I am a Patriot, a Tea Party’er, I believe our govt, under its current leadership is out to destroy our constitution and it’s for that reason that I’m armed and for that reason I own a Glock, .. reliability. Having read some of your stuff, the 2nd Amendment is more important to me than my family and friends can realize and I enjoy reading your stuff. I believe tyranny is upon us and that history may repeat itself, and for that reason, I own a Glock, …and other firearms. It’s a real honor knowing who you are, who your Dad was and I know I hooked up with the best out there.

Sincerely, Bill

Great Savings on the Information You Need

People are always asking me what my recommendation is for The Best Glock Book.  Even though it would be easy to tell them that my own book, How to Customize Your Glock is the best, I take this question very seriously.  The answer depends on who the reader is.

If the reader is a beginner, just getting into Glocks (either from ground-zero or from another platform), I always recommend Patrick Sweeney’s The Gun Digest Book of the Glock.  Sweeney approaches the subject carefully and thoroughly.  He’s a knowledgeable gunsmith and a great communicator.  A perfect combination for the greenhorn.

If the reader is already familiar with Glocks, but is hoping to make the jump to the next level, I recommend Ptooma’s The Complete Glock Reference Guide.  This is also a good book for beginners, but it is written for those who are already familiar with gun language and terms.  It goes deeper into the nuances of the Glock as well as some modifications and maintenance. 

If the reader is interested in competing with his or her Glock, then there is only one correct answer and that is Robin Taylor’s The Glock in Competition.  Taylor assumes you are already addicted to Glocks and are ready to push the envelope, and he is ready to push with you!

Finally, if the reader is wondering why he would want to carry a gun at all, and a Glock specifically, my father’s Living with Glocks has an almost miraculous ability to convert the timid into the tenacious.  The Second Amendment will become second nature after reading this electrifying book.

My own Glock Book makes an excellent supplement to any and all of these other titles.  No other Glock Book walks the reader through disassembly and re-assembly like How to Customize Your Glock.  That is the reason I offer package deals at GlockBooks.com.  With every type of Glock reader in mind I have devised packages to fit specific needs.  Plus you save over buying the same books anywhere else!

First there is the Full-House Ultimate Glock Library.  You will save $29.00 over buying these six books anywhere else.  This package is for every Glock shooter who wants everything in print on his or her favorite pistol.

Next is the Tinkerer Glock Library.  Three books that focus on the Glockster who wants to get inside and customize, modify and personalize Perfection.

Then the Glock Competitor’s Edge Package includes three books that offer the information to bring you to the next level in your gun games.

For beginners, I’ve designed the Quick-Start Glock Package.  You want to know the history and the revolutionary features of your Glock?  You need to know how to care for and repair your Glock?  Here’s the info in this set of books.

Guns not only fascilitate personal protection, they actually hold all of society together.  Learn the deeper rights and responsibiliteis of gun ownership in this Tea-Party Glock Package.

Glocks, like all artifacts, are products of their time and culture.  The three books in the Warrior-Sage Glock Package contemplate the implications of a society that needs guns to sustain itself.

If you are looking for the last word on the history of the Glock pistol, the Glock Historian Package is for you.   These books were written by insiders who were there when the new-fangled plastic pistol was introduced to the world.  Their perspective is invaluable.

Finally, there are three books that every Glock shooter must have on his or her shelf.  They compose the most well-rounded encyclopedia of Glockdom and I offer them at great savings in the Glock Reference Package.

Remember, you save $15.00 on each of the standard GlockBooks libraries over buying the individual books anywhere else.  And you save $29.00 on the Full-House Ultimate Glock Library!  Go to Glockbooks.com and invest in your Glock education.

Keep on Glockin’

Morgan

The Show runs for three hours.  5-8PM Pacific or 8-11PM East Coast time.  We talk about the rights and responsibilities of being a gun owner and friend of liberty.

Email us or call in tonight!

I will be celebrating his lifelong support of the Second Amendment by co-hosting the Armed American Radio Program with Mark Walters on Sunday evening.  If your local station does not carry this show, check it out live on WGKA AM on the interweb.

Dr. Bruce Eimer, Mark Walters and Morgan Boatman

Hear my past shows at Armed American Radio.

Call in or email Mark on Sunday and show your support for my dad and Glocks!

Morgan

His point, I believe, was that, without support from the population, all the political and legislative changes he could make are pointless.  If the majority of the people don’t want guns availible to the public, who are we, as gun enthusiasts to try to change that?  It may not be right.  I may not be possible.  So, the real work is not in Washington, it is in your own neighborhood.  We must re-educate the citizenry that has forgotten that guns are an important part of a civilized society.  We must take people out to shoot in a safe, enjoyable environment.  We must change the voters if we want to change the votes.

One listener had this to add:

Arthur Wood says:

I loved Morgan’s comment, “take someone shooting,” when asked how to help the Alan Gora’s work. I couldn’t agree more!!! The majority of Americans view guns as being negative. We need to take steps to change the general public’s perspective. I would like to add, because you were also talking of the NRA, the NRA has a fund raising banquets done by the Friends of NRA. Most NRA members are unaware of it. The banquets have raffles, live and silent auctions with NRA and donated items. All of the money raised goes directly to shooting programs, with 50% staying in the state it is raised. The programs include Boy Scouts, Eddie Eagle, youth shooting programs, women shooting programs and other programs. We NEED to change the anti-gun culture and the Friends of NRA is a great step in that direction. Keep up the great work guys.

Gun permit-holders aren’t the problem

Sunday, October 18, 2009

To the editor:

In Friday’s edition of the paper, [there was] a letter admonishing those choosing to lawfully carry firearms. First, I respect and thank him for expressing his views. However, I disagree with them.

If he doesn’t trust someone to lawfully carry that firearm, he certainly has that right. However, implying they’re pretending to be police, etc., is false and illogical. Assuming local police will be there to protect you at all times is a dangerous assumption. FPD has excellent officers doing a tough job, but they simply can’t be everywhere at all times.

I exercise my right to carry a firearm. Like most others, I am no Rambo, or “wannabe.” However, as a former police officer, I recognize that personal safety is my responsibility. It isn’t something taken lightly. This is why I have met all state-mandated requirements to obtain my permit and routinely practice to ensure proficiency.

As one that wore a badge for nearly a decade, I never had one negative encounter with a permit-holder lawfully carrying a firearm. The person that takes the time and energy to complete training, DPS background investigations and fingerprinting statistically isn’t one to worry about. Both FBI and DOJ stats reinforce that.

I respect anyone’s choice to exercise their right to not lawfully carry firearms, but remind them respect should go both ways. You don’t have to agree with someone’s choice to respect it. Just because someone doesn’t agree with your view, doesn’t give cause to demonize them.

TIM CARTER

Bellemont

What was your reaction to The Constitutional Right and Social Obligation to Carry a Gun the first time you read it?

Here’s someone’s:

I recently read your article referenced above and I appreciate the spirit in
which it was intended. However, my issue is with the overall tone of your
article along with many other proponents of the 2nd Amendment.

I think we all agree the 2nd Amendment applies to individauls in both
ownership and carry. However, your overwhelming desire to use name-calling
instead of facts hurts our cause. I can’t say for certain if your article is
only to be consumed by the choir or if you’re actually trying to convince
others there might be a better way. You’d be hard-pressed to convince anyone
new to the issue.

There are many folks conservative, liberal and middle-of-the-road who are gun
owners. By making this an emotional, non-logical argument you alienate those
who may be interested in listening and the ones we should be out to convince.
Preaching to the choir may get more amens but it doesn’t do much for the
cause.

By LARRY HENDRICKS
Assistant City Editor
Wednesday, July 01, 2009

The state Court of Appeals has granted a new trial to a Valley man convicted of second-degree murder in the May 2004 shooting death of a man on a national forest trail in Coconino County.

Harold Fish gets another chance

The court decided that the jury in the trial of Harold A. Fish, 62, was not allowed to hear evidence that might have supported his claim of self defense when he shot and killed Grant Kuenzli. The court concluded that a jury should have heard evidence that Kuenzli acted violently when he was confronted about his dogs.

The court also concluded that the jury should have been instructed more clearly on definitions of self- defense and crimes considered “unlawful physical force” to determine if Kuenzli had been committing a crime when he approached Fish on the trail.

Lee Phillips, Fish’s Flagstaff- based appellate attorney, said, “We’re thrilled that after several years in prison that Hal Fish might finally be getting the justice he deserved.”

Fish’s wife Debbie said, “I’m not really surprised. We had very valid reasons for making the appeal.”

She continued: “We’re ecstatic we finally got the answer back and hopeful that my husband will be home soon pending the new trial. It’s been a long, hard road.”

Phillips added that Fish’s release won’t be immediate because the state will likely file an appeal to the Arizona Supreme Court.

Michael Lessler, chief deputy county attorney who prosecuted the case, said that the Coconino County Attorney’s Office and the Attorney General’s Office will review the 110 pages of opinions issued by the appellate court.

“But at this point we have made no final decisions about how we will be proceeding,” Lessler added.

Fish maintained at trial that two dogs in the care of Grant Kuenzli care rushed at him as he exited a trail off Highway 87 near Pine and Strawberry. To protect himself, Fish said he pulled a 10 mm handgun and fired a warning shot to keep the dogs away. He also said Kuenzli then rushed at him, threatening death or harm.

He shot Kuenzli three times in the chest. Two of the wounds were fatal. Kuenzli was unarmed and Fish was not injured in the incident.

The prosecution argued that Fish overreacted and took a man’s life when other options were available. Self defense was not justified, it contended, and a forensic report suggested Kuenzli was in a defensive posture when the bullets struck him.

The jury agreed and convicted Fish of second-degree murder in June 2006. Judge Mark Moran sentenced Fish to 10 years in prison

In the appellate court’s opinion, the judges ruled that Fish should have been able to present evidence to establish his credibility because the prosecution had said Kuenzli was “merely trying to retrieve his dogs,” at the time of the shooting.

Fish had told investigators the dogs had charged him, so he should have been able to present evidence of specific acts to which Kuenzli would react violently when confronted about his dogs, according to the opinion.

Additionally, the court ruled that jurors were not given clarity on what constituted “unlawful physical force.”

Fish had wanted to produce instructions to the jury that included crimes in the category of unlawful physical force, which includes endangerment, threatening or intimidating and aggravated assault.

Judge Moran did not allow the instructions to the jury.

By excluding such instructions, the jury may have been able to conclude that what Kuenzli did when he came at Fish did not constitute unlawful physical conduct, when, in actuality, it could have.

Particularly concerning to the court was that the jury had actually requested a definition of “attack” during their deliberations. The jury was instructed that all the direction they needed was in the jury instructions they had been given.

“Whether the question referred to the dogs or the victim’s alleged attack on the Defendant, this uncertainty underscores the need for the jury to have understood that the Victim may have unlawfully attacked defendant without physically touching him.”

The court continued: “Because there was evidence supporting Defendant’s self-defense claim and because the flawed jury instruction allowed the jury to disregard this evidence, we cannot say that the state met its burden to show harmless error,” wrote the court.

While Fish is undergoing the appellate process, the Legislature is working to pass a self- defense law that would apply retroactively in Fish’s case and give him a new trial.

Just days after Fish’s trial started, the Legislature passed a self-defense law that changed the burden to prove self-defense from the defendant to the prosecution.

Moran, the judge hearing the case, ruled that the law did not apply to Fish because the law had been created after Fish had been charged under the old law.

Last week, the state Senate voted to overturn Fish’s conviction by stating that the new law was specifically meant to apply to cases like Fish. The House of Representatives has yet to vote on the bill.

The Legislature has approved similar bills in the past, but Gov. Janet Napolitano vetoed those efforts.