anti-gun blog firearms ownership politics stewardship

About those recent comments…

About the political aspect of this blog: please do not leave offensive comments and later say, “no offense.”  Please do not assume I’m a “Tea Bagger”.  I’m not.  Please do not bring any anti-gun mentality to this blog.  If you don’t like what you read, move on, because I probably didn’t have you in mind when I decided to create the blog…the internet is HUGE and you should be able to find something more to your liking than this blog.

What you think is radical may in fact not be as radical as you think.  It’s only radical because you don’t believe or understand the subject matter.  Radical Islamics…THEY’RE radical.  Fostering gun ownership in a nation that gives it’s citizens the right to bear arms…that’s not radical.  You also may think that some of what’s posted here is dramatic.  If you think so, this blog isn’t for you.

Gun topics tend to bring out the nastiness in people.  Guns are tools, just as anything tangible in today’s world is.  I speak of politics because of today’s stance against firearms (and stewardship means talking about ALL don’t dodge subjects because people might not respond well to the subject matter).  I speak to educate those that are curious about firearms and the laws governing them (and there are a LOT, so you tend to see a lot of posts on this blog regarding politics — there’s no way around that).  I’m not waiting for someone who is against gun ownership to start a debate.  That’s not what this blog is about.

I’m trying to foster stewardship and education.  If you hate guns, this blog is NOT for you.  I’m not trying to appease those that are against gun ownership nor those that think “they’re not out to take your guns”.  I’m not trying to cooperate with anti-gun folk, so there’s no compromise when it comes to my posts on my blog.  I don’t need convincing, either.

Facebook firearms First Amendment Hickok45 Second Amendment Zuckerberg

Facebook’s Attack on the 2nd Amendment

I wanted to share a few quick notes on my opinion of Facebook’s recent attacks on groups that involve firearms.

Here’s one thing I really hate about FB. They’ve hacked pages and if you’re not careful on what you click, you can have your page hijacked. Now that’s not the only worry…personal information can be stolen and some of that information can be used to damage other aspects of your life.

When I report a hacked page, FB does nothing. Nothing at all. But yet they’ll make it a mission goal to shut down gun groups for things they don’t understand. In many states, private sales of guns is legal (ie, Virginia). Another thing is, they seem to not even be investigating…they respond based on reports. Anyone can claim a page/group is in violation, but you’d think FB would be validating the claims. I don’t think they are.

When the public was outraged that the US government was serving notices to social media, Zuckerberg was all over it, insisting that he was fighting “the man” because of privacy concerns. Yet he’ll tromp all over 2A. WTF. You can’t choose what Bills within the Bill of Rights you’ll support. If you tear one down, what’s to stop the rest from being torn down? You can’t love 1A, speak bad about 2A, try to get 2A removed, and expect 1A to be safe. These people are seriously retarded.

 Yes, I know that FB isn’t the only social media service that has issues with firearms.  And I also know that FB is a private organization.  FB isn’t the only social media outlet that does this type of thing:  Google shut down Hickok45 twice last month for posting/linking his videos to Google+.  Does that make it right, though?  No.  This has nothing to do with the Patriot Act (there are no parallels and just because the PA exists doesn’t mean we need to be tearing down basic freedoms), as a recent responder mentioned.  This also has nothing to do with supporting a Republican cause (this is another labeling of the aforementioned responder).  I’m not a Republican — you can be Democrat and still love and support guns, but just because I’m speaking out against FB and anti-gunning tactics doesn’t mean I’m Republican.

I suggest gun owners and the firearms community utilize services that support firearms and the 2nd Amendment.  One such tool is MeWe, a social media tool.  I’ll be creating a MeWe account soon.  There’s also  Both of these are good social media tools that are less tyrannical than FB.

carry conditions of readiness firearms israel israeli method

Condition 1 Carry VS the “Israeli Method”

Semi-automatic pistols can be carried in various conditions of readiness. First defined by the legendary  Lt Col John Dean “Jeff” Cooper, these conditions are commonly accepted to be:

  • Condition 0 – A round is in the chamber, hammer cocked, and the safety is off.
  • Condition 1 – known as “cocked and locked”, means a round is in the chamber, the hammer cocked, and the manual thumb safety on the side of the frame is applied.
  • Condition 2 – A round is in the chamber and the hammer is down.
  • Condition 3 – The chamber is empty and hammer down with a charged magazine in the gun.
  • Condition 4 – The chamber is empty, hammer down and no magazine is in the gun.

These conditions are/were designed with a 1911 style pistol in mind. The Glock with no external safety (but with its “safe action” safety measures) technically can’t have the thumb safety applied so it’s condition when loaded and chambered is a matter of debate amongst handgun owners and experts but it’s commonly accepted that a Glock is in “Condition 1” when loaded with a round in the chamber.

More @


Another page on the subject is @ and it elaborates on the different conditions.

In which condition do you carry and why?

anchor carry CNN firearms self defense shooting

Former CNN Anchor After Self-Defense Shooting: “If you don’t want to carry please don’t. Then, shut the f— up about it.”

Excerpted from a recent NRA ILA newsletter:

Last week we shared the harrowing story of former CNN Headline News anchor Lynne Russell and husband Chuck de Caro, who exercised their right to armed self-defense to stop a gun-wielding robber who forced his way into their Albuquerque, N.M. motel room.  Espousing a straightforward logic that even gun control supporters should be able to grasp, Russell stated, “If you don’t want to carry please don’t. Then, shut the f–k up about it. Make your own decisions.”  Both Russell and de Caro are Right-to-Carry permit holders, and in an interview with Fox News following the shooting Russell had some choice words for anyone that would deprive them of the right to bear arms.

Espousing a straightforward logic that even gun control supporters should be able to grasp, Russell stated, “If you don’t want to carry please don’t. Then, shut the f–k up about it. Make your own decisions.”

Makes sense to me!

Read more here.

firearms forums James Yeager online firearms personality TheYankeeMarshall TP-9 TYM

So, You Don’t Like A Particular Firearms Online Reviewer?

Every once in awhile when conversing a particular gun or accessory that might be highlighted in a YouTube review or article, I get the following or sometime similar:

“James Yeager SUCKS!  Please quit sharing his content!”

Please realize that it’s easier for you to filter (mentally or physically) the things you don’t like about the firearms industry than for you to personally inform me of your distaste…I’m not going to cater my thoughts, forum banter, or blog content to every individual that’s displeased with some online firearms entity.  Why should I care what you think about him/her?  I’m only trying to share information about a particular product and many times (especially if a product isn’t popular or if it’s new), there will only be one online reviewer posting about it.  When I share the data with others and they don’t particularly like the reviewer, either move along or vent elsewhere…hammering me about your loyalties (or lack of) isn’t going to get me to remove or alter my content.

I posted in a forum that a revised DA/SA TP-9 was just released to the public and one person asked for an information source.  There is only one source of information thus far, review-wise, and that’s James Yeager.  The video isn’t really a review…it’s more of a notice that a review is coming and that they’ve a gun on-hand to review.  Wouldn’t you know…several guys got bent about the fact that it happened to be Yeager that provided video coverage of the gun.  They shared their displeasure by attempting to share out that I didn’t know what I was doing and that by linking his videos, I was hurting the firearms community.

My response was that no matter who it might be, people always complain.  I’m not going to try to make everyone happy by trying to appease them when they make such trivial complaints.  If you don’t like reviewer X, that’s YOUR problem, not mine.  Forums have ignore features.  If you don’t like what you see and I’m not violating a forum’s terms of usage, then you should use the ignore feature…if you don’t and you become irrate, I’ll use it on you.

I never think like I know more than people who make their living selling guns or firearms training, the only exception would probably be TheYankeeMarshall…that guy is a total tool, as he give bad reviews on guns he’s never touched/shot, which makes him less than credible on the whole, IMO.  And while I can’t stand TYM, I never try to force my opinion of him down someone else’s throat.  You might think James Yeager has no firearms knowledge, and to be honest, I don’t really like the guy personally, but I do agree with a lot of the knowledge he shares about certain firearms or his logic on self defense.  That’s me taking what I want from him while not caring for his personality traits.

As an individual, I’d prefer choosing on my own what knowledge is good for me and what knowledge I consider to be junk.  I don’t need anyone trying to decide for me…I’m no sheep.  If I need help deciphering or deciding on a particular issue, THEN I’ll ask for forum input.  Unsolicited “advice” that turns into rants?  You can keep it to yourself.  If you don’t like a particular person, what’s it worth to me?  Nothing…such things do not add value to discussions.  I take what I can from most online firearms personalities, even if I don’t like their demeanor.  Another thing:  if someone is judging these reviewers, what’s the criteria in deciding who sucks and who doesn’t?  Who says I have to agree?  Does it matter if I agree when I’m trying to get a point across that doesn’t relate to that particular person?  Most of those things are highly subjective…each person will look at things differently but I refuse to play the groupie and hunt down other opposing groups.  I’m an outlier…I group to no one.

When I state these thoughts, it’s certainly not to be dickish.  If you share your opinions, be prepared for me to share mine, and if it doesn’t agree with yours, don’t get bent.  We’re all sharing a passion for firearms…it’s stupid to let such trivial things get between us, especially when continuing to struggle in ensuring our 2A rights aren’t eroding.

2A carry concealed carry firearms training

Some 2A Food For Thought

I posted the following yesterday to my friends and family on Facebook:

Yes, folks, I carry. I’m carrying 70% of the time I’m not showering, not sleeping, or not on the work campus. Do I care that others don’t know that I carry? No…that’s not what the 2nd Amendment is about. The 2A doesn’t say that I’ve the right to bear arms as long as other people know I’m carrying and that they’re comfortable with it. Why do I carry? Because I choose to. Basically, I’ve the constitutional right to carry. There’s nothing conditional about it. I do not have to let other citizens know. Yes, open carry is an option (it’s legal here), but not for me…why would I let potential bad guys know that I’m their first priority?

Those that see me occasionally…I was probably carrying when you last saw me. You probably never knew. You probably felt comfortable then. Will you feel as comfortable the next time we meet, now that you know? I hope so, because I wasn’t a nut then and I’m not a nut now.

Why advertise that I carry? You all already know I own guns…I’ve been posting pictures and articles the last 9 months. I’ve been a gun lover since 1986, when I enlisted. That’s the total of my adult life. You’re also my friends, which is why you’re seeing this now. The assumption is that you already suspected that I carry, so it’s not a big deal for me to keep this a secret amongst a certain group of people. Some people hide such facts. I don’t.

Again, this isn’t a big deal for me. YMMV.

Where’s this coming from? An opinion on 2A from someone that doesn’t exercise the right.

I got the reply, which I agree with:

Now more than ever, it’s an option that every law abiding American should exercise.

Someone then replied to him with the following:

I know enough law abiding Americans who are generally a danger to themselves and others to appreciate that not everyone should have a gun.

What does someone say to that?  Well, the same can be said of anything. Some people have no business driving, for example, yet they’re never noticed until they’ve been in several nasty accidents.  And, when this happens (it happens a LOT with chronic drunks driving home), is there overwhelming support to ban people from having easy access to cars?  Nope.

As with anything, some people either require more training than others or need to not do that particular activity. The slope becomes slippery when additional criteria is added to basic rights…the rights are no longer really rights. The system doesn’t need to be tweaked every time someone gets emotional about an issue that, on the whole, isn’t all that much of a problem.  If someone becomes problematic, deal with that particular person, not the whole group.

In VA, you’re required to pass a basic firearms handling course before you can carry concealed…if people still are considered to be a danger to themselves and others even after meeting the state requirements, then what do you do? Limiting the population as a whole isn’t a good answer, especially if those types of people are outliers.  Until that person accidentally kills himself or someone else, there’s really nothing you can do.  Regulating a whole population because a few are inept is bad, and there’s nothing that can be preemptively done that won’t affect the people that are carrying properly.

basics cardinal rules firearms gun safety

Changing the Rules: Revisiting the Basics of Safe Gun Handling — USCCA

You know the rules. They are: 1. Treat every gun as if it is loaded. 2. Never point your firearm at something you are not willing to destroy. 3. Keep your finger off the trigger until you have made a decision to shoot. 4. Know your target and beyond.

So, do you agree with all those rules? Do they make sense in every situation?

I learned recently of differing definitions that more clearly relate safe gun handling techniques to the tasks of personal defense than do those four cardinal rules. While attending a class at the Sig Sauer Academy, my eyes were opened to the difference between safe gun handling and “range rules.”

I read the article and I totally agree with everything that was mentioned.  The rules, although considered “cardinal” are taken too literally.  It’s not a problem with the rules, but a problem with how they’re understood.  For example, if you watch some people check to see that a weapon is clear, you’ll see many rack the slides 10 times (in a row)  when it’s only necessary to do this once.  As well, some people stick their finger in the chamber to check if a round is there…really???  Simply looking is enough…there’s no need to feel for something that you’d normally see (and a slide catch letting go on a finger can cause injury).  If you don’t see it, it isn’t there.  We’re not talking about weapons with chambers so deep you can’t see ammo that might be chambered.

This one is a pretty good read.  It is good suggestive reading material, IMO.

AZ CA California CCW CO firearms moving NM NV OR VA

Nope, Not Moving to CA!

I’ve had a change of heart and cancelled my plans to move to CA.  Why?  After thinking on it for months, I’ve determined that I’d be a fool to move to a state that limits it’s citizen in the manner that CA does (and not just with guns, but with everything).  After submitting for my VA CCW, I had a license in hand eight days later.  In CA, depending on the county, the CCW permit process could take up to 1.5 years, with a year wait almost guaranteed.  The gun laws are generally very restrictive, even if you’re not carrying.  10-round mags.  A highly restrictive list of guns that can be sold to you via retail.  Lots of red tape even selling used guns from one CA citizen to another.  I’ve lived there before…I didn’t like it then, either, and I wasn’t even into guns then.  Some advice:  never ever try to ignore yourself when your conscious is giving you bad vibes about a decision you’re trying to make.  I already feel much better about myself, now that I’ve decided not to move to that state.

I told my wife that I’d be receptive to moving to a border state (NV, AZ, OR) or states that are relatively close to CA (Utah, Colorado, New Mexico).  She only wants CA, but that’s not going to happen.  She thinks someone influenced my decision.  No, I just woke up.

So, I’ve got 10 guns now, and the only reason I bought the majority of them was because they aren’t available via retail in CA.  That doesn’t bother me since they’re excellent guns.  It does mean that I probably won’t be getting any guns for awhile, but that’s fine too.

awareness backpack carry CCW concealed firearms holster situational

Everyone Wants To Think They’re the One-Stop Firearms Guy

Why is it that every gun forum has these guys that think that their methods of carrying (and their equipment) is the one and only methods?  These guys think that their answers are the absolute only way to address a situation.  They’re the one-stop guys…the guys that think that they’re asked first and the questioners have their answer and that’s the end of it.

Am I claiming I know better?  No, but a LOT of this isn’t one-shoe-fits-all, either.  And a LOT of it is common sense.  As well, there are soooo many variables with gun owners, their experience, and their equipment that it’s stupid to think that there’s only one answer.  These are the same people that will immediately call someone a sheep, but yet they’re giving these canned and wrong answers.

Where’s all this coming from?  There’s this guy on a forum that has two full-sized (or nearly so) handguns and he says they print too much with his summer shirts.  He wants to store his gun in a backpack when running and was asking for people who had experience with carrying in that manner.

The first forum responder asks if he’s talking about the legality or the practicality of carrying in a backpack.  He also shares his experience (he carries his in a dry bag when he’s boating or kayaking).  He also says that some carry methods aren’t optimal (carrying on a bike, for example) and that you have to do the best you can, and that “a little less reaction time has to be adjusted by more situational awareness.”  I agree.

Some others responded by stating to use backpacks that have CCW in mind, or even use a fanny pack or shirts that have robust built-in holstering.

One responder outright stated that using a backpack was a bad idea.  I responded to him by stating that there’s no absolute answer.  There are so many variables in assessing what’s best based on your individual needs that just because Owner A may use a certain holster doesn’t mean that holster will be acceptable for Owner B.  The original poster stated he wanted to carry his gun when he’s running with his dog.  His guns are difficult to conceal in his running gear, I assume.  One offered option was to downsize his guns (trade or sell his guns for smaller framed guns that are easier to conceal).  I also offered the option of maybe finding running gear that will better accomodate his handguns, or get some printed shirts that will hinder printing.  Telling the guy outright that carrying in a backpack was the worst answer was really awful…that’s what this responder did.  It started a debate between myself and the responder.  My argument was that you would need to give yourself more time to be situationally aware when carrying in this manner.  His argument was weird…he was like, “situational awareness has nothing to do with carrying”, which was the worst answer possible.  If you aren’t situationally aware and you’re also carrying, that’s dangerous, especially if you’re open-carrying.  He kept stating that it’s quicker to unholster a gun that’s being carried on your hip than it is to reach inside of a backpack.  He’s right, but no one was arguing that point.  Well, he was but no one else cared.  Several guys within the thread stated that you should always be situationally aware and if you are sufficiently aware, you could buy yourself time to get to the gun.  Another argument this person used was, “well, there was a guy in a van that pulled up next to this girl, he pointed a gun at her, demanded she get into the van, then he repeatedly raped her.”  He used this to argue his point of a holstered gun being better than a gun in a backpack.  I asked if she was carrying a gun and asked how that proved his point.  He never answered…just stated that I was being obtuse.

My point is, every gun owner that carries (whether concealed or not) should be performing mental risk assessments to determine how to best deal with potential problems based on the equipment they’re planning to use.  There are so many variables in assessing risk (gun, owner’s experience and training, owner’s holster, owner’s ammo, the potential defensive situation…), you can’t just say, “a bag isn’t going to cut it”. There’s no absolute answers. You deal with it the best you can. Even if you practice daily, real life situations aren’t scripted. You’ve to adjust as it happens.  Situational awareness is going to help with that.  His example of the girl being raped, for example…she could’ve done several things based on the risk involved.  She could’ve run, or yelled at the top of her lungs, or did both.  A gun wouldn’t have solved that and would’ve escalated the incident.  Running and yelling would probably have worked because those are defensive actions…potential rapists don’t typically shoot their potential victims if they yell or run.  People have been killed with holstered guns, as well.  Having a gun does not stop bad things from happening, but even if you’ve a gun, carrying in a manner that is basically looking for a confrontation with a bad guy is…bad.  If you see a bad guy coming toward you with a gun, are you going to just stand there and wait for him to get to you?  You should move, run, hide, or at least make enough distance between you and him so that you can get the gun from the backpack.  A backpacked gun is better than no gun in that situation.  One could argue that someone could steal the backpack.  Well, one could bumrush a person CCWing and take his holstered gun as well (remember the Walmart incident in Florida earlier this year?).  The gun by itself isn’t the weapon…your MIND is the weapon too.  Don’t let yourself be lulled by the fact that you’re carrying concealed.  If you’re printing and not aware of it and have the attitude that you’re safe, you’re now in a higher level of danger and you’re in a complacent state of mind, as a bad guy will more than likely see your printing gun and see you as an immediate threat.  I’m not even a LEO or have been through advanced or even basic defensive firearms courses and I know this.  What’s crazy is that it seems that everyone wants to be the internet expert on armed confrontation…they think they’re John Wick, I guess.

Is a backpack the best equipment to carry a gun?  NO!  But if it’s all you have, then you make the best of it, or get something that’s a bit better than a backpack (maybe a backpack that’s designed around CCW), or get a smaller handgun.  Work out what’s best for you and what you can cope with, risk-wise.

CA statutes firearms handguns magazine limits magazines off-roster

CA and Off-Roster Guns

I want to quickly discuss the validity of owning off-roster guns in CA.

Please reference, as it is the frame of reference I’ll be using.  People moving to CA with off-roster only have to ensure they’re compliant with: and (Pen. code, §§ 17000, subd. (a), 27560 pretty much covers it, statute-wise).

Can you own off-roster guns?  Yes.  On-roster guns apply to retail sale only.  Many people bought off-roster guns with the SSE option, which expired Jan 1, 2015.  People also bring off-roster guns into the state when switching states of residency, which is also legal and is stated in the CA penal code.  CA residents can also have immediate family that are not CA residents transfer guns to them (as gifts)…that includes off-roster guns.

Yes, magazines with round counts greater than 10 are illegal.  That does not make the gun itself illegal, though.  If you’re in CA and need, for example, a new mag but the maker only sells 15-round mags, you’d need to find an FFL that is licensed to have 10+ round mags…many such FFLs have the capability to limit 10+ round mags to 10-rounders.  Or, Glock and Springfield Armory sell 10 round versions of their mags…many gun makers do.  As well, CA isn’t the only state to limit magazine round counts.  I bought both my XD 9 Mod.2 and Glock 19 Gen 4 (both off-roster guns) for the express purpose of bringing them to CA while knowing that they’re not available for retail sale within CA’s borders.  I also bought them because they came with 10-round mags out-of-the-box.

Why am I discussing this?  I’ve people commenting on my videos that I’m sharing misinformation.  Those same people won’t back up what they’re saying or even point out the bits of misinformation they say I’m sharing.  Some are not paying attention to what’s being said in the video.  Some are confused about their state’s own laws, especially as it pertains to people moving into CA from another state.  I’ve no problem accepting fault if I’m spreading misinformation, but I’ve found out that in all cases, I’m not wrong.  Before claiming that I’m wrong, be sure I’m wrong by doing your own research…don’t listen to other  people that might be wrong.  Reference the CA statutes then come back to me with the reference that shows that I’m wrong.  I’m pretty sure that’s not going to happen, since the majority of YT commenters are either young or are only going by what they were told (ie, being spoon-fed information from people that don’t know what they’re talking about instead of learning the information from the CA government).

While I’m no firearms guru, I know just enough to keep myself out of trouble.  Trust me when I say that there are people with Glock Gen 4 models (which are ALL off-roster) and XD 9 Mod.2s (which is also off-roster), that are located in CA.  The guns are sold to them with 10-round mags, FROM THE FACTORY.  For example, my XD9 came with 10-round mags…no, the mags weren’t altered at a gun shop.  SA sells 10-round mags and 9mm versions for the Mod.2 are here and here;  Glock 19 factory 10-round mags are listed here, but I wasn’t able to locate ANY mags on Glock’s website.  There’s also this.  The guns are legal…it’s just a matter of how you obtained them.  If you’re currently a CA resident, the only way to get firearms not approved by CA DOJ is via PPT, which means “private party transfer”, meaning, the gun is already owned by a CA resident and is being transferred to another CA resident.  Those handguns were either grandfathered (bought before the current laws) or were bought in by non-residents who decided to move to CA.  Note that there was also an SSE exemption awhile back but SSE is no longer an option, although you may find gun shops in CA that were bought when SSE was an option.  The CA DOJ approval list doesn’t apply to incoming residents…they can bring whatever they have, as long as their guns aren’t assault weapons (there’s a separate criteria for those type of guns) and as long as the magazines have a 10-round maximum capacity.  This isn’t rocket science and I’m surprised I have to explain this to CA residents.  4/5ths of my guns are off-roster…do you honestly think I didn’t research this before spending that much money (in such a short period)??

CA people…read your statutes…don’t just read them, read them while trying to understand the intent of the statutes.  If you’ve questions, ask them on, but most questions have already been answered, so search to find your answers, or, better yet, just learn how to read the CA statutes.  I will not link or post up the statutes for you (although I did post them up in my XD 9 video, within the video description).  If you need to know their location and read them, google it like I did.