American Hunter.

1. It’s certainly not the only target cartridge in existence.

2. It’s not old enough to be your grandfather’s cartridge.

3. It’s trendy, and trendy sucks.

4. It’s going to take over the hunting industry.

5. It works.

Amusing, as intended.  As for effectiveness, you might want to check out this piece entitled 6.5 Creedmoor Proven: How Does It Actually Perform On Big Game?

Prior: 6.5 Creedmoor Ammo Prices

Amy Howe:

Earlier this month, New York City sent a letter to Scott Harris, the clerk of the Supreme Court, to inform the justices that a challenge to the city’s ban on transporting guns outside the city limits is moot – that is, no longer a live controversy. The Supreme Court did not accept the letter, perhaps because the challengers in the case objected. The challengers argued (among other things) that the letter was “premature” because the developments that the city cited as rendering the case moot had not yet gone into effect. With changes to both state and city laws now in place, the city returned to the court today, urging the justices to remove the case from their docket for the upcoming term.

Changes to the city’s rules, the city explained, will allow licensed gun owners to transport their guns to, among other places, second homes and shooting ranges outside New York City. Those rules went into effect on July 21. And on July 16, the city continued, New York Governor Andrew Cuomo signed a bill that changes state laws to allow licensed gun owners to transport their handguns to other places – again, such as second homes, shooting ranges and shooting competitions – where they are legally allowed to have them.

These developments, the city told the court again today, mean that the case is moot. The challengers, the city reasoned, had asked only for the “modest ability to transport their licensed firearms, unloaded and locked away separate from ammunition, to a shooting range or second home outside city limits” – which they now are able to do, the city stressed. The case should therefore be dismissed as moot or, at the very least, be sent back for the lower courts to decide whether it is moot.

I’m not sure I completely understand this.  Amy’s publication date for this post is July 22, the same evening I’m writing this.

We’ve already covered the NYC argument to the Supreme Court, as well as the response letter by Paul Clement.  Is there yet another letter from NYC to the Supreme Court after Clement’s response, and if so, it doesn’t seem to be linked at Amy’s place?

At any rate, if I interpret this correctly, NYC just won’t give up making stupid arguments.  Quite obviously, they’re afraid of what comes next.

I had never seen this and Kyle does a good job of showing how to do it, but I’d want to practice it if I ever thought I was going to need it.

Via David Codrea, this decision.

The Supreme Court has been careful to note that “longstanding prohibitions” like “laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings” remain “presumptively lawful.” Heller I, 554 U.S. at 626, 627 n.26…. [T]he same security interests which permit regulation of firearms “in” government buildings permit regulation of firearms on the property surrounding those buildings as well…

Second, the lot is close to the Capitol and legislative office buildings. Class possessed a firearm less than 1,000 feet away from the entrance to the Capitol, and a block away from the Rayburn House Office Building. Although there is surely some outer bound on the distance Congress could extend the area of protection around the Capitol without raising Second Amendment concerns, Congress has not exceeded it here.

Finally, as the owner of the Maryland Avenue lot, the government—like private property owners—has the power to regulate conduct on its property. See [Adderley] v. Florida, 385 U.S. 39, 47 (1966) (observing in the free-speech context that the government, “no less than a private owner of property, has power to preserve the property under its control for the use to which it is lawfully dedicated”); cf. Bonidy v. U.S. Postal Serv., 790 F.3d 1121, 1126 (10th Cir. 2015) (observing that when the U.S. Postal Service acts “as a proprietor rather than as a sovereign, [it] has broad discretion to govern its business operations according to the rules it deems appropriate”).

There are no interests in the regulation of firearms in government buildings or “sensitive” places.  That’s a figment of the imagination.  Criminals don’t obey the law, so a regulation won’t be enough to stop someone bent on evil.  Anyone intent on violating the prohibition on murder will gladly violate a prohibition on firearms possession.

So the first two paragraphs are pure mythology.  As for the third paragraph, I find myself in agreement.  Property rights supersede the RKBA on private property unless the government forces our presence on that private property.  For patrons of that parking deck, they should find another place to park.

EDIT: I see that by posting late and mis-reading the text I feel into their trap.  I still support property rights above everything, but in fact the FedGov does not have property rights.  They shouldn’t even own property.  My initial reading of the text indicated to me that a private corporation owned the parking deck.  That isn’t the case.

From Wayne:

Herschel,

You and I are now fighting the toughest and most consequential election battles of our lives – and I need you shoulder-to-shoulder with me like never before.

The news media is now attacking NRA 24/7, with a nonstop barrage of fake news and lies. Billionaire Michael Bloomberg is pledging to spend AT LEAST $500 million electing a gun-ban extremist to the White House next year.

And we’re facing the most radical anti-gun candidates in the history of American politics – gun-hating zealots who want to LICENSE and FINGERPRINT gun owners, OUTLAW magazines holding more than 10 rounds, and BAN and CONFISCATE every semi-automatic rifle in America.

To prepare for these massive battles AND say thank you for your past support – I want to offer you some very generous membership discounts and extraordinary NRA gifts when you renew or upgrade your NRA membership by August 2nd.

Gee, that’s all too bad, Wayne.  But the gravy train had to run out of other people’s money at some point, just like socialism.

I’ll tell you what.  Let’s suppose you have honestly had a conversion.  I’ll give you this chance.  I’ll join again the day you get rid of the GCA and NFA.  How’s that?  You have a target to shoot for now.  Write me another note when that happens.

Next up, it looks like Wayne and the witch of the NRA, Marrion Hammer, are trying to punish dissidents.

Over the weekend, former NRA President Marion Hammer sent a private email to board members telling them to fall in line or face the consequences.

Hammer’s letter, previously only reported within the firearms blogosphere, is an apparent response to a number of board members who have posted publicly that they have faced retaliation for questioning alleged financial malfeasance in the organization. Hammer wrote that stripping the assignments was a punishment for ongoing “agitation” that has taken place outside of the “appropriate setting.”

“The NRA finds itself under attack,” Hammer wrote. “Some within our ranks—members of the NRA Board of Directors—have joined in these attacks. There have been leaks of proprietary and confidential information to the front pages of newspapers, websites and social media pages. Members of the board have a fiduciary responsibility to act in the best interests of our Association. Yet, some have chosen not to do so.”

“Those who didn’t get an assignment might want to consider whether or not they want to help us save the Second Amendment or continue on a course detrimental to NRA and our mission,” she concluded. “The decision is ultimately theirs.”

Just how NOT working on a committee is punishment, I cannot fathom.  I’d rather take a beating than work on a committee of pretty much any kind.  Working on a committee is like trying to herd cats.

But it appears that the witch believes she can bully good men.  There are a few good men left on the board, I take it.  The two salient questions are these: [1] How long will those good men sully their reputation by being associated with the failed NRA, with the added bonus of now being known as someone who could easily be bullied by the likes of Marrion Hammer (can you say “Coward?”), and [2] How long will the Fudds continue to fund Wayne’s and Marrion’s fat paychecks and retirements?

David Codrea:

Speaking of which, of the “21,000 children” they say “died from guns” [!] we find “There were 14,583 deaths for 18-21-year-olds…”

Good grief, we’re talking gang-bangers here. At least that puts to the lie any notion that “background checks” will be “universal.” We’re also talking legal adults, pediatrics childcare admissions criteria notwithstanding. We’re talking people old enough to vote, to marry, to serve in the military and on many police forces.

Meanwhile, the U.S. military is considering lowering the recruitment age to sixteen.  A “child” to the controllers as they argue for more control, and an adult [or whatever, it doesn’t really matter] to the controllers as they try to find people to fight their wars.

It’s almost like they just make up the rules as they go to suit them.  Whatever the case, they must maintain the monopoly on violence at all costs.

Hunter’s Corner:

James is also an avid reloader. We had a good chuckle over the latest wonder rifle cartridge, the 6.5 Creedmoor. In 1896 the 6.5 x 55 Swedish Mauser was introduced to the shooting public. It was a smokeless powder cartridge. It became the most popular moose rife in Sweden and probably still is. When the .270 Winchester was introduced to the shooting public the date on the .270 was very close to the 6.5 x 55. In my teen years I wanted to get one but all that was available was war surplus.

Now comes the 6.5 Creedmoor which if you look closely at the 6.5 stats it is very close to the .270. I don’t remember the .270 ever being suggested as a 1,000-yard rifle. Don’t get me wrong, the 6.5 Creedmoor is a welcomed addition to the shooting community, but is the cost of the ammunition worth it? Next time you are at a retailer, check out the price of .270 ammunition compared to 6.5 Creedmoor ammo.

By the way, a friend of mine hunts with a 6.5, loves it, and has taken a monster Maine buck with it. As for me, when I am hunting in a rifle-authorized area, I will continue to use my .270.

There’s nothing wrong with either one, but remember, the 6.5 Creedmoor is a short action cartridge (based on the .308 case) while the .270 is a long action cartridge (based on the .30-06 case).  That means the 6.5 Creedmoor is easier to deal with in semi-auto.

At any rate, I think he’s exaggerating the price of the 6.5 Creedmoor.  There is a wider variability in prices for the 6.5, so for a 20-round box you can spend less than a dollar a round, but as much as $2 per round.  On the other hand, pretty much all of the 6.5 is available for less than $1 per round if you buy in bulk through someone like Lucky Gunner.

This video has apparently gone viral.  What isn’t apparent, and seems very clear to me with all the giggling going on, is that she doesn’t understand anything about bears.

This man and woman don’t seem to either, relying on the bear speaking English and their ability to reason with it.  And of course this woman seems clueless.

Here is a recent video the girl should watch before giggling any more when a bear is interested in her.

Outdoor Life.

Strange as it may seem, the U.S. Marine Corps entered the jungle campaigns of World War II without a decent combat knife. Their first attempt was a double-edge dagger based on the British Commando knife, but it quickly proved to be a very poor utility blade for infantry combat. Going back to the drawing board and working with Union and Camillus cutlery companies, they came up with an all-purpose sheath knife, the USMC Knife/Fighting-Utility Model 1219C2. Camillus is said to have made the first deliveries to the Marines on January 27, 1943. Maybe “Knife/Fighting-Utility 1219C2” was just too big of a mouthful, and Camillus just didn’t have much of a ring to it. In any case, Leathernecks quickly unofficially labeled all knives of this pattern “kabars” after the trademark stamp of Union cutlery.

The rest of the article is very informative.  I have two.

I happen to like a partially serrated edge for mine, finding it has more utility in the bush and elsewhere.  If you don’t, you can get them without the serrations.

For those who are shaving grams in the bush, a large utility/fighting knife may be too much weight.  For me the perfect compromise is also a Ka-Bar.

It’s called “The Mule.”  It’s a folder with serrated edge, and it’s the heftiest, beefiest folder I’ve ever owned.  It can be used for virtually anything, up to and including chopping at wood in case I needed it for shelter, but at a reduced weight compared to the large fighting knife.

The sheath is kydex with cordura on the outside, but was very hard to find.  I didn’t like the leather sheath sent with the fighting knife.  The sheath for the folder is very nice, comes with the knife, and has straps that can hang on molle or pack straps.