Too Lazy to Fail

Image from some 4chan link someone sent me. Poster by me. Click to enlarge.

While I was at the church working, Tracie went to a machine gun shoot down in South Jackson, where she didn’t get to partake in any full-auto goodness, but did manage a little range time with her Kahr PM9. The picture was taken by a coworker of hers.

Edited to add: The front of her shirt says “Trust me… I’m a reporter.”

My second night at the class was much more a mixed bag than my first night. We started the classroom portion with a hilariously bad DEA training video. The focus of the video was “having the will to survive” but that wasn’t why we watched it. When the video was over, Givens went over what was done well and poorly in the re-enactments of shootouts. I felt like there were a few nuggets of useful information in the DEA video, but they could have been presented more efficiently as stand-alone lessons, instead of a reward for sitting through a very long and awkward video.

Then it was announced that we were getting a civics lesson to accompany our self-defense training. Turns out Scandinavia had a much lower crime rate that its neighbors up until the advent of satelite TV. Apparently their terrain was so rugged that terrestrial television didn’t work. When television came to Scandinavia via satellite, so did higher crime rates. The point of this was that perception is reality. When you see things done incorrectly, whether those things are social interactions or firearms use, you’ll tend to emulate. So to put some “positive reinforcement” into our heads, we were shown a training video from Gunsite.

Kind of a stretch? I thought so as well.

The video was long. I should have timed it, but didn’t. It was easily 30 minutes to an hour. It covered things that were covered in Level II at Rangemaster. It covered malfunctions and the drills to correct them, which was interesting. It covered non-standing shooting positions and how to transition in and out of them. I thought that was informative, but without live demonstration and practice, it was pretty useless. The video gave all of 90 seconds to “Pivots and turns”, which I’ll note is one of the bullet points in the course description. Did we *learn* these movements? No, we saw a police officer execute them. Once.

By this time I was pretty frustrated, and I fear that my negative attitude about the evening up to that point impacted my performance in the range portion of the class. We did another scored course, and I probably scored lowest of all the participants. The instructors were understanding and helpful, but the problem was that I understood my errors but wasn’t able to correct them. It’s not the fault of anyone at Rangemaster, but mine for not getting in enough serious range time. Even Givens commented, “At least you know what you’re doing wrong, so you can fix it.” I was slightly shamed, but having been through the scored course that emphasized the differences between close and distant targets, I have a good idea of how I can set up my range time to get productive use from it.

I need to slow down and focus on getting good, consistent, slow hits instead of poor, scattered, fast hits. I even heard one of the instructors comment to another behind me: “I think he wants to be a gunslinger.” Don’t try to talk behind the back of a student wearing electronic hearing protection, guys! Still, it’s a valid criticism, and I’ll work on it.

In the last hour we had our “simulated gunfights” which were 1-on-1 IDPA-style scenarios. The course involved running up to the booth, knocking off an ammo box with your dominant hand (to ensure that nobody is drawing early), scoring 2-3 solid hits on a cardboard BG 6 feet away, then engaging a reactive target about 25 feet away which will only fall on good COM hits. We didn’t have time to do the entire ladder, but I went up twice and survived both times. Each round requires two points to win, and during my second round I lost my first one (my target started falling as my opponent’s hit the ground), tied the second one, won the first one (by a hair) and won the last one. It was pretty neat to hear folks laughing behind me when I missed the pop-up a few times, and grunt in approval as I slowed down and downed it. The competitive portion of the range time was a blast!

(Side note: If you’re going to be a purist and carry a 1911, please be proficient with it. At least if I screw up I’ve got a 15-round magazine, but more than one 1911 guy had to reload in the middle of the match, which was almost certain death.)

We closed the class by stepping in front out the booths and getting just a little instruction in movement. Nothing fancy, but it was neat to see Givens demonstrate some general principles for how to react in the opening stages of a fight.

It’s hard to summarize my feelings about this course. I guess my fear is that someone who was present will remember how poorly I performed on the range and think that I’m putting the rest of the course down in an effort to make it look like I don’t suck so terribly. But I can admit it, I did much worse on the shooting portions than I had any excuse for.

The range portion was good validation of practiced skills for some (and a humbling reminder that more practice is needed for me) but few new skills or techniques were presented. The classroom portion on the first evening was packed full of good information related to lessons learned from famous shootouts, but on the second night I felt like an elementary school kid on the last day of school, with the teacher showing video to the class to pass the time until everybody went home. The Gunsite video, for instance, was a good video, but I came under the impression that we would be taught in person by Rangemaster instructors in an interactive setting. If I wanted to watch a video from another school, I would order a DVD from their website.

I feel bad being so critical, because I like Givens and the other instructors. I learned a ton from them in Level II, and so I can’t help but feel like I’m not being fair to Rangemaster in this review. Still, came away from the course feeling like I didn’t quite get my money’s worth this time around.

I’m still planning to take more courses from Rangemaster. In particular, I’m looking at the Back-Up Gun course, Defensive Shotgun, Vehicle Defense, and Urban Defense Carbine. But maybe it’s time that for pistol instruction I take a look at other schools and instructors, as well as spending more time on my own getting my proficiency with a handgun up to an acceptable level.

I did have a great time in the competitive portion of the class, however. I’m going to give some thought to going once or twice a month to the Friday night shooting league they host.

I picked up a copy of their Defensive Shotgun DVD. I’m eager to watch it, but wanted to get this review out of my head first so I had a clean slate. Expect a review soon.

I’m doing now what I should have done when I took the Level II course at Rangemaster, and that is to record my thoughts soon after the class instead of letting myself put things off until I had forgotten enough to keep the venture from being worthwhile. I may post this tonight and may not, but want to at least get my raw thoughts on paper while I still have the session fresh in my mind.

I met Squeaky across the street at Chili’s we ate and talked for a while about school and family and other mostly non-shooty stuff. Jesse joined us toward the end to finish off the last of Squeaky’s food, and we left in our three-vehicle caravan for Rangemaster a few miles away. Thank heavens: It meant I didn’t have to navigate.

They shot for a while and I read for a while on one of the couches in an attempt to fight off the nervousness that I knew would wear me out if I let it continue. They finished shooting and sat with me for a little while. Soon Givens announced that since everyone was there, we could get started early.

We started off with some discussion about the Newhall Massacre, with special emphasis given to mistakes that were made by the CHP officers due to poor training.

The range masters in their department didn’t like having to clean up brass, and so officers were required to empty their revolvers into their hands, then put the empty brass into their pockets before loading fresh rounds into the weapon. Officers had serious trouble reloading their revolvers (without the aid of speed-loaders), and Givens reported that one officer was still trying to put his empty brass into his pocket and had just started digging for fresh rounds when one of the suspects walked around the car and shot him point-blank.

The officers trained with their .357 revolvers by shooting the lower-power (and cheaper) .38 special cartridge. Never having fired a full-load .357 before, one of the officers must have thought that his gun had blown up, because witnesses say that he dropped it and stared at it in horror after experiencing the recoil, noise, and blast.

Newhall lessons learned: You will fight the same way you practice. Things like taking the magazine out and finding a pocket to put it in while reloading will get you killed. Magazines are cheap. Life is expensive. Let them drop. Likewise, substituting low-power ammo or shooting airguns, while both can be enjoyable, will cause you trouble if you don’t stay familiar and proficient with the actual ammo and equipment you carry. This will make me reconsider the purchase of a .22 upper for my Glock.

Next came discussion about the 1986 shootout between two bank robbery suspects and multiple FBI agents. Between the discussion, viewing the FBI re-enactment and analysis of the events, and more discussion, we spent almost two hours on this one event and the ramifications on Law Enforcement firearms training and equipment. This was a great example case because it involved a series of individual engagements at varied distances with varied equipment. Among the salient points from my perspective:

• You’re never too close to miss. One agent was six feet away from the suspects at the begining of the fight, emptied his six-shot revolver, and only made a single ineffective hit. Use that front sight. Had the agent taken two careful shots instead of just emptying his gun in the suspect’s direction, he could have announced, “It’s Miller time, boys. Let’s go home.”
• The agents had access to long guns and body armor, but did not make use of them because they figured finding Platt and Matix was a long shot, so they didn’t expect to get into a fight that day. Never go looking for trouble with a handgun! “Handguns are what you carry when you are absolutely positive that you will not be in a fight that day.”
• Two agents lost their unholstered pistols because they were laying on the seat of their respective cars when the flag flew. One of them was able to engage with an inferior back-up weapon, and the other, now unarmed, ran away and had to watch his friends get killed from a distance.  The gun you don’t have on your person will not be useful in the timeframe of a defensive shooting.
• Never give up. Platt was hit with what Givens calls “a ****ing remarkable shot” from 30 feet with a 9mm round that passed through his arm, penetrating his ribs, one lobe of his liver, and a lung, stopping just short of his heart. It was a mortal wound in the truest sense, with examiners later stating that he would not have lived even with immediate care. Still, with his lung filling to the top with 1300 ml of blood, Platt fought on for four minutes. Givens: “Dying is damn-near voluntary.” If you are awake enough to be aware that you’re hurt, you’re awake enough to fight. Keep going. What have you got to lose?
• Platt dominated most of the engagement, though despite heavy FBI casualties he was eventually stopped. Platt and Matix were both highly skilled, competant, motivated indivuduals who were sober and goal-oriented, and this combined with Platt’s superior equipment (Ruger Mini-14) allowed him to be the most dreadful of the combatants. Lesson: We like to think of our potential adversary as a stupid, unskilled thug who is high on drugs and armed with a stolen .25 pistol. There exist hard, cold people in this world who are trained and equiped as well as any police officer. Prepare and plan accordingly. Rifles are the ideal tool for interpersonal conflict resolution, if you can have one handy.
• Platt was hit in the forehead from close range with a .38 +P slug fired from a long-barrelled .357. It went under his scalp, skidded around against his skull, and exited, doing almost no damage. The lesson is that the thick, armored skull is a terrible choice of targets if you’ve got a handgun. (I won’t comment on whether this is consistent with Rangemaster’s recent statement that a similar incident involving a .380 proves that the round is completely inadequate for self-defense.) The other lesson: Hit well, hit repeatedly! Sounds familiar.
• We’ve been told repeatedly that when the crap hits the fan, we do not rise to the occassion, but sink to and below our level of training. If you are not doing your homework, you will most likely “suck out loud”. You might get lucky, but at that point you’ve had the luck of getting in a gunfight, so what kind of odds on a fortunate shot are you willing to take?
• The stakeout had been up and down a long stretch of busy road, and when the flag flew only 8/14 of the agents were able to engage in time. The other six arrived just in time to see the final shots and start cleaning up the mess. Those six, of course, were the SWAT officers with shotguns and hard armor. Lesson: The cavalry will not arrive in time to help you, so you’ve got to be ready to deal with a problem with the skills in your noggin and the equipment on your person.

As you can see from the ginormous list (which is just the stuff that stood out to me), there was a lot to absorb.

Next came the shooting portion of the class. My presentations from concealment were excellent because of time spent in dry practice, but I suspect that my shooting “sucked out loud” because all of my range trips in the last six months have been “fun trips” with friends instead of time spent practicing a serious skill. I will resolve to work on that.

My shooting improved somewhat as the night drew to a close, but we’ll see if any of it sticks for tonight.

I’m off to Mogadishu on the Mississippi where Rangermaster’s Advanced Tactics and Skills pistol course awaits. Along the way I will have dinner/lunch with Squeaky Wheel. It’ll just be us, because none of you conformists can get away from your pesky jobs. Capitalist pigs.

Maybe I’ll blog about class this time, instead of putting it off until all details are forgotten as before.

I’m looking forward to a few days away from the drama at the office. Hopefully some relaxation and a long (6 day) weekend will see me refreshed and ready to help out on Tuesday.

This afternoon on my way home from work I stopped by a local sporting goods store to see if they had received their broken Kahr PM9 back from the service department yet. They had not, but I spotted something under the counter that had not been there before: a completed DPMS AR-15 lower at a price low enough to make me wonder if I wanted to assemble my own after all. While I was looking at it, the salesman asked me what kind of AR I was looking to build:

Paul: Well, I’ll probably go with a light-weight, no-frills carbine. It’s my first, so I want to save money where I can and get a short, handy first rifle.

Salesman: And that lower would be great for that. In fact, you could get a 10.5″ upper online if you’re willing to risk it.

Paul: And become a felon, sure.

Now folks, I don’t like the NFA any more than the next guy. The $200 tax stamp required for SBRs, the paperwork, and the wait are annoying, but not nearly as annoying as skipping them, getting caught, and having “FELON” stamped onto your background checks for the rest of your days. Not to mention the whole going to jail and losing the right to vote and own firearms. As I’ve stated before, I don’t consider legality and morality to be intrinsically linked, but let’s not be stupid here: $200, though unjust, is not the end of the world. I know folks with SBRs, and aside from the wait the process was no big deal. It’s a violation of my rights, but not enough of a violation to justify an action that could take me away from my family for a few years, and away from productive employment for a lifetime. All that is an especially bad idea for a “feature” on an AR that sacrifices a large portion of its utility.

As I was processing this, I overheard the following exchange:

Customer: Man, that EOTech sight sighted in like nothin! I got it off eBay for $400, and you can’t beat that!

Salesman: Yeah, I like them a lot. I’ve got one on my rifle at home.

(It should be noted that earlier, when I asked if they had any fixed or folding AR sights, he tried to sell me a $30 red dot.)

Customer: They say that mine can be used with night vision gear. I can’t afford it, but it sure looks nice.

Salesman: Yeah, and you don’t see much of it. Most of the newer night vision stuff you see at shows are from the military. Soldiers just write ‘em off as losses and take ‘em home to sell. Hell, I’m going off to war myself soon, and I’m planning to stick a few in my bag when I come back.

First off, I must point out that Gen III NVDs are available to anyone, though it’s worth noting that there are export restrictions. Pricey, yes, but perfectly legal.

Making a personal decision to break what most consider to be an unjust law (unregistered SBR) is one thing. Advocating noncompliance with such laws from a storefront is stupid, but I’m not going to judge. Announcing that one is planning to steal from the US Government for personal gain, though? I mean, he knows everyone in that room pays for that stuff, right? Do people have no shame?

I’m just about sure that a complaint letter to the owner is in order. What do you guys think? How would you approach this? This guy is giving firearm retailers and gun-owners everywhere a bad name, but it’s possible that he’s not the only one and that such a letter would be ignored.

In any case, I won’t be purchasing that Kahr, or anything else, from that establishment unless they kick the guy to the curb.

Students for Concealed Carry on Campus

Expensive, but shoots better than a gun that size has any right to shoot.

Full review Monday.

EDIT: Did I say Monday? I mean next Monday. The pistol is currently in a secure, undisclosed location, and I want to include pictures of some internal parts of the gun that I’d like to talk about.

Rangemaster sent out a Memphis-area anecdote yesterday:

This past Sunday evening there was a very instructive incident in East Memphis. A couple was in town for a special event, and were staying at a local hotel. They got into a domestic dispute, and the wife became quite angry and picked up the .380 semi-auto her husband had brought along.  From a few feet away, she shot him in the head with the .380. At that point, he moved quickly, causing her second shot to miss. He then grabbed the gun away from her and went outside and called the police on his cell phone.  When police and paramedics arrived, they found that the bullet had entered the skin on his head, and burrowed around a few inches without entering the skull. This left what the officer described as a “mole tunnel” in the skin. The shootee refused to be taken to the hospital, and was treated and released at the scene by the paramedics.  At no time did he lose consciousness or the ability to fight back.

This is a perfect example of why we say the .380 is not adequate as a defensive round. This lack of effectiveness is the rule with this caliber, not the exception.

A few bloggers have commented approvingly of the admonition from the instructors at Rangemaster, and I can partially agree: the .380 is not a round I would voluntarily rely upon to protect myself and my family. I am mildly bewildered, however, at the dogmatism with which some folks attack sub-caliber pistols.

While those that preach the virtues of the .45 over the 9mm usually do so either without data or with data that ignores modern cartridge design, those who warn us against sub-calibers like the .380 usually do so with good reason, as the modern hollow-point design and hotter potential loading which rescue the otherwise anemic 9mm aren’t as feasible in a cartridge that has the lighter bullet and lower safe pressure threshold of a .380. Simply put, 9mm works because it can go fast, causing the hollow-point bullet to expand while having enough energy left to penetrate. With the .380, one often must choose between penetration and expansion. Without expansion, you’re just punching tiny holes. Without penetration, you’re not reaching vital organs that will cause the aggressor to involuntarily stop what he’s doing.

It sounds like I’ve come not to praise the .380, but to bury it. It’s not the case, or at least, not entirely.

I’m a lucky guy. I carry a Glock 19, which is a full-size, double-stack 9mm pistol. In addition to the pistol I carry a spare magazine and a 2oz can of pepper spray. These items are neither light nor small, but I’m fortunate enough to work in an environment where a nice untucked camp shirt is acceptable attire for the 20-something office manager, so I can conceal what I consider to be a very adequate personal protection configuration. In addition, my employers know that I carry and have no qualms about it. If someone spots the weapon I’m carrying, I’m not in trouble.

Not everyone is so lucky. Most folks work in less permissive environments, where getting caught with a weapon would lead at best to an uncomfortable conversation, and at worst to an escorted trip to the door, with a quick stop to box up personal effects. Some even make the intensely personal decision to protect themselves when not only the employer, but the state itself has required that they disarm. For these individuals, being “made” will result not only in the loss of respect or employment, but the loss of freedom and all the rights of upstanding citizenship.

So what is a person operating in a non-permissive environment to do? Some would tell them to find a new line of work, but that’s easy to say when you’re secure in a job that allows you to protect yourself. The “undercover carrier” is then stuck between a rock and a hard place, between employers that will fire or imprison him if they discover that he carries a weapon, and trainers/writers/gun store employees who imply that there is no excuse for not carrying at least a 9mm, and who mutter under their breath that you’re really not safe with anything but a full-size .40 or .45. Again, I note that full-time trainers work in environments where concealment and secrecy is not a factor.

One option is to go to great lengths in attempting to conceal a full-size pistol. There’s lots of great options out there, and effective every-day concealment in comfort is attainable, but slipping under the radar at Walmart is a lot easier than hiding a large, hard object (Stop snickering!) from people who see you up close nearly every day. For a time I wore a Glock 26 in a tuckable holster with my shirt tucked in and properly bloused. One day a very bright 14 year-old intern with the church’s Urban Ministry program spotted the clips outside my belt while standing beside me at a copier, ruled out a knife or a cell phone, and asked very innocently, “Mr. Simer, do you carry a gun?”

Now, everyone in the room except for this young man knew the answer to that question, but I’m in a permissive environment where it wasn’t a big deal. I give that example to point out that full-size weapons WILL be discovered eventually. Somebody will give you an unexpected hug, or spot some outside bulge or attachment point for the holster, or hear you go “clunk” as you walk too close to a doorframe and hit it with your pistol. Ask yourself: What are the ramifications of discovery? If they’re too costly, as with my friends that carry in spite of state law, then you’ll need to re-evaluate your carry gun.

Someone once said that comparing stopping power among handgun rounds like like comparing ranks among army Privates. ALL handgun rounds stink for self defense, and will “fail” in the manner Rangemaster described occassionally. Some fail more often than others, and while we must take that into account when equipping ourselves, we must also make practical considerations that will allow us to carry in the first place. Rule one of a gunfight: “Have a gun.”

So I’m a big fan of the pocket pistol. I’ve carried a .380 in my pocket when any other gun would have been impossible to conceal under the mandated atire. I carry a larger pistol because I’ve made arrangements for it to be comfortably concealed, and I operate in an environment that endorses my decision to carry. If I ever have to work in a non-permissive environment again, I will not feel ashamed to put a sub-caliber pistol in my pocket. Hey, it beats throwing rocks.

10/22: Still sitting in the corner with one-too-many factory powder coats, screws painted over, and barrel stuck about four degrees off center. Ruger couldn’t get their act together with their new shipping/pickup system, and I haven’t called them back since about a week before Guatemala. Next chance I’ll get to talk to them during their business hours when I won’t be at work is next (not this) Friday. If they don’t take care of me then, I’ll make a comprehensive whining post here, print it, and ship them the gun. If they don’t make this right, I’m not sure I’ll buy another Ruger firearm again. To the dozen people who’ve found my site and emailed me after a Google search such as “Stainless 10/22 Review”: I’d buy the blued version if I were you.

AR-15: I have the stripped lower and plenty of nice magazines, and can finish the rifle for about $600, but I know that when I build it I will have to feed it, and that’s expensive. What’s more, I’d like to put a quality red dot on it, and those don’t grow on trees.

Carry Gun of the Year: This year’s model is a Glock 19. I went from Glock 23 (which was too expensive to shoot: .40) to a Glock 26 (purchased because I thought I needed a smaller gun, when what I needed was a holster that worked for me: the MTAC), and now the “compact” 9mm. There’s been some back and forth about “adequate” vs. “perfect” handguns, and I’ll make my contribution real soon (title: I Don’t Like Guns). My Glock 19 suits me just fine, and I wear it all day every day with no discomfort.

Wife’s Guns: Tracie likes her Kahr CW9 with a rubber sleeve added to the grip, but wants a Kahr PM9. We found one tonight for $100 less than normal, but used. I took it to the store’s range and it exhibited some sort of problem returning from slidelock. They are going to send it to Kahr, then give me a call when it comes back repaired. I will probably take 100 rounds to make sure it’s reliable before purchasing. Truthfully, I would love a PM9 of my own as Back-up Gun, but like the AR build, things keep popping up that I’d rather spend money on. Like being out of debt.

It appears that a Google search for “Carry Permit Holders” directs to an anti-gun group as the first result. Folks from the blogosphere are trying to fix that.

So yeah, I totally approve of carry permit holders.

We had a small group, but much fun was had and it was great to meet new folks.

Tracie was too busy shooting most of the time to take many photos, but this is what we have.

Here I am shooting Squeaky’s carry gun:

Here I am describing to Squeaky the way I plan to crush the heads of my foes with the stock of a 10/22 when the Zombie Apocalypse comes. She is apparently simultaneously awed and horrified.

Here’s Brandon’s little girl shooting Squeaky’s new .22 pistol. I love seeing parents teaching their kids about responsible gun use, and Gracie seemed to be having a great time. Even if she didn’t want to pose with the fake AR-15.

Everybody got a turn with the .22. I think I would have trouble getting used to the sights on the Neos, but it seems as if the sights are only a formality, and it is really intended to have an optic mounted to the top of the frame. With a red dot, it would be a superb competition or plinking gun.

The group shot taken by a range employee. From left to right: Jesse, Squeaky, Brandon (with kiddo), and Yours Truly with my wife Tracie.

I had a blast today, and I hope we can do it again sometime.

Is Saturday in Bartlett, coordinated by Squeeky!

Don’t forget, if you’re in the Memphis area (and we even have folks coming from Jackson!), and you’d like to hang with us, you’re more than welcome.

What:  Blogger Meetup

When:  2pm, Saturday, July 19th

Where:  East End Grill, Bartlett Location on HWY 64

Confirmed Attendees:

• Jesse
• Rusty
• Paul (w/wife and possibly 2 others)
• POSSIBLY Brandon

Several of us are going to Range USA afterward to participate in shooty goodness.  If you don’t want to come to the range afterward, or can’t, you obviously don’t have to.  But I’d love it if we could get some more people to come to the lunch and socialize.

You don’t have to be a gun blogger, and I swear we’re all nice people, so if “meeting strangers” squicks you out, then you can’t pick a better group to overcome that fear with.  In fact, I’ll be meeting several of these folks for the first time - and that’s the point:  to connect with other Memphis area bloggers.

Hope to see you there!

(Next time, you folks have to come to Jackson. Free range time at the FOP range!)

Tracie is going along as my staff photographer. It should be a great time!

Of course, I’m pleased. It did not accomplish much in terms of practical, immediate gains for most of us, and even for those it immediately effects the fight isn’t over (expect news of significant delays in the permit process, draconian restrictions on weapon type, ammo type, liability insurance requirements, etc), but what makes it really significant is that the wholesale question of “Guns for civilians, yes or no?” is not a question that will be asked again. We may not have gained massive ground with Heller in terms of immediate lifting of infringing laws, but a line was drawn. Here. No futher. From this line we can push forward for victories in individual battles without the risk of losing the war.

Some have reminded us that the NRA was against this case moving to the Supreme Court, but is now one of the first to the microphones proclaiming what a great day it is for America. How dare the NRA swoop in as the champion of all of us, when they didn’t want to fight the battle in the first place? What these critics forget is that the decision was 5-4. As some have noted, we were just one heart attack away from a 5-4 ruling against Heller and a recognized individual right to bear arms. Maybe one slip of the tongue in the oral argument. Maybe one bad day for a Justice. That’s frighteningly close, and the ramifications would have been far-reaching and devastating. By opposing the movement of the case into the Supreme Court, the NRA was doing the safe–not irresponsible–thing. Gura and his team scored for us a huge victory, but to go for it required risking everything. Thank God it worked out in our favor.

It’s also been mentioned that had Gore or Kerry been President, the Second Amendment would be gone today. I don’t think that’s the case. The move by Heller’s representation to test the Second Amendment in the Supreme Court was ballsy enough as it was, and very nearly ended in disaster. Had the makeup of the Court been tilted–had, say, Roberts never seen nomination and a liberal elevated in his stead–I would like to think that any attorney not secretly hostile to his client and the ideas his client represents would never take a suicidal run straight to a catastrophic ruling against the individual right.

But it’s over. I’m glad it worked out. Celebrate tonight, because tomorrow there’s still work to be done.

Chris goes into detail about the benefits, misconceptions, and practical ramifications of open carry.

I’d add that open carry isn’t for everyone. Most folks I know work in environments where, even if there’s not a sign posted, there is a written policy against employees going armed. In some places, management is so frightened of the idea of a person going through an extensive background check and receiving training carrying a scary gun recklessly that it becomes a bad idea to even let on that one knows how to work the tools with which to defend one’s family death dealing killing machines. For these folks, open carry is a bad move because one may happen to run into a co-worker or boss while outside the job. People who are afraid of guns may be irrational, but they’re not stupid. Whether you choose to carry a gun at work against policy or not, your anti-gun coworkers may be more likely to cause problems for you on the job because of your lifestyle outside the office.

I’m fortunate to work at a place where my coworkers are aware and appreciate that I’m armed. Though I don’t open carry at work, I don’t worry about the patrons of our establishment (read: congregation) spotting me with a gun if I choose to do so outside of work.

My experiences open carrying here in Jackson have been very positive. Those who are observant enough to notice and bold/nosy enough to approach me about it are usually very receptive and reasonable when I explain the legal framework around carrying a handgun in Tennessee, openly or concealed. I’ve offered on the spot to take more than one person to the range.

Provided one is knowledgeable about the topic and level-headed, open carry is a great way to make folks aware that any law-abiding citizen can have the peace of mind of being armed, and that those who choose to do so are not the psychopaths that the media makes them out to be, but rather reasonable, responsible folks who want to do the right thing for themselves and their families.