Is SCOTUS ready to step in on an “assault weapons” ban?

Since the Bruen decision was delivered last June, the Supreme Court has been largely content to let lower courts wrestle with the opinion and what it means for the future of gun control laws like a ban on so-called assault weapons or even the new concealed carry restrictions put in place by the state of New York after its “may issue” regime was struck down by SCOTUS in Bruen. Now the Court is being asked to weigh in on an “assault weapons” ban imposed by the city of Naperville, Illinois, and Second Amendment advocates are hoping that at least four justices are ready and willing to take up the request for an injunction.

The National Association for Gun Rights is hoping the Supreme Court will do what the Seventh Circuit did not; put a halt to Naperville’s gun ban while the case plays out in court. On Monday afternoon, Supreme Court Justice Amy Coney Barrett directed Naperville officials to respond to NAGR’s request no later than noon on May 8th. Coincidentally (or not), that’s the same day that U.S. District Judge Stephen McGlynn has told the plaintiffs in the challenge to the statewide ban on “assault weapons” to reply to Illinois’ request to stay his injunction against the “assault weapons” and “large capacity” magazine ban, which was handed down last week.

The National Association for Gun Rights (NAGR), in conjunction with the National Foundation for Gun Rights (NFGR),says the law conflicts with the high court’s NYSRPA v. Bruen decision last year, which ruled gun laws must align with constitutional text and history.

Well, that’s not gonna happen. The bigger question is whether the Supreme Court will step in now or wait for another case involving a ban on so-called assault weapons to reach its doorstep.

Continue reading “”

Not a Second-Class Right – The Second Amendment

On July 25, 2022 the Second Amendment rightfully rejoiced about an historic decision from the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS). In this now famous case, New York State Rifle & Pistol Association Inc. v. Bruen, (now commonly referred to as Bruen) the court dropped the hammer on the bigotry the 2A Community has faced for far too long.

In that ruling, the court reiterated an earlier statement form SCOTUS regarding the Second Amendment in a case referred to as McDonald: “The constitutional right to bear arms in public for self-defense is not “a second-class right, subject to an entirely different body of rules than the other Bill of Rights guarantees.” McDonald, 561 U. S., at 780”

In Bruen, the court went even further declaring: “We know of no other constitutional right that an individual may exercise only after demonstrating to government officers some special need. That is not how the First Amendment works when it comes to unpopular speech or the free exercise of religion. It is not how the Sixth Amendment works when it comes to a defendant’s right to confront the witnesses against him. And it is not how the Second Amendment works when it comes to public carry for self-defense.”

These were very groundbreaking and profound statements from the highest court in the U.S. It should have meant the immediate end of modern gun control as we know it. Sadly, those of us who have been in the trenches for a long time knew it wouldn’t be. Like many other communities that have faced social bigotry in the past, we knew the anti-civil rights crowd would fight to create scorched earth policies for lawful citizens.

There is one piece of this that really hasn’t been talked about. The phrase: “The constitutional right to bear arms in public for self-defense is not “a second-class right…”

As simple as it sounds, is it really? What does that one statement mean to the rest of Bill of Rights? The 2A Community needs to be shouting loud and clear that the ruling clearly means that whatever government does to the Second, it must also apply to every civil right, period! Imagine the true breadth of this.

If government, as a nation or state, places restrictions on or precents you entirely from exercising your Second Amendment civil rights, then why should we trust you to vote intelligently and responsibly? How about sitting on a jury? If we are not supposed to trust you with a gun, why would we ever trust you to dispense justice fairly? If, for example, a single drunk driving conviction with no jail time permanently revokes your Second Amendment rights, why should it no revoke all the rest.

Imagine all those people who believe healthcare and higher education are civil rights. Now imagine the public outcry if they were to lose those rights because they were declared “unsuitable”? There would be riots in the streets and possibly a real insurrection.

What if anyone running for any public office had to meet the local standards and restrictions faced by the 2A community? After all, if someone is not eligible under local laws to exercise their 2A civil rights, then why should they have the ability to pass laws about it? How interesting would it be for the local police chief to have suitability authority over political candidates.

If all of this seems a little far-fetched it is only because the Second Amendment being treated as a true civil right is sadly a brand-new concept. If indeed the Second is not a “second class” civil right, which it is not, then there is going to have to be a profound awaking across the board with all civil rights. Moving forward, the message from the 2A community to government officials everywhere and the anti-civil rights crowd: “Whatever you do to us, you must do to everyone and every civil right, period. If what you propose is not acceptable for any other civil rights, then it is not acceptable for the Second!”

May 3

1802 – Washington, D.C. is incorporated as a city after Congress abolishes the Board of Commissioners, the District’s founding government. The “City of Washington” is given a mayor-council form of government.

1855 – American adventurer William Walker mounts a private military expedition,  departing from San Francisco with 60 men to conquer Nicaragua.

1901 – The ‘Great Fire of 1901’ in Jacksonville, Florida begins when sparks from the chimney of a nearby building start a fire at the Cleaveland Fibre Factory, eventually burning down 146 city blocks and killing 7 people.

1921 – West Virginia becomes the first state to legislate a sales tax.

1942 – During World War II, Japanese naval troops invade Tulagi in the Solomon Islands during the first part of Operation Mo. 

1948 – In  the case of Shelley v. Kraemer, the U.S. Supreme Court rules that covenants prohibiting the sale of real estate to blacks and other minorities are legally unenforceable.

1951 – The Senate Committee on Armed Services and the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations begin closed door hearings into the relief of General of The Army Douglas MacArthur by President Truman.

1952 – USAF Lieutenant Colonel Joseph O. Fletcher and William P. Benedict make the first landing of a U.S. plane at the North Pole..

1957 – Walter O’Malley, the owner of the Brooklyn Dodgers, agrees to move the team from Brooklyn to Los Angeles.

1968 – Braniff International Airways Flight 352, a Lockheed L-188 Electra, breaks up in midair after flying through a thunderstorm and crashes near Dawson, Texas, killing all 85 passengers and crew aboard.

1978 – The first unsolicited bulk commercial email , now known as “spam” is sent by a Digital Equipment Corporation marketing representative to every ARPANET address on the west coast of the United States.

1979 – Margaret Thatcher wins the United Kingdom general election becoming the first female British Prime Minister.

1999 – A tornado of the 1999 Oklahoma tornado outbreak, measured at the highest wind speed ever recorded of 301 mph, hits the southwestern portion of Oklahoma City, killing 45 people, injuring 665 more, and causing $1 billion in damage.

2000 – The sport of geocaching begins, with the first cache placed and the  GPS coordinates posted on Usenet.

2015 – Both gunmen who launch an attack on the “First Annual Muhammad Art Exhibit and Contest” at the Curtis Culwell Center in Garland, Texas,  barely make it out of their vehicle before being ignominiously gunned down in the street by an off duty Garland police officer, hired as a security guard.

THEY WANT A FIGHT
SO LET’S GIVE IT TO ’EM!

It will have been one year on June 23 since the U.S. Supreme Court handed down its landmark ruling in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen and ever since, anti-gun Democrats have been acting like the decision never happened.

A state House representative in Olympia, Wash. may have pegged the reason why during an interview with me back in January. His analysis was matter-of-fact, entirely sensible and a little scary.

The $10,000 Secret

The gun control crowd wants a fight. They are determined to wage a war of perpetual litigation if necessary to have their way — or at least make sure you don’t get your way — at the expense of taxpayers rather than acknowledge they’ve been wrong about the Second Amendment.

Rep. Jim Walsh, from the Evergreen State’s Grays Harbor area along the Pacific Coast has watched them.

“That’s the dangerous thing,” he said about the gun prohibition mindset. “They have a blind spot on this issue. The profound question is whether it’s an ideological position or a political calculation.”

Either way, gun owners cannot allow them to win.

Continue reading “”

Supreme Court Requests Brief in Case Against Illinois Town’s ‘Assault Weapons’ Ban

Naperville, Illinois, will have to defend its ban on the sale of AR-15s and similar firearms before the Supreme Court.

Justice Amy Coney Barrett, who oversees the circuit the case against the ban is happening in, asked the city to respond to an emergency request for an injunction against the ordinance on Monday. That means at least one justice wants to hear more about the case before the High Court decides whether or not to weigh in. The city has until May 8th to answer claims that the ban violates the Constitution.

“We’re thankful the Supreme Court is taking the Second Amendment rights of Illinoisans seriously,” Dudley Brown of the National Association for Gun Rights (NAGR), a plaintiff in the case, said in a statement.

The move may indicate the Court is getting closer to taking up a case against so-called assault weapons bans. After it handed down a new test for gun cases in New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v. Bruen, the Court ordered the Fourth Circuit to rehear a case upholding Maryland’s ban. Federal judges have been split on whether the bans violate the Second Amendment under the new test, opening the door for potential Supreme Court intervention and clarification.

Illinois enacted a statewide ban earlier this year, but it has since been blocked in state and federal court. It has also faced substantial backlash from Illinois sheriffs, a majority of which say they won’t enforce the ban because they consider it unconstitutional.

NAGR was denied a preliminary injunction against the Naperville ordinance in February, and the Seventh Circuit rejected the gun-rights group’s request to block enforcement of the law while its appeal is being processed. Now, the group is making the same request to the Supreme Court.

If the Court does issue an injunction against the ordinance, it will signal similar bans adopted by ten states are unconstitutional. That could upend the debate over gun control in America, which has largely centered around prohibitions on the AR-15 and similar guns. But, while Barrett’s request for a brief increases the odds the case will see action, most cases where briefs are requested do not get a full hearing.

NAGR said it is confident it will prevail in the case, though.

“Any ban on so-called ‘Assault Weapons’ is plainly unconstitutional, and now it is on the city of Naperville to explain the legal justification for their ban,” Brown said. “Of course, there isn’t any. The bans were ludicrous from the start, and if Illinois had any sense, they would wave the white flag now and save us all some time.”

Naperville did not respond to a request for comment.

May 2

1519 – Leonardo da Vinci, Italian painter, sculptor, and architect, dies, age 67, at the summer home of King Charles VIII, Château du Clos Lucé, Amboise, France.

1559 – John Knox returns from exile to Scotland to become the leader of the  Scottish Reformation.

1611 – The King James Version of the Bible is published for the first time in London, by printer Robert Barker.

1670 – King Charles II of England grants a permanent charter to the Hudson’s Bay Company to open up the fur trade in North America.

1863 – General Thomas ‘Stonewall’ Jackson is wounded by friendly fire while returning to camp after reconnoitering during the Battle of Chancellorsville.

1918 – General Motors acquires the Chevrolet Motor Company of Delaware.

1945 – The U.S. Army’s 8th and 82nd Airborne Divisions liberate Wöbbelin concentration camp, near Ludwigslust, Germany. finding around 1000 dead prisoners out of 4000 imprisoned there.
In southern Bavaria, a column of several hundred prisoners, en route from from Dachau to the Austrian border is halted by the U.S. Army’s  522nd Field Artillery Battalion.
The Soviet Union announces the fall of Berlin.

1964 – Viet Cong commandos from the 65th Special Operations Group mine and sink the American aircraft carrier USNS Card while it is docked at Saigon.

1982 – During the Falklands War, the British nuclear submarine HMS Conqueror sinks the Argentine cruiser ARA General Belgrano.

2000 – President Clinton announces that accurate GPS access would no longer be restricted to the U.S. military.

2011 – Special Warfare Operators of U.S. Navy Seal Team-6 assault a compound in Abbottabad, Pakistan, where Osama bin Laden, the mastermind behind the September 11 attacks is suspected to be hiding, and kill him and several other Al Qaeda terrorist leaders

Who turned the lights out? Joe Biden

Does the radical climate change agenda know no end? Earlier this year, it was gas stoves — and then lightbulbs.

Then, a few weeks ago, President Joe Biden’s administration announced much less gas cars after 2032. Even though about half of Americans say they don’t want an electric car and only 6% of drivers are buying them.

But that was child’s play compared to the latest Biden scheme to shut down as many as half our electric power plants across the country. These are the plants that charge those Tesla batteries and cellphones. They also keep the lights on in our factories, schools, hospitals, stores, and homes and power the internet. Further, they cook our food and keep us warm at night. No, that power doesn’t just come magically from the socket in the wall.

Most of the electric power supply in America and around the world comes from fossil fuels. Coal, gas and oil power plants account for more than 60% of the electric power we use in the United States today. Only about 20% comes from wind and solar power.

Hold that thought. Because the Biden administration has announced what The Washington Post calls a plan to “drastically reduce (power plant) greenhouse gas emissions.” These cuts are so stringent that most of our gas- and coal-fired plants would be technologically incapable of complying. But here’s what’s sinister: That’s the point of these rules — to wrench fossil fuels from our energy supply altogether.

Our electric grid system is already stressed to the limits. States that have tried to switch to green energy — California comes to mind — are having to undergo dangerous blackouts and brownouts. This is what happens in Third World countries. It isn’t supposed to happen here.

Where are we going to get the electric power to charge 150 million EVs every night? From windmills? Remember, these new Environmental Protection Agency rules come just weeks after Biden announced cars would soon no longer be fueled with gas, oil or diesel. Yet now, we are going to shut down more power plants?

The Biden administration says that coal and gas plants will have to pay for carbon offsets to make up for their carbon emissions. Who’s going to pay for that? We all will with much higher utility bills.

If you want to cripple an industrial economy like that of the U.S., a good way to do so is to dismantle its energy supply. Who is the president residing in the White House these days? Joe Biden or Dr. Evil?

No country has cleaned its air more than the U.S. has over the last many decades. The Institute for Energy Research reports that our air pollution emissions — including lead, sulfur, carbon monoxide and particulates — have fallen by a combined 74% over the past 50 years. We have the cleanest air in any of our lifetimes.

Even our carbon dioxide emissions have fallen in recent years more than any other country, thanks to natural gas production. We aren’t the problem. China is, and you can be sure they’re not doing anything to slow their economy.

These new EPA regulations aren’t about breathing cleaner air or changing the temperature of the planet. They are a dangerous assault on the American free enterprise system and U.S. global leadership.

Biden thinks his legacy will be as the president who fought global warming.

Wrong. He will go down in history as the president who turned the lights out on the U.S. economy.

Stephen Moore is a senior fellow at the Heritage Foundation

My eyesight has been changing in the past few years and I’ve found that dot  optics like the Aimpoint M68 or SiG Romeo require me to use prescription eyeglasses to keep everything in focus.
Optics Planet recently had this scope on sale ($150 delivered ) so I bought one, then a month later a second one.
This review is pretty good so I thought I’d share it

VORTEX CROSSFIRE II 1-4X24MM RIFLE SCOPE REVIEW

The Vortex Crossfire II 1- 4 x 24mm riflescope is the stuff grown-up folks need to feel like kids again. This offering of the Crossfire II is quick to use, acquires the target smoothly, small so that it will be at home damn near anywhere on any size long-gun.  If you can’t tell already, I kind of like it.

Vortex Background

OK, for a little fanboy action about Vortex, they have been making modern optics in Wisconsin since 2002, and before that, the owners had an optics shop, then decided to make their own from scratch.  Vortex is very happy to have anyone stop by the sales floor lobby and look at all they have to offer, and you will need some time, it’s a long walk.

On their 50 and 100 yard indoor ranges, they offer police training to the departments in Wisconsin and Northern Illinois, and I am sure plenty of time has been spent looking through this optic by many of the officers training there.

OK, now onto some time spent in the desert, and breathing a bit of dust from a sudden wind storm that I have some feeble and colorful language to describe, with that I will keep that part of the day to myself.

Some Identifying Features

What style of a rifle will this scope work best on?  The AR platform seems to be a perfect fit.  The guide guns, heavy, large-caliber lever action guns that Alaskan guides carry as bear-repellent, would be a great fit as well.  I have seen pictures of this scope on a crossbow, now that is something to think about.  All caliber will benefit from this scope, with this Crossfire II offering magnification at 1x up to 4x power, I believe this scope on a world-class 22 Magnum bolt action would be a devastation to the squirrel world.

Vortex Crossfire II

Continue reading “”

REGULATORS SEIZE FIRST REPUBLIC IN SECOND LARGEST BANK FAILURE IN U.S. HISTORY:

Early on Monday, regulators seized the San Francisco-based First Republic Bank and agreed a deal to sell its deposits and most of its assets to JPMorgan Chase, preventing further spiral in the banking industry.

Three of the four largest-ever U.S. bank failures have occurred in the past two months. First Republic Bank, which as of April 13 had $229.1 billion in total assets and $103.9 billion in total deposits, is the second largest bank to go under in U.S. history, behind only Washington Mutual, which went down in 2008. First Republic has been struggling since the failures of Silicon Valley Bank (SVB) and New York-based Signature Bank in March.

Investors and depositors were growing increasingly worried the bank would not survive because of its high amount of uninsured deposits — that is, deposits over the FDIC-insured limit of $250,000. First Republic also had high exposure to low-interest loans. A focus on wealthy clients on both coasts allowed First Republic to grow into one of the biggest banks in America. Large deposits funded low-rate mortgages to wealthy home buyers.

The bank lost $100 billion in deposits in a March run following SVB’s collapse. First Republic struggled to cope with the declining situation until eleven of America’s biggest banks deposited $30 billion into its coffers. That gave the bank breathing room and it tried to turn itself around. First Republic planned to sell off unprofitable assets, including the low interest mortgages, and it also announced layoffs of a quarter of its workforce.

The quarterly report, however, sent investors into panic. With the stock price in freefall and the bank poised for further spiral, regulators considered intervention necessary.

“As part of the transaction, First Republic Bank’s 84 offices in eight states will reopen as branches of JPMorgan Chase Bank, National Association, today during normal business hours. All depositors of First Republic Bank will become depositors of JPMorgan Chase Bank, National Association, and will have full access to all of their deposits,” explained the FDIC in a statement Monday.

“The resolution of First Republic Bank involved a highly competitive bidding process and resulted in a transaction consistent with the least-cost requirements of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act,” the agency added, estimating the cost to the Deposit Insurance Fund to be about $13 billion. The agency is sharing losses on First Republic’s loans.

The FDIC seriously considered a bid from at least one smaller bank — namely, PNC Financial Services, the Wall Street Journal reported.

Both First Republic and Washington Mutual are now substantially owned by JPMorgan. Chairman and CEO Jamie Dimon was instrumental in earlier efforts to rescue First Republic. JP Morgan was one of the eleven banks to intervene in March and Dimon was pushing for additional steps to be taken.

“Our government invited us and others to step up, and we did,” explained Dimon in a statement. “Our financial strength, capabilities and business model allowed us to develop a bid to execute the transaction in a way to minimize costs to the Deposit Insurance Fund.”

“This acquisition modestly benefits our company overall, it is accretive to shareholders, it helps further advance our wealth strategy, and it is complementary to our existing franchise,” Dimon added.

JPMorgan expects the addition of First Republic to add $500 million to its net income per year, not including the approximately $2.6 billion one-time post-tax gain or approximately $2 billion of post-tax restructuring costs expected over the course of 2023 and 2024.

This could affect how the courts rule on any bureaucrap regulatory schemes

Supreme Court will consider major case on power of federal regulatory agencies.

Nearly 40 years ago, in Chevron v. Natural Resources Defense Council, the Supreme Court ruled that courts should defer to a federal agency’s interpretation of an ambiguous statute as long as that interpretation is reasonable. On Monday, the Supreme Court agreed to reconsider its ruling in Chevron.

The question comes to the court in a case brought by a group of commercial fishing companies. They challenged a rule issued by the National Marine Fisheries Service that requires the fishing industry to pay for the costs of observers who monitor compliance with fishery management plans.

Relying on Chevron, a divided panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit rejected the companies’ challenge to the rule. Judge Judith Rogers explained that although federal fishery law makes clear that the government can require fishing boats to carry monitors, it does not specifically address who must pay for the monitors. Because the NMFS’s interpretation of federal fishery law as authorizing industry-funded monitors was a reasonable one, Rogers concluded, the court should defer to that interpretation.

The fishing companies came to the Supreme Court in November, asking the justices both to weigh in on their challenge to the rule and to overrule Chevron (or, the petition suggested, clarify that when a law does not address “controversial powers expressly but narrowly granted elsewhere in the statute,” there is no ambiguity in the statute, and therefore no deference is required). After considering the case at five consecutive conferences, the justices agreed to take up only the second question, on the Chevron doctrine.

Continue reading “”

The Truth Behind “Children Killed by Guns”, Critical Analysis of Misleading Statistics & Hidden Agendas

U.S.A. — A recent article, “When ‘Children Killed by Guns’ are Not Children at All,” by Paul Valone, President of Grass Roots North Carolina, with contributions from Jim Parker and Sean Sorrentino, is an informative and insightful look into the propaganda and deception involved in the gun control debate.

The article examines the lies perpetuated by gun control advocates, such as the idea that “gun violence is the NUMBER ONE cause of death for children and teens in our country.” This honest and factual research dig details the truth about gun-related deaths and the ages, races, and circumstances surrounding them.

When ‘Children Killed By Guns’ Are Not Children At All

The first fake news lie addressed in the article is the definition of “children.” The article points out the obvious, to everyone but gun banners, that 18- and 19-year-olds are NOT children, yet gun control advocates include them in the statistics to inflate the numbers. The research also notes that the claim of ‘gun violence’ being the number one cause of death for children is FALSE, as the real statistics show that motor vehicle deaths are more common than gun-related deaths.

Actual and Accurate Total Deaths of Children 0-17 Source CDC WISQARS

Valone’s continued research delves further into the lie that all age groups are equally afflicted. The data from the CDC’s WISQARS system shows that in the 0-15 age range, the rate of motor vehicle deaths is 41% higher than gun-related deaths. However, when looking at 16- and 17-year-olds, the data reveals that firearm deaths by all intents exceed motor vehicle deaths, with a 29% difference.

Another Big Lie Exposed

Another lie exposed in the article is the claim that all demographics are equally afflicted. The article looks at the 16-17 age range and finds that when factored by race, blacks are 425% more likely to be killed by guns than whites.

This is an alarming statistic that is completely ignored by gun control advocates who push for blanket policies that do not address the root cause of gun violence in certain communities.

Hiding Reality

A chronic problem in the Fake News reporting on guns is “combining intents,” particularly suicide. Suicide rates are often used to inflate the numbers and justify gun control policies. However, the article notes that suicide is subject to the “substitution effect,” where people denied one means of suicide tend to substitute another. Japan, for example, has a high suicide rate despite a near-total prohibition on gun ownership.

The accurate statistics highlight who the real winner or, should we say, victims are. When it comes to homicide, blacks are the clear “winner” with a rate of 800% that of whites in the 16-17 age group.

The important article by Paul Valone, Jim Parker, and Sean Sorrentino is a well-researched and eye-opening look into the lies and propaganda surrounding gun control. The authors provide a data-driven analysis of gun-related deaths and the circumstances surrounding them. They reveal the truth behind the inflated statistics often used by gun control advocates to push their agenda.

The article is a must-read for anyone interested in the gun control debate and values honesty and accuracy in reporting.

Is It Right For You?
There are many different kinds of pistols out there, and what’s right for one person might not be right for you.

When doing gun reviews, the duty of the gun writer is to be as objective as possible. My personal opinions are not as important as an honest report on the gun’s quality of manufacture, accuracy, form and function. You, the consumer, on the other hand, should approach the same gun from a very subjective position. Let me give you an example.

As a young peace officer I carried a Smith & Wesson 4-inch Model 19. It was a good gun and I liked  it. However, several of the best marksmen in our department shot Colt Pythons. Naturally, I had to try one and bought a Python at the earliest opportunity. With no better idea, I chose to shoot the Colt on our standard department qualification course. After shooting the course several times, over a period of weeks, I came to the conclusion that the Python was not for me.

The Colt, being a slightly larger frame that the S&W, just did not fit my hand as well. I also had trouble with the way the DA trigger stacked prior to the sear being released. And, finally, I found the gun a bit more difficult to conceal for off-duty carry.

Now, to be very clear, the Colt Python is, and was, a fine revolver. But, based upon my subjective evaluation, it just didn’t suit me as well as the Model 19. And that certainly doesn’t mean that it isn’t well suited for other shooters. By the way, the Colt being a quality piece of work, I was easily able to trade it off for other stuff, including my first every 2½-inch Model 19.

It is an excellent idea for the consumer to establish a uniform method of evaluating new guns. I suggest developing a standard shooting drill by which all guns are evaluated. This drill should involve shooting from very close to the target and on out to at least 25 yards. It should involve precision shooting to test accuracy and speed shooting to determine suitability for personal defense. With each gun being put to the same test, it is much easier to determine the one that suits you best.

Just as I had to find out for myself about a suitable revolver, I can’t possibly tell you which gun is best suited for you. I can tell you which guns are well made. I can give you an ideas of the potential accuracy. But, you have to decide for yourself which ones are best suited for your particular needs and preferences. That requires trips to the range and putting lead in the air. And that’s also a fun day, so there really isn’t a downside. Good shooting!