Carrying a gun without knowing the law? Words just fail me. (sticky)

If you carry a gun for self-defense, you have to know the law.  Just because you are skilled at driving a car does not mean that you know the laws of the road and are safe driving on them.

Invest the money you’d spend on shaving a tenth of a second off your splits with Andrew Branca’s book or seminars — it’ll pay far greater dividends. Visit this link to learn more, and use the discount code “streetstandards” for a 10% discount.

Also, strongly consider shooting self-defense legal “insurance” plans.  They are NOT all the same.  I believe in the model and services of the Armed Citizens’ Legal Defense Network.  This link explains the different models of after-the-event legal aid.  Caveat emptor!

Understanding how the vendor/writer relationship works

Was reading this post on Soldier Systems about some dick head that wanted to scam some free shit out of a vendor.  The vendor’s response was way too polite, IMO.

Anyway. it caused me to dust off and expand a piece I’d written earlier on the relationship between industry writers, vendors, and readers.  The piece is here; it’s 3000 words long and will only take a couple minutes to read.  Here’s the title and sub-titles, explaining what it’s about:

HOW NOT TO SCREW UP THE WRITER/VENDOR RELATIONSHIP

For Vendors: How Not to Get Written About

For Writers: How to Not be an Ass

For Readers: How to Read a Magazine

Three-and-a-half resources for learning the law of self defense

View, and act.  Make use of at least one – don’t be a fool.

Update – I’m now reading Andrew Branca’s new 3rd edition of his book and it’s obvious that there are many elements and subtleties of the law –  as well as a large variation in the law between states – which aren’t addressed in the Armed Response DVD that I mention.  So I suggest that you simply stick with Atty. Branca’s book, as well as the classics by Mas Ayoob.

Gun rights in a nutshell

I first formulated these sentences over 30 years ago.  The thought isn’t original, certainly, but I think this formulation is.

You can not simultaneously assert a right and deny its means of expression.  You can no more assert a right to self defense and deny access to firearms than you can assert a right to free speech and prohibit printing presses.