Will The Biden Regime Call Second Amendment Activism Misinformation?

H/T AmmoLand.

Anything Joe Pee Pads Biden will try to discredit Second Amendment Activism will not surprise me.

White House/Silicon Valley – -(AmmoLand.com)- In the course of White House press briefings, Second Amendment supporters got good news, but they also found themselves facing a much greater short-term danger. The good news is that Jen Psaki probably handed enough evidence to prove that Silicon Valley has been acting as a proxy for the federal government to pretty much ensure former President Trump will win his court case.

The bad news is that Surgeon General Vivek Murthy has upped the ante over the short term by claiming that “misinformation” about COVID-19 is “an imminent and insidious threat to our nation’s health.” Of course, Murthy has a prescription that includes “suggestions” for social media companies.

Do you know what else has been described as a “public health” issue? The Second Amendment.

Remember how the Centers for Disease Control were pushing gun control? It was so bad Congress wisely pulled the plug on funding for that pseudo-science, much to the chagrin and anger of anti-Second Amendment extremists like Senator Ed Markey (D-MA), who want to take us back to the bad old days of politicized medicine.

(As an aside, the CDC’s blatant anti-Second Amendment propaganda may be a big reason why they aren’t entirely trusted with regards to COVID and vaccines. Let this be a lesson to Second Amendment supporters who, in this media environment must take a higher level of care about how we come across to our fellow Americans, like avoiding the use of dubious quotes.)

The big question is, of course, whether Murthy would declare activism for our Second Amendment rights as “misinformation” if CDC goes back into the business of being propagandists for gun control. We can’t put that past them, especially given how Silicon Valley censorship has affected things already.

Think about how CDC has suppressed information about the use of firearms for self-defense in the past. Or remember how Arthur Kellerman claimed that a firearm was 43 times more likely to be used to kill you than to be used for self-defense? Right now, if Murthy calls efforts to point out Kellerman’s BS “misinformation,” you can bet that Silicon Valley will be censoring in moments.

As we now know, Kellerman got that figure by only counting those homicides that were ruled self-defense. But as Massad Ayoob – or any other competent self-defense instructor – would quickly tell you, you don’t have to kill an assailant to have successfully defended yourself. Don’t take my word for it: The NRA’s Armed Citizen over the years has examples of armed bad guys fleeing or surrendering when they realize there is an armed good guy, with no shots fired by the good guy at all.

Second Amendment supporters need to urge their Representative and Senators to block any CDC effort to attack the First and Second Amendments in the name of “public health.” In addition, they need to work to defeat anti-Second Amendment extremists at the federal, state, and local levels at the ballot box as soon as possible.

Columnist: If Guns Went Away, Criminals Would Use Something Else

H/T Bearing Arms.

If every gun was to magically disappear criminals would find something else to commit murder and mayhem with.

Good guys like to use guns for protecting themselves and others for one very simple reason. It’s just the best tool out there for stopping a bad person from doing a bad thing to a good person.

However, bad guys like guns because they’re the best way to do bad things to good people.

The thing is, if guns went away, bad guys would still do bad things to good people. They’d just pick up another tool

That’s something columnist Diane Dimond addressed in her latest column.

The White House is launching a new assault to bring down the crime rate. As you’ve likely heard, crime, especially homicide, has exploded in many major hotspot cities over the past year or so. President Joe Biden says he knows what to do, he’s been at this for years and he’s got a plan ready to launch that includes several definitive steps.

“The first of those that work is stemming the flow of firearms used to commit violent crimes,” Biden told a group of reporters as he was about to go into a closed-door meeting with visiting police chiefs and city officials. “It includes cracking down and holding rogue gun dealers accountable for violating federal law.”

The new plan includes five new federal strike forces, agents with the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATFE), which will embed with local police departments in Chicago, New York, Los Angeles, San Francisco and Washington, D.C. Their mission is to disrupt gun trafficking coming into those major cities.

The cold hard fact is this: There are some 470 million guns in civilian hands in the United States right now, with new ones — including untraceable, homemade ghost guns — being manufactured every day. Legal, registered gun sales are at record highs. If by some stretch of the imagination we could magically do away with all the guns belonging to criminals, what do you think might happen? Do you believe hardcore lawbreakers would simply shrug, walk away from their criminal life and go get a nine-to-five job? No. They would find other weapons with which to inflict their terror on innocent citizens. Knives, Molotov cocktails, scissors, an ax perhaps. Criminals aren’t just violent; they are deviously creative.

That’s precisely what would happen.

After all, we’ve seen it happen. In the UK, they put a ban on guns and eventually got rid of enough of them that criminals had a hard time obtaining them. Violent crime, however, didn’t end. Instead, it increased because criminals knew their targets didn’t have guns. Rather than firearms, though, they used knives.

Now, the UK is trying to heavily restrict knives as much as they can get away with it, even talking about taking the points off.

Even that won’t stop the bad guys. They’ll just move over to something like hammers, next.

Only a fool would believe that anything different would happen in the US. The only alternative I’d accept is someone pointing out how it’s virtually impossible to make criminal guns vanish so the whole thing is a waste of time discussing because, well, that’s also true.

Criminals aren’t going to just roll over because all the guns are gone.

What will happen, though, is that good, decent, law-abiding people won’t be armed anymore and will be at the mercy of those criminals like never before. While previously, they could have drawn their own weapons and protected themselves, that’s not likely to happen after a gun ban.

Of course, I’ve long wondered if that wasn’t really the point.

Ohio Woman Arrested Over Gun After SHE Called Police

H/T Bearing Arms.

This is one more reason I like living in Indiana you are not required by law to report you have a License To Carry A Handgun and are armed.

Duty to inform” is a legal obligation on a gun owner to tell police they’re armed during any kind of contact with law enforcement. Some people, especially police officers, like this because it keeps surprises to a minimum. Some gun carriers do it even without a duty to inform because they don’t want officers getting punchy if they see a firearm.

Obviously, there are some who want this to be the law of the land.

I’m not one of them. Frankly, I don’t tell the police I’m a registered voter, or that I exercise my right to free speech on a daily basis, so I don’t see any reason to tell them I’m exercising my right to keep and bear arms. I just also make sure they have no reason to suspect I’m reaching for a firearm, either.

Frankly, I do that whether I’m armed or not.

Part of why I oppose duty to inform laws is that people in stressful situations may well forget to tell the police things. That includes that they’re armed for whatever reason. That seems to have landed one Ohio woman in handcuffs after she called the police herself.

In the fight to change the law regarding the duty to promptly notify a law enforcement officer that one is legally exercising their right to bear arms in the State of Ohio, Buckeye Firearms Association is often asked what harm is the current law actually causing.

Another such example comes to us this week from the city of Warren, where a woman who called police for help in removing a wanted man from her home was charged for having forgotten to notify the officer that she had a concealed handgun license (CHL) and had her firearm in her purse.

From WMFJ (NBC Youngstown):

A Warren woman who called the police to remove a man from her home was cited for failing to tell officers she had a gun in her purse.

Police say they seized the conceal carry permit and handgun from Ashley Heiskell after she had called officers to remove a man who was at her Commerce Street townhouse early Tuesday.

Officers arrested the man after confirming Heiskell’s claim that he is wanted on a warrant out of Cuyahoga County.

One of the officers also asked dispatchers about the 33-year-old woman and discovered Heiskell had a permit to carry a concealed weapon.

When the officer asked her about the permit, she showed him a 9mm handgun she carried in her purse.

Asked why she didn’t tell officers that she had the gun as required under Ohio law and taught in CCW classes, Heiskell said she didn’t know she had to do that and didn’t remember much about the classes, according to the police report.

Police issued a summons for Heiskell to appear in Warren Municipal Court to answer a charge of failure to notify. The officer also took Heiskell’s gun and the permit.

This woman was literally charged because she had armed herself when a wanted man was in her home and neglected to mention that fact to the responding officers.

Now, I’m sorry, nothing about this is right and this right here is why I refuse to support any duty to inform laws. While I believe it’s no one’s business whether I’m carrying or not, I also don’t want to see someone get jammed up because they either didn’t know they had to tell police or they simply forgot under the stress of the situation.

Look, I have a lot of respect for the police. However, we all need to remember that while some officers are very pro-Second Amendment, others aren’t. They take an “us versus them” approach to society and will find anything to charge you with that they can. These aren’t the majority of officers, but there are enough of them that you have to be careful.

Removing duty to inform laws simply makes life easier for everyone.



Gun rights back at U.S. Supreme Court.

Civil rights group files amicus brief with U.S. Sup. Ct.

Every American has a Second Amendment right to self-defense, which is at the heart of an amicus brief filed with the U.S. Supreme Court by Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership, supporting a challenge of New York State concealed carry laws by the New York State Rifle & Pistol Association.

JPFO is joined by the DC Project Foundation and Operation Blazing Sword—Pink Pistols. The brief was prepared by attorneys Charles R. Flores and Daniel N. Nightingale, Beck Redden LLP in Houston, Texas.

Jews, Blacks, Gays, Women and other victims of hatred are under increased threats, making them more vulnerable, JPFO contends.

“Whatever arguments may be made or invented for gender equality, men are at virtually no risk for rape. Police are incapable—and it is settled law that they are not even legally required—to act in defense of any individual,” said Alan Korwin, author and spokesperson for the organization. “When seconds count, citizens are on their own. The Supreme Court must act on behalf of the people, and remove New York’s unconstitutional ban on our right to bear arms for personal safety,” he said.

With calls for defunding the police rampant—and acted upon in some segments of society—the need for an unfettered ability to act in self-defense has become paramount, the organization said. This is one key element of the amicus brief filed today by JPFO. Both the Heller and McDonald decisions recognized the need for arms to defend “homes, families or themselves,” (referring specifically to Blacks), which was “widely held.” In McDonald the need for women is emphasized since they are “especially vulnerable to violent crime.” The LGBTQ community is disproportionately affected by violent crime, more than four times more likely and rising. Extensive statistics are backed up with citations and deep research included in the brief.

Requiring people to be defenseless is, in JPFO’s opinion, indefensible, violating not only the Constitution, human rights and common sense, but the Torah itself. So-called “gun-control” legislation exacerbates the problem.

“New York pretends its police can meet the need, but this is fantasy and goes against legal precedent,” JPFO said. “The New York law, which requires ‘proper cause’ to receive the nearly impossible-to-get carry permit, denies decent citizens the right to defend life, liberty and their constitutional rights, in an arbitrary and capricious manner. People of color, LGBTQ and religious groups face particular risk. The standards New York applies are unreasonable, designed to deny rights, not to protect citizens.”

To New York, even “a showing of extraordinary personal danger, documented by proof of recurrent threats to life or safety” (their unreasonable standard) gets turned down, JPFO said. That state believes you have no rights. This long standing unconstitutional and lethal affront must be overturned.

What’s the Right Age to Teach Kids to Shoot?

H/T The Truth About Guns.

I was seven when I learned to shoot a .22 cal. rifle.

Over the past year, I have been asked several times about teaching children, and what is the youngest age child I’ll teach firearm fundamentals. While many people that have been a generational, gun-owning family may not give this question much thought, as it’s a rite of passage for their children, many newer firearm owners, especially those living in urban/suburban areas, don’t have this experience.

Furthermore, cultural and societal stigmas and expectations play a major role in how children perceive firearms and self-defense and can play a significant role in a child’s success in learning how to shoot.

In a perfect world, the answer is…as early as a kiddo can hold a firearm and understand the four basic rules of gun safety.

iowa middle school gun safety training
courtesy Guns Save Life

Other than logistical issues such as range age limits and any insurance policy restrictions, there are many factors that come into play when deciding what age is appropriate to teach firearm fundamentals.

First, I always begin by chatting with parents as well as the child prior to allowing them to take a class. I want to evaluate how mature they are and whether they can stay focused, multi-task, and do what is asked of them without being defiant. Are they shy and afraid to ask questions? I want to know if they have any motor or cognitive skill limitations that can be worked with.

Second, it’s important to know if they’ve had any negative experiences with firearms (have the seen mommy threatened with one, or did grandpa let them shoot a 12 gauge at age 7 with no lessons or help?).

This one is often overlooked in adults, not to mention children. It can have a serious impact of their ability to learn, as well as how I approach teaching them, and can literally mean the difference between life and death if they are ever faced with needing to use a firearm for self-defense.

courtesy gunssavelife.com
Courtesy Guns Save Life

I want to gauge how comfortable in general they are being around firearms. Just because dad is a hunter and a child knows the safety rules doesn’t mean they are comfortable around them. And they may be too afraid or embarrassed to discuss that with their parents.

Last, but certainly not least, is whether the child genuinely wants to learn how to use a firearm…or if it their parents are pushing them to do it. I’ve met 6-year-olds that are better prepared to take a firearm fundamentals class than some 16 year olds.

All children can be taught to use a firearm safely from an early age (with a few exceptions that are also applicable to adults as well, such as debilitating mental/physical capabilities).  It’s just a matter of how to approach and address any individual challenges or concerns they have, as well as helping them understand and embrace the responsibilities and skills needed to be successful.





That’s just through June 2021—mass media
promotes these like sport scores!

•  Prosecutors seem to be in hiding—little activity reported—perps still at large

•  One shooting of a White girl gets the “Nancy Grace breathless treatment” fast

•  If any officer shoots any Black person—criminal or otherwise, anywhere—the entire nation gets non-stop saturation coverage for the rest of our lives, by every “news” outlet; Pundits falsely call this balanced, fair reporting

•  The public is no longer fooled—criminals are bad, guns are inanimate

The White House has responded to the alarming increase in daylight murders, gang activity and brazen violent street crime by threatening to crack down on federally licensed firearms dealers and historically run gun shows. What’s the point with 300 million guns already owned? Most of this violence occurs in specific urban areas—not even “democrat-run cities,” as right-leaning media prefers to call it. Reporting on the types, ages and race of murderers and victims, sources of weapons and other salient details, which would be informative, is suspiciously absent from reports.

JPFO calls this suspicious because the thrust of reports seems aimed at vilifying guns and disarming the innocent. Little effort at identifying criminals and enforcing the law is apparent. Hard police work, considered by experts to be needed to control crime, especially when society is fraying as it currently is, has been met by state and federal legislators calling and acting to defund police. Even useful idiots can see crime, fear and lack of official response is being used for control, not of criminal activity, but of the public the government seeks to dominate. An armed public is a threat to those in power, a classic and well understood basic government principle. Government seeking control over its subjects has no interest in preventing crime.

The Auto Mag Pistol: A Magnum-Power Pistol Revived

H/T American Rifleman.

This is way out of my price range.

Reincarnation is possible, at least for classic firearm designs with an avid fan base. With modern metallurgy and today’s tight CNC tolerances, retro-style designs can be safer, stronger and better performing than the original.

Enthusiasts know that process sometimes surrenders the attractive fit, finish and feel that endeared them to the gun in the first place. That’s not the case with the new .44 Auto Mag., which has somehow captured everything that captivated gun owners when it first appeared on the silver screen and managed to squeeze in improvements.

The task was not as simple as producing a clone, either. The .44 Auto Mag Pistol (AMP)—the original version’s name—was a recoil-operated semi-auto that first appeared in 1966. The bolt was rotary, much like that of today’s AR-15 and the .44 AMP cartridge it digested generated enough muzzle energy to rival that of the .44 Mag.

Unfortunately, the company ran into financial problems, name changes, bankruptcies and by 1982, production ceased at barely 9,000 units. As fate would have it, the next year, Inspector “Dirty” Harry Callahan cemented the design to enthusiasts’ memories on the silver screen. Clint Eastwood worked the behind the trigger in the movie “Sudden Impact.”

Shortly after, it was seen in “Beverly Hills Cop 2” with Eddie Murphy. Then came an appearance in the video game Tom Clancy’s Rainbow Six Seige.

Auto Mag LLC—a name that honors the original design—recognized the pistol has much more going for it than simply Hollywood legend. The company secured the rights in 2015 from the original designer’s son. It then invested six years in development and added 20 improvements, all without abandoning the original’s looks and feel. Today it markets it as “The Legend, Reborn,” for good reason.

There are two different models of the .44 Auto Mag are available—either 6.5″ or 8″ barreled models with brushed satin finish. The former’s starting price comes in at $3,495, with the latter carrying an MSRP of $3,795. For an extra $275, you can opt for a high-polish metalwork on either.

Both are chambered in .44 AMP, a cartridge based on the .308 Win. case. The guns ship with two, seven-cartridge capacity magazines. Grips are Hogue, either G10 or checkered wood. The front sight is fixed, but the Kensight at the rear is adjustable.

The 9mm Luger Cartridge: History and Performance

H/T American Rifleman.

The amazing history of Georg Luger and the 9mm.

Georg Luger was an interesting man. Born into a rather privileged family on March 6, 1849, his father was a renowned surgeon, so Georg was schooled in Italy. He later studied business at studied at the Wiener Handelsakademie (Vienna Commercial Academy). In 1867 he enlisted into the Austria-Hungary 78th Infantry Regiment as a reserve officer cadet. It was here that he showed his superior marksmanship skills which garnered him an assignment to Austro-Hungarian Military Firearms School at Camp Bruckneudorf.

Soon he became an instructor there. Automatic firearms were in its infancy, but the idea fascinated Luger, and he took an active role in developing automatic loading firearms. After his military stint Luger floated around a bit surviving on jobs like an accountant at a jockey club. He met Austrian firearms engineer Ferdinand von Mannlicher during this time, and the two worked together on developing rifle magazines.

By 1891 Luger had found employment with Ludwig Loewe & Company, Berlin, Germany, eventually working his way into a design consultant. After Ludwig Loewe’s death, the company became Deutsche Waffen und Munitions Fabriken (DWM), and was the manufacturer of the Hugo Borchardt-designed C-93 pistol. Luger was tagged with demonstrating it to the U.S. Army.

Though rejected, Luger carefully recorded the criticisms the army had with the pistol and returned to DWM. Borchardt disallowed the criticisms, which included unwieldly overall handling because of its weight and nearly vertical grip, excessive recoil from the 7.65×25 mm Borchardt cartridge, as well as being too expensive to mass produce, and refused to make any design changes. The job was then given to Luger to integrate the improvements.

Luger shortened the cartridge to 21 mm, calling it the 7.65×21mm Parabellum—Parabellum meaning “prepare for war.” This allowed him to lighten and shrink the size of the toggle-link system of the C-93, shorten the stroke of the toggle, design a narrower angular grip that helped balance the pistol better in the hand and offer a more natural pointing of it. The result was the Luger Parabellum pistol of 1898.

A Model 1900 Parabellum pistol. These Swiss military service pistols were introduced in 1900 and chambered in 7.65×21mm Parabellum. The engraving of the Swiss cross “in splendor” (rather than as a coat of arms) indicates that this pistol was built before 1909. Photo from Hmaag.

Production began in 1900, and Switzerland immediately adopted the Pistole Parabellum in 7.65×21mm, a.k.a. 7.65 Parabellum and .30 Luger. The cartridge has been popular in Europe and the U.S., as well as Brazil. European police agencies used this cartridge well into the 1960s, however Germany led the move to upsize the power by increasing the bullet diameter to 9 mm, the weight of the standard bullet from 93 to 116 grains while retaining a nominal muzzle velocity of 1,200 fps from a 4.25″ barrel.

The case was shortened from a net 21.59mm to a net of 19.15mm by removing the bottleneck while retaining the taper of the parent case. The result was the 9x19mm Parabellum or 9mm Luger, developed in 1901. To say that the 9mm Luger has been a success would be a severe understatement. The cartridge is, without a doubt, the most popular pistol and submachine gun cartridge in the world since the end of World War I. It has a lot going for it. First, it is effective, especially in its military role.

Newer developments in propellant and bullet design have increased its effectiveness, greatly providing even more incentive to those needing a firearm for personal defense. Pistols made for the cartridge have not been overly burdensome, and more recent developments in sub-compact handgun design allow the full-size service pistol cartridge to be crammed into astonishingly micro-weight pistols that are easy to carry. The 9mm Luger is accurate enough for the target range and the roil is light enough to be controlled by most. The array of different firearms produced in this chambering is almost incomprehensible.

Not only has it been chambered into the beautifully engineered and produced Luger P-08 and Browning Hi-Power P35 pistols, it has been at the forefront of handgun design for more than a century. The first successful double-action, locked-breech, semi-automatic pistol, the Walther P-38, is chambered in 9mm Luger. Even revolvers, both double- and single-action, have been chambered or co-chambered in 9mm. In short, any gun enthusiast worth his or her salt that wants to shoot something prevalent and inexpensive should have something chambered in 9mm.

One of the many more recent sub-compact handguns to hit the market chambered for 9 mm, the SIG Sauer P365.

In the early days of World War II, Commonwealth countries developed and adopted a higher-pressure loading of the 9x19mm cartridge. Designated the 9 m/m ball MK 1z (Commonwealth nomenclature), it soon became the standard loading for modern firearms like the Browning Hi-Power and Sterling submachine guns. This load featured a 116-gr. bullet at a claimed 1,300 f.p.s. Canada put together a similar, but slightly softer load clocking in the mid-1,200s in 1955. It was adopted as the standard NATO load in 1962.

After the 1986 FBI Miami shootout between eight FBI agents and two murderous bank robbers, it was found that despite a 4-to-1 one advantage, the FBI lost two agents due in large part to the superior firepower of the criminals’ rifles versus the FBI’s .357 Mag. revolvers. A search began to find a better cartridge for revolvers as personal-defense weapons for agents and other law enforcement professionals.

Eleven years later, across the nation in North Hollywood, another pair of bank robbers stood off dozens of Los Angeles Police Department officers armed with 9mm pistols and .38 Spl. revolvers with a pair of Kalashnikovs. A dozen officers and members of the public were wounded during that 44-minute exchange. Along with other shootings, the incentive to build a firearm with a large magazine capacity and better stopping power led to the development of the so-called “Wonder-Nines.”

“Wonder Nine” is a term coined by writer Robert Shimek during this period. It referred to the “wonder” pistols of the day, chambered in 9mm Luger with double-column magazines holding at least 15 rounds. As much as anything, the popularity of the 9mm as a law-enforcement and personal-defense round in America is due to this evolution in firearms and cartridge design.

More recent bullet developments, along with some propellant improvements, have moved the 9mm ahead of such American stalwarts as the .45 ACP and .357 Mag. Mind you, the American cartridges are by no means obsolete, nor are they any less effective. In fact, some of these advances in bullet and propellant technology have rubbed off on those other cartridges. Regardless, the 102-year-old 9mm Luger is still on the throne as king of the pistol cartridges. I don’t see that changing in the near future.

What Hollywood Productions Get Shootouts Right?

H/T America’s 1st Freedom.

For those of us who know a thing or two when it comes to working our way around a firearm, it is something of an amusing spectator sport to pick up the endless inconsistencies and impossibilities brought to life on the small and silver screens.

Still, now and then, a diamond does emerge from the rough and an entire production, or even just a scene, is closer to the real than the reel.

So who has gotten it right? Pose the question to gun enthusiasts and there is a good chance that the answer will still be Michael Mann’s 1995 “Heat.”

“That was a movie that changed everything for the better, set a new bar in terms of accuracy and precision in filmmaking,” said Tim Clemente, a retired FBI agent and founder of the specialized production company of X-G Productions, Inc., whose credits include Criminal Minds (CBS), NCIS Los Angeles (CBS), The Following (FOX) and The Americans (FX). “The gun-handling was very, very well done, and the sounds were very real.”

In particular, an intense 10-minute bank robbery shootout is the stuff of legend. The production team shut down swaths of downtown Los Angeles for weeks on end, and British SAS operatives were brought in to train the A-list cast that included Val Kilmer, Robert De Niro, Tom Sizemore and Al Pacino to get the tactics on-point.

Shooting pros point to the small details—the way the film’s characters provide each other with cover fire, the careful communications, the suppression of the enemy while others advance their positions, the guarding of their rifles—as being chillingly akin to a real-life firefight.

Yet it is just as much what the scene omits as what it includes that makes it chillingly authentic. Unlike much of the pyrotechnics and strange sound effects that show business likes to add for dramatic purposes, “Heat” steered clear of the arbitrary spraying. Instead, each player—from the police to the criminals—fires with tactical precision, stares down their sights, has rifle positioned correctly into the shoulder and are endeavoring to take cover.

“The actors didn’t have limitless magazines, which are normally what Hollywood does, they will use a six-round revolver and it somehow sprays 50 bullets before requiring a reload,” Clemente said. “But in ‘Heat,’ they were doing the changes and were tactically communicating, moving. It was all well done.”

And while even the best trainers and technical advisers in show business don’t have the ultimate authority on how a scene plays out, many in the industry say there is a renewed push, if only for safety purposes, to ensure extensive, high-end training with top professionals before filming.

Indeed, Keanu Reeves is one actor known to have put in the hard work with world competition champion and gunmaker Taran Butler, subsequently cementing “John Wick 3” into the echelon of skilled Tinseltown illustrations.

“I think most people would be surprised to learn just how much time Keanu spent at Taran’s place learning what it takes to get comfortable with a gun,” Clemente said.

Not to mention, Reeves is now known for being able to hit six, 8-inch plates set 30 feet away one-handed after drawing from the hip. “John Wick 4” has commenced production, so Reeves certainly must be doing something right.

“You see hyper-realistic handling of firearms, along with Keanu and other John Wick characters actually running out ammunition at the right moments,” said Chris Cheng, “Top Shot” star and California-based weapons consultant. “In many movies, it seems like they have unlimited ammo. But what also makes John Wick’s gun handling interesting is even his reloads are interesting to watch.”

And there are a few alternate honorable mentions to go around.

According to retired U.S. Army soldier Boone Cutler, HBO’s 2008 miniseries “Generation Kill” strikes a special chord. 

“It really captured a lot. There was great audio, and the relationships between the guys nailed it. You could hear the guys changing magazines; they took hits and looked like they got hurt. The whole thing felt very realistic,” he said. “And there was an ambiguity to where the enemy was, a sense of being back on a 360-degree battlefield. It was a show that kept me up at night.”

Then there is 2012’s “Act of Valor,” produced and directed by Mike McCoy and Scott Waugh, and starring active-duty Navy SEALs rather than actors. 

“They [filmmakers] had the buy-in from the Pentagon, especially from the Navy. Essentially, they wanted it to be an advertising flick,” Chacon said. “But the great thing was that they used real weapons, live ammo and tracer rounds. There wasn’t a lot of CGI except for an explosion or two, so the gunfighting we saw was legit.”

Furthermore, Peter Berg’s 2013 portrayal of the ill-fated Navy SEAL mission in Afghanistan dubbed “Operation Red Wings,” in which Mark Wahlberg plays the only survivor in the group, Marcus Luttrell, in the film “Lone Survivor” typically generates the thumbs-up for its meticulous shooting and firearms handling.

“Mark Wahlberg is another guy, like Keanu, who is totally dedicated to training and accuracy,” said Bobby Chacon, a retired FBI agent and writer/technical advisor for CBS’s “Criminal Minds.”

But there is one known misnomer. According to one production who worked closely on the tactical component, the scene featuring a Berretta tucked into the team’s back pocket stemmed as a result of paid product placement; yes, Hollywood still does take checks from arms manufacturers.

“It’s well-known the SEAL teams carried a SIG-226,” the insider said. “But that’s Hollywood.”

And it’s safe to say that despite the often erroneous and often even dangerous depictions of firearms use in film and television, the industry has no interest in gun control for entertainment purposes. According to a 2018 study by The Hollywood Reporter, illustrations of firearms used on-screen have more than tripled since the Internet Movie Firearms Database (IMFDB) started compiling information in 1985.

Nonetheless, Clemente also emphasized that diligent training can change perceptions about firearms inside the entertainment arena. He recalled receiving a call from a stunt coordinator on a television pilot, centered on a military combat unit, days before filming a shootout scene as the lead actress was suffering anxiety about using a blank gun.

“She was all panicked, so I spent the whole Saturday with her going through all the basics and getting her comfortable, assuring her that pulling the trigger was not going to hurt her and was not going to hurt me,” he said. “That ended up a classic example of teaching someone it isn’t as scary as it might seem, and it brought them around in understanding why people own firearms.”

Failure Drill: A Proven Strategy to Stop an Attacker

H/T American Rifleman.


During the Mozambique War of Independence (1964-1974) mercenary Mike Rousseau was fighting at the airport in Moputo. During the fighting, he encountered a guerrilla fighter armed with an AK-47 at very close range. Rousseau delivered two shots to the enemy’s vital zone with a Browning Hi Power only to see his adversary stay on his feet and keep coming. Rousseau quickly fired a third shot which was aimed at the man’s head. Probably having jerked the trigger just a bit, Rousseau saw his bullet take effect in the fighter’s neck, dropping him immediately.

Some time later, Rousseau related this event to Col. Jeff Cooper, of Gunsite Academy fame. Cooper realized the value of the technique and incorporated it as a defensive drill in his school. Since those days, the drill has also come to be called “The Failure Drill” or “The Failure To Stop Drill.”

There may be a lot of reasons why two shots to an attacker’s vital zone fails to put him down. Attackers could be wearing body armor. They could be high on drugs. Of course, it could just be that the two shots missed the various organs located in the vital zone. In the end, it really doesn’t matter why they are still on their feet and functioning.The fact is that they are still a very real threat and must be dealt with quickly.

The third shot should properly be delivered to the head in order to impact the central nervous system. When done correctly, this third shot will turn the attacker’s lights out immediately. And the reason that this head shot is not delivered in the beginning is because the target is much smaller and the head is generally always moving. In all, it is a much smaller, more difficult target to hit.

When defensive shooters practice delivering two shots to the vital zone, they are reminded that they may fire two shots, but they should see their sight picture three times. Because we don’t have any assurance that the two shots will have the desired effect, we pull our pistol out of recoil and take the third sight picture, ready to deliver more shots should they be needed. If the attacker is still on his or her feet and appears to be functional, the third shot is then delivered to the head.

But a shot to just anywhere in the head is not necessarily going to be effective.The bones in the forehead are quite thick and may cause the bullet glance off and fail to penetrate. Imagine an upside-down triangle, of about four inches on every side, with the top edge being the eyes and the bottom point being the upper lip, just below the nose. This is the area where facial bones are the thinnest and a bullet delivered to this location has the best chance to getting the brain and/or brain stem and stopping the criminal attack.

We often see shooters practicing this drill by firing three shots in cadence with each other (bambam, bam) as quickly as they can. And this is actually an incorrect method. The proper cadence is bam, bam. Pause. Bam.

The reason for this is that the first two shots are being fired to an 8″ vital zone.With practice, they can be delivered very quickly. However, the third shot is being delivered to a much smaller area, and it is only being delivered if it is necessary. We deliver the two shots, recover our sight picture and evaluate the threat. Should the third shot be needed, we tighten up and deliver it as accurately as possible, thus the pause.

In actuality, it is a difficult drill that few can perform properly and effectively. It takes a lot of practice and plenty of determination and cool nerves to perform in an actual fight. But we know that it can be done.

While two shots to the vital zone of an attacker will usually stop the threat, determined defensive shooters know that this will not solve the problem 100 percent of the time. They practice the Mozambique, or Failure Drill, to deal with that eventuality.