Hopefully a happy time of year. :)
Monday, December 21, 2015
Tuesday, December 08, 2015
Ol Hickey
I looked up wikihow's 11 easy steps to remove a hickey, but the bastard only persists. Attempts to hide it have failed as it spoke with NPR today:
"Hickenlooper also talked about the attack on Planned Parenthood two weeks ago and potential gun control measures; what he can do to prevent acts of ISIS inspired terrorism..."
The gist is that he thinks an AWB would be difficult to pass or enforce, but says that if more mass shootings occur it could be on the table. He did mention mental health as a possible approach to the gun owner control problem, as well as keeping folks on the No-Fly list from obtaining firearms. He mentioned domestic violence convicts again, as well as restraining orders (makes ya wanna send him a highlighted copy of federal law, don't it?). Children. He mentioned children. And firearm storage. Oh, and he did make a deal about Colorado Springs being well populated with concealed carry permit holders and that not stopping the Planned Parenthood attack. He wasn't saying that a high gun toting population caused the attack, he just used that bit of asininity to slam the idea that more folks carrying weapons would deter mass shootings.
(Now just twixt you, me and the entire free world, I think it's safe to say that no matter what the demographic is of the block surrounding block the number of concealed carry permit holders, or even just gun owners that carry sans permit, would only approach zero from the negative side of the scale inside Planned Parenthood. It's like a democrat campaign rally - it may not say it's a "gun free zone", but no one in Vegas would lay money down otherwise.)
What I gathered from our states most annoying hickey is that the dems here will try to push through some sort of mental health bill relating to firearms. There's even a chance they will try to ban anyone in state from possessing weapons if they're on the No Fly list. I think some sort of push for a safe storage law (For The Children, of course) may happen.
If you're thinking there's no chance any of that will pass, I wish I could share your optimism, but I know the local GoP. I can see some "law and order" type of stupidity being used to justify a reacharound across the aisle, and ol' hickey has mentioned that he's been talking with some people that were opposed but now open to more gun owner control laws. Hopefully it's no one with any power or influence within the local GoP (such as the one defector we know of), but they ain't called "the stupid party" for nuffin'.
I also think there may be an attempt to up the magazine capacity limit to 30 rounds. This is a mistake as there are better ways to attack the entire law (through the courts as well as through the legislature), not just put out our hats as we beg "Please sir, may I have some more".
Colorado has a hickey that just won't go away. A very embarrassing hickey (which usually you can't see because it's covered up bythat nasty little fascist from NYC's Bloombergs boot on our throat...). I wonder how many gallons of witch hazel it'd take to... oh, nevermind. I fear we'll just have to wait this one out. Anyone got a state-sized turtleneck we can borrow?
"Hickenlooper also talked about the attack on Planned Parenthood two weeks ago and potential gun control measures; what he can do to prevent acts of ISIS inspired terrorism..."
The gist is that he thinks an AWB would be difficult to pass or enforce, but says that if more mass shootings occur it could be on the table. He did mention mental health as a possible approach to the gun owner control problem, as well as keeping folks on the No-Fly list from obtaining firearms. He mentioned domestic violence convicts again, as well as restraining orders (makes ya wanna send him a highlighted copy of federal law, don't it?). Children. He mentioned children. And firearm storage. Oh, and he did make a deal about Colorado Springs being well populated with concealed carry permit holders and that not stopping the Planned Parenthood attack. He wasn't saying that a high gun toting population caused the attack, he just used that bit of asininity to slam the idea that more folks carrying weapons would deter mass shootings.
(Now just twixt you, me and the entire free world, I think it's safe to say that no matter what the demographic is of the block surrounding block the number of concealed carry permit holders, or even just gun owners that carry sans permit, would only approach zero from the negative side of the scale inside Planned Parenthood. It's like a democrat campaign rally - it may not say it's a "gun free zone", but no one in Vegas would lay money down otherwise.)
What I gathered from our states most annoying hickey is that the dems here will try to push through some sort of mental health bill relating to firearms. There's even a chance they will try to ban anyone in state from possessing weapons if they're on the No Fly list. I think some sort of push for a safe storage law (For The Children, of course) may happen.
If you're thinking there's no chance any of that will pass, I wish I could share your optimism, but I know the local GoP. I can see some "law and order" type of stupidity being used to justify a reach
I also think there may be an attempt to up the magazine capacity limit to 30 rounds. This is a mistake as there are better ways to attack the entire law (through the courts as well as through the legislature), not just put out our hats as we beg "Please sir, may I have some more".
Colorado has a hickey that just won't go away. A very embarrassing hickey (which usually you can't see because it's covered up by
Hickenlooper also
talked about the attack on Planned Parenthood two weeks ago and
potential new gun control measures; what he can do to prevent acts of
ISIS-inspired terrorism - See more at:
http://www.cpr.org/news/story/hickenlooper-calls-further-investigation-planned-parenthood-wasting-taxpayer-money#.dpuf
Hickenlooper also
talked about the attack on Planned Parenthood two weeks ago and
potential new gun control measures; what he can do to prevent acts of
ISIS-inspired terrorism - See more at:
http://www.cpr.org/news/story/hickenlooper-calls-further-investigation-planned-parenthood-wasting-taxpayer-money#.dpuf
Hickenlooper also
talked about the attack on Planned Parenthood two weeks ago and
potential new gun control measures; what he can do to prevent acts of
ISIS-inspired terrorism - See more at:
http://www.cpr.org/news/story/hickenlooper-calls-further-investigation-planned-parenthood-wasting-taxpayer-money#.dpuf
Hickenlooper also
talked about the attack on Planned Parenthood two weeks ago and
potential new gun control measures; what he can do to prevent acts of
ISIS-inspired terrorism - See more at:
http://www.cpr.org/news/story/hickenlooper-calls-further-investigation-planned-parenthood-wasting-taxpayer-money#.dpuf
Hickenlooper also
talked about the attack on Planned Parenthood two weeks ago and
potential new gun control measures; what he can do to prevent acts of
ISIS-inspired terrorism - See more at:
http://www.cpr.org/news/story/hickenlooper-calls-further-investigation-planned-parenthood-wasting-taxpayer-money#.dpu
Saturday, December 05, 2015
Foreign And Domestic
The case of Sudden Jihad Syndrome in California appears to actually be an episode of Premature Jihadilation (as explained by Nikki). Though Cali has arguably the strictest gun owner control laws in the nation, that didn't stop Jihad Joe and Jane from simply ignoring them and others (such as the ones prohibiting murder). The reaction form some quarters has been predictable in direction, though a bit surprising in degree. Michael Bane points out that indeed, they want to take away our firearms. The NYT editorial that Mr. Bane mentions is fisked by Miss Claire, who notes that the first front page editorial from the NYT since 1920 is all about gun owner control with innuendos of confiscation. David Codrea notes that it may be time to add another line to the Hickenlooper Blues. He links to a Denver Post interview where Bloomberg's that nasty little fascist from NYC's chief public servant in Colorado claims he's talking with folks about adding more constitutionally repugnant gun owner control laws here. For those of you with any sort of faith in the Colorado GoP, I'd point to the DP article Mr. Codrea links to, wherein Hicky claims he's in talks with those who previously opposed any more gun owner control laws but now say they're open to them, and this was prior to the latest breakout of SJS (or PJ) in Cali. Given the talk about cutting a deal for 30 rounders a while back, I'd also keep an eye on the local (and national for that matter) pro-gun groups to make sure they aren't trying to pull a Chamberlain Gottlieb (again or again).
It's easy to see who are enemies are when they call for disarmament, whole or partial. But I would also caution that our enemies aren't just the ones that try to enact new laws to impose upon our Rights, but also those that try to protect laws that currently impose upon our Rights. Y'all have probably heard that attempts at passing new gun owner control laws were stopped in the senate last week. What I fear may be overlooked is that an attempt to loosen a very burdensome situation was also stopped. Via David Codrea I found this article from the Hill, explaining Rand Paul's attempt to force D.C. to issue concealed carry permits to residents and non residents as well as honoring out of town permits. Of course I'm not happy with anything short of constitutional carry (no permit required to carry a weapon, openly or discreetly), but no one voting against Paul's measure, including Kirk from Illinois (who for some inexplicable reason has an "R" beside his name) did so for the sake of a constitutional carry bill being brought to the floor.
Billll contemplates calling out the militia. While making a formal call may not be uncalled for, it may not be necessary either, as most folks I know of are making it a point to be not only cautious but prepared. With advanced warning, calling out the militia may just be the thing to do. But the threat we have is non specific; there's no particular area or even type of place that we're certain the enemy will fling itself against (though it's not a bad bet that there'll be a victim disarmament sign outside whatever locale they pick next). Militia historically have not always been summoned by some central authority. If the Reivers descended upon your village, you didn't wait for word from the chief - you cried the alarm as you grabbed your spear and sword and went out to repel the invaders.
I'll also remind folks, cause it's worth reminding folks about, that a little over 14 years ago the militia, who had been disarmed by the feds, was called into service. But instead of having a .380 in his pocket as was his birthright, the Feds gave Todd Beamer a food cart and told him to go do his duty. They have not admitted their mistake, and in fact have doubled down on unconstitutionally disarming the citizenry that wish to travel. So in Detroit, upstate NY and D.C. you have public servants that are in effect calling forth the militia, telling folks to be prepared and to be vigilant. But in those places, and too many others, an immoral process of permitting or licensing is in place that has at the least a chilling effect on people exercising their Right to carry weapons.
We have enemies outside of this country that seek to send their agents in for the purpose of attacking us. Bear in mind that we also have enemies within this country that, while being too cowardly to attack us directly, would use the law to disparage our Rights to the point that we are defenseless against direct attacks. While being cautious and looking out for the former, don't get blindsided by the latter.
And in case you've forgotten, appeasement is for chumps.
It's easy to see who are enemies are when they call for disarmament, whole or partial. But I would also caution that our enemies aren't just the ones that try to enact new laws to impose upon our Rights, but also those that try to protect laws that currently impose upon our Rights. Y'all have probably heard that attempts at passing new gun owner control laws were stopped in the senate last week. What I fear may be overlooked is that an attempt to loosen a very burdensome situation was also stopped. Via David Codrea I found this article from the Hill, explaining Rand Paul's attempt to force D.C. to issue concealed carry permits to residents and non residents as well as honoring out of town permits. Of course I'm not happy with anything short of constitutional carry (no permit required to carry a weapon, openly or discreetly), but no one voting against Paul's measure, including Kirk from Illinois (who for some inexplicable reason has an "R" beside his name) did so for the sake of a constitutional carry bill being brought to the floor.
Billll contemplates calling out the militia. While making a formal call may not be uncalled for, it may not be necessary either, as most folks I know of are making it a point to be not only cautious but prepared. With advanced warning, calling out the militia may just be the thing to do. But the threat we have is non specific; there's no particular area or even type of place that we're certain the enemy will fling itself against (though it's not a bad bet that there'll be a victim disarmament sign outside whatever locale they pick next). Militia historically have not always been summoned by some central authority. If the Reivers descended upon your village, you didn't wait for word from the chief - you cried the alarm as you grabbed your spear and sword and went out to repel the invaders.
I'll also remind folks, cause it's worth reminding folks about, that a little over 14 years ago the militia, who had been disarmed by the feds, was called into service. But instead of having a .380 in his pocket as was his birthright, the Feds gave Todd Beamer a food cart and told him to go do his duty. They have not admitted their mistake, and in fact have doubled down on unconstitutionally disarming the citizenry that wish to travel. So in Detroit, upstate NY and D.C. you have public servants that are in effect calling forth the militia, telling folks to be prepared and to be vigilant. But in those places, and too many others, an immoral process of permitting or licensing is in place that has at the least a chilling effect on people exercising their Right to carry weapons.
We have enemies outside of this country that seek to send their agents in for the purpose of attacking us. Bear in mind that we also have enemies within this country that, while being too cowardly to attack us directly, would use the law to disparage our Rights to the point that we are defenseless against direct attacks. While being cautious and looking out for the former, don't get blindsided by the latter.
And in case you've forgotten, appeasement is for chumps.
Thursday, December 03, 2015
A Few Losses
Sadly, Dean Dillabaugh passed in mid-October. He ran Dean's Gun Restorations whose motto is "Life's too short to shoot an ugly gun". The business he started is still operating and from what I've seen doing nice work.
Also, Jim Dubell of Delta Gun Shop and Clearwater Reboring passed away back in July.
I never had occasion to do any business with either of the aforementioned gentleman, but their work was reputed to be of the highest quality in their respective fields. They will be missed.
Also, Jim Dubell of Delta Gun Shop and Clearwater Reboring passed away back in July.
I never had occasion to do any business with either of the aforementioned gentleman, but their work was reputed to be of the highest quality in their respective fields. They will be missed.
What They Think Of You
Joe Huffman has a category on his blog labeled as "This is what they think of you". When I stumbled upon the following story it definitely came to mind.
A Nazi who worked at Auschwitz was tried for complicity in the murders of 300,000 people. He received a 4 year prison sentence.
Keep in mind, having a shotgun with a barrel that's 17.99" long sans a $200 tax stamp can land you as much as 10 years in the pen.
In Cali, possessing an "assault weapon" or a .50 BMG rifle contrary to the law will net you a minimum of 4 years in prison.
In Illinois possessing a firearm without a FOID will land you up to 1 year in prison.
In NY possessing three or more firearms, an "assault weapon" or a "high capacity ammunition feeding device" carries up to a 7 year sentence. If you have five or more firearms, or one that's loaded, then it's up to 15 years.
Possessing a handgun without the proper permit in Iowa or Massachusetts can fetch 2 years in prison. In NJ it's 3 years minimum.
Merely exercising a constitutionally enumerated Right if your papers are not in order can cause you to spend anywhere from 1/4 to almost 4 times the prison sentence of a Nazi that helped the death machine at Auschwitz murder 300,000 people. (Granted, the Nazi should have gotten more - I've long thought that the nooses at Nuremberg should have had cooks & clerks as well as commanders - but the point still stands, that if you own or carry a firearm then you're equivocal to an evil person that belonged to an evil group.)
That's what they think of you.
A Nazi who worked at Auschwitz was tried for complicity in the murders of 300,000 people. He received a 4 year prison sentence.
Keep in mind, having a shotgun with a barrel that's 17.99" long sans a $200 tax stamp can land you as much as 10 years in the pen.
In Cali, possessing an "assault weapon" or a .50 BMG rifle contrary to the law will net you a minimum of 4 years in prison.
In Illinois possessing a firearm without a FOID will land you up to 1 year in prison.
In NY possessing three or more firearms, an "assault weapon" or a "high capacity ammunition feeding device" carries up to a 7 year sentence. If you have five or more firearms, or one that's loaded, then it's up to 15 years.
Possessing a handgun without the proper permit in Iowa or Massachusetts can fetch 2 years in prison. In NJ it's 3 years minimum.
Merely exercising a constitutionally enumerated Right if your papers are not in order can cause you to spend anywhere from 1/4 to almost 4 times the prison sentence of a Nazi that helped the death machine at Auschwitz murder 300,000 people. (Granted, the Nazi should have gotten more - I've long thought that the nooses at Nuremberg should have had cooks & clerks as well as commanders - but the point still stands, that if you own or carry a firearm then you're equivocal to an evil person that belonged to an evil group.)
That's what they think of you.
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."
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).
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.
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:
and
and
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:
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:
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.
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 toreeducation 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.
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
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.
"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 ord...er, 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.
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 ord...er, 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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.)
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 KeepAndBearArms.com 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.
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.)
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:
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.
"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:
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.
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.
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
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?
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
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
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.
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
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.
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...
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.
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.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)