Source.

SPRINGFIELD, Ill. — A federal judge in East St. Louis issued an order Friday blocking enforcement of Illinois’ ban on assault weapons and high-capacity magazines until a lawsuit challenging the law is resolved.

Judge Stephen P. McGlynn, of the Southern District of Illinois, said the law known as the Protect Illinois Communities Act, or PICA, is likely to be found unconstitutional when the case goes to trial and the plaintiffs in the consolidated cases will suffer harms without a preliminary injunction to block its enforcement.

In a 29-page opinion, McGlynn acknowledged that the law was passed in the wake of a mass shooting at an Independence Day parade in Highland Park last year. But he said the “senseless crimes of a relative few” cannot be used to justify abridging the constitutional rights of law-abiding citizens.

That’s the so-called “heckler’s veto” which we discussed just recently.  These legal doctrines do matter.

“More specifically, can PICA be harmonized with the Second Amendment of the United States Constitution and with Bruen?” McGlynn asked rhetorically in the opinion. “That is the issue before this Court. The simple answer at this stage in the proceedings is ‘likely no.'”

McGlynn’s decision came less than a week after another federal judge, Lindsay Jenkins, of the Northern District of Illinois, reached an opposite conclusion and denied a motion to halt enforcement of the law. Plaintiffs in that case have indicated they intend to appeal to the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals.

This will likely go to the seventh circuit to rectify the split, and all bets are off there.  But the seventh circuit will block the law, in which case it’s either over or it may go to the supreme court, or they will uphold the law, in which case it will certainly go to the supreme court.

Judge Benitez hasn’t issued his ruling for California as of this writing, but there isn’t much doubt as to what he will do.  In the end, these will likely go to the supreme court, with the decision based on Heller, which stipulates that if a weapon is in common use for lawful purposes, it cannot be banned.  Heller doesn’t say if a weapon is in common use for self defense it cannot be banned.  It says “for lawful purposes.”  If there are thirty million ARs and AKs in America and they are all being used to adorn fire place mantles, that’s common use.

Here is Judge Stephen P. McGlynn’s ruling.  Here are some takeaways from the ruling.

The prefatory clause of the Second Amendment states, “[a] well-regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State . . . .” The prefatory clause “announces a purpose” for the operative clause but “does not limit [it].” Id. Meaning that there “must be a link between the state purpose and command” but that the scope of the operative clause remains unchanged by the prefatory language. See Id. As the Supreme Court noted, the operative clause of the Second Amendment creates an individual right. See Id. at 598. Thus, logic demands that there be a link between an individual right to keep and bear arms and the prefatory clause. The link is clear, “to prevent elimination of the militia.” Id. at 599. During the founding era, “[i]t was understood across the political spectrum that the right . . . might be necessary to oppose an oppressive military force if the constitutional order broke down.” Id. Therefore, although “most undoubtedly thought [the Second Amendment] even more important for self-defense and hunting” the additional purpose of securing the ability of the citizenry to oppose an oppressive military, should the need arise, cannot be overlooked. See Id.

Which I have always maintained.  The prefatory clause is sufficient but not necessary, or sufficient but not comprehensive.

The second section of the operative clause, “Keep and Bear Arms,” defines the substance of the right held by “the people.” Id. The Heller Court first turned to what constitutes “arms” and found that “arms” were understood, near the time of the ratification of the Second Amendment, to mean any weapon or thing that could be used for either offense or defense. See Id. The Court specifically noted that “the Second Amendment extends, prima facie, to all instruments that constitute bearable arms, even those that were not in existence at the time of the founding.” Id. at 582. Finally, the Court turned to the meaning of “keep” and “bear.” Id. at 582-92. These words are understood, in light of founding era history, to mean to “have” and to “carry” respectively. See Id. at 582-84. In sum, the operative clause of the Second Amendment “guarantee[s] the individual right to possess and carry weapons in case of confrontation.” Id. at 592.

Yes, although the supreme court dealt specifically with the “keeping” part of the RKBA in Heller, and the “bearing” part in Bruen.

… in the years following Heller and McDonald, the Courts of Appeals analyzed the Second Amendment under a two-step test. See Id. at 2126. The first step included an analysis to determine if “the original scope of the right based on its historical meaning.” Id. The second step was a balancing test of either intermediate scrutiny or strict scrutiny depending on “[i]f a ‘core’ Second Amendment right is burdened.” See Id. (quoting Kolbe v. Hogan, 849 F.3d 114, 133 (4th Cir. 2017) (en banc)).

The Bruen Court firmly rejected this two-step framework, concluding that “[d]espite the popularity of this two-step approach, it is one step too many.”

Bruen once and for all ended “interest balancing” for the RKBA.  It’s over and done with, and should more cases appear before the Supreme Court where interest balancing has occurred, they will be dealt a blow.

He goes on to deal with magazines, and many other important things.  I’m disappointed that Judge Benitez hasn’t issued his ruling, for I expect it to be a good one.  However, this is an excellent ruling for the RKBA.

Here is Mark Smith celebrating the victory.

Prior:

Sixth Circuit Strikes Down Bump Stock Ban

Hundreds more in the Second Amendment Category

I won’t rehearse the history of Matt Hoover and CRS Firearms.  I think most of you know it anyway.  I also won’t rehearse my love for logic.  Most of you know that anyway.  Mark does a nice job of finding a very relevant legal precedent that should have been applied before the idiots at the DOJ and ATF ever brought him to trial.

The ATF was never able to demonstrate that what Matt helped to sell could ever work, or did ever work.  It was a collector’s item, and nothing more.  Anway, here is the relevant part from the court case.

Hypotheticals further illustrate the weakness of this methodology. A mouse is not an “elephant” solely because it has three characteristics that are common to known elephants: a tail, gray skin, and four legs. A child’s bike is not a “motorcycle” solely because it has three characteristics common to known motorcycles: two rubber tires, handlebars, and a leather seat. And a Bud Light is not “Single-Malt Scotch,” just because it is frequently  served in a glass container, contains alcohol, and is available for purchase at a tavern. To close with a firearm-related example: a hockey puck is not a “rubber bullet,” just because it has rounded sides, is made of vulcanized rubber, and is capable of causing injury when launched at high speeds. Learning that one object has three characteristics in common with some category may not be very helpful in determining whether the object in question belongs in that category.

I love the judge’s use of logic.  All law school graduates should be required to take multiple courses in Aristotelian (or classic) logic, and furthermore, logic should be an integral part of the BAR exam. I’ve read books on logic. Why shouldn’t a lawyer be required to do the same thing?

This is a lengthy history of Weaver’s growing acquaintance with shooting and the grip, stance, and style that he developed over the years. It’s part biographical and includes interesting input from Jeff Cooper. An engaging piece if you’re mature or patient enough to read beyond sound bytes and blurbs.

In the beginning was point shooting. For those precious few who prepared themselves to use a pistol as a serious defensive weapon, it was fired from the hip, without the benefit of sights. For others, including target shooters and law enforcement officers alike, the pistol was fired at arm’s length, onehanded, and, often, very slowly. Either way, the pistol was a one-handed gun, and the unfortunate thing was neither the close-quick-dirty approach nor formal pistolcraft bore any real resemblance to the skills needed to survive a real-life shooting. And then in 1959, along came an L.A. County Sheriff’s Deputy who held his pistol with both hands, hit what he aimed at, and did it faster than anyone else. His name was Jack Weaver, and as Jeff Cooper put it, “He showed us the way.”

Photo from the article: Weaver during his military days, with a single-action Colt Peacemaker. Note the high boots and the spurs — standard uniform for the mule pack to which he was assigned.

[…]

During this year of practice, however, he realized if he brought the pistol up a foot higher, and dropped his head just a bit, he could get a split-second look at his sights before pulling the trigger. Thus was born the Weaver Stance: two hands on the gun, with a flash sight picture and the offside foot placed a little forward. So in 1959, the trophy marked “Leatherslapping: Best Overall Gunfighter” went home with Jack H. Weaver’s name engraved on it. What made his win so sensational was no one had ever seen a pistol shot like Weaver was shooting his. “It looked kind of stupid,” he concedes. “Everybody was laughing at me, but it worked. I took the money.” Laugh though they might, he had found something that worked, and it worked consistently.

“They’re a stubborn bunch,” Jack says of the early combat shooters. “They kept laughing at me and thinking it was funny, and I thought, ‘that’s great!’” It got to the point the Weavers could get a hotel room and buy dinner, and count on paying for it with the winnings. After being beaten three years in a row, Jeff Cooper gave some careful thought to Weaver’s shooting position, finally announcing it was “Decisively superior” to anything else.

From his bully pulpit writing for Guns & Ammo, Cooper described the matches and the lessons learned, ultimately distilling them into the Modern Technique of the Pistol that formed the backbone of his teaching. In 1987, when Cooper was interviewed in Handgunner, he stated “Most of what I’ve done in my life has been eclectic — taking the best ideas of other people and putting them to use.” True to form, though he popularized it and taught it, he always gave Jack Weaver the credit for the stance. Indeed, it was Cooper who named it the “Weaver Stance.”

Honorable men and note, not an ounce of fat.

Also from the article: The early days: from left to right are Jack Weaver, Jeff Cooper, and Eldon Carl.

Here’s some of that old-fashioned American ‘never give up.’ When you know something is good keep at it; sooner or later, you’ll be recognized. Fortunately for Weaver and us, it wasn’t posthumously.

And so time passed. Jack got a letter from the FBI National academy in 1982, letting him know they had adopted the Weaver stance. The Weaver Stance became the Modified Weaver, and became a part of the Modern Technique of the Pistol, as set forth in the Gregory Morrison book of the same title. Cooper, of course, went on to found Gunsite Academy, where the Weaver Stance remains part of their core doctrine. There’s even a framed photo of Jack Weaver hanging on the wall in the main classroom, alongside portraits of Thell Reed, Elden Carl, Ray Chapman and Bruce Nelson, all shooting from the Weaver stance. Gunwriters still never tire of arguing Weaver vs. Isoceles, although the Weaver is now so universal it even popped up by name in the movie Meet the Fokkers. While the stance became a part of the culture, the man behind it was almost forgotten — almost.

The article continues at the link and here’s a good representative photo; one man is point shooting, but Weaver is using his sights and wins.

Again from the article: Weaver, winning the 1959 Leatherslap. That’s Jeff Cooper crouched down between the hay bales.

It’s a leap worth making; that concealed carriers are always examining surroundings and people, profiling for danger and a thing or person that seems out of place or acting strangely. It’s a natural fit that you would be on the lookout for anything, even a low-threat profile minor in distress. We suppose this can also apply to folks who witness for Jesus Christ in public places or other ministries for Christ as well.

You are not a cop (unless you are). All we’re doing is standard the security sweep and this extra thing; are there any young girls or even boys or adults who oughtn’t to be in that situation or environment? Nobody would blame you for not involving yourself with the police. Call the National Human Trafficking Hotline at 1-888-373-7888, gather as much information as you safely can, and let them handle it. Defense of others, and especially the least among us, is the law of God!

Sure, there are high-likelihood areas, and the readership here is generally less likely to be in those places than some demographics, but, leaving our Oligarch pedophile global “leaders” aside for the moment, there is a higher socioeconomic level associated with the prostitution of minors than you might imagine.

The article is not offensive; however tragic the topic may be, read it and watch the video.

I’ll put it somewhat crudely one time, No 13-year-old girl says, hey, maybe I’ll go turn some tricks. They are kidnapped and forced.

Concealed carriers who, as the late, great William Aprill said, possess a “fully-formed mental map of the expected terrain” and heightened sense of awareness can take actions that reduce the chances that the persons they love and care about ever become sex trafficking victims. In addition, we can become quicker to recognize the signs of  other person or persons that we do not know become sex trafficked and take actions that may result in getting law enforcement involved and ultimately rescuing the victim or victims  that end up with the victim receiving assistance from a crisis services program such as the one offered by  Cross Timbers Family Services where the goal is recovery and an opportunity to live a full life. The rest of this article is dedicated to providing readers with at least a partially-formed mental map to what sex trafficking is and is not based upon the above-described panel’s presentation on Human Trafficking.

For some reason, I’m unable to embed this time; here’s the video link URL.

https://youtu.be/rmuZuhEpPJY

Be the smartest guy in the room.  Always catch Mark’s videos.  They are legal classes in 12 – 15 minutes. And you don’t have to pay law school tuition for them.

This would be funny if it weren’t sad, and also a serious warning to free people. Forget for the moment that this resolution has no force of law, and this post isn’t about Red Flag laws necessarily.

On a nearly straight-line party vote, Knox County commissioners rejected a resolution supporting a “red flag” gun reform law backed by Gov. Bill Lee.

The governor has asked GOP lawmakers to pass the safety measure, which is supported by an overwhelming majority of Americans and can help stop mass shootings like the one that killed three 9-year-olds and three adults in Nashville.

The Knox County resolution, which was drafted by local high school students on the new Junior Commission, urged lawmakers to pass a law that temporarily takes away guns from those who are deemed to be a threat. The resolution was sponsored by Courtney Durrett and Dasha Lundy, the commission’s two Democrats.

Larsen Jay was the only Republican to support it. Kyle Ward was absent.

Jay said the resolution was “a statement that at its core says we support our governor in his efforts to make this a better state.”

Rhonda Lee, explaining her vote against it, said gun rights are too important to weaken with any proposal to limit access to guns by mentally ill people.

West High School junior Caroline Scoonover told the commission during the meeting that the resolution she helped draft was intended to be a nonpartisan approach to stopping gun violence.

“This resolution is in no way, shape or form extreme,” she said. “We’re simply trying to protect ourselves with common sense solutions.”

Dain Shelton, a senior at Hardin Valley Academy, asked commissions to stand up for kids in the community who are terrified of school shootings.

“Technically we may be children, but I can assure you, we are not children,” Shelton said. “I wish we were. We’ve had our childhood stripped from us.”

I don’t want to say anything against this terribly ill-raised and misled student, but Dain Shelton’s parents should be ashamed of themselves. Hardin Valley Academy is populated by some of the most privileged people on earth. They, every parent, teacher, and student should be on their knees before the Christ of God, worshiping Him and giving Him all glory, praise, and honor for the absurd level of abundance of every resource of provision that even the people in the next county over could only dream of. This abundance includes layers of security and safety from parents, neighbors, and the government. Hardin Valley is one of the safest and most comfortable places on earth.

“Childhood stripped?” Seriously? Go work the lithium mines for your Teslas! I’m not classist; the people who have built the businesses and provided the jobs and homes are critical to this area, but listen to these children; they’ll turn on the productive in a heartbeat.

Other students echoed his statements, with Gabriela Sanchez Benitez adding, “This is not how it should be. We are not free. We are tied down by chains of fear.”

Irrational fear comes from a spirit of evil through the absence of Holy God (2 Timothy 1:7). “Tied down by chains of fear?” This rises to the level of AOC silliness.

What should bother the reader is the training these young people have received; that should make Americans fearful for the future. They have no concept of reality, truth, or the hard work it took to make Knox Country, and particularly Hardin Valley, prosperous and free. And despite all of Knox County’s problems and vanishing liberty every day, it’s still relatively free compared to much of America. Ungrateful to God, thankless to their forebears, whiny children of privilege! Pathetic.

They’re so ill-educated that the concept of those same laws being used against them is inconceivable to their feebly trained minds. Of course, purposefully retarding their ability in logic, reason, and critical thinking is all part of the communist program, even in East Tennessee.

Edit: look at this propaganda headline from Fox News. If you still watch and read them, you’re daft! “Tennessee governor defends Second Amendment in previewing special session on public safety, gun reform”

No Red Flag law! Tennessee already has a sufficient law for criminal threats.

Always remember that you have Trump to thank for the bump stock ban, and the corollary empowered ATF making law out of whole cloth.

Just today, the Sixth Circuit struck down the bump stock ban.  Two of the judges decided in favor of the plaintiffs because of the doctrine of lenity.  I disagree with that.  I think the law is very clear and adding a piece of plastic to a rifle doesn’t convert it to a machine gun under the statutory language.  The third judge said it better.

But I would go further. As explained by Judge Murphy in Gun Owners of America, Inc. v. Garland, the best reading of the statute is that Congress never gave the ATF “the power to expand the law banning machine guns through [the] legislative shortcut” of the ATF’s rule at issue in this appeal, see Bump-Stock-Type Devices, 83 Fed. Reg. 66,514 (Dec. 26, 2018) (the Rule). See 19 F.4th at 910 (Murphy, J., dissenting). Simply put, under the statute as it currently reads, the addition of a bump stock to a rifle clearly does not make it a machinegun.

26 U.S.C. § 5845(b). Under this definition, a bump stock cannot be a machinegun part because a bump stock by itself cannot increase the rate of fire of a rifle, nor does it change the mechanics of a “single function of the trigger.”

Here is Mark Smith celebrating the victory.

On Instagram, Aero Precision posts this.

They also issued a statement of disagreement, of course, and intent to fight this in court.

This gun ‘toober predicts the end of Aero Precision.  I don’t think so.  Here is the law.  It doesn’t prevent Aero from continuing to manufacture rifles, just from distributing them within state.  Here is the relevant part.

The manufacture, importation, distribution, offer for sale, or sale of an assault weapon by a licensed firearms manufacturer for the purposes of sale to any branch of the armed forces of the United States or the state of Washington, or to any law enforcement agency for use by that agency or its employees for law enforcement purposes, or to a person who does not reside in this state;

That’s an exception to the law.  Having said that, I think it was a mistaken for Aero Precision to relocate and stay within the state.  They should have moved South a long time ago.

This is the case for now.  It’s already being challenged in federal court.  Judge Benitez has yet to issue his ruling in the state of California.  I’ve told you what I think will happen.  Judge Benitez will strike down any ban in California.  If a federal judge in Washington upholds the law, it will go to the Ninth Circuit to handle the split.  If the Ninth Circuit strikes it down, it’s finished.  If the Ninth Circuit upholds the law, it will go to the supreme court.

This isn’t over yet.  But it’s a loss for the good folks left in Washington.

Source.

Let’s face it: Many armed Americans are deathly — and irrationally — afraid of others. And so they have become a menace to the rest of us.

According to a 2021 Gallup Poll, as many as 88 percent of gun owners are apparently terrified of being harmed, since they say the guns are for self-defense.

His link is used to justify his assertion that gun owners are “apparently terrified of being harmed,” but the link doesn’t say anything of the sort.  The link is a rundown of how many weapons have been purchased for self defense.  He just inferred that last overly-emotional part.  Normally, good writers don’t do things like that.  I’d probably respond that gun owners are the least scared of all home owners, given that they have means of self defense.

Yet very, very few gun owners end up defending themselves and their families from the sort of random crime they fear. According to The Trace, fewer than 3 percent of gun owners ever use a weapon in self-defense, and apparently some of those involve misrepresentation of what actually happened in order to paint the shooter in a good light.

Of course, the media — especially, but certainly not only, the likes of Fox — have played a large role in convincing an element of our society that they are in constant mortal danger. It’s totally false, but if all you do all day is consume random horror stories, your grip on reality becomes distorted. That is one reason for the current insanity, and we in the media need to acknowledge that and fight against it.

And of course the GOP probably would not hold any significant power in this country if they did not psychologically terrorize their base.

That metric doesn’t include harm that didn’t obtain because of the very fact that the potential victim had a weapon.  But it doesn’t matter.  Would it make any difference if the value was in reality 0.00005%?  Does Mr. Russ Baker have health insurance?  If so, why?  Does he have life insurance?  If so, why?  Does he have fire insurance?  If so, why?

He’s got it all wrong on the GOP, whose hold on power in Washington, along with the democrats, constituting the uniparty, is the subject of loathing and hatred among most conservative voters who believe they are cowards and sellouts.  He imagines that conservatives are led by leaders who tell them what to think, sort of like collectivist voters.

Just to round out the most recent toll, we had a shooting in North Carolina. Some children were playing in the street when their basketball rolled into a man’s yard. When they tried to retrieve the ball, a 24-year-old man went into his house, got his gun and came out firing indiscriminately at various people, wounding some only slightly, but a father and his six-year-old daughter were seriously injured. The shooter ran away and is being sought. And two teenage cheerleaders were shot when one accidentally tried to open the door of the wrong car in a Texas parking lot.

With such horrific assaults, our entire society is endangered — as is our mental wellbeing.

The other day, I was speaking with a doctor — Black, as that seems to matter to gun owners, many of whom apparently have a statistically unrealistic fear of Black people coming to harm them — and she said to me, “I can’t believe that the only solution is to train our kids like they’re going to die — which causes anxiety and depression.” She mentioned the incalculable toll on upcoming generations, who are basically told to prepare for gun violence at any time.

The racial component is undeniable, although gun violence affects all races as both perpetrators and victims. In the Kansas City incident, the shooter was white, and the victim was Black. In upstate New York, both the shooter and the victims were white. In the Texas parking lot, the shooter was Hispanic, the victims, white. In North Carolina, the shooter was Black, the victims, white.

Meanwhile, one of our editors at WhoWhatWhy said he loves to swim but goes to the neighborhood pool with what he knows is a statistically irrational concern that it might be the next “cool” target. He wanted to write about the psychology of his fear of an unlikely event with catastrophic consequences, but is concerned that it might “inspire” someone to target a pool.

What?

That’s one oddball string of words.  The shooter in N.C. was black, shooting a white kid for retrieving a ball in his yard.  But this example leads into a yelling session how race matters mostly to white people, I think.  And then tells me that I should care about his doctor being black.  Why I should care about him or his doctor is quite beyond me.

I simply cannot parse the word salad well enough to offer intelligent commentary, especially on the last paragraph.  But I leave it to you to ask the question, “Was this writer drinking when he wrote this?”  This is some of the most stilted, horrible writing I’ve ever witnessed.

We all feel this mounting dread, yet the Republican Party keeps making it easier for people to buy deadly weaponry, and the Democratic Party and many gun reform advocates still propose only marginally ameliorative measures, like more effective registration and so forth.

How on earth is the republican party making it easier for people to buy deadly weaponry?  Tell me one thing they’ve done for the second amendment in the last forty years?  Is hearing protection like suppressors off the NFA?  Nope.  Have they been true to their calling and appointed only judges who honor the second amendment?  Nope.

I think what Mr. Baker probably should have meant is that the supreme court is increasingly siding with the founders in Heller, McDonald, Caetano and Bruen (I know, they waffled on a number of things, but they’re gradually coming around, and eventually we may rid ourselves of the “common use” test and replace it with outright respect for the 2A).  So Mr. Baker might have pointed the finger at the founders, knowing that the supreme court would strike down most or all of the gun control measures he wants to see passed.  Surely he isn’t stupid enough to believe that if Congress passes an AWB, it would stand when the supreme court hears it?  There are some 30 – 40 million ARs in use for lawful purposes.  Under Heller, if a firearm is in common use for lawful purposes, it cannot be banned.  Heller dealt with the keeping part of the RKBA, Bruen dealt with the bearing part of RKBA.  Full stop.  End of discussion.  I’d call 40 million common use.

Why is he looking to mankind as his savior anyway?  And the worst of the worst of the dregs of society at that, i.e., beltway politicians.  What sort of sad existence obtains in life when a man has to turn to other men as his savior?  What sort of dark clouds engulf a man who believes that a body of pit vipers, gargoyles and demons will save him?  From what does he need to be saved?  Has he given that question much thought?

If others won’t say it, I will: We do not need 400 million guns in our society — and there are very strong reasons to get rid of almost all of them. None will actually defend us against our military or other militaries. Guns in the hands of untrained, unvetted, potentially irresponsible users do much more harm than good. Period

[ … ]

Obviously, law enforcement, the US military, and members of those “well-regulated” militias would be exempted.

We could start with something like this: Civilians have three months to surrender (for generous buyback with full amnesty) every assault weapon (AR-15, AK-47, Kalashnikov, etc.) in their possession. After that, anyone convicted of possession receives a mandatory sentence of 20 years in federal prison.

So there you go.  Mr. Baker isn’t against guns.  He’s very much in favor of guns – just not in your hands.  He advocates that government have a monopoly on power.  But he ignores that in the twentieth century alone, mass shootings at the hands of the state have caused at least 170 millions deaths.  Or maybe he doesn’t really ignore it.  Maybe Mr. Baker is okay with mass deaths as long as it is all inflicted by agents of the state.  Perhaps he even prefers to see mass shootings as long as they are approved by the very people who stand to benefit from those shootings by the concentration of power in a single body of horrible people.

As to that little thing about “None will actually defend us against our military or other militaries,” that’s amusing.  Try telling that to the guys who fought and lost in Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan, the last example where goat herders ran the most powerful country on earth out of their land – not once, but twice, once with the Soviet Union and then with the U.S.

He isn’t interested in the second amendment because he doesn’t see the constitution as a covenant between men, with blessings for obedience and curses for breakage.

He may find out soon enough though.

I assume Mr. Baker will be among that crowd that confiscates all of those ARs and AKs?  Have you volunteered to lead the stack into the first house, Russ?  Or, like a coward, are you volunteering others to do this dirty work for you?

As a follow-up to Night Sights: The Key to Fighting the Night from last week, we thought to post this brief discussion about several sights in varying light conditions. Though, in this article, the camera doesn’t capture well the pitch-dark aspect, the pictures are still helpful upon close examination.

Having a handful of different sight setups on a few of my Glocks, I figured it’d be handy to compare them side-by-side in various lighting conditions in a consistent manner. While I had my own feelings going into it, I found it interesting how similar the tritium and fiber options were with blacked out rears. Granted that was just when the tritium front sight came with a day-glo orange ring around it for extra highlighting, but I had expected the narrow fiber sight to have a clear advantage in all situations other than completely dark (which may be difficult to come up with a justifiable circumstance for).

H/T g/@ShootyMcBeardface