Don’t give up if a replacement firing pin is unavailable from your catalog suppliers. Instead, use these tips to solve the problem.

Here are all the items tested in Gun Tests magazine from 2011 back through 1999.

The group Media Matters for America hates NRA. Few organizations have more strongly proclaimed their disdain for our right to keep and bear arms and self-protection, says the NRA-ILA.

Lethal Force Institute’s Massad Ayoob gives a lesson on what to do if you are stopped with firearms in your vehicle. These essential tips will teach you how to safely interact with police when carrying a firearm while driving. (3:47).

Gun Reports - News

Liberal Courts Still Gunning
Against Second Amendment Rights

(GunReports.com) -- Forbes contributor Larry Bell, a professor and endowed professor at the University of Houston, wrote recently on Forbes.com:

Does the Second Amendment right to bear arms for self-defense extend outside the doorway of our homes? Well, no — at least not according to rulings of judges in California, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, New York and Virginia. Although 40 states currently mandate that permits shall be granted to allow all competent, law-abiding adults who seek them to carry concealed loaded firearms, California, Illinois and Maryland deny permits to all but those who can show they face specific dangers.

Moreover, an Oct. 4 ruling by the Federal U.S. Court of Appeals found the Washington, D.C., ban on even owning “assault weapons” and large-capacity magazines doesn’t violate constitutional rights of residents living in the nation’s capital. The 2-1 judge decision also upheld registration requirements for handguns put in place after a landmark U.S. Supreme Court ruling in 2008 ended the city’s near total ban on firearms, and ordered a lower court to review other aspects of their gun control law, such as limits on multiple purchases as well.

“Progressives” continue to argue that the use of deadly force should be restricted to police and army personnel, and that ordinary citizens simply can’t be trusted to play any role in maintaining law and order, including protection of family lives and property. Media coverage featuring deranged civilian gun violence incidents is exploited to make this case, while much more commonplace events involving armed citizens who successfully thwart attacks are largely unreported. Law-abiding citizens acting in self-defense actually shoot and kill many more criminals each year than police do, and with a much lower percentage of incidents where an innocent person is mistakenly identified as a criminal.

Read more at Forbes and then come back to GunReports.com to discuss.

Tweet

Reader Comments

The idea that the SCOTUS is better suited to decide who should own a gun than our society is so ludicrous it makes me sick. Who and what do these Supreme Court Justices think they are??? Next they will try and ban self defense period.The Good Lord turned his other cheek, my attacker would not be so lucky!Progressives should spend a few nights walking the streets of Philly or NY after hours...they would take a different view of self defense.

Comment by: Sharps | October 27, 2011

Obama's liberals have decidedly gone after our rights as American citizens. Obama is a leftist, and an avowed Muslim who despises anything to do with American patriotism. When he announced Osama Bin Laden's death, he (Obama) said "The United States has killed OBL", not our military has caught and killed the terrorist leader and financier OBL. Obama is clearly un-American in my views. He has done everything to disassociate himself as an American. Many voted for him to show they weren't Racist, now they must vote against him to show they are'nt idiots. (author unknown)

Comment by: Ralph De La Huerta | October 27, 2011

I would love to see some regular publication of all the cases of people killed AFTER calling the police for help. I'm sure the stats might not be readily available, nor the pictures or videos of the scene, as most LEO depts. probably don't want citizens to get the idea that cops won't arrive in time to save you and even if they do they're not permitted to endanger themselves to save you. However, I think the citizens are entitled to be made aware of those facts and to decide based upon them if they wish to be armed or not. I believe the absolutely BEST way to fight this anti-safety agenda is to play the tape of the call in the background while showing photos or video of the crime scene WITH the victims/ bodies in the shots, and a clock showing call time and response time.

Regardless of how you feel about the subject, it was the constant weekly barrage of photos showing young girls dead in alleys and cars with pools of blood between their legs that got abortion legalized. People realized eventually that 'illegal' never means 'not going to happen', so they chose to save lives by making it legal for them that wanted it. Similar pictures of violent crime scenes would really push emotional buttons, and would quickly get America armed. BUT, what organization will take this on as a regular effort? I don't know.

If the cops are only going to show up to tag and bag the bodies anyway, then the bodies should be those of the initial attackers.

Comment by: david b | October 27, 2011

Interesting point David, though that tactic only seems to be exploited by the left. We all know that police realistically come along only after a crime to document and investigate, but we all knew abortions were happening illegally just as well. There is an ad I've seen, though only in gun magazines, that pictures a map showing your daughter, your gun, and a rapist.

Funny how judges can see one side of the err in their ways, but not the other:

As Judge J. Wilkinson who sits on the 4th Circuit Court wrote in March, “This is serious business. We do not wish to be even minutely responsible for some unspeakably tragic act of mayhem because in the peace of our judicial chambers we miscalculated as to Second Amendment rights.”

Flip it around your honor, because when you deny us our Constitutional rights, we become victims. I guess those tragedies are "speakable?"

Comment by: PVB | October 27, 2011

In the 'gun discussion', P V B, it's only the 'anti-s' that use that tactic, that's true. But remember, I'm an accused and unrepentant liberal, and I'm suggesting we use it to SUPPORT Second Amendment rights. Our message is true, the events would be provable, and we would win that 'idea war' quickly. It shouldn't be so 'foreign' to conservatives either - there's plenty of 'scare commercials' run every election by conservative interests. In fact, I just saw some anti-Obamacare commercials in the last two weeks, and it's not an election year, but they were intended to be scary. So our problem ("our" being Second Amendment supporters) is how do we get this message out in a regular fashion?

However, my reply above gave me an idea - we only need one or two of these videos run as commercials in prime time and one targeted to women during day time TV hours (women being the main demographic in that time block) to get the message across. I had been thinking of something like internet videos, but paid commercials would likely reach more folks faster.

Do you think the big urban PDs would be honked off? I do, but if the brady bunch loses the urban mindset, they're done for. They've already got no traction out in the rural areas.

Comment by: david b | October 27, 2011

I am reminded of the old quotation: "When seconds count, the police are minutes away". The fact is, however, that response times have become so long, that the 911 call has essentially become a means of getting somebody to come to a crime scene to clean up the mess. As long as I draw breath, I will not surrender the safety of my wife and myself to the idea that the police may investigate who attacked us and might possibly bring them to justice. As Isaac Newton ultimately realized: "For every action, there is an opposite and equal reaction". I'm with Newton, and I will react promptly and decisively.

Comment by: canovack | October 27, 2011

Ralph De La Huerta sates,"When he announced Osama Bin Laden's death, he (Obama) said "The United States has killed OBL", not our military has caught and killed the terrorist leader and financier OBL." I find it ludicrous that OObama is given any credit for the killing of OBL. All I remember is the photo of the Anointed One sitting in the corner of the "War Room" cowering like a child waiting for daddy to come whip his ass.

Comment by: Omnistuff | October 28, 2011

IMO, no POTUS should ever get credit for military actions during his term in office. They're not wearing the boots. And that includes 'Jump-suit George'.

Comment by: david b | October 28, 2011

I heartily agree, david b. It's the men and women of our armed forces who get out there and do the dirty work.....and make the sacrifices! Just because the president happens to be the so-called Commander-In-Chief is no reason for him to take any credit for anything done by the military forces of our nation.....nor should he be blamed for any military failures.

Comment by: canovack | October 28, 2011