I'm hoping to get the same one as this guy.

[youtube][/youtube]

OOo! get the Tom Mix holster with the fringe and rhinestones!

or not.

Nothing says second amendment and personal defense like gun bling.

Maybe just for the game photos.

THE
BY JINGO
AARDVARK

I know guns are not toys, so I'll say for the record that I won't ask you to carry it around when we shoot you for Cyberganked.

HOWEVER, the holster can be a toy. So if you could get the more garish holster you can think of, that'd be perfect.

Earlier this week I went to actually go get my license. This is how it went.

(The formerly "Concealed Carry" license has now been renamed the Self-Defense Act (SDA) License. Everyone still refers to it as a "concealed carry" license, even though with it, you can now open carry. No one actually refers to it as an SDA license.)

After completing an authorized class (like I did), you have to go to the County Sheriff's Office in the county in which you live. For me, that's about 15 minutes away. (For ICJ and 'Vark, it's a stone's throw from the onion burger place we ate at.) My Sheriff's Office only processes license applications two hours a day, from 8am-10am. The next county over only does them two days a week from 2pm to 4pm. Every county is different.

Before you arrive, you must bring the following things: (a) the certificate from your class; (b) a completely filled out four-page application; (c) two passport quality photographs; (d) a $25 cashier's check or money order made out to the sheriff's office for taking your fingerprints; (e) a $100 cashier's check or money order made out to the OSBI for $100 for a 5yr license or $200 for a 10yr license. If you forget any of those items, you will be turned away at the door. All payments are non-refundable, so if you do something wrong and your application is denied, you lose your money. As one of the guys waiting with me mentioned, this is all so that you can exercise a right we have all been granted in the Constitution of the United States.

I have heard that if you haven't been processed by 10am you will be turned away, so I arrived at 7:55am, five minutes before they opened. When the doors opened I was the first one in.

At 8am sharp I handed the sheriff's secretary my paperwork. She went over ever line and complimented me on filling out the form completely. It scares me that other people applying for the right to carry a loaded weapon around on their hip in public can't fill out a form.

I was then handed another form to fill out and told to take it next door to the jail to be fingerprinted.

When I walked out of the sheriff's office I saw two guys wearing black and white striped clothes that looked like the Beagle Brothers from the old Scrooge McDuck comics. I looked around and didn't see any police officers monitoring them. Odd, I thought.

So I walk over to the jail and when I get there there are three more guys with INMATE written across their backs painting the outside of the jail. One guy's up on a ladder, painting. One's kneeling down, and the third is carrying paint buckets. This is not what I imagined inmates doing.

I get inside the waiting room at the jail (which seats 6) and am told that they are rebooting the digital fingerprint station and they hope to have it online within 30-60 minutes. While waiting in the lobby someone delivered a Thanksgiving feast to the jail. While two officers held the doors open, half a dozen prisoners went outside to fetch the food and carried it back in. If you're counting, so far that's 11 prisoners I've seen freely leaving and entering the jail.

The lobby soon fills with fingerprint applicants. First there's two of us, then three, then six, then ten. There are 10 people in a room that seats six. Occasionally inmates leave and we have to move because we are all scared shitless of these guys in orange jumpsuits.

Eventually about an hour later, maybe more, the fingerprint machine comes back online and I go back. The fingerprint machine is very picky and doesn't like my thumbs, which he has to scan five times each. The man doing the fingerprints is entertained by my joking. When the machine says "print too small" after scanning my pinky, I joke that I should have brought my other fingers. I'm guessing there's not a lot of joking in the county jail. He appreciates my effort.

Taking my fingerprints takes 15 minutes. I got there at 8am with everything I needed to bring completed, and was the first one there. It's now 9:40am. I take the fingerprint sheets back to the sheriff's office. The lady takes them, thanks me, and says my license should arrive in 12-14 weeks.

12-14 WEEKS.

Here are the things that can prohibit you from obtaining the license: if you have been convicted of a felony, if you have been convicted of an assault and battery, if you have ever had a VPO filed against you, or if you have ever been found mentally unstable. I don't have access to the OSBI database, but how hard could that possibly be to research? I've never been arrested. I would think this would be an easy background check to perform.

When the lady told me it would be 12-14 weeks I said, "but I was plannin' on shootin' somebody this weekend!" She laughed.

So now I guess I have 3 1/2 months to buy a gun.

Tdarcos wrote:Most people who refer to someone using Wikipedia are doing so perjoratively. I had the impression from one of the shows about the incident that they had killed some police or bystanders; the fact they didn't buttresses my argument even stronger, which was in response to the comment that less than 20% of shots actually hit someone fatally, and I pointed out that professionals in combat routinely need thousands of bullets per kill.

How many do you think it would take for a particularly stationary target?

Tdarcos wrote:professionals in combat routinely need thousands of bullets per kill.

"I know, right!?!"

pinback wrote:

Tdarcos wrote:Bank of America Shootout in North Hollywood, CA confirmed this. Two guys against the LAPD, and tens of thousands of rounds shot on both sides, and mostly misses or injuries. They died and I think they killed only 4 people despite hundreds of police and bystanders in the area.

Just in case anyone cares about facts, the shooters killed zero people.

This proves my whole point; they were firing thousands of rounds with fully-automatic weapons, the police fired back probably hundreds, and nobody was killed.

Ice Cream Jonsey wrote:I wish he would quote from the Wikipedia and get his facts straight more often.

Most people who refer to someone using Wikipedia are doing so perjoratively. I had the impression from one of the shows about the incident that they had killed some police or bystanders; the fact they didn't buttresses my argument even stronger, which was in response to the comment that less than 20% of shots actually hit someone fatally, and I pointed out that professionals in combat routinely need thousands of bullets per kill.

pinback wrote:

Tdarcos wrote:Bank of America Shootout in North Hollywood, CA confirmed this. Two guys against the LAPD, and tens of thousands of rounds shot on both sides, and mostly misses or injuries. They died and I think they killed only 4 people despite hundreds of police and bystanders in the area.

Just in case anyone cares about facts, the shooters killed zero people.

I wish he would quote from the Wikipedia and get his facts straight more often.

This one is still the coolest in my book, but I'll go with the bank robbery as number two.

[youtube][/youtube]

pinback wrote:

Tdarcos wrote:Bank of America Shootout in North Hollywood, CA confirmed this. Two guys against the LAPD, and tens of thousands of rounds shot on both sides, and mostly misses or injuries. They died and I think they killed only 4 people despite hundreds of police and bystanders in the area.

Just in case anyone cares about facts, the shooters killed zero people.

Off-topic, but since fats brought it up, are we all in agreement that this was the coolest thing to ever happen?

Defending yourself during a home invasion <> two bank robbers in full body armor <> duty combat.

Tdarcos wrote:Bank of America Shootout in North Hollywood, CA confirmed this. Two guys against the LAPD, and tens of thousands of rounds shot on both sides, and mostly misses or injuries. They died and I think they killed only 4 people despite hundreds of police and bystanders in the area.

Just in case anyone cares about facts, the shooters killed zero people.

Flack wrote:... a small gun that you will carry is better than a big gun that you leave at home because it's too big.

Tdarcos wrote:Smaller gun on you better than larger one at home too heavy to carry.

Survey says? Fail.

Ice Cream Jonsey wrote:Not if Tdarcos keeps quoting Wikipedia for 100 lines.

What is it with you people? You're the second person to falsely accuse me of quoting Wikipedia, and I'm getting sick of it. Get your goddam facts straight, I did not use Wikipedia at all. I got the information from places that offer training for CCW permits, and once you get a permit, where else it's valid.

Flack wrote:The first thing to decide is, are you going to own multiple guns, or just one? I just want one.

When carrying, largest gun holdable w/o fatigue is better. Smaller gun on you better than larger one at home too heavy to carry.

Flack wrote:It was the opinion of our instructor, for what it's worth, that "more bullets are better". Also according to him, in a standard gun fight or shoot out, approximately 18% of bullets hit their targets.

I read In combat, typically takes thousands of shots 2 kill 1 soldier. Most shooting to mess up other side's shooting, and force their heads down. Bank of America Shootout in North Hollywood, CA confirmed this. Two guys against the LAPD, and tens of thousands of rounds shot on both sides, and mostly misses or injuries. They died and I think they killed only 4 people despite hundreds of police and bystanders in the area.

AArdvark wrote:Only fired my friend's .40 cal Glock on one occasion. Loud and rather inaccurate, but that might have just been me trying to hit a target too far away for the range of the gun.

If it's anything like my Dad's .45, my first shot was a lot more accurate than all the others as I was anticipating a hard kick and a loud boom every shot after the first one.

AArdvark wrote:Only fired my friend's .40 cal Glock on one occasion. Loud and rather inaccurate, but that might have just been me trying to hit a target too far away for the range of the gun.


Scary to think about having a shoot out/ gun fight situation in any event.

Not if Tdarcos keeps quoting Wikipedia for 100 lines.

Only fired my friend's .40 cal Glock on one occasion. Loud and rather inaccurate, but that might have just been me trying to hit a target too far away for the range of the gun.


Scary to think about having a shoot out/ gun fight situation in any event.

A bit more in regards to gun choice ... and I'll start off by saying, I don't know very much about guns, so some of this is just me putting my current thoughts down.

The first thing to decide is, are you going to own multiple guns, or just one? I just want one. The next thing you have to decide is, what do you want a gun for? I want a gun for both home protection and, occasionally, outside the home protection. If you decide you want multiple guns then you might want a different gun for home protection vs. one for carrying outside the home. If you just want to own one gun, like I do, then you have to pick one that works the best for all scenarios.

The way the concealed carry licenses work is that there are three levels: derringer, revolver, or semi-auto. If you qualify at the range with a derringer, that's all you can carry. (Derringers are tiny guns that only hold one or two bullets.) If you qualify with a revolver then you can carry either a revolver or a derringer. If you qualify with a semi-automatic weapon (one with a clip), then you can legally carry any of the three. All of the concealed carry classes around here (including the one I took) require you to qualify with a semi-automatic pistol. The class I took supplied 22s, which make holes slightly larger than a BB would.

It was the opinion of our instructor, for what it's worth, that "more bullets are better". Also according to him, in a standard gun fight or shoot out, approximately 18% of bullets hit their targets. The downside of revolvers is that they only hold six shots, and they are slow to reload. I will say that a semi-auto takes a little more time to become familiar with and are a little more intimidating, but it really only takes just a little bit of time to become more comfortable with them.

Next up is the size of the ammo and that's where I'm still debating. The 22 I shot left holes about the size of a screwdriver being poked into something. There are websites I've found that say a thick winter coat might stop a 22 from penetrating a person. I wouldn't want to take one to the eye, but I would also be afraid that it wouldn't stop someone really intent on harming me or my kids.

Then there are the 9mm/.38s, which are essentially the same bullet. From what I understand, 9mms shoot faster while 38s pack more mass, but whatever you shoot with either one is going to have a real bad day.

Then you've got .40s and 45s. Those are obviously heavy duty weapons. I've shot my Dad's .45 many times and it's not fun. It kicks hard, it's heavy, and it's loud. Obviously it is going to do a lot of damage (which is ultimately the idea) but on the other hand, practicing with it at the range isn't all that much fun.

That, along with the fact that you can get 9mm ammo anywhere (and it's really cheap) is why I'm leaning toward that. Everyone I talk to so far has a different opinion, however.

AAA vs. Guns is a valid question.

This past summer we took an Alaska cruise, leaving from Seattle. We drove our minivan, which currently has 215,000 miles, from Oklahoma to Seattle. We went on the cruise and had a great time. When the cruise returned to Seattle, we went out to our minivan and the battery was dead. We discovered that one of the kids left on one of the dome lights.

Now, it just so happens, I do have AAA, so we called them. I really want to paint this visual for you. We were in the middle of a huge parking lot, and just outside the parking lot was the AAA shop. Had I climbed on top of the van I would have easily been able to see the AAA building. So we called AAA and they said it would be 60-90 minutes before they could come over and give us a jump. Again, if I had a rock in my hand and the wind had been just right, I could have hit the AAA building from where we were parked. I have no doubt that I could have pushed the van over there in less than 90 minutes. But, they only had one guy working that Sunday, he was out towing a car, and he would be there in 60-90 minutes. It was closer to 90.

Now, about where we were stranded -- we were in an outdoor parking lot with controlled access, surrounded by a big fence with barbed wire across the top. We couldn't have been in a safer place. There was a security guard that came around about every 15 minutes to check on us. (He said his employer prevented him from giving our car a jump.) It was cold, but not unbearably cold. We were in no danger whatsoever.

But.

What if it had been 11pm instead of 11am? What if we had been in East St. Louis instead of eastern Seattle? What if the first person to arrive was not a AAA employee?

I guess overall I would say that I think of AAA as being a lot like the police. I think their intention is noble and I think once you call them, they plan on heading your way and coming to help you. I also think that, until they arrive, you are on your own. Hope for the best, plan for the worst.