Monday, May 29, 2017

Trigger Scale

I broke down and bought a Trigger Scale from Amazon last week.  I never owned one before, and I was curious about just how heavy the trigger pull was on my pistols.

I rather wish I had not.  The scale only measures to eight pounds ... most of them were way over the limit.   Which is okay for certain uses, I suppose, but not for any purpose for which I bought the pistols.    Even The Beloved Kimber, since I got the trigger replaced, now clocks in at "UGH!" pounds trigger pull.

I can understand it for DA-Only pistols, but even my SA pistols tend to over-do it.

The only exception is the STI Edge in 10mm, which still breaks at a crisp, clean 3-3/4 ounces.
Ah ... perfection!   Unfortunately, my eyes have degenerated so badly in the past few years that I'm unable to use it as well in competition as I use to.   I can't see the iron sights.

I'm sorely tempted to have it mounted with an AIMPOINT, and get back into the Pistol Game ... even if I do have to shoot in OPEN Division without a compensated barrel.


"Will Not Comply!" Eh!

The funny thing about our "kinder, gentler" Northern Friends is that when it comes to taking their guns away, they're every bit as resistant to The Gov'ment as are we rowdier "southern neighbors".

This Week:
More than a million restricted, prohibited guns in Canada - Politics - CBC News:
A year and a half after Prime Minister Justin Trudeau's government came to office promising to tighten Canada's gun laws, there are now more than a million restricted and prohibited firearms across the country. The number of restricted firearms in Canada rose 5.5 per cent last year, reaching its highest point in more than a decade, according to the annual report from the RCMP's commissioner of firearms. There are now 839,295 restricted firearms, many of them handguns. The number of prohibited firearms in Canada, such as fully automatic guns, edged up 0.5 per cent to 183,333
Considering that these firearms are being described as "prohibited" and "restricted", it's difficult to understand how they get an exact count of the 'restricted' guns    Let alone the 'prohibited'!

In the meantime, the article missed an interesting point when they neglected to mention whether unregistered "restricted' guns were confiscated if/when found, or were the owners merely obliged to register them.

Seeing as how a government which would restrict guns would prefer to say "Mister and Missus Canada, Turn 'em All In!" it's probably safe to say that the guns were confiscated without compensation.
Eh?


"Quite frankly, the Trudeau government really hasn't done very much in regards to attacks on firearms owners in Canada since they got elected. About the only thing they have done is let the RCMP run wild and make up laws as they go."
And that does not endear the Trudeau government (or any government) to citizens who would be legal firearms owners without these bizarre restrictions.

(H/T: "The Gun Feed")

Friday, May 26, 2017

Hillary an Alcoholic???

Secret Service Detail: Hillary Clinton Was Drunk Morning of Campaign Rally | True Pundit:
(Posted on October 31, 2016)

Hillary Clinton had been drinking vodka the morning of a New Jersey campaign rally and was “visibly intoxicated,” a law enforcement source told True Pundit. “She’d been hitting it (alcohol) early,” one member of Clinton’s Secret Service security detail told True Pundit. Amazingly, the source acknowledged it wasn’t the first time Clinton enjoyed multiple cocktails prior to taking the stage at a campaign rally, fundraiser, or television appearance.
See, it's crap like this which makes us think that somewhere, some "pundit" is casting aspersions against a candidate for political purposes.

I hadn't seen any of the webposts which supported this charge until today, and it didn't make any difference to my vote back in November:  Hillary is a lying shrew, and nobody blames her husband quite so much for his can't-keep-it-in-his-pants ways now that we've got to know Hillary a bit better.

Sure, I think that Hillary is a lying, conniving manipulator who would say anything to gain a high office ... but I'm trying to think of another politician on the national level who doesn't also fit the mold.
(The short list is VERY SHORT!  I'm thinking a General who was responsible for the European Theater of Operations in WWII ... and he was not exactly a competent President even if he was our first American president to demand that we put a 5 pound satellite into orbit.   Post-Sputnik joke at the time:  "Why can't Eisenhower ride his horse at night?  He doesn't have a Saddle-light!"  But .. Integration, Civil Rights, Highways, Budget .. Korea!)
Sorry .. I digress in favor of one of few presidents I admire.

And of course, Hillary is married to Bill ... any woman who puts up with that pusillanimous p*ssy-hound has either a heart of gold, or she wants "Higher Office" so desperately that she is willing to put up with anything to further her political aspirations.

It's obvious to most oblivious that Hillary is not the fortunate possessor of a "Heart Of Gold".

And I would not be disappointed if she disappeared from the political fold forever.

But is she an alcoholic?

Hell, I don't know,  I'm the LAST person to ask.

Still,  on  9.11.16 when Hillary stumbles and had to be helped to her car, the explanation was both "allergies" and "Pneumonia", as well as "Dehydration".

No, I'm not persuaded by three contrasting medical explanations, advanced by "experts" within hours, not days, of her "Stumble" episode.   The comments (by people who have probably never evaluated her physical condition her in the examining room) are not convincing.   Surely, a politician would not have a personal physician who couldn't keep his mouth shut in a politically charged "event".

When that many people are eager to explain away what would have been a mere "stumble" in the average citizen ... I'm not persuaded, but I'm still unconvinced.

You tell me which is the most denigrating explanation, versus the most reasonable.   Hillary's political opponents are quick to offer unqualified opinions.   Her supporters provide so many alternative explanations, it muddies the field.

I'm still waiting for a reliable first-party (independent attending physician?) who is willing to go on the record to provide a definitive explanation for that momentary lapse in coordination,

Anybody?

Nope.  Not going to happen.  We still are left with no better explanation than our own private political opinion, and that's perhaps not the best way to judge the physical competency of a political candidate.

My personal opinion is not worth the paper it's not written upon.

Thursday, May 25, 2017

Oh Hell!

Hell Is In The Eyes



You can explore the public story (the below link is a good start),
 but the real story is not in the text, but in the photo.

IF that is not The Most Evil Set of Eyes you've ever seen, then you have truly been through hell, and I pity you.

Wasserman Schultz Threatened Police Chief Over IT Evidence | The Daily Caller:
As one of eight members of the Committee on Appropriations’ Legislative Branch subcommittee, Wasserman Schultz is in charge of the budget of the police force that is investigating her staffer and how he managed to extract so much money and information from members. In a highly unusual exchange, the Florida lawmaker uses a hearing on the Capitol Police’s annual budget to spend three minutes repeatedly trying to extract a promise from the chief that he will returna [sic] piece of evidence being used to build an active case.
Under that gaze, I'd do and say anything to just get the HELL out of the same room with her!

Do you really think she doesn't know the power of her gaze?

PS: Nice dress; crappy hair
Texas Chainsaw Massacre eyes!

Tuesday, May 23, 2017

"Have I Got A Deal For You!"

Charleston church shooter Dylann Roof pleads guilty in state court, avoids second death penalty trial - The Washington Post:
Instead of pursuing their case after the federal one, prosecutors agreed to a deal in which Roof would plead guilty to nine counts of murder, three counts of attempted murder and a related weapons count and face a guaranteed sentence of life in prison without parole.
(H/T: John Lott)


He plead guilty (see here)
Gross Travesty of Justice?

Roof never gave his victims such a choice.

[Charleston church shooter: ‘I would like to make it crystal clear, I do not regret what I did’]

JUSTICE would have been a firing squad.

But Roof is now ... what?  Twenty-three years old?  

By all accounts a good looking, slightly effeminate lad.

His future now is with a Prison Husband who rents him out to his 300 Best Friends.
That sounds like retribution.

Roof may welcome the shiv in his belly ... eventually.

I don't believe the lad chose wisely.

Variation on the "Man Bites Dog" theme

Yeah, I know; but she actually fired a gun in the city limits.

Woman Charged for Pointing Gun at Teen Allegedly Raping Dog | US News:
There’s a difference between pointing a gun at a 14-year-old kid for no reason and pointing a gun at a 14-year-old kid because they’re having sex with a dog,” Wilkinson says.
See ... I didn't know that.
An Arkansas woman is facing a felony charge after pointing a gun at a teenage boy who she says was sexually assaulting her neighbor’s dog.
Kerrie Lenkerd told police in Centerton, a northwest Arkansas town, that she looked out a window and saw the teen with "the dog he raped last time."
"I got my gun out of my safe and went out my back door," Lenkerd told police, according to a court filing. "I told him to get on the f---ing ground and pointed my gun at him."
The boy, identified only as NM, 14 years old, in court documents, jumped over a fence and ran. As he fled, Lenkerd fired a shot into the grass "to scare him," she said.
The teenager left behind an iPad and clothing, Lenkerd told police, who also found a spent shell casing.
Presumably, the police were able to follow the lad home by following the trail of excreta he left behind him.



Another version of the story.

Why I Don't Trust Computers ... or Government!

This is, of course, Bureaucratic Incompetence.

Florida concealed weapons permit holders exposed in computer hack | Tampa Bay Times:
More than 16,000 concealed weapons permit holders in Florida may have had their names accidentally made public because of a data breach at the Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services. The agency released a statement saying concealed weapons licensees who renewed online may have had their names accessed, and 469 other customers were notified that their Social Security numbers may have been hacked as part of the breach.
The article identifies this as a "HACK".  As far as we know, some clerk printed a list and dumped it in a wastebasket without shredding it.   That, too, is a "data breach".

How concerned is the "Department of Agriculture" about providing third-level security on their database?   Was it wise for Florida to embed extremely sensitive personal information in a database designed to identify crop rotation practices in commercial orange groves? (I made that up.)

I know people who have chosen not to apply for a CHL (Concealed Handgun License) because of this very thing.  Well, and also because they object to "the guvmint" knowing more about their private lives than is absolutely necessary.

They still carry ... but contend that the Second Amendment is their CHL.
(And they are right.)

Just one more reason to love your country but fear your government.
I so fear my government that I applied for a renewal of my CHL, because it's better to risk being hacked than to be arrested for carrying without a license from the state.

"License From The State" ... to exercise my constitutional right.  Isn't that a sorry tale?

[H/T: Say Uncle]



Publish or Perish for Politicos

GUNS OUT: 2A Group Targets Anti-Gun Legislators:

While I'm no admirer of politicians Senator Warren, this ill-conceived and misbegotten attempt to interfere with legitimate consumer activity is nothing more than political grandstanding and should never even come to the table.
Earlier this week, GOA submitted a letter to the House Energy and Commerce Committee expressing their concern over House Bill 1652, Sen. Elizabeth Warren’s Over-the-Counter Hearing Aid Act. According to GOA, the bill could adversely affect gun owners. By establishing this new regulation, “hearing enhancers,” used by hunters to amplify sound, would mean the government could regulate hunting.
Oh, no.   It's MUCH worse than that!

A lot of people in shooting sports own and use "electronic ear muffs", which filter out sounds above a certain decibel level, but allow lower volumes (such as range commands) to be clearly heard.

Range Officers rely upon these "discriminatory amplifying" electronic devices, because if a downrange safety issue is observed by someone one in the audience who yells STOP!, for example ... that warning might be missed by the Range Officer who has his attention focused on the gun.

At the same time, the competitor is better served with amplification, because he is focused on his targets and the RO's range commands must be loud enough to attract this attention.

Amplifying low-decibel sound is an important range safety consideration.

Yes, you can conduct a shooting match without amplification ... but you can do a better job of it with amplification of background sounds.

So by the same sense ' ... the government could regulate target shooting ...', for example.

Regulation of any product often increases its price to the consumer, as well.  It's unwise for a government to not only interfere with a constitutional right, but also to tax it.   But don't tell the ruling class that there's a reason to butt out ... they're in the business of seeming to be "doing something" by passing laws.  (Sort of a "Publish or Perish" for Politicos.)


Take my computer ... please!

House IT Workers Fear Members Are Being Blackmailed | The Daily Caller:
The Awans “had [members] in their pocket,” and “there are a lot of members who could go down over this.”
We didn't elect them because they were the smartest kids on the block.

Note to Pols:
You got to ask yourself ... do you feel lucky?

Saturday, May 20, 2017

watermelon thigh squeeze

watermelon thigh squeeze practice - YouTube:

Okay, I'm not looking for a date.
Any more.

Ever.

Okay?







No Big Magazines for YOU, California!

SF forces gun suppliers to agree to halt sale of high-capacity kits - SFGate:
(May 16, 2017)
San Francisco extracted a legal settlement Tuesday from online gun suppliers who may have tried to sidestep state and local bans on high-capacity gun magazines by advertising “repair kits” that could be used to assemble the forbidden weapons’ cartridge holders
But the question is ... can San Francisco do this ... legally? *
 (City Attorney Dennis ) Herrera sued five out-of-state companies in February, accusing them of violating state laws prohibiting the sale of gun magazines that can hold more than 10 rounds. He said Tuesday the companies have agreed to a 10-year settlement that forbids them from selling or advertising the repair kits in California and requires them to notify customers on their websites that the kits and the large-capacity magazines are illegal in the state. 
I had thought this was a San Francisco ' local ordnance, but NOOoooo .. it's state law!
 (See the above reference for full text)

“Californians have spoken clearly. We don’t want these weapons in our communities,” Herrera said in a statement. “I have zero tolerance for gun sellers who try to skirt the law.”

Well, magazines are not weapons, but I catch your drift.

The answer to my above question is .. oh, hell yes! *


I won't ever go to San Francisco again ..
but I have family down there, which are too important to me, for me to be scared off by a bunch of hopolophobes.

So I will still go down to the wilds of California from time to time, but only carrying 5-shot and 6-shot revolvers.   No semi-automatics ... I get it.

But if California wants to throw me in jail for carrying a tiny revolver (or .380) for personal defense ... they can do so and kiss my patootie.

I'm kidding, of course.


Take away my stuff, will you? SUE YOU, I will!

Today, May 18,the National Rifle Association Institute for Legislative Action (NRA-ILA) announced it is supporting, along with the California Rifle and Pistol Association (CRPA), an important Second Amendment lawsuit challenging California’s ban on the possession of standard capacity magazines capable of holding more than 10 rounds. The lawsuit, filed by NRA attorneys, titled Duncan v. Becerra,challenges California’s ban on possession of these standard capacity magazines because the law violates the Second Amendment, the due process clause, and takings clause of the United States Constitution.
What this article is suggesting is that California CANNOT confiscate private property without addressing the constitutional rights of the owners.

The first  *(Due Process Clause)* is that the owner cannot be deprived of his property without an actual legal action, in which he may defend the ownership of his property in court.

The second *(Taking Clause)* is that the owner, even if he loses the court decision, cannot be deprived of his property without compensation ... presumably, for the monetary value of the property which is being confiscated.
(GREY AREA ALERT: with a physical article, it may be sufficient to present a receipt for the original purchase; for landed property, such as a house and lot, the valuation of the property may be the cause of many more legal actions.)
DETAILS:

It occurs to me that some folks may not be aware of the details of the "Due Process Clause", and the "Takings Clause", of the Constitution  Here are the details of both clauses of the 5th Amendment:

Expired? Who ... ME?

My CHL *(State issued Concealed handgun License)* expired on the 17th.

That means I have to go to the county sheriff's office, get my picture taken, pay them a couple of bucks (I think it's on the order of $15 for the processing fees), and then wait for a week for them to send me a new CHL.  I doubt they need to take my finger prints again, but if they do that's okay.
They already have them on file, have for years since I got my first CHL from this office.

This is the third time I've had a renewal (I got my first CHL in 1966, but it expired LONG ago!) and as I recall it takes about a week for them to make a new card ... which looks a lot like a drivers' license.

It's my fault, really; but how often do you look at those cards to see when they expire?

Credit cards are nice, they write you a letter to let you know when yours is about to expire, and make it really easy.

But the sheriff is not exactly 'customer oriented'; and they need to know you're still alive before they re-issue.  (Credit cards don't care; they know you have a bank account, and they'll charge you even if some stranger is using your card, unless you deliberately cancel the card!)

This may be a good time for you to check your CHL (or whatever passes for a concealed carry license in your area) and make plans to update it before it expires.   Note that the cops CAN arrest you for carrying with an expired CHL ... depending on the local laws.

I think the sheriff considers CHL processing to be a mundane administrative chore .. they only schedule two days a week, and always after lunch  (if I recall correctly) to process either new or renewals.  So I'll have to make an appointment, and then get a haircut; nobody wants to license a handgun owner with scraggly hair.

Hell, if it weren't for scraggly hair, I wouldn't have no hair at all!

But nobody wants to look like a fugitive on their CHL picture!


The Decline and Fall of the British Empire

Self-defense is now ILLEGAL in the UK - NaturalNews.com:

As reported by The New American, British subjects seeking advice about what are and are not permissible self-defense instruments found some recently on a police web site. It is sponsored by the British government's Police National Legal Database. Q589: Are there any legal self defence products that I can buy? The police answer: The only fully legal self defence product... is a rape alarm.
Chaperone® Baysik Personal Rape Alarm with Test ButtonIf a British subject picks up an object to defend against a violent intruder, that is a crime.  Even if they only threaten, and don't actually USE it against their aggressor.


The only LEGAL alternative to a rape alarm (what the heck is a "Rape Alarm"?) would be a squirt bottle of dye which could be used to easily identify the intruder after he has had his way with you, your family, and your home.
StoppaRed Mini Defence Spray


But if you squirt it in his eyes, that also  may be a criminal offense.

The intruder, if caught, will probably not be charged.  The resident will most likely be charged.

Pick up a knife?   You're toast, Baby!

Aren't you glad you're you?

Product image
Welcome to America ... Land of The Free and Home of the Saved!

You don't know what you think you know; and the difference can be important

Massad Ayoob  Blog Archive  THE VERDICT IN TULSA:

 Officer Shelby had observed erratic behavior from a large man who appeared to her to the under the influence of PCP. This would later be supported by evidence: Crutcher had PCP within his body, and a quantity of it in his car. After repeatedly ignoring lawful commands, he suddenly reached to the open window of his car, as if for a weapon. It was enough to cause the male officer present to fire his TASER at Crutcher, and enough to cause Shelby to fire the single pistol shot that killed him.
The difference between a trained LEO and a "Private Citizen" (no matter what your training) is big enough to take your breath away.

Literally.

Officer Shelby had LEO training which would cause her to believe that a suspect under threat of address might respond in an extreme manner ... such as reaching for a firearm to resist arrest.

A person (not a suspect, if you're not an LEO) who is confronted by a 'citizen' pointing a firearm at him might legitimately reach for a gun; if you shoot him, you are a murderer.

Forget all that "Citizen Arrest" BS.   You, as a citizen have few rights beyond those afforded the person you may be accosting, for whatever reason.

Unless you are accosting an unknown & aggressive trespasser on your own property, and are not a LEO and have not identified yourself as such .. you are an aggressive felon, in the eyes of the court.

(Very little wriggle-room there, and circumstances are subject to the eye of the interpreter.)

As a private citizen, you not, with confidence that your actions will be acknowledged under"Castle Doctrine" guidelines shoot at someone who is not moving aggressively toward you, or not threatening you with a lethal weapon.  *

However, in most american counties ... if you're in your home and someone breaks in and threatens you ... most counties will assume that deadly offense if a legitimate defense if you can't tell that your assailant is NOT there with the intention of physical meyham.
*(Some local exceptions may apply; if you don't know them, don't expect them to justify your actions. Exceptions are rare, but MAY apply for your physical response using only fists and boots, or apply with a firearm only if you are a juvenile, female, old person, abused domestic partner of record, absolute stranger ... etc.)
I am not a Lawyer, nor do I play one on television.

But I am sufficiently well-read to realize that the concept of "Castle Doctrine" may not be completely legally agreed upon in all states, if at all.


If, under the circumstances, you are completely convince that a home intruder intends to do murder or "grievous bodily harm" (and who can read their mind?) you decide to defend yourself, your family, your home with aggressive lethal means ... you're probably much better protected from legal challenges in America than you might be in England .. which espouses the concept of Proportional Defense.

I know, I've said this all before.

I'll say it again.

You don't need to read it, if you already know everything.

"Allowing"?

 Allowing more Minnesotans to freely carry guns seems unwise | Duluth News Tribune:

 It wasn't that I thought the NRA and its members had some ill intent when I decided to discontinue my membership; it was because of the evermore unlikeable image of the NRA to many people.
Odd, that this writer decided that he should quit the NRA because of what OTHER people think.
(You may want to read the original post to GROK the context.)
PERSONAL:I have no objections to his decision to quit the NRA; I've personally quit the NRA a dozen times over the past 50 years .. .for reasons which were personal, and not related to what someone else may think.
.
I still don't much like the NRA; I get tired of getting "personal emergency letters" from La Pierre, hounding me for more money.   I'm retired; I need my money for ammunition

So, "This Guy" quit because of public pressure?  Because anti-gun groups, founded by a half-dozen zillionaires, are using their money to turn their own personal preferences into laws which infringe on MY private space?

And "This Guy" has made this decision to quit the battle because his friends and neighbors wonder if he's such a nice guy, after all?  He has allowed the opinion of others to prevail upon his personal judgement, because either he is not sure of his own judgement, or he is fearful of the opinion of his neighbors.  So who needs him?
(Thought: move to another neighborhood; your neighbors don't deserve you.  On second though, because you kowtowed to the opinion of others instead of forming your own judgement, perhaps you deserve them.)
America was built by Individualists; people who knew what this country looked like when outsiders, fearing an armed populace, imposed  severe restrictions upon their civil rights.

Now these  "NEW outsiders" who are nominally INSIDERs are actively trying to impose these same restrictions on me (not us ... ME, personally!)

In 1776 (and before, and later), the OUTSIDERS were the British, who didn't like it that "free men" thought they should have some say about what laws were reasonable, vs those laws which kept them from their freedoms.

Now these new OUTSIDERS are international fat-cats who share the same nationality as we do, but they don't share the same respect for the Constitution.

They want to force us to reject our freedoms, because they fear another revolution.   Which is odd, because their actions are driving America into a mini-revolution; one which has already started.

So far, it's a war of words; a war for men's minds.

Here are some words to ponder:




H/T: Sebastian

Friday, May 19, 2017

"What Did I Do Wrong?"

WATCH: “Shattered” co-author Amie Parnes on the many mistakes that doomed Hillary Clinton’s campaign - Salon.com:

In “Shattered,” the first must-read book to emerge from the 2016 presidential election, political reporters Jonathan Allen and Amie Parnes provide a detailed autopsy of what their subtitle calls “Hillary Clinton’s doomed campaign.” Their account — drawn from background interviews with numerous people who worked in or around the Clinton campaign — is controversial for many reasons. As they admit in their introduction, Allen and Parnes assumed all along that Clinton would win, and that for all her strategic missteps and messaging problems they were probably chronicling the election of America’s first female president. Only on the night of last Nov. 8, they write, did the full meaning of their reporting become clear.
Dear Hillary;
Let me tell you the story of a man named Job  [cue banjo theme song]

Job was a poor man, barely kept his family fed.  He observed the sabbath and kept it holy, paid his tithe faithfully, was diligent in his work and never spoke ill of any man.
Then one day his daughter turns up pregnant.
His son runs away with someone named "Maurice".
His wife admits that she has contracted a social disease, and she's not sure from whom.
The sky clouds over, the rains pour down, washing his crops away.
His oxen are struck by lightening.
His barn burns down.
He develops running pustules on his face.
And all of his neighbors turn their backs to him
.
Job falls to his knees, looks up into the stormy skies, and weeps:
"Lord, why hast thou forsaken me?"
The rains stop for a minute.   The clouds part, a beam of brilliant golden sunlight catches job, and a deep voice booms out:

There's something about you, Job, that just pisses me off!


Thursday, May 18, 2017

Jason Chaffetz ... lays out Reasons for leaving Washington DC. - YouTube

Jason Chaffetz ... lays out Reasons for leaving Washington DC. - YouTube: Published on May 18, 2017 Jason Chaffetz Tears up as he thinks about his kids, and lays out his reasons for leaving his position in Washington DC. He speaks about his conversation with President Donald Trump....



This is important. Chaffetz is one of the most .... aggressive and believable Conservatives in Congress, and he's leaving for reasons which are not quite clear, other than he would prefer to spend more time with his family.

Just one more reason to admire his integrity.

I'm going to miss his effect on the current administration.

If you're interested, here's an interview:




Dumb Thief Steals Airsoft Gun After Handing in Resume

Dumb Thief Steals Airsoft Gun After Handing in Resume - YouTube:

Uploaded on Dec 12, 2011
Check out what happened at Airsoft and Hobby Stores in Santa Clarita. Pretty amazing how stupid some people are.



Old news, but still ... geez!

OWIEE!

Police: Suspect Shot In Groin While Trying To Rob Man With Gun  CBS Philly:
PHILADELPHIA (CBS)—Police say a suspect was shot in the groin while trying to rob a man in Philadelphia on Tuesday. It happened around 2:37 p.m. in the 4800 block of Palethorp Street.

There's an AP for that:


Oregon gun nuts ... another gun bill.

They Never Give Up | Oregon Firearms Federation:
After the failure of their last bill that sought to force gun dealers into the mental health business,House Rep (and gubernatorial hopeful) Knute Buehler and anti-gun extremist Senator Elizabeth Hayward are back with a watered down version. HB 3460, introduced today, would require the Oregon Health Authority to create “a firearm safety and suicide prevention program.”
Go read the whole thing

Universal Background Checks = Registration!

THIS is What's Wrong with Universal Background Checks - The Truth About Guns:
 Universal background checks are a bad idea that leads to even worse ideas. They should be opposed and repealed.
I keep reading articles about UBC (Universal Background Checks) as part of the process required for transfer of firearms from one person to another, and I can't believe that everyone who writes about the "process" misses the most important point:

Universal Background Checks = REGISTRATION!
Has nobody noticed that when you submit to a UBC, during purchase of a firearm, you must submit detailed information about the gun you are proposing to purchase?

Why is this significant?

Person "A" wishes to purchase a firearm from Person "B", so both parties submit to a UBC,   No problem, so the purchase is .. well, not "Approved", but at least not "Dis-approved".

What information is required for a background check.

There's a lot about the purchaser, a little about the seller, and a bit about the firearm in question.

Why do we need to submit information about the firearm being traded?

Make, Model, Serial number.   Isn't that part of the form filled out?

Form 4473 is the standard paperwork required to properly complete a firearms transfer.

 HERE is a copy of the standard form 4473, necessary to register any gun sale.

Notice that the purpose of the form is to determine whether the purchaser of a firearm is legitimately and legally authorized to purchase a firearm.

Notice that Section "D" includes full information about the firearm being transferred: including make, model and serial number.

Complete the form?  Buy the gun?

You have just registered the gun.

Now our kindly Uncle Sam knows that Person "A" just bought a gun  (with full information including make, model, caliber, serial number, etc) from "Person "B", and even if Person "B" didn't register the gun ... he is now known as the seller.   Isn't that just too cute?

And Person "A" is registered as the proud new owner of the gun.

And Person "B" (the seller) is also registered .. in case he didn't go through the process (as in: private transaction) of letting Uncle know that he purchased a firearm in a very private transaction ... he looks Not Very Good because he didn't tell Uncle that he owns an unregistered gun.

(Tsk Tsk ... this will NOT look good on your Resume!)

Don't believe in registration?  Too bad, Charley .. your loving uncle has established a record of ownership going back to both you, and the seller.   What do you want to bet that Uncle can't .. or WON'T .. track any other firearms transaction by you or the seller?  Paranoid much?

Don't like that?  Too bad ... it's the law.  And you always thought that "Registration" was for people in "other states".

WHY does the form include information about the gun?  The obvious justification for the form is to determine that the seller is legally someone who is not forbidden to purchase a gun (insanity, felony .. whatever reason why you shouldn't buy a gun) but why include the information about the gun?

Because your Uncle wants to know what guns are being transferred (and are now being owned) from whom and by whom.  Including your social security number (which you have been PROMISED will not be used to trace your chattel!)  By completing the purchase, and a 'gun show' .. you have just registered the gun.

Did the person who sold you the gun buy it in a private transaction, where no 'registration' was required?  Gee, he now is flagged as an "unregistered gun owner' and he will be followed through every sales transaction that pops up on the Internet, because he didn't register the gun when he bought it.

Shrug ... just part of doing business, expect Uncle to look over your shoulder at every opportunity.

He may not pay much attention NOW, but in the future ... if your name pops up in some other investigatory venue ... every thing you do and think and say (and every firearms transaction) will be flagged.   Yes, Big Brother is definitely watching you.  Not actively, but very completely.

Paranoia much?  

Probably not enough.




Wednesday, May 17, 2017

Money for nothing ... chicks for free!

Deportation fears stop some LA County immigrants from applying for EBT program:
(May 10, 2016)
Los Angeles County officials say they are hearing stories that immigrants with legal status or those who are undocumented are staying away from health and social services programs. At a county Board of Supervisors meeting Tuesday, Supervisor Hilda Solis said she’s hearing from residents in her district that pregnant women are afraid to go to hospitals to deliver their babies. Los Angeles law enforcement officials as well as those with various county departments have said they will not share immigration status with ICE.
So you want to immigrate to the States, but you don't want to take advantage of all the Free Money that America offers its citizens under the Welfare program?

Good.

Get a job, become a citizen, contribute to the common welfare and then feel free to take advantage of American welfare programs after you have paid your fair share.

I'm sick of extra-nationals coming to America only to abuse the programs which we have established to take care of our own.

Not every American is as heartless as I am on this point.  

Most of us are sympathetic to citizens who have issues which require them to rely on the largess of the Public Trust to help them get past the Hard Times.

But people who come to America only to suck on the public teat?

Not so much.

And if you legitimately decline public support because you know that you have not contributed?

Very good for you ... you are a responsible new citizen and we are happy to include you.   WE will help you to find a job, support yourself and your family, and welcome you to the community of hard-working who just want to do the best they can with the (often limited) means they have.

Every one else, those who sneaked into this country because you think you can get money for nothing?

Not so good for you.

You're liars, you're cheats, you are an imposition on our trust, and frankly we don't need more never-do-wells whose intent is to take take away from the rest of us, because we will let you.  

Monday, May 15, 2017

It's hard to get a baby-sitter in the middle of a burgulary

Homeowner Shoots, Kills Man Who Allegedly Brought 7-Year-Old Son Along for Home Invasion - Breitbart:

According to the San Antonio Express-News, the suspect allegedly tried to break in through a window in the very room where the homeowner happened to be asleep. The female homeowner heard the suspect trying to make entry into her home, armed herself, and fired at least two rounds. Police arrived in time to transport the alleged intruder to a hospital, where he was pronounced dead. The woman was in her mid-30s and the alleged intruder was his mid-30s. 
Police also discovered the alleged intruder’s 7-year-old son at the scene. San Antonio Police Chief William McManus said of the young boy, “We’re gonna get help for him.”
The man must have been either desperate, or depraved, to bring his son along with him when he attempted to perform a "Home Invasion" in an occupied dwelling.

Either that, or he was trying to "break his kid in" on the Family Business.

Stupid Is As Stupid Does:

Perhaps he was as stupid as he sounds.

It's gonna be hard for the child to work through all of this.   I doubt if he really understands it.

I know I don't.

Probably, it's going to be difficult for police to explain to the lad that "Your Father Was As Dumb As A Box Of Rocks, And We Expect You To Turn Out Better".

It's worth a try, I guess.

I have no great expectations.  Stay tuned about seven years from now for The Rest Of The Story.

Fratricide is Religious; don't f**k with my religion!

Anti-Travel Ban Lawyer Leans on Argument that Honor Killings Are Islamic:
 
The lawyer representing the State of Hawaii in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit today has stated the collection of data with regards honor killings should be removed from President Trump’s Executive Order in order to “pass constitutional muster”.
In other words, it's okay to kill your sister if she acts in a manner which contravenes the strict interpretation of your shared religion?   Is that the tenet?

And if some person calls on the Constitution to justify murder because he claims it is a religious tenet
 .. that should be considered acceptable?

That is the most despicable thing I have ever heard.

The Constitution is the one thing which should never be used to justify immoral acts.

And this thing ... "honor killings" of a family member ... is the most immoral act possible.

That is not America, and anyone who leans on the Constitution to justify despicable immorality is the most horrible person imaginable.   They should NOT consider themselves part of America.

FOAD!

How the Illinois House can help combat gun crime - but they won't

Where I live, I can (and do) carry every day.  In fact, I'll be going to my local sheriff office tomorrow to renew my CHL license.'   For the third time ... CHL must be renewed every five years; the cost is $5,

I feel good about that.   I've never been threatened by a gun, or witnessed firearms violence in the 20+ years I've lived here.

How many people in Chicago (etc.) can make that claim?

How the Illinois House can help combat gun crime - Chicago Tribune:
Will allowing the state to regulate dealers prevent all guns from getting in criminal hands? Of course not. But allowing the state to require dealers to improve security measures will help prevent gun theft and burglary. Recently, the U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives stated that since 2012, the earliest year for which data are available, burglaries from licensed dealers have increased by 48 percent, and the number of guns stolen during these burglaries increased by 73 percent. Requiring dealers to train all employees on how to identify potential straw purchasers will also reduce that path of guns getting into the illegal market.

Chicago might be better served by allowing gun stores to locate in the inner city, where police presence is better manned, then  forcing them to establish in the outlying districts.

NRA ... can't you tell when you're being played?

It's Publish or Perish in the Blog-o-sphere, and sometimes we write stuff that is obvious.

Sometimes we have to belabor the obvious, to reach the 2% who just don't "get it" without having everything spelled out for them.

Like all the foo-fra over Maloney's latest "outlandish measure".

Of course it's impossible.   So we should not be treating it like it was a legitimate attempt to pass a bill.

Part of her proposal is for her own self-aggrandization;  part to show her constituents that she's "trying to do something about the Gun Problem", and part just to bait the NRA.

Since the NRA *and its members* would be better served to ignore the professional politician [but they didn't], they fell right into her trap.

She can SHOW she's "doing something", can SHOW that the NRA can't do anything, and SHOW that she's important because she has the NRA dancing on her strings like a clumsy marionette.

As of today, I score it Maloney 3, NRA zero

Just looking at the following NRA release (an excellent example of over-explaining the obvious),
 I wonder if we aren't as dumb ... or at least as easily manipulatable ...  as we think she is,

America's 1st Freedom | Another Helping Of Maloney Baloney:

Now Maloney has introduced an outlandish measure in the U.S. Congress—H.R. 2380—requiring that within five years, all newly manufactured handguns sold in the country include technology enabling only authorized users to fire the gun. That’s quite startling when you consider that proven technology of that kind doesn’t even exist. H.R. 2380 would also require that existing handguns be retrofitted with similar technology within 10 years of the measure's passage. With the wide variety of handguns made and sold over the past many decades, such an undertaking would, of course, be impossible. The result of such legislation would simply be outlawing all of those currently owned handguns.
When I was a journalism minor in college, my instructor told me:
"It's all about Column Inches, Son; don't ever forget that."

I didn't.  Didn't like it.  Went into computers instead of journalism.

Now where am I?   (Duh!)

Washington State Background Check Failure

New Washington State Background Check Failure Reporting Law Raises Questions:
So much for Michael Bloomberg’s I-594 living up to its promises. Not that anyone expected it to have any effect whatsoever on predators. What it did do, aside from forcing “law-abiding” gun owners to give up private transfers, was create and put a new class of “criminal” at risk for life-destroying consequences —the previously “law-abiding” who chose “I will not comply” civil disobedience over submission to new Intolerable Acts.
- David Codrea
Yep.   Look for the same results here in Oregon.   We always tread on Washington's coat tails.

Einstein's Definition of Insanity:  Trying the same thing over again, expecting different results

NOTE:   Also posted by IRONS

Sunday, May 14, 2017

EEEEYAAAAAAHHHHHH!

I have commented unfavorably on the issue of the so-called "Appendix Carry".

(We use to call it "Mexican Carry" before that was considered to be a ... racist, socially unacceptable and very insensitive term.)

From now on, whenever the subject comes up (excuse the expression) in conversation again, I can simply point (excuse the expression) to this article as a very good reason why ...

IT IS NOT A GOOD IDEA, Cowboy!  (Excuse the expression.)


Ohio Man Shoots Himself in Penis While Exiting His Car - The Drive:
There have been about 700 unintentional shootings this year—and this one may be the most unfortunate. (At least, among the non-fatal incidents.) A poor guy named Murad Hamedallah in Toledo, Ohio was found by police on the ground near a garbage can with a bullet hole in his penis and his right thigh. Witnesses say he was screaming after he got out of his car, tried walking, and collapsed. You would be screaming too, if you went through what he did.


Saturday, May 13, 2017

No guns for you, no guns for you ... go away kid, you bother me1

California Assemblyman Kevin McCarty (D-7) is pushing legislation to take away school administrators’ power to allow teachers with a Carry Concealed Weapon license (CCW) to be armed in classrooms for self-defense.
Sez it makes him nervous.

He doesn't spend a lot of time on high-school grounds (note: "NO GUN ZONE" ... duh!)

Well, it's not as if maniacal gunmen waste their time shooting kid on school campiii ...

What's the worst that could happen?

Dem. Assemblyman Pushes Bill to Guarantee Teachers Cannot Shoot Back if Attackers Strike - Breitbart:

Anatomy of a Basic Discipline Correctional Spanking (NSFW)

When you surf, sometimes you trip over a Great White Shark.

Not sure how I got here from there ...not sure WHAT I got here!  But if the Great White Shark is to be believed...   (GET OFF THE BEACH!)

... there are actual protocols for spanking


Anatomy of a Basic Discipline Correctional Spanking Absolutely NEVER Spank Above the Peek    

CONSENTING ADULTS Skin ONLY 

THIS IS: "What the heck is a tyrannifile?"

H/T: The Hobo Brasser  (No, don't try to look him up) who actually researched the  term:

Apparently, it's an "In Thing" term for "The Neocon Left"
The faux-left love to label the genuine left as ‘apologists for dictators’ ’Stalinists’ ‘or tyrannophiles’.
But when it comes to apologisingn (sic) for tyrants no one is more guilty than neocons and the faux-left.

I'm shaking my head.

Not because this is too Au Courant "Leftist" for me ... but because my friend actually looked it up .. and found the answer.

I had always thought better of him.

_____________________________________
The thought which frightens me is, that the machines all-too-often ARE smarter than me!
On the other hand, the kids that were smarter than me in Junior high School usually got the crap beat out of the by the "dumb" kids who resented their "Holier Than Thou" attitudes.
(There's an aphorism there, but the best thing I could come up with is "Smarmy Smart Kids Shouldn't Try To Lord It Over Tough Dumb Kids")
Needs a little work, doesn't it?


Friday, May 12, 2017

What the heck is a "Tyrranophile"?

Maloney’s Stupid ‘Smart Gun’ Bill an Unintended Gift to Gun Owners | Oath Keepers:
Because it shows Maloney for the sick tyrranophile that she is. It takes away the arguments that gun owner rights advocates are “paranoid” and that “No one wants to take your guns.”
I pride myself on my vocabulary, but when David Codrea calls Maloney a "Tyrranophile" I admit that I'm just guessing:
Tyrannosaurus Rex   ["Tyrant Lizard King"?] is the king of cretaceous-era carnivorous monster  "Tyrant" lizard, and "Phile" is "one who loves" so I assume that this makes Carolyn Maloney a tyrant lover.   
Having said all that:

Maloney's proposition that ALL firearms must be "Retrofitted" to apply "Smart-Gun Technology" is the purest political polyglotism 

 It is a twice-told tale full full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.

Thursday, May 11, 2017

To Protect Me, I Can't Close My Garage Door

I came home from a day at the range, opened my garage door with the remote in my car, and moved all my gun gear into the garage.  When I had everything in the right place, I pushed the inside-the-garage mounted controller to close the garage door. Nothing happened.

So I went to the (exterior) frame-mounted, coded controller on the outside of the garage, entered my four-digit code, and waited.   Nothing.  Tried it four more times, being VERY careful to ensure that I used the correct code.

Nothing.

So I went back to my car, entered the four-digit code to unlock the car door (it worked), and used the same in-car remote to close the garage door ... you know, the one I had use to OPEN the door.

Nothing.

I got my landlord to come over.  He couldn't get it to work with his remote, either.
Finally, we physically disengaged the garage door opener mechanism from the garage door, manually closed the garage door, manually pulled it down.  And manually locked it.

That all occurred three weeks ago.

My landlord has been in touch with the GENIE people; this week they gave him instructions how to test the garage door opener.  Everything they tried, doesn't work.  Finally,  they decided that the mother-board was fried.  They promised to send a replacement.   They're a little bit backed up, so it will take a couple of weeks to get one to him.

So the replacement mother-board for the garage door opener will be here late this month.

My landlord was careful to inform me that it won't actually be REPLACED, let alone tested, that soon.

I told him .. that's okay.  I can move my gun gear from the driveway to the garage through the patio doors; it's not convenient, but I can get it 'off the street'.  And I'm confident that nobody will be able to get into my garage in the meantime.

That's very comforting.  Nobody can get at my stuff.

On the other hand .. neither can I, unless I go through a lot of physical 'stuff' that takes a lot of time and inconvenience.

Now: please tell me how the same technology that can't get my garage opener to operate in less than six weeks will help me to defend myself and my home if my firearms uses the same technology 'to protect me'?
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rep. Maloney Introduces Legislation to Reduce Gun Deaths, Make Guns Safer | Congresswoman Carolyn Maloney: May 8, 2017 Press Release WASHINGTON —In an effort to improve gun safety, Congresswoman Carolyn B. Maloney (D-NY) has reintroduced The Handgun Trigger Safety Act, forward-thinking legislation to use new and emerging technology to prevent gun deaths. The bill would promote the development of new “smart gun” technology that only allows an authorized user to fire a gun. It would also mandate that all newly manufactured handguns use this technology within five years, and that existing handguns be retrofitted with this technology within ten years. Senator Ed Markey (D-MA) will introduce a companion version in the Senate.

OH and by the way: I'm a widower.

I live alone.   Nobody gets inside my home unless I let them in; my landlord and I have the only keys.

Tell me how it protects the children (there are none here) if I don't lock up my guns where I can't access them quickly.  And how does any state mandate firearms maintenance laws when they don't apply to every home situation?

H/T David Codrea

Monday, May 08, 2017

'Training Day'

'Training Day' Stunt Costs Florida Sheriff's Deputy His Job - NBC News:

 MAY 08 A Florida sheriff's deputy loses his job after he allegedly reenacted a scene from the 2001 movie "Training Day," starring Denzel Washington as a corrupt detective.
(Waving his gun, waving his arms, acting erratically ...)

... I've actually seen people doing this sort of shenanigans, during training session. It looks like they're playing "Octopus" and the don't have control of their gun.

I have called their attention to it, and their response is "Huh?  What do you mean?  I don't do that When do I do that?!"

Usually it's during the "Unload and Show Clear" phase of a stage. I don't know of they are trying to put some "Style" into their routine or they are really that disjointed from reality.    They look like a dude, shooting his cuffs to show off his French cuff-links after donning a too-tight Italian-cut suit.

All I want them to do is to remove their magazine, rack the slide to eject any chambered round, the point the gun safely down range and pull the trigger to drop the hammer.  That proves that there is no live round left in the chamber.

Then ... holster the damn gun!

Is that too much to ask?

Instead they point their gun toward the sky at shoulder height or higher, shift their grip so their thumb is above the trigger guard, waggle the muzzle a couple of times while they try to find the mag release, push the button and drop the magazine.

In the meantime, their muzzle is pointed about eighty degrees above horizontal.   broke the 180!

I honestly don't know where they learned this shit, but I can't break them of their bad habits in the less than a half-hour of personal training which is devoted to them, in a large class.

I suppose I could shame them, but Damn!  I've seen GrandMasters point their gun into the sky when loading and unloading.  (No, I didn't DQ them, either.)

(sigh)  I guess the only thing I can do is to actually go to the next match, get squadded with them, and the next time they pull this shit .. DQ them.

NOT the best solution; other than some bad habits (which I failed to break them of, although I did bring it to their attention);   I have long decided that the best thing was NOT to break their spririt; let them go to a match and allow the Range Officer on the first stage where they pull this shit to DQ them.

Then they will say: "Oh, I did the same thing on my INTRO TO USPSA class, and I didn't get DQ'ed.

Upon which opportunity, the RO will say:  I'm not trying to keep you in The Sport; I'm trying to run a safe range.  You're not safe, and you are SOOOOoooo out of here~!"

I'm not perfect.

Nobody is.

Well, except for the Range Officers during an actually match.

Another Fishing Expedition?

Last week I placed an order with AMMOMAN.COM for a couple of cases of ammunition.

Later, I received a "confirmation email" from someone who purported to be a representative of AMMOGARAND informing me (in an embedded link internal to the email) that my order had been cancelled.

 (NOTE: Some of the order was for .30-06 ammunition appropriate for use in an M1 Garand; which made the bogus 'follow-up' seem reasonable.)

Here's the text of the 'error message':

***HOLD*** Status means we don't have your documents***
Tracking information is provided below once order has shipped.
If you have any questions about your order, please Contact Us
*** ID Copy (ie. a Driv Lic, FFL, Carry Permit etc) MUST be on file or sent to process orders! Previous Buyers do NOT have to resend documents unless info has changed. 

(The underlined link has been deleted and replaced with a 'dummy' text; the link went to a yahoo.com address ..... which seemed suspicious unprofessional to me.)

Rather than to click on the "CONTACT US" link, I forwarded the email to my original supplier ... Eric at Ammoman ... informing him that I was loath to provide either my Drivers License or Carry Permit information to someone I never heard of, and with whom I had never knowingly done business.  

(Eric has has exchanged emails AND ammunition samples to me, and he is a Trusted Contact; I know he would never attempt to do business with me through a 'dubious contact', such as the one I received through the never-to-be-sufficiently-damned media known as EMAIL!)

I told him I still wanted my ammunition order, and that I didn't wanted to deal with them.
"You Deal With It" I told him

Eric responded quickly.   He didn't know them either, and strongly suggested that I not respond directly to that link.   He confirmed that my order and payment information had been processed, and the full order had already been shipped.

Well, I am old and I'm not that bright, but I had already figured that much out for myself.  Kudus for Eric and Ammoman for their concern about my computer security.

Moral: don't be "That Guy".    Don't take emails for granted.  Only place online orders with people that you trust.   If there's a LINK in an email, check it out ... if it doesn't obviously point to a reputable (or at least confirmable) online business address, don't trust it.

PS:

I love the smell of napalm in the morning

 Dirty Harry Fail - YouTube:


(but the smell of feces in the dungarees is not so sweet)

People who don't know how to handle a firearm ought to find some better source of amusement.


Friday, May 05, 2017

Garand

About 20 years ago I bought a Garand at a gun show.  I already had a .30-40 Krag and a 1903A3 Springfield rifle (supposedly "Match Quality"), so I thought I ought to bring myself up to World War II in my collection of military rifles.

I ordered a couple of boxes (40 rounds) of 150-grain .30-06 for the Garand.   Couldn't find any 165-grain ought-six, so I'll try this stuff out and see how well it functions in the M1.

I'm aware that the Garand really likes what it likes, and poops all over itself if it gets fodder it doesn't like (such as very hot loads, which hammer the whatchamaycallit thingie ... if you know what I mean, you don't care if I use the right terminology. )

 (What you DO care about is whether I refer to the M1 as a "gerAND" or a "GARund".   I pronounce it as it's spelled; so there!)  

SN 3568***

If I'm reading the chart right, the gun was built by Springfield Armory in October of 1944.  The gun is older than I am; and that's saying something.

I had originally wanted to buy an M14 (the civilian version, not the select-fire), but the price was out of my league; and the Garand is a by-Gawd real .30-06 instead of that wimpy .308 version.    Except that I liked the magazine feed of the M14, and I had trained on them in Basic back in 1968 at Fort Lewis.   (And fired a few rounds through the select-fire version in The Land Of Bad Things the following year.   CF: the story about The Chief, earlier this month.)

So I need to get some range time in with that rifle, now that I've found some ammo which will probably function reliably and will probably not damage the gun.

Anybody who knows more about Garands than I do, you're invited to let me know if I've made an error in judgement.  I really like the Garand; I just haven't fired more than a dozen rounds through it.  I have ten clips, which I also bought on the cheap at a gun show.

I even got the oiler kit, the web sling and the canvas gun case that goes with it.

I'm all set for an interesting day at the range.  I've not fired a rifle on the Main Range at my gun club for several years, so I've been reading the new 'terms of use' (safety and etiquette).   It gets kind of complicated.   I like trying new things ... or perhaps better called "old things that are new to me", so I have something to look forward to.

How do you get to Carnegie Hall?

"Practice!  Practice!   Practice!"

I've elevated my P3AT to my primary EDC because I don't like the difficulty of concealing a big chunk of iron.

Which means, of course, that I need to start practicing with the poodle-shooter.

What to do ... what to do ...  what to do?  

Bright idea ... I bought a case of .380 from Ammoman (Hi, Eric) and when it comes I'll be spending an extra hour every week working with the "minigun".

It's important that I know the little guy works with the kind of ammunition I expect to run in it.  I tried the cheapest practice ammo I could find a couple of years ago, and it fed like a ... well, like a well-oiled machine.

But then I tried some relatively expensive "defensive" ammunition ... and the little mutt didn't like it at all!   It acted as if the OAL was wrong (either too long or too short) and I had to manually feed the gun at least once in every magazine.   Or it just doesn't like hollow-point ammunition, I don't know.

So forget that!

I'll take the cheap stuff, if it feeds.






Into Thin Air .... almost

From Flipboard:


Czech rally car driver Tomasz Kasperczyk tested the limits of a guardrail in a terrifying accident during the first stage of the FIA European Rally Championship’s Rally Islas Canarias on Friday. In the clip, Kasperczyk can be seen driving his Ford Fiesta along a winding road conveniently located ...

http://flip.it/4f18Yb

Sent via Flipboard, your personal magazine. 
Get it for free to keep up with the news you care about.


Why You Really Should Get A .22lr Handgun

Why You Really Should Get A .22lr Handgun:
There may be no more pleasing pistol to shoot than a .22 handgun. The shooting is easy and the ammunition is cheap…if you can find any. There may be no better tool in learning or sharpening shooting skill.
I agree, and I sincerely regret that I have allowed both of my .22 handguns to go by the way (I sold them for less than they were worth!) because I didn't realize how much I would miss them when they were gone.

But I have other options, and I thought I was cool with it until I decided to invite neighbors out for range days.

Example: I have neighbors who I value (actually, my landlord and his wife) and I have brought them to the range at my local club once ... and I'm in the process of bringing them back again.

SHE is not happy because the ear muffs are too tight and they made her feel uncomfortable>  I have no solution other than to provide her with ear spikes ( the inner-ear style of noise reduction technology).

HE doesn't seem to care .. give him a gun, drop a ton of ammo on the counter ... he'll keep shooting until he had no more reloads, and then he'll ask for more.  *(my kind of guy.)*

Um ... I could get to like this guy.  He has a proper appreciation for the availability of ammunition.

She?  I have no idea what I can do to find her fitting earmuffs that won't clamp too tightly around her head.  Any suggestions which are not "off the cuff" would be appreciated.  I think the problem is that the spring steel binders (for lack of a better word) are generally designed for people who are less sensitive to whatever it is that presses the ear protectors against your head.  I'm about to suggest inner-ear plugs, but those are even more uncomfortable for most people.

Anybody have any idea about hearing protection which is .. umm .. "less something that makes you feel like your ears are glued to  your head"?

Why do gun control advocates seem like bottom-feeders after mass shootings?

Why do gun purchases spike after mass shootings? - CNN.com:

Nicole Hockley lost her 6-year-old son, Dylan, in the 2012 shootings at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut. On the day of Dylan's memorial, the National Rifle Association issued a statement about the shooting that left 26 dead, mostly children. 
"The Only Thing That Stops A Bad Guy With A Gun, Is A Good Guy With a Gun!"


Don't buy it:  Read on.


The Rash.

People keep dying, and gun control advocates keep bottom-feeding on the worst of murders.  So why do the anti-gun organizations (all of which are tax-free foundations) keep making the most vocal declarations based on tragedy?

Because this is where the money is.

EVERYBODY denigrates the National Rifle Association (NRA), a self-declared political nosebleed organization which unabashedly survives because of its PACs in support of the right to keep and bear arms ..  but nobody talks about the anti-gunner Political Activity Committees which similarly live to provide fodder for it's anti-Second Amendment constituents.


 "The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun," said the association's executive vice president, Wayne LaPierre.

That statement is widely poo-pooed by the Democratic community, but so far nobody has actually found a rhetoric which disproves the polemic.

And the sad fact is ... the Bad Guys With Guns community have nobody who can stop their horrific massacres ... not police, not FBI, not the Army,'

In the ultimate event, nobody stops the Bad Guy With A Gun except for the quiet private citizen who happens to be on the scene, has a gun, and perhaps had the nerve to pull the trigger on the Bad Guy to a well-deserved everlasting hell.

Although that's not always necessary, as we shall see.

We don't see it very often, but we see it often enough to quietly whisper:

 "I'm so glad he was there".

Admit it.  You said it to yourself, when "The Bad Guy With A Gun" was rampaging his way through a Thursday afternoon shopping mall, and the $6-an-hour mall guards were not to be seen, and the cops couldn't get there in time to stop the shooting, and this one little mouse guy just .... stopped it.

Right there.

It doesn't  happen often.  Not as often as we would wish.  But even once is enough.

Enough to let a mother go home to her kids, and hug them, and tell them "I'm all right".

Enough to let a clerk in an aromatherapy store go home to tell his own kids ... "I'm all right".

Hugs are important, and when you stop to consider that value, think about the clerks and jerks who don't  get to go home and tell their children .... "I'm all right"; often it's due to the presence of a Good Guy with A Gun.

..

Clackamas Town Center in December, 2012, Nick Meli pulled his pistol and set his sights on the shooter ... but did not pull the trigger because there were "too many people" in the area, and he was loath to fire downrange, at the risk of hitting an innocent with his fire.

No matter, the shooter saw that he was being aggressively engaged by an armed citizen, and rather than be shot by another he committed suicide by gun ... thus ending the massacre.

After action, Meli declined to exaggerate his role in ending the siege, only saying that he "didn't shoot", but did point his legal concealed carry pistol at the Active Shooter.

That was enough to end the fire.  The Bad Guy With A Gun shot himself rather than to face the fire of a Good Guy With A Gun ... whether out of remorse or determination, nobody knows.

No further shots were fired; it was sufficient that the Good Guy with A Gun was present, and actively engaged in the exchange.

So, Silly ass Liberal Commentators ... comment on that.

A good guy with a gun CAN prevail on a bad guy with a gun.

Nick Meli is just one example of what a responsible Concealed Carry person can do to make his community stronger than it was ... yesterday.

You don't even have to scare the children;sometimes you just have to be there, and be bold enough to be willing to do the very difficult job.

The good news is that you ARE powerless! (Just so you understand that)

Why do gun purchases spike after mass shootings? - CNN.com:
(CNN)Nicole Hockley lost her 6-year-old son, Dylan, in the 2012 shootings at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut. On the day of Dylan's memorial, the National Rifle Association issued a statement about the shooting that left 26 dead, mostly children. "The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun," said the association's executive vice president, Wayne LaPierre.
 Hockley said LaPierre's comments come from the "false rhetoric" that often follows mass shootings. "How do you recognize who the good guys are?" she asked. "How does arming ourselves with more weaponry make us a safer society?"
Dear Nicole;

There is no way to ensure that we have a "safe society".
As long as bad men are bad, and as long as nobody opposes them in their determination to Be Bad ... your people and my people will be victims to their villainy.

You may feel powerless.  You have family at risk (and had family at risk) and you never realized that there was nobody ... nobody in the world who could protect your innocent against men who are determined to do evil to your children.

Here's the Bad news; you ARE without power.

The good news is ... oh.  There is no "good news". As long as you do not find someone to project power in defense of the people you love, you will never have power.

But I will tell you how to recognize who "the good guys are".

They're the people who not only want to keep your children from being murdered, but they are willing  to put THEIR lives on the line to protect them.

Simplistic?  Yes.

Does it help you to feel better?  No, it does not.

There must be someone, some group of people who are willing to put their lives on the line to protect the people you love.

I don't know how to help you identify these people.  I'm sure they 're out there, but you may not be prepared to meet them.''

You will assuredly not find protections from your Liberal friends; they think that your best bet is not to challenge an armed person to help you protect your family.


Why do gun purchases spike after mass shootings? *What better time?*

Why do gun purchases spike after mass shootings? - CNN.com:

Now a voice for gun violence prevention through her organization, Sandy Hook Promise, Hockley said that the families of mass shooting victims have responded very differently. "I don't think I've ever had a family who's lost someone (in a mass shooting) ... say, 'we need to have more guns available so that we can protect ourselves,' " she said
Thank you for the invitation.  Allow me to introduce myself:  I think we need more guns.  Because they may possibly stop murderers.

In 1988, my wife and her mother were murdered in my home.  The killer was my step-son .. my wife's son by her former husband.   After almost 30 years, I still can't get it out of my mind.

He walked into my home while I was at work, pulled a Dan Wesson .44 Magnum Revolver, and shot my wife (his mother) in the head.  Her brains were scattered over the cedar panelling wall above the fireplace which we had so lovingly rebuilt.

Her mother, my mother-in-law, was in the kitchen washing dishes at the time.  When she heard the shots, she dived for the back door ... but it was locked, so she turned and ran down the stairs to the basement;

dead end.

Literally.

She didn't get halfway down the stairs until her grandson ... "Chad" caught up with her and shot her through the back of her head with his pistol.

She crumpled at the foot of the stairs, quite dead.

I think I can make a case that I have had a family murdered by firearms.

My stepdaughters came home from school, found the bodies there,  went to the next door neighbors, and eventually the eldest phoned me at work from my next-door neighbor's house::
"Daddy, come home ... Mommy is dead!" she said.
My wife's SON ... my mother-in law's GRANDSON, murdered them both  for no better reason than that he could.

So, if I carry a pistol in my pocket at home, when there is no better reason than that  "I Should" ... don't call me paranoid.   Just because I'm paranoid, that doesn't mean that someone wants to kill me.

He gets out of Prison in a few years, with "good behavior": , and who knows who friends he may have made and who are willing to kill me as the last surviving adult member of the family.

There IS someone out there, who wants to kill me.
 I testified at his trial.   He probably has "friends". from prison.


I've said  this before: I'll say it again, every year..

I'll carry to my dying day, and I don't much care who thinks I'm paranoid.

Oh, yes; there were guns in the home, locked in the closet, and everyone knew where they were, when my wife and her mother were murdered with a Dan Wesson .44 Magnum.

They didn't do any good for the people who didn't know they had to defend themselves against a loved Family Member.

Who can you trust?
Nobody.

Oregon Senate passes gun-control bill

Oregon Senate passes gun-control bill – KOBI-TV NBC5 / KOTI-TV NBC2: \\SALEM, Ore. – A bill that would prohibit certain individuals from owning “deadly weapons” passed through the Oregon Senate Monday. Senate Bill 719 passed with a 17-11 vote and will head to the House of Representatives for a first reading. Supporters say the law will get guns out of the hands of people who could hurt themselves or others, but pro-gun groups say it violates constitutional rights. 
Um  .. yes.  It will definitely allow the State to confiscate guns from otherwise law-abiding owners.

It will also allow disenfranchised family members to wreck their wrath on gun owners that they do not like.

It's difficult to imagine any proposed law which would be more likely to provide a disservice to the public, but the Democratic Senators in Oregon have exceeded all expectations.

This "bill" (soon to become "this law", I have no doubt), serves no purpose but to enfranchise mean people to screw family members that they don't like.

It would/will allow anti-gun politicians to step aside with clean skirts, while they watch families break apart under the guise of law.

The purpose here is to remove firearms from the possession of otherwise law-abiding citizens; it serves the purpose of only those who have no faith in the Second Amendment, to pursue their anti-constitutional agenda while teasing one's own family to act as the agent of The State.

Or at least, unpaid agents provocateur of the politicians who do not like the Second Amendment.

People who love the Constitution will soon discover that this bill, if/when enacted, is the tool for revenge and retribution, serving the purpose only of the disaffected family members with a serious bone to pick.

It does not serve any Constitutional purpose; it does not provide for the Public Safety.

Instead, it enlists the aid of families who feel anger, and gives them a tool by which they can express their ire.  They do not need to define the reason why they think their cousin should be denied his/her Constitutional Rights.

In stead, it provides a safe and easy tool to "take down" someone they just ... don't ... like.

In a perfect community we would embrace the various means of expression which the Constitution offers.  Instead, in this imperfect community, our own elected representatives have proposed this evil bill which will put one cousin against another, and undermine the rights of one with no need for justification on the part of the other.

We all know sick families; it's no less sick when our elected representatives take advantage of this familial dissatisfaction to further their presonal political agenda.

I had thought that politicians could not possibly sink lower on the scale of humanity.

Well, I guess I was wrong.