No matter how many times the pouty Open Carry zealots lose a battle or make the gun-owning public look bad, they never seem to connect the dots between their stubborn attention-whoring behavior and the clear negative consequences that they cause.
Did they learn after they pushed Starbucks into the arms of the gun control lobby?
No, they did not:
“Chipotle is asking customers not to bring firearms into its stores after it says gun rights advocates brought military-style assault rifles into one of its restaurants in Texas.”
Way to go, idiots.
Now, I cannot seem to locate my Magic 8-Ball, but I will go out on a limb and make a prediction anyway: this clear and uniformly negative result from their behavior will not stop Open Carry Zealots from being idiots yet again and playing into the hands of the Brady Bunch.
It’s almost like they are doing it on purpose. Maybe they need to be investigated to see if they are taking money from Bloomberg to act this way. It’s hard to believe that a rational human being could screw up so often and not realize that they are screwing up.
6 days! The first arrest under the draconian and pointless “assault rifle” and “high-capacity magazine” law took place on the morning of January 6:
“The handgun was loaded with 11 bullets, and had a magazine capable of handling 15 rounds, police said…The gun owner told Norwalk officers that he was unaware of the law or the deadline, according to the police report. He was issued an infraction for possession of a large-capacity magazine and having a mutilated license plate. The weapon was returned to the owner, under the condition that he keeps the magazine separated from the handgun, and he was released at the scene, police said.”
Read the whole thing, especially the reason that the man was pulled over.
Now, if you are a handgun permit holder, and you carry a gun that can accept a high-capacity magazine, you have the option to do so provided that you only load 10 bullets in it. And perhaps you carry an extra magazine, as recommended by many self-defense experts.
But what happens if the arresting officer decides to take a bullet out of your spare magazine and load it into the magazine that was in your gun. You are a felon, that’s what. There’s probably no way to prove that is what happened, and you are left holding the bag. Or the mag.
My advice to Connecticut permit holders is to avoid carrying a gun with a high-capacity magazine in it, and eliminate the chance that this could happen to you. Carry extra magazines, and be sure to tell people why. And also, practice reloading drills. You might not become Jerry Miculek but you can certainly improve your time.
Think I am being paranoid? You might be right.
But if the police feel entitled to shoot 90-pound children who have been tased and restrained, what wouldn’t they do?
A story has been circulating in the gun blog world, a podcast interview with a crime victim as well as the original AR15.com thread where he posted his story.
After listening & reading, I (like many others) believe that there are lessons to be learned from this man’s unfortunate experience.
What those lessons are may depend heavily on the biases that you bring to the analysis.
This guy has beaten himself up plenty over this incident, and I am not trying to pile on. But he made some major errors that are entirely correctable.
We talked before about doctors pushing gun control.
But now a major medical journal is taking the exact opposite view:
“A major fallacy in the analogy between motor-vehicle crashes and shootings is that crashes are almost always accidental, and shootings are almost always intentional. Thus, in the former, the safety characteristics of cars and roads are highly pertinent, whereas in the latter the issue is why a shooter decides to pull the trigger.”
The article also calls out the AMA (American Medical Association) and ACP (American College of Physicians) as having “fashioned gun violence as a “health problem” rather than a “crime problem.” In so doing, they have avoided the real causes of violence and to pursue federal funding for research from an advocacy perspective.”
Read the whole thing.
Gee, why hasn’t this received more media attention?
Let’s add it up: