We’ve done this before but . . . “A federal judge has tossed out the loaded gun seized from a motorist in Brooklyn, ruling that the cop falsely testified as to why he had pulled over the vehicle, nydailynews.com reports. “The decision — which will likely result in the defendant, Raymond Jones, walking away from the felony rap — is the fourth illegal gun suppressed by a judge in Brooklyn Federal Court in the past 12 months over concerns about the credibility of testimony by cops.” Who saw that one coming? Be that as it is, the interesting bit here is Mr. Jones’ rationale for having a gat on his person . . .
Jones was arrested Nov. 13, 2013 for packing a .38-caliber Smith & Wesson revolver. Jones admitted to anticrime cops from the 73rd Precinct in Brownsville that he had purchased the gun for protection because he had been shot earlier in the year and his assailant was still on the street, according to court papers.
The feds were prosecuting Jones because he had prior felony convictions for narcotics and assault and a felon in possession of a handgun faces more jail time as a federal crime than under state law.
Now I know that some of you make distinctions in these matters. A felony narcotics beef? Restore his gun rights. A violent offense? Not on your Nelly! But on the face of it, Mr. Jones had good reason to pack heat. If you think about it, released felons are at more risk of a violent assault than the general population. I mean suffering a violent assault.
Live by the gun, die by the gun? Create a federal system for the restoration of felons’ gun rights? Or full rights restoration for felons upon release? Where do you stand on gun rights restoration?
And how handy would it be for law enforcement to say, hey that guy has an armatix watch on, he must be carrying a pistol.
Write all your state and federal representatives and demand that Law Enforcement Organizations be mandated to use nothing but smart weapons. Point out it will save lives if the officer loses control of their weapon, or leaves it/loses it somewhere that a child might find it, will keep a criminal from being able to use it if stolen (ok, that kind of a lie, pretty sure criminals would figure out how to modify the system to fire in a ‘dumb’ mode). That the department could possibly ‘turn off’ the gun of a rogue cop via an RFID signal or jammer. Or could better control their officer’s from firing prematurely in a hostage situation via similar methods….
If it saves just one life, right? Let the LEOs and their unions make all the arguments pointing out how stupid these things are in reality.
If they’re too dangerous to get their gun rights back when they’re released, they shouldn’t get out in the first place.
1
<—- THIS, is what I've been arguing. We are awash in a sea of guns (thank god!). If you can't be trusted with one, then you need to be under supervision of some sort (loony bin or prison). Otherwise, if you get your right to freedom back, then you get it back all the way.
Nope, sorry, felons knew the score up front. The punishment for the crimes they committed includes losing firearms rights. Yet, they committed their crimes anyway. Why should we cut them any slack on the deal they willfully agreed to?
So felons all went and did what they did fully knowing they were going to be convicted or tried. Like the guy who shot the intruder and lost the self-defense case?
You sure are good at finding justification for taking people’s rights. Putin could use you in the Ukraine.
James? You don’t get to make up points for me, then casually dismiss them. I’ll speak for myself, thank you very much. And yes, they willfully agreed to the penalty.
The laws are all published. True or false?
They list what actions are crimes and what punishments accompany them, including loss of firearms rights. True or false?
Yet, would-be felons go out and commit their felonies, anyway. True or false?
Soooo…………they agreed to that punishment when they committed their crime. No fair coming back and crying “King’s X!” after the fact.
For starters, because they are still human-beings and not restoring their rights dehumanizes them, and one could argue, makes them more likely to slip back into a criminal life-style. Also, because not all felonies are violent offenses, and not all felonies were committed by people who have a history of previous crime or violence.
At the very least, the parole system should also be about evaluating the potential for rights restoration as much as it is about accountability and reintegration. Anything less and you are telling a parolee that they will henceforth always be a second-class citizen with no chance of reprieve. If you don’t restore their rights, and therefore restore their dignity, then you are creating the worst case condition for a parolee – not having anything to loose.
Jonathan – Houston ~ According to some we all commit *3 felonies a day [unless you have a permit to live under a rock] there are DA[s] that sit around [drinking cocktails] and pick people at random to prosecute! [Could be me or you someday]
Now to the topic at hand I ask you, what is nearly the first thing an arsonist can and does buy when [s]he get out of prison? “Gasoline” for the car right? And an axe murderer that gets released from prison what can [s]he buy right after getting out? yup you guessed it an axe. Ever see one of those **Fiskars axes impressive they are! And I could go on and on…
Now the ***reason for punishment is to correct a behavior [among other reasons] and after the punishment is complete to include a probationary period the ex-con should be given a fresh start back in society. All rights restored.
When you [or when you were a kid] got punished did you or your parents hold it over your head FOREVER or did they keep an eye on you afterwards to ensure you were corrected [probation] and when you had learned your lesson [probation complete] you got the car keys, TV, Xbox, etc… back and you felt your life was restored and it was, what’s the difference? Other than your personal fears and they have no place in this argument.
And that’s about all I got to say about this, Drew
* http://www.threefeloniesaday.com/Youtoo/tabid/86/Default.aspx
** http://www.fiskars.eu/c/woodxpert
*** http://www.shestokas.com/general-law/criminal-law/the-purpose-of-criminal-punishment/
Agree. We should be punishing the violent use of weapons in CRIMES. A person carrying for self protection should not be a crime. If there are soo dangerous that they can’t be trusted to carry a gun, they can’t be trusted to walk free in society. To deny the right to self defense is to deny the right to life. And we know where that road goes.
+ another 1.
Someone who has completed their sentence, including parole, should have their full civil rights restored – including the right to armed self-defense. For that matter, all active duty soldiers should have their right to armed self-defense restored, even on military posts.
I’ll add another +1.
Poor bastard. Has to decide between protecting himself from criminals and protecting himself from government prosecution. I guess each person in his situation needs to decide which of the two is more dangerous.
On the other hand, there are people who have been falsely convicted or who actually turned over a new leaf. Why should they become any further disenfranchised from the system?
The answer lies with politicians “allowing” the lowly citizens to have guns in the first place. Personally, I think the incarceration rate in this country is deplorable, but that is only the result of corrupt leaders continually failing to manage the population they so desperately claim to be proficient in, every 2 to 4 years. Instead of managing a system that strives to bring up the downtrodden (I’m not referring to welfare), all they do is enhance our ever-quickening race to the bottom.
So we’re agreed: the doctor convicted of cocaine use gets to be an surgeon again, upon his release, and you’re cool with him working at YOUR neighborhood hospital? Got it.
The four time DUI driver who gets out of prison is, per you, good to go for being bus driver at YOUR kid’s school? No problem.
Paid their debts to society and all…….
If someone lacks the maturity, integrity, or mental capacity to responsibly carry they shouldn’t be allowed to wander at large without proper supervision.
Unless he’s going back to a life of crime why is a convicted felon at greater risk of getting shot than the rest of us?
You make it sound like all his past associations who had “beef” with him are just going to leave him alone because he’s turned away from a life of crime….. ahh utopia!
Not all felonies are created equal. Some are more serious than others. I’ll admit that some felons could/should have thier rights restored.
That’s a point I’ve madew for some time. Back in the 90s, back when the Brandy handgun checks law came in, I remember reading the news story about a preacher that got a little ‘knock knock’ by the ATF after he tried to buy a shotgun as a convicted felon.
The story behind (if my memory serves) it was in the 60s/70s the man, as a teen, mooned the government of some state during some sort of protest. He was arrested and throw in jail for several days before being allowed to just plead guilty and walk with time served. The problem here was that he plead guilty to was a felon indecent exposure charge. So when he filled out that form for his background check it came back in the NICS system that he was a convicted felon with a charge of a sexual nature on his record. Which got him a visit from the ATF.
That’s only one story. I’ve heard people getting slapped with felon charges for a number of things to illegal dumping of garbage to speeding. No one really wants to see serious felons being able to get firearms. But at the same time we have to watch out that we don’t see people being denied their rights without just cause.
Isn’t the definition of “felony” any crime whose minimum sentence is greater than 364 days in prison?
The word “felon” sounds violent, dangerous, etc., surely due to the conditioning we receive.
I think so really. I can only assume that this charge that was leveled against the person in the story would have been that long of a sentence, but was suspended. Don’t really know much about the law… I can only tell what I’ve read.
I would not be against full rights once the probation period is finished. The idea of probation is that a criminal still has boundaries, but once its done, they should be fully rehabilitated.
I agree. If someone has completed their incarceration and their probation period successfully, they should have ALL their rights restored. The ones who will go back to a life of crime will most likely not complete their probation successfully.
PS: if you want to do something- just put out the word.
Remember Armatix, the ones who snuck into the gunstore in LA? Same folks who went to Europe with Rabbit Joel to label gun makers there as part of the problem, and infer they were Nazi’s if they didnt agree.
Remember Bill Ruger supporting gun control under Clinton. That didnt work out so well, and Ruger learned.
Same for Smitth and Wesson.
Now Glock and Smith and Wesson are not selling guns to CA, in protest of the microstamping tech imposed top-down, despite proof it doesnt work, by AG Kamala Harris.
New Jersey is considering mandating smart gun technology for the plebes.
Time to tell ALL the non-smart gun makers to refuse to sell to states that disarm the law abiding, by refusing to make guns that wont work, and further- to refuse to sell guns that will, to the state.
Let the NYPD and LAPD and New Jersey State Police be armed with smart guns, and see how it works out, fighting criminals.
Money talks, and you know what walks.
If an LGS offers an Armatix I wont be buying there, ver. That includes the chains, like Turners, Big Five, and Cabelas. I hope they are listening.
If they’ve done their time they get all their rights back. Simple as that. Otherwise you just build incentive to expand the definition of felonies until you strip Americans of all their rights. Which they are doing right now.
There should be an affordable appeals process in place. A good friend of mine will not be able to inherit his father’s very large collection due to a 25 year old drug charge.
Ogres have lairs. Batman has a lair. My house needs a new layer of paint.
However, I guess it is fair to state that “ogres” have layers too depending on individual mythical anatomy.
I bought a retention holster (Safariland ALS) in case I am in a situation where I need or want to Open Carry. I use it as a range holster and once I got used to it, getting a smooth draw isn’t a big deal.
I don’t like, nor do I own or use any holster with any kind of retention system, having said that, I do own, wear and use good leather holsters, from which can only be drawn from the correct angle, I would defy anyone to run up and try to draw my EDC, a 1911, from my NON retention leather holster from any angle, the pistol simply won’t draw except from at the angle it’s supposed to, and that angle is the angle from which I draw from…if a retention holster can prevent other from drawing your weapon, it can also prevent you from drawing as well…
“…shall not be infringed.”
We released them to society, but don’t trust them to carry on as a member of society? Then jail needs to be rethought.
Does the second amendment say they can not? No, so I say they should.
I’m going to go the other way, if there is a felon who should have their RKBA restored, then whatever they did should not be a felony.
When felons have done their time they have by definition paid their debt to society. Unless there are extenuating circumstances related to potential violence, all their rights should be restored.
Lol. Isn’t the leader of tge Second Amendment Foundation a felon?
Sub classes of citizens, secret watch lists, byzantine probation standards, all of these aren’t the hallmarks of an open and free society. That being said it is in the Constitution: “nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law.” So if there was “due process” the State can ignore some or all of your rights or even take your life. I guess it’s up to citizens to make the standards very high for removing rights. The state will always take as much as it can get because it is in its nature to control. Ayn Rand said it best:
“The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren’t enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws.”
If the US Attorney General wants felons’ voting rights restored, then so too should be their gun rights.
‘Nuff said!
I’m actually not too keen on having their voting rights restored, so consistency demands that I not be too keen on them having their 2A rights restored I guess. Unfortunately, as others have pointed out, the “currency” of felonies has become somewhat debased by inflation (ie too many “felonies” out there).
Because criminals might choose not to obey gun restriction laws (disobeying laws is what makes them criminals, after all), this debate sounds a lot like the debate about gun laws in general. For example, so-called gun free zones are not really gun free unless everyone chooses to obey the law that keeps them gun free. And background checks don’t prevent non-checked sales, whether from private owners or through illegal markets. In the end, the only way to keep guns out of the hands of dangerous people is to keep dangerous people in a place where they can’t get guns: this place is called prison. (And prisoners still sometimes manage to get guns in there, too.)
These Federal laws are unconstitutional anyway, not even bringing up the 2nd Amendment issue. The Constitution does not give the Feebs any general police power. It can be argued that other than the UCMJ the only police powers the Feebs should have are in regards to piracy, treason and counterfeiting.
Well, huh. I expected to get blasted for opining that felons should have their rights restored once the sentence is served. Instead, it appears to be the popular opinion around here. Go us.
I think the armed intelligentsia has caught wise that the rule of law is a weak disguise for the whims of the powers that be. Case in point, David Gregory. If the police and law are just tools of oppression, best to weaken them as much as possible.
Is an infringement of a convicted felon’s rights if he is forbidden to be armed, even for the lawful purpose of defending his life?
Yes — in exactly the same way his supposedly “inalienable Rights . . . Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness” are suspended when he is put in prison, or even executed for a crime after being convicted.
Should this suspension of 2 A. rights be for life? No, but the burden of proof that the felon is no longer a danger to the community is on that ex-convict, and it should be a heavy burden. I have just heard of “Shrimp Boy” Chow, who was being lauded as a reformed gangster, tied to Sen. Leland Yee in the gun-running scandal in San Francisco. The bar must be higher than the endorsement of some Lib/Soc politicians.
I’ll look into the Red/IR one. Both modes are friendly on night adjusted vision and devices. For the white light… I’m not changing to one of these. The Red/IR would be something convenient to save my vision or put out some extra IR illum for NODs.
Seems to me, everyone in NY City are being considered as pre-felons. How about restoring their rights?
AND for a final advantage of using your Garand in this match: No problem identifying your brass when it’s over. There are not a whole lot of tactical carbines chambered for .30-06.
How quickly we forget and frame our questions in the negative. Prior to the Gun Control Act of 1968 they did (legally – they still do illegally) and the world did not hop of its axis. Better question:
Should we go back to the way things were for most of human history?
Answer: Yes!
Pistols just for shooting your way to your rifle.
brave brave man and such a senseless sacrifice by our nation. thank you for your service SFC Ferguson. I wish for your family and friends that your memories be strong and sweet and are a source of pride and happiness during these troubling times.
Commit the crime lose the right. Simple as that.
Inalienable right…..even simpler.
Now that everything is a felony everyone is a pending felon.
Said it before and will say it again. If the men were armed it would not have happened the first time.
@Paul G. The rule that was in place until comparatively recent times was that, once released, a felon was restored to society the same as any other citizen. If they persisted in “a life of crime”, the next judge they stood before would normally see to it that it would be a longer time before they were free again. The thing is, just what have these prohibitions actually accomplished? That is not a sarcastic comment. just how many times are there “felon in possession” prosecutions were that is the only charge? Usually it is tossed in for good measure along with the substantive charge for whatever they did.
So you feel blanket removal of inalienable rights is a good thing. I much prefer the Constitution.
Arguing “because”, isn’t that how anti-gunners work?
Uh, does this qualify as our side using dead bodies to justify our cause?
We need to watch ourselves and hold the higher moral ground. Unless the family wants their dead member’s name to be used, it’s kind of sick to use the dead to further your own needs.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=44zW84FKd50
It depends on what type of felony the person was convicted of. If there was serious violence, then the person has shown that he or she is a risk.
This highlights one of the main reasons why I left military service. The constitution that swore an oath to uphold and defend did not apply to me. I had much the same civil and constitutionally protected rights as felons. That lifestyle wasn’t for me.
People commenting about consistency between voting rights and gun rights are missing the point. It does not need to be consistent. Punishment is about deterrence. Now, if my son is bad and I threaten to take away his stuffed animals hed say go right ahead , I haven’t played since I was 3. If you commit a violent crime against another human being,you lose rights up to and including your life. We don’t have to take all of them away, just the ones you value. If you have no problem with capital punishment, why would you have a problem with removing gun rights for the rest of your life. Should someone who killed someone walk around with some stain for the rest of their life? Maybe jail doesn’t bother you because your buddies are there. Maybe the appropriate punishment is if you walk around for the rest of your life with a kick me sign on your forehead.
http://www.packers.com/news-and-events/article-1/Practice-gives-way-to-team-building/ad62b44d-ea1e-459a-85b8-0946887275be
This article talks about the 2012 Green Bay Packers going skeet shooting as a team-building exercise at the end of mini camp. That’s at least 53 football players with guns! No one was hurt and everyone had a good time.
if their that violent put them to death
Politically “Correct” claims yet another life.
It’s a shame about this , what about this man’s family , he probably had a wife who will never see him again , he probably had kids who will never see him again , maybe even grand kids that won’t ever see him again , he was probably working part time at this job to help make ends meet because these same political idiots that have kept up the ruse that gun control will stop crime from happening , have made working a regular paying job almost impossible , or maybe this guy had to make up for the price hike for Boobamacare , in his regular paycheck . The Northeast part of the nation has been headed down this road for more gun control for some time now , I am not going to apologize but I am from Mississippi , and from the folks I have seen worked with or talked to that are from up north are just a little bit different , it seems they don’t care about their basic civil rights unless they can make money from them , one of the main problems is that unions are entrenched up north and they have been infiltrated by the communists for so long that the members have been indoctrinated so heavily that they do not question anything that unions push them to do . Plus most folks from up north have the attitude of let someone else do it or I don’t want to get involved , but I am not saying that all folks up north are that way but there are so many like this that it is hard to see the forest for the trees . Be prepared and ready . Keep your powder dry .
Lots of good information in the article but too much second guessing Smith’s actions. His SA could have been just fine; or not. When in a situation many variables impact your SA even at its highest level affecting your focus and decisions/ actions. None of us were there wearing his shoes so anything said critiquing Smith’s actions and movements is all irrelevant Monday morning quarterbacking.
Re: Retention holsters.
I used one when in uniform in the mid 70’s – a level 2 according to the descriptions above. I think it was a relatively new concept product at the time. It was leather, designed with the usual snap retention to be worn high and tight on the Sam Brown same as any closely worn duty holster. The difference was that to remove the sidearm one had to move it quickly forward through an opening down the front of the holster securely held closed by a long heavy metal spring that was open at the top of the holster. The gun was absolutely secure from anyone else wresting it from the holster, and most of the time there was no trouble clearing leather when drawing was necessary. But without adequate quick forward momentum, or being in a position that impeded a quick forward draw, the muzzle end of the weapon invariably got hung up at the bottom of the holster at the closed end of the retention spring and one had to struggle to get it out. After less than a year I went back to my straight draw thumb strap retention duty holster. No question of reliably drawing every time.
I’m confident that retention holsters are more dynamic and reliable now as every LEO I see has one, so I can’t speak to the present. Personally I don’t favor any holster that impedes my draw in any way. To this day, I favor closely worn medium deep but open top holsters without a strap or anything to impede draw. CC only of course, so no exposure to open carry grabs.
Absolutely disgusting. Every disarmament advocate needs to own up for the innocent lives lost because of their ideology.
The Disarmament Lobby idealogues say- better good men like the NCO occasionally die in a hail of bullets then let soldiers arm thenselves, with the resultant mass “loss of life” due to NDs and whatnot.
The Needs of The Many to Feel Safe and to Promote to Flag Rank override the Needs of the Fewer to Defend Themselves.
this hit’s rather close to home for me…. years ago I used to work right next door to the Crown Palace at the Blockbuster video…
The simple act of possessing and/or carrying a firearm, by itself, produces no victim. Therefore, it does not make sense for that action to be a crime.
One could make a logical argument that those who are in the process of reintegrating into society (e.g. those who are on parole and/or living at a halfway house of some sort) need to not carry firearms as a condition of their release, at least for a while. But they still have the right to defend themselves, and I do not think they should be prohibited from carrying any weapon at all. I also do not see a problem with them having firearms for protection at their home.
Those who have been “fully released” and are no longer on any period of probation or parole should have their rights fully restored. To say they should simply be locked up forever is not only impractical but arguably cruel and unusual punishment.
The biggest problem that we have regarding all of this, IMO, is that governments at all levels continue to make more and more actions crimes. In the same way that the simple act of carrying a firearm, by itself, does not harm anyone else, the simple act of possessing or consuming a drug does not harm anyone else. Yet people are convicted of these non-violent non-harmful actions and are thrown in a cage.
Every year there are more and more actions that are considered felonies. That, by itself, is a major problem.
Sure, restore their gun rights. In fact, why take away their gun rights to begin with? Prisoners are at greater risk for physical violence than the general public, so allow convicts to carry in prison. It makes sense — if you’re totally nuts. As some of you may be.
yeah I have to say 80 old school of thinking and protocols. They’re dead set on things that have been improved upon. Almost like taking your brand new Lexus to a shade tree mechanic in expecting him to be able to hook up to the computer and the on-board diagnostic system and read the error codes not going to happen. Not when you’re used to working on carbureted engine that run off points and condenser electronics. Technology can be a real pain in the butt, but you have to move on and learn everything that’s new and everything that sold and then make up your school’s plan of action of which are the best of everything pick and choose and tell you get the right disciplinary plan of action to teach your students. Just my opinion.
I am a Front Sight lifetime member. So is my family and many friends. We have been to at least 6 of the training sessions. At no time did we hear or receive anything related to Scientology, though if I had, I would have made an issue about it.
The instructors we had were former military or former firearms instructors for State Police or other law enforcement. Maybe we have not been there enough to see the problems that Caleb has seen, but we haven’t seen anything yet to dissuade us.
I believe if there was any actual Scientology connection, they would not have been able to resist pitching it to you. They depend upon ever-escalating infusions of ca$h, and they would have wanted some of yours.
They’ve come a ways from putting rattlesnakes in their enemies’ mail boxes (and everyone is a friend or else an enemy to them), but they’re still Scientologists, a cult based on the highest hokum.
not to get in there pissing competition here, but I was an instructor for over 8 years at a gun range in Florida that taught the police officers that could not hit the targets at 25 feet with their pistols classes on how to become a better shooter. This was after being too hot for over three weeks in the Academy,by the so-called experts police instructors.
You have added so much to the value of this conversation. Thank you.
So disarm all the athletes. And disarm Costas’ security too.
Should be case by case, I have no problem with Martha Stewart owning a gun for self defense.
“Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends.” – Jesus’ words, as recorded in John 15:13.
Oregon has a way for most felons to regain their full rights. It involves keeping ones nose clean for a few years.
I think that’s acceptable.
That makes far more sense than having anyone who ever ran afoul of the law forever branded as a criminal. There is nothing worse than forcing people into a life of crime because they think “If I have the name, I might as well have the game”.
I like it and have been many times. The techniques are very good to teach beginners (who never even touched a gun)to shoot. I have also taken the advanced classes and like them as well. Many get frustraited that they have to graduate the beginner class if they want to take the advanced class regardless of thier prior experience. The only thing I don’t like is the email offers the come all the time so I opt out. The place in not designed to teach people to be operators….the goal is to teach people to be comfortable carrying and shooting. I have watched them convert more than one fence sitter with thier simple and non bootcamp like techniques. The cost is solved with a membership available for $500. (The prices on the website are a joke in my mind.)
Also, you would not know the owner is a scientologist unless you googled him. Scientology is not part of the shooting school that I’ve ever screen. Plus why would we not like him due to his religion?
I would bet he would let TTAG do a story if they would attend a course.
Went to the gun nuts web site, read the comments. The TTAG webmasters would have a shit fit deleting those comments. Decent destination though, will bookmark. I like me some snark. That’s a concept lost on a lot of posters here.
Read Tim’s posts on the self defense and mind set related stuff…only thing there worth the time, in my opinion.
Unless you just love snark…in that case…have at it. 😉
Actually, Gabby’s posts are pretty interesting from the perspective of seeing a new shooter develop. Some of what she says is close to naive, but that’s the whole point…she’s learning (and willing to learn). Sometimes, some of the commenter intelligensia get on her pretty hard.
When I do check there, Tim’s content is pretty much all that holds my interest.
Elitism. Its what’s for dinner.
He did what all GOOD soldiers would have done. It just sad that he could not have done what he was trained to do. Return fire. 🙁
I took Front Sight’s 4-day defensive handgun course in 2010 and I thought it was great. I liked it enough that I’ll be heading back sometime in the next year with my wife.
Scientology never came up in any way. Like Allen Morgan said in his comment above, if Scientology had come up I would have a big problem with that.
The cost issue is a little weird. Sure the cost to just walk up and attend a class is $2,000, but if you search on eBay you’ll find the certificates for $50. They hand out course certificates basically for free with certain memberships and after you take classes. While I know it helps them get new people to Front Sight who wouldn’t normally have come, it does seem a bit hokey and I can see where it could turn some people off.
Only major gripe: their website autoplays some stupid greeting from Mr. err… Dr. Piazza
you forgot:
“I’ve been hunting/shooting/masturbating all my life. I support the second amendment. I even know the 3 rules of gun safety. But..” 3???????????????????????? Really???????? These “experts” are so stupid they can’t even manage to use a Google brand Google search engine.
I doubt I would ever pay to take a shooting class except maybe for extreme long range. If I was going to think about paying to take a class I would want to see the CV of the instructor and he had better have been in the teams for a number of years or won numerous shooting competitions at the national if not world level. So what if he was an instructor for the local pd or service branch. That means nothing. I want someone who has walked the walk and has extraordinary abilities that I can learn from. There are so many poser mall ninja types out there getting $650+ yelling at people shooting holes in cardboard that would crap their pants if anyone ever pointed a gun at them. Yet again PT Barnum was right…
I have a friend who has been and who like it very much. As far as I can tell the scientology thing doesn’t show up in the classes etc.
I suppose one might not want to support Ignatius Piazza personally because of it, and thus eschew patronizing his business. And there would be some fairness in that, as he is both a liar (when that scandal broke he said he was Catholic but had attended a fiew sientology meetings, and it turned out he was chin deep in scientology), and a zealot for that cult (sue happy anyone?). But again, I don’t think it bleeds through to Front Sight and has anything to do with the classes.
As far as being outdated…I wouldn’t know. I will say my friend was not better a shot than I for having done their 4 day handgun course, and I have had zero training since boy scouts…but that could just be him
Cost is prohibitive, but you can get it a lot cheaper that it is posted as. My main reason not to (my friend offered me his membership for cheap), is that I really need one on one training if I am going to spend much money. Everyone does two handed shooting, and training with weak hand….and none of that is relevant to me who has the use of only one hand.
My wife and I both took the 2 day handgun course, and I would recommend it to anyone. My wife made the comment that she was treated with respect and NEVER looked down on, even tho she had some problems. I had a problem too and they take you aside and help you on an individual basis.
I had no problem with price, but our two day hand gun course for two people was no where near $1k! If the price went up that high, then shop around and add travel expenses to that figure. Caleb. do you have a hard on for these folks? It sure sounds like it from what you wrote. Get on target next time.
I saw in my 4 day pistol some excellent instructors working with the new female shooters. Front Sight was really good at a soft and firm approach to training. I think the woman shooters I saw were as empowered as your wife was. Along that side my grumpy and uncoachable father managed to really warm up the respectful female instructors. His redneck side didn’t much like getting feedback from the males but that is more about him then them.
I get spammed by Front Sight every single day. It works up to “this is the absolute last time I’m going to make you the unbelievable offer”, and then it starts all over again.
What exactly is wrong with Weaver stance?
Nothing. It’s just Caleb’s posting style. He’s the same guy that rags on SA revolvers and swears EVERY defensive handgun MUST have a laser, etc.
Sometimes, it is quite funny. {shrug}
He’s learned things that work for him and posts as if he thinks that is The One True Way ™. Sometimes I get the impression it’s just a provocative posting style, as he does get called out a lot in his own comment section.
Thanks for bringing up old memories of my ex. Thanks a lot.
One True Way. She knew the one and ONLY best way to do EVERYTHING. If you used another method – one you know works well for you, and is effecient – YOU WERE WRONG.
It was so far beyond irritating, words to describe it fail me.
See James Yeager’s video on stance. He says it is about sights on target when the trigger breaks. Body position is irrelevant. Then again, he teaches how to survive a gun fight, not how to win a competition.
Never go full Yeager lol.
According to a couple comments above their more geared towards new shooters. That’s not a bad thing. If you want to go take a more high speed low drag then go train somewhere else.
If your not going to train with somebody based off their religion that’s your choice. Just remember in this country we still have freedom if religion, every bodies free to believe what they want. The real issue is when people start killing each other due to believing different things.
I’ve been approached at multiple ranges by people pushing FrontSite memberships for cheap and if I recruit other people, I’d get even more money off. It feels very very very pyramid scam like. Needless to say, I didn’t take any of them up on it. They also tended to scatter whenever anybody official, like an RO was around.
someone once told me you dont name guns. guns already have names, and have to be coaxed into revealing them…
*rolls eyes*. i thought it was kinda cute, though.
I’ve never been there, nor have I any intention of every going. Not necessarily for any of the reasons highlighted in the article, though. I’m doing fine with what’s going on here in Houston and that’s my thing.
What does strike me as odd, is someone going all out in near jihad against someone else who’s doing his own thing. If you don’t like the place, don’t go. If they’re overpriced, then undercut them. If they’re outdated, then their graduates will deploy poor techniques to miserable effect.
Maybe write an occasional critique, if you’re so moved; but I don’t get making it your life’s mission to discredit someone who simply has a different view on a topic (handgun stance, for example) which is more a matter of personal opinion and professional judgment, than it is of scientific certainty. It reminds me of people who hate 1911’s and want to tell everyone everywhere all about it. Or people who love AR’s and would have AK devotees drawn and quartered had they their druthers. It’s silliness bordering on psychosis sometimes.
“If they’re outdated, then their graduates will deploy poor techniques to miserable effect.”
Haha, probably not. The cold reality is most SD gunfights don’t involve these range perfect stances anyway.
More likely (or just as) is you will be shooting one handed while fighting with your other hand. Or even drawing from the ground (how many of us practice THAT?).
It’s what makes the whole argument funny…all this belly aching over “which is BETTER” is far from useful in the real test. Technique is great for practice and training, but more important is learning adaptability. If all you ever train is ISO or Weaver, and never the other or say weak hand only, you are training too narrowly.
This is actually an interesting subject.
Let’s think beyond the gun for a moment. When you come here legally, at which point do you gain all the same rights as the rest of us? How about the right to vote? Well I think that should only be after becoming a full citizen. Even still it does make sense in a lot of ways.
Those on the path to citizenship should be afforded the same rights and protections as the citizens.
While I know that the antis aren’t stupid enough to try and challenge this ruling, imagine the fallout that would ensue if they tried. Trying to argue against the rights of migrant workers? It’s be magical.
I don’t know if anyone else has made the point yet but has anyone been able to get a hold of one of these to play with it? More to the point to see just how hard it is to HACK one of these. I can’t imagine any system that would make it impossible to either jam the RFID signal or to even just flat out strip the ID system out.
Hmm…gets me thinking I should name one of my guns.
I think I’ll name my Glock 29 “The Gavel” because when you hear it, your criminal proceeding will be over.
Can’t really see a problem with this. As long as all laws are obeyed. After all…. our rights, including the right to self defense, are INALIENABLE. It seems wrong to say that an ALIEN can’t have the same rights.
We clearly need to ban sports, as athletes are assault people.
The “Could there be another Waco” question is not an “if” question, it is a “when” question.
I was typing the same thing the same time as Blake!
as i recall from reading the report on waco there were multiple undercover officers in the compound already. a little before the raid koresh pulled them all aside and very politely explained that there agency was about to preform a raid and they needed to leave so they didnt get hurt in it. from what i understood at the time, and this was nearly 20 years ago so my memory is fuzzy at this point, he was polite and professional about it. told them who they worked for, who there supervisors were, and that he was sorry to see them go. it probably still would have worked had the agencies knocked and asked politely, but that was one of the decideing factors at the time for why they hit so hard to start with. there operation was ‘comprimised’ and they couldnt risk evidence being destroyed
Daniel Silverman,
You’re asking about the difference between what the founders called natural rights and civil rights.
We are born with the right to bear arms, regardless of political boundaries. Civil rights, like the right to vote, come from our membership in a community. It wouldn’t make sense to speak of a right to vote, for a person stranded on a desert island, or for a Pakistani national spending the weekend at Vail. But both the islander and the Pakistani have rights to self-defense, to be secure in their property, etc.
This also helps us understand why being legally required to show ID to buy a gun is injurious to our liberties, but requiring ID to vote just makes sense. Why should we let you vote in our election, if we don’t whether you have a right to?
Someone needs to do a FOIA on this system to get all necessary information and prove negligence. Time to shame these contractors or “industry partners” out of business.
I did my beginning training at FS (4-day and 2-day handgun, 4-day shotgun, 4-day rifle) and have since taken courses with Combat Focus Shooting (Pincus) and Tactical Response (Yeager) as well as competed in IDPA. I think FS is GREAT for a brand new shooter. I got a very thorough foundation in defensive use of handgun, rifle and shotgun and have adjusted techniques as I’ve learned better ways to do things. Yes, the marketing is relentless, but as others have said, just about no one pays the full listed prices. You can take a 2 or 4-day course for $100-$200. I got a full lifetime membership (all classes for the rest of your life) for $250. As to the Scientology link, I know he was involved in the 90′s, but I don’t know about the last decade. Bottom line is I think the training is good, especially for a beginner, and worth it if you get a cheap membership. If you’re an experienced shooter, then there’s probably not a lot to learn there. In my rifle class there was a group of CHP guys there on their own dime. I want to take the rifle and shotgun classes again, and if I take the pistol class again I would use the isosceles I’m now comfortable with. They won’t force you to use their method. I have witnessed this. Caleb’s four points are weak to me. Yes, they teach Weaver but you can do what you want. Prices are ultimately cheaper than any other school if you utilize them. Instruction is very thorough, professional and consistent. The last point is a personal choice whether if you want to support Piazza or not. I know people who won’t go to WalMart or Starbucks on principle. How about we first confirm if he’s even still involved?
Ladies and gentlemen, your Florida Panzers!
Forgot: For those who wonder, top left and around:
Weatherby .270 bolt action, Bushmaster 5.56, BPS 20 gauge and a Romanian AK47
Five bucks says “Enchanting” Shannon Watts is a ciggie smoker.
Hot chocolate?
Left foot dammit! I keep telling you guy’s to lead off with your LEFT foot.
I’m pretty sure the Sutton quote is apocryphal. I believed all my life, until several years ago.
Buzz quote, though…
zero customer service, would never buy from this company again, no matter how good product may be.
I have asthma. It wasn’t diagnosed until a few years ago. I went through 10 years in the Navy with it and without any kind of treatment. I simply assumed that everyone felt that intense burning sensation when the ran or worked out. I smoked for a while but it was only one or two cigs per day when i could stand it. Those who have served know that a cig break is just about the only way to have a few minutes away from work. Now when I get down wind of a smoker I have a mild attack. It is just about every time. If i go to a club that allows smoking inside, I almost always end up with pneumonia.
Cigarettes actually harm others with second hand smoke. I am proof of that.
Guns actually protect others by their presence in the environment.
I cannot think of a more false comparison.
The Moms’ Demands just seem to get more desperate by the day.
What athlete needs a gun when a knife will do. Just ask OJ…
I have served hundreds of warrants.
For minor crimes, have you ever just phoned a warrant suspect and told him to come down to the station? I’ve heard from a rural sheriff that it works quite well.
You’re skating on thin ice, Private!
I love going to an ATM, shoot the muggers on site, it’s some kind of a sport here..
I’m sure you are resting in peace, Otis. You’re not in Chicago anymore.
what a wonderful and brave man. He deserves our thanks and gratitude and I really hope a national organization establishes a scholarship or some other tribute in his honor so I may make a contribution.
I am learning the strategy of the enemy by being on Twitter.
It is fairly simple:
Float the idea and test it a bit, using your followers.
After you have tightened it up, make a quick but timid/pathetic thrust at your enemy (she seems to like Dana Loesch)
Ignore all responses
Meanwhile it is very easy to dispense with the followers and their postings. I haven’t lost one yet. The only problem is the sheer number of them; once they grab the message and start broadcasting it, there is no way for one or two people to handle the onslaught.
Need more warriors ….
My current response to this meme is: How can it be a #publichealth issue when far more people are Saved by guns than “lost by gun”?
I think what they’re trying to say, badly, is that smoking doesn’t make you into some cowboy, and having a gun doesn’t make you into a cop. Both, I guess, they say are ‘fantasy’.
Basically that non-cop gun owners are imagining that they’re cops, (you know, the only people who SHOULD have guns) – and that that’s fantastical.
Or something. I’m sure it made sense to some Moms(TM).
“Never not bring a gun to a gunfight with a non-Indian Indian.
Is that the lesson here?
Glad you are ok.
I’m amused his “fine” was only $10 and upon threat of death if you didn’t pay. I think you were/are probably worth more than $10.
Hey… that guy stole my mom’s hairdo….
My neighborhood was so tough, we started a war and a hockey game broke out!!!