Artillery Lugar


Here is where all this stuff comes from. I live on my laptop
whenever I’m not at the clinic, asleep or in the shower.
I write a lot. It’s honestly a compulsion not unlike alcohol or drugs. Other guys are addicted to porn. If I don’t bang out a Guncrank column every week, I start to feel like I’m developing a skin rash. We all have our burdens.
I typically post my writing efforts on Facebook as they come out. I don’t know why, but I’ve been doing it for years. A lot of my patients are Facebook friends and comment on the latest efforts when I see them in clinic. There’s never any profanity, and my politics are pretty tame relative to the rest of the planet. I wear Jesus on my sleeve and strive to treat others with respect and kindness. I like to think that comes through in my prose.
I recently posted a piece about flying a vintage Grumman Goose floatplane with some buddies back when I was in the Army. For reasons I cannot begin to fathom, Facebook tagged that as offensive content and deleted it. The stated justification was that I was somehow using subterfuge to get “Likes” or some such.
I enjoy the adoration of an army of hot, rabid cheerleader groupies just as much as the next obscure gun writer, I suppose, but I really never paid much attention to “Likes.” I just felt Facebook was a good vehicle to share my work with anyone who cared enough to read it. I had never been cancelled before. It was a weird experience.
I clicked on the review tab and, in due time, got a note back that my post was reinstated. Facebook said they had removed it by mistake. And then it got removed again. I subsequently penned a brief second rebuttal that formed the basis for this column. My story about flying WWII airplanes got duly banned once more. I still have no idea why.
Apparently the automated Facebook Gestapo does not care
for lighthearted tales about flying vintage-WWII airplanes in Alaska.
Grand Scheme
I published 255 commercial writing projects last year. I am hardly the best writer in my genre, but I am arguably the most prolific. As I said, I can’t help it. However, getting banned was thought-provoking.
This is quite literally nothing. So the Facebook spam filter is set to Nazi Gruppenfuhrer and excludes homey little tales about flying in Alaska. What difference does that make? Well, perhaps a lot.
I met a young lady several years ago who had recently spent six months living in China — the massive communist sort, not the tiny free island. I asked her what that was like. She was a college student — sweet and smart but naïve. She said at first, having everything she did scrutinized was kind of novel, exciting and cool. She felt like a character in a spy movie. After a while, however, she began to notice a trend.
Whenever she would say anything, even vaguely negative, about the government or the country in an email, she noticed that her internet connection would fail for a while. Over time, that became predictable. After six months, she was starving to get back to home and freedom. Living in a draconian dictatorship for real was simply suffocating.
We’re really not so far from such stuff over here on our side of the pond as we might think. We enjoy such a precious birthright of freedom that we do not adequately appreciate. All that could be gone with a headline.
If anybody cares about my opinion, I think censorship in most any form is bad. The Nazi death camp guards thought they were the “good guys.” Whoever wrote the Facebook content restrictions probably believed they were acting in the best interest of the common good. It is simply that absolutely everyone is biased. We can’t help it.
We live in the Information Age. The free flow of information defines our everyday lives. Humankind has never lived like this before. We’re figuring it out as we go along. It’s a brave new world.
That can indeed be dangerous. I am fairly convinced this is where so much ADHD comes from. We bombard the human mind with loud, flashy stuff from the moment we first draw breath and then subsequently struggle to pay attention. Who could have seen that coming?
I certainly acknowledge that folks do stupid things in response to propaganda. History is littered with bad behavior that spawned from passionate oratory or carefully metered information. A lot more people have died as a result of behavior safeguarded by the First Amendment than ever perished by that of the Second.
That being said, methinks we still need to be careful letting the censor bots determine what we should and should not be allowed to read. I’ve seen those movies. They never end well. I don’t trust any of them. It’s not that I’m paranoid, it is simply that I’d sooner not end up someday paying taxes to my microwave.
Remington-Lee Model 1885

But now, Mr. LaPierre, 74, faces his gravest challenge, as a legal showdown with New York’s attorney general, Letitia James, goes to trial in a Manhattan courtroom. Ms. James, in a lawsuit filed amid an abrupt effort by the N.R.A. to clean up its practices, seeks to oust him from the group after reports of corruption and mismanagement.
Much has changed since Ms. James began investigating the N.R.A. four years ago. The organization, long a lobbying juggernaut, is a kind of ghost ship. After closing its media arm, NRATV, in 2019, it has largely lost its voice, and Mr. LaPierre rarely makes public pronouncements. Membership has plummeted to 4.2 million from nearly six million five years ago. Revenue is down 44 percent since 2016, according to its internal audits, and legal costs have soared to tens of millions a year.
When the N.R.A. filed for bankruptcy in Texas nearly three years ago, the step was part of a strategy to move to the state amid the New York investigation. But a Texas judge dismissed the case, saying the N.R.A. was using the filing “to address a regulatory enforcement problem, not a financial one.” Now, longtime insiders say, the organization may be reaching a point where a legitimate bankruptcy filing is necessary.
Even with the N.R.A. moribund, Mr. LaPierre’s legacy as a lobbyist, if not as a marksman, remains intact. The gun rights movement has become a bulwark of red state politics during his more than three decades at the group’s helm. In recent years, significant federal gun control measures have been a nonstarter for Republicans despite a proliferation of mass shootings.
Mr. LaPierre is among four defendants in the suit brought by Ms. James in 2020. Others include John Frazer, the N.R.A.’s former general counsel, and Wilson Phillips, a former finance chief. The fourth defendant, Joshua Powell, was the organization’s second-in-command for a time, but later turned against it and even called for universal background checks for those buying guns and so-called red flag laws that allow the police to seize firearms from people deemed dangerous.
The attorney general’s office has had settlement talks with Mr. Powell, a person with knowledge of the case said, but no deal has been announced.
The N.R.A. was founded in New York State in 1871 by Civil War veterans who wanted an organization that would help gun owners improve their marksmanship, but in the modern era it has been the face of resistance to efforts to regulate weapons.
Ms. James seeks to use her regulatory authority over nonprofit groups to impose a range of financial penalties against the defendants and to remove Mr. LaPierre; any money recovered would flow back to the N.R.A. Jury selection is scheduled to begin on Tuesday before State Supreme Court Justice Joel M. Cohen. The trial is expected to last six to eight weeks.
A parade of revelations from recent years will be front and center. Mr. LaPierre, for instance, was a regular for more than a decade at a Zegna boutique in Beverly Hills, where he spent nearly $40,000 of N.R.A. money in a single May 2004 outing. He also billed more than $250,000 for travel to, among other places, Palm Beach, Fla., Reno, Nev., the Bahamas and Italy’s Lake Como. He has argued that these were legitimate business expenses.
During his testimony in the 2021 bankruptcy case, Mr. LaPierre said he did not know Mr. Phillips had received a $360,000-a-year consulting contract after being pushed out of the N.R.A. He also said he was unaware that his personal travel agent, hired by the N.R.A., was charging a 10 percent booking fee for charter flights on top of a retainer of up to $26,000 a month. Mr. LaPierre’s close aide, Millie Hallow was even kept on after being caught diverting $40,000 in N.R.A. funds for her son’s wedding and other personal expenses.
The N.R.A. has said it is being persecuted by New York regulators. The group recently enlisted the support of the American Civil Liberties Union in a federal lawsuit that accuses former Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo and his administration of misusing their authority by dissuading banks and insurers from doing business with the N.R.A. Ms. James, the group has pointed out repeatedly, vowed to investigate the N.R.A. even before she was elected.
“It’s a matter of faith among members, based on credible external evidence, that the N.R.A. was facing these adverse actions by government officials if not entirely, then in large part, because of their antipathy toward the N.R.A. and its Second Amendment advocacy,” the gun organization’s lead lawyer, William A. Brewer III, said in an interview.
He added that the organization had taken numerous steps to address its corporate practices and that the attorney general’s case relied largely on witnesses who were no longer affiliated with the N.R.A.
“This phase of the case is about tales from the crypt,” Mr. Brewer said, adding that the organization’s mentality today was that “if you made a mistake, you’re going to pay it back with interest, and if you do it again, you’re gone.”
Mr. Brewer, a Democrat, emerged as the N.R.A.’s top lawyer in 2018 after being enlisted by Mr. LaPierre to ward off New York regulators. He is viewed with extreme suspicion by the longtime N.R.A. lawyers that he supplanted, including one, J. Steven Hart, who once asked a colleague in an email: “Is Brewer a moron or a Manchurian candidate?”
Beyond Ms. James, the N.R.A.’s most formidable adversaries these days are not gun control groups, but former insiders who have been cast out of the kingdom.
Oliver North, the organization’s former president, is scheduled to be a witness. He has said Mr. Brewer’s legal bills, which exceeded $70 million over three years, “are shocking to me and many others.” Mr. North was forced out in 2020 amid a power struggle between Mr. LaPierre and Mr. Brewer on one side and the N.R.A.’s longtime advertising and public relations firm, Ackerman McQueen, which employed Mr. North, on the other.
Another former insider, Willes Lee, departed abruptly as first vice president of the N.R.A.’s board in April and was a vocal critic of the group for a time. In a Facebook post, he summed up the N.R.A.’s legal strategy as “Keep old folks who were in charge during the heinous NYAG allegations & admitted abuse. Eliminate leaders who weren’t here during the gross abuse & outrageous allegations. To the Judge, plead ‘We’ve changed’.”
With the trial approaching, tumult has continued within the organization’s leadership. Joe DeBergalis, Mr. LaPierre’s top deputy, left and was replaced by Mr. LaPierre’s longtime spokesman, Andrew Arulanandam. Phillip Journey, a former N.R.A. director turned critic who is also among the scheduled witnesses, was critical of the move.
“He’s putting malleables — what did Lenin call them, useful idiots? — in all the important spots,” he said in an interview.
Ms. James originally sought to shut the N.R.A. down entirely, as one of her predecessors succeeded in doing with the Trump Foundation, a scandal-plagued offshoot of former President Donald J. Trump’s financial empire.
That step was rejected last year by the Judge Cohen. More recently, the judge appears to have lost patience with the N.R.A., writing on Dec. 28 month that its latest motion to dismiss the case was “belated and procedurally questionable” and expressing concern that it could interfere with the trial schedule.
Legal observers think Mr. LaPierre will be hard pressed to convince the judge that he should keep his job, given the revelations that have surfaced.
“He won’t go down without a fight,” said Nick Suplina, a former senior adviser and special counsel at the attorney general’s office who works for the gun-control advocacy group Everytown.
“Given the pervasive problems at the N.R.A.,” he added, “it is hard to imagine a judge not finding fault with the head of the organization.”
The post LaPierre, Longtime N.R.A. Leader, Faces Trial That Could End His Reign appeared first on New York Times.
The ROK in the Korean War
When you wanna go big, and I mean big, the P220 is here for you. This big, beastly, 45 ACP pistol comes from a Swiss-German conglomerate, and today we are reviewing the old-school cool pistol straight out of West Germany.
SIG P220 SPECS
- Caliber45 Auto
- Overall Length7.7 in
- Height5.5 in
- Barrel Length4.4 in
- Weight30.4 oz
The Swiss P220
SIG designed the P220, but the German firm J.P. Sauer and Son would produce and distribute the pistol. This started the famed SIG Sauer brand we all know and love. The original idea was to develop a service pistol to replace the SIG P210, a pistol that had been serving since 1949. By 1975, Switzerland’s 9mm variant of the SIG P220 saw adoption.
While the P220 is mostly known as the 45 ACP SIG, it’s been produced in a ton of different calibers, including 9mm, 7.65x21mm Parabellum, .38 Super, and of course, 10mm. The P220 would replace the single action only P210 with a double-action / single-action design that featured a decocker.
The P220 went on to be sold as the Browning BDA in the United States but eventually was sold under its proper name, the P220. Over a short period of time, the P220 went from a heel magazine release to a standard button magazine release. The design change was a welcome one by American shooters who were never partial to heel-type magazine releases.
As double-stack 9mms took over, the P220 became increasingly known as a 45 ACP firearm. SIG’s own P226 offered a double-stack 9mm option, and the P220 kept up with the most popular 45 ACP pistols in its single-stack configuration. Plus, America still really loved the 45 ACP round, and the SIG offered an M1911 alternative. Thus, the P220 became the 45 ACP pistol we all know and love.
Sig P220 Features

1DA/SA TRIGGER SYSTEM
2THREE DOT SIGHTS
3SINGLE STACK MAGAZINE
4ALUMINUM FRAME
SIG P220 GUN MODELS
THE P220 IN ACTION – OUR TAKE
Let’s start with what I think is obvious. The P220 is far from modern, it feels and is dated, but it’s still a bit pricey. Most SIG all-metal pistols aren’t well known for their budget-friendly price point. They can be quite pricey. A single stack 45 ACP is a tough sell in a world where the Glock 21 and P320 in 45 ACP both exist.
It’s a weapon for collectors and enthusiasts of SIG pistols. The P220 can be a tough sell outside of that environment. My particular model is an older model with the West German stamp, and the rough finish and old design helped me acquire a P220 on the cheap. Classifying the P220 as a budget or value-filled firearm is tough to do.
Dropping Rounds
The P220 might not be the best value, but it’s still a damn fine pistol. The P220 is quite accurate. Impressively so. Even my old P220 prints tight groups and makes headshots at 25 yards completely possible.
Heck, Ernest Langdon used a P220ST to win the CDP title at the 2003 IDPA National Championship, and he won it so hard the organizers introduced a new weight rule to prohibit the use of the P22ST. Keep in mind this division was ruled by 1911s, and the SIG beat ‘em.
Blasting away with the big fat 45 ACP rounds is a ton of fun. Hitting a variety of gongs in various sizes was super easy. Like any DA/SA gun, the longer double-action trigger pull can affect accuracy, but the P220s are ultra-smooth and quite crisp. After that initial long trigger pull, the single-action kicks in, and you get a delightfully short trigger pull that’s super crisp with a short reset.
The big, thick grip offers you a nice comfy grip for dealing with recoil. I feel less recoil with the P220 than a 1911. I think the larger grip spreads the recoil out a bit more and creates a more comfortable gun. That big thick grip will be a turn-off for those without the hands of a Swiss lumberjack, but for me, it’s outstanding.
A big heavy all-metal frame and a thick grip make the P220 quite shootable. Controlling the weapon’s muzzle rise and recoil isn’t tough to do. You can drive the gun between targets and fire the weapon rapidly without losing control.
Simple And Easy
Ergonomically the thick grip isn’t for everyone. Combine the thick grip with the long reach to the double-action trigger, and some with small hands will feel challenged. I have huge hands, and it fits me just right.
What doesn’t fit me just right is the slide lock. Big hands mean I have big thumbs, and those thumbs pin down the slide lock. This renders it a pain in the bum when the slide fails to lock to the rear after the last round is fired.
Where SIG has always shined is in the placement of their decocker. It’s right where the thumb of a right-handed shooter sits. To decock the gun, it’s pressed downwards with your thumb in a very simple and natural motion. Spinning up a reload isn’t tough, with the placement of the magazine release being just right for thumb access.
The gun chugs along with whatever 45 ACP I toss in it. This is one of the few 45 ACP guns I currently own and probably the one I enjoy shooting most. I’ve shot standard 230-grain FMJ loads, 180-grain JHPs, steel-cased ammo, and more without a single problem. My P220 is ancient and seemingly beat up but still goes bang whenever I squeeze that trigger.
SIG P220 Pros And Cons
- Accurate
- Easy to Control
- Awesome DA/SA trigger
- Reliable
- Heavy
- Expensive
REPORT CARD |
||
SHOOTABILITY |
That thick grip soaks up recoil and makes it very easy to shoot. The gun bucks a bit, but not too much, and shooting fast and straight make it an awesome option for practical shooting. |
A |
RELIABILITY |
The P220 is a big, hard-hitting, and extremely reliable weapon. It’s a heavy hitter, and it always goes bang. |
A |
ERGONOMICS |
The ergonomics are fairly solid. Some may be turned off by the thick grip, and I don’t care for the slide lock’s placement. Overall, it’s plenty easy to use. |
B |
ACCURACY |
It’s a tack driver of a gun. It’s so much fun ringing tiny gongs consistently with a handgun. |
A |
VALUE |
A single stack, 45 ACP gun that costs upwards of a grand and isn’t a custom piece can be a tough sell. From a practical standpoint, it’s a tough sell when compared to other modern 45 ACPs on the market. |
C |
Opinion

Our alert last week described a recent NBC News article on rising gun ownership in America, which cited national polling numbers showing that “[m]ore than half of American voters – 52% – say they or someone in their household owns a gun.” This represents “the highest share of voters who say that they or someone in their household owns a gun in the history of the NBC News poll, on a question dating back to 1999.” The actual gun owner numbers are likely to be still higher, given that most people are unwilling to discuss their personal details with complete strangers.
Another sign that the American public is still keen on guns is sales data. This year’s Black Friday smashed the previous Black Friday record, with firearm background checks “up over 11,000, or 5.5%, from the previous record set in 2017.” The most recent Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) statistics on the “top ten highest days” for National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) gun-related background checks has this year’s Black Friday as the highest “Black Friday” on record, and at third place overall.
The Crime Prevention Research Center (CPRC) has just published its latest annual study on concealed carry permits. Concealed Carry Permit Holders Across the United States: 2023 (Nov. 30, 2023), authored by Dr. John Lott, Carlisle E. Moody and Rujun Wang, examines trends regarding concealed carry permits.
There’s good news here, as well.
Earlier, the CPRC’s 2022 study concluded that an estimated 22.01 million individuals in America had been issued a concealed handgun permit, a 2.3% increase over 2021. This was “the slowest percent and absolute increase that we have seen since we started collecting this data in 2011,” and the study attributed it, in part, to the 24 states at that time that had a permitless carry law in effect. The “number of permits declin[ed] in the Constitutional Carry states even though it is clear that more people are legally carrying.”
The CPRC’s newest study notes that, for the first year since its reporting began, the number of permits declined, albeit by a fraction of less than one percent (down 0.5% from 2022 figures). To put this in context, the number of permits overall has grown from 2.7 million in 1999 to “at least 21.8 million” as of the latest count.
Far from being an indicator of lessening interest in lawful concealed carrying, the dip is due to a change in applicable state laws, which allow qualified individuals to carry without application forms, fees, wait times, and other bureaucratic hoops. “A major cause of the marginal decline is that 27 states now have Constitutional Carry laws,” with Alabama, Florida and Nebraska most recently joining the states that allow permitless concealed carry. Significantly, the study notes that the 27 states with constitutional carry represent “65% of the land in the country and 44% of the population in 2022.”
With more than half of all states having embraced constitutional carry, “the concealed carry permits number does not paint a full picture of how many people are legally carrying across the nation … while permits are increasing in the non-Constitutional Carry states (317,185), permits fell even more in the Constitutional Carry ones even though more people are clearly carrying in those states (485,013).”
For this reason and others, the study cautions that the numbers cited are an underestimate, and that “the scale of that underestimation is increasing over time” due to old or missing data on permit issuance in some jurisdictions, and the continued spread of constitutional carry laws.
The CPRC study provides valuable data on permit holders by state, ranks states by the percentage of permit-holders in each state (with Alabama, Indiana, Colorado, Pennsylvania and Georgia as the top five), and lists the 2023 costs, by state, of getting a permit.
The study also breaks down data on permittees by race and gender for the jurisdictions that make that information available. “Seven states had data from 2012 to 2022/2023, and permit numbers grew 110.7% faster for women than for men.” As has been the trend in previous years, the concealed carry community remains increasingly diverse. “When permit data is broken down by race and gender, we find that black females have had the fast growth, especially during the pandemic. The rates of permit holding among American Indian, Asian, Black, and White females all grew much faster than the rates for males in those racial groups.”
The study points out that “there was a noticeable drop in the percent of permits issued [to] women and blacks after Constitutional Carry was adopted. It appears that both groups were relatively sensitive to the cost of permits.” Even in “shall issue” states, the application, training and other fees required to obtain a permit apparently present a real barrier to the exercise of Second Amendment rights, in many cases for the very people who are most vulnerable to crime and violence.
Except the extraordinary high rates of homicide offenses since the first year of the pandemic in 2020, the rate has dropped around 11% for the past two decades. Violent crime fell from 5.23 per 10 million people in 1999 to 3.81 per 10 million people in 2022, a 27% drop. Meanwhile, the percentage of adults with permits soared by five-fold. Such simple evidence by itself isn’t meant to show that concealed handgun permits reduce violent crime rates, as many factors account for changes in crime rates, but only that there doesn’t seem to be any obvious positive relationship between permits and crime.
In the meantime, the constitutional carry juggernaut presses on. The twenty-eighth state to go permitless is likely to be Louisiana. Republican Jeff Landry, Louisiana’s former Attorney General and new Governor, has made a commitment to secure the enactment of constitutional carry legislation in 2024.
In contrast, President Joe Biden – who has spent a significant part of his term down the gun-control rabbit hole – is running on a reelection platform of even more gun control. (The details are TBA as the “Joe’s Vision” tab, /joebiden.com/joes-vision/, at the official Biden/Harris 2024 website currently features a “Dark Brandon” error message and a graphic of a grinning Biden with two red blotches for eyes.)
Biden’s campaign is circulating a memo (“Trump’s America in 2025: More Guns, More Shootings, More Deaths”) that appears to build on the deceptive message that increased gun ownership means increased violence and crime. “More guns, not less. That’s Donald Trump’s plan to make us safe,” reads a statement from a Biden-Harris 2024 spokesperson.
For those looking for reasons to disagree with the “more guns, less safety” narrative, look to the millions of responsible gun owners across America who know better.
About NRA-ILA:
Established in 1975, the Institute for Legislative Action (ILA) is the “lobbying” arm of the National Rifle Association of America. ILA is responsible for preserving the right of all law-abiding individuals in the legislative, political, and legal arenas, to purchase, possess, and use firearms for legitimate purposes as guaranteed by the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution
For decades, Wayne LaPierre, the National Rifle Association’s longtime leader, has been a survivor. He has endured waves of 


