So I went to a local gun show today, mostly looking for magazines and the availability and price of certain ammunition, but I was also surveying prices for all manner of guns.  I offer up a number of observations in no particular order.

For pistols, sellers still focus their stock in the cheap, plastic, striker-fired guns with crunchy, crappy triggers.  Good, high quality 1911s are just not carried by the folks looking to push large quantities of inventory (and rely on quantity rather than quality and larger markups for their profits).  And yes, I consider most if not all polymer handguns cheap plastic guns (with the exception of FN because their .45 tactical is a hammer gun and the FN 5.7 is an internal hammer gun).

The prices of rack (budget) ARs have not changed in months, or even years.  The prices aren’t going to get lower.  The prices of higher end ARs have not changed in months, or even years.  I suspect the prices aren’t going to get lower.  If anything, I expect the prices of the higher end ARs (Daniel Defense, Rock River Arms, FN, etc.) to creep slightly higher over the next few months, and then take off within a year or a little longer.

Good chassis bolt action guns are expensive, many as expensive as ARs.

There was plenty of ammunition for sale if you were looking for 55 gr. 5.56 mm / .223, .308, .45, 9 mm or the standard soft point hunting rounds.  Everything else is an esoteric round to them and few dealers had much else.  For more out-of-the-ordinary rounds like 77-gr. 5.56 mm, 5.7X28, .45 SMC (which I was looking for, finding none at all), and even some run-of-the-mill PD pistol rounds for 9 mm and .45 that you can get at Gander Outdoors, Cabela’s, or Bass Pro Shop, you may have to rely on mail order if you don’t want to pay a visit to aforementioned large stores.  Shipping ammunition is expensive because of the weight.  When you drive near the aforementioned large stores, always consider buying ammunition because you don’t know when you’ll be back if you don’t live near one.

Overall, there were about a third less tables than usual, and the crowd was thinner than usual.  It all felt rather bleak and depressing.  My assessment: the gun owning public is asleep at the wheel.  Give this until after the mid-term elections and it will all turn around, and it will peak at a frenzy as we near the presidential election.  The GOP shouldn’t expect to carry Florida and North Carolina again.

Get what you need while you can.

News from Vancouver:

A Chilliwack couple is taking the law into their own hands by shooting paintballs at the thieves who repeatedly rob them.

It’s a desperate tactic that police say could be illegal in most circumstances — but Rob and Nicole Iezzi say they’ve already tried everything else.

“This is a constant problem. It’s an escalating problem in our town,” said Nicole.

The couple say they are not taking this step lightly, saying they have been robbed of iPods, hand tools, Leathermans, and attachments for their truck, at a cost of thousands. One friend’s purse was also stolen from their truck in their driveway, resulting in identity theft.

The thieves have hurt them too, pepper-spraying Nicole in her doorway in a bid to steal her cellphone, and clubbing their Rottweiler to death in the yard when it challenged them.

They tried calling the police, putting up security cameras, improving their fences, and put in better locks but the thieves keep coming back.

So that’s when they decided to fight back — with a paintball gun.

Videos the couple has posted online show them rushing out to challenge thieves, firing paint at them as the thieves scurry away on their bicycles. Even Nicole has fired at one, shooting as he left on the street.

“He came this way and I just pop, pop, pop,” she said.

The couple said they take no pleasure in firing at thieves — just hoping to send the message that their property is not to be trifled with. It was only after some deliberation that Rob, who has a firearms license, decided on paintballs.

“I didn’t want to shoot him with a pellet gun, because you’re going to make him bleed. With a paintball, it’s like getting punched. I didn’t want to punch him, so a paintball seemed like the logical thing,” he said.

It also doesn’t go through walls and won’t hurt a neighbour, he said.

But Chilliwack RCMP are warning that vigilante justice could be dangerous and illegal.

“We understand that people are frustrated,” said Const. Tracey Wolbeck.

Shooting paintballs could escalate a nonviolent property offense into a violent crime, Wplbeck said, and the thief could react, putting the property owner in danger.

On top of that, attacking someone with a paintball could be considered an assault, potentially resulting in charges.

“In extreme cases we could see assault with a weapon,” Wolbeck said.

The cops are doing what cops always do.  I just think it’s too bad they didn’t use real guns and kill the perpetrators.

If weapons control is inherently wicked, and I believe it is, it is wicked in the superlative to require peaceable men and women to sit defenseless and allow themselves to be abused by savages while the state prefers criminals over productive, law-abiding citizens.

The government who would do this is a worker of evil and should be overthrown and the government workers hanged for cosmic treason against God’s Holy law.

Via David Codrea, this from Stamboulieh Law.

A few days ago (yes, days), I submitted a FOIA to ATF and FBI regarding bumpstocks and the Las Vegas shooting.  Today I received a CD with 777 pages of information, which you can review at the following links:

Volume 1

Volume 2

Volume 3

Volume 4

What shouldn’t even need to be said is that I haven’t had time to slog and crawl through all of this information.  A little reader assistance would be nice.

No, I’m not talking about the kind who wants to see everyone follow the rules of gun safety, as well as specific range rules.  I’m talking about this kind.

The guy wasn’t overly aggressive but before I even got all gear out he spotted my AR pistol with a KAK brace. he came right over and said “i don’t want to see that touch your shoulder, if you don’t like it you can leave” . The range was packed so I thought it rather funny how fast he zeroed in on my evil pistol that should not be owned by plebs like myself.

He then proceeds with an ignorant quip about it being a federal offense to not have the proper paperwork blah blah. I didnt argue I just smiled and said “ok”. I fired off a few from a cheekweld so he could get his powertrip ego stroked which worked and he left me alone. Seems like these types of people are all the same and predictable.

As soon as my yearly pass is over I will be taking my money elsewhere maybe a less fuddworthy range nearby. Just kind of astounds me that someone who spends as much time around firearms is ignorant of the law.

What a dick.  I hope they go out of business.

The Washington Times:

Reversing the usual script, Democrats praised one of President Trump’s federal appeals court nominees Wednesday while Republicans brought the tough questions for Mark Jeremy Bennett over his defense of gun control laws and free speech rights.

Mr. Bennett, a former Hawaii attorney general now nominated to the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, had backed a limited interpretation of Second Amendment rights that was overturned by the Supreme Court.

Sen. Ted Cruz, Texas Republican, also questioned Mr. Bennett over opposition to Citizens United, the Supreme Court case that overturned campaign finance restrictions and helped pave the way for the current system.

“You took positions, taking a very narrow view of what the First Amendment protects,” Mr. Cruz told him during a confirmation hearing in the Senate Judiciary Committee.

Usually it’s Democrats who fire the tough questions at Mr. Trump’s judicial picks, but Mr. Bennett won praise from them.

[ … ]

The Alliance for Justice, which has led the fight against Trump judicial nominees, said Mr. Bennett is an exception, and they won’t oppose him.

David Codrea makes the following remarks.

Just being a highly-placed Hawaiian political nominee ought to raise red flags. The state is a “leader” in citizen disarmament. If they ever do have another real catastrophe there, most citizens are going to find out how badly those who have been defrauding them of their birthrights have screwed them.

Add to that the fact that the Ninth Circuit, widely recognized as one of the most “progressive” (read “anti-gun”) courts, recently lost the one sane voice it had on the Second Amendment with the #MeToo-pressured resignation of Judge Alex Kozinski.

Obama gave us Fast & Furious, a number of very bad judges, and a lot of anti-gun rhetoric.  In a short tenure thus far Trump has given us a good justice on the Supreme Court, a bump stock ban, and new funding for the CDC to pump out anti-gun propaganda.

Ignoring words and focusing on actions, if the two presidents were in a contest to see who had done the most damage to observation of our gun rights, I’d be hard pressed to pick a winner.

There are some who might claim that being the 3D chess player Trump is, he is baiting the Senate, who didn’t oppose the bump stock ban, and some of whom will face reelection soon, to turn this nominee away and thus burnish their second amendment credentials before the election.

This view suffers from two fatal errors.  First, Trump himself will face reelection in the coming several years, and will need the support as badly or worse than the Senators he allegedly is trying to help.  Some of the gun owning public will remember this nomination.

Second, there is always the chance (and it may in fact be the highest probability) that the Senate won’t turn this nominee away and we end up with yet another totalitarian at the appeals level.

The contrary view is more likely.  This is who Trump is.  He is supposedly a supporter of the second amendment because he had enough money to pay lawyers to get him a concealed handgun permit, and because he sat for an interview with Field & Stream where he showed a predilection towards Fudds.

I wish I could say that seldom has the bar been so low for gun owners to lend their support to a candidate.  But that would be a lie.  The only historic limitation on gun owners whoring themselves out has been the availability of opportunities to do so.

Burlington Free Press:

Vermont gun shop owners reacted with anger and disappointment Thursday to the new gun laws signed by Gov. Phil Scott on Wednesday …

Adam Nilson co-founded Atlas Gunworks in North Ferrisburgh in 2016, together with his partner, Tod West, making competition handguns that start at about $4,000. Nilson said his business has doubled its revenue each year, and that he expects to do $2 million in business this year. He has 8 employees.

But they might soon not be working here.

“We’re going to leave,” Nilson said. “It was hard enough to do business here when Vermont was gun-friendly. Seeing how fast they did what they did, the writing’s on the wall. We don’t feel welcome here.”

Gov. Phil Scott signed the new gun laws Wednesday in an outdoor public ceremony in front of the Statehouse, facing a hostile crowd of gun-rights activists, together with supporters of the legislation.

Nilson, who grew up in Colchester, said he’s considering moving to Tennessee, West Virginia or North or South Carolina, “somewhere where they’re gun friendly.”

[ … ]

Henry Parro, who supported Scott with a $200 donation to his campaign from his business, said he was going to “reserve comment” on the new gun laws until he gets an interpretation of the laws from his attorney.

Like Datillio, Parro said he has “thousands” of high capacity magazines that would become illegal after Oct. 1.

[ … ]

One of the provisions in the new laws requires universal background checks for private sales. People who want to transfer a gun privately must visit a federal firearms licensee for the background check. There are exceptions for immediate family members and law enforcement.

Pidgeon said he will not be offering background checks for private sales.

“Anger and disappointment?”  What?  Where were you guys earlier before this abomination was signed?  He told you he was going to do it.  How can you now be disappointed that he did what he said he would do?

At any rate, as I said before, move South like all other gun manufacturing.  The North will have nothing left.  That’s perfectly fine with me.  Rock River Arms, Mossberg, Remington, Kimber, Springfield Armory?  Why are you still there?

The great thing about the ban is that if law abiding and peaceable citizens can no longer get standard capacity magazines, neither can the criminals, and so everyone will be on a level playing field when it comes to home invasions.  And since there is now universal background checks, the criminals probably won’t even be able to get guns.

That’s true, right?  The criminals can’t get them, neither guns nor standard capacity magazines.  Right?  And a level playing field between peaceable men and criminals is a good thing, right?  Each has an equal chance of winning, statistically speaking?  Everybody will play fairly, right?

St. Louis Post-Dispatch:

Religious leaders across denominations spoke out in St. Louis on Wednesday against pending legislation that would allow concealed weapons in places of worship in Missouri without permission of the clergy.

“The bill would broaden Second Amendment rights at the expense of the First Amendment right of religious liberty,” said Most Rev. Robert Carlson, archbishop of St. Louis, who presides over some 500,000 Roman Catholics in the region.

What a strange thing.  The law doesn’t mandate that churches allow weapons, and since this is private property I support that because I support property rights.

What the law does is force them to post since this property usually comes with understood open invitations to join the services.  In other words, the “clergy” here doesn’t want the public to know their position, or at least be forced to wonder.

Perhaps they also don’t like the fact that in an ironic twist they are announcing the fact that they have decided to leave themselves without protection of any kind and thus a shooting gallery for would-be perpetrators.

I think it’s a wonderful thing that congregants and parishioners can now tell if they should enter at their own risk as soon as they set foot on the property.  I think it’s sad that the rest of the folk have been left with no protection.

These clergy aren’t clergy at all.  The churches are open sepulchers with dead men preaching to dead congregants.  They have no wisdom, no discernment, and couldn’t care less about the law of God, the pinnacle of which is the law of love, or protecting and caring for those around you.

Did a wonderful meetup with @WRSA tonight at my home.  He drove much farther than I would have liked to meet me face-to-face and for us to get to know each other better.  It’ll be my turn next time.

What a wonderful man, and wonderful time together.  We talked philosophy, theology, hardware, the state of things in our country, PT, our own history, and good cooking, among many other things.  And I think he enjoyed the chicken and broccoli casserole I made for him.

I’m very blessed that I have people in my life who would make efforts like that to meet me and get to know me.  While cyberspace is okay, it’s no replacement for face-to-face meetings, time together, and simple relaxation with friends.

You MUST do that with your friends, but also make a decided and determined effort to do that with those who are not as close as you would like.  You will need them in the future, and they you.

News4SA.com:

OLMOS PARK — The video has gone viral. Open Carry Texas President CJ Grisham and several other members were along the streets of Olmos Park protesting their right to carry a loaded gun.

Grisham and two other men were arrested by Olmos Park police, facing various charges including resisting arrest and assaulting a peace officer.

“He was legally carrying and they are drawing down on him like he is a terrorist, he had his hands up and he is backing away, which they will say he is resisting arrest, but doesn’t everyone back up from a threat,” said Open Carry Texas member Felix Cano.

Open Carry Texas says they were protesting a Olmos Park city ordinance that prohibited anyone other than law enforcement to carry a loaded rifle or shotgun on public streets. Thursday City Council voted unanimously to repeal that ordinance.

“The City of Olmos Park had from a long time ago put in place an ordinance that none of the current council members were involved with, regarding not allowing those two types of weapons to be loaded,” said Olmos Park City Council member Enzo Pellegrino.

Open Carry Texas says this was a victory for them.

“There shouldn’t be any more illegal arrests and throwing down Americans that are legally allowed to carry and putting other charges that don’t belong there,” said Cano.

“Open Carry Texas says this was a victory for them.”  Well I guess so.  It was indeed a victory for them.  I had followed this story from a distance, not knowing the back story behind it and not wanting to do the research necessary to understand it.

But this is the backstory.  It looks like the city of Olmos decided to engage in a little nullification themselves, being the little Napoleons they are.  Open carry is now legal in Texas, and while Olmos challenged that, Texas Open Carry decided to challenge Olmos.

Texas Open Carry won.  Good for them.  The city cannot make its own laws.

The Hill:

A Bank of America executive announced Tuesday that the bank will stop lending money to companies that manufacture “military-style” rifles that are available for civilians to purchase.

Anne Finucane, Bank of America’s vice chair, told Bloomberg TV that the bank doesn’t want to “underwrite or finance military-style firearms” and has told a number of gun manufacturers that it will no longer do business with them.

The bank has lended to the gun makers Vista Outdoor, Remington and Sturm Ruger, CNBC reported.

Bank of America had said that after the shooting in Parkland, Fla., in mid-February it was exploring ways it could contribute to stemming gun violence. The confessed gunman in that shooting used an AR-15-style rifle.

“These are clients we have enjoyed a relationship with,” Finucane said. “There are those I think will reduce their portfolios and we’ll work with them and others that will choose to do something else.”

Asked if Bank of America would stop doing business with retailers that sell assault weapons, Finucane said that would involve complicated issues dealing with civil liberties and the Second Amendment.

“That’s a good public dialogue, but that’s a ways off,” she said.

Finucane said that reaction from gun manufacturers to Bank of America’s decision has been mixed.

“Reduce their portfolios.”  That’s what the progressives at BoA want gun makers to do.  Reduce their portfolios.  Gun control by fiat via decisions in the banking industry.  Frankly, it wouldn’t surprise me to hear at some point that the FedGov was involved in meetings with BoA to encourage this decision.

Also take note that the notion of stopping business with retailers who do not comply deserves a “public dialogue,” and is “a ways off.”  In other words, it’s a step in the works but needs more time to ferment.  And it was two days ago I said this.

Now let’s turn to gun manufacturers.  Suppose that Ruger needs to spend $500,000 buying to tooling to replace old and worn tooling machinery, or to retool a line to fabricate a new product.  Suppose that none of the banks will do business with Ruger.  How does Ruger pay for the tooling machinery?  They can’t go through the bank.  They can’t hand cash to the machinery manufacturer – their accountant would reject it as making them look like they’re doing business with Iran.  No bank in their right mind will allow a company to deposit $500,000 cash without knowing where it came from.

I know accountants.  I maintain that no accountant can deposit a million dollars in cash with a bank teller.  It just doesn’t happen.  No, I’m not talking about drug deals in Florida or Texas or whatever other exception you can find.  I’m talking about people who pay their taxes, want to stay in business, and have to make it work with banks in order to stay above board.

This will prove to be very difficult for gun manufacturers to deal with.  And I maintain that this is just one step in the coming festivities over the next couple of years.  There will be further controls over gun owners as well.  You mark my words on that, whether at the local, state or federal level.  Bump stocks won’t be the last you hear of gun control by the Trump administration, all endorsed and given cover by the NRA.