I guess the armed citizenry theory isn't just for right wing nut jobs any (RWNJ) any more!

SOURCE: http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/exclusive-westgate-interpol-chief-ponders-armed-citizenry/story?id=20637341&singlePage=true

I post it here before it disappears from MSM.

Interpol Secretary General Ronald Noble said today the U.S. and the rest of the democratic world is at a security crossroads in the wake of last month's deadly al-Shabab attack at a shopping mall in Nairobi, Kenya – and suggested an answer could be in arming civilians.

In an exclusive interview with ABC News, Noble said there are really only two choices for protecting open societies from attacks like the one on Westgate mall where so-called "soft targets" are hit: either create secure perimeters around the locations or allow civilians to carry their own guns to protect themselves.

"Societies have to think about how they're going to approach the problem," Noble said. "One is to say we want an armed citizenry; you can see the reason for that. Another is to say the enclaves are so secure that in order to get into the soft target you're going to have to pass through extraordinary security."

Noble's comments came only moments after the official opening of the 82nd annual gathering of the Interpol's governing body, the General Assembly. The session is being held in Cartagena, Colombia, and is being used to highlight strides over the last decade in Colombia's battle against the notorious drug cartels that used to be the real power in the country.

The secretary general, an American who previously headed up all law enforcement for the U.S. Treasury Department, told reporters during a brief news conference that the Westgate mall attack marks what has long been seen as "an evolution in terrorism." Instead of targets like the Pentagon and World Trade Center that now have far more security since 9/11, attackers are focusing on sites with little security that attract large numbers of people.

At least 67 were killed over a period of days at the Westgate mall, more than 60 of the dead were civilians. The Somalia-based al Qaeda-allied terror group al-Shabab claimed responsibility for the attack as it was ongoing but investigators are still trying to determine exactly who planned the strike, where they are and what is next for them. U.S. authorities in Uganda, fearing another similar incident in Africa, issued a warning late last week.

Citing a recent call for al Qaeda "brothers to strike soft targets, to do it in small groups," Noble said law enforcement is now facing a daunting task.

"How do you protect soft targets? That's really the challenge. You can't have armed police forces everywhere," he told reporters. "It's Interpol's view that one way you protect soft targets is you make it more difficult for terrorist to move internationally. So what we're trying to do is to establish a way for countries … to screen passports, which are a terrorist's best friend, try to limit terrorists moving from country to country. And also, that we're able to share more info about suspected terrorists."

In the interview with ABC News, Noble was more blunt and directed his comments to his home country.

"Ask yourself: If that was Denver, Col., if that was Texas, would those guys have been able to spend hours, days, shooting people randomly?" Noble said, referring to states with pro-gun traditions. "What I'm saying is it makes police around the world question their views on gun control. It makes citizens question their views on gun control. You have to ask yourself, 'Is an armed citizenry more necessary now than it was in the past with an evolving threat of terrorism?' This is something that has to be discussed."

"For me it's a profound question," he continued. "People are quick to say 'gun control, people shouldn't be armed,' etc., etc. I think they have to ask themselves: 'Where would you have wanted to be? In a city where there was gun control and no citizens armed if you're in a Westgate mall, or in a place like Denver or Texas?'"

Prior to the Westgate attack, the gun control debate has been ignited time and time again in the U.S. in the aftermath of a series of mass shootings, including one in a movie theater in Aurora, Col., a suburb of Denver.

I am sure that you all have heard the controversy surrounding ATF's proposed changes to NFA items and trusts. Mainly that they are trying to make a person a "responsible party" and therefore subject to additional requirements including the much elusive (and impossible to obtain in my neck of woods) CLEO sign off. There has been much written on it.

So, my question to you is if you have recently gone the trust route for a suppressor did you have a lawyer draft your trust, or did you use an online Gun Trust? I continue to read that ones created with generic box software (like Quicken) are getting rejected or worse revoked.

A quick search of buy "NFA Trust" returned a bunch. There was one for about $135 which you basically got the forms (including add/remove trustees) which seemed like a good deal, but had no support and is not not state centric. Others ranged from $200 and up. A few looked like you had to buy additional services for simple things like add/remove trustees. My understanding of how a trust works is that you should be able to do it on your own. Unless there is some type of legal agreement with the vendor disallowing you to do so. I do not like such restrictions.

Anyway, please let me know what route/vendor you went with. With Washington State's legalization of suppressor usage (it used to be legal to own but illegal to use) I am very curious.

Thanks!

I was browsing the Sig website and came across the the P938. It is an oddity in the Sig line like like the P238, at least in the fact that it is a non-traditional (meaning non-1911) single-action. Notwithstanding the P210 which is in a class all in its own.

I am not sure how Sig came along this line (P238 and P938) but I am impressed. There are stories that Sig bought the rights to Colt's Mustang (and equipment) which had been discontinued for years. But, Colt recently reintroduced them so I am not sure if that is true. Although according to Colt they are building them on new CNC machinery.

Anyway, the Mustang (IMO) was an under-rated pistol. A joy to shoot and very popular at training classes with new shooters. Remarkably accurate considering the rudimentary sights. If you like small thin single-action pistols it is great. And unique. Enter the P938! A Mustang scaled up to 9mm! I like it.

It reminded me of the Star FireStar. At the time it was a maligned pistol, but it was far ahead of its time. I regret not getting one. They worked. I found this article http://www.policeone.com/police-products/firearms/articles/6426721-The-SIG-P938-is-reminiscent-of-the-Star-PD/.

The P938 reminded the author of a Star PD. I think that is probably a more accurate assessment based on the lightweight frame. Another pistol way ahead of its time. Star sure built some nice pistols.

Anyway, the Sig P938 is definitely worth considering IMO if you are looking for something small without a 30# DAO trigger pull.

I am LMAO at this news article posted today. I repost it because I am sure at some point they are going to realize the ridiculousness of a kit that converts a "standard gun" into a semi-auto. Or maybe they won't fix it. They clearly don't care about their gun illiteracy or accuracy in reporting. I suspect they meant converting a 10 round magazine back into its standard capacity (more than 10).

Link to Chicago Tribune Article

SACRAMENTO, Calif., Oct 10 (Reuters) - California Governor
Jerry Brown vetoed several closely watched gun control bills on

Friday, a move that essentially rebuffs an effort by fellow
Democrats to enact a sweeping expansion of firearms regulation
in the most populous U.S. state.

Brown vetoed the strictest bill, which would have classified
any firearm with a removable magazine as an assault weapon,
calling it an "infringement on gun owners' rights." He did,
however sign some new firearms regulations, including a measure
to ban conversion kits used to convert standard guns into
semi-automatics.

(Reporting by Sharon Bernstein; Editing by Cynthia Johnston)

I am laughing, but I am also deeply saddened by how ignorant MSM and reporters are about firearms. Unfortunately, I fear that it is not limited to firearms, and they don't seem to care about accuracy in reporting.

However, in the meantime, where can I get one of those kits to convert my standard gun into a semi-auto?

I have been silent on the Springfield XDS recall mainly because it is all over the internet and I have nothing new to say. In general, I find SA's support to be superb. While this may be there first recall (and learning experience) it is not their first XD problem. People have forgotten but the early XD's were plagued with striker breakage (hmm..they were not the only ones with this striker problem) and they had a policy that they would not send out replacements (you had to send the pistol in). This caused me to choose another brand of striker pistol, the S&W M&P (both registered trademarks which I am not affiliated with) which ironically also suffered striker breakage problems. However, S&W (tm) did just send me a replacement striker. SA XD's also had finish problems which led to them using the Melonite process to treat the metal. The date that this occurred is actually somewhere in a post on this blog.

None of this is to detract from Springfield Armory. I am still a huge fan, own their pistols, and find their customer service excellent. In fact, in a blog post here recently the XDS was on my potential buy list. I ended up not getting one because, well, I think they are a little spendy for what they are, and (ironically) too new. Although I haven't gotten it yet the Glock 30 won out for me. Springfield can survive this. Lots of recalls lately- S&W (tm) Shield (tm), Ruger SR9, Walther PPK, etc. Even almighty Glock has had its share of factory "upgrades." I remember sending in my Glock 21, although quite a few years ago. They all have survived.

However, this isn't to say that they handled this recall optimumly. The blog post below is from a current owner and I agree. The blog is also a neighbor :)

http://clarkcountypolitics.blogspot.com/2013/09/how-springfield-armory-is-screwing-up.html

P.S. It is also noteworthy that SA doesn't actually make the pistol. They import them from Croatia. For some reason folks seem to not know this. They are actually made by IM Metal and were originally imported under the name of HS2000. This fact only exacerbates the complexity of coordinating a recall.

Well, it is October and that means that I should buy another handgun. I know that should please Piers Anthony and Jim Carrey immensely. Oh well!

I was recently impressed with Beretta USA's statement that they may move from restrictive Maryland. That ended up not coming to fruition, but they did state that any future expansion would be elsewhere. That is at least a start and is more than some other big East Coast gun companies. It is noteworthy to mention that Magpul & PTR have moved, Kahr & Ruger have moved some operations, and Colt has expanded in Florida.

But I digress. Why the Beretta 92FS/M9? This is prior to blogging but back in 1985-6 I was not a fan. I couldn't believe that the venerable M1911A1 which had served for 75 years and was being replaced by a pistol with undesirable features (my list of cons at the time):

• big
• fat
• 9mm
• looong heavy double-action
• slide mounted safety
• integral front sight
• open top design
• complicated (# of parts) design

• I wasn't a big fan of the 9mm, but if I had to have a 9mm it should be a High Power. I still love the HP, but 9mm ammo has come a long away and a lot of my early criticisms are not a concern to me any longer.

  Well, almost 30 years later I have come to admire the pistol. One has to admit that despite the controversy and "problems" it has served the United States well. When I say problems I mean specifically the Italian metallurgy issues (that brought about the 92F to 92FS) and broken locking blocks. Both these issues appear to be very limited in scope. Compare to other folks recalls lately (hmm...that sounds like another blog post in itself).

  Other "issues" like the effectiveness of 9mm FMJ in combat or bad contract magazines can't really be blamed on the pistol.

  What else changed my mind about the Beretta 92FS? Actually spending some range time with one! First time out with one I was able to qualify marksman with it. I was amazed at how straight shooting they are. The craftsmanship on this particular one was exemplary (it was a 90's Italian if that makes any difference). The pistol operated liked butter - the trigger/hammer although ridiculously long and heavy were superb and everything about it was smooth without grittiness. Pull the action back on one, cock the hammer - no break in required!

  You may have noticed that I am not a big fan of the looong and heavy double-action trigger. At the time I was coming exclusively from the world of 1911s and HiPowers. I didn't like any DA but the Beretta in particular was stood out as excessive. Since then I have a lot more shooting experience with DA pistols and well, have become more proficient with them.

  Ironically, DA-pistols once claimed the pistol thrown and were all the rage, are now out of vogue. In fact, try and find one. There are few made in the world of single-actions and strikers. Take a look at Ruger's offering. Ruger pistols were once dominated with double-action pistols in just about any caliber. Now there are none. The P95 (under-rated IMO) was on there the last time I looked, but must have been recently removed.

  My, how times have changed. When the U.S. Military announced M9 adoption everyone rushed out to buy one - at inflated prices. Now, I called around to find one and the youngster who answered the phone at one shop didn't even know what one was! Forced to looked it up he said that they were discontinued and that all I could get was a compact, INOX (which he had no idea meant stainless slide with silver frame), and M9A1. The 92FS is still in the Beretta catalog, so I hope that they are made. I was bummed that I did not see the Brigadier offered any longer. I don't think the slide beefing up is needed any longer, but I don't see it as a detriment.

  The Beretta 92 was designed in 1972 so it is not that old of a design, at least when compared to the 1911 or the HiPower (adopted in 1911 by the U.S. and 1935 by Belgium respectively). I pick these two pistols because they are were designed by John Browning and influenced almost all small arms pistols that have come since. If it has a tilt barrel, it is based on Browning's designs. Did you know that one of the HiPowr prototypes was a striker pistol? The Beretta 92FS however is completely different and to me that makes it stand out.

  So, what about that list of negatives? Well, they are still there but keep in mind that it is a duty pistol. For me, it will be a range and a nightstand bump in the night pistol and will be perfect. I also suspect that its smooth functioning and non-existent recoil will make it a hit for training new shooters. I still wouldn't considered it as a primary CCW pistol.

  Sometimes, things are worth taking a second look.

I have been wanting to get a new shoulder rig for driving. I currently have a couple, but they are for full-size all-steel pistols and I think that something a little more weight would be more comfortable. I have also been wanting to get another holster for my FNX. I only have the stock (BladeTech) OWB currently.

So, when I saw a close out sale from High Noon with an Undertaker for $70 I jumped at it. Actually, they had Glock 19/23 Under Armor too but I didn't call fast enough the next day. I would have bought that too :) The difference between the two holsters is all leather with hard molded holster vs a synthetic leather like material which is unmolded. I have an Under Armor holster for my S&W (tm)* 1066. It is very leather-like and nice.

*I am not affiliated with the company known as "Smith & Wesson" in any way. It's trademarks are held by whoever they are held by.

Anyway, the Underarmor was a left hand, but they were able to flip the holster portion inside out to make it a right hand. The only difference is that traditionally the smooth side of the leather faces out, while the rough is on inside. In this case it is flipped. This is strictly cosmetic and makes no difference functionally.

I have to say that I am VERY impressed! The holster is very simple in design and quite frankly very well put together. I have only tried a handful of shoulder rigs, with the Galco Miami Classic II being my favorite - at least up until now. The High Noon Under Taker is by far the most comfortable I have worn yet.

I like to wear my holster and mag carrier to ride fairly high up. Galco seems to think that it should ride much lower than I would like and I run out of adjustment. Maybe I am shorter than the average shoulder rig wearer (I am 5'7").

Some observations follow:

High Noon leather quality is very nice, in fact nicer than some other holsters I own. I don't know if it makes any difference but Galco feels like it is sealed or laminated. The High Noon does not and that makes it feel less stiff. Maybe that is why it is more comfortable?

-The High Noon comes with very simple hardware--I like that. The only bulk is from the leather itself.

-The High Noon comes with keepers. VERY VERY nice touch! Since I like the holster/mag carrier to ride up high, there is a lot of extra material.

-The High Noon comes with a lot of notches for adjustment. One pair almost goes up to the top. I found putting that side in the back worked best for me.

-The High Noon's straps are all the same size. Depending on the Galco rig you get this may or may not be true (MC's are the same while the SSII has larger front straps).

-The High Noon mag carrier is drop down. This is similar to the Miami Classic. The Maimi Classic II holds the mags horizontally. I really like (and have gotten use to) this. The horizontal mags are very fast to access. However, the drop down are very secure with the flap. Dual snaps also allow multiple magazine sizes - I tried Glock 23 mags without any problem. Note: Both the MC and MCII can also accomodate mutiple sizes.

Driving with the High Noon was great. Success!
And now some pics. I apologize for the pic quality, my light box accidentally got destroyed in my garage and I have to make a new one. Camera is is my Nokia Lumia cell phone -- I am lazy tonight.

Click on any pic to view the full-size.

Cocked & locked! High Noon gears their holster for hammer down but it works fine.

Simple hardware works great. They do pivot.

Straps pivot on the center diamond. Note the keepers - there are four, although only two are visible in the pic.

Mag crrier

Mag carrier

"Selfie" (haha) just to show how I like to position the holster and mag carrier

Well, I just submitted my paperwork for another M1 Garand (it will be my second). It should only be a short 6 month wait! Wow, and I thought 2 months was a long wait last time! How times change.

For those not familiar CMP = Civilian Marksmanship Program they have some great benefits & programs! One of their most popular benefits is the purchase of a former issue M1 Garand rifle! Meeting the program requirements is not very hard and you can own a piece of history. If you have any interest I would purchase in the near future, you never know what will happen, or how long supply will last.

Anyway, just wanted to share :)

Here is my Springfield and my Inland M1 Carbine, both from the CMP (Carbines are long gone I am afraid - I wish I got two)...

Hi all,
A lot of this website's traffic comes via search engine so I thought I would make a post here for those not following threads in Downloads:

1. Company commonly referred to as "Smith & Wesson" (a registered trademark) to which neither I or this website is affiliated with in any way has suspended its NRA Instructor Program.

2. Ruger has resumed their program

3. Discounts are available from the entire Cerebus/Freedom Group family of products (DPMS, REM, Para, Marlin, etc).

For more detail please visit the Downloads section, and thank you to all the folks contributing up to date info!!

Here is an opinion piece/article from someone calling for "responsible" gun laws.
It is from Feb 17, 2013.

The reason I reprint it here? Because I suspect it will disappear due to the fact that the author uses Kenya's gun laws as an example.

This to me is a prime example of how gun laws don't work. Watch, due to recent events they will (always) push for stricter laws. This is why pro-gun folks are afraid of the domino effect of gun laws. Sure, 'universal background checks' as a vague concept sounds good or "common sense" - however because they can't be enforced what legislation will follow it? Think about it - if the gun/owner isn't registered how do you know if the owner has had a background check?

BTW, here are the Kenyan gun laws: http://www.kenyalaw.org/klr/fileadmin/pdfdownloads/Acts/FirearmsAct_Cap114.pdf

Original article quoted below:
Trib.com: Give us Responsible Gun Laws

Give us responsible gun laws
February 17, 2013 12:00 am • ELLEN DUDLEY(10) Comments
I am a hunter and gun owner who is concerned about gun laws.

When I lived in Kenya, gun laws required gun owners to submit to background checks and register their guns, to demonstrate their ability to use the guns, and to provide secure storage for their guns when they were not in use. If any of your guns went missing you could be fined, and, in case of gross negligence, you could lose your right to own a gun.

In the house I rented, the gun safe was set in concrete.

British and European friends in Kenya said their countries had similar laws. In those counties the issue of the right to bear arms was evidently not confused with the issue of legislating for the responsible use of those arms. Nor, it seems, did we Americans confuse those two issues when in 1934 we passed the National Fire Arms Act which, among other things, strictly regulated the private ownership of machine guns. The act was upheld in 1939 by the Supreme Court which found it entirely consistent with the Second Amendment.

How then have we, a nation that once found it reasonable and do-able to regulate for the responsible use of firearms, been stampeded to the entrenched and intransigent position that gun use legislation is nothing less than an attack on our Second Amendment rights?

We have stood by while the National Rifle Association and gun industry, in the name of defending the Constitution, have squashed debate and used personal attacks and threats to livelihoods to silence those who questioned their domination. We have not been outraged enough by their callous response to gun violence and their mantra that "Guns don't kill people, people kill people," when we know that the horror a sick person might want to wreak with a gun on the public will not have such consequences if he can not get his hands on a gun.

Sixteen years ago, when a sick person with an assault weapon massacred people in Australia, Australia passed legislation banning assault weapons and offered to purchase the weapons from assault weapon owners. Australia meant business, and millions of assault weapons were turned in. In 16 years Australia has not had another assault weapon incident and Australians have continued hunting and owning guns.

Our recently expired ban on assault weapons is considered to have been ineffective, and no wonder - it had loopholes you could drive a truck through. The very entities that could have sewn up the loopholes and helped us shape and enforce effective gun legislation, the NRA and the gun industry, were obstructive and lobbied successfully to insure a feeble law that was doomed to failure.

We citizens who want effective gun laws, legislators, members of the NRA and gun industry need to come together for the common good to construct laws that will ban assault weapons and magnum clips, keep guns out of the wrong hands, and foster the responsible use of guns.

How many more people have to get gunned down before we do? We who want gun legislation that we can all live with need to make our voices heard. We need to insist our representatives give us effective gun laws and we need to boycott those in the NRA, the gun industry and its associated industries who come to the table as obstacles rather than allies.

Dudley lives in Dubois.