Even regular readers of The Shooter’s Log can’t read or respond to all of the comments, so we have started a new weekly feature that will recap a sampling of the most active, interesting, or on occasion, randomly selected comments from the previous weeks. Feel free to respond with your two cents at the bottom of this article or by clicking the story link and adding it directly to the discussion.
Reader Comments From Previous Weeks
I am not certain if you were attempting to refute certain aspects of my post by bringing up the perceived effectiveness of weapons bans at your county court or postal facilities, but regardless, your comment actually supports my position.
My post actually cited, and I quote, “…especially when your bans don’t even attempt to offer me additional security to replace that which you’ve stripped me of providing myself.”
In direct correlation to my comment, the specific facilities you’ve mention actually do rise to the level of additional and exceptional security measures and responsibility I’ve mentioned – in exchange for forcibly waiving our Second Amendment Rights when visiting or working within those facilities.
However, the same could never be said for all these liberal school campuses and other random places that demand we be stripped of our constitutional right to protect ourselves. Instead they just demand all the guns banned, but don’t ever think in exchange that it is their responsibility to implement additional protections to mitigate the security deficit they create with their bans.
But even within those more secure facilities you’ve mentioned, they are still not infallible. Not a year goes by that we don’t hear plenty of news stories about shootings in court rooms where bailiffs or deputies had their guns overtaken by a defendant in chains and still managed to kill a few before being subdued or even escaping.
As for the Postal Facilities – the issue was disgruntled employees, not the patrons; which explains why you don’t always see “security personal with metal detectors” up front. But such security measures have been implemented quite extensively behind the scenes since their last shooting; and thus would explain the reduction in deadly work-place violence occurrences.
So that brings us to the portion of your comment in which you wrote, “Maybe it’s time to turn our attention back on the brain behind the trigger”. Interestingly the Postal Service is a prime example of an organization that has done precisely that in the aftermath of their work-place tragedies.
Millions of dollars have since been invested towards the Postal Service’s implementation of advanced programs that involve extensive pre-employment screenings, ongoing stress management practices and classes for employees, work-place conflict resolution counseling, dedicated Mail Center Security Coordinators and staff, along with advance facility detection systems and additional armed Postal Inspectors who are trained to investigate and act on even the slightest hint of a disgruntled employee.
While such measures have virtually prevented any more postal worker deaths, look at the immense cost, manpower, and effort associated with such prevention. And even then the Postal Service still has their less lethal instances resulting in bodily harm caused by internal disgruntled employees; but you never get to read about those occurrences because they are investigated internally and officially sealed as undisclosed employee matters.
So in conclusion – despite all the best efforts, the only dependable measure to self-preservation will always be reliance on none other than one’s self. The framers of the Second Amendment understood this and it is as viable today as it ever was.
I don’t see why “EVERY state should require a test of proficiency.”
Maine, Vermont and New Hampshire all now have constitutional carry, they not only do not require a test, they don’t even require a fee, application, or license for open or concealed carry.
Coincidentally these states are ranked the #1, #2, and #3 safest in the USA in terms of homicide and violent crime, with average murder rates lower than Canada’s.
Recently on the University of Texas at Austin campus, there was a deranged person who attacked several people with a knife, killing one of them, a freshman student. What the media refused to mention was a student with a license to carry was the one who stopped the attacks. When the student pulled his gun, the deranged person took off running and when he went around the corner, the police caught him. If that brave student with a license to carry had not been carrying his pistol and intervened, there would’ve been a lot more students injured or killed. I guess Professor Dorman doesn’t live in the world of facts, only his fictional notion that people who go through all the training and documentation to have a license to carry a handgun somehow make it unsafe.
My MK 25 does not like blazer brass too weak a load barely moves the action and tosses the casings down your shirt when it actually ejects the stuff
Winchester ran flawlessly and threw the cases hard and far
Mind you it’s a brand new pistol only 200 rounds threw her now
I bought a model 70 Winchester classic in .375 H&H second hand. The rifle was manufactured in 2012, but appears in new condition. In examining the rifle it appears the barrel has been screwed into the receiver slightly past vertical as indicated by the front and rear sights and barrel band stud. I mounted a scope on the rifle and tried to sight it in, but it fired only one of four rounds. The primer had been struck in the centre of the firing pin, but perhaps not strongly enough. My friend fired the same shells in his pre 64 model 70 and they fired without issue. The rifle does not seem to be tampered with in any manner. What is happening and would this be a warranty issue? Thank you for your consideration.
I really don’t know why this is a surprise. The liberal media was behind HRC and did everything they could to help her. They are also anti-Trump and opposing anything that is conservative in nature. It furthers their agenda to hop on anything they can to turn the general public to their idea that all guns are bad, and it’s easy to obtain a firearm legally by terrorists. It almost seems as if they want to encourage ISIS attacks here by opposing the POTUS’s proposed temporary travel ban on the countries deemed hotbeds of terrorism. When Obama wanted to single those same countries out nobody was complaining.
Mr. Newton, the .45 ACP and .357 are both excellent defense rounds and both have excellent merits.However, I would like to mention the 38/.357 bullet is exactly that. .357 in (9.1mm). The 9mm (9 x 19) is .355 in. Not much of a difference, but none the less, different in construction and diameter.
The .357 Sig shoots a .355 in diameter. Basically a 9mm +p+.
Also, Comparing a single shot, muzzle loading, black powder, flintlock. Shooting a round ball out of a smoothbore to a modern smokeless round is not exactly a fair comparison.
I retired from the US Army Infantry branch at Ft. Riley, KS. in 2003. I lived in Kansas from 1998 until 2010. During that period of time, I watched the people of Kansas win the debate on concealed carry in their state. They have since taken it further to open carry within the state. I have been through the concealed carry class in Kansas, and had their license. Their training is designed to familiarize the individual with the laws of Kansas and to confirm that the individual knows his or her handgun well enough to use it effectively. Colorado’s class is much the same. They both assume one is familiar with firearms. I follow the news in Kansas. I have several friends who are still in Kansas. I have some questions for the professor about some of his statements.
First, what campus shootings? This law has only been in effect since October of 2016, and approved and instituted at KU only since December, 2016. I have heard of no shootings or violence involving firearms on any Kansas institutions of higher learning of any kind since its passing or since it has been applied. Did I miss something in the news? To the best of my knowledge, there have been NO active shooter incidents at any of the colleges in Kansas since this went into effect.
Second, as to training with weapons, either firearms or other types, many of the students of these universities are former or active military. I was a student at Kansas State after retirement, and I used to instruct both pistol and rifle marksmanship, basic and advanced over my 20 year career in the Infantry. I was even an armorer for a while. Most of the former military students are highly trained in the use and safety of various types of firearms. The concealed carry class simply adds to their knowledge of the laws of Kansas. Also, as a group, these men and women are highly stable emotionally. The have been taught to be so in an unforgiving school, that of a combat environment. They are taught to think before acting, and their lives at times have been at risk when instability would have killed them.
Also, quite a few of these people, especially those in combat arms, are trained in combatives. If they wanted to maim or kill one, they could do it without a firearm.
Third, this man is a liberal arts professor. He doesn’t teach in any area of hard science. I cannot say if or how much he is liberal in his personal politics, but as a professor, he adds nothing direct to the training of engineers, chemists, physics or any other area of scientific development. At most, they have to pass his class as a required course to make sure they are ‘educationally rounded’ as part of their degree requirements. I seriously doubt that campus carry will worry any of the professors who teach in the hard sciences. If the past is a teacher, campus carry will make the campus environment safer.
Fifth, as to being a deterrent, concealed carry has been proven to be very effective in passive deterrence, and active deterrence both. I see no evidence that it will not prove to be so in this instance, too. If I were going to speak in a public forum on any of the liberal campuses today, I’d want some emotionally stable people in the crowd to be armed, if only to stop the ‘activists’ from trying to attack me for my views, which has happened several times lately, even to speakers who are in my view somewhat radical in their liberal views.
Finally, this could be simply fear. This professor may simply be afraid and using all of this to cover for his personal fear. I have no doubt that he had already secured a new position elsewhere and this is his parting shot at rationalizing his personal fear. I don’t think that concealed carry would do other than insure that debate in his or any other class would be somewhat more polite. Or perhaps this professor is somewhat belligerent with his students and fears that this would threaten his ‘teaching style”. I’ve had professors who were so. I do know that what he says in his letter is neither true nor accurate, thus his conclusions are erroneous.
~Elton P. Green
This is a tremendously complex realm, full of beguiling pitfalls that lead away from the primary focus – what should be done to prepare best, to optimize the chance for survival for yourself and companions, in the (rare) event of an apparently lethal attack? Playing devil’s advocate, suppose training endlessly for rapid draw and fire leads to the inevitable killing of unarmed/nonthreatening persons by LEO, because they’ve trained to bypass the mental decision steps of the 4 cardinal rules? Should training focus first and always to be 100% certain of your intent to shoot the target rather than training to reflexively shortcut those crucial moments of decision and deliberation? Training seems too narrowly focused on the myth of having to outdraw the perp, when it is mostly going to be either seconds of time, or zero – i.e. gun already aimed ready to shoot you. In the first, you may be able to draw from concealment, into a low profile ready position, from which raising to target and firing may only take another 0.2sec. My thoughts are, be liberal on initial drawing to ready, then slow down/conservative to the point of firing, instead of training the process as one. If you do not take time to make mental note of your target, before firing, you may have a lifetime to regret it. And no, your life is not worth more than that of an innocent stranger or family or friend.
Nice review! I am definitely a fan of the Russian Vepr and although I am certainly a made-in-America kind of guy, there are certain things the Russians just make better! I hope FIME has changed that.
If possible could you do a review on the Palmetto State Armory PSAk-47 “MOEkov” rifle???