Safety – Page 35 – MILESFORTIS

Seattle PD having trouble hiring new officers

Politicians often can’t really afford to be far-sighted. Their constituents want immediate results, not the promise of better days down the road.

Yet officials can be far too short-sighted for their own good. Seattle, for example, was another of a handful of cities that cut funding to their police department not all that long ago.

Now, that may well be causing problems.

Violent crime reached a 14-year high in Seattle last year as the city’s police department deals with a staffing shortage that is straining its ability to protect the community.

Seattle Mayor Bruce Harrell said during his state of the city address this week that there is funding to hire 125 new officers this year and put more resources on the street.

“The depleted staffing we see today does not allow us to react to emergencies and crime with the response times our residents deserve,” Harrell said Tuesday.

“It does not allow us to staff the specialty teams we need for issues like domestic violence or DUI or financial crimes targeting the elderly,” he said. “It does not allow us to conduct the thorough investigations we expect to make sustainable change.”

Twenty officers left the force in January, 171 officers exited last year, and 186 officers separated from the force in 2020 amid the push to defund the police, according to KOMO. Only 137 officers have been hired in that time span.

In other words, Seattle treated officers like crap, demonized them, and then are absolutely and completely shocked that they can’t hire officers.

Yep. The whole thing is an absolute mystery. Not a soul could have seen this one coming, now could they?

I mean, other than every person with a functional brain, that is.

Look, cops are people. Not only does that mean some will be good and some will be bad, it also means they want to be appreciated for what they do and know they’re supported by their leadership.

Additionally, when you’ve demonized them in the press, you can’t really expect applicants to flock to fill the void. It’s just not going to work that way.

“You know, the media and the city have been treating police like crap. I just can’t wait to get me some of that!” said no one ever.

This is of Seattle’s own making, much like what’s going on in San Francisco right now. You can’t demonize the police then be surprised when things don’t go well in the aftermath.

I get that they shouldn’t be lionized and shielded from liability for their mistakes, but there’s a middle ground that most people can understand and respect between those two extremes. Most people want that middle ground, even.

Unfortunately, public officials are too short-sighted to see that appeasing a mob one day might come back to bite them in the backside in the not-so-distant future.

So, here we are. Seattle can’t get enough police officers and seems genuinely confused as to why. Frankly, were it not for good people who are going to get hurt, I’d just sit here and laugh at them.

TPTB want the ‘unwashed’ disarmed because we’re a long term threat to their controller dreams. They’re not ignorant of history where the pitchforks, rope & torches have often come out in response to their tyranny.

Is the Gun Dangerous, or is it the Criminal?

The world is fascinatingly complex yet important truths are often simple. We shouldn’t take that too far since most simple answers are also wrong or incomplete. That tension helps make life so interesting as we try to understand the world around us. For example, we saw violent crime increase in the last few years. Should we try to keep violent criminals away from guns, or should we try to keep violent criminals away from us? Is the tool dangerous or is the person dangerous? Let’s look at both ideas and see if there are any simple answers to be found.

When we look for simple solutions we see that criminals use guns to commit violence. That sounds like the case is closed but there is more evidence to uncover. If we keep looking then we find that innocent victims also use firearms to stop violence. That means the answers are not black and white but shades of gray.

When we look at all firearms we see that a vanishingly small fraction of the guns owned by civilians were used in violent crime each year (1 in 1400). Now we look deeper and find out that honest citizens used a firearm for self-defense over 1.6 million times a year. That is more people than live in New Hampshire or Hawaii. Each year, more people use a firearm for self-defense than the population of Wyoming and Vermont combined. Armed defense is common.

Proportions matter when we’re looking at shades of gray. We use a firearm for self-defense six times more often than a firearm is used in violent crime (5.98). Good guys with guns save lives. That is both simple and true.

Despite the facts that guns overwhelmingly stop crime, New York State legislators passed a law to lets the public sue gun manufacturers because criminals used a “dangerous” gun that the manufacturers released into the public. That obviously misses the target of reducing crime. Either those New York lawmakers missed the facts or they didn’t care about honest citizens who defend themselves. Politics is obviously complex.

When we look at how criminals behaved, we see that most violent crimes (85%) didn’t involve a firearm at all. Said another way, if we would magically disarm everyone, that wouldn’t hamper the vast majority of violent criminals. Instead of reducing crime, disarming the innocent victims makes it easier for the criminals and would lead to more violence.

Young men commit most violent crimes. Young men are stronger than old men, and far stronger and faster than most women. Disarming women and the elderly makes them much more vulnerable to violent criminals.

Few of us want that. Disarming the good guys hurts honest citizens who want to protect their family. That isn’t an abstract theory, but common practice as we use a gun for self-defense over a million times a year.

Let’s step away from the soundbites. Look at human nature instead and think of the people you know. Some of the people you know are completely trustworthy while others are not. Some resist any temptation while others can’t be trusted with a penny. We are not all the same. When it comes to violence, some of us are a danger to others and most of us are not. It is the person who is a danger to others rather than the tools they use. Again, that is both simple and true.

Violent criminals are not like us. Most of us will never commit a violent crime, yet we know that a few people will victimize others. Most murders are committed by a few hitmen in drug gangs. 64 percent of felons who served time for a violent crime were re-arrested. 41 percent of violent criminals were later re-convicted of subsequent crimes. 34 percent of them were re-incarcerated. Some people practice a life of violent crime.

Shades of gray matter and a violent criminal is 500 times more likely to re-offend than a firearm is likely to be used in a violent crime.

In contrast, firearms manufacturers built a product that we overwhelmingly use to save lives in armed defense. If we’re looking for people who increase the risks for all of us, then let’s sue New York politicians, judges, and prosecutors who put dangerous recidivist-criminals back on our streets. Now that will save lives

New firearm owners shaking up gun culture and American politics

HARRISBURG — Richard Reisinger, of New Bloomfield in Perry County, leaned in as David Walker of Savage Guns, a Massachusetts-based firearm company, showed him how to work a new innovation that allows the owner to adjust a gun for right- or left-handed users.

“I have grandchildren; some of them are left-handed, some are right-handed, so now if you purchase a gun, all you have to do is place this on the handle and it accommodates either, so you buy one gun and multiple kids can shoot it,” Mr. Reisinger said, admiring the practicality of the design.

“It is really nice.”

Mr. Reisinger — who was visiting the Savage booth at the Great American Outdoor Show at the Pennsylvania Farm Show complex recently — said he comes from a long line of hunters, a tradition he now enjoys with his grandchildren.

“I do a lot of whitetail hunting at the moment — but with grandchildren, I’ll take them out to hunt pretty much anything that they’re interested in. I love coming to the outdoors show because I get to see, and touch, and feel a lot of different firearms that I might be interested in down the road,” he explained.

Mr. Reisinger — like dozens of other people interviewed that day — said gun ownership is about a lot of things: “Putting food on the table and providing for my family, self-protection and the motor and dexterity skills it sharpens when you go target practicing. You meet more and more new gun owners all of the time; most of them said they bought their first gun for those exact same reasons … they found all of it personally empowering.”

This is a truth that conflicts with our culture’s misconceptions about who “the American gun owner” really is and what his or her motivations are for enjoying firearms. If you turn on the national news or log onto social media, you’re likely to find lawful gun owners portrayed as cultish, backwoods white males who have a gluttonous appetite for violence.

Gun owners see themselves quite differently — and their demographics and motivations don’t fit neatly into the stereotypes.

Despite the millions spent in digital advertisements by gun control advocates like former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, the appeal of gun ownership is only increasing. Of all the firearms sold last year, 30% — 5.4 million purchases — went to new gun owners, according to a retailer survey conducted by the National Shooting Sports Foundation.

A new interest in self-sufficiency, caused by collapses in our supply chain, has also led to an explosion in applications for hunting licenses.

According to Stateline, a Pew Trust initiative, many states across the country saw a dramatic rise in both men and women taking a hunter safety class for the first time — with states like Michigan seeing a 67% hike in new hunting license buyers in 2021 compared with 2019, including a 15% increase in female hunters.

People who would never have considered owning a gun were now curious about hunting to provide for their families — and about target practice to learn how to defend themselves and their homes.

Continue reading “”

FYI; All data pulled from massshootingtracker.site which freely and openly admit their definition of ‘mass shooting’ isn’t what the FBI uses for its Uniform Crime Report (and which just happens to increases the number of incidents)

Here are a few tidbits according to the data provided for 2021:

California has the 3rd highest number of mass shootings (54 by their definition).

New York was 5th with 41.

Both have had magazines and AR bans for 28 and 9 years respectively.

Inversely Alaska, Idaho, New Hampshire, and South Dakota have had only 1 mass shooting with no such gun control laws.

Hrmmm. I think I see the possibility of a pattern emerging. It’s like gun control doesn’t just not work, it makes the problem worse!

¡Grupos de Autodefensas para mi!

‘We’re scared’: People worry about shooting spikes in Spokane, turn to self defense for protection

SPOKANE, Wash. — Shootings are up in Spokane. It’s been a trend for years, and people and police are trying to get a handle on the issue.

So far this year, there have been 21 shootings, according to Spokane Police.

Here’s a breakdown of the rise in shootings over the years:

2018: 36 shootings
2019: 52 shootings
2020: 94 shootings
2021: 152 shootings

There were 10 shootings in just this past week police are still investigating. One of those happened at Gordon and Division where the victim fired back at someone who shot bullets into his living room, narrowly missing the family inside. Since that shooting, neighbors say they’re organizing a crime watch team to fight the issue. The man shot at says he won’t leave his home without a gun again.

Another drive-by shooting in East Spokane on East 5th Avenue and South Fiske Avenue has one mom ready to move out for good.

“We’re scared,” said Jamie Anderson. She has a son who says hasn’t slept well since the last shooting. “We’re trying to move out of this area and into a better area.”

The shooting spikes across the city are something police are worried about.

“It certainly is a troubling one that we want to try and get a handle on get under control,” said Nick Briggs, a Corporal with the Spokane Police.

He adds this rise in gun violence is a national trend, but they are concerned about the local increase and are working to find the people committing the shootings.

Gun shop owners say people are handling their own safety instead.

“They have to take their own precautions and do what they feel is necessary to keep their families safe,” said Jeremy Ball. He’s the owner of Sharp Shooting Indoor Range & Gun Shop.

He says his gun sales haven’t gone down since the start of the pandemic. High sales are the “new normal.” Last year, the nation saw the second highest amount of guns sold on record. At Ball’s shop, he says he seeing more first time gun owners buying small compact guns they can keep on them.

“We’re still seeing lots and lots of sales in small compact guns that people are using as carry weapons,” he said.

Anderson says she owns a gun but even that isn’t giving her the protection she wants.

“If a stray bullet comes through my door, we can’t stop that or it comes through my wall, we can’t stop that,” she said.

Police say people need to be careful with self defense. It’s a complicated issue if you don’t know the rights you can use to stay safe.

“It gets to be a very convoluted and complex legal analysis in terms of what somebody can and can’t do,” Briggs said.

What Briggs said you should do is report any information about these crimes and others to police as they work to keep Spokane safe. They also added in relation to other cities similar in size, the city still has a relatively low crime rate. Major Crimes and the Spokane Regional Safe Streets Task Force are actively investigating these recent shootings.

Letters to the Editor: You don’t have to shoot someone to use a gun defensively

To the editor: Dr. Steven J. Sainsbury pushes the absurd claim there are only 2,000 defensive gun uses per year. (“Thinking of buying a gun for self-defense? Don’t do it,” Opinion, Jan. 31)

The claim overwhelmingly relies on counting defensive gun uses reported in news articles, but that is a dramatic undercount because the vast majority of successful self-defense cases don’t make the news. Ninety-five percent of defensive gun uses involve merely brandishing a gun, and less than 1% involve the attacker being killed or wounded.

But most news stories only report on cases where attackers are killed and brandishings are ignored.

Seventeen national surveys find an average of 2 million defensive gun uses per year. The U.S. Department of Justice’s National Crime Victimization Survey puts it at around 100,000. Both show the 2,000 claim to be ridiculous.

Finally, the article labels me as a “gun rights advocate,” not a researcher who has held academic positions at the University of Pennsylvania, the University of Chicago, Stanford and Yale. I have also been a senior advisor for research at the U.S. Department of Justice.

John R. Lott Jr., Missoula, Mt.

5th-graders learn to shoot guns by using school gym as target range

A school district in Wyoming posted pictures of 5th and 6th grade students shooting targets with air rifles in a school gym.

A school district in Wyoming recently used a gymnasium as a shooting range, training fifth and sixth grade students in marksmanship during PE. Hot Springs County School District #1, in the small town of Thermopolis, shared photos of the sharpshooting session in a Feb. 2 Facebook post, and it quickly caught the attention of thousands.

McClatchy News has obtained a screengrab of the Facebook post, which is no longer publicly available. In the pictures, the children are seen aiming air rifles across the gym at a set of targets propped up against the bleachers with what appears to be plywood.

Often a child’s introduction to the world of firearms, air rifles generally use gas stored in a small canister to propel a BB or pellet out of the barrel at relatively high speed. While far less lethal than true firearms, they can cause serious harm in some circumstances. “All students passed their safety test and have been sharpening their skills,” the post said.

As of the morning of Feb. 8, the post had garnered 13,000 reactions and 5,700 comments and had been shared over 60,000 times. For perspective, the population of Thermopolis is around 2,700.

“This is what America needs more of,” one comment read.
“Education and responsible firearm ownership.”
“This is so awesome! Probably one of the safest schools in the country too,” a commenter wrote.
“I need to find a school like this for my son once he’s old enough!”
“CA masks their kids, Wyoming teaches marksmanship,” said another.

Of the nearly 6,000 comments, most are in support of the district.

I Was Anti-Gun And A Pregnant Mother When Home Invaders Broke Into My House

(SOFREP invites reader submissions for publication. Today we offer you this harrowing story from one of our members named Marcie who writes about how a home invasion while she was pregnant and home alone with her other child changed her entire worldview when it came to gun ownership.)

Few people would look at me now and think that, but yes, I used to believe that guns were a danger to society.

The media likes to show us gun violence all the time, with the insinuation that it’s the gun, not the person, who did the crime. Rarely do they show you examples of guns being used in self-defense. Most people who promote gun control live in quiet neighborhoods where residents see guns as almost alien.

But if you have ever lived in a dangerous place, then you know the importance of guns. That’s what happened to me when I moved to Tolleson, Arizona, two years ago.

I moved there to live with my husband, who is a firefighter. After moving, my husband needed to leave town for training. So I was left home alone, pregnant with our child. I didn’t mind too much, as I thought it would be a little staycation. I couldn’t go anywhere, anyway, since our clunker of a car was in the shop.

In hindsight, I should have known that no car being at our home for an extended period made the wrong people think that both of us were gone. Sure enough, that happened. When two thieves broke into my home through the kitchen door, it happened so suddenly that I had no plan of action. My heart racing, I ran into the bathroom where I thought it was safe and took out my phone.

I frantically started to call 911. However, my phone could not get through to a responder. The bathroom was a dead zone for phone service where I lived. However, my phone was connected to my WiFi. I contacted my sister on Facebook, and she managed to call 911.

As I waited for the police to come, my heart continued to race. What if the police did not respond in time? There are many cases of the police taking too long to respond to a situation that requires immediate action, as many factors can delay response time.

As I heard the thieves rustling around the house, I wondered what they would do. Steal my TV or jewelry? That was replaceable. However, what if they found me and did something horrifying to my unborn child and me?

All these worries soon subsided, luckily, as the police did arrive in only a few minutes. After seeing the police approach my door, the thieves immediately ran away, their pockets empty. One bystander told me the thieves were armed as I was filing a report. Once again, those thoughts about what the thieves could have done to me immediately raced to my head.

It was at that point I realized I needed to arm myself. Since then, I have never left home without a pistol. I have to protect myself, my husband, and our two-year-old daughter. Chances are, you have someone you want to save. I recommend arming yourself as well with an easy-to-access pistol.

Speaking of pistol, what’s my favorite? As a woman, I wanted something easily concealable that I could fire at a moment’s notice. I wanted something powerful yet easy to use for a more petite frame.

Upon research, I chose the SIG Sauer P365. This 9mm pistol is a little under 6 inches wide and slightly above 4 inches tall, making it perfect for concealing. Despite its small frame, it holds ten rounds and packs quite a wallop. Any woman can use it to even the odds if a thief enters their home. With its small trigger, it doesn’t matter how small you are. You can fight back.

That’s my story. Since having a gun, I’ve felt safer, and I’ve found a new hobby to enjoy. If you’ve been interested in owning a firearm, now is the time to do so. I hope this article helped you learn where I’m coming from when advocating for guns.

BLUF:
The lie is that mandatory training saves lives.
The truth is it costs lives.
Gun-control laws often disarm minorities, women, and the poor.
The lie is that mandatory firearms storage saves lives.
The truth is it costs lives.
The lie is that gun-laws disarm criminals.
The truth is that gun-control laws disarm law-abiding victims.
That tells me that one purpose of gun-control is to impose higher costs on gun owners rather than to save lives.
The lie is that guns cause violence.
The truth is that criminals cause violence and government officials have failed to control violent criminals.

Painful Lies and Boring Facts About Being Armed

I’m in a rut. I read the endless stream of gun-control proposals and I have the same reaction time after time. Gun-control advocates promise us safety in return for further restricting the ability of ordinary citizens to go armed. Those excuses would be laughable if they didn’t cost so many lives. It is easier for us to recognize the false-claims of gun-control if we have a sense of proportion and perspective. Then we can see it is a step backwards when we create a larger problem as we work to solve a smaller one. If we actually want to save lives then we have to see the big picture and do no harm.

Ordinary citizens defend themselves with a gun several thousand times a day. Our armed defense stops tens of thousands of robberies, assaults, and rapes. It saves thousands of lives a year. Many thousands. Despite that immense virtue, nothing is perfect. We are human so there are problems with armed defense.

Gun-control runs into problems precisely because armed defense saves so many lives. To change our laws and save a few more lives tomorrow, we can’t reduce the many lives we save each day. It is hard to pass a gun-control law that will do no harm. Let me give you an example to make that clear.

Each week I analyze how ordinary people defended themselves with a firearm. I advocate for instruction, training, and practice. I encourage people to plan for lethal and non-lethal defense. We talk about avoidance and de-escalation all the time. Sure, I want gun owners to be trained, but I have perspective.

Week after week we see criminals break into a home. Grandma grabs her gun and says she is armed. The robber runs away because grandma wasn’t the victim he expected. The great news is that eight-times-out-of-ten the bad guys runs away before we have to fire a shot. I don’t see where mandatory safety training could make this self-defense situation significantly safer or more effective. 8-out-of-10 times it is already good enough.

Proportions are crucial. Firearms accidents are rare but criminal attacks are common. Yes, I ask gun owners to take training, but I know that costs money, takes time, and demands energy. Disarming ordinary citizens until they take training means that more good people will be disarmed. Maybe mandatory training saved a few people from firearms accidents but we condemned more of them to be the unarmed victims of violent crime. The unarmed victims will have to surrender or go against a criminal attacker with their bare hands. Criminals plan their attacks to beat an unarmed victim. I don’t want that, and few of us do.

Continue reading “”

Good advice.

Gun Buying Advice For Women, From a Woman

I used to be vehemently opposed to firearms because of the way my mom’s negative view of them influenced me as I grew up. It wasn’t until around 19 years old that my boyfriend at the time gave me my first introduction to firearms. He was very patient and taught me the basics of how to shoot. I loved it. I no longer felt negatively towards firearms, but I never really got into them, either. I honestly didn’t see a reason to. I didn’t feel I needed one for protection and didn’t have a desire to go shooting for fun or to hunt. It just wasn’t who I was at the time. It wasn’t until I met my now-husband that I got heavily into firearms. It was as if I had discovered a part of my true calling.

Continue reading “”

Armed Defense is always a Matter of Time

I know that you’re way smarter than this, but I keep hearing new gun owners get bad advice. We hear it everywhere, from the news to the lunch counter. I’m not criticizing either party because I suspect they are simply repeating something they’ve heard. This is important because we can invent all sorts of complicated schemes as we plan our defense. It is easy to forget that time controls almost everything as we defend ourselves. Eventually, we remember that the bad guys arrive with a plan. We get to defend ourselves, our family, and our friends with what’s physically within reach and mentally within reach. Let’s look at some common suggestions and see how they measure against the clock.

Continue reading “”

Constitutional Carry and Letting Our Neighbors Go Armed

It is more dangerous when honest men and women face criminals barehanded, and safer when the good guys are armed. That isn’t hard to understand. It is easy to calculate the additional lives we’d save each year if a state allows honest people to carry guns in public. I can explain it in a minute. I will, but the real mystery is why we’re still talking about fantasy problems while violent criminals are killing our neighbors. We’re acting as if our bad dreams were more real than the bodies with chalk marks around them. Part of that problem is political. Politicians appeal to our fantasies and we’re suckers for that. Politicians also suck up to anti-gun billionaires to get campaign contributions. Ultimately, voters like us are the problem when we hide behind sound-bite solutions.

Back in the real world, disarming our neighbors costs lives.

When you take even the shallowest look at violence then you notice that an armed attacker usually overpowers an unarmed victim. Criminals may break the laws but they are not stupid. They choose the tools that work. To quote one thug, ‘Guns and knives make people so generous.’

Robbers sometimes threaten to shoot us even when they don’t have a gun. Criminals only use guns in one-seventh of violent crimes. Unfortunately, violent criminals wait until they have an advantage in strength, in number, or in surprise. Rather than struggle with the insoluble problem of knowing if the robber’s threat is real, the real solution is for good men and women to go armed.

We don’t need clever calculations to know how many lives are saved when the victims are armed. We know that about 1.7 million legal gun owners use a firearm in self-defense each year. We know how many people live in each state and already have their carry permits. We know the rate of violent crime in each state, and we learned that about 30 percent of adults will carry concealed if the carry permit is optional. We even know how often people with their carry permits actually go armed in public. We know what happens because we asked and because 21 states already have a form of permit-optional concealed carry.

In most states, we’re talking about saving thousands of lives a year. We can argue about the clearest way to explain the answer, but the calculations only take junior-high-school math.

Continue reading “”

Bill aims to erase “duty to retreat” in New York law

ALBANY — When threatened by an aggressor outside their homes, people in New York, under current law, have a duty to retreat — if possible — before resorting to force.

Now, an upstate lawmaker, state Sen. George Borrello, R-Chautauqua County, has introduced a measure that would scrap the duty to retreat requirement, framing his proposal as a public safety measure that will extend the right of self-defense and provide potential legal immunity in civil lawsuits against people who shoot those threatening to do harm.

New York law, as written now, imposes no duty to retreat on people when they are in their dwellings. Borrello said there should be no inconsistency in the law. His bill would remove the self-defense restrictions in instances when people face a violent aggressor outside the home setting, as long as the person facing the threat is at a location where she or he can legally be.

Continue reading “”

Inspecting the FN 502™ Tactical Manual Safety

FN America, LLC, has become aware that a very limited number of FN 502 Tactical pistols in the field may have an improperly installed manual safety. In these cases, the external safety lever will not function as designed and may result in unintended firing. To ensure the pistol’s safe operation, FN is asking owners of the FN 502 Tactical to suspend use of their pistol and perform a function check to verify the manual safety is operating correctly, following the inspection procedure below.

This safety bulletin applies to FN 502 Tactical pistols with a serial number range lower than LR007999. If your serial number is above this range, it is not subject to this bulletin.
This safety bulletin provides instructions on how you may check to see if your FN 502 Tactical is affected.
However, if you would like FN to inspect your pistol, please contact FN Customer Service at 1-800-635-1321, ext. 145. You may also take your pistol to your local firearms dealer or gunsmith for inspection.

Before inspecting your FN 502 Tactical, ensure your pistol and magazine are unloaded and that there is no live ammunition in your work area. For more details on safe handling and unloading, please reference your owner’s manual.

Inspection Procedure:

Depress the magazine release to eject the magazine. Remove all ammunition from the magazine and the work area.
With the magazine removed, pull the slide back and lock the slide to the rear by pressing the slide stop up, allowing the slide to rest against the slide stop.
Carefully inspect the chamber both visually and physically to ensure no cartridge is present before continuing to step 4. Do not proceed unless you are certain your pistol is unloaded.
Release the slide by pushing downward on the slide stop or by pulling rearward on the slide to disengage the slide stop and then let the slide move forward under control.
Engage the manual safety and set it to the “SAFE” position (up) as shown in the photo below. Ensure that it is moved all the way into position and remains in place.
With the unloaded pistol pointed in a safe direction, pull the trigger.

Note: Please do not ship any affected product to FN until FN has generated and sent to you a return label. If the firearm is not affected by this safety bulletin, no action is necessary.FN is deeply committed to providing customers with the safest, most reliable firearms possible. Patience and cooperation are appreciated as we receive, inspect and service these firearms. We will make every effort to return the product to customers within 14 days.

For questions about the safety bulletin or assistance in returning a firearm, contact the FN customer service team at 1-800-635-1321, ext. 145, or by email at customerservice@fnamerica.com.
Hours of operation are 10 a.m. to 4 p.m. Eastern time, Monday through Friday.

Continue reading “”

Data shows there’s more diversity at a gun range than a university faculty lounge

“Gun-ownership in America is diversifying, because of safety fears,” says a headline over at The Economist. As those of us in the Second Amendment community have known for a while, the sociopolitical climate since the start of the pandemic – egregious criminal–coddling behavior by the state, releasing dangerous prisoners because of COVID, nationwide “fiery but mostly peaceful” riots, rising violent crime, looting / shoplifting, hate crimes, falling trust in law enforcement – contributed to a sudden surge in gun purchases by groups historically not inclined to own them. The Economist reported the following:

Of the 7.5m Americans who bought firearms for the first time between January 2019 and April 2021—as gun-buying surged nationwide—half were female, a fifth black and a fifth Hispanic, according to a recent study by Matthew Miller of Northeastern University and his co-authors.

The 7.5 million number may well be a low estimate; one estimate from the NSSF is that there were 8.4 million new gun owners in 2020 alone. As I’ve written before in these pages, adding up numbers for 2020 and the first half of 2021 points to a potential 11.6 million first-time gun owners. The team here at Bearing Arms has written a lot about growing diversity in the Second Amendment community. We see this not only in data collected nationally and over the long-term, but also experience it first-hand at gun ranges. (As an immigrant who grew up without guns and didn’t touch one well into his adult life, I’m living proof of this demographic shift myself.)

However, diversity is a whole lot more than ethnic bean counting or about the superficial differences – religion, sexual orientation, etc. – among us. What counts the most, in my opinion, is diversity of thought and opinion, and the ability to express those freely without the fear of retaliation or retribution. This is where I think gun owners are simply outstanding; respect for individual freedom, for not treading on someone else lest our freedoms be tread upon, appears to come naturally to lawful gun owners. There is some data on political diversity among gun owners. Anecdotally speaking, the gun owners at my local club cover the gamut from traditional blue-collar tradesmen to Ph.D. holders, from the MAGA coterie to Medicare-for-All supporters.

Contrast that with a typical university faculty lounge and the difference is night and day. There is hard data showing how limited diversity is among university faculty. They may look different, have different national origins or sexual orientations, but politically they are incredibly alike. There’s also plenty of publicly available data that shows how faculty donations to candidates for office is overwhelmingly left-wing. Consider these recent examples: 96% at Harvard University, 97% at Yale University, and 98% at Cornell University.

Continue reading “”

The Tide Is Turning On Gun Control
After two consecutive years of record violence, some on the left may be rediscovering the importance of self-defense.

Contrary to popular misconceptions, the Second Amendment did not create a right to keep and bear arms. Rather, the Second Amendment acknowledges and seeks to protect the People’s natural right to self-defense and the tools required for the exercise of that right, which obviously include firearms. This is why the amendment speaks of “the right” to arms as something already in existence and not to be infringed—rather than as something newly conferred, a point recognized by the U.S. Supreme Court.

It should not be a polarized and partisan issue. Historically, the right of armed self-defense was understood and exercised by figures who were far from conservative or libertarian, from Eleanor Roosevelt and George Orwell to the Black Panthers and Malcolm X. In a dangerous world, they understood that one’s life should not be left to the mercy of an aggressor.

In light of 2021—a second consecutive year of record violence—are some on the left rediscovering the importance of self-defense? There’s reason to think so.

Continue reading “”

The carjacking surge in Philadelphia shows why the Second Amendment is so important

Democrats routinely disparage guns and gun ownership in this country as one of the main reasons for violent crime. As soon as there is a mass shooting, Democratic politicians beat the drums for gun control legislation.

Even now, amid a violent crime surge largely resulting from failed Democratic policies in cities nationwide, they still blame guns. Yet, what goes ignored are the incidents in which guns are used for self-defense.

People are fighting back, demonstrating the importance of the Second Amendment.

Philadelphia has had a tsunami of violent crime in the past couple of years. Homicides reached an all-time high in 2021 after nearly setting a record in 2020. Carjackings have also experienced a surge in the city, going from 225 in 2019 to a whopping 720 in 2021, CBS3 reported .

The crime wave forced the Philadelphia Police Department to publish a survival guide on what to do if confronted with a carjacking. But with the city failing to protect its citizens, some have realized they must protect themselves. As a result, there are numerous stories of citizens defending themselves from carjackings by using their legally owned guns. In these incidents (with several that do not make the news), guns saved lives.

The “good guy with a gun narrative” is widely disregarded by those on the Left in the debate over guns. They continually promote the narrative that guns are evil tools that cause nothing but destruction and the loss of human life. While this is absolutely true, so is the opposite — guns save lives. According to statistics, guns are more often used to save lives than take them.

According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, there are anywhere between 30,000 to 40,000 gun-related deaths each year, with about 60% of those being suicides. Conversely, the CDC reports between 60,000 to 2.5 million incidents involving guns to save lives. The “good guy with a gun” narrative happens a lot more than the media or agenda-driven Democratic politicians like to acknowledge. The stories in Philadelphia are just some of the most recent examples.

With people needing guns to defend themselves out of necessity, the Second Amendment is needed now more than ever. Legal gun ownership can mean the difference between life and death. At a time when Democratic politicians have prioritized the safety of criminals over the welfare of the innocent, the Second Amendment could be the difference between being the victim of a violent crime or surviving one.

A Frank Discussion of Knives for Self-Defense

This article owes a lot to Marc “Animal” MacYoung, a prolific writer and thinker about self-defense issues whose work you should really check out. One of his areas of expertise is knife fighting and the use of knives in self-defense. MacYoung presents three basic considerations for knife use in a self-defense context in his must-read article on the subject, and I’m unable to improve on them:

A knife is a lethal force item
As such its legal/moral/ethical application is narrowly allowed
‘self-defense’ is a legally defined term.

Any discussion of knives for self-defense has to keep these three points in mind. Legally and morally, you’re introducing a lethal weapon into the conflict—and that may have long-lasting repercussions for everyone involved. You may not intend to do lethal damage, but that’s the trick: knives can wound or kill with a touch, and in the chaos of an assault that can happen inadvertently. Another caveat: this article is about the general use of knives in self-defense, not engaging in a knife fight with another armed person. With all that having been said, let’s talk about choosing a knife as a self-defense tool.

The first step, as always, is to get familiar with your local laws on the subject. Each state—and many municipalities—has its own laws about knives: what you can carry, where you can carry, when/how you may use them, and what constitutes the legal use of lethal force (yes, that again) for self-defense. It might be a good idea to book a consultation with an attorney. Yes, that’s expensive, but it’s best to get legal advice from a professional who is bound to act on your behalf.

The second step is to consider your self-defense plan as a whole. Personal protection does not start and end with weapons; there’s a lot that goes into conflict-avoidance and safety planning other than planning for use of force. Make sure you’ve got those bases covered.

Nor should you neglect other possible self-defense tools. Even if you have a knife, you may not be able to deploy it in time, or you may need a less-lethal tool instead. Make sure to keep those options open.

Now, let’s talk about the knife you’ll be carrying. Unless you live in a rural area, you’ll probably legally and logistically be better of with a lock-bladed folding knife, one designed as an all-purpose tool. Because that’s what it’ll spend most of its time doing. Opening boxes, cutting strings and rope, and other mundane tasks are its purview. If legal in your state, there are knives made specifically for knife fighting such as the Colonel Blade or the Clinch Pick.

Finally, you’ll need some training. Probably quite a bit of training. There are numerous systems for the use of knives in self-defense out there. One that comes to mind but I have not taken is the Edged Weapons Overview course by Shivworks. I would suggest selecting a system or school that teaches both armed and unarmed techniques—you’ll likely need both if something does go wrong. I’m a big advocate of the notion that a short-range weapon like a knife exists to give you the time and space to run, so please give that some thought.

These are just some thoughts to get you started. Please reach out to me in the comments section or via email and let me know if you have any further questions or ideas. I love hearing from you.

The Right to Defy Criminal Demands: Negligence and the Robber’s Explicit Demands

I’ve just finished up a rough draft of my The Right to Defy Criminal Demands article, and I thought I’d serialize it here, minus most of the footnotes (which you can see in the full PDF). I’d love to hear people’s reactions and recommendations, since there’s still plenty of time to edit it. You can also be previous posts (and any future posts, as they come up), here.

Let’s return to situation 3 from the Introduction: Craig comes to rob Danielle’s store; he is demanding money, and Danielle has reason to think that, if she doesn’t comply, he’ll injure some of the patrons. Does this make Danielle legally liable if she refuses to comply, on the theory that she has an affirmative duty to protect her business visitors, and failing to give in to the demands violates that duty?

No, several courts have ruled, expressly recognizing a “no duty” rule. The most prominent case is Kentucky Fried Chicken of California, Inc. v. Superior Court, from the California Supreme Court:

[A] shopkeeper does not have a duty to comply with the unlawful demand of an armed robber that property be surrendered…. Recognition of a duty to comply with an unlawful demand would be contrary to public policy as it would encourage similar unlawful conduct….

[T]he standard of a “reasonable prudent person under the circumstances” is the general standard of care [for property owners’ duty to protect their visitors]…. [But] in particular situations a more specific standard may be established by judicial decision, statute or ordinance.

Continue reading “”