Resident Arses:




Laura Elizabeth







| Front page | Next page »

(Originally published August 2008)


The so-called "assault weapon" ban was stupid--and just about anyone who knows anything about it knows it was stupid.


If you're like most gun owners, you probably have at least one anti-gun friend who can't understand why gun owners opposed the federal "assault weapon" ban originally, or why we oppose it now.


What I've generally found is that the vast majority of those individuals know next to nothing, if anything at all, about what the so-called "assault weapon" ban actually was.  What they generally know is that they don't like guns that much in the first place, and they sure don't like any gun specifically designed for "assault."


If you have such a friend, I encourage you to send them this simple quiz and ask him or her to send back the answer.


Most knowledgeable gun owners should know the answer, but I'll be posting it in a separate post later on. (UPDATE: the answer is posted HERE).


At any rate, here is the first question:

Assuming each of the 20 firearms pictured below (i.e., an individual unit/product, not the model) was available for purchase in January 1994, how many would have been banned from sale, transfer or use in the United States during the period between 1994 and 2004 owing to the provisions of the Federal "Assault Weapon" Ban?

Good luck!












"Today the Supreme Court ruled that Chicago's handgun ban violates the right to keep and bear arms. The 5-to-4 decision confirms that the Second Amendment binds state and local governments as well as federal domains such as the District of Columbia, which had a similar gun law that the Court overturned in the landmark 2008 case D.C. v. Heller. The Court ruled that the Second Amendment, like most other protections in the Bill of Rights, applies to the states by way of the 14th Amendment's Due Process Clause."

Full text of the opinion here :

She should've waited for the police!   /snark


ABC Action News - Police: Wife shot husband in self-defense

Witness statements and further investigation showed that Troy Christoff intended to shoot several members of his family.  Before the shooting, he armed himself with a handgun and began to load the weapon, stating which member of his family each bullet was intended for.

Via Facebook:

Round 2 of the Nationwide "Chicago Tea Party" is set to happen on April 15th, 2009... TAX DAY!

Our Theme: Repeal the Pork, Cut Taxes

We'll be working with different groups in a collaborative effort to make this one even larger than the last.

Join this group and invite all of your friends!

More info posted at

We've all heard it before.  The "expert" who'll tell you with a straight face that a .22 won't even slow down a mouse, or that a leather jacket is enough to stop a .32 bullet, or that the sheer momentum of a .45 will almost always knock down a grizzly bear.


This is, of course, utter bunk.


There is (or should be) little debate that the average .45 acp cartridge is more powerful than the average 9mm Luger cartridge, which is more powerful than the average .380 acp cartridge, which is more powerful than the average .32 acp cartridge, which is more powerful than the average .22 LR cartridge.  We would probably safely assume that the best .45 acp cartridge will, all other things being equal, inflict more tissue damage on a target than the best cartridge of any of the above calibers.


This is all pretty much common sense.  Extrapolating these basic and fairly uncontroversial principles into broader, "one size fits all" maxims, however, just doesn't work.  The forum know-it-all who'll tell you that a 9mm isn't even worth carrying if you care about your life, or that anything less than a .357 Magnum will just hack your assailant off, is engaging in the time-honored tradition of making crazy broad statements without much of anything to back it up. 


Despite what you may have been led to believe, there is no pistol cartridge which will ALWAYS, under ALL circumstances, stop an attack with one shot.  There is also no pistol cartridge which could NEVER stop an attack under any circumstances.  There are some pistol cartridges which are MORE LIKELY to stop an attack and some which are LESS LIKELY to stop an attack under the same circumstances.  As above, when you go beyond these basic and uncontroversial principles, things get muddy fast. 



Sporting a gorgeous pair of oversized cannons, Angelina Jolie kicked ass and took names as Lara Croft in ''Tomb Raider.''  Although we haven't seen the numbers, we're wondering if sales of H&K USPs were up in the wake of Jolie's performance as the impetuous young adventurer.


Ms. Jolie's experience with guns extends beyond her acting experience.  In real life, Ms. Jolie is a gun owner and an unapologetic believer in self defense.  Potential intruders beware:

"If anybody comes into my home and tries to hurt my kids, I've no problem shooting them...I bought original, real guns of the type I used in 'Tomb Raider' for security. Brad and I are not against having a gun in the house, and we do have one. I'd be able to use it if I had to."

(More photos of Angelina Jolie below the fold)


Previous Arsenal Gun Babes:


Gov. Sarah Palin        Jessica Alba       Hayden Pannetierre


2008 was certainly a "mixed bag" for gun owners.

Though the election of Obama and Biden is certainly not something gun owners should cheer, the defeat of John McCain was not something gun owners should shed too many tears over. McCain was willing to go along with a number of Sarah Brady's favorite stupid ideas, including but not limited to a return of the Assault Weapon Ban and new federal restrictions on private transfers of firearms. In 2008, gun owners were faced with the choice between really bad and really not-so-great.

Ultimately, the American people elected two of the Senate's most anti-gun members to the White House. I'd be lying if I told you this is a good thing for gun owners. It's definitely not. Although most of the pundits are not expecting any new gun control STATUTES soon, there's every reason to expect more stringent PROCEDURES, REGULATIONS and EXECUTIVE ORDERS on firearms--and particularly as regards the importation of "politically incorrect" military-style rifles (e.g., Simonov and Kalashnikov variants), ammo and accessories (e.g., large-capacity magazines). In many areas of gun control regulation, Barack Obama's Executive Branch will have wide discretion to modify the rules without Congressional approval, PARTICULARLY as regards importation of foreign firearms. Thus, if you have an interest in owning one or more foreign-made military-style rifles, you might want to consider stocking up sooner rather than later.

Despite the bad news at the polls, there was a very shiny SILVER LINING to 2008 courtesy of the U.S. Supreme Court. Specifically, the Supreme Court FINALLY settled the question of whether the Second Amendment protects an INDIVIDUAL right to keep and bear arms. Thankfully, the Court answered that question correctly. This is HUGE, and is something that should give all gun owners reason for optimism.

I enter 2009 prepared to stand up for my rights under the Second Amendment, and I know that I'll only be able to do that effectively if others are willing to stand with me. I hope that I can include our Arsenal readers in that group.

Posted at

The SKS rifle in a lot of ways reminds me of a classic Rodney Dangerfield act, it gets no respect.  No respect from the “mainstream” Gun press.  No respect from the guys who hunt deer once a year.  No respect from gun collectors.  No respect from the Mainstream media.  Sometimes it even gets no respect from the people who own them. 


Most of the above mentioned people don’t get my respect anyway, the mainstream media for instance.  I swear, the next time I hear of another terrible gun crime committed with an “SKS Assault Rifle” I’m going to pitch my TV right out of the window.  Most of the press could look at a stock, unmodified Norinco SKS and not think of it as anything but an “old wooden rifle. ” Most of these idiots couldn’t even recognize an SKS if it was right in front of them but if it gets used in a crime it’s an “assault rifle.”  But anybody reading this editorial probably already knows that. 

Courtesy of ATF.TREAS.GOV:


May a nonlicensee ship a firearm through the U.S. Postal Service?

A nonlicensee may not transfer a firearm to a non-licensed resident of another State. A nonlicensee may mail a shotgun or rifle to a resident of his or her own State or to a licensee in any State. The Postal Service recommends that long guns be sent by registered mail and that no marking of any kind which would indicate the nature of the contents be placed on the outside of any parcel containing firearms. Handguns are not mailable. A common or contract carrier must be used to ship a handgun.


[18 U.S.C. 1715, 922(a)(3), 922(a)(5) and 922 (a)(2)(A)]

May a nonlicensee ship a firearm by common or contract carrier?

A nonlicensee may ship a firearm by a common or contract carrier to a resident of his or her own State or to a licensee in any State. A common or contract carrier must be used to ship a handgun. In addition, Federal law requires that the carrier be notified that the shipment contains a firearm and prohibits common or contract carriers from requiring or causing any label to be placed on any package indicating that it contains a firearm.


[18 U.S.C. 922(a)(2)(A), 922(a) (3), 922(a)(5) and 922(e), 27 CFR 478.31 and 478.30]

May a nonlicensee ship firearms interstate for his or her use in hunting or other lawful activity?

Yes. A person may ship a firearm to himself or herself in care of another person in the State where he or she intends to hunt or engage in any other lawful activity. The package should be addressed to the owner. Persons other than the owner should not open the package and take possession of the firearm.

Posted at

I strongly endorse Ken Blackwell to be the next Chairman of the Republican National Committee. Ken served with distinction with my home-state Senator John McCain and with Georgia Republican National Committeeman Alec Poitevint on the International Republican Institute (IRI). He also replaced Vice President Dick Cheney on the Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs (JINSA).


Ken has been a strong supporter of the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms and respects every individual's fundamental right of self-defense. I strongly support his candidacy and urge my friends on the Republican National Committee to join me in supporting Ken Blackwell.


Sincerely, Sandy Froman

Via Estes Park Trail Gazette:

A 25-year-old federal rule severely restricting loaded guns in national parks is being holstered. The Bush administration last Friday announced it is overturning the 25-year-old Reagan-era regulation that severely restricted loaded guns in national parks. Under a rule to take effect in January, visitors who have the proper permits for carrying a concealed weapon will be able to carry a loaded gun into a park or wildlife refuge.


The new regulation allows individuals to carry concealed firearms in federal parks and wildlife refuges to the same extent they can lawfully do so under state law. The previous regulation required that firearms be unloaded and placed somewhere that is not easily accessible, such as in a car trunk.

Via the New York Times:

Nearly six months after the Supreme Court put an end to the District of Columbia’s decades-old ban on handgun possession, the City Council here passed a sweeping new ordinance on Tuesday to regulate gun ownership.


The legislation would require all gun owners to receive five hours of safety training and to register their firearms every three years. In addition, they would have to undergo a criminal background check every six years.


Councilman Phil Mendelson, who helped draft the bill and shepherd it through the Council, called it a “very significant piece of legislation that borrows best practices from other states.”


Opponents said the legislation flew in the face of the Supreme Court ruling in June.

Via L.A. Times:

The Los Angeles City Council approved a package of gun control laws Wednesday, placing new requirements on ammunition sellers and banning the sale of military-style ammunition in the hopes of further reducing the city's gun and gang violence.

The measures ban the sale of .50-caliber ammunition, capable of penetrating a car's engine, and would require the city's ammunition vendors to be licensed, to sell ammunition face-to-face instead of over the Internet and require gun dealers to report a full accounting of their inventory twice a year to the Police Department.

Michael Steele has been getting a lot of buzz in his race for RNC Chairman.


Unfortunately, Steele has been less than 100% supportive of the Right to Keep and Bear Arms.  I'm particularly troubled by this interchange:

Q: Should people have access to buy assault weapons or any gun that they want?


A: Well, I mean you draw the line.  I mean, what do you need an assault weapon for?  I mean, if going hunting, I think that's a little overkill or whatever, but the reality of it is, I think it's important for a society, a community to draw the lines as we've drawn in a number of other constitutional areas, but I don't think that that means that you go to a total ban for those who want to use guns for skeet shooting and hobbying and hunting and things like that.

Sad to say, but this same quote could've been spouted by Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama.  It's the LEFTIES who think the Second Amendment has something to do with hunting.


Michael Steele's weakness on gun rights has had me looking elsewhere for a candidate to support.


One of the names mentioned as an alternative to Michael Steele is Ken Blackwell.


After reading some of Blackwell's writing on the Second Amendment, I am happy to report that Ken Blackwell is not at all equivocal in his support for the Second Amendment.


Here's Ken Blackwell on the Right to Keep and Bear Arms:

| Front page | Next page »