A Lexington man fired shots at a suspect who broke into his home early Wednesday morning.
Police say a man kicked in the front door of ahome along Republic Court around 3 a.m. and entered the house.
The homeowner woke up when he heard the noise and grabbed his gun. He says that when he went into the hall and flipped on the lights, he saw the suspect standing there.
The homeowner fired a few rounds and the suspectran out of the house. Read more
“We did what was in the best interests for the NRA and the Second Amendment, and we would do it again. We do not take positions on bills that do not affect us.”
That was NRA spokesman Andrew Arulanandam quoted in "Politico" discussing HR 5175, a bill that would allow free speech for the NRA and cut out almost everyone else.
HR 5175 is a blatantly unconstitutional bill that would end free speech for countless organizations and was opposed by the NRA until they cut a backroom deal with Democrats in Congress. NRA would be "carved out" of this bill and the NRA would slink away and end any opposition to it.
All other pro-gun organizations, including other national and all state-wide groups would be silenced, with the NRA's tacit blessing, and the NRA would be assured of a monopoly on political speech before elections.
Of course, just like much of McCain Feingold, this bill, if passed, will be overturned by the courts. But not before the next election, and that is exactly what the anti-gun majority is planning for. The bill is intended to protect people like NRA darling Harry Reid for one more election cycle. Read more
A top House Democrat said Monday that he remains hopeful of mustering enough votes to pass sweeping new campaign finance legislation, which has prompted a political uproar over a deal crafted to help the National Rifle Association. — The Washington Post, June 21, 2010
According to the Post article from yesterday:
Democrats are "in striking distance of getting the votes" for the package, which would require corporations, nonprofit groups [like GOA] and unions to disclose details about their political spending.
The big news last week was a "carve out" that Democrat leaders made to exempt the NRA from the provisions of the bill. This week, in order to gain more votes, there is talk about exempting many more non-profit organizations — which may include GOA.
Our answer to Congress is simple and is found in the First Amendment: "Congress shall make no law… abridging the freedom of speech." In other words, NO DEAL.
The NRA claims, in a widely circulated letter, that "some of our critics believe we should put the Second Amendment at risk over a First Amendment principle to protect other organizations."
To the contrary, sacrificing a First Amendment principle will end up putting the Second Amendment on even more precarious footing. Read more
Mayor Daley has plenty of liberals eager to argue for crime-ridden Chicago's gun ban.
Is the person next to you on the bus “carrying heat?” How about that lady in the Starbucks line, who appears to be “packing” (and I don't mean for summer vacation)? Your co-worker had a bad week and is fiddling with his pistol.
Today, the U.S. Supreme Court may strike down Chicago's controversial gun ban, legal experts predict. In the landmark case, McDonald vs. the City of Chicago, the justices are expected to rule that the city's 30-year-old prohibition on the possession or sale of handguns violates the Second Amendment.
If the law is banished, the city no longer will be able to forbid the possession of handguns.
The People of the Gun argue that citizens are entitled to the right to own guns for self-protection. They may win this round. Others fear the Windy City will begin to look more like Dodge City. Maybe even Tombstone, Ariz.
Things are bad enough. Every day in Chicago is another day of gun mayhem. Children caught in the crossfire. A lady preacher shot over a poker game. Road rage gone wild. More and more lost to domestic violence, suicide, impulse killings. Read more
The latest Gun Digest Kit of the Month focuses on the most popular rifle in America. This valuable kit will help you keep your AR-15 running strong. Click the link and take a look.
Overturning Wisconsin's over 130-year-old ban on carrying concealed weapons (CCW), the Wisconsin legislature last week passed SB93, sending the bill to Governor Walker for his signature.
Wisconsin residents: Do you plan to buy a new handgun or other gear in light of Wisconsin's new concealed carry law?
Recommended gun books for those who carry concealed handguns:
Created by duck hunters for duck hunters, the Browning Maxus is big on reliability, accuracy and power.
The very first sentence in the 2010 Browning catalog in reference to the company’s latest autoloading shotgun, the Maxus, is as follows – “The Browning Maxus – Maximum Reliability.” From experience, those five words certainly do say it all.
My first date with the Maxus was in Alberta in late 2008. Our group had, if memory serves me right, five of the new guns – a number which I believe represented, at that time, the whole of the population. Our host for the hunt, Browning’s Scott Grange, sheep-dogged his tiny stockpile of innovation with more intensity than did Golem guard The Ring.
However, at the end of our three-day stint north of Edmonton, there wasn’t a one of us writers who wasn’t plotting some way to sneak one of the Maxus’ back into The States. Yes, they’re that good.
A year later, Grange allowed me four days on the Great Salt Lake behind the recoil pad of a Plain Jane black-and-synthetic Maxus. Goldeneyes, pintails, mallards, widgeon, grey ducks, and bluebills all fell to the gun; so, too, did my first tundra swan and first drake cinnamon teal.
This time, the now year-old SKU was put through a brutal battery of field tests, including freezing cold temperatures, exposure to saltwater, and absolutely no maintenance whatsoever, and emerged with a report card sporting all As.
The catalog write-up goes on to list what Browning describes as the Maxus’ “innovative technologies.” Certainly, so-called such cutting edge technology can be nice and, at times, even useful. However, ‘tis often the case where one man’s innovation is another man’s gingerbread – or rather, fluff disguised as innovation. Fortunately, the latter is not case with the Maxus.
Technically Speaking
To me, the Maxus is without question the spawn of a waterfowler’s collective, a duck gun if there ever was a duck gun. A goose gun, too. In its purest form, the piece is a 3.5-inch gas-operated semi-automatic 12-bore; but it is more than that.
The Maxus’ efficiency begins where it should, with a trio of elements designed to enhance the gun’s on-target performance. Browning has combined their already-existing Invector-Plus choke system, with a lengthened (2.5-inch) forcing cone and back-bored barrel – the result being minimal shot deformation, and vastly improved pattern density, consistency, and uniformity.
These attributes are particularly noticeable when using larger non-toxic pellet sizes, and especially true in the case of steel shot.
Function for the Maxus is via what Browning calls their Power Drive System.
Elementally, it’s a port-and-piston design; however, oversized ports quickly bleed off excess gas with heavy loads, while a 20-percent longer piston stroke allows the piece to operate smoothly and reliably with the light stuff.
The unit itself is, for all intents and purposes, uniquely sealed, thus helping keep what my father always referred to as “mud, muck and corruption” out of the inner workings.
Recoil with the Maxus has been greatly reduced – An 18 percent reduction, as compared with other modern autoloaders – thanks to a combination of the Power Drive System, back-boring, and a space-age recoil pad, complete with what’s being deemed Inflex Technology.
Additional, if not novel features include an excellent trigger mechanism, Browning’s grip-tight Dura-Touch Armor Coating on all composite surfaces, a tricked-out Speed Lock forearm that eliminates the traditional threaded magazine cap, and a TurnKey magazine plug that allows for quick removal and/or installation of a two-round plastic plug.
The Maxus does sport the company’s decades-old Speed Load Plus feature, which automatically sends the first round in the magazine directly into the chamber. 26- and 28-inch barrel options are available, as are color schemes of matte black or Mossy Oak’s Duck Blind.
My Personal Report Card
It’s no secret that to stay competitive, firearms manufacturers must continually introduce – pardon the cliché – new and better mousetraps. And if not the entire trap, at the very least a new twist or feature designed specifically to make you, the potential buyer, understand that life ends should you not purchase Product X.
This said, the Maxus certainly does sport a long list of so-called better mousetraps; some of which I find useful, and others, at least to me, are burnt umber where brown would suffice. First, the 3.5-inch chamber is lost on me. Yes, I know there are thousands of 3.5-inch fans out there; however, I probably don’t shoot five 3.5-inch shotshells annually.
I don’t like the expense, I don’t enjoy the recoil, and, finally, I’m of a mind that if I can’t kill it with what’s in a 3-inch hull, I probably shouldn’t be shooting at it in the first place. Still, to some the option to shoot a 3.5-inch shotshell is a bonus.
Both the Speed Lock forearm and TurnKey Magazine Plug, while nice enough features, are likewise personally moot points. Since working with my first in 1979, I’ve somewhat grown accustomed to a screw-type magazine cap. True, the Speed Lock forearm does allow for quick and easy sling installation; however, so too do modern caps, the majority of which come sling-ready from the factory.
As for quickly removing and then reinstalling a magazine plug, I again quote my father, a long-time semi-automatic man, as saying – “If I haven’t killed it in three, it’s probably getting away.” Ever since I can remember, our autoloaders, as well as our pump-actions, have been plugged out of the box, and have stayed that way for all time. I agree here with my Pop on his Three And Out theory.
So what do I particularly like about this piece? I could definitely see the positives inherent in the Maxus’ Lightning Trigger System; not so much in the mechanism’s speed, which is undeniably fantastic, but more so the fact that the whole of the trigger group is easily removed, thus making it easy to clean.
And while on the topic of cleanliness, the Maxus’ internal workings, i.e. the gas operation system, contribute greatly to an elevated ease of maintenance – a huge plus, especially for those somewhat frightened by gun oil and greasy rags. And once I got accustomed to it, the Speed Load Plus feature did prove convenient, particularly in the tight confines of a layout boat or ground blind.
What I like most about the Maxus are three things. One, the gun points and handles as if it were an extension of my own arms. Only one other off-the-shelf shotgun has ever fit me out of the box like the Maxus does, and that was a loaner Winchester Super X2 that I sent back to the factory because money was tight at the time.
Do I regret that decision? Without question. The second is the Maxus’ recoil, or more precisely, the lack thereof. Not only is the piece balanced extraordinarily well, but recoil, even with 3.5-inch shotshells, is negligible. Physical punishment is practically absent; so, too, is the target-to-target interruption common with heavy waterfowl loads, lighter guns, and oft-brutal recoil.
Third, and finally, the Maxus goes boom every time I pull the trigger, and this often despite both internal and external coatings of everything from mud and sand to sunflower seed hulls, Skoal drippings, and Dorito crumbs. It’s frighteningly reliable, plain and simple, and that, above all else, is what I’m looking for in a waterfowl gun.
This article appeared in the June 21, 2010 issue of Gun Digest the Magazine.
Gun Digest is the source for firearms news, pricing and guns for sale. Readers benefit from in-depth editorial expert advice, show reviews and practical how-to instructions. With your Subscription, you'll also learn about threats to your Second Amendment rights. Click here to begin your subscription to Gun Digest.
Inside This Issue:
– Test your skill with rifle golf – The search for a classic SIG – Ahern on lights and blades – Field Gun Review: Browning's Maxus – Trends of Value for Rifles, Handguns, and Shotguns – Extensive classifieds section.
Not a subscriber? Make sure you don't miss another issue! Subscribe now
Think about this for a minute. The majority of these United States have shall-issue CCW laws that allow honest, law-abiding citizens to protect themselves from violent attacks.
Yet Chicago continuously ranks very high in the number of murders per 100,000 residents. In fact the cities with the highest murder rates have the strictest gun control laws. For crying out loud, there was talk about calling in the National Guard to help control the streets of Chicago because the police couldn’t handle it.
Chicago’s famously anti-gun mayor Richard Daley has said only police officer should have guns. I guess he believes only the police can be trusted.
There was an uneasy silence cast upon that rhetoric when the video of one of Chicago’s “finest” beating the crap out of a female bartender surfaced.
That video should be all the proof you need to remind you that when people in power have no checks on their authority bad things happen to the general public.
It can happen in the United States if we let it. It, of course being a totalitarian government run amok with power among an unarmed populace. Now before you all sit down to your keyboards and tell me how I’m preaching to the choir, there is reason for this column.
This editorial appeared in the June 21, 2010 issue of Gun Digest the Magazine. Click here to learn more. Click here to subscribe.
The Supreme Court of the United States is about to hand down a decision concerning Chicago’s Draconian gun laws. And it is my guess that Chicago’s famously anti-gun mayor Richard Daley will at first rail about the injustice of it all, ignore the ruling and then work to obstruct implementation of any changes.
This is what people with unchecked authority do.
Gun owners need to check his authority. He needs to know what people really think. Yes, he only serves one city and he will argue that only the opinions of city residents matter to him, but that doesn’t mean he shouldn’t hear about how well the pro-gun movement is going in the rest of the country.
None of the dire predictions associated with easing gun laws has ever come true. It has been 30 years since the first CCW laws were passed and the only places blood is flowing in the streets are those cities that refuse to allow people to defend themselves.
The Illinois State Rifle Association is doing a great job keeping the pressure on Daley and his cronies, but they can always use some help. Invest the 44 cents and the 20 minutes it takes to write a letter to the misguided Mr. Mayor and let him know that he is wrong and we are right. Good people with guns do good things. Here is his address:
Mayor Richard Delay 121 N. LaSalle Street City Hall Room 507 Chicago, IL 60602
Chicago is just another brick in the wall that is gun control. We need to work together to knock out those bricks one at a time until we eventually bring down the wall. Write a letter. Join a march. Let people know we will not give up our rights.
Human beings only have two ways to deal with one another: reason and force. If you want me to do something for you, you have a choice of either convincing me via argument, or force me to do your bidding under threat of force. Every human interaction falls into one of those two categories, without exception. Reason or force, that's it.
In a truly moral and civilized society, people exclusively interact through persuasion. Force has no place as a valid method of social interaction, and the only thing that removes force from the menu is the personal firearm, as paradoxical as it may sound to some. When I carry a gun, you cannot deal with me by force. You have to use reason and try to persuade me, because I have a way to negate your threat or employment of force.
The gun is the only personal weapon that puts a 100-pound woman on equal footing with a 220-pound mugger, a 75-year old retiree on equal footing with a 19-year old gang-banger, and a single guy on equal footing with a carload of drunk guys with baseball bats. The gun removes the disparity in physical strength, size, or numbers between a potential attacker and a defender.
There are plenty of people who consider the gun as the source of bad force equations. These are the people who think that we'd be more civilized if all guns were removed from society, because a firearm makes it easier for a [armed] mugger to do his job. That, of course, is only true if the mugger's potential victims are mostly disarmed either by choice or by legislative fiat – it has no validity when most of a mugger's potential marks are armed.
People who argue for the banning of arms ask for automatic rule by the young, the strong, and the many, and that's the exact opposite of a civilized society. A mugger, even an armed one, can only make a successful living in a society where the state has granted him a force monopoly.
Then there's the argument that the gun makes confrontations lethal that otherwise would only result in injury. This argument is fallacious in several ways. Without guns involved, confrontations are won by the physically superior party inflicting overwhelming injury on the loser. People who think that fists, bats, sticks, or stones don't constitute lethal force watch too much TV, where people take beatings and come out of it with a bloody lip at worst. The fact that the gun makes lethal force easier works solely in favor of the weaker defender, not the stronger attacker. If both are armed, the field is level.
The gun is the only weapon that's as lethal in the hands of an octogenarian as it is in the hands of a weightlifter. It simply wouldn't work as well as a force equalizer if it wasn't both lethal and easily employable.
When I carry a gun, I don't do so because I am looking for a fight, but because I'm looking to be left alone. The gun at my side means that I cannot be forced, only persuaded. I don't carry it because I'm afraid, but because it enables me to be unafraid. It doesn't limit the actions of those who would interact with me through reason, only the actions of those who would do so by force. It removes force from the equation… And that's why carrying a gun is a civilized act.
The new Ruger LCR, the critically acclaimed Lightweight Compact Revolver, is now available with a “Boot” grip and XS Sights. Jointly developed with Hogue, the LCR Boot Grip features the highly effective Tamer insert which effectively manages recoil when coupled with the LCR’s patented polymer fire control housing.
The new LCR Boot Grip is smaller, lighter (by ½ oz) than the standard grip, and features smooth side panels and a smooth bottom contour, making the grip less likely to snag on clothing. However, both the front of the grip and the backstrap over the Tamer insert are overmolded in soft rubber, enabling effective control when shooting. The LCR Boot Grip also features a deep speedloader cutout, making speedloaders easier to use with a wide range of ammunition.
“The LCR has been a phenomenal success for us,” remarked Chris Killoy, Ruger’s Vice President of Sales and Marketing. “The new Boot Grip for the LCR gives our customers a slightly more concealable option for discreet carry, yet gives up very little in terms of controllability and recoil management.”
The LCR Boot Grip is now available as regular production model, but the Boot Grip is also available as an accessory sale through www.ShopRuger.com. The LCR Boot Grip can easily be exchanged with a standard grip on the LCR’s grip peg by simply loosening a single screw at the bottom of the grip.
The newest LCR also features a XS Sight Systems 24/7 Tritium Standard Dot front sight for those who desire fast, low-light target acquisition. XS Sight Systems 24/7 Tritium Standard Dot enhances sight acquisition in all light conditions. Fast, simple and effective, the 24/7 Tritium Standard Dot offers the user a “flash sight” picture, the ultimate self defense sight system that excels in improved low-light accuracy in high stress defensive situations. The low profile, snag free design of the XS Sight Systems 24/7 Tritium Standard Dot front sight does not compromise the concealability of the Ruger LCR while it provides sights that can be seen around the clock.
For more information on the new LCR with Hogue Boot Grip and XS Sights, or to learn more about the extensive line of Ruger firearms, visit www.Ruger.com. To find accessories for the LCR and other Ruger firearms, visit www.ShopRuger.com.
Stamped on the Stevens Model 355, and its successor Model 335 hammerless boxlock guns, I see the patent date Mar 19,1907. On the Stevens Model 330 and Riverside No. 315 and Springfield No. 311, which are also boxlock hammerless models, I see stamped the words Patented April 20, 1915. On some Stevens' Riverside No. 215 hammer doubles is stamped Patented Feb 10,1914 . Were these Patents owned by Stevens? What features do these patents protect. and when were these patent dates stamped on the guns? Knowing this would help me to identify models and estimate their dates of manufacture. As you know, because no Savage ( including Savage/Stevens/Fox/ Baker/Davis/Crescent) factory production records have survived, getting a sure fix on Stevens doubles' models and dates can be difficult. Did these patents issue on the dates noted or did they take effect when the patents were ‘applied for'? Did they expire after 17 years? Hope this is within your realm of expertise. Thank you. FS
Answer:
Interesting question! I have researched this and can try to offer you some information on patents used by Stevens. Remember, the patents were good, unless invalidated, for 17 years after being granted. Sometimes the patent application process was ‘dragged out' to keep the patented invention under control of the owner for a longer period. Dates and brief descriptions of the three Stevens patents you mention in your letter follow. These were very important patents to Stevens!:
March 19,1907 = #847,659 Ed Elder to J Stevens A&T Co. cocking lever trigger plate on hammerless boxlocks 1907-1914 Stevens (335, 365), also “Pat appl'd for” 2 years previous to 1907.
February 10,1914 = # 1,086,378 George S Lewis to J Stevens A&T Co. plunger strikers (firing pins) with coil springs and pivoted triggers on hammer boxlocks, 1914 -1928 and “Pat appl'd for” two years previous to 1914. Models Stevens (225), Riverside (215).
April 20,1915 = #1,136,247 George S Lewis to J Stevens A&T Co. one piece cast frame, combination cocking lever and extractor on hammerless boxlocks 1915-1932, doubles stamped “Pat appl'd for” and ‘patent pending' several years before 1915: Models marked: Riverside (311,315) Springfield (311,315), Stevens, Eastern Arms , Central Arms, many other private brands.
This 1915 patent was most significant because it covered both the combination (one piece) sliding extractor-‘comb' shaped cocking piece with coil-spring powered striker firing mechanism used by Stevens in all their hammerless doubles from 1914 to 1933 (Riverside 315, Springfield 311 and 3151, Stevens Model 330 and 331 etc) and the one piece ‘hollow' frame which carried the critical parts of the mechanism (hammers and sears) on horizontal pins. This was a unique system, reliable in use and inexpensive to build. The ‘comb' extractor cocker was much easier to make and fit than the parts which performed the same operations in other guns of that era. It was a genial design.
The system that followed it appears not to have been patented. This was the ‘spade' shaped rod, which being first introduced in the “Springfield” line in 1932, was not used on Stevens brand doubles until the introduction of the Stevens Model 530 in 1932. This ‘spade' shaped rod slid down diagonally in the barrel lug (against a spring in later models) to simultaneously actuate the extractor and lift the hammer toes on the internal hammers which succeeded the coil spring powered strikers of the ‘comb' system. I mention it because it owes a lot to Lewis' earlier inventions, especially the one-piece cast frame. Beginning about 1933, and until 1988 when they stopped making them, all Stevens doubles employed the ‘spade' cocker-extractor system with internal hammers. Both systems depended on a movable stud on the fore end iron which, when the fore end iron was assembled to the gun, pushed the ‘comb' or ‘spade' into engagement with the lever(s) which cocked the strikers or hammers, respectively.
George S. Lewis worked for J. Stevens A&T Co from 1909 to 1920. His inventions provided the major designs for Stevens hammer and hammerless boxlock guns. Long after his patents expired, Stevens doubles were based on his work. Only Louis Elkas had such a positive effect on Savage/Stevens designs. Lewis later worked for WRA Co's New Haven Works Manager, Ed Pugsley, who was spearheading John M.Olin's effort to produce the Model 21 double gun started by his predecessor, T.G. Bennett (Oliver Winchester's son-in-law) and famed designer T.C. Johnson.
Another inventor who was very important to Stevens was Andrew E Whitmore. Remington owned and used his sliding rod lockup for their guns in the 1880s, but Stevens also used it on their hammer boxlock Model 325 introduced about 1903. Stevens stamped the left side of the Model 325 frame “Pat s Appl'd For”, but maybe that referred to other patents (note the plural), because the Whitmore 1874 patent would have expired in 1891 and Stevens would have been able to use it freely. Stevens did replace the Whitmore locking system with a much simpler extension notch lock up in their second version of the 325 about 1905.
The Stevens Model 325 was dropped altogether in 1908 but it had ushered in a new era of simpler, stronger, cheaper boxlock doubles which the shooting public trusted and liked. It was the beginning of Savage/Stevens' dominance of the ‘affordable' double gun market in America.
The “Shotgun Sellout” exempts large organizations from the most burdensome regulations of the DISCLOSE Act, “Democratic Incumbents Seek to Contain Losses by Outlawing Speech in Elections,” while pistol whipping genuine grassroots groups.
“The Democratic majority has decided that established, powerful interest groups should be exempted from the proposed draconian regulations, while small advocacy groups should have their voices silenced by the DISCLOSE Act,” said Center for Competitive Politics President Sean Parnell. “Exempting the National Rifle Association from these regulations while local groups such as the Oregon Firearms Federation would face stifling regulations if they choose to exercise their First Amendment rights simply cannot be considered ‘reform.'”
“This sort of special carve out for an established interest group is just the kind of insider manipulation that gives the public the sense that Congress is unresponsive to the concerns of ordinary Americans,” said Allison Hayward, CCP's Vice President of Policy. “How can it be that invasive and onerous disclosure requirements are proper when applied to small, regional interest groups but not large, wealthy national groups?” Read more
Rep. Bryan Lentz of Delaware County, who is running for a Congressional seat in suburban Philadelphia, wants to make it harder for Pennsylvanians who have been denied a license to carry' firearms in this state to simply get one from another state, in particular, Florida.
Currently, state law generally requires a person to be licensed by the state of Pennsylvania in order to carry a concealed weapon.
But there is this exception allowing firearms for "any person who possesses a valid and lawfully issued license or permit to carry a firearm, which has been issued under the laws of another state, regardless of whether a reciprocity agreement exists between the Commonwealth (of Pennsylania) and the state."
To hear them tell it, the five police agencies who apprehended 39-year-old Oregonian David Pyles early on the morning of March 8 thwarted another lone wolf mass murderer. The police "were able to successfully take a potentially volatile male subject into protective custody for a mental evaluation," announced a press release put out by the Medford, Oregon, police department.
The subject had recently been placed on administrative leave from his job, was "very disgruntled," and had recently purchased several firearms. "Local Law Enforcement agencies were extremely concerned that the subject was planning retaliation against his employers," the release said. Fortunately, Pyles "voluntarily" turned himself over to police custody, and the legally purchased firearms "were seized for safekeeping."
This voluntary exchange involved two SWAT teams, police officers from Medford and nearby Roseburg, sheriff's deputies from Jackson and Douglas counties, and the Oregon State Police. Oregon State Police Sgt. Jeff Proulx explained to South Oregon's Mail Tribune why the operation was such a success: "Instead of being reactive, we took a proactive approach."
There's just one problem: David Pyles hadn't committed any crime, nor was he suspected of having committed one. The police never obtained a warrant for either search or arrest. They never consulted with a judge or mental health professional before sending out the military-style tactical teams to take Pyle in. Read more
Looking to go armed, but are stuck in the weeds as to what to arm yourself with? Here are 20 excellent concealed carry gun options that will keep you on the defensive.
A Lexington man fired shots at a suspect who broke into his home early Wednesday morning.
The Gun Digest Book of Concealed Carry
