June 1, 2020

2006 Version of "The Rifleman"

This video will impress you – I think! Of course it’s an advertisement for Baretta shotguns but you have to be impressed by two things – the performance of the gun, including the limited recoil and the marksmanship of the guy doing the demonstration.

Click here to download video

Thanks again to Rod Davis who sent me the video.

Tom Remington


Mayor Nagin, New Orleans Refuse To Return Guns To Owners

Shortly after hurricane Katrina nailed the Gulf Coast and in particular Mississippi and Louisiana, police in the city of New Orleans traveled about the city illegally confiscating guns from law abiding citizens. It was deemed an outrage as well as putting many people at serious risk because they lost their only means of self defense from thugs and looters.

The NRA went to work through the courts to get this actions stopped. The courts agreed and ordered the city to stop taking guns away from these people and to return the guns to their rightful owners.

This has not happened and so once again, the NRA along with the Second Amendment Foundation, has filed a lawsuit against Mayor Hagin and New Orleans Police Superintendent Warren Riley.

Alan Gottlieb, founder of SAF, said that the lawsuit was initiated only after all attempts through legal channels have failed to get Nagin and Riley to act. He said the city of New Orleans will only say that no guns were illegally confiscated but attorneys for the NRA and SAF have documented proof that this is not so. Gottlieb wants to have Nagin and Riley appear before a public court and explain why they should not be held in contempt of the court.

Tom Remington


Clemson Newspaper to Raffle AK-47

Clemson University newspaper called the Tiger Town Observer, is sponsoring a raffle to raise money and awareness. Editor and Chief Andrew Davis says he wants to raise awareness of the 2nd Amendment and educate people about their rights to keep and bear arms.

Davis says proceeds from the raffle will go toward paying expenses to run the paper, fund a self-defense program for female students and to a democracy foundation in Iran.

And this is the hoot! A spokeswoman for the University said they did not condone the event (raffle) but would not act to stop it.

Tom Remington


Justice Scalia Says Attack the Stereotype

Justice Antonin Scalia was the keynote speaker at a recent convention of the National Wild Turkey Federation at the Gaylord Opryland Hotel and Convention Center. He said that in order to fight to preserve hunting, we need to attack the stereotype that guns are only used for evil purposes.

He went on to say that we need to attack the beliefs that guns are only for crime. Scalia is a hunter and conservationist. He related to the crowd of nearly 2000 the days of his youth when bringing his hunting rifle with him on a New York subway. “Could you imagine doing that today in New York City?” he said.

Scalia praised the group for their efforts in conservation and urged them to continue. The group also was treated to a taped message from President Bush.

Tom Remington


A Look Inside The Mind of An Anti-Gunner

Ever wonder what makes anti-gun people tick? Well, if you have, I have a good read for you. It is called, “Raging Against Self Defense: A Psychiatrist Examines the Anti-Gun Mentality” by Sarah Thompson, M.D.

I’ll tell you up front, this is a long read but it is worth the read if you care enough to better understand what you are up against in dealing with those bent on taking away your guns and stopping you from hunting.

Tom Remington


Florida Gun Bill Stalls

Florida was just beginning the debate in the House of Representatives, when it became clear that the Republican controlled House was all over the board on House Bill 129. HB129 if passed, would force business owners to allow its employees to have guns in their cars while parked on business property.

The business owners in Florida mounted a strong defense for their right to control their property rights. They say passage of this bill would seriously jeopardize the safety of its employees and their own business.

The NRA is supporting the bill that was sponsored by Dennis Baxley (R) Ocala. They cite personal safety and 2nd Amendment issues as reasons for passage of the bill. They say that people going to and leaving the workplace have a right to protect themselves.

As the debate began to heat up, it became clear that the Republicans were split in which side to take. The Republican controlled House has historically sided with Florida business and gun rights issues.

After a few feeble attempts at discussing compromises, it was decided to table the bill and go to work behind the scenes to work out some compromises. It was obvious nobody at this point in time wanted to force the Republicans to take a side.

The NRA’s argument about business being able to tell its employees what they can bring to work in their cars, is simply big business controlling the personal lives of its workers. I agree to a point. The representatives of the business lobby fighting this bill say that if this passes and employees are allowed to bring their guns to work and keep them in their cars, it is a major violation of that businesses private property rights. Isn’t that stance hypocritcal? If that is a clear violation of their property rights, isn’t prohibiting things in a person’s automobile also a clear violation of personal property rights?

This is a complicated issue. Does one right trump another? If an employer can dictate to its employees that they can’t bring a gun to work in their car, what else can they then dictate? Does the business owner have the right to inspect every car upon entry to the parking lot?

These are all good questions and I don’t know who will answer them. Ultimately, I believe it will be decided in the courts and I don’t even like the thoughts of how our judges will view this issue.

Tom Remington


Why Can't People Mind Their Own Business?

The Virginia Legislature killed a bill that would stop doctors from asking their patients about guns in the home. Doctors say they talk with their patients about many things, especially children, when it comes to the overall safety, health and well being. They discuss locking the medicine cabinet, wearing a helmet while riding on a bicycle and whether they have access to guns.

Those who oppose doctors asking these questions say it is an infringement on their privacy.

First of all, who cares? I am my own self. I choose who I go see for a doctor. If I don’t like the doctor asking what I might consider private issue questions, I’ll not give him the answers. If it becomes a problem beyond that, there are more doctors to choose from. If my children are seeing a doctor, as a parent, I will always be with the doctor and my child. The same rules quoted above will apply.
I am not a doctor and therefore I can’t come up with any real good reasons why I would be asking anybody whether they had access to guns, unless they were an extreme mental case. The same applys with wearing helmets or locking the medicine cabinet. Is that somewhere in the hippocratic oath that doctors swear to ask personal probing questions that really don’t pertain to the administration of medicine?

In Virginia, the bill began because someone thought doctors shouldn’t be allowed to ask these questions. As I said before, if you don’t like it move on. Too many Americans are caught up in running everybody else’s lives – including doctors.

Thankfully, the Virginia Legislature saw fit to kill this ridiculous bill. People need to be assertive and take control of their own healthcare issues and doctors should mind their own business. We should all stop trying to make laws forcing people to do things simply because we don’t like them.

Chalk up a victory for the Virginia Legislature.

Tom Remington


The Gun Nut From Field and Stream

David E. PetzalFor us gun nuts, David E. Petzal who has been writing for Field and Stream for 30 years has a new blog. It is called The Gun Nut, and rightfully so!

He has tons and tons of stuff to say about guns, shooting, new gear, and hunting. Looks as though he has been updating it each day. Go check it out…

They describe his blog simply as the  “Rantings and ravings from Field and Stream’s David E. Petzal”

Steven Remington


The 28-Gauge Shotgun

Vice President Dick Cheney was hunting with a Perazzi Brescia, Italian made 28 gauge shotgun. The affidavits from the Kenedy County Sheriff’s Office does not say what size shell or number of load he was using. My guess would have been a #7 1/2 or #8. Depending on the brand of shell, or perhaps he was firing reloads, the shell probably was a 2 3/4 inch shell. Ammo is limited for 28 gauge. Approximate muzzle velocity would have been around 1200-1300 fps and the number of pellets, again depending on make and size, could have been roughly between 250 and 300.

People have wondered what kind of damage could really have been done at 90 feet away. The article below says that the 28 gauge with a #9 load gives a good enough pattern density to break a clay target at reasonable distances.

Not trying to play this down any but, considering the muzzle velocity, the size of the load and the distance, it probably hurt like hell and obviously there was enough velocity for at least one pellet to penetrate Mr. Whittingtons skin and get somewhere near his heart.

Being that Mr. Whittington is 78 years old, the bruising visible on his face and neck today when departing the hospital, could have been expected. Had he taken the brunt of the load in his legs, most of the pellets probably would not have penetrated his clothing.

The reason I mention the lower body is the Mr. Cheney stated in his affidavit that Mr. Whittington was standing in a low area and had he been on the same level as the VP when he shot, he would have hit him in the lower part of the body not the upper.

These observations I am sharing are only that. I am not an expert and I realize that under certain conditions, most anything could happen. I am only making an attempt to help people who have been asking, to better understand how seriously Mr. Whittington was injured.

Below is an article I retrieved from Chuck Hawks web site about shotguns and loads. This may be of help to anyone looking for a better understanding of Mr. Cheney’s weapon, etc.

The 28 Gauge: The Little Shell That Could

By Chuck Hawks

The highly respected American firm of Parker Bros. introduced the 28 gauge back in 1903. The nominal bore diameter of the 28 gauge is .550 inch; not much compared to the .729 bore of a 12 gauge. But, perhaps surprisingly, it has proven to be quite effective on both upland game and clay targets.

The small bore skeet class, for which the 28 gauge is legal, has played a major role in keeping the 28 alive for the past century. In recent years the little gauge has become increasingly popular with upland hunters, who appreciate the 28 gauge gun’s light weight and fast handling characteristics.

28 gauge guns typically have light recoil, pattern well, and point like a dream. They are lightweight, easy to handle guns. They are far more effective than their small bore might suggest, patterning much like a 20 gauge. The selection of guns made in 28 gauge is somewhat limited. Perhaps the most common 28 gauge guns in North America are the Browning BPS and Remington 870 pump shotguns. Browning, Charles Daly, Ruger, and Weatherby O/U field guns are also available in 28 gauge, and while certainly not inexpensive they are more affordable than most 28 gauge doubles. For the shooter of means, most of the bespoke side by side doubles can be ordered in 28 gauge.

All 28 gauge shells are 2 3/4 inches in length. The selection of shot shells in 28 gauge is pretty limited, and all are loaded with lead shot. I will cover them individually below. Price can also be a problem, as 28 gauge shells are not widely distributed and are seldom found in discount stores. Most fans of the 28 probably reload the bulk of their ammunition.

The 28 is not the gauge for large size shot, as a limited number of pellets can be accommodated in the standard 3/4 ounce load. Like the .410, the 28 is probably at its best with #7 1/2, 8, and 9 size shot. #7 1/2 is probably a pretty good compromise for shooting most upland game and #9 gives the pattern density to break clay targets at reasonable ranges.

For years Federal offered a 1 ounce magnum load in 28 gauge. I have not seen it listed in recent Federal catalogs, but it has been picked-up by Winchester in the form of a Super-X High Brass load with a muzzle velocity (MV) of 1205 fps. Shot sizes are 6, 7 1/2, and 8. The one ounce load allows efficient use of shot as large as #6, which number 225 to the ounce. Winchester offers no other 28 gauge hunting load.

Remington also offers exactly one hunting load in 28 gauge. This is a high brass Express Extra Long Range load with 3/4 ounce of #6 or #7 1/2 shot at a MV of 1295 fps. There are 262 #7 1/2 shot in a 3/4 ounce load, but only 169 #6 pellets.

Federal’s single 28 gauge offering for the hunter is a Premier high brass 3/4 ounce load at a MV of 1295 fps. Shot sizes 6, 7 1/2, and 8 are the choices. There are 307 #8 shot in a 3/4 ounce load, which makes for pleasantly dense patterns.

The most common 28 gauge shell is the target load, available from all three of the big ammo companies at a MV of 1200-1230 fps. These are skeet or sporting clays loads containing 3/4 ounce of #8, 8 1/2, or 9 shot. Size 8 and 9 shot are offered by Remington and Winchester; Federal offers 8 1/2 and 9. The somewhat unusual #8 1/2 size shot has a pellet count of 373 in a 3/4 ounce load.

There is no law against using #8 target loads on the smaller species of upland birds at moderate range, where they have proven quite effective. Target loads have the singular virtue of reduced recoil compared to the higher velocity hunting loads. The 3/4 ounce target load at 1200 fps generates 12.8 ft. lbs. of recoil according to my Shotgun Recoil Table.

The 28 gauge is the little shell that could. It can dominate small bore skeet, it’s effective on upland birds, and it makes a light yet low recoiling gun for beginner or expert alike. All it lacks is the public acceptance that would bring with it a larger assortment of guns and ammunition at reasonable prices, and that may be coming.

Tom Remington


The Anatomy of a Hunting Ignorant Politician

I have brought you several stories here about the state of Wisconsin’s attempt to pass a bill that will lower the minimum age to hunt from 12 years to 8. I am not going to debate this issue. What I am going to do is debate the stupidity of politicians who open their mouths on issues they know absolutely nothing about as well as display their overall ignorance in general.

Pat Kreitlow, a former news anchor at WEAU-13 TV in Wisconsin, is running for the 23rd District Senate seat in November. He has opened his mouth and revealed his true colors on the issue of lowering the hunting age. I will share some of his comments with you.

These quotes come from an article written by Jeremy A. Jenson in the Chetek Alert.

Kreitlow says that citizens of Wisconsin need to ask bigger questions. And what is this BIGGER question?

“It’s not that the issue is good or bad; in my mind, it’s a matter of priorities,” says Kreitlow. “Instead of tackling tough issues that impact everyone – education, property taxes, campaign reform, the health care crisis – they’re talking about stuff like this.”

Well said! NOT! Gobbledy Gook from a politician who has no direction and to make matters worse, he has done something probably an eighth grader would have learned while campaigning for student council. He refers to debate on lowering the hunting age “stuff like this”. Oooh!

“We need to talk about the issues that are going to impact real people in their everyday lives,” says Kreitlow.

Yikes! Strike two. Real people? Oh, man! The father who strongly knows his 10 year old can and should be with him in the woods, isn’t a real person? My guess is Mr. Kreitlow never walked in the woods, say nothing about hunted. Hunting heritage is huge in Wisconsin and other states. Sorry, Mr. Kreitlow, this bill impacts a lot of real people in Wisconsin. Are you sure you want to be a Senator from Wisconsin?

But he gives it another shot. Afterall, he’s got one more strike but he may not get another at bat in this ballgame. He says there is no consistency – I think refering to state government in passing laws. Read this.

“It’s ironic, really, that the very same week they’re taking up the bill about requiring booster seats for children until their 8 years old, they’re also talking about lowering the hunting age to eight,” says Kreitlow. “What they’re saying is that in order to be safe, a child has to stay in a booster seat until they are 8 years old, and then we’re going to turn around and send them into the woods with a loaded gun. Where’s the consistency there?”

If all of Wisconsin was that stupid, I would have to agree. I happen to know one person from Wisconsin and I think they are smart enough to know not to vote for Kreitlow. There is quite a bit of difference between riding in a car and going hunting with dad. I’ll go hunting with anybody’s dad before I’d ride in a car with my dad – much safer.

Of course Kreitlow’s true colors come shining through loud and clear when he inflames his statement with rhetoric saying that this bill would send an 8-year old kid into the woods with a loaded rifle.

It is obvious Mr. Kreitlow is one of those who doesn’t think his constituancy is smart enough to raise their kids the way they see fit. He doesn’t understand the real people of Wisconsin and he is sending the message to his voters that unless he has an issue that he feels strongly about, it is not worth pursuing.

My point is this. Hunting, fishing, trapping and all related matters, are all very important, high impacting issues in Wisconsin. Unless Mr. Kreitlow’s Senate District seat doesn’t go beyond the bounds of the steel city, he doesn’t have a chance in hell at getting elected.

Tom Remington

*update* As soon as I finished this piece, I realized that the same newspaper that wrote the article also has an editorial supporting Kreitlow’s point of view along with a few other inflammatory comments.