Recently got home from the 2013 Polite Society event, a/k/a National Tactical Conference, in Memphis. A symposium like this allows you to recharge your batteries and remember what you fight for. There were roughly 150 attendees – 25 of them teaching – and damn near all of them were carrying loaded guns the whole time. The name of the conference comes from a Robert Heinlein quote popularized by armsmaster Jeff Cooper: “An armed society is a polite society.” One quick translation of that is, creatures with fangs and claws do not see other creatures with fangs and claws as prey…and unless it’s a mating issue or a turf issue, they generally leave them the hell alone.
There were too many fine presentations to relate here, though each is discussed on an upcoming ProArms podcast that four of our crew who attended were able to record in the car on the way home. Yes, the drive of eleven hours each way was more than worth it for what we got out of the conference. It is not “up” yet, but should be soon; patience appreciated.
Many of the presenters and attendees alike were cops or retired cops. Across the board, there was unanimous agreement that the current trend toward private citizen disarmament was deplorable and wrong-headed. Host Tom Givens, the founder of the program, made a telling point: real-world analysis of violent crime indicates about a one-in-thirty chance that any individual American will face it at some time in his or her life. (Virtually ALL of the presenters had come face to face with it already, one reason they were selected to teach.) Tom pointed out that over the years, sixty or more of his civilian graduates have been involved in lethal force encounters. All but two prevailed and survived. The two who didn’t prevail, died. Not coincidentally, those were the two who were unarmed when it happened. Tom reminded us all of the advice of Jeff Cooper’s acolyte Mark Moritz, a gun-wise attorney: “The first rule of gunfighting is, Have A Gun!”
The eclectic program encompassed emergency first responder trauma care for gunshot wounds, stabs and lacerations, and blunt trauma injury, taught by MDs. It included a veteran psychologist on one side and a homicide investigator on the other delineating how human predators think and act. There was hand-to-hand work, and knife awareness, and recognition of assaultive behavior cues. There was aftermath management: the blocs I taught revolved around lessons learned in some of the more recent homicide trials I’ve been involved in, including one a month ago, all of which were killings done in defense of self and/or others. (And yes, in each case the jury agreed.) The veteran cop who talked about “active shooter” scenarios deplored the fact that this has become the terminology, since human monsters such as those should be considered “active killers” or indeed, “active mass-murderers.” He had been involved in two such incidents himself, both of which ended in the quick death of the monsters as soon as they were confronted with lethal force resistance, and he quite pointedly noted that some of the cases under discussion were ended by armed citizens who saved countless lives.
Time with people who understand the ugly reality of having to stop murderers, is time well spent for those who may have to one day face such murderers.
And “those who may have to one day face such murderers” includes everyone reading this, and indeed, everyone, period.
Thanks to Tom Givens and his team for making this top-tier level of training available to law-abiding private citizens, as well as the many cops who were in attendance. Next year’s program will be held on February 21-23, 2014 in Memphis, and you can get more information from the Rangemaster Website.
The RangeMaster complex in Memphis had room to train 150 good people.
Jon Hodoway gave an excellent lecture on the survival capabilities that can be found in an ordinary smart phone.
J
Ever heard of SouthNarc? He’s retired from police work now, so I can finally publish his picture…and I’ve long recommended his street-wise training.
Here, I’m briefing the audience on lessons learned from recent homicide trials. On screen is the Ruger .45 used in a self-defense shooting.
Mas, as a retired big city cop after a 34 year career, I bring some modicum of experience to the conversation of always being armed. Like most police officers, I seldom went unarmed when “off-duty”. I never once was challenged for carrying. Why? Because it was always concealed. The point is this; if you are a normal, law- abiding citizen you are very unlikely to ever be searched unless you go into a building where you know you are subject to being searched( federal buildings, courts,airports, etc). After concealed carry laws came about, business owners were allowed to “post” their premises making it “off limits” to permit holders, but these violations fell under the misdemeanor laws of criminal trespass which required a verbal warning for first offense and only applied to that location. As friends and family members got their licenses and would ask my advice, I would tell them this (one of the few times I advised ignoring the law); let your conscience be your guide, but unless you act a fool, no one will ever know, and if you must use it to defend yourself or someone else, at least in Texas, no one will question where the weapon came from as long as you were righteous when you used it. I long for the day when common sense returns to this country. Once upon a time I could tell a young rookie; if it looks wrong. it probably is, if it is something you would have done yourself, even if it is against the law, that’s where “officer discretion” comes into play. I hope training officers are still giving that advice.
Great article Mas. Sounds like it was a great conference. Jon Hodoway hasn’t chaned much in the 10 years since I have seen him. Thanks for sharing….
How I envy you Mas.
LA Times: Gun Rights Activists are Worse Than Terrorists, Need to Be Monitored
Posted on March 10, 2013
There’s no surprise that the Los Angeles Times is heavily biased against gun owners. California is already a hotbed of civilian disarmament, and the idea of the peasants rising up against their rulers doesn’t sit well with the California elite. So, when the top brass at the Angeles Times saw tens of thousands of law abiding gun owners rallying to protect their civil rights, they damn near browned their pants. And in an unsigned editorial entitled Peril from ‘Patriots’, they’ve equated these gun rights supporters with terrorists.
There are, in increasingly frightening numbers, cells of angry men in the United States preparing for combat with the U.S. government. They are usually heavily armed, blinded by an intractable hatred, often motivated by religious zeal.They’re not jihadists. They are white, right-wing Americans, nearly all with an obsessive attachment to guns, who may represent a greater danger to the lives of American civilians than international terrorists.
There’s no basis for that statement. The Southern Poverty Law Center (which is cited in the article) talks about an uptick in “patriot” groups, but is overly broad in their definition. And for an example of how dangerous these groups are, the LA Times uses the example of the Oklahoma City Bombings as these groups “showing their teeth” when that was in reality one guy’s lone wolf plot. In reality, I can’t think of a single instance of a “patriot” group ever actually attacking anything in the United States. But that’s not stopping the LA Times from spreading fear of gun owning citizens. Patriot groups are motivated by a host of anti-government attitudes, but their primary focus is guns. They are convinced that the government is out to seize their weapons, even though most legislation is focused on keeping guns out of the hands of criminals or restricting the types of weapons that can be sold.
False. Gun control legislation has and will never be an effective means of keeping guns out of the hands of criminals. By definition, it only impacts law abiding citizens. And yet, the LA Times doesn’t understand why people don’t agree with their “sensible” and “common sense” approach to civilian disarmament.Many are also united by belief in an outlandish one-world government conspiracy theory positing that the United Nations is poised to strip away American property rights and impose socialism on us all.
Some do, but no more than Democrats that believe that crystal triangles hold mystical powers. I can trot out the crazies on each side of the aisle, but I try to keep from making sweeping judgments about people based on the people that agree with their point of view.The typical patriot acts within his free-speech and 2nd Amendment rights, and in fact most patriot activity consists of venting steam by meeting with like-minded Neanderthals and firing off blog posts threatening civil war. Nice. In one sentence the LA Times derides “bloggers” as not being journalists, and calls everyone who owns a gun a “Neanderthal.” Way to keep it classy, there.
Yet such blather tends to get under the skin of the Timothy McVeighs of the world. These groups should be closely monitored, with resources adequate to the task, even if it means shifting some homeland security money from the hunt for foreign terrorists.
Apparently gun owners need to be under DHS surveillance. Because infringing on our fundamental right to bear arms isn’t good enough, but because of our political beliefs we don’t have a right to privacy either. I guess civil rights are only for people the LA Times agrees with . . .
Just a thought? If we want to keep mentaly ill from having guns then why do we not keep mentaly defective politations from passing gun coutrol bills? Many of these proposed bills are so off the wall they must have come from people with out a full deck. Rig th now there are thirty bills being c onsidered in WA State. The plan is to flood the capital with so many that a few may slip through the cracks and become law. No matter how real law enforcment people not political chief’s and sherrifs feel about all this they are still must uphold even the bad laws or risk loosing their job’s THey all need our backing and support at a time when they are tested by the right and wrong of laws thrust upon them. Dooing the dirty work of politations is not a good thing.
CO Sheriff: Dems Threaten Salary Cap Over Opposition to Gun Control
Posted on March 10, 2013
During a radio interview on the Jeff Crank show KVOR (6:40 above), El Paso County Sheriff Terry Maketa claimed he received an email from the offices of the County Sheriffs of Colorado threatening to stop or stall pay raises to the state’s elected sheriffs if they don’t support Colorado’s pending gun control legislation. After the interview, Maketa back-pedaled on his Facebook page as follows . . .
I want to take this opportunity to let you all know that I very much appreciate your support. I believe all of us share a passion for all of our Constitutional rights, including our right to bear arms. Unfortunately, we have a liberal majority in control of our legislative process, who without any statistical data, empirical evidence, or studies to support their gun control agenda, will do what it takes to pass these control measures.
I want to make something very clear; I have not been directly threatened or coerced in any way nor would I tolerate any threat. A message delivered verbally to a representative of the Colorado Sheriff’s Association basically stated that the Senate Dems are very upset with the Colorado Sheriffs opposing the gun legislation proposed by the Senate Democrats. This message insinuated that this could negatively affect the salary bill which has been delayed and put off by the Democrats with the excuse that they would expect bipartisan support.
I do believe the salary proposal is being held hostage and I believe that if they’re willing to send gun control measures without bipartisan support then they should be willing to take a stand as the majority leadership and follow a democrat-created commission’s recommendations. It is the democrats’ created commission, which was put in place by Gov. Ritter. That same commission has gone to the legislature on a couple other occasions since its formation to increase the salaries of sheriffs and other elected officials. These salaries have not been increased since they were legislated in 2006.
I find it so ironic that they have withheld bringing this forward as legislation and taking formal action, especially in light of a double standard they hold with gun control. This inaction, and other vague insinuations, I take as quid pro quo. They are holding the salary of sheriffs hostage to gain compliance with gun control matters. I assure you that there is not a legislator on the dems’ side of the isle that will take ownership of this injustice, nor will they know where it came from, but their inaction will speak volumes.
This salary proposal or recommendation has no bearing on me personally as it does not affect me since I am term limited. Again, I want to make it clear this is not about me, or any threats made directly toward me; this is about doing what’s right and we have many sheriffs around this state standing their ground and defending law abiding citizens. These proposed laws will not increase public safety or save lives.
Rather than create laws that criminalize law abiding citizens or infringe on due process and property rights, we should be targeting criminals. We should target those who have a history of crime and a history of violence, not erode Constitutional rights nor punish law-abiding citizens, disarm them or restrict their rights. Gun control doesn’t work. Chicago is a great example, one of which our president never mentions or uses as an example.
Countless studies conducted by DOJ, the Urban Institute and even the American Journal of Medicine show gun control does not work, it only controls law abiding citizens and that’s not where we should be focused. They claim these measures will stop future mass shootings, when in fact they will not. Had these same measures been in place in any of the states where these tragedies took place, the outcomes would have been the same.
I want to thank all of you for your support and I think together we can stand firm, we can be heard, and we can make a difference. We cannot let up, we cannot give up and we cannot fall to the rhetoric they’re trying to spread. I will stand tall for you, and with you, and ask all of you to do the same. Government should be for the people, not against the people.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mHzx3ZyXRWw&feature=player_embedded
The Most Fckued-Up New York Times Article On Guns Ever Published
Posted on March 10, 2013
“The national debate over firearms regulation is often presented as a battle of extremes: those who view any effort to tighten gun laws as an infringement of rights versus those who see guns as a menace to society,” writer Susan Saulny writes at nytimes.com. “But gun owners like Michael Kundu come from a largely unexplored middle ground — a place of nuance and contradiction.” Unexplored because you can’t count on one hand the kind of people Ms. Saulny has somehow managed to unearth for her expose. To wit: “Mr. Kundu is a master marksman from rural Washington who owns pistols and assault rifles for self-defense, all while claiming to detest the presence of guns in his life and in the broader American culture. ‘I’d love to see all guns destroyed,’ he said. “But I’m not giving up mine first.” It gets worse . . .
Other gun owners interviewed for this article expressed similar reservations, citing their enjoyment of hunting or of introducing family members to the sport while expressing support for stricter gun control legislation. Mr. Kundu, for instance, supports a ban on the kind of assault weapon that he owns, a rifle manufactured by Panther Arms.
OK then. Anyone else?
Kay H. Wilson, a blogger in Waco, Tex., who recently wrote a post about her “love-hate relationship with guns,” said, “We need people to speak up.” Ms. Wilson describes herself as “a pretty good dang shot” when she practices her aim at a family farm in West Texas, but also said, “I’m no lover of the personal handgun.”
While she and her husband, Richard, have a gun in their suburban home for personal protection, they store it and the bullets in separate rooms. And Ms. Wilson acknowledges that she would sooner throw her cat at an intruder than shoot someone. The gun does not make her feel safer.
Ban assault cats! But seriously, where did Susan find these people? And yes, there are more.
Sonia Wolff, a novelist in Los Angeles, felt compelled to buy a pistol a few years ago for self-defense, a decision she wrote about in The Los Angeles Times. “I had never wanted a gun,” the introduction states. “Now I own a Smith & Wesson revolver. Why?”
The short answer, she said in an interview, was, “When push comes to shove, I’d rather have one.”
But she added, “If I had my way in the best of all worlds, nobody would have a gun.”
Any more? All done. Nope.
John Flores and Patricia Speed, a married couple in San Francisco, own two 9-millimeter handguns and a Winchester Model 70 rifle because they have recently come to enjoy shooting at ranges. They say they enjoy the concentration it takes to be a good marksman and find the practice relaxing.
But as first-time gun owners, they say they were shocked by how easily they bought the guns and feel uncomfortable about storing them — even unloaded in a locked safe — in their home.
“It freaked me out how easy it was to buy a gun,” said Ms. Speed, 30, a graphic designer. “I think it’s harder to get an iPhone than it is a gun. Now I’m a gun owner who believes there needs to be way more regulation.”
This fear and self-loathing reminds of nothing so much as the members of my tribe who’d dressed Preppy and spoke like Thurston Howell III to hide their Jewish roots.
Anyway, if I may sum this up: I want a gun but people like me shouldn’t have one. And that includes you. Is that really what we’re up against?
Will you be at next years event, Mas? I moved north to Georgia, so it’s a lot closer for me to drive, now.
Matt, I’m already scheduled to be there next year, as both student and one of the instructors. 🙂 Hope to see ya there.
It was nice to see you again Mas. I enjoyed your presentation. Very informative and entertaining at the same time. 🙂
It was a great event. I salute Tom Givens, his wife and the staff of Rangemaster for hosting such a great event.
Good report Mas, and it was good to see you again. You put on a very informative class, BTW, thanks for that.
Great presentation Mas. That really was a great three days of training. I hope to make it down next year as well!
Hi Mas:
I have enjoyed your gun articles. your class was great and I learned a lot. Also, know all the instructors have forgotten more than I will ever know!
Just bought your 2013 Handgun guide and enjoying it. The Polite Society is so encouraging and as a “1st Time” attender will be back next year for more “gun camp.”
Regards,
Terri
p.s. please email about your gun guide.
Mas,
Could you post a link for information on these training classes?
Thanks.
Mike
Patrick:
The LA Times would be referring to people like those in the Michigan Militia. I admire them and have learned a lot from their website. They are open about their beliefs and training, and they even invite FBI agents and anyone who wants to spy on them to join them at their gatherings. The Michigan Militia say they don’t do anything illegal, so they have nothing to hide. Everything is there on their website for all the world to see.
Richard:
It is possible for liberal journalists to make up stories in order to brainwash their readers. It may be that those people mentioned in the NY Times article are fictitious. I know you and I wouldn’t lie in print, but someone who believes they are helping to bring about a Marxist Utopia would certainly use lies to further their cause. I can’t prove this, just a hunch. If those gun owners are for real they must be slowly evolving from scared liberals to knowledgeable, patriotic, confident conservatives.
Mike, the next Polite Society event is scheduled for February 21-13, 2014 in Memphis; information will be available at http://www.rangemaster.com.
Terri, I think you’re referring to the Complete Book of Handguns 2013; it’s available from Harris Publications in New York City, and can generally be found at Barnes & Noble and other periodical shelves.
Thank you Mas.
I missed the link on the first readthrough.
Mike
For those who may not know, firearms trainer and LEO John Farnam usually does a good job of posting Polite Society reviews, too, over on his defense-training.com site. Between the stuff from John and Mas, it’s the next best thing to being there!
As for the quote by the lawyer regarding always have a gun, I’d another good phrase to keep in mind is “always have a lawyer!” You’ll need one even if you’ve been in a righteous shooting!
and now… on to Shumer’s Background Check bill…
http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2013/03/foghorn/breaking-details-of-shumers-mandatory-background-check-bill-s-374/#.UT_Krt3LQd4.facebook
I’ve got to say that this is about as from “common sense” in it’s provisions, as suspending a kid, because he took a bite out of a pop tart and someone idiot adult said: OMG – that looks just like a gun!! or the kid who was suspended for even talking about toy guns…
:: shakes head ::
“An armed society is a polite society.” I feel safer at the gun club than anywhere else, including my own home because everyone is armed and does conduct themselves respectfully of everyone else.