Friday, November 20, 2015

What Chesty Would Say

In late 1950 the Chinese managed to sneak an army into north Korea and surround X corps. This was a bit problematic, as you can imagine. MacArthur's staff had vehemently denied that the Chinese would get involved, and when reports of Chinese assaults were relayed, Willoughby (MacArthur's Chief of Intelligence) snorted "That's another goddamn Marine corps lie".  There were a lot of internal politics involved and MacArthur did not want to believe that the Chinese had entered the war. Reality tends to trump politics though.

Chesty Puller was commanding the 1rst Marine Regiment at the time. When the embedded press asked him about his plans concerning the distressing situation they were in it's reported that he replied;

"We've been looking for the enemy for several days now. We've finally found them. We're surrounded. That simplifies our problem of finding these people and killing them."

It is also told that when informed by his intelligence staff that they were surrounded, he quipped;

"Great. Now we can shoot at those bastards from every direction."

The order was given for X Corps to turn around and march back down to Hungman, to establish a perimeter under the guns of the Navy.  Puller's regiment, acting as rearguard for X Corps, not only smashed up 7 Chinese divisions on their way out, but managed to take a bunch of equipment the Army had abandoned. When they reached the safety of Hungman, Chesty told some reporters, "Remember, whatever you write, this was no retreat. All that happened was that we found more Chinese behind us than in front of us, so we about-faced and attacked".

I bring all of this up not only because it's fascinating history, or that brave men and their deeds should not be forgotten, but to highlight that Puller was not "nervous in the service" so to speak. He wasn't prone to exaggeration or paranoia or unwarranted concern. In fact the actions mentioned above got Chesty his fifth Navy Cross and a Distinguished Service Cross from the Army.

On the road from Koto-Ri to Hungman, Puller admonished his troops, especially the tank commanders, to not let the civilians that were tagging along get too close. Most were merely North Korean refugees that just wanted to get the hell out of there and find some semblance of safety (and food and shelter). But scattered among them were North Korean and Chinese soldiers that had donned civilian clothing. Under their coats they had grenades and submachine guns. The instructions were to fire over the heads of the civilian crowds to keep them back. If that failed then firing into the crowds was the only thing to do. It was gruesome and a sorry thing to go through, but necessary. A few commanders didn't follow those orders and at least 3 tanks were lost because of it.

When talk of bringing refugees from the middle east over here comes up, I recall what Puller went through in North Korea. I remember the unwillingness of the brass to acknowledge the realities of the situation, and the danger that was hidden amongst folks that were naturally sympathetic.

The reality is that for every hundred or thousand refugees that only want a safe place to live there's probably a few miscreants who wish to get as close as they can before they attack. It's entirely possible, given the relatively porous state of our borders, that dozens of such infiltrators are already here, waiting for the moment to strike at us. But I see no benefit in flying more groups in here when they're possibly contaminated by those who only want to get their jihad on.

The federal government here is even blinder than MacArthur's folks back then; the current administration will refuse to see beyond the politics of the situation and thus dismiss the notion that they cannot control every single immigrant once they're here.

Being vigilant is definitely something to strive for (as it always has been). This country has plenty of soft targets - schools, malls, movie theaters - too many of which are "gun free zones". This country has plenty of places where self defense and effective tools for same are discouraged. If you have to be in any of those locations I'd advise keeping your eyes open as well as having a plan to deal with any sudden jihad syndrome that infects the place. With the holidays approaching, many of those aforementioned places will be much more crowded than usual, and thus be more tempting targets as well as being harder to notice signs of danger in.

If several places are hit on the same day across the country it'll create a panic. I'm confident that in such an event the federal and state governments will take immediate, decisive and inarguably wrong steps, bolstered by folks who are just downright scared. The upshot of this cheery prediction is that, as you probably already figured out by now, you're on your own.

So have a plan, not just for dealing with a crackhead who really needs your money and has a knife to prove it, or for some emo punk that thinks killing folks before offing himself is somehow the thing to do, but for being in a place that has 2 or more attackers that desire to punish the infidels in as great a number as possible before moving on to the next location on their quest for religious purity. I'd go ahead and assume they would have something thicker and more bullet resistant than a T-shirt on under their coats, for what it's worth. (If you're thinking, "Gee, it'd sure have been nice if they hadn't outlawed armor piercing handgun ammo now wouldn't it? then allow me to welcome you to the Libertarian Party).

That means having an escape plan, and having the means and skills to fight back if escape isn't desirable or feasible. Some folks suggest putting the trunk gun back in your trunk, though I'm still wondering why anyone would drive around without at least one there in the first place. If you can't keep a medical kit on you, at least have one in your vehicle. And for Vishnu's sake, don't walk around in a blissful daze thinking your I-phone's screen is more important than your surroundings. If you end up in Valhalla because you were reading a semi-funny text and didn't notice Jihad Joe whipping out an AK and deciding you were a perfect first target, Thor will make fun of you. For millennia.

I'll leave you with another admonition from good ol' Chesty:

"I want you to make 'em understand; Our country won't go on forever, if we stay as soft as we are now. There won't be any America - because some foreign soldiery will invade us and take our women and breed a hardier race."

Thursday, November 12, 2015

A Bone To Pick

Winter's Bone is a book written by Daniel Woodrell in a style he calls country noir. It was made into an independent film back in 2010 starring Jennifer Lawrence. As usual, I'd suggest reading the book after watching the movie, but the movie was a much better telling of the story than a typical Hollywood effort (for example what they did to Starship Troopers, or Percy Jackson, or how they distorted LotR and Harry Potter). It's about a poor family in the Ozarks and their struggle to survive a crisis caused by the meth trade. Woodrell writes decent prose and tells a good story. I was impressed by Lawrence and the other actors, as well as the way the movie transferred the story to film (minus one semi random polarized shot of squirelliness, which I'll give a pass on since it was an independent film going for an award). so I do recommend reading the book and watching the movie. In fact, here's the trailer:

Now, what I wanted to chat about was a review of the movie, which I think not only highlights the anti-Southern prejudice prevalent in so many places, but provides another glimpse into the culture war we've been fighting for a few millennia now. Oh, and there'll likely be spoilers.

Ten I See

Over at Unc's place, there's an amusing little poster whose aim is to further the caliber wars. Just to catch anyone up who wasn't munching on popcorn whilst perusing gun nut forums for the last decade-ish, there's a disagreement as to whether it's best to have a lot of rounds of a smallish caliber, or a few rounds of a biggish caliber, usually simplified as 9mm vs .45 acp (or .40 S&W). PapaDeltaBravo has a pic to illustrate the smaller caliber advocates position.

A 9mm loaded with modern JHP's of a sufficient velocity (which you'll find in most "defense" loading of said cartridge) is probably fine for most situation where someone would have occasion to fling rocks at someone. Most people will be well served by that cartridge.

I don't carry a 9mm. I carry a 10mm. (cause it's 1mm better!)

Looking at the pic PDB has up, you'll see that penetration of several different projectiles is virtually the same, thus leading one to conclude that since each projectile is practically the same as another, then using a projectile in a cartridge with increased magazine capacity and reduced recoil would be a wise decision.

That pic however is not all inclusive. I note that the .40 S&W rounds weren't loaded to their full potential for example. And it was not all inclusive, as the 10mm among others wasn't shown. Also, I presume it was bare gelatin.

In WW2 (and The Korean War) the most prevalent round on the battlefield was not M2 ball. It was M2 AP. That's because there was a helluva lot of metal all over the place, and having a projectile that could reach the other side of some of that metal was desirable. M2 ball would have worked just fine on the itinerant fascist, imperialist or (later on) communist soldier who hadn't seen the wisdom in surrendering, but it had to reach said enemy combatant before it could do its job, and with the metal prevalence it was best to just go ahead and use AP ammo.

That's what I think a lot of folks neglect when proclaiming their choice in cartridge, especially when accompanied by "stopping power is a myth" or other such rallying cries. I'm sure 9mm will do fine if its trying to reach vitals covered only by denim and skin, but what if there's a more substantial barrier?

Bears live out here. There's been occasion when they've wandered into my neighborhood, and I'm only 15 minutes from downtown Denver. A 9mm won't reach anything terribly important in a bruin. It's arguable that a hot loaded FMJ in .40 S&W wouldn't do enough to put a bear down. A 10mm loaded relatively hot will.

I know my luck well enough to speculate that if I am attacked in such a manner that I think making real loud noises whilst throwing rocks is warranted, that the assailant(s) will likely have more than just a winter coat on. Depending on how thick any body armor is, a 10mm may not penetrate though it'd be more likely to than a 9mm (though less likely than a hot .454 Casull). But the loads I carry have more muzzle energy than a 9mm, thus a better chance of distracting an attacker even if the hit doesn't go through body armor. I may even be fortunate enough to crack a rib, which will make that assailant less effective in attacking me.

For any number crunchers out there, I found this test of several different types of 10mm ammo. I'll note that all but two type of 10mm achieved at least 12 inches of penetration (the two that didn't had more than 100% expansion). Here's a ballistic chart showing velocity and energy of various 10mm loads. (And for what it's worth here's a forum thread discussing 10mm ballistic gelatin tests).

You can find 10mm pistols with capacities varying from 2 to 20 rounds, with concealability decreasing proportional to the yield of the cartridge box. In general it's usually about the same number of cartridges in an otherwise identical pistol chambered for .40 S&W, and two or three less rounds than you'd find in a comparable 9mm. My 10mm's have noticeably more recoil than a comparable 9mm, and thus follow up shots are a tad slower. Accuracy is equivalent for all practical purposes.

Where the 10mm shines is that it can go places the 9mm or arguably even the .40 S&W and .45 acp just can't go, namely to the vital zone of something with a moderate to heavy barrier twixt you and it. (A .44 Magnum would accomplish that even better, but at the cost of increased firearm weight, increased recoil and much lower capacity.)

I mention all this to illustrate that when most folks start pointing to that PDB pic of gelatin tests or otherwise proclaim the 9mm equal or superior, they're neglecting the qualifiers, such as having the target being a human sans any sort of artificial barrier.

If you carry a 9mm and are happy with it then cool. I won't attempt to alter your selection. If you carry a .380 acp, a .22 magnum, a .357 Sig, a .455 Webley, a .32 H&R Magnum, or even a .22LR then as long as you're proficient with it and understand the cartridge's capabilities and limitations then that's groovy.

There is no one best cartridge, only cartridges better suited to particular tasks than others. a large part of what determines that suitability is little more than personal preference. If you lack bruins and discount the small but not improbable likelihood of being attacked by armor wearing thugs (here's where I'll remind y'all of the Tyler Texas courthouse shootings, and Mr. Wilson), then the 10mm may not be the best choice for you.

For me and the way I think, the 10mm makes the most sense in a carry gun. However it's still a compromise and if a bruin or armored miscreant was something I knew I was gonna face, I'd grab a Garand loaded with AP. (that's if I couldn't get my hands on a Bofors of course).

The Keyword Is Fight

Firearms are usually the best tool to use to exert force against another entity. Usually. Being gun nuts a lot of us have a tendency to over-emphasize firearms use. Now I don't want to be misconstrued - if you're 5'4" and barely tip the scales over the 100 pound mark, then a firearm is definitely the most effective way to stop that unknown and uninvited fellow from busting all up in your house (unless you've got a lightsaber). But as the old saying says "a .25 in your pocket is more useful than a .45 back at your house" it also is true that whatever you have in hand when the fight starts is more useful than anything you have to unholster.

Let's say you're sitting in a bar. You have a glass half full (cause we're optimists on occasion) of your favorite beverage. You have a very cool automatic knife with adamantium blade on your belt and a handgun in an IWB holster under your light jacket. Suddenly, seemingly out of that proverbial nowhere, a large, angry, somewhat substance-altered fellow comes rushing at you with a machete raised. So how would you get to your primary weapon?

You wouldn't - your primary weapon is already in your hand. It's the glass with liquid in it. You throw the liquid in the fellow's face, then fling the glass itself at the same face that should be drenched with that raspberry-strawberry smoothie you were enjoying just seconds before.

Even a full glass of berried up smoothie isn't anywhere nearly as effective as a handgun. But when a fight starts you don't have time to organize your equipment to your liking. The number one task is to stop this hypothetical miscreant from making you test how effective your health insurance is. Yes, shooting him once or thrice would be more effective than a face full of juice if you had time to draw and fire. In our hypothetical you don't. You do have time to hinder his eyesight by dousing his ocular region with liquid. If things go well with that, he'll falter long enough for you to introduce pain into the equation via a glass to the face. Those things will hopefully give you enough time to create some lateral distance and grab one of your other weapons.

It's a simple idea to test; have an assistant standing well off to the side with a glass of water. Place an object a few feet ahead of yourself that you intend to cleave with a machete (or axe, or tire iron - whatevs). At a signal, move forward and try to strike the object while your assistant throws water in your face. You may be able to pull it off, but you'll know you weren't nearly as efficient as you'd have otherwise been. You'll have taken longer, and that delay is the important part as it gives an opponent more time to react.

Someone, and I forget who exactly, once criticized the notion that in a theater shooting the audience should have pelted the attacker with popcorn. But that's exactly what folks should do. A bag of popcorn, even day old mostly stale popcorn like you'll find in some theaters, isn't as effective as a .45, or even a 9mm. There's not gonna be any ballistic gelatin tests or one-shot stop ratios concerning a bag of Redenbacher. But its purpose is not to stop, but to distract and/or delay.

Again, use an assistant. set up a target 25 yards away. Use whatever weapon you like. At a signal, try to fire 5 rounds into the target, but at the signal your assistant will throw popcorn at your face (from the side of course). The result will be that you'll take longer to shoot those shots, and your shots will not be as precisely placed.

If a punk decides to shoot up a movie theater, folks should throw popcorn, drinks, purses, cell phones, canes, chairs - anything they have at hand. This will distract said punk enough to decrease his ability to hit what he's aiming at. It will also remove his focus from anyone who may be trying to rush him form off to his side. And it should overwhelm his senses enough that he won't see the two or three people reaching behind their back to draw a handgun (all things being ideal).

When you're attacked your primary weapon is whatever you can use right damn now. Be that a glass or a bag of food or an electronic communications device or a barstool. Whatever you have to draw or otherwise whip out isn't. At that point when aggression is initialized against you, that slick 10mm on your belt is a goal. Just like it's said that a handgun is a good thing to use to fight your way to your long gun, whatever you have in your hand (or close enough to grab without much effort) is a good way to fight your way to your handgun.

Firearms are real damn cool once you break them out, but they are just a type of tool, and not the only type. A gunfight is just a type of fight. While the gun is a real cool component to have, the most important part isn't the gun, it's the fight.

Saturday, August 22, 2015

What Really Matters

Over at Sipsey Street Irregulars I stumbled upon this post which contained the following photo:

Which is yet another flagrant example of Direct Impingement Supremacy rearing its ugly head! (not to mention it's displaying a carbine, not a rifle.) Black Rifles aren't the only rifles that matter. For instance:



So in short:

Which technically is misleading since I pictured two carbines. Lemme try this again:

See? That's much more inclusive of our inherent diversity, isn't it? :)

Oh, and just cause shorty's need love too:

How To End The Colorado Magazine Capacity Limits

There was for a while talk of cutting some sort of deal to increase the magazine capacity allowed by an unconstitutional law. The method was legislative and for a number of reasons I was not in favor of such a move. The most practical reason is that increasing the limit to 30 rounds would negate a fatal weakness in the law as it stands now. That particular flaw is that the magazine capacity limit law interferes with interstate commerce, and thus is unconstitutional. I'll spell it out below the break.

Friday, August 21, 2015

Garand Stuff

Just a quick update on the Garands around here. I have the new barrels about 1/5th of the way broken in. I've added optics to 2 out of 3 I plan on putting some form of glass on. I acquired new springs and pins for them all, as well as butt stock cleaning kits, plus a few accessories here and there.

In case anyone that reads here missed it, I had one of my Garands worked on by Tim Shufflin of Shuff's Parkerizing. He offers a modification he calls the Mini-G, which shortens the Garand's barrel to 16". his turn around time is measured in weeks and I his customer service is superb. I heartily recommend him for any of the services he offers.

Here's my Mini-G is as currently configured:

That's an Aimpoint Micro T-1 with a 4moa dot with an LRP conversion kit (basically it turns the Aimpoint mount into a QD affair) sitting on top of an Ultimak M12 rail. On the back is an Olongapo stock pouch. The front sight is a Smith Enterprise Tritium post. An M1 web sling and an M1 bayonet round out the package.

When I took it to the range I was pressed for time and didn't get around to everything I wanted to that day. The Mini-G and another Garand both have new Krieger barrels and I was hoping to get them both properly broken in, but I fell woefully short of that goal. I did manage to get everything sighted in with irons (or reconfirm the sighting in some cases). That was before I got the optics. With the Aimpoint it's not that big an issue, as the iron sights are usable through the glass, so I just adjusted the dot to sit on top of the front post as I sighted through the rear aperture. It'll have to be verified at range of course, but that should get me minute of windbreaker on anything within self defense range.

After initial sigtht in I did manage to get off a few shots at 100 yards to get an idea of how the Mini-G will work:

Considering the HXP ammo and my old eyes, I'm thinking that 16" barrel is gonna work out fine, just fine.

Recoil was a bit more pronounced and the report was louder than a full length Garand, but nothing too harsh for me. I did acquire a rubber boot meant to soften the recoil from launching grenades on old '03 Springfields. It slips on a Garand buttstock with some effort and off again. I'm unsure how much a difference it'll make (as I don't find the recoil that bad to begin with) but I'll try it next time I hit the range. I still had to consciously refrain from yelling "PULL!" every time I threw that thing to my shoulder. This may become my go-to pheasant gun... (I kid, but not by much)

Another Garand got new glass:

This one is set up almost identical to the Mini-G - Smith Enterprise Tritium front sight, Olongapo stock pouch, M1 sling and M1 bayonet. It also sports a GarandGear Ported Gas Cylinder Lock Screw (which they call a Gas Plug) as well as a Burris 2x7x32 handgun scope in Warne Maxima QD medium rings.(Note: I tried the low rings but didn't quite get enough clearance aft, so went with the medium.)  I haven't had a chance to sight in this scope yet, but it seems like a promising set up, judging from how things looked as I got the eye relief adjusted when I mounted it on the rifle.

The others are coming along but nothing too exciting to report. I'm still trying to decide on a scope for the Griffin and Howe mount, and the remaining Garand I'll leave as is (except I did add a GarandGear Ported Gas Cylinder Lock Screw). I'm also contemplating having Rock Creek Barrels whip me up some G.I. contour tubes but with a 1:11 twist, as well as a few other odds and ends. The main thing left now on almost all of them is to refinish the metal and wood and do some adjustments to the triggers to smooth things up a bit. I'm also look real intently at this DMR adjustable trigger. It's pricey but it's very interesting, as is their drop-in competition hammer and their selection of reduced and rectangular apertures (for Garands, M1A's and a few other types of rifles) Oh and of course I still need to remedy the lack of grenade launchers round here.

I'm hoping things slow down enough in the next few weeks that I can hit the range again and get all these fundamental operations out of the way so I can start putting these hole punchers through their paces (and start load development for those new barrels). Knowing my luck, weeks could turn into months. So when I can I'll keep y'all updated on how these projects are coming along.

I Am Offended

Speaking (er, typing) on behalf of those of us who self-identify as Operating Rods (personal pronoun of choice being "You mother*&%^$%^!!!!!") I am deeply, gravely and perhaps even gustationally offended by someone I thought was more sensitive - nay - someone whom was a pal, a friend, a fellow who wouldn't steal towels at the beach while everyone else was in the water. In other words, Michael Bane (a wolf in self identified Llama's clothing!).

In this post Mr. Bane perpetuates the Direct Impingement Supremacy (Hereon after referred to as DIS) propaganda with the following hurtful words strung together as if to form a sentence of pain and entitlement:

"...the AR-15 platform carbine, which should of course be the first long gun purchase."

There it is. Bold and brazen for all to see. A first long gun purchase should never be some dirty, ill used, socially irrelevant thing with a piston on it. Oh nooo, why that would just  upset the social order and cause people to whisper loudly at the theater now wouldn't it? But it gets worse...

In this post he continues his unabashed DIS'ing and in this one, the micro-aggressive macro-aggressions are enough to offend your offensibilities! To wit:

"We also got so see a bunch of new products for the AR platform…they are every bit as thoughtful and well-designed as the rifle itself."

See that? His subtle implication is not just that the AR platform is well designed (a contention that those of us around here would dispute if we weren't so sensitive to other people's feelings!) but that any and all piston involved firearms are thus inferior, brutish, of sub-standard comprehension capability and should be sent off to reeducation scrap metal camps! Oh, how we have been DIS'ed!

It gets worse. In that last linked bit of hurt and woe and DIS, he links favorably to a piece entitled "If You Only Had One 5.56 Carbine", wherein the gentle reader is shocked to find these words:

" And yes, trust us on this: you really want an AR, not an AK or G3 clone or Valmet or AUG or Tavor."

See? The DIS is not hidden or subtle or even deftly concealed in an Eastern Barbecue sandwich - it's right there in the open for all to see and be viscerally injured by!

Yet it gets even worse. Michael Bane Felabeorbt unleashes more DIS in this post, wherein he intones the chant of:

"Black Rifles Matter!"

Mr. Bane? Michael? Felabeorbt? Don't Brown Rifles Matter too?

Can we live in a world where all Gas Operated Reloading methods - Direct Impingement, Long Stroke, Short Stroke and even Gas Traps - get along? Can we have a conversation about the validity of the variety of Gas Systems available? Can we just celebrate diversity? As long as Direct Impingement Supremacy continues to repress us, I fear the answer is no.

Oh, the pain of being DIS'ed! Oh, the emotional trauma of being treated like we're Children of a Lesser Gunsmith!

As a result of these tetra-aggressions I have become not merely offended, but More Offended Than Thou (which consequently makes me eligible for a Senate seat in New York state or tenure at CU Boulder, possibly both...). Now if you will excuse me, after all these emotional blitzkriegs I really need to go hug a Garand. Or two.

Missouri Gets It Wrong On Rights

In Missouri the state's supreme court has decided that the prohibition on felons possessing firearms is not constitutionally problematic. (h/t Sayuncle) Let's examine the situation, shall we?

Friday, July 31, 2015

Defending The Bridge At All Costs

Too bad this particular one is located on the Kwai River:

Now More Voices Agree on the Need to Fix NICS:

"...We are in the third year of our industry’s national effort to ensure that the system has all the appropriate records put into it.  We call the initiative FixNICS  and we have been successful through our direct efforts to convince 16 state legislatures to pass legislation to ensure that there are no statutory, regulatory, administrative or procedural impediments to entering all appropriate records – criminal and mental health – into NICS." {internal link omitted, and h/t Sayuncle)

Yes, Ve need to in-sure that ev-reboodies papers are in, I mean that only the desirables get to have gu... er, Oh nevermind.

Fix the background check system? Only if they're talking about fixing it the way Rand Paul videos himself "fixing" the tax code - while the chainsaw method looks fun I've not ruled out the flamethrower as the best option just yet.

The background check system exists to make sure The Wrong People don't exercise a basic, fundamental human Right that's enumerated in at least one applicable constitution. It should be eliminated, not enhanced in its efficiency.

"Yes.  The 'gun lobby' did that.  We prefer to be called the firearms industry, but yes, we did that. We don’t expect the gun control groups to provide any credit to our industry. It runs counter to the narrative that they proffer, and that is too often accepted without challenge by reporters who should know that verifying information should be part of every story they file."

Why should the anti-gunowner groups credit the NSSF for the gun industry's work on background checks? I mean, it's embarrassing when your enemy effectively does your job for you. What is a surprise to most gun owning folks is how willing the firearms industry is to further the cause of gunowner control.

Then they go on to offer a tepid repudiation of extended background checks to private sales. You cannot reasonably prop up background checks at retail and effectively argue against them in other venues. That whole principal thing comes into play and most people aren't convinced by what seems a schizophrenic response.

The only thing to do is to oppose background checks in their entirety, and support abolishing the prohibited persons list altogether. It won't be easy swaying public opinion (especially with so many of our alleged allies cheering the other team on in this matter) but I have a few ideas about that.

And remember, appeasement is for chumps.

Edit: 07/31/15 14:35 MDT I just realized that thanks to the NSSF's efforts, no vet or octogenarian who has someone else deal with their finances will slip through the cracks. After all, the VA and SSA aren't the only ones who keep track of who ain't balancing their own checkbook. I'm sure there are state level programs that have that info and, thanks to such efforts as FixNICS, they'll be sure to include them from now on.

The South

The Anarchangel his-self has a post up I want y'all to read. It's entitled Wounds, and Scars, And Battle Flags.  It's not a short read, but many things that are worth reading tend toward the lengthier side of life. As he warns, it contains something to piss off just about everyone concerning this issue. But read it as what I'll write will make more sense with his post in mind.

Now that you've presumably read it, I disagree with My Byrne's base assertion - that the confederate battle flag is a symbol of hatred towards black folks. I agree that some if not many black people have this view, but in general it's not quite what it seems.

When a person sees the flag that once flew over the Army of Northern Virginia, they don't see it a as symbol of hatred. They see it as a symbol of The South. They view The South as something that represents hatred. They're gravely mistaken, but that's what they see. 

What was missed in that very well thought out post is what southerners see, specifically southerners that grew up in the 1960's through 1990's.

Vets And Purges

Workmageddon appears to be easing up momentarily, but I don't want to count my days off before they hatch. Posting may continue to be light (er, nonexistent) for a while, but whilst I have some time I'll try to jot down a few things.

So, Obama has told Israel that if they like the peace in our time they can keep it and goes on to criticize critics of his so called deal. Steyn disagrees that this is comparable to Chamberlain, as Chamberlain actually loved his country, or to Munich, as this seems far worse than Munich.

Domestically Obama is moving to disarm what seems like old folks. I don't think that's his goal though.

"The Obama administration wants to keep people collecting Social Security benefits from owning guns if it is determined they are unable to manage their own affairs, the Los Angeles Times reported."

That same criteria is used by the VA. Coincidence? I kinda doubt it. Methinks this is geared towards disarming vets. If some old folks get caught in this net, no biggie, but the goal is vets. 

Far fetched you say? I'll remind you of that DHS report from 2009 which listed vets, among others, as potential terrorist threats. Legislation is almost assuredly out of the question, so Obama is doing what he can (and more if one puts any stock in the Bill of Rights or that whole separation of powers notion) through executive action, and if your resources are limited you use them on what you perceive as the greatest threat within your capabilities of acting upon. In this case, it's vets.

Of course, hypocrisy is obvious - telling folks who can't balance a checkbook that they're unfit to own firearms coming from a guy who can't balance a budget yet has nukes at his disposal?

A lot of folks - millions from what I gather - have some trouble keeping their finances together. Now if you look at the Rand Paul videos where he literally destroys copies of the u.S. tax code you'll perhaps note the enormity of the documents. It is perfectly reasonable to be able to competently own and use a device as mechanically and morally simple as a firearm while not wanting the stress of flipping through 70,000 pages of legalease to interfere with trying to deal with whatever it is you're trying to deal with. Hell, most folks without PTSD or some other ailment don't want to deal with the tax code. That in no way reflects their competence with firearms, or motor vehicles or power tools.

But for this administration it's a way to disarm those that are seen as the most pressing threat. After all a veteran presumably has training in the use of arms and would therefore be able to put up the most resistance to any government imposed efforts to force a population into doing something it really didn't want to do. I am not saying or even implying that Obama is looking to declare martial law, crown himself president for life and start setting up re-education centers to murder 25 million stubborn Americans (the latter was only endorsed by Obama's pals, not by Obama himself). But if you see a group as a threat you try to take away their ability to do you harm. If old folks get disarmed along the way I doubt anyone in this administration will shed a tear.

I should also note that Obama has been making some changes within the military itself.  Not just cultural changes, but a reduction in troops as well. There are suggestions of a purge of the military, not only of high ranking officers who aren't politically or socially desirable, but of the warrior class. I don't think this is part of some diabolical plot but simply an extension of Obama's (and the Progressives) worldview. He sees everything as political, and the military is a cultural problem that needs attention. Military culture ain't perfect - no culture its. But military culture is as close as can be of an institutionalized form of Scots-Irish culture, which is an abhorrence to the Progressive culture. Therefore it requires no Machiavellian plot to conclude that the changes he's trying to make to the military are an extension of the changes he's trying to make to society at large. Not good changes, as they all operate on the foundation of videri quam esse as does the Progressive culture itself, but not changes involving any sort of conspiracy.

Of course, just because there's no conspiracy doesn't mean they're not out to get ya, and you don't really need an excuse to stock ammo cans four or more deep. 

Tunes For Gunnuts Part 1

 By chance I found a CD just lying on the ground. Normally I'd have just tossed it in a trash can but on it was written "Gunnut songs" Intrigued I took it home & popped it in a player. I was astounded as I never noticed the tunes on it were in fact geared towards the Gun Culture. I must have misheard the lyrics for all these years. Here are a few of the titles

A.R. U Gonna Go My Way (Lenny Kravitz)
R.O. Got Us Fallin' In Love (Usher)
She's Only 17 (HMR!) (Winger)
It's Still Rock Island Armory To Me (Billy Joel)
Glock Around The Clock (Bill Hailey)
My Baby Garand (Billy Joel)
The Garand Tour (George Jones)
Trigger Control (Janet Jackson)
Three Times a Lahti (The Commodores)
For Those About To Glock (AC/DC)

 Damned montegreen

Friday, April 24, 2015

30 Ain't Enough

30 pieces rounds of silver were offered to us. Allegedly. Kinda. Maybe. Sorta.

A democrat, none other than ol' "you don't know if you're being raped" Salazar (D-Thorton), mentioned he might go for upping the limit on magazine capacity to 30 rounds. He wasn't speaking on behalf of his party, he wasn't making a solid proposal, he just tossed that out there.

I doubt that the dems would have gone for it. even if it could have passed the house it'd be moot as it would have never passed out of committee to get to a floor vote in the house. And Hick would have never signed it, as Bloomie the Hut would have denied him permission to do so.

But like a scrap of meat dropped twixt two hungry dogs much fighting has ensued over it.

I won't get into the players involved as that's not all that important. What is important is that A: a lot of gunowners fell for it and B: a lot of gunowners don't realize what they fell for.

Saturday, April 04, 2015

The Covers Are New But The School Is Old

Posting has been and likely will continue to be light, so in lieu of actual content I have something a bit cheerier - interesting covers of popular tunes, like Trainor's "All About That Bass" (Postmodern Jukebox European Tour version), Smith's "I'm Not The Only One" (Vintage New Orleans style), Maroon 5's "Maps" (Vintage 1970's Soul version), Blackstreet's "No Diggity" (Vintage Jessica Rabbit style), Guns'n'Roses' "Sweet Child Of Mine" (New Orleans style), Bishop's "Fooled Around and Fell In Love" (dobro, upright, snare & heels version), Bel Biv Devoe's "Poison" (Vintage Old Jack Swing version), Thicke's "Blurred Lines" (Vintage Bluegrass Barn Dance style), Brown's "It's a Man's Man's Man's World" (Orchestral Funk version), Coolio's "Gangsta's Paradise" (Vintage 1920's Al Capone style), and Franklin's "Baby I Love You" (jeans and dobro version).

If you've never heard of Miche Braden, Morgan James, Shoshana Bean, Ariana Savalas, Hailey Reinhart, Robyn Adele Anderson or Casey Abrams, then below the fold I'll help you correct that distressing oversight.

Saturday, March 14, 2015

The Highs And Thurlows

Via Mandy Connell, I see that state rep. Thurlow is upsetting his constituents. In case you didn't jot it down, Thurlow voted with the dems to kill a bill that would have forced the CBI to respond to NFA paperwork within 5 days. He did vote correctly on the other gunowner bills that were up that day, but his attempts to reach across the aisle in other areas are ticking off folks that voted for him. This is perhaps why the old guard GoP around here doesn't like the concept of recalls - they know it can be used against RINO's just as effectively as against dems.

Friday, March 13, 2015

Ten Years American Time Etc

Again, apropos of something in particular (though probably none of my damn bid'niz), a few vids below the break.

Sunday, March 08, 2015

Killing Daylight

Savings Time, that is. Here's an article discussing some of the reasons to nix DST. I will add this; all the hipsters who revel in the extra hour of daylight after clocking out of their 9 to 5 - they, like proponents of smoking bans, think musicians make way too much money.

Ya see, DST results in folks spending less time in bars. I don't just mean the little dance joints with electronica blasting louder than the obnoxiousness of the $20 cover, I mean bars where working bands ply their trade. Less of a crowd means less revenue is generated, and therefore less money the bar owner has to pay the band.

So when someone asks why aren't there any good blues bands around any more and everyone's stuck listening to N'Sync records at the local bar of choice, now you can tell them - it was the government's attempt to make thing better by arbitrarily changing the time so senators can have an extra hour-ish on the back 9 each day.

(I'm not exaggerating all that much - the decrease in revenue because of DST won't usually wipe out a bar scene where live music is the draw, but it will hamper it for the players. Making a living playing music was difficult enough that even a little bit mo' difficult can't be justified to me by skiiers wanting to stay on the slopes til 8 or 9 p.m.)

Petty Is As Petty Does

Ages ago, I was a regular on a Guns and Ammo forum. I am not positive, but I suspect that a notable gunwriter who at that time had recently dropped by started grumbling about as there were several postings from there that did not present the NRA in a good light. I defended the use of KABA as it was very informative, especially back then, and tried to explain that it was a clearinghouse of firearm related news, though it seems the powers that be were either daft or biased. A new policy was announced that any posts containing links to KABA would be deleted. A few days later, one of my posts was deleted because it contained a link to a KABA story (I forget the details, but I recall it wasn't bashing the NRA or anything - just a bit of news I thought relevant).  I left. Never posted there again. Never bought another G&A magazine or anything from Petersen Publishing.

So it's a bit sad that KABA has resorted to the same petty behavior.

Ya Best Stay Off His Lawn

Perusing the CMP forums I stumbled across a post that I thought was worth sharing. Here's the accompanying photo:

And here's the post about a vet acquiring his first Garand since leaving the Army.

The person who posted and the vet pictured live in Wyoming. If they'd been just a few hundred miles south this neighborly gesture would have involved a trip to a gun store, government paperwork, a fee and a wait for approval from some bureaucrat, all to make sure this octogenarian wasn't one of the wrong people.

Luckily they live in America* instead of Colorado, so it was a rather simple exchange. Somehow, even without government oversight, I don't think anyone is gonna lose sleep worrying about this fine old gent knocking over  a liquor store with his recent acquisition (well, except for those jack-asses who want to keep this "military-grade weapons off the streets"**). Trespassing would be ill advised however. Remind's me of a post over at The Smallest Minority: Old Men Must Be Dangerous. Go read that one if you haven't already.

(*That'd be the current America, not the Bloomberg/Obama/Gottlieb America where Universal Background Checks would have been traded for some beads and promises not worth the paper they're printed on. Remember this tale when folks try to sell you on UBC's for some other concessions. Don't let America become BOG'ed down.)

(** At the cost of at least 41 jobs and over the objections of Senator Leahy (D-Vermont) amongst others, Obama used his executive power to block the re-importation of M1 Garands from South Korea, implying that they were too dangerous for mere civilians to possess. Criticism of this move could be found in the expected places, like Ammoland but also from Obama-friendly sites like the Huffington Post. [The CMP does not use commercial channels to acquire its stock of M1 rifles and is therefore unaffected.] Of course, I regard this action of Obama's as a high crime and/or misdemeanor and am sorely disappointed that impeachment proceedings have not begun in regard to this.)

Saturday, March 07, 2015

Wait A Minute or 77,760

It is worth mentioning that the Colorado GoP had a stand off with the dems here over increasing funding for the CBI's background check department.  Colorado Pols wasn't happy with them ( that's a very left leaning publication btw) and has a nice conspiracy theory take on things (i.e. the GoP wants the backlog to go past 90 days so people won't have to have background checks for CCW permits). The Gazzaette has a more head covering-sans-aluminum foil discussion:

"If we're going to add people and we're going to expand the program, it's more appropriate to do it during the budget, not a supplemental,' House Minority Leader Brian DelGrosso, R-Loveland, said. 'I think that is a department that the numbers may fluctuate."

Further, Sloan (the head of the CBI) has a problem with arithmetic. Back in 2013 before the gunonwer control laws were passed, the CBI had trouble keeping up with background checks. wait times were well over 9 days at one point. Finally CBI re-allocated some staff to reduce the backlog,  but it always seemed to me that the long waits had more to do with Sloan wanting to use them as an excuse to increase his budget than them merely being overwhelmed. His comprehension seems questionable as well, judging from his inability to answer a question about a law he supports and would oversee enforcement of.

Back to the Gazette article, with the appearance of deceptive practices by the CBI's head, I find this next quote to be plausible:
"DelGrosso said the denial of funds shows the agency was not convincing in the need for the mid-fiscal year budget increase."

So perhaps the budget committee used calculators when Sloan was speaking?

"Traditionally, when the House and Senate cannot agree on a final version of a bill a temporary committee is formed to hash out the issue and find a middle ground.
On this issue, however, Senate Republicans adhered to their original version and sent the bill back to the House to either be approved without the background check appropriation or the entire bill would die."

That's promising.

The Durango Herald also covers this story:
"The current wait time is about 54 days on background checks. The additional money aimed to lower that time to about 20 days. Wait times are expected to increase past 54 days without the funding. Colorado law requires permits to be issued without a background check if the wait time crawls past 90 days."
54 days? 54? To get permission to exercise a Right? And Sloan's request for more funds would only cut that wait to 20 days? I'd assume that's 20 business days, mind you. 54 days is 77,760 minutes to wait on something that should be instantaneous if it is to be tolerated at all.
"But Sen. Kent Lambert, R-Colorado Springs, chairman of the JBC, said some of the blame should be placed on the CBI. He also suggested that Colorado should adopt a different concealed-carry background check law that models one used by the Federal Bureau of Investigation, which Lambert said would reduce wait times to one day.
'I believe the request at this time is superfluous and unnecessary,' Lambert said."

So it may not be that the GoP has a problem with the concept of background checks 9much to their discredit), it could be that they think that waiting 20 days, or 54 days, or more than one is ridiculous. 
It's nice to see the GoP here showing some backbone. Shame the same can't easily be said of the national Gop. But if the Colorado GoP was really interested in protecting the Rights of folks to own and carry weapons, then they should expand this new-found linkage of vertebra into a broader effort, similar to the one I proposed here.

Colorado Pro Gunowner Bill Updates Continued

 The previous update can be found here.

The hearing for SB15-175 (the magazine capacity ban repeal [.pdf]) will be on Monday, March 9th at 1:30 p.m. MDT in room 271 of the capital building in Denver, Co

Here's the senate's judiciary committee page where you'll find contact info. A note in the senate calender said that remote testimony was available for this committee session, so if you'd like to testify but cannot make a physical appearance at the capital then go to this page, fill out the form and select the location closest to you from the drop down menu. It seems they have several locations around the state for a person to testify from. It's not perfect, but it'd save you driving into Denver from way out of town.

I am not positive, but the Colorado Channel may stream audio and/or video of the committee hearing. Try them at 1:30 p.m. MDT.  

HB15-1152 (a permitless carry bill [.pdf]) will be heard by the house state, veterans and military affairs committee on Monday April 6th (time and location to be announced).

HB15-1168 (carry on school grounds by permit holders [.pdf]) will be heard by the house state, veterans and military affairs committee on Monday April 6th (time and location to be announced).

That's all the movement on these bills since the last update (linked to at the beginning of this post). 

The house state, veterans and military affairs committee is where the leadership sends bills that they do not wish to see on the house floor for a full vote. Last time they killed all the pro-gunowner bills that were before them. It's likely that they'd do the same this time around. I should note that noted "civil rights" lawyer Joe Salazar (you remember Joe don't ya? Mr. "A woman shouldn't carry a gun because she doesn't know if she's being raped"?) is the vice-chair of that committee. That he might ever forget that he uttered that sentiment would be cause for the very stones themselves to weep, so if you're in his district by all means, keep mentioning it to him and anyone that can listen.

As I said it's likely that the kill committee will live up to its name. Still, it's worth writing your reps and showing up if you can. The senate committee is much more favorable, but again it's a good idea to show up if you can, or contact your senator if you can't.

Friday, March 06, 2015

March Sixth Two Thousand Fifteen

I'm very tired and where I am it's almost the 7th and I'm just not up to attempting a clever title or explanation (I don't claim to actually come up with anything clever, I merely try) for this post. Here's Tony! Toni! Tone! doing an old fav of mine from 1993. Enjoy.

Monday, March 02, 2015

More On The Law And Open Carry

The video below was posted about by Say Uncle and (with a h/t to Mr. Vanderboegh) Bob Owens. I'll embed the video here as well, for y'alls convenience.

A lot of folks, gunowners even, seem to feel that this fellow's detention was justified and the cop did no wrong. Some downright nasty condemnation of the open carrier has been and likely will continue to go on (from gunowners no less). But there's another video I'd like you to watch before you start to load boulders into that onager (that sits atop the Maison de Verre in which you may reside) and fling them at someone who looks differently than you and enjoys his Rights in a different fashion than you may be accustomed:

In this instance, I think a lot of gunowners would benefit from learning More, n'est-ce pas?

Thursday, February 26, 2015

Snow Related Note Part Deja Vu

This isn't the same pic from the other day (this one was taken a few hours ago) but it is oddly reminiscent, no?
The snow was almost all melted off the bike by Wednesday morning. But then fell another few inches (and by few I mean just shy of 8) of nature's own Darwinian Test Media, Driver, Instantaneous. That's slacked up but they're calling for another few inches tonight, and a few more inches through the weekend (with a predicted high of 19 today and climbing up steadily to a balmy 29 by Sunday). At last check, we were two-point-something inches away from being the snowiest February on record. I am confident that by Saturday evening we will have the raw material to exceed that quota and thus provide meteorologists from all around an excuse to break out their erasers and scribble some new lines, or go boarding or something.

To toss in something gun related (cause this is a gun blog primarily. I think): all those gelatin tests that proved your round of choice was superb and reliable and tacticute and all that - you did see how it did with a few layers of denim in front of the Jell-o didnja? Cause methinks in the icebox that is this part of the world (and perhaps yourn too) the bad guys like to bundle up just as sure as they don't like to leak, and having that nice, downright purdy snapshot of what your projectile does in bare collagen derivative may not tell the whole story once the thermostat justifies a parka. Just askin'.

 But (as if one needed an excuse) this weather does seem to warrant a little Over The Rhine:


Wednesday, February 25, 2015

Still Smokin

Ah, Sleepy Brown, son of Jimmy Brown (lead singer and sax player for the ol' disco band Brick). This tune of his has a groove so deep that it's damn near pornographic. Contrary to the beliefs of Steve Goodman and David Allen Coe I don't think there's a "perfect" song for any given genre, but this tune right here comes about as close as one could to the platonic ideal of R&B groove. I bring this tune to ya for two reasons. 1; it reminds me of damn near every bass player I've ever known some old pals and 2; it seemed fitting since the idiots that run Boulder are at it again:

Boulder's Expanded Outdoor Smoking Ban Get Final Approval

"The ban will apply within the boundaries of the downtown business district, which extends several blocks around the Pearl Street Mall, including alleys within the district, all city parks and open space, Chautauqua, Flatirons Golf Course, multi-use paths, within 25 feet of those paths, and within 25 feet of bus stops and building entrances."

Outdoors. Because second hand smoke? Nope; this is nothing more than an attempt to wipe out behavior, perhaps a subculture as they see it, that they find undesirable. That's why it includes e-cigarettes.

"The vote was unanimous.

That should simplify things, like voting the bums out, or getting indictments. At the very least, if anyone on your property mentions that they're on the Boulder City Council, you won't have to ask their name and thumb through a list - you can just grab them by the scruff and toss them out..

Monday, February 23, 2015

On Malls And The Price Of Slavery

Last summer a former deputy CIA director warned of possible attacks at shopping malls, saying if a terrorist showed up with an AK-47 and started shooting it wouldn't surprise him. Last fall reports of the Islamic State operating just across the southern border were taken seriously enough for a military base to alter the way it handles its security.

Here and here are stories (with annoying auto-play vids) about a recent Al-Shabaab (an Islamic terrorist group that is aligned with Al-Qaeda) video calling for armed attacks on American shopping malls.  The Mall of America was mentioned specifically and they have said they were increasing security measures - perhaps by making their Gun Free Zone signs bigger? After the Al-Shabaab attack on the Westgate mall in Kenya, the Interpol chief said there were two methods to protect people from similar attacks; either create an extremely secure perimeter or arm the citizenry. I guess Mall of America didn't get the message.

Michael Bane elaborates on the threatening messages the Islamic State has for the u.S.and some thoughts to keep in mind as well as to act on. He also points to something that has been making the rounds - the Islamic State's price list for slaves.

According to this list a Yazadi or Christian girl between 10 and 20 years old will sell for $130. There's a reason they failed to list the price for an American girl -  at 13 years old the price is already way too high for them to pay:

And as an American woman gets older that price ain't getting no cheaper:

More and more women are becoming gun owners in this country. The reasons vary, and most likely protection from the more common domestic variety of thug is the main concern, but not ending up on the auction block is a definite incidental benefit. Free people own guns. Slaves don't.

Sunday, February 22, 2015

Colorado Pro Gunowner Bill Updates

On February 23rd at 1:30 p.m. MST in room 271 of the Capital building in Denver, Colorado, SB15-175 (The magazine capacity ban repeal [.pdf]) will be heard by the state senate's judiciary committee. It will likely pass out of committee but it's still a very good idea to keep the pressure on.

Here's the senate's judiciary committee page where you'll find contact info. A note in the senate calender said that remote testimony was available for this committee session, so if you'd like to testify but cannot make a physical appearance at the capital then go to this page, fill out the form and select the location closest to you from the drop down menu. It seems they have several locations around the state for a person to testify from. It's not perfect, but it'd save you driving into Denver from way out of town.

I am not positive, but the Colorado Channel may stream audio and/or video of the committee hearing. Try them at 1:30 p.m. MST. 

SB15-086 (The UBC repeal [.pdf]) passed out of the senate judiciary committee (3-2) and was sent to the senate finance committee.

SB15-032 (The permitless carry bill [.pdf]) passed out of the senate and is waiting to be introduced in the house. (I discussed this bill a bit in this post here.)

Rocky Mountain Gun Owners' Billwatch page is a good way to keep up with the status of things in the state legislature, if you ain't hip to it already.

Update: 02-22-15 19:50 MST The hearing for SB15-175 has been postponed due to inclement weather.

Update: 03-07-15 14:25 MST The hearing for SB15-175 will be on Monday, March 9th at 1:30 p.m. MDT in room 271 of the capital building in Denver, Co. 

Snow Related Note Part Sumfinsumfin

Sometimes after not riding for a spell a person will brave the cold and risk getting a little chilly just to get some time in on a bike.

Today definitely ain't sometimes.

Stick Fighter

I've often said the courts, not the legislature, are our best hope in having the Right to arms respected. That should not be taken as implying the courts are honest, rational or even timely.

For 12 years Jim Maloney has been trying to have the courts declare that the possession of two sticks and a rope is not something that should be criminal in New York. Here's his web page giving updates and history on not just the one, but now three nunchuk cases in New York. The latest of which is a foreigner, just passing through a NY airport, being arrested for having nunchuks in his checked luggage (sound familiar?).

12 years for the original case. Twelve. Years. Post McDonald it was remanded back to the district court where it awaits further action. But 12 years to have a court say that owning a pair of sticks tied together with a rope is not a crime? Judge Narragansett would be rolling over in his fictional grave.

Oh, just coincidentally as they were serving another, totally, really, seriously, for true, unrelated warrant cause they'd never try to harass anyone or anything even though he was not guilty of what the warrant said and they for sure wouldn't trump up a charge and serve a warrant just to have an excuse to look for nunchuks, the NY State police just happened to find a pair of nunchuks in Mr. Maloney's home recently. He was arrested charged and convicted. It's a misdemeanor but a 2nd offense would be a felony.

I always found it ironic. Nunchuks were invented in response to a weapons ban so folks would have some means of protection against thieves and thugs, and here several centuries later the thieves and thugs have gotten around to banning nunchuks.

But the Right to arms is not just about firearms. Knives, swords, clubs and even sticks tied together are weapons that must be protected against government intrusion. And of course, machetes...

This Is Sworda Ridiculous

A NY state senator wants to ban machetes (h/t SayUncle). The article itself as well as the concept behind it are fisk-worthy.

Norman Architecture

Norman v State (.pdf) was a case from Florida's 4th District Court of Appeal  where the state's ban on open carry was challenged. Eugene Volokh, Sebastian and others have written about the case approvingly, because even though it upheld the state's ban on open carry it opined that a state could ban open or concealed carry, but not both. It had to leave at least one of the two options available.

The court used a two step test, the first step determined whether the law severely intruded upon the core Right (armed self defense outside the home), and the second step what level of scrutiny should be applied. The court decided that since it only affected one mode of carry, with the other available, that it was not a severe burden on the core right. The court went on to apply a light form of intermediate scrutiny - probably a bit more strict than rational basis, but not quite as harsh as actual intermediate scrutiny. The court also declined to consider an overbreadth challenge to the open carry prohibition.

The court erred in several places, and those who think this some sort of victory are mistaken.

Friday, February 20, 2015

Colorado's Solution

In this post I explained how the old guard of the Colorado GoP has been much more concerned with preserving its own power than with winning elections or helping gunowners. Here I'll try to explain what the Colorado GoP could do to repeal the gunowner control laws passed in 2013 (and before) if they were serious about protecting the Right to arms.

What they could do, if they were serious, is to put the brakes on everything. A legislative blockade, if you will.

Colorados Problems

In a continuation of this post, I'll try to explain, to the best of my knowledge, how Colorado wound up where it is. And as usual I completely circumnavigate even the most fledgling attempt at brevity. So fill your glass, grab some snacks and remove any objects of a toss-able nature.

Colorado Corrections

Sebastian has some suggestions for what can be done to win Colorado back. Bless his little Yankee heart.
First, at least he's thinking enough about us trapped behind enemy lines to try to give us some supportive advice, and I really do appreciate that, and hope he (or none of y'all) will take this as me ripping him down. But there are a few corrections necessary:

As well as Sebastian's post linked above, I refer you to two previous posts of my own: Bloomberg's Money Was Well Spent and The Audio Of The First Round Of 2015.They both concern the pro-gunowner bills in Colorado so far this year.

SB15-032 (.pdf) was not a constitutional carry bill. It was a permitless carry bill. The difference is thus: this bill would have eliminated the permit requirement to carry a concealed handgun for anyone over 21 and "granted" the same "authority" and imposed the same limitations as a concealed carry permit. A constitutional carry bill would have simply eliminated the prohibition on carrying a weapon. With constitutional carry, a 20 year old could slip a 4" knife in her purse  (currently it's 3.5" for a concealed blade) & not have to hand it over to a "peace officer" if she is for some reason detained. With this bill, a 20 year old who only owns a knife would be out of luck if that knife had a blade over 3.5 inches. This bill is an improvement, but it's not actually constitutional carry.

Almost all the house bills were shot down 6-5. One was lost by a 7-4 vote. That means 1 republican, in this case Dan Thurlow, voted with the anti-gunowners. I can speculate as to why, but I have nothing definitive.

Sebastian dislikes Dudley Brown, head of Rocky Mountain Gun Owners. That's cool - I don't really care if folks don't like someone. Hell, I don't even care if folks don't like me. But RMGO has been the only pro-gunowner group in this state since I've been here. The NRA's state affiliate, The Colorado State Shooting Association, has been milquetoast at best, and outright hostile at times. When actual constitutional carry bills have been brought up in the past, we weren't busy fighting the anti-gunowners, we were busy fighting gunowners, mainly permit holders and instructors, and the CSSA (and at times the NRA itself ). I refer to you this very old (and of course very long) post of mine comparing Colorado's then brand spankin' new "shall issue" ccw law to the may issue it replaced and the better carry bill it stepped on. Also if you really want to know the sordid history of gunowner groups in this state (at least where it concerns RMGO and the CSSA and NRA) this piece by Ari Armstrong called A House Divided is worth the time.

I am not concerned if anyone thinks that Brown is personally a great guy or the biggest jerk in the world. What is important is that Brown knows Colorado politics and he almost always advocates the most principled position available, certainly more principled than the CSSA or the NRA to date. And by principled I mean having the most respect for the Right to own and carry weapons. I've disagreed with him a time or two, and it's not likely he and I will go out golfing any given weekend. But he and RMGO have been fighting for more freedom for me and everyone in Colorado. The NRA and CSSA for the most part haven't.

So no; Brown isn't a false prophet. Flawed perhaps, but not false. Until someone shows me an alternative RMGO is the only pro-gunowner organization in Colorado. Driving folks away from them, unless it can be shown that they've been supporting gunowner control, is counter-productive if you're pro-gunowner (which not all gunowners are).

Now, Sebastian says we must find republican "...candidates who can win in that state’s more socially liberal political climate."

Isn't that just precious?

That's been tried. That's how we wound up where we are. And it deserves a post of its own.

Tuesday, February 17, 2015

A Few Things Volume One

 A few thoughts on various subjects (some definitions to ponder, gunowner registration ain't acceptable, the proposed 5.56 ammo ban and why the "simple fix" won't work, on blaming gunowners for legislators' evil, the dangers of national reciprocity, what to do about gunnowners that don't show up, and politicians - not open carriers -are the problem) that'll likely tick off all both of my readers:

Monday, February 16, 2015

Garand Development Plan

Do you know how to make a Garand better? You can’t. A Garand within specifications is about as good a general purpose rifle as you could hope for. What you can do is make a Garand better for your specific purpose. Think a Garand is too short? You can add some length to it. Think a Garand is too long and heavy? You can reduce its length and weight. Want it chambered in a heavier or milder cartridge? That can be done. Add optics? There are several solutions depending upon your desire. It’s even possible, in theory – I haven’t tested this out yet myself – to make a Garand float! It’s not as easy or versatile as a shooter de la poodle an AR to optimize for your tastes, but a Garand can do a lot of things as is, and it can do a bit more with some work.

To illustrate I’ll walk you through what I’ve done and am doing (or at least currently plan to do) to some of my Garands:  

Saturday, February 14, 2015

Humorous Valentinus

In honor of the occasion (otherwise known as SAD - Singles Awareness Day, or more ominously as VD) for your consideration I'll offer two videos. The first from our favorite Token Libertarian:

& the second from miss Chaka Kahn

Oh what the heck, let's make this a trifecta after this anecdote:

What Hollywood and its studios often do to movies is downright criminal and tends to show that the folks way at the top aren't exactly turning down offers from NASA on a weekly basis so they may become slaves to art. Case in point, after a very positive screening of a picture in 1961 an executive with the studio went on a mini rant about how he hated the most prominent song in the movie and wanted it removed.  This infuriated the star, one miss Audrey Hepburn, so much that she - well reports vary from her standing up and stomping her foot as she said he'd remove the song "over my dead body!" to a more profanity filled protestation of the proposal. The song stayed in and despite it actually being a nicely written (and nicely performed by miss Hepburn) little ditty for its genre it has, ever since, in elevators and dentist's offices across the globe, been butchered more mercilessly than an eraser at a budget meeting run by Democrats in an election year. Shame as it really is a sweet little tune. And here it is.

An Offense In Speech

Public servant Rhonda Fields, satisfied that her efforts at disparaging the 2nd article of the Bill of Rights won't be reversed this year, has decided that pesky 1rst article is getting in her way:

Douglas County family affected by attempted suicide supports 'Cyber Bully Bill' Measure criminalizes electronic harassment

"Fields is sponsoring a bill (HB 15-1072) that would criminalize harassment via 'interactive electronic devices.'
'I think we need to send a strong message that there's going to be accountability associated when people use hate as a force of intimidation and harassment,' the lawmaker said."

If you click on that link embedded in the quote you'll see a .pdf of the bill in question. Public servant Field's bill would alter the current law outlining what harassment is, affecting only subsection e. Added are the words "directly or indirectly", "or directs language towards another person", and "or other interactive electronic medium".

Thursday, February 12, 2015

That Ain't Right

A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the Right of the people to obtain a permit to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

That can be the only explanation for the title of this bill:

The Constitutional Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act (h/t SayUncle).

Wednesday, February 04, 2015

Make Our Beautiful State Free Again

Via The War On Guns, I found this article at Colorado Peak Politics that contained the following video of Lily Tang Williams testifying for the repeal of the Colorado magazine capacity ban. The lady has a website as well as a facebook page and a Youtube channel if y'all would like to tell her that y'all appreciate her taking the time to speak up for her Rights, and to try to make this state free once more.

The audio isn't the best so I'll include the text she read from below the jump

The Audio Of The First Round Of 2015

I spent a little time listening to audio of a committee hearing on various gunowner bills in Colorado. Here's a post on what those bills were

Here's a link to archived audio of Colorado legislative committee hearings. I couldn't find one for the Senate judiciary committee hearing. On the left hand navigation bar under House Committees click the State Veterans and Military Affairs link and look for February 2nd 2015.  This will open a pop up where you can listen to the hearing if you have a little over 9 hours to spare. I just started listening and they seem to be alternating between pro and anti testimony.