1. Mr. Ayoob,
    I seem to recall you writing about how an Armed Police Officer engaged the Columbine shooters with his issue handgun and how his “standard” capacity magazines alowed him to stay in the fight against multiple heavily armed assailants. One of the arguments made by the Gun Control crowd currently is that a single armed officer didn’t prevent the Columbine shootings. If my math is correct that officer had at least twice the lead flying back at him as he was putting out and he had several pipe bombs thrown at him. In ever other Spree Shooter incident I have found when the shooter is confrunted with armed resistance they either A: Commit Suicide, or B: Surrender immediatly.

    I would like to know if you remember the article as I seem to have lost it. As Mr. Correia points out the only remedy to knee jerk hysteria is facts and calm debate.

  2. Great Article !, its too bad the anti-gun crowd is so blinded by emotion that they dont bother to realize the facts. One being that the 2nd amendment was never about hunting- its about “THE PEOPLE” having the right to keep and bear the same arms of the standing army of the day-in order for them to form a militia and combat any future tyrannical government.

    Opponents to this would claim that the founders never owned assault weapons back then. However the founders were not drafting the 2nd amendment merely for their generation- they were drafting it to ensure the freedoms of all future generations as well which would naturally include future advancements in weapon technology.The standing army (U.S. Military) today do use actual assault weapons- therefore the people should also be equally equipped with the same arms of the current standing army. This is the only way they could possibly overcome any future tyrannical government, as the second amendment was designed to ensure that the rights of the people shall not be infringed.

    2nd Amendment – “A Well-Regulated Militia being Necessary for the Security of a Free State,The right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed”

    The other sad reality is that both anti-gun politicians and the anti-gun mainstream media have yet to discover or bother to investigate the true defination of an “Assault Weapon” . They truly believe that a semi-automatic rifle functions like an actual military assault weapon-merely because of the fact that some civilian manufactured semi-auto rifles just happen to cosmetically look like military style rifles. However in Reality of course those who are actually knowledgable experts on firearms know the actual difference between the two very different types of weapons.

    A semi-auto rifle naturally only functions in semi-automatic fire capability-meaning only one round is discharged with each single pull of the trigger.

    An Actual “Assault Rifle” however functions entirely differently than a semi-auto civilian made rifle and a True assault weapon functions in full-auto capability-meaning multiple rounds are discharged with one singular pull of the trigger. Some Assault weapons are also capable of “selective fire” capability by way of a selector switch which allows the operator to choose between full-auto,or semi-auto capability.
    What confuses the public is that semi-auto rifles manufactured for civilian use merely resemble the military rifle in a cosmetic fashion.

  3. Mas – you just might want to double check the Michael Moore story. I could be wrong, but it seems to be referencing an incident which happened in 2005, and not last week.

    That said when it comes to Michael Moore; I do agree that is a delightful irony (or sickening hypocrisy) about someone who castigates America for living in a culture of fear and guns surrounding himself with armed bodyguards.

    Meanwhile here’s hoping we all get what we want for Christmas. Or if we can’t get what we want, we at least get what we need.

  4. Mas, correction: the Michael Moore bodyguard thing was in 2005. Still a notable event for a media bigshot who is so anti-gun. Your point is still valid- “they” want to have their own protection and leave the rest of us to take our chances. Worse yet, the NY pols are talking about MORE restrictive gun laws, in an apparent attempt to one-up the state of California. I’m a member of SAF, and I have written my NY politicians. All who believe the 2nd amendment still means something should do likewise, or “the people” are screwed.

  5. I can remember years ago discussing gun control with a live on-air radio host. When I brought up the need to protect ourselves from a tyrannical government, he responded by saying that, “well what good is your .30-.30 going to be against a guy in a tank”? I came right back and said something like, “that guy in that tank is going to have to come out at some point or it’s going to get pretty smelly in that tank”. “The VietCong did a pretty damn good job at stopping us with little in heavy armament”. “My .30-.30 can get me a grenade launcher, too”. You know you are winning the argument when the liberal starts calling you names.

    Sometime later, on a different broadcast the host had the Lord High Sheriff as a guest. I just had to call in and ask the Sheriff if the host was acting normally. The Sheriff said he thought the host was OK, and I responded by saying that since I assumed that he (the Sheriff) was carrying and since the host believes that guns have a mind of their own that he would have been very agitated, being in the same room and all. I had a good laugh out of it and maybe got some people thinking.

  6. Mas we REALLY need a recap on Columbine. I must have heard it tossed out by the MSM 5 times on Sunday alone. The response times to stuff like this needs to be HOURS not days or weeks. What the heck is wrong with our side? Dont they understand this is the SAME monster media machine that just crushed the Repubs??? Wayne just sat there like a bump on a log. Couldnt challenge Gregory on this and didnt challenge him on illegal mags in DC tv studio. This is 2012 not 1982.

  7. It looks like the law cited above refers to Ammo, not magazines, right? So the reporter would not be violating that unless he had ammo in the magazine.

  8. on December 24, 2012
    A lazy Saturday morning in Sacremento, California was interrupted by a gun fight Saturday in a Sacramento man’s front yard. Three men, armed to the teeth, were attempting to break into his house, but the homeowner decided his life and property were worth defending. Not to mention the group of kids that were reportedly for a sleepover. CBS Sacremento picks up the story . . .
    Police say around 3:30 a.m. Saturday, armed suspects burst into a home on Haven Court, trying to rob those inside. Instead, one of the homeowners would grab a gun, and after an exchange of gunfire, the homeowner and two suspects would be wounded, while another suspect was shot dead.
    Against three attackers, the homeowner killed one and wounded the other two attackers before being shot himself.

    From the local ABC affiliate:

    When officers arrived, they found one robbery suspect fatally wounded; the suspect was pronounced dead at the scene. The homeowner was also shot and was transported a hospital with non-life threatening injuries.

    Another robbery suspect, 21 year old Thomas Ordonaz, who was injured in the shooting was later arrested on charges of assault with a deadly weapon and accessory.

    A third person showed up at a local hospital with gunshot wounds. It’s unclear how this person is connected to the incident, but was detained by police, Morse said.

    There’s a rising number of home invasions where the robbers kill any and all occupants they find to try and cover their tracks. So there’s a good chance that the father saved the lives of his family and the other children on Saturday by resisting the forces of evil using his constitutionally protected right to bear arms. The same rights the president and members of Congress are working so hard to limit.

    Three attackers. Three armed men trying to get inside a house, determined to separate the homeowners from their possessions by any means possible. Tell me that limiting magazine capacity to 10 rounds makes sense when there are three armed men on your doorstep.

  9. Long Island Mike makes a very good point about the media message, I think. I’ve read Correia’s blog – and we ought to be plastering it all over the internet and find a way to get this out in the traditional media. (He has gotten an overwhelming response already). I’m thinking about sending it on to my Congressmen/women… and even our new governor. Preaching to the choir, just isn’t good enough right now.

    It’s encouraging to me, to see how many “new” shooters are part of the wave of Christmas Rush and Panic Buying that’s going on. I’ve been trying to talk to as many as I can (as they wait in line) in stores… they have a lot of questions, need education and mentoring, and support from more experienced shooters (even someone who considers herself still a newbie, like me). But the one question they have already answered for themselves is: should I buy a gun? The reasons behind that answer are the interesting part. The one I hear the most often is “I wanted to, while I still can” followed by “I need to protect myself”.

    Merry Christmas to all!

  10. “high powered bow and arrow”


    Reference the second photo: If you take a picture of an apartment after the bomb squad has been through, it’s liable to be “messy.”

    My wife’s a reporter. I’d get her opinion of this “story,” but I don’t want to spoil her Christmas.

  11. Posted on December 25, 2012
    Webster Police Chief Gerald Pickering said Tuesday that 62-year-old William Spengler was [illegally] armed with a .223-caliber Bushmaster rifle, a .38-caliber revolver and a 12-gauge shotgun in Monday’s ambush,” reports. “Spengler killed two firefighters and wounded two others before fatally shooting himself.” Crucially, perhaps, “Police have not said which weapon or weapons were used to shoot the firefighters.” That said Pickering told the press it was “likely” the killer used the Bushmaster. At the moment, the mainstream media has focused its main attention on Spengler’s suicide note which read (in part): “I still have to get ready to see how much of the neighborhood I can burn down and do what I like doing best – killing people.” In 1981, Spengler pleaded guilty to manslaughter for bludgeoning his 92-year-old grandmother to death with a hammer. He was imprisoned until 1998. Supervised parole expired in 2006.

  12. D.C. Police Warned NBC NOT To Use Magazine on Meet The Press, NBC Ignored Warning
    Posted on December 26, 2012
    There’s news from Politico that NBC had contacted the Washington D.C. police department prior to Sunday’s show to inquire about the legality of using a standard capacity magazine on the show as a prop. It appears that NBC was warned NOT to use the magazine (since it was a violation of D.C. gun law) but they went ahead and did it anyway. From Politico:
    NBC was told by the Washington, D.C., police that it was “not permissible” to show a high-capacity gun magazine on air before Sunday’s “Meet the Press,” according to a statement Wednesday from the cops.
    “NBC contacted [the D.C. Metropolitan Police Department] inquiring if they could utilize a high capacity magazine for their segment,” Gwendolyn Crump, a police spokeswoman, said in an email. “NBC was informed that possession of a high capacity magazine is not permissible and their request was denied. This matter is currently being investigated.” So they knew ahead of time that possession of the magazine was illegal, but they went ahead and did it anyway. Ain’t that just the height of hubris, to assume that the 4th estate is above the law?

  13. BREAKING: ATF OK’ed NBC Gregory’s Illegal AR-15 Magazine Stunt

    Posted on December 27, 2012 by Robert Farago
    “NBC evidently got conflicting guidance from federal and local law enforcement officials about the legality of displaying an empty gun magazine on ‘Meet the Press,’ according to statements by the agencies involved. An official with the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives told CNN that he relayed information to NBC from the Washington Metropolitan Police Department that displaying an empty gun magazine was legal. Meanwhile, an MPD spokeswoman said her department told NBC such a display would be illegal. It was not clear in what order NBC received the communications. NBC declined again on Thursday to comment on the matter.” The ATF told CNN . . .
    . . . that a reporter with NBC News – not Gregory – called ATF last Friday to inquire whether it would be legal to have ammunition or an empty magazine on the set of the Sunday show, which is broadcast from Washington.

    The ATF official said he reached out to officers with the MPD to ask if that was permissible.

    “What was relayed back to me – which turned out to be a miscommunication – is ammunition was not legal unless (in the possession of an officer), but a magazine was not a problem,” said the official, who passed along the information to NBC.

    If I remember correctly, ignorance is no excuse under the law. Unless, of course, it is.

  14. I have read several reports that the Bushmaster rifle was not used in the CN massacre, that four pistols were found in the school, but the rifle was found unused, in the trunk of the car he drove to the scene.

  15. @Michigan Swampdog – Me too. We’ll probably never hear the truth from any of the MSM news agencies.

  16. From gun owners of America

    Harry Reid Prepares to Annihilate Second Amendment

    On Election Day last November, several Democrat Senators were campaigning for reelection in pro-gun states. And in order to get their constituents’ votes, they promised fealty to the Second Amendment.

    Well, on November 6, Democrat Senators Joe Manchin (WV), Bob Casey (PA) and Jon Tester (MT) all won their respective elections. These seats, among others, were crucial to helping Harry Reid return to the top post in the Senate.

    But only a month after the election returns were tallied, the Senate — under Majority Leader Harry Reid’s control — is now crusading to implement:

    * Gun bans on semiautomatic firearms and magazines;

    * An effective ban on gun shows;

    * A ban on private gun sales, without going through a gun dealer; and,

    * Changes in the Senate rules which would allow them to ban guns with a mere 50 Senate votes.

    This last proposal is particularly insidious. Gun grabbers are not going to be able to get 60 votes to break a Senate filibuster of gun control. But, with the help of fake “pro-gun” Senate Democrats, they may be able to get 50.

    So the question of whether Senate Democrats will need 50 votes or 60 votes will determine whether gun control -– and much of Obama’s agenda -– will be slammed through and passed into law.

    This brings us to the “nuclear option.”

    This is a trick which anti-gun Democrats intend to use the first day of the Senate session in order to obliterate the Senate rules and clear the way for 50-vote passage of gun control.

    Your senator’s vote on the “nuclear option” may be the most important gun-related vote he casts during the 113th Congress. It may be the difference between whether Obama can secure Senate passage of gun bans, magazine bans, gun show bans, and bans on private gun sales.

    Anti-gun Democrats will try to tell you that the Senate is just following its precedents.

    But that’s a bald-faced lie. As Democrats made clear during the Bush administration when the Republicans were contemplating the “nuclear option,” the nuclear option has been threatened, but the trigger has never been pulled.

    Anti-gun Democrats will try to tell you that the “nuclear option” can only be invoked on the first day.

    That’s a lie. Senate Rule 5, Paragraph 2, provides that the Senate rules continue from one Congress to the next, unless changed by 67 votes (needed to break a filibuster of rules changes). If the Senate can use brute force to obliterate Rule 5 by 50 votes, it can use brute force to obliterate any rule at any time by 50 votes.

    This is a major vote that will have huge ramifications for our republic. Our gun rights are just one of the many freedoms that are on the chopping block right now. And if Harry Reid can squelch his opposition by nuking the filibuster, it will be the first step towards completely obliterating our Constitution.

    ACTION: Contact your Senators and tell them that the vote on the “nuclear option” will be the most important gun control vote of the 113th Congress. Urge them to vote AGAINST changing the Senate rules. Tell them to vote AGAINST the “nuclear option.”

    You may also phone the United States Capitol switchboard at (202) 224-3121. A switchboard operator will connect you directly with the Senate office you request.