Articles by Herschel Smith

I don’t have to worry about this since I NEVER put metal to my BCGs.  I only use cleaners and nylon brushes.

With that said, I think it might be nice to get the gauges he mentioned.

Source.

The Estes Park Police Department received a report from an anonymous source at approximately 9:23 a.m. Wednesday that there would be an active shooter at the Estes Park High School, which was closed due to weather.

Estes Park was among several Colorado school districts that received threats Wednesday, including Alamosa, Aspen, Boulder, Brighton, Cañon City, Clear Creek County, Durango, Englewood, Fort Morgan, Gilpin County, Lamar, Roaring Forks and Wiggins.

A majority of the schools were either evacuated or put on lockdown as a safety precaution, and all threatening reports proved unfounded.

Estes Park Police Chief David Hayes said he was informed about a threat that came into Boulder High School at approximately 8:33 a.m., before being informed by an EPPD staff member that Estes Park received a threat of its own.

[ … ]

While one of the last rooms in the elementary school was being cleared, an Estes Park Police officer fired their rifle. “It was an accidental discharge,” said Hayes. “The bullet went into the floor. The good news is that no one was injured, clearly something we don’t want to happen.”

As I’ve observed so many times before, “You’re never in more danger than when the police are around.”  Get away from them as fast as is humanly possible.

I suspect that pranksters know this dictum and intended this to be a dangerous situation.  It’s a wonder someone wasn’t shot by the cops.

Can you imagine a chief of police being so nonchalant about a negligent discharge by you?  Do you think you would be charged with a crime if you discharged a firearm inside a school?  Maybe red flagged with permanent loss of firearms rights, a hefty fine, and some punitive jail time?

Tenth Amendment Center.

The federal government relies heavily on state cooperation to implement and enforce almost all of its laws, regulations and acts – including gun control. By simply withdrawing this necessary cooperation, states and localities can nullify many federal actions in effect. As noted by the National Governors’ Association during the partial government shutdown of 2013, “states are partners with the federal government on most federal programs.”

Based on James Madison’s advice for states and individuals in Federalist #46, a “refusal to cooperate with officers of the Union” represents an extremely effective method to bring down federal gun control measures because most enforcement actions rely on help, support and leadership from state and local governments.

Fox News senior judicial analyst Judge Andrew Napolitano agreed. In a televised discussion on the issue, he noted that a single state taking this step would make federal gun laws “nearly impossible” to enforce.

“Partnerships don’t work too well when half the team quits,” said Michael Boldin of the Tenth Amendment Center. “By withdrawing all resources and participation in federal gun control, states and even local governments can help bring these unconstitutional acts to their much-needed end.”

The state of Iowa can legally bar state agents from enforcing federal gun control. Refusal to cooperate with federal enforcement rests on a well-established legal principle known as the anti-commandeering doctrine.

Simply put, the federal government cannot force states to help implement or enforce any federal act or program. The anti-commandeering doctrine is based primarily on five Supreme Court cases dating back to 1842. Printz v. U.S. serves as the cornerstone.

Despite all of the accolades for the appropriateness of the action being taken by this subcommittee, I see efforts like this as toothless.

They are necessary first steps, but proponents should see them as such.  Until they send county Sheriffs after FedGov agents who attempt to enforce federal infringements, this just isn’t a serious effort.  FedGov agents must be imprisoned when they attempt their infringements, or else they won’t stop.

Non-cooperation isn’t nullification.

Source.

Colorado counties would be able to prohibit people from discharging firearms in specific unincorporated areas under a bill moving through the state House.

Currently, a board of county commissioners can designate unincorporated areas of a county where it’s illegal to discharge firearms. However, the commissioners can’t prohibit the discharge of firearms in shooting galleries, on private grounds or in residences in circumstances where persons and property aren’t endangered. Plus, an area must have a population density of 100 people or more per square mile for commissioners to enact a designation.

House Bill 23-1165 repeals the exemption for private property. It changes the minimum population density to require any designated area for restrictions to be 35 dwellings or more per square mile. The legislation also prohibits any county from restricting the discharge of a firearm by any peace officer, in an indoor shooting gallery located in a private residence or at a shooting range.

This is one more tactic used by the controllers.  First they go after firearms.  Then they go after ammunition.  Then they go after licensing and permitting to own and carry them.  Finally, they go after being able to practice and hunt with them.

The work around the clock to infringe upon your rights.  We must work around the clock to stop them.

Post and Courier.

The S.C. House of Representatives approved legislation that allows adults to legally tote a handgun with no training required while creating a felon-in-possession crime designed to enable officers to charge more people who shouldn’t own a gun.

The bill approved 90-30 on Feb. 22 mostly along party lines would allow anyone 18 and older who can legally buy a gun to carry it around, whether openly or concealed, without needing a permit.

It does not change where guns are banned. Places where they remain illegal for almost everyone include schools, day cares, courtrooms, jails, hospitals, businesses that post “no weapons” signs, and city and county offices.

The bill adds clerks of court and public defenders to the list of exempted people — primarily, judges and prosecutors currently — who can carry where others can’t, but with one caveat. Public defenders still couldn’t take their handgun into a jail or prison.

Amendments approved during the debate encourage gun owners to get training without mandating it, and require them to report a stolen gun to local law enforcement within 30 days without setting a punishment.

Republicans argued the effort is about restoring a “constitutional right” in the Second Amendment that shouldn’t need government permission, while Democrats countered it’s a dangerous bill that will lead to more murders and accidental deaths.

[ … ]

Republican Rep. Alan Morgan of Greer, a co-sponsor, responded by citing statistics from the 25 states that have already passed so-called “constitutional carry” laws, arguing they haven’t led to a rise in gun-related killings there.

It’s the lack of predicted “Wild, Wild West” scenarios here over the last two years that changed some minds, said Rep. Bobby Cox, R-Greer, the main sponsor.

In 2021, Republicans pushed through a law allowing South Carolinians to openly carry their handguns, as long as they have a concealed weapon permit.

As I told you before, I listened to the entirety of the debate (a full day of it) when the S.C. senate passed open carry (the largest pill for the fearful and timid to swallow, mainly because of law enforcement).

“The majority of the state probably doesn’t even know we’re an open-carry state yet,” said Cox, an Army Ranger currently in the Reserve. “That goes against the Wild, Wild West argument we hear.

“People were very worried about guns being seen everywhere, especially in the tourist areas,” said the executive for Sig Sauer gun manufacturer. “I work in the area, and I’ve only seen one person carry.”

[ … ]

Charleston Police Chief Luther Reynolds said he can picture King Street, which attracts throngs of people to its shops, restaurants and bars, awash with guns.

“We are prevented and precluded — because they’re entitled to carry a gun — from even asking them if they’re illegally carrying it,” he said.

And you should be prevented from asking them.  It’s none of your business.

Law enforcement screamed long and loud about the wild, wild west when open carry passed two years ago.  Hopefully they’re adequately shamed now and they’re staying silent this time around, so that they don’t look even more ridiculous than they already do.

Baby steps.  I was delighted to see open carry pass two years ago.  I’ll be delighted to see permitless carry pass as well, but I predicted exactly this sequence of events if you will recall.  I told you that permitless carry was next in line and will pass at some point in S.C. (I gave it a year, it has taken two), but they had to see for themselves what every other state has seen.

The state doesn’t become a war zone and burn to ashes.  The manner of carry doesn’t change a man’s character.  I dream of a day when a man is seen for the nature of his character rather than the method of his carry.

Cowboy State Daily.

Jones was referencing Senate File 148, which would preempt any local firearms regulations that contradict Wyoming statute.

It’s done well so far. The Wyoming Senate passed it by a vote of 30-1 on Feb. 8. It passed its second of three readings before the Wyoming House on Wednesday.

“I think it will pass,” Jones said. “If it doesn’t pass, a municipality could feasibly implement their own gun control, as long as they exempt firearms manufactured in Wyoming.”

SF 148 clears up an oversight that’s created some confusion over gun policy in Wyoming, Jones said, adding that Wyoming has long had a “preemption statute.”

That means gun rights policy set by the state preempts those proposed by a municipality or other localized but essentially entity, such as the University of Wyoming campus, he said. Private property owners and privately owned businesses still retain the right to restrict guns as they see fit on their premises.

The Wyoming Freedom of Firearms Act was passed in 2010. That protects Wyoming gun or gun accessory manufactures from undue federal regulations, Jones said.

However, for undetermined reasons, the preemption statue wasn’t properly referenced in the Freedom of Firearms Act, Jones said. So technically, a municipality or other entity can pass its own additional gun restrictions – they just wouldn’t apply to guns made in Wyoming.

And since outside of a few custom firearm makers, firearms manufacturers are based outside of Wyoming, those local gun restrictions would apply nearly all commonly owned firearms.

SF 148 fixes that, making it clear that the preemption statue applies to all firearms, not just those made in Wyoming, Jones said.

SF 148 was prompted in part by a challenge to UW’s prohibition against carrying firearms on campus, Jones said.

In 2018, Lyle Williams of Unita County was ticketed for open-carrying a firearm in the university’s convention center during the state Republican party’s annual conference.

That citation was challenged on the grounds that both open and concealed carry are allowed by state statute in Wyoming. But in 2020, Albany County District Court Judge Tori Kricken ruled in the university’s favor.

In her decision, Kricken cited the fact that the preemption statute as cited in the Freedom of Firearms Act applies only to guns made in Wyoming, Jones said.

That’s a stupid reason for a judge to reach a decision like that.  There is no excuse for a lame judiciary who looks to the jot and tittle of the law but ignores the sweep and intent.

Anyway, this needs to pass so that residents of Wyoming can once again not have to worry with progressive do-gooders.  For example, Jackson, Wyoming is likely to try something similar in nature within city limits.  Have you looked recently at the makeup of the city council in Jackson?

Richard Mann writing at F&S.

• 30-30 Winchester
• 357 Magnum
• 44 Magnum
• 45/70 Government
• 360 Buckhammer

[ … ]

The 30-30 Winchester and the 30/06 Springfield are often considered the two most iconic American rifle cartridges. They’ve withstood the test of time. But they’re not the oldest or the most versatile. The 45/70 was introduced in 1873, 21 years before the 30-30 and 33 years before the 30/06. Originally designed for the Trapdoor Springfield, the 45/70 gained its current fame in the lever-action, and it is arguably the most popular lever-action rifle sold today. By modern standards, original 45/70 ballistics are pathetic. Modern 45/70 loads are not. And when all the 45-70 loads are considered, you have what might be the most adaptable big game cartridge of all time.

There are essentially three power levels of 45/70 ammunition, which is a trait no other centerfire rifle cartridge can claim. Power-level-one loads replicate the cartridge’s original ballistics and launch a 405-grain bullet at about 1300 fps. Inside 75 yards they’ll work for many big game animals. Second-power-level loads are generally loaded with a 300-grain bullet and pushed to about 1800 fps. They can generate more than 2000 foot-pounds of muzzle energy and are sufficient out to around 200 yards for non-dangerous critters. And finally, there are the third-power-level 45/70 loads. These can generate more than 3500 foot-pounds of muzzle energy—with recoil to match—and are sufficient for spy balloons or any beast walking Earth.

He also discusses the other cartridges, including one of my favorites, the .44 magnum.

I always enjoy reading Richard’s work, but my goodness it seems way, way premature to include 360 Buckhammer in that list.  It’s brand new, and in my opinion will end up being a flash in the pan.  Basically it doesn’t really do anything that the 30-30 can’t with the heavier loads (e.g., I have both 150 gr and 170 gr sitting on my desk in front of me now, and ballistically, it’s not really proven that the 170 gr does any better than the 150 gr.).  It’s parent case is the 30-30, just with a heavier bullet.  It’s also not proven that the .35 Remington does any better than the 30-30.  I just don’t think there’s a void to fill with the 360 Buckhammer.  Prove me wrong with ballistics analysis.

But let me tell you where I think there is a void.  Between the .44 magnum and the 45-70.  The perfect cartridge to fill that void is the 454 Casull, and I have written both Henry and Marlin begging them to introduce a rifle chambered in 454 Casull.  Apparently, my protestations have been to no avail at this point.

Anyway, I expect 350 Legend to wane in popularity, and I don’t expect wide availability of the 360 Buckhammer.  It may be an item of interest at some point (“Wow, I haven’t seen one of those in a long time, it may be a collector’s items at this point”), but it remains to be proven.

The 30-30 will never go out of style or off the market, and there will always be a high demand for either a new release by Marlin or a legacy JM stamped 336 in 30-30.

But I demand that Marlin introduce a Model 336 in .454 Casull.  I’ll buy two immediately upon release.  And I’d be happy to write about 20 articles on a new 336 in .454 Casull for Marlin if they send me a prototype.

Listen to it all to learn about the changing tactics of the gun controllers – tactics that will lose before Judge Robert Benitez.  I always learn something by listening to Mark.

It’s a deep penetrator and hard hitting round, and causes a significant wound channel.

In case that wasn’t too impressive, watch a slow motion rendering of what happens with this round in ballistic gelatin.

Video here.

WaPo.

Gun control advocates have long sought ways to circumvent the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA), a federal immunity law that shields the gun industry from liability. State lawmakers in Democratic strongholds across the country contend they have achieved that feat through the passage of “public nuisance” gun laws.

In New York, New Jersey and Delaware, gun manufacturers, sellers and distributors can now be sued for endangering the public’s health and safety — or creating a “public nuisance” — through improper marketing or sales practices.

• The new statutes mark the latest round in a long-running battle between gun control advocates and firearm manufacturers over the federal immunity law. And this time the issue could land before the Supreme Court, according to legal experts, as several Democratic-led states take a more aggressive approach to restricting firearms.

The gun manufacturing industry is fighting back hard and contends the new laws are unconstitutional and in no way in compliance with the 2005 law.

The National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF), the gun industry’s trade association, is leading the challenge.

Here’s where the legal fight stands between the NSSF and the states that have enacted these “public nuisance” laws:

• New Jersey: A New Jersey federal judge sided with the NSSF last month when he blocked the state’s law from being enforced, noting that it “is in direct conflict” with federal law. New Jersey has appealed the ruling.
• New York: The NSSF has appealed the dismissal of their New York lawsuit by a district court to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit.
• Delaware: A hearing for the NSSF’s district challenge in Delaware will be held Feb. 28.
• California: The group also plans to sue California later this year when its version of the law goes into effect.

Gun control advocates and legal experts who focus on the Second Amendment said the NSSF’s multistate approach bears all the hallmarks of how a special interest group can maneuver to give itself the best chance to bring a case before the Supreme Court, particularly one that may be viewed favorably by the majority.

The NSSF says its goal is simply to challenge the new laws in every jurisdiction where they are being implemented.

“There’s no grand strategy,” said NSSF senior vice president Lawrence Keane. “We are simply responding to the threat to our industry that is occasioned by these statutes being passed at the behest of these gun control groups.”

• But gun control advocates are skeptical the industry is not angling for a date with the Supreme Court.

Good.  I hope they’re able to “manufacture circuit splits.”  I don’t care whether that’s their strategy or not – I hope it redounds that that end.

I don’t much like Larry Keane.  He’s always been neck deep in NRA shenanigans.  But that doesn’t matter for this purpose.  The only other thing to do if the supreme court doesn’t take this up and then knock it down is for manufacturers to stop sales of all firearms to citizens in those states who enact such laws including and most especially law enforcement.

That would be financially harmful to the firearms industry, but less so than lawsuits that cause bankruptcy.