Hello all,

I am very close to switching over the site to this new one. If you had a user account at firearms.fortreg.com
it should have been migrated here.

The password schemes from Wordpress, however, do not translate over so the password will be: instructor
You can also reset it, I have also changed from PHPmail to authenticated SMTP mail.

I want to thank Lou for helping test a number of functions on the new site!
I hope you guys like it.

Thanks

Reg

 

 

 

 

I get asked about Springfield quite a bit and it has been awhile since I inquired. They are always very prompt to reply.

Springfield currently offers the LE discount only to LE or Military Instructors. We hope to someday have a program in place for all NRA instructors but we do not at this time.”

I did remind them that S&W and Ruger offer programs.  So, hopefully one day!

Monday, 15 February 2016 11:39

Back after another hack :(

Written by

 

*** If you are reading this you are on the NEW site (currently in testing)! ***

Welcome!!

 

 


 

Hi,

The site was hacked again, I was notified by my ISP (at least they gave me a chance to remove them before shutting the site down this time).

Sorry that we down briefly today - I also found some questionable files and had to clean them up - reverting to backup. I will be accelerating the site's move to Joomla.

Thanks for your patience.

Original article: Gun ownership does not make women safer from the Boston Globe

This is an example of showing that a study will prove exactly what you set out to prove.

First they attack the statement that a woman with a firearm can defend herself. In fact, they even go as far as to say that they have discredited its possibility by citing a particular study.

However, the study doesn't have anything to do with women owning a firearm!
Instead the study actually says that women, who are around more people with firearms are more likely to get harmed by a firearm. hmm...no  mention of the rates of firearm ownership by women though.

Is that like the study that concluded that if you own a firearm, that you are more likely to get shot with your own firearm?

"The presence of a gun is the biggest risk factor for domestic violence deaths among women.”
Really? The "biggest" risk factor? So, if a woman knows someone with multiple firearms (gasp!) is she exponentially more in danger? Right. It's the gun(s), not the person - got it.

The article also strikes me as sexist in its implications that a woman cannot handle a firearm. In me experience, that is simply not true.

Source: https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/virginia-politics/bloomberg-gun-control-group-launches-new-ad-against-mcauliffe/2016/02/09/5ef0e3e6-cf16-11e5-b2bc-988409ee911b_story.html

Anti-gun groups are quick to say that pro-gun people are unreasonable and unwilling to compromise.
But apparently, they are quick to attack any pro-gun control supporter who might be willing to make a compromise. Hypocritical much?

Their complaints are very weak. Each side got something, and to use the anti-gunners' mantra:
"If it saves just one life!"

They wanted people with protective orders against them to not be able to give/sell their firearms away, but rather be required to give them to law enforcement. Why?

And the universal background checks requirement for gun shows is voluntary with a stationed police officer at gun shows didn't go far enough. But "if it saves just one life"? Right?

It essentially restores status quo of CCW reciprocity that existed before the AG's "re-examination" and to quote the article: "...in exchange for tighter restrictions on gun ownership by domestic abusers and voluntary background checks at gun shows."

Sounds good, right? Apparently not! I guess unless it is completely draconian or has the word "ban" in it, it is no good.

Let's also not forget the fact that there were a couple of bills introduced that would have reversed the CCW reciprocity AG ruling anyway. One attempted to make VA a CCW license-less state which would honor any state's CCW license!

In the end (and being from the Commonwealth myself) I like Gov. McAuliffe's response:

McAuliffe dismissed the criticism during an appearance in Northern Virginia, saying “everybody supports [the gun deal] except one gun-safety group out of New York City.”

This is a refreshing ruling from the 4th Circuit Appellate Court. The 3 judge panel ruled that the "because they are scary" justification to ban assault weapons is too vague and that it could effectively used to ban anything, sending the case back to district court.

This is actually a fairly decent article on the topic:
http://cnsnews.com/commentary/hans-von-spakovsky/fourth-circuit-strikes-blow-marylands-overly-restrictive-gun-law

What is frightening is what the dissenting judge said. He said that people would die because of this ruling. Wow, what rhetoric. I find that judge to be too scary to be a sitting judge.

Page 7 of 57