This particular blog is not a gun review, but on gun law, gun violence and freedom facts. PLEASE READ.

Facts on gun crime and law abiding citizens Constitutional Rights.

The great gun debate seems to be everywhere these days with the liberal left wing and our government using grandstanding and manipulating facts to try to get what they want - a gun free America.

The facts are that are Founding Fathers of this great nation never intended America to be a gun free country. If that where true The Second Amendment would never have been written. it reads; Amendment II -
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

That amendment has no cracks, holes, loopholes or misunderstandings. It is as airtight as the Constitution, The Holy Bible and right to life itself. However, many people from our current president to completely uneducated people and many types of people in between consistently try to make loopholes or say it is old fashioned, outdated or unreasonable. But let me ask you this, without armed citizens, would America ever been more than a collection of colonies still being abused by a tyrannical king? Would the African Americans ever been freed? The answer to both of these questions is a resounding NO. In both The Revolutionary War and The Civil War, Militias formed in individual States and later being formed into an army, The American Army or Colonists in The Revolutionary War and later in The Civil War, were formed by citizens just like you and me bringing THEIR OWN PERSONAL GUNS to fight tyranny and oppression as their Patriotic duty.

Later, yes the Union and Confederate armies supplied some of them with guns, however the original firearms were owned and brought from the soldiers homes. These guns were also what they hunted and protected their families with, then their country. Even after The Civil War had been gong on for years, soldiers used their own money to buy better guns such as The Henry Repeating Rifle and The Colt Dragoon and Navy models to better defend their lives and win the war to free the slaves and keep this great country whole. Why did they need to buy these guns with their personal funds? Because the government would not provide them with them. Given my own research on history, it was not President Lincoln who would not provide these guns, nor was it lack of funds to pay for them, it was the bureaucratic red tape tying Mr. Lincolns hands that stopped our men from getting the war changing repeating cartridge guns that eventually helped win the war.

The 1860 Henry Repeating Rifle

it held 10 round of 

water proof cartridges.

The Henry Rifle also had a sight to help a soldier shoot at different ranges.

When the Confederate soldiers saw this rifle, they called it " That D-mn Yankee rifle that they load on Sunday and shoot all week."

Other founding father quotes about Americans needing to be armed; 

" A free people ought to be armed " - George Washington

"A strong body makes the mind strong. As to the species of exercises, I advise the gun. While this gives moderate exercise to the body, it gives boldness, enterprise and independence to the mind. Games played with the ball, and others of that nature, are too violent for the body and stamp no character on the mind. Let your gun therefore be your constant companion of your walks." - Thomas Jefferson

"The Constitution of most of our states (and of the United States) assert that all power is inherent in the people; that they may exercise it by themselves; that it is their right and duty to be at all times armed."

- Thomas Jefferson

These quotes are from some of the most respected men in history. Without them, their would be no U.S.A., or freedom or choice in government. Firearms wouldn't even be an option. We would either be ruled by the British still or the nazi's, Russia or some other tyrant.

One of the arguments that anti gun people try to say is that if you take away guns, you take away gun related crime. This is totally untrue. Most guns used in crime are bought illegally. The guns were stolen or bought and sold from one criminal to another. In the case of fully automatic guns, they are bought from criminal gun runners. 

To get a fully automatic gun, such as a machine gun or Uzi, a law abiding citizen has to go through a long application process and have a really good reason for wanting to own one. A special tax stamp is needed and the persons record has to be almost flawlessly clear. Even then, most are denied and most that are approved have to have the weapon fixed so that they are made either not fire at all or at least are reduced semi automatic.

The fact of the matter is that anyone with a criminal background cannot ever own a fully automatic weapon legally and rightfully so. In Wisconsin, if a person has been convicted of any violent crime, felony, domestic dispute which involved violence, or anyone on parole or probation cannot own a gun and that is also rightfully so. When a person consciencely makes a decision to become a criminal and is convicted by a jury, those lose certain rights. Gun ownership being one of them and rightfully so. No one wants to arm a criminal. That would be insane.

The other side, the law abiding citizens being stopped from owning or carrying guns for protection, be it at home, open carry or concealed carry is also insane.

Let's face it, when a law abiding citizen is stopped from owning a gun, criminal have the advantage. An advantage that they enjoy and exploit. Because the criminals now have an easy target to rob, assault, rape or kill with little resistance since the criminal is illegally armed and the law abiding citizen can't use equal force.

The state of Illinois, and especially the city of Chicago has some of the most restrictive gun laws in America. However, that gun control isn't working in the year 2012 alone there were 3,873 violent gun crimes which include Homicide, shootings and assaults committed by law breaking criminals. That doesn't even include the rapes, gun threats or robberies. 

The saddest part about those statistics in Chicago is that compared to the Afghanistan war, there have been 2196 American deaths in 14 years OF WAR. there obviously is no gun control given to American soldiers during a war. That means that your chances of being killed, wounded or assaulted by a gun criminal in Chicago in one year are higher than if you were in the military engaged in war in 14 years. The law abiding citizen changes of living 14 years at war are better than surviving 1 year in Chicago. Given in Chicago you may survive the shooting, assault, etc. , but most of that is probably because there is better and faster medical care available.

That should tell any reasonably intelligent person that gun control and/or disarming citizens DOESN'T WORK. Those statics are staggering. 

I got these statistics for Chicago from 91.5 Wbez's website, the link is http://www.wbez.org/news/data-behind-chicagos-gun-crimes-108092

I got those Afganistan War info from Wikipedia, the link being http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Forces_casualties_in_the_war_in_Afghanistan

Any simple Google search can provide the info with little effort.

I am fortunate enough to live in Wisconsin, a very gun friendly state. Where Open Carry, Concealed Carry and Home Defense are all legal. Wisconsin is a big hunting and shooting state, we rank  number 26 in studies for gun friendliness. Which is nice, but could be better.

The thing that strikes me as funny is that the law makers and politicians come to Wisconsin or other gun friendly stars when they want to hunt. Also, even though the politicians of Illinois made it illegal for concealed carry among citizens, they made it legal for themselves to conceal carry, a bit of hypocrisy there I'd say. This year, 2014, Illinois passed a law approving concealed carry for citizens, but only after an intensive training coarse, however even people having met the requirements, are not receiving licenses. What else can you expect from a state where many of the politicians end up behind bars?

I have been mostly concentrating a lot on Illinois, since they are the harshest gun law State. But then Connecticut tried one the most absurd laws probably in U.S. history. Earlier this year they demanded that by law all owners of certain types of rifles, mainly the AR15, which happens to be one of the most popular guns in America. This came because AR15's look like a military or assault rifle, but the truth is most AR15's are nothing more than .22 caliber rifles just made to look tough. A .22 caliber is what most kids learn to shoot with, excepting maybe a BB or pellet gun, since it isn't very powerful. However, Connecticut has made it a felony if the rifles aren't registered. 300,000 citizens are refusing to register since that law is unconstitutional. Connecticut is then only left with one choice, which is threatening, and that is to kick in doors in the middle of the night and raid houses with NO WARRANT. That is also unconstitutional. Isn't that one of the many reasons we fought the British for our independence?  Doesn't that sound like nazi Germany, Communist Russia, Communist China or Mussolini's Italy? The theory being, disarm the citizens and the government has complete control through fear.

I studied on this some and the state of Connecticut has 55 million dollars that they allot for prisons in a years budget. If the where to arrest the 300,000 citizens that are refusing to register their guns, Connecticut would have to spend roughly 600 million dollars a year to House all the wrongfully arrested so called felons. There is no way they could afford that. Which tells me, this wasn't well thought out and the politicians must have thought that people were going to just blindly give up their Constitutional rights.

Politician's and some police men act like when we use our Constitutional rights, they are doing us a favor or giving the people a gift by not arresting them. Our rights by the Constitution or the Bill of Rights, be it the Second Amendment or any other right are not gifts, THEY ARE INALIENABLE RIGHTS, FOUGHT AND DIED FOR BY AMERICANS FOR AMERICANS. We, the law abiding citizens, are the people giving them the gift of having a government job, we are the bosses, not the other way around.

Thomas Jefferson said, "The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government." 

I am going to close with the report below because I think it says a lot. There are still those in law enforcement who will stand for the Rights of the citizens that they work for.



Some lawmen are still or maybe starting to see it this way. 250 law enforcement officers in Connecticut have written a letter saying they refuse to uphold this law because it is UnConstitutional. Here is part of the report.

It is estimated that over 300,000 gun owners have practiced civil disobedience in refusing to register and give up the newly forbidden items. Only roughly 50,000 citizens in the state have complied.

But now these courageous citizens have key support in high places. With at least 250 law enforcement officers joining them in disobeying an unconstitutional law, the gun owners have a new weapon in their arsenal -- the support of hundreds of police officers.

Hardy reported that with the lack of support of police, Connecticut faces massive civilian resistance, with police officers refusing to enforce a law that to most citizens crosses a line that is unacceptable in a free society.

If such a thing can happen in a deeply blue state in New England, what would law enforcement encounter if they attempted such an ill-fated attack on Constitutionally-protected rights in Texas, Wyoming, South Carolina, Utah, or Kentucky?

This is something that the political powers that be in government and law enforcement -- and in the Courts -- should think long and hard about before acting in such a knee-jerk fashion as Connecticut, Maryland, New Jersey, and Massachusetts have done.

The link is, http://www.examiner.com/article/conn-police-refuse-to-enforce-new-gun-laws

Uberti Smith & Wesson Schofield Topbreak

Uberti Replica of  the Smith & Wesson Schofield Topbreak .45 Long Colt Caliber

When I first saw The S&W Schofield Topbreak, it really grabbed my attention. It is an interesting and well designed revolver. It also has an incredible history. It easily belongs with the greatest of the 1800's and Old West revolvers, among which are the (in order of invention and each of which were the best pistol of there time, they barely overlapped each other for long and can be credited at corresponding times for winning the settling of Texas, winning the Civil War and settling The Old West.) 1- Colt Dragoon, 2-Smith and Wesson Schofield Topbreak and finally the Colt Peacemaker or Colt Army (they are the same gun).

The Colt Dragoon started out and was mostly a cap and ball revolver, but eventually a conversion kit was offered that made it a cartridge revolver. Then came the Smith & Wesson Topbreak, which was the first cartridge revolver in several calibers and designs. Finally, the Colt Peacemaker in .45 Long Colt caliber.

Smith and Wesson paid to use a cartridge patent and then made the first cartridge revolver. S&W put Colt and other makers out of the cartridge revolver business by having paying a commission  exclusive patent rights. Colt had the means to make them, but couldn't legally.

The first Topbreak model 1, had some problems, it was a small .22 caliber to small for military or self defense and the barrel flipped up, not down, making it harder to load. The model 1 1/2 was the same except in .32 caliber, increasing the power, but not enough. People bought them, however wanted improvements.

Smith & Wesson Model 1 1/2

Smith and Wesson then got it very close with the Model 3, they put the swivel so that the barrel swung down and installed an ejector to push out the empty cartridges when the barrel was opened. Making it very easy to unload and reload. The original Model 3 had break latch that pushed up and the Army loved them, however the Calvary didn't, because it took two hands to load and unload. A big fan of the Smith & Wesson Topbreak was Major George Schofield, a hero of the Civil War and had a good mechanical mind. Schofield decided to improve it for the Infantry, so he redesigned the opening latch to pull back with just the thumb and hardened the steel to make the opening latch more durable. Then he patented his idea. After talking with Smith  & Wesson, who loved his idea and gave him a commission from every sale of what now would be called The Smith & Wesson Schofield, Schofield showed them how a horseback soldier could hold the reins and revolver in one hand and open the latch, flick their wrist ( which opened the barrel and engaged the revolvers ejector to eject all six empty cartridges ) then the man would just drop in new cartridges with his free hand and flick the gun shut. All while maintaining control of his horse. Nothing even close to this was ever possible before, making it state of the art then and now.

Soon after Schofield got Smith and Wesson a chance to obtain a chance to get the exclusive U.S. Military sidearm contract. Of course, by this point the cartridge patent had expired, so Colt now had the famous Colt Army Revolver in .45 Long Colt caliber, so there was a competition held.

The competition included speed of fire, speed of reload, power and accuracy. Both revolvers were tied in accuracy, the Colt was more powerful, both were as fast as could be had for single action revolvers, but it was the reload time that won the Schofield the majority of the contract. The Smith & Wesson Schofield could be reloaded in 30 second, while the Colt Army took over a minute to reload.

The U.S. Military ordered a lot of Schofields, 100's of thousands of them, but with the request for them to be chambered in .45 long Colt. For some unknown reason Smith& Wesson said okay, but delivered guns chambered in .45 Schofield. That was a huge mistake. 

The .45 Schofield round was powerful, but after awhile, as more Colt Army guns where showing up, causing some troops to have both guns in the same troop. An ammunition problem came up. The troops were sometimes sent only one or the other cartridges instead of both. This didn't prove a problem to the soldiers with the Colts, but it did to those armed with the Schofield. 

The .45 long Colt was a longer bullet. Both bullets being the same diameter was ok, but the length difference became a problem. The Colt armed soldiers could shoot either cartridge in their guns, but when only .45 long Colt cartridges came to a troop, the Smith & Wesson revolvers wouldn't load because the bullets where to long to fit. This left large portions of men unarmed. When soldiers are fighting wild Indians and outlaws, this is a major problem. Also a major mistake by Smith & Wesson for not just clambering there guns in .45 long Colt because the Army soon stopped ordering more Schofields and discontinued the use of them altogether. Replacing them and equipping the men with Colt Army revolvers.

The .45 long Colt is on the left, the .45 Scofield on the right. Clearly showing the length difference.

The army soon surplused the Schofields they had. Companies like Wells Fargo bought them up at dirt cheap prices, had the 7 inch barrels cut to 5 inches and equipped their stage coachmen with them. 

The Wells Fargo version of The Smith & Wesson Schofield 

The public also bought them, so did gunsmiths cutting them down to pocket pistol lengths is about a 3 inch barrel. Making them popular with gamblers who now had six shot, reliable revolvers instead of mostly one shot Derringers.

There was also plenty of ammo, since it was still being made and sold in stores.

Smith and Wesson also received huge orders from Russia for a special Russian model. The Russian model is a bit wierd  looking, but Russia loved them and ordered hundreds of thousands of them.

The model I had was the Uberti Smith & Wesson Schofield Wells Fargo Edition with a 5 inch barrel. I found it to be of great quality. The machining was of tight tolerances, the blued finish very nice and the unblued hardened finish parts of top quality. The wood was beautiful, the trigger nice and smooth. The extractor worked great. The sights where a little unusual, but easy to get used to and accurate for a cowboy revolver.

This is no doubt a great reproduction of the gun that started Smith & Wessons fame. It was calibered in .45 long Colt.

I've since traded this revolver for a Remington R1 1911 Centennial Edition, but would like to get another one some day.

Out of five stars this revolver gets 4 1/2 stars.

Cost at 4 stars - I think $1100.00 is steep for any reproduction Cowboy revolver. I understand that this revolver has more machined parts than most because of all the moving parts that aren't usually on a gun. With the Topbreak action, it also has too have thicker steal that has to be hardened longer, but I still think the price is expensive.

Accuracy is 4 stars - Most Cowboy guns don't come super accurate right out of the box, but this was more accurate than most since the sights are basically an older version of the fixed sights S&W uses on some of the guns today. The main problem was the visibility. Being iron sights they are harder to line up inside or at a black target.

Shootability is five stars - the revolver is a nice weight, doesn't kick to much, loads easy and emptying is a snap literally.

Weight and size is 5 Stars - As far as cowboy guns or any revolver goes, this is a beauty. The weight is like most revolvers and the size is perfect. The 5 inch barrel gives a good sight picture and accuracy.