees you'll use to sell your "necessity" snake oil.

But you know that.

Just like the resistance to the "needful" assertion the NPS uses for its authority, expect resistance to any more unconstitutional infringements directed towards peaceful gun owners.

Here's how King George reacted after April 19, 1775 -



Yeah, it was about gun control.

---
Share this post! Click the Twitter, Facebook or Google+ icon below, and let your friends know!
Copyright 2016 Bison Risk Management Associates. All rights reserved. Please note that in addition to owning Bison Risk Management, Chief Instructor is also a partner in a precious metals business. You are encouraged to repost this information so long as it is credited to Bison Risk Management Associates. www.BisonRMA.com

Thursday, December 3, 2015

They've Got It Good, Here In America

Yesterday, I was working on another post when I got a text asking me if I was watching the news.  I clicked over to Google news and saw what was going on in San Bernardino.

Predictably, your president made a statement about how we need more, "common sense gun control".

How is it possible that the president of the United States doesn't have access to facts?  Facts about who is committing these mass shootings.

Take a 6 minutes out of your life and watch this excellent video by Bill Whittle about murder rates here in America and around the world.



I'm pretty sure they have an Internet connection at the White House, so Barry should be able to watch this as well.

Yet he still spews his lies and promotes his agenda to disarm you.  Ironically, as another friend noted, Barry made his remarks about how America is the only country that has these mass shootings.... in Paris - which just had its guts blown out only weeks beforehand.

And the last time I checked, Mexico has got more mass shootings and bullet-riddled corpses than they have non-corrupt government officials.  You know Mexico - that highly gun-controlled country to which he has granted statehood - at least when you consider their freedom to cross any of our borders, attend government schools, get driver's licences and collect welfare checks.

So, what kind of profile can we draw about these mass murderers?

  • They used legally purchased guns.  All of the existing "reasonable gun control" boxes were checked.
  • They are Muslims or mentally-ill liberals.

Are there exceptions?  Of course.  Tim McVeigh in Oklahoma City 20 years ago, and the recent wacko in Colorado Springs who shot from the abortion clinic come to mind.

Oh, and Barry also conveniently forgets to mention the single largest source of mass shootings in America.  This source does tend to use illegally-gotten guns.  It's young, black inner-city males.

It might also help his policy wonks to consider who IS NOT committing these heinous acts of terrorism.  This should help them focus their efforts elsewhere:

  • They're NOT Second Amendment-loving gun owners who are members of the NRA, GOA or other similar civil rights organizations
  • They're NOT conservatives
  • They're NOT Christians
  • They're NOT young, white inner-city males

You see, Barry, it's not the guns that are the problem.  Hell, every one of these terrorist acts is stopped by good guys with guns.  The problem is the culture in which these terrorist animals believe, and where they are free to practice their evil-doings.

Oh, and I hate to break this to you, but it ain't global warming, either.  The airfare to Paris was a waste.  Sorry to burst that CO2-filled bubble of yours.

But you know that.  Yet you focus your efforts of control on the very sources able and willing to fix the problem.

What the hell is wrong with you?

Your actions, policies and rhetoric directly contribute to this problem.  America is becoming one big "soft target" under your reign.  You refuse to enforce our border laws, you enact stringent gun laws on the law-abiding, and you refuse to address the FACT that the vast majority of mass shootings are committed by anti-American liberals, black inner-city males and radical Muslims.

I'm still waiting to hear how just one of your "common sense" gun laws would have stopped a single mass shooting.  C'mon, Barry, gimme just ONE.

I'll ask again - what the hell is wrong with you?
---

I know, I know.  I'm brushing up against Einstein's definition of insanity (Doing the same thing over and over, and expecting a different result).  Barry won't change.  Liberals won't change.

And the mass murderers won't change, either.  They don't need to.  They've got it good, here in America.


---
Share this post! Click the Twitter, Facebook or Google+ icon below, and let your friends know!
Copyright 2015 Bison Risk Management Associates. All rights reserved. Please note that in addition to owning Bison Risk Management, Chief Instructor is also a partner in a precious metals business. You are encouraged to repost this information so long as it is credited to Bison Risk Management Associates. www.BisonRMA.com

Friday, November 20, 2015

Gun Control Song



---
Share this post! Click the Twitter, Facebook or Google+ icon below, and let your friends know!
Copyright 2015 Bison Risk Management Associates. All rights reserved. Please note that in addition to owning Bison Risk Management, Chief Instructor is also a partner in a precious metals business. You are encouraged to repost this information so long as it is credited to Bison Risk Management Associates. www.BisonRMA.com

Tuesday, April 28, 2015

Guns: Is THAT Premeditation?

Simultaneously Posted At BoomerPreps.com


Anyone who owns a gun for self-defense has thought about the repercussions of having to use the gun to protect their life, or the life of another. I can think of few things that would be more of a emotional jolt than taking the life of another human being.

One of the things that would be worse would be my life being taken because I hadn't prepared for the situation.

We preppers plan. We look at the universe of events that could unfold, and we plan for them.

We put more time and effort into our preps for things we believe are more likely to happen, or which may have a significant, debilitating negative impact on our lives - regardless of the likelihood of the event coming to fruition.

Being killed by some random thug is high on the latter list. The places where I live and work aren't over-run with gun-toting, blood thirsty savages roaming the streets.

But dozens of people get mugged and murdered every day of every week here in America. It's a low probability event for you as an individual, but it's a real possibility.

So we plan. We prepare. We get ready.

We practice with our guns at the shooting range.

We buy memberships and insurance that will protect us if we shoot someone in self-defense.

We select ammunition that will most effectively stop the threat, and stop it quickly.

We learn advanced shooting techniques so we are more able to ensure we come out of the encounter alive.

Many people - the anti-gun crowd, much of government and most of the media in particular - will affix a special term to this kind of preparedness: Premeditation.

Why? Because they know it will scare many non-gun owners into thinking that anyone who uses a gun in self-defense is a cold-blooded killer. "Premeditated" is always coupled with "murder".

Let's first look at the definition of "premeditated" from Merriam-Webster online dictionary -
characterized by fully conscious willful intent and a measure of forethought and planning [premeditated murder]
The word-nerds even have it out for us! So, by definition, all prepping is premeditated. Especially when it comes to guns.

And that's a very good thing. We "gun nuts" genuinely want people to act responsibly with their guns. People are harmed when you do otherwise.

What follows is one video and links to two articles about guns - written by lawyers. In Texas.

"We Don't Dial 911"



The point about the signs influencing a jury is well-taken - especially in a "blue state" such as California, New York, etc.

My biggest problem is that you are advertising that you own guns. To me, it would be the same as posting a sign out front saying, "Don't bother robbing my house. My gold and silver are in a burglar-proof safe."

Not a single one of my neighbors knows I own a single gun - or own an ounce of silver. Publicizing your "stuff" is an invitation for trouble.

Carrying a "Statement Card"

A Statement Card is a card you carry around that gives you a "script" to follow if you're ever involved in a self-defense shooting. An excerpt from this article -
Q: I called my attorney here in Denver to ask him, and he said if the prosecutor ever found out I had contacted him before an incident, which I was doing at that moment, it could be interpreted as premeditation.

A: Great question. Having pre-printed cards to that effect do seem a little premeditated, in that each factual situation is different. These are certainly good and accurate things to say, but having them pre-printed on a card seems a little over the top. Additionally, the invocation of your rights should be made verbally in the case of an incident.
Let me be painfully clear: I do not care how "premeditated" it appears to anyone asking me questions about a self-defense shooting. SecondCall Defense has a "script" they suggest you use if you're involved in a shooting, regardless of how innocent you think you may be.

Unless you're a gun law attorney, call 911, follow the script, then call SecondCall Defense. Then prepare yourself to be arrested. You'll have bail money and an attorney in hours.

You may say the most innocent thing, and it can get you convicted. DO NOT risk your freedom (see "7 Shooting Incident Mistakes").

By the way, as the article notes, most police officers are instructed NOT to say anything for 72 hours after they are involved in a shooting. There's a reason for that. Follow their lead.

Does Your Ammo Choice Matter In Court?

Lots of concern out there about being in possession of ammo with, "greater stopping power". This gets back to the whole "premeditated" angle and the blood-thirsty image portrayed by the media and some prosecutors -
Based on comments in the blog, many Cheaper Than Dirt! readers who might be forced to defend themselves with a firearm worry about how the effectiveness of their ammunition may prejudice how they’re viewed by the courts.

Q: From a legal perspective, does it matter what ammunition I use in my handgun?

A: The short answer is, probably not. But for the purposes of this discussion, let me be very clear — we’re talking only about Texas law here. Unfortunately, not every state can be as reasonable as ours. Some ammo may or may not be legal for possession or use in other states, so be sure to check the local laws to make sure what you are carrying is legal.
The bottom line is, get the most effective ammo that is allowed in your state. If they don't allow effective ammo, move. Isn't your life worth that?

In all of my beginner and advanced pistol classes, I teach that you keep shooting until the threat has stopped. Then YOU MUST stop. Crappy ammo ends up with crappy results. And you may be harmed or dead if you're forced (or choose) to use ammo that will not stop your assailant.

---
Share this post! Click the Twitter, Facebook or Google+ icon below, and let your friends know!
Copyright 2015 Bison Risk Management Associates. All rights reserved. Please note that in addition to owning Bison Risk Management, Chief Instructor is also a partner in a precious metals business. You are encouraged to repost this information so long as it is credited to Bison Risk Management Associates. www.BisonRMA.com

Thursday, February 19, 2015

Chokepoint: Coming To A Biz Near You

Have you heard of Operation Chokepoint?  No?  It's this consumer protection cocoon designed to make you safe and sound from all of the bad businesses in your life.

You know, like these -

  • Ammunition Sales
  • Cable Box De-scramblers
  • Coin Dealers
  • Credit Card Schemes
  • Credit Repair Services
  • Dating Services
  • Debt Consolidation Scams
  • Drug Paraphernalia
  • Escort Services
  • Firearms Sales
  • Fireworks Sales
  • Get Rich Products
  • Government Grants
  • Home-Based Charities
  • Life-Time Guarantees
  • Life-Time Memberships
  • Lottery Sales
  • Mailing Lists/Personal Info
  • Money Transfer Networks
  • On-line Gambling
  • Payday Loans
  • Pharmaceutical Sales
  • Ponzi Schemes
  • Pornography
  • Pyramid-Type Sales
  • Racist Materials
  • Surveillance Equipment
  • Telemarketing
  • Tobacco Sales
  • Travel Clubs

Take a look at this video, and see where this bad boy is headed.  I'll wait....



For me - with the businesses I run - the coin dealers and gun-related businesses cause me some concern, obviously.  Back to those in a minute.

Look at some of these others.  Let's see, "Racist Materials".  I'm not a racist, you're probably not either, but isn't it my right to be one, and to buy or sell such materials?  You know, that whole First Amendment, "abridging the freedom of speech" prohibition on government?

Naw, shut 'em down!

Life-time memberships?  Like maybe an NRA Life Member, perhaps?  I'm guessing it wouldn't apply to the NAACP, or Democratic Socialists of America (note:  I'd posit that you can't get a lifetime membership to their youth program, the Young Democratic Socialists of America, 'cause, well, you will get old, right?).

The only one I agree with is the one on Ponzi schemes, but there's no way they're gonna shut down the Social Security Administration.  That's just crazy talk!
---

The ones that really matter are the ones that allow an individual to remain independent.  Money and guns being the key components.

What better way to force feed people to use electronic and approved forms of "cash" than to remove competing financial instruments?

Payday loans compete with banks.  Shut 'em down.  Precious metals allow you to hold a part of your personal assets "off the books".  How the hell can Nanny tax you or seize your assets if they don't know what you've got?!

With guns, well, even some of the dyed-in-the-wool liberals still believe the government can't simply ban guns, so you ban what makes them go bang, or the places you can buy them.

All better now.  Liberal nirvana is maintained.

As the video notes, the FDIC has issued statements saying they're backing off.  Yeah, right.

If you believe that, I've got Get Rich Government Grant Escort service to sell you.  ACT NOW and we'll throw in a tobacco store/fireworks shop (it's safe, we promise!).  BUT WAIT, THERE'S MORE!   Call in the next 17 minutes, and you'll get a Homebased Pornography Dating Service at no extra charge!

Supplies are limited...


---
Share this post! Click the Twitter, Facebook or Google+ icon below, and let your friends know!
Copyright 2015 Bison Risk Management Associates. All rights reserved. Please note that in addition to owning Bison Risk Management, Chief Instructor is also a partner in a precious metals business. You are encouraged to repost this information so long as it is credited to Bison Risk Management Associates. www.BisonRMA.com

Wednesday, January 21, 2015

Gun Grabbers: THIS is why we have guns

I will just love to hear some feedback on this from the gun grabbers.

The situation:  Next door neighbor has spun out of control in the past.  The person who has been abused decides to set up a camera facing his front door just in case the crazed neighbor - once gain - kicks in his door.

Crazed neighbor spins out of control, and as you'll see, kicks in the door, WIELDING A MACHETE.


Thank God the guy in the apartment had the forethought to arm himself.  Otherwise, he and his girlfriend would have likely been HACKED TO DEATH.

I'm guessing that in the eyes of the gun grabbers, that would have been "acceptable losses" in their crusade to disarm all Americans.

I'm guessing the families of the two survivors have a different opinion.


---
Share this post! Click the Twitter, Facebook or Google+ icon below, and let your friends know!
Copyright 2015 Bison Risk Management Associates. All rights reserved. Please note that in addition to owning Bison Risk Management, Chief Instructor is also a partner in a precious metals business. You are encouraged to repost this information so long as it is credited to Bison Risk Management Associates. www.BisonRMA.com

Tuesday, October 7, 2014

The Soft, Mushy Skulls of Gungrabbers

I have great difficulty understanding the mindset of the gun grabbers.  And of the, "I have no opinion on the subject" folks as well.

I simply don't understand why it won't sink into their soft, mushy skulls that restricting access to guns for the general population increases the likelihood of horrible, deadly rampages.
  1. Bad guys will have their guns with them REGARDLESS of what the law says.  They're bad guys, after all, and the laws restricting access to their means of protection and aggression are entirely disregarded.
  2. Good guys, on the other hand, do follow the law.  If they're told they can't bring a self-defense gun into a church, or store, or business, they won't.  Because they're good guys, they - and everyone around them - are now at a disadvantage against the aggression of the bad guys.
Why is this so difficult to understand?  Please, someone, ANYONE, refute these statements.

After this most recent head-chopping-off episode in Oklahoma - which was stopped by a fellow employee with a gun - a number of articles have been written on the subject of self-defense in the workplace.

Many express this sentiment -
There is of course a concern from some employer sectors who reason that by allowing employees the right to bring their weapons to the workplace, Jihadist lone wolf homeland converted terrorists will easily bring their weapons in as well. 
Seriously, are you unable to think for yourself?  If your "Jihadist lone wolf homeland converted terrorist" wants to bring in his guns, right now - against all laws of the land - HE'LL DO IT because he has no regard for the law.

As we've seen again, and again, and again.

For God's sake, a law is nothing more than words on a piece of paper.  Words are not going to stop him from doing as he pleases.  Guns aimed in his direction are.

If he's hell-bent on shooting up the place, he's going to do it.  He'll be limited in his rampage only when someone stops him.  As we saw in Oklahoma, it was stopped after one death.  As we saw at Sandy Hook Elementary School, the aggressor wasn't stopped until the police arrived, and he took his own life.

After scores of deaths.

Those deaths are on the shoulders of those that would take away the means of defense for those children and adults.

---

I've been seeing an interesting shift in public opinion here in California.  Folks that are usually in the, "guns are bad" or "guns scare me" crowd, are moving over to the, "I'm protecting my own butt" crowd.

Many in direct, unequivocal defiance of California law.  I love it!

I see it in my precious metals store.  I see it in my gun training classes.  I see it in my pepper spray classes.  I see it in (God bless them) little old ladies packing a revolver in their purse.

These people are finally waking up to the fact that the restrictive gun laws do nothing other than increase the chances of the good folks becoming a victim.

In my pistol classes, I tell my students that I believe you have the moral and ethical right to self-defense, regardless of the law.  I tell them very quickly after that, that if they are caught with a gun in a situation deemed unacceptable by The State, they will be punished.  There are indeed consequence for our actions.

I tell them that this is why I'm leaving California.  I will not be told when and where I may defend my life.  My once great state cannot be restored to its former stature.

The soft, mushy-skulled types have run the place into the ground.  Beyond repair.  It must fail - horribly - before change will occur.  So, until then, I'll be free and independent in a state that thinks as I do.

Enjoy the show from afar.  It should be spectacular!

---
Share this post! Click the Twitter, Facebook or Google+ icon below, and let your friends know!
Copyright 2014 Bison Risk Management Associates. All rights reserved. Please note that in addition to owning Bison Risk Management, Chief Instructor is also a partner in a precious metals business. You are encouraged to repost this information so long as it is credited to Bison Risk Management Associates. www.BisonRMA.com

Sunday, May 11, 2014

Choosing The Right Weapon For YOU

Every person is different.  Some of us are strong.  Some of us... not so much.  Some have "hawk-eye vision"  while some of us suffer from various eye and sight ailments.  As we age, our dexterity, strength and agility can begin to wane.  Our physical "assets" must be taken into account when selecting a self-defense weapon.

Like it or not, we are responsible for our own safety.  In the most optimum case, the police are 5 minutes away - and that assumes we've been able to call 911.  Lots of bad things can happen in 5 minutes. In order for us to maintain our independence, we must know how to ensure our physical safety.

 Let's look at some defensive tools we can select, and the kind of training that's necessary to use them effectively.

 Equipment

There are a number of options, all of which are generally restricted in some form or another. It is of paramount importance for you to understand the state and local laws regarding any self-defense tool you purchase.

 For instance, in California, pepper spray is legal, but it has size limitations. In most states, expandable batons are legal, but they're illegal in California. Use one to save your life, and YOU will be going to jail.

 Expandable Batons - a great tool that is easily concealed.  Causes great pain to the assailant when they are struck on the boney portions of their bodies - knees, wrists, elbows, head.  Generally considered to be non-lethal, but will break bones when used on wrists and arms.  Since direct contact is necessary with the assailant, it should only be considered as a last-line of defense.

  

 Pepper Spray - an excellent all-around defensive tool. Causes involuntary closing of the assailant's eyes and makes breathing difficult. Easily carried and concealed, and relatively inexpensive to purchase. Able to stop multiple attackers, allowing you to escape. Spray must hit the face of the attacker to be effective.  Generally considered to be non-lethal.

 Stun Guns - very effective tools, but require direct contact with the assailant. They disable the attacker with an electrical charge (up to 10 million volts) that causes involuntary muscle seizures. Easily carried and concealed, inexpensive, but only able to stop one attacker at a time. Generally considered to be non-lethal.  Should only be considered as a last-line of defense.

 Tasers - like stun guns, the attacker is disabled by an electrical charge. The civilian models fire electrical probes up to 15 feet. Both of the probes must make contact with the attacker to be effective. In the event the probes miss their mark, the Taser can be quickly converted into a stun gun. Expensive compared to stun guns or pepper spray. Generally considered to be non-lethal.



Handguns - fires a projectile (the bullet) at a high rate of speed into the attacker, causing trauma to their internal organs. Concealed possession in public is highly restricted in most states, unless state-sponsored training is completed. Very effective if used properly. Able to stop multiple attackers. Considered to be a lethal weapon.  The single most effective tool for ensuring your physical safety when proper training has been taken.

Shotguns - the favored home-defense weapon by most experts. Home defense models can be purchased for less than most handguns, and they are allowed in virtually all states. Contrary to popular belief, shotguns must be aimed like any other weapon to be effective, but when "shot" is used (as opposed to slugs), the defender has a greater margin for error to ensure they stop the attacker. Effective against multiple attackers. Considered to be a lethal weapon.

Rifles - generally not recommended for in-home defense, as the risk of "over penetration" (the bullet hitting the attacker and still passing through walls behind him) is too great. Like shotguns, they are generally allowed in virtually all states. Effective against multiple attackers (less so for bolt-action rifles). Considered to be a lethal weapon.  

Training

Once you have decided on the self-defense tools you wish to use, and which are legal in your jurisdiction, proper training is very important. Simply owning a defensive tool is not enough - you need to know how to use it to its highest effectiveness.

Let me stress something:  Your objective is to escape harm.  You're not a police officer looking to incapacitate a suspect prior to arrest.  Your plan is to incapacitate the assailant, and then get the hell out!

 Non-lethal weapons - there is very little training available for non-law enforcement individuals. This pepper spray video offers some great tips - with a couple of caveats:  I teach my students to only buy the stream style of spray.  It allows you to be the furthest away from your attacker, as well as reducing (but not eliminating) the chance of "blow back" should the wind be blowing in your direction.  Additionally, I suggest a "Z" pattern for the spray towards the face.  In this way, you have the greatest opportunity to hit the eyes, nose and mouth of your attacker.

   

 As this next video demonstrates, stun guns are very effective in keeping an assailant away from you, but it is more difficult to disable them.  To disable the assailant, you must maintain contact for 3 to 5 seconds. Personally, I keep a stun gun in my car as a means of stunning an attacker that is attempting to enter my vehicle, or for removing them form the vehicle.

 

 This video on expandable batons - though a bit melodramatic - is a good demonstration of how to use it effectively.  Strike at the weapons and the arms/wrists holding them, then disable the attacker and escape.

 

 Lethal weapons - there is a great deal more hands-on training available for handguns, shotguns and rifles. For handguns, I strongly encourage new and prospective gun owners to first take the NRA FIRST Steps Pistol Orientation class.  It's a 3+ hour class where you'll learn the basics of gun safety, usage, ammo selection, cleaning and storage.

After practice and when you've become proficient, consider joining an IDPA Practical Shooting Organization.  These will teach you how to shoot in realistic defensive situations, while also placing you under some of the stress that comes with real self-defense.

Many local shooting clubs have basic trap and skeet shooting courses for individuals to be able to learn how to properly use a shotgun. Most of these skills are transferable to defensive situations. The NRA also offers a number of shotgun courses around the country. One note, though: Home defense shotguns generally have a shorter barrel - 18 1/2 inches or so. Be sure to get some practice to be able to see how your shot pattern changes with the shorter barrel.

As noted above, a rifle is not a great choice for a in-home self-defense weapon, but the skills you learn can be transferred to pistol and shotgun shooting. Rifle training is offered by the NRA, but I believe the best rifle training is offered by the Appleseed Project. It is two days of practical training that is geared towards males and females of all ages and abilities.

 I truly cannot recommend this training highly enough.

 Put together a plan. The first choice is always avoidance. The best place to be when disaster strikes is somewhere else.

Sadly, our world doesn't always allow us to avoid danger. Obtaining the proper tools and training will go a long way in keeping you and your loved ones safe.

 ---
Share this post! Click the Twitter, Facebook or Google+ icon below, and let your friends know!
Copyright 2014 Bison Risk Management Associates. All rights reserved. Please note that in addition to owning Bison Risk Management, Chief Instructor is also a partner in a precious metals business. You are encouraged to repost this information so long as it is credited to Bison Risk Management Associates. www.BisonRMA.com

Thursday, May 1, 2014

Use Of Deadly Force Exceptions

Every gun owner I know or have had contact with understands that deadly force is only used when your life, or the life of another, is in mortal danger.  The gun grabbers would have the general population believe that we gun owners have, "itchy trigger fingers" just looking to pop a cap in the ass of some bad guy.

They'll point to the handful of incidents a year where some idiot goes off half-cocked and crosses a line.  In the eyes of the gun grabbers, all 100 million of us gun owners are represented by those nut jobs.

We "good guys" understand the heavy burden involved in owning and using a gun.  We willingly accept that burden.  The very last thing we want to do is to use our guns for self-defense, but the "bad guys" don't always give us much choice.  If we believe you are a threat to our life or the life of another, we will shoot you in self-defense.

Most of us have gone through training on how to ensure we only have to shoot the fewest number of shots to stop the threat.  THIS is a key concept we all understand:  We MUST stop shooting once the threat has stopped.  Otherwise, in the eyes of the law, we've become the aggressor.

A great example:  I was teaching one of my introductory pistol classes on a Saturday.  My classroom is way in the back of the gun range/shop.  All of what follows happened without any of us in the classroom being aware it was going on.

All of my students had shown up early, so my door was closed by 10:45, and class had begun.  Out in the shop, the manager was alone.  The other employee was delayed.

Around 11am, a guy walked into the shop, and was asking questions about the pepper spray.  He wanted to buy one for his girlfriend.  The locked display case for the pepper spray was on a wall out in the store.

The manager grabbed his keys, and was pulling out a spray when his head got slammed into the edge of the case.  The "customer" grabbed for the manager's sidearm.  Thankfully, it was in a Serpa retention holster, and the guy couldn't get it out.

The manager shook off the stun of having his head slammed and threw an elbow backwards into the face of the bad guy.  The manager cleared his head, drew his weapon.... and cursed.

The bad guy was running out the door towards a get-away car.  The manager had ample opportunity (and skill) to drop the guy as he ran, but his training stopped him.

He had gone through similar scenarios in his head enough times to know NOT to shoot.  The manager would have been hauled off to jail for murder/attempted murder.

SecondCall Defense recently ran an article on some other scenarios where you may not be justified in using lethal force:
Initial Aggressor – Once again, laws vary from state to state. However, in most cases, if you are the one who initiates violence, you risk losing the ability to argue self defense. If you throw the first punch, then later start losing the fight and pull a gun to defend yourself, you may be considered the bad guy.
True enough.  Good reason to walk away from a fight especially if you're carrying concealed.  The law will likely side with the other person.  Opening statement from the DA in court:  "Mr. Smith - who was carrying a gun during the altercation - clearly felt omnipotent when he assaulted Mr. Jones."  Lose/lose situation.
Escalation – Anything you do that causes a bad situation to get worse can be held against you. For example, if someone is verbally threatening you and you respond with counter threats, you are escalating the situation. Escalation means you are playing a part in creating a deadly force encounter.
The key here is, "verbally threatening" you.  Remember the old, "sticks and stones" rhyme from your childhood.  Words cannot be considered by you to be a mortal threat.  Use your head, and don't taunt the aggressor.
Committing Felony or Unlawful Act – If you are robbing a gas station, physically assaulting someone, or otherwise committing a crime, and in the process you are faced with a deadly threat, you will have a very difficult time arguing self defense. It depends on the facts of the case, but in general the law is not designed to protect criminals.
Break the law while using a gun, means you're going down.  As you should.
Reengagements and Pursuit – Given the premise that justifiable use of deadly force must be something that is thrust upon you and not something you cause or seek out willingly, you can hurt your self defense argument if your attacker runs away and you then chase him in order to continue the conflict.
The example of the manager above is the perfect illustration of this principle.  Drill this into your head:  Once the threat has stopped, YOU must stop your self-defense.

States like California throw in additional exceptions.

If the aggressor would not be considered a physical threat by a reasonable person, deadly force is not justified.

For instance, I'm a physically big guy.  If a little old lady starts coming after me with a baseball bat, I'm likely not in fear for my life.  I can likely take the bat from the little old lady, and the incident is over.  But, if I were also a little old lady, and the aggressor was coming after me, I WOULD be justified in using deadly force, as the two actors in the incident are of equal physical stature.

There must be a reasonable expectation that you'd be severely harmed before you can use deadly force.

I guarantee you, though, that a "reasonable" person is very different in San Francisco than they are in Dallas.  In San Francisco, the gun grabbers only consider armed self-defense to be reasonable when they literally have a gun pointed to THEIR heads.  Otherwise, you're expected to chit-chat and delve into the psyche of the assailant to uncover why he's been forced to point a gun at someone else's head.


Accept The Challenge

Using deadly force is not for the timid, or the easily taunted.  I've mentioned before that if you use your gun for self-defense in any circumstances, you should expect to be arrested.  Get that in your head - right now - so that if you are arrested, you don't make the situation worse by resisting arrest.

Membership in organizations such as SecondCall Defense educate you on how/when it's justified to use a firearm in self-defense, and then provide legal and financial support once the incident is over.

Of equal importance is for gun owners to train on an ongoing basis.  Walk your own home to understand the various strengths and weaknesses for cover and concealment you can use.  Gain the, "home field advantage" by having insider knowledge about which walls, structures and appliances will provide you with cover from bullet penetration.

Understand your "fields of fire" in your home.  If you shoot in that direction and miss, what's on the other side?  A window?  An easily penetrated plaster board wall?  A bedroom?  In my precious metals store, taking a few steps in one direction makes a missed shot go into a wall... or into a busy parking lot.

Go through scenarios in your head.  If someone is walking towards you with a knife, when do they become a real threat?  What are you going to say and do as they approach?  What if they have a pepper spray or stun gun?  At what distance are you really threatened?

Are you defending a life or property?  This is a crime - or not - depending upon your state and your location (home versus a business).

Understand and train for different situations before you're in them for real.

---
Share this post! Click the Twitter, Facebook or Google+ icon below, and let your friends know!
Copyright 2014 Bison Risk Management Associates. All rights reserved. Please note that in addition to owning Bison Risk Management, Chief Instructor is also a partner in a precious metals business. You are encouraged to repost this information so long as it is credited to Bison Risk Management Associates. www.BisonRMA.com