A Militia Of One: ...At a debate at Columbia Law School in November,
Robert A. Levy, one of the lawyers for the plaintiffs in the case before
the Supreme Court, District of Columbia v. Heller, proposed a thought
experiment. Suppose there were a constitutional amendment that said, "A
well-educated electorate, being necessary to the self-governance of a
free state, the right of the people to keep and read books shall not be
infringed." Who would doubt that such an amendment protected a right to
possess all books and to read books for purposes other than civic
self-betterment?
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/13/weekinreview/13liptak.html?_r=1&ref=us&oref=slogin
A Law Professor's View Of The Second Amendment:
http://www.virginiainstitute.org/publications/primer_on_const.php
A Grammarian's View Of The Second Amendment:
http://www.2asisters.org/unabridged.htm
---
Gun Vote Could Decide Michigan GOP Primary: ...The three candidates
topping the polls in Michigan all have something to run on. Mike
Huckabee easily has the strongest Second Amendment record out of the
three, earning top ratings and endorsements from the NRA when he was
running for governor of Arkansas. Mitt Romney is an NRA member speaking
in favor of gun rights, though his continued endorsement of the Clinton
Gun Ban and Brady Bill on Meet the Press last month is generating
criticism from many gun owners. And John McCain supported pro-gun
legislation during his many years in the House and Senate, including the
bill to end junk lawsuits against gun dealers, though it's also no
secret that he has crossed swords with gun-rights supporters on more
than one occasion
http://www.townhall.com/columnists/SandyFroman/2008/01/12/gun_vote_could_decide_michigan_gop_primary?page=full&comments=true
---
National Guardsman Convicted In Weapon Malfunction: A drill instructor
in the National Guard has been convicted in a Wisconsin federal court of
illegally transferring a machine gun after a rifle he loaned to a
student malfunctioned, setting off three shots before jamming...That
means now that anyone whose weapon malfunctions is subject to charges of
having or handling a banned gun, according to an expert witness who
reports that the particular problem is a well-known malfunction and was
even the subject of a recall from the manufacturer..."Basically if your
Ruger 10/22, Browning Citori Over and Under or Remington 11-87
malfunction and fire more than one round at a time; the ATF will now
consider it a machine gun," he wrote.
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=59650
---
Finally!: For years I have been on the lookout for a good pocket
holster, for the time in my life when I could clear out my left front
pants pocket for one more S&W Centennial revolver. At the 2005 IALEFI
conference, Tom Marx had a PCS pocket holster that seemed better than
anything else I had seen. Problems I have encountered with other pocket
holsters have included difficulty obtaining a full firing grip inside
the pocket and failure to keep the gun stable in the pocket while
seated. I recently received a No See-Um Straight PCS holster from
Lightning Arms Sports that meets my requirements, so long as the pocket
is as deep as that on my pleat-front Dockers. Several other models are
available, for various styles of pocket. The No See-Um models are the
only ones that are not molded on both sides and the stitching visible on
the flat side is for another layer of leather on the inside, which
includes a slight cylinder recess for the flat side. Years ago I tried a
Kramer pocket holster, which places a sheet of Kydex on the outside of
the flat side, and find the PCS holster to be a much better design, at
least for my purposes.
http://www.lightningarms.com/products.htm
---
From The Firearms Coalition:
In typical, "screw your friends and appease your enemies," Republican
fashion, the Bush Justice Department has filed an amicus brief defending
the DC gun ban in the DC v. Heller case currently before the Supreme
Court. The Justice Department calls on the Court to acknowledge the
Second Amendment as an individual right, but asks that the Circuit
Court's decision in the case be reversed and remanded (thrown out and
sent back to the Circuit Court) with instructions to determine whether
DC's laws unreasonably restrict resident's ability to exercise their
rights. It appears that the "pro-gun," Republican Department of Justice
fears that any decision from the Supreme Court which held that banning
any class of weapons was an infringement of the Second Amendment, might
open the door to challenges against bans on dreaded machineguns.
It is worth noting that Congress recognized back in 1934 that banning
machineguns would be a violation of the Second Amendment so they instead
devised a plan whereby they could control such firearms with burdensome
taxes and paperwork restrictions. It was not until 1986 that the first
ever federal firearms ban was enacted when NRA accepted a ban on private
purchase or possession of any newly manufactured machineguns as an
amendment to the McClure-Volkmer, Firearms Owner's Protection Act. At
that time, NRA-ILA chief, Wayne LaPierre declared that repeal of the
machinegun ban would be NRA's top priority in the next session of
Congress. Even though Mr. LaPierre has been the Chief Executive Officer
of the organization for more than 15 years now and receives a
compensation totaling more than a million dollars a year, no bill to
repeal the '86 ban has ever been put forward by NRA.
If the Supreme Court follows the government's request in this matter, no
firm decision about the practical value of the Second Amendment could be
expected for at least another four years; many thousands of dollars, and
at least two new Justices from now. Republican politicians and
operatives across the country need to hear and feel the wrath of
GunVoters over this latest in a long list of betrayals from our
oh-so-reliable, pro-gun friends. Write to the President, the
Vice-President, your Republican Senators and Representatives, your local
Republican officials and your County Central Committee and let them know
that your anger will be reflected at the ballot box. This is just
another example of why Republicans like Rudy Giuliani, Mitt Romney, and
John McCain are completely unacceptable presidential candidates and why
Republicans are likely to lose the Presidency and additional
Congressional seats due to a poor showing from GunVoters in the coming
elections.
*******************
We will continue to keep you informed about the important events in the
gun rights fight. Thank you for staying on the front lines and helping
us play a role. If you do not currently subscribe to our bi-monthly
newsletter, The Hard Corps Report, or have not made a contribution to
our cause recently, we would appreciate your help right now.
Contributions can be made through our web site:
www.FirearmsCoalition.org, over the phone at 703-753-0424, or by mail to
The Firearms Coalition, PO Box 3313, Manassas, VA 20108.
Your support is the only way we can stay in the fight so please help if
you can.
Yours for the Second Amendment,
Jeff
Jeff Knox
The Firearms Coalition
www.FirearmsCoalition.org
P.S. Special thanks to Dave Hardy, Second Amendment scholar and good
friend (
http://armsandthelaw.com/archives/2008/01/government_file.php)
for alerting us to this important development and giving us the, "screw
your friends and appease your enemies," quote. JAK
---
From John Farnam:
10 Jan 08
Siderlock?
This is a "security trigger" add-on for Glocks. It apparently
completely replaces the original trigger with one with an integral,
cross-bolt safety button. It is ostensibly being marketed in order to
make the Glock pistol "safer."
"Safer" than what? How "safe" do guns have to be?
There have been any number of these after-market, manual-safety add-ons
produced over the last two decades for Glocks. We see them in Classes
from time to time. None work well, and we're broken several. None are
recommended.
If your pistol must have a manual safety, you need to look at one that
was designed that way from the beginning, like a 1911, the Taurus 24/7,
or Ruger's new SR9.
We'll apparently see this latest attempt to make Glocks "safer" at this
year's SHOT Show in Las Vegas.
Another money-transfer device for idiots!
/John
(Glock reportedly made a run of pistols with thumb safeties for a Middle
Eastern contract many years ago but presumably will not offer that
option in the US for fear that doing so might be painted, in court, as
evidence that they have been selling "unsafe" guns here for years.
Cominolli Custom [
http://www.cominolli.com/ourproducts.html] offers an
aftermarket thumb safety for Glock pistols and I would guess that this
is one of the designs which John derides. Depending on your perception
of need for an additional safety on a bottom-feeding pistol, your needs
might be met by the grip safety on the Springfield XD. Jeff Cooper used
to say that the most important safety device on any firearm is keeping
your finger out of the trigger guard until your sights are on the target
and you're prepared to fire. Others have concerns about keeping
unauthorized users from firing the gun without some exploratory
fiddling. A good friend of mine, recently retired from LASD, had one of
his own S&W revolvers, which he used to carry on duty before the
transition to Berettas, fitted with a Murabito safety, a system that
converts the cylinder release into a thumb safety. )
11 Jan 08
Excellent comments from an Instructor:
"Virtually every fire extinguisher currently manufactured works exactly
the same; the inexpensive one in my kitchen, and the professional model
carried on fire trucks. They're all simple to operate, so there is
actually some possibility ordinary people, in a panicked state, will be
able to make them work in a beneficial way, and in time for it to do
some good. They are designed to be used in an emergency, so they don't
come with combination locks nor a tedious, six-step, sequence-critical
procedure necessary to get them running!
Thank heaven some audacious gun-makers build handguns in this same spirit.
Others display infinitely more dread for the life-saving device they
themselves manufacture, than they do for life-threatening event it is
created to stop!
We think the foregoing is funny, but, for example, how am I supposed to
look upon the credibility and sincerity of a manufacturer of ostensibly
defensive pistols who states in the very literature that is supplied
with each copy of his product:
'Keep this pistol unloaded at all times... Keep this pistol
inaccessible at all times... Never load this pistol at all, until just
before you intend to shoot, and unload it immediately after
shooting.....' ad nauseam?'
I get the distinct impression, they, like the politicians we all
despise, couldn't care less about my life, caring instead only about
insulating themselves from litigation.
God forbid I actually use this pistol for its intended purpose!"
Comment: It would be a good deal more helpful, and infinitely less
disingenuous, if, in their instructional manuals, manufacturers frankly
and openly discussed how to correctly carry and handle a continuously
loaded pistol, how to shoot VCAs in a way that ends the fight quickly
and permanently, authentic options for storing the pistol safely and yet
in an adequate state of readiness, effectively interacting with the
criminal/justice system in the
Aftermath of a defensive shooting, et al. That information would be
genuinely helpful, but is all perpetually "subject-non-grata." Writers
of instructional manuals prefer instead to hypocritically dance around
the real issues.
Guns are dangerous! They have to be, or there would be scant point in
ownership, much less in carrying one. Of course, "dangerous," is a
relative term. However, WHEN FIGHTING FOR MY LIFE, THE ONLY KIND OF GUN
I WANT IS ONE THAT IS EXTREMELY DANGEROUS! The "extremely dangerous"
gun I need at the critical moment is, of course, going to be
"extremely dangerous" the rest of the day too, so I need to know how to
carry, handle, and keep it correctly. That vital information should be
supplied, in spades, by manufacturers, but rarely is.
A well-trained trigger finger, a clear mind, and a virtuous and
courageous heart are as close to a "safety" as we're ever likely to
get. Who are missing any of the above are well advised to pass on gun
ownership!
/John
---
From Force Science Research Center:
Force Science News #89
Low-cost training in crisis decision-making that still "makes 'em
sweat"
Don't have the money for a bells-and-whistles training simulator? Don't
have the time for realistic live role-playing?
Despair not!
If you have paper and pencils and a reality-based imagination, you can
still prepare your officers to react immediately with good decisions in
life-or-death crises, according to Dr. Laura Zimmerman, a research
psychologist whose insights into police decision-making have earned her
a PhD and a job assignment to improve the way officers think under stress.
For low-budget, time-pressured training, she advocates what she terms a
"low-fidelity" learning format called DMXs (Decision-Making Exercises).
These, in effect, are "war games" of the imagination, in which officers
give written responses to scenarios that are challenging, ambiguous,
potentially assessed as high-threat, and then they engage in a lively
give-and-take dissection of each others' solutions to the problems posed.
"DMXs help officers to better recognize danger cues, question
assumptions, seek and sort relevant information in a chaotic
environment, deal with uncertainty and changing goals, and meet other
cognitive challenges they commonly face in high-stakes, fast-paced,
tactical confrontations," Zimmerman says. "These exercises build mental
models in the officers' memory that they can flash back to in a crisis
when they don't have time for a lot of pro-con analysis."
Zimmerman, formerly a certified law enforcement academy instructor in
Texas, is now a senior scientist with Klein Associates, a division of
Applied Research Associates Inc., in Fairborn, OH, a firm that, among
other things, designs training programs for the military and public
service agencies. Her master's thesis focused on techniques for
enhancing memory in eyewitness interviews, and her doctoral dissertation
dealt with strengthening law enforcement decision-making during critical
incidents. She's now engaged in expanding Klein's involvement in police
training.
Recently she wrote an article describing DMXs for the ILEETA Use of
Force Journal. In an interview with Force Science News, she elaborated
on how the process works and why it can add value to any training program.
THE SET-UP.
Ideally, Zimmerman explains, DMXs are integrated into a 3-prong training
strategy that also includes computerized simulations and live
role-playing exercises. But even by themselves they can be highly
effective. "They're low-cost, very flexible, easy to set up, and
adaptable to a wide variety of training environments," she says.
Up to 20 trainees at a time can manageably participate. The class should
include old hands at street work, as well as less-experienced officers.
If only recruits or officers with limited experience are being trained,
spare instructors should join the audience to offer some of their
experience-based insights.
The class instructor distributes and then reads aloud a typewritten
scenario about 2 pages long. A map of the scene where the action takes
place should be included, and for the discussion later, a blow-up of the
map should be posted where it's visible to all trainees.
The scenario should depict a volatile, in-progress situation with
problems that demand immediate attention. The trainees, working alone,
are given 2 to 3 minutes to write out what they would do to handle the
situation for the best possible outcome.
"Of course, that's more time than they probably would have on the street
to consider their options," Zimmerman says. "Ideally, you want to match
the time frame of real life, but you have to allow for writing time.
Limit their response time as much as possible, just enough time to write
a reasonable answer. Even 3 minutes gets their blood pressure up and
makes them sweat."
SCENARIO CONSTRUCTION.
"The scenario needs to be engaging, not dry," Zimmerman points out. "It
has to be the start of a good story that gets the officers involved and
makes them wonder, What's going to happen next, What am I going to do
now? Like the real world, the story should be complex, contain
ambiguity, leave some information missing or uncertain, and present a
problem that allows for more than one acceptable solution."
It's key that the situation not have a single "perfect solution," she
noted in her ILEETA article. Solutions with "a mixture of pros and cons
[will require] the trainees to weigh these factors and consider
consequences. Many subtle factors and critical decisions should be
present throughout the scenario, rather than one incident-ending
decision. You want multiple, feasible, realistic choices. And, of
course, you want to avoid no-win circumstances.
"Scenarios should contain important (as well as insignificant) cues that
allow trainees to do such things as spot early signs of problems, adjust
their approach to the situation, gather resources, plan cover and escape
routes, etc.
"Trainees should not have a crystal-clear picture of the situation.
Officers enter real situations with a great deal of uncertainty and do
not have access to important information as they proceed. A
characteristic of expert decision makers is their ability to handle
uncertainty. Trainees need to develop strategies that work effectively
in the face of uncertainty and ambiguity."
While effective scenarios may be drawn from actual incidents, Zimmerman
advises that it's better not to use local addresses, beat numbers, or
place names. "Give places and people fictitious names so you remove
preconceived notions officers may have, based on what they experience in
their daily work environment," she explains. "Preconceived notions may
skew how they perceive threats and lead to inappropriate decisions,
especially among newer officers. You want the scenario to create a world
of its own, outside the context of any particular place."
SAMPLE ENCOUNTER.
Here's a scenario that Zimmerman considers to represent an
"intermediate" level of difficulty as to decision-making:
You and your partner of 2 years are in a marked patrol unit with
standard equipment and are assigned to a low-income neighborhood with
many historic buildings and landmarks. The neighborhood, the most
run-down in town, is notorious for drug activity, prostitution, and
petty crimes. As part of an effort by the mayor to restore it and
re-attract families and tourists, your chief has mandated a
zero-tolerance policy on petty crime, which includes tracking down and
arresting residents with outstanding warrants. Neighborhood people are
unhappy about the tightening of police control. Many are openly hostile
to officers on patrol.
At the start of your shift, your sergeant hands you and your partner a
stack of arrest warrants and tells you to serve the one for Jay Johnson
before doing anything else. This warrant is left over from the last
shift, and the officers from that shift have information that Johnson is
currently in his house. The warrant is for a probation violation from an
identity theft conviction.
When you and your partner knock on the door at Johnson's residence, an
elderly woman answers and states that her son Jay Johnson is currently
at work and won't be home for 3 hours. As your partner talks with her,
you observe that she looks to be white, whereas the description you have
of Jay Johnson is that he's black. In addition, this woman looks to be
too old to be the mother of your 19-year-old subject. Your partner asks
for Jay's work address and the woman asks you both to come inside as she
goes to get it.
No one else is in the living room as you enter, but you detect the
distinct smell of marijuana in the air. Your partner stands and speaks
to the woman as she writes down the address. You walk through the room
and glance into the kitchen. You see that no one is in there and that
there is no outside exit. Then you go out another doorway into a
hallway, where the smell of marijuana is stronger.
You radio in to confirm that the address on the warrant is correct, and
to advise that drugs are present. While you wait for a reply, you look
down the hall a see a girl about 3 to 4 years old walk out of another
room and into the hall.
As you take a few steps toward her, you suddenly hear your partner yell
out sharply from the living room, "Put the gun down!" and hear a man's
voice yelling angrily. The little girl turns toward you and starts
screaming and crying. She is standing between you and the front door, in
an open doorway into the living room.
Your back-up unit is still en route to your location - 5 to 10 minutes
away. What do you do? How do you assess the situation? Where do you
position yourself? How do you communicate with your partner?
In a time limit of 3 minutes, determine what course of action you will
take and write out why you took that action, with justification.
THE DISCUSSION.
"Trainees will not learn from DMX scenarios unless they discuss their
solutions and analyze their action choices," Zimmerman stresses. In
fact, the discussion is probably the most important part of the exercise.
Often it begins with a volunteer reading for the class his "solution" to
the troublesome scenario and the instructor then encouraging other
trainees to interactively compare and contrast his approach to their
own. Before long, a variety of resolutions and rationales will be in play.
With provocative questions, the instructor can get the officers to
verbalize why the situation at hand was difficult...what factors led
them to chose the courses of action that they did...what cues they were
paying attention to...what missing information would have helped the
most...what other actions were considered and why they were ruled
out...what elements of the scenarios were important and what were merely
distracting or irrelevant...what were the officers'
advantages/disadvantages compared to those of the perpetrator...when and
why in the scenario their assessment of the encounter changed...what
would likely go well and what wouldn't in the solutions offered...how
might the situation have been avoided...and so forth.
The focus of the discussion needs to be on "situation assessment and
decision-making challenges," Zimmerman states. "How do they interpret
the situation and determine what decisions may or may not lead to
successful outcomes? With everyone verbalizing their thought processes,
they learn from one another and see danger cues and creative resolutions
that they may not have thought of on their own."
If the discussion sags at any point, the instructor can stir it to life
again by altering some elements of the scenario: what if it had occurred
at night instead of during the day...what if a second offender suddenly
interceded...what if your partner was a rookie fresh from the academy
rather than an experienced officer...what if the weather were
different...what if your pistol malfunctioned...what if your partner got
shot...etc. In Zimmerman's experience, thorough critiques can take an
hour or more and still not be wrung dry.
The concentration is on "training cognitive skills rather than tactical
or procedural skills," although the instructor may also find it useful
"to ask trainees to discuss appropriate force levels at various points
in the episode, and to discuss the pros and cons of possible strategic
and tactical maneuvers" to broaden the scenario's training value.
THE PAYOFF.
In a class that contains officers with a variety of experience levels,
younger officers are able to absorb the cues and thought processes that
guide the decision-making of seasoned veterans. In this way, they gain
valuable experiential knowledge that might otherwise take them years on
the street to develop independently. And experienced officers can be
jarred from ruts they've unconsciously slipped into by hearing fresh
ideas from less time-worn colleagues.
DMX training gets high marks from participants she has surveyed,
Zimmerman says. They tend particularly to find the discussions valuable
because they reinforce that there are usually multiple options for
successful resolutions-"more tools they can add to their toolbox," she
observes.
"DMX training helps officers build memory patterns of cues,
expectations, creative ways of handling difficult situations. When
they're in a real-life crisis on the street, they may recognize patterns
in the situation that match something from their mental model that will
help them effect an instant appropriate reaction."
Dr. Bill Lewinski, executive director of the Force Science Research
Center at Minnesota State University-Mankato, agrees. "Good spontaneous
decision-making comes out of training and experience that is already
embedded in your brain," he says. "In most street situations, you don't
have time to carefully analyze all your options. You just have to react.
"The more training and experience you've had that relates to the problem
you're confronting, the better you can react. You just sense what to do.
That's how highly proficient athletes work. In an instant, they
comprehend the moves they need to make and they act, without consciously
thinking about it.
"But to react automatically, to make good decisions that fast, you need
a reservoir of valid experience you can draw upon to help you.
Unfortunately, officers often don't do what's most effective in a crisis
situation. A number of factors may be involved in that, but certainly
prominent among them are a lack of training and a lack of experience.
"For trainers, DMX scenarios and discussions are a low-cost, low-tech
means of helping to fill up the reservoirs of the officers they're
responsible for preparing."
[Note: The article from the ILEETA Use of Force Journal referenced in
this report contains an additional sample scenario. More information
about Klein Associates/ARA can be found at: www.decisionmaking.com. Dr.
Zimmerman can be reached at:
[email protected].]
================
The Force Science News is provided by The Force Science Research Center,
a non-profit institution based at Minnesota State University, Mankato.
Subscriptions are free and sent via e-mail. To register for your free,
direct-delivery subscription, please visit www.forcesciencenews.com and
click on the registration button.
(c) 2007: Force Science Research Center, www.forcescience.org. Reprints
allowed by request. For reprint clearance, please e-mail:
[email protected]. FORCE SCIENCE is a registered trademark of
The Force Science Research Center, a non-profit organization based at
Minnesota State University, Mankato.
================
--
Stephen P. Wenger, KE7QBY
Firearm safety - It's a matter
for education, not legislation.
http://www.spw-duf.info
