My last post mentioned some of my interests. Based on the title of the page (and this post and this post) you can guess I am into guns, as well. I'm also into cars. I'm not a gearhead or grease monkey, by any means. I just like cars.
Well, I like cars I can't afford. And I like listening to bumbling, sarcastic Brits prattling on about said cars I can't afford. So, naturally, I watch Top Gear.
And while Jeremy Clarkson may take the piss out of James May for getting overly pedantic regarding cars, engineering, physics, and design, it is entertaining because they DO IT TO BE ENTERTAINING. They are in on the joke. They expect you to be in on the joke. They expect the audience to understand the humor of a scraggly-haired car nerd at a white board describing the innards of a hovercraft.
Another example of Top Gear acknowledging their personal foibles is Clarkson going on about power, speed, and guns in his exuberant, pseudo-jingoistic manner (imagine a twelve-year-old with a monster truck fitted with rocket launchers and you will have a good idea).
Where I come to the point
So, I happen across a Top Gear video of Clarkson and May racing sport wagons on a biathlon course because of course they will. As part of this race, they do the shooting element of the course, firing the prone targets from inside the back of the car because of course they will. Clarkson, however, forgoes the standard Anschutz for a Heckler & Koch MP5 submachinegun because of course he does.
Let the theatrics commence. I can wait.
I showed the video to a friend. This led to questions about biathlon rifles. This led to biathlon, itself. I then happened across a great video produced by Sturm, Ruger & Co. Featuring Annelies Cook from the US biathlon team, the video shows a typical biathlon rifle and the use of it, including the unslinging and slinging (watch all of the various manual checks and manipulation a of covers). There is some awesome footage of the shooters, proper form, and discussions of how they do what they do.
Really good stuff there.
Abandon hope, all ye who enter here...
A mantra of mine regarding YouTube:
do not read the comments.
do not read the comments.
do not read the comments.
After viewing this video, I accidentally neglected my mantra. And this one time, it was gold.
Gun Guys in the audience will recognize some incorrect usage (clips, bullets, shells, and the like). As can be expected, some of "those guys" make an appearance on the comments lamenting the use of perceived incorrect terminology, America's lackluster biathlon performance in the Olympics, and what can only be described as a cross between "kids these days" and "get off my lawn!"
One of my fave Gun Guys - Steve Fjestad from Blue Book Publications
During my time as the Curator of the Cody Firearms Museum, one of my favorite activities was talking to Gun Guys. One of my least favorite activities was talking to Gun Guys...
The following dialogue from the YouTube comments on the Biathlon video (screen-capped for posterity) made my day. It involves BOTH types of gun guys.
David W. is my new Hero of the Interwebz.
He used his wittiness, knowledge, and snark to defend against the demons of pedantistry. As another associated the woman's use of firearms terminology with reasons behind how America sucks at biathlon, David W. kept his calm and poked the troll in such a manner that he started using all sorts of unrelated arguments (the supposed wealth of Olympians, his military experience, and the use of the word 'Libtard' - the hallmark of all well-planned defenses).
David W. won the internet.
In search of a common language
While watching this discourse, I began to ask myself why we cannot progress beyond this argument of pedantic terminology. I remember getting into arguments about this more than three decades ago - as a GRADE SCHOOLER!
I think we are at a point in the shooting world at which we can recognize that language is malleable. Language changes. Language moves. Language bends. Language becomes new.
Yes. A magazine and a clip are, pedantically, two different things.
Yes. A bullet and a shell and a cartridge are all different things.
But people (most people) use them interchangeably. Most of us (students of firearms history and related esoterica) prevent ourselves from getting the vapors when we hear someone describe how they load bullets into a clip. We stop ourselves from hollering at people "It's a Magazine!!!"
I have known too many women who have been the recipient of mistreatment, negative attention, slut-shaming, and harassment, at best; abuse, violence, and rape, at worst. This is not the result of their actions as people. This is the result of the choices of others. These choices deriving from a belief that women should bend to their will and be the object of whatever attention the others choose to give.
I have known too many 'men' who act like this because we are still raised that women are chattel and somehow become our property once we enter into any sort of a relationship. (I use 'men' in quotes simply to denote that I do believe 'manliness' is very much a concept that drives a lot of this behavior)
I am hacked off at any of the attempts I have seen to make it sound like all men are guilt-free because "it wasn't us, it was him" (check out #notallmen on Twitter). Bullshit.
It was us. We may have not pulled the trigger, but it was us who allow others to act this way. The same self-perpetuating nonsense allows white men (of which I am one) to continue to fail to realize that we ARE a privileged group. This is not a case of white guilt, male guilt, or any other guilt. This is an acknowledgement that there are differences within our society - differences in how we are treated.
I have never been singled out by a cop, a clerk, or anyone else because of my skin, my sex, my dress, or my mannerisms. I have never had to be in fear of my safety because someone had any sort of intentions, sexual or otherwise. I never had to worry about how I dressed and how that would make others perceive me other than in a business sense.
I have been guilty of ogling and making assumptions of women due to their dress and actions. I have been guilty of making advances that were unwanted. After reflection, I realized I was in the wrong. That may have been years ago and miles away, but there are still people who still may feel the effects of my actions and words. That is where my guilt lies.
What I can do now is show others that it is not OK to let this slide.
A boy in California (yes, I will call him a boy) was turned down by girls. In response to this, he decided he had to go on a shooting spree.
I know he had issues. I know he needed help. However, despite what some pundits have proposed, he didn't need to get laid - or, interpreted in another way, none of the women in his life needed to give in to his desires and give him what he apparently felt he deserved.
If a woman says she does not want you in that way: Let. It. Go.
If she wants to be 'friends': Be. Her. Friend.
Just because you want something and you do not get it, whether a look, a word, a kiss, a feel, or more, it does not mean she is a bitch, a tease, or any of a number of worse words. She is being a person with every right to control what happens to her being. If you choose to act in a manner that forces her to unwillingly give up this control, you are the one in the wrong.
If you are preventing someone from exercising their control over themselves (or you are enabling this), you are part of the problem. You do not have the right to someones agency. You have not "put in the hours". You have not "earned it".
You only have to acknowledge that the issue may not be with them. The issue may be with you.
Either way, driving around town with a gun and bad intent is not an appropriate response.
* Although I do discuss a male-female power relationship in this post, this type of situation can be present in any type of relationship, whether straight, gay, or otherwise. In all of these relationships, believing others are less can only lead to bad things. All of this article is a poorly-written attempt to straighten out some of this view in my own head. I can't guarantee any logical clarity or simplicity of view.
Actually, I know what I want to say. I am just not sure if I can say it in a way that won't come across as uncaring (because I'm not) or that I believe I know all the answers (because I don't). This is part of the reason I have held off as long as I have in commenting on the subject of the horror of last Friday.
Well, that and the fact that I wrote a rather longish blog post a couple nights back that was posted, published, and then passed on to Facebook, Twitter, and even Google+. The link on Facebook even showed an image from the posting. I woke up the next morning and it was gone. Poof. Lost in the Ether.
More Craziness
There was a period last Friday during which I seriously considered just going home, pulling out all of my guns, and selling them. It lasted all of about 5 seconds, sure, but it was there.
That's when I reminded myself that it would not resolve anything.
It would not keep those kids and adults from having their lives taken from them. It would not prevent such an event from happening in the future. It would not do anything except remove part of who I am. I am a gun guy. I am a Liberal Gun Guy, sure, but a gun guy nonetheless.
Since then, I settled. I shed a tear and felt some wishful thoughts about the situation in Connecticut. Then I went home and hugged my kids. I have a little Liberal Gun Guy who turns eight tomorrow. I also have a little Liberal Gun Gal who is five. I can't imagine. I just can't. Not enough band-aids to cover that cut.
Talking Heads
I currently have a sore neck. Nothing I did, really. I didn't sleep on it wrong. However, I did listen to too much commentary on the TV and radio. About every 5-10 minutes, someone said something that would cause a synapse in my brain to pop and my head to whip around, as if that would help get the factual errors out of my head.
I get that, though. I did nothing but guns for almost six years. I wrote a book on guns for Pete's sake. I can be expected to talk semi-intelligently about guns when needed. After the Aurora shooting, I even ended up on a legal-talk radio show talking about the ins-and-outs of obtaining guns.
99% of the folks I heard on the radio don't have that background. The reporters, news readers, guest commentators, and others made statements that represented levels of experience from watching an episode of CSI to growing up around (while not knowing a lot about) guns.
Clearing the Air
The other 1%, all three of them, impressed me. One was an antigun guy with an extensive background and some solid mechanical and legal knowledge. The two progun guys were similar except that their experience placed them on the other side of the discussion. Unfortunately, the rest of the week was misinformed or uninformed blather.
A lot of the last week's discussion has focused on a few subjects. Unfortunately, it has also been reflexive posturing for the most part. The usual suspects were there, saying the usual things, and repeating the usual memes. The big issues that registered with me during the last week (not all inclusive) are:
Reinstatement of the 1994 Assault Weapon Ban
Arming Teachers
Reworking our Mental Health System
Secure Storage of Firearms
How Congress Helped the Gun Industry
I'll let the Assault Weapon Ban (AWB) go simply by stating it was a bad law written by people who didn't understand what they were legislating. In effect, it made certain firearms less visually scary. The day it went into effect, it only aided the manufacturers of these arms by streamlining their product manufacture. "We can't put bayonet lugs or folding stocks on them? That's OK, we'll save money on a supply item and still charge the same."
The only other effect of the AWB was the increase in the price of magazines that held more than 10 rounds or ammunition. The standard magazine size for an AR-15 prior to the ban was 30 rounds. The 10-round restricted magazines were priced at the same price point as the original standard magazines and the 30-round magazines shot from $10-20 each to $60-100 each. The last eight years has seen a HUGE uptick in the manufacture of these components though, so I don't think this will have much of an impact. And then there is Makerbot...
Reactivate the AWB and the industry will have the best quarter they have ever had. Want to keep those guns out of the hands of the wrong people? Establish a Gun Show background check.
Miss Janey's Got a Gun
Arming teachers is problematic in that many (most?) teachers don't like guns in the first place. Those who do like guns may not necessarily want to carry. I have known Concealed Carry Permits holders who don't like carrying or, for a variety of reasons, choose not to carry. I think something like this would be similar to the Armed Pilot Program. Only 10% of pilots are trained to carry in-flight. And this is a population that has a very large prior-service military contingent.
I have heard some of the folks proposing that teachers carry because Israel arms their teachers. Sorry, but it ain't the case.
The Inmates are Running the Asylum
I'm looking at you, Congress.
The majority of the mass shootings in the last 30 years involved shooters who showed signs of mental illness prior to the shooting. Yet these people were able to possess firearms. Even going through the right channels and processes. This tells me that the reporting mechanism has issues, or the process to adjudicate is flawed, or that doctors, friends, and families don't feel comfortable facing the fact that there is indeed a problem.
I fell into that last category once upon a time. A good friend of mine committed suicide after he went off his meds - one of them an anti-psychotic. A few of us knew what he was taking. We knew he was a gun owner. He was a retired Air Force security officer. He didn't drink or smoke. He was active in his church. He was a straight arrow. Health problems led to the meds. Going off the meds led him to threaten his family (scared them enough to drive 90 miles to stay in a hotel). The next morning, he shot himself.
I still feel guilty. I feel I could have talked to him or others prior to that in order to help make sure that he would have been safe. But I didn't. I didn't want to be the guy who said, "I don't trust you to be safe with your guns, even with the thirty years of training, instructor time, and being one of the most squared away folks I know."
I do believe that we need some sort of meaningful legislation to change how we look at gun ownership by those who have the potential to be unsafe
Put a Lid on It
If you leave guns where someone can get to them, and that person is not you, you are asking for any bad things that happen. Kids in the house? Roommates? Family members with mental illness? LOCK UP YOUR GUNS.
One of the major causes of accidental firearm deaths is this.
The next step - make sure that EVERY. PERSON. who will come into contact with the gun has training. Now, I am not talking about uncle Jimbo taking little Stevie out to the quarry to show him how to shoot. I am talking about taking an NRA Firearms Safety Course. These two steps will cut down on accidents like you do not believe.
The Upshot
We are finally moving somewhere on a discussion. Unfortunately, I doubt much will come out of it that is meaningful. However, we are talking a bit more and looking into causes before we look at solutions - a nice change in and of itself.
I still feel that education is essential for everyone. Learn what a gun is. Learn what it isn't. Learn how to be safe, not sorry.
I will leave you with two last beliefs of mine:
The only safe person with a gun is the person trained to be safe.
The only safe gun is the gun that is unloaded and not in someones hands.
Cheers, and keep the community of Newtown in your thoughts.
PS - this includes the National Shooting Sports Foundation, headquartered in Newtown, Connecticut.
With all of the bad press going on about guns lately, I am glad I have the chance to get on my soapbox so I can talk about the positive side of gun culture. Also, keep in mind that I am the Liberal Gun Guy, so my view is more middle of the road. My views on the world are like those of many Americans - mixed. I lean left on some things and right on others. Sometimes these views conflict and I have to work it out - I supported Afghanistan, but not Iraq for example.
Once we all start to accept that people can be a mix of beliefs and not just black-and-white, I think we will agree that we agree - at least on a few things.
Now. With that off my chest, I realized that other than referencing Kim Rhode's ammo use, I failed to mention that there is a small sporting event going on in London.
By the time I am writing this, the Women's 10m Air Rifle and the Men's 10m Air Pistol are over. The US was out of the medals in each, but the female shooters represented us well, coming in 5th and 7th.
No, I'm not talking about the magazine. I am talking about Guns and I am talking about Ammo.
Actually, I did already talk about these once today. I had a great time on internet radio with Bennet Kelley (and here) on the CyberLaw & Business Report. We spent a half hour discussing some of the various points of purchasing guns and ammunition online. In light of last week's shooting (no, I'm not linking to it), we looked into the various rules and regs of buying guns, magazines, and ammunition.
The best thing about this is that I was able to walk Bennet and his listeners through what it takes to purchase these online, talk about how more regulations won't necessarily be a good thing, and how some common sense and education would definitely be a good thing.
Note to Gun Guys: DO NOT EVER EVER EVER EVER EVER sell a personal firearm to someone across state lines or who even jokes about not being able to pass a NICS check without going through an FFL!
As a sidenote, I want to give a nod to HARO (Help A Reporter Out). This is a website set up to help reporters get into touch with subject specialists. I jumped on the mail list and within a few days I was on the web (and getting hits as a result).
Now on to business...
How much ammo does one person need?
Over the last few days I have been in a few conversations about the shooting in Aurora (nope, still not linking it). Each one included the question, "Why did he need six thousand rounds?"
*sigh*
A little voice in the back of my head snarked, "Because he couldn't afford seven?"
I had to ask why that was a problem. It wasn't like the shooter needed much. By all of the reports I have heard, the C-Mag in his M&P 15 jammed - but we have not heard when. His shotgun likely carried 5-8 rounds (several versions of the Remington Model 870 exist). The standard magazine for the Glock G22 holds 15 rounds. There are extended magazines available (similar to those used by the shooter in the Tucson Shooting), but there have been no reports of these being used. Totaling that, we are looking at about 123 rounds (barring any backup magazines or loose shotgun shells). With some number of those not being fired, this is less than 2% of his ammo stash.
I'm just damn glad it wasn't stadium seating and that the C-Mag jammed. Seconds here... seconds there...
Shooters and Ammunition
I remember years ago (as a young Liberal Gun Guy) buying a box of shells, going to the range, and shooting EVERY LAST ROUND. How many rounds were left at home? none. I couldn't afford any ammo other than what I put into the cinder cliff behind the target. Now? I'll shoot about half of what I buy (maybe). If I'm in a 100-round trap shoot, I'll get 150 shells and come home with 40-some. Sure, those extras get shot at some point, but they build up.
As a result of the conversations recently, I did some mental calculations. Given range bringbacks and the odd lots I have picked up along the way, I think I have about 1500 rounds of different types - 40 S&W, 12 gauge, .410, .30-06, 7.62x54R, .303, and .22. I think I also have some loose .45ACP (which I don't even have anymore...). Don't think I'm the only one. I didn't intend to get there. I just did. Now, if I was an active shooter (in a local-gun-club-regular-shoot-winner), I would be buying or reloading hundreds of rounds a week (high power rifle maybe being a little less).
Shotgun sports, 3-Gun, Cowboy Action Shooting, name it. If these folks want to stay on top of their game at the local/regional level, they will shoot (conservatively) 300-500 rounds a week - often a non-standard round. That is somewhere around 5,000 rounds in a few months. This is a supply that can't be supplied by your FLGS (Friendly Local Gun Store) or Wal-Mart.
Kim Rhode, two-time Gold Medalist in Double Trap, shoots 500-1000 rounds A DAY. Even on the south side of that (and taking a couple months of over the year), this comes up to more than 150,000 rounds over a year. Take that order to the Gun Shop up the street.
EDIT: I was reminded by a Facebook Friend that another reason competition shooters buy in bulk is to ensure that the ammunition is part of the same production lot. This ensures that differences from cartridge-to-cartridge and box-to-box are kept at a minimum.
Unfortunately, these aren't the folks we hear about. We hear about the folks stockpiling against armageddon, further government regulation, and zombies... OK, maybe not necessarily the last.
Also, unfortunately, we have the guy in Colorado. I don't know his deal. He had a lot of ammo. He also had a lot of issues (based on numerous articles and his appearance at his hearing. It does reflect poorly. I want to stress that while he had lots of ammo, he didn't apparently have a plan for it except to leave it in his apartment to burn it. This may give a tip to his knowledge of guns and ammo.
Ammunition in a fire will go nowhere - it needs a chamber to prevent a splitting case and a barrel to give direction. I have seen the aftereffects of a house fire on several hundred rounds of .30-06 stored in a wood case. It was a beautiful, semi-artistic piece of lead, mangled cartridge cases, and copper bullets.
The Upshot
Seeing as how he passed a series of background checks while purchasing four firearms over the previous several months, the knucklehead in question would have undoubtedly passed any sort of check someone would want to create for ammunition. There are legitimate reasons (sane or otherwise) to obtain or store bulk ammo. Registering bulk purchasers would be tantamount to registering gun owners. To my mind, this seems to be something that the majority of gun owners would oppose. I don't mind some regs and laws, but I don't want my name on a list.
Weak close, I know, but I had a good (long) day and I am glad I got to teach some folks about guns.
Now. I will let that point sit on its own. Please don't go all 24-hour-news-cycle on us. We don't need to see his face. We don't need to hear nonsensical eyewitnesses give their side of the story using hyperbole and incorrect gun terms. We don't need news readers making comments of a technical nature.
We do need facts. We do need what happened (as far as we can tell). We do need who did it (as far as we can tell). We do need to know what we need to do next (lock our doors, pack our bags, hug our families).
We do need restraint.
We do need to get on with the other things going on in the world. This may sound callous, and my heart does go out to the victims, their families, and their friends, but I am glad I have the internet so I could see if there was something else going on in the world.
First Response
I guess you know how I feel about the network coverage. Between the inane rambling of people still on an adrenaline high after surviving the worst shooting since the Va Tech Massacre and the inane rambling of a news anchor who knows next to nothing about guns (I love you, Robin Meade, but you need to get to the range sometime), I was boggled. The only decent eyewitness account I felt was legitimate was that of a combat-experienced Marine who was with his wife. He calmly described what he saw and heard. He didn't exaggerate. He didn't make guesses. He told what he knew.
Sadly, I believe the best journalistic effort of the day came from the Onion, citing an imaginary person as saying "Nothing really surprises me when it comes to this kind of thing anymore. And that makes me feel terrible"
and "In
exactly two weeks this will all be over and it will be like it never
happened."
Yep. This.
The United States of Guns
I'll let most of the pundits go into the facts and figures.
TL:DR - There are more guns in the hands of fewer people now than there have been historically. Violent Crime has been decreasing rapidly. Concealed Carry is available in almost every state (several without permitting).
Let me use my golden, reassuring voice to scare you into buying something.
Since Senator Obama was nominated as the Democratic Party Candidate in 2008, sales of guns and ammunition went up in the mistaken belief President Obama would take all of our guns away because of his following a European socialist who was attempting to ban our guns. I was there and I watched it happen. The last four years saw the gun industry as one of the only recession-proof areas of the economy other than the gold sellers advertising via Glenn Beck. (I do have to admit, I expected the bottom to fall out of the gold market by about 2010-2011... I was wrong)
I like my guns. I like being able to shoot them. I like being able to teach people about the role of firearms in American and World history. I like teaching museum people about firearms (reaaaallll small slice of the Venn diagram there...). I like talking to Gun Guys (and Gun Gals).
However, I also can't stand talking to Gun Guys.
Most Gun Guys I know are great people. Some are religious, some aren't. Most are on the right, some are on the left. Some are active shooters. Some are collectors. Some just buy guns. Most are the salt of the earth. Most are white. Most are upstanding members of their communities. Genuinely nice folk, for the most part.
Sometimes, though, being around guns has placed me in the company of some people I really did not like. Racists, White Supremacists, Anti-Government Conspiracy Theorists, Separatist movement folks, and a few Aryan Nation folks. Real great crowd. Shining examples of a group of otherwise great people. Also, the folks who will easily get on camera because they fit the stereotype.
Stuck on the NRA
Then there is the mix. Good people who are believing everything the NRA is telling them. When pundits mention the core of the Republican Party, they are talking about these people. I have written previously about my feelings on the NRA. I will reiterate that I appreciate the non-lobbying activities - firearms use and safety training, youth shooter programs, and grants for ranges to make improvements, to name a few. As I am happy to share, I am a life member of the NRA. However, I have to admit I giggled when I saw the Onion giving Wayne LaPierre a dig.
Over the last couple of decades, Wayne and his people have been pushing Social Security off of the third rail of the political subway and replacing it with Firearms. For the last 10 years especially, they have made the life of our Congresspeople harder than it already was. Vote the wrong way on a bill and every gun owner in your district will find out. nice.
The NRA, as usual after a situation like this is lying low. They did the same after the Gabby Giffords Shooting - smart move on their part.
Some folks, however, are pointing to a decline in the power of their organization. There are different reasons behind why this may be happening. One is that they are outliving their utility as a result of one success and one failure. The success is that they have pushed back or removed many gun restrictions across the country (including hamstringing the ATF through limiting their investigative power). The failure has been in catching the graying of the gun community too late. The retirees with guns are passing away. The greatest Generation is all but gone. The youth are in single-parent homes with no dads (This is what happens when you believe "Only boys shoot guns"). The majority of our population lives in an urban setting. On the one hand, you have one of the most liberal environments for gun usage. On the other, the percent of the population that does own guns is decreasing.
Worshipping at the Altar
The result of this is that those with guns see themselves surrounded by those without. Tie this with the belief in family, church, and country shared by many of these folks and you get an almost religious fervor that has spread among the gun-owning public.This was best shown through the Pat Robertson-esque comments made by Texas Congressman Louie Gohmert. Referring to our Founding Fathers and asking repeatedly, "Where was God in all of this?" he is searching for ties that aren't there. In asking why no one in that theater was carrying concealed, he is making an assumption of your typical concealed-carry permit holder and the situation in the theater. My money is on Representative Gohmert never having a concealed carry permit.
I have. After arriving in Wyoming in 2003, I applied for and received my concealed carry permit. That permit allowed me to carry concealed in more than 1/2 of the United States. I regularly did. Even in Cody, Wyoming, I would carry to Wal-Mart, to restaurants, and, yes, to the movies. Why? Because I knew then what some folks are just starting to understand. This can happen anywhere. Statistically, you have a better chance of getting cancer, but there is always that chance.The best training doesn't just teach safety and how to shoot. It teaches you when to shoot and how to determine IF you should shoot. Many was the time at Wal-Mart when I knew that I would not be shooting - I would be grabbing my kids and doing my best Franco Harris impersonation.
Part of the reason I support legal carry is simply that I have met too many idiots with guns. Most of them, fortunately, do not get the concealed carry permit. Sitting in a class for 16 hours (in a lot of states), filling out forms, writing a check, and then waiting is too much for some. Others aren't legal residents of the state in which they live. Some get refused because of a past crime. Some have "issues." These folks decide to carry concealed for reasons unknown. These are the people I worry about.
And then there are the people like Aurora (I won't call him by name). He picked out what he wanted to do. He picked a great place to attack. He chose a good time to go "in costume." He chose some good weapons for the job. The guns were purchased legally. There were no warning signs (that have been reported). He was not going to be stopped.
Weapons in the Hands of Private Citizens
Even if someone had been carrying (like that Marine I mentioned earlier?), I would expect that their first and best response would have been to get the hell out of Dodge and keep your eyes open. This is due to the stories of the smoke grenade (if that is what it was) and the combination of the Remington 870 and AR-15. If I have a handgun and the other guy has a rifle or shotgun, I am finding hard cover. Why? Because they can do more damage and are more accurate over range.
The larger firearms (and the ones folks tend to freak over) have historically been designed and used for hunting. Even the venerable AR-15 uses a round very similar to small game cartridges. I have an 870. I've shot trap, grouse, and rabbit with it. I would likely own an AR if I had the spare cash. Why - because they can be so heavily modified. Otherwise, there are other firearms that don't look so scary that are more dangerous because that can fire larger ammunition just as fast.
Whether or not we should have these firearms is, to me, not an issue. I believe we have the right, but I would give them all up for a happy peaceful world (this is why I am damned to be a Liberal). The more I have thought about it, though, the more I am surprised the Democratic Party is not on the side of gun rights. This is one of the only rights issues that the Democratic Party does not support. We support the right to choose, the right to love who we want to love, the right to vote, the right to think and worship (or not worship) as we wish. We should be the gun rights party.
The Upshot
I'm just rambling now, but there are bigger issues than gun rights and bans. There is the issue of our society. There is the issue that we have a nation that does not pay attention to mental illness as it should. There is an issue in that our society does not engender more empathy and respect for life. It's not guns, it's not video games, it's not kids underlining 'Eskimo' in their copy of Moby Dick. It's responsibility, it's family, and it's love.
"Thank you. It's just that he was a gun collector and..."
The rest of the conversation usually pans out the same way. Almost every time. The husband had lots of guns - maybe 20, maybe 50, maybe 100, maybe more. He died. She didn't realize how many he had, what they are, what they are worth, and (most importantly) who to trust.
The reason I get this call is that some buddy of the late Mr. Hoplophile is nosing around, knows a little (or a lot) about the collection and wants to help the widow by giving her some money to help her out by buying one (or more) of the guns - with a pained expression and at a cost WELL below retail. I received calls like this about once or twice a month while I was the Curator at the Cody Firearms Museum. I still get them through friends and acquaintances now. Maybe I seem to be the trustable sort. Maybe it's the boyish good looks, maybe it's the glazed look and the paunch, I don't know.
The sad thing is that it is preventable. As fanatical as many of us are with our guns while we are alive, we sure don't seem to care much about when we're dead. This needs to change.
Why is it always the Gun Guys?
I'll tell you why. It's because we did all we could to beg, borrow, and steal to get them in the first place and we don't want the government (or anyone else for that matter) to take them from us.
Now. That guy isn't too far off from the truth. I have known... well... not this guy, but many like him. According to the American Firearms Institute (an organization devoted to defending gun rights) "there are 250 - 280 million firearms in the US" and "40 - 50% of US homes own a firearm, that's 120 - 150 million people". Easy math. that averages out to 2 per household in about half of the homes in America. However, as with most averages, there are outliers. I know many folks who own just one gun. I also know a couple guys who could outfit a small Latin American country, so long as they don't mind bolt actions from the two World Wars.
What is common amongst all of these people? They will not give up their gun(s) easily. If they are like this while they are alive, why do it when they are dead?
I don't know.
I don't know if it is a lack of planning, an unrealistic belief that they will always have time to divest themselves of the collection before they pass on, or just simply believing that it will work itself out on it's own as part of the rest of the estate. But it drives me crazy and tells me that they care more for their guns than they do for their wife and family.
T.C.B.!
Many gun owners arm themselves initially because they feel they need to TCB - Take Care of Business. This could be defending life and limb from an intruder or getting groceries through the barrel of a gun. However, we all protect ourselves and our families in other, less dramatic ways. Unless you are supporting your self solely on Social Security, you are taking care of business - financial business.
Elvis (Mr. TCB) and a few of his guns - note the Luger on the left and the suppressor on the top right
Think about it. We all plan in the boring, mundane, "Gee, I hope the economy doesn't tank again before I retire or die, taking my nest egg with it" way. We set up retirement plans, 401(k)s, investments, stocks, bonds, annuities, and all sorts of other things that make me fall asleep. Some of these guys have retirement plans that cover EVERYTHING - except their guns. No plan, no inventory, no appraisals (scrawling a list of 100% values from the Blue Book doesn't count). I don't get it. But I have come to terms that it happens. Every day.
If you fail to plan, you are planning to fail
Regardless of how you pass on, not having a plan for your guns is a bad, bad thing. Think about it. No matter how much warning you have, you cannot prepare. You die in your sleep of a heart attack (you eat red meat and stay off the treadmill, right?), you get an aneurysm on the floor of the gun show (we've all seen prices on guns that could lead to this...), or you stroke out on the golf course.
Just kidding. That last one never happens to gun guys. They stroke out during a round of Sporting Clays.
During any of those, there is no time to prepare. But that's OK, you have emphysema, ALS (I know way too much about that one now), or the big 'C'. I'll have plenty of time. Sure. Once you get past "Depression" and on to "Acceptance", you have a short window. By that time, though, you will be hip-deep in medical bills, clinic appointments, and last checks on your bucket list. There will be time to take care of the guns later - besides, you may get better. You're right. You might. Lots don't.
So. While you are still healthy, wealthy, and (hopefully) wise, here are some things to do to prep your collection for your demise, sudden or otherwise.
Inventory - Get a list with make, model, and serial number (separate from any bound book you may keep as an FFL or C&R). Tag the guns - you can use those little hangtags they sell at most office supply stores. For Pete's sake, no tape, no markers, no pens, pencils, sticky dots, or other adhesive badness.
Photograph - Get digital pictures of it all. Use a generic mount (you can use a range sled/sandbags with a nice cloth over the mount). Get both sides and necessary details (barrel address/sns are not necessary but inscriptions/engraving are). Have a card in frame showing make, model, and sn. Use decent lighting - a shop light behind the camera on the left and right should be good - prevents flash shadows. Use a tripod. Use a neutral background - not a plaid tablecloth. VERIFY that all of the pictures are clear.
Appraise - Get a legitimate appraisal. If it is a few nice guns, you can Blue Book it. Write it down. Again, record make, model, and serial number with the value, the source for your estimation, and why you think it fits in a certain grade/%. Depending on the size or value of your collection (and your insurer's limits), you may want to go to one of the major national GUN auction firms or a private appraiser. Repeat this at least every five years - or if something happened that would otherwise increase the value of your collection. Legitimate appraisers will charge you for their time, per gun, etc. If they charge a percentage, they benefit from high-balling your collection.
Insure - Theft, fire, or any number of other things can happen. Now that you know what you have, insure it. Most reputable companies have a firearms policy rider. Boost the limit to whatever you are willing to go to, not surpassing the value of the collection. If you think the value has gone up, get it reappraised and insure accordingly.
Secure - Keep it locked up. Keep it in a safe. Keep it in a locked display case. Keep it in a locked room. Ask a trusted (industrious) buddy to figure out how he would steal your guns. Fix what he would do. Why? Because someone will try to steal them (with a check or otherwise) after you are gone. Also - make sure someone trusted stays at the house while you are in the hospital or the casket.
Allocate - Figure out where they go. Now. Just like anything else in your will (the house, property, etc.), this should be established well before you are de-established. Which ones go to your son or daughter. Which ones go to which friends. Make conditions (with a list of prices) to allow private sales (helps with the 'buddy' mentioned above). ID which guns go to an auction house. Figure out which ones go to a museum. Figure out which ones go to other non-profits (If you plan to send them to the NRA, let the NRA know first).
Note on Museums - Make arrangements with any museum AHEAD of time. I have had to refuse gifts from the deceased because of conditions they set. There are things responsible museums cannot agree to, in good faith. I am certain they were small issues that could have been resolved simply through a discussion beforehand, but legal conditions are exactly that.
Organize - Keep all of the documentation on ALL of the above in hardcopy and on a USB thumb drive. Keep these in at least two places - with the guns and off site (safe deposit box if you have it).
I recognize that some of this appears to be expensive. That's because it is. Ask yourself how much you spend on investment counseling, overhead fees on your IRA, or your accountant. Now ask how much you are willing to spend to take care of your family in this way.
The first time I did this presentation was for the 2004 Mountain-Plains Museums Association (MPMA) Conference in Casper, Wyoming. I had been at the Buffalo Bill Historical Center as the Firearms Curator for about a year-and-a-half. I was leading a charmed life. I had my (at the time) dream job, I was being paid to talk to people about guns, history, and museums, and I was starting to build some great friendships in MPMA.
Anyway, here I am, almost eight years later. I moved on to a great (and in many ways better) job at a different museum. I am still involved with MPMA (I've been a board member for 6 of the last 8 years). I still love talking to people about guns!
Part of what I love about this is that I get to help cross the great divide - the divide between the gun guys and the Museum world. It's not that there are no gun guys in the museum field or museum folks who like guns. However, this is a small slice of a huge Venn diagram. There are lots of gun guys out there who like - but misunderstand - museum operations. There are many museum professionals who are responsible for firearms in their collections but don't fully understand them as objects or have concerns about guns and their accoutrements.
Unfortunately, the channels of communication between the two groups are limited. There are about a half dozen titled Firearms Curators in the country. I know most of them by first name. Some of these guys, by choice or job description, don't have the opportunity to talk to the general museum field. The museum field, tending to skew politically liberal, are often not gun owners. I, on the other hand, fall into both areas to a certain extent. As I have titled the blog, I am a Liberal Gun Guy.
Having set myself apart and acknowledging this difficult and sometimes tenuous position, I am more than happy to talk to both groups about how we can all get along. Tomorrow will be the sixth time I have presented this specific seminar. It has been seen by about 100 museum professionals and others to this point. I had several hunters skip the opening day of deer season to catch the talk in Bismark, North Dakota (thanks to the State Historical Society of North Dakota). I have had input from the (at the time) Firearms Conservator from Springfield Armory National Historic Site. I even have done the unthinkable - I enlist the aid of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives.
With the aid of these folks (and the host organizations I have dealt with), I get to talk to 20 more people about two of my loves - museums and firearms. Safety and identification, legal issues, conservation and care, and exhibition and curation will all be covered.
OK - here we go. I've been thinking about doing this for awhile, but I finally got to it.
I want to start this off with this article about the guns getting into Mexico... Fox News isn't exactly my favorite, but this does make some good clarifications about the subject.
