Tri-County Gun Club's monthly IPSC match today (Sunday, July 16, 2006) was officially a Classifier Match. That is, of the six stages presented, four of them were classifiers.
Ho. Hum.
Lots of people didn't show up, because (a) we had a Charity match in the Section yesterday, and (b) what fun is a classifier match?
Well, if you do it right, it can be a lot of fun.
We usually like to take a lot of pictures, but again .... B-O-R-I-N-G! Not worth the effort, unless you're the kind a guy who would shoot an unarmed man in the back (as Christopher Walken likes to say a lot in "Last Man Standing".)
Here are pictures of a few people, shot from the side, while they're shooting at Steel.
Go look at 'em (they're only 2mb files, very fast stages) while I jazz up this article with some Art.
Done? Good.
Here's scene 1 of four: Roger
Roger, you are now immortal!
Scene 2 of four: Jerry the Revolver Guy
(Great example of a fast revolver reload)
Scene 3 of four: SWMBO
Scene 4 of four: Geek
Sunday, July 16, 2006
Monday, July 10, 2006
Squad 18 Photo Status: Area 1IPSC Videos
(Time and Date have been reset to keep this at the top of the page)
UPDATE:
Monday, July 10, 2006
The rest of the Day 2 videos have been edited and added to the Day 2 album, including the rest of Stage 12 ("Crazy Eights") and all of Stage 1 ("Tunnel of WHAT?").
Still to come: Day 3.
This will probably consist mainly of (the "Dying Cochroach Stage") Stage 4, because Stages 2 ("Triple-Tap the Movers") and 3 ("Stop-Sign Targets") aren't always that exciting. That is to say, I did poorly on these stages and I can't bear to watch it too many more times.
Yes, I did make up those stage names. I like them better than the official names.
--------------------------------------------
Wednesday, June 28, 2006 11:55pm
MORE photos and edited videos have been loaded to Jerry The Geek's Video Shooting Gallery.
(June 28): ALL videos from Day 1 have been edited and added here.
(June 29): Videos from Day 2 ... stages 9, 11 and 12 have been added here.
We now return you to the show in progress
--------------------------------------------
(June 27): Area 1 match videos for Day 1 (Stages 5, 6 and 7) have been posted on Jerry The Geek's Video Shooting Gallery.
Also posted there: the only existing video (maybe) of Stage 10: Dummy Enough. This is the stage which was thrown out of the match.
Now that I have fewer "other projects" to deal with, I plan to post 4 or 5 day's stages of videos per week, working Sunday through Thursday. All videos should have been completed by July 11.
Those are all edited photos. Stage 10 is a 6mb file, and stages 5 & 6 are 4mb. Stage 7 is represented by files of no more than 2mb, and the plan is to present stages 8, 9, 11, 12, 1, 2, 3 and 4 in files of no more than 2mb. The "Short Stages" (such as Stage 3 and 4) will probably be no more than 1mb each because most shooters required less than 7 seconds to complete them.
Just thought I should let you know. If you don't care about Area 1 videos ... don't read this note.
UPDATE:
Monday, July 10, 2006
The rest of the Day 2 videos have been edited and added to the Day 2 album, including the rest of Stage 12 ("Crazy Eights") and all of Stage 1 ("Tunnel of WHAT?").
Still to come: Day 3.
This will probably consist mainly of (the "Dying Cochroach Stage") Stage 4, because Stages 2 ("Triple-Tap the Movers") and 3 ("Stop-Sign Targets") aren't always that exciting. That is to say, I did poorly on these stages and I can't bear to watch it too many more times.
Yes, I did make up those stage names. I like them better than the official names.
--------------------------------------------
Wednesday, June 28, 2006 11:55pm
MORE photos and edited videos have been loaded to Jerry The Geek's Video Shooting Gallery.
(June 28): ALL videos from Day 1 have been edited and added here.
(June 29): Videos from Day 2 ... stages 9, 11 and 12 have been added here.
We now return you to the show in progress
--------------------------------------------
(June 27): Area 1 match videos for Day 1 (Stages 5, 6 and 7) have been posted on Jerry The Geek's Video Shooting Gallery.
Also posted there: the only existing video (maybe) of Stage 10: Dummy Enough. This is the stage which was thrown out of the match.
Now that I have fewer "other projects" to deal with, I plan to post 4 or 5 day's stages of videos per week, working Sunday through Thursday. All videos should have been completed by July 11.
Those are all edited photos. Stage 10 is a 6mb file, and stages 5 & 6 are 4mb. Stage 7 is represented by files of no more than 2mb, and the plan is to present stages 8, 9, 11, 12, 1, 2, 3 and 4 in files of no more than 2mb. The "Short Stages" (such as Stage 3 and 4) will probably be no more than 1mb each because most shooters required less than 7 seconds to complete them.
Just thought I should let you know. If you don't care about Area 1 videos ... don't read this note.
Sunday, July 09, 2006
10th Annual Oregon Single Stack Tournament
It's over.
I didn't compete.
I really can't see those itty-bitty sights on The Beloved Kimber well enough to acquire an accurate sight-alignment in a competitive time, so for the first time in nine years, I didn't sign up for the Single Stack Match.
However 123 people DID, and 118 of them actually showed up to shoot.
Of course, I couldn't just ignore it, so I showed up at 8am, my cup of Dutch Brothers coffee in hand and a camera bag on my shoulder. One way or another, I was determined to shoot that match.
The FIRST thing that happened was that I stood in the Stats Shack to eat my Burger King Breakfast and watch the competitors go through the registration line to get their squad sheets, their t-shirts, their order slips for the deli-sandwich bag lunches, and their tickets for a post-match drawing of FIVE Springfield Single-Stack pistols.
The second thing I did, as soon as I dumped my breakfast bag in the trash barrel, was to wander into the path of Match Director Mike McCarter.
"Jerry", he said, "I wonder if you can help me out. We need someone with experience. Someone needs to set a few targets and then walk around the stage to see how it needs to be tweaked".
Okay, maybe I can't shoot worth a darn, but I still run a mean staplegun. I wandered over to Stage Two and found ... nobody. I did find a stage completely set up except for the targets, which were lying on the ground in front of the targets stands where they were suppose to be stapled. Picking them up, I noticed that they were all full-face targets: no hard-cover. Checking the stage setup instruction sheet, I found that 7 out of the 12 required hard-cover painting. I found Mac and asked him to unlock the paint-locker so I could get a can of black paint. He made a run, and I started using black masking tape to block out the hardcover areas of the targets.
While I was painting, Mark Kruger came into the bay and started helping. He grumbled a little when he discovered that the paint was still wet on the targets ... I was still spray-painting them as quick as I could. We finished the painting, stapled the targets as best we could (Range Master Tom Chambers stopped by long enough to mention that one of the arrays was to be engaged through a low port, so they should be set fairly close to the ground to prevent rounds directed at the targets from going over the berm.)
When we finished, we walked the course and found that the competitors could avoid stopping in at least two of the for designated shooting positions, because the arrays could be seen from the other two positions ... as well as the arrays in front of them. We dragged some more vision barriers onto the stage, until at least ONE target in each array could only be seen from each shooting position. Had we not, it's possible that someone loaded with a 10-round magazine could skip a reload. We knew that wasn't in keeping with the Spirit Of The Game.
Mark and I helped out with final setup on a couple of other stages, and then it was time for the Pre-Match Shooter Meeting.
While McCarter and Chambers addressed the shooters, I speed-marched back to my car to pick up my camera bag, folding field chair, tripod and water cooler. I made it back in time to not only film the crowd scene, but also to take photos of each stage as "establishing shots".
(IPSC stages are really boring without people in them; I hope I never need to use them. In fact, IPSC isn't much of a spectator sport and even the movies I filmed are probably of interest only to the people who were actually involved.)
After the shooting started, I wandered from stage to stage, filming at least one shooter in each stage. I didn't get all of the photos I wanted, but I got 1.5GB of still and motion pictures on most of the stages. The last of the 10 stages was a long-distance accuracy stage (a trademark of the Range Master), and I didn't bother trying to film anybody shooting it. I know a lot of people had problems with it, as you can see in the Match Results found here.
The first stage I watched was Stage 2: Setup Standards
I had wanted to film The Smurfette shooting Singlestack. I know how difficult it is to transition from Limited or Open Division to L10 or SS divisions, and I was looking forward to seeing her again because she is an entirely charming lady.
Unfortunately, the only stage I was able to film was not her best one. This video illustrates the problems when we are shooting an 'unfamiliar gun'. In fact, on this same stage, I witnessed another Master Class shouting "What's the matter? My sights are WAY off!" while he was shooting this stage.
The stage was a 26-round stage with four shooting positions, lots of targets, lots of hard-cover, and the first target array had four IPSC targets bunched around a "No-Shoot" Penalty target.
There are a lot of targets, awkward shooting positions, and most of the targets are severely restricted by either hard-cover zones painted on the targets, or penalty targets placed in close proximity. It was the first stage I helped set up at the start of the day.
The next video was somewhere in the middle of the match.
Stage 8, "Up You Go", required target engagement only from "The Ramp" or "The Platform". The competitor runs from the shooting box to a ramp, which leads to a platform. There are IPSC targets on both sides of The Ramp, and from the platform one must engage eight Pepper Poppers.
Rob does a good job on this stage, as is appropriate for a Local Hero. He wasn't entirely happy with his performance, and indeed his stage time was extended for a few makeup shots and he didn't get as many A-zone hits on the IPSC poppers as he would have preferred. But very few shooters managed this24-round stage in under 15 seconds, which included some non-productive travel time.
The final video was among the last I filmed.
Stage 2, "Triple Time" features a Texas Star and six IPSC targets. Every IPSC target must be engaged with at least 3 rounds
Since most IPSC stages only require engagement with two rounds, this is a 'play with your mind' stage. Throw in the Texas Star (I witnessed one shooter who used 3 8-round magazines to drop the 5 8" plates from the star"), and you have a lot of potential problems.
And then there is the matter of SS reloads ...
Rich (who drove down from the Seattle area to compete in this match --- we were squadded together in the Ice Cream Squad at the Area 1 match last month) encountered a common problem: the 10-round magazines often jam when reloaded in a SS pistol which has been shot empty. The slide locks back, the shooter rams another magazine into the gun, and the gun refuses to allow the slide to move forward to chamber the first round. It has happened to me many times, and it's always embarassing.
However, I've never managed to handle the situation with such penache.
I didn't compete.
I really can't see those itty-bitty sights on The Beloved Kimber well enough to acquire an accurate sight-alignment in a competitive time, so for the first time in nine years, I didn't sign up for the Single Stack Match.
However 123 people DID, and 118 of them actually showed up to shoot.
Of course, I couldn't just ignore it, so I showed up at 8am, my cup of Dutch Brothers coffee in hand and a camera bag on my shoulder. One way or another, I was determined to shoot that match.
The FIRST thing that happened was that I stood in the Stats Shack to eat my Burger King Breakfast and watch the competitors go through the registration line to get their squad sheets, their t-shirts, their order slips for the deli-sandwich bag lunches, and their tickets for a post-match drawing of FIVE Springfield Single-Stack pistols.
The second thing I did, as soon as I dumped my breakfast bag in the trash barrel, was to wander into the path of Match Director Mike McCarter.
"Jerry", he said, "I wonder if you can help me out. We need someone with experience. Someone needs to set a few targets and then walk around the stage to see how it needs to be tweaked".
Okay, maybe I can't shoot worth a darn, but I still run a mean staplegun. I wandered over to Stage Two and found ... nobody. I did find a stage completely set up except for the targets, which were lying on the ground in front of the targets stands where they were suppose to be stapled. Picking them up, I noticed that they were all full-face targets: no hard-cover. Checking the stage setup instruction sheet, I found that 7 out of the 12 required hard-cover painting. I found Mac and asked him to unlock the paint-locker so I could get a can of black paint. He made a run, and I started using black masking tape to block out the hardcover areas of the targets.
While I was painting, Mark Kruger came into the bay and started helping. He grumbled a little when he discovered that the paint was still wet on the targets ... I was still spray-painting them as quick as I could. We finished the painting, stapled the targets as best we could (Range Master Tom Chambers stopped by long enough to mention that one of the arrays was to be engaged through a low port, so they should be set fairly close to the ground to prevent rounds directed at the targets from going over the berm.)
When we finished, we walked the course and found that the competitors could avoid stopping in at least two of the for designated shooting positions, because the arrays could be seen from the other two positions ... as well as the arrays in front of them. We dragged some more vision barriers onto the stage, until at least ONE target in each array could only be seen from each shooting position. Had we not, it's possible that someone loaded with a 10-round magazine could skip a reload. We knew that wasn't in keeping with the Spirit Of The Game.
Mark and I helped out with final setup on a couple of other stages, and then it was time for the Pre-Match Shooter Meeting.
While McCarter and Chambers addressed the shooters, I speed-marched back to my car to pick up my camera bag, folding field chair, tripod and water cooler. I made it back in time to not only film the crowd scene, but also to take photos of each stage as "establishing shots".
(IPSC stages are really boring without people in them; I hope I never need to use them. In fact, IPSC isn't much of a spectator sport and even the movies I filmed are probably of interest only to the people who were actually involved.)
After the shooting started, I wandered from stage to stage, filming at least one shooter in each stage. I didn't get all of the photos I wanted, but I got 1.5GB of still and motion pictures on most of the stages. The last of the 10 stages was a long-distance accuracy stage (a trademark of the Range Master), and I didn't bother trying to film anybody shooting it. I know a lot of people had problems with it, as you can see in the Match Results found here.
The first stage I watched was Stage 2: Setup Standards
I had wanted to film The Smurfette shooting Singlestack. I know how difficult it is to transition from Limited or Open Division to L10 or SS divisions, and I was looking forward to seeing her again because she is an entirely charming lady.
Unfortunately, the only stage I was able to film was not her best one. This video illustrates the problems when we are shooting an 'unfamiliar gun'. In fact, on this same stage, I witnessed another Master Class shouting "What's the matter? My sights are WAY off!" while he was shooting this stage.
The stage was a 26-round stage with four shooting positions, lots of targets, lots of hard-cover, and the first target array had four IPSC targets bunched around a "No-Shoot" Penalty target.
There are a lot of targets, awkward shooting positions, and most of the targets are severely restricted by either hard-cover zones painted on the targets, or penalty targets placed in close proximity. It was the first stage I helped set up at the start of the day.
The next video was somewhere in the middle of the match.
Stage 8, "Up You Go", required target engagement only from "The Ramp" or "The Platform". The competitor runs from the shooting box to a ramp, which leads to a platform. There are IPSC targets on both sides of The Ramp, and from the platform one must engage eight Pepper Poppers.
Rob does a good job on this stage, as is appropriate for a Local Hero. He wasn't entirely happy with his performance, and indeed his stage time was extended for a few makeup shots and he didn't get as many A-zone hits on the IPSC poppers as he would have preferred. But very few shooters managed this24-round stage in under 15 seconds, which included some non-productive travel time.
The final video was among the last I filmed.
Stage 2, "Triple Time" features a Texas Star and six IPSC targets. Every IPSC target must be engaged with at least 3 rounds
Since most IPSC stages only require engagement with two rounds, this is a 'play with your mind' stage. Throw in the Texas Star (I witnessed one shooter who used 3 8-round magazines to drop the 5 8" plates from the star"), and you have a lot of potential problems.
And then there is the matter of SS reloads ...
Rich (who drove down from the Seattle area to compete in this match --- we were squadded together in the Ice Cream Squad at the Area 1 match last month) encountered a common problem: the 10-round magazines often jam when reloaded in a SS pistol which has been shot empty. The slide locks back, the shooter rams another magazine into the gun, and the gun refuses to allow the slide to move forward to chamber the first round. It has happened to me many times, and it's always embarassing.
However, I've never managed to handle the situation with such penache.
Thursday, July 06, 2006
If War Is The Answer, What Is The Question?
Knowledge Is Power
Sondra K, a PNW blogger of great power (and many good friends) posted a seven-minute YouTube video yesterday, depicting American Troops and Iraqi Children.
This video is work-safe, and kid-safe, so disregard the 'warnings'. It's a pleasant surprise, and a lovely film for people who see children as a better, more innocent "us".
Go, watch it. No, don't wait to read the rest of the article. You need these images in your head to understand what follows. Click on the link above. We can wait.
...
Done? Good.
On the other hand, here is a contrary viewpoint.
I have some baggage when it comes to people who leave their country to evade the draft during time of war, and even more regarding those who have volunteered for military service and then refuse their movement orders because, they say, this is not the "right" war.
As a Vietnam veteran, I faced the same decision in 1968. When was drafted, I took the pledge at my induction without reservation.
And I decided not to criticize other should-have-been draftees who evaded the draft by taking up residence in Canada. I figured they were aware of the down-side to their decision, and if they were willing to pay it ... it was their decision.
I wasn't pleased when, in1977, then-president Carter granted amnesty to "Canadian Draft-Resistors". It seemed to me that they had lived when better, more honorable men had died for them. It seemed unfair to allow them to return to the country which they had betrayed.
Now these same ... people ... are celebrating their decision, in public, without shame.
A personal note to the Wusster person: you are being dishonored because your actions did little to further the anti-war movement. What you did was to save your own precious self. You dishonored yourself. Instead of thanking God for saving you, and Carter for accepting you back to the bosom of your family, you continue to protest in your delusional concept that you acted out of honorable intent.
I hope you, and others of these physical and moral cowards, see that film clip if only to learn how men who are truly honorable conduct themselves.
It's probably too late for you to acknowledge how you have shamed your families, but perhaps a few of you will at least admit your own secret shame, if only to yourselves.
You have not redeemed yourself even as much as had Henry Fleming in Stephen Crane's The Red Badge of Courage.
You have not payed enough.
Sondra K, a PNW blogger of great power (and many good friends) posted a seven-minute YouTube video yesterday, depicting American Troops and Iraqi Children.
This video is work-safe, and kid-safe, so disregard the 'warnings'. It's a pleasant surprise, and a lovely film for people who see children as a better, more innocent "us".
Go, watch it. No, don't wait to read the rest of the article. You need these images in your head to understand what follows. Click on the link above. We can wait.
...
Done? Good.
On the other hand, here is a contrary viewpoint.
Vietnam War draft dodgers reunite in Canada
CASTLEGAR, British Columbia (Reuters) - Three decades after they fled the United States to avoid the Vietnam War, a small group of former draft dodgers gathered in Canada on Thursday, more convinced than ever that their anti-war stand was right.
Peace activist Isaac Romano, who moved to Canada from the United States in 2001, said he helped organize the conference to honor both the Americans who opposed the war and Canadians who helped them establish new lives.
I have some baggage when it comes to people who leave their country to evade the draft during time of war, and even more regarding those who have volunteered for military service and then refuse their movement orders because, they say, this is not the "right" war.
As a Vietnam veteran, I faced the same decision in 1968. When was drafted, I took the pledge at my induction without reservation.
And I decided not to criticize other should-have-been draftees who evaded the draft by taking up residence in Canada. I figured they were aware of the down-side to their decision, and if they were willing to pay it ... it was their decision.
I wasn't pleased when, in1977, then-president Carter granted amnesty to "Canadian Draft-Resistors". It seemed to me that they had lived when better, more honorable men had died for them. It seemed unfair to allow them to return to the country which they had betrayed.
Now these same ... people ... are celebrating their decision, in public, without shame.
Craig Wiester, who moved to Montreal in 1968 after being drafted into the military, said Americans have amnesia about the men who left their families rather than fight in a war that even some U.S. officials now say was wrong.
"Why are we still dishonored in American society ... those of us who said (the war was wrong) and knew it, and acted out our feelings on that," said Wiester, 59, who now lives in Minneapolis, Minn.
He said although his father, a World War Two veteran, personally hated the Vietnam War, he nonetheless reported his own son to the FBI after learning he was planning to refuse military service.
A personal note to the Wusster person: you are being dishonored because your actions did little to further the anti-war movement. What you did was to save your own precious self. You dishonored yourself. Instead of thanking God for saving you, and Carter for accepting you back to the bosom of your family, you continue to protest in your delusional concept that you acted out of honorable intent.
I hope you, and others of these physical and moral cowards, see that film clip if only to learn how men who are truly honorable conduct themselves.
It's probably too late for you to acknowledge how you have shamed your families, but perhaps a few of you will at least admit your own secret shame, if only to yourselves.
You have not redeemed yourself even as much as had Henry Fleming in Stephen Crane's The Red Badge of Courage.
You have not payed enough.
Sunday, July 02, 2006
Buyer's Remorse
I bought another car this weekend.
Had to do it. The Geek Jeep was so decrepit, it would cost more to repair it than I could get in trade-in value.
I wasn't a smart shopper, though; the next day when I reviewed the paperwork, I found I had purchased a $2000 "extended warranty" (maintenance support contract) thingy, and I doubt I'll be able to get out of it. I didn't want it, don't need it, can't afford it. I just had an expensive Senior Moment, I guess.
Worse, I bought a [choke] Ford, after all these years of badmouthing Fords.
It could be worse.
While cleaning out the Geek Jeep for trade-in, I found an ISMI 170mm replacement magazine spring, three ISMI 140mm replacement magazine springs, four pounds of Vihta Vourhi, 300 rounds of reloaded .45acp ammunition with 200gr swc bullets and a case of Montana Gold .40/10mm jacketted bullets ... all of which I had stored in the Geek Jeep and forgotten about. So there is one more up-side to changing vehicles; it was the first reason I'd had to clean out the cargo area of the Jeep for a month.
Combined with the need for providing birthday gifts to my two children and one daughter-in-law this month, chances are good that my cash-flow concerns won't allow me to pay match fees for the 2006 SingleStack Tournament at ARPC next weekend.
But the value of the "found items" go a long way toward paying for the (hopefully unneccesary) extended warranty.
I'm thinking of having bumper stickers made up, reading:
I have a working muffler now.
You won't even hear me before I run over your foot.
UPDATE:
Surprisingly, when I phoned the dealer Monday Morning, he agreed immediately to cancel the maintenance support contract and re-write the loan papers ... which he had not yet submitted to my credit union.
I went back to the dealership, where the finance manager had all but completed the new paperwork. We voided the maintenance support contract and the old financing paperwork (with my credit union) and activated the new one. Then, as frosting on the cake, he helped me find the key-pad-entry factory default code numbers so I could enter my own, personal code. In the end, he spent about an hour of his time to help me, at no cost to me at all. They didn't even charge me a fee for processing the extra paperwork, which I would have gladly paid.
I told him how much I appreciated his efforts to make me happy with the deal. I said I'd be back in a few years, and I would send everybody I know who was looking for a car to talk to him.
If you're in my area, looking to buy a car, look up G&J Auto Sales. Ask for Jeremy.
Had to do it. The Geek Jeep was so decrepit, it would cost more to repair it than I could get in trade-in value.
I wasn't a smart shopper, though; the next day when I reviewed the paperwork, I found I had purchased a $2000 "extended warranty" (maintenance support contract) thingy, and I doubt I'll be able to get out of it. I didn't want it, don't need it, can't afford it. I just had an expensive Senior Moment, I guess.Worse, I bought a [choke] Ford, after all these years of badmouthing Fords.
It could be worse.
While cleaning out the Geek Jeep for trade-in, I found an ISMI 170mm replacement magazine spring, three ISMI 140mm replacement magazine springs, four pounds of Vihta Vourhi, 300 rounds of reloaded .45acp ammunition with 200gr swc bullets and a case of Montana Gold .40/10mm jacketted bullets ... all of which I had stored in the Geek Jeep and forgotten about. So there is one more up-side to changing vehicles; it was the first reason I'd had to clean out the cargo area of the Jeep for a month.
Combined with the need for providing birthday gifts to my two children and one daughter-in-law this month, chances are good that my cash-flow concerns won't allow me to pay match fees for the 2006 SingleStack Tournament at ARPC next weekend.
But the value of the "found items" go a long way toward paying for the (hopefully unneccesary) extended warranty.
I'm thinking of having bumper stickers made up, reading:
Unless I'm unable to re-negotiate the financing on the new Geekish Land Yacht, if you're wandering around on foot in an Oregon IPSC range parking lot about a half hour before the next CCS Club Match starts, I want to warn you:
Last Year I couldn't spell "Ford Driver", and now I are one!
I have a working muffler now.
You won't even hear me before I run over your foot.
UPDATE:
Surprisingly, when I phoned the dealer Monday Morning, he agreed immediately to cancel the maintenance support contract and re-write the loan papers ... which he had not yet submitted to my credit union.
I went back to the dealership, where the finance manager had all but completed the new paperwork. We voided the maintenance support contract and the old financing paperwork (with my credit union) and activated the new one. Then, as frosting on the cake, he helped me find the key-pad-entry factory default code numbers so I could enter my own, personal code. In the end, he spent about an hour of his time to help me, at no cost to me at all. They didn't even charge me a fee for processing the extra paperwork, which I would have gladly paid.
I told him how much I appreciated his efforts to make me happy with the deal. I said I'd be back in a few years, and I would send everybody I know who was looking for a car to talk to him.
If you're in my area, looking to buy a car, look up G&J Auto Sales. Ask for Jeremy.
Thursday, June 29, 2006
Dillon is my friend. I think
Several weeks ago I phoned Dillon asking to return the electronic ear protectors (which I had bought from them) for repair or replacement, on warranty.
I have had the muffs for 2 or 3 years; they were a gift from SWMBO. I liked them, but eventually the trunnions on both muffs (you know, the part that the hangers hook onto, with the little pin that keeps falling out) broke off. Not all of them, just one on each muff. That happened on the same day, I guess. I don't know. They were fine when I put them in my bag, but when I pulled them out at the match the were both broken.
I suspect that I caused the damage. I was running out of the little pins that keep falling out, so I used some Loc-Tite (red) to install my last two spares. I guess the plastic doesn't like loc-tite (red).
When I called Dillon, the helpful customer-service guy said they were running short on parts. He didn't know if he could repair them, but if I returned him they would take a look at them. If the had the parts to repair them, they would. If they didn't have the parts, they would keep my muffs for parts and sell me a new set for the low-low price of only $85.
The were worth zilch to me in that condition, so I said sure, you betch, sounds like a great deal.
I dithered for a couple of weeks, then I caught a bad chest cold and wasn't going anywhere for a couple of days. SWMBO came by to bring me cold medicine and asked if there was anything more she could do for me.
Such a caring, solicitous lady.
Quick to take advantage of her kindly nature, I said "Well, now that you mention it, there is one little thing."
I grabbed the unsealed box I had thrown the muffs into, along with the Dillon's catalog on which I had written the Authorized Return Number, explained what I was giving her and asked if she would please, PLEASE send them to Dillon for me.
She smiled sweetly ... well, what else could she do, she asked ... and said "why sure, honey. Anthing I can do to help a poor, sickly Geek."
Yeah, she calls me Geek, too. Well, not all the time.
I don't know how long those muffs laid around her house. I last saw them a couple of weeks ago. But today, when I got home from work, I found a little brown package from Dillon (via Fed-Ex) on my doorstep.
Anxiously opening the box, I found .... this.
What I had SENT them, was ... this.
Well, it was the black ones and they weren't nearly in such good condition. But it definately included two muffs, and headstrap and wires and hangers.
The single muff is worth a lot more than what I sent them (functional, except they wouldn't stay on my head), and I'm really grateful for their fast service and cheerful no-bullshit warranty.
It's just that I was kind of expecting to see an entire set of ear protectors in the box.
I don't mind paying for the replacement. But I'm a little confused about what they expect me to do with one, single, blue muff.
I'm a little apprehensive about calling them to ask that question. Maybe they know I'm a Geek. In that case, their answer might be a little ... physically unlikely?
But call them I will. I'm pretty sure they'll explain that it was a mix-up in the shipping department. A failure to communicate, if you will. Probably, somebody said "Ship an HP earmuff to The Geek", and they guy they were talking to thought "mmm, okay, an earmuf it is".
After all, that's exactly what I got.
I just hope that nobody calls me "Geek" while I'm talking to them.
It isn't easy, being Geek.
UPDATE:
I talked to Dillon, and there was apparently a missed communication between the Returns Department and the Shipping Department.
What they had intended to send me was a complete replacement set of HP1 earmuffs. Not a new set, but one mostly reconstructed from returned/functional components. I don't know, the single muff I received looked like brand new. They will send me the headstrap and the other muff (probably was shipped out last Friday, I may receive it by the end of the week). I'll have to hang the single muff on the other side of the head strap, but it's still under warranty and the cost to me was . . . nothing. Nil, zip, nada, not a single penny. Not even for shipping.
I guess Dillon IS Still My Friend!
I have had the muffs for 2 or 3 years; they were a gift from SWMBO. I liked them, but eventually the trunnions on both muffs (you know, the part that the hangers hook onto, with the little pin that keeps falling out) broke off. Not all of them, just one on each muff. That happened on the same day, I guess. I don't know. They were fine when I put them in my bag, but when I pulled them out at the match the were both broken.
I suspect that I caused the damage. I was running out of the little pins that keep falling out, so I used some Loc-Tite (red) to install my last two spares. I guess the plastic doesn't like loc-tite (red).
When I called Dillon, the helpful customer-service guy said they were running short on parts. He didn't know if he could repair them, but if I returned him they would take a look at them. If the had the parts to repair them, they would. If they didn't have the parts, they would keep my muffs for parts and sell me a new set for the low-low price of only $85.
The were worth zilch to me in that condition, so I said sure, you betch, sounds like a great deal.
I dithered for a couple of weeks, then I caught a bad chest cold and wasn't going anywhere for a couple of days. SWMBO came by to bring me cold medicine and asked if there was anything more she could do for me.
Such a caring, solicitous lady.
Quick to take advantage of her kindly nature, I said "Well, now that you mention it, there is one little thing."
I grabbed the unsealed box I had thrown the muffs into, along with the Dillon's catalog on which I had written the Authorized Return Number, explained what I was giving her and asked if she would please, PLEASE send them to Dillon for me.
She smiled sweetly ... well, what else could she do, she asked ... and said "why sure, honey. Anthing I can do to help a poor, sickly Geek."
Yeah, she calls me Geek, too. Well, not all the time.
I don't know how long those muffs laid around her house. I last saw them a couple of weeks ago. But today, when I got home from work, I found a little brown package from Dillon (via Fed-Ex) on my doorstep.Anxiously opening the box, I found .... this.
What I had SENT them, was ... this.Well, it was the black ones and they weren't nearly in such good condition. But it definately included two muffs, and headstrap and wires and hangers.
The single muff is worth a lot more than what I sent them (functional, except they wouldn't stay on my head), and I'm really grateful for their fast service and cheerful no-bullshit warranty.
It's just that I was kind of expecting to see an entire set of ear protectors in the box.
I don't mind paying for the replacement. But I'm a little confused about what they expect me to do with one, single, blue muff.
I'm a little apprehensive about calling them to ask that question. Maybe they know I'm a Geek. In that case, their answer might be a little ... physically unlikely?
But call them I will. I'm pretty sure they'll explain that it was a mix-up in the shipping department. A failure to communicate, if you will. Probably, somebody said "Ship an HP earmuff to The Geek", and they guy they were talking to thought "mmm, okay, an earmuf it is".
After all, that's exactly what I got.
I just hope that nobody calls me "Geek" while I'm talking to them.
It isn't easy, being Geek.
UPDATE:
I talked to Dillon, and there was apparently a missed communication between the Returns Department and the Shipping Department.
What they had intended to send me was a complete replacement set of HP1 earmuffs. Not a new set, but one mostly reconstructed from returned/functional components. I don't know, the single muff I received looked like brand new. They will send me the headstrap and the other muff (probably was shipped out last Friday, I may receive it by the end of the week). I'll have to hang the single muff on the other side of the head strap, but it's still under warranty and the cost to me was . . . nothing. Nil, zip, nada, not a single penny. Not even for shipping.
I guess Dillon IS Still My Friend!
Wednesday, June 28, 2006
Lawdog
It is with great pleasure (read: ROFLMAO) that I celebrate moving "LawDog" from "Places That I Recommend" to "Websites That I Read Every Day".
If I were to be completely honest, I would probably swap it with Scrappleface, but that's just me.
As much as I appreciate the ingenuity of Scrappleface, it doesn't stand comparison with the originality, the humor, the sheer exuberance of Lawdog.
Scrappleface is engineered humor. Lawdog is spontaneous and real to the point that nobody (even Doc Adams) can match.
If you're not reading LawDog every day, you're waiting too long for your daily quota of fun.
If I were to be completely honest, I would probably swap it with Scrappleface, but that's just me.
As much as I appreciate the ingenuity of Scrappleface, it doesn't stand comparison with the originality, the humor, the sheer exuberance of Lawdog.
Scrappleface is engineered humor. Lawdog is spontaneous and real to the point that nobody (even Doc Adams) can match.
If you're not reading LawDog every day, you're waiting too long for your daily quota of fun.
Monday, June 26, 2006
10 Annual Oregon SingleStack Championship
It's only two weeks away, so it's time once again to start touting the Biggest Little SingleStack IPSC Match In The World!
(Apologies to Reno, "The Biggest Little City In The World", and any other singlestack match that manages to get more participants than Oregon's match does.)
On July 8, the Albany Rifle and Pistol Club (ARPC), under the benign influence of world-class USPSA Section Coordinator Michael "Mac" McCarter, will once again host a match whose motto is "No Yuppie Guns".
ARPC Webmaster Brian Berkely has described the technical qualifications for match entry so well, I'll just quote him rather than try to improve on it:
If you click on the article title, you'll be taken to the ARPC IPSC website, which (among other information) includes links to the twelve (12!) stages which will be featured in this match.
You read that right. It's a one-day match, and you'll be shooting twelve stages.
You can get an entry form and match info here (match fee was $45 until June 15; it's $55 now) and detail match info here ... including much information already provided by Brian.
Last Year there were over 100 competitors. This year there are already 86 people pre-registered, and I don't know how current the competitor list is.
Will I be there? You bet your bippy; I wouldn't miss it for the world.
Will I be competing? That's another story. I've been whining for so long that I can no longer see Iron Sights, the people who have to squad with me at the weekly club match are beginning to lay sacrifices at the altar of Dave Skinner who is the latter-day father of Open Guns. (At least I have ONE gun I can still shoot, which cuts down on the whining except for this once-a-year-day.)
Actually, I was seriously considering a pass on the whole match. But at Area 1 I met the Blue-tiful Smurfette at a safety table and she asked me if I was going to the SS match. When I said I didn't think so, she admonished me severely. Well, if she's going, I'll be there. Whether I compete or not depends entirely upon my masochist-factor for that week. I've got the gun (The Beloved Kimber, which needs cleaning), I've got the bullets (I'm pretty sure there are 230 rounds in that 30-caliber US Army Surplus Ammo Can), I've got the money ($55 is pretty cheap for a Major Match with twelve [count 'em, 12!] stages that I don't even need to set-up or tear-down).
You're probably saying "So, Geek, what's the problem? You can't hit shit anyway with that big ol' Open Gun. You think you're going to embarass yourself any more shooting Limited 10 again?"
Well -- no. Actually, it might be GOOD to have a by-golly certifiable alibi going into the match.
Mac is famous ... or infamous, depending on how badly you were snookered at the last match where he was responsible for stage design ... for providing interesting, challenging stages. The club expanded the North Range this winter from 7 to 12 shooting bays, and I'm anxious to see what it's like to shoot on the five new bays dug into the East Side of Saddle Butte.
And it's worth the trip to watch the for-sure Vultures circling overhead during the match. You don't get that kind of aerial show at many other ranges in the world. Especially while there's shooting going on.
MMM --mmmm, I'm wavering here. I need a bit of arm-twisting.
Tell you what. If the competitor list tops 100 between now and July 8, I'll be there with bells on.
Which might just be sufficiently distracting to the other members of my squad to give me a slight competitive edge.
UPDATE: June 27, 2005
I just received an email from MD Mac, sent to CCS members. It has a few more details, you might be interested:
(Apologies to Reno, "The Biggest Little City In The World", and any other singlestack match that manages to get more participants than Oregon's match does.)
On July 8, the Albany Rifle and Pistol Club (ARPC), under the benign influence of world-class USPSA Section Coordinator Michael "Mac" McCarter, will once again host a match whose motto is "No Yuppie Guns".
ARPC Webmaster Brian Berkely has described the technical qualifications for match entry so well, I'll just quote him rather than try to improve on it:
If you haven't heard, this year's rendition of the Oregon Single-Stack Championship will be no different than the previous years. It will have more stages, and also recognize the Provisional USPSA Single Stack Division. If you have a pistol that meets Single Stack Division criteria, you can use that. You can use your traditional Limited 10 Single Stack Pistol in Limited 10. You can use your wide body STI/SVI in Limited 10 (unless you have a single-stack grip frame on it, you just compete for ribbons). You can shoot your polymer/tenifer Austrian wunder pistols in Limited 10 (compete for ribbons if using double-column mags). We are still giving away 3 Springfield Armory Stainless GI .45's. We have lots of other goodies from Springfield to give away as well. So, if you haven't sent in your match registration, hop to it! You don't want to miss out on one of these awesome shirts .......
If you click on the article title, you'll be taken to the ARPC IPSC website, which (among other information) includes links to the twelve (12!) stages which will be featured in this match.
You read that right. It's a one-day match, and you'll be shooting twelve stages.
You can get an entry form and match info here (match fee was $45 until June 15; it's $55 now) and detail match info here ... including much information already provided by Brian.
Last Year there were over 100 competitors. This year there are already 86 people pre-registered, and I don't know how current the competitor list is.
Will I be there? You bet your bippy; I wouldn't miss it for the world.
Will I be competing? That's another story. I've been whining for so long that I can no longer see Iron Sights, the people who have to squad with me at the weekly club match are beginning to lay sacrifices at the altar of Dave Skinner who is the latter-day father of Open Guns. (At least I have ONE gun I can still shoot, which cuts down on the whining except for this once-a-year-day.)
Actually, I was seriously considering a pass on the whole match. But at Area 1 I met the Blue-tiful Smurfette at a safety table and she asked me if I was going to the SS match. When I said I didn't think so, she admonished me severely. Well, if she's going, I'll be there. Whether I compete or not depends entirely upon my masochist-factor for that week. I've got the gun (The Beloved Kimber, which needs cleaning), I've got the bullets (I'm pretty sure there are 230 rounds in that 30-caliber US Army Surplus Ammo Can), I've got the money ($55 is pretty cheap for a Major Match with twelve [count 'em, 12!] stages that I don't even need to set-up or tear-down).
You're probably saying "So, Geek, what's the problem? You can't hit shit anyway with that big ol' Open Gun. You think you're going to embarass yourself any more shooting Limited 10 again?"
Well -- no. Actually, it might be GOOD to have a by-golly certifiable alibi going into the match.
Mac is famous ... or infamous, depending on how badly you were snookered at the last match where he was responsible for stage design ... for providing interesting, challenging stages. The club expanded the North Range this winter from 7 to 12 shooting bays, and I'm anxious to see what it's like to shoot on the five new bays dug into the East Side of Saddle Butte.
And it's worth the trip to watch the for-sure Vultures circling overhead during the match. You don't get that kind of aerial show at many other ranges in the world. Especially while there's shooting going on.
MMM --mmmm, I'm wavering here. I need a bit of arm-twisting.
Tell you what. If the competitor list tops 100 between now and July 8, I'll be there with bells on.
Which might just be sufficiently distracting to the other members of my squad to give me a slight competitive edge.
UPDATE: June 27, 2005
I just received an email from MD Mac, sent to CCS members. It has a few more details, you might be interested:
Hi All,
Just a last of the minute reminder that the 10th Annual Oregon Single Stack Championship is just around the corner, July 8th.
This year it is 12 stages (Iron Man Match) and 265 rounds in one day. There are over 90 people signed up for the match to date and more coming on all the time. We will probably cap the match at 120 people and 12 squads but we can go as high as 144 shooters.
We will be giving away 3 Springfield Single Stacks to competitors plus staff has a chance to win one.
The stages are up on Albany IPSC's and NASS website. It will be a shoot out at the top with 10 Master - Grandmasters including Lisa Munson from Seattle.
Come on out and play at one of the best matches on the West Coast.
Hope to see you,
Mike
Wednesday, June 21, 2006
Blogmeat: 2006
It has been a LONG time since I offered a BlogMeat post. I've been very aware of the link from Michael Bane's Outdoor Gallery, and I've made a concerted attempt to cleave to shooting competition related subjects.
I'll do that here, but it's time to add a little more spice to the Geek Blog.
Item 1: Area 1 Videos
I can't show the 1GB of still photos and videos I recorded at the match ... I had problems with my Video Shooting Gallery software and couldn't upload the files for a few days.. It's not that big a problem, as I haven't edited any of the files although I would have liked to have uploaded the raw files even though they are HUGE and (as the word implies) un-edited. I'll work on editing the videos, and begin posting them eventually at this album on the gallery. You can see the progress so far by clicking on the Video Shooting Gallery on the sidebar, and selecting the "Area 1" album.
Fortunately, friend Norm the Ungrateful has already made a number (the number is 11) of his personal videos available.
You can see them here, on Google.
Item 2: Area 1 Overall Results
The problem with USPSA is that they are so invested in 'results by division' that they don't provide overall results
Here is the solution.
Clicking on the link will allow you to download an EXCEL spreadsheet (978kb) containing all the Overall stats from the Area 1 match. That is, the results from all stages and the match total with ALL divisions ... including points, time, penalty points, hit factor, stage % and % of available points.
This compilation is provided courtesy of our friend, Stephan Zopfi (aka "Zippy"), who has also generously shared his 100mb zip-compressed file containing all of the photos and videos he filmed during the match.
Now you can see how badly you -- and I -- bombed during the match.
Item 3: MOTORTREND:
Here is a good place to compare the theoretical (read: what the computer projects in animated video) comparison between the current Chevy Camero and Ford Mustang performance.
You'll have to download the executable files, but they look fairly impressive when you run them.
Which car wins the race 80% of the time?
Well, that would be telling, wouldn't it?
Item 4: Paris Hilton Sings!
Uh ... sorta.
This video (downloaded from Comcast.net) demonstrates that young Paris should keep her day job. Other advice for Paris: lose the hunk, learn to drive, and for goodness put some clothes on!
BTW, I don't know if the link activates if you're not signed on as a Comcast member. Give it a try. If it doesn't, well, you haven't lost a lot.
I'll do that here, but it's time to add a little more spice to the Geek Blog.
Item 1: Area 1 Videos
I can't show the 1GB of still photos and videos I recorded at the match ... I had problems with my Video Shooting Gallery software and couldn't upload the files for a few days.. It's not that big a problem, as I haven't edited any of the files although I would have liked to have uploaded the raw files even though they are HUGE and (as the word implies) un-edited. I'll work on editing the videos, and begin posting them eventually at this album on the gallery. You can see the progress so far by clicking on the Video Shooting Gallery on the sidebar, and selecting the "Area 1" album.
Fortunately, friend Norm the Ungrateful has already made a number (the number is 11) of his personal videos available.
You can see them here, on Google.
Item 2: Area 1 Overall Results
The problem with USPSA is that they are so invested in 'results by division' that they don't provide overall results
Here is the solution.
Clicking on the link will allow you to download an EXCEL spreadsheet (978kb) containing all the Overall stats from the Area 1 match. That is, the results from all stages and the match total with ALL divisions ... including points, time, penalty points, hit factor, stage % and % of available points.
This compilation is provided courtesy of our friend, Stephan Zopfi (aka "Zippy"), who has also generously shared his 100mb zip-compressed file containing all of the photos and videos he filmed during the match.
Now you can see how badly you -- and I -- bombed during the match.
Item 3: MOTORTREND:
Here is a good place to compare the theoretical (read: what the computer projects in animated video) comparison between the current Chevy Camero and Ford Mustang performance.
You'll have to download the executable files, but they look fairly impressive when you run them.
Which car wins the race 80% of the time?
Well, that would be telling, wouldn't it?
Item 4: Paris Hilton Sings!
Uh ... sorta.
This video (downloaded from Comcast.net) demonstrates that young Paris should keep her day job. Other advice for Paris: lose the hunk, learn to drive, and for goodness put some clothes on!
BTW, I don't know if the link activates if you're not signed on as a Comcast member. Give it a try. If it doesn't, well, you haven't lost a lot.
Tuesday, June 20, 2006
If you can't beat 'em, change the rules!
Mr. Completely
Sure, I had planned to spend this entire week blogging about the Area 1 match. But sometimes, "Life Happens". In this case, "Life" is defined as "Breaking News" in the Pacific NorthWet.
Today I received an email from "Mister Completely", a fellow PNW Gun Blogger. Apparently he competes in a gungame known as "Falling Plates" (your guess is as good as mine, I've never tried it) and is noticably successful.
As a consequence, the Match Director (I'm still guessing here, as I don't have details) of the local host club decided unilaterally that he was winning too many matches, and the reason is that he has been using a two-handed grip which is, or ought to be, illegal.
Just to make sure that this point is not lost on the local participants, the MD sent out an email which specifically makes it illegal.
The reason the grip on the pistol should not be legal?
The hands are not touching.
Still guessing, this grip lends an unfair advantage to those competitors who are using guns sufficiently long that they can GET two hands on the gun without the hands touching.
Well, that's obviously a big NO-No! Next thing you know, people will be cutting the stocks off rifles and using them in what is purportedly a pistol competition. Then the Equipment Race will just take off, and the sport is no longer do-able for The Average Shooter.
We've seen this trend time and again in IPSC (although with somewhat more substantial justification), although it has never lead to a ban on competitors because of their grip ... usually, it leads to recognition of another division of competition when it involves equipment. One wonders why said MD didn't redefine the sport in terms of equipment instead of, for cryin' out loud, the GRIP!
More often, we've seen this approach used in Gun Control legislation: subject gun is deemed an Assault Rifle because it features a pistol-grip stock and a bayonet lug, or some such trivia.
I probably don't understand the issue here, and I admit that I have only one side of the controversy.
You can (and should) go to the link on Mr. Completely's website and read the whole story, including the original announcement from the MD and Mr. Completely's response (essentially: if you're going to arbitrarily change the rules, I'll vote with my feet thank-you-very-much!)
Can't say that I blame Mr. Completely. He got the Bum's Rush, and if it happened to me I would also be inclined to take my football and go home.
I gotta say, I've looked at the picture and it (the grip) doesn't look particularly stable to me.
You might say that the MD is entirely justified in his decision. I don't agree, but I do remember Pete Townsend of The Who saying:
The MD might feel this way.
Sure, I had planned to spend this entire week blogging about the Area 1 match. But sometimes, "Life Happens". In this case, "Life" is defined as "Breaking News" in the Pacific NorthWet.
Today I received an email from "Mister Completely", a fellow PNW Gun Blogger. Apparently he competes in a gungame known as "Falling Plates" (your guess is as good as mine, I've never tried it) and is noticably successful.
As a consequence, the Match Director (I'm still guessing here, as I don't have details) of the local host club decided unilaterally that he was winning too many matches, and the reason is that he has been using a two-handed grip which is, or ought to be, illegal.
Just to make sure that this point is not lost on the local participants, the MD sent out an email which specifically makes it illegal.
The reason the grip on the pistol should not be legal?
The hands are not touching.
Still guessing, this grip lends an unfair advantage to those competitors who are using guns sufficiently long that they can GET two hands on the gun without the hands touching.
Well, that's obviously a big NO-No! Next thing you know, people will be cutting the stocks off rifles and using them in what is purportedly a pistol competition. Then the Equipment Race will just take off, and the sport is no longer do-able for The Average Shooter.
We've seen this trend time and again in IPSC (although with somewhat more substantial justification), although it has never lead to a ban on competitors because of their grip ... usually, it leads to recognition of another division of competition when it involves equipment. One wonders why said MD didn't redefine the sport in terms of equipment instead of, for cryin' out loud, the GRIP!
More often, we've seen this approach used in Gun Control legislation: subject gun is deemed an Assault Rifle because it features a pistol-grip stock and a bayonet lug, or some such trivia.
I probably don't understand the issue here, and I admit that I have only one side of the controversy.
You can (and should) go to the link on Mr. Completely's website and read the whole story, including the original announcement from the MD and Mr. Completely's response (essentially: if you're going to arbitrarily change the rules, I'll vote with my feet thank-you-very-much!)
Can't say that I blame Mr. Completely. He got the Bum's Rush, and if it happened to me I would also be inclined to take my football and go home.
I gotta say, I've looked at the picture and it (the grip) doesn't look particularly stable to me.
You might say that the MD is entirely justified in his decision. I don't agree, but I do remember Pete Townsend of The Who saying:
No one knows what it's like
To be the bad man
To be the sad man
Behind blue eyes
No one knows what it's like
To be hated
To be fated
To telling only lies
But my dreams
They aren't as empty
As my conscience seems to be
I have hours, only lonely
My love is vengeance
That's never free
The MD might feel this way.
Wednesday, June 14, 2006
RKBA News: Preparation H
Judge Overturns San Francisco Weapons Ban
Early last November, I wrote about the San Francisco Proposition H move to ban weapons and ammunition from The City.
My comments at that time included "it's a SCAM" and "I'm not too worried". These comments were made while the voting was still going on ... before the measure was accepted by the voter!
I don't have a record of my outrage and disappointment when the measure was approved by a majority of the San Francisco Voters. I only have the memory of thinking: "Well, that's ONE city I'll never visit again!".
In fact, the blog article includes an Update in which I said:
Here's what the current article had to say:
Here is the text of the measure.
The "Coalition Against Measure H" presented arguments against.
The NRA pulled out all the stops.
An Oakland NGO called "The Independent Institute" didn't like it at all.
And somebody who blogs under the name "Homeland Stupidity" had some really 'hurtful' things to say:
He was bang-on right about the "... Proposition H probably won’t stand up in court..." thingie.
One of the neat things about this blog/website (it doesn't exactly follow the format of a 'blog', which makes it even more intriguing) is that he allows some very disagreeing (and disagreeable) people to make comments, and leaves those comments for our edification.
Here's the first comment, just for example:
Let's fisk this ho-dad, shall we? (Apologies for the redundancy.)
MOST police are against confiscation of civilian arms, that doesn't mean ALL of them are. He asks "what good are they?", and we can only suggest that most of us don't need a gun until we need it very badly.
He should ask his daughter what their average response time is to a 911 call. He doesn't cite the source for his statistics, but we can assume it is the same for every other anti-gun nut who cleaves uncritically to the "43-to-one" gun deaths are caused by guns in the home" nonsense... which is a falatious argument based on a biased premise.
As for his claim that "The majority of citizens do not have the skill to defend themselves with a gun ...", that claim only serves to support the suggestion that MORE, rather than LESS citizens should be trained in safe gun-handling skills.
Nowhere does he suggest that a trained civilian is incapable of defending himself, his home, his family with a gun. Where does he think that criminals learn how to use a gun?
Next, the respondant avers:
And their record is none too good even in this ex post facto function
Let's move on ....
Daddy is a "FORMER gun shop owner", but he is "scared to death of the damn things."
That may help to explain why his business failed.
Then he says:
Apparently, this comments-writer doesn't realize that:
Consider that England has outlawed guns for nine years. Guns, knives, swords ... any deadly weapon you can imagine.
The Yobs still manage to find a way.
The innocents ... suffer.
Is this "The Way" you envision for San Francisco?
I thought not.
Early last November, I wrote about the San Francisco Proposition H move to ban weapons and ammunition from The City.
My comments at that time included "it's a SCAM" and "I'm not too worried". These comments were made while the voting was still going on ... before the measure was accepted by the voter!
I don't have a record of my outrage and disappointment when the measure was approved by a majority of the San Francisco Voters. I only have the memory of thinking: "Well, that's ONE city I'll never visit again!".
In fact, the blog article includes an Update in which I said:
The passage of Proposition H in San Francisco caught me unaware. I knew those people were crazy, and I knew that they were stupid, but I had no idea of the extent of their mania.I guess I'm not the only one who thought this measure was to zany to be believed.
Here's what the current article had to say:
SAN FRANCISCO – A state trial judge sided Monday with the National Rifle Association in overturning a voter-approved city ordinance that banned handgun possession and firearm sales in San Francisco.
Measure H was placed on the November ballot by the San Francisco County Board of Supervisors, who were frustrated by an alarmingly high number of gun-related homicides in the city of 750,000. The NRA sued a day after 58 percent of voters approved the law.
In siding with the gun owners, San Francisco County Superior Court Judge James Warren said a local government cannot ban weapons because the California Legislature allows their sale and possession.
"My clients are thrilled that the court recognized that law-abiding firearms owners who choose to own a gun to defend themselves or their families are part of the solution and not part of the problem," NRA attorney Chuck Michel said. "Hopefully, the city will recognize that gun owners can contribute to the effort to fight the criminal misuse of firearms, a goal that we all share."
The decision was not unexpected. In 1982, a California appeals court nullified an almost identical San Francisco gun ban largely on grounds that the city cannot enact an ordinance that conflicts with state law.
But years later, in 1998, a state appeals court upheld West Hollywood's ban on the sale of so-called Saturday night specials, small and cheap handguns that city leaders said contributed to violent crime. And three years ago, the California Supreme Court ruled in favor of Los Angeles and Alameda counties, saying local governments could ban the possession and sale of weapons on government property, such as fairgrounds.
That decision, however, did not address the issue of private property sales and possession, as outlined in the San Francisco law.
Some background is needed.
Here is the text of the measure.
The "Coalition Against Measure H" presented arguments against.
The NRA pulled out all the stops.
An Oakland NGO called "The Independent Institute" didn't like it at all.
And somebody who blogs under the name "Homeland Stupidity" had some really 'hurtful' things to say:
I really LIKE this guy!The usual left-leaning suspects are spouting off the usual tripe about this measure.
“We had a record 88 homicides last year,” said Supervisor Chris Daly, a leading advocate of the measure. “We’re in the 70s now this year. Most of them are handgun-related. It’s clear that the city has yet to figure out how to get a handle on the problem. A ban — that type of gun control can play a part in stemming the tide of violence.” — San Francisco Chronicle
There is precisely one gun store in the city and county of San Francisco, and it declined comment.
Now, what the usual left-leaning idiots who don’t understand gun violence and criminal behavior at all don’t seem to understand is that these guns used in street violence are almost never “legally” obtained. That’s right, the law already prohibited these criminals from obtaining the guns they somehow got! This is what we call a black market. If Proposition H passes, the black market will simply expand if necessary to cover any additional demand for illegal guns.
“Those who are committing violence on the street don’t use legally obtained guns anyway,” said Larry Barsetti, a retired San Francisco police lieutenant. — Ibid.
Told you so. Police have been saying the same thing all over the country for years. That’s right, the cops want ordinary people to purchase, become familiar with, and carry guns to defend themselves.
“The facts are in and the record is clear: right-to-carry gives law enforcement, their families and our communities real protection from violent criminals,” said James J. Fortis, executive director of the Law Enforcement Alliance of America.
And the real losers here will be the law-abiding citizens of San Francisco, who will have one less option for defending themselves from criminals.
And I didn’t even get into the fact that Proposition H probably won’t stand up in court. The California Supreme Court has previously ruled that only the state can regulate possession of firearms.
“We’ve crafted the measure carefully so it has a chance to withstand a challenge of state pre-emption,” Daly said. “The NRA’s going to have some good lawyers, but I don’t think they’ll be as good as my lawyer, Dennis Herrera, the city’s lawyer, the people of San Francisco’s lawyer.” — Ibid.
You asshole. The people of San Francisco deserve protection from violent crime, not to have it taken away from them. Don’t fall for Daly’s (and the left’s) bullshit. Vote for the right to defend yourself and your family from violent criminals. Vote NO on Proposition H.
He was bang-on right about the "... Proposition H probably won’t stand up in court..." thingie.
One of the neat things about this blog/website (it doesn't exactly follow the format of a 'blog', which makes it even more intriguing) is that he allows some very disagreeing (and disagreeable) people to make comments, and leaves those comments for our edification.
Here's the first comment, just for example:
Let's fisk this ho-dad, shall we? (Apologies for the redundancy.)
This guy's daughter makes a statement, and he doesn't stop to think it through for himself. Congratulations on your absolute faith in your daughter, but that doesn't make her right.The right wingnut who published this nonsense stated: “Police are up in arms against the measure.”
That was enough to make me realize he has no credibility. Which police? My daugher is a Police Officer and would love to see all handguns outlawed. What good are they? Statistics are very clear that most handgun homicides are committed by family and friends in domestic violence. The majority of citizens do not have the skill to defend themselves with a gun they purchased “for protection.”
MOST police are against confiscation of civilian arms, that doesn't mean ALL of them are. He asks "what good are they?", and we can only suggest that most of us don't need a gun until we need it very badly.
He should ask his daughter what their average response time is to a 911 call. He doesn't cite the source for his statistics, but we can assume it is the same for every other anti-gun nut who cleaves uncritically to the "43-to-one" gun deaths are caused by guns in the home" nonsense... which is a falatious argument based on a biased premise.
As for his claim that "The majority of citizens do not have the skill to defend themselves with a gun ...", that claim only serves to support the suggestion that MORE, rather than LESS citizens should be trained in safe gun-handling skills.
Nowhere does he suggest that a trained civilian is incapable of defending himself, his home, his family with a gun. Where does he think that criminals learn how to use a gun?
Next, the respondant avers:
If guns are outlawed, only outlaws AND THE POLICE will have guns.He concedes that criminals ("outlaws") will have guns, regardless of the laws that are prevelant in the community. I wonder if he is aware of the difference between the SFPD response time to a 911 call and the time it takes for a home-invasion to result in civilian injury? The police are charged "to protect and to serve", but the police are not legally obliged to protest civilians from injury ... only to make a 'best effort' attempt to find the malefactor AFTER injury has been visited upon the civilian.
And their record is none too good even in this ex post facto function
Let's move on ....
I am a former gun shop owner (the Outdoorsman that was located on the 700 block of Columbus Ave.) and am scared to death of the damn things.Well, that's encouraging.
Daddy is a "FORMER gun shop owner", but he is "scared to death of the damn things."
That may help to explain why his business failed.
Then he says:
Go back to your muzzle loading squirrel guns the framers of the Constitution were referring to and keep the red coats at bay.
Apparently, this comments-writer doesn't realize that:
- Criminals (outlaws) aren't using "muzzle loading squirrel guns";
- The 2nd Amendment doesn't specify the type of firearm which is appropriate for civilian ownership, and;
- Proposition H would outlaw private ownership of "muzzle loading squirrel guns".
Consider: If there were no handguns available, where would the criminals get them?
Let the handgun madness stop. And let San Francisco lead the way.
Well, Ron, in the words of Jeff Goldblum portraying Dr. Ian Malcolm in "Jurasic Park":
Life will find a way.Similarly, Outlaws Will Find A Way.
Consider that England has outlawed guns for nine years. Guns, knives, swords ... any deadly weapon you can imagine.
The Yobs still manage to find a way.
The innocents ... suffer.
Is this "The Way" you envision for San Francisco?
I thought not.
Tuesday, June 06, 2006
NYC RINO Bans Paint-By-Numbers
Laws would track offenders, ban paint that disguises guns as toys
I thought I had Seen It All, but I was wrong.
Republican In Name Only Michael Bloomberg, mayor of New York City, has proposed new laws (city ordinances?) which would do two things:
Oh my goodness.
What Mikey isn't telling us is that ANYONE who possesses a firearm in NYC without a permit is guilty of a third-degree felony.
As nearly as I can tell, "criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree" need not be supported by any display of violence; if violence were involved, the charge would probably be of a higher degree.
Yet Bloomberg justifies his proposal by saying: " ... as a group they are highly prone to committing repeat violent crimes."
What violent crimes? We don't see any evidence of violence. How can you repeat something that you haven't done yet?
The only logical construct I can imagine for Bloomberg's proposal is that if a person is found to have been in possession of a firearm, he must be judged to be capable of a violent crime, and therefore must be registered, tracked and controlled because he is more likely to commit a violent crime in the future than someone who does NOT possess a firearm.
If that logic structure sounds reasonable to you, I offer you a syllogism:
Michaell Bloomberg possesses a penis. He has not charged with having used this penis in a violent crime (rape), but because he has been found to be in possession of a penis, he must be judged to be capable of a violent crime, and therefore must be registered, tracked and controlled because he is more likely to commit a violent crime in the future than someone who does NOT possess a penis.
Sounds pretty stupid, doesn't it?
Wait. It gets better.
The council also will seek to ban gun painting kits that are used to make real firearms look like toys.
You're got your Sick Deception right there, Pal.
This is a law proposed to resolve a problem which does not exist. Bloomberg admits it is so, but because he "... learned of the paint kits through advertisements in gun enthusiast magazines" he assumes it to be a problem and by golly he's going to stop this nefarious painting of guns in 'playful ... colors' before it starts. (What is he doing, reading gun enthusiast magazines on company time?)
His personal philosophy about writing laws is different from mine.
I think laws should be proposed in response to demonstrated real problems. He thinks they should be proposed in response to his own sick fantasies. I wonder what he would do when confronted to an IPSC pistol (I know, already illegal in NYC) with the grips splatter-painted.
Although more deaths nation-wide are caused by automobile accidents than by deliberate use of firearms, you have to ask yourself why Mayor Bloomberg hasn't proposed a law prohibiting the painting of automobiles in "Playful Flourescent Colors".
(By the way, aren't toy guns already outlawed in NYC? If not, it's not because they haven't already tried. Why not toy automobiles? That would solve that problem immediately, because we all know that as soon as something is something is defined as 'illegal', it disappears from the City Scene. ) ( /sarcasm_mode )
Why?
Because it doesn't address their priorities. It's not about guns, or "gun violence", murders or injuries due to (already illegal) firearms possession or usage. It's about catching the headlines. They don't care about firearms or injuries; what they really care about is the amount of press time they get every week.
When the numbers go down, the rhetoric ramps up.
If they really cared about crime in the streets, they would try to do something about welfare moms, single-parent families, out-of-wedlock births, gangs, the drug culture and the revolving-door justice system.
But that's too hard, and it doesn't make headlines.
It's easier to adjudicate the legal system than the social dysfunctions which are rampant across America.
Politicians always treat the symptoms instead of the disease, because their priority isn't to fix the problem ... it's only their own personal aggrandizement.
They don't have to walk the streets. They only have to get re-elected.
I thought I had Seen It All, but I was wrong.
Republican In Name Only Michael Bloomberg, mayor of New York City, has proposed new laws (city ordinances?) which would do two things:
- Require people convicted of gun crimes to register as 'firearms offenders' the same was as 'sex offenders; are required, and
- Outlaw painting firearms in bright colors.
Laws would track offenders, ban paint that disguises guns as toys
By SARA KUGLER
Associated Press Writer
June 5, 2006, 2:05 PM EDT
NEW YORK -- Criminals convicted of gun crimes in New York City would have to register and update their addresses _ similar to sex offenders _ under a law proposed by city officials on Monday.
The gun registry act is one of several modest measures that Mayor Michael Bloomberg wants to push through the City Council as part of his effort to crack down further on illegal firearms. The city and state already have tough gun laws on the books.
The registry would require offenders convicted of criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree to list their addresses and check in every six months, for four years after their convictions.
Bloomberg said hundreds of people are convicted of these offenses each year in New York City, and deserve heightened supervision "because as a group they are highly prone to committing repeat violent crimes."
Oh my goodness.
What Mikey isn't telling us is that ANYONE who possesses a firearm in NYC without a permit is guilty of a third-degree felony.
(NOTE: A third-degree felony is less than a second-degree; a second-degree is less than a first-degree. While I haven't found the text which describes "criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree", it sounds to me as if it might be described as "simple possession". That is, if the convicted felon were found to have displayed or "brandished" the firearm, it might be a second-degree felony. If the felon were found to have actually fired the weapon, it might be a first-degree felony. I can cite no references which define the degree of "wrong-ness", these only seem reasonable to assume given the way the "degree" context is commonly structured. See here for a rough comparison of the way Utah structured its polygamy laws in 2003.)
As nearly as I can tell, "criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree" need not be supported by any display of violence; if violence were involved, the charge would probably be of a higher degree.
Yet Bloomberg justifies his proposal by saying: " ... as a group they are highly prone to committing repeat violent crimes."
What violent crimes? We don't see any evidence of violence. How can you repeat something that you haven't done yet?
The only logical construct I can imagine for Bloomberg's proposal is that if a person is found to have been in possession of a firearm, he must be judged to be capable of a violent crime, and therefore must be registered, tracked and controlled because he is more likely to commit a violent crime in the future than someone who does NOT possess a firearm.
If that logic structure sounds reasonable to you, I offer you a syllogism:
Michaell Bloomberg possesses a penis. He has not charged with having used this penis in a violent crime (rape), but because he has been found to be in possession of a penis, he must be judged to be capable of a violent crime, and therefore must be registered, tracked and controlled because he is more likely to commit a violent crime in the future than someone who does NOT possess a penis.
Sounds pretty stupid, doesn't it?
Wait. It gets better.
The council also will seek to ban gun painting kits that are used to make real firearms look like toys.
Bloomberg and Police Commissioner Raymond Kelly said guns painted in playful fluorescent colors [emphasis added] endanger police officers who must assess risk in a split second when they are faced with someone brandishing a weapon." ... sick deception ..."?
Kelly did acknowledge that no painted guns are believed to have been used in city crimes or recovered by law enforcement officials, but said they learned of the paint kits through advertisements in gun enthusiast magazines.
To illustrate the danger, Bloomberg waved two handguns above his podium at the City Hall news conference, one real and one fake, but both painted like toys.
"Just imagine the tragic consequences of this kind of sick deception," he said.
You're got your Sick Deception right there, Pal.
This is a law proposed to resolve a problem which does not exist. Bloomberg admits it is so, but because he "... learned of the paint kits through advertisements in gun enthusiast magazines" he assumes it to be a problem and by golly he's going to stop this nefarious painting of guns in 'playful ... colors' before it starts. (What is he doing, reading gun enthusiast magazines on company time?)
His personal philosophy about writing laws is different from mine.
I think laws should be proposed in response to demonstrated real problems. He thinks they should be proposed in response to his own sick fantasies. I wonder what he would do when confronted to an IPSC pistol (I know, already illegal in NYC) with the grips splatter-painted.
Although more deaths nation-wide are caused by automobile accidents than by deliberate use of firearms, you have to ask yourself why Mayor Bloomberg hasn't proposed a law prohibiting the painting of automobiles in "Playful Flourescent Colors".
(By the way, aren't toy guns already outlawed in NYC? If not, it's not because they haven't already tried. Why not toy automobiles? That would solve that problem immediately, because we all know that as soon as something is something is defined as 'illegal', it disappears from the City Scene. ) ( /sarcasm_mode )
Gun control has become one of Bloomberg's top priorities in his second term. The Republican mayor lobbies for the cause on Capitol Hill, and has formed a coalition of his counterparts from dozens of U.S. cities to push for stricter federal and state anti-gun laws.Nobody in NYC is listening to Cox or the NRA.
The National Rifle Assocation's chief lobbyist, Chris W. Cox, said a gun offender registry is unnecessary because the criminal record system essentially serves the purpose of tracking felons. And banning paint kits, Cox added, "is not going to bring down crime rates."
Why?
Because it doesn't address their priorities. It's not about guns, or "gun violence", murders or injuries due to (already illegal) firearms possession or usage. It's about catching the headlines. They don't care about firearms or injuries; what they really care about is the amount of press time they get every week.
When the numbers go down, the rhetoric ramps up.
If they really cared about crime in the streets, they would try to do something about welfare moms, single-parent families, out-of-wedlock births, gangs, the drug culture and the revolving-door justice system.
But that's too hard, and it doesn't make headlines.
It's easier to adjudicate the legal system than the social dysfunctions which are rampant across America.
Politicians always treat the symptoms instead of the disease, because their priority isn't to fix the problem ... it's only their own personal aggrandizement.
They don't have to walk the streets. They only have to get re-elected.
Friday, June 02, 2006
Bored at Home
I have a cold.
Maybe it's an alergy, or bronchitis.
All I know is I feel crummy, can't sleep, I've got a hoarse throat (think "Mister Ed") and I can't be around other people for a while.
That's not all bad. I've been surfing the net, and again I'm amazed at the stuff you can find there.
Since I haven't done a BLOGMEAT post for a long time, here's The Geek's Stuff To See When You Really Need A Timewaster.
Thanks to Jason at Jason's Blog, I found a really swell Rube Goldberg advertisement for the Toyota Accord.
Also, my friend Gary T. sent me a video which is so weird I created an entire new album on my Photo Gallery for Weird Stuff. Here's the Kosovo song (apologies to The Beach Boys).
Speaking of music, I'm always on the lookout for music to dub into IPSC Videos. (Okay, this works. It's continues the ISPC theme of the blog.) Lately I've been looking for "Holding Out For A Hero" by Bonnie Tyler. I tried Napster, but the download had some weird code inserted that prevented me from using Windows Movie Maker to add it to a project.
Fortunately, I did find a wonderfully terrible video she made (sometime in the 80's?) which was so badly staged it was hillarious. Can you believe Google Videos?
[sigh!] I suppose I'll have to find a cd in the used-cd store that has the song on it. I was planning to hold it out for a particularly spectacular stage, such as Yong Lee's performance on Stage 5: "The Doors", in the 2005 Croc Match. I would have liked to use "Hero" as the theme song, but I was lucky to have a copy of "Ballroom Bash" and the timing was right even though I couldn't really get a sense of the energy of the effort.
I had loaded the video I DID make to YouTube, which allows me to present it here (The same video is available for display from YouTube elsewhere on this website. But I'm bored .)
Yong Lee: 2005 Banzaii Ballistic "You Got Bullets?" Croc Match, September 2005. Stage 5: "The Doors":
What else?
While I was uploading the Kosovo video to my photo gallery, I decided it was time to reorganize it. There's no content there yet that you haven't already seen, but this is the Official Announcement of the "Geek House of Weird".
Watch this space. I get bored quite often.
I'm getting hungry, too. Here's a recipe for a Drunkards Lunch.
Take a quarter-pound (whatever size it comes in that will fit) of Edam or Brie cheese, wrap it in a Pillsbury Croissant Dough package. That stuff comes in the blue tube, it's already rolled out and triangularly perforated to make the croissants. Sqeeze the dough together where it's perforated, so it's one sheet. Wrap up the cheese. You got dough left over? cut it off, cut in into triangles, and make mini-croissants. Put the 'cheese in broulle' (pastry-wrapped cheese) in a shallow glass pan, surround it with the mini-croissants, and bake it in the oven @ 350 degrees for 20 minutes or until it's brown on the top. It helps if you put butter on the top, it browns better.
While that's cooking, core and thin-slice a couple of apples, put the slices in a bowl of cold water so it doesn't turn brown.
Then slice a quarter pound of smoked salmon ... I prefer the peppered smoked salmon, but it's your choice ... in bite-size pieces on a small cutting board.
Open a bottle of your favorite wine, preferably a white or rose but Boone's Farm will serve. Or open a beer. You probably have one open already; forget I mentioned it, I'm an idiot.
Put the sliced smoked salmon, apples, and a couple of plates with forks on the coffee table in front of the couch. You know you have one. Just sit on the couch, look at the TV, and that cluttered surface between you and the TV is the coffee table. Put the plates there, put the salmon there, put the apples there, put a couple of pot-holders in the middle and take the browned cheese boule on it. Serve it in the glass pan you cooked it in.
Slice up the cheese thingie, serve eighths portions of it with that triangle-shaped thing you got as a wedding gift from your uncle in Alaska that your wife uses to put pie slices on those dinky saucers.
The cheese, you should eat with a fork because it's hot. Everything else (except the beer/wine, dummy) is finger food. Eat a slice of apple. Fork in some cheese stuff. Nibble on the salmon. Don't swallow until you can't stand it any more, because the combination of flavors and textures is, as Martha Stewert is too wussy to say, "to die for". Especially when you wash it all down with the wine/beer whatever.
BTW, don't drink 'lite beer". You may think it's your choice, but it's my recipe and I'm telling you, the whole idea is to have strong, contrasting flavors that somehow compliment each other. You start pouring week horse-piss down your pie-hole, you've ruined the whole thing. Get outta here, I don't even want to talk to you, you moron!
Okay, you guys who are nodding your heads, you get it. You can stay.
There's enough food there for two people to snack on for a quarter of a football game, if you aren't both guys. There's a hint in there for you. Whip this up for your sweetie on a dull evening. She'll be impressed that you can cook (you DID remember to set the timer to 20 minutes for the cheese, right? Do NOT burn the cheeze, you wuss!) and it's fun to play for five or ten minutes trying to figure out how to get the dough to wrap around the odd-shaped chunk of cheese.
Here's a hint: when you slice the apples? Don't peel them, okay? And slice them under the kitchen faucet, so when you invariably SLICE YOUR THUMB you can hold it under the water and nobody will ever know. (Elegant hosts will dispose of the bloody apple parts in the kitchen-sink garbage diosposal. You yobs will want to make sure you eat the gory apple parts before they get to the table, okay?)
When you're done, here's how to make EXTRA big points with your sweetie.
Pick up the cheezy glass pan, the bowl full of water, the cutting board, the plates and forks and silver pie-server and napkins and dispose of them properly in the kitchen sink. Don't run water on the napkins, it's a mess when your sweetie cleans up after you. You got the TIVO thingie, you can pause the ball game for thirty seconds.
On your way back out to the living room, bring the wine bottle with you and top of her glass.
Several times.
You cook, you clean, you pour wine like a sommelier (which I can't spell and you can't pronounce). That's pretty impresive to your sweetie.
Who knows, you just might get lucky.
At least, in the morning she may not remember that you can cook and you can clean.
Whew! Dodged that one, Partner!
Maybe it's an alergy, or bronchitis.
All I know is I feel crummy, can't sleep, I've got a hoarse throat (think "Mister Ed") and I can't be around other people for a while.
That's not all bad. I've been surfing the net, and again I'm amazed at the stuff you can find there.
Since I haven't done a BLOGMEAT post for a long time, here's The Geek's Stuff To See When You Really Need A Timewaster.
Thanks to Jason at Jason's Blog, I found a really swell Rube Goldberg advertisement for the Toyota Accord.
Also, my friend Gary T. sent me a video which is so weird I created an entire new album on my Photo Gallery for Weird Stuff. Here's the Kosovo song (apologies to The Beach Boys).
Speaking of music, I'm always on the lookout for music to dub into IPSC Videos. (Okay, this works. It's continues the ISPC theme of the blog.) Lately I've been looking for "Holding Out For A Hero" by Bonnie Tyler. I tried Napster, but the download had some weird code inserted that prevented me from using Windows Movie Maker to add it to a project.
Fortunately, I did find a wonderfully terrible video she made (sometime in the 80's?) which was so badly staged it was hillarious. Can you believe Google Videos?
[sigh!] I suppose I'll have to find a cd in the used-cd store that has the song on it. I was planning to hold it out for a particularly spectacular stage, such as Yong Lee's performance on Stage 5: "The Doors", in the 2005 Croc Match. I would have liked to use "Hero" as the theme song, but I was lucky to have a copy of "Ballroom Bash" and the timing was right even though I couldn't really get a sense of the energy of the effort.
I had loaded the video I DID make to YouTube, which allows me to present it here (The same video is available for display from YouTube elsewhere on this website. But I'm bored .)
Yong Lee: 2005 Banzaii Ballistic "You Got Bullets?" Croc Match, September 2005. Stage 5: "The Doors":
What else?
While I was uploading the Kosovo video to my photo gallery, I decided it was time to reorganize it. There's no content there yet that you haven't already seen, but this is the Official Announcement of the "Geek House of Weird".
Watch this space. I get bored quite often.
I'm getting hungry, too. Here's a recipe for a Drunkards Lunch.
Take a quarter-pound (whatever size it comes in that will fit) of Edam or Brie cheese, wrap it in a Pillsbury Croissant Dough package. That stuff comes in the blue tube, it's already rolled out and triangularly perforated to make the croissants. Sqeeze the dough together where it's perforated, so it's one sheet. Wrap up the cheese. You got dough left over? cut it off, cut in into triangles, and make mini-croissants. Put the 'cheese in broulle' (pastry-wrapped cheese) in a shallow glass pan, surround it with the mini-croissants, and bake it in the oven @ 350 degrees for 20 minutes or until it's brown on the top. It helps if you put butter on the top, it browns better.
While that's cooking, core and thin-slice a couple of apples, put the slices in a bowl of cold water so it doesn't turn brown.
Then slice a quarter pound of smoked salmon ... I prefer the peppered smoked salmon, but it's your choice ... in bite-size pieces on a small cutting board.
Open a bottle of your favorite wine, preferably a white or rose but Boone's Farm will serve. Or open a beer. You probably have one open already; forget I mentioned it, I'm an idiot.
Put the sliced smoked salmon, apples, and a couple of plates with forks on the coffee table in front of the couch. You know you have one. Just sit on the couch, look at the TV, and that cluttered surface between you and the TV is the coffee table. Put the plates there, put the salmon there, put the apples there, put a couple of pot-holders in the middle and take the browned cheese boule on it. Serve it in the glass pan you cooked it in.
Slice up the cheese thingie, serve eighths portions of it with that triangle-shaped thing you got as a wedding gift from your uncle in Alaska that your wife uses to put pie slices on those dinky saucers.
The cheese, you should eat with a fork because it's hot. Everything else (except the beer/wine, dummy) is finger food. Eat a slice of apple. Fork in some cheese stuff. Nibble on the salmon. Don't swallow until you can't stand it any more, because the combination of flavors and textures is, as Martha Stewert is too wussy to say, "to die for". Especially when you wash it all down with the wine/beer whatever.
BTW, don't drink 'lite beer". You may think it's your choice, but it's my recipe and I'm telling you, the whole idea is to have strong, contrasting flavors that somehow compliment each other. You start pouring week horse-piss down your pie-hole, you've ruined the whole thing. Get outta here, I don't even want to talk to you, you moron!
Okay, you guys who are nodding your heads, you get it. You can stay.
There's enough food there for two people to snack on for a quarter of a football game, if you aren't both guys. There's a hint in there for you. Whip this up for your sweetie on a dull evening. She'll be impressed that you can cook (you DID remember to set the timer to 20 minutes for the cheese, right? Do NOT burn the cheeze, you wuss!) and it's fun to play for five or ten minutes trying to figure out how to get the dough to wrap around the odd-shaped chunk of cheese.
Here's a hint: when you slice the apples? Don't peel them, okay? And slice them under the kitchen faucet, so when you invariably SLICE YOUR THUMB you can hold it under the water and nobody will ever know. (Elegant hosts will dispose of the bloody apple parts in the kitchen-sink garbage diosposal. You yobs will want to make sure you eat the gory apple parts before they get to the table, okay?)
When you're done, here's how to make EXTRA big points with your sweetie.
Pick up the cheezy glass pan, the bowl full of water, the cutting board, the plates and forks and silver pie-server and napkins and dispose of them properly in the kitchen sink. Don't run water on the napkins, it's a mess when your sweetie cleans up after you. You got the TIVO thingie, you can pause the ball game for thirty seconds.
On your way back out to the living room, bring the wine bottle with you and top of her glass.
Several times.
You cook, you clean, you pour wine like a sommelier (which I can't spell and you can't pronounce). That's pretty impresive to your sweetie.
Who knows, you just might get lucky.
At least, in the morning she may not remember that you can cook and you can clean.
Whew! Dodged that one, Partner!
Dundee IPSC Videos
My friend Brian, who also provides server space for my Photo Gallery (so I don't want to offend him) has a brand new Open gun for IPSC Competition.
I think the Aimpoint sight is beer-can-on-a-stick ugly, but he makes it work for him so if I sound 'negative' it's probably just jealousy.
Here he is at the May, 2006, club match shooting Stage 4.
He and I are unofficially competing head-to head, so here's my performance on the same stage.
Result: Brian took 4th place on the stage with 97 match points, I took 3rd place with 104 match points.
Unfortunately, this was about as well as I could do against his juggernaut competition. For the entire match, he won 4th Open with 523.6 match points, and I settled in comfortably in 5th Open wth 520 match points. (Brian kicked my butt on the next stage, an 'accuracy stage', and I never recovered from it.)
Brian did very will with his brand new STI Open Gun, and I congratulate him.
Guess I need to practice more. Either that, or I should re-evaluate the qualities of an Aimpoint sight over a C-More sight.
I think the Aimpoint sight is beer-can-on-a-stick ugly, but he makes it work for him so if I sound 'negative' it's probably just jealousy.
Here he is at the May, 2006, club match shooting Stage 4.
He and I are unofficially competing head-to head, so here's my performance on the same stage.
Result: Brian took 4th place on the stage with 97 match points, I took 3rd place with 104 match points.
Unfortunately, this was about as well as I could do against his juggernaut competition. For the entire match, he won 4th Open with 523.6 match points, and I settled in comfortably in 5th Open wth 520 match points. (Brian kicked my butt on the next stage, an 'accuracy stage', and I never recovered from it.)
Brian did very will with his brand new STI Open Gun, and I congratulate him.
Guess I need to practice more. Either that, or I should re-evaluate the qualities of an Aimpoint sight over a C-More sight.
Wednesday, May 31, 2006
A Practical Shooter In Iraq: Part Two
Part II of the series initiated here.
In response to the article, and much correspondance, Loren, C. Gray states:
Loren has been incredibly candid, so I can't do less but to include his picture (wearing his Vest) and his email address: loren.c.gray at us.army.mil
Replace the " at " with the "@" sign if you choose to write him.
I hope you do write to Loren. I recall how rewarding it was to receive supportive letters from total strangers thirty-toomany years ago when I was a lowly Staff Sgt overseas. I'm sure he would appreciate hearing from you.
In response to the article, and much correspondance, Loren, C. Gray states:
Thanks for caring about my privacy. I don’t really mind if my name, email address, phone number, social security number or bank account information gets out. I’m just happy to live day-to-day. I don’t have many secrets or things that I care if everyone knows about. I don’t necessarily want to get more email, but I don’t mind if other folks write me as long as they know I’m a bit slow in responding sometimes.
Thanks for the fine words on your website. I’ve passed your comments on to some of my buddies here. We’re grateful for those of you who care enough to pray for us.
I wanted to correct something I read, though. I didn’t actually enlist to come over here. I’m 43, the Director of Customer Service for Clarity Visual Systems in Wilsonville, and live in Portland with my family.
I joined the Army 23 years ago and was an infantryman in the reserves for 13 years. About 10 years ago I went inactive, because I was so busy at work (InFocus at the time) and there was a lot going on at home. I’ve always enjoyed the Army (or so I think) and I wanted to be able to get back in if things slowed down for me at work. I would get calls from recruiters from time to time, but other than that I had no contact with the Army. That is, until October 2005 when I got a letter in the mail asking me to come join the fun. I put my civilian and personal life on hold and reported to Ft. Jackson, SC on the 4th of December. I spent several weeks there, went to Ft. Bragg, NC for a couple of weeks, up to Ft. Dix, NJ for a month of Civil Affairs training and then went back to Ft. Bragg for combat skills training until the 23rd of April. It took almost 5 months from the time I reported for active duty to get to Iraq. I have to spend 12 months here before I can go home and get back to my other life.
Given where I was at in life, I wouldn’t have volunteered to spend a year and a half away from home. But I’m glad to be here and doing something that may make a difference in this world. None of the guys I’m with volunteered for this, but there’s no one here who has a bad attitude about it.
You asked for a picture of me, so I’ve attached one. I’m just leaving the office to convoy home and the outer vest I wear every day is the same one I've worn to all the Practical Rifle matches for the past couple of years.
Loren has been incredibly candid, so I can't do less but to include his picture (wearing his Vest) and his email address: loren.c.gray at us.army.milReplace the " at " with the "@" sign if you choose to write him.
I hope you do write to Loren. I recall how rewarding it was to receive supportive letters from total strangers thirty-toomany years ago when I was a lowly Staff Sgt overseas. I'm sure he would appreciate hearing from you.
Tuesday, May 30, 2006
Pompous WaPo Anti-Gun Nut With An Agenda
Gun Safety in Homes
Every now and then we see the mainstream media publish the same tired platitudes that "guns are bad". These articles are presented with no attempt to provide a balanced presentation of the issues, no citation of the studies which are provided in an attempt to support the author's obvious bias, and no consideration of the reason for firearms ownership.
Such is the case in an online discussion of "Gun Safety In The Home" ; we thank Publicola for bringing it to our attention.
Today (May 30, 2006), the Washington Post provided its own private Doctor Phil at 2pm to answer online questions about "Gun Safety In The Home". His qualifications: he's a Harvard Professor. In fact, he's "associate director of the Harvard Injury Control Research Center and co-author of a new study on gun safety in Archives of Pediatric and Adolescent Medicine."
More on that later. *
The exercise fielded exactly 7 questions, all of which were apparently submitted by people in the immediate Washington, DC area (6) and Chicago (1) ... metropolitan areas which, counter to the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, refuse to allow private ownership of firearms.
If questions were submitted from outside the Beltway/ChiTown area, they weren't included in the published article.
Here's a sample of the questions, and the answers, provided for your amusement and edification:
The reference to "(Price et al., 2005)" is not linked at all. No attempt has been made to provide an explanation or reference to the cited 'study', and the Washington Post has made no effort to provide contributory references.
The same is true ofthe profligrate citations "(Howard 2004; Himle et al 2004; Gatheridge et al 2004).", which are impossible to verify.
It would appear that the citations were invented on the spur of the moment to suggest scientific studies are available to support an opinion which is not, in fact, supportable.
In other words: the author is making it up as he types.
I can do that, because I'm just a pajama-clad blogger and nobody expects more of me. HE can't do that, because he presents himself as an authority.
That is to say, while I may lie with impunity, I don't; I present references to support my claims.
While he may lie with authority, he is unable to providing supporting documentary evidence.
Ergo: I could be a liar, but I'm not; he's unconvincing liar.
Here's another exchange from the original article:
An economist? At Harvard? School of Public Health? And Milller is "associate director of the Harvard Injury Control Research Center"? Sounds positiviley incestuous.
The book ( "PRIVATE GUNS PUBLIC HEALTH") actually exists. Amazon has two in stock, which it cannot sell. It also lists 32 available from other sellers, who can't find a buyer. Given that this book is rated #478,458 in Amazon Books, that's not surprising.
What is surprising is the review ... provided by "Phillip J. Cook, Ph. D" and copyright by the Massachusetts Medical Society. Their review included the following comments:
The choice of words and phrases in this review suggests that the reviewer was not objective in his evaluation. Nobody else cared enough to comment, so we are resigned to accepting the single reviewer as either credible ... or not.
One more example, just to make a point:
Howerver, he does encourage "... [physicians to play ...] a more active role in educating parents about the medical risks involved in firearm ownership and the risk of various storage practices."
* We mentioned that we would discuss "The Archives of Pediatric and Adolescent Medicine" (APAM) later. This is the time.
The Claremont Institute ("Doctors for Responsible Gun Ownership") has said, in response t0 the tendency for some pediatricians to question and counsel patients about Gun Safety In The Home and APAM:
The Claremont Institute has also suggested, in the article "DOCS GUN FOR A BAN":
In fact, it is not only professionally unethical, but also perhaps unlawful, for physicians to suggests safety measures relating to firearms ownership and storage ... an area where they typically have no personal experience or professional training.
Only a personal opinion, which is presented under the guise of "I'm Your Doctor, I Know What's Right".
These articles clearly suggest that the authors of the "yearlong Harvard study (studies)" cleave more to an agenda than to well-considered scientific study.
Based on the unscientific agenda propounded in the root article, we tend to agree.
Every now and then we see the mainstream media publish the same tired platitudes that "guns are bad". These articles are presented with no attempt to provide a balanced presentation of the issues, no citation of the studies which are provided in an attempt to support the author's obvious bias, and no consideration of the reason for firearms ownership.
Such is the case in an online discussion of "Gun Safety In The Home" ; we thank Publicola for bringing it to our attention.
Today (May 30, 2006), the Washington Post provided its own private Doctor Phil at 2pm to answer online questions about "Gun Safety In The Home". His qualifications: he's a Harvard Professor. In fact, he's "associate director of the Harvard Injury Control Research Center and co-author of a new study on gun safety in Archives of Pediatric and Adolescent Medicine."
More on that later. *
The exercise fielded exactly 7 questions, all of which were apparently submitted by people in the immediate Washington, DC area (6) and Chicago (1) ... metropolitan areas which, counter to the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, refuse to allow private ownership of firearms.
If questions were submitted from outside the Beltway/ChiTown area, they weren't included in the published article.
Here's a sample of the questions, and the answers, provided for your amusement and edification:
Note: www.futureofchilden.org is a broken link. The reference simply does not exist.Rockville, Md.: Do you have any references to the studies supporting the notion that teaching kids about safety does not work? I find it hard to believe that teaching safety does not have some positive impact.
Matthew Miller: A great reference -- and a sobering one -- is Hardy behavior oriented approaches to reducing youth gun violence. It can be found at www.futureofchilden.org
Here are a few examples:
Currently, some 10 percent of elementary school teachers provide some firearm safety education. The most popular curriculum is the National Rifle Association's Eddie Eagle program (Price et al., 2005). Unfortunately, recent evaluations find that while the Eddie Eagle program may teach children aged 4-7 to verbalize safety messages, these messages do not lead to actual behavior change (Howard 2004; Himle et al 2004; Gatheridge et al 2004). In one study, boys aged 9-15 were strongly warned not to touch guns. However, when left alone with a gun, about a quarter touched and played with it. Almost all then denied doing so when they were asked. None of the boys touched any other forbidden item after being warned against doing so. "The results of the current study indicate that guns hold a unique allure and cast further doubt on the ability of gun admonitions to keep children safe around guns" (Hardy 2003, 352).
The reference to "(Price et al., 2005)" is not linked at all. No attempt has been made to provide an explanation or reference to the cited 'study', and the Washington Post has made no effort to provide contributory references.
The same is true ofthe profligrate citations "(Howard 2004; Himle et al 2004; Gatheridge et al 2004).", which are impossible to verify.
It would appear that the citations were invented on the spur of the moment to suggest scientific studies are available to support an opinion which is not, in fact, supportable.
In other words: the author is making it up as he types.
I can do that, because I'm just a pajama-clad blogger and nobody expects more of me. HE can't do that, because he presents himself as an authority.
That is to say, while I may lie with impunity, I don't; I present references to support my claims.
While he may lie with authority, he is unable to providing supporting documentary evidence.
Ergo: I could be a liar, but I'm not; he's unconvincing liar.
Here's another exchange from the original article:
Hemmingway is "... an economist at the Harvard School of Public Health".Baltimore, Md.: Have you compiled statistics on how many times a gun has actually been used to protect/defend family members in their homes in recent years? Thank you.
Matthew Miller: I highly recommend David Hemenway's book "PRIVATE GUNS PUBLIC HEALTH" as a one-stop shopping source for clear and unbiased information about the costs and benefits of firearms in the U.S. Here are a few of the statistics Dr. Hemenway notes in his recent book:
Numbers of Uses: The National Research Council (2005) examined the scientific literature on self-defense gun use. They concluded that: "self-defense is an ambiguous term" (p.106), that whether one is a defender or a perpetrator may depend on perspective, and that "we do not know accurately how often armed self-defense occurs or even how precisely to define self-defense" (p. 13). The claim that there are 2.5 million self-defense gun uses each year received no support.
A teenager from Arizona, working with his father, provided a reality check on the claims of millions of self-defense gun uses. They examined all Phoenix area newspaper reports, supplemented by police and court records. Unsubstantiated findings from a Kleck-Gertz study would predict that the police should have known about 98 civilian defensive gun use killings, and 236 defensive gun use firings at criminals during the period studied. Although a homeowner successfully defending his family against a home invasion would provide a juicy news story, a careful investigation by the father-son team could find only two actual cases of self-defense gun use involving a killing or a firing at an assailant. These two incidents appeared to be escalating altercations, with innocent bystanders exposed to the gunfire (Denton & Fabricius 2004).
Is More Better? While there are undoubtedly virtuous incidents of self-defense gun use, there are too many stories of self-defense gone awry. "A five year old girl in Houston is dead after being mistaken for a burglar by her stepfather He shot when someone tried to open the door of the bedroom where he and his wife were sleeping" (NBC56.com, 8/16/04). "A teenager, who celebrated his 16th birthday by playing pranks in his neighborhood, was fatally shot by a neighbor who mistook him for a burglar (the teen) and an unidentified friend were ringing doorbells or knocking on doors and then running away" (St. Petersburg Times, 10/27/03). "A small girl [aged 2] remained in the hospital in critical condition Sunday from a gunshot wound inflicted by a man who had confronted a group of teenagers after one sent a football crashing through the window of his southwest Houston apartment (The man) rushed out, demanding to know who broke the window He took his hand out of his pocket and he had a gun. That's when everybody started running. Police said (the man) raised the pistol toward two of the fleeing juveniles and fired" (Houston Chronicle, 7/24/05).
Claims about the high frequency of self-defense gun use are also contradicted by the data. For example, for sexual assaults, only 1 victim in 1,119 total incidents reported attacking or threatening with a gun (15 used a non-gun weapon; 38 called the police or a guard; 120 attacked without a weapon; 161 ran away; 219 yelled; 343 struggled). In robberies, 1.2% of victims used a gun, whereas 3.8% called the police or guard, 12.7% ran away, 20.5% struggled. In confrontational burglaries, 2.7% of victims used a gun, 3.3% some other weapon, 6.3% ran away or hid, 10.9% struggled, 20.4% yelled or turned out the lights, and 20.1% called the police. In all confrontational crimes, 0.9% of victims reported using a gun, 1.7% a non-gun weapon, 7.2% called the police, 10.1% ran away, 13.8% struggled, and 29.3% did nothing (Hemenway 2005).
The NCVS data show that: (1) gun use in self-defense is very rare; (2) it is not clear whether resistance will or will not reduce the likelihood of injury; and (3) two of the most common forms of "resistance" also appear to be the most successful in terms of reducing the likelihood of injury-calling the police or running away (Hemenway 2005).
An economist? At Harvard? School of Public Health? And Milller is "associate director of the Harvard Injury Control Research Center"? Sounds positiviley incestuous.
The book ( "PRIVATE GUNS PUBLIC HEALTH") actually exists. Amazon has two in stock, which it cannot sell. It also lists 32 available from other sellers, who can't find a buyer. Given that this book is rated #478,458 in Amazon Books, that's not surprising.
What is surprising is the review ... provided by "Phillip J. Cook, Ph. D" and copyright by the Massachusetts Medical Society. Their review included the following comments:
(Emphasis added)
The canonical example for injury-control investigators is highway safety, in which the comprehensive approach propounded by Bill Haddon, a physician who served as the first director of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration....
Haddon sought to direct the focus in highway safety away from improved driving and toward improved design of vehicles and roadways. For gun violence, the analogy is to focus less on the shooters and more on access to guns and their design. Of course, it is not obvious that an approach that has been successful in reducing highway crashes, which are mostly unintentional, will also be successful in curtailing the intentional acts (suicide and assault) that produce most gun injuries and deaths. If shooters were determined, resourceful people with clear and sustained deadly intent, then regulating guns would likely have little effect on the number of homicides and suicides; they would find a way. But in the real world, as Hemenway spells out, a large portion of serious intentional violence would be less deadly if guns were less readily available or less user-friendly. Furthermore, although gun "accidents" make up only a small fraction of the total gun injuries, they are common enough that the Consumer Product Safety Commission would surely give them high priority if it were not barred from doing so by federal law.
Another feature separates firearms from vehicles: the possibility of "virtuous use." The belief in the importance of giving civilians a means of self-defense has long been used as an argument for preserving the right to keep handguns in the home. In recent decades, that philosophy has fueled a successful effort to ease state restrictions on carrying concealed weapons in public. This campaign has made great use of the work of criminologist Gary Kleck, who concluded from his analysis of survey data that there are millions of virtuous self-defense uses of guns each year. Hemenway has done more than any other scholar in rebutting that absurd claim.
The choice of words and phrases in this review suggests that the reviewer was not objective in his evaluation. Nobody else cared enough to comment, so we are resigned to accepting the single reviewer as either credible ... or not.
One more example, just to make a point:
Again, the author makes claims about statistical evidence, but does not cite the sources.Washington, D.C.: This topic is a sensitive one for me: When my brother was 8 years old, in the early 80s, he accidentally shot himself with a police revolver my father had borrowed from a friend. [snip]
...
[snip] Do you feel the penalties for negligent firearms control satisfactory? Would making it mandatory that a negligent parent would see jail help deal with the problem?
Matthew Miller: Parents in cases where a child accesses a gun are rarely charged, but I do not personally think that making it mandatory that a negligent parent would see jail is the best way to reduce accidents and suicide among our children.
[snip] One myth is that where guns are more prevalent killings are less likely -- the exact opposite is the case.
[snip]. Physicians should also be playing a more active role in educating parents about the medical risks involved in firearm ownership and the risk of various storage practices.
Howerver, he does encourage "... [physicians to play ...] a more active role in educating parents about the medical risks involved in firearm ownership and the risk of various storage practices."
* We mentioned that we would discuss "The Archives of Pediatric and Adolescent Medicine" (APAM) later. This is the time.
The Claremont Institute ("Doctors for Responsible Gun Ownership") has said, in response t0 the tendency for some pediatricians to question and counsel patients about Gun Safety In The Home and APAM:
Some medical organizations have urged doctors to tell their patients about the dangers of guns. We all know that misusing guns can be dangerous, but the risks of guns have been blown way out of proportion by groups like the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP). Even worse is the tendency of some medical organizations to inject their political views favoring gun control into patient education. That's simply unethical. (emphasis added)
The Claremont Institute has also suggested, in the article "DOCS GUN FOR A BAN":
Another slam at kids and guns appeared in the April 2004 issue of Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine. "Gun Threats Against and Self-Defense Gun Use by California Adolescents" studied gun use among a group of Californians aged 12 through 17. Only 4% of them reported ever having been threatened with a gun. The earthshaking scientific contribution this article makes is that these 4% were boys who tended to threaten others and whose parents didn't know where they were after school. Did we need a yearlong Harvard study to tell us that? And what about the 96% who never had been threatened with a gun? Can we learn anything from good kids who stay out of trouble? The authors apparently think not. (emphasis added)
In fact, it is not only professionally unethical, but also perhaps unlawful, for physicians to suggests safety measures relating to firearms ownership and storage ... an area where they typically have no personal experience or professional training.
Only a personal opinion, which is presented under the guise of "I'm Your Doctor, I Know What's Right".
These articles clearly suggest that the authors of the "yearlong Harvard study (studies)" cleave more to an agenda than to well-considered scientific study.
Based on the unscientific agenda propounded in the root article, we tend to agree.
Monday, May 29, 2006
A Practical Shooter in Iraq
One of the gun clubs here in NW Oregon includes a Practical Rifle match every month ... rain or shine.
It's really a "Tactical Rifle" match because Randy S., the guy who has accepted responsibility for keeping the program going, works hard to make the stages as realistic as possible. There are frequent short-range and long-range change-ups in some stages, and most involve shooting from uncomfortable positions. Because this is a year-around competition, the participants often find themselves trying to assume a comfortable shooting position while bellied up to a rocky, muddy bern with rain coming down the back of their necks.
Randy recommends tactical vests, which seems like a good idea considering some of the stages require reloads when it's just not 'practical' to dig around for a reload magazine which you can only get to by rolling over onto your back -- or which might be in the mud puddle you are curled up in because that's the only place where you can see all of your targets.
It's not a game for people who object to getting mud on their shirts, or who think it's unreasonable to shoot from behind a berm and then getting up and running 30 yards to the next shooting position.
You might say it's as realistic as Basic Training. Perhaps more-so.
A couple of months ago, Randy forwarded an email he had received from a young man, Loren, who had been a member of this muddy group. Loren enlisted in the Army last year, and this year he's serving his country in Iraq. Taking advantage of the mil-net email capabilities, Loren sent a letter home to the people who would appreciate hearing about his recent experiences; the guys who had given him his first taste of Practical Rifle.
I wrote Loren to thank him for his service, and he gave me permission to quote the letter. I've edited it only to suit this format. All of the words are Loren's.
When Loren replied with permission to print his letter, he also had some other things to say. I'll keep this short by posting that in a separate article, but I do want to tell Loren:
Thank you for your service to your country, and for giving us all some perspective on the war in Iraq. It's only a coincidence that I received your email on Memorial Day, but I'm grateful to you for providing such a timely reminder of what they did, all of those fine young men who made such a terrible sacrifice for their country. We visited their graves and honored them today, as we do every year. THIS is to honor those who accept the risk for us this year. We want you all to come home. We know some of you will not; you have accepted an arduous and dangerous task. Our thoughts and our prayers are with you every day.
If you would like to write to Loren, please email me (see the bottom of the page) and I'll forward it to him.
It's really a "Tactical Rifle" match because Randy S., the guy who has accepted responsibility for keeping the program going, works hard to make the stages as realistic as possible. There are frequent short-range and long-range change-ups in some stages, and most involve shooting from uncomfortable positions. Because this is a year-around competition, the participants often find themselves trying to assume a comfortable shooting position while bellied up to a rocky, muddy bern with rain coming down the back of their necks.
Randy recommends tactical vests, which seems like a good idea considering some of the stages require reloads when it's just not 'practical' to dig around for a reload magazine which you can only get to by rolling over onto your back -- or which might be in the mud puddle you are curled up in because that's the only place where you can see all of your targets.
It's not a game for people who object to getting mud on their shirts, or who think it's unreasonable to shoot from behind a berm and then getting up and running 30 yards to the next shooting position.
You might say it's as realistic as Basic Training. Perhaps more-so.
A couple of months ago, Randy forwarded an email he had received from a young man, Loren, who had been a member of this muddy group. Loren enlisted in the Army last year, and this year he's serving his country in Iraq. Taking advantage of the mil-net email capabilities, Loren sent a letter home to the people who would appreciate hearing about his recent experiences; the guys who had given him his first taste of Practical Rifle.I wrote Loren to thank him for his service, and he gave me permission to quote the letter. I've edited it only to suit this format. All of the words are Loren's.
Hello fellow warriors,
I hope you are doing well these days and the Practical Rifle gang is going strong.
I finally made it to Iraq. I'm in beautiful Kirkuk now and getting ready to go to work. The resort I'm staying at is called forward operating base (FOB) Warrior, just outside of Kirkuk. Kirkuk has a population of about 700,000 people. Kurds make up about 60% of the population, Arabs are about 30% and the rest are Turkmen and Assyrian.
The company I was assigned to is in another part of the country. They split my team off and sent us to Kirkuk. Since we've been here I've been split off from my team to manage an Iraqi non-profit organization. My official title here is Kirkuk Business Center Advisor.
The Kirkuk Business Center (KBC) is focused on facilitating economic growth in Kirkuk province. There are 8 employees and 3 State Department advisors that I manage. Even though my title is Advisor, I have compete authority over all the operations here. These guys have been told what to do and how to do it for so long, they can't run the business on their own. I could do like my predecessors and direct the entire operation for them. My plan is to coach them to run the business for themselves. One of these days the coalition forces will leave and they'll be on their own. The people at the KBC are good people and the service they provide will be essential to local businesses over the coming years.
When I leave I want to make sure they can run things independently, without our guidance and money. I'll probably replace the manager shortly because he isn't effectively managing the operation. I need someone who is energetic and can interface well with the local business and political leaders.
If you want to know more about the KBC, go to www.kbciraq.org.
It's still a dangerous place here and I'm keeping my head down, so to speak.
We sent a young kid home a few nights ago and the ceremony was very honoring. This was my first experience. Even though we were still running missions, about 800 people from the 101st, my unit, some Air Force and private security stood in formation on the flight line just before midnight. A C-130 landed, positioned itself and lowered its rear ramp. It shut off its engines and everything else that makes noise. In the silent darkness we saluted as a US flag was presented, placed over the casket by the honor guard and the casket was slowly loaded onto the aircraft. Once the casket was secured we walked away in silence as the soldier's unit huddled around the soldier to say good bye one last time. I hope his family was told about how much respect he was shown as he left here. I hope we don't have to meet like that on the flight line again.
Each Practical Rifle match is really another day of training. I'm thankful for all the training I've had with you guys because I'm now doing something with it. Even though I'm working as an advisor here, there are still days when we run other types of missions or go out in support of something the 101st is doing. I carry and M-4 rifle and a Beretta M-9 pistol and I don't have to concentrate on what I'm doing with my weapons and my mind can focus on the situation I'm in. All the time we've trained together has made weapons handling and employment 2nd nature.
I'd say the most difficult part of working over here is having to wear so much crap everywhere. I wear the regular ACU uniform, an ACH (advanced combat helmet), ballistic eyewear, combat earplugs, the IBA (interceptor body armor) vest with SAPI (I don't know what that stands for) plates (heavy plates in the front and back of the IBA that will stop a 7.62 round), my Blackhawk tactical vest, a backpack and a Camelback with 1.5 liters of water. I carry my rifle and pistol, 270 rounds of 5.56, 45 rounds of 9mm, a thermite grenade, a smoke grenade, various knives, a Leatherman and about 30 pounds of gear in my backpack including a computer. I don't need to, but I carry 6-8 cans of Diet Coke in my bag too. With all that stuff hanging off your body, it makes moving around kind of difficult and it gets really hot. Then when you get into the humvee, the space is so tight you can't hardly move with all that stuff on and a rifle next to your leg. That's where I really prefer a cross-draw holster over a thigh holster.
I love my M-4. I have my flashlight and green laser permanently mounted on the handguard rails. I put on an ACOG or my dot sight, depending on the mission. I tuned the trigger so it's lighter and smoother and I put on a First Samco pistol grip that fits my hand better. I'd rather have my Glock than the M-9, but it's a backup anyway. I really like the M-240B 7.62 machinegun. It's really smooth and accurate for me. The M-249 5.56 version is a little too light and jumpy. The good old M2 .50 cal is still as good as it always was. It feels really good to rip stuff up with that one.
We start a lot of fires with the M2 because we mostly use the incendiary rounds. As with everything, regular maintenance is the key to their performance.
Keep up the good training, you never know when you'll need to put it into action. I'll catch up with you soon.
Loren
When Loren replied with permission to print his letter, he also had some other things to say. I'll keep this short by posting that in a separate article, but I do want to tell Loren:
Thank you for your service to your country, and for giving us all some perspective on the war in Iraq. It's only a coincidence that I received your email on Memorial Day, but I'm grateful to you for providing such a timely reminder of what they did, all of those fine young men who made such a terrible sacrifice for their country. We visited their graves and honored them today, as we do every year. THIS is to honor those who accept the risk for us this year. We want you all to come home. We know some of you will not; you have accepted an arduous and dangerous task. Our thoughts and our prayers are with you every day.If you would like to write to Loren, please email me (see the bottom of the page) and I'll forward it to him.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)