Cogito Ergo Geek

Rabbits of the Purple Sage

2012-01-31T12:29:00.000-08:00

My father loved hunting Jack Rabbits.

He worked (variously) as a welder, a mechanic, a Millright ... and worked hard all of his life. And in his free time, he was a Stock Maker. He made beautiful stocks for a lot of rifles, and (with his brother "Shorty" built a lot of beautiful rifles to go with them. I still have a couple of those excellent rifles, and when I die my son will get them; I will never sell them.

These rifles were for hunting: sometimes, deer and elk, later in his life Antelope, and always Varmint Hunting.

He hunted Jack Rabbits because, according to him, they were excellent practice for hunting Deer and Antelope. And he was right; if you can hit a running Jack with a deer rifle, the smaller game animals were not that much of a challenge.

The difference is, except for rare occasions, we didn't hunt deer in Sage Brush.

Sage Brush is a whole different thing.

I recall the occasion, when I was about 10 years old, when my father, a friend of his, my mother and the friends wife took me on a Jack Hunt. Pop found a butte, or a mesa (a flat-topped butte?) in the Umatilla County area of Oregon where he most liked to hunt. It was less than an hour's drive along the Columbia River valley, and there was non-arable land in plenty full of sage brush and Jack.

Where you find Sage, there be Jacks!

On this occasion, I tired early. Pop realized I was too small and weak for the climb, so he pointed to me the direction to the car, and sent me back, while the two adult males climbed the mesa and sat down to watch the surrounding area.

Although we were only 200 yards from the car, I soon discovered that I was lost. Although at the time I was probably within 100 yards of either the mesa or the car, the sagebrush was over my head and all I could see was ... sometimes ... the mesa. I recall distinctly the impression of the two sitting men, with their rifles propped up against their knees, looking like two capital A's and I stopped to shout back at them, asking for directions. My father made a dismissive pushing-away gesture, as if to say "keep going the same way, away from here".

I tried, but I was entirely disoriented and had no idea of the distance required to the car, and I was unsure of the direction. The brush grew thicker, I felt a sense of vertigo. I was lost, and nobody would come and find me?

Ten year old me started crying, then sobbing, and it took a bit of serious wailing before my mother became aware of my predicament and followed the whiney-noises back to her whiney son. I felt no shame at the time; I was so grateful that I had been rescued from the Sea of Sage.

Damn! I really hated the sage!

---

After a couple of years, I grew much taller and learned not to fear the disorientation; indeed, there came a point where I always knew the way back to the car! (This was a talent, or gift, which served me well in Viet Nam some years later. I always knew my way back to the nearest point of the Red-Line, although the promised trucks/choppers were not always where we had been lead to expect.)

Hunting Jack Rabbits with full-power hunting rifles turned out to be excellent training for fast-moving deer and antelope. I may not have got a clean kill on all the deer and antelope I shot, because I had learned to take the challenging shots ... but I always put them down, and they weren't often difficult to find DRT (Dead Right There).

In fact, the most awkward kills were those at less than 100 yards ... which is why I no longer hunt. Right after I got back from Viet Nam, I shot an antelope standing still LOOKING at me at a range of 88 yards ... and missed him. He disappeared into the Eastern Oregon Sage, through which I chased him; then when he ran through a clearing in the sage I took an ill-advised shot at him quartering away, and broke his right rear leg. After I followed the trail and found him down and panting in fear and panic, I finished him off. And then I wept again, for I had made such an egregiously bad shot and caused such pain.

I would have taken an earlier follow up shot, but for the Sage, which instantly obscured him. It took me 20 minutes to track him, and finish him off.

My father watched me as I had watched the fine buck antelope die, and he said only: "That's all right; I have no use for a man who can't weep over a wounded animal". This was one of the most shameful moments of my life; I went on ONE more hunt, when my father was too old to hunt; I took the only antelope ... it was doe season, and I took my only doe ... and then I quit forever. There was no sage brush on that Wyoming hillside, and when I hit her she was dead before she hit the ground. I field dressed her, carried her 85 pound back to the truck and back to camp. We loaded up and went back to Oregon .. and stayed there.

---

Somewhere in the middle of all this (rather earlier, probably closer to one of my first "armed" Jack Rabbit hunts) my father dug out a sage brush and took it home, where he planted it along the white picket fence which delimited the Southern border of our suburban lot. Mom thought it was ugly .. so did I, by now ... but my father was adamant. He loved the Sage, and in fact it grew to be an impressive five feet tall. Healthy and bushy, if nothing else it served to block the view from my eyes to my neighbors (who didn't like it either).

There were times when I would walk by the Sage just to inhale its powerfully pungent aroma. At least it never attracted any of the Killer Hummingbirds, who loved the Sage as a base for their nests, and would attack any intruder (read: "Jack Hunter") who inadvertently ventured near.

And I never neared that particular sage only to jump backwards in fear ["two feet up, six feet back" as my father described one of my formidable encounters with a Western RattleSnake curled at the base of a Sage Brush"].

Yes, I killed every rattler I met in the Purple Sage. And it's true, if you point the barrel of a rifle or a shotgun at them, they WILL align themselves with the muzzle. Note: You will never find more than a bit of spine of a Rattler hit with a 12 gauge shotgun; and you will not find that much of a Rattler hit with a .25-06.

There came a time when my parents moved away from their home in Pendleton; they had sold the Old Home Place to a guy who probably couldn't afford it anyway, and one of the first things the new owner did was to rip out that Sage Brush.

My father was slightly heartbroken; I guess he had hoped that the new owner would appreciate this taste of the wild.

I thought: "Good riddance to the damned old thing"; I need never feel "lost" again.

And I have never hunted Jack, or Antelope again.

Now, if they just moved the Jacks and the Antelope onto golf courses, I would consider it a good use of otherwise wasted terrain.

Words To The Wise

2012-01-30T23:28:00.000-08:00

(Hat Tip to The Hobo Brasser):

* I think it's about time we voted for senators with breasts. After all, we've been voting for boobs long enough. ~ Clarie Sargent , Arizona senatorial candidate

* The problem with political jokes is they get elected. ~Henry Cate, VII

* We hang the petty thieves and appoint the great ones to public office. ~Aesop

* If we got one-tenth of what was promised to us in these acceptance speeches there wouldn't be any inducement to go to heaven. ~Will Rogers

* Those who are too smart to engage in politics are punished by being governed by those who are dumber. ~Plato

* Politicians are the same all over. They promise to build a bridge even where there is no river. ~Nikita Khrushchev

* When I was a boy I was told that anybody could become President; I'm beginning to believe it. ~Clarence Darrow

* Why pay money to have your family tree traced; go into politics and your opponents will do it for you. ~Author Unknown

* If God wanted us to vote, he would have given us candidates. ~Jay Leno

* Politicians are people who, when they see light at the end of the tunnel, go out and buy some more tunnel. ~John Quinton

* Politics is the gentle art of getting votes from the poor and campaign funds from the rich, by promising to protect each from the other. ~Oscar Ameringer

* The Democrats are the party that says government will make you smarter, taller, richer, and remove the crabgrass on your lawn. The Republicans are the party that says government doesn't work and then they get elected and prove it.~P.J. O'Rourke

* I offer my opponents a bargain: if they will stop telling lies about us, I will stop telling the truth about them. ~Adlai Stevenson, campaign speech, 1952

* A politician is a fellow who will lay down your life for his country. ~Texas Guinan

* Any American who is prepared to run for president should automatically, by definition, be disqualified from ever doing so. ~Gore Vidal

* I have come to the conclusion that politics is too serious a matter to be left to the politicians. ~Charles de Gaulle

* Instead of giving a politician the keys to the city, it might be better to change the locks. ~Doug Larson

* Don't vote, it only encourages them. ~Author Unknown

* There ought to be one day - just one – when there is open season on senators. ~Will Rogers

OMG!

2012-01-27T09:04:00.000-08:00

Are You In? — Barack Obama

Oh, dear!

I am SO not "in"!

Blogging will continue: official notice

2012-01-01T00:02:00.000-08:00

Retirement from the work force has had a negative effect on my blogging volume ... and in the content of the few articles I DO write, and the interest generated by those few articles.

New resolution:

I either need to rediscover my interest in ranting, or to close this morbid website so my few frequent readers don't waste their time stopping by from time to time to see if I'm awake. Or alive.

This blog was started in December of 2004. During the past seven years, I've often presented boring or incomprehensible trash, but there have been some themes which were actually interesting to many readers.

Not recently.

Since my retirement I've lost interest in the "outside world". Not to put too fine a point on it; I've become bored. And I've become boring.

During the past year I've spend a huge amount of time reading, and very little time writing. The reading has not sparked my interest in anything controversial. It has been a waste of my time.

And this blog has become a waste of your time.

I'll give it a month to see if I can reconnect with the outside world, and take an interest in the many things which I find interesting. Where lately I've read and said "Hey, this would make a great (or interesting, or at least 'not boring') article" without following through --- I'm going to see if I can get that spark back and rediscover the fire which originally forced me to find an outlet.

When I retired, The Hobo Brasser told me that I would wonder how I managed to get so much done with all the free time I now had. That I haven't experienced this wonder leads me to wonder whether I am an essentially lazy man, or I have outlived my sense of wonder.

I'm not sure which I hope to find, but I know that over the past couple of years a lot of blogs which I once eagerly anticipated on a daily basis have just ... folded. The wonder I felt then was "Why did these terrific writers quit writing? I LOVED his stuff!"

Time for me to rediscover my "stuff".

Kahr Notes

2011-12-20T00:17:00.001-08:00

I submit this in the most ~~exposed~~ candid mode possible; it is an email which I received recently, and I offer it here with NO expectation about its veracity. I have neither requested, nor received, permission to quote it directly. My expectation is that it has become 'generally available' across the internet by the time it reached me. And you.

I've included as much of the source data as has been made available to me. If you have information which conflicts wit that which is here presented, I hope you will do me the courtesy of providing the information in the COMMENTS section and reserving any condemnation for the original source.

I don't know if this is true; You'll have to work that out for yourself. (Imagine, a blog which asks you to think for yourself!)

Subject: [Dtiquips] Watch These Experts!

12 Dec 11

Impossible Demand?

NYPD, after requesting of Kahr Arms that they dramatically increase the trigger pull-weight of their Kahr-9 Pistol (a nominal seven pounds to thirteen pounds!), is now ordering its officers not to carry Kahr Pistols.

This all came about as a result of a number of recent NDs (no fatalities, but some resulting in personal injury, mostly self-inflicted) on the part of NYPD officers with Kahr pistols.

The Kahr-9 is an extremely popular concealed-carry/backup pistol, because of its high quality, reliability, and compactness. For regular concealed carry, it is hard to beat. I own and habitually carry several. Like most modern pistols, Kahrs are drop-safe.

But, as with all guns, you have to keep fingers off the trigger during those times when you don't want it to discharge!

A thirteen-pound trigger on a pistol that small would make it virtually impossible to use for any serious purpose by many officers, particularly those with small hands and limited hand-strength.

In general gun-commerce, Kahr could not give away such a pistol!

Once again, personal carelessness and poor training are being excused/covered-up by shifting blame to gun manufacturers.

Once again, truth is the first casualty when embarrassing events take place within police departments!

Once again, the Second Amendment is blamed by politicians and the media for all the ills to which flesh is heir!

"Same routine- same results! Loosely translated: 'When you keep doing the same old thing, you'll keep getting the same old results!'"

Dave O'Young

/John
_______________________________________________
Dtiquips mailing list
Dtiquips@clouds.com
Copyright 2011 by DTI, Inc. All rights reserved.

With respect and appreciation to the G-Man!

Son of Bob

2011-12-14T02:36:00.000-08:00

Stephen Hunter has got another hit with his latest 'Sniper' book, "Soft Target".

His latest action hero, Ray Cruz (son of Bob The Nailer") is trapped in a mega-mall with a group of Somali terrorists armed with AK74s. The entire complex is in lock-down, local and federal LE forces are unable to make entry to rescue the 1,000+ American Christmas shoppers. His wife and her family members are among the actual and/or potential hostages, and Ray doesn't even have a gun.

To make things worse, when Ray starts scouting the mall, FBI HRT snipers try to kill him.

The action is fast, the tension rises, and Hunter introduces a Crisis Commander who is a literary analogue of an inexperienced, irresolute American President ... named "Obobo".

Buy this book. Read it now.

Deer Season?

2011-12-05T23:02:00.000-08:00

This is the consequence of retailers starting their Christmas Season Sales before the end of Deer Season.

For some of us, it's just all so COMPLICATED!

Forty Short & Wimpy: Still kaBOOMing, after all these years

2011-11-27T00:22:00.000-08:00

My Friend Gary the T-Man has started out sending (with permission) quotes from a highly respected firearms training facility.

This is one of the latest (November 23, 2011) "quips":

Subject: [Dtiquips] No Free Lunch!

23 Nov 11

No free lunch! This from a Range Officer with a big department:

"We ruined one of our department's G35 pistols (40S&W) last week.

During a range exercise, one of our Deputies experienced catastrophic
splitting of the pistol's frame, along with ballistic ejection of the
magazine. No significant injury, but the pistol itself is toast!

We found the offending case. It was split its entire length.

We started reloading our own training ammunition a year ago, due to the exponentially-increasing cost of new ammunition. Since, we're had a few incidents, this being the worst.

It seems, with high-pressure cartridges like the 40S&W, expansion during the firing process weakens brass cases far more than is the case with lower-pressure cartridges, and the phenomenon is not confined to Glocks. I suspect this is one reason Glock recommends against using reloaded ammunition, for any purpose!

In any event, we've reluctantly concluded that using 40S&W reloads, even for practice, represents false economy."

Comment: My friend is right! I, along with Glock, strongly recommend
against reloading 40S&W, 357SIG, and 45GAP cases, even once. Ruined guns, and personal injury, will quickly negate any savings in ammunition cost.

/John
_______________________________________________
Dtiquips mailing list
Dtiquips@clouds.com
Copyright 2011 by DTI, Inc. All rights reserved.

I've been bad-mouthing both the .40 Short and Wimpy cartridge, and Glock pistols, for years. (Search this website for the keyword "Kaboom".) Perhaps I have been overly critical.

On the other hand, in the past 10 years most of the "KaBOOM!" events I have witnessed, either directly or immediately thereafter, have involved either a Glock or a .40 S&W cartridge .. usually both, in combination.

A couple of years ago I conceded that this destructive malfunctions, perhaps caused by this combination, have greatly diminished; most probably because Glock incorporated better barrels (Fully supported) in their .40S&W chambered barrels.

Apparently, this has not yet been entirely successful in totally eliminating the "KaBoom!" factor.

History:

Two of the primary reasons for the alarming amount of explosions of .40S&W ammunition have been (a) competitors reloading ammunition with very fast-burning powder, which reaches a peak pressure exceeding the ammunition design, and (b) using competition-loaded ammunition in pistols without fully supported chambers.

Relatively recent design/production changes, which incorporated fully-supported chambers in GLOCK barrels, supposedly "eliminated" these problems. It now appears that it has reduced, but not entirely eliminated, that problem.

This "KaBoom!" factor is the primary reason why, when I ordered an STI Edge in 2000, I specified 10mm caliber rather than .40 S&W. The Mighty Ten has a much stronger case than the .40 S&W, especially in the region near the base ... where most "KaBOOM!" events occur because the unsupported case AND the relatively weak case design usually result in explosive detonation.

In ten years of competition, I have never experienced a "KaBOOM!" detonation using a 10mm pistol/case, with a fully supported chamber, after thousands of rounds of major-power ammunition with USED ammunition, loading Vihti Vourhi N320 powder behind 200gr Montana Gold bullets.

Glock and Reloaded Ammunition:
Glock has, as the article specifies, ALWAYS warned owners against the use of 'reloaded" ammunition. This article demonstrates why that is a prudent precaution.

Unfortunately, when one is competing with ammunition which can cost approximately $16 per box of 50 (and up!), and expecting to use 'about' 150 rounds of ammunition in a match ... the $45+ cost of ammunition (plus the match fees, travel, etc.) places the cost of competition outside the range of fiscal ability for most of us, except for perhaps one match per month.

Most pistol ammunition is reloadable for $7 to $10 per box of 50 (assuming reasonable retrieval of expended brass), which is sufficient to allow TWO club matches a month, for the same or less price of using factory ammunition. (Probably less for 9mm.)

But Glock says "Do not use reloaded ammunition" for ALL of its products, even the Glock 17.

I agree, the cost of using factory ammunition is FAR less than the cost of replacing a pistol .. or worse, the pain and expense of hospital bills in the worst cases.

Still .... why shouldn't I accept both safety AND economy, if it's available in a different pistol/caliber combination?

Christmas, already?

2011-11-27T00:00:00.000-08:00

Do you remember when the Christmas Season started ... well, around Christmas?

Me, too.

No more ...

(H/T: Gary T-man)

USPSA Presidential Elections Run-off

2011-10-30T01:12:00.000-07:00

Here are two (not so) very surprising results from the 2011 USPSA Presidential election;

not very many USPSA members submitted their ballots, or submitted them before the deadline; and ..
therefore, so few ballots were received that it was impossible to determine a 'winner', within the definition of the UPSA constitution.

The reason why that's not very surprising is that most people in USPSA don't much care who occupies the position of President; they just want to go shoot, and not be bothered with organizational details.

Isn't it odd that so many of us volunteer to work as Range Officers, and instructors, but won't vote on a Presidential election?

Well, no. No really

According to the accounting company hired to monitor the results (Jacob Jarvis) ....
about 5,500 valid votes were received, out of the approximately 18,000 current members eligible to vote. Which means that less than one out of three of us cared enough to register an opinion.

Again, this isn't all that surprising. Most of us just want to go shoot club matches. Some of us attend Sectional matches, fewer attend Area (Level III) matches, and typically about 500 individuals compete in National Matches (that is, 500/18,000 or about 0.3%; of the 2 or more National Matches, a significant number attended more than one match --- every year). And most of those National Match attendees are those who think they have a reasonable chance to win.

Note: I've attended a few National Matches, but never expected to win. I have never been disappointed; I never won.

This supports my original thesis; most of us just want to shoot. It's not that we are victims of ennui. As long as a national organization exists in any form, and club matches are still held regularly within a reasonable driving distance, and a working classification system is maintained regularly, we don't much care who is driving the bus.

Unfortunately, this is not characteristic of a healthy, thriving, viable organization. It does not provide a sense of confidence that this sporting organization can continue for the foreseeable future.

Let's look a the the run-off for President: Michael Voigt (the incumbent) garnered 2,639 votes, for 48% of the valid received ballots. Phil Strader (the challenger) received 1,890 votes for 34.4% of the valid received ballots. The three 'other' listed challengers received less than half of the votes, all together, that Phil Strader received. Total votes received: 30.2% of the ballots sent out.

Why Should We Care?
Actually, if all you want to do is to shoot club matches once a month, should you care who is the President of USPSA?

No, of course you shouldn't. After USPSA collapses, you can still get together with your friends every now and then and go shoot IPSC-like matches. It just requires a lot more organizational effort on the few people who are still willing to put on a match.

Of course, if USPSA falls, then there is no classification system. Then you won't be able to provide a viable "relative scoring" of one competitor to all others.

Is this likely to happen? No, probably not. At least, not for a while. If you are wondering why you really NEED a USPSA (or an IPSC) organization, it's ultimately all for the classification system. Most of us couldn't care less who is the President of the USPSA; after all, the incumbent is always intrinsically interested in the continuation of the organization, because this is where they earn their living.

Professional Shooters
Let's look at the two top contenders for the office: Michael Voigt and Phil Strader. These two gentlemen can reasonably be described as Professional Shooters. They make their living from competition and from training. Until Michael Voigt was elected in way-back-when (1998?), all of the USPSA presidents were more 'administrators' than 'professional shooters'.

They may have competed in International matches, but it wasn't because their primary qualification was name-recognition, because they were "professional shooters". They may have attended, and competed in, International matches; but it wasn't because they expected to win. They just wanted to shoot. Like you, and me.

Mission Statements of the President(s) of USPSA
And we have reaped the benefits of the vision of the current USPSA President, Michael Voigt. After all, he headed the effort for USPSA to semi-divorce itself from IPSC, as far as the American competition rules are allowed to differ from the International competition rules.

Or did he? Wasn't it the members of the Board of Directors who actually spear-headed the effort for USPSA to continue with a rule book which actually reflected the unique second-amendment friendly environment of the United States?

Many of the regions of IPSC could not legally compete because of the legal requirements of their national governments. I don't know how many IPSC Regions cannot use the "Metric Target", for example (because it is contrary to National Law to shoot at 'human-form' targets), but it is a significant number.

In fact, during the compilation of the USPSA rules of competition, Michael Voigt found himself voting against some motions of the USPSA Board of Directors, because Voigt was the only member who regularly competed in Level IV "International" competition.

But most of us in USPSA ... surely over 95% of us .... haven't ever competed internationally. We don't much care what IPSC thinks is an appropriate limitation on target shape or presentation. We just want to shoot at club matches, and the limitations that IPSC had enacted were anathema to many of us. The USPSA Board of Directors, in fact, led the way in deciding that, for example, a rule which disallowed targets to be displayed when rotated more than 90 degrees from vertical made no sense to us.

And we don't really like the IPSC Division definitions of Standard and Modified. IPSC doesn't recognize Limited, Limited-10, Single-Stack, etc. divisions.

European and other Regions are often restricted in the definition of acceptable competitive rules, because they have "local" (National) laws which regulate what they can and cannot do. For example, some nations (eg: England and Tokyo) will not allow their citizens to own pistols; they have to shoot with 'airsoft' guns, at best, and can only shoot 'real' guns by travelling outside their own country of origin. Consequently, they can't write a rule book which allows the same freedoms as we enjoy in America; they are obliged to bow to the dictates of their political masters.

USPSA Autonomy
And so, there is a decided NEED for USPSA to maintain its autonomy outside of the global anti-gun, anti-freedom agenda with which so many of our international friends must contend ... and we can ignore. It's not the American Way. It's the United Nations "Let's Make All Civilian Firearms Ownership Illegal" way.

I don't want some foreign government to decide what firearms I can and cannot own, nor how I can use them, nor what target shape (isn't that bizarre?) I can shoot them at. And neither do you.

What we need is a USPSA President who can stand up for 'inalienable rights' against intrusive governmental interference. That's asking a lot of the leader of a relatively minor sporting organization, although that is exactly what we would prefer ... if it was only possible.

We can't free our international friends from these intrusive laws, but we can stand up for our own rights and serve as a shining example of a nation where the government can't apply arbitrary restrictions on our Second Amendment Rights. Can other nations learn from us? Probably not; they have been so brainwashed by socialist agendas, they are willing to abrogate the competitive rules of their own sports, just to allow themselves their primary consideration ....

... they just want to go shooting on the weekends. Just like you, and me. We don't HAVE to go shooting every weekend, to remain active. It's enough to know that we can, and when we go to a match we know that there's not some interfering "Suit" telling us we're bad just because we want to poke holes in cardboard and make that steel target go

Whaddy gonna do?
So sometime in the next month, a majority of us 18, 197 eligible voting members need to send in our ballot and take a stand. The right to vote is essential to American citizenship, even if it's just to choose the leader of our sporting organization for the next few years.

What am I going to do? I'm going to vote for Phil Strader, instead of Michael Voight. Nothing against Mr. Voigt; he's an honorable man, and he's done his best during the past several years to keep USPSA on track and consistent with the priorities we hold dear.

My personal opinion is that it's time to bring a new man onto the scene, and see what he can do with the office. My hope is that he will be a leader. The BOD has been blessed with leaders during the past several years, but many of them have 'retired', and I miss their leadership qualities (even though I have offended a few of them with my criticisms on specific occasions.)

I don't personally know most of the current BOD members, so I'm hoping for a strong leader who will take our best interests to heart. My feeling is that (a) Mr. Voigt has done what he can in the past, and we need a new leader ... perhaps he has a new vision, and I'd like to see what he can do with the office; and (b) although this is not intended as a criticism of Mr. Strader, who is a good man and a great competitor AND a good firearms/competition instructor, I would very much have been able to elect someone who does not make (or augment) his living from his shooting career.

But if we must have a "Professional Shooter" as the next USPSA President, I would rather let the 'new blood' take his best shot at it.

I'm hoping for an A-zone double tap.

You can vote for whom ever you choose; but --- choose someone. Don't let my vote constitute too much of the valid votes, if you don't agree with me. Or even if you do. we're looking for at least a 50% return on the votes, this time.

Run, shoot, or get out of the way!

Jerry the (My "Honor Scholar" can kick your "Honor Scholar's" ass!) Geek

Gunwalker

2011-10-25T04:31:00.000-07:00

What Holder and administration apologists expect us to believe about Gunwalker - National gun rights | Examiner.com:

This from David Codrea, "Gun Rights Examiner", October 17, 2011:

If we are to believe Attorney General Eric Holder, he knew nothing about “Project Gunwalker” while it was being implemented, and did not first hear of it until a few weeks before Darrell Issa asked him about it in a May House Committee on Oversight and Government reform hearing.

If we are to believe him, any briefings he received did not discuss gunwalking. Plus he never read reports from senior staff.

If we are to believe administration apologists, not only is this so, but gunwalking was confined to the Phoenix office and the operations were conducted from the bottom, while senior ATF and DOJ managers were blissfully kept in the dark.

And Issa is on “a witch hunt.” So there.

---

If I understand this correctly, this is in reference to the BATF program which we have previously known as "Operation Fast And Furious" ... the federal policy which (a) required Arizona firearms dealers to sell guns to people who were obviously "straw purchasers"; and (b) attempted (but failed) to track the transfers of those guns to drug cartels in Mexico.

... and need we add (c) this program not only failed miserably in all of its vaguely defined goals, but ultimately led to the deaths of U.S. Border Patrol Agents, who were murdered by these same uncontrolled guns?

If you are not already outraged by the ill-defined and poorly executed policy, perhaps you will join me in being outraged by the all-too-obvious cover-up which the U.S. Justice Department has chosen as the 'best use' of the funding which we so generously provide them by our tax dollars.

I am far too furious about this situation to comment with any degree of civility, but somehow I am reminded of the December 7,l 1941, cover-up of the U.S. Navy's failure to perceive the threat of a Japanese Sneak Attack ... which (you may recall) led to the American entry into World War II.

The lack of leadership is similar, and I predict that the lack of accountability will also be similar. A couple of high-level administrators will be dismissed from government service, but the house-clearing will not reach the appropriate levels of accountability: in WWII, the Secretary of the Navy, Frank Knox; and today, to the 82nd Attorney General of the United States, Eric Holder.

Heads should roll on this. But although Holder should suffer the same punishment as the innocents in the U.S. Border Patrol, he will not.

AND FOR THIS ONE ...accountability should go all the way to the President.

Soft Target

2011-10-24T20:12:00.000-07:00

Well, he has done it again.

That intrepid Sniper-Novel-Writer Stephen Hunter has written another "Bob the Nailer" book, except it apparently stars the new hero, Ray Cruz.

Having read all of Robert B. Parker's "Spenser" books, I often wondered how he could keep a Korean War Veteran believable 40 years after the prime of his protagonist. Parker solved it by adding a couple of new primary characters ... including Jesse Stone (all of which video rights, incidentally, were quickly purchased by the TV star, Tom Selleck).

Hunter hasn't yet found a purchaser for his Bob the Nailer movie rights (with the possible, but failed, exception of his 2007 movie "Shooter", staring Mark Wahlberg).

Still, Hunter has committed to at least 3 new books since the completion of his last BTN trilogy, and the second seems to be "Soft Target":

The new book is due to be released December 6, 2011, and of course I've already pre-purchased it from Amazon.dom. I get a good price by pre-purchasing books by my favorite authors (I also, at the same time, pre-purchased Vince Flynn's newest book, due out in February of 2012).)

Hunter hasn't written a 'bad" book in the current century. I didn't like a few of his earlier efforts, although I changed my mind about one of his early books upon rereading it 20 years after publication. But since he hit upon the "Sniper" theme, he has done a fairly consistent job of writing; I only disliked one of his "Bob The Nairler" books, and that one featured his (Bob's) father's adventures in Cuba.

Many (most?) of Hunter's Sniper books are .. pretty far out there. But it's like watching movie cartoons; if you are not willing to suspend disbelief, you have no business watching the cartoons, or reading the books, because you are doomed to dissatisfaction. If Goofy can fly when he winds up to pitch a baseball, then Bob the Nailer can (for example) ride a motorcycle like nobody's business and hit what he aims at no matter how near or far the target is.

When Bob misses a crucial shot, the frnachise will fail. Hence (to complete the circle) the introduction of Ray Cruz.

Here's the pre-review from Down Range TV.

Soft Target a new thriller by Stephen Hunter coming in December | Outdoor Channel: Posted October 14, 2011

From Down Range TV

Stephen Hunter, the “father” of Bob Lee Swagger and a regular on our shows Shooting Gallery and Gun Stories, is back with another book. In Dead Zero, we were introduced to Marine Sergeant Ray Cruz. The now retired Marine returns in Soft Target which will be released in early December.

The following is the book description posted on the publisher’s web site:

Black Friday America’s largest shopping mall Suburban Minneapolis 3:00 P.M.

Ten thousand people jam the aisles, the corridors, the elevators, and the escalators of America, the Mall—a giant Rubik’s Cube of a structure with its own amusement park located in the spacious center atrium. Of those people, nine thousand nine hundred and eighty-eight have come to shop. The other twelve have come to kill.

Stephen Hunter’s hyper-drive, eighth-gear new thriller, Soft Target, chronicles the day when the unthinkable happens: twelve gunmen open fire in the mall corridors, driving the pack before them. Those on the upper floors take cover or get out any way they can; but within a few minutes the gunmen have herded more than a thousand hostages into the amusement park.

Go ahead and buy it. Sure, you may be disappointed; but what if you aren't?

The 9/11 Revolver - Katie Pavlich

2011-10-02T17:07:00.000-07:00

The 9/11 Revolver - Katie Pavlich

B-b-b-Bye ATF? Part 2: Obama Disclaims

2011-10-02T01:41:00.000-07:00

Document Dump: White House in Heavy Communication About Operation Fast and Furious

(Click on the title above to view the original Townhall commentary)

"What did he know, and when did he know it?"

This question has often been asked of Republican administrations, and now it is being asked of this specific Democratic administration.

President Obama has denied any knowledge of "Operation Fast and Furious":

"First of all, I did not authorize it [Operation Fast and Furious]. Eric Holder, the attorney General did not authorize it."

"This is a pretty big government, the United States Government, I've got a lot of moving parts."

Barack Obama June 2011:

"As you know my Attorney General has made clear he certainly would not have ordered gun running to be able to pass through into Mexico."

"The investigation is still pending and I'm not going to comment on a pending investigation"

"It wouldn't be appropriate for me to comment on the investigation if it is not completed."

But Townhall correspondent Katie Pavlich, in an October 2, 2011 article, suggests that Our President, Commander in Chief and Leader of the Free World might perhaps be less than transparent on this specific issue:

New documents from the White House show extensive communications between for Special Agent in Charge William Newell, who has since been promoted to a cushy position within the Obama Justice Department in Washington D.C., and White House national security team staff about Operation Fast and Furious. In the video above, Obama claims it is his administration's policy to "catch gunrunners and put them into jail," when in fact ATF and DOJ policy under Obama has been exactly the opposite. ATF agents were told by senior officials to allow gunrunners to put high powered weapons into the hands of ruthless cartels, not to arrest them and to allow them to go back into Mexico.

From CBS News:

The documents show extensive communications between then-ATF Special Agent in Charge of the Phoenix office Bill Newell - who led Fast and Furious - and then-White House National Security Staffer Kevin O'Reilly. Emails indicate the two also spoke on the phone. Such detailed, direct communications between a local ATF manager in Phoenix and a White House national security staffer has raised interest among Congressional investigators looking into Fast and Furious. Newell has said he and O'Reilly are long time friends.

William Newell admitted during testimony on Capitol Hill in July that the White House had in fact been in contact with him about Operation Fast and Furious. Newell even referred to Kevin O'Reilly as, "a good friend." Previous to Newell's admission, the White House denied any knowledge or authorization of Operation Fast and Furious. Once Newell said he was in contact with O'Reilly, the White House then claimed O'Reilly and two other White House national security staffers knew about the program but didn't know "details."

Now, we know that White House National Security Staffer Kevin O'Reilly was heavily briefed about the details of the operation through emails and phone calls.

I guess it all comes down to whether or not you believe that President Obama has always and ever been entirely candid ... or truthful ... with the American Public.

Perhaps it may be helpful to put the question this way:

Do you recall ANY American President, from FDR (who was the President when I was born) on, who has always been entirely candid ... or truthful ... with the American Public?

hmmmm ...

Nope.

Geez, they're all politicians! All they want is to get re-elected, and eventually to be remembered reverently so they can set up their Presidential Libraries and gets lots of speaking engagements which will pay them big bucks.

Like Bill Clinton.

Remember him? Mister "I did not have sexual relations with That Woman .... Monica Lewinski"?

Yeah. I thought so.

___________________________________________

IN THE MEANTIME ...

... there are corresponding "fallout" issues which have may have been generally overlooked by Media and Federal Administration authorities:

According to testimony, it has become common practice for retaliation to occur against ATF Agents who spoke out against their supervisor's corruption, even when operations had no logical backing.

[ATF Special Agent Peter] Forcelli [in his testimony] also added that while the ATF was ordering gun dealers to sell to straw buyers under surveillance, gun dealers were taking the heat for it, and being held responsible for violence in Mexico. He stressed gun dealers were not the problem. In fact gun dealers were helpful in pursuing cases against cartel members, making it blatantly clear law abiding gun owners are not at fault, but the government is.

[emphasis added]

It's never the government, it's never the leaders ... it's always The Little Guy who takes the heat.

It's a Wonderful World, isn't it, where the expression "I'm from the government, and I'm here to help you" is automatically interpreted to be an exercise in irony.

B-b-b-Bye ATF?

2011-10-01T20:54:00.000-07:00

I received an email from "Llago" (not necessarily a frequent reader of this blog) which provided the (undated) text of a Townhall.com correspondent Katie Pavlich column, suggesting that the Department of Justice agency "Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives" *(BATF, frequently referenced here as "ATF")* might possibly be deactivated:

Bombshell: DOJ Considering Elimination of ATF

Katie Pavlich
Columnist, Townhall.com

Multiple sources, including sources from ATF, DOJ and Congressional offices have said there is a white paper circulating within the Department of Justice, outlining the essential elimination of ATF. According to sources, the paper outlines the firing of at least 450 ATF agents in an effort to conduct damage control as Operation Fast and Furious gets uglier and as election day 2012 gets closer. ATF agents wouldn’t be reassigned to other positions, just simply let go. Current duties of ATF, including the enforcement of explosives and gun laws, would be transferred to other agencies, possibly the FBI and the DEA. According to a congressional source, there have been rumblings about the elimination of ATF for quite sometime, but the move would require major political capital to actually happen.

“It’s a serious white paper being circulated, how far they’d get with it I don’t know,” a confidential source said.

After a town hall meeting about Operation Fast and Furious in Tucson, Ariz. On Monday, ATF Whistleblower Vince Cefalu, who has been key in exposing details about Operation Fast and Furious, confirmed the elimination of ATF has been circulating as a serious idea for sometime now and that a white paper outlining the plan does exist.

Sounds great right? Eliminating ATF? But there is more to this story. Remember, low level ATF field agents, like ATF whistleblower John Dodson, were uncomfortable conducting Operation Fast and Furious from the beginning, but were told by high level officials within ATF that if they had a problem with the operation, they could find a job elsewhere.

“Allowing loads of weapons that we knew to be destined for criminals, this was the plan. It was so mandated,” ATF Whistleblower John Dodson said in testimony on Capitol Hill on June 15, 2011
In fact, not only were the ATF agents forced to carry out the operation, they were told to go against what they had been taught in training.

“This operation, which in my opinion endangered the American public, was orchestrated in conjunction with Assistant U.S. Attorney Emory Hurley. [Emory Hurley is the same Assistant U.S. Attorney who previously prevented agents from using some of the common and accepted law enforcement techniques that are employed elsewhere in the United States to investigate and prosecute gun crimes.] I have read documents that indicate that his boss, U.S. Attorney Dennis Burke, also agreed with the direction of the case,” Special Agent Peter Forcelli said in testimony on Capitol hill on June 15, 2011.

(Look for the name "Dennis L. Burke" near the end of this essay .... you may not be entirely displeased by the context.)

In the interest of "full disclosure", I checked the TOWNHALL website, and researched their archives for the correspondent, with no luck. I looked back for three weeks and didn't find the article cited. It's certainly possible that if I had taken my research farther back, I would have found it. [see update at the bottom of this article]

I did, however, find several current and/or recent (as of October 1, 2011) ATF-related articles by Pavlich, which suggests that she is pursuing the ATF-related theme assiduously.

Good on you, Cobber.

[In passing, I note that as of this date (October 1, 2011) the ATF website mentions neither the transition of the ATF director, nor the controversy of the "Fast and Furious" program. However, on August 17, 2o11 it does refute the "... Inacurate news report regarding 'Fast and Furious' personnel' ". The disgrace of the temporary, transitional and FIRED! acting temporary Director has yet to be addressed. Typical.]

You may not find the above-quoted material convincing; since I was unable to find the original article, and the submitted material did not include a publication date, I have no way of convincing either you or myself that it is legitimate. However, I am personally acquainted with "Llago". My own private conclusion is that the correspondent did write the article, and my inability to find it reflects upon my own lapses, rather than the correspondent or the website or the person who sent me the full text (the full text is available to you upon request, as email).

So, is the ATF dead in the water? I don't know.

I do know that, since Prohibition, ATF has been responsible for a LOT of "governmental intervention" in the realm of private activity. Were they more of a help than a hindrance during prohibition, when they prevented a lot of "bathtub gin" from being sold to private citizens? Perhaps ... but if the federal government (in it's wisdom) had not prohibited the legal production of SAFE gin, it might never have been a problem.

In the area of firearms manufacture and sale, what positive influence have they been?

In the 1992 "Ruby Ridge" fiasco, ATF agents entrapped Randy Weaver into cutting the barrel of a shotgun shorter than the ATF found acceptable, and then while trying to arrest Weaver an FBI
"Hostage Rescue Team" sniper (was there ever a more ironic acronym?) shot and killed Weaver's wife "accidentally". Was this an "Accidental Discharge"? No such thing; it's a "Negligent Discharge", to give it it's proper nomenclature.

And in the 1993 "Branch Dividian" massacre, ATF was instrumental in the assault on the Waco compound of David Koresh resulting in the death of over eighty American citizens ... including many children who can never be describe other than as "innocents". As the "Serendipity" website describes the situation:

After the February raid by the U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (BATF) of David Koresh's dissident religious community at Waco, Texas, the FBI and the U.S. Army took over, mounting a 51-day siege. This included such psy-war tactics as sleep deprivation of the inhabitants of the community by means of all-night broadcasts of recordings of the screams of rabbits being slaughtered.

(emphasis added by the editor)

Now we see "Operation Fast and Furious", where the ATF deliberately allowed the (questionable) sale, transfer and transportation of American firearms to "straw purchasers" ... which would ordinarily be rejected by the governmentally. audited retailer ... with the final disposition of those firearms to violent Mexican drug traffickers. The ATF has jumped through every hoop it could find to defend it's OFFICIAL "hands off" policy, based upon the concept that allowing such purchases would allow them (the ATF) to track the movement of arms to its ultimate receiver.

The tracking effort usually failed (not least because the "tracking devices" sometimes embedded in the illegal firearms were powered by "Radio Shack" batteries, which had a very limited life ... someone didn't think that through) and the basic fallacy of the policy became tragically (an embarrassingly ... for the ATF) obvious when a U.S. Border Patrollman was killed by one of those same "Fast and Furious" guns. The consequence: the egrigious and controversial "temporary" ATF chief, Kenneth E. Melson ... and his accomplice (the U.S. Attorney in Phoenix, AZ --Dennis L. Burke) were "replaced".

You know the old joke: "What do you call 600 attorneys drowning at the bottom of the ocean? 'A Good Start' "?

Well, this was another "Good Start".

It's not enough, but it's A Good Start.

Neither Burke nor Melson will lose their lives in as a consequence of their horrendous lack of judgement.

Unfortunately, we can't say as much for the innocent-but-dedicated (and now deceased) Border Patrol Agent, Brian Terry.

Surely, Brian Terry wasn't the only victim of this ill-conceived and poorly-executed, failed Federal policy. But he is the sacrificial lamb who will inevitably be overlooked by history.

The ATF may be eliminated? Can you say "Goodbye and Good Riddance?" children.

I knew you could.
________________________________________________
UPDATE: OCTOBER 2, 2011

This morning I found the original article link on the front page of TOWNHALL. You may read the entire article here. I could not find a date on the original article, but the first of the (over 300) comments was dated September 30, 2011.

Oregon appeals court throws out university gun ban

2011-09-30T22:43:00.000-07:00

Oregon appeals court throws out university gun ban:

Now they tell me:

SALEM, Ore. (AP) - The Oregon University System cannot ban guns on college campuses, the state Court of Appeals ruled Wednesday in a decision that overturns a decades-old prohibition.

I worked on the OSU campus for 15 years, and while I always had a firearm on-campus (if not on my person), the policy was that if I was CAUGHT with a firearms ... even though I had a legitimate CCH (Carry Concealed Handgun) license, the university was allowed to fire me if they found me in possession of a firearm on campus.

Now, I have been retired for about FIVE months, and the Oregon judicial system has only just decided that my determination to protect my private person is legally justified.

Why didn't they do this 15 years ago, when I first started working for them?

Fifteen years of bringing a concealed handgun on campus every day, worrying every day that I would be discovered; and all this time I never fired a gun .... never assaulted anyone ... never caused my co-workers to fear that I would attack them because of the rage which they KNEW was generated from the mere fact that I had a gun and might "go postal" at any given moment~

Gee, Folks. Had I only been able to testify that I had a gun on campus for fifteen years and my co-workers were still safe from me, I would have felt that my presence was justified. Maybe if I had felt that my job and my co-workers were still safe even though I carried (or perhaps they were 'more safe'), this dorky "administrative" rule would have been abrogated years ago.

Thank you Oregon State Court Court of Appeals, for finally noticing that University Workers were not the threat you should be worried about.

I will not even link to the Virginia Tech issues, or the comments I have already made defending the Oregon University System student who was busted a couple of years ago for having a weapon on campus.

I can't even say "It's About Time".

All I can say is ... "Thank God" that the courts have made this small step, which brings University Policy in line with State Law.

As for the Oregon State universities?

What a bunch of maroons, that it took a judicial ruling to make them wake up!

Felons BUSTED in Kansas for illegal firearms ownership

2011-09-28T22:08:00.000-07:00

Shooting Wire

The folks in Kansas (and also the ATF) are SERIOUS about enforcing the law(s) which prevent convicted felons from possession of firearms .... and I'm glad!

WICHITA, KAN. - Sixty-seven defendants have been charged with federal and state crimes as the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives wraps up an 11-month operation aimed at taking guns out of the hands of convicted felons, U.S. Attorney Barry Grissom announced today. Leaders of ATF, the Wichita Police Department, the Sedgwick County Sheriff's Office, the Sedgwick County District Attorney's Office and the Wichita Area Gun Task Force joined Grissom for a news conference to announce the indictments.

This operation was planned for one purpose - to make Wichita safer, Grissom said. I believe that every weapon taken out of the hands of a convicted felon represents lives saved and violent crimes prevented.Dozens of law enforcement officers and agents executed arrest warrants this week. Prior to the execution of arrest warrants, the operation recovered 200 firearms, including guns that had been reported stolen and sawed off shotguns, as well as cocaine, crack cocaine, Ecstasy, marijuana, methamphetamine, PCP and prescription drugs.

We focused resources on offenders who use and provide guns for the commission of violent crimes, Grissom said.

Federal law prohibits anyone convicted of a felony from possessing firearms or ammunition. It also prohibits drug traffickers and users of controlled substances from possessing firearms.

I believe that this kind of action is a direct response to the constant complaint from responsible gun owners (including the NRA), which has for decades complained of Federal, State and Local administrations that " ...they want to impose new firearms restrictions on honest people; why don't they take guns away from the criminals, and --- oh, yes --- how about enforcing the 20,000 existing gun laws?"

Now they are. A lot of people are in a world of grief, because they are being prosecuted for making responsible gun owners look bad.

(Well, and also because they are violating laws which do NOT apply to responsible gun owners.)

The National Rifle Association has been true to the mantra for years; criminals should and MUST be prosecuted for violation of gun laws, in addition to their other felonies. While the NRA has not always had the same priorities as I do, at least this time SOMEONE in Kansas and ATF have listened to me, even if they haven't heard me. And I'm fully willing to credit the NRA for their continued drive to require enforcement agencies where the most egregious violations occur: the criminal element in our society.

Now we only need to other communities and states to follow the excellent example of Sedgwick County and the city of Wichita, Kansas.

"Dances With Wolves" would be proud of them.

My Fellow Americans ....

2011-09-22T23:00:00.000-07:00

We get letters.

Being a blog, we get letters from special interest groups asking us to please use our private forum to espouse their private interests. Sometimes I reply, usually I ignore them.

In fact, one of the reasons why I have been shamefully reticent about blogging for so long is that my "Irish" is up, not the least because of the 9/11 anniversary which I dreaded because I feared

Recently (shortly before the 9/11 tenth anniversary), one special interest group has been particularly adamant for me to post their plea for support of the cause of Islamic Acceptance. Finally, I declined, with reason.

Here is the original email, asking me to "sponsor" (by presenting their message) a group which wishes to portray Islamic Americans as just more "Americans". I like the idea, but not the manner in which their video proposes their message.

My Fellow American is a film project in the United States devoted to recognizing that Muslims are our neighbors. I am reaching out to you because you addressed the recent events in Oslo, Norway, on Cogito Ergo Geek and I am hoping you will share this message of tolerance with your readers. We’ve put together a 2 minute film that I believe you will be interested in sharing, watching, and discussing:

http://myfellowamerican.us

I would love it if you could post or tweet about this and share the video. If you can, please let me know. I am here if you have any questions. Thank you so much.

Incidentally, I do not ascribe to the philosophy of many radio talk-show host, especially Micheal Savage (who was extensively quoted in the video), because their format tends to demonize groups rather than the actions of individuals. On the other hand, some groups tend to have too many members who are just as fanatic as (for example) Savage ... except sometimes members of these groups use physical violence to further their aims. I don't like Savage, but I fear Jihadists who believe that the world should become a Caliphate, even by the Sword. To put it in simplistic terms: Savage is a nut; islamicists are a danger to innocents.

And I am reminded of President Theodore Roosevelt's speech regarding "HyphenatedAmericans" ... which includes Islamic Americans:

There is no room in this country for hyphenated Americanism. When I refer to hyphenated Americans, I do not refer to naturalized Americans. Some of the very best Americans I have ever known were naturalized Americans, Americans born abroad. But a hyphenated American is not an American at all... The one absolutely certain way of bringing this nation to ruin, of preventing all possibility of its continuing to be a nation at all, would be to permit it to become a tangle of squabbling nationalities, an intricate knot of German-Americans, Irish-Americans, English-Americans, French-Americans, Scandinavian-Americans or Italian-Americans, each preserving its separate nationality, each at heart feeling more sympathy with Europeans of that nationality, than with the other citizens of the American Republic... There is no such thing as a hyphenated American who is a good American. The only man who is a good American is the man who is an American and nothing else.

I will discuss the subject of "Islamic-Americans" later in this post. Briefly, I think that's the crux of the problem. And no, the term "Islamic-Americans" is not mentioned in the video.

Just so it's clear, I think that our allegiance should be to our country, rather than to the unique religious choices we make. On the other hand, I realize that many people of every religion would disagree with me. For many people, their religion-of-choice is their primary guideline, and that's fine ... as long as they abide by the existing laws of their espoused country. For me, the deciding factor is whether our political or religious beliefs allow the slaughter of innocents.

The slaughter of innocents. That's a powerful term. And either our political or religious beliefs may take precedence, depending on our national culture. Still, we should not support any belief system which encourages us to murder our fellow man because he doesn't believe the same things as we do .... as long as his beliefs are similarly accepting of the right to exist.

In the U.S., we went through a terrible period of "Racism", where 'innocence' was often defined by race. We've pretty much got through that, even though we're still struggling with residual hatred. But it is not a national policy, and it is not supported by federal law (more on that later). We're making progress, even if it's slow.

Getting back to the video, it shows friendly, cheerful and productive Islamic American citizens who are free to practice their religion in public. If you are not an Islamic , you cannot practice your religion in ... for example .. Saudi Arabia. Do you know that you cannot bring a bible into Saudi Arabia? And they are a friendly country to the United States. How multi-cultural is that? Are they working to get past that? No, they are not; it is national policy, and national law.

Here's how "Multi-Culturalism" is working out in Europe:

(From "Mark Steyn Online: The Department of Sharia /September 20, 2011 and also published in National Review Online)

And in Egypt, also a Friendly State to America and generally considered one of the most 'liberal' of Islamic States (actually, not generally considered an "Islamic State", even though they are becoming more Islamic daily), if an Egyptian citizen held up a sign stating "Christianity Will Dominate The World: Islamic Statism Can Go To Hell" --- that person would be lucky to be arrested before the mobs murdered him (as was Egyptian Presidant Anwar Sadat after he had ratified a peace with Israel in 1981) ... or sexually assaulted her.

No, I do NOT believe that every Islamic is a terrorist. However, in the past ten years, every Terrorist has been an Islamic.

And before you say it, I am quite aware that this particular catch-phrase has been used so often that it has become associated with anti-islamic hysteria for the past ten years. As in; since September 11, 2011.

Name me one terroristic act in the past ten years which has NOT been perpetrated by an Islamic?

It use to be that we could point our fingers at the Irish. Sinn Fein seems dormant. The IRA hasn't made a lot of headlines lately, although it still active ... 22 terrorist acts in 2009, 39 in 2010.

But that is small change, and generally restricted to Ireland and GB. Islamist terrorism is ... may we say it? ... worldwide, and almost indiscriminate.

So why not accept Islamic terrorism with the same seeming equanimity as Irish Terrorism?

The difference is, many Irish are outraged by Irish Terrorism. We heard a lot of that in the Bad Old Days, but now the terrorist acts are so few and so relatively minor (when's the last time the Irish attacked America, or blew up skyscrapers, or tried to blow up airplanes filled with anonymous innocents?) that they pale to insignificance when compared to Islamic terrorists.

But I'm still not a supporter of the brand of terrorism that a few Irish support, even though they didn't demolish buildings and innocents on a grand scale ten years ago. Or ... ever.

And ... getting back to that video that we linked to earlier, with the smiling Islamics in America? Where in that video did anyone refer to, let alone OBJECT to, the terrorist acts repeatedly committed by their coreligionists?

No where.

Another reference to Mark Steyn, who recently (September 18, 2011) posted an essay called "MOLLIFYING MUSLIMS, AND MUSLIFYING MOLLIES", where he mentioned, in part:

Take this no-name pastor from an obscure church who was threatening to burn the Koran. He didn't burn any buildings or women and children. He didn't even burn a book. He hadn't actually laid a finger on a Koran, and yet the mere suggestion that he might do so prompted the President of the United States to denounce him, and the Secretary of State, and the commander of US forces in Afghanistan, various G7 leaders, and golly, even Angelina Jolie. President Obama has never said a word about honor killings of Muslim women. Secretary Clinton has never said a word about female genital mutilation. General Petraeus has never said a word about the rampant buggery of pre-pubescent boys by Pushtun men in Kandahar. But let an obscure man in Florida so much as raise the possibility that he might disrespect a book – an inanimate object – and the most powerful figures in the western world feel they have to weigh in.

Aside from all that, this obscure church's website has been shut down, its insurance policy has been canceled, its mortgage has been called in by its bankers. Why? As Diana West wrote, why was it necessary or even seemly to make this pastor a non-person? Another one of Obama's famous "teaching moments"? In this case teaching us that Islamic law now applies to all? Only a couple of weeks ago, the President, at his most condescendingly ineffectual, presumed to lecture his moronic subjects about the First Amendment rights of Imam Rauf. Where's the condescending lecture on Pastor Jones' First Amendment rights?

The President of the United States publically denounced this irrelevant clergyman for speaking his mind

And that, friends in INSTITUTIONAL terrorism, committed by our own Federal Government. It is a matter of national policy that nothing which can remotely be described as detrimental or insulting to Islam will be tolerated in The Land Of The Free and The Home Of The Brave.

Why is that so?

It happens because our national leadership has decided to meddle in the 'national conscience', to determine what is and is not acceptable for us to think about religion, tolerance and acceptance in America. The Constitution of the United States be damned; Obama didn't like it, and so he sent the attack-dog lackeys of the American Press to vilify this private individual.

(Yes, the parson is a jerk. The First Amendment of the Constitution was codified to protect the rights of Free Speech for unpopular opinions. If we liked what he had to say, we wouldn't need a First Amendment.)

It's not enough that the president has infringed on the First Amendment Rights of a private American citizen, but our current culture has gone totally ape-shit in its surge to back the president .... in an attack on a private citizen who had broken no laws. And it is, the press at the same time supported an attack on the First Amendment of the Constitution of the United States of America. So much for the white coat-tails of the Fifth Estate.

---

So, when I get emails asking me to "sponsor" a video which presents Islamics in America as totally joyful and non-aggressive, I have to ask: "Where's the beef?"

What happened to showing both faces of the culture which is not assimilating itself into the American culture? Instead of becoming more American, and speaking out against terrorism ... adherents of this religion expect us to accept it without acknowledging that many of its members have as its basic priority that we should be forced to abandon our culture in favor if its religious fanaticism?

I don't think so.

When I see that the News Of The Day features Americans (who just happen to be Islamics) speaking out against terrorism, I will consider supporting that concept.

But that won't happen until Islamics (who just happen to be Americans), have made it a priority that they don't want to change the American culture.

Today, Islam is not just Another Pretty Face. If they want to be accepted, Islamics must conform to American culture; not we to theirs.

How You Tube Really sucks ....

2011-09-20T09:19:00.000-07:00

How not to change a mag. - YouTube

Here is a video of an IPSC shooter who does a mag-change, with an Open Gun, and rocks with the next 18 (+/-) rounds to finish a stage on what appears to be in indoor range.

The shooter is shown without any reference to the target, so it's difficult to see the shooting problem which he is addressing.

But look at the comments on the video ... almost everyone who contributes to the discussion is critical, but they're not clear on why they denigrate the shooter.

Some of the critics mention the high-capacity (?) magazine, but even they are not clear on why they seem to think this is 'a bad thing'. Could it be because they are not permitted to have a magazine with 19 rounds capacity in their home country?

Okay, I'm not really sure why the commenters are so critical about this shooter. Sure, he bobbles the mag change .... but most people who care enough to contribute comments don't seem to care much about that, although those who DO mention it seem either to hot have mucked up a reload, or they have no idea what it's like to reload a 170mm magazine.

My personal evaluation is a combination of the above. Specifically:
(a) they don't like that he has a big magazine;
(b) they don't really understand what IPSC competition is about;
(c) they are envious that he has "better" equipment than he has;
(d) they are entirely ignorant about the nuances of IPSC competition
(e) they are a bunch of people who are so dominated by their country's political limitations on their persona freedoms that they can't understand that a man DOES have superior competitive equipment, because he CAN buy anything he can afford.

I think it's sad that this guy is denigrated by people who should be his "peers". The comments reveal their "Sour Grapes" attitude. Because they can't legally own equipment which is competitive, they feel the need to criticize him because he lives in a country which is constitutionally forbidden to deny his right to buy reliable pistols without restricting magazine capacity.

I'm going to keep an eye on that YouTube Video. Reading the criticisms there helps me to remind myself that a LOT of people do not have access to normal equipment ... and they are so pissed off about it, they are ready to criticize a man who has full rights to buy and use whatever equipment he can afford.

What a bunch of maroons!

The First Priority

2011-09-20T06:19:00.000-07:00

Sue's DQ - YouTube

The YouTube Video is not clear, but it seems that the lady brought loaded magazines to the Safety Table in her hand. This is a clear violation of rule 10.5.12:

10.5.12 Handling live or dummy ammunition (including practice or training rounds, snap caps and empty cases), loaded magazines or loaded speed loading devices in a Safety Area, or failing to comply with (http://www.blogger.com/img/blank.gif Rule 2.4.1. )
The word “handling” does not preclude competitors from entering a Safety Area with ammunition in magazines or speed loading devices on their belt, in their pockets or in their range bag, provided the competitor does not physically remove the loaded magazines or loaded speed loading devices from their retaining or storage device while within the Safety Area.

If the shooter brought loaded magazines in her hand to the safety table, the rule is appropriately applied.

This is a rare and difficult enforcement of the rule; it requires that the competitor violate safety rules in the presence of a Range Officer, or someone wh is qualified to act in that capacity.

IF the supposition is true (the competitor did 'handle live ammunition' at the safety table) then the DQ is legitimate. No question about it.

This has always been one of the more difficult Safety Rules to monitor. Again, it presupposes that the infraction occurred in the presence of a Range Officer.

At the same time, it's one of the easiest Safety Rules to break. You see in the video that the competitor was paying more attention to her conversation, than to the safety rule.

It may happen that the purpose of this competitor's live is to provide a good example of a bad practice.

Competitors may handle ammunition ANY WHERE on the range .... except at the Safety Table. Until she actually laid the loaded magazines (?) on the table, she was deemed "safe".

During my "Introduction to USPSA" classes, I try to emphasize that all safety infractions are similarly penalized by a Match DQ. This rule is difficult to illustrate, because I have never seen a violation. Now I have seen one, and while the Match DQ seems "friendly", it had the same necessary consequence; the competitor seems to be insufficiently aware of safety considerations, and is disqualified from further competition.

I think this DQ Judgement, while unusual and perhaps a little bizarre (given the circumstances) may well serve as a valuable example to both new and old shooters, for a variety of reason:

ALL Safety rules are equally applicable, and must be imposed upon EVERY incidence;
Participants in USPSA/IPSC competition are perceived in a common practice; running around with loaded gun (not at all times ... supposedly). We are all subject to the most stringent safety rules, and a violation of ANY rule necessitates a Match DQ, because it illustrates that the offender is not in the right mental state to be trusted with his/her loaded gun;
This incident was clearly a situation where the 'offender' has been distracted, and yet the most powerful consequence (being disallowed to continue in competition) has arbitrarily been imposed upon her. This is entirely appropriate. The existing rules serve to identify an "un-aware competitor", and remove her from the competitive. The rules work to support the primary goal of "SAFETY", above all other considerations.
If the safety rules sometimes seem to be too harsh, they still impose the SAFETY priority; even in marginal circumstances, they identify and remove unsafe shooters from the competitive environment. This serves the sport, and guarantees the safety of other competitors wh share the range with the unsafe violator.

The last two discussion points obviously overlap. This is entirely within the philosophy of competitive Safety Ruless, which apply a "Belt AND Suspenders" method of stopping unsafe shooters before they can violate even more drastic Safety Rules.

We want everyone to go home from the match without injury, or fear of injury. If one competitor is forbidden to compete (for reasons of safety), that is MUCH better than that this or another competitor be injured.

We will NOT accept an unsafe shooter into our ranks. If a competitor cannot understand, accept and practice the safety rules 100% of the time, it's better to penalize that shooter than to ask other competitors to accept the risk of allowing unsafe conditions to exist.

We are safe.

That is the first priority.

Judge Judy on TSM: Entitlement?

2011-08-08T01:09:00.000-07:00

The Smallest Minority: The Entitlement Mentality

"You know what I'm sayin'?"

I get SO tired of hearing that from clueless persons.

Kevin BAKER zeroes in on "What's Wrong With America Today!" *

*(Freeloaders who think they're 'entitled' to the money they get for 'free'.)*

Wil and Grace

2011-08-07T21:56:00.000-07:00

Actually, their names are William ("Call me Wil") and Betsy. Betsy is Wil's sister, and they magically appeared at the August "Introduction to USPSA" class at the Albany Rifle and Pistol Club.

Will and Betsy are brother and sister, and I was privileged to provide instruction to them about IPSC Competition. Yes, I've spoken of this "Introduction to USPSA" class before, and invariably in positive tones. I love teaching the class, because it provides me with the opportunity to meet some of the very nicest people in the state with the goal of introducing them to the principles and policies of IPSC competition in Oregon.

Of course, we're trying to acquaint them with the culture and practices of competition, but we're also trying to help them understand the Safety Rules which keeps us all safe while we're running & gunning with pistols ... "designed to shoot people", as the gun-grabbers contend, but actually the most fun target practice to come our way since Pub Darts.

Wil and Betsy are gregarious, nice people who have no desire to shoot other people. They're just tired at shooting at [ho-hum, BORING] bullseye targets, and thought that a more complex shooting sport would add vinegar to their sports shooting. (Not to mention that it would confirm the three rules of shooting safety, and help them feel more comfortable during their first few matches -- because it will teach them what to expect, how a pistol match is conducted, and how their fellow shooters will expect them to act.)

A word about the "three rules of shooting safety", and how the Intro to USPSA class reinforces them:

(1) "ALWAYS keep the gun pointed in a safe direction."
This is enforced by the IPSC/USPSA safety rules, which dictate that anytime your pistol wanders away from being definitively pointed 'downrange', you will be stopped by the Range Officer and you will not be permitted to continue shooting for the duration of the match. The basis for this penalty is that you have demonstrated that you are not in the "safety" mind-set today, so while you are welcome to stay and watch ... we don't trust you today. Maybe next week, eh?

(2) "ALWAYS keep your finger off the trigger until you are ready to shoot".
Another safety rule in IPSC/USPSA -- you must keep your finger off the trigger (a) when you are reloading, clearing a jam, or otherwise not actively engaging a target and (b) when you are moving, unless you are actively and obviously engaging a target.

(3) "ALWAYS keep the gun unloaded until ready to use"
IPSC/USPSA ranges are always "cold ranges" .... the only time you can handle your pistol AND your ammunition is when you are on the line, ready to begin engaging legitimate targets, and under the direct personal supervision of a Range Officer.

(Actually, the founder of IPSC .... Colonel Jeff Cooper ... proposed a fourth rule:

"Be sure of your target and what is behind it."

Since IPSC/USPSA competition always takes place in a closed and supervised range setting, the target and background are placed and constructed to be ALWAYS safe .... so while this rule is certainly valid, it is accepted as a 'given quantity' in this milieu.)

Back to the class:

Actually, Wil's wife, Beth, would have also attended this class. Unfortunately, she was physically unable to attend because she had taken her penultimate Chemotheraphy treatment on Thursday. As we know, the day after Chemo the patient feels great; but when the drugs wear off, in about 36 hours, they feel very not-so-great and do not feel attracted to any physical activity, nor do they enjoy the heat of an August Saturday at the range.

I understand this. My personal experience with the long struggle with Cancer treatment which SWMBO endured has sensitized me to the discomfort of Chemotherapy. I had, in fact, tried to avoid the subject when Wil and Betsy were going through the course. It was only toward the end, when Wil asked my direct questions about SWMBO (I had unwisely referred to her positive experiences with IPSC/USPSA competition) that I admitted, that ... well, SWMBO didn't make it. The chemo never worked for her.

---

The good news is that, again, Beth is completing her treatment, and it seems to be working for her. Wil tells me that she is in fact an NRA instructor, and they are both active in the Four Corners Gun Club in Salem. Going through the certification course is something that Beth wants to do at least as much as Wil and Betsy did. I've made tentative arrangements with Wil to provide a special class next weekend, with Beth as the only student and Wil there to provide support.

Wil and Betsy are good people. They both agree that Beth is the 'pistol' (in the sense of being very competent, very goal-oriented) shooter in the family. As they talked about Beth, the things they say about her reminded me very much of the things I've always said about SWMBO: competent, strong, dedicated and a leader.

I'm looking forward to meeting Beth. Maybe she will let me talk about her experience in a week or two.

And if she won't ... I won't talk about her. She must, after all, "be obeyed".

Doorbell | Power Line

2011-08-03T21:47:00.000-07:00

Doorbell | Power Line

"Are You Still Alive?"

2011-07-27T00:13:00.000-07:00

Last week I received a phone call from my friend, The Hobo Brasser, asking if I was still alive.

Good question.

His point was that I haven't been attending IPSC matches locally, haven't been in touch with my Usual Suspect friends, and haven't posted anything on this blog since ... Whew!

Independence Day!

When I responded to the effect that I THINK I'm still alive, he responded with the emphatic suggestion that I ought to, at least .. "Write Something!"

Good Idea.

The thing is, there is SO much going on (Norway and El Presidente being two very good examples) that it's difficult for me to write without blood dripping from my well-bitten tongue.

I don't know what to write about first, given that my sense of outrage over The World's increasing propensity for outrageous can't begin to keep up!

SOooo ... forgive me if I don't try to Keep Up.

For example:Norway's modern-day pseudo Viking slaughters 6+ random strangers with a bomb and goes on to slaughter 86 (+/-) teens on an isolated island ... and NOBODY raises a hand to stop him for hours? I cannot begin to express an opinion here. I don't know whether to comment on the increasingly virulent anger of "non-socialized" sociopathic predators, or the society which denies that they exist, have ALWAYS existed, WILL always exist ... and in their liberally blindered home-made society refuses to acknowledge the continuing existence of evil; or whether to comment on an American President who seems determined to spend-and-tax the richest nation in the history of the world into bankruptcy.

God knows I'm incapable of properly addressing either phenomenon, let alone both.

I've resolved to allow other writers, who are capable of dissecting sociopathic abnormalities more eruditely than me, to address these immediate stories.

The truth is that I am so absolutely appalled that I cannot fathom either phenomena, let alone dissect either with the hope of providing some profundities for your erudition.

There was a time when the worst we could imagine was the total destruction of the world in a whirlwind of Atomic Fire.

At the time, we thought that was The Worst Thing That Could Happen.

Now we imagine that the world will end, as T.S. Eliot suggests, " ... not with a Bang, but with a Whimper".

Forgive me if I seem excessively negative, but for me; I would vote for the Big Bang Theory of TEOTWAWKI ("The End Of The World As We Know It")

Note: I also thought that the best world I could leave to my children was one in which my children would NOT have to go to war. Now my son is in the Navy, and is a Master At Arms ... essentially, a Navy Cop. As it happens, this is among the brighter hopes for tomorrow, as I see it now.

"A Penny for The Old Guy".

One of the Good Things about growing old, is how much we can learn about our changing world. I'm glad that my Gentle Ben is learning to be aggressive, skilled, reactive and proficient in the ways of personal combat .. and most recently he's gone to Armorer's School. This may be one of the most positive influences on my personal Next Generation.

Well, along with the cranky Black Irishmen that my daughter had the presence of mind to marry.

Anyone who prefers 18 year old Jameson is okay in my book.

Independence Day

2011-07-03T20:36:00.000-07:00

The preparations for The Geek Family Independence Day are progressing well, thank you for asking.

Life is good when you're the King of the Family.

ChronoGeek, Part 1

2011-06-23T19:34:00.000-07:00

Today was the RO Match at the USPSA Area 1 tournament --- Albany Rifle and Pistol Club; Shedd, Oregon.

(Actually, it started yesterday but the Chronograph was not yet operational. The equipment had not yet arrived.)

A bit of explanation here. I'm claiming the title of ChronoGeek because it's my blog, and I can do that. But I'm not the CronoDude. That would be Loren (whose name I invariably mis-spell, so I'm not going to worry about it). Loren has been officiating at IPSC/USPSA matches for literally Decades, and many of those tasks he shard with his wife, Sherrie. (Loren lost Sherrie to Cancer a year ago last December, and since I have lost Sandie last November, we have a lot to talk about. He's good company, and I admire his skills.)

We decided that Loren would handle all things related to the CE Chronograph ... actually, two chronographs arrayed in tandem in a light-box ) and I would just be the shooter.

As it turned out, I'm not only doing the shooting, but I'm also pulling bullets from the 8-round "sampler pack" and weighing them so we have 1/2 of the equation for determining Power Factor.

Loren records the bullet weight before I fire the competitor's ammunition from his/her firearm, and the new-version CE chronograph hardware/software determines the power factor. This is a great improvement on previous chronograph versions, and it simplifies our task of determining whether the competitors makes Major Power, or even meets the Minimum Floor for Minor Power (especially in Production Division, where everyone is deemed to be shooting Minor Power regardless of the caliber and PF of the actual load.)

This morning we met at the range at 7am, SHARP! The two new Chronograph arrays had arrived from Competition Electronic (CE), as promised.

It took 3 hours for Loren to assemble the dual-chrono array in the light-box, and even then he couldn't get it to work. Apparently one of the sensors was not registering the 'exit' incident, so it could not compare the velocity recorded by the first chronograph.

As it turns out, Loren had a 'older' (but compatible) sensor array, so he replaced the malfunctioning sensor with a proven working sensor, and we finally ended up with a tandem array with working sensors which could be mutually verifying. It was almost noon when we could begin actually chronographing the sample loads collected the previous day, and during the Thursday shoot.

In the meantime, I was busy pulling bullets from each ammunition sample, and recording the bullet weights.

I discovered that being the "Designated Shooter" at the Chrono Stage is a dream job. I would have done this for no pay at all! (Actually, I did; although the MD bought lunch for all the RO's, we don't get paid unless we are from "out of town", in which case the Match Director pays for our housing. I live 20 minutes from the ARPC range, so I donated my time and mileage in return for a free lunch, and the opportunity to shoot the firearms of over 300 competitors, plus 50 match-staff .. using their guns and their ammunition!

Talk about a Dream Job!

Tomorrow, we find ourselves beyond the R.O. Match and working with paying customers. Loren and I have had this one day to work up our routine, and by the end of the day we were running shooters through the Chrono stage with fair efficiency.

There were only a few incidents to blight our enjoyment.

If the first ... oh, I don't know --- about 100 competitors including the match staff .. we had to disappoint two shooters when their ammunition didn't support their declared "Major Power" status. I hate it when that happens. It's like DQ-ing a shooter, except it happens more frequently. Major bummer, for them and for us. We always want everybody to make Major Power if that's what they need; unfortunately, either because of using factory ammunition, or because of different climatic conditions between their home range and 'this' range, it doesn't always happen.

The other Major Disappointment of the day was the last shooter that we Chronographed. We had only a few shooters who hadn't had their ammunition chronographed, so we pulled them off the last stage of their day and ran them through the Chrono Stage. This shooter was still waiting to shoot the last stage of his first match day, but agreed to go through the chronography experience anyway, just so Loren and I could close down the stage and go home.

The first shot I fired through his Open gun was weird; when I tried to pull the trigger; it wouldn't move. I had to put a LOT of pressure on the trigger to get it to fire; it was extremely resistant to ANY movement of the trigger.

The second round, I tried 3 times before I could get the trigger to move. I commented to the shooter: "What's with this trigger, how can you shoot with it? It must be at least an 8 pound trigger, and I have to really work to get it to break!"

He said: "I don't have any problems with the trigger, it's not that tough".

So I pulled the trigger on the third round ... and the left-side of his ambidextrous safety fell off.

Oh, he made Major Power, okay. But his gun was broken and he still had to shoot his last stage of the first day. Plus come back the next day and shoot another half-dozen stages.

I really hope he's a very good gunsmith, AND that he has extra parts. Because the left-side of his ambidextrous safety looked well and truly broken, both to me and to Loren.

maybe he was lucky. If he had shot that gun on the last stage, he would have zeroed the stage. Nothing we did would have accounted for the breakage; it was just bad luck.

At least this way, he has the overnight opportunity to find and install replacement parts.

I hope he can manage it.

We'll let you know tomorrow how this works out ... if we can track the shooter.

Pendulum Waves

2011-06-18T21:53:00.000-07:00

YouTube - Pendulum Waves

Hat Tip: G-man

Ho Hum - Bicycles: just another Excellence in Performance video

2011-06-18T01:54:00.000-07:00

YouTube - Danny MacAskill - "Way Back Home"

I want you to watch this video, and think about just how much Excellence in Performance is demonstrated here.

Done watching?

Pretty damn impressive, wasn't it?

Now, go watch Athena Lea's performance at the latest major USPSA match ... 2011 Double-Tap Match. Go ahead; if you haven't seen it yet, go watch it. We'll wait.

No, even if you HAVE seen it before, go watch it again.

And while you're watching that video, keep in mind the differences between the two videos.

The Danny MacAskill - "Way Back Home video showed one person, in carefully chosen milieus, performing stunts which the common person could not even imagine himself doing. It's breath-taking. It's beautiful (not in the least because of the background music) ... in a controlled, stolid and consistent setting. When we watch this, we are in awe. We can only imagine the years of practice and dedication which allows and leads one person to accept and overwhelm such challenges of balance, speed, and power.

I'm impressed. Aren't you? If you aren't, you should be.

But consider the Athena Lee video. How are the challenges SHE faces any less intimidating? How many years has she practiced her skills .... and in the effort competed against a multitude of people no less skilled, no less dedicated, no less practiced over and over again.

Or, how are her challenges MORE intimidating? Other than, of course that she is competing, rather than making a feel-good video?

Danny has a 3 minute (more or less) video, which is obviously the result of hours of filming. It's like a Jackie Chan movie ... who knows how many takes each shot required, before he got it 'right'. Sure, he may have injured himself in the filming; we don't know. What we saw here were only the very best of an unknowable number of 'takes' before everything was just right.

Now look again at Athena Lee, or ANY USPSA/IPSC competitor. They only get one run, one chance to make the perfect run on any given stage ... On EVERY Stage! If it isn't perfect every time, they don't get another go at it .... their time and score is recorded and they stand on their single best/worst/good/mediocre performance. They have to be ALWAYS at the top of their game on every stage at every match .... or nobody cares about them.

I think that when people look at videos of USPSA/IPSC matches, they tend to say "ho hum, just another day at a match".

But when they look at a bicyclist riding a child's bicycle, they say "Hey, Wow! That's rather a dicey place he's put himself into, isn't it?"

Bicycle riding is ... I don't know if I can put it in to the proper framework. I'm impressed by the amazing stunts they can do, but I'm always aware that they probably didn't do it 'right' the first time, no matter what stunts they do.

USPSA/IPSC competition, however, is ALWAYS "do it right the first time, over and over, or you're merely an "Also Ran". (And we all know how many of us fit in THAT category, don't we? Show of hands? I thought so.)

I'm not saying that the antics of grown men on kiddy-cycles isn't impressive, because it is.

And yes, I've deliberately used the most demeaning buzz-words I could imagine in describing this phenomenon, because I am trying to demonstrate the wide gap between appreciation of one "non-spectator sport" and another.

When we see a grown man on a kiddy bike jumping walls and riding rails, it's justifiable impressive.

But when you see a truly champion-class Practical Pistol shooter (Athena Lee, for example) doing everything right, on every stage of a bit match, it's all to easy to say "Ho hum, just another IPSC match." You and I could probably do a fair approximation of Ms. Lee/s performance, couldn't we?

Well, maybe so, maybe no. But the point is ... you can't get your name in the winners' circle with a "maybe". You need to perform better than everyone else, first time and every time. Or you're still a "Ho Hum" performer.

I think that the kind of competition as typified in USPSA is the finest, most point-of-the-sword kind of competition available on this planet. This is roughly equivalent to Olympic quality athletes, but looked at in a different way.

(And do NOT get me started on the stupid failed efforts of IPSC to make Practical Shooting a "Demonstration Event" in the International Olympics a decade or so ago. I'm still frosted about that; this was the most inept political effort in recent history, in ANY venue, and a child could have told the IPSC President ["He Who must Not be Named"] that it was ill timed, poorly conceived, and ineptly executed.)

Yes, Practical Shooting could and perhaps should be elevated to an Olympic level, but that's a Political Decision, and IPSC/USPSA is not a politically-correct "sport" (Quotes used advisedly, well knowing that they are included in the sardonic sense.) In a single sentence: Kiddy-Bike rail-jumping will be elevated to an Olympic level before Practical Shooting is, because Kiddy-Bike rail-jumping is not politically incorrect ... even if it's EASIER TO DO.

Scroll back:
Biking looks good, because you get a lot of tries and it's not competitive AT ALL!

Shooting doesn't look good, politically, and it's easy to lose because you have only ONE TRY and the competition here is fierce, man. Truly fierce!

No, I'm not putting down biking, whatever the venue. Some of the stunts I see in the provided video ... oh hell, ALL of them! ... are just beyond the concept of the common man to perform.

But when I look at videos of USPSA/IPSC competition, I'm even more impressed. I KNOW I can't do that, because I've tried, for over 25 years, and I know that however well my performance may look on video, there's always some one else who can do the same thing better, smoother, faster. It's like the Bionic Man:

"We can do it. We have the technology. We can make him better .. stronger ... faster."

Yeah, but can you make him "better .. stronger ... faster" than everyone else? Or can you just make him look good on Video?

Here's the point:
You can look at a lot of video events, and you can look at a lot of competitive sports. But there are very few events which are both competitive sports, and which position each competitor against every other competitor .. in a field which may include 300 or 400 other competitors ... and elevate one single person above all of his or her opponents. This kind of competition selects the best, the fastest, the smartest and the most consistently excellent person in the field.

This kind of competition is found in very few venues; these venues include ..... well, The Olympics. And all subordinate versions of competition which qualify competitors for The Olympics.

No mistakes. No awkward moments. No minor slip-ups wit the penalty of only a second or two accumulative over multiple efforts ..... and the first try you get is the ONLY try you get.

Child bike-riding looks really good on video, but when you compare it to IPSC/USPSA competition (remember, these people are shooting real guns and a moment's slip-up could result in disaster!), it's just a kid sport.

Ho hum.

Area 1 Director wins "Super Trooper" at FNH USA 3-gun National Shoot-Off.

2011-06-16T19:28:00.000-07:00

Shooting Wire: "Anderson Wins 3GN Shoot-Off, $5K From Warne":

"PARMA, Idaho - A year ago, Chuck Anderson came up one run short. This time around, he could not be denied.

Anderson, delivering remarkable speed on the pistol, upset perennial favorite Daniel Horner in the finals of the FNH USA 3-Gun Nation Shoot-Off, Presented by SureFire, following the MGM Ironman to win $5,000 from Warne Scope Mounts on June 11.

Anderson qualified for the 3GN Shoot-Off by defending his Trooper class title at Ironman, one of the most unique divisions held anywhere. In Trooper division, competitors are required to carry all their gear on their person for the duration of the match. With shooters carrying as many as six firearms, ammunition and gear, especially at the physical slugfest that is MGM's Ironman, winning Trooper division is a major achievement." (emphasis added by Geek)

Congratulations, Chuck!

I've watched Mr. Anderson compete in USPSA matches for years, and he has always been among the top shooters. A working LEO, Chuck has always been a hard man to beat. Although I'm not familiar with the "Trooper division", it sounds like a true Iron Man category.

I'm impressed, you should be too.

I'll be working the Chrono stage at the Area 1 match later this month. Hope to see him there, so I can offer him my personal congratulations.

Fred

2011-06-15T11:49:00.000-07:00

I had to vacuum my Antelope today.

The dust-bunnies were just getting too darn thick; every time I looked at him, he appeared about to sneeze.

That's a pretty tough trick for a critter who has been dead for going on 30 years.

Actually, it's hard for me to decide exactly how long I've had "Fred". I took him in SE Oregon during a season during the early 80's. It was probably about 1982 or 83, because my son was still a toddler and he was born in 1980.

My father and I had been hunting antelope together since I was in high school, which means our first hunt was probably in the autumn 1963. We went to Wyoming then (the area around Rawlins) and we both bagged decent Buck Antelope although they were nowhere near trophies.

Then we started applying for tags for Eastern Oregon Antelope hunts. They were limited, we had to put if for the drawing, and had to specify the area we wanted to hunt in. We found a dry lake bed just outside of Burns, Oregon, and thought that it would hold little attraction to most hunters even though it was just a few miles from an Antelope reservation area. We figured there might be a few drifters from the reservation, and that they would probably be lone bucks or old bucks with a small harem. We got our tags, drove down there in a teensy little datsun pickup (attached to a motor home ... we like our comforts when we can get them) and spend a couple of pre-season days scouting the area.

We saw a TON of good, shootable bucks as we were driving around the day before the season opened. but when we went back to the same places on Opening Day, we didn't see any Antelope at all. We decided that Antelope are like Deer; they know when the hunting season opens, and plan to make themselves scarce.

But the second day we move a little bit west, where we hadn't scouted before, and found a magnificent 100-foot tall mesa that was narrower than it was tall, and it had a slope on the south side that we could easily climb.

When we got on top of that mesa, we could see for miles in either direction. We saw two water tanks of which we were not previously aware, so we decided that this was good hunting country because both the cattle (which were pasturing in the area) and the wildlife would know that there was a reliable source of water.

We also saw a few antelope ... a small bunch of five or six ... about a mile away. By that time of cay (about 9am) they had already watered for the day and were now grazing. Or browsing, more likely, because like Deer, Antelope feed less on grass than on bushes and brush ... even sagebrush.

So we took a compass bearing (NE by N), climbed back down from the mesa and headed out on the same bearing. After trekking about a half-mile, we started still-hunting.

Antelope like cattle; in Antelope country, you don't always look for Antelope. Sometimes you look for cattle, and when you find them you begin to hunt Antelope.

So it was that day. Cattle were scattered all through the area, but we found Antelope in the near vicinity.

The big buck had a small harem of 3 does. There were a couple of young bucks loitering around the area, sniffing around the does. The big buck had apparently been successfully fighting them off, as all three males showed signs of fighting. The most obvious evidence of this was the chips off the horns.

We sneaked around the harem, Pop in overwatch and me doing the sneak. I came around a big sagebrush, glanced to my left, and saw the biggest damn Antelope I had ever seen in my life. He was looking straight at me from about 35 feet away, and (they are so fatally CURIOUS about things!) the old boy kept watching me as I faced him, raised my .25-06, and shot him ... and missed!

I've missed game before, but never that close, standing still, and just begging to become my dinner. I guess it must have been Buck Fever, or I just rushed my shot so badly because it was so PERFECT I didn't want to blow it.

So I blew it.

The buck didn't wait around for me to repeat my invitation to dinner. He wheeled on the proverbial and headed for parts West ... back toward his harem.

I had no good shot. So I racked another 117 grain Nosler Boat-Tail Partition bullet in that customized 1903-A3 and shot him right in the ass.

Pitiful. Broke his leg at the hip, and he kept ON running hell-bent for leather with one hind leg literally flapping in the breeze. Who knew a hundred-ten pound Antelope could be so tough?

He went through the sage like a swallow goes through a swarm of gnats. I locked down the ought-six and took off running after him. The sage brush was tall, over my head, and he didn't need to bob and weave to quickly get out of my sight. But he wasn't hard to track. There was a plain blood trail that my 2 year old son could have followed. About a hundred yards away I came up on him. He was laying on his side, bleeding and broken, and looking up at me with the biggest dark eyes the world has ever known.

I feel like the biggest jerk the world has ever know. Rather than put another high-velocity bullet in him, I pulled my 1911 and put a 230-grain hardball through his heart. But THAT took me two tries, as well, before he finally put his head down, sighed, and died.

I was so ashamed of my self. I sat down in front of him and started to weep. I was only a couple of years back from Viet Nam, I had killed men, and none of that ever affected me as much as this horrible, sloppy inexcusable murder of an innocent beast.

My father walked up on my while I was sniveling; he saw what was going on, and just stopped. Waited for me to settle myself down and get back up on my feet. The old man surprised me a lot (as I got older, he got SO much smarter!), be never as much as when he said: "That's okay; a man who has no feelings for the animals he kills, is a man I don't want to hunt with."

I never figured out exactly what that meant, but it made me feel better about it even though it was a nasty, sloppy kill.

I started field dressing the critter while Pop went to get the pickup. When got looking at him close, I found that my first shot had not been a clean miss. The view was quartering me more than looking head-on, as I had thought. I only know this because I found a shot low on the ribs from the front aspect which went through a little meat before exiting ... the light hollow-point bullet wasn't hitting bone or enough meat to cause it to expand. The poor old fellow could have run a mile with that hole before he bled out, and I might not have ever tracked him to his death spot because he was only bleeding heavily from the second shot, the leg-breaking hit.

We got him cleaned up, washed out the body cavity with five gallons of water we had hauled for that purpose (no Virginia, it doesn't ruin the meat to pour water on it; it cools it off and keeps it from getting gamey in hot weather) and put him in the back of the truck.

On the way out, we ran across another small bunch. Parked the truck, I bird-dogged with the binoculars and Pop stalked down a very nice young buck (no harem there ... the buck was about 2 or 3 years old as were his bachelor buddies) and took him with one clean shot. That 7mm Magnum hit right in the neck, a broadside standing shot at 200 yards, and that Antelope collapsed just like a puppet when his strings are cut. Never saw a more instant kill before, never did again. That was a beautiful shot; he never knew he was dead. Well. Pop was ever the better hunter.

We dressed the second buck, and t when we got back on the graded dirt road we were met by an Oregon State Wildlife (Fish & Game) Ranger. He checked our tags to make sure they were attached and filled out properly, and admired my buck.

He admired it so much, he took a picture. He said they like to post them on their bulletin board at the Ranger station, so hunters stopping by can see what fine Antelope they grew in that area.

We took our bucks to the local taxidermy station (they set up in the boondocks during Antelope season, it's just good business.) Eventually it cost me about $350 to get a full head-and-neck mount, and I've cherished that singular trophy ever since. Turns out, the tips of both horns were broken out (see the photo), apparently Fred was fighting off the young males to protect his harem. I guess one of those two young bucks fought off the other to game breeding rights ... but that's all Antelope Culture.

Oh ... when we finally got back to Oregon, I took Fred to a professional butcher. Ordered all cutlets ... no roasts, no chops, no hamburger. But I did ask them to turn all the stuff that would ordinarily be used to make hamburger, to be made into salami.

Fred may have died hard, but the meat was tender and absolutely delicious! Since then, I've had all of my antelope processed the same way.

---

We (Pop and me) went back to Wyoming three other times ... it's where we had our last hunt as well, in the mid 1980's. It was sad, as it was the last hunt my father went on. I found him a good big antelope with good horns and a beautiful black face, but he couldn't see it even using the scope mounted on his 7mm Remington Magnum rifle. Two years earlier, he did just fine, but Pop was in his late 70's and his eyesight was going and so was his stamina. I hunted the last day by myself, because Pop was too pooped to make it up those steep Eastern Wyoming hills in the strong winds. I found a little doe and I had an "any-sex" tag, so I shot her down like a mangy dog, gutted and dragged her to the truck, and went back to camp so we could pack up to go home.

I haven't hunted since. It's no fun, unless you have the Jaeger Meister with you.

Eviscerating Sarah

2011-06-14T23:52:00.000-07:00

Palin and Paul,
sitting in a tree,
K.I.S.S.I.N.G.

Earlier this month Sarah Palin told a group of Massachusetts tourists that The Midnight Ride of Paul Revere (originally described by Longfellow as "Paul Revere's Ride") included warning the British that the American Patriots were waiting for them and would not willingly give up their guns (many of which were stored in an arsenal at Concord, Massachusetts).

In fact, Revere was captured by the British and held at gunpoint.

Palin's assertion that Revere "warned the British" was recorded, and subsequently her grasp of historical fact was gleefully derided by many Liberal sources.

Chris Mathews on HARDBALL stepped on Palin's neck, asserting that Palin "... don't know much about history" and "I think that speaks for her credentials more than anything else". Quoting John McCain, Mathews said "She Doesn't Know Anything".

(Why is the Lame Stream Media so focused on Palin?
No matter what she does ... or doesn't do ... she is criticized. Even if the LSM pays more attention to Palin than to supposedly 'major' Republican candidates, the story is that her day-to-day activities are more emphatically (and critically) reported in the News than "mainstream" Republican candidates. And the reason for this is .. . what?)

One radio commentator was so astounded (after stating that "She's an idiot .. it doesn't matter") when his staff informed him that Palin's assertion was accurate, that his head exploded ... leaving only his mouth to further his political agenda regardless of the facts.

These were his earlier comments ... before he realized that he was entirely clueless:

What a bunch of maroons!

When asked by Fox News about her supposed faux pas, Palin confirmed her assertion, saying "I know my American History".

And in fact, according to the Massachusetts Historical Society, Palin was exactly right.

In a much later letter written long after the event, Revere said (in part - note that variant spellings and grammar are reproduced exactly as written):

I got a Horse of Deacon Larkin. While the Horse was preparing, Richard Devens, Esq. who was one of the Committee of Safty, came to me, & told me, that he came down the Road from Lexington, after Sundown, that evening; that He met ten British Officers, all well mounted, & armed, going up the Road. I set off upon a very good Horse; it was then about 11 o'Clock, & very pleasant. After I had passed Charlestown Neck, & got nearly opposite where Mark was hung in chains, I saw two men on Horse back, under a Tree. When I got near them, I discovered they were British officer.

One tryed to git a head of Me, & the other to take me. I turned my Horse very quick, & Galloped towards Charlestown neck, and then pushed for the Medford Road. The one who chased me, endeavoring to Cut me off, got into a Clay pond, near where the new Tavern is now built. I got clear of him, and went thro Medford, over the Bridge, & up to Menotomy. In Medford, I awaked the Captain of the Minute men; & after that, I alarmed almost every House, till I got to Lexington.

I found Mrs. Messrs. Hancock & Adams at the Rev. Mr. Clark's; I told them my errand, and inquired for Mr. Daws; they said he had not been there; I related the story of the two officers, & supposed that He must have been stopped, as he ought to have been there before me. After I had been there about half an Hour, Mr. Daws came; after we refreshid our selves, we and set off for Concord, to secure the Stores, &c. there. We were overtaken by a young Docter Prescot, whom we found to be a high Son of Liberty. I told them of the ten officers that Mr. Devens mett, and that it was probable we might be stoped before we got to Concord; for I supposed that after Night, they divided them selves, and that two of them had fixed themselves in such passages as were most likely to stop any intelegence going to Concord.

I likewise mentioned, that we had better allarm all the Inhabitents till we got to Concord; the young Doctor much approved of it, and said, he would stop with either of us, for the people between that & Concord knew him, & would give the more credit to what we said. We had got nearly half way.

Mr Daws & the Doctor stoped to allarm the people of a House:

I was about one hundred Rod a head, when I saw two men, in nearly the same situation as those officer were, near Charlestown. I called for the Doctor & Daws to come up; - were two & we would have them in an Instant I was surrounded by four; - they had placed themselves in a Straight Road, that inclined each way; they had taken down a pair of Barrs on the North side of the Road, & two of them were under a tree in the pasture. The Docter being foremost, he came up; and we tryed to git past them; but they being armed with pistols & swords, they forced us in to the pasture; -the Docter jumped his Horse over a low Stone wall, and got to Concord.

I observed a Wood at a Small distance, & made for that. When I got there, out Started Six officers, on Horse back, and orderd me to dismount;-one of them, who appeared to have the command, examined me, where I came from, & what my Name Was? I told him. it was Revere, he asked if it was Paul? I told him yes He asked me if I was an express? I answered in the afirmative. He demanded what time I left Boston? I told him; and aded, that their troops had catched aground in passing the River, and that There would be five hundred Americans there in a short time, for I had alarmed the Country all the way up.

(Note: this was the part where Revere "ratted out" the American Patriots.")

He imediately rode towards those who stoppd us, when all five of them came down upon a full gallop; one of them, whom I afterwards found to be Major Mitchel, of the 5th Regiment, Clapped his pistol to my head, called me by name, & told me he was going to ask me some questions, & if I did not give him true answers, he would blow my brains out. He then asked me similar questions to those above. He then orderd me to mount my Horse, after searching me for arms. He then orderd them to advance, & to lead me in front. When we got to the Road, they turned down towards Lexington. When we had got about one Mile, the Major Rode up to the officer that was leading me, & told him to give me to the Sergeant. As soon as he took me, the Major orderd him, if I attempted to run, or any body insulted them, to blow my brains out.

We rode till we got near Lexington Meeting-house, when the Militia fired a Voley of Guns, which appeared to alarm them very much.

As you can see from Revere's own words, he was repeatedly threatened with sudden death and yet he had the presence of mind to "warn" the British that Americans were prepared to resist British efforts by force of arms.

He had no real knowledge even that Americans would respond to his call to arms, let alone how many might show up at concord; but Revere valiantly presented to the British that they would be resisted.

I didn't now this about American History. Did you?

But Sarah Palin knew it, and was so secure about her knowledge of American History that she placed herself in a very dangerous position .. and then defended her position, successfully. Did she have a very knowledgeable staff? Or was she just so confident that she was willing to place herself in a position where she had to confirm her knowledge about America, to make a point.

B. H. Obama would NEVER do this!

This was not, as may be assumed by some leftist Americans today, an attempt to appease his captors. Instead, it was a exercise in what we would call today "disinformation". At the point of his capture by aggressive British soldiers, Revere played his sole remaining trump card and threatened the British with American Resistance.

Revere had no reason to believe that the British would not execute him with no notice; yet he continued his resistance even though he knew that it could incite the powerful military to violence ... at the cost of his own life.

We can only wonder why the Liberal Press has reacted so fervently against Palin's History Lesson. Was it because they thought it made an American hero, Paul Revere, seem less than fervent in his revolutionary ardor?

No, probably the reaction of the Liberal Press was solely because Palin is a Conservative, and they will not consciously miss any opportunity to portray her in the most unfavorable light.

The MSM, as antiquated as they are, will always portray a female conservative as dim-witted.

Fortunately, they don't do their homework, as Sarah Palin obviously does.

My thanks to Conservatives4Palin, for the link to the original Revere letter; also, to "Legal Insurrection" for the link to the link.

Also, note that Yahoo News in their article "How Sarah Palin Got It Right about Paul Revere 'Warning The British'" for their link to the link to the ... well, you know.

Fortunately, we don't have to rely on the Main Stream Media for information. They don't do their homework, and they should be ashamed of their lapse.

Incidentally, this puts the MSM long-time claim that "Bloggers aren't reliable news sources, because they don't have the staff to confirm the validity of their information" completely out of our realm of approbation. In this case, as in so many others, the MSM doesn't do their homework.

Bloggers do.

And so does Sarah Palin.

IMDb Video: Eyewitness

2011-06-14T04:40:00.000-07:00

IMDb Video: Eyewitness

Several Incidents .... Adam-12 full episode link

Amazing Products We Don't Need: Pistol Bayonet

2011-06-09T01:02:00.000-07:00

LaserLyte : Rear Sight Laser : Laser Gun Sights : Laser Bore Tools : Pistol Bayonet

"Haven't you always wanted a Becker Tac Tool for your gun?"

"Quick detachable, looking good on your gun. Now you can have the best of both worlds. Even comes with a polymer sheath".

They don't saw what the "both worlds" thingie means. Nerd and Non-Nerd?

The time was, the concept of a "pistol bayonet" was a joke. (I've got a picture here somewhere ...)

In my mind, it still is. And that's not just me.

UPDATE: June 12, 2011

... and an alternative to the Pistol Bayonet: The AR Chainsaw Bayonet!

Athena Lee and the 2011 Double Tap match (Shooting Wire/Youtube)

2011-06-09T00:02:00.000-07:00

Athena Lee can be seen in the video below, shooting all 12 stages to win the Women's Open title at the 2011 "Lost/Atlantis" Double Tap match in an extremely close-run race for the title.

You can see this video, and several other similar videos of the 2011 Double Tap Championship, starting here.

These videos are especially helpful to competitors because they demonstrate how to handle difficult challenges such as retreating uprange, safely (with out sweeping yourself) opening both doors and 'windows', shooting "off balance", and the value of timely and reliable reloading of magazines.
Comparing the videos of Athena's performance vs 2nd place Valerie's demonstrates how a bobbled reload (stage 3) and a jam or two (stages 8 & 9) can snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.

Athena was shooting Minor power; Valerie was shooting Major. The Athena won the match by lest than 0.98 points.

Get more information on this match, and other recent (June 08, 2011) Major Match information from "Between the Berms" thanks to The Shooting Wire.

Welcoming Returning Vets at Port of Entry

2011-06-01T03:06:00.000-07:00

Tommy, Et Al

Kevin Baker always has topical, interesting thigs to say. That's why I check his blogspot frequently.

Tonite (well maybe a little bit earlier), he quoted Rudyard Kiplings "TOMMMY" and followed it up with a short video of newly minted Vets returning from ... presumably ... The Sandbox.

I loved it, and I'm pretty sure you will too.

But three is a point to be made: when we returned from RVN, we never walked into an airport to receive this kind of ..l.. I don't know; let's call it ADULATION.

Because my flight on 20 September, 1969 landed at Oakland, CA. around 5pm, by the time we got into a civilian airport to catch a (civilian) ride home, it was after 11pm. Nobody watched us walk through the door, and frankly I'm just as happy; we had all HEARD about people harassing returning veterans, but we were spared this.

Instead, we were greeted with stolid indifference.

By the time I got to SF International Airport (I didn't understand the geography, nor did I know how to see when the next flight 'home' ..... to Oregon .... was scheduled, I arrived to discover that:

The next flight was at least 12 hours away
There were no provisions suitable to find a room for returning vets over night
There WAS a USO shelter ... but it was completely filled

All of these situations were endurable; I found a couch and made it mine for the next 12 hours. When the morning 'commute' flight to Oregon was available, I was among the first in line.

I know I've told this story before, but I was impressed that the Stews upgraded my seat to First Class, and asked what they could do to make my flight more memorable.

As it was a "Red Eye Special", early morning version, they couldn't offer me a drink.

MY Second choice: Chocolate cake, which they COULD (and did) provide. That was the sweetest thing I had swallowed after a year of accepting unworkable orders from .

clue-less brass. I wasn't really in the mood for Chocalte Cake, but they had it and I choked it all down

.... after we arrived at PDS, the stews were lined up to say goodby, and thank me for my service. I had no clue that anyone noticed up to this point, so it was with gratitude that I thanked them

This is not a "Baby Burner" story, only a moment to explain that air crews understood what we had gone through.

And if the video is to believed, many other people feel this way too; that we should have immediate short-term recognition of what American Soldiers do for their country, after a tour "overseas".

I loved the video. I hope you do, to..
x

Courtesy at Sea

2011-06-01T01:32:00.000-07:00

I know this is an old, OLD joke but it's so old I had forgotten the punchline.

Very well done. Don't know who made the video, but it's wonderfully well done.

H/T to G-Man

HP Printer Technical Support

2011-05-29T09:13:00.001-07:00

Sorry, folks, I have no knowledge or experience which qualifies me to comment on the technical reliability of HP printer/copier/fax/whatever hardware.

However, this soldier is obviously not impressed.

May I add that I am not all that impressed with his combat skills? He's got this very nice, very expensive high-tech full-auto rifle/Machine Gun, and he can't hit a big-assed printer from 20 feet away in his first two bursts?

Dude, you are spending WAY too much time in the office, and WAY too much time whining .... and WAY not enough time on the range or in the field!

One can't help wondering how much of the problems are related to the hardware, vs how much are related to operator error.

That question applies to problems with both the HP and the MG.

Memorial Day!

2011-05-29T08:08:00.000-07:00

I plan to be busy later today, and perhaps tomorrow ... so please accept this as the Official Geek Memorial Day tribute to our service members today , tomorrow, and yesterday.

Please include in your thoughts Sgt. Paul Phillips, my mother's brother, who lost his life in the Massacre at Malmady in WWII.

PS: I have been dealing unsuccessfully with Insomnia for several years. This has been another such day ... I haven't been able to sleep for the past 24 hours, so if my friends AJ and KJ notice I'm not present at the annual Memorial Day Usual Suspects BBQ .... please understand I'm probably safe at home, asleep in my bed.

Or my chair, in front of this computer.

Goodbye AlQuida Rose

2011-05-28T23:46:00.000-07:00

Is it ... "Civilized" ... to be satirical about the death of another human being?
In the words of Gremlins 2: "Civilized? No, decidedly not ... but funny!"

*

H/T SnarkyBytes via
Zeta Wolf

LATER:

Actually, this all makes me feel very uncomfortable.

Do you remember the images of Arabs dancing in the streets when they heard the news that the Twin Towers had been taken down?

This is nothing more ... or less.

I think it's the smarmy looks of the pianist (Is that Martin Short on a bad day?) when he perceives that he is pleasing the audience. It's an expression of gloating, and if Shadenfreud had not been invented before by the Germans, it would have been re-invented now.

Whatever the reason, when we gloat on the death of Bin Laden .... it doesn't exactly put us in the same barbaric league as those Arabs who danced in the street at our misfortune, but it certainly is a significantly similar state of mind.

I, for one, do not care for the comparison.

Yes, I know that Bin Laden gloried over his deliberate murder of 3000 innocents.
Yes, I understand the difference between gloating over the 3,000, and gloating over the death of a single not-innocent.

But I still don't like it.

It was necessary for us to but down the mad dog Bin Laden.
It is not necessary for us to act like irresponsible rabble in celebration.

We're better than that. We had damn well demonstrate that to the World, if we wish to establish the clear difference between 'us' and 'them'.

I don't want to look like 'them'.

I Am Number Four

2011-05-28T23:33:00.000-07:00

Watched the movie.

It's more of a pilot for a television series. Think of it as "Buffy, the Vampire Slayer". Except with less sexy girls and less sexy scripts.

Then I put "RODIN" in the video player. No comparison at all; DeNiro made it a practice to appear in movies with good scripts and good directors.

Some people could learn from that.

NCIS FULL EPISODE

2011-05-26T19:12:00.000-07:00

Courtesy Comcast. Er ... I mean .... XFINITY

Not sure this will work without a Comcast Internet account, but worth a try if, like me, you don't have a TV but enjoy NCIS

VERY Interesting -- but Stupid!: Freedom For Cash

2011-05-24T22:17:00.000-07:00

YouTube - Video Shows Officer Offering Truckers Freedom For Cash
Tennessee Law Enforcement ... "Give up the Drug Money, and we'll let you go free!"

I don''t know if this is a legitimate law enforcement tactic or not, but the District Attorney General has a hard time deciding how to justify the practice of intimidating truck drivers to get them to give up the 'Drug Money' they are carrying (supposedly, knowingly).

Anything that undermines the profit motive from Drug Running is "A Good Thing", right?

Or is it? I don't know.

YOU watch, you decide.

Hat Tip:

War on Guns

PS: I would LOVE to hear how these drivers explain how they lost a half-million dollars to their drug-dealer honchos.

Wouldn't you?

Especially, after the seizure is posted on You Tube.

Sorry, guys, but I think that the Tennessee cops have just undermined their program: these drivers will no longer be seen, except perhaps as evidence in the alimentary tract of no-longer-starving coyotes in Mexico.

How the Rapture Was One

2011-05-23T20:44:00.000-07:00

familyradiocountdown20110521.jpg (JPEG Image, 496x467 pixels)

Greetings, from Rapture Central

2011-05-23T19:31:00.000-07:00

Hello my Friends.

Well, here am I in the bosom of Heaven. Yes, the Rapture has come and gone and I find myself among The Taken.

I've been looking for you all ... can't seem to find any of you anywhere. Should we perhaps set up a Bulletin Board system? You know, like:

"Adam; miss you. Meet me by the Old Apple Tree, please? I'm so sorry! All my love -- Eve"

Well, perhaps not.

Actually, I'm pretty lonely here. Having led such a sinful life, I'm amazed to find myself here. Also, I'm surprised to discover that I am allergic to the pollen from Angel Wings.

It's very nice sitting at the Left Hand of God, and all that.

But I do miss my friends.

So having spent 24 hours in Heaven, I plan to abdicate. That's right, I'm turning in my wings and heading back to "Left Behind, Oregon". There I intend to meet my friends at the umpteenth-annual Memorial Day BBQ, song-fest and reunion of the Usual Suspects, where I will open a virgin bottle of Jameson's Irish Whiskey and lead the toast to .... Absent Friends.

I just hope the Irish Dancers, who provided the entertainment at an earlier meeting (2005), were "Taken".

That would make it all worth while.

PS: From now on, no more morbid topics. Back to Blogging As Usual.

Geek Promise!

Eulogy to Mom

2011-05-18T05:34:00.000-07:00

Wilhelmina Hanna Phillips (1917 - 2011) quietly passed away in her sleep a few minutes before 3pm on Tuesday, May 17, 2011. Her planned 94th birthday party was not celebrated on May 9 due to critical illness.

Cause of death was complications of the surgery performed May 11, 2011, attempting to correct the cause of her critical illness. At her request, no further surgery was performed in an attempt to resolve the complications; the best resulting physical condition was not acceptable to the patient and further major surgery itself held a low survival prognosis.

Wilhelmina changed her name in when she was married, in the early 1930's. (Her married name is with-held to protect the privacy of herself and her family.) She changed her name legally in the 1960's, from "Wilhelmina Hannah" to "Mina", because she was known familiarly by friends and family as Mina (to rhyme with "Myhana", not "Meena"; she was insistent upon the correct pronunciation).

Mina's husband, Vernon, proceeded her in death in December of 1994 after more than sixty years of marriage.

Mina is survived by two children (Shirley, of Eugene Oregon and Jerry, of Corvallis Oregon). Other survivors include four grandchildren, about 22 great-grandchildren, and a mixed Shi Tsu / Lhasa-Apso named Bogie.

All of the surviving members are now struggling to re-envision their own lives without the love of the woman they knew variously as Mom, Mina, Nana and (in Bogie's case) a gleeful "Woof!".

A private celebration for family and invited friends is planned for June, when goodbye wishes will be inked on helium filled balloons, which will then be released to follow her soul to heaven.

For EPA definition purposes, the withered remains of these balloons will be classified as "free-range prayers".

Environmentalists who wish to protest these arrangements may apply directly to Mom, c/o God, in Heaven.

Unsuccessful protests may be adjudicated by Satan; travel by POV is authorized, and encouraged.

Not Mother's day

2011-05-16T16:26:00.000-07:00

We were all so pleased, and optimistic when my mother came through her major surgery on Wednesday, and even more pleasantly surprised when her first day after the operation proved her to be in very little pain, relatively speaking. The third day, second after the operation, I spoke to her on the phone and she seemed more concerned about me and my sister than about herself.

That was Friday.

Saturday, the nurses recorded a significant change in blood pressure. Blood tests were not encouraging.

The following day, Sunday, my sister phoned me in tears. The doctors had determined that regardless of their prior optimism, apparently some sort of "infection" had developed within the operational area, defined by the surrounding pelvic girdle. Their only choice would have been to immediately re-enter the torso, remove the colon, excise any possibility of infected tissue, and fit her for a colostomy bag.

Mother had already decided against 'heroic' (or "extreme") attempts to extend life, and voiced a strong preference to NOT ending her life with a bag on her belly. The doctors told my sister thta the only possible outcome was that the infection would prove fatal in the near future.

Mom is in the hospital doped to the gills with Morphine Sulfate; both to minimize the amount of discomfort (searing pain) ad to encourage her to sleep as much as possible.. She is incapable of lucid communication, obviously suffers hallucinations when the painkiller dose is too low, and does not appear to recognize any of her family or personal friends who have visited her.

We are on a death watch. It is almost the same situation as the family of Mom's friend and neighbor endured earlier, except that we don't know if our mother will linger for days or weeks ... or hours.

I've returned home to shave, shower, and get a few hours of sleep. Yesterday slept from 4am to 6am this morning; Friday I didn't sleep at all. My sister gets by on her firm intention to be as much help to her mother as possible, and the support of friends and family. My eldest niece is an active Christian and supports us all with prayer from time to time.

Obviously I won't be talking here much for a few days. I may borrow my sister's laptop if I feel I need to vent, but I'll try to spare my friends that experience.

Court: No right to resist illegal cop entry into home

2011-05-14T20:57:00.000-07:00

Court: No right to resist illegal cop entry into home (New York Times; May 13, 2011):

"INDIANAPOLIS | Overturning a common law dating back to the English Magna Carta of 1215, the Indiana Supreme Court ruled Thursday that Hoosiers have no right to resist unlawful police entry into their homes.

In a 3-2 decision, Justice Steven David writing for the court said if a police officer wants to enter a home for any reason or no reason at all, a homeowner cannot do anything to block the officer's entry.

'We believe ... a right to resist an unlawful police entry into a home is against public policy and is incompatible with modern Fourth Amendment jurisprudence,' David said. 'We also find that allowing resistance unnecessarily escalates the level of violence and therefore the risk of injuries to all parties involved without preventing the arrest.'

David said a person arrested following an unlawful entry by police still can be released on bail and has plenty of opportunities to protest the illegal entry through the court system"

[emphasis added]

Let me see, now ... according to this Indiana Supreme Court ruling, the Fourth Amendment protections which we have enjoyed for over 2o0 years ... no longer applies.

You are NOT protected from "illegal search and seizure" .. instead, you are allowed to protest against illegal search and seizure.

That's hardly the same thing.

In Indiana today, instead of arguing that an unwarranted Search and Seizure is "unconstitutional", you can only protest by bringing suit against the LEO agency. The disposition of your case, then, is not to be decided upon Constitutional issues, but upon your (or your lawyer's) ability to make a case protecting you on 'other than Constitutional issues'.

This is CLEARLY not the same thing. The burden of proof is now your responsibility ... essentially, in Indiana you need to prove your innocence.

That's hard to do. Often, it's impossible. It is contrary to the concept that a citizen is "innocent until proven guilty", too.

That means, any LEO can enter your home and perform .... whatever actions he considers reasonable. You must hire a lawyer (at your own expense?) and defend yourself against the CHARGES brought against you, even though the entry was not effected in response to the presence of any evidence which might have been supported by a legal search warrant.

For example, they can (and probably will) seize any firearms and 'drugs' (including legally acquired prescription drugs). They may remove your children from the home. They can shoot your dog, they can point a gun at your wife or your children ... anything that they would earlier have been permitted to do under the auspices of a search warrant which specifically included searches for objects, they can now do and can now expect that the 'evidence' would be acceptable in a court of law in Indiana.

(Most such actions, performed during "legal raids" by LEOs who were operating under the auspices of a search warrant, have before been penalized by judges and courts when the search warrant did not specifically permit the LEO's to address these specific situations .)

When the U.S. Constitution can arbitrarily be undermined by "local" or State judicial authorities, then the rights of "The People", as acknowledged by The Constitution, has been violated.

The rights of the Federal Government are narrowly described in the Constitution; all state and local authorities are required to recognize these narrow descriptions, because the Constitution is essentially intended to define the rights of "The People".

"The People"... includes individual citizens of the United States, and the Constitution was specifically framed to protect their rights. It also restricts powers of the Federal government. Not entirely incidentally, it also restricts the authority of any 'lower power" to infringe upon the rights of "The People".

The Constitution allows local, state and Federal authorities to operate within the restrictions there-in defined. These rights of "The People" can NOT be abridged by any authority at any level.

No State Court can independently determine that these protections of "The People" may be abridged at a State Level.

It ain't right.

-----------------------------------------

UPDATE: May 18, 2011
It's no longer a matter of states permitting violations of the 4th Amendment. Kevin Baker at The Smallest Minority provides a link to the PDF of "Kentucky vs King" where in SCOTUS agreed , on May 16, 2011, to the violation of your constitutional rights in "The War On (some) Drugs".

No, it's no longer a matter of States Rights; it's a matter of Individual rights.

Cabela’s Destination Store Boosts Oregon’s Eugene, Cascades & Coast Brand - Small City Branding Around the World

2011-05-13T18:08:00.000-07:00

Cabela’s Destination Store Boosts Oregon’s Eugene, Cascades & Coast Brand - Small City Branding Around the World

Mother's Day

2011-05-11T21:49:00.000-07:00

It all began on a little forty-acres-and-a-mule farm in Eastern Oregon on May 9, 1917.

That's when my mother, "Gramma Geek" was born. She was the fifth of six children (3 brothers, 2 sisters) borne by my maternal grandmother. All of them born at home, with no more help than neighbors and relatives as midwives.

One brother was killed in the war, at the Massacre at Malmedy. One brother died on his own farm, the other in a hospital. One sister was a schoolteacher, the other the wife of an abusive bastard (she was the youngest, who died 3 years ago).

They have all died; my mother is the last of her family, and often wonders why she was doomed to be the Last Living member of her family.

Last weekend my sister planned to take my mother to the Oregon Coast for an annual pilgrimage. Since Mom's birthday was so often close to Mother's Day, Mom missed out on a celebration every year; Mother's Day and Mom's Birthday were celebrated together.

This year, their plans were cancelled due to illness. Mom had severe digestive problems for the past 10 month, and this year she was overwhelmed by nausea, vomiting, diarrhea and severe cramps.

Instead of the coast, my sister took Mom to a doctor. He referred her to a new specialist, who immediately checked her into the hospital.

Mom's chronic Diverticulitis had caused a stoppage in her large intestine. The Diverticulitis had caused scarring in a section of her colon, and shrinkage in the diameter. He saw no alternative to operating.

The usual solution is to resection the bowel; cut out the obstructed part and sew the two major parts back together. The problem was that the affected section was so large (long), the remaining sections were dramatically different in diameter. In his discussion, the doctor described it as "trying to attach a garden hose to a drinking straw". After reviewing the images from the MRI, he was not certain that it would be possible to do a simple resection.

The best alternative might turn out to be a Colectomy ... that is, a resection as described above.

But if that proved during the surgery to be impossible, the alternative would be a Colostomy. That is the solution where the severed colon is connected to an artificial portal outside the body, and the product of the colon is collected in a bag which must be emptied manually, every day.

Mom has been experiencing depression since the death of her last sibling, and the thought of a Colostomy bag was, in her mind, worse than her own death.

And in fact, that third alternative result of the operation was a very great risk. Because of her age (94 years), her poor general health as a consequence of her extended debilitation, and what seems to be a random toss of the dice ... she may not survive the operation.

The surgeon claimed to have a great deal of experience in this procedure, but he was unable to be more reassuring than to say he would know what needed to be done when the surgery allowed him to actually view the state of her organs, first hand.

The operation was scheduled for 8am this morning. The doctor decided to delay the operation so that all of the normal day-shift medical professionals would be on duty, alerted to the possibility of extravagant medical reactions to what he found, and be able to respond immediately. He warned that there was a very good chance that the surgery may only be partially successful, or fatal.

My sister and I agreed to meet at the hospital at 6am, so we would have an hour with Mom before they begin at 7am to prep her for surgery.

Mom was already awake when we got there. She had not slept well the night before ... the pain and discomfort were only partially alleviated by a wide range of pain-killers, including Morphine and its derivatives.

We tried to be as positive as possible, but in all of our minds we were aware that this was the last time we might be able to talk. The kiss I gave her on greeting her might be the last kiss.

The hour we had together passed quickly, and we were all, I think, pleasantly surprised by the calm (or fatalistic) attitude we shared. Whatever happened, we were together as a family.

They took her to Surgery pre-op at 7am, and my sister and I went to breakfast. Neither of us were able to finish the excellent meal we had been served. Still, it helped.

Then we went to the Surgery Patient Family Waiting Room at Sacred Heart ("Riverbend") hospital in Springfield, and settled down for a long wait. The doctor told us that nothing would happen for at least two hours, so at 8am we went to look at the new Cabela's store which had just opened last week. My sister and I shopped ... I bought a holster and a box of .45acp bullets ... and tried to keep our minds off what was going on. That didn't last for more than an hour, though, so we went back to the waiting room.

Ten o'clock came and went, with no word. Eleven o'clock ... still no word. By 11:30 we decided that the operation had went past the expected duration because they had to do more than the simple resection; they must be performing the Colostomy.

At 11:45 the doctor came out to talk to us in the waiting room. He was surprised, he said, that he was able to join the two ends of the colon to bridge the gap left by removing the damaged portion. He said he had double-stitched it, so that it would remain strong while the body began to heal itself. There was no danger of sepsis; it was a clean operation with no actual complications. He rated her chances of complete recovery very high, although he emphasized the she would have to stay in the hospital for five to seven more days, until they were sure she could accommodate solid foods and process them correctly.

We were stunned. Both of us had been reluctant to expect this most perfect of all possible results. We were not sure, we said, whether the Colostomy or death would be the preferred solution for our mother ... but we were actually both convinced that Mom would rather be dead than to spend the rest of her live with a Colostomy bag taped to her side.

It was as if we had both received the best Christmas Gift ever. Mom was going to be in Recovery for another two hours, so we (my sister and I) retired to the local Steak House for lunch. We both had drinks before and with our meal ... neither of us quite finished our meal, but we didn't leave unfinished drinks behind and I gave our waitress a 40% tip: no reason why we should be the only ones celebrating an unexpected gift today.

We got a call from the Hospital as we were leaving; Mom was on her way back to her room. And we got there just after they had got her settled in.

Mom was in a lot of pain, so the nurse gave her a shot of something more powerful to bolster the on-demand Morphine derivitive they had flowing through her IV. After she fell into a deep sleep, I said goodbye to my sister and told her I would let her know what time I would be back tomorrow. She was going to stay for a while, "just in case Mom wakes up".

But we also called our friends and family, and gave them the good new.

My sister's short discussion to Mom, while we were waiting for the nurse to bring the seditive:

"Mom, you're a tough old bird, and you can get through this and it will better than it has been for a long time. I'm a tough old bird, too, and together we can get through this. I know it hurts now, but that's just the incision from the operation. It will heal. And you won't have the pain you've had to live with for the past year."

What she didn't say, but she could have, was: "Next year, we'll all go to the coast together".

I'm planning on that. Our family has more than one generation. Today I realized just how much I would miss Mom, if she wasn't here for us.

I grow tired of losing the important women in my life.

Obama on 60 Minutes, 05.08.11: 60 Minutes Full Length Episodes Online | Free on XFINITY TV

2011-05-09T08:21:00.000-07:00

Watch 60 Minutes, 05.08.11: 60 Minutes Full Length Episodes Online | Free on XFINITY TV

I don't know how interested you are in hearing Obama's interview with 60 Minutes regarding the assassination of Osama bin Laden, but I found it interesting.

It's a full-length episode, so you don't need to watch the full 40 minutes of actual run-time of a "Sixty Minutes" episode.

History Rewrites: Is this how we will see yesterday ... tomorrow?

2011-05-06T21:32:00.000-07:00

H/T: Mark the Rock

Clueless Gun Store Owners

2011-05-05T20:11:00.000-07:00

I went to a gun store today!

That may not be as exciting to you as it is to me, but listen!

It has been a long time since I went to a gun store. All of the local gun stores have gone out of business, and I have to drive 12 miles to find the nearest one.

Okay, so there's one less than ten miles away in Philomath, and I've bought 3 guns from them ... but I've been burned at least one. It was my fault for being gullible, but the rancor still burns. I was looking for my own .22 pistol. I let them talk me into selling a revolver with no finish, double-action but with a hammer-spur, and the only way to eject empty cases was to remove the cylinder and use the cylinder pin to punch the empty brass out ... and I payed them $200 for it!

I hate people who take advantage of me. Worse, I hate having to admit I've been taken! (That was over a year ago, and I haven't fired a round out of the pistol yet; I'm afraid to risk the "Collector Value"!)

Most of those in "that town" (Albany) are "specialty" stores. The single exception is a very small one-man operation with a very classy store and very classy merchandise. Except he's mostly a S&W dealer, and no matter what you walk through his door looking for, before you leave the store he's going to try to sell you a S&W.

Let me illustrate:

One of my ex-co-workers asked me if I knew where he could pick up a .22 pistol. At the time, I was still working so I couldn't go to this store in Albany that I've always wanted to check out, but they're closed on weekends. (WTF?)

But I've since retired, so this afternoon I spend an hour driving to Albany, checking out the store, and driving back without either a gun or a business card.

I show up about 3:30, charge into the store and the owner is standing at his counter with a perplexed look on his face. I say "Hi! I'm looking for a .22 pistol for a friend of mine!"

"Oh!" (he says) Well, we're closed."

[Picture me looking around] "Huh? The door was unlocked, The sign says open from 1 pm to 4 pm and it's only 3:do. I came in looking for a gun, and ..... ?"

So he explained that he is closing early today, he had turned the lights out and turned the sign on the door to "CLOSED".

Geek Perplexed Look. (I've gotten pretty good at looking perplexed. Practice ... constant practice .. that's the ticket to communication!)

The guy is a nice guy, but his marketing skills need work. He has signs all OVER his shop reading:

NOTICE!
If you are unable to legally possess a firearm, you may NOT enter the premises!

I can't blame him for that, but I would have thought that the sign on the door would have been enough. The sign on the wall facing the door, the sign on the sidewall leading to the counter, and the sign over the counter ... that strikes me as overkill. But it's his shop, and obviously he has a LOT of time on his hands since he's only open 6 hours a day, seems to close early and won't let anyone in his doors on weekends.

Still, he relents when I explain that my mission is to find a .22 pistol for a friend.

"I have a Walther .22. $800."

He doesn't have a card, but when I ask for one he hands me a flyer. I haven't read it yet.

I turn and begin to leave, and on the way out I notice the display of handguns (mostly S&W) in his display cabinet. "Nice Guns!" I mention.

I may have pushed his hot-button; either that, or he woke up and realized he had a customer in his store. Running around his counter he invites me to look at the Forty Caliber S&W. Being a nice person, I decide not to tell him my opinion of the .40 Slow-and-Wimpy cartridge, or how much I love (not!) the flipper/de-cocker mechanism of the S&W Semi-Automatic Pistols. Instead, I say: "Real nice. Looks just like my old Model 659. I gave it to my son."

It is always, ALWAYS a Bad Idea to say anything to a gun dealer which may lead him to believe you are interested. I wasted five minutes listening to his tales of the Mighty Forty, the Wonderful (all steel) 4006, and what a "stopper-cartridge" it was.

Then he hits me with the ~~bad~~ good news: ONLY $895!

Just to impress me, he adds that S&W only made (I don't know, some obscure like "235 of them", and adds: "I have twelve". I think I was suppose to be impressed.

I'm looking around, he's got a steel gun-cabinet (rifle-length floor model, looks like a 5- or 6-gun capacity), also priced at ONLY $895.

Scooting for the door, I make the final mistake of actually listening to his "I See A Customer Heading For The Door" spiel. If I am a 'close' family member of a serving member of the military, he will sell me a special-order firearm without charging me the usual price for "special order" firearms. (Anything that he had on his shelf, of course, was not subject to any kind of discount.)

It took me another five minutes to get out the door. And it struck me, as I as leaving, that there was something peculiarly WRONG with his salesmanship.

I wasn't greeted as if I was a valued customer.
In fact, he acted as if I was an inconvenience, and I was stupid to have walked through the (unlocked) door during posted business hours.
He didn't have what I was looking for in any kind of variety except for a very narrow (and not widely popular version).
He didn't seem interested in trying to find out MORE about what I wanted, or offering suggestions that might be helpful to me.
He wasted my time in trying to sell something to me ... a product in which I was obviously NOT interested.
He made it clear that a pistol (which was so widely unpopular that there was only a very limited run) was something in which he was obviously overstocked.
And he put a premium price on the pistol.

The guy had a very classy store front, and obviously is living off his inheritance because I cannot see how a man with a narrow inventory, a narrow mind, closes his shop arbitrarily early and has no people skills ... can stay in business without an extraneous source of income.

---

The best gun store I even patronized was in Salem about 10 years ago. The owner was a guy whose hobby was trapping. He opened the store to sell trapping supplies. Because that didn't fill many shelves, he also added a 12-point indoor shooting range, rented guns for the range, sold a LOT of reloading components at a competitive price, had an in-store gunsmith, had a very wide range of both new and used firearms (and ammunition, holsters, and other accessories), sold the brass swept up from the range as "once-fired brass" at a reasonable price, and always had at least three salesmen on the floor besides the guy who ran the indoor-range (gun rental) counter.

That store would have been open .. and profitable .. indefinitely, except that one day he became despondant that he wasn't selling any traps, lost interest in the store, and arbitrarily just closed it down. Almost overnight.

What IS it about Gun Store Owners that they can be so clueless?

Who is "Seal Team 6"?

2011-05-03T20:34:00.000-07:00

- WWW.THEDAILY.COM

I don't know, you don't know, and I'm not completely convinced that the folks who produced this article / "app" really know who or what Seal Team 6 is, either.

But I HAVE read one of Richard Marcinko's books. (He has published over a dozen books, most of them in the "Rogue Warrior" series. Most, if not all of them, are available at Amazon.com.)

And I have at my desk my dog-eared copy of "Lone Survivor: The Eyewitness Account of Operation Redwing and The Lost Heroes of Seal Team 10", by Marcus Luttrell (with Patrick Robinson).

About half of that book addresses the selection and training for SEAL team acceptance. The training and winnowing-out process described there provides some small amount of understanding about what sort of man can call himself a Navy Seal.

And I am very impressed all over again, every time I reread Luttrell's fascinating, dramatic ... saddening account of the extended firefight which lead to the virtual elimination of that select group of warriors.

Getting back to "SEAL TEAM 6"; The Daily has also published an article which it says describes "The Raid". Among other information, the article refutes earlier reports to the effect that "... one of bin Laden's wives was killed ..." during the firefight.

(For further information about the background of involved agencies, read "The Secret Team that Killed bin Laden", from National Journal. H/T Michael Bane; "Who Says Double Taps are Old School ?" May 02 2011)

Providing further background information, USA TODAY reported that "Obama laughed at a bin Laden joke" the night before the raid, at the White House Correspondents' Dinner. It's an interesting footnote, demonstrating that this raid ... the planning for which began last February ... had actually been delayed for one day. We can only imaging that this was an odd moment in the President's career, when he was forced by circumstances (and the need to maintain operational security) to publically dissemble in reaction to the joke about bin Laden hosting "... a daily program on CSPAN between Four and Five (pm) ..."

We must remember to give President ~~Osama~~ Obama credit for his great leadership: he has proven once again that he can dissemble with the best of them.

And finally ....

FROM ONE DEAD MAN TO ANOTHER:

Lyrics:

Steve walks warily down the street
With the brim pulled way down low
Ain't no sound but the sound of his feet
Machine guns ready to go

Are you ready, hey, are you ready for this
Are you hangin' on the edge of your seat
Out of the doorway the bullets rip
To the sound of the beat - yeah

Another one bites the dust
Another one bites the dust
And another one gone and another one gone
Another one bites the dust, eh
Hey, I'm gonna get you too
Another one bites the dust

Dick ... couldn't have said it better.

Geronimo-E KIA

2011-05-03T08:22:00.000-07:00

AND .... America Reacts:

AND ... Apparently Rush Limbough isn't the only 'talker' who can't keep track of the difference between "Osama" and "Obama" when discussing the political assassination

(H/T: "Max Redline")

bin Laden dead!

2011-05-02T02:58:00.000-07:00

Obama: Al-Qaida head bin Laden dead | General Headlines | Comcast.net: "WASHINGTON — Osama bin Laden, the glowering mastermind behind the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks that killed thousands of Americans, was slain in his luxury hideout in Pakistan early Monday in a firefight with U.S. forces, ending a manhunt that spanned a frustrating decade.

'Justice has been done,' President Barack Obama said in a dramatic announcement at the White House.

A jubilant crowd of thousands gathered outside the White House as word spread of bin Laden's death. Hundreds more sang and waved American flags at Ground Zero in New York — where the twin towers that once stood as symbols of American economic power were brought down by bin Laden's hijackers 10 years ago."

Michelle Malkin � Baseball’s Greatest Play, 35 Years Later

2011-04-30T10:40:00.000-07:00

Michelle Malkin � Baseball’s Greatest Play, 35 Years Later

I don't know how many people who are reading obscure blogs this week/month/year would be interested in this, but I'm pretty sure that everyone who is reading this obscure blog will appreciate the "Save The Flag" moment brought to us via Michelle Malkin, courtesy of Rick Monday.

H/T "The Hobo Brasser"

NRA/Lou Dobbs appalled about ATF "Fast and Furious" program

2011-04-29T00:39:00.000-07:00

NRA 2011 Annual Meetings & Exhibits - Contact Us

Wayne LaPierre discusses the BATF scandal on Lou Dobb's Tonight

Shocking Evidence Revealed: Obama Administration Stonewalls Congress By Covering Up BATFE'S "Fast and Furious" Gunrunning Scheme That Sent Thousands Of Guns To Mexican Cartels ... Watch here, Watch Now!

This was the text of an email from the NRA which I received on April 25, 2011.

It seems that Wayne and Lou are reacting (slowly, if surely) in the context of the 2011 "NRA Annual Meeting" (link provided by the 4/25 email, replying in the context of the 4/29-5/01 2011 annual meeting ... which began 4 days AFTER the email) to the ATF "Fast and Furious" program.

As if this was "New news".

The "scandal" isn't new; it has been discussed to the point of ennui in so many contexts. I'm wondering why this release from the NRA is being sent to NRA members now, since Project Gunrunner has been also the subject of many earlier NRA announcements.

And the YOU TUBE video (see below) was first loaded on April 21, 2011.

These guys post as irregularly as *_I_* do!

Still, I wonder why Lou Dobbs continues to talk about "Assault Weapons", and the NRA publishes his comments as if they are the official position of the NRA.

My understanding has been that the weapons in question are NOT "Assault Weapons" (eg: full-automatic) but instead semi-automatic versions of military weapons. (For example: AR15 rather than M16, etc.) None of the weapons required special licenses to purchase or transfer.

At least, that was true of the "Project Gun Runner" weapons which have been reported in the Popular Press (MSM). There were no announcements in the accompanying video which suggest that true "Assault Weapons" were involved in these exchanges.

The National Rifle Association, and Wayne LaPierre in particular, continue to disappoint me. This is exactly why I continue to "Join the NRA" (in hopes that they will someday provide true, sane representation of American Gun-owners) and then invariably fail to renew my membership when they let me down.

I was not impressed by Harlon Carter, and and I have not been impressed by Wayne LaPierre. Even when Charlton Heston was 'honorary' President of the NRA, he went on record stating that he saw no reason why any American would need an M16 or even an AR15.

This goes far beyond the failure of the ATF to screw up the program to entrap gun dealers. It goes directly to the failure of NRA to adequately serve as sane, reasonable representatives of the American Firearms owner.

These people are a blight on the Second Amendment movement. I am not a current member of the NRA (even though these idiots continue to send me their email, after I let my membership lapse last year) because I am embarrassed to admit to my friends and family that they represent me. That implies that they way they present my case for legal firearms ownership is the way that I would present it.

Yes, my friends have been arguing for decades that the NRA is the only consistent force which argues in favor of the Second Amendment.

And I remain embarrassed by our leadership.

It's like being a member of the Republican Party; I'm still disappointed that there are no sane, reasonable, candidates for the 2011 Presidential Election.

I can defend myself against my enemies; can no one save me from my "Friends"?

Professional Shooting Websites

2011-04-28T22:32:00.000-07:00

I've just added a new section to my Sidebar ... it's called "Professional Shooting Websites".

While I was struggling (unsuccessfully) to define "Professional Shooters" in the context of Practical (Action) shooting competition, it occurred to me that everyone in USPSA --- and, to a certain extent, IPSC --- intuitively "knows" who is a 'professional shooter', it's difficult to do more than select sufficient identifiers to differentiate between a "professional" and someone who has less lucrative, but still significant, connection with the Firearms Industry and also with Internet resources.

One major factor may be that the "Professional Shooter" often makes a significant portion of his or her annual income by training. They may be training amateurs, they may be training other professionals (eg: military, LEO), but they have established a business on the basis that their training is recognized as a benefit to people who want to shoot.

If I started a business training people to shoot, I probably wouldn't make much money at it, if any. I know a lot of what NOT to do, and even some of what a shooter SHOULD do. But my competitive success (or lack of it) demonstrates clearly that people who have much success in competition would probably not benefit from my instruction.

In short, I'm just not 'good enough' to support myself through training.

On the other hand, we can name a long list of people who can win matches, can benefit a sponsor who is willing to at least pay his or her expenses, and can probably attract a lot of people to attend any training session which they may choose to offer.

This is my attempt to identify those people who can considered professional in that they provide training, and they are able to attract enough 'students' so that their income probably exceeds their expenses.

This last is not an Iron-clad guarantee, but they at least have sufficient standing in the shooting community that they think they can make a profit.

I'll be working on this concept during the ensuing weeks, but my first connection is "Ron Avery - PSA".

Ron Avery is President, and Director of Training at the "Practical Shooting Academy". He is a contributor to POLICEONE.COM

PSA is apparently homed at the NRA Whittington Center (near Raton, NM) and is centered at Ouray, CO, judging from the website's "About" information. It offers training in Tactical, Practical and NRA courses. It also offers "Online" training courses. (Most of these seem to be used to discover the skill-level of prospective students, in one context or another.)

Ron Avery has historically been one of the "Greats" in IPSC/USPSA competition. Several years ago I purchased Ron Avery's 3-volume video series on Practical Pistol competition. I found it sufficiently helpful that I subsequently loaned the tapes out to a series of friends and new shooters. Unfortunately, that practice seems to have back-fired on me, as I cannot now find the tapes.

However, the website does contain a number of videos which the student may find informative, perhaps elucidative, and always impressive.

I've included a 10-minute video of Ron Avery appearing as an "Adjunct Instructor: at the Sig Sauer Academy in Exeter, NH. This video is (curiously, to me) titled "American Guardian". I understand that this is cut down from the original 12-minute version, to meet the then-limits imposed by you tube.

Watching this video, I found several very useful tips on shooting a pistol in a situation which involves multiple shots fired from a position oriented in the same general direction. Watching new shooters (and more, watching videos of myself shooting) I see a lot that I can learn from this single video about grip, body stance, adjustment of weight and tension .... it's all the same old stuff that I've read (for example) in the Brian Enos book "Practical Shooting, Beyond Fundamentals". But I was unable to get such a clear understanding, without the video experience.

Ron's earlier videos were not as helpful to the inexperienced shooter, actually, as was this single video. At that time (ten years ago?), Ron wasn't as good a trainer. I suspect that the information in this single ten-minute video would be extremely helpful to the student who was willing to watch it several times, and make note of the points presented ... and then practice them.

If course, it's difficult to be your own trainer. That's why professional trainers can charge hundreds of dollars for a single day of personal training ... and why it's often worth it to the student.

BONUS MATERIAL:
PoliceOne.com published an article by Ron Avery on July 26, 2010, titled "Dealing with Citizens Carrying a Concealed Weapon". While this may be a useful bit of information for LEOs, it may also prove helpful to honest citizens who are lawfully carrying concealed. The emphasis here is that LEO and CCW citizen can become aware of the kind of activities and other 'indicators' which may help to LEO to understand the difference between a (potential) felon and an honest CCW citizen. I found it helpful; you may, too.

Summer Flu, Summer Colds

2011-04-28T21:09:00.000-07:00

I'm told that the worst colds (or flu) are those you catch in the Summer.

I think that this flu, the one I've been fighting for two weeks, must be a Summer Flu. It just came early this year.

I haven't posted anything for a week, mostly because I've not felt like doing anything more than lying around and drinking Alka-Seltzer Cold medicine. And reading, watching old movies. Usually try to east something once a day ... if I can stay awake long enough to nuke a can of soup.

Yesterday I did go to the store, bought a small steak, came home and cooked it. Mashed potatoes, brown grave, ate it all and boy was it good!

Then I slept until about 1:30 this afternoon. Went to the bathroom, came back and slept for another 3 hours.

This is the first time I've felt like posting for a week, and I think I've just about worn myself out.

Tomorrow I'm going to do what I PLANNED to do last .... clear up the last details on disposition of my pension funds, and insure that the Social Security payments are set to start on schedule.

Some of this stuff just can't be done over the phone. Especially when you keep nodding off.

Thank God Almighty, I'm Free At Last!

2011-04-21T17:30:00.000-07:00

(I'm really quite excited about being shy, and retiring)

But I have a plan for my retirement.

First I have to work on my "people skills"; then to cure my stutter. Then I have to work on my Anger Issues. These are all problems for people of "my generation".
Hope I don't blow it. (Watch the drums, Sparky!)

Down To The Wire

2011-04-20T20:03:00.000-07:00

Top Shot — History.com Videos (Season 2 Semifinals)

Since I realized last week that I could see Full Episodes of the History Channel's popular "Top Shop" show via the internet, I decided to try tonite to see what yesterday's show looked like.

This was the penultimate show of the season. The competition had been winnowed down to the last 5 contestants, and this show was to eliminate the last shooter --- leaving four challengers for the $100,000 prize to be awarded on the April 29, 2011 show.

The main test was to use a Glock 17 to shoot 10 balloons. The trick was, the shooter was suspended from a 125' tall crane, and then dropped .... there were only a few seconds to actually engage the targets.

The winner got 5 balloons, the loser got 3 balloons.

Then they went to the challenge to see who would be voted the Weakest Link. Or whatever they call the guy who got voted off.

Two people were chosen, and they had to do a shoot-off using a Benelli M2 against 8 Clay Pigeons. The trick was, they were riding in the back of a truck driving 25 mph down a dirt road.

The winner got 5, the loser got 3 targets and was dropped.

I know, it sounds pretty ho-hum but the show is beautifully produced, the props are professional, and the production values (and editing) are surprisingly well done. It's no wonder this television show is so popular. For a minute there, I was tempted to have Cable Television installed here in Geekistan. Almost.

Which is just my saying ... I think this is MUCH more interesting than watching "Dancing With The Stars"!

Well, except of course I do kinda miss the Lady Dancers.

You can click on the link at the beginning of the page and see the whole thing yourself. It runs about 40 minutes.

Olofson's Out!

2011-04-19T20:20:00.000-07:00

Olofson Out - Gun Owners Of America

You remember David Olofson, don't you?

Short version: He's the U.S. Army Vet who loaned his AR15 to a friend, who took it to a shooting range where it malfunctioned by firing several rounds 'very quickly'. Someone heard this, thought it sounded like a "machine gun", and since full-automatic weapons were not permitted at this range they called the police. Police went to the "friend's" home and confiscated the weapon. Six days later they arrested Olofson at his home and he was eventually convicted in Federal Court of "... knowingly transferring an unregistered machine gun".

BACKGROUND IN DEPTH: Gunowers.com has a decent summary, and links to MANY supporting documents to the Olofson Case.

Olofson has completed his 30 month sentence in prison and has been released. Now he's trying to make some money to pay his expenses and get back to his life. GOA's press release asks for people to check an online website to see if they want to buy anything that Olofson is trying to sell.

There has been a lot of commentary on the Olofson case over the past 3+ years, much of it generated by Snowflakes In Hell blog.

Four points:

(1) At first blush, this is seems to be a situation where bad judgment and bad mechanics combined to put a man in prison and ruin his life; a man who has honorably served his country and not only has NOT committed a violent crime (such as robbery with assault, which would probably get him about the same sentence) but arguably has done NOTHING wrong, or even illegal. It's just a Bad Thing all around, and the least we can do is shake our heads sadly and say "There but for the grace of God ....". Because, conceivably, any of us could be ensnared in the Nest of Vipers that is our legal system today.

(2) One of the most egregious enforcers of that legal system is the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives ["ATF"]. This agency is part of the Treasury Department, and was essentially established to enforce laws which were created to regulate "noxious substances" by forbidding their use without paying applicable taxes .... and then refusing to accept the taxes (if payment had been offered) because they just didn't want you to HAVE the Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms or Explosives. Yes, this is a gross oversimplification.

The point, though, may be that the Federal government has chosen taxation as a means of justifying regulation. The agency committed some very strong offensive moves against people who tried to sell alcohol during Prohibition, and now they are committing some very strong offensive moves against people who try to sell (or in the Olofson case, merely "lend") firearms. Is ATF a governmental over-reaction? Is it an "Out Of Control" governmental agency? Is it really necessary that the Federal government should be empowered to define what inanimate objects we may possess, and is this constitutional? Or, in this more "civilized" era, do we need the federal government to protect us from our own excesses?

(As a side note, GOA just documented disturbing news about ATF efforts to ban the importation of several brands, makes and/or models of SHOTGUNS because they include features which make them look 'military'; and “military shotguns, or shotguns with common military features ... are unsuitable for traditional shotgun sports.” Who defined "traditional shotgun sports", and what does that have to do with the Second Amendment?

(3) Was this a simple case of "Presecutorial Zeal"? The Supreme Court definition of a machine gun includes the phrase " ... a firearm that shoots automatically more than one shot by a single function of the trigger until the trigger is released, or the ammunition in the magazine is exhausted". The judge's instructions to the jury had been to accept the ~~Persecutor's~~ Prosecutor's definition: " ....shoots more than one shot with one pull of the trigger". Those of us who fire semi-automatic weapons extensively have usually witnessed one or more incidents where a semi-automatic firearm "doubles" or even "triples". This is universally (except for the AFT, the Prosecutor and the Judge) acknowledged to be a malfunction. In a 1911 model pistol, that can be caused to occur by improper installation of the "3-finger" spring, or "sear spring". Correcting that mechanical error will stop the malfunction. Conversely, if the weapon had been modified to shoot in full-automatic mode, the AR15 would have continued to fire. However, in this case it was clear ... both from the testimony of the ''friend" and that of the ATF technical witness that the AR15 would jam (stop firing) after only a few rounds had been fired. There was NO evidence that the ATF laboratory was able to cause the AR15 to fire an entire magazine of ammunition without jamming.

S0 ... was it a 'full-automatic" weapon, or was it a malfunction?

And WHY was the prosecutor so determined to get a conviction that he deliberately changed the definition of a full-automatic weapon to suit the facts of the case?

(4) As for poor Mr. Olofson, it may very well be that his life purpose has been only to serve as a Bad Example to the rest of us, "pour encourager des autres".

Here's a Lou Dobbs TV commentary on the Olofson case, after Olofson had been imprisoned. The video is dated January 22, 2009. I think that the commentary does a very good job of making point (3):

The Bottom Line:

I'm glad he's out of prison --- finally. It probably comes as no surprise to the reader that I think Olofson should never have been put through this ordeal in the first place.

In the spirit of "Full Disclosure", I've had a firearm malfunction and fire multiple shots with one pull of the trigger, also.

It was at the 2001 Area 1 USPSA match in Washington. I had given my STI Edge 2011 pistol to a gunsmith-wise friend a week before the match, asking him to do a thorough cleaning and function-check of the pistol, in preparation to this Major Match.

Unfortunately, I neglected to provide him with magazines and ammunition so he could function-test the pistol. And when I received it back, 10 minutes before the beginning of the first day of the match, there was insufficient time for me to check the pistol.

When I started the first stage, I engaged the first target and the gun Doubled. The Range Officer stopped me, because I obviously had an "Unsafe Gun" (according to the USPSA Rules of Competition.)

I looked up my friend, who was also competing at the match. We retired to a Safety Area where he disassembled the gun and discovered that the Three-Finger (Sear) spring had been incorrectly installed. The Sear 'finger' had been installed over, rather than under, the sear. (Or the reverse, I can't recall just now.)

Having no tools with us other than a small screwdriver, he used a rock as a hammer and the screwdriver as a punch to drive out the mainspring retaining pin, and when the grip assembly was removed he could tell that he had installed the spring incorrectly. He re-installed it, checked it, and re-assembled the pistol. I paid a dollar to test-fire the gun at the Function Test stage (monitored by a Range Officer), and it functioned correctly.

Cost to me? One dollar. Penalties? None ... I actually was allowed to reshoot the stage, due to a technical glitch in the Stage Range Officer handling the problem.

However, if the ATF had been present, chances are that I too would have been accused, charged and convicted (under the rules of the Olofson case) with having "...an unregistered machine gun".

The Ruger SR1911 (Video) | Down Range TV

2011-04-19T05:17:00.000-07:00

The Ruger SR1911 (Video) | Down Range TV

Michael Bane and his DOWNRANGE TV website helped introduce the RUGER SR1911 pistol this week. (Michael has been taking some heat on his weblog lately for "Dissing" the pistol ... which he didn't even identify or comment upon before it was announced by the manufacturer.)

Until we have our hands on the gun, it's going to be difficult for any of us to speak to the quality of the pistol, so it's not reasonable to comment on Bane's description of the product or its functionality.

Bane's description of the pistol sounds .... about as swell as any shooting-magazine writer would present when a manufacturer cooperates in the publication of a "first release" article on any kind of firearm or associated equipment. That is to say: if he gives a bad review, that will be the LAST time when that manufacturer allows him first-day access to the product. It's not that Bane, or any gun-writer will deliberately down-rate a new product. However, unless there is something majorly wrong with the product, you won't learn about it here.

That's not a comment on Bane or his show; it's just a comment on the industry. That's the way it works.

---

Accepting, temporarily, the above caveat, Bane's evaluation of the pistol sounds both positive and fair. Ruger (a surprise tome) has, Bane says, been producing 1911 pistols for some years. I assume this has been as a sub-contractor to some other manufacturer .... there's nothing new about this; I simply was ignorant of the fact.

And the accoutrements, for example, include Novak 3-dot sights. As Bane says, if you dont' like 3-dot sights, you don't have to have them.

All the specifications are available on the Ruger website, so you don't have to rely on me to 'get it right'. Which is a relief, because there have been rumors about this product since December, 2009 (perhaps earlier ... I didn't bother to research the rumor mill further back than that.)

In short, a reliable gunmaker has jumped on the 1911 Bandwagon, and I'm glad they did.

I'm also glad that Michael Bane is there, right on top of things to provide us with a reliable "First Look" and an old reliable.

---

7-round vs 8-round Magazines:

The only negative thing which came to mind when I watched his video was purely peripheral ... Bane's mention of the fact that Ruger had decided to include both a 7-round magazine and an 8-round magazine with the new gun. Bane stated that the 8-round magazine did not feed as reliably as the 7-round magazine.

I don't know why he said that.

I've only been shooting 1911's in .45 acp since 1997 (Not counting several thousand rounds I fired in Vietnam in the late 60's / early 70's from 7-round magazines), so I cannot count myself as an expert on the care and feeding of the pistol/magazine combination in that caliber. However, I have to say that the only failures to feed have been from failure to load the ammunition to specifications (usually too short), when the magazine was improperly maintained (eg: magazine spring old and weak, like me; or the feed-lips were not adjusted properly) and when the handgun had not been adequately maintained.

And again, when the ammunition was not re-loaded appropriately; usually due to not full-length sizing the cartridge correctly, crimping them correctly or using the 'wrong' bullet.

On the other hand, the quality of the magazine is ALWAYS suspect. The military issue 7-round magazines I used in 1969 were, in my experience, "questionable" using Military Hardball ammunition. But those magazines, and probably the ammunition as well, had probably been created during WWII ("The War To End Wars To End Wars") and most likely had been over-used and under-maintained.

Put a new quality magazine spring in any "name brand" 8-round magazine and tune the feed lips, they'll perform as reliably as any 7-round magazine that has ever been made.

WeBlog Stats

2011-04-19T04:50:00.000-07:00

I've not been very good about posting regularly, for quite a while. As my retirement date (April 21) nears, I've been finding more time to devote to the project. And it has been very rewarding, both in terms of finding something 'useful' to spend my spare time on, and because the blog seems to continue drawing interest.

This is my opportunity to say "Thank You" to my readers.

Generally, based on the number of comments submitted, it's easy for me to assume that my "regular readers" are but a handful. However, the following statistics from my Stats-Counter Service suggest that there is, indeed, a "Silent Majority". And they're not just out their to stab Bill-Hilary (or Nixon) in the back!

This week was a milestone; over a quarter of a million page loads, total, since the blog was started in December, 2004. That makes it "pretty old" and "Pretty Slow", which seems appropriate, since I demonstrate the same virtues. (To which those who have seen me shoot may attest.

And the week past when I am STILL not writing regularly, demonstrate an increased audience if only I can get out of bed and write for an hour or two in the morning. Or the evening.

URL: http://jerrythegeek.blogspot.com/

	Mon	Tues	Wed	Thur	Fri	Sat	Sun	Total	Avg
Pageloads	166	134	95	128	92	111	118	844	121
Unique Visitors	118	102	70	109	76	85	92	652	93
First Time Visitors	103	88	57	84	63	71	72	538	77
Returning Visitors	15	14	13	25	13	14	20	114	16

So I thank you "unique visitors", be you returning or first-time. You encourage me to indulge in one of my favorite activities. Writing.

You ARE an odd bunch, aren't you?

WEBRING

2011-04-19T04:27:00.000-07:00

I've been receiving MULTIPLE complaints that some folks try to sign on and the WEBRING connection at the bottom of the website takes over ... they can't even see MY blog, let along send nasty comments.

Thankfully, most of the people who send Nasty Comments to me are personal friends, or they otherwise have my email address.

Due to these informal communications it has become increasingly clear that the options which I added in 2005 and 2006 for the convenience of my readers have overwhelmed the original purpose of this blog.

In other words, the Progressives are taking over my website!

I tried last month to take care of the few 'most popular' WEBRING sites by commenting out the code from the Template, but either it didn't actually work or the ones I 'removed' were not those which were causing problems.

I've lost patience, and it may be too bad that because of one badly-programmed function I've lost several similar functions which may not have been causing problems.

However, in fairnes to me few but faithful readers, I have today DELETED all WEBRING connections, including those which I only (tentatively) "Commented Out" ('deactivated').

That's right. I dumped them, for now and for always. They will not be available in future versions of this website. I've discarded the code; even I don't know how to get them back.

As it happens, they probably not only did harm, but did no good either. I know that I never received a comment from anyone that they were grateful for the WEBRING access; only (recently) that they could not access THIS website because they were always redirected to another WEBRING sight. It was 'vended code', Folks, and I had not access to correct their programming ... only sufficient parameter detail to join and participate in the 'community'.

I hope this clears it up for everyone. If not, I hope you will let me know at jerrydgeekblog (at) comcast (dot) net.

In other words:

"Can you hear me now? NO? Okay, then send me an email!"

PS: Latest H/T: BigDawg

Clarification from STI

2011-04-19T03:23:00.000-07:00

Saturday (April 16, 2011) I wrote about "STI UNDER NEW OWNERSHIP", describing (based on available media releases) that Dave Skinner (and Pauletta, too!) have retired, and that the new CEO --- Tim Dillon -- plans for the new version of STI [Would that be STI 3.0?] to lend a new emphases on Defensive Handguns rather than Competition Handguns.

Today I received an unsolicited email from Rabbitt Boyett, the Marketing Director of STI, who very kindly and generously helped me to better understand their new current marketing plan.

I will reproduce his email in total in a moment, but the main point is that STI current leadership has no intention of paying less attention to it's Competition Market. In fact, as Rabbit says:
"we are planning to offer MORE support than ever".

While it's quite understandable that STI is going to work harder to broaden their appeal to the "Self Defense Market", it's impressive that they intend to put another serious effort into growing another market. I don't know where they're going to find the resources in R&D and new manufacturing, but it sounds as if they have an infusion of cash and are willing to spend the money designing and developing new market lines. And I'm assuming that the manufacturing will be moved from Georgetown, Texas, to The Philippines.

(I have to say, I'm not so happy with that. But SWMBO and I visited the Georgetown facility in 2005, and even then they were running out of room in their SteelBarn building ... and there wasn't much room, either, to expand in their current Industrial park.)

I'm impressed. I know that they have spent a lot of time, effort and money lately in developing:

the GP5 (Polymer Frame, exposed hammer, double-action in 9X19 w/3.25" barrel)
the GP6 (Polymer Frame, exposed hammer, double-action in 9X19 w/4.25" barrel)
and the GP6C (Polymer Frame, adjustable sights, exposed hammer, double-stack,double-action in 9X19 w/4.25" barrel)

... these three choices make a "good start" into the Wide Wide Wonderful World of Self-Defense guns.

What can we expect to see in future Self-Defense pistols from STI?

the following are just my guesses, and yours are as good as mine, but I can identify a couple of niche markets which are becoming more popular, such as:

Sub-compact double-action with fixed sights in 9x19, Very Short Barrel (2"?), and 6-7 round single stack magazine;
Sub-compact in .380, similar to Compact or Kel-tec P3AT;
Mini-Compact in calibers larger than 9x19;

Those are just Wild Ass Guesses, of course, but they are, or have been, fairly popular in Self Defense handguns over the past few years. (And no, I don't really think STI is going after Kel-Tec; any improvements would be in ergonomics or power or magazine capacity, and by then you're automatically in the "Mini-Compact" genre.)

So ... yes. This is, indeed, a Marketing War and STI is late in getting into it. Can they develop their own niche? I don't see it.

Can they bounce early entry manufacturers? Well, Ruger has (this month) the hottest of the hot in their LC9, and it seems as if they have already set the standard; can STI make up for ergonomics and power with excellence of manufacturing ... and if so, can the set a competitive price? Can they beat $433 for the LC9? Or will they go for the larger frame/length/weight etc and compete against Ruger's SR* series?

We don't know, but it's an exciting Next Chapter in the Never Ending Story of STI-World!

(Full text of email follows.)

Hi Jerry-
I read your post about Tim Dillon taking over as President/CEO here at STI and while that is true, there’s a little misunderstanding about just one thing: when you say “he is going to move the company away from the ‘Competition’ market toward the ‘Self Defense’ market.” While we ARE going to be expanding our CCW/LEO offerings, we are NOT going to be diminishing our support of the competition market. We fully understand that it is our competitors who put us where we are today and we are not EVER going to turn our backs on those customers and friends- quite the contrary, we are planning to offer MORE support than ever: better guns, better options, better lead times, better customer service, and better communication between us and the public. The changes will be a little slow initially as Tim is using his experience in logistics and efficiency to improve processes around here (without sacrificing ANY of the quality people have come to expect from us, btw. I’m sure you can see how that might take a little time…) Some of those changes won’t be noticeable at first to anyone that doesn’t work here, but I promise you that in a year or two everyone will be able to tell how much better we’ve gotten as a company. Tim has a very clear vision of what STI is capable of and I speak for all the other employee owners when I say that I am just thrilled to be a part of helping this company to live up to its full potential to benefit ALL shooters- competitors, LEOs, self defense folks… everybody! Thanks again for noticing, Jerry, and if you or anyone else wants to weigh in you can always reach us at Feedback@STIguns.com

Rabbit Boyett
Employee Owner | Marketing Director
512.819.0656 | Fax: 512.819.0465

Monster Hunter Nation

2011-04-18T22:11:00.000-07:00

Have you read Larry Correia's "Monster Hunter" series yet?

No? Why not? You read this blog, think guns are neat and monsters are awesome (as I said ... you read this blog).

Larry Correia published Monster Hunter International in 2009. It wasn't a really major publishing house, but it sold like the proverbial condom at a nymphomaniac convention, and impelled Correia to stardom!

Well, sort of. Those of us who DID buy and, and DID like it, also bought his next book THIS year (okay, late last year if you were into pre-buying books)

I got into the swing of it after buying Book #2, Monster Hunter Vendetta, and decided that this was a series that I wanted to follow.

It doesn't hurt that he has already got a pre-release date on Book #3 in the series, Monster Hunter Alpha. No, I don't have the date it will be released, but I HAVE already pre-ordered it because .... well, it's like eating Caramel Corn.

And because he's still a 'small name' writer, they're being published in soft-cover for the low-low price of $7.99 -- not even previously owned by a little old lady from Pasadena, but entirely new with that new-book smell inside every cover.

So I'm all about Correia's fun-fantasy schtick about professional monster hunters, festooned with 1911's and M5's or whatever ... who hunt and slay MONSTERS for a living. And yes, it's really hard to get through a chapter without either reading or thinking about the phrase "Target Rich Environment".

When I found a link to the (previously unknown to me) blog that Correia has been writing for who-knows-how-long, I put off trying to eat my burned pasta for just a while longer to read the latest 3 posts at Monster Hunter Nation.

I've rewarmed dinner 3 times so far, choosing instead to pour another small glass of Crown Royal (cheap-price courtesy of snow-birder Hobo Brasser) and warm up the pasta for one minute with a few stirs of the pot to keep from burning it even more than it already has.

My advice: Check out the books (not forgetting that he has OTHER books, such as Dead Six, co-written with Mike Kupari ), and also read the Monster Hunter Nation wordpress blog. Check above for the link, okay? 'Cause it's late and I'm tired.

The think about the blog is that it seems to kind of wander down the road barely keeping between the fence posts, but every article shows the kind of verbose enthusiasm that makes me think "Gee, I write long articles; why can't they be as interesting?"

I know that unless you're not sitting at home with an hour to kill before it's late enough for you to go to bed (which implies that you don't have a television), you probably won't want to go read a blog written by someone who had the #27 "new book" on the market.

So I won't say "Go, Read The Whole Thing" (or RTWT, as bloggers say when they don't tend to overwrite).

I'm just saying, the guy can write and he has some interesting things to say.

It's not like watching a rerun of Cheer's, for Goodness Sake!

I Burned Dinner Again --- Thanks, Walt Scholl!

2011-04-18T20:43:00.000-07:00

page7b

I started dinner tinite at 8pm, and by a quarter after I was ready to let my pasta-with-meat dish simmer for 25 minutes. I knew I needed to stir it a couple of times, but while I'm waiting it seemed reasonable to run upstairs to the computer and check my mail.

Uh huh, Mom's out of the hospital ... turned out to be nothing.

Uh huh, Digger has a "Gun Free Zone" video to show (I've seen it, posted it here last year)

Uh Huh, Walt has a link to Steve Ricciardelli's "ON-LINE MANUAL FOR EVERY GUN ON EARTH" page (as Walt referred to it). I just HAD to go check this out at http://stevespages.com/page7b.htm

It was an impressive looking website, with a HUGE list of links to manuals which the website-owner has compiled from .... well, all over I guess.

When I tried to right-click on one of the links, though, I got an error window "FUNCTION HAS BEEN DISABLED".

Ha Ha, good joke. It's a gag page. Right?

Wrong. I browsed back through the list and noticed that I had already viewed the manual for KEL-TEK P3AT. I just hadn't bothered to share this find with anyone else at the time ... which was 2 years ago. So I did a little checking. Turns out that the manuals are THERE, you just can't right-click the links to bring it up on another tab or window.

The website home page is http://stevespages.com, and if you follow that link back to the main webpage you will learn that there are many other resources available, not including firearm-related pages. For example, there direct links to about a dozen different on-line news websites.

One thing on the home page you need to note, though, is Steve's warning:

The pages you encounter inside ARE NOT for the hit-and-run user, nor are they for the hit-and-miss user. If you are in a hurry, then don't even bother entering.

I read that and laughed, then started to surf the website.

Forty minutes later I realized that I had not even stirred the pot, let alone shut off the burner, let alone stopped long enough to eat supper.

I think maybe there's some sauce and pasta on the top that I can skim off and it won't taste too burned. I've been a bachelor for a couple of decades, so I'm not entirely unaccustomed to eating burned dinners.

So, I turned off the heat, stirred the pot a little, put the lid back on and came back to warn you: as much as I recommend this site to you --- before you go check it out, please ensure that you don't have your dinner on the stove when you start reading.

I should have posted this on BUY-A-GUN-DAY! But I didn't, so I will add it to my website under "RELOADING SOURCES".

But I'll go eat my dinner first. Even if it will be cold by the time I get BACK to the kitchen

[PS: H/T Walt]

Cheers: Abnormal Psychology, Rum and Coca Cola

2011-04-17T00:31:00.000-07:00

Okay, I know it's goofy and passe ... but I always enjoyed the show.

I was in The Caribbean, specifically the Cayman Islands, when the last CHEERS show was broadcast. I and my then-Amore' watched the final show. Then we left our bungalow, walked hand and hand barefoot along the white sands of the Grand Cayman shores, found a good bar and got snookered on Rum and Coca Col a.

Part I

Part II

Part III

Fishing; not skill, but finding the 'right spot'

2011-04-16T23:53:00.000-07:00

Fishing at it's best. @ ExplorOz Forum

Fishing is NOT about skill; it's about finding the right spot, at the right time.

(H/T: G-man)

STI under "New Ownership"

2011-04-16T23:16:00.000-07:00

As announced at the 2011 SHOT Show ....
Dave Skinner has retired as CEO and President of STI. The company is now "Employee Owned".

New CEO/President Tim Dillon says he is going to move the company away from the "Competition" market toward the "Self Defense" market.

This would certainly support STI's International "Police and Military" market, and I'm just hoping that the support for Competition pistols will not be undermined by STI's New Vision.

See the video for more details.

PERTINENT LINKS:
On the Brian Enos Forum
Letter from Tim Dillon on STI Website
You can also (as of March 29, 2011) see the Video on the STI Website

Finally, Dave Skinners December 2010 "Skinnergram" also announces (among other items) Tim Dillon's new assumption of leadership .... the Skinnergrams are directed to their dealerships, but are also an excellent (early) source of information about new programs and directions for STI.

IPSC Loads - Loads for USPSA/IPSC Practical Shooting Competitions

2011-04-16T21:11:00.000-07:00

I was drooling over guns on the STI Guns website today and I noted that some of the competition-type pistols listed the link to "Jeff Maass' IPSC Resources Page" on the specifications.

So I followed the link, and instead of Jeff Maass, I found:

IPSC Loads - Loads for USPSA/IPSC Practical Shooting Competitions

Background:
This use to be the "Jeff Maass' IPSC Resources Page", but Jeff eventually got out of the business of trying to keep up all of the 'new' loads that were being reported to him (and I suspect he was beginning to worry about liability issues), so he quit updating the website. After a couple of years, he took the website down.

I was disappointed at the time, because this was one of the best reloading data resources available on the internet. His published loads were real-life loads designed specifically for IPSC competition. The premise is, these are loads which will (within defined parameters) "probably" be "pretty close" to something you can run in your gun and make major power. If that's an issue for you ... especially if you're shooting Open with a compensated pistol in .38 super or 9mm Major ... then this was probably the only available central clearing house of useful information.

Now I see that the data has been made available again, but published by (one of the guys who use to regularly post on the Unofficial IPSC Mailing List), whom I met once at the 2005 "Shirley Skinner Annual Make-A-Wish Charity Match" at Waco, Texas. I won't mention his name, because if he wanted his name associated directly on the website he would have entered it himself. I will say, though, that he and his wife have run shooting-training classes for several years and as far as I know, they still do.

Anyway, I'm going to return the link to my sidebar under REFERENCE SOURCES and the name Jeff Maass' IPSC Loads List. (Here's the link again.) If you are trying to work up a new load, this is one place you might check to get at least a 'reasonable starting place'.

(NB: When working up a new load, ALWAYS start with a powder charge at least 10% lower than cited, and be sure to pay CAREFUL attention to (a) the Over-All Length of the loaded cartridge and (b) check the NOTES column on any individual load to ensure that your firearm has a configuration similar to the cited gun ... that is to say, if it's a compensated gun, don't use this load in a Limited gun!)

In other words, take the cited loads with a grain of salt and ~~ONE~~ TWO grains less powder!!

And as you develop your loads, fire each round over a chronograph to insure that you know when the velocity of the bullet falls within the acceptable range for the power factor which you require. And always keep an eye out for signs of excessive pressure. These signs are, among others:

Flattened primers
Firing-pin indentations have a 'rimmed crater'
Smearing of the primer material across the base of the case
The base of the case is so flattened that you can't read the caliber
The firing pin is jolted loose
Your gun goes KaBOOM! when you pull the trigger, and you experience a searing pain in the palms of your hands when the exploding cartridge flashes hot gas through the magazine and the trigger-slot of the frame.

(Hopefully you will not wait until the gun self-destructs, although that IS always a sure sign of an overload, or a bullet seated too deep.)

Obviously, since I had no part in either developing the original loads or publishing the data, I cannot be responsible for the safety of any load. For example, in the entire list of .38 Super loads, there is not one which uses the bullet-weight and powder combination I have developed for my own use.

OTHER GOOD THINGS FOUND THERE:
The original page includes many useful links. Among these are:

Competition Reloading Videos
"Burn rate" chars for various powders
Reloading Component Manufacturers Links
Reloading Equipment Links
Reloading Component Dealers

This Will Make You Lose Your Lunch

2011-04-12T22:11:00.000-07:00

This Will Make You Lose Your Lunch

Neutrition Comic (no, I am NOT making this up!) demonstrates just ONE way that the American Busybodies have been working diligently to ensure that the American Nanny-State emulates the oh-so-helpful BRIT Nanny-state.

Some years ago, my fellow comedian Tim Slagle and I produced short comedy bits for a libertarian talk show. In one bit, the health-care police arrested a man for sneaking coconut oil into a movie theater to put on his popcorn. (I’ve embedded it at the end of the post.)

The trouble with using comic exaggeration to make fun of nanny-state busybodies is that reality keeps catching up. What starts as parody ends up sounding like a straight news report some years later.

Just look at what the nanny-staters have been up to lately. First, a councilman in New York City proposes banning toys from Happy Meals that don’t meet his definition of “healthy.” Some commenters on the blog suggested I find a picture of that councilman. So I did:

No, I'm going to let you go to the link and catch the punch-line.

All I can say is ... 'Ya'all oughta be freakin' ashamed of yourselves!

Lead Issue Heating Back Up | Shooting Wire

2011-04-11T20:02:00.000-07:00

Lead Issue Heating Back Up | Shooting Wire:

Jim Shepherd of the Shooting Wire notes that the effect of lead ammunition on animal toxicity has been revised by Animal-Right organizations (and wildlife conservators):

"Last year, the Environmental Protection Agency denied a petition from the American Bird Conservancy and a group of animal-rights based organizations asking that the EPA broaden its mandate to outlaw lead as a component of ammunition. It is not in the EPA's purview to regulate ammunition, but the petition had suggested the EPA use its authority to ban lead as a component in both ammunition and fishing tackle.

In the end, the EPA denied both components of the petition, citing several reasons, including a lack of comprehensive evidence to support the petition.

On Friday, the American Bird Conservancy issued a press release outlining a new survey announced at the Society of Toxicology's annual meeting in Washington. That survey, the ABC contends, points to lead ammunition 'as a primary factor limiting the survival and recovery of one of the country's most imperiled birds, the California Condor.' (Editor's Note: You can read the ABC release here)."

Reading the whole article, and the original release, might lead one to ask questions about the validity of the claims, and the over-all effect on society whether or not the clams are indeed valid.

For example, a study comparing the lead toxicity of "Free-Flying" California Condors vs those which were reared in captivity apparently shows that those birds which were not raised in a protected environment were found to have significantly greater amounts of lead in blood samples. Since Condors are both predators and scavengers, the assumption is that they they they acquired their food supply from animals which had been shot, but not removed.

No way of proving that assumption, of course, but it seems intuitively acceptable as a talking point.

Also, venison (Deer, Elk, and other game animals) donated to Food Banks were often found to have lead fragments in their meat. Several tons of donated venison were rejected due to tests on the meat.

I can personally attest to developing a distaste for Pheasant, because I kept biting into shotgun pellets at dinner. However, all of the venison I have personally consumed ... must be a ton or more of the critters in more than at half-century of People Eating Tasty Animals slain with a gun ... has failed to support this argument. Very few Deer or Antelope in my experience were heavy enough to even slow down a .30-30, .25-06, 6mm-284, 7mm Remington Magnum or .30-06 bullet on the way to splash against a cliff-face on the far horizon. In Oregon, it's illegal to hunt 'major game animals' with ammunition of less than .25 caliber. Could this be the answer to at least part of the problem.

As for the Condor Problem, perhaps this is largely due to having small game (including rodents and varmints) hunted by sub-caliber ammunition, most likely .22 rimfire, or shotguns. Both of these firearm types are typically more likely to not completely pass through the bodies of the critters.

EFFECTS OF RESTRICTIONS ARE ACCEPTED:

I note that lead shot is forbidden in many states in bird hunting, both upland and especially waterfowl. Instead, steel shot is the best obvious replacement since tungsten is too expensive for shooting birds on the wing. There is a "down side" on this, as the lighter steel shot is not as effective as lead shot beyond a relatively short distance. This results in more wounded birds; but at least when they eventually die and are eaten by scavengers, there is zero chance that lead is re-introduced into the environment from which it came (although, in nature, not ordinarily introduced into the bodies of carrion).

The attempt by these 'conservancy' types to eliminate the use of lead bullets, though, seems to be "Industry wide", and here is where my resistance starts.

That would not necessarily restricted to ammunition used to take game, or kill varmints.

it would apply to ANY ammunition, even those calibers used for non-hunting purposes.

Self defense ammunition would necessarily be less powerful: not previous comments on lowered lethality on game birds.

Target shooting ammunition would necessarily be less accurate at other than very short range.

And it's as likely that whatever metal used as a substitute for lead would be more expensive.

Further, in the context of IPSC-type competition, using bullets with a steel core would put the entire concept of engaging steel targets (e.g. plates, pepper-poppers, US poppers, etc.) would be impossible. Steel-core ammunition destroys steel targets for the purpose of competition with as few as one single shot either dishing or penetrating the target ... rendering it useless for competition.

Example:
"Hey, I hit the plate"
"(No, you didn't; it would have gone down or left a mark.)"
"Sure I did, I guess the bullet went through the bullet hole!"

Economic and Competition Consequences:
Based on the millions of rounds fired annually just in the USPSA competition matches every year, the cost of competition would rise exponentially; especially when one considers the cost of retooling for bullet manufacturer which will be passed on to the consumer.

Actually, although there may be a legitimate point in this effort to eliminate lead in bullets which are fired at game, in fact it is an exercise which will make shooting so expensive that the people who shoot the most rounds (competition) will bear the greatest burden, and will be most negatively affected.

Meat Hunters will be affected marginally, in economic terms. Sure, they will lose some meat due to reduced effectiveness and accuracy at distance, but their usage of bullets will be numbered in the hundreds.

Competition shooters, who do NOT demonstrable contribute the the cited problem, often fire tens of thousands of rounds per year. There is no documentation, in the literature alluding to this "Free Lead" movement, which suggests that there may be a waiver in the case of ammunition which is used in competition.

Skeet? Trap? Bulls-eye? IPSC? Speed Steel? Cowboy Shooting (SAS)? Gallery Rifle? Bench-rest? Wimbledon Cup and other Long-Range Shooting?

ALL of these competition firearms activities would be negatively impacted by a ban on Lead Bullets. Between the economic impact and the affect on stability/accuracy on long ranges of the less dense material, all of these forms of shooting competition would be either so expensive or so disheartening in the resulting accuracy degradation that the Shooting Sports would effectively disappear.

The effort is perhaps well meant, and it may even (if enacted reasonable) be acceptable ... if meat-hunters and varmint shooters are willing to accept that their kill ration will decrease significantly. That is to say, if they're willing to let wounded animals live, although tortured by not-quite-fatal wounds.

No hunters, and no varmint shooters that I know are happy about leaving a wounded animal to be lost, to die in pain after an experienced period of time.

And no competition shooter I know is willing to spend an exorbitant amount of money for ammunition which may or may not reliably be expected to consistently hit The Elusive "Perfect Double".

20 life lessons they don’t tell you about | View From The Cop

2011-04-10T23:46:00.000-07:00

20 life lessons they don’t tell you about | View From The Cop:

March 31, 2011, was Lt. Steve Rose's last post on "View from The Cop" Steve is a member of the Atlanta, Georgia, Police Department. I guess he's got other things going (go to the link and check out his "other blog offerings" from the AJC .. maybe he's not there).

I just discovered Steve's almost-daily blog last year, and while I haven't been the most faithful of daily readers, I'm glad I found him before he found it no longer viable to continue the blog.

As a farewell Gift, Steve wrote about 20 life lessons. Here are just a few of them.

Wise man, our Wild Irish Rose. I shall miss him.

11. If you have a gun, clean it and go practice with it. If you can’t do that, sell it to someone who will.

12. Don’t give crooks credit they don’t deserve. They’re morons and have no honor. They steal from you, me, their own families and anyone who leaves the opportunity for them to commit crimes.

13. You will NOT make millions from a land baron in a small foreign country. Banks will not request you send personal info on your email to keep your account from suddenly being frozen. Read up on scams.

14. Be politely skeptical. Don’t be afraid of asking questions, but do buy the Girl Scout cookies — no questions asked.

15. Call the police when you see something suspicious. Most arrests are a result of a suspicious resident making a 911 call.

Gun Talk TV

2011-04-10T22:44:00.000-07:00

Tonite I subscribed to Gun Talk TV.

This site bills itself as "The #1 Online Resource for Gun Training". When I first became aware of it, I went to the website and noticed that they had a LOT of short (under 5 minutes) videos which discussed shooting-related issues. The first one I watched, for example, explored the question "Why attend a Gun Fighting school?"

Uploaded with ImageShack.us
I thought that was a good start, and I was impressed by what Cory Trapp of Gunsite had to say ... essentially, that the root word in "Gun Fight" is not "Gun", but "Fight". There is a difference between "pure marksmanship" (going to the range and shooting the center out of the bullseye every time), and "fighting with guns". The "Combat Triad is Marksmanship, Gun-handling, and Mindset ... and the last part is Marksmanship."

Incidentally, there was an amusing event in this 2:49-minute video where Trapp is demonstrating that the gun-handling response to a malfunction of your rifle is to immediately go to your pistol. He simulated a malfunction of his rifle, drew his pistol, and engaged the target: the pistol went *CLICK*! He recovered by racking the slide, thus chambering the first round and allowing him to effectively ... but slowly ... engage the next target. Then he went along with his lesson plan, safing and holstering the pistol, and continuing to discuss the priorities of Gun Fight Training.

I thought this obviously inadvertent error added a degree of verisimilitude to his training point, even though it didn't speak well for his supposed tendency to ALWAYS be prepared when going into a Gun Fight. Or a Training Example, but we know that these things happen during training. Still, he wasn't rattled and his recovery was immediate and appropriate; and that's part of what he was trying to train, although I doubt he would have chosen this particular method; it was what I choose to call a "Teaching Moment".

But I digress.

I thought that the ability to access interesting videos was an important part of the Basic membership, which was my initial option. After I spend some time on the website, I will decide whether it is worth splurging my pension money on a $5.95/month "Premium Membership". And if I upgrade, I will let you know when, and why.

For now I was delighted to learn that this resource was available online. I understand that these sequences are part of a regular television show ... but they are not available to me because I don't have a Cable TV subscription. The only way I can access these resources are via my cable internet connection, and I'm grateful for the opportunity to at least evaluate it at an "entry level" to decide whether it will provide useful information, if only potentially.

My first impression is that the internet link will give me a greater body of reference for my own attempts at firearms training. The "Introduction to USPSA" class is a monthly 3 hour opportunity to teach the elementary parts of, not only competition, but gunhandling (and yes, safety). Here, as on GunTalkTV, "marksmanship" is a tertiary emphasis; it's up to the student to develop his or her marksmanship skills.

That is to say, we don't really care whether the student hits the target, as long as no safety rules are violated ( "gun-handling") and the student understands what is expected ("mindset").

I've already learned something from this first exploratory step, and I'm sure there is much more to learn.

We'll keep you posted. Maybe.

Boo Bloomberg

2011-04-09T21:35:00.000-07:00

Shooting Wire

SAF Files Lawsuit Against Bloomberg

In New York State, you can a Handgun License for no more than $10. That's the law.

Except in New York City. There, the fee for a Handgun License is $340.

According to this April 6, 2011, Shooting Wire story (subscription information available on the linked site):

The Second Amendment Foundation [link added] has filed a federal civil rights lawsuit against New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg that alleges New York City's $340 fee for a permit to keep a handgun in the home is "excessive and impermissibly burdens the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms.

(View the SAF News Release here)

Many RKBA supporters view the entire concept of firearm licensing to be the next thing to Firearm Registration ... a dubious concept which has historically led to Firearm Confiscation.

Still, many citizens find themselves in the unhappy situation of being forced to pay licensing fees in order to exercise their Second Amendment rights, even though we're pretty sure that this isn't what the Founding Fathers had in mind. How many other Constitutional Rights were regulated by a fee structure? Answer: no RECENT impositions come immediately to mind; but do you remember the kerfuffle which occurred when some states imposed a Poll Tax which restricted the rights of legal citizens to vote if they could not afford to pay that odious fee? That practice began in the 1880's and endured until in 1964 the 24th Amendment to the Constitution ended this now-unconstitutional practice.

In the meantime, there are areas where "Poll Tax" type fees take the exercise to extremes; NYC Mayor Michael Bloomberg's $340 licensing fee does not build confidence of citizens to trust their local government to protect them, and constitutes an insurmountable obstacle for people who simply cannot afford to pay the fee.

From the SAF news release:

In its lawsuit, SAF notes that the $340 fee is not used to defray administrative costs, so there appears to be no purpose for it other than to discourage people from applying for a permit. The excessive fee, according to Gottlieb, puts the exercise of a constitutional right solely within the financial reach of the wealthy class, essentially turning a civil right into a privilege for the rich and well-connected.
“New York is one of only two states that require a permit just to keep a handgun in one’s own home,” Gottlieb said. “Citizens in the other 48 states would consider that an outrage. The city’s ‘residence premises’ handgun license amounts to a charge of more than $100 annually to keep a handgun in one’s home, which is ridiculous. Mayor Bloomberg is essentially taxing the fundamental right to defend one’s self in his or her own home. We cannot think of anything more egregious than perpetuating a fee structure that puts a financial obstacle in the way of citizens who want to protect their homes and families.

It's difficult to understand why this lawsuit had to come from SAF; it seems logical that New York City citizens would lead the protest, instead of an organization centered in Bellevue, Washington. Still, it's good that somebody is willing to stand up to bureaucratic atrocities on the 'body politic'.

No, this is not a good time to discuss Chicago (regardless of the McDonald decision) or D.C. (regardless of the Heller decision). It is, however, a good time to consider whether the fight against firearms licensing fees should be the next step to establishing the Second Amendment as equivalent to the 24th Amendment, in terms of acknowledging that of our Constitutional Rights should be equally free of local infringement.

'Vampire Woman' With Horn & Fang Implants Is Terrifying! (VIDEO) | The Stir

2011-04-07T21:28:00.000-07:00

'Vampire Woman' With Horn & Fang Implants Is Terrifying! (VIDEO) | The Stir: "The horns I have are a symbol of strength and were implanted without anaesthetic. I had the fangs done because I loved vampires as a little girl and I changed the colour of my eyes so they were how I really wanted them to be. Tattooing is my way of being immortal, of really being a vampire and not dying -- leaving my work on other people's skin."

(See the video here)
I have no idea why anyone would subject themselves to this deliberate disfigurement.

This looks very much like the woman about whom, at closing time at the tavern, I once thought "Hey, when you look at her just right, she's not that bad!"

Birther ... me?

2011-04-07T20:59:00.000-07:00

I turned 66 in February. I applied for Social Security benefits, Medicare benefits, and formally announced my retirement (effective ... not soon enough!). This is old news.

What I haven't mentioned is that my drivers license expired, so I had to go to the DMV and apply for a renewal.

The last time that happened, it was a hassle because they had this vision test, which took about 10 minutes ... and there was a long line of people waiting to fulfill this requirement, so it was a huge bottleneck in the process.

This time, they had changed the vision test something which looks very much like what my optometrist gave me. It also included a glance to check peripheral vision.

It still took me a month to get my permanent license, because I had to produce my birth certificate to prove that I was a natural born citizen.

Before I had to produce it, I would have sworn that it was safely locked in my home filing cabinet, along with my car titles and other important documents. Big surprise ... I looked for it there for days, and could not find it. Ultimately, I had to apply for a "Registered Copy" from my state .... something-or-other office. I was required to provide all my my birth information, parents' names, etc., and also send them copies of documents which provide that my SSN was assigned to me, and that the home address I gave them was my true current address. It took me some time to gather all of the materials. (I could have just sent them a copy of my current drivers license but they would not accept an expired drivers license; by that time, the license was expired.)

The process took several days, and what with fees for processing, and shipping my new hard-copy birth certificate, cost me about $60 "out of pocket".

There's a warning here for anyone else getting ready to retire, or to renew his/her drivers license; start early, and KNOW what documentation you need.

And there's a thought here, too: I wonder what's going to happen when President Obama has to renew his driver's license?

Professional Shooters: Part III

2011-04-03T00:25:00.000-07:00

Continuing the dialogue from Professional Shooters, Part II (comments from Hobo Brasser and Whitefish ... primarily a response to Whitefish):

Whitefish ... My original thought (not a completely contemplated proposal, I admit) was that while IPSC/USPSA was originally evolved as an "Amateur" competition, it has lately evolved to one in which "Professional Shooters" have dominated all Major competition.

A "Professional Shooter", for the purpose of argument, is one who has not only had all competitive expenses compensated by a (commercial) third party, but sufficient or a major part of his/her income derives from competition-related ... or expertise-related (eg: training classes), or professional (eg: branch of the U.S. Military which has assigned him/her to, for example, the U.S. Marksmanship Unit) ... day-to-day work to the point where we can honesly assert that their livelihood IS supported directly or indirectly by their Competitive prowness. And this support is to a greater degree incumbent upon their continuing ability to 'win' at the shooting competition defined by USPSA.

"Sufficient or Major part of his/her income" is defined as the amount which, if removed from his/her income, would require the shooter to either find another supporting source of income, or to dramatically reduce his/her life-style because residual funding is not sufficient in comparison.

Please let me know if any part of this definition does not seem reasonable to you. I'm not talking about mere "sponsorship";
_______________________________________

Whitefish, your comment was:

While it may have merit, it takes us to a whole different level of bureaucracy, which we already have plenty of. Witness our burgeoning rulebook and those infamous interpretations thereof by JA. At what point does someone become a professional? Does someone (say a company or gunsmith) giving you a gun to use constitute enough to be called a professional? How about ammo to shoot at matches and practice with or a shirt with a sponsors name on it for advertising? If you will recall a certain arrangment with STI and the open gun you have used for several years, that may constitute "being a professional". I think that is great, but it also falls in the category of be careful what you ask for!!!

_______________________________________
Point(s) well taken, and worth talking about.

First, I cannot address ANY suggestion that "J.A." may 'rule' against any change to the Classification system such as my comments may have been considered to suppose. Mr. J.A. pretty much defines the world in his own vision, and I have no idea which way he may jump on any given comment.

But let's just consider what would happen if he did NOT present himself as an active opponent to the idea, okay? Better to think about how it may come to be, rather than think about the opposition. This is still a conceptual proposition; there's room to play with it.

Here are your points of concern:

... it takes us to a whole different level of bureaucracy ...
At what point does someone become a professional?
Does someone (say a company or gunsmith) giving you a gun to use constitute enough to be called a professional?
How about ammo to shoot at matches and practice with or a shirt with a sponsors name on it for advertising?
If you will recall a certain arrangement with STI and the open gun you have used for several years, that may constitute "being a professional". I think that is great, but it also falls in the category of be careful what you ask for!!!

Let's start out talking about a "whole different level of bureaucracy...", which I think is the most important issue among your many concerns:

BUREAUCRACY, GROWTH:
In the late 1990's at the National Championship in Las Vegas, Nevada, I was approached by a match official who was also a candidate (failed, as it happens) for the USPSA Presidency. He wanted to know my thoughts about a proposed new Division, prvisionally named "Limited 10". He had a clear vision about why it should be accepted, and although he was not elected USPSA President, the concept was accepted by the USPSA Board of Directors.

At this time, we have Six Divisions:

Open
Limited
Limited 10
Production
Single Stack
Revolver

I bring to your attention that HALF of these divisions (Limited 10, Production, and Single Stack) have been instigated since that match. It's clear to me that USPSA leadership has no problems with initiating new Divisions, as long as it provides new options which are attractive to increased membership.

It occurs to me that the prospect of NOT being compared to "Professional Shooters" may be attractive to the "amateurs" among us.

Perhaps I have not given sufficient attention to the concept of adding a new divisory unit which differentiates PROFESSIONAL shooters from AMATEUR shooters, and I don't know (although I suspect not) that this should become a new Division. Probably, it would have to be hierarchically rated somewhere above DIVISION. (Forgive me for the stilted construct; I am, after all, a Geek!

While we're only talking about it, I don't much car what name you call it. Heirarchicaly, I see it looking like this:

(UNKNOWN CATAGORIZATION) ("Status?"): Amateur (Professional)
...........Division (Open, Limited, Limited 10, Production, Single-stack, Revolver)
....................Class (GM, M, A, B, C, D, unclassified)

The current breakdown:
...........Division (Open, Limited, Limited 10, Production, Single-stack, Revolver)
....................Class (GM, M, A, B, C, D, unclassified)
You can see the hierarchical structure. While Amateur/Open would not compete against Professional/Open, the Match Winner (in a major match) would be the same regardless of ... let's call it "Status"

Wouldn't it be wonderfully kewl to see a match where an Amateur won against a Professional? Wouldn't it be more meaningful?

Okay, so let's use this as a springboard, and take your issues point-by-point:

... it takes us to a whole different level of bureaucracy

I think we have already addressed the issue of "bureaucracy". In the past 13 years, USPSA has demonstrated a readiness to increase the bureaucracy needed to support a dramatic increase in the number of "Divisions". If it were to accept a new separation between PROFESSIONAL and AMATEUR, it would require a certain amount of redesign for the computer system to accommodate a new primary hierarchical definition, but the actual bureaucratic impact is yet to be determined.

At what point does someone become a professional?

How about ammo to shoot at matches and practice with or a shirt with a sponsors name on it for advertising?

I think this is one of the following 3 questions can be answered all at the same time.

The new definition of "Professional" vs "Amateur" would be based on remuneration over and above purely competition-related expenses. That is to say, it would provide (in some manner, yet to be determined) for the recipient to be able to compete as a "Professional" without need for a "second job" to provide for more than optional funding. That is to say: you can quit your "day job" and still suffer not significant lowering in your previously-established standard of living.

Does someone (say a company or gunsmith) giving you a gun to use constitute enough to be called a professional?

See above: could you quit your day job?

If you will recall a certain arrangment with STI and the open gun you have used for several years, that may constitute "being a professional". I think that is great, but it also falls in the category of be careful what you ask for!!!

See above: there's no WAY I could quit my day job based upon this personal accommodation! This suggestion may be something less than the precise definition of mere hyperbole, but it is something more than the suggestion that it would constitute the status of a "Professional Shooter.

An allegory would be a sales representative who would be hired to represent a commercial company at a competitive event; the sales representative would have use of the equipment, but there would no expected (nor material) 'other' remuneration regardless of the place of finish; nor would continued 'favor' be based upon the competitive excellence displayed, or not displayed.

I realize that here you are not making an attempt to establish a Quid Pro Quo, but only exploring the boundaries of the discussion. Please be aware that this extension of the discussion is not only not on point, but is also personally objectionable. (This is like flunking your match semi-final; it doesn't determine your final grade for the term, but it bodes ill.)

The Bottom Line:
It's quite likely that I have not provided a good, definitive description of The Professional Shooter. I accept the criticism, and I only suggest that it is a ripe field for further discussion.

We aren't quite certain how to define the Professional Shooter, but in a small way (and forgive me for the comparison) somewhat about the Supreme Court Judge when, asked how to define Pornography, said: "I'm not sure how to define it, but I know it when I see it".

You and I, my friend, have watched Professional Shooters at USPSA (IPSC, before that) for YEARS. They are the ones who get special attention, special favors from ... well, from Range Officers at Major Matches ... for example.

At a 1990+ National Match in Oregon, I watched a World Champion Grandmaster argue a Range Master into declaring that an obvious A-hit/miss into a "Perfect Double". I'm sure this happens, but I'm not convinced that it happened in this case. The point is, the competitor was a definitive Professional Shooter ... and he got preferential treatment which you or I would NEVER have been accorded.

The next year, I saw the same World Champion Grandmaster at a Charity Match (but a major match, none-the-less), where at the Chronograph stage his load was determined to be Minor Power. He had one round left, and his was the choice whether to re-weight the bullet or take a final shot over the chronograph to determine velocity.

He asked "Let me look at my gun", and his request was acquiesced by the match official. The World Champion Grandmaster then OILED THE BARREL of his gun, and returned it for the final chronograph shooting. It showed up marginally above Major Power velocity (for the measured bullet weight), and all of his scores were subsequently scored as Major Power

I do not know if that person's "perfect double" was a double, or an alpha/mike shot.

Nor do I know if his final shot velocity (in the other match) was influenced by the oiled barrel. (Full Disclosure: in fact, I had been careful myself, to clean and oil the barrel of my own pistol; but this was before I went to the Chronograph Stage, as it had been my practice to do so before every stage because I know I was loading with the minimal power charge to make Major.)

However, I found myself resentful that this action was taken outside the normal practices; when you submit your gun and ammunition for chronograph, it is not typical that you are allowed to make changes in either in the middle of Choreographing your ammunition.

I realize the all of the last few paragraphs sound like Sour Grapes, but in fact it is evidence of "his" unofficial protests to the normal match events being accepted where in similar circumstances "my" similar protests, if I was sufficiently bold to make them, would probably be rejected out of hand.

Professional Shooters not only have an advantage in the support the receive in fiduciary matters, but they also may receive preferences in Match Administration matters. Whether this is evidence that Match Officials are intimidated by Professional Shooters ("He is so good, he doesn't NEED to argued that he couldn't possibly have missed the target!") or not, I personally find it unacceptable that I must compete .. if only in my Classifier scores comparison .. with Professional Shooters. They have the skill, they have the experience ... and they arguably have the influence in several ways over me. And over you, probably.

Why should Amateurs compete against Professionals?

Is it because it would be too "difficult" for USPSA to define a separate group: "Professional Shooter"?

I don't think so. USPSA hasn't weighed in on this question, but if they were reluctant, when closely pressed, I would think it would be because of laziness.

This is NOT the impression I have received of USPSA. over the decades they have administered my competition.

I think we should bring the situation to their attention; make them aware that we are serious about this differentiation; and allow them to address it as they see fit.
x

Professional Shooters: Part II

2011-04-03T00:17:00.000-07:00

The Hobo Brasser (216.105.75.114)
Skeet shooting went downhill when they divided it up into so many classes that one could not hope to recoup your entry fees even by winning a high overall in a guage. It just got too big and the overhead was too high. A major match like the USPSA Nationals now costs almost $300 dollars to shoot. This is all ready too high IMHO. Lets leave it alone.

Yesterday, 3:40:02 PM

– Like – Reply – Edit – Moderate

jerrydgeek (24.20.226.106)
We got to this point in IPSC/USPSA in 1998-1999, when we (USPSA members) were torn about whether to add a New Division: Limited 10. I recall being at the Nationals in Las Vegas, and being approached by "a candidate for the USPSA Presidency" (who shall remain nameless) who seemed to thing that this was the "make or break" decision for USPSA.

Subsequent history? We not only added Limited-10, but also Production Divisions. And the consensus seems to be thta we have improved the sport.

I'm not saying that the analogy between USPSA and Skeet Shooting is inapplicable. I'm only saying that USPSA has chosed "The Road Less Travelled", and now Production Division is often more 'higly subscribed' than that division which had earlier been described as The Road to the Future.

New ideas are difficult to accept. I don't much like "change" myself. But Benjamin Franklin, when asked what value could be found in a New Invention, replied: "What use is a new-born baby".

We don't know what adventures, what advantages the road ahead may hold for us. And until we allow it room to grow, we probably never will.

Yesterday, 11:50:30 PM

– Like – Reply – Edit – Moderate

Whitefish (75.94.54.221)
While it may have merit, it takes us to a whole different level of bureaucracy, which we already have plenty of. Witness our burgeoning rulebook and those infamous interpretations thereof by JA. At what point does someone become a professional? Does someone (say a company or gunsmith) giving you a gun to use constitute enough to be called a professional? How about ammo to shoot at matches and practice with or a shirt with a sponsors name on it for advertising? If you will recall a certain arrangment with STI and the open gun you have used for several years, that may constitute "being a professional". I think that is great, but it also falls in the category of be careful what you ask for!!!

I've tried 3 times to reply to this: I can't meet the 3000 word limit that the commenting softwary includes as a restriction. I'll make this a separate, now article. Suffice it to say .. there are other issues than "The Grown of Burearucracy" which may be related to this major change in USPSA organization.

Introduction to USPSA: April, 2011

2011-04-02T20:21:00.001-07:00

Thursday night (March 31), I realized that I didn't know whether or not there were any students pre-registered in the Intro class for Saturday, so I emailed Mac asking whether I should show up or not.

Friday, I received a response saying that he had received an inquiry from one person:
"Bernie".

Also, my in-basket included a CC from Bernie confirming that he wanted to take the class, and offering both email and phone contact information.

I phoned Bernie "after dinner" (6:45pm in any self-respecting Oregon home, although not in mine) and confirmed that he did intend to take the course. I sent him an email with the basic information .. known as "The Boilerplate". That included an invitation to "... bring your friends, bring your family ...", so when I showed up at the range Saturday afternoon Bernie met me at the gate and said he had brought his friend Tim.

Tim seemed reasonable conversant with basic gun-handling concepts, even though he announced that he had only bought his pistol a short time ago. He mentioned that he had qualified with pistols in the military; that seemed to be "a good start", if not a guaranteed of advanced techniques. I accepted him as a student with few questions.

We moved down to Bay 7, and about the time we were starting to do our classroom segment, David showed up. He said he had been trying to work the class into his schedule for "a long time", but this was the first date he had been able to attend. He informed us that he had been competing in Speed Steel for some time, so I accepted this as verifying his basic gun-handling skills.

We got through the preface, started working through the test that they had (well, Bernie and Tim) downloaded from the Internet, and another student showed up: Juan.

Juan didn't profess to have any specific pertinent experience in gun-handling. Even though he had not been vetted by Mike McCarter, who usually handles and unknown or "marginal" entries to the class, I instinctively liked him because his calm and confident demeanor. I accepted him into the class anyway.

So I had one person with demonstrated skills-sets; one with only a recommendation from Mac; one with no demonstrable background at all; and one who admitted he has a new pistol with which he has not experience.

To my not-so-special surprise, all four of them managed to endure the next few hours of instruction and testing with .. perhaps no errors, but they all demonstrated good judgment even when the Feces hit the Rotary Air Conditioning.

It's a general statement that people who want to take this class usually have more experience and/or better judgment when it comes to gun-handling skills than the average man in the street. This is not universally true, and my experience in the past before Mac assumed the responsibility for vetting prospective students was sometimes unpleasantly surprising; still, 3 out of 4 participants were this week accepted although they had not necessarily demonstrably met the minimal qualifications.

We are, after all, an Equal Opportunity Gun Club. And I don't even have a bullet-proof vest.
But then, being in charge of the class allows me to exert the ultimate control of the class, shooters and stages; I have the authority to refuse further training on anyone who doesn't meet my standards. I've not had to exercise that yet; although the day the lady pointed a pistol at my belly while we were chatting at the safety table did give me a moment of retrospect about my decision to accept the trainer position. BTW, she never appeared at a match. Perhaps she realized independently that she didn't have the proper mindset to do "run-'n-gun" with live ammunition.

Anyway ....

Amazing that 24 hours before I thought I had no students, and now I had four. Even more amazing considering the the temperature at 1pm was 46 degrees and there was a strong wind bring an uncomfortable wind-chill factor into the equation.

These guys were really interested. What with the recap for slightly late-arriving Juan, and considering that at least one of them had neither red the manual or completed the test, the one-hour classroom session took us an extra 30 minutes over the scheduled time.

Then it took another 20 minutes to raid the prop room and set up the basic stave construction for the "Live Fire" exercises. By the time we started working on them, we were 47 minutes behind schedule.

I talked fast, but these guys were sharp and motivated; they asked intelligent questions in class, not all of which they may have need had everyone completed the preparatory material. However, they were all quick-witted and nobody asked a 'dumb question'. (I don't know what that is, except that my impression is that a "dumb question" is the one which is not asked. I was glad that I had already invited them to interrupt my presentation if they had questions; that allows me to respond with information which they really need.)

So, we got into the Live Fire portion a little late, and as a consequence when we got down to the end of the hard-wired syllabus, they were all willing to stay a little late so they could get the "extra credit" stage. Today, that included an impromptu stage teaching advanced topics such as "strings" in a stage, and "Strong-hand/Weak-hand" target engagement.

Everyone voted to stick around for that exercise, and I was impressed at how well they performed. At least one student told me that he had very little experience shooting handguns; no experience in competitions; and in fact he had just bought the handgun he expected to use "a few weeks ago" (a Beretta 92, which he discover was too large-framed for his hands).

But that wasn't the most notable moment of the class.

Teaching Moments:
I try to emphasize to these class attendees that there are some things in Practical Pistol Competition which are not intuitively obvious, and these will lead to moments of confusion or dismay in which they will doing something "not in their best interest". Also, that if there is an "extreme sport" version of competitive shooting, it is in Action Shooting (Practical Pistol, Multigun, 3-gun, etc.) In order to help them understand how actions which they take without thinking may lead to disaster, I describe at least a couple of things they need to think about.

During cold-weather months, almost everyone shows up with jackets, sweatshirts, and long-tailed shirts. I make a point of explaining that when they shoot a stage, they would be best served if they remove their coats/jackets before coming up to The Line. If they have a top which hangs outside their belt they must be absolutely certain that they holster their pistol carefully; if a shirt, jacket or sweater is hanging loosely about their waist, that material may be inadvertently scrunched between their pistol and the belt. In that case, if they (for instance) raise their arms above their head, the material may drag the pistol up out of the holster far enough that the pistol will fall on the ground.

The class, as seems reasonable, pretty much ignored this. All of my classes ignore this, because I give them a lot of advice and it becomes "Information Overload". (Think: "This guy is over-teaching, and it's not gonna happen to me because he's a worry-wort and I KNOW how to shoot .. he has nothing important to tell me.")

You can buy them books, but you can't make them read.

Five minutes after we had established the range props and targets, I was explaining the first exercise when I hear the clatter of a pistol hitting the concrete pad on the covered bay. Glancing to the side, I see a small Glock on the pad, and a very worried student wondering how the hell he's going to survive this Teaching Moment.

One of the other scenarios we had discussed was --- dropped gun. Drop your gun on the range while you're shooting a stage: definitive DQ. Drop your gun while you're smokin' and jokin' with your buddies in the Squad Area, you're okay as long as you do NOT touch the gun! That's "handling a firearm", and Match DQ."

Definite Teaching Moment. I've told them that their primary concern is the same as the Eddy Eagle Program:

Stop!
Don't Touch!
Call an Adult!

Or in IPSC terms: protect the gun, and call a Range Officer.

I got everyone uprange of the gun (even if I had to push them), looked at the gun in situ, rotated it downrange so it wasn't pointing at anyone. Then I picked up the gun, cleared it (unloaded, of course), called the owner over and handed it to him with the instruction to "unload and show clear; hammer down; holster".

End of lesson, except explaining how it illustrated one warning (don't let your clothing bind your pistol in the holster) and one Safety Rule ( don't touch a downed gun).

I have to say, this was the first time that this particular warning was so graphically illustrated. It was almost as valuable as the time in an earlier class when a Demonstrator I had shanghaied to help me with the class tripped during a Course of Fire ... and was NOT DQ'd because he "did everything right".

Full Disclosure: since I shot my first match in 1983, I have NEVER seen anyone drop his gun on a concrete floor in the Squad Area because when he raised his arm his shirt-tail pull his gun out of his holster. But I've seen less demonstrative incidents related to this phenomena, and I always knew it was just a matter of "when", not "if". And no, it's not that the student was especially negligent. He just did what a lot of people do without thinking. I can guarantee that nobody in THIS class holstered a pistol without checking whether his clothing was trapped between his pistol and his holster; and none of them will ever again holster a pistol without making that check.

LIVE-FIRE:
When we actually started shooting, we discovered that there were two other issues which had not been clear -- or, having been clear, not immediately loaded in the Hind-Brain so it would never happen:

Keep your finger off the trigger when you are loading/unloading, clearing a jam, or moving; this is a Safety Issue and may lead to a Match Disqualification (DQ);
When you are done with the Course of Fire, and the Range Officer give the command "If clear, hammer down, holster", you should do exactly that ... paying close attention to maintaining control of your firearm and NOT "sweeping" yourself. THEN you can worry about picking up your dropped magazine, your unfired/ejected round, and your brass; and if you didn't perform according to your self-imposed standard you are free to beat your head against the Bianchi Barricade. In the meantime, listen to your RO and do exactly what he tells you to do; nothing more, nothing less.

When they violated a safety rule, I stopped them and announced that they had just been DQ'd. Then I let them continue.

One student was "DQ'd" twice during the same stage; once for leaving his finger on the trigger during a reload, and the second for leaving his finger on the trigger during Unload And Show Clear.

Other areas which need work:
Very few areas here, as this was an exceptional class. The single most frequent recurring problem, other than leaving your finger on the trigger during loading/unloading, movement, and clearing a jam was that students sometimes forgot to reload when a mandatory reload was part of the Stage Procedures.

Then, we announced it to everyone in the class. Reinforcing the lesson is embarrassing when you are the subject of The Teaching Moment, but it tends to help you remember The Thing You Did Wrong. Calling attention to a failure to perform a mandatory reload, for example, is part of emphasizing the "per-shot" penalties which are imposed when you forget to reload when the Stage Procedures tell you that you must do so.

Other than that, the relatively minor problems which were demonstrated during the class were no different than any other class. These included: not knowing what to do when you performed a mandatory reload, so you racked the slide "anyway" thereby discarding a round from your gun; at the beginning of the stage, forgetting what the Starting position was and therefore assuming it was the same as a previous stage (e.g. "surrender position"); and at one point during the Live Fire exercise, slowing down to look at the gun to determine what "condition" it was in. *(Is the safety On, or Off; and should the safety be On or Off?)*

IPSC competition is very different from the usual "going to the range with your pals, and handling the guns indifferently at the counter in front of the range". When we shoot with our friends, and we either aren't aware of the Safety Regulations or we assume that they don't apply here, we tend to develop bad habits. Breaking these Bad Habits is one of the un-announced primary purposes of USPSA training.

PENALTIES:
In a way, embarrassing a student because he demonstrates gun-handling habits which are entirely comfortable to him when he's shooting casually with his friends, but In Real Life (i.e. contrary to the rules of safe gun-handling), seems cruel. On the other hand, one of my common practices is to inform the students at the beginning of the class that ... one major reason for the class is to ensure that they are all sufficiently aware of the difference between "safe" and "not safe" handling. Why do I care? Because someday I may squad with them, and I only want to squad with Safe Shooters.

I want them to be safe because I expect to squad with them. And I don't want to get shot.

So I do not allow my natural disinclination to embarrass them prevent me from making a MAJOR POINT OF IT when they violate a safety rule.

My job here is to acquaint and familiarize them with the rules, especially those rules concerning safe gun-handling, and when they perform an unsafe act I intend to do whatever is necessary to reinforce the concept: they just did something "unsafe", and If This Was A Real Match you would be DQ'ed.

And if I say it loud enough, the other members of the class will somehow register it in their minds that this is something that IPSC shooters take very seriously. They should avoid it, if only to avoid personal embarrassment. Sweeping; Finger on the trigger; breaking the 180; dropped gun; and all of the other naughty things that one might do during a USPSA match.

In fact, I have compiled a "Seven Deadly Sins" list of DQ-able offenses, and I have recently started to include that in my regular syllabus. Those "Seven Deadly Sins" include most of the Safety Failures which I teach to my students as UNACCEPTABLE:

MUZZLE: don't break the 180 degree demarcation between a "safe" zone where you can point your gun, and where you cannot point your gun safely.
FINGER: Keep your finger off the trigger when you are (1: moving except no more than one step, or when you are actively engaging targets), and (2: when you are reloading, unloading, clearing a jam).
SWEEPING: Do not allow the muzzle to point toward any part of your body ... sweeping during holstering/drawing/bagging has special circumstances.
Dropped Gun: If you drop your gun during a Course of Fire, it is a DQ. Special circumstances if you "ground" your gun while recovering from a prone position, etc. If you drop your gun not during a Course of Fire (e.g., while you are observing or out of the shooting area), it is not a DQ unless you touch your gun except under the direct and specific supervision of a Range Office.
D&D: "Drunk and Disorderly": "DRUNK" specifically includes "under the influence" (alcohol or other drugs, even if prescribed by your physician), especially they if they undermine your judgment, ability to perform safely, etc. "Disorderly" specifically refers to Unsportsmanlike conduct such as arguing with the RO in an unseemly or profane manner.
Over The Hill: specifically refers to "negligent discharges", and other incidents which may be loosely grouped under this sometime-vague umbrella (note: the rules may not be all that vague, but is sometimes a 'judgmental' definition).
Cheating: Refers to claiming exceptions to the rules which are defined elsewhere. Example: deliberately dropping "eye or hearing protection", which is required -- and accidental loss requires a mandatory reshoot. ( "Unsportsmanlike Conduct" overlaps with #5: D&D.)

SUMMARY:
As usual, many of these issues and points of interest overlap with comments I have made in previous articles referring to the "Intro to USPSA" classes which I have been privileged to teach. For those comments which are obviously redundant, I apologize; it was not my purpose to bore you with meaningless repetition.

It's just my way.

However, in EVERY class I learn something new. Sometimes it's something ... some incident or occurrence which may be a new version, or reinforces something I have observed before and am astonished to see that it remains no matter how I change the course syllabus to emphasize recurring issues. Sometimes it's something that has been mentioned before, but is reinforced by an actual re-enactment of what had previously been nothing more than a precautionary note. (Case in point: clothing jammed between holster and pistol results in a "dropped gun:"; or, how the competitor should respond to the situation, and how they may expect the RO to deal with the situation.)

If you aren't interested in an ongoing litany of "How Things Can Go Wrong", it's easy to avoid any future re-visitation to this kind of article. Just ignore any post labeled "Intro to USPSA".

On the other hand, I think it's interesting to note the kind of situation which many of us who are more experienced just -- take for granted. Yet new shooters provide a prolific field of errors and misunderstandings which may help the rest of us to re-visit our gun-handling practices.

If it saves just one ~~child~~ Range Officer ....

Japanese Schoolgirls - NSFW

2011-04-02T19:32:00.000-07:00

Nipponese Swing - Freaking Wild!

Another H/T to G-Man.

And NSFW doesn't mean "Not Safe For Work" here; instead, it means "Nipponese Swing ... Freaking Wild!"

"SING SING SING", that great Benny Goodman hit was ... Too hot to trot! (The Swing Girls don't even have a Clarinetist.) I've already watched it 3 times, and I'm not including the link for your benefit, but for mine; I wanna go back and watch it again and again. Wonderful performance of Le Jazz Hot. (Here's how Benny Goodman did it.)

The link takes you to some really "I feel The Need ... The Need To Speed" video. There are lots more where that came from; search YouTube for " . Unfortunately, they(whomever published the "Swing Girls" videos on YouTube) requested that embedding be disabled for this video. What a great loss for Jazz Lovers.

One of the videos which was NOT "disabled" was their treatment of Glenn Miller's "In The Mood", which was not one of their best. Their performance was desultory, not showing the energy which the 'disabled' videos allowed. They did all the technical things, but it didn't demonstrate the enthusiasm which they demonstrate in their best performances.`

I saw music from Glenn Miller, the Dorsey Brothers, and Duke Ellington played much better. It's a disservice to people who want to see more that they didn't allow their "best" to be embedded. (Incidentally, the RAF Band did "In The Mood" in the same way that The Glenn Miller Band did ... more upbeat. Even if the British musicians in their performance looked like aging sourpusses (which the Swing Girls apparently considered the be the audience of the Glenn Miller classic to be the same kind of aging sourpusses.) It may be that the conductor slowed down the tempo because of perceived limitations of the performers, but the Swing Girls may have shown as much enthusiasm if he had allowed them to play it at Full Speed.

They did "Take the A-Train" well, for example (with a guest First Sax, and "embedding disabled" -- sorry), but they seemed to be walking through it. (Also, the first trumpet player hit a couple of flat notes. It happens.) If it's not Rock and Roll tempo, it's just another day at work. Well done, of course, but ... when they get the stuff they like to do, they show The Flash what should happen when he says "FLAME ON!"

Their performance of "Moonlight Serenade" was well done, although the arrangement they were given may not have been hot enough for them.

If you want to see more of them, search YouTube for "First & Last Concert2004".

All of these numbers were apparently in a movie titled "The Swing Girls". My guess is that the flat notes and pedestrian numbers reflect their original bad attitude: IMDB description of the show:

A tale of delinquent and lazy school girls. In their efforts to cut remedial summer math class, they end up poisoning and replacing the schools brass ban

Well, that will sour the performance.

Bob Hope Christmases with the troops

2011-03-31T21:05:00.000-07:00

Bob Hope Christmases with the troops

I served my time, but I was never privileged to see a Bob Hope show. (We generally got Philippine Rock Bands, and we were glad to see them ... except for the Female Impersonators, but that's another story).

Thanks to Gary the G-man, we have the link to this short video.

Nobody who has ever been in this situation will ever deny that Bob Hope was A Great Man.

(Ten Minutes of Nostalgia. Worth the watch, if only for the chicks. And thank you again, Gary.)