SAF Sues Holder, FBI Over Gun Rights Denial

Shooting Wire: "BELLEVUE, WA -

Acting on behalf of a Georgia resident and honorably discharged Vietnam War veteran, the Second Amendment Foundation today filed a lawsuit against Attorney General Eric Holder and the Federal Bureau of Investigation over enforcement of a federal statute that can deny gun rights to someone with a simple misdemeanor conviction on his record.

---

In July 1968, Schrader, then 21, was found guilty of misdemeanor assault and battery relating to a fight involving a man who had previously assaulted him in Annapolis, MD. The altercation was observed by a police officer, who arrested Schrader, then an enlisted man in the Navy, stationed in Annapolis. The man he fought with was in a street gang that had attacked him for entering their 'territory,' according to the complaint."

This guy can't legally own a gun in the state of Maryland because of a bar fight 40 years ago.

The man must be some kind of "Rambo".

(Note: this is based upon information available on October 15, 2010)

HP Printer Support in Iraq

No comment ... the video says it all.




H/T "Digger Fulkerson"

Sharron Angle sends Joy Behar flowers

Sharron Angle sends Joy Behar flowers: Scott Wong - POLITICO.COM:

"Sharron Angle said it with flowers.

The Nevada GOP Senate nominee sent a floral arrangement to “The View” co-host Joy Behar on Wednesday, one day after Behar called Angle a “bitch,” and a “moron,” and said she’s “going to hell.”"

Of course, Behar (Mighty Mouth of "The View", not that anyone watches that except excerpts on the Internet) didn't get the joke.

American Groupspeak

American Groupspeak - Victor Davis Hanson - Townhall Conservative:

Dr. Victor Davis Hanson has nailed it: You can talk about anything you want in public, but if you don't couch it in "politically correct" context you'll be accused of being mean, hurtful, cruel, racist ... in short, a Conservative!

So maybe it's better to just keep your mouth SHUT!?

"Here are some reminders about what to shut up about.

Don't discuss the deficit. Instead, call borrowing 'stimulus.' Trillions are not much different from billions. Debt can be paid back with more borrowing and someone else's higher taxes. Ignore the lessons of Greece and California. To appear noble, call for more unemployment benefits, free medical care and more entitlements. To sound cruel, talk about borrowing to pay for them."

Oh, and don't forget to read the comments. Especially run the 4:51 minute "Runaway Slave" trailer.

Joe Biden blurts out that he will be Barack Obama's 2012 running mate – Telegraph Blogs

Joe Biden blurts out that he will be Barack Obama's 2012 running mate – Telegraph Blogs:

"Joe Biden just can’t keep his mouth shut. OK, I know that’s not exactly breaking news. But at a time when Democrats are supposed to be focussed on the November 2nd mid-terms and Barack Obama has not even announced he will seek a second term, did Biden really need to declare that he’ll be on the 2012 ticket?

Here he is shooting from the lip to the New York Times:

“I tell you what, there’s real trust, that’s why he’s asked me to run again,” Mr. Biden said Monday, dropping this tidbit at the end of a 40-minute conversation, just before he dashed off to his third fund-raiser of the day. “Look, he said, ‘We’re going to run together, are you going to run?’ I said, ‘Of course, you want me to run with you, I’m happy to run with you.’ ”"

Simpering Joe is just a heartbeat away from the Presidency of the United States of America.

Let us all pray for the continuing good health of B.H. Obama's heart.

Their grandparents wanted to rule the world!

"The acrid immigration debate sparked this summer by former Bundesbank board member Thilo Sarrazin has apparently had an effect on the German public. A poll released on Wednesday showed that one-tenth want a “Fuhrer,” while one-quarter admitted to strong xenophobic attitudes – up from one-fifth in 2008"

It surprises me, ... does it surprise you? ... that a significant percentage of German people have responded to a poll supporting the rise of a "Fuhrer" to lead the nation. This is obviously similar to the feelings of 1930's Germany, which encouraged the elevation of Adolph Hitler to the role of Chancellor, and later "Fuhrer", of the country.

The poll numbers are probably in response to the rising percentage of Islamic German Citizens, the political influence of which natural born Germans are increasingly opposed.

If this catches you unprepared to accept, especially when compared to the 1937-1945 Nazification of the country (which has been so determinedly renounced by Germans during the past 65 years), then perhaps it would be illuminating to consider the current attitudes of endemic Germans regarding the possession of firearms:

In the light of "shooting rampage[s] with ... legally owned sporting weapon[s]", German citizens are asking each other WHY they [the average German citizen] should be 'allowed' to possess firearms:

"The Badische Zeitung, based in Freiburg some 80-kilometres from Larrach, expressed the region’s sense of shock and helplessness in the face of such incidents.

“Along with the speculation that comes after the fact there's another question which we can’t spare the countless weapons lovers living in peace,” the paper said. [Emphasis added by the editor: is it surprising that "weapons lovers" might "live in peace"? Perhaps they know something that undefended people do not know.] “When there is a firearm at hand, is there not a threat that difficult psychological conflicts will escalate faster than without them? To this day the weapons lobby still hasn’t been able to convince us that the two have nothing to do with the other.”

Baden-Wirttemburg's capital daily, the Stuttgarter Zeitung, warned against knee-jerk weapons law reforms, but said Sunday’s shocking events renewed questions about whether current regulations are adequate.

“Once again a weapon that should have been used for recreational sport shooting was used to kill, and this time the perpetrator was a markswoman herself,” the paper said. “She would not have been able to commit the crime if she had faced tighter weapon regulations.”

While stronger laws for such weapons may not prevent every crime, they would hinder at least a few, the paper said."

“After the most recent crimes we must be allowed to weigh the freedom of sports shooters against other people’s right to life. In this society people’s freedom is encroached for petty reasons. Is it really unreasonable then if marksmen only have a right to reach for their weapons when they are practising the sport? Stricter weapons law won’t make disturbed people better. But in individual cases it could soften the consequences of their behaviour.”

Hannover daily the Neue Presse agreed with this view, lamenting: “Why on earth do sport shooters bring their weapons and pistols into their homes at all? There is no plausible reason.”

These guns are meant only for use within sporting clubs, where they should be stored with the appropriate security precautions, the paper said.

This is an excellent question, and German newspapers are performing a valuable service by asking the question ... although the context in which the question is raised may seem, to the average American reader, to be slightly skewed to a conclusion which is pre-ordained by the publisher.

This newspaper seems to accept the precept that private ownership of firearms is "A Bad Idea", even though a half-hearted attempt has been made to present the question in a 'neutral' context.

Why SHOULD German citizens be permitted to own firearms? After all, one article supports the concept of a "Nanny State", and the other (under the guise of presenting the 'general viewpoint of the average German Citizen') presupposes that there is no justifiable reason for private ownership of firearms.

The Jews know why.

In the period 1939-1943, under increasing persecution by the Nazis, the Jewish population of the Warsaw Ghetto learned that the only viable opposition was "armed resistance". Only by forcibly opposing German oppression were they able, for a short time, to prevent the Germans from shipping them to concentration camps. While they were in the Ghetto, the Jews discovered that the sole relief from persecution was to resist, by force of arms, German oppression and persecution.

It didn't last; the Jews were eventually overwhelmed by the diversion of a German artillery division for a series of months. But during that period, they succeeded in weakening, even so slightly, the German military power although it caused the Jewish population to suffer grievously.

Yes, the Jews know why it is tantamount to tyranny for a civilian population to be denied the God Given Right to self-defense. It isn't a matter of permitting citizens to engage in sporting competition; it isn't because a government "allows" its citizens to own firearms; it isn't even because a government 'recognizes' their right to defend their home against individual predators.

God gives them the right to defend themselves against a predatory government. Nothing less is implied, nor significant in comparison to the right to defend the freedom of the people.

If the Germany of today does not recognize, or accept, that Right, then the citizens of Germany are only fooling themselves when they think that a paltry few individuals who die because a German person goes 'mad' and shoots his or her neighbors justifies abrogation of that right.

Madness on the individual level is surely to be deprecated; madness against an entire segment of the population is ... Government.

When we allow "The State" to determine our fates, we give out fate unto the hands of people who are "popular". Have we not yet learned that popularity does not equate to wisdom?

Germany should have been the first group of people to recognize the value of (as it is known in America) the Second Amendment to the Constitution.

Apparently, they have already forgotten the lesson.

The Jews have not.

Let us all learn from the Jews.

Craigslist Ad

To the Guy Who Tried to Mug Me in Downtown Savannah night before last. Date: 2009-05-27, 1:43 a.m. E.S.T.


I was the guy wearing the black Burberry jacket that you demanded that I hand over, shortly after you pulled the knife on me and my girlfriend, threatening our lives. You also asked for my girlfriend's purse and earrings. I can only hope that you somehow come across this rather important message.

First, I'd like to apologize for your embarrassment; I didn't expect you to actually crap in your pants when I drew my pistol after you took my jacket. The evening was not that cold, and I was wearing the jacket for a reason. My girlfriend had just bought me that Kimber Model 1911 .45 ACP pistol for my birthday, and we had picked up a shoulder holster for it that very evening. Obviously you agree that it is a very intimidating weapon when pointed at your head ... isn't it?!

I know it probably wasn't fun walking back to wherever you'd come from with that brown sludge in your pants. I'm sure it was even worse walking bare-footed since I made you leave your shoes, cell phone, and wallet with me. [That prevented you from calling or running to your buddies to come help mug us again].

After I called your mother or "Momma" as you had her listed in your cell, I explained the entire episode of what you'd done. Then I went and filled up my gas tank as well as those of four other people in the gas station, -- on your credit card. The guy with the big motor home took 150 gallons and was extremely grateful!

I gave your shoes to a homeless guy outside Vinnie Van Go Go's, along with all the cash in your wallet. [That made his day!]

I then threw your wallet into the big pink "pimp mobile" that was parked at the curb ... after I broke the windshield and side window and keyed the entire driver's side of the car.

Later, I called a bunch of phone sex numbers from your cell phone. Ma Bell just now shut down the line, although I only used the phone for a little over a day now, so what 's going on with that? Earlier, I managed to get in two threatening phone calls to the DA's office and one to the FBI, while mentioning President Obama as my possible target.

The FBI guy seemed really intense and we had a nice long chat (I guess while he traced your number etc.).

In a way, perhaps I should apologize for not killing you ... but I feel this type of retribution is a far more appropriate punishment for your threatened crime. I wish you well as you try to sort through some of these rather immediate pressing issues, and can only hope that you have the opportunity to reflect upon, and perhaps reconsider, the career path you've chosen to pursue in life. Remember, next time you might not be so lucky. Have a good day!

Thoughtfully yours,

Alex

The Last Hunt

It was late in the 1980's, my father (whom I had always address as "Pop") was 75 years old and his bones and his eyes were both getting old.

Pop and I had been hunting Antelope since 1963 .. first in the Owyhee Reservoir in Eastern Oregon, then in the Steens Mountain region west of the Malheur Wildlife Reservation. But when the draw for Oregon Antelope Hunts had become so fiercely competitive that it was virtually impossible to reliably get tags, we began buying tags for the Antelope hunts near Rawlins, Wyoming.

By the middle 8o's it had become apparent that all of the 'good' areas even in Wyoming had been taken, so even though the Western Cheyenne area was not a highly populated Antelope area, we decided to spend another week, another thousand bucks, and drive a thousand miles each way for a last Father and Son Hunt.

We both bought 'felt hats' (his was brown, mine was dark grey) and brought matching .41 Magnum revolvers to the hunt. Mine was the original 'iron sights', his had a 6x optical scope which was firmly mounted by copious amounts of glass-embedding compound which he had used in his stock-making business.

On the first day of the Wyoming Antelope season, we found a nice draw beside the forest service road in( whatever the National Forest immediately West of Cheyenne was named), and set up a make-shift camp with our cheesy tow-along trailer/camper. We had two-and-a-half days to hunt before we had to start back, so we got there early and after a hard trek up a 60% hill we found ourselves glassing a high prairie covered in knee-deep yellow prairie grass. We saw lots of antelope, be we knew by our experience they would be scattered the next morning.

The first day we mostly loafed around. Tried to sight in our GoatPistols ... Pop's scope mounts failed after two shots (the glass bedding compound was not able to withstand the pounding recoil), so no telescopic sights for his pistol. He would have to settle for his hand-made 6mm-280 rifle. A fierce weapon for the thin-skinned "Prong Horned Antelope" but not what he would have preferred. He wanted to take "The Goat" after overcoming a challenge.

Little did we know then how much of a Challenge it would be to take meat, let along an edible beast.

So our first morning was devoted to haphazard shooting, with no expectation that any game in the area would stay put while we were plinking.

But Antelope are both fickle and curious creatures, and one can never know what will cause them to move away ... or stay ... in an area where there is shooting going on. Unlike Deer, Antelope tend do graze where cattle graze, and if the cattle are not concerned by rude noises, sometimes the Antelope stay in the same area "anyway".

Later that day, I found myself laying on my back in a shallow gully, trying to stay still while a herd of Antelope grazed nervously around me. I suppose I should have shot one of the, but I was so enthralled by their propinquity, and their beauty, that I could not bear to disturb them.

Later in the day I had a head-shot at a decent buck at either 20 or 90 feet; took a shot with the revolver and hit him right between the horns ... and about two feet high. No trophy here.
Even later, what was probably the same buck jumped up and ran left-to-right across a big open area; I took either two or six shots at him, missing him every time. The term "Buck Fever" was invented for this kind of situation. Pop was standing behind me, laughing quietly. I didn'tmind; I wasn't expecting to take an antelope with a pistol; hoping, yes. Expecting, no.


The second day of the hunt, we were getting more serious. And this is where the disappointment of the hunter entered the picture.

Middle of the day, I found the King Buck Antelope standing broadside in the tall grass less than 200 yards away .... proud, arrogant, and a perfect target for the 6mm-280 that my father was carrying. I pointed the buck out to my father, and he could not see it. At all.

I got behind Pop and moved his six-power scoped rifle as close as I could to the antelope. Pop still couldn't see it.

In frustration, pop said "I can't see it .. why don't you take it?"

"No", I said. "This is your antelope, Pop. Either you take it, or we'll walk away. You choose."

He couldn't see it, and the antelope walked away. And so did we.

We went back to the camp, chased our hats which had been blown away in the afternoon predominant Westerly Wind. We ate a light meal, and had a drink, talked until dark and got to bed early.

The next morning the third day of the season, I awoke early. Tried to wake Pop and he said
"I don't really don't feel like getting up; why don't you just go hunt without me?"

I didn't really want to hunt without him, but I did. I tried out my home-made "snake load" rounds from the .41 Magnum on a telephone pole about 10am. It made a nice pattern.

Just before noon, a pretty little doe pranced up onto the ridgeline I was wandering along, and then stopped in (again) the classic broadside pose. Less than 100 yards away, and although I had never knowingly killed a female of any game animal, I took the shot. We had "any sex" tags, so it was legal and ... well, I couldn't bear the though of coming home without any meat, so I dropped her as clean as I could, which was not much of a challenge for the .25-06 loaded with 117 grain Nosler boat-tail bullets .. which I had used successfully at five times the range, several times.

Field dressed, I guess the sweet girl weighed about 70 pounds, so it was no great chore to drag her the 200 yards or so to the truck. I boosted her onto the rack on top of the cab, and we skinned her out at the camp.


That night we made it as far as Evanston, a few miles short of the Western Wyoming border. We got a motel room, and just as we walked into the restaurant the power went out. We sat down n what was (as it turned out) the dining room. We sat there for an hour while we listened to the folks in the bar laughing and enjoying themselves; if we could have found it in the dark, we would have had a better time. The bartender obviously know the location of the 'good stuff', and it was all free. We never had a drop.

But we had a good dinner, eventually, and went back to our room for a good night's sleep. At 6am the next day we awoke to 4" of snow and that sweet doe was frozen stiff from there, thru breakfast at Salt Lake City, and on into the cooler at Schwaggart's Frozen Foods in Pendleton by closing time.

We got a hide, and from that a couple of pairs of soft gloves out of the old girl. Oh, and about 40 pounds of good Antelope steaks after she was boned out. Pop wouldn't take any of the meat; said it was my kill, my meat, and I hadn't the heart to insist that he take any of it.

Because the truth was, Pop really wouldnt have been able to stomach any of it. He had his chance for a good trophy Antelope, and he just couldn't get the job done.

I ate every bit of that she-goat, over then next year, and as much as I enjoyed it I would much rather he had taken an equal share.

The trip cost us at least $1,000 each, which when prorated over 40# of meat made it the most expensive meals I had ever eaten.

But the expense, the meat, the trip .. none of that was the point.

The point was that my father never went hunting again, and he died a few years later from a combination of Diabetes, Cancer and Alzheimer's, never having enjoyed a bite of the meat and ... if his memory had been intact ... knowing that he didn't take one of the best shots of his life.

But he had the hunt, he had the time with his son, and he never voice more than a passing regret.

Me? I wanted him to have that shot. Hit or miss, I had guided him to one of the best animals he had ever not-taken.

This is the man who, on my first antelope hunt 15 year earlier, took the best antelope out of the herd right out from under my sights on Opening Day, because dammit .. he had the shot, and I didn't.

He taught me everything I know about hunting, about sportsmanship, and about shooting. And in the last months of his life he didn't know who I was. For all that, he didn't know who his wife was.

The perfect end to this story would have had him nailing that buck in the tall grass, but it just wasn't what fate had in store for him.

It may be the last good lesson he had to teach me; disappointment, and how to deal with it. I didn't want to learn that lesson quite so early, but it has served me well in the ensuing years.


It always hurts. Disappointment always wounds. But I have learned to just ... let it go, and move on.

I'll probably not be able to teach this lesson so well to my own children. God, I hope not!

But if I could, I could wish no better wish than to teach this most bitter lesson by simply ... sleeping through it.

There was a man.

Bollywood dance flash mob erupts at OSU | kgw.com | KGW Local News | Portland, Oregon

Bollywood dance flash mob erupts at OSU (Corvallis,Oregon)

Unsolicited Advice

LAST weekend (September 11, 2010) I managed to make it to a USPSA match and shot the whole thing! This is my goal at all matches, of course, but you may recall that at the Monster Match the weekend before, I only competed in the first day of the two-day match.

In itself, this match is not particularly exceptional. It was a great club match, I had many (too many!) stages where I almost did it right, I had a lot of fun and I enjoyed shooting with some good people.

But this is what I have learned to expect from a match. Just enough mistakes to keep me from looking like I know what I am doing, and the company of good people making it worth the effort and expense of, basically, "showing up".

I did take a lot of time taking pictures, which is another thing I enjoy.

Well, no. I don't like taking pictures all of the time, because I would rather just watch folks shoot as other people do .. with the naked eye. Trying to film as much as I can is a great distraction, and I only do it for a couple of different reasons.

First, because it I can later give the edited films to the people who are shooting with me on that day, and second because it gives me video to include in the articles I write here.

The first reason is the real purpose.

I learned a long time ago that people don't object to me filming them, even when they screw up because it gives them the opportunity to critically review their own performance.

My own experience, when someone has video-taped my stage runs, is that I can not only see what I did wrong, but I can also see what I do right. That helps me understand both my weaknesses and my strengths, so when I am walking through a stage in the future, I can choose the best way to shoot it by determining whether I can capitalize on my strengths.

And of course, it also shows me the things I need to practice.

As if I ever practice.

One of the better events in this match is that I was squadded with some people who were students at the "Introduction to USPSA" class which I teach.

This is a 3-hour course (often extended for the convenience of the students) which attempts to teach folks who have not competed in USPSA matches what they need to do. We not only teach safety rules, we also teach etiquette, the rules of competition, and what can help your performance. And we strive to make every new shooter the rules of safety, and all of the ways in which they can avoid to violating those rules.

At this match, I was pleased to learn that I had been squadded with several people who had taken that course. They are all good folks, and I like them. So I was especially gratified to see what they had learned after having taken the course, and then getting a couple of matches under their belts.

It's not easy to get started in Practical Shooting, and I've learned that they will often make mistakes .. but they rarely violate the safety rules. At least, those who are obviously paying attention learn that.

Yes, I got to matches with, and I squad with, the people that I teach. I've learned that they have enough problems with just becoming comfortable to the competitive environment. They don't need someone offering unsolicited advice. They will learn to dope out the best way to shoot a stage sooner or later. The important thing is that they shoot safely. All of the other stuff won't be learned until they mess up a stage or two. Or more.

So I don't offer advice. When they want it, they know they can ask. Usually, they don't ask. They want to make this sport their own, or they don't want to continue competing.

All they want, is to shoot. Eventually they will learn ways to shoot which make them more competitive, but the best thing to do is to just ... let them shoot.

Sometime during every class, I make this point to the students:

"When you go to your first class, you need to make it clear to your squad that you are a New Shooter. If asked, they will put your scorecard down at the bottom. That's good, you are new at this and you need to 'go to school' on more experienced shooters.

And sooner or later, one of the more experienced shooters will offer you advice. You should listen to them carefully, smile, and thank them for the advice. Then just go shoot the stage they way that seems best to you."

Usually, unsolicited advice is an annoyance at best, and insulting at worst.

The moral of the story is, if you are one of those "more experienced shooters", you should be reluctant to offer unsolicited advise. Whatever you say will probably be right, but as long as it is not a safety issue, or a clarification of the rules (which they have violated, or might have come very close to violating), the kindest thing you could say to them is "Good job! You shot the stage safely."

I'm sure glad I got that of my chest, and thank you for listening to my unsolicited advice.

Now, I'm including a video from the last ARPC club match, featuring two shooters who have only a few matches experience. I've already sent this video to them, but I want to include it here to show that even relatively 'raw' shooters can do just fine in competition. They may do some things that you think you could help them to do better, but I think it's a really good idea to treat them with the same courtesy and thoughtfulness that you expect others to extend to you.

In other words, consider not bothering them while they're finding their own best way though the competitive jungle.

If I need to be more clear: just shut up and let them rock!

Monster Match 2010

Here's the Bad News:

In the spring of 2010, land developers encroached upon what had been "safe" over-the-berm areas to the west of the Chehalem Valley Sportsmen's Club in Dundee, Oregon. Because all but one of the shooting bays at this Dundee range had been oriented to the west, it became necessary to go in with earth-movers and carve new shooting bays oriented to the south. At a club-cost of $40,000 to $50,000, the Dundee club had managed to get most of the earth moving done, and most bays established, by July of 2010. They still needed to do 'other' range work, including establishment of a semi-permanent building in what had been the "Croc Bay" to serve as a stats shack. Mainly because work was still in progress, the Dundee "You Got Bullets?" Croc Match was not scheduled for this year.

This high-round-count match has always been both a well-appreciated, well-attended match, but also one of the staples of the club's annual match income.

We local people were disappointed, especially because the 2009 match had been canceled due to the general unavailability of reloading components to the public -- due to the combination of heavy Military consumption of ammunition, and a general public 'run' on ammunition and components after the election of Barack Hussein Obama in the fall of 2008.

Here's the Good News:
This year the Albany Rifle and Pistol Club (ARPC) chose to put on a somewhat similar high-round-count match.

Scheduled for Saturday and Sunday of Labor Day weekend (September 4-5, 2010), the match criteria was: Eight stages in two days, OVER 450 round minimum required to complete the match, $50 match fee, and competitors ARE permitted to pick up their brass as long as it does not delay the match.

Speaking personally, that has been one of the main reasons why I have not been able to attend the annual Crock Match in recent years. Those matches were going to ten stages, 650+ rounds minimum requirement ... and the ammunition cost was often as high, or even higher than the match fees.

Thanks to the good offices of the Hobo Brasser in loading 1200 rounds of ammunition for me (all new Winchester .38 Super brass), I was able to attend.

Author note: I was unable to attend both days, for the simple fact that my recurring battle with Insomnia kept me from sleeping after the Saturday round. At 7am on Sunday morning, I had to call the MD, Mike McCarter, and notify him that I wouldn't be shooting that day as I was in no condition to run&gun. It is important to notify the statistician so that my missing score sheets would not cause them to delay release of the final scores. I ended up in 39th place.

The match ran smooth as clockwork and according to the final scores (apparently not yet available online) 50 people showed up for the match. Four DQ'd, and everyone seemed to be having a good time.


I managed to get videos of all of the 5 stages I shot. Too bad I didn't get to shoot the other three stages, because some of them seemed very challenging ... with lots of steel targets, including the Texas Star.

Here are the stages and the descriptions:


Stage 4: Swinging
This 240 point, 48 round was mostly shooting at cardboard, with the only 'gimmick' that the last two ports were covered by a door which had to be manually moved by the shooter to engage the second port, both of which were available from the same location. It should have been a hoser-fest, but as it was the first stage of the match for this squad, most of us were very deliberate in both movement and shooting pace. One squad member, Bill J., had gun problems within the first few seconds of this stage: broken extractor on his 1911 Limited gun. Fortunately, he managed to find a replacement pistol and completed the match.



Stage 5: Cross Over
This second stage (230 points, 46 rounds) was very similar to the first, without the door. There was an alley to traverse, targets available through ports on both sides, and at the end there was a mixture of cardboard and steel targets which couldn't all be seen from the same port.

Also, one of our youngest shooters, Dante (son of Adam, who you will also see a couple of times in the videos) had more gun problems: his 1911 Open gun would not reliably return to battery between shots. There was a question whether his small stature and musculature just wasn't providing sufficient resistance to the recoil to make it function correctly ... a not uncommon situation derogatorily described as "Limp Wristing". Eventually Adam found someone who had a lighter 1911 Recoil Spring, which when swapped out for the original seemed to solve the problem.





Stage 6: Sit Back
Except four the round count (285 points, 57 rounds), this stage was somewhat similar to the preceding stage, in that it involved traversing an alley and engaging targets through ports on both sides of the alley. The targets were mixed cardboard and steel. A couple of barrel-stacks at the end of the alley made it necessary to engage targets from both sides of both stacks, and one of our squad just didn't see that sneaky US popper hiding behind the right-side barrel stack.

The shooting ports were 20" gaps between the (snow fencing) vision barriers, and more than one of us ... including myself ... ran past a port toward the end and had to back-pedal to complete the stage without Failure To Engage and compounded Miss penalties.

The necessity of starting out sitting in a soft car-seat, back touching the back of the seat, was a safety related concern for people who, like me, were using Race Holsters. The choice was to lock the pistol in the skeletal-framed holster and then fumble with it on the draw, or to be VERY careful in the way you sit, your posture, and controlling the gun when standing up. As far as I know, nobody DQ'd the match because of this issue during the match.

These three stages, in sequence, may seem boringly similar ... especially in that there is some lateral, then some deep "vertical" (uprange to downrange) movement required. In the actual event, each proved to have its own challenge, and represented variations on the theme of requiring the shooter to be thoroughly familiar with target disposition and the best place to engage them. This is particularly important because of the large number of targets, and the limited number of places from which they could be engaged. If nothing else, they emphasized what must be every IPSC shooter's mantra: "Do a thorough walk through, know each target and shooting position, and be VERY aware of the need for tight ammunition management!"

Yes, in this match this was very true even for hi-cap shooters.

Note that every stage was carefully designed to be 8-round neutral. As is always the case in high-round-count matches, Revolver shooters had to be very aware of places where they could minimize standing reloads, and 10-round limited (Limited 10, Production) shooters experienced ammunition management challenges throughout the match.





Stage 7: Double Stack
This stage (220 points, 44 rounds) was a sudden change in design. The access to targets were not so much restricted by vision barriers as it was by the need to engage them while positioned in one of five boxes .. and the last two target arrays could ONLY be engaged from the box farthest downrange.

Again, having a good game plan before starting the stage proved critical. It was possible to shoot the mirror-image stage without visiting all of the boxes .. but the two targets behind the barrels before the last box are extremely difficult to hit from that position, exposing as they do less than a couple of inches of target from the fifth box. Better to engage them from the middle-right box, as you will see both shooters in this video doing.

I, being the first shooter, didn't do such a good job. As I was crouching in the last box to get below the last vision barrier, I realized that I had not engaged those two deep central targets from the fourth box. Faced with the need to either move backwards to the fourth box, or take the slim margin available from my last shooting position, I chose to lean to the right and shoot around the barrels. I got double-D hits on the lower target. The upper target exposed the B-zone and the upper A-zone, so I got one hit on each target. Major penalty of time involved in making such careful shots, but it took less time than moving backwards.





Stage 8: Watch Your Step

This last stage was ARPC's answer to the well-beloved "Jungle Run", as the similar stages at the Croc Match have historically been called. It was a high-value stage: 270 points, 54 rounds minimum.

The Croc Match built its Jungle Run along a path following a small creek. There was a little up-hill running, some down-hill, but it was mostly level.

This Jungle Run was uphill, all the way!

When we came on the stage, we took the better part of a half-hour just walking through the stage trying to find all of the targets. This was necessary, because at least two targets were not visible to competitors who just followed the narrow road which defined the course of fire.

After getting to the top of the road, a path branched off to the right (still leading uphill) where ten cardboard targets and two pepper-poppers lurked. The competitor could stop just a few feet from the turn, and engage all of the targets ... many of them at long ranges (in excess of 50 feet, especially for the steel.) But that turned out to be a Bad Idea, because some of the targets were double-stacked ... an obvious target stacked high on the target frame, and another target below it on the same frame, which could only be seen by running (or in my case, trudging) another 20 feet up hill. The problem? The targets were sited in thick, thigh-high underbrush, and could only be seen from the uphill shooting position.


One of the first shooters in our squad elected to not move any further uphill, but engaged the visible targets (10 IPSC, 2 US Popper) from the turn. He got miss and FTE penalties on the two hidden targets, and panting while engage steel targets from 50 feet is a very tiresome exercise ... especially when it takes a dozen hits to down the steel.

I made several trips up and down that hill during our extended walk-through, and ran the score-sheets up and down the hill for the first 4 or 5 shooters. Well, I was far down in the shooting order, I thought I could do that and still do well.

I was wrong. By the time I turned the score sheets over to another (and younger!) squad-member, I was in pain and out of breath. When my turn to shoot came up, I didn't do a lot of running.

But I knew where every target was, and I had no miss or FTE penalties. Of course, it took forever for me to get through the stage. I took over 73 seconds, all of it uphill. The top shooters were completing the same COF in half the time. (Yeah, but can they program in COBOL, SQR, SQL and Pro-C? I think not!)

The video below shows a pair of shooters, from my resting position uprange of the starting box. They are not very good, because I was shooting into the sun (hence the purple haze on the video) and because you can't always see the shooter. I left the camera rolling for one shooter as he went out of sight, just to capture the sound of many more shots from his hidden position around the turn. And on the last shooter, I allowed the camera to drop JUST when Iain was doing his fanciest shooting ... double-tapping a close target on the way past it, strong-hand only.




Conclusions:
It is difficult, and perhaps unfair, for my to draw conclusions about the whole match when I didn't experience the whole match. I can truthfully say that I regretted not returning for the second day, in which we only had to shoot 3 stages. I think they were probably the most interesting stages.

About the only criticism I can feel good about is that the Jungle Run stage was more a test of strength, stamina and endurance than about shooting skill. And that's small potatoes, when you consider that IPSC started out by depicting real-life "combat shooting" situations, as my be experienced by Law Enforcement Officers. In truth, I think that Col. Cooper, the Father of IPSC, would have approved of this stage.

It would have been MUCH better, in some ways, to have a dedicated RO and taping team running this stage. They would have had to be Iron Men, though. And not working the stage doesn't provide the average shooter with the opportunity to understand the stage and identify each target, and from where they best can be engaged.

Ultimately, the best I can honestly say about this match (or the portion of which I attempted) is:

It kicked my ass!

(Oh, and I will definitely be back again.)

_______________
Later:
It took me 2 weeks to complete this blog article .. sorry for the delay. It took one day to edit the videos into something that was even reasonable acceptable, and 4 hours tonight to load the videos and write the text.

The rest of the time, I was wondering what the heck I could say to make the article interesting, at least to the folks who were there.

I hope there's some interest also for the folks who were not participating.

Can't sell the steak? Sell the Sizzle!

Dems launch $2M pro-reform blitz - Sarah Kliff - POLITICO.com

After congress passed a Public Health Care bill that was incomprehensible and unwanted ... over strong public opposition by the folks who will have to live under it (which excludes the congress-critters who voted for it) ... they swore that we would like it after we had been given enough time to understand "what it was".

Surprising to most of us, since it was obvious that our federal representatives didn't understand "what it was" before they voted for it.

Time has passed, we still don't know "what it was". We are merely living in dread that instead of "what it will do for us", we'll learn "what it will do to us".

The democrats have therefore invested $2 million of OTM ("Other People's Money") to establish a non-profit for the sole purpose of convincing We The People that this Obamacare thing is A Good Thing.

Makes me wonder when was the last time I saw a political party not only ram a bill down our throats, but then set up a Shadow Group to teach us how to say "Thank You Sir, May I Have Another?"

I can't remember anything like this ever happening before. Can anybody else think up a good representative example of this particular type of political manipulation?

Touring Motorcycles - with THREE wheels?

YouTube - rivasuperstore's Channel

Some Motorcycle Retail store in Fort Lauderdale wants me to be a "friend". I don't subscribe to commercial channels, but the view of the "bike" was unusual enough that I thought you might be interested.

And if I don't post something "easy", I have to finish editing my videos from last weekend's "Monster Match" at ARPC and write some readable verbiage to go along with it. And that is not easy.

One thing about this bike design is just too much. No, its not the three-wheels (one up, two back). It's the heated handholds for both passenger AND rider!

Mama? What's "Satire"?

Obama Scraps Idea of Billing Vets for Service-Related Injuries

A couple of days ago a friend forwarded an email to me, with the title "This Guy Is Nuts!".

My friend had (along with a dozen other people) received from a friend of his; THAT friend had (along with a dozen other people) received it from another friend. And so on and so on. I don't know how many people were sent the text of the email, but I do know one thing:

It wasn't true.

Here is (a very short sample) of the text that was sent:

Bad press, including major mockery of the plan by comedian Jon Stewart, led to President Obama abandoning his proposal to require veterans carry private health insurance to cover the estimated $540 million annual cost to the federal government of treatment for injuries to military personnel received during their tours on active duty. The President admitted that he was puzzled by the magnitude of the opposition to his proposal

.
The "quote" goes on to paint President Obama in an even worse light. And then the quote is followed by the comment:

I'm guessing that everyone, other than the 20-25 percent hardcore liberals in the US , will agree that this is another example of why Obama is the worst president in American history. Remind everyone over-and-over how this man thinks

Want to see the WHOLE Quote? Easy to do, you can go directly to the source, which would be

JOHN SEMMENS: Semi-News -- A Satirical Look at Recent News

... for March 21, 2009.

Did you get the title of the website? "...SATIRICAL..."

That doesn't mean that's what Obama said, that's just somebody deliberately twisting the situation for the sake of humor.

But the folks who are sending this out to their friends, and their friends friends, and their friends friends friends (I count over SIXTY people on the distribution lists I see, not counting my own email address as one of the recipients) -- they don't realize that this is a lie. They see the satire, but they just don't get it. They accept it as the truth because some good ol' boy they never heard of before said it, so they just mindlessly pass it on.

It took me less than one minute to discover that it was a lie. I googled "Obama Military Insurance" and came up with this SNOPES reference: and that article included a link to the original satirical article from the march 21, 2009, in the Arizona Conservative.

There was also an explanatory article in the Stars&Stripes ... they got it right.

Also in TRUTH OR FICTION ... they were also able to identify the basic premise (truth) and separate it from the satirical portion (fiction).

Obama's attempt to put some of the military expenses (medical insurance) off onto private insurance companies is bad enough, especially considering that he has since crammed national health insurance down our collective throats. But that was cancelled when it proved to be not only unpopular, but infeasible. The rest of the letter, and the Arizona Conservative satire article, was all made up. It was a lie, and was published just ten days before April Fools Day.
Get it?

But automatically buying into Satire as truth, and mindlessly, unthinkingly and irresponsibly passing it on to friends and families is not the best way to convince them that the American President is incompetent; instead it only suggests that we are incompetent, if we can't even check the validity of our second-hand accusations.

Unfortunately, there is a moral to this story (and I'm the guy who hates morality tales):

If you receive an email suggesting that somebody you don't like did something you don't like. don't just blindly pass it on to 37 of your most intimate friends. Instead, first check it out. At least look it up on GOOGLE (if you don't already know any reliable anti-urban-legend websites) and go to at least 2 or three referenced websites so you can get a better idea of the answer to this question:

Who is the fool here?

Here Comes da Judge!

Ga. judge shoots, kills man breaking into his home - Breaking News - Macon.com

Here's the story:

Augusta, Georgia: 20 year-old wanna-be hood John E. Howard Jr. and his (still-unidentified) buddy pick a house at random in the middle of the night and break into it by throwing a brick through a window.

Well, that's subtle. Apparently they neither knew, nor cared, whether anybody was home.

Somebody was.

The homeowner, Superior Court Judge J. Carlisle Overstreet (65) hears the noise and calls 911.

No, I'm kidding.

Overstreet grabs a gun, and prowls the house looking for the voices he heard. According to the Macon, Ga. newspaper report:

"The suspect, wearing a bandanna over his face and socks covering both hands, was coming down the stairs toward Overstreet," Strength told reporters Friday. "Overstreet fired one time at the suspect, hitting him in the chest."

THEN the judge calls 911 ... to pick up the trash.

The other burglar made it out of the house alive, with a lap-top computer. Guess he figured it wasn't enough to live through his really bad career choice; he had to make a profit on the deal. Bet he doesn't find another 'friend' willing to join him in a little easy-money burglary.

Trash-boy made it to the hospital, then to the morgue without passing "GO". Nice Shooting, Your Honor!


THE MONEY QUOTE:

Police didn't find a gun on Trash-boy, but His Honor has been exonerated of any criminal charges. In the words ... which should NOT be forgotten ... of Richmond County Sheriff Ronald Strength:

"You're protecting yourself, ... You don't have time to say, 'Sir, are you here just to steal something or are you here to shoot me?'"

If there were more people like Overstreet and Strength, there would be fewer people like John E. Howard Jr.
Well, as of now there are one fewer than there were last month. If Kim De Tuit was still blogging, this would increment his "Goblin Count" by one.

The Best Match I Never Attended

At the beginning of this month, The Hobo Brasser made the generous offer to load 1,000 rounds of ammunition so I would be able to shoot while the XL650 was being 'rehabbed' by Dillon. While I have been named A Fool by my detractors, I proved them all wrong by quickly accepting.

When I got home, I grabbed a big bunch of Montana Gold 115gr hollow-point bullets, an unopened four-pound keg of Vitha Vourhi N350 powder, all of the Small Rifle primers I could find, and three 100-round bags of new, unprimed Winchester .38 Super brass. The next weekend, I wheeled up to Canby and delivered them to Chez Hobo. I also told him the powder-weight to load them, and included a handful of rounds I had loaded and one of my STI magazines, so he could confirm and check the correct over-all length of the loaded cartridge.

I also ordered another 1,000 Winchester brass, and when they arrived from Dillon I grabbed two bags out of the box and took the other 8 bags up to HB, also. Yes, that adds up to 1,100 cases. I had given him a total of 1,200 primers, as well ... primers disappear magically during the reloading process, and sometimes you get a bad load, so I wanted to make sure he had all the components to actually build 1,000 shootable rounds.

And if he happened to just keep loading until he had filled all the cases? Well, if he was such a good friend to make a generous offer, I'm friend enough to milk it. Who knows? Someday I may be in a position to do him a favor. It would be unkind of me to make him feel guilty if he accepted. This way ... he owes me one.


Last week HB emailed to say he had finished loading the ammunition, and when did I want to pick them up? I suggested that I get them from him at the monthly Dundee match (which was this weekend), and since we usually squad together that seemed a reasonable solution.

[Actually, we usually manage to squad with an amiable group of folks and we all have a good time. HB and I enjoy a camaraderie of exchanging verbal quips and cheap-shots, kind of like Don Ameche and Frances Langford as The Bickersons. Neither of us can shoot all that well, but we enjoy the social occasion at least as much as we do the competition.]

I was really looking forward to the Saturday match. Friday evening I spend a couple of hours an hour at least 15 minutes getting all of my gear together, along with a box of books and a bottle of 14 year old Jamesons' as a thank-you gift to HB. I laid out a Springfield Armory t-shirt to wear to the match, climbed in bed and waited for sleep to overcome me.

And waited.

Couldn't sleep. Finally I got up and too a sleeping draught, and crawled back in bed to wait for sleep, or morning ... whichever came first.

And waited.

At 6am I was still waiting for sleep, and wondering if I shouldn't just get up and get started.

The next thing I knew, it was 9:30am. The sun was shining, and I had managed to sleep through two alarms. This is not good. The match starts promptly at 9am, and the range was 80 miles away over country roads. What to do, what to do?

So I took the coward's way out, and went back to sleep for another hour.

Two cups of coffee later I felt alert enough to shower, dress, load the car and headed for the range. By then it was noon, but I figured they wouldn't get off the range until 2pm. I had just time to drive to the range, meet HB and get the reloads, and then we could go to our traditional lunch of Linguica Pizza at the Abby's Pizza Parlor in Newburg. I could do this.

[Incidently, Linquica Pizza is the super-secret power lunch of IPSC shooters the world over. As far as I know, you can only get it at the Abby's Pizza Parlor in Newburg. How IPSC shooters all over the rest of the world get their power lunch, I'll never know. I guess that's the secret.]

On the drive up I called HB on his cell phone. I knew he wouldn't hear the phone ring, but he might see the missed call, and know to call me when he saw it. And he did, and called me back. But I had changed my ring-tone last week and I couldn't hear it over my new ZZ Tops CD which I was playing as I drove. About half-way to the range I checked my phone, discovered I had a message from HB. He found the missed call, and .... save the reading time here and just assume a short series of voice mail exchanged.

When I got to the range at a quarter of two, the competitor cars were already leaving. I saw a ridiculous day-glow orange Subaru Forrester stop in the middle of the flow, and HB leaned out the door and waved to me. We pulled off the road, and agreed to meet at Abby's and exchange cartons of 'stuff'' there.

Turns out the Subaru was a loaner. His pickup had broken down ... for the second time this summer ... and he was driving around in this "Oregon's Answer to the Pimp-mobile". Not hard to tell why the shop used it as a loaner car. Who would steal it?

I bought the pizza, HB bought the beer. As the beertender was pouring a small pitcher of wheat-bear, HB was telling me about his match. He decided to shoot Single-Stack this time, and there was a stage where you start with your pistol on the top of a barrel. Apparently, when he picked up the single-stack (last time I looked, it was a well-used Charles Daly ... a brand which is now totally defunct), and the front sight fell off. After he finished the stage "I only got one miss!", he got the squad to search for the sight in the gravel. Fortunately, they found it. So he put a piece of tape in the dovetail, pounded the front sight back in, sighted it in (that's a first) and finished the match.

I had to interrupt him.

"How did you know the front sight fell off? Did someone tell you?" I asked him.

"Huh? What do you mean?"

"Well", I answered, "it's not as if you ever actually LOOK at the damn thing."

Yes, I DID wait until he had paid for the beer.

While we were waiting for the pizza to burn, he started telling me about the match. "Great match", he said. "Interesting stages. I had a lot of fun. Weather was perfect. I didn't do all that well, but gee I sure had fun."

"Stop, stop" I said. " I don't want to hear about a great match. I don't want to hear you had fun. I missed it. I don't want to have missed a great match, I want to hear that it was a crummy match, the stages were cheezy, everybody had a lot of trouble ... don't make me think I missed anything by oversleeping!"

"Oh, gee, I'm sorry", he said. "Okay, you don't want to hear about having missed the best match you never went to. I won't tell you about it."

And then he smiled.

The bastard. I never liked him, anyway.

....

This is my revenge.

"You realize, of course, that I finally have something to write in the Blog about tonite?"

"Oh", he said. "This is BlogMeat, right"

Damn straight.

That's when he told me that he 'might have' had a couple of problems with the ammo. A couple of primers showed up in the primer-discard tray. They were crushed, he said. He didn't know when that happened, but I "might want to check the ammunition" before I shoot it, he said.

Eleven Hundred Rounds.

If you shoot IPSC in Oregon, you may someday see a snowy-haired, decrepit Senior Citizen hunched over picking up brass with all the fervor of a hobo picking up return-for-deposit beer bottles. If you do, my best advice to you is: don't muck with him.

That's all I'm saying.




Uploaded with ImageShack.us

Cruiser cam catches 100 mph crash

Cruiser cam catches 100 mph crash

I thought this was pretty freaking amazing, speaking as a student of human foibles, that a single 18-year old driver could find himself in such an incredibly violent situation ... and live through it. (Last I heard, he was still in critical condition.)

The video in the article is the original, and the article also has links to follow-up information.

But the video below has a higher quality to it.

Another Local Hero: Iaian Harrison

Another Oregonian TV winner: Sherwood's Iain Harrison and 'Top Shot' | OregonLive.com

On the finale of the first season of the History channel series, "Top Shot," which aired Aug. 15, Harrison nailed a daunting final challenge, which involved throwing knives, shooting an arrow and target shooting. As the champ, the British-born Harrison wins $100,000 -- and the title of "Top Shot."

I've seen Iian shoot pistol, and he is very good. But I had no idea that he was also skilled in knife-throwing and archery.

And I've never known how to spell his name.

He's another Oregon shooter, living in Sherwood (very conveniently located about a mile from the Tri-County Gun Club). He and his wife are seen together at local matches ... much more often than I am.

He may be at the Dundee match this weekend. If you see him, be sure to congratulate him on his win.

And ... don't ask him for a loan. Just content yourself with admiring the expensive pistols which they

Local Hero

A local hero here in Oregon has been announced by the Shooting Wire

Leonard Scores Open Rimfire Steel Challenge Win

(Click the link above for the full article)

Ryan Leonard is the son of Nick Leonard, who has been running the Speed Steel matches at Tri County Gun Club for ... well, the better part of the last decade.

Nick has always been an extremely competitive shooter. He either wins, or he crashes and burns ... badly. There are no half-hearted attempts when Nick shoots; he always gives 110%, and he is always trying to win.

Nick started Ryan shooting in competition when Ryan was about 10 years old. (Heck, he may have been younger.) Ryan learned to be as competitive as Nick, but had the advantage of starting earlier in life, and the further advantage of having a great coach.

Nick always ensured the Ryan had good equipment, lots of practice, and the advice of a seasoned shooter. That would be Nick. That was as true for IPSC/USPSA competition as it was for Steel Challenge.

In the past couple of years, as Ryan became even more proficient and self-confident, Nick may have focused more on Ryan's training and maturation as a competitive shooter than on his own competitiveness. Whatever the reason, Ryan has become one of the stronger young shooters in both disciplines.

Keep your eye on this young man. When I saw them at the Dundee match last month, Ryan had grown in height, bulk and confidence. Since then he WON the Columbia Cascade Championship as an Open/Master Class shooter, coming in a comfortable 6% ahead the next closest competitor (also a Master Class shooter), and beating the nearest GM/Open shooter by 9%.

And then he won the Open Rimfire Steel Challenge:

PIRU, Calif. - When the last shots were fired in the Steel Challenge's Open Rimfire pistol event, it was 17-year-old Ryan Leonard of Oregon City, Oregon, who outgunned the likes of Glock's Dave Sevigny, Blackhawk's Todd Jarrett and Smith &Wesson's B.J. Norris to claim the World Speed Shooting Championship title.

Leonard posted the fastest score on three of the eight stages - 5 To Go, Smoke & Hope and Outer Limits - to finish in a final time of 69.76 seconds to edge out Team Glock's captain Dave Sevigny of Smyrna, Ga. by 1.45 seconds.

Congratulations to both Nick and Ryan. I think you'll be seeing Ryan winning in Level III USPSA competition, too. Ryan has outgrown the local field, and should be ready to challenge the National Best in even more competitive fields.

Pelosi calls for investigation of WTC mosque opposition - Washington Times

AUDIO - Rep. Pelosi calls for investigation of WTC mosque opposition - Washington Times

Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi has suggested that people who voice opposition to the construction of a Mosque near the Twin Towers "Ground Zero" site should be investigated.

"There is no question there is a concerted effort to make this a political issue by some. And I join those who have called for looking into how ... this opposition to the mosque is being funded,"

This is the first I've heard that someone wants this kind of investigation. But I only spend a couple of hours a day reading the news; apparently I have not been as well-informed as I thought.

All I've seen are the comments from readers who have voiced opposition on the basis of the concept that 911 was not an attack on New York City, but on America ... and that in the minds of most Americans, "Ground Zero" has become as near to a Holy site as any which has been consecrated by construction of a religious edifice.

Also, I've read a lot of commentary to the effect that this mosque (1) represents a "foot on the neck" of America, or a monument to the damage caused by the attack; and (2) that there must be some reason other than that which has been stated, to choose this specific site for construction of a $100 million Mosque.

That last is especially curious, since New York City is said to already contain over 100 Mosques.

But getting back to Pelosi: I wondered, when I read this, just WHO is going to run this investigation?

Then I read this New York Times article (republished) titled: "Civilians to take U.S. Lead after Military Leaves".

The article addresses concerns about how American support of Iraq will be continued as the Military Bug-out continues.

By October 2011, the State Department will assume responsibility for training the Iraqi police, a task that will largely be carried out by contractors. With no American soldiers to defuse sectarian tensions in northern Iraq, it will be up to American diplomats in two new $100 million outposts to head off potential confrontations between the Iraqi Army and Kurdish pesh merga forces.

Hmm ... the State Department. That would be Hillary Clinton, right?

This extends HillaryCare to its logical absurdity.

Poor Iraqis, relying on Hillary diplomats to keep them safe.

You people are screwed. Screwed.

So, is Hillary also going to be responsible for undermining both the American First Amendment? Will she be the one who investigates the protests which are obviously a grass-roots uprising? If so, Americans are screwed, too.

What idiot let the State Department take responsibility for ... well for anything? A good president is one who keeps the Department of State firmly under his thumb.

Hmmmm????

That's a lot of bull!

Bull leaps into bullring stands in Spain, 40 hurt

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

I know you can watch this in gigantic format on the original MSNBC link (see above), but I was impressed.

Rep. Maxine Waters - It's Bush's Fault!

Rep. Maxine Waters Refutes Ethics Charges - ABC News

Representative Maxine Waters has been brought up on charges from the House Ethics Committee on the grounds that she used her congressional influence for the betterment of OneUnited Bank ... a commercial enterprise in which her husband has a $350,000 investment.

Her defense is that she wanted to resolve a 'general' lapse in governmental assistance to financial institutions, but the Bush Treasury Department was so slow in responding to her ... proposal that by the time they got around to scheduling a meeting only one bank showed up at the meeting.

That bank was OneUnited Bank.

When the meeting was held, OneUnited was the only bank represented, according to the report. A lawyer for the National Bankers Assn. also was present.

That, the Office of Congressional Ethics said, was "cause for concern,'' given that the National Bankers Assn. represented 103 banks, including two in the Washington area.

Waters, one of the most Liberal congress-critters (and a representative from California), has called for the earliest possible hearings, so that she may state her case.

She has also fallen into the political trap of ascribing ANY negative result from congressional intercession to the presidential administration of former President George W. Bush.

As I said earlier: if I had known that there was so much HUMOR in national politics, I would not have attempted to avoid the subject, in recent months.

This illustrates the universal truth about Liberal Politicians: no matter what the subject, or the timing, whatever happens to cast a negative interpretation on Liberal politicians ...

.... it's always George Bush's Fault!

(Does this have any relationship to Waters' desire to nationalize the Petroleum Industry? )

"This Liberal would be all about socialisin .. uh ... uh ... basically .... taking over .... and the government would be running all of your companies."

Yeah, like the government has done so well in the past couple of years running the country, let alone running an actual for-profit industry.


As my friend Hobo Brasser has so often said (courtesy of Jimmy Buffett): "If we couldn't laugh we would all go insane."

This Liberal (Mad Dog Waters) is obviously unable to laugh. Might be a vitamin deficiency. Or a salt-shaker deficiency. She should see her physician.)

Rolling Stone reporter not allowed to "embed"

Rolling Stone reporter denied embed after McChrystal piece - CNN.com

"The Rolling Stone magazine journalist whose article about Gen. Stanley McChrystal helped end the Afghanistan commander's career has been denied permission to embed with a military unit in Afghanistan, a Pentagon spokesman told CNN Wednesday."

The writer was obviously, disappointed. It appears that he thought his career plans had been unfairly undermined by the Pentagon decision not to 'embed' him with a military unit in "The Sandbox".

Interesting article, you may wish to read it. Hastings is right, there is obvious aversion on the part of Military commanders in a War Zone to accept him as an "embedded correspondant".

One wonders why? Could it be that his last series of interviews with our fighting men and women resulted in the relief from command of one of the most successful Generals of the entire Middle Eastern Command?

The cited article includes segments of a Larry King interview. One memorable quote was when Hastings said: "If the White House had wanted to 'sweep this thing under the rug', they could have done that".

Sure. The article was published in a popular American magazine, and was clearly critical of the President's military decisions.

Another question from King was: "What do you think is going to happen to him (McCrystal), Michael?"

Hastings' answer: "I'm not sure, I think he's going to open a book store ...".


General George S. Patton made many comments critical of the current administration during WWII. He was counseled by his peers and military superiors against such intemperate comments, and was (for a while) relegated to posts which were not on the Front Line of battle.

But he never was treated to such an ignominious dismissal.

I, for one, am glad to hear that Hastings will not be reporting the "War News" At this time, it's not clear whether his career has been embellished or tarnished by this article. We can only assume that it has been embellished for his 'fearless determination to print the truth', no matter how much his perceived 'truth' has damaged current Military efforts in the Middle East.

But there's no obvious reason why current Military Commanders should readily agree to accepting Michael Hastings as an "embedded correspondent".

The man (Michael Hastings) is a quisling, nothing more and nothing less. His technical skills as a writer are immaterial in this context.

For now, he is the 21's Century's equivalent of Lord HaHa.

As a Military Spokesman told CNN News Wednesday:

"Embeds are a privilege, not a right. The unit decided they didn't feel the trust necessary for an embed. They declined,"

Politically Incorrect

I've tried hard -- so very hard -- to minimize the amount of political commentary here. This is suppose to be about "shooting sports" and cultural issues.

Please understand that the following photo doesn't fit either of these categories. It's just so darn funny I almost spewed a sip of decent Canadian Whiskey Ice Water on my keyboard when I saw it. It's included here strictly for its HUMOR value.


The funny thing, judging by the 'other' sign seen in the picture, is that this seems to be a protest rally organized by "ANSWERcoalition.org" Which is a group of folks who ... judging by the sidebar articles on their website ... are decidedly, uh, "Liberals".

Well, then that makes it all right, doesn't it?


If I had realized that Politics involves so much humor, I might not have been so diligent about censoring the Political aspects from this blog.

Which is why, when I listed my Quotes (in the blue area, above) for this week, I included one by Nicolas Boileau:

"Sometimes a fool makes a good suggestion."


(A hat-tip to Randy S.)

"They Also Serve, Who Only Sit and Wait"

Soldiers returning from war surprise kids, loved ones. NSFW b/c you will bawl your eyes out (video) : theCHIVE

This video is featured today for Sgt. Adam, his father Bill, and all their combined family.

And for my family, and for my Son's family.

And for all the family and loved ones of those men and women who have put their life on hold while they serve their country. It's one way of saying "Thank you for your service", and "Welcome home!"

It's ten minutes long, and I suggest you close your door while you watch it. If you don't like "Schmaltzy" videos that make you feel ... human ... maybe this isn't for you.

Too bad. You should go see your doctor. Maybe it's a vitamin deficiency.

Gun Control: About Control, not about Guns!

The Smallest Minority

You may recall that in 2008 I spent a considerable amount of time talking about two proposals to physically trace the origin of a firearm from which a bullet was fired. This has always been presented as an attempt to solve crime.

Essentially, these were various ways in which unique numbers would be 'microstamped' on either the bullet, or the cartridge case. The 'unique numbers' (or other unique identifying characteristics) would all Law Enforcement agencies to identify ... ultimately .. the person who fired the bullet during the commission of a crime.

There have been three methodologies defined. Two of them are new, untested and require that laws be passed at either the State or Federal level; they require that either the ammunition or the firearm used will emboss an unique identifier on the ammunition itself.

ENCODED AMMUNITION:

The first, and least practical approach, is that each unit of ammunition (a 'box' ... usually 20 rounds for rifle ammunition, typically 50 rounds for pistol ammunition) be pre-stamped during the manufacturing process. When purchasing the ammunition, the buyer must provide incontrovertible identification of name, address, and such demographic information as the individual state may deem advisable. That is linked with the specific encoded number of the individual 'unit' of ammunition. In each box of ammunition, all individual rounds are pre-stamped with a identifying mark, usually a number, and this mark is not present on ANY other unit or box of ammunition.

The intent is that the purchaser of ammunition would be readily identifiable by reading the microstamped identifier on either the bullet or the cartridge case (either or both of which were usually, in the bills of the various states proposing this law required to be encoded).

In a mass-production process, this approach is obviously unsupportable. The waste is incalculable, if even a single round must be rejected during the inspection phase; then all other rounds in that unit must be rejected also, and the necessary paperwork to certify that the number is 'rejected' would be beyond all but the most expensive procedures. The cost ammunition would be enormous, and the cost of governmental oversight would be absurd.

I have discussed this in slightly more detail here, and perhaps elsewhere.


MICROSTAMPING AMMUNITION:

In this scenario, there is no burden upon the ammunition manufacturers to accommodate difficult and absurd requirements to match 20 or 50 (or more) units to a single box of ammunition. Instead, the imposition is on the manufacturers of firearms.

New firearms would be required to emboss upon the breech-face of each firearm the produce an unique identifier, which would be 'related' to the firearm serial number. This would also be entered in a National Database, which includes also the description of the firearm .. type, model, etc. Presumably, upon retail purchase of each firearm the new owner information would also be entered into the same, or a related database.

There are as many objections to this process as to the Encoded Ammunition proposal, not the least is that this de facto constitutes Firearm Registration ... it would be a permanent record.

Of course, the people who propose to provide the technology are as adamant as those who provide Encoded Ammunition that it is reliable, unalterable, and easy to use. And of course both the technology and the claims are untested and unsupported by simple logic.

First, the identifier would only be embossed on the case, not on the bullet. Then consider that the microstamping on the case would only be usable by police if the case was found at the scene of the crime ... which immediately makes it unusable for revolvers (which do not eject a case when fired).

There is no evidence that a 'dirty gun' would impress a clear impression of the identifier on the base of the ejected brass, and depending on the extent and volume of the base of the brass might be dedicated to the manufacturer's headstamp, some rounds of ammunition may be less liable to display the entire identifier than others.

Of course, there is no reason to expect that a gun owner (who may not be the original retail purchaser) will not deface the breech face of the gun to obscure or eliminate the embossed identifier. It would have to be a raised stamping or engraving to make a readable impression on the brass, so it would be easy to remove by a dremel tool, or even a hone.

But it's not necessary to remove the impression by the physical means. The slide on a semi-automatic pistol, for example, is only a 'part'. How difficult would it be to buy a replacement part? The serial number is on the frame: is the Federal Government going to impose serialization requirements on a slide, similar to that already required on a 'firearm' (the frame)? Imagine the expense and bureaucratic burden that would be for a firearm owner?


No, this is no more usable or practical than the "Encoded Ammunition" scenario.

I have discussed this in slightly more detail here, and perhaps elsewhere.


BALLISTIC FINGERPRINTING:

Finally this discussion gets down to the purpose of this article. Existing technology has historically been used to match ammunition components (bullet, case) to the firearm which fired the ammunition round by dint of either the striations on the bullet ... which reveals a profile of the barrel through which it has been fired ... or 'tool marks' on the case.

The bullet striations application is familiar to all of us who watch television. Two bullets are compared ... one from the crime scene, the other from a test round fired by a suspect firearm ... and both the rifling and 'supplemental' marks on the bullet (caused by wear on the barrel) will, supposedly, allow Law Enforcement Ballistic Forensic Examiners to definitively determine that a specific bullet has been fired by a specific firearm.

(More on this in a moment.)

An alternative approach is based on the theory that the cartridge case is similarly marked when a round of ammunition is fired. Usually this involves primer indentation caused by the unique profile of the firing pin, but also considers the mark of the ejector, and such striations on the case due to any unique marks caused by unique characteristics of the chamber which may 'scratch' the surface of the case.

If this last sentence seems carefully composed, that's because it is. The hypothetical marks may be caused by accumulated powder residue left by the firing of previous rounds through the barrel, imperfections or tool-marks imposed upon the chamber during manufacture, or ... well, one is left to one's own imagination as to the chain of events which may create unique identifiers on the cartridge case. It's easy to imagine that this combination of 'marks' might change during repetitive firing, and dependent on too many environmental factors (including cleaning) to be enumerated.

Which brings us to the original article from Mr. Kevin Baker (not "Bacon") in The Smallest Minority article of January 14, 2005.

We wouldn't want you to take our word for it, so this is an excellent time for you to read the entire article "Why Ballistic Fingerprinting Doesn't (and Won't) Work".

Ignoring that the 'ballistic fingerprinting' is dependent on the failure of the firearm to change the components of the firearm (slide, firing pin, barrel), Baker emphasizes three things:

1. The validity of the approach is flawed because you have to have a comparison round to identify the firearm. The legal approach is to require firearm manufacturers to provide one (or two) sample fired cartridges which will be electronically scanned and entered into a Federal Database.
2. This sample is taken with a new firearm, one which has either never been fired, or has only been test-fired a very limited number of times. (Contrary to popular belief, new firearms are not typically 'test fired' before being made available for purchase. Some very expensive and exotic firearms are, but this is not the usual practice for most manufacturers.)
3. After a very limited amount of use, most firearms will 'imprint' upon the fired cartridge a decidedly different variety of scrapes, striations, etc.

But the most IMPORTANT consideration reported by Mr. Baker is that even brand new never-fired guns will imprint differently on different ammunition!

Breach marks, chamber marks, firing-pin indentations .. all are different on different brands of ammunition, different hardness of primers, different loads and bullets which result in different velocities (and, assumedly chamber pressures) will result in different markings.

In actual tests of new firearms, even with the same ammunition from the same manufacturer and from the same lot, tests were unable to match guns which fired the ammunition, even from a very restricted number of test firearms!

___________________________________________

Even if you choose not to read Bacon's article (if only to see the citations for his sources, at the end of the article), you should not exit this without reading his ultimate conclusion. I'll make it easy for you; here it is:

UPDATE, 1/19: This is probably the most linked and most viewed piece I've written to date. Thanks to everyone who has commented and pointed readers this way (though I'm surprised I haven't seen a single hate-bomb out of the two thousand or so who've read this.) One commenter over at Chicago Boyz made an observation that I would have included in the body of this piece if it weren't already so long:

I've long since concluded that the gun controlers [sic] don't really expect measures like these to "work", in the sense of lowering crime, or aiding the police. The inconvenience and cost to gun owners is what they're aiming for. In the long run, if they can make gun ownership enough of a hassle, the number of gun owners in the next generation will decline, and perhaps we'll lose enough political clout that they can get the outright ban they really want.

But that's not a motive they can openly admit, and still hope to get the programs enacted.

To which I replied:

Brett Bellmore hit the nail on the head - the purpose is not to build a useful tool for crimefighting, the purpose is to make it more difficult for individuals to aquire [sic] and keep firearms. The effort is, and the gun control groups state this implicitly, to reduce the number of guns, because they ALL blame "the number of guns" in circulation for the level of gun violence we have here.

The British did a yeoman's job of making gun ownership an onerous privilege to exercise, then used the rules under which that privilege is exercised to remove whole classes of firearms...

From the law-abiding subjects. The criminals, however, still have access to pretty much anything they want.

Note this passage from the second Maryland report:

The Vision of the MD-IBIS Program was to have it fully performing in three to five years. This was to include the amassing of some 30,000 database images per year. This projection fell and was embarrassingly overstating. The actual acquisition of cartridge case numbers was about 36% of the estimation. The main reason for this drop-off appears to be from the reduction of handgun sales in Maryland after the passage of the law.

Now, did those sales actually disappear, or did they go black-market? Did this law really reduce the influx of handguns into Maryland by nearly two-thirds, or did it make a whole bunch of Marylanders (choose to become) instant criminals?