• Hello, this board in now turned off and no new posting.
    Please REGISTER at Anabolic Steroid Forums, and become a member of our NEW community!
  • Check Out IronMag Labs® KSM-66 Max - Recovery and Anabolic Growth Complex

Gun Forum?

Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence : State Gun Laws


the brady campaign has rated states based upon their gun laws. Utah got a 0. :clapping:
It's ironic that the states with the strictest gun laws have the most gun violence. :hmmm: go figure. anyway, if you guys are interested check out the link.

PA got 25. I was surprised it got that much! I'm moving to Wash. State in a few months and they got 17 so even better! LOL!
 
If you want to try excellent test of your basic skills with a handgun, try the F.A.S.T. (Fundamentals, Accuracy, & Speed Test) drill designed by ToddG at Pistol-Training.com.

The FAST test can be downloaded:

pistol-training.com » F.A.S.T. (Fundamentals, Accuracy, & Speed Test)

I can usually do it under 7 seconds, but still have not broken that 5 second mark.

You will need a shot timer, but anyone who is actually serious about being proficient with a handgun as a fighting/defensive tool, already owns one..

To show I'm willing to put my money where my mouth is, I made a vid doing the FAST test today. I had faster runs, but my best cold time with all rnds on target was 6.85. Not gonna win any coin with that time! I'm rusty I must say, and felt rusty as hell on this first day of outdoor range time. It's amazing how fast the skills go...I'll try to get it under 6 seconds is the goal once I get my mojo back up. :D

YouTube Video



I hope some of you try it and post your times!
 
TODD Svigney? I thought Svigney's name was Dave. The only Todd I know is Todd Jerrett. They get together and have a love child? :hmmm:


By the way, nice shootin', Tex. Seriously, the bad guys should be worried. :clapping:
 
TODD Svigney? I thought Svigney's name was Dave. The only Todd I know is Todd Jerrett. They get together and have a love child? :hmmm:


By the way, nice shootin', Tex. Seriously, the bad guys should be worried. :clapping:

Crap, it is Dave. I'm an idiot. Print out FAST, and test yourself some time. :ohyeah:
 
If you want to try excellent test of your basic skills with a handgun, try the F.A.S.T. (Fundamentals, Accuracy, & Speed Test) drill designed by ToddG at Pistol-Training.com.

The FAST test can be downloaded:

pistol-training.com » F.A.S.T. (Fundamentals, Accuracy, & Speed Test)

I can usually do it under 7 seconds, but still have not broken that 5 second mark.

You will need a shot timer, but anyone who is actually serious about being proficient with a handgun as a fighting/defensive tool, already owns one..

To show I'm willing to put my money where my mouth is, I made a vid doing the FAST test today. I had faster runs, but my best cold time with all rnds on target was 6.85. Not gonna win any coin with that time! I'm rusty I must say, and felt rusty as hell on this first day of outdoor range time. It's amazing how fast the skills go...I'll try to get it under 6 seconds is the goal once I get my mojo back up. :D

YouTube Video



I hope some of you try it and post your times!

Awesome! Gonna give that a try!
 
A long read, and worth EVERY word. Forget what you think you know about gun fights, and learn from Jim here. It may save your life some day...

The "Center Mass" Myth and Ending a Gunfight

By Jim Higginbotham

Surviving a gunfight isn't what you think it is. Don???t let conventional wisdom get you killed. A well place round to "center mass" in your attacker may not take him out of the fight. Lots of people stay in the fight after "center mass" hits, and some even win it. If you expect to win your gunfight, you have to make sure that you have effectively ended the threat of your attacker. One, two or even several well placed "center mass" shots may not do what you think it will, and learning to recognize this before you gunfight may save your life.

There is a self styled self defense ???expert??? under every rock, and perhaps two behind every bush, these days. If you have a pet theory on what might work on the street then you can probably find a champion for that idea who actually charges people to teach them that skill. But few of the experts out there have ever been in gunfights, and even fewer have studied real gunfights to see how things really work out when the bullets really fly for blood.

There are more misconceptions out there than I can cover in one article but the one that probably gets to me the most, even over all the caliber wars that rage interminably in the print and cyber media, is the nearly universal acceptance that shooting a miscreant ???center mass??? with ________(fill in your favorite make, model and caliber) shooting _________ (fill in your favorite ammunition) hyper speed truck killer is practically guaranteed to get the job done.

Having studied in this field from a number of decades, I have run into plenty of cases where bullets did not do what folks would have assumed. And I have now collected enough of these that I think that rather than being anomalies, they are actually closer to the norm. Center mass hits in a gunfight do not in most cases end the fight. Erroneous assumptions can get you killed!

There is a well known video in training circles in which a Highway Patrol officer shoots an armed subject 5 times ???center mass??? (this is not my assessment but the statement of his immediate supervisors which are interviewed on the full version of the hour long tape) with his 4??? .357 Magnum revolver firing hollow point ammunition. All 5 hits failed to do the job and the subject was able to fire one round which struck the officer in the armpit. That round wondered around in the chest cavity and found his heart. The officer unfortunately died at the scene and his attacker is alive today.

In a class I conduct under the title "Fire For Effect" I start out by showing a video of standoff in which a hostage taker is fired on by police with .223 rifles and .40 caliber handguns. Throughout the whole disturbing sequence, which lasts about 10 seconds, the bad guy is hit multiple times in the torso with both rifle and pistol rounds. You can see him place his non-firing hand to his chest, clearly a lung is hit. However he is able to shoot his hostage 3 times, not rapidly. The hostage, a trim female, is active throughout the scene but later died from her wounds. In this case both the attacker and the victim had ???center mass??? hits that had no immediate effect.

I have accumulated confirmed incidents in which people have been shot ???center mass??? up to 55 times with 9mm JHP ammunition (the subject was hit 106 times, but 55 of those hits were ruled by the coroner to be each lethal in and of themselves) before he went down. During training at the FBI Academy we were told of a case in which agents shot a bank robber 65 times with 9mm, .223 and 00 buckshot ??? he survived! These are not rare cases. The happen quite often.

If a gunfight ever comes your way, your attacker may fall to a hit to the liver and he may not. He may fall to two or three hits to the kidneys, intestines or spleen, but he may not. He will certainly be in bad health. He likely will not survive, but what he does for the next several seconds to a few minutes is not guaranteed because you hit him "center mass."

Heart and lung hits don't statistically fare much better. I have three students and three other acquaintances who were all shot in a lung at the outset of gunfights. The students came to me after their fights to learn how to keep from getting shot again. Last time I checked all of those people were still alive and the people who shot them are still dead. Every one of them was able to respond effectively after being shot ???center mass???, one might even say they were shot in the ???A-zone???. And they were shot with .38 Special (three of them), 9mm, .357 Magnum and 8mm Mauser, so it's not all about caliber. One of those was a Chicom 12.7 mm round! He lived next door to me for many years.

So, what???s a person to do? First off, realize that one shot, even a fairly well placed shot may not do the job so don???t set there and admire your handiwork or wait for it to take effect. But even two hits may not get the job done!

After years of trying to get a grasp on this I have come to look at the results of shooting a living breathing target ??? be it a human attacker or a game animal ??? as falling into 3 or 4 categories. They are :

1. Instant Collapse ??? this takes place 1 to 2 seconds from the shot being fired
2. Rapid Collapse ??? this can take from 3 to 15 seconds and is quite common.
3. Marginal Effect ??? this can even be a lethal hit but it takes from 15 to 300 (yes 300!) or even more seconds.
4. The 4th is simply unacceptable and is a total failure.

The last category we don???t like to discuss but happens too often . We saw it recently in Washington with a Center Mass hit from an officer???s pistol and the subject was still walking around the next day.

What is ???effective??? shooting? Sad to say, it is demanding. It is also, I think, variable depending on the conditions. For example, the robber armed with a scattergun who is standing 10 feet away must be stopped ???right now!??? If you do not bring about Instant Collapse someone may very well die???that someone may be you!

On the other hand, if there is a gang banger launching bullets in your general direction using un-aimed fire about 20 yards away then a hit that brings about Rapid Collapse might do the job.

I cannot imagine a Marginally Effective result being very desirable in any case, but it does buy you some time in some cases.

How does this relate to hits? In order to achieve Instant Collapse you must scramble the ???circuitry??? that keeps the bad guy on the attack. That means the brain or spinal cord.

The head is not only a fairly difficult target to hit in the real world ??? because it moves a lot ??? but it is also difficult to penetrate and get a pistol bullet into the place it must be to be effective. For normal purposes we might write off the head, keeping it in reserve for very special circumstances.

The spine is not that easy to hit either. It isn't large, and to be effective the hit needs to be in the upper 1/3 of the spine or at a point about level with the tip of the sternum. I think that is around T11. But of course the huge problem is that it is hidden by the rest of the body. We are the good guys, we don???t go around shooting people in the back. So the exact location is something that can only be learned through lots of practice on 3D targets. Your point of aim on the surface changes with the angle at which the target is facing.

The bottom of the spine isn't much use. I know of several people shot in the pelvis. It did not break them down as many theorize. I am not saying it doesn???t happen but in the only case I know of in which it did the person who was ???anchored??? with a .357 magnum to the pelvis killed the person that shot him ??? you can shoot just fine from prone.

A shot, or preferably multiple shots to the heart and major arteries above the heart (not below!) may achieve Rapid Collapse, but not always. Officer Stacy Lim was shot in the heart at contact distance with a .357 Magnum and is still alive and her attacker is still dead! Score one for the good guys???or in this case gals!

So now what constitutes Marginal Effectiveness? A hit to the lungs! Even multiple hits to the lungs. Unfortunately though, most often lung hits are effective in ending the fight because the subject decides to quit the fight, not because he MUST. A famous Colonel Louis LeGarde once wrote what is considered "the" book on gunshot wounds. 65% of his patients shot through the lungs ??? with rifles! ??? survived with the predominant treatment being only bed rest!
Effective Practice and "Dynamic Response"

The goal of practice, one would think, is to make correct, effective shooting techniques a matter of reflex, so that you don't have to think about what you are doing in a gunfight.

Most people will perform under stress at about 50 to 60% as well as they do on the range???and that is if they practice a lot! If they only go to the range once every other month that performance level decreases dramatically. Shooting and weapons handling are very perishable skills. Also folks tend to practice the wrong stuff inadvertently. I put this in the classification of ???practicing getting killed??? but that too is a topic for another day.
Movement and Variation doesen't mean
innacurate shooting. In a real gunfight you and
your adversary will most likely
be moving. Click here if you can't see the video.

Let???s talks about a basic response, what I call "Dynamic Response." Situations vary and this is not meant to be a universal answer, just one that will work for about 80% of scenarios.

It is pointless to stand still on the range and shoot a stationary target, unless you simply want to polish up some marksmanship fundamentals. That is a necessary part of learning to shoot. But if you are practicing for a fight, then fight!

Some rules.


1. Don???t go to the range without a covering garment ??? unless of course you always carry your gun exposed (no comment).
2. Don???t practice drawing your gun fast ??? ever! ??? while standing still.

Part of the Dynamic Response is to step off the line of attack (or on rare occasions that are dependent on circumstances backwards or forwards) and present the weapon with as much alacrity as you can muster and engage the target with overwhelming and accurate fire! By the way, never assume a fight is completely over just because you canceled one threat. Don???t practice ???standing down??? too quickly. We have a video attached which will hopefully give you the right idea.

I wish there was a formula of how to stand and how to hold you gun but there really isn't. We don???t do ???Weaver vs. Isosceles vs. Modern Iso vs. whatever???. We don???t do ???Thumbs Crossed vs. Thumbs Forward vs. Thumb Up???never mind.??? Those are things for you to work out on your own. You use what makes YOU effective not what works for a guy who practices 50,000 rounds the week before a big match (that is not an exaggeration). Competitive shooters will throw out advice on what works for them. It may not work for you.



Cont:

The "Center Mass" Myth and Ending a Gunfight - Shoot Better! - GunsAmerica Magazine & Forums
 
Damn Will, good article. (Even if a bit disheartening.) I've never heard anybody poo poo center mass hits before. But he sure makes logical sense. Guess I need to schedule some more range time with the ole .45. :eek:
 
Damn Will, good article. (Even if a bit disheartening.) I've never heard anybody poo poo center mass hits before. But he sure makes logical sense. Guess I need to schedule some more range time with the ole .45. :eek:

That's reality. He says what I and others have said for years, but he does a better job of summing it up. Friend of mine has been in 6 gun fights, won them all, and he's the one who sent me the article....
 
Something I'm still not clear on though, WHAT am I aiming at? I completely understand the Dynamic Response concept and how to practice it but, he never comes out and says to aim for the head instead of center mass. (If he did, I missed it.) So, during Dynamic Response training, assuming I'm using a standard B-27 sillouhette, do I aim for the head or center mass?

Either way it gives credibility to the old cliche': Winning their hearts and minds; two to the heart, one to the mind."
8.gif
 
Muscle Gelz Transdermals
IronMag Labs Prohormones
Something I'm still not clear on though, WHAT am I aiming at? I completely understand the Dynamic Response concept and how to practice it but, he never comes out and says to aim for the head instead of center mass. (If he did, I missed it.) So, during Dynamic Response training, assuming I'm using a standard B-27 sillouhette, do I aim for the head or center mass?

Either way it gives credibility to the old cliche': Winning their hearts and minds; two to the heart, one to the mind."
8.gif

"A shot, or preferably multiple shots to the heart and major arteries above the heart (not below!) may achieve Rapid Collapse"

If you watch the vid there, you can see he places the bullets more or less upper center mass. His major point I think is not that center mass shots are not effective per se (head and spine shots are of course most effective but can't be counted on in a gun fight....) but that they unlikely to be effective under most circumstances with only a few rnds, and one should shoot and shoot often in a life and death situation.
 
"A shot, or preferably multiple shots to the heart and major arteries above the heart (not below!) may achieve Rapid Collapse"

If you watch the vid there, you can see he places the bullets more or less upper center mass. His major point I think is not that center mass shots are not effective per se (head and spine shots are of course most effective but can't be counted on in a gun fight....) but that they unlikely to be effective under most circumstances with only a few rnds, and one should shoot and shoot often in a life and death situation.

Oh HELL yeah! Once you start shooting, you don't stop until the attack has been stopped.
 
So it's not really a Myth, he just makes you aware that it isn't an instant showstopper. We were taught this in the Navy, just because you empty a clip into their chest doesn't mean they can't raise their arm one last time and put one in your head just like you see in the movies. I thought aiming for the heart/center chest was the common goal, perforate the heart, lungs everything keeping the other guy pulling down on you....
 
Oh HELL yeah! Once you start shooting, you don't stop until the attack has been stopped.
Don't stop until they drop or at least their weapon does, then blow their fingers off so they can't put anyone else in that situation.....
 
"A shot, or preferably multiple shots to the heart and major arteries above the heart (not below!) may achieve Rapid Collapse"

If you watch the vid there, you can see he places the bullets more or less upper center mass. His major point I think is not that center mass shots are not effective per se (head and spine shots are of course most effective but can't be counted on in a gun fight....) but that they unlikely to be effective under most circumstances with only a few rnds, and one should shoot and shoot often in a life and death situation.

One thing I would like to point out is that in police training, they train you to shoot center mass. I know you are familiar with this Will. They do not want it to look like you were "trying to kill the suspect", only stop him. Which I find very odd. Why do you shoot him in the first place? Because he poses a danger to you or the innocent public. Courts are a very weird place to be and you never know how a case will go in court against you, even if you were right in your actions. I know it's a common practice and thought for every officer to shoot to kill if someone is shooting at you. But in court, you better not say that or it may get you in very hot water.
On a side note, during some combat training during timed exercises, some instructors will make you take a head shot.
 
One thing I would like to point out is that in police training, they train you to shoot center mass. I know you are familiar with this Will. They do not want it to look like you were "trying to kill the suspect", only stop him. Which I find very odd. Why do you shoot him in the first place? Because he poses a danger to you or the innocent public. Courts are a very weird place to be and you never know how a case will go in court against you, even if you were right in your actions. I know it's a common practice and thought for every officer to shoot to kill if someone is shooting at you. But in court, you better not say that or it may get you in very hot water.
On a side note, during some combat training during timed exercises, some instructors will make you take a head shot.

Because its bad PR for a perp to be on the ground with his face blown off, on the 6 o'clock evening news.

Also the larger target of "centermass" dictates a higher hit probability which I believe Will has already mentioned all of this.

I usually train with a quick double tap to upper center mass, with 1 round to the head. Though I often train with mag dumps in double tap intervals which with practice can be easily controlled.
 
One thing I would like to point out is that in police training, they train you to shoot center mass. I know you are familiar with this Will.

Yes, but it was shoot center mass twice, then assess. That has gotten many an officer killed. It's my understanding current training is teaching them to shoot 'till the threat is no longer a threat per this article. The old doctrine assumed 1-2 shots center mass would put them down (Ergo the myth...), and experience showed that not to be the case more often then not.

I'm not privy to the training teachings of every academy, but I do know many LE and or Mil trainers, and the "2 shots center mass then assess" is long gone.

However, I have shot with many people - civi and LEO alike - who still follow it in their training (because they greatly over estimate the effectiveness of the bullets and or under estimate how tough people really are) and that can and will get you killed.
 
However, I have shot with many people - civi and LEO alike - who still follow it in their training (because they greatly over estimate the effectiveness of the bullets and or under estimate how tough people really are) and that can and will get you killed.

Whatchoo talkin' 'bout?!?!? I shoot a .45 A C mofokin' P. I hit a bad guy in the pinkey with that suckah and he'll spin around three times and drop dead just from the shockwave. :pissed:


And I NEVER miss, cause I gots me some badass sights on my heater:


homeboynytesytes467ace.jpg
 
Yes, but it was shoot center mass twice, then assess.
Yup. Ive never understood this,.. and fully agree too how this can put lives at jeopardy, which is why I personally would never rely solely on one double tap to do the job. Many of the guys I have shot with (LE, ex military and competitors) all train with accurate and controlled mag dumps in some form. I know each training facility/academy is different and everyone has or teaches their own technique, but I believe this is the most effective method.
 
That was a good read Will. Allot of officers shoot at my range and they tell me this stuff all the time, a gunfight isn't over until the gun is 10 feet away from an attacker. I've never even had to draw my weapon out on the street. I pray I never have to. Our pistol club does allot of Handgun safety drills outdoors and even in a controlled environment, knowing there is no real threats, my hand still gets the shakes from the adrenalin rush. So I do hope my skills kick in if the need ever comes because I'm not sure how calm I can remain if someone else is shooting back!
 
criminals don't fill out paperwork and submit to background checks. all the added regulations do is add more fees for hardworking people to pay..more hoops to jump through. I don't care for guns and I dont have one, but I like knowing that nobody says I can't...
 
Strike another one for the good guys! 5/4 decision, scary close (4 of them really need to get a clue...) but reason and actually paying attention to the spirit and intent of the Second Amendment won out. :clapping:

(Reuters) - The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday extended gun rights to every state and city in the nation in a ruling likely to spur new challenges to gun control measures across the United States.

U.S. | Politics

The 5-4 ruling could ultimately make it easier for individuals to own handguns in a country that already has the world's highest civilian gun ownership rate. Some 90 million Americans own an estimated 200 million guns.

Splitting along conservative and liberal lines, the nation's highest court extended its landmark 2008 ruling -- that individual Americans have a constitutional right to own guns -- to all cities and states for the first time.

The decision extending gun rights, one of the country's most divisive social, political and legal issues, was a setback for Chicago's 28-year-old ban on handguns, which now faces new judicial review and is likely to be eventually overturned.

Legal challenges to existing laws restricting gun use in other states and cities are also expected.

Investors saw the ruling as a win for gun makers, pushing shares of Smith & Wesson Holding Corp up 5.6 percent and Sturm Ruger & Co up 2.2 percent on Monday.

The right to bear arms, under the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, previously applied only to federal laws and federal enclaves, like Washington D.C., where the court struck down a similar handgun ban in its 2008 ruling.

The ruling, issued on the last day of the Supreme Court's term, was a victory for four Chicago-area residents, two gun rights groups and the powerful National Rifle Association.

"This decision makes absolutely clear that the Second Amendment protects the God-given right of self-defense for all law-abiding Americans, period," said Chris Cox, the rifle association's chief lobbyist.

Chicago had defended its law as a reasonable exercise of local power to protect public safety. That law, and a similar handgun ban in suburban Oak Park, Illinois, were the nation's most restrictive gun control measures.

"We hold that the Second Amendment right is fully applicable to the states," Justice Samuel Alito concluded for the court majority, ruling that the right to bear arms was a fundamental right.

YEARS OF LAWSUITS

It could take years of lawsuits before courts draw a clear line between an individual's right to a gun for self-defense and reasonable government gun regulations to reduce violent crimes like murder, suicide and accidental shooting deaths.

The justices did not strike down the Chicago law directly, but sent the case back to a U.S. appeals court for review, where it appeared likely to be struck down under the ruling.

Gun control advocates had expected the ruling and predicted that reasonable regulations would survive future challenges.

Paul Helmke of the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence said, "We can expect two things as a result of today's decision. ... The gun lobby and gun criminals will use it to try to strike down gun laws, and those legal challenges will continue to fail."

The court's four liberal justices dissented.

Retiring Justice John Paul Stevens wrote in a 57-page dissent that the "consequences could prove far more destructive

-- quite literally -- to our nation's communities and to our constitutional structure."

It was widely seen as one of the Supreme Court's most important rulings this term, along with the decision in January that corporations can spend freely to support or defeat candidates for president and Congress.

Gun rights could emerge as a key issue at Senate confirmation hearings that started on Monday for Elena Kagan, nominated by President Barack Obama to replace Stevens.

'LOVE TO KILL'

In Chicago, a clearly disappointed Mayor Richard Daley said he was working on a new gun ordinance now that the Supreme Court had ruled on the city's handgun ban.

He also took issue with the court's majority ruling that elected officials were not doing enough to quell gun violence.

"Common sense tells you we need fewer guns, not more guns," Daley said. "When it comes to Chicago, the court has ignored all that has been done in the past decade to reduce the murder rate and violent crime."

Daley cited statistics detailing the nation's level of gun violence: 100,000 people shot each year, eight people dying each day from gunshots, one million dead since 1968, the year Martin Luther King and Robert Kennedy were assassinated.

He said $10 billion a year is spent in the United States on guns and ammunition.

"We can kill more people in America than anywhere else," a visibly angry Daley told reporters. "We love to kill."

The Supreme Court case is McDonald v. City of Chicago, No. 08-1521.

(Additional reporting by Andrew Stern in Chicago, editing by Simon Denyer and Todd Eastham)
 
Well done Will. I forgot to post this. Great news!
 
Guns are cool
 
I got an email from GOA as soon as it passed. I'm glad, but like Will, this should not have even been close. The newest member of the court, sonia sotomayor, said this during her confirmation hearings..............

On July 14 of last year, Sotomayor was asked by Sen. Pat Leahy during the confirmation hearings:

"Is it safe to say that you accept the Supreme Court's Decision [in Heller] as establishing that the Second Amendment right is an individual right? Is that correct?"

Sotomayor responded: "Yes, Sir." In other words, she affirmed with her response that the right to keep and bear arms was a fundamental, individual right.

It's no surprise that she joined the anti-gun dissenters, but it highlights what a sham the judicial hearings are -- and how Senators should put no stock in a nominee's responses.
The same is being done right now with Elena Kagan. Kagan doesn't have a record of judicial opinions, but her views on the Second Amendment are no mystery:

* Kagan drafted a directive in favor of a semi-automatic import ban while serving in the Clinton administration;

* As a law clerk, she advised against allowing the Supreme Court to hear arguments in Sandidge v. United States that the D.C. gun ban was unconstitutional;

* Kagan was also part of the Clinton team that pushed the firearms industry to include gun locks with all gun purchases and was in the Clinton administration when the president pushed legislation that would close down gun shows; and

* Just today, Kagan gave a hint to her true colors. When asked a simple question by Senator Grassley of Iowa -- does the Second Amendment codify a pre-existing right from God or is it a right created by the Constitution? -- Kagan looked like a deer caught in the headlights. After an awkward pause, she said: "I've never considered that question."

Yikes... the Supreme Court is no place for on-the-job training!
If she is confirmed, you know she will vote right along side of the 3 liberls left (minus retiring judge).
We need to oppose this new appointment as hard as we can!
 
I got an email from GOA as soon as it passed. I'm glad, but like Will, this should not have even been close. The newest member of the court, sonia sotomayor, said this during her confirmation hearings..............

On July 14 of last year, Sotomayor was asked by Sen. Pat Leahy during the confirmation hearings:

"Is it safe to say that you accept the Supreme Court's Decision [in Heller] as establishing that the Second Amendment right is an individual right? Is that correct?"

Sotomayor responded: "Yes, Sir." In other words, she affirmed with her response that the right to keep and bear arms was a fundamental, individual right.

It's no surprise that she joined the anti-gun dissenters, but it highlights what a sham the judicial hearings are -- and how Senators should put no stock in a nominee's responses.
The same is being done right now with Elena Kagan. Kagan doesn't have a record of judicial opinions, but her views on the Second Amendment are no mystery:

* Kagan drafted a directive in favor of a semi-automatic import ban while serving in the Clinton administration;

* As a law clerk, she advised against allowing the Supreme Court to hear arguments in Sandidge v. United States that the D.C. gun ban was unconstitutional;

* Kagan was also part of the Clinton team that pushed the firearms industry to include gun locks with all gun purchases and was in the Clinton administration when the president pushed legislation that would close down gun shows; and

* Just today, Kagan gave a hint to her true colors. When asked a simple question by Senator Grassley of Iowa -- does the Second Amendment codify a pre-existing right from God or is it a right created by the Constitution? -- Kagan looked like a deer caught in the headlights. After an awkward pause, she said: "I've never considered that question."

Yikes... the Supreme Court is no place for on-the-job training!
If she is confirmed, you know she will vote right along side of the 3 liberls left (minus retiring judge).
We need to oppose this new appointment as hard as we can!
I agree full force with what you put here. I fear kagan's appointment will go down just as easy as sotomayers did
 
Btw, here is my newest toy. THe pic came out blurry but you can tell what it is.
T/C .50 cal Triumph, Bone collector edition, with Leupold Ultimate slam 3-9x40 scope.
Look out big bucks come deer season!
 
Back
Top