98.6

It's  hot here.

"How hot is it, Johnny?"

"Too Darn Hot to be running around in a gravel-surfaced pistol range, Doc!"

Last year I changed my "Introduction to USPSA" schedule from 3 hours to four hours, because it was impossible to cover all the necessary material: there are often one or two participants who need more training in Gun-Handling skills than may be provided in a three-hour class.

And I changed the hours from 1pm to 4pm, to Noon to 4pm.   More daylight in the cold season, and it gets us off the range 'earlier' in the hot season.

This is, officially, "The Hot Season" here in Oregon.

It's 6pm as I write this, and the ambient temperature is .. you guessed it .. ninety-eight point six degrees.

Since it was easily 100 degrees on the training bay, I closed the class at 3:30pm so we could all get out of the heat.   Not just because of my concern for the welfare of my students, but I announced that my eyeballs were drying up.  And actually, they were.  I hydrated myself well (drank two bottles of water from 12pm to when we quit) but the glare on the gravel-surfaced bay acted as a reflector, so the accumulative heat was beyond the safety margin that I had established for myself and the students.

We still managed to get the basics covered, and even did the final exercise ("El President") where I recorded time and scores, and used that to demonstrate how Hit Factors are used to determine where each competitor placed in a given stage.

And we did "Mandatory Reloads", "Transitioning Between Targets" ("close" and "far"), "Steel Targets vs Paper Targets".

One of my students was kind enough to (inadvertently) NOT seat her magazine firmly in her pistol,, and when she turned to me for advice I informed her:
"It's your gun.  The clock is still running".   She finally realized the cause of the problem, applied the solution, and got back into the game.

 I let her complete the stage with benefit of instruction (but with the timer still running) so she could demonstrate the "Tap/Rap/Bang" clearance drill in real time, and we discussed the three kinds of malfunction ("Stovepipe", "Tap/Rap/Bang", and "Failure To Feed").

(This "Failure To Feed" malfunction is when a round .. usually the first in a reload magazine ...can best be resolved by dumping the magazine, the round which is jamming the slide, and loading a new magazine after which you trombone the slide to chamber the top round in the new magazine; when you struggle to make the 'old' magazine work it takes more time than this 'immediate action drill'.)

We even did the exercise where I have students shoot paper targets up close, then move to another shooting box and engage steel; that provides them the opportunity to judge when they can emphasize speed in addressing targets  vs when they need to focus on accuracy.

Another of my students was kind enough to demonstrate the fallacy of performing a reload during "Dead Time" (movement), when he had two rounds in his magazine and moved to engage a Pepper Popper and a U.S. Popper;  he missed both shots, and had to do a standard reload in his single-stack 1911.  [When asked, he said he was "trying to save time by not doing a reload"; he admitted that, in retrospect, that was a 'poor economy' considering that it cost him over 5 seconds to realize he needed to reload, cursed himself under his breath, complete the standing reload and get back to the business of engaging targets.  It only took him 2 shots to knock down both steel targets at 35 yards].

But the part that is most interesting to the students comes after we have completed all the Standard Exercises and invite them to design their own shooting problems.  We just didn't have time to do that.

I regret that the participants didn't have the opportunity to test their acuity in some of the more complex drills.  They were all bright, attentive and SAFE shooters, and none of the three students made the same mistake twice.

 Also, I regret that I didn't have time to even mention "Strong Hand Only" and "Weak Hand Only", let alone give them a chance to see how it feels.

One of the students had only brought 100 rounds to the class, and he was running low on ammunition, so I didn't really feel that anyone was ... you know ... shorted in their instruction.  Still, although everyone seemed to be enjoying themselves, I know that there was more I could have taught them,

About "El Presidente":

Katie Couric "Apologizes" with Second Misleading Edit, Doubling Down

Katie Couric "Apologizes" with Second Misleading Edit, Doubling Down: Katie Couric “Apologizes” with Second Misleading Edit, Doubling Down



I have NO idea whether this source is legitimate, whether this photo is representative, or even if it is Katie Couric.

But it's a helluva photo, don't you think?

To be perfectly candid, if it IS couric and it IS legitimate .. way to go Girl!

I may not agree with your politics, but I do admire your Chutzpah.

"Going To The Bullet Box"

WTF, Larry, were you thinking?

 Larry Pratt, the executive director emeritus of Gun Owners of America, said on his “Gun Owners News Hour” radio program this weekend that if a Democrat wins the White House and the Supreme Court starts issuing decisions in favor of gun regulations, conservatives may turn to the “bullet box” to rectify the situation.

What does "Going To The Bullet Box" mean?

I doubt that Mr. Pratt intended a threat.

I think he 'mis-spoke' on a talk show where one makes statements "off the cuff" which would have been phrased differently in an essay.   It's subject to personal interpretation; some of which may be accusatory.

Pratt may seem to have subtly offered violence to those who do not support his political views.  I'm morally certain that this was NOT Mr. Pratt's intention.  He wasn't making a call for a civil war.

He may have been trying to notify a presumptive Democratic Administration that gun-owners will 'stringently' oppose attempts to undermine our Second Amendment Rights.

By peaceful measures.  
The preferred method of protesting laws which contravene the obvious intent of the Second Amendment involve, primarily, "nonviolent civil disobedience". 

"I Will Not Comply" is one of the more recent methods (within this century) of Civil Disobedience.

When firearms owners are confronted by onerous and anti-constitutional measures (such as limitations on "high capacity magazines" or "assault weapons" or "Registration", they often quietly fail to register their guns, or turn in their magazines.

If it's not obvious, this approach is analogous ( if not the same ) as Ghandi's "Non-Violent Civil Disobedience" (see link above) which this Indian Saint used during the transition in India from British to "Indigenous" political control of one of the most populous nations in the world.

Acknowledging that interpretations of the Second Amendment by its advocates includes accepting the right of civilians to possess arms to resist a Totalitarian Government, most of 'us' (gun owners) don't really expect that the Constitutional rights will be repealed.   Yes, we have concerns that oure rights will be 'chipped away' by niggling little rules and regulations .. often on a states' level .. with future Supreme Court interpretations.

Yes, we are concerned that a Democratic Administration will nominate and seat Supreme Court Judges who are unfriendly to the Second Amendment.

And yes, we do not trust a Democratic Administration to hold the Second Amendment in the same reverence as we do.   A political philosophy which dismisses the Constitution as a "living document" is subject to the whims of an ungrateful nation.

But ...  "Going To The Bullet Box"?

That's not a Threat.
That's Rhetoric.

Why I Am Not A Libertarian

Gary Johnson tossed rival Austin Peterson's gift of George Washington's replica pistol in trash - Washington Times:

Mr. Petersen tearfully presented Mr. Johnson with the pistol as a symbol of party unity during the Libertarian Party convention in Orlando, Florida, Fox News reported. “You have my sword, and you have my gun,” he said, as the nominee accepted the gift. Fox News reported that Mr. Johnson then “unceremoniously chucked it in the garbage can.”

So much for "party unity".  Or mutual respect.Or self respect.  Or respect at all.

<== LIBERTARIAN PARTY

 Or the facade of being better than Liberals.

" ... THEN THEY CAME FOR ME ..."

"... and there was nobody left to speak for me."

California isn't satisfied with trashing the Second Amendment; now they're going after the First Amendment as well.

Landmark California bill would allow prosecution of climate-change skeptics - Washington Times:

This arbitrary, unilateral attack on the Bill of Rights comes to you courtesy of Liberal Theology.

The title and lead quote, of course, are a satirical paraphrase of Pastor  Martin Niemöller.    See the full quote at The Holocaust Encyclopedia.

But .. but .. it said "Thirty Eight"!

Bank Robber Loaded The Wrong Ammunition In His Gun... - Gunmart Blog

Investigators are still puzzled as to how Frost knew the exact moment when the teller would have $90,000 sitting out for him to snatch. They said it was very likely Frost tried to fire his .38 caliber Derringer during the robbery, because when they examined the weapon, they saw the firing pin had been struck. Frost had loaded .380 ammunition into the weapon.

Please, God, don't make Dumb Crooks smart.
The world would be a much less entertaining place to live without Dumb Crooks! 
I can hear Jeff Cooper laughing in his catacomb, all the way from Arizona.  
Or where-ever.

The Mediocre Middle

Sometimes when I write, I paint myself in a corner; and I don't know how to get out of it.

"Let me be the best of the worst, or the last of the first, but God save me from the Mediocre middle!" - me

Recently I made a remark which prompted an interesting response in the comments:

Trumps support for the 2nd Amendment is just a pose. He's not "for" the 2nd; he's "against Hillary".

Archer said...

Whatever position she takes, he takes the diametrically opposite political position.That's a dangerously risky (yes, I know that's redundant) way to run a campaign.It's very simple: By setting himself up to be the polar opposite of his opponent, The Donald is letting Hillary set his position on everything. Hillary's campaign could capitalize on that, if she or her advisers are clever enough.

May 31, 2016 4:37 PM

I must (reluctantly) agree

The Good Lord knows I hate politics, and I detest politicians; anyone who actively seeks public office is obviously unqualified.  But there are times when you just have to do the best you can with your single vote.  What do you do when you face the prospect of choosing between two extreme candidates, and you despise them both?

And has there ever been a more polarizing Presidential Election?

We are faced with choosing between the Queen of Lies, and the King of Kerfuffle.   Neither is qualified, neither is appealing (except to radicals on both sides of the political spectrum), so what are those of us who are not willing to vote the Straight Party Ticket to do?

We can vote our conscience, but my conscience dislikes both of them.

TRUMP: an obvious opportunist whose radical view on civil rights are suspect at best ... but 'claims' to support the Second amendment.

CLINTON: a radical liberal who is making political hay on her promise to impose radical Gun Control measures.

Who do we believe? 

I believe Clinton:  Yes she DOES want to 'take our guns away".
Not by deleting the 2nd amendment, but by undermining constitutional affirmations such as the Heller decision (which affirms the right of simple firearms possession to Americans.).

No, I do not believe Trump's promise to protect the Second Amendment, because he's just another arrogant asshole who seeks office for personal aggrandizement.  (Oh, aren't they all?)

Bottom Line is ...

We know that Hillary has made a campaign promise which she WILL make good, if elected.

We think hope that Trump is sincere in his support for the Constitution, and since Liberal Democrats (I'm pretty sure there are two or three of them in America) are against that particular Amendment, the choice seems to be a "no-brainer'.

But does Trump truly intend to  protect the Second Amendment?  (Tump releases his plan)

If we are reduced to believing the promises of a Presidential Candidate, we are screwed.

Sometimes, it seems that the best vote we can register, is not to vote at all.  This is true, at least, if we have no confidence in our candidates.




How about a nice game of chess?

LATER:

Politics is a game, but abdicating the responsibilities of citizenship is NOT the way to play it.

The best you can do is to vote your conscience.  Win, lose or draw ... it's important that you make your voice heard.   Refusing to vote is the very worst option in Politics.

It's better, to vote and let it be seen that your opinion may not agree with whatever the 'popular' vote, than to allow the perception that your opinion doesn't count even to yourself.

Remember the 2000 elections, and the "Hanging Chad".

The Forgotten War: Korea

I was 8 years old in 1953 when "The Korean Conflict" (or "Police Action", etc.) ended  after 3 years of fighting, and I recall wondering why we were at war all the time.   My parents were still talking about WWII ( aka: "The War to End Wars to End Wars").  

I didn't understand then, and I don't understand now, what it was all about.  All I know about that war is from watching M*A*S*H, and some reading of military History.  No, I never understood the whole General Macarthur thing, either.   Apparently, neither does wikipedia, although they put a lot of words to describe just how much they don't understand it.

But since we're just winding down from Memorial Day, the Korean War (at which 35, 000 Americans died) seems a reasonable subject for discussion.

Fortunately, Dennis Prager has some information about what has been called "The Forgotten War".

PRAGER U: Why Did We Fight The Korean War? | The Hayride:

Here’s a must-watch video from Prager University, particularly given that we’re a day removed from Memorial Day and there are still a good many Korean War vets still living. Korea is something of a stepchild of a war according to popular history in this country; it cost the lives of 35,000 American servicemen, so you would think it would be worth paying attention to, but there are few movies made about it and little is made of it in the media outside of an occasional reference when the North Koreans act up.

and here's television:




Frankly, I prefer the television version.

(NORM!!!!)

Hear the responses to Couric's 'embarassing 9 second lapse'

Katie Couric Gun Documentary Deceptively Edited Interview:

This website at the Free Beacon provides the audio tape which fills the 9-second gap in the Couric video.

Oh, go listen .. you know you want to.

For NPR, "Gun Control" equals "KumBaya"

Hillary Clinton is now running her Presidential Campaign on the bodies of young black men.

A recent article on the National Public Radio website exemplified why it is considered so demonstrably liberal that one wonders why it is publicly funded ... by our tax money.

Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton Clash Over Gun Rights : NPR:

Here's the story of a black woman whose son was shot down

Queen Brown has told the story for years now, and it shows.
But it doesn't sound rehearsed. It sounds lived in, thought over, played on repeat over and over again. The story of her son, Eviton Elijah Brown, killed nine years ago, shot by a man Eviton didn't even know.
Eviton had been a student at Florida Agricultural and Mechanical University, or FAMU, before he was shot. He took some time off from school, to work after his girlfriend got pregnant. He was staying at home with his mother. One day, after a long double shift driving trucks, Eviton came home, exhausted.
His mother made him one of his favorite meals: a fried egg, cooked medium, with garlic powder on top, and some bagels, toasted in the oven. Then Queen Brown stepped out to run an errand. She would never see her son alive again. That would be the last meal she'd ever make for him.
"My son was tired when he died," Brown said. "But I felt good, because he wasn't hungry."

 That's touching.  And so pertinent.  Hillary thought so, too, so she invited "Queen Brown" to her "circle of mothers".  

(Eviton Elijah Brown sounds like the salt of the earth, and he probably was a very good young man.  Searching through the internet, it's almost impossible to find the details of his death; but the text you read above is copied word for word on almost every website found after a GOOGLE search of his name.)

 Which has nothing to do either with Hillary's Election Campaign, or the song-and-dance Hillary is using him to orchestrate.  (Does anyone think that Hillary just became BFF with his mom because they happened to meet at the same aerobics class and recognized that they had so much in common?)

The Circle of Mothers schedule includes not just seminars, but an aerobics class and even two hours of "glam time." "We do a lot of hugging," Queen Brown said of the event. "We do a lot of crying. We do a lot of back rubbing. We connect with ourselves."
 Clinton is trying to draw major distinctions between herself and Donald Trump, the presumptive Republican nominee, on guns. Trump was recently endorsed by the National Rifle Association, and when receiving that endorsement, he said the Second Amendment is "under attack" and "on the ballot in November."

Actually, what Hillary is 'trying' to do, is to present herself as a person who cares.
Which is kind of a difficult balancing act, as she recently tried to convince firearms owners that she cared about them, too.

That is amazing, since there are so many things she does NOT care about!

She doesn't care about The Law which as a U.S. Senator she has been sworn to protect and defend (eg: "The Email Scandals")'

She doesn't care about her husband (eg: "The Bill Clinton Bimbo Scandals")

She doesn't care about protecting American interests and personnel (eg: "The Bengazi Scandals")

She doesn't even care about National Security (eg: "The Email Scandals")

And she doesn't care about The Constitution, (eg: "The Australian Gun Ban")

What DOES she care about?


Actually, the The Most Important Thing That Hillary Cares About. is GETTING ELECTED!!!!!

Toward that end, she will do anything, say anything, espouse any public issue which makes her seem to be A Real person, even though she is not.

Getting back to the original premise of this story, National Public Radio (our tax money at work, remember?) is working hard to get Hillary elected.  And with a clear conscience, since Hillary seems to imply that this is The Right Thing To Do.

Toward that end, they are willing to do anything, say anything, air anything which will support that purely political agenda.

See what we did there?

We just equated NPR with Hillary's Political Agenda.

Which probably doesn't come as a surprise.

SO:  As A Public Service .. we present the following instructional video for your edification.

Watch, listen, and learn.  There will be a test on your understanding, in November.





z

IS Trump a "Second Amendment Defender"?

Some hopefuls espouse the opinion that Donald Trump it the savior of the Second Amendment because he has said the things that we want to hear. Such as:

Opponents of gun rights try to come up with scary sounding phrases like “assault weapons,” “military-style weapons” and “high capacity magazines” to confuse people. What they’re really talking about are popular semi-automatic rifles and standard magazines that are owned by tens of millions of Americans. Law-abiding people should be allowed to own the firearm of their choice.

Second Amendment Voter's Guide: Trump vs. Clinton - Breitbart
Comments to the article (above) include:

• • • • • • • 
              
  • 

    
    
    
    
    
    

    van trump

    
    

    On Second Amendment rights... Trump slays Hillary.

    
    

    
    
  • 

    
    
    
    
    
    

     axle357

    
    

    on every issue Trump is miles ahead of hillary...anyone that would vote for any demarat is an anti american traitor...the dems want to destroy the country..Trump wants to save it.. › 

    
    
    
  • Wrong axle357
  • 
    
  • Trumps support for the 2nd Amendment is just a pose.  He's not "for" the 2nd; he's "against Hillary".
  • Whatever position she takes, he takes the diametrically opposite political position. (Read History)
  • 
    
  • I call that "Bold Talk for a One-eyed Fat Man", but Donald Trump is no Rooster Cogburn. 
  • 
    

And any man who thinks he can "John Wayne" himself into the white house is just an opportunistic liar.

You know, like all the other candidates for the past 50 years.