Arizona State Senate Bill 1070 — the “Welcome to the Hotel California” legislation that has drawn so much attention nation-wide — will take effect on July 29th, 2010. Two other bills that will become law that day are more interesting to me, if not to TV-camera-mugging know-nothings in other states.
First, it will be lawful in Arizona for citizens to carry a concealed weapon without applying for a state permit. Arizona has always been an open-carry state, and, until now, a concealed carry permit required nothing more than a small fee plus 16 hours of instruction. With or without the legal requirement, the instruction is not a bad idea. But what will change on July 29th is the attitude of bad guys. Unlike thugs in, say, Chicago, criminals in Phoenix know there is a high degree of likelihood that ordinary people will be armed. As Robert A. Heinlein said, “An armed society is a polite society.”
Second, firearms manufactured and sold within the state of Arizona will not be subject to the Federal Brady Law’s national firearms database. It’s not a big deal right now, but it is plausible that there will come a time that the Feds — or their surlier successors — might try to confiscate every gun they know about. Having weapons Johnny G-Man knows nothing about might turn out to be an important advantage, if the shit hits the fan.
Look at this:
Isn’t that a sweet little pistol? It’s a Ruger LCP, specifically designed for concealed carry. It’s a .380, six rounds in the grip, one in the chamber, so it’s strictly a self-defense weapon. But it’s just a little bit larger in all dimensions than a pack of index cards, so it is very easy to conceal on your person. You can get a belt-mounted holster for it that looks like a camera case.
That’s a Realtor’s gun, a salesperson’s gun, a weapon for people who go to a lot of places they’ve never been before and don’t know what to expect. Less than ten ounces, and no one knows you have it until it turns out to be your other lock box key. And now that both the U.S. Border Patrol and the Toronto Police Department have made it plain that you are on your own, should you need to defend your own life or property, it seems like a gun like that might be a good investment.
Take note: This is not a SHTF weapon. I intend to talk about what might happen if some or all of western civilization hits the skids — taking account, always, that I do not expect this to happen — but a gun this size is not adequate for self-defense if self-defense becomes an everyday chore. Per Steve Earle, “It can get you into trouble, but it can’t get you out.” But this is a very nice form factor for a concealed weapon, just enough firepower to contain casual idiocy.
And here is where I live right now: I’m going to buy two of these in August, one for each of us to carry every day. I truly do not believe the shit is going to hit the fan, but I am less resolved in that belief than I have been at any time in my life so far. I want for my mother back home to buy and learn to use a Colt 1911, also, but I know she won’t. I sent her pepper spray and rosary beads, instead.
What’s even sweeter for me about that Ruger LCP is that Sturm Ruger’s factories are in Prescott. Janet Napolitano, the very-publicly-inept head of the department of Homeland Security, was the gun-hating governor of Arizona in her last disaster of a job. Next month she and the entire BATF can go pound sand. That much makes me proud to call myself an Arizonan.
But what about you? Should you arm yourself now, just in case? I think like a Realtor, and I think every female Realtor should be armed at all times. I think every post-pubescent female should be armed to the teeth, though, so maybe that doesn’t count. But, male or female, if it’s plausible to you that being able to brandish or even fire a weapon could prevent a worse harm, to you or to another party, I think you have a responsibility to yourself, to your family and to your estate to be able adequately to defend yourself, your property and your companions. The adverb matters: Simply owning and carrying a firearm is not enough. It’s much more important to learn to use and maintain the weapon safely and effectively. Usus est magister optimus. Practice is the best teacher.
So: Do I carry a weapon now? No. But I want Cathleen to do this. And I do recognize that events can take us by surprise, our haughty hubris notwithstanding. And I like it that Arizona is doing this, and I agree wholeheartedly with the underlying sentiment: Not only is it our right as Americans to provide for our own defense, it is also our responsibility to do this. The perfect symbol of the American citizen is not an eagle but a Saguaro cactus: Not solitary, but proudly independent, armed mightily, but never in offense, yet utterly ruthless, inconquerable and unforgettable in defense.
< ?php include "https://www.bloodhoundrealty.com/BloodhoundBlog/cheerful.php"; ?>
Alex Cortez says:
You couldn’t have said it better: it’s not only our right to protect ourselves, it’s our responsibility.
I have always been a huge supporter of the 2nd Amendment and with proper enforcement of applicable laws and regulations, open-carry can have a HUGE impact as a crime deterrent. Here is my corny line of the day: guns don’t kill people, people kill people.
July 2, 2010 — 6:12 pm
Joe Dallorso says:
So Bloodhound is breaking new ground with a review of self defense technology for Realtors. Got to love it.Guns are the great equalizer. Suddenly a 100 lb woman has the advantage over a 250 lb man.
As a very experienced shooter & someone who has a CWL I need to point out a couple of things about the Ruger LCP. Do to the very light weight it has a pretty hard kick and is a bear to shoot. At the range I find it hard to shoot more than a few rounds before my hand hurts. It’s important to practice with a carry gun. It is also not very accurate once again do to it’ size. It is a very close range weapon designed for ” an arms length transaction”. For men in a warm climate like Arizona or here in Florida, the Ruger is real easy to just put in your pants pocket. Buy a pocket holster.
A better alternative is the Ruger LCR, a 13 oz revolver or similar Smith and Wesson revolver. Easier to shoot, surprisingly accurate, larger caliber and still easy to conceal. This is a better choice for women who can hide a gun in a purse as opposed to on their person.
July 3, 2010 — 5:08 am
Barry Bevis says:
Great read- have you looked at the Kel-Tec P-3AT .380?
July 3, 2010 — 5:11 am
Doug Lindstrom says:
I have fired as many of the pocket pistols as possible. The Ruger (as Joe Mentioned) has too much recoil and will discourage you from going to the practice range. The Kel Tek is a fine gun but I just purchased the http://www.diamondbackfirearms.com .380. It works like a charm with little recoil and is very accurate & safe with a 5 lb double action trigger.
I would recommend a pocket holster that has a trigger guard. See http://cgi.ebay.com/STICKY-POCKET-HOLSTER-FITS-KELTEC-32-380-LASER-/350370859280?cmd=ViewItem&pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item5193bb0910
July 3, 2010 — 8:09 am
Greg Swann says:
I am so glad I brought this up! This should be its own designation class, Realtors At Home On The Range.
July 3, 2010 — 10:10 am
Jeff Brown says:
AZ has found a way to increase ‘tourism’ in August and September. 🙂
It’ll be interesting how MSM responds the first time a kidnap ‘victim’ shoots their kidnapper. As you’re aware, AZ has endured a number of those recently due to the drug dealing gangs coming up from Mexico.
July 3, 2010 — 8:58 am
Jim Klein says:
Good stuff Greg, though the layman should note that it takes a lot of practice to be a decent shot with a handgun, let alone in a crisis situation. It’s not like on TV where you just point the weapon and he falls. That only happens in very close quarters for regular (untrained) people. This knowledge saved my ass once, following an armed robbery…he wanted me to go with him and I judged him as likely not a great shot. According to witnesses later, I judged correctly.
Me, since I don’t like making mistakes, I’m a long gun fan. I figure that if I really need a handgun, then I must’ve made some other mistake first. So I try not to make those mistakes and figure that I can make up for my lack of quality eyesight, with a quantity of chances!
Plus, there’s the underlying philosophical issue that we’re trying to show people how to live with each other, not kill each other. Still, there’s the very sad problem that some people just won’t think any other way, and we sure enough have to keep ourselves alive. In that sense, all weapons are great equalizers and hence Egoism in Action.
FWIW I concur with Joe…there’s plenty to be said for a plain ol’ 38 or 357 service revolver. Not as much fun at practice maybe, but very, very dependable. If you want a great weapon for close quarters, check out a well-made tomahawk. I think I’d rather face an opponent with a handgun than one of those, since they’re more instantly fatal and never jam.
But best of all, I’d rather not have any opponents! So I work on that.
July 3, 2010 — 9:17 am
Rob Thiessen says:
This just became my most favorite BHB post! I have permit (retired L.E.)so I dont worry when showing properties but I want my wife, REALTOR, to have one. Local PD chief has final say in approving CCW since we live in city limits. Always says NO! But, better to be judged by 12 than carried by 6? I think so.
July 3, 2010 — 5:16 pm
David Losh says:
In the world of 380s mine is a Colt. If you would get your mom a 1911, then the Colt should be your first choice anyway. The Kel Tek is a good option, and if you carry a wheel gun in 38 or 357 you should have it fitted with grips.
The problem is killing some one. You can shoot to beat the band, but you have to kill some one. Of course you would shoot below the torso to comply with liability laws, but to be effective you have to kill the person coming at you.
If you carry a gun, and intend to use it, you have to be willing to kill some one that day. That’s military training. You kill, or be killed.
What I have found is that good self defense training is better than having a gun. Even if the other American standing before you has a gun they also have a reluctance to kill you. By attacking them physically you have a chance to over power them, and take their gun. Then you can kill them without any thought about liability.
It’s all a crap shoot, but either way it takes training. It takes a mind set.
July 4, 2010 — 7:20 am
Joe Hayden says:
Interesting post… I suggest reading “In the Gravest Extreme” by Massad Ayoob as food for thought.
A significant amount of mis-information and of course fear surrounds the use of firearms for personal defense. I myself cannot imagine not having the option to defend myself with lethal force if presented with an attack that warrants such a measured response.
Researching the subject, I found the scenarios that could afford you the option to choose deadly force as a response were much more narrow than one would reasonably expect. It’s not enough to say that you have to be responsible and that you have to practice with your weapon of choice. You have to be able to honestly ask yourself if you could pull the trigger if you found yourself in the “right” situation. And you have to honestly be able to answer “yes”, or you are a much more dangerous person armed with a weapon than without.
July 4, 2010 — 6:03 pm
Phil Hopkins says:
I just posted a blog on Active Rain called http://activerain.com/blogsview/1729516/draw-your-line-in-the-sand
The jist of it is that government is reluctant say that firearms are against the law since they might align local law enforcement with the citizens.
I have long believed that many of us have what I call a “survival mechanism” that, when triggered, allows us to do what we have to do to stay alive. Someone that has that “survival mechanism” is not someone that you want to be in a confrontation with. You will not win.
I have seen and been through some fairly dramatic events and thank my survival mechanism for being here today.
I’m glad we’re all on the same page (literally). Our forefathers gave us the “unalienable right to bear arms”. They chose the first word in that line very carefully. I will not be surrendering any firearms under any situation. That is my right as a direct decendent to a signer (Stephen Hopkins) on the Constitution of the United States of America.
Phil Hopkins, Realtor
Prudential Arizona Properties, Payson, Arizona
July 6, 2010 — 7:21 am
Al Lorenz says:
I love that BHB goes where other real estate blogs don’t! There’s some great advice in both the post and comments. How about some self defense and concealed carry training at the next Unchained and Unfettered event? Take a look at the Kahr PM9 as well. It shoots softer than the LCP and is easier to aim.
July 6, 2010 — 10:15 am
Michael Cook says:
Dare I go out on a limb and disagree??? Do we have any proof that states with open carry or looser gun laws have less crime? While I appreciate the warm stories, there are certainly stories in the other extreme like a person shooting their son, who surprised them by coming home early and things of that nature.
While I certainly would find it interesting to see a group of my neighbors jumping into a gun fight, the risks seem to outweigh the rewards. Too few people take the time to truly understand gun safety and marksmanship. As a son of a cop and frequent shooter of a variety of weapons (M-16 is my personal favorite), I just dont see the layman taking the time to do what it takes to make carrying a gun a reasonable alternative.
You risk my life every time you arm yourself with a gun without the proper training. At a minimum, why can we at least require a certain level of competency before we allow you to carry a gun. Isnt it the same reason we dont let just anyone drive a car. You take a written exam and an on the course exam to have that right because allowing you behind the wheel without proper training makes you a danger to yourself and everyone else. Surely a gun is more dangerous than a car?!
Voting is a constitutional right, but it can be taken away if you commit a felony. Why do we see gun rights as so black and white? Safety is an important issue, but trusting yourself to discern a when to use deadly force is equally important. Having to live with the consequences of hitting innocent bystanders is also important.
July 7, 2010 — 2:54 pm
jay seville says:
For Michael, this was a recent article of interest to peruse….One thing to keep in mind, the onus is on the leery to demonstrate that concealed law states have higher crime rates as a result–not the other way around. But much data is out there showing strong correlations of lower crime where concealed weapons laws and permits are highest regardless.
the recent Supreme Court decision shows well what happens when liberals try to prevent firearm ownership–the criminals get all the guns and know it. The 76 year old man who obeys the law is screwed and defenseless. the irony is that those cities with the highest and most strict gun laws have the highest crime rates, etc. Chicago had just had 20+ shootings previous week before the Supreme Court ruling.
The inverted morality of the social justice posers is amazingly nefarious.
http://biggovernment.com/jlott/2010/06/08/how-obama-reduced-crime-rates-last-year/
@ everyone else, I’ve decided to move forward with my concealed weapons license and spent the afternoon handling firearms. Thanks for bringing the subject up. It helped me to move forward with more resolve to make this happen in the coming weeks or months. The Kel-tec P-3AT and others are quite handy and will carry easily….
July 7, 2010 — 4:11 pm
David Losh says:
In all the world you hear that the United states is the most violent place on earth. We have gun violence.
Gun violence is a statistic. It’s easily tracked because it’s in the police report. World wide gun violence is a statistic. It’s like tracking residential home sales.
What’s NOT a statistic is the number of people world wide that live in fear of hoodlums.
July 7, 2010 — 6:02 pm
Brian Wilson says:
So Greg, what is your gun of choice for when the cities fall?
July 9, 2010 — 5:49 am
Greg Swann says:
> So Greg, what is your gun of choice for when the cities fall?
Are you being smug, Brian? If so, what profit do you expect to reap in exchange for the finite and irreplaceable time of your life?
July 9, 2010 — 6:21 am
Brian Wilson says:
No, I am really asking. After what I have seen around the world, I don’t not be able to sleep well at night if I did not have a readily available firearm, just in case.
July 9, 2010 — 6:43 am
Greg Swann says:
> I don’t not be able to sleep well at night if I did not have a readily available firearm, just in case.
So what would you suggest? You have more military training than anyone else who has spoken up, I would expect.
FWIW, if cities collapse, I would think a more pressing problem is going to be potable water. Dead bodies, too. And food. American cities live on a four or five day supply of food. Interrupt that and you get a lot more dead bodies really fast. My weapon of choice, I think, should the shit hit the fan, is a decent truck and a five-day head start.
July 9, 2010 — 6:53 am
David Losh says:
For open urban, home protection, the Ruger Mini 14 in stainless steel, with a Butler alloy folding stock, is by far the most superior weapon.
July 9, 2010 — 6:54 am
Brian Wilson says:
I think people underestimate how quickly things can digress, even here in the U.S. I live in the Houston area and in the last hurricane aftermath, the town lost power for about 3 weeks. In that short of time, we had neighbors blocking off their cul-de-sacs from strangers, people taking shifts doing walking patrols, and community rationing. That is just from a few weeks without electricity.
I would love to have a semi-automatic rifle like an M-4 if I could. As far as being prepared, the Mormons have the right idea. Most Mormon families have a stockpile of supplies and canned goods to last a year.
July 9, 2010 — 7:00 am
David Losh says:
The M-4 is a complicated weapon. An AK 47 would be a better choice, as has been proven in at least two wars. The Mini 14 offers the 223 round, with the simple mechanism.
As far as stock piling food, you would be better to abandon your home, and move to an area that is still functioning. If you need a years worth of food, then you better be armed.
July 9, 2010 — 7:36 am
Michael Cook says:
Tying this back to an earlier discussion, why couldnt we just leave if things got back. Wasnt that the recommendation for the people of Haiti? The problem with the mobility suggestion is that if people had the obvious means to move, they probably would have.
In your scenario of cities falling, why not be on the first thing smoking out of here, rather than, bunker down with an M-16? If the US falls, surely, China, Russia or some other country will remain in tact. Globalization has been aggressive, but their are still plenty of civilizations outside of the norm.
Considering the US supplies the majority of the world with food, the options would obviously be limited, but I have to imagine Bora Bora would be more palitable than going back to the Wild West?
From an outsiders point of view, I just dont see the value in arming myself on the off chance that someone mugs, attacks, robs me or cities fall. If someone wants my wallet, I would give them my coat as well, they obviously need it more than I do. Perhaps I think too highly of human beings, but for all the looting in New Orleans after the storm, there was far more coming together and helping one’s neighbor.
I am surprised by Greg, given his view of people as altruistic. No one can take my wealth producing mind, so why should I put that on the line by escalating a situation. It doesnt feel logical to me, but feel free to enlighten me.
July 9, 2010 — 7:57 am
Brian Wilson says:
In New Orleans, I don’t think there was more coming together to help one’s neighbor. There was coming together to feel safety in numbers. A lot of terrible things happened to people in New Orleans who could not take care of themselves. I only see people expend resources to help others once they feel secure that they have plenty for their own families.
July 9, 2010 — 8:01 am
Doug Quance says:
For those of you who believe that guns cause crime…
Let’s look at two cities that ban guns:
Chicago – http://www.cityrating.com/citycrime.asp?city=Chicago&state=IL
and Washington DC – http://www.cityrating.com/citycrime.asp?city=Washington&state=DC
versus a city that twenty years ago MANDATED that every household have a gun:
Kennesaw GA (suburb of Atlanta) http://www.cityrating.com/citycrime.asp?city=Kennesaw&state=GA
Yes, an armed society IS a polite society.
July 10, 2010 — 8:20 am
Doug Quance says:
By the way, here’s the cliff notes:
Chicago: 2.18 times the national avg for all violent crime.
DC: 2.63 times the national avg for all violent crime.
Kennesaw: 0.15 times the national avg for all violent crime.
July 10, 2010 — 8:24 am
Jeff Brown says:
Stop with all the empirical evidence, Doug.
July 10, 2010 — 8:48 am
Doug Quance says:
>Jeff: I’m sorry. Force of habit, I guess. 🙂
July 10, 2010 — 9:24 am
David Losh says:
Just to share an opinion I have from other countries is that the United states has true democracy for, and by the people because we are armed.
In France during a demonstration for more workers compensation it was an armed military presence that guided the protest to a preset conclusion. At the end every one wandered off.
In London there was a section that I stayed where I was told not to go out at night because of the thick booted skin head thugs.
In South America the criminals are armed. In Africa the criminals are the military.
It took me many years to appreciate our right to bear arms, but it is an important right I hope we never need.
July 10, 2010 — 10:45 am