Thomas Kamaka, Jr. was sentenced to probation yesterday for four counts of sexual assault against a 14 year-old girl. Photo by: KHNL.com

One of the most common arguments against the issuance of concealed carry permits in Hawaii is the low rate of violent crime on the islands.  While it is certainly true that we enjoy a fairly low rate of violent crime, we are far from living in a zero-crime utopia.  One need only look at a sexual predator tracking website such as Family Watchdog to see that registered sex offenders in our neighborhoods are much less scarce than anyone would like, and one sociopath is all that is required to cause serious physical injuries and life-long emotional pain.

Although our judiciary system and law enforcement officers work hard to keep our loved ones safe, the system does break down from time to time.  One such breakdown occurred yesterday, when a 43 year-old Waianae man, Thomas Kamaka, Jr, was sentenced to five years of probation in a plea deal for four counts of second degree sexual assault against a 14 year-old girl.  Kamaka also beat up the girl’s brother when he tried to save his sister, according to investigators.  (Full story available at Hawaii News Now)

That a man who sexually assaulted a 14 year-old girl, and beat up a family member who tried to help, would be sentenced to nothing but probation is quite disturbing in its own right.  I don’t pretend to know every detail of the case, such as whether or not the victim was willing to testify, or what evidence the prosecutor’s office did or didn’t have, but it is enough to know that a terrible crime was committed against a young girl and the offender walked away with no jail time.

What can we take away from this case?  First, horrible things can and do happen, even here in Hawaii.  Second, sometimes family members or friends find themselves in a position to stop a crime against someone very dear to them.  Third, the state of Hawaii virtually ensures that those same family members will not be equipped to deal with the situation by prohibiting even competent, qualified adults from carrying any sort of defensive tool such as a Taser or handgun.   Ask yourself: If you found yourself in the brother’s shoes, would you be able to successfully stop the attack bare-handed?  Would you be willing to bet your loved one’s life or physical and mental well-being on that?  I, for one, would not, and that’s why it is so urgent that we reform Hawaii’s policy of disarming potential victims.

Until Hawaii’s laws are reformed, I encourage each of you to take steps to ensure that something like this does not happen to you.  Be aware of your surroundings, and get to know your neighbors.  Be on the lookout for things and people that do not belong in a given situation, and when you see something suspicious, call the police.  Take a self-defense class that will teach you to protect yourself when you’re away from home, and take a firearms safety class and acquire a quality defensive firearm for use in the home.  The only thing I can imagine that would be worse than having a criminal attack one of my loved ones is being unable to prevent or stop that attack.  Good luck, be alert, and stay safe!

Here is a quick video showing some of their training!

In a recent firearms safety class, the discussion turned to the use of firearms for defense.  One of the students asked the question, “So, do you shoot to kill?”, which was a pertinent question, and one that the non-shooting public asks on a regular basis.  We have been conditioned by movies and television to think that there is a difference between warning shots, shooting a leg, and “shooting to kill”.  Every time a police officer or armed citizen is involved in a fatal shooting, the inevitable question arises, namely, did the deceased really deserve to die for his actions?

The first thing to understand is what deadly force actually is.  According to HRS 703-300:

 ”Deadly force” means force which the actor uses with the intent of causing or which the actor knows to create a substantial risk of causing death or serious bodily harm.  Intentionally firing a firearm in the direction of another person or in the direction which another person is believed to be constitutes deadly force.

That definition is nearly universal in the United States, and what it means is that warning shots, wounding shots, and shots to the chest all fall into the same group.  If you are not justified in using deadly force against an assailant, you are not justified in firing a warning shot or “just winging him”.  Shots are not fired until the situation has been elevated to a point where killing is justified.

The next point that needs clarification is what is meant by “shoot to kill”.  When asked if I would “shoot to kill”, my answer is both yes and no.  If presented with a clear and mortal threat to my life or the life of my child, I would shoot to kill; in the sense that my shots would be aimed for the center of the attacker’s chest.  Clearly that poses a significant risk of killing him, so yes, I would “shoot to kill”.  However, the goal of deadly force is not the death of the assailant; the goal is to force the assailant to cease a behavior (attack) which prompted the use of deadly force.  So no, I’m not shooting to kill, I’m shooting to stop.  Once the attacker ceases being a threat, whether because he runs or is incapacitated, continued application of deadly force is no longer justified.  Because of the wonderful resiliency of the human body, there are very, very few ways to reliably force someone to stop.  If there were a more reliable means of accomplishing the goal of stopping an attacker before he has a chance to do harm, I would sell all my defensive firearms to purchase it.  Unfortunately, for the time being, the only reliable way to stop an attacker is by placing bullets into vital organs.

The final question is whether or not I feel an attacker deserves to die for his actions, and it’s one that I don’t have an answer for.  Frankly, it’s irrelevant.  The bottom line is that a criminal who attacks a peaceful citizen for their money, body, or life has taken almost every choice out of the hands of that citizen.  He has chosen the setting, the time, his weapon, his approach, literally everything.  Most importantly, he has decided to force a peaceful citizen into a scenario where someone will be seriously injured or killed.  The only question left is who that person will be, and for those of us who have made the decision to take responsibility for our own defense, the answer is, “NOT ME!“

Deadly force is not a judgment of the assailant’s character, punishment for his crimes, or vengeance for the victim.  It is simply the level of force necessary to immediately stop an imminent threat to innocent people.

The Brady Campaign is the highest profile gun control group in the nation, and they spend a great deal of time and money working to halt the advancement of Second Amendment rights both in court and through state and federal legislation.  Naturally, it’s safe to say that the people working for the Brady Campaign recognize a threat to their oppressive agenda when they see one.  That they have retained a local lawyer and filed an amicus brief indicates that their operatives believe the Baker case stands a strong chance of succeeding.

Those familiar with the typical anti-gun arguments will immediately recognize the faulty logic and dubious studies cited in the Baker brief.  Probably the most profound failure of common sense is this gem: “…carrying a gun in public is not an effective form of self-defense…”  One wonders if the Brady Campaign has alerted the FBI, Secret Service, and the various state and local law enforcement agencies that their agents and officers are being placed in grave danger by their practice of providing their employees with an ineffective means of self-defense.

Citing a study by Philip Cook, the Brady Campaign speculates that increased numbers of private citizens carrying firearms would lead to increased numbers of criminals carrying firearms to protect themselves from citizens protecting themselves.  Of course, speculation is completely unnecessary, because reams of data exist proving that no such calamity has occurred in the states which have relaxed their gun laws.  Even the Brady Campaign doesn’t believe the Cook study.  If they did, they would simultaneously be urging law enforcement to disarm, along with private citizens.

The brief also quotes a study by Charles C. Branas, et al, which states, “gun possession by urban adults was associated with a significantly increased risk of being shot in an assault,” which may actually contain a kernel of truth.  The problem is that it’s impossible to determine which came first, the chicken or the egg.  Does gun possession create an increased risk of being shot in an assault, or does an increased risk of being shot in an assault make it more likely that one would acquire a firearm?

The preceding examples are but a mere sampling of the logical carnage contained in the Brady Campaign’s brief, and are by no means all-inclusive.  Like the rest of the assertions made by the gun control lobby, the brief rests entirely on twisted facts, omissions, and outright lies.  While this is not surprising, it is surprising that the Brady Campaign would deem it necessary to spend the time and money to file a brief with Hawaii District Court.  That they have done so indicates that they believe the Baker suit has a good chance of succeeding, and that they understand the ramifications will affect the entire country.  This should come as a heartening development for gun owners everywhere.

Obviously with the Brady Campaign weighing in on the case, the Hawaii Defense Foundation now finds itself in a rather lopsided fight; a small, local organization taking on the nation’s largest and most influential anti-gun establishment.  Obviously this requires both money and work, so if you have not yet done so, please consider joining or making a donation to the HDF using the Paypal “Donate” button at the upper right corner of this page.  Those interested in volunteering to help the cause  can contact me directly at derek.scammon@gmail.com.  Much remains to be done in our effort to bring Hawaii’s gun laws into compliance with the US and Hawaii State Constitutions, but this latest development is a positive indication that we’re on the right track.
Brady Brief against Baker v. Kealoha et. al.

Starbucks’ statement on the matter was surprisingly common sense. In 2010, the coffee giant issued the following statement:

“We comply with local laws and statutes in all the communities we serve. That means we abide by the laws that permit open carry in 43 U.S. states. Where these laws don’t exist, openly carrying weapons in our stores is prohibited. The political, policy and legal debates around these issues belong in the legislatures and courts, not in our stores.”

It’s a great statement for two reasons: first and foremost, it’s exactly right; second, it’s simply good business. If open carry is legal in a given locality, the citizens of that locale clearly favor the right to keep and bear arms, or vice-versa. Either way, Starbucks maximizes their customer satisfaction at every outlet.

Some of the pro-gun groups have hailed Starbucks’ stand as being a victory for the gun rights movement, and in some ways they’re correct, though probably not for the reasons they may think. The Starbucks policy isn’t a victory in and of itself, it’s a byproduct of the many, many, other victories groups like the NRA and Second Amendment Foundation (and countless smaller, local organizations nation-wide, like your very own Hawaii Defense Foundation!) have won over the years. It’s a solid indicator that gun ownership has become normal again, despite the devious machinations of the various gun control lobbyists.

SUPPORT RIGHTS:  ANTI-GUNNERS WILL BOYCOTT YOU

Because the gun control lobby was unable to stop 43 US states from un-mangling the Constitution, they want Starbucks to do it for them, unilaterally. Since Starbucks refuses, a boycott of the coffee giant has been announced, starting Valentine’s Day this year. (Apparently the gun control lobby operates on classic mob principles: “Hey, when the Don invites you to join the Family, you join, capisce? Now, you sleep with the fishes!”) Clearly it’s in our collective best interest to ensure that Starbucks not be muscled into submission on this issue, so the Hawaii Defense Foundation is joining numerous Second Amendment advocacy groups across the country in asking all liberty-loving Americans to support Starbucks on the 14th of February.

SUPPORT RIGHTS: AMERICANS WILL SUPPORT YOU

Americans will Support you Starbucks

Take your sweetheart out for a cup of coffee. Replace that travel mug you’ve been wanting to throw out. Help us make this boycott a complete non-issue, and show Starbucks that the gun owners of America have the numbers and the buying power to more than offset any loss of business from petulant gun control groups.  Now, where is my Mocha Chip Freedom Frappuchino?

Bill 1 would change the wording of the fees to exclude non-profit charities from the fee, while Bill 60 would clarify that the $15/hour fee is to be charged only when an organization requires a Parks facility to be open outside normal hours and staffed by an attendant.

These are good bills for the shooting pulic to support, so please don’t hesitate to send in your testimony, or if you’re available on Wednesday, 25 January at 10:00am, register to speak.  The meeting agenda, details on how to register to speak or submit testimony, as well as the text of the two bills, can be found at the city of Honolulu’s website.

Mr. Berg has been appreciative of the hard work all of you have done in writing testimony for various bills relating to the shooting sports on Oahu.  Please be sure to submit your comments.  Even if you’re not going to win a Pulitzer Prize for your writing, it will at the very least demonstrate to the city council that there are a large number of people on the island who care deeply about their Second Amendment rights.

I will edit this post to add a sample testimony letter, once I’ve had a chance to write my own testimony.  Thank you all for your past and continuing support.

The one limit is the the bar to granting relief from disabilities is still in there, with its exemption for corporations convicted of felonies!

Agricultural, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies Programs for the Fiscal Year ending September 30, 2012, and for other purposes. Conference Report to accompany H.R. 2112. H.R. Report No. 112-284, 112th Congress, 1st Session. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 2011, pages 58-60.

BUREAU OF ALCOHOL, TOBACCO, FIREARMS AND EXPLOSIVES SALARIES AND EXPENSES For necessary expenses of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms
and Explosives,…. :   See more here at Of Arms and the Law!

By Rococohobo at Flikr.

Recently, I ran across an FPK (Dragunov-style) Sniper Rifle, 7.62x54R by Tennessee Guns International at a gun show in Florida. These are built using new US manufactured Nodak Spud PSL/FPK square-backed receiver with riveted, gusseted re-enforcement plate that facilitates a US MADE Ironwood Designsstandard AK-47 butt stock and pistol grip (instead of the short PSL comb stock). A refinished “category 1″ Romanian PSL parts kit and Excellent condition Romanian chrome-lined barrel, original Romanian pinned flash hider, TAPCO G2 Trigger kit, one 10rd mag and sling round out the usual offering. Note that this incarnation does not include a scope, like many of the PSL’s that are offered in the U.S.

The TGI-FPK, 7.62x54R, by Tennessee Guns International.

Assembly

The barrel is 24″ which is right between the 28″ M91/30 and the 20″ M44 Mosin-Nagants that were more or less the original rifles designed to shoot 7.62x54R. The fact that the receiver is squared-off and lugged to take a regular AK stock means that any AK stock/grip will work. The original Romanian PSL receivers and stocks never inspired a lot of aftermarket choices. Since the original PSL receivers are illegal, per BATFE Royal Decree, the importers use a U.S.-manufactured copy that doesn’t have the 3rd axis safety sear that BATFE is so hysterical about, and ship it to Romania to be reassembled with a “demilled” PSL – in other words, all parts from an original PSL are transferred to the U.S. receiver. In this case, the opportunity to use a modified receiver design that is more AK-like offers a good deal more versatility. Nodak Spud only made these receivers for TGI for about a year or so. TGI was assembling them from “PSL-kits” – basically by importing all the parts except for the receiver, and then upgrading the trigger group and furniture. Now, TGI is back to just selling imported kits and Romanian assembled PSL’s with US-made PSL recievers again; they no longer build this custom version in-house. I found this one sleeping at a show for less than any price I’ve seen on the web. I’ve seen a few FPK’s and PSL’s for sale on Gunbroker, albeit at retail prices.

Purpose-built

In the case of the PSL/PSL-54C/ROMAK III/SSG-97/FPK/FPK-”Dragunov” variants, they are not really a “sniper rifle” in the sense that Americans usually think of, i.e., the Marine Scout Sniper-type role. It’s intended for more of a squad-based “Designated Marksman” role. So, maybe not so much on the 1000-meter shots, but definitely will get out further than the 150 to 200 meters of an AK-47 or SKS in 7.62×39 – and even at those shorter ranges, more accurate and hard-hitting. At the same time, those in the market for this type of weapon should note that nothing figures more heavily into desperate, defensive warfare (civil defense scenario) than logistics. I’ve got a Browning BAR with a BOSS in 7mm Magnum that is REALLY NICE, but when ammo starts running short and the jackboots are rolling up on you in force, it’s a good idea to have something that will shoot what’s available (and what you can get A LOT OF on the cheap), and do it rather well.

Ammunition

Now, with some of the surplus steel core and commercial stuff I have, it does pretty well out to reasonable hunting ranges and somewhat beyond, say, 500 yards or so, since that’s about as far as any rifle range I’ve ever had access to will facilitate. The only one close to me here will only offer 100 meters, so this is a constraint on this particular review. I’d also like to get some 7N1 to see if it really shoots that much better, but of course, it’s much more expensive than the cheaper surplus steel-core Russian and Bulgarian stuff that you can get now for about $140.00 per 880-round case, plus shipping.

In Russia, Barnaul and Novosibirsk currently produce several types of specialty ammo such as armor piercing, tracer, sniper, and the ST-M2 steel core light ball, bringing this cartridge into its third century of military use. They also, along with Tula, Ulyanov, and Klimov, continue to produce 7.62x54R for the commercial market. In Yugoslavia, Privi Partizan and Wolf Gold are their branded military export production. Igman is produced in Bosnia-Herzegovina and there’s also the Sellier&Bellot/Winchester sporting cartridges, so it’s not going to get scarce anytime soon.

Thinking again about this weapon in logistical terms, a few years ago when the shorter 7.62×39 was available for less than half what it costs now, a lot of people were buying up surplus SKS rifles to shoot on the cheap, but think about this now:

Russian SKS costs about $300.00 (up from $125.00 ten years ago, for a good one)
FPK or PSL costs about $700.00

7.62×39, 1000 rnd case = $199.99 (20 cents/round) (up from $99.99 ten years ago)
7.62x54R, 880 rnd case = $139.98 (16 cents/round)

So, at 10,000 rounds, cost of ammo + gun breaks even at about $2300.00 total cost for each of these solutions. Anything over 10,000 rounds, 7.62x54R gets cheaper, with the added value of greater power and accuracy at range. Of course, you’ve got to determine your own stockpile goals, and three Mosin-Nagants at about $100.00 each can do a fine job of filling out a fire team for a fraction of what 4 guys toting AR-15 variants would cost.

Now, there’s not much choice for semi-autos in 7.62x54R. These Romanian PSL variants are about the cheapest. A real Soviet Dragunov SVD is now a collector piece that can run up to five grand. SVT-38′s and SVT-40′s are so rare, it would take a lot of legwork to locate one, much less happen across the right price – but of course I’m still looking…

At the range…

Shooting the TGI-FPK

Shooting at 100 meters on the combat setting, I was 4 inches low and 2.5 inches left. I forgot my SKS windage tool (dammit) but it wasn’t far off, really, and half of that may well have been shooter-induced… After setting the rear sight up at 100m, I turned in the 10 round group shown, which I’ll call an avg. 1 inch low and 1 inch left. Again, that could just be my hold with iron sights at the end of a HOT day on the range, looking through shooting glasses… It’s not MOA, but certainly combat-effective and accurate as any battle rifle shooting surplus steel core I’ve ever seen.

The FPK fed like a dream, no jams or stovepipes, and that muzzle break takes just enough edge off the recoil. It’s more like a hard shove, as opposed to the full swing of a ball peen hammer hitting you in the shoulder pocket that my Mosin-Nagants remind me of with this same ammo. I popped off a few 10 round mags for as fast as I could pull the trigger, offhand for suppressive fire, and kicked up a hell of a dirt cloud, too. Fun, fun!!! Now, it’s a chunk to carry around, so maybe it’s not quite as nifty as a carbine like the SKS, but for these ammo prices and the extra firepower downrange, it’s worth the extra weight. It is what it is, and it’s not a carbine. It’s a semi-auto RIFLE that is no joke, and I can shoot a hell of a lot more with this for the money than I can with the only comparable weapon I own, which is an M-1 Garand.

Here is a little piece from our local news today.

According to a crime mapping application linked to the Honolulu Police Department’s web site, at least 34 homes have been burglarized in Kaneohe in the past month along.  If you go back two months, the number surges past sixty.  Go back three months and the number of homes broken into reaches eighty-four.

Despite a number of arrests, police say the trend has continued.  Read more from Khon2 news.