SCALIA'S CLOSE

Opinion of the Court
Justice Scalia, writing for the Majority

We are aware of the problem of handgun violence in this country, and we take seriously the concerns raised by the many amici who believe that prohibition of handgun ownership is a solution.

The Constitution leaves the District of Columbia a variety of tools for combating that problem, including some measures regulating handguns, see supra, at 54–55, and n. 26.

But the enshrinement of constitutional rights necessarily takes certain policy choices off the table. These include the absolute prohibition of handguns held and used for self-defense in the home.

Undoubtedly some think that the Second Amendment is outmoded in a society where our standing army is the pride of our Nation, where well-trained police forces provide personal security, and where gun violence is a serious problem. That is perhaps debatable, but what is not debatable is that it is not the role of this Court to pronounce the Second Amendment extinct.

We affirm the judgment of the Court of Appeals.

It is so ordered.

HELLER PREVAILS.

Supreme Court says Americans have right to guns
By MARK SHERMAN, Associated Press Writer

The Supreme Court ruled Thursday that Americans have a right to own guns for self-defense and hunting, the justices' first major pronouncement on gun rights in U.S. history.

The court's 5-4 ruling struck down the District of Columbia's 32-year-old ban on handguns as incompatible with gun rights under the Second Amendment. The decision went further than even the Bush administration wanted, but probably leaves most firearms laws intact.

The court had not conclusively interpreted the Second Amendment since its ratification in 1791. The amendment reads: "A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed."

The basic issue for the justices was whether the amendment protects an individual's right to own guns no matter what, or whether that right is somehow tied to service in a state militia.

Writing for the majority, Justice Antonin Scalia said that an individual right to bear arms is supported by "the historical narrative" both before and after the Second Amendment was adopted.

The Constitution does not permit "the absolute prohibition of handguns held and used for self-defense in the home," Scalia said. The court also struck down Washington's requirement that firearms be equipped with trigger locks or kept disassembled, but left intact the licensing of guns.

More here.

OBAMA BLOGS - A RESPONSE

I don't normally write responses to other blogs here... instead, I leave responses as a comment. But in this case, the blog only allows comments from "team members" - and as I'm not a member of their team, I can't leave a comment.

For Reference : The Original Article:
NRA Smears Obama's Stance on Gun Ownership

Barack Obama is trying to walk a fine line between protecting the right to bear arms guaranteed under the Second Amendment and clamping down on more than 30,000 deaths from firearms that happen every year in the United States.

However, the National Rifle Association is against any limitations on gun rights, including banning or controlling any kinds of ammunition...

So is the Constitution.

they are also protecting the right of criminals to have easy access to automatic weapons and high kill rate ammunition

No one has easy, legal access to automatic weapons in this country - except people working for the govt.

Making a statement like that shows how clearly ignorant you are about firearms laws that already exist in this country.

I challenge the author to call a gun shop in this country - ANY gun shop, or hell - even go to a gunshow - and try to legally purchase an automatic weapon. Prepare for a stack of govt paperwork, fees, background checks. Prepare to pay $5000-25,000 for such a weapon.

Relatively speaking, there aren't that many automatic weapons in this country available for the average citizen to purchase. It's difficult, time-consuming, and highly expensive to legally own an automatic weapon.

You're asking for laws to be made that already exist.

And furthermore, what the hell is "high kill rate ammunition"?

The laws Barack Obama supports that the NRA are vehemently against include sensible acts like:

Mandatory waiting periods to purchase a gun

Good idea. People in fear of danger shouldn't have easy access to self-defense. Women being harassed by violent ex-husbands should just rely on hope, or perhaps 911 if the line isn't busy.

Requiring citizens to actually register their firearms

So that if the govt decides to ban them, confiscation will be easier.

Mandatory micro stamping of guns to aid tracing weapons

A technology that only works according to - surprise - the manufacturer. Forensic scientists by and large report that such an effort would have a minimal advantage - if any - in helping to solve crime. Furthermore, microstamping is incredibly easy to defeat. Stop watching CSI and do some research.

Banning inexpensive handguns that make it easier for criminals to acquire

Ok, I'm confused - earlier you implied that criminals don't buy guns; they steal them. Are you also against lower-income families being able to legally purchase a firearm?

Limit gun purchases to one gun a month

Why not 2 per month? Why not 1 per quarter? How exactly have you (or Obama) determined that 30 days is the magic number?

Require training for gun owners

Quite honestly, nearly every gun owner I know is well-trained in the use of their firearm. This is a non-issue in most respects.

Restrict gun ownership to citizens 21 and older

Why not 18 years? Why not 31 years? How is 21 years the magic number? Do criminals wait until they are 21 years old to steal guns and kill people?

Eliminate right to carry concealed weapons

Criminals are already forbidden to carry a weapon - concealed or otherwise. So clearly you are attempting to disallow law-abiding citizens from carrying a concealed weapon.

So - how do you feel about me just carrying a gun around town in a holster on my belt, openly for the world to see? You cool with that?

Ban gun shops from operating within 5 miles of a school

Now this is just complete stupidity. The only reason to create such a law is to be able to close gunshops. There's no safety advantage for the school whatsoever.

Ban resale of police firearms which include high powered assault weapons

I don't buy guns that the police have worn out. Nonetheless, I fail to see what you're concerned about such a thing. Police cannot sell a citizen a gun that the citizen cannot purchase (yes, legally) from a store.

Ban high capacity ammunition magazines that are often used by gang members in drive by shootings and not needed to kill a deer

Here's an idea - why not just ban gang shootings? Or shooting out of cars driving down the road?

Oh, wait. There are already laws against such things. Odd that laws against murder and prisons and death penalties haven't stopped gang shootings, yet you think microstamping will.

By the way... to a few of the other posters, who use terms like "KKK" - gun owners' feelings about Obama's gun control agenda have nothing to do with race.

The fact is, Clinton's agenda is no different when it comes to guns. She wants to ban them all as well - she's just less overt about it when making speeches.

BEST OF CINCINNATI

Four places in or near Cincinnati that you might not be aware of, but should be:

BEST GUN STORE:
Peterson's Gun Shop
11338 Reading Rd, Sharonville


When you tire of looking at endless rows of the latest tactical offerings that debuted at SHOT and wish for something a bit different - drive over to Peterson's for a real treat. While they do have a respectable collection of new handguns, it's the items inside the back counter that you should spend some time studying. You'll likely find a treasure or two, whether you're looking for a vintage revolver or a more modern used weapon.

The pricing is fair, and the store offers 90-day layaway. If you're concerned about the reliability of their used guns - don't be. They have a gunsmith on premises to examine things before they're offered for sale, and offer a money-back guarantee on their used guns.

It's a small shop, and may not look like much from the street... you may have even driven past it and not noticed it. Nor do they do heavy radio advertising like the large store/range just down the road. But their large, unique selection and great personable service make it the perfect destination on a Saturday morning.

BEST INDOOR RANGE:
Shooter's Supply
3450 Richardson Rd, Independence KY


Shooter's is relatively new to the scene, and I'll admit a bit of trepidation in revealing their location... they almost seem like a well-kept secret; a place that real gun owners go to shoot with others of their kind, instead of having to deal with long lines and the occasional questionable customers at the range a few miles north of Petersons. ;)

To be fair, I've done a lot of shooting at TargetWorld. The staff is very friendly, and I'll quickly admit they've always treated me more than fairly - both when I've used their range or purchased guns. But as with many things, popularity tends to bring population - and on many weekends, waiting 30-60 mins for a lane is not unheard of. Also unfortunate is the condition of the range. It's not uncommon for multiple lanes to be "down", and the customers range from older gentlemen with excellent skills, to college kids perfecting their spray-and-pray technique.

Such is not the case at Shooter's.

The range has excellent lighting and plenty of room behind the firing line. It's kept cleaner than your basement, and I've yet to see a lane out-of-service. You'll find your fellow shooters will be a bit more mature in their attitude and safety practices, as well quite friendly should a conversation arise.

Extra bonus: if you reload, you'll have no problem sweeping up your brass as there's nothing cluttering up the range and most customers I've seen are very good about policing their own brass. Finally - if you enjoy shooting rifles larger than rimfire, Shooter's may be just your ticket. While they don't allow higher-velocity rounds such as 22-250, feel free to bring your .223 AR15.

While the store doesn't have the the wealth of inventory ala TargetWorld, you'll find that their range is worth the drive.

BEST SUSHI:
Wild Ginger Asian Bistro
3655 Edwards Road, Cincinnati


For years, I had a rule about eating seafood in the Midwest: I didn't. Growing up 30 minutes away from the Gulf of Mexico gives one a different opinion of "fresh seafood" compared to the fare in Ohio. But every rule has an exception, and in this case it's in Norwood.

It's fresh, it's tasty, and the prices are - well, strangely affordable. It's fairly packed around lunchtime, so if you're hoping for some quiet conversation over a Spicy Tuna Roll - prepare to hear quite a few conversations in addition to your own. However, once the food arrives you'll have little time to talk... the flavors will win the contest of talk vs eat.

If you happen to have a lunch partner that doesn't enjoy the perfection that is raw seafood - not to worry, as there's also an extensive menu of noodle and rice dishes. I highly recommend the Thai Garlic Chicken. PF Chang's does have its merits, and Bangkok Bistro does have a loyal following... but if you truly want the best Asian food, you'll be at Wild Ginger.

BEST LIVE ENTERTAINMENT:
Shadowbox Cabaret
Newport on the Levee, Newport


Shadowbox isn't a bar with live entertainment; more accurately, it's a theatre that happens to serve drinks. While I could type a couple of paragraphs describing the stellar entertainment value, I really wouldn't be able to do it justice. It may be the best live music and sketch comedy presentation you'll ever see in Cincinnati.

If you're hoping to impress your date/girlfriend/boyfriend/spouse (and don't mind more adult-oriented humor) Shadowbox is hands-down going to earn you some Cool Points. But consider yourself warned... if you're anything like me, don't be surprised when you go from being a "first timer" to nearly an "all the damned timer".

Note: this list is Bethy-approved.

7 MONTHS, 7 YARDS

In June of last year, I decided it was time to sell my Glock 19 and acquire a handgun I felt better suited me... I wrote about it here. While the G19 is a fine gun, I could never get any consistent accuracy. Some shots would be good, while others flew to the left with annoying regularity.

When I first fired the P99, I knew I had found something better for me. While I don't consider myself to be a great shooter by any means, I've steadily improved over the months... getting my stance more consistent, raising the gun to the same height every time, and forcing myself to focus more on the front sight and less on the target.

Normally I place targets around 3-5 yards, but today I decided to push out to 7 yards. I was doing well at the shorter distances, and decided to see how it would translate a few feet further. I raised the gun up, got a good sight picture, and started pulling the trigger.

The results basically shocked me.

In the recent past, I've usually managed 3-4" groups at 5 yards, and around 5-7" groups at 7 yards. But today, everything really came together. I fired 10 rounds into a 2.5" group. I looked up a bit amazed, and reloaded. On the second pass, I popped a flyer on the 6th shot. After silently cursing myself for rushing it, I raised the gun back up and put the last 4 through the red.

I retrieved the target and smiled.

I shot about 40 rounds after that, most within 3-4" at that distance. Finally my hour was up - I packed up, collected all my brass and headed home. It was a good day for shooting.

THE GIRL AND A GUN

The Bethy flew up to Cincinnati to celebrate the New Year, and on Sunday we went on her second trip to the range. Her first time ever was nearly a year ago, and she was eager to punch some more holes in paper.

Before we left home, I quickly gave her a refresher course on how the guns worked. It had been a long time since she'd held one, and I wanted to make sure she was comfortable. I handed her the Walther P99, and was impressed; she immediately remembered her trigger and muzzle discipline, indexing her finger on the slide and keeping it pointed in a safe direction.

We stopped by Walmart and picked up 200rds of WWB, some extra .22 for the Ruger MkII, and a pack of reactive targets. Normally I use regular paper targets, but I thought seeing the holes brightly pop out would make it easier for her to track her shots.

Her shooting was impressive. She hadn't fired a gun in nearly a year, yet her form was good and her groups respectable for someone so new to the sport. Her first few shots were always very close to the center. She did have a tendency to drop her aim near the end of the magazine, but her lack of an obvious flinch is indeed a strength.

I'm fairly sure she shot more that day than I did, but for me it wasn't about trigger time... it was just about spending time with my girl. She's without a doubt my favorite range partner, and I can't wait for our next trip.

AFTERNOON AT THE GUN SHOW

Bill Goodman's gun show stopped in Cincinnati this weekend. It's been a few months since the last one, and I'd marked the date on the calendar. I'm not in the market for anything in particular, but I've been looking forward to the show hoping that something interesting would catch my eye.

To summarize the show today:

If you're looking for a Mosin M44, Walther P22, any handgun made by Taurus, an AR15, or some cheap bejeweled pocket knife: the doors open again tomorrow at 9am, but don't worry about being the first in the line. They have so many to choose from that there's no chance you'll miss out on buying one.

Unfortunately, I'm not interested in any of those weapons.

To be fair, there were many new guns for sale from the companies you'd expect: Glocks, Smith & Wesson, Springfield, and the aforementioned Taurus... but I can easily find those in the gun shop, for nearly the same price. It's the used guns that attract me to the show, but sadly the selection wasn't too diverse. S&W revolvers were scarce, as were ones from Ruger. Hardly any 1911s, and guns made by Jennings/Lorcin/Highpoint easily outnumbered the Walthers 10-1.

A couple of things did catch my attention, though.

I passed a table and noticed an HK VP70, priced at $365 - quite a deal; nearly half the price of ones I've seen on Gunbroker. I took a close look at it, and the inner excitement turned to depression. The edges on the slide were worn far beyond what counts for holster wear, and even without a borelight I could see the rifling was in fairly poor condition. The magazine showed similar signs of neglect, with splotches of rust competing with the steel for dominance. I briefly considered purchasing it and having the slide refinished, but the condition of the bore and magazine killed the deal for me.

An hour later, I came upon a Walther P5 selling for around $650. I wasn't prepared to spend that much today, but thought it was worth a look. The finish wasn't bad, but did show some moderate use - this was definitely not a "lived in a police officer's holster" specimen. I pulled the slide back to check the chamber, and was horrified to notice that the feed ramp had been polished. No, "polished" is the wrong word... "butchered with a grinding wheel" would be more accurate. After noticing that, the rest of the gun's condition was of little interest to me.

Finally, I came upon a display containing three Nagant M1895 pistols made in 1944-45. At least one had the original holster, complete with cleaning rod. Though I didn't ask to examine one, all appeared to be in very good condition and had a fair price of $109. They were interesting, but would be little more that a conversational piece for me. I debated it a bit, and eventually decided I'd just leave the $100 in my pocket.

After about 2 hours of walking the aisles, I purchased a box of 9mm +P hollow points and drove home for lunch a bit depressed. Tomorrow I'll be hitting the range for some good practice. I'm sure after a couple hundred rounds I'll mostly forget that there was nothing to buy, and be happy with the gun I'm shooting.

15 vs 16

I recently purchased a 16rd magazine for the P99. Though I've put a budgetary hold on my gun purchasing funds (due to other priorities), the price was too good to pass up. I've read that the P99 originally shipped with 16rd magazines, but the magazine was later redesigned to a 15rd capacity. This one is particular has a Walther-labeled baseplate, and was manufactured by Mec-Gar.

In case you're unfamiliar with the differences - and there are a couple - I thought a couple of pictures might be useful:



The lips at the top have been reshaped. The 16rd is on the left, the 15rd on the right. Note the more angular cut on the left. I'm not sure if this modification has any effect on feeding the rounds (my tests show no difference), but it does make loading the mags more difficult for sure. The first round is especially harder to quickly insert and seat onto the follower.

The cases themselves have differing vertical indentations, but I've no idea if these differences affect the mags' reliability.

The springs are different as well:



The 15rd (top) has a standard uniform coil, while the 16rd (bottom) has a staggered coil approximately 1/5 down from the top.

Curiously, I've been unable to load 16 rounds into the magazine. I'm not sure if it's due to a spring issue (perhaps it was replaced by the previous owner), or if it's naturally difficult to get the 16th round in - something you'll notice in Glock magazines, when they are new.

Because the magazine will only be used for range trips, I'm not too concerned about the unexpected capacity limit. It was a great deal, and it will do the job just fine. But if you're in the market for a used mag, hopefully this might give you a bit more info on the fact that the 16's and 15's are quite different in construction.

SHOOTING ON A BUDGET

If you shoot with any sort of regularity, or read posts by people that do, you've probably noticed that the price of ammunition is rising.

I've read several reasons for this.

Some people say that it's due to the war, and the military's increasing needs for ammo is driving up the price. American law enforcement agencies are also placing larger orders for ammo, which of course plays into the laws of supply and demand. Others point out that raw materials such as brass and copper are in higher demand in other countries (such as China), which increases the costs of the metals worldwide. Other factors come into play too - the price of fuel affects everyone, from the producer to the shipper to the retailer.

There are several ways the average gun owner can deal with this problem, but simply complaining about it isn't one of them. So instead of just adding another post to the internet's archives about how much ammo costs annoy me, I thought I'd share a few of the things I do to keep the cost of my range trips down.

In no particular order:

SHOP WISELY
The most expensive place I've purchased ammo was from the range itself. A 50rd box of Blazer Brass 9mm sells for around $14. At Walmart, the same box sells for around $8. A 100rd box of Winchester WhiteBox is around $15. In other words, you can buy twice as much ammo for the same price by simply choosing where to purchase it.

Online vendors typically offer good prices, but be sure to add shipping costs into the overall price. Gunshows can also sometimes be a good source for cheaper ammunition - especially self-defense ammo.

In addition, I purchase more ammo than I need for one range trip. Usually I buy 500-1000rnds at the time. A local store you wont give you a multi-box discount, but you will save time and gas money by combining several store trips into one.

MAKE YOUR OWN TARGETS
Range targets are sold at a premium, usually going for .75 - $1 per target. It may not seem like much, but over a year you might end up spending $40-50 just on sheets of paper. There are a number websites out there with PDF targets you can download and print at home. Even better, print one target at home and make the rest on a copier (inkjet supplies are very expensive - copies can be made at Kinko's cheaply, or depending on your workplace - for free.) Buy just one B27 at the range and use tape to place your homemade target over the COM.

If you do a lot of bullseye shooting, you dont need a B27. Get some large index cards, and use an ink marker to make a small circle in the middle. Some shooters use paper plates as a cheap target. Whichever solution you use, try to limit the number of fullsized expensive targets you purchase.

DON'T WASTE AMMO
Every time you empty a magazine, you've basically thrown $2 down the range. I've seen casual shooters come into the range with a rental gun and 2-3 boxes of ammo... they finish in an amazing amount of time. One moment they're loading the first mag, and 10 minutes later they've emptied all 3 boxes by pulling the trigger as quickly as possible without much regard to accuracy or technique.

Granted, rapid-fire can be a lot of fun. But always keep in mind that rounds are practically dollar bills. Don't waste ammunition anymore than you would randomly light piles of money on fire.

PLAN YOUR RANGE TRIP
Simply stated: if you're going to the range for half an hour, try to guage how much ammo you will shoot... and don't take much more than that. For me, that's about 100-150 rnds of 9mm and 50-100 rnds of .22. If I take 500rds of each, then mentally I'll be trying to use it all before my time is up. Back to the previous point: don't waste ammo. Better to have a few unused minutes on the clock, than waste 30 more rds just trying to kill some time.

Shoot until you've accomplished your goal for the day - don't just shoot until you're out of ammunition.

SHOOT FEWER CALIBERS
If you have a .22, a .357, a .45, a 9mm and a .44 magnum with you every time you hit the range - you're going to spend a lot of money feeding them. I've read posts by people seeking to consolidate their guns into just 2-3 calibers at most, and I believe it's a good idea. The more calibers you own and actively shoot, the more boxes of ammo you're going to have to purchase.

BUY A .22 PISTOL
Anyone that owns a .22 will tell you it's a great investment for shooting cheaply - and they're right. .22 Ammo is very inexpensive, and the skills necessary to be accurate with a .22 will translate into a larger caliber. If you want to shoot a LOT every time you hit the range, use a gun that isn't expensive to shoot.

Some of these might be something you can try, while others may not help at all... competitive shooters have different needs than someone who just owns a gun for self-defense. So consider these suggestions, or freely ignore them.

IN THE DARK

Here's a test for you...

1. How quickly can you field strip your carry weapon, and reassemble it?
2. Can you do it in the dark?

There's not necessarily a correct answer for the first question. It's not a task that one normally has to do in under 20-30 seconds. But if you cannot perform a field strip without referring to your manual, then take some time this weekend and learn to do it.

Once you can do it effortlessly, try putting on a blindfold. Learn to check the chamber without your eyes. You may find, as I did, that replacing the slide is a bit harder when you can't visually line it up... or perhaps you'll need to learn how each end of the recoil spring feels, so that it's not put in backwards.

I don't know that it's a skill that I'll ever need, but it's nice knowing that I have it... and I believe that every gun owner can benefit from learning it as well.

ACQUISITIONS

A couple of months ago, I bought this from a gentleman in Louisiana - a Wilkinson Arms 9mm Linda pistol, with 4 full-sized magazines. I have no particular use for it, but there's a bit of satisfaction that comes with owning a gun that is banned in several states. (Legal disclaimer: I have carefully researched the laws in Ohio regarding this gun and the magazines' capacities. The gun is completely legal to own in Ohio, and the magazines fall under the legal limit for assault weapon capacity.)

Wilkinson began making weapons in California, but later moved his factory to Ohio. This particular one was made at the Parma factory in 1989. I've read that the quality of the weapon went down after he moved to Ohio - particularly the sights. Instead of nicer target sights, he began installing much cheaper ones made of tin. This must have happened at a later time, however, as mine does have the adjustable sights.

I took it to the range last week, and fired 60 rounds through it without a single malfunction. The recoil is very tame, which is no surprise given the gun's hefty weight. It has a bolt/blowback action, and ejects spent cartridges in a manner similar to the AR15 system. The 8.3 inch barrel is very accurate, and it quite a lot of fun to shoot.

It's hard to find information on it, as they haven't been made in a very long time. Even finding a schematic or manual has proved to be very difficult. Removing and cleaning the barrel is a simple matter, but I've no idea how to properly detail strip the weapon in order to clean it.

I doubt I will take it to the range again - given the age of the gun, the lack of spare parts available, and the inability to properly clean and lubricate it. While I enjoy shooting it, I don't wish to abuse it by not maintaining it after each range trip. But it's a wonderful weapon to hold and admire, and I'm glad I was lucky enough to find it.

9MM REDUX

I began shooting almost 30 years ago, but it wasn't until last year that I purchased my first handgun. As with other interests in life, I did a lot of research before deciding on which one to purchase. When I decided I wished to own a handgun, I didn't expect it to be the first of several... therefore it needed to be one that I would be satisfied with for a very long time.

After much online reading, I was leaning towards the Walther P99. I examined one in the store, and liked the ergonomics a lot. However, the price was higher than I wished to pay. A friend took me shooting, and I tried his Sig 9mm. The DA/SA trigger had a very heavy first pull, and I found the decocker to be difficult to manipulate. The range we shot at had several guns for rent, and I decided to try the Glock 19. The gun was a good size for my hand, and I preferred the constant weight of the trigger pull compared to the Sig. I decided it was the best choice.

Two weeks later, I found a G19 for sale on Glocktalk. As luck would have it, the seller was a a local guy who was planning to attend a Bill Goodman show here in Cincinnati that weekend. We made arrangements to meet at the show. The gun was in very good condition and had night sights installed. The price was fair, so we exchanged IDs and I became a new gun owner.

Since then I've become a fairly regular shooter. Though the range is not a place I require myself to go religiously, I do try to shoot at least twice a month. I would estimate I've shot about 1500 rnds through the G19, and over time my skill has improved. It's been a very reliable gun, and lives up to the reputation as being tough as well as easy to strip and clean.

But as many gun owners know, it's often the case that over time you find yourself looking at other guns. Though I've been happy with the Glock, I've never loved it. While I couldn't determine exactly what it was, something was missing... I didn't have any special fondness for it. If one can "bond" with their weapon, I never bonded with the G19.

Over the past few weeks, I'd found myself thinking back to the Walther. After a range trip, I spoke with a salesman. He removed a P99 AS from the gun case, checked the chamber, and set it on the counter. I held it my hand, and was again surprised how "right" it felt. The grip was perfectly sculpted, the action of the slide was precise as Swiss clockwork. The trigger - though DA/SA - was far more smooth than the Glock. The only problem was that the store had no P99 available for rent. I'm a firm believer that if a gun is intended for self-defense, it should be fired before purchase. Online reviews and examinations at the counter only go so far.

A week later the Smith&Wesson/Walther rep was at the store and had samples of all their weapons. He was more than willing to let me try the P99 on the range. I purchased a target, loaded 10 rounds in the magazine, and put the target to around 5-7 yrds. I slowly pulled the trigger, feeling a smooth takeup and predictable breaking point. The round fired, and I was amazed at how close to the bullseye the hole was.

19 Rounds later I retrieved the target, looked at the groups - and couldn't stop smiling. I returned the Walther to the factory rep, and he asked me how I liked it. I told him I was about to buy one.

3 Weeks and 450 rounds later, I believe I've found my gun. I'm still getting familiar with the sight picture, trying to consistently present the gun with the front sight placed correctly above the POA. It's taking some adjustment, due to having a higher axis than the Glock as well as the DA/SA trigger... but the groupings don't lie. The Glock is a fine handgun, for sure - but in the past 3 weeks, I've been more accurate with the P99 than I ever managed to be with the G19.

Sometimes our first choice is actually the best one... yet we choose other things before realizing it.

CONDITION CORRECTIONS

Those that choose to carry a concealed weapon often speak of Col. Jeff Cooper's "Color Code". It's a very interesting system of approaching conflict. But as it happens with many things over time, the intended lesson has been somewhat misunderstood. Rather than write my own interpretation of the Color Code system, I'll let Col. Cooper speak for himself. (Article reproduced as original. Paragraphs have been reformatted for ease of reading.)

I have been teaching the Color Code for about 30 years now, but I have not been teaching it well. I keep seeing something handed back to me which purports to be what I have taught, but which is not. Clearly I am not as much of a teacher as I would like to be.

I believe I can speak freely of the Color Code because as it applies to defensive pistolcraft I invented it. I cannot, of course, say that what I think is right, but only that what I have preached is just that - what I have preached. It works, and it satisfies me, but not all the time. I have scores of cases now from men I have taught and who have reported back to me that their understanding of a Color Code saved their lives. This, of course, is very satisfying, but I do wish the matter were more clearly understood.

The Color Code refers not to a condition of peril, but rather to a condition of readiness to take life. Fortunately most people are very reluctant to take lethal action against another human being. Most people are reluctant to shoot for blood on a harmless game animal, until they become used to it.

To press the trigger on a human adversary calls for a wrenching effort of will which is always difficult to achieve and sometimes apparently impossible.

Thus we live our days in Condition White, which may or may not have anything to do with our danger, since quite frequently we are in deadly danger and do not realize it. Any time you cross directions out on a two-lane highway you are at the mercy of that character coming towards you in the opposite direction. Usually he is okay, but when he is under some sort of chemical influence, or is psychologically upset, he may only twitch his wheel to produce a multiple fatal accident.

Most of us would prefer to live in Condition White permanently, and many do, but those who are more aware of the nature of things are often in Yellow, which is a condition in which we are aware that the world is full of hazards which are human, and some of which may be obviated by our own defensive action. When one is in Condition Yellow he is aware that today may be the day. He is not in a combat mood, nor is he aware of any specific situation which may call for action on his part.

There is a vital difference between White and Yellow, and it has to do not with any specific enemy or a set of circumstances, but rather with your awareness that you individually may have to take decisive action on this very day.

If you are attacked in Condition White, you will probably die, or at least need a stretcher. If you are attacked in Condition Yellow, you will probably win, assuming that you are armed, awake and aware. The difference does not lie in the deadliness of the hazard facing you, but rather in your willingness to take a very unusual action.

If in the course of events you become aware of the possible existence in your presence of a lethal adversary, you switch from Yellow to Orange. The difference lies in the specific nature of your presumed antagonist, not in his evident competence or attitude. In Yellow you say to yourself, "I may have to shoot today." I may actually have to press my trigger on a human adversary, but I don't know who or where.

When you detect the presence of a target who may be the one you will have to engage, you shift from Yellow to Orange. In Yellow your mind-set is "I may have to shoot today." In Orange it is "I may have to shoot him today." At this point your normal reluctance becomes easier to overcome. Legal and moral aspects of the conflict are lowered and have been dismissed from your mind. Your attitude is dictated by the presence of that enemy standing there. You may have to shoot him, now, today.

What is needed is a trigger. The trigger is the act establishing that the situation is indeed a matter of lethal conflict. This is Condition Red, and in Red you have solved the psychological problem and have no further concerns beyond the technical. In Red you are go, and your mind is concerned only with front-sight and surprise.

Moving from the various Conditions into each other is easy to accomplish once it is understood. If you are attacked in White you will lose the fight. In Yellow you will have the advantage of initiative response over your antagonist. In Orange you are pretty safe, provided you are armed, alert and aware. In Red you win.

Simple, isn't it?

Clearly you cannot go any further than Red because in Red you have already made the lethal decision.

Complications are unproductive.

FIRST-TIME SHOOTERS

One of the reasons some people have an aversion to firearms is merely a lack of proper exposure to them. They've seen them in movies, television, and music videos but haven't ever actually fired a weapon. The depiction of guns in film is often tightly married to feelings of fear, domination, and gratuitous violence... emotions which are quite rightly something that people don't feel comfortable with.

Those of us that actually own firearms know that the real experience of going to the range has nothing to do with fear nor violence. Learning to shoot is a very fun-filled experience. It can give you a feeling of accomplishment as you improve, and at the same time give you a skill that may someday save your life.

The best way I've found to get someone over their fear and dislike of guns is to invite them to the range and let them experience what firing a gun is really all about. A few months ago, I took The Bethy out to shoot a gun for the first time. She was worried that she might not do well, and as a result not enjoy the experience. We started off with the Ruger MKII, and after she got comfortable she tried the Glock 19. We had a lot of fun, and she did great.

Today, it was my co-worker Aaron's turn. I'd casually asked him at one point a few weeks ago if he'd like to try shooting. He said he'd never shot a gun before (except an air pistol), but would like to try it. Today was the day, and we hit the range with plenty of .22 and 9mm ammunition.

Aaron is the type of guy that likes to know all the details of what he's doing... how everything works as it does, and why it was designed that way. We had to wait about 20 minutes for a lane, but that gave me plenty of time to completely explain the mechanical workings of the guns... and most importantly, discuss ALL the aspects of gun safety.

When we finally hit the range, I could tell he had taken all of that talk to heart. His muzzle and trigger discipline were outstanding. Though his stance and grip are something we'll continue to work on, he certainly had the fundamentals down. It showed in his targets. We started with the Ruger, and once I felt he was comfortable we moved onto the Glock. For a first time shooter, Aaron was a great student.

As we packed up for the day, I could tell he had enjoyed it - especially when he mentioned that the next time I go shooting, he'd like to come along again. I'll be taking him up on that... range trips are always more fun if you have someone to shoot with.

Find a co-worker, a friend, or a neighbor that's hasn't shot a gun before. Invite them on your next range trip, and show them what firearms are really about. At the very least, you can mitigate some of the fears they have about guns. Even better: you may even introduce them to something they'll enjoy for a lifetime.

PREVENTATIVE MEASURES

One of the benefits - or downsides - of working in the media is that you are treated to hearing the news throughout the day. Most people that watch the news do so at their leisure, and watch a particular news program at a particular time. Some people make it a point to always watch Shepard Smith on FoxNews; at least 139 people watch Katie Couric on CBS every night.

But those of us that toil every day to create the news have a slightly different perspective. We hear and read all the news - not just the snippets that are edited together for broadcast. Furthermore, we hear all of the broadcasts throughout the day - not just the 6pm newscast. And believe me, the news pieces that air at 11pm are sometimes quite different than those airing at noon or 6pm.

It's not really a conspiracy matter. The news programs have different content based on market research. For example, morning news is typically "lighter" than the evening. People don't like to wake up to gloom and doom... it's not the type of thing that gets them in the mood to drive to work.

Perhaps I should start getting to the point...

Over the past 3 days, I've heard an incredible amount of news related to the Virginia Tech shooting. As the story continues to develop and mature, I'm beginning to sense a particular slant or trend that involves the motivations of Cho Seung-Hui. Writers, researchers and reporters are all scrambling about to learn the details of Cho's past, in an effort to find out what events in his own history led to his final murderous actions.

I've seen reports discussing the fact that Cho came from a poor family, and that he felt a derision towards rich people. I've been informed that Cho was bullied in Junior High School, because he was Korean. I've read that Cho suffering from deep depression. I've seen news reporters remind us all of the symptoms of depression - how to recognize it, and interact with a depressed person. I've listened to people talk about Cho's feelings in inadequacy, as it relates to his mastery of speaking the English language. I've heard his classmates at VT describe him as a loner, and socially withdrawn... rarely talking, and having no friends (nor apparently wanting to form friendships with others).

Quite frankly, I'm sick of hearing about Cho's past and I'm insulted that somehow I'm supposed to feel a bit of pity for the man.

Forgive a quick tangent on an important, but minor matter: please note I called him a "man" in the sentence above. Not a child, not a college kid. He was neither a child nor a college kid. Cho was 23 years old. He hadn't been a "kid" for several years... so please, let's have no more descriptions of him which imply that somehow his age was a factor.

When Cho's victims were staring down the barrel of his gun, his past history was of no consequence. His motivations did not matter. There were only two relevant factors:

1. He had a deadly weapon, and was intent upon killing as many people as possible until he was stopped or became bored with killing.

2. How could one stop such a person from continuing to kill people?

One of the most saddening things about that day was that no one in the building had an effective way of stopping Cho's rampage. Virginia Tech has a firm policy in place which forbids students who are licensed to carry a concealed weapon from bringing a gun onto campus. Virgina Tech is what people call a "designated gun-free zone". Depending on your locale, bringing a weapon into such a place can lead to expulsion or arrest.

It's nothing if not obvious that Cho had no concerns about VT's gun-free policies. Someone who is anxiously planning the death of 32 people is not concerned with any such policy. Gun-free policies only affect one type of gun owner - the ones that would never commit such a crime to begin with.

Some politicians, such as Carolyn McCarthy and Barbara Boxer have already begun to talk about new legislation which will somehow prevent this kind of thing from happening again. They're discussing waiting periods, gun shows, registration, and banning "high capacity" magazines.

Where did Cho purchase his guns? No, he didn't take advantage of the mythical "loop hole" at a gun show. He purchased them from a licensed gun dealer, after undergoing the required federal background check.

How did the waiting period affect him? Virginia prevented Cho from purchasing both guns at the same time; I've read the state has a "1 handgun a month" law. That wasn't a problem for Cho. He purchased his first handgun in early March, and then purchased the second one a month later. He had planned this attack for weeks; a three-day waiting period was of no corcern to him.

High-capacity magazines? Would it have really made any difference if Cho had to reload twice instead of once? Cho wasn't discretely carrying one handgun with a magazine inserted; he was carrying two guns and had extra magazines stuffed in his pockets. I don't believe that his killing spree would have been any less effective if he had to carry five magazines instead of four.

With all their talk of creating more restrictive gun laws, it seems that many lawmakers, colleges, and a few law-enforcement brass are overlooking the one solution hasn't been tried: allowing people more latitude to arm themselves in self-defense.

They made laws to restrict Cho in nearly every way possible. They made him wait to purchase his guns, they declared he could not bring a weapon on campus, and most certainly they've made murder illegal. Cho showed patience with the laws that were inconvenient, and completely ignored the other ones.

That day, the laws only denied the victims their means to defend their lives.

I'm not clairvoyant. I cannot say with certainty that if one student had been armed, Cho would have been stopped. Perhaps that one student would have been the first victim.

However, I can say with certainty what the result will be when no one but the murderer is armed. Watch the news, Carolyn McCarthy. Watch the news, Michael Bloomberg. Watch the news, Sarah Brady. The result is 32 dead college students... all of whom followed your pathetic laws, all of whom were unarmed and unable to offer any effective defense.

You believe that if we can somehow come to "understand" what led to Cho's actions, and further restrict American gun rights, we can prevent such things from happening again. Here's another newsflash for you: crazed murderers don't care about your laws. Once a person has decided they are willing to break one of the highest laws - the one against murder - it's laughable to believe that your law banning guns at school will have any effect.

And finally:

To all the politicians, writers, pundits and police captains who believe guns could not have stopped this tragedy, I ask this question:

When the students were dialing 911, who were they calling for help?

People with guns.

TOO MANY GUNFIGHTS

There are far too many gunfights going on far too regularly. I could be in the minority here, but I tend to doubt it. Everyday, another one seems to start here and there. Never a winner, never a loser - yet the participants seem to think there can and will be a victor at some point and the battle will end.

I'm not talking about people who fight with guns, by the way. I'm talking about people who fight about guns.

Humankind has a lot of passion, and one thing we all seem to be passionate about are the choices we make... even to the point of fault. For example, it's often not enough to be satisfied with a choice; some feel that their choice has to be constantly reinforced as the "correct" one by telling someone else that their choice is wrong.

Visit a random forum that deals with firearms, and you'll doubtlessly find one of these endless battles.

...

The posters that believe the revolver is a simple, yet superior handgun will argue with the fans of the semi-automatic.

The semi-automatic fans argue amongst themselves about which is better, the 1911 or a more modern polymer handgun.

The polymer crowd argues the merits of Glock vs XD.

The Glock owners argue which caliber Glock is the best, 9mm vs .40.

The 9mm guys argue over which is the better choice, a G17 or a G19.

The ones that own a G19 argue about whether it's better to go with a fast & light 115gr or a slower & heavier 147gr.

And I'm sure at some point there's been a heated discussion over which brand of 147gr hollowpoint is the most effective.

...

It's one thing to be passionate about your choice of handgun, but it's also important to remember that your choice is exactly that: YOUR choice. One person's reasons for choosing to carry an HK do not necessarily have anything to with why another chooses to carry a Kimber.

When people choose to enter an internet gun battle, it should be for the right reason. It's good to offer knowledge and experience about a particular firearm, in order to help someone learn more about it. It's rather pointless to carry on a flame war, acting as if someone's dislike of your gun is akin to them spitting on your mother.

Or to paraphrase a succinct post I came across in one of those 12-page flame wars:

"What if people spent as much time writing to politicians, demanding fewer gun control laws, as they do yelling at each other about which gun is the best?"

It's worth considering.

THE ART OF THE DRAW

I've always found this clip entertaining. Due to the frequency that gun owners post it on the internet, I suspect I'm not alone.

I believe the reason it's so popular is because of the scenario it depicts: a close-quarters encounter with an armed opponent. Hollywood has filmed countless gun battles, but typically the scenes range from improbable to completely unbelievable.

Nearly every street encounter that people will experience will be with an armed thug standing within just a few feet, if not right in your face. There won't be any Matrix-type spins and flips along the wall. The bad guys won't be emptying several magazines from their automatic weapons (all bullets missing the hero), while the hero dives to the ground, rolls into a crouching stance and methodically takes each bad guy down with a headshot.

The encounter will be quick, it may be unexpected. The odds are good that your opponent has had these encounters in the past, with other victims. It's quite possible that the opponent has used his weapon before. It's also possible that he's been shot in the past, and doesn't experience petrified fear at the sight of your weapon.

When you practice with your handgun, keep this video in the back of your mind. How often do you practice dry-firing your weapon? How often do you practice your draw? How quickly can you fire from rest and put a bullet in the COM?

In a street encounter, we won't have time to check our shooting stance, correct the grip, double-check our sight alignment and slowly squeeze the trigger. All of those actions must practiced until they are completely automatic.

The thought process cannot contain several sequential steps.

It must be one word: REACT.

9MM FAILURES: BEHIND THE STORY

New shooters often ask which handgun and/or caliber is "best" for self-defense. It's inevitable that they'll get as many answers as there are handguns and calibers.

Some people mention their own gun as the best... whether it's a Glock, a 1911, an XD, or a revolver.

In answering the caliber question, one popular answer is "anything that begins with .4". Another is "a 9mm may expand, but a .45 will never shrink".

The answer we should always begin with is "The best firearm for you is one that is reliable, feels comfortable, and that you can afford." The best caliber is "the one you can can shoot with consistent control, and afford to practice with." Once we've established these two points as key, then we can begin to move into other areas of manufacturer, type of action, and the size of the bullet.

Some shooters are partial to revolvers, and for good reason: generally speaking, they are the most reliable and the easiest to operate. A good revolver can also be more accurate than some semi-autos, given that the barrel is connected directly to the frame; there's no "play" between the two pieces to affect accuracy.

Other shooters prefer the semi-auto, and within that camp there are various sub-camps that will declare the 1911 to be the only pistol worth shooting, or that the 1911 is a old-timer's gun which (while a notable firearm) has been far eclipsed by polymer guns in terms of reliability, ease-of-maintenance, and cost.

No one can really decide for someone else which gun is best for that shooter... all we can offer is advice and feedback on what our own experience has been. The advice I always give someone is to shoot various guns, and determine which one feels the best in their own hand.

Caliber is yet another choice to be made, especially if your chosen gun is available in multiple calibers. While the shooting community generally agrees that anything less than a .38 isn't a good defense round, we tend to endlessly debate the best higher-end choice. Some won't carry less than a .45, while others feel the 9mm is a proven round. Some shooters have decided to follow the lead of law enforcement and carry the relatively new .40.

While reading posts in the countless gun forums out there, I've often read the story of the Miami Bank Robbery incident. It was this incident which prompted LE to find a replacement for the 9mm round, due to the poor performance of the round in this incident. Shooters who malign the 9mm in favor of larger rounds often mention this case as "proof" that the 9mm lacks power and penetration.

Until recently, I'd found the story mildly interesting... although it didn't affect my choice in carrying a 9mm. But yesterday I came upon a link which shed some new light on the subject. Especially interesting was this diagram, which shows how the 9mm failed to stop the assailant.

Here's the part I find especially notable: the "failed shot" entered the man's arm, went through it, entered the right side of the torso, went through the ribs, and then stopped just short of the heart.

Now in terms of failing to hit the heart (and kill the man) - yes, the 9mm round did fail. But I want to point out two things. First, the round itself was 115 gr. That's rather small compared to what is currently available in 9mm... both 125 gr and 147 gr are popular choices. Secondly, while the round did fail to penetrate the heart - it penetrated his arm, back out again, and then went through the ribs! While I'm not a pathologist nor a ballistics expert, my opinion is that if the round had begun it's fateful journey from the front of the chest - we might not be having this conversation.

Details of the entire incident are available here, so there's no need in restating the whole matter. But to sum up: shot placement by the LEO's was fairly non-existent due to many factors. The shot that "failed" certainly had a lot of penetration - just not enough in this circumstance. And finally, the round itself was a very light 115 grains. Might a 147 gr might have reached the heart...? Perhaps, perhaps not. But it's worth considering.

Gun owners should base their decisions on many factors, and the story above is indeed a factor to consider. But it's not the end of the story. Countless people have been stopped with every caliber from .38 special to .44 magnum... and while this one incident did change the climate in law enforcement, it is not a universal verdict on the lethality of the 9mm cartridge.

GLOCK MADNESS

Something that continues to mystify me is the strange over-obsession with Glock handguns. I'm not talking about the people that own a full-sized for range use and a compact for daily carry; I'm talking about people that seem to collect them like Pokemon.

I understand the desire to collect unique, old, historical, or rare firearms. Or sometimes you'll find something that you can't explain your desire for, but nonetheless you'll pull out the wallet and take home a new prize. Some wants and needs have no justification. Nor is it required.

I don't need an H&K VP70-Z, but I do want one. I also don't need a Ruger revolver, but I'm still kicking myself for not buying the one that I saw for sale last week in a forum. Nor do I have a practical need for a Walther P99-AS 9mm, but the gun feels so nice in my hand that I hope to buy one some day.

But some Glock collectors make me wonder. People that own duplicates of the same model, and multiple models. Keep in mind that we're talking about a handgun with a design that is virtually identical across the spectrum. There's no functional nor size nor aesthetic difference in a G19 and a G23; the only difference is caliber. Yet it never fails to amuse me when someone proudly states they own a G17, two G22's, three G19's, two G23's, and they're on the hunt for another G23 "to join the brothers in the safe".

I wonder even more about Glock fans that constantly bemoan the fact that Glock doesn't innovate often enough. They generally post messages on forums begging for Gaston to offer some combination of caliber and features that isn't available.

Here's the part I have trouble with:

Glock makes 23 different models (not even counting the 380, which generally isn't available for import) in various slide lengths, calibers, width, and capacity.

I seriously believe that if Glock offered every caliber in every slide length (from compact to longslide) with every capacity (single-stack to hi-capacity) with both types of rails... some people would still find some variation that Glock hadn't thought of and still not be happy.

Here's my point: whatever your reasons for collecting Glocks - they're your own reasons, and likely none of my business. But sometimes it doesn't look like "collecting"; it looks more like "compulsive buying".

If you can't find the perfect combo that you're after, then perhaps it's time to look at another brand of firearm. Or even better, take 1 of the 18 Glocks you own out of the safe, go to the range, and shoot 200 rounds through it.

And for the record: in case any readers think I just don't like Glocks... my defensive handgun of choice is a G19.