The Mother of All Gun Control and the .357 Magnum
I want to say from the beginning that as a second amendment advocate and political conservative, I have what many of my friends and relatives might consider an almost unreasonable respect for Diane Feinstein. It is not because I agree with her politics or her views on gun control, though she does claim to endorse the validity of the second amendment.
When I was in college on November 27, 1978 in Northern California, I was shocked to learn that a fraternity brother of mine was murdered in cold blood in his own office just 80 miles from where I sat. He had graduated from the University of the Pacific many years before I would, so I had never met him. But San Francisco Mayor George Moscone was, by all accounts, a good man. He was gunned down by a member of the San Francisco Board of Supervisors who suffered from mental issues; Dan White. White was enraged because he was unable to withdraw his resignation from the board of supervisors. He blamed Moscone and fellow Supervisor Harvey Milk. After wounding, then methodically executing Moscone, White then gunned down Milk, the first openly gay person elected to public office in America. The movie "Milk," starring Sean Penn, was based on Milk’s life and death.
I remember vividly the horror of clinging to the television all that afternoon as the news got worse and worse – and worse. I remember Supervisor Dianne Feinstein standing up and announcing to the assembled press corps the terrible reality of the shooting and the deaths. While I do not agree with her politics, I felt that the way she handled herself that horrible evening was commendable and she earned my respect.
While I'm not likely to ever vote for Ms. Feinstein, I respect her as a logical, intelligent human being. That is why I was not surprised to hear that when she became the target of vicious terrorist threats and attacks, she availed herself of the privileges guaranteed by the second amendment:
Feinstein got a gun.
When I was in college on November 27, 1978 in Northern California, I was shocked to learn that a fraternity brother of mine was murdered in cold blood in his own office just 80 miles from where I sat. He had graduated from the University of the Pacific many years before I would, so I had never met him. But San Francisco Mayor George Moscone was, by all accounts, a good man. He was gunned down by a member of the San Francisco Board of Supervisors who suffered from mental issues; Dan White. White was enraged because he was unable to withdraw his resignation from the board of supervisors. He blamed Moscone and fellow Supervisor Harvey Milk. After wounding, then methodically executing Moscone, White then gunned down Milk, the first openly gay person elected to public office in America. The movie "Milk," starring Sean Penn, was based on Milk’s life and death.
I remember vividly the horror of clinging to the television all that afternoon as the news got worse and worse – and worse. I remember Supervisor Dianne Feinstein standing up and announcing to the assembled press corps the terrible reality of the shooting and the deaths. While I do not agree with her politics, I felt that the way she handled herself that horrible evening was commendable and she earned my respect.
While I'm not likely to ever vote for Ms. Feinstein, I respect her as a logical, intelligent human being. That is why I was not surprised to hear that when she became the target of vicious terrorist threats and attacks, she availed herself of the privileges guaranteed by the second amendment:
Feinstein got a gun.
"Chief's Special"
The gun Diane Feinstein got was a. 38/.357 caliber Smith & Wesson “snub-nose;” a short, small revolver commonly referred to as a “Chief’s Special.” She also received from the police chief of San Francisco, a permit to carry a concealed weapon, commonly known as a ‘CCW.’
Besides its provenance, the other reason Feinstein’s gun should be called a “Chief’s Special” is that if you or I lived in San Francisco and were terrorized by a group bent on harming us, or just needed protection because of a stalker or living and working in a high-crime area, we could not obtain a CCW from the Chief of the San Francisco police. He doesn’t give them out to common citizens. For any reason. Ever. Only to politicians. And in particular, one who believes gun regulations need to be strict, and all exceptions removed.
Dianne Feinstein, the mother of all gun-control politicians, found herself in fear for her life. So, she got a gun. I applaud her for that. But then she used her political connections to get a CCW that normal citizens cannot get, bypassing--- wait for it --- gun control regulations. Dianne Feinstein getting a gun is wonderful for me. Getting it using privilege she wishes to deny others is hypocrisy.
There is another, more subtle irony here that I would hesitate to call hypocrisy. The stated purpose of Feinstein's gun control legislation is to "save innocent lives." I get that, and I endorse that. But her choice of her personal gun illustrated perfectly the problem with gun control. The very gun she purchased to defend herself was almost identical to the gun which started her crusade against gun violence--the Dan White murders of George Moscone and Harvey Milk. Except that Feinstein's version was more powerful and more concealable than White's. Power, conceal-ability, and a quick reload; the three-headed monster of gun control.
Feinstein purchased a Smith & Wesson revolver. How was Ms. Feinstein's gun different from White's? Dianne's gun was easier to hide, carried one less bullet, but was 20% quicker to reload. It fires the .357 cartridge which travels as much as twice the speed of Dan White's .38 caliber bullets, which could not fire .357. In short, it is significantly more dangerous as an offensive weapon than Dan White's Model 10.
Besides its provenance, the other reason Feinstein’s gun should be called a “Chief’s Special” is that if you or I lived in San Francisco and were terrorized by a group bent on harming us, or just needed protection because of a stalker or living and working in a high-crime area, we could not obtain a CCW from the Chief of the San Francisco police. He doesn’t give them out to common citizens. For any reason. Ever. Only to politicians. And in particular, one who believes gun regulations need to be strict, and all exceptions removed.
Dianne Feinstein, the mother of all gun-control politicians, found herself in fear for her life. So, she got a gun. I applaud her for that. But then she used her political connections to get a CCW that normal citizens cannot get, bypassing--- wait for it --- gun control regulations. Dianne Feinstein getting a gun is wonderful for me. Getting it using privilege she wishes to deny others is hypocrisy.
There is another, more subtle irony here that I would hesitate to call hypocrisy. The stated purpose of Feinstein's gun control legislation is to "save innocent lives." I get that, and I endorse that. But her choice of her personal gun illustrated perfectly the problem with gun control. The very gun she purchased to defend herself was almost identical to the gun which started her crusade against gun violence--the Dan White murders of George Moscone and Harvey Milk. Except that Feinstein's version was more powerful and more concealable than White's. Power, conceal-ability, and a quick reload; the three-headed monster of gun control.
Feinstein purchased a Smith & Wesson revolver. How was Ms. Feinstein's gun different from White's? Dianne's gun was easier to hide, carried one less bullet, but was 20% quicker to reload. It fires the .357 cartridge which travels as much as twice the speed of Dan White's .38 caliber bullets, which could not fire .357. In short, it is significantly more dangerous as an offensive weapon than Dan White's Model 10.
Image may be NSFW.
Clik here to view.
Clik here to view.
Feinstein's .357 on the left, White's .38 on the right. The senator's gun was more powerful, faster to reload and more concealable. Otherwise, they are nearly identical. Don't be fooled by the longer barrel on White's less powerful gun. It's a puppy compared to the .357.
The Chief’s Special Ms. Feinstein obtained was the same type of weapon that I used for years as an undercover agent in the FBI. It was also nearly identical to the Chief’s Special my father carried during his career in the FBI. I think of it fondly. Neither my father’s gun nor mine has ever been fired in anger, and in 51 years, neither of these guns have ever injured or killed anybody. But I can tell you mine has saved my life.
The .38/.357 special “Snub-nose” is perfect for concealment. It can be hidden in a belt, a purse, or even a pocket. For a long time, I even carried mine on undercover meetings in the inside of a pair of cowboy boots equipped with a custom-made holster. It fires five rounds of a .357 caliber cartridge. When combined with hollow-point bullet tips, (almost always), the .357 is a deadly weapon.
It is also a well-made law-enforcement and personal defense tool, as Senator Feinstein would have to admit. It is cast from high-carbon or stainless steel, machined to Swiss-watch tolerances and is reliable in the extreme. In the 50+ years my father and I carried our Chief’s Specials, not once did either cause a misfire. They are beautiful pieces of engineering. I’m sorry, but if flag-burning is “free speech,” then well-made guns are art. Period.
The .38/.357 special “Snub-nose” is perfect for concealment. It can be hidden in a belt, a purse, or even a pocket. For a long time, I even carried mine on undercover meetings in the inside of a pair of cowboy boots equipped with a custom-made holster. It fires five rounds of a .357 caliber cartridge. When combined with hollow-point bullet tips, (almost always), the .357 is a deadly weapon.
It is also a well-made law-enforcement and personal defense tool, as Senator Feinstein would have to admit. It is cast from high-carbon or stainless steel, machined to Swiss-watch tolerances and is reliable in the extreme. In the 50+ years my father and I carried our Chief’s Specials, not once did either cause a misfire. They are beautiful pieces of engineering. I’m sorry, but if flag-burning is “free speech,” then well-made guns are art. Period.
The Devil in the Details
Dianne Feinstein has re-introduced the Assault Weapons Ban in the United States Senate. Her bill would exempt “weapons legally owned on the day of enactment and over 900 specific weapons ‘used for hunting or sporting purposes.’”
While that caveat is a good start, there is a landmine in the wording. The exemptions promised are for two reasons only, “hunting” or “sporting.” But the firearms right of which Senator Feinstein availed herself "self-defense" related neither to sport nor hunting. Senator Feinstein knows that as a senator or retired senator, she will have no trouble obtaining armed protection in the future, regardless of the laws she authors which deny the same right to her constituents.
Let me assure you, no serious scholar believes that the founding fathers enacted the second amendment because they were hunters or sportsmen. They were defenders of life and liberty.
In the past year, I have spoken with literally dozens of friends and acquaintances who have asked for my assistance or advice in purchasing firearms and/or obtaining firearms training. Not a single one of them asked advice on a choosing or shooting a hunting gun or a competition gun. Every single person I spoke with, without exception, wanted information on how to best defend themselves.
My opinion on this matter is likely well known by those of you who know me. Simply purchasing a pistol and putting it in your house and feeling that you have made yourself safer is like the person who desires to hear violin beautiful music and (rather than purchasing an iPod) goes to a store and purchases a violin, expecting to hear beautiful violin music.
That said, the second amendment guarantees the right to self-protection. The second amendment was not put in as a gesture towards sportsmen. It was not put in the constitution as a gesture towards shooting sports. Make no mistake, when politicians remove “self-defense” as a legitimate reason to own a firearm from legislation, they are eviscerating the second amendment.
As a final note, after Senator Feinstein felt the threat against her had passed, Feinstein, who is Jewish, had the gun melted down and formed into a cross, which was given to the Pope. Which makes as much sense as owning a self-defense gun and denying that right to the people who hired her.
While that caveat is a good start, there is a landmine in the wording. The exemptions promised are for two reasons only, “hunting” or “sporting.” But the firearms right of which Senator Feinstein availed herself "self-defense" related neither to sport nor hunting. Senator Feinstein knows that as a senator or retired senator, she will have no trouble obtaining armed protection in the future, regardless of the laws she authors which deny the same right to her constituents.
Let me assure you, no serious scholar believes that the founding fathers enacted the second amendment because they were hunters or sportsmen. They were defenders of life and liberty.
In the past year, I have spoken with literally dozens of friends and acquaintances who have asked for my assistance or advice in purchasing firearms and/or obtaining firearms training. Not a single one of them asked advice on a choosing or shooting a hunting gun or a competition gun. Every single person I spoke with, without exception, wanted information on how to best defend themselves.
My opinion on this matter is likely well known by those of you who know me. Simply purchasing a pistol and putting it in your house and feeling that you have made yourself safer is like the person who desires to hear violin beautiful music and (rather than purchasing an iPod) goes to a store and purchases a violin, expecting to hear beautiful violin music.
That said, the second amendment guarantees the right to self-protection. The second amendment was not put in as a gesture towards sportsmen. It was not put in the constitution as a gesture towards shooting sports. Make no mistake, when politicians remove “self-defense” as a legitimate reason to own a firearm from legislation, they are eviscerating the second amendment.
As a final note, after Senator Feinstein felt the threat against her had passed, Feinstein, who is Jewish, had the gun melted down and formed into a cross, which was given to the Pope. Which makes as much sense as owning a self-defense gun and denying that right to the people who hired her.