Shooter’s Log Weekly Wrap Up November 29-December 5, 2015

After the Democrats failed in their “forced vote-a-thon” on universal background checks, no-fly no-buy policy, and others during the Senate’s session on Thursday, all eyes are now on President Obama to see if he will execute executive action. In fact, his plans are our top story this week….Read more for all the news headlines that impact gun owners.


Obama Says Gun Control Legislation is Under Legal Review

Obama has his administration looking into how to enact new gun control through executive action, mainly “new background-check requirements for buyers who purchase weapons from high-volume gun dealers,” reported the Washington Post. In an interview with Bill Simmons in GQ magazine, Obama stated, “There are maybe a few more that had to be scrubbed by lawyers because essentially, with every executive action, we can count on it being challenged by somebody in Congress or, in this case, the NRA. We want to make any executive action we take as defensible as possible legally.”

NICS Hits Record Numbers

The National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) reports its highest number of background checks in history. On Friday, November 27, 2015 (Black Friday), NICS processed 185,345 background checks, beating the previous record by over 8,000. Over the Thanksgiving weekend, 368,774 background checks were performed.

Petition to Declare State of Emergency…Because ‘Gun Violence’

The National Gun Victims Action Council (NGVAC) has started a petition for Congress to declare a state of emergency in the United States, allowing Pres. Obama to use emergency powers to enact strict gun control laws. The petition states, “Americans are in the midst of a gun violence epidemic. The National Emergencies Act gives the president the power and responsibility to declare a state of emergency when the government lacks the procedures and capacity to address an unchecked natural or man-made public health epidemic.” NGVAC asks Obama for executive action on not only universal background checks, but to control carrying guns outside the home.

Toxic Substance Control Act Amended

President Obama signed the National Defense Authorization Act of 2015 last week stopping the EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) from having any form of control over ammunition through the Toxic Substance Control Act. Representative Jeff Miller said, “I applaud the efforts of Chairmen Thornberry and McCain to include this common-sense language in the defense bill that will clarify, once and for all, that the EPA does not, and should not, have the jurisdiction to regulate traditional ammunition or its components.”

National Fraternal Order of Police Want to Carry at Football Games

The National Fraternal Order of Police penned a letter to NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell requesting that off-duty police officers be allowed to carry guns into stadiums. The NFL responded to a similar document from the Order written in 2013:

“Recognizing that reasonable people may hold a different view, the NFL believes the safest environment for all fans is achieved by limiting the number of firearms and weapons inside stadiums to those required by officers that perform specifically assigned law enforcement working functions and game day duties. On average, more than 500 civilian security personnel and 150 on-duty uniformed armed law enforcement officers were assigned to protect public safety and enforce the law in every NFL stadium.

If permitted to carry concealed weapons, they create deconfliction issues for working law enforcement officers and increase the potential for “blue-on-blue” response confrontations. … Moreover, off-duty law enforcement officers are not included in the on-site law enforcement chain of command or bound by department or agency-on-duty policies that [sic] restrict their use of alcohol or subject them to other on-duty behavior standards.”

Georgia Rep. Introduces Firearms Training Bill

Representative Keisha Waites (D-Atlanta) pre-filed a bill (H.B. 709) requiring firearms training for everyone applying for a carry permit in Georgia. Law enforcement, active military and firearms instructors would be exempt from the law. Rep. Waites said, “This is simply a means to protect people and get them to think about safety. We need to move away from the conversation about gun rights. This is purely a public safety situation.”

Nashville Board Stops Gun Shows at Fairgrounds

The Nashville, Tennessee Metro Board of Fair Commissioners stopped gun shows at the Nashville Fairgrounds until gun show organizers will accept and comply with new rules since law enforcement has linked guns purchased at gun shows to felons. The Board is considering posting signs that read all gun sales must go through background checks. The executive director of the Tennessee Firearms Association, John Harris said in regards to the Board’s vote, “We will stand up for the 2nd Amendment and gun owners in Tennessee against this intentional usurpation of our God-given rights as citizens to engage in lawful conduct on public property.”

Wisconsin Court of Appeals Rules that Second Amendment Also Protects Knives

The Wisconsin Court of Appeals repealed a lower court’s rule that held that switchblades were illegal. The Court of Appeals ruled:

“Although the Heller Court emphasized that handguns are frequently used for self-defense, we do not think Heller can be read to create different levels of protection for different types of arms that fall under the Second Amendment, based on their popularity. In addition, it is not particularly surprising that handguns are more prevalent than switchblades, given that switchblades were banned or severely restricted in many states, including Wisconsin, beginning in the late 1950s and early 1960s.

For safety reasons people with children may not want guns around the house. People with limited financial resources who may not be able to afford a proper gun likely would be able to afford an effective $10 automatic knife. Finally, for people who are excluded from lawful gun ownership, an automatic knife may be the most effective arm available.”

The State argues that [the switchblade ban] serves an important governmental objective – namely, protecting the public from the danger of potentially lethal surprise attacks posed by individuals using switchblade knives. However, the State cites no evidence to establish that this danger actually exists to any significant degree. Again, the State has the burden to establish that [the switchblade ban] satisfies intermediate scrutiny, and it must do so by showing the existence of real, not merely conjectural, harm… Thus, on the record before us, we are not convinced that [the switchblade ban] serves an important governmental objective.”

Product News

LWRC Introduces Direct Impingement AR-15

LWRC introduced its direct impingement rifle earlier this week. Senior vice president of sales and marketing, David Ridley said, “The LWRCI-DI was born out of the U.S. Military M4 PIP program that called for longer barrel life, ambi charging handle and safety, more reliable bolt carrier group, and user configurable floating rail system. The LWRCI-DI excels on all counts, offering our customers an advanced DI rifle at a price that will surprise you. It is truly a ‘Step-Up’ from the basic direct impingement rifles on the market.”
LWRC’s new DI AR-15 has a monoforged upper, modular one-piece free floating rail, cold hammer-forged spiral fluted barrel, fully ambidextrous controls, ergonomic fore grip, mil-spec six-position buffer tube and LWRC’s proprietary direct impingement bolt carry group with a keyless gas key.

The LWRCI-DI started shipping on December 1. Keep checking back at Cheaper Than Dirt! for it to come in stock.

Smith & Wesson Celebrates One Millionth M&P Shield

Smith & Wesson M&P Shield
The Shield is accurate, shoots well, comfortable to grip and produces 2-inch groups with quality ammo.

Smith & Wesson celebrated its one-millionth M&P Shield pistol with a ceremony. Since 2012, the S&W M&P Shield has continued to grow in popularity. The one-millionth pistol will not be sold, but instead have a special display at the company’s headquarters.

S&W President and CEO James Debney, said, “From the engineering and marketing teams that first conceived the design for the M&P Shield, to the employees that produce and deliver it to our customers every day, thank you. Your dedication to innovation, quality and meeting our customers’ desires has helped Smith & Wesson to maintain our leadership position in U.S. handgun manufacturing.”

Liberty Ammo Achieves NTOA Member-Tested Recommended Status

Liberty Ammo’s Civil Defense .45 ACP +P ammo received the National Tactical Officers Association (NTOA) member-tested recommended status by scoring a 4.63 out of 5 points.

Liberty Ammo’s Civil Defense .45 ACP +P ammo received the National Tactical Officers Association (NTOA) member-tested recommended status by scoring a 4.63 out of 5 points. Citing lower felt recoil and weight, all testers approved of the round. Vice president of sales and marketing Matt Phillips said, “We are very happy to have NTOA’s members give the Civil Defense .45 ACP +P such a high approval rating. We want our law enforcement officers to have the highest performing duty ammunition available, and our products are designed with them in mind.”

The Liberty Civil Defense .45 ACP +P is a lead-free, 78-grain copper fragmenting hollow point bullet with a muzzle velocity of 1900 feet per second.

You can purchase Liberty Ammo Civil Defense .45 ACP +P ammo at Cheaper Than Dirt! Click here to buy it!

Troy Industries Introduces M-LOK and KeyMod Handguards for the AK-47

Troy Industries has introduced its M-LOK and KeyMod handguards for the AK-47 in two sizes. The Troy handguards are made of hardened aircraft aluminum and stainless steel with a MIL-SPEC hardcoat anodized finish. The AK handguards are available in a 13.5-inch rail and a 10-inch—both with shorter Picatinny rails with multiple attachment points for M-LOK and KeyMod accessories. Troy’s AK-47 Battle Rails fit both stamped and milled AKs with standard-length handguards and a sling mount.

In case you missed them, here are the top 10 read blog posts this week:

What developing stories are you closely following? Are there any stories would like us to cover more in-depth? Tell us in the comment section. If you have a news story you would like to share, send us a link at

The Mission of Cheaper Than Dirt!'s blog, The Shooter's Log, is to provide information—not opinions—to our customers and the shooting community. We want you, our readers, to be able to make informed decisions. The information provided here does not represent the views of Cheaper Than Dirt!

Comments (32)

  1. I agree with Gman on this. Obama did not meet the education requirements to be a Professor or even Associate Professor, which requires a GPA of 3.9 out of 4.0 or 4.5 out of 5.0 PHD degree. The only exception is to have at least 10 years experience with a 9.0 out 10.0 wins in numerous cases or be a legal genius. Obama is none of the above.

  2. You need to check attorney registration ARDC Attorney Registration and Disciplinary Commission, State of Illinois. The Chicago or Springfield office.

    All criminal and unethical behavior is maintained by the ARDC.

  3. Gman you have got that right. Personally I believe Obama the disbarred attorney heighten the racial divide to protect his job position. Now if he plays the same game on the international level he will find himself standing in front of the the International Court. Regardless of his color of skin.

  4. “who purchase weapons from high-volume gun dealers”

    I’m really glad to hear this won’t apply to street corner and alley “low volume” dealers.

  5. Correction: Obama was a substitute Constitutional Law Instructor. He resigned in lieu of disbarment meaning he is not a lawyer and he will never be again. Take it from a lawyer in good standing. Obama is no legal scholar.

    1. Thank you for posting this.

      Obama is not a lot of things, including a leader or POTUS. He is a fraud, like so many of his type.

    2. @ Sivispace.

      Obama, got his Law Degree in 1991, and his License to Practice Law in December 1991. I CAN’T FIND ANY RECORD of him Breaking the Law ANYWHERE or AT ANYTIME. Or EVEN his Wife Michelle, Please “Enlighten Me”…

    3. @ Sivispace.

      Incorrect, Sir. From 1992 to 1996 Obama was a Lecturer at the Chicago Law School. From 1996 to 2004, Obama was a Senior Lecturer and Taught Law courses Three times a Year for Eight Years. in 2004, Obama was Given Professorship status, but declined the Offer to go into Politics. But for 1992 to 2004 he held the Title of Associate Professor…

    4. @ Secundius,

      Which Kool-Aid drinking site did you query that BS from? The highest title Obama ever held was “Senior Lecturer”. But never did Obama EVER hold a formal title with the word “Professor” in it; and most definitely never did he hold a title worded as “Associate Professor” as you’ve claim.

      Now then, it only stands to reason that after one of their former part-time “Instructors” became president, that the liberal suck-ups at the University of Chicago were more than willing to embellish their formal press release, in order to back Obama, and imply he was a professor.

      But the simple fact remains that Obama never was officially titled as a “Professor”. As such, the University’s first press release led to inside pressure from real professors which forced the University to retract their first printed release and walk it back to what is now published on their site for all to read to this day.

      The most they could offer up in their corrected press release about Obama was reduced to wording like, “regarded as” and “considered to be” a professor. This choice of new wording is still a clear and obvious stretch of the truth, but one that in their liberal minds gets them past their lie of ever actually saying outright that he WAS a professor.

      All of this is with good reason, and that is because Obama was never made a professor by that University’s official standards. Real professors are full-time, given tenure, and have voting rights to make serious decisions which affect the school – none of which Obama ever had.

      As for your twisted wording that, “Obama was Given Professorship status…”; well, that is simply more bunk too. He was never “Given” any such status. The University instead states he was “invited to join the faculty full-time”, but that is a far cry from being given a Professorship that he declined, as you’ve so incorrectly claimed.

      So as usual you’re at the ready to gobble up and regurgitate the liberal garbage, and as usual I am right behind you to clear up the BS and mop up your mess in order to set the real record straight.

      And one more thing, please spare us your boring comebacks every time I prove you wrong. You usually say something odd about Obama’s birth certificate or refer to me as G. Gordon Liddy or some weird and completely unrelated comment that never makes sense. Have a great day.

    5. @ G-Man.

      Didn’t you Admit to being an Active FBI Agent on one of other Websites? KILLED the Website, TOO.

  6. Gun Purchases & Voter ID

    I find it interesting to look at the dichotomy between the liberal perspective on identification requirements in order to vote and background checks to buy a weapon.

    There has been a very clear liberal argument that Voter ID laws are unconstitutional and unfairly target minorities. Their argument is that we should essentially let anyone vote who wants to and not worry too much about their actual right to vote or their motivation and that challenging such a perspective is a indication of racism and bias. This argument is despite substantial evidence indicating widespread voter fraud.

    Yet, the same individuals argue that another constitutional right (bearing arms) should be managed through a rigorous identification and verification process. A process that would clearly dissuade anyone who has anything but multiple IDs, plenty of time, and a near perfect record from attempting to purchase weapons. Does not the same argument apply? If requiring IDs to vote is an attack on the constitutional right to vote is it not also an attack on the constitutional right to bear arms? And does it not also overly impact the same audience (minorities)? Thus by Liberal reasoning much of their gun control agenda is just as racist and repressive of minorities as they believe voter ID laws to be.

    I am not arguing that purchasing a weapon should be a completely anonymous affair…just as voting should not be a completely anonymous affair. Yet the hypocrisy of the Liberal argument is clear. Both issues are constitutional rights…and both influence the security of the nation (though I would argue that voting is likely the more important of the two.) Yet how these issues are treated by Liberals is vastly different.

    From the Conservative perspective…we should be conscious of such hypocrisy and ensure we both publically address it and don’t fall into the same trap ourselves. One is either for or against the rights guaranteed in the Constitution…In my opinion many Liberals have clearly staked out their side as against. It is up to Conservatives to hold the higher ground of being for, and to then clearly annunciate that argument.

    We are a great nation because of our people and our Constitution not despite of them. As I have said in previous posts, these issues must be addressed in a clear headed, rational, and logical manner that accurately and realistically debates the points. I think the comparison of Liberal voter ID perspective and gun control perspective is one area that shows clear Liberal bias and is a very usable chink in their argument…if Conservatives stay to the higher ground of supporting ALL constitutional rights.

    1. @ Steve H

      Huhhhh, The last time I voted. The asked me for my Gun Permit as ID, instead of My Driver’s License. Go Figure.

    2. No kidding! The Libs want all this oversight on who is buying weapons, but, of course, they don’t care whether you can legally vote or not because that benefits them since most of their base is wealthy Liberals, welfare recipients and illegals.

  7. We know that evil dictators love false flag events. These events are simply authentic flags. It’s not like the administration is unaware of Islam’s end game. It just happens to suit his program of disarmament and pacification. Remember the meaning of the word “Islam” is “to submit.” If it’s all the same to him, I will die on my feet before I live on my knees! I will obey the only true Lord Yeshua bar Yaweh!

  8. Did anyone listen to Obama this evening? Still preaching gun control and about keeping Americans safe. To me he is saying that there is little that can be done about terrorist inside the borders of this, but more gun control. Then his thing on Isam in this country about avoiding hate. His legal team should advise him that under Sharia Law Chapter 5 the actions of the two in San Bernardino were justified. Just more bs to support his gun control agenda.

  9. Obama is a worm who was forced on us by wealthy liberals and welfare recipients because he fulfilled the Liberal view of state control, and the welfare view of everything for free with no work on their part.

    I hope the people who voted for him burn in the Hell they don’t believe exists.

  10. Let us be clear. Obama is doing his best to disarm us with his left hand while holding the door open for Islamic extremists and illegal alien felondvwith his right hand. What more evidence do we need that he is intent on the destruction of America?

  11. I think that the watch list needs to be made 100% accurate and we need to know what gets you put on the list before we can even think about denying people rights when they end up on it. I remember many cases where a senator or govt official or some other well known person ended up on the list and had a hard time getting off of it even with all their connections. So imagine what happens to the lowly citizens that end up on it and can’t call in a favor to get off it. The scariest thing is no one knows how or what actions get you put on in the first place. Way to much room for abuse until these problems are fixed.

  12. This what burns me about his anti gun agenda after the San Bernardino incident. As a Commander and Chief he failed to look at the tactical offense that occurred. If it had been looked from this view point it is easy to see the principle was to drive everybody in the building into hiding, drop the ieds, and let the ieds take the whole building down. The weapons played a minor factor in the event. If the ieds had been built right the carnage would have been in the hundreds. If these idiots learn how to build an ied right, Heaven help the next gun free zone.”

  13. RE: Obama Says Gun Control Legislation is Under Legal Review

    Obama has his administration looking into how to enact new gun control through executive action, mainly “new background-check requirements for buyers who purchase weapons from high-volume gun dealers,” reported the Washington Post. In an interview with Bill Simmons in GQ magazine, Obama stated, “There are maybe a few more that had to be scrubbed by lawyers because essentially, with every executive action, we can count on it being challenged by somebody in Congress or, in this case, the NRA. We want to make any executive action we take as defensible as possible legally.”

    For those fans of the movie 5th Element, the Mangalores (ugly shape-shifting thug types) said it best, “If it’s war they want, it’s war they’ll get!” We already have a huge number of citizens across the nation engaged in The Armed Civil Disobedience of Non-Compliance. We have either been made felons over night by rogue state governments backed by rogue courts, or not because their unenforceable, unconstitutional, intolerable acts are simply NULLIFIED. What do they think will happen when jack-boot government thugs start going door to door to search for (never mind confiscate) personal firearms?

    Bring it Obozo and company…IT’S YOUR MOVE!

  14. Regarding Obama’s gun-control push, everyone at one point in their life has experienced a situation where their mind was firmly made up, yet later completely changed views after getting more information. The mis-information being spread over gun-control issues is no different.

    I firmly believe that any reasonably intelligent individual, given all the facts, would eventually realize that restricting law abiding gun owners’ right to bear arms has no bearing in the slightest towards stopping the executions by dedicated Islamic extremists or mass shootings by the psychotic mentally ill.

    Albeit the more intellectual people will arrive at this conclusion much sooner, which means those that don’t are obviously not so intellectual. So, barring the unintelligent masses, this still leaves us with a very serious dilemma regarding the intelligent elements driving the anti-gun hysteria.

    We must then ask ourselves if they too are just as aware that history has proven that gun-control really does nothing to prevent mass shootings, then what is the real agenda behind continuing such a push? The only conclusion would be their desire to deceptively continue disarming the public in order to eventually render us defenseless against future planned tyranny.

    1. Violating the United States Constitution:
      Exceeding the Executive Authority of the Presidential Office,
      Failing to defend the people of the United States against terrorism,
      Ignoring the “separation of powers,” assuming the role of the Legislative
      Branch of Government (the Senate and the House of Representatives).

    2. @ Thomas Gravy

      If they were Impeachable Offenses, I suspect he would have All Ready Have Been Impeached. Remember HE’S a Constitution Law Professor and Lawyer. How many in Congress can Make the Same Claim.

    3. @ THIS OLD MAN,

      An overwhelming amount in Congress does make the same claim and easily exceed Obama’s experience. More than a third of the House is comprised of lawyers and 60% of the Senate are lawyers.

      The 114th Congress knows the law quite well and has already publicly stated on many occasions that Obama has easily exceeded his authority and failed to fulfill his oath of office to the point that it definitively warrants Impeachment. However, they also say the reason no one is willing to vote on Articles of Impeachment is the unwillingness to go down in history for impeaching the first black president.

    4. @ G-Man

      One problem though, there NO CLOSER to Impeaching him NOW. Then they WERE when he to Office!

    5. @ THIS OLD MAN,

      Your response shows you didn’t fully grasp what I wrote. So here it is again but this time in a step-by-step easy to follow format for you:

      1.) Obama has in-fact committed many high crimes and misdemeanors during both his terms in office which highly warrant impeachment.

      2.) Many in Congress have for years publicly identified Obama’s high crimes and misdemeanors and laid them out for the public both through television and on their various websites.

      3.) When asked publicly why no one in Congress is moving to impeached Obama, the overwhelming response is that no one is willing to go down in history as the legislator that impeached the first black president.

      4.) In summary this would explain why Congress never has, nor will they ever be, any closer to impeaching Obama. It is NOT because they tried and failed, or that Obama has done nothing impeachable, it is instead simply because Congress is unwilling to impeach Obama due to the color of his skin.

      I hope you understand now there is no “problem” trying to get Obama impeached, as he could have easily been impeached by now. The real problem lies within our pathetic Congress that is willing to look the other way over fears of being labeled as racists.

      It is already disgusting enough that at the bottom of the spectrum your skin color can convict you of crimes you never committed, but it is even worse that skin color can protect criminals such as Obama at that made it to the top of the spectrum.

      For such disgrace to be happening in our country should drastically disturb any American because it means that Lady Liberty is not really blind like she is supposed to be… at least not color blind.

    6. @ THIS OLD MAN,

      CORRECTION: Sorry, meant Lady of Justice not Lady Liberty. Hopefully that did not do too much damage to my point.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Your discussions, feedback and comments are welcome here as long as they are relevant and insightful. Please be respectful of others. We reserve the right to edit as appropriate, delete profane, harassing, abusive and spam comments or posts, and block repeat offenders. All comments are held for moderation and will appear after approval.