If violent crime is to be curbed, it is only the intended victim who can do it.
The felon/terrorist does not fear the Laws, police, prison, judge nor jury or G*D.
Therefore what he must be taught is too fear is his armed victim.

Armed men are citizens. Unarmed men are subjects.

So said Col. Cooper.

Not true under normal circumstances. But the only logical recourse when the law and government fail.

Yes, of legal firearms, the numbers stand at (+/-) about 300 million weapons owned by approximately 103 million Americans. And, of course, by virtue of all Blue big city's rigid and restrictive gun laws, they mostly aren't owned by people living there; they're out in the hinterlands.

A couple years ago the police chief of Detroit publicly urged citizens to arm themselves stating the police could not be everywhere. Surprising from a big city police chief.

While he was police chief in Cincinnati, he was anti-gun.

After a stint in Maine, where he saw responsible gun use, he changed his mind.

He was an officer in LA during Rodney King and wasn't happy being ordered to retreat and leave people defenseless either.

Thanks for the additional background.

Thanks for the background.

I thought the number of guns owned in this country was up to 400 million.

"The Gun Is Civilization" by Marko Kloos

Human beings only have two ways to deal with one another: reason and force. If you want me to do something for you, you have a choice of either convincing me via argument, or force me to
do your bidding under threat of force. Every human interaction falls into one of those two categories, without exception. Reason or force, that's it.

In a truly moral and civilized society, people exclusively
interact through persuasion. Force has no place as a valid method of social interaction and the only thing that removes force from the menu is the personal firearm, as paradoxical as it may sound to some.

When I carry a gun, you cannot deal with me by force. You have to use reason and try to persuade me, because I have a way to negate your threat or employment of force.

The gun is the only personal weapon that puts a 100-pound woman on equal footing with a 220-pound mugger, a 75-year old retiree on equal footing with a 19-year old gang banger, and a single guy on equal footing with a carload of drunken guys with baseball bats. The gun removes the disparity in physical strength, size, or numbers between a potential attacker and a
defender.

There are plenty of people who consider the gun as the source of
bad force equations. These are the people who think that we'd be more civilized if all guns were removed from society, because a firearm makes it easier for a[armed] mugger to do his job. That, of course, is only true if the mugger's potential victims are mostly disarmed either by choice or by legislative fiat--it has no validity when most of a mugger's potential marks are armed.

People who argue for the banning of arms ask for automatic rule by the young, the strong, and the many, and that's the exact opposite of a civilized society. A mugger, even an armed one, can only make a successful living in a society where the state has granted him a force monopoly.

Then there's the argument that the gun makes confrontations lethal that otherwise would only result in injury. This argument is fallacious in several ways. Without guns involved, confrontations are won by the physically superior party inflicting overwhelming injury on the loser.

People who think that fists, bats, sticks, or stones don't
constitute lethal force, watch too much TV, where people take beatings and come out of it with a bloody lip at worst. The fact that the gun makes lethal force easier works solely in favor of the weaker defender, not the stronger attacker.
If both are armed, the field is level.

The gun is the only weapon that's as lethal in the hands of an
octogenarian as it is in the hands of a weight lifter. It simply wouldn't work as well as a force equalizer if it wasn't both lethal and easily employable.

When I carry a gun, I don't do so because I am looking for a
fight, but because I'm looking to be left alone. The gun at my side means that I cannot be forced, only persuaded. I don't carry it because I'm afraid, but because it enables me to be unafraid. It doesn't limit the actions of those who
would interact with me through reason, only the actions of those who would do so by force. It removes force from the equation... and that's why carrying a gun is a civilized act.

An armed society is a polite society.

Brilliant comment.

The LEFT loves to paint GUNowners CCW and LTC
as WILDeyed vigilantes who can't afford a CAPEnCOWL.
The TRUTH is that we know that if we use our weapons all hell will break loose.
So we limit ourselves to protecting us and those we love.

That's the way I look at it as well. If WE, the legal gun owners, show up at these riots and WE are forced to defend ourselves, it is WE who will get arrested. Besides all that, I was always taught to stay away from trouble and that has served me well over the years. However, it will be a BIG MISTAKE to think that I won't stand my ground when threatened.

The only place where I've never heard a cross word is a gun range and I've been on a whole bunch of them.

Not even ONE cross word.

The police are 6 times more likely to commit a crime than any CCW holder

If anyone tries to break into my home, I will fire a warning shot...straight to the head. Gun control is hitting the target with the first shot.

and 2nd and 3rd as well

I like the quadruple tap!

Be careful: there have been many horrible instances of people mistaking their own relatives for intruders.

Then you fire the second " warning shot " just above the door..............................

Mozambique drills, keep practicing until it becomes natural.

head shots are low probability. go for center of mass. after the first couple of torso hits slows them down,then take the head shot.

If you have a 12 AWG pump, single torso hits are all you need.

Mossberg.

00 buckshot

You don't want them to get out alive or they will hire a lawyer and you will become the criminal and wind up in jail.

Thank you. Points well made.

Scoped hunting rifles make excellent stand off weapons. Three people in a pickup truck can control an intersection from 400 yards. Two in the back shooting, one in the front ready to drive if things get edgy. Add one more pickup truck and you are in control.

He who snipes and slips away, lives to snipe another day.

"Out of nowhere ..."

From a place you cannot see, comes a sound you will not hear.

Bravo. Looking forward to your next article. Btw, in NYC the Dominican community defended themselves against rioters/looters in a manner similar to the Korean-Americans of LA - though it was more a matter of muscle than guns (though some were likely packing, it wasn't the majority, nor did they advertise it). Jews (in Sheepshead Bay, Flatbush and Midwood Brooklyn) also held armed patrols (in their case, baseball bats - again, don't know if they had actual guns) and stated that they were ready for any looters/rioters. Note: outside of NYC, the religious Jews on patrol open-carried actual guns and rifles. They don't mess around.

I live in that community in NYC! The pushback by the Dominican community was fierce. It was a wonderful thing to see the "NO" in action! Although I have lived in NYC for many years, I was born in northern New Mexico 71 years ago, and I remember what "self-sufficiency" looked like, and now, I have been amazed to see rampant dysfunction permit defeat. I too look forward to Jack's next article, because I have these past weeks felt that I was drowning in "the problem" with few emerging as leaders to support and encourage resistance to the mob. I do not believe in nurturing a culture of victims. I believe in fighting back.

A) Good for you.
B) I lived there too (Cooper, right off 211/Isham) and loved it. I'm on the UWS now. Go Dominicans (and Latinos in general - very patriotic, hard-working and naturally conservative)!

Actually, early attempts have been made to riot in small towns and suburbs. Snohomish, WA., and watch some of Tiborasaurus Rex's vids on YouTube. He fully describes the attempted riot in his western North Dakotan town, which was effectively repulsed by a coalition of vets, police, and even bikers.

Many members of my wife's family still live in the Fishtown section of Philadelphia. The rioting racists and degenerate subversives didn't limiy their activities to Center City but made their way up Frankfort Ave devasting everything in their wake. One of the Black Luves Madness Sociopath publically stating that they were going to go after the white racists of Fishtown and take what was theirs and even planned one of their viscious riots for a park accross from the police station. The non-hipster citizens of Fishtown weren't having it. With the National Guard staying down in Center City a large group of citizens armed with a few guns and alot of baseball bats surrounded the police station to protect the police. Likewise similarly armed groups of citizens guarded shopping areas. And guess what ? The loadmouthed viscious Antifa BLM sociopaths never came ! The local media vermin potrayed these citizens as racists ..... of course

Been doing this for many decades now. The police come afterward, draw chalk outlines and take statements. They cannot be everywhere at once. When seconds count - if you are really really luck the cops are minutes away, but most likely hours to days

It can be depressing that few stand up to the organized mobs. It's an indicator of how low our nation has sunk. We've been in a trough before.

One big problem: If we on the right protect ourselves we get arrested. If you're on the left you get let go.

"better to be judged by 12 than carried by 6". these days,you might not survive an attack by a group of rioters.
also,fists CAN be lethal weapons. More than a few people have died from a single punch to the head. Or the first punch might render you incapable of defending yourself at all,you could be killed before you recovered enough to defend yourself. Or you might be permanently crippled,or blinded. The law calls this "grievous bodily harm",legitimate grounds for use of lethal force.

BTW,most states consider arson to be a "forcible felony",and thus legit use of lethal force to stop an arsonist.

Like you say the 12 or 6. Me I'm at the range at least once or twice per month. Practice makes improvement.

Yeah, funny how that works.

That's george soros getting his money's worth out of all those state and local DA campaigns he financed.

I applaud 1st time gun purchasers and think it is a step in the right direction. Really though, owning one firearm is nice but at the minimum you should have are three to be prepared for almost all situations. One rifle, one shotgun and one handgun are the bare minimum you should own to cover all situations. If you do not have all three you are just dipping your toes in the pool. If you really just can only afford one, I'd pick the shotgun as the most versatile for home defense.

An AR-15 is much easier to learn to shoot and can handle anything from 1-300 yards.

The next most important step is learn to use it effectively. Go to the range and learn what you are capable of

"... 1-300 yards ..."

And in fact other calibers are available just by changing uppers (say upper 2/3 of the rifle) that will get you out well beyond 500 in a package that weighs hardly more than the basic 5.56x45 version. These rifles are a SYSTEM with interchangeable parts that can be replaced to better adapt them to specific needs.

The 5.56x45 NATO cartridge version is basic and suited for defense at modest ranges and for training (minimal recoil -- ideal for the new shooter), target shooting, hunting of game smaller than deer. But it's a small bullet moving fast: Good for those things, not so hot for some others.

What about a gate guard who needs to be able to stop a ramming vehicle? Swap the upper and get some new magazines and you can use the .458 SOCOM cartridge. Instead of a 55 gn. bullet it's 500 gn. and delivers energy comparable to many much larger rifles -- enough to stop an engine with one shot in many cases.

But that's still the basic rifle the guard trained with: He does not have to learn new controls, handling/cleaning procedures, precautions, etc. There's a wiki I think.

Then there's the 6.5 Grendel (6.5x39 mm) cartridge, still on the basic AR-15 system but higher velocity and a longer and heavier bullet to reach ranges as great as 1000 yards.

There are DOZENS of such choices. If you have a reason to prefer a particular 'intermediate' cartridge, chances are someone makes an AR-15 upper that'll let you shoot it.

The AR-15 was developed by downsizing the AR-10. Those rifles follow the same scheme and are available for many cartridges too large for the AR-15 system.

However: For most 'home defense' shooters I'd still favor the Ruger Mini-14. There's less new stuff to learn and from where you are standing to your property line it will do every job just as well as an AR-15 set up for the 5.56x45 cartridge.

I am a shotgun fan, but they take too much training and most women don't like them. An AR-15 rifle is the most versatile and requires the least training of any Home Defense weapon.