Should a nine-year-old girl shoot an Uzi?

I’ve had a number of phone calls and emails about this tragic incident asking questions about what happened, should it have been prevented and the like.  First off I have no access to any information that has not been reported by the media. I have nothing but a lifetime of experience teaching firearms skills, on which to base the following opinions.

This week at a shooting range in Arizona, a nine-year-old girl shot the instructor she was working with in the head with an Uzi sub machine gun. This has sparked debate on gun culture, how old is old enough to shoot, at what point is a submachine gun to be introduced, range procedures and a litany of other issues. From what we know so far, there is some room for improvement. Here are the general questions people seem to be interested it.

Should a nine-year-old shoot an Uzi?

 

First off the Mac 10/11(AKA Uzi) has very limited application in the tactical realm. Other than for entertainment or very close range ambushes, they are generally useless. The blow back system creates substantially more muzzle climb then other sub-guns making them very difficult to control. There are far more controllable sub-guns out there (like the MP5) which would be a more suitable starting point as an introduction to sub-guns. For someone with limited or no experience, that is one of the last guns I would choose.

That said, there are seven year olds out there with the firearms experience, maturity and physical strength to control an Uzi. Age is largely irrelevant in shooting, and experience, strength and maturity are much better gauges to measure what any person can handle.  We flock to age because it’s easy to quantify, but it is a really crappy indicator. So can a nine-year-old-girl handle an Uzi safely… Maybe. Certainly yes in some cases, but generally probably not the best choice of firearm for a nine-year-old girl with little experience. Read Teaching Children to Shoot for more ideas on how to safely and effectively introduce children to firearms.

Were the Range Procedures adequate?

 

In reading the comments of the owner, there are a few things that indicate to me there are some gaps. First the instructor went from single shot to full auto on a fully loaded magazine. A far safer procedure would be to load a magazine with 2, 3, 4, and 5 rounds to give the shooter a bit of experience controlling muzzle climb in a progressive manner. Next would be to give the shooter experience stopping firing when muzzle climb causes the gun to come off target. Give them a few 5 round magazines and have them attempt to stop at 2 – 3 rounds (the appropriate method of employment) on their own. At that point a full magazine can be safely introduced.  Clearly that procedure (and there many other safe ways to do it), does not exist at the range as the owner indicated “all policies and procedures were followed”.

Was the instructor qualified?

 

The range owner stated that Charlie Vacca (the instructor who was killed) was qualified because “he had served in combat in Iraq and Afghanistan”, was in the Army and a member of the reserves. This indicates to me that the range owner does not really know what it means to be a qualified instructor. Additionally, it appears they have no good process in place to screen and train the people they hire.  The reality is that most military and law enforcement personnel are not qualified instructors. You learn to be an instructor by first becoming proficient, then by coaching under the supervision of other more experienced instructors, and finally by teaching on your own. Most of us continue to take courses from other instructors just to stay on top things. Range time and experience matter more than a NRA stamped piece of paper, but that piece of paper is better than nothing. According to the NRA, he was not an NRA instructor.

Teaching Experience Matters!

 

If you spend time on a range, you will see people do dangerous things. As you start teaching you start to key in on the precursors to people doing dangerous things. Initially you can react to minimize the danger. After a while, you can see it coming and head it off before it happens. When you can do that with out really thinking about it,  you are ready to teach independently.  I can’t tell you when that time occurs for an instructor. What I can tell you is that it is not hard to identify the instructors who have the experience to do so, from those who do not. I don’t like to to speak ill of the dead, but in this case, from the video I watched, this looks entirely predictable.

Could that happen here at Aegis Academy?

 

First, we don’t do half hour fun shoots, because although shooting can be a great time, in order for it to be fun and safe, you need more information than we can impart in 30 minutes. Our shortest class is a little over four hours. There are ways to do shorter introductions to firearms safely… But the less the shooter knows, the greater the risk.

Second, all of the staff at Aegis Academy has a minimum of ten years of Law Enforcement or Military service in Special Operations or SWAT units where range time was extensive. They have to have at least two years of instructor time with a department or agency before they can even be considered for employment. Lastly, everyone who works here must complete the instructor development program, which is an additional 5 days run by the Staff. Admittedly that certainly exceeds the minimum requirements to be a safe firearms instructor, but that is the minimum for our team.

Third, we have detailed written range procedures for each and every drill we have clients shoot. The range masters have the latitude to modify those drills to overcome individual training limitations as necessary. The process of writing up the procedures and drills, placing them into a binder and teaching the staff how to teach the drills in the instructor course is what makes the procedures effective. Writing it down doesn’t make you safe, but it’s a good place to start. It’s in teaching how and why the procedures apply that creates a safe environment.

So could it happen here? Despite all of the above – Yes, a client could shoot an instructor in the head at Aegis Academy. Saying anything else would be arrogant. We reduce that risk to as close to zero as we can, but when you’re dealing with a firearm, your risk is never zero.

An Instructor is dead, a girl’s life is forever changed

 

My sympathy goes out to the family of Charlie Vacca. My sympathy goes out to the girl who will undoubtedly suffer from the trauma she is experiencing over this event. Lastly, my sympathy goes out to her parents who will second guess this decision for the rest of their lives. Let us not forget, in pointing fingers and laying blame, that this was a tragic event that happened to what are probably very well meaning people. I never want to see anyone needlessly injured or killed, nor suffer the impact of doing so – with out good reason.

In closing, there are safe, effective and entertaining ways to learn to use firearms. This was not an example of that. The staff is internally reviewing the event as a group to see if there are some lessons we can take away. We prefer to learn from the mistakes of others. Whether you train here or elsewhere, asking what happened and how your instructor feels about it is both a fair question, and will give you some insight in how that person or company thinks and acts. Trust your gut and don’t be afraid to walk away if you don’t feel safe!

Have fun, but stay safe!

About Author

 

Chris White - Range Master

 

Chris White is 20-year veteran of the United States Navy (SEAL Teams) where he retired as a Chief (SO7). He has multiple combat tours and was assigned to three different SEAL teams as well as Naval Special Warfare Development Group during his active duty service. His key billets include: Assault Team leader, Platoon Chief and Platoon LPO at Development Group. He spent 6 years in instructor and training assignments during his career. Since his retirement, he has worked as an instructor and contracted operator at numerous high threat security providers in the Middle East and Africa. He continues to deploy in support of contingency operations and high threat protective details spending approximately 120 days a year overseas. He holds an extensive list of Department of Defense and Special Operations Command certifications and qualifications.

First Published at Aegis Academy

Is ISIS the future of Islam?

Western leadership has denounced the beheading of James Foley, and both Obama and Blair have referred to ISIS as a “cancer”. Cancer is probably the most accurate analogy of what Islamic extremism really is to Islam as whole. The real question we need to ask is if we can treat it? In making that determination in a cancer patient, we would look at the location of the cancer, the growth rate and the degree of metastasis of the infection. For diseases, we would also like to know the vector (or mechanism by which it spreads). We have metrics to measure these all of these components of extremist Islam.

The National Counter Terrorism Center (NCTC) released an unclassified version of their 2011 Report on Terrorism, which shows that 56% of total attacks can be attributed to Sunni Islamists. They are also responsible for more than 70% of total global terrorist attack deaths, which tells us that on average their attacks are considerably more violent than other terrorist groups. If we do not face the fact that there is strong correlation between terrorists, terrorist attacks and Islam, then we are choosing to ignore the statistical reality of the problem. If we continue to ignore the causal factors of the problem, we have very little chance of solving it.

Neither Islam nor the Quran independently create terrorists

 

Neither Islam nor the Quran is the cause of terrorism. One of the often-cited myths about Islam is that the Quran has Suras (Verses) which justify terrorism and that those equivalent versus are lacking in the bible. The first part of that sentence is true, the Quran is rife with instructions to do violence against non-Muslims. For example Sura 9.5, “God instructs his Muslim followers to kill unbelievers, to capture them, to ambush them…”. Sura 4.34, 5.33, 8.12 and 8.6 are pretty commonly used as examples directing what western society today would call torture.

The falsehood arises in the second part of the sentence when Christians conveniently ignore the equivalently violent passages in the Bible, (and the Jews in the Torah, specially the Tanakh). The passages are equally descriptive and direct the extermination of the Canaanites – effectively advocating genocide. Certainly there are many other references that could be select and used to justify cruelty and violence. To say that the justification for violence is more present in the passages of the Quran than in the bible or the Torah is simply false. Extremism is no more rooted in the holy book of Islam, than any other religion. We need to look to the culture of Muslim nations and determine how their interpretation of these versus creates such a high percentage of global terrorists.

Sunni terrorism is the primary driver of global terrorism

 

The NCTC report does not break out the Shi’a based terrorist attacks by groups from the total sum of “other” attacks. Shi’a Islam makes up only about 12.5% of the global population of Muslims. Therefore their total contribution to global terrorism is relatively low compared to their Sunni counter parts. Further, Shi’a based terrorism is typically associated with much more targeted attacks like political assassinations, kidnapping or car bombs. This is probably due to the controls imposed by Iran, the state sponsor of Shi’a terrorist groups like Hezbollah and others. As such, this is a significantly different driver of extremism and it should be treated separately.

According to a recent Rand study, (June 2014) “since 2010 there has been a 58% increase in Salafist Jihadi Groups” (One branch of Sunni Islam that advocates violence), “a doubling in the number of fighters and a tripling in the total number of attacks”. The total Muslim growth global rate is approximately 2.5% per year, but the growth rate of Salafist Jihad’is based on those metrics is nearly 20% per year. What we can take away from those two reports is that Sunni Islam is the main vector by which extremism is spread, and that it is spreading almost 10 times faster than the potentially healthy elements of Islam.

The attitudes of Muslims can be and have been tracked

 

When we look at the 2013 Global Pew Poll titled The World’s Muslims: Religion, Politics and Society, I want to point out the range of responses is wide. Different cultures certainly influence how Islam is practiced, and how extremism is viewed. It does however identify some significantly frightening points on the compatibility of Islam with other religions.

One key difference is highlighted in Appendix A which shows that American Muslims are considerably different from their global counter parts in their tolerance of other religions (They are off the scale and considerably more tolerant). In all other aspects of their religion, they are within the range of responses from their global counter parts. Religious tolerance is both a legal necessity to live in America and the only socially accepted position in American society.

That said, this uncharacteristic American Muslim tolerance of other religions, provides Americans with a distorted view of Muslim tolerance as a whole. American culture demands acceptance of other religions and this fact coupled with American Muslims being exceptionally tolerant undoubtedly helps create the American misconceptions that Islam is a tolerant religion and that acts of terrorism are not highly correlated with the Islamic faith. The fact is that Islam is generally intolerant, and Islam is highly correlated with terrorism, but that is socially unacceptable to say in America. These misconceptions created the illusion that there is no link, and the social norms stop Americans from identifying and discussing the root of the problem.

When we look at all other measures in the reported poll data, American Muslims are consistently similar to their global counter parts. One example of that similarity (which could be a measure of extremism as well) is their support for suicide bombing. Nineteen percent of American Muslims express support for its use. In the Muslim community at large 28% express support for suicide bombing. The American response falls well within the global range of responses.

As we saw in the video “A Message to America” which showed the beheading of American journalist James Foley, we can clearly see that influence in how it is practiced does not provide immunity from the infection. Another example is the Russian news agency requested poll from ICM research asking Europeans about their support for ISIS. Germany, the UK and France have about 2%, 7% and 15% respectively, of their total populations (Muslim and non-muslim alike) expressing support for ISIS. We can make the assumption that this support is coming primarily from the Muslim population, but clearly that is a surprisingly high number for western nations.

Next we can look back to the Global Pew poll, which looks at Muslim support for extremist groups. The global median of all Muslims who express an unfavorable view of specific terrorist groups in 2013 was as follows:
Al-Qaeda 57% / The Taliban 51% / Hamas, 45% / Hezbollah 42%
The question evoked responses of positive support, which globally ranged between of 13% – 32% of respondents. Very close to 25% of respondents refused to answer or stated they did not know. Less than half of the global population of Muslims sees the activities of those organization as incongruent with their religion. That tells me less than half of the Muslim population opposes the actions of the extremists.

Using our cancer analogy, if the cells of a human body were 25% cancerous and increasing at 20% rate per year, the chances of survival would be low. Applying those same growth metrics to the Ebola virus, if infections were growing at the same rate as extremist Islam, with its current slightly over 1,000 cases worldwide today and its two-week incubation, period we would have nearly 100,000 cases a year from now. Islam is neither a cancer nor a disease, but the extremist elements certainly have cancerous effect on the populations they engage with.

Can we stop the spread of extremist Islam?

 

Only recently, as ISIS started to threaten the political power in both Iraq and Syria, do we see Muslim governments starting to condemn their actions. It is neither surprising nor impressive that they are speaking out to preserve their power structures in the face of what is now a credible threat. The real power in the Middle East has always been tribal alliances followed by religious authority and only then do national governments and political power structures come into play. From a cultural perspective, Islamic governments have little or no ability to stem the tide of extremism.

Religious leadership would be the appropriate place from which to drive change. We can make the assumption that the Muslim population takes its cues and opinions from the religious leadership and the survey data largely reflects those views. Less than 50% state they are actively opposed to the actions of the extremists, so at best a consolidated push by Muslim Religious leadership would result in a draw… They are simply not on the same page.
ISIS on the other hand has clearly stated their goal. ISIS is in the media and on TV. ISIS is fighting a war with America to establish an Islamic State. ISIS confidently proclaims its leadership of the Muslim world. For many young Muslims, ISIS fighters are the war hero’s of their generation.

Conversely, Muslim religious leadership is talking, debating and arguing amongst itself. While a number of Muslim scholars have openly condemned ISIS actions, very few, if any, have condemned their goal of an Islamic State. Further, their messages are disjointed and they are simply not speaking to the Muslim community or world with a cohesive message. It is unwise to bank on religious leadership driving a successful shift in Muslim culture to one where radicalization and extremism is not tolerated. I see absolutely no indicators that a change of that magnitude is within their capability.

Barak Obama naively stated a few weeks back that ISIS is a Muslim problem and that Muslims must take the lead in solving it. In actuality this is a problem America created in 2003 by deposing Saddam Hussein. Until 2011 we were managing the problem we created and there was a chance to mentor the fledgling democracy that we had spent 9 years and 4,488 lives creating. In December of 2011, Obama’s “end” of the Iraq war left an incompetent military, and a disjointed, ineffective, non-representative government to figure it out on its own. ISIS was born in the Syrian conflict that Obama failed to engage in. It has swept aside the Iraqi Army he abandoned in 2011 and filled the power vacuum he created. ISIS is the surrogate son of Barack Obama and failed American foreign policy.

Setting aside blame, lets assume for a minute that Muslim governments do have the desire to solve the problem that America dumped in their laps. The only tool they have at their disposal is military force. We have seen how effective the Iraqi Army is, and quite frankly despite their clear incompetence in the face of ISIS; they are some of the better-trained and equipped soldiers in the region. Name one Muslim nation that credibly projects power beyond its own borders? Save Iran, there is none. Iran has absolutely zero incentive to do anything save ensure its own borders are secure at this point.

Military power alone will not change the future of Islam

 

We can use air power and Special Operations Forces and intelligence assets to delay ISIS from taking more ground. We cannot win a war via a delaying action. ISIS fighters are estimated at 17,000. Based on the past growth rate of extremism we calculated earlier, extremists are created at the rate of about 60,000 per year, which is certainly an adequate recruitment pool. ISIS is clearly benefiting from its new position as the dominant player in the extremist world and as such we can expect it to grow quickly.

We can probably keep a lid on it for a while, but air power is indiscriminate and every civilian casualty and non-combatant we kill increases the growth rate. SOF, air power and intelligence assets are not going to eliminate ISIS. If ISIS is a cancer, Muslims are militarily incapable of carving out the cancer themselves. From a practical perspective, western military power is the only force capable of performing the excision.

The excision of ISIS is not the issue. Like every Muslim army on the planet they are simply no match for U.S. military power. The problem is military power does not deal with the cultural elements in Islam that creates the extremists. If we are unwilling to go to war with the Salafist culture and the society’s it infects, then we should not go to war. We should in fact waste no more U. S. resources on fighting the symptoms and ISIS is only a symptom of the greater disease. The disease is not rooted in the Quran, or in a specific country. The disease is rooted in the culture surrounding a segment of the Islamic religion.

If America fails to clearly identify the root of the problem and create and lead the coalition to effect change, then ISIS is the future of Islam

 

As a country we currently lack the will to fight the protracted war in the Middle East against a significant potion of the Islamic religion. That is what it would take to eradicate extremist Islam. I am not sure how many beheaded Americans, bombed and attacked embassies, and terrorist acts on U. S. soil it will take to generate the will. What we do know is the Muslim world cannot independently solve the problem we created for them.

Under the Obama administration, ISIS has been handed the future of Islam, and until America generates the leadership and the will to fight extremism at is root causes, we will change nothing. Effecting change requires both the commitment of forces necessary and the strategic mission of eradicating the portion of Islam that is incompatible with the rest of humanity. Extremist Islam has been at war with America for quite some time. We have yet to declare war on it…

About Author

 

Patrick Henry - President & Firearms Instructor at Aegis Academy

 

Patrick Henry received his operational training and experience from the U. S. Government, 22 years of which were spent in the Marine Corps where he served in the Reconnaissance, Infantry and Intelligence fields. During his active service, he spent more then seven years deployed overseas in combat, operational and training assignments. After the military, Pat worked as a contractor and as the Director of Operations at a private paramilitary company, specializing in training special operations forces and providing protective services to select private clients. His education consists of an MBA from the University of Southern California (USC), and a BS from San Diego State University with an emphasis in Biochemistry, Cell and Molecular Biology and a minor in Psychology. He holds an extensive list of security and training related certifications from a variety of government and nationally recognized entities. He currently sits on the advisory committee at USC’s Master of Veterans Business Program, and is an active member of Infraguard and the American Society of Industrial Security (ASIS). He has been a guest speaker at ASIS, the San Diego Industrial Security Awareness Council and other private organizations on physical security, travel security, and competitive intelligence collection counter-measures.

First Published at Aegis Academy

The James Foley beheading was not a random act of violence

The James Foley beheading is ultimately a horrific scene, but in creating it, ISIS has made some significant and intelligent creative choices that are unique, and provide substantial insight into the enemy we face. The video starts with Barak Obama coldly laying out his justification for attacking ISIS in what is unfortunately a dispassionate, disinterested and uninspiring tone. His distain for intervention in the Middle East could not be more clear and he comes across as tired, worn out and reluctant. They cut to the overhead imagery of a bomb being dropped, presumably in Iraq. The title of the video is “A Message to America”. The video quality is clear, the sound is crisp, and the imagery appropriate to the message throughout. This introduction is mostly Obama (and the arabic textual translation) and lasts about two minutes.

As indicated in the title the target audience is America and the west, but the translation, tone and imagery will speak volumes to the Muslim world. This in and of it self is telling in where ISIS considers its support base to be, and where it thinks it can gain influence. Mr. Foley has been coerced into to making a cohesive statement about ISIS grievances with the United States. He articulates an unreasonable but rational justification for his own death. He then makes an emotional argument against American intervention via the an appeal to his brother, a pilot in the U. S. Air Force, to think about who he is victimizing. Lastly he creates an emotional connection with his audience by discussing his wish for a future with his family that he cannot not have. He ends his speech with “all in all, I wish I wasn’t an American” thereby, expressing his personal disagreement with the American polices. Rational thought processes, emotional connections and audience manipulation are not the techniques of amateurs. James did not make this up on the fly, nor without substantial guidance and probably coercion from his captors.

This was very well scripted. Throughout the speech, Mr. Foley is calm, collected, well spoken and very well rehearsed. For a man who is explaining why he is about to be murdered – he is too calm. My suspicion is that he has “rehearsed” this speech many times, and believes this to be yet another rehearsal. The calm on his part is a critical component to this video that his murderers intentionally captured on video. Fear creates discomfort in human beings and we can hear it in the voice, and see it on the face of any other living being. If that fear were present, it would create what is called cognitive dissonance – a emotional disconnect with the message. Mr. Foley was not afraid, and therefore he did not evoke the natural disconnect from his message that would otherwise have been felt.

His murderer stands confidently, and patiently next to Mr. Foley as if listening respectfully to what he has to say. It is filmed outside, in the light of day for all to see. They are not hiding in a basement, because they want to give the impression that they are in control of the area and the conditions in their Islamic State. Mr. Foley is kneeling and his murderer is standing to create the subliminal illusion that ISIS is significantly larger and clearly in complete control of its small American captive. We are now 3.5 minutes into a 4.5 minute video. When the murderer begins to speak, he grasps the collar of the orange jump suit behind the neck of his victim, like one would grab the collar of a dog, to reiterate his complete control.

They selected a UK educated (if not born) murderer. English may or may not be his first language, but his command of the language is impressive and he has clearly spent a substantial amount of time in the UK. He speaks in English with a clear, precise, calm and educated tone and with perfect diction and grammar. He introduces Mr. Foley by his full name to acknowledge that he knows the human being he is about to kill. He does not preach, quote the Quran, or speak down to his audience. He makes a clear statement that Obama and the U.S Government policy of attacking ISIS, not the American people are to blame for what he is about to do, there by attempting to give the impression to Islamic viewers that there is a difference between the American people and the American government.

He laid out a clear rationale for his actions, which largely parallel the justification used by Obama for the American airstrikes during the introduction. Unique to this video is the lack of a religious justification for his actions. This is not a religious fanatic, but the explanation of a state actor. Unlike Obama, James Foley’s murderer is passionate and engaged and he comes across as anything but tired. He makes the claim that the insurgency is over, and America is now attacking an Islamic Army in an Islamic State that Muslims have accepted. He claims aggression against the Muslim state, is aggression against all Muslims, and that Obama’s attacks are not allowing Muslims to live at peace in the Islamic caliphate. This is intended to make the case that America’s bombs are killing muslim civilians and that this is the result. He spends less then 45 seconds making his case.

The murderer then calmly, but efficiently begins the process of beheading Mr. Foley at which point the camera cuts to black, and only some limited sound remains. The beheading is not done under screams of Allahu Akbar. The arterial blood spray is not shown. There are no screams of pain, nor sounds of choking. Once again, the cognitive dissonance created when seeing fellow human beings in pain is completely avoided. The next scene is Mr. Foley’s decapitated head placed in the middle of his back. It is designed to be shocking, and demonstrate that ISIS follows thorugh with its threats. In this case they have done so in a very business like and controlled manner. The final scene is the murderer holding Steven Sotloff by the neck of his orange jump suit and telling Barak Obama that his next decision on American use of force will determine weather or not Mr. Sotloff lives or dies.

This video is in stark contrast to previous Islamic beheadings and spefically Al Qaeda beheading videos. The brutality depicted in Nick Berg’s beheading turned many supporters and eventually Al Qaeda it self against Abu Musab Al Zarqawi. This video is unlikely to evoke nearly as much backlash in the Muslim world. From a messaging standpoint, every thing is translated on screen into Arabic, and every subliminal message is that we (The Islamic State) are in control.

In my opinion this is one of the the most impressive quality video messages to emerge from Islamic terrorists to date. That does not in any way excuse their brutality nor their barbarous behavior, against Mr. Foley, and probably hundreds of thousands of Syrians and Iraqis in the past two years. In fact the intelligent production indicates they know and understand exactly what effect their brutality is having.

This is a living breathing example of what it means to have an Islamic Caliphate on the face of the earth. This is the face of Islam we are now dealing with. Call them extremist Islam, or whatever you choose but there is no compatibility between humanity and this growing disease that is ISIS. This is a disease that Barack Obama’s inaction in Syria, and his foreign policy failings throughout the globe have created. Unfortunately he and his advisors lack the skill, experience and spine to effectively deal with it.

Our prayers to Foley Family, and our condolences for their loss.

About Author

 

Patrick Henry - President & Firearms Instructor at Aegis Academy

 

Patrick Henry received his operational training and experience from the U. S. Government, 22 years of which were spent in the Marine Corps where he served in the Reconnaissance, Infantry and Intelligence fields. During his active service, he spent more then seven years deployed overseas in combat, operational and training assignments. After the military, Pat worked as a contractor and as the Director of Operations at a private paramilitary company, specializing in training special operations forces and providing protective services to select private clients. His education consists of an MBA from the University of Southern California (USC), and a BS from San Diego State University with an emphasis in Biochemistry, Cell and Molecular Biology and a minor in Psychology. He holds an extensive list of security and training related certifications from a variety of government and nationally recognized entities. He currently sits on the advisory committee at USC’s Master of Veterans Business Program, and is an active member of Infraguard and the American Society of Industrial Security (ASIS). He has been a guest speaker at ASIS, the San Diego Industrial Security Awareness Council and other private organizations on physical security, travel security, and competitive intelligence collection counter-measures.

First Published at Aegis Academy

Gun Control Advocacy - Toxic in 2014?

With the re-election of Sherriff David Clarke, we can see the beginning of public backlash against the push for senseless anti-gun laws. Gun Control Advocacy has been toxic in a number of races, and most recently we can see it playing out the Colorado Governors race. Incumbent Democrat John Hickenloper is virtually tied with newcomer Republican Bob Beauprez. This doesn’t happen in Colorado where incumbents tend to retire from the office rather then be voted out and democrats traditionally hold the governor’s office considerably more then republicans. The number one issue that swing voters cited in a recent poll – Passage of Colorado’s gun restrictions.

In fact, reaction to the gun control advocacy of two Colorado state senators ( John Morse and Angela Giron ) resulted in their recall and both were cast out. Here was Bloomberg’s response just last month to a question about the recall:

“The NRA went after two or three state Senators in a part of Colorado where I don’t think there’s roads. It’s as far rural as you can get. And, yes, they lost recall elections. I’m sorry for that. We tried to help ‘em. But the bottom line is, the law is on the books, and being enforced. You can get depressed about the progress, but on the other hand, you’re saving a lot of lives”.

We’ll ignore his delusions life saving grandeur in this article and just focus on the tactical errors he made. In reality the recalled state senators were from Colorado Springs, the second largest city in the state which hosts the Air Force Academy and the U. S. Olympic Training Center, and Pueblo, the 7th Largest city in the state. I’ve dove through Pueblo in 1995 and shockingly was able to stay on concrete and asphalt the entire time. I also spent few days in Colorado Springs a few years back. They not only have roads, theaters & restaurants, they have clean running water and them fancy new flush toilets all over the place! My guess is regardless of which side of the political fence residents are one, they probably don’t appreciate his comments.

Bloomberg’s mistaken or more likely intentionally false comments are not surprising as has never been one to let the facts stand in the way of pushing his agenda. The best part of this continued mantra of ignorant BS is that Bloomberg and his money are becoming toxic in some pretty contested states. Even better is that he and his organizations continue to double down on their largely failing attempts. While that is good news, relying on the opposition to screw it up is not necessarily a solid strategy for success.

The NRA has been mostly silent on a number of issues that they have intelligently chosen to support. They are not shouting their successes from the rooftops, nor rubbing it in the face of those who opposed it. Politics and guns are intertwined, and so far this election cycle the NRA has done a great job of staying in the lane of gun rights, and out of the lane of “extremist organization”. I doubt the NRA will suddenly become the organization of choice for democrats after spending all of 2011 & 2012 bashing left leaning ideology as freedom hating control freaks, but they are making progress with what is a simple message. The truth.

The key point here is that the numbers speak for themselves. Despite the emotional tone of the arguments, there are hard facts we can point to. People who fear guns are not attempting to take our freedom, they are simply afraid of something they do not understand. Calling them socialist or fascists or comparing them to Adolf Hitler, does not make one person want to actually do the research to find the truth. According to Bloomberg and the like, gun owners are a bunch of intolerant backwoods extremists, clinging to our bibles and our guns. My experience with gun owners is actually quite different.

As foreign as it may be to most of you reading this article, there are many, many people who are undecided on the issue. We see them every week in our entry-level courses. They are turning out in droves to learn something about the issues, and to consider a firearm as tool they may want as an option in taking responsibility for their own safety and security. Those are the people we have to influence.

The fight over gun rights will be won or lost by which side can attract the most moderates. Currently, moderates are rejecting the Bloomberg funded nonsense. That is quite likely to continue, if we give them access to the truth without blending it with a message that is incompatible with their core beliefs. The battle ground states are not Kansas, or Arizona, or Texas. The guns rights battle is being fought in New York, California, Illinois, and Massachusetts. It is being fought in places where a conservative majority does not exist and in places where conservative rhetoric is largely rejected. That is where their anti-gun experiments are victimizing citizens.

I find it amusing that Canadian Libertarian Candidate Tim Moen was the first person I heard articulate what was at the time the polar opposite position to the NRA’s approach to gun rights in 2011 and 2012. He said “I want every married gay couple to be able to defend their pot farms with an assault rifle”. I am not advocating that become the mantra of gun rights in this country. What I am recommending is that we stick to the truth about gun ownership and not lose that message in our personal choice of religion, lifestyle or recreational activities.

The fact is that gun ownership is associated with less crime, less victims of violent crime, and more law-abiding citizens. We have an opportunity in this election cycle to put people in offices who can repeal these unconstitutional state restrictions on American gun ownership. If we simply stick to the core message and the facts, we’ll be more successful. My recommendation this election cycle is that we don’t over reach. People are tired of the unfounded BS that Bloomberg and his lobbies are spewing. We can’t fall into the same trap. And that’s the best part of being right, we don’t have to make stuff up…

Have a great week!

About Author

 

~ Patrick Henry

 

Patrick Henry received his operational training and experience from the U. S. Government, 22 years of which were spent in the Marine Corps where he served in the Reconnaissance, Infantry and Intelligence fields. During his active service, he spent more then seven years deployed overseas in combat, operational and training assignments. After the military, Pat worked as a contractor and as the Director of Operations at a private paramilitary company, specializing in training special operations forces and providing protective services to select private clients. His education consists of an MBA from the University of Southern California (USC), and a BS from San Diego State University with an emphasis in Biochemistry, Cell and Molecular Biology and a minor in Psychology. He holds an extensive list of security and training related certifications from a variety of government and nationally recognized entities. He currently sits on the advisory committee at USC’s Master of Veterans Business Program, and is an active member of Infraguard and the American Society of Industrial Security (ASIS). He has been a guest speaker at ASIS, the San Diego Industrial Security Awareness Council and other private organizations on physical security, travel security, and competitive intelligence collection counter-measures.

First Published at Aegis Academy

Product Review: AR-15 Scraper Tool

As a Marine, competitor, instructor, and firearms enthusiast, I seek to learn as much as I can about my passion for shooting. At many points along my journey, I’ve come across some useful tools for cleaning and maintenance as well as some pure gimmicks. In this article, I will review what I believe to be a very impressive, effective, and inexpensive tool to clean and maintain the AR-15. It is the AR-15 Scraper Tool manufactured by Real Avid. Trust me, it is not a gimmick. It is $19.99 very well spent.

Throughout my 20 years in the Marine Corps, in competitions, and for recreation, I’ve been shooting variations of the AR-15 from standard service models through accurized competition models. I will gladly tell you how much I enjoy shooting this platform. It is lightweight with fast target acquisition and very low recoil for rapid follow-up shots. I’ve also found it to be extremely reliable as long as you take the time to maintain it. However, in spite of all the AR-15′s merits…… I HATE CLEANING IT!!!!

For those who know me, that last statement seems out of place. My friends, colleagues, and clients know that I am VERY serious about weapons cleaning and preventative maintenance. So let me be more specific, I DETEST CLEANING THE AR-15 BOLT AND BOLT CARRIER GROUP! The time I typically spend scraping carbon build-up from the bolt tail shoulder, the inside of the bolt carrier, and the inside of the bolt carrier key surpass the time spent cleaning the remainder of the firearm!

A New Tool for a Dirty Job

So, when I stumbled across an advertisement for the AR-15 Scraper Tool in an issue of Guns & Ammo magazine, I noticed the simplicity of the design, its utility on the work bench or in the range bag, and its price. Real Avid’s web site (click here) describes the AR-15 Scraper as follows: “A faster, easier way to clean the bolt carrier group. The AR 15 Scraper removes heavy, baked-on fouling from 12 critical bolt carrier group surfaces faster and easier than brushes and solvent alone. It speed-cleans all 4 major parts of the bolt carrier group: the bolt, firing pin, bolt carrier and bolt cam pin. The swivel protects your hand from the double-ended scraping edges.” Furthermore, the tool is designed to clean critical surface areas on the bolt and bolt carrier: inside the boat tail; the bolt tail shoulder; the bolt waist; behind the cartridge extractor; the small diameter of the firing pin; the large diameter of the firing pin; the bolt face; the bolt tail; the bolt lugs; the bolt cam pin; and the inside surfaces of the bolt carrier.

For just less than $20.00, I thought I would give it a try!

Putting the AR-15 Scraper Tool to the Test

After shooting just over 500 hot hand-loads in my AR-15 in .223 Wylde, I put the AR-15 Scraper Tool to the Test. Here are some of the “before” photos of a filthy bolt and bolt carrier group caked with carbon.



While I have a lot of experience shooting a wide variety of firearms, I’ll admit that my camera skills could use a lot of improvement. Bear with me… you get the idea on how to use the scraper in the following photos. However, if my photography skills leave too much to be desired, click (here) for a link to Real Avid’s instructional video.
 

 

The Results!

I’ve got to tell you… this is one of the few tools that truly lives up to the hype! The AR-15 Scraper Tool is a simple plan executed well. It did, indeed, make cleaning the bolt and bolt carrier group much easier and saved considerable time. This tool and its unique facets made light work of scraping the bolt tail shoulder and provided access to the “hard to get” spots inside of the bolt carrier and bolt carrier key. Whereas I used to spend considerable time cleaning these areas, I now spend only a fraction of the time removing carbon. I’ll let the photos below speak for themselves. Note the immaculate interior of the bolt carrier!

 

 

Confessions of a Convert

 

I believe that you’ll agree that the results are impressive. I have to admit, this tool has turned me into a bit of a convert: I NO LONGER HATE CLEANING MY AR-15!!!! Since I have spent considerable time and money trying and testing some products that don’t live up to the advertising, I’m proud to be able to objectively share this information with you and recommend the AR-15 Scraper Tool as a product that works. It may not be the perfect tool for your work bench or range bag, but hopefully this article can help you narrow down the options, avoid over-hyped junk, and find the tool you are looking for.

If you have any success stories or horror stories with consumer products that you would like to share, send me a note at Hall@aegisacademy.com.

Stay safe and shoot straight!

About Author

 

Howard Hall - Range Master

 

Disclaimer: This article is an objective consumer evaluation. I have written it as a pure consumer. I have no connection with Real Avid, its owners, or its employees. I have not been compensated in any way by Real Avid and paid full-price for the product evaluated.

Howard has served for nearly 20 years in the Marine Corps. He has served as a Platoon Commander, Company Commander, Battalion Executive Officer, Regimental Operations Officer, and Battalion Commander. He has multiple combat tours to include serving as a military transition team member in Fallujah. He is an NRA Certified handgun instructor and holds numerous Marine Corps training credentials. An active competitor in action pistol (United States Practical Shooting Association), long range rifle (NRA F-Class), and shotgun (Amateur Trapshooting Association, National Skeet Shooting Association), howard has earned numerous accolades and medaled during DoD competitions with the 1911 platform in bulls-eye shooting.

View original source

Domestic Violence and Guns

In his latest attempt to drum up support for his largely rejected theories about community safety, Micheal Bloomberg has started Every Town for Gun Safety. Domestic Violence and guns is the latest rallying cry and just like his other anti-gun organizations; Mayors Against Illegal Guns, the Bloomberg School of Public Health, and Moms Demand Action, the Bloomberg funded Every Town for Gun Safety is already fabricating statistics in an attempt to perpetuate their emotional appeal that guns are bad. This time they have enlisted the help of Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords who co-authored an article published by CNN titled Guns Killing Women : Time for Congress to Act.

Congresswoman Gifford, regardless of what you think of her politics, was nearly killed because she chose to serve the nation. Jared Loughner (a paranoid Schizophrenic) attacked congresswoman Giffords, shooting her and 17 other people, six of whom died in 2011. She was shot in the head at close range and was both strong, and lucky enough to survive. Congresswoman Giffords has lost significant vision in both eyes, and has trouble speaking. She officially resigned from congress in January 2012 vowing to return. She and her husband subsequently jointly published Gabby: A Story of Courage and Hope.

More recently she Katie Ray Jones published the opinion piece referenced above. Every sentence from the article that we reference below can be found practically verbatim in Every Town for Gun Safety’s “Study” on guns and domestic violence, and of course, none of the statistics are sourced. Unfortunately, Mrs. Giffords and Mrs. Ray-Jones have relied on these “facts” in their article supporting gun control as a means of protecting women. Unfortunately, these Every Town for Gun Safety “facts” are grossly misleading, and in some cases outright falsehoods.

Lets take a look at a few of these statements:

“Women in America are 11 times more likely to be murdered with a gun than women in other democratic countries with developed economies.”

While I have no doubt that there is a subset of countries that you can select to get to a metric of “11 times more likely”, why would you exclude the rest of the population from the study? Perhaps Every Town for Gun Safety considers women from non-democratic countries less worthy of protection… Perhaps poor women from undeveloped nations are unworthy of consideration… Or could it be that their statistical inclusion destroys your gun related violence theory. Regardless, here is where American Women rank in the global homicide statistics.

According to the UNODC 2013 Study on Homicide, females are the victims of 21 percent of the total homicides in the world. According the U.S. Department of Justice Homicide trends in the United States, females are the victim of 23.2 percent of the total homicides in America.

The global firearms related homicide rate is approximately 4.723 per 100,000 people. That number is difficult to calculate due to inconsistent data tracking, gaps in reporting and the assumptions and exclusions necessary to create average the appropriate rates. I used all available data from the UNODC from 2003 – 2010, averaged the year over year rates by county, and then took the average rate based on the largest set of data available.
According to the UNODC, in 2011, the U.S. Firearms related homicide rate is 3.2 / 100,000.

Globally the rate for female firearm related homicide is 0.992 per 100,000. For American Women, it is .736 per 100,000. Those are what the statistics tell us is true and the fact is that American women are 26 percent less likely to be involved in a firearm related homicide than their global counterparts. I have no idea what selective data set you chose in an attempt to make the statement “11 times more likely”, but that is an outright fabrication.

“If an abuser has access to a gun it increases the chance that a woman will die by 500 percent.”

While I will not attempt to contest the fact that when a person chooses to kill someone, they will choose the most effective tool available to them. What I question is does gun access actually result in 5 fold increase in female domestic abuse deaths?

Here is what the U. S. Department of Justice had to say when they released their Report titled Homicide Trends in the United States, 1980 – 2008 This section and these graphs depict the results of domestic violence related homicides by weapon use.



What we see from the above graphs is that the use of firearms in domestic violence related incidents are in fact lower than the use of firearms in stranger related homicides by about 20 percent. The use of other weapons is what makes up the difference. The facts tell us that firearms are actually less prevalent in domestic violence incidents than in the other homicides that occur in society. A bit further down you see that gun use in domestic violence in America is in fact declining, but on the first graph you can see downward trend in gun use.

“Most of the time, women are murdered with guns by someone they know, either by a family member or an intimate partner, such as a former or current husband or boyfriend.”

When we look the U.S. Department of Justice, we see that the facts show us that in 78.1 percent of all homicides, the victim and offender know each other. As we see above in the case of domestic violence; weapon use and guns specifically are less prevalent in domestic abuse homicide than in stranger homicides.
Nothing in that statement is patently untrue. Abuser access is an un quantifiable number. The reality is that the data shows us that guns are irrelevant in the equation. That sentence is designed solely to give the impression that domestic violence and guns are somehow linked.

What we see here on the left is that the use of firearms in domestic violence incidents have declined significantly in the past 30 years.

“Between 2001 and 2012, more women were shot to death by an intimate partner in our country than the total number of American troops killed in the Iraq and Afghanistan wars combined.”

I have no idea how the ability of American Medics to save the lives of critically wounded service members fighting an enemy of our nation has any parallel or comparison to the behavior of cowardly males who take out their inadequacies on their wives and partners. I am proud of the American Servicemen and Women who were fortunate enough to return, and I am proud of the American medics and doctors who enabled that to occur. If we use survival metrics from any other war prior to the Gulf War, we would not come close to those numbers. When you choose to attempt to advance your ill informed opinions, I would appreciate if you would refrain from dancing on the graves of my fellow soldiers who did not return in the process of lying to your countrymen.

“Currently, federal law prevents people who are under domestic violence protection orders or have misdemeanor domestic violence convictions from accessing guns. But even though increasing numbers of couples are choosing to marry later in life, the law hasn’t been extended to address dating partner abuse.”

The Laughtenburg Act which prevents persons convicted or subject to domestic violence restraining orders from handling firearms (to include military service members on active duty) does not limit the restriction to a spouse, or domestic partner. Anyone subject to a domestic violence restraining order is not allowed to access, purchase or posses firearms. The law they are claiming needs to be enacted, not only exists, it has existed since 1997.

If we are to make progress on the issue of community safety, we need to look at the world as it exists, not as we wish it to be. Mr. Bloomberg has decided to spend his vast fortunes attempting to ban guns from society because he has convinced himself they are somehow detrimental to society. Unfortunately he is flat out wrong. This latest attempt to push domestic violence as the emotional basis for this argument is in fact counter productive to women’s safety.

When we look at England and Australia, the most commonly touted gun control success myths, we see increased violent crime, no impact on total homicide or suicide, and that women bear the brunt of those ill-conceived decisions. Most egregious are the rape rates in these westernized nations where women have no legal means of defending themselves from sexual assault by a physically more capable aggressor.

These types of wholesale fabrications we just went over are right in line with any of the organizations that Mr. Bloomberg funds. You can read about John Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health’s fabrication of numbers here. If you want to know more about the truth of what is at the base of the gun control argument, check out this brief introduction to the topic below. Do some research and you’ll see that guns have no correlation with violence, domestic or otherwise, unless you choose to study “Gun Violence”, in which case you have identified your culprit before you started to study the problem…

While Mr. Bloomberg is spending millions to couch his ill-informed opinions as credible research, there are many productive research based attempts to reduce the violence in our society. Criminals, mental health, gangs and a cultural glorification of violence are real problems, which we as a society can impact. Guns are currently a symptom that has the nation distracted from addressing the underlying causes of violence in our society.
Stay informed and stay safe!

 

About Author

 

Patrick Henry - President & Firearms Instructor at Aegis Academy

 

Patrick Henry received his operational training and experience from the U. S. Government, 22 years of which were spent in the Marine Corps where he served in the Reconnaissance, Infantry and Intelligence fields. During his active service, he spent more then seven years deployed overseas in combat, operational and training assignments. After the military, Pat worked as a contractor and as the Director of Operations at a private paramilitary company, specializing in training special operations forces and providing protective services to select private clients. His education consists of an MBA from the University of Southern California (USC), and a BS from San Diego State University with an emphasis in Biochemistry, Cell and Molecular Biology and a minor in Psychology. He holds an extensive list of security and training related certifications from a variety of government and nationally recognized entities. He currently sits on the advisory committee at USC’s Master of Veterans Business Program, and is an active member of Infraguard and the American Society of Industrial Security (ASIS). He has been a guest speaker at ASIS, the San Diego Industrial Security Awareness Council and other private organizations on physical security, travel security, and competitive intelligence collection counter-measures.

First Published at Aegis Academy