The Barrett .50-BMG is Practical!

This is, I swear it, the last comment for a long LONG time about the .50-BMG.

It's just that I think we need some perspective on the issue, and I've spent a lot of time talking about the 'political' aspects of this fine rifle in America.



Now it's time we spend a moment considering the Military aspect.

We can do this, I think, thanks to a reference from the excellent Michael Bane Blog.

Michael shows us how much the U.S. Military Appreciates the contribution made by Mr. Barrett.

Barrett's Model M107 Rifle System Selected By the US Army As One of the Top Ten Inventions For CY2004

Barrett M107 LRSR Barrett Firearms Manufacturing, Inc has recently earned several honors that reflect on the commitment the company has to providing the soldier with the best .50 caliber long-range sniper rifle in the world. This week we have been again been recognized for the US Army's M107 LRSR.

Barrett M107 was selected by the Chief of Staff Office of the US Army as one of the "Top Ten Inventions of 2004" for the fight against the war on terror.

More on the Barrett letter to the LAPD Chief of Police

Last night I posted an article which called into question the 'immediacy' of an article by Publicola. He referred to a letter that Ronnie Barrett had written to the LAPD Police Chief.

In 2002, Barrett attend a Los Angeles City Council meeting, where he was unable to convince them NOT to pass local laws against private ownership of the rifle which he manufactures. Part of the reason was that a LAPD representative was there and spoke in favor of the legislation.

I made the point that the letter was written in December of 2002. It may be 'news' (especially in light of recent productions by '60 Minutes' and published comments from the Violence Policy Center), but it isn't "NEW news".
Besides, I had no way of confirming that Barrett had actually followed through on the implied threat; that he would no longer sell to the LAPD, nor service rifles he had already sold to them. For that matter, it wasn't clear whether Barrett would refuse to do business with the LAPD, all California Government Agencies, or with anyone in California. That had seemed, to me, to be the most salient point of his letter. Consequently, I had no idea whether the issue really warranted comment.

Part of my confusion was due to the following verbiage posted on the Barrett's main page:

NOTICE TO CALIFORNIA .50 CALIBER OWNERS:

Before sending in any .50 caliber rifle or receiver to be built up, your rifle must be registered with the California Department of Justice. Shipping in and out of California must be handled by a DOJ Assault Weapon/.50 BMG Rifle Permit holder. Please call Barrett prior to shipping your .50 caliber rifles/receivers. 615-896-2938

That statement strongly implies that Barret WOULD sell to at least some customers in California.

Since that time, I've checked Barrett's website more thoroughly. Under the "NEWS" button I found a link to a letter to the American Rifleman, dated January of this year.

2 comments:

Ronnie Barrett Shuns Gun-Banning LAPD?????

LA GUN BANS - Letters of Opposition


The Los Angeles City Council, in a meeting discussing a proposal to ban the private ownership of the .50 BMG in Los Angeles ...

... voted to have the city attorney draft an ordinance to ban the .50, and further, to instruct the city's representatives in Sacramento and in Washington D.C. to push for bans at their respective levels.

Ronnie Barrett, the owner of Barret Firearms Manufacturing, Inc., attended the meeting and attempted to present the facts of .50 BMG ownership in contravention of statements by the Violence Policy Center. (See also here.)

Unfortunately, the VPC press releases had apparently swayed the council members even before the meeting started, and his arguments seemed to have no effect.

Perhaps decisions of the council were pre-determined. Certainly Barrett's position was undermined by the presence of a LAPD member who brought a Barrett .50 BMG to the meeting, sat with it in the front row, and testified that the LAPD supported the ban on public ownership of the firearm. After the meeting, the LAPD member provided the rifle to council members for "photo opportunities".

Upon returning home, Barrett was surprised to find that the LAPD had returned for servicing one of the .50 BMG rifles which they had bought from Barrett.

In a letter to LAPD Chief Willam J. Bratton, Barrett apologized for the "slow service" and stated:

I will not sell, nor service, my rifles to those seeking to infringe upon the Constitution and the crystal clear rights it affords individuals to own firearms.

Here's the most important FACT of this situation:
The letter from Ronnie Barrett to the LAPD Chief of Police was dated December 11, 2002.

It may be "news", but it ain't NEW news.

I have no idea if Barrett has actually established a policy of not selling, nor servicing rifles sold to, the Los Angeles Police Department. Nor do I know if the policy, if actually established, has continued during the intervening 2+ years since the letter was published. I can't find anything on the Internet, and the item is too old to find any information in the LA Times, the LA City Council, or Barrett's website.

I guess the lesson here is: when you read something on the web it's a good idea to check it out before you get all excited about it.

I generally check out the Snopes website as my first step to determining the probable veracity of an 'urban legend', but this is a bit too eclectic to show up on the 'Snope Scope'.


(hat tip: Publicola)

UPDATE:

I just received an email from Publicola:

Jerry,
I called Barret before I posted. If you look in the extended entry you'll see that they verified that they weren't selling to any government agency in Cali.

The letter is two years old & only dealt with L.A. but this thing they're doing now is statewide.

(Democratic) Foes cite progress vs. Bush agenda

Boston.com / News / Nation / Washington / Foes cite progress vs. Bush agenda

(Democrats) Say strategy fuels GOP infighting

By Rick Klein, Globe Staff | April 11, 2005

WASHINGTON -- Senior Democrats are increasingly confident that they have blocked Republicans plans for historic breakthroughs in legislation under GOP control of the White House and Congress, declaring that the Democratic strategy of unified opposition to major items on the leadership agenda has succeeded in turning Republicans against themselves.
[emphasis added]

Democratic leaders say the focus on opposition, rather than on their own legislative proposals, has allowed them to hold up President Bush's plans to remake Social Security. They are honing a message that highlights what they portray as Republican abuses of power, and say their new level of party discipline is forcing Republicans to wrestle with their own divisions over judicial confirmations, foreign affairs, and taxing and spending.

Huh?
wait a minute here ... is this a Parody?

Am I reading The Globe, or The Onion?

There's more:

''The Democratic caucus has never been as unified, and you've seen it on Social Security, the budget, and judges," said Senate minority leader Harry Reid of Nevada. ''It took a while for us to realize that we weren't in the majority. I think, though, we have learned the lesson well. And we have also learned that the majority party won't be in the majority forever."

I'm happy for them, that they're all singing from the same hymnal (so to speak), but I have a problem with this:

Democrats acknowledge the strategy carries the risk that members will be viewed as obstructionists, focused on what they can stop instead of what they can accomplish. Republicans hope to use Democratic opposition as a weapon in 2006 elections, and Bush still has time in his second term to guide his priorities into law.

Nonetheless, after 10 years as the minority party in Congress, many Democrats who in the past have pushed for the party to offer explicit alternatives are realizing they can more effectively communicate their message by positioning themselves in the ways they oppose Republicans, said Representative Barney Frank, a Newton Democrat.

''The official agenda is entirely in their hands, and it's very hard to get things that are being done unofficially into the public debate. Therefore, it makes sense for us to define what we are doing in terms of the opposition to the official agenda," said Frank, who was first elected to Congress in 1980. ''We do have a positive agenda to get to, but we first have to get everybody's attention by stressing our opposition to what they do."

[again, emphasis added]

Do I understand this correctly?
The Dems have officially discounted the principle that they "stand for something". They have decided that their best political position is to admit that they have no political platform of their own, except that whatever the Republicans want to do ... they're against it.

Am I right?



I think I'm right in my understanding of this . I mean, I do understand that the Democrats don't STAND for anything. They just so profoundly hate Bush and the Republican majority (if only because the Republicans are currently in power) that they have no political agenda other than blind, unreasoning opposition.

Well, that's refreshing.
This is the first time in recent memory that the Democratic Party has been entirely candid about their politics.

In 2004, we watched as millions of citizens voted, not FOR John Kerry, but AGAINST George Bush. There were so many citizens who hated George W. Bush that they nearly elected a political non-entity ... a man who had NO platform, other than "I'm Not George Bush!"

Thank God for that!

For the past several years, I've assumed that the Democratic Party has no agenda of their own; their platform has had only two planks:
(1) We're not Them
(2) Whatever They support, we're against it

It's pretty slim pickings, if you want to choose between political parties on a rational basis. But the Democrats haven't been rational since Clinton was elected ... or even earlier. I listen to the rhetoric, hoping to find some sort of "I'm For This" statement from the Democrats, and all I hear is "I don't like the people who are making the decisions instead of me!" It doesn't seem as if they have a vision, a plan to make the future of our country brighter than it is now. It's nothing more than outrage that they are no longer in power.

Most recently, the Democratic party has decided that they need to find something to say which will appeal to focus groups. No, they haven't considered changing their priorities, or their policies; they only need to make them more appealing to a few special interest groups.

I ask myself: "Is this a dynamic group who have a vision, who will attract me because of the wisdom of that vision; or this is a stagnent bunch of politicians who have no goal beyond regaining their lost power?"

The answer is clearly "Plan 'B'", and now they have even admitted it to themselves.

What a bunch of maroons.

(Hat Tip to Rush Limbaugh)

Selena is Dead. Long Live Selena!

Mexican recording artist Paula Rubio poses as she arrives on the red carpet for the Selena Vive tribute concert at Reliant Stadium Thursday, Apri. 7, 2005, in Houston. Some of the biggest stars of Latin music came out to pay tribute to Selena 10 years after her death. (AP Photo/Brett Coomer)

I just thought you would ... you know ... want to know.

Aftec Extractor

I broke my extractor.

For two weeks I thought my repetitive jams during IPSC matches was caused by magazines ...t he new ISMI springs I had installed in all of my magazines, the Dawson Plus-Two I had installed on one magazine, or perhaps because of the natural tendency of magazines to open up at the magazine lips due to natural wear of using the same magazines for a year or more.

When I finally wised up, I took a close look at my extractor under a strong magnifying glass. I found a chip on the face of the extractor hook ... not a corner of the hook broken, as has been my experience with EVERY pistol (including S&W) I've ever used for IPSC competition for more than a year. (Figure 12,000 round per year, at a minimum.)

Because I shoot IPSC matches every weekend during 'the season' I wasn't willing to accept any decrease in reliability, so I contacted Chuck Bradley at Shooter's Connection to get a replacement.

(Extractors are a 'consumible' product; if you're going to shoot a couple of hundred rounds through your 1911 pistol every week, most weeks of the year, you have to expect that the extractor is going to fail eventually, even if you're using the now-classic STI.

It's only reasonable to have a spare extractor in your range bag, but when I went looking for mine, I discovered that the cupboard was bare ... extractor-wise.

Chuck had much the same problem: he had no STI extractors in stock, and his order to STI hadn't come in yet. But he had AFTEC extractors on hand, and I've always wanted to see if this product was worth the premium price it demanded, so I ordered one.

I also back-ordered a replacement STI extractor, to be delivered as soon as Chuck's order came in. It never hurts to have extra parts on hand, if you compete in as many matches each year as SWMBO and I do.

I didn't get my order in to Chuck until Monday night. He replied by email later that same night (has Chuck nothing better to do than keep track of his customers?) and I clarified my request that he send his available extractor ... the Aftec ... immediately, and also send a spare STI extractor as soon as they came in.

I received my Aftec extractor on Thursday night.

Information available on the Internet indicated that installation of the Aftec extracor required 'some gunsmithing'. Specifically, they supposedly required that you drill out your extractor channel to fit the larger-diameter Aftec. After this, of course, the stock extractor was no longer an option.

The extractor is an Aftec Extractor. It uses a small, heavy duty coil spring to give constant tension to the case in the chamber. I have broken two of these in this gun so far. The replacement parts are hard to come by as they are no longer produced. To install the Aftec extractor, you have to drill out the extractor hole in the slide to a larger diameter. It is impossible to go back to the regular type extractor after one of these are installed. The weak area is by the hook part of the extractor, where a crack forms and eventually the hook breaks off. I do not recommend this modification because of the two failures I have had with mine.

Either this description is VERY much out of date, or it is patent bullshit. I prefer to believe that this installation process is based on a very EARLY model of the Aftec extractor.

My experience was less traumatic. The Aftec dropped right in. The extractor channel didn't require any modification, and even the perennially Gunsmithing-Incompetent Geek was able to install the After-Market part without opening the dusty Dremel Tool box.

Saturday morning, 9am, I started the match at the Albany Rifle & Pistol Club. To my delight, the Aftec extracted with near-perfect reliability. (The single exception was when I attempted to use a 140mm magazine newly equiped with a 'Dawson Plus-Two' basepad, which caused a jam after 6 shots in the 22-round magazine. My bad: I had used an 'old' 170mm ISMI magazine spring, conforming to my personal theory that a NEW 140mm magazine spring wouldn't work with a plus-two magazine. I'll replace that with a new 140mm ISMI magspring and report back later. Did I mention that I was mechanically stupid?)


John Moses Browning ... My Hero!

While I'm a traditionalist where gun-parts are concerned, I've never been entirely convinced that the original John Browning design of a bend-it-to-tune-it extractor was the best possible solution. Given the one-match experience, I have no negative critical comments about the Aftec extractor so far.

Give me some time. If it's possible to muck it up, I'll do it. But for now ... I like it!

THE WORLD'S UGLIEST CAR

The Worlds Ugliest car: it took 12 years to restore it to ... this!

Is THIS The Police? (John Farnam's Quips)

John Farnam's Quips - 26Mar05.html

I am aware that my recent preponderance of commentaries about Law Enforcement Officers (LEO) who find themselves in ... uncomfortable ... situations, seems to imply that I am gleefully gleaning the Internet for every little thing that can go wrong.

Wrong.

Actually, it has been a bad time for LEOs. I admire their willingness to put their lives on the line to protect us, but their job is so terribly difficult that it doesn't take much for Things To Go Terribly Wrong.

Which leads me to the events of March 11, and Atlanta.


An accused rapist with a long history of crime, having been taken from his cell and moved to a 'holding area', overpowered his guard (variously identified as 'a deputy' and 'a bailiff'), took her service pistol, and escaped. In the process he killed a judge and two other people, beat a reporter and took his car, and held a young woman captive for several hours before she talked him into giving himself up.

As mentioned above, our Brian is a bad boy even if he is capable of redemption.

But how did this tragedy start?

It started with the bailiff he overpowed, and he was able to do so because the bailiff (Sheriff's deputy) was an aging, short woman who was unable to successfully resist when he attacked her.

John Farnam some insight into the reasons why this attack succeeded, and it does not reflect well upon the Fulton County Sheriff's Office. The bailiff wasn't the only one who didn't do her job.

26Mar05

Atlanta incident details, from a friend and lawyer in the area:

"Video cameras, monitored at the local sheriff department, clearly displayed the entire courthouse attack on the single, hapless deputy guarding the unhandcuffed prisoner. At the time of the incident, there were no fewer than three other deputies assigned to duty in the SO's command center who were, among other things, supposed to be monitoring the video:

One deputy had been sent to assist in a courtroom, leaving two in the command center.

Another deputy was sent away by the captain to fetch the captain's breakfast.

Only one officer remained to both monitor the video and perform the other duties. He was apparently distracted when the attack took place and neither saw nor reported it.

I surely hope the captain enjoyed her breakfast!

It gets worse. The prisoner responsible for the murders was found with a shank on him two days earlier. What additional precautions were taken with respect to this prisoner? Apparently none! They did not even search his cell. When they finally did, AFTER all the murders, they discovered detailed plans of his escape route and a 'hit list' of individuals, that included the judge who was murdered.

This elevates negligence to an art form. Anyone familiar with Atlanta knows nothing substantive will be done, and our idiot sheriff will remain in office, unless, of course, we can get him to take over at the UN! You're on your own down here."

/John

Jeff Cooper's Commentaries

Jeff Cooper's Commentaries

I may be a little late, but it is worthwhile noting that the March, 2005 Cooper's Commentaries is UP!

Besides the Colonel's usual eclectic comments on everything from Swagger Sticks to the superiority of the 1903-A3 rifle, he provides these comments:

As the Holy War continues in Iraq, it remains clear that minor caliber smallarms cartridges are not working. The consensus we get back from the war zone is that while the 223 cartridge is a reasonably reliable stopper when hits are delivered to the upper torso region, they are not a really good answer to a fight. The Parabellum cartridge of 1908 is simply not a good idea, except possibly in the full-automatic mode - as with the machine pistol. As a sidearm cartridge it does not measure up - or have I mentioned that before?

While it is possible to scrounge a good pistol out there in Mesopotamia, ammunition is difficult to obtain. Of course a pistol is not fired very much in military combat. My studies of the matter suggest that 50 rounds of pistol ammunition should suffice for an entire war. It is unusual for an infantryman to fire more than a couple of magazines in a whole battle.

Huh. I can't make 50 rounds of pistol ammunition 'suffice' for ten minutes on the range. But he's right, of course; there are very few 'mag changes' in battle. And if your combat situation has so degraded that you have no available weapon better than your pistol, you're so far out on The Sharp End that the question of survival will not be determined by a 1-second reload.

Kim du Toit & Massad Ayoob ... Not RKBA?

Kim du Toit - Daily Rant

Kim du Toit, usually the most ardent of RKBA supporters, cites this comment from LFI Guro Masad Ayoob ....

"No, as a matter of fact, you don’t have a God-given right to carry a loaded gun in shopping malls where there are kids walking around. It’s a privilege, and you need to be able show society that you know how to use it and when to use it. That you’re not going to shoot at a perpetrator and hit a kid by mistake."

.. and surprisingly (to me), he buys into it whole-hog:

All the above came from a reading of this article, sent by Reader Richard A. There are times when I don’t agree with Mass Ayoob, but on his central thesis at LFI, I am in complete agreement.

Perhaps not surprisingly, I do not share his agreement with the thesis, and I say so about 70 comments into the dialogue.

Somewhere less than half-way through the discussion, du Toit states that he will NOT enter the dialogue ... one supposes this decision is caused by the nearly overwhelming statements of disagreement from his readers.

This may be one of the most important subjects which he has ever posted, if only because of the huge volume of controversy among RKBA supporters who don't agree with him or with Ayoob.

I wish du Toit had continued to be an active participant in the discussion, because I don't really have a good grasp of his justification for deciding that legal CCW (Concealed Carry of a Weapon) is any more egregious thanCCW in a church or a courtroom, both of which he has discussed lately and decided that RKBA issues would apply.

One can only conclude that he is uncomfortable with his espoused position, and is reluctant to concede that his original statement is not in accordance with earlier statements.

My interpretation is that he feels he has contradicted himself, and either way he will have to admit to having taken an indefensible position.

But that's just my take on it. You may read it entirely differently.

Please go read the whole post and the cited link to Ayoob's original statement. I would appreciate it if you would comment either here or on Kim's website.

Daylight Savings Time

What does Daylight Savings Time mean to me?

Well, if you didn't get The Word, it means if that you got to work at 8am, it was really 9am and you probably are late to work.

It means that the after-work time you had counted on to go to the range isn't there. By the time you got off work, the daylight you had hoped for to sight in your heater probably won't be available for another six weeks.

It means that, during the height of summer, it's no use going to bed at 9pm. It's still light out, so if you have to get up early you probably won't have got a good night's sleep because your choices are (a) keep the window open, and smell your sun-and-beer bummered neighbors burning cheap hamburger for another hour or two, or (b) close the windows and suffocate. If you don't have air conditioning, even in Oregon, there's no way to enjoy a cool night's breeze.

If you DO go to work early, and if you expected to putter in the garden for a while before you hit the road ... forget it until June when it's finally light at oh-dark-thirty.

I have no idea whose convenience Congress had in mind when they imposed Daylight Saving Time on the American public, but I expect it's those late-to-bed, late-to-rise politicians who don't work the same hours as most of their constituents.

Lucky for me I'm a night-owl. I don't get to bed before midnight, no matter what the political expediencies are and no matter where the sun is. But I still wonder what it means to an HONEST working man, if I knew any.

No, it's not easy being me. But sometimes, it's better than being 'normal'.

Captain's Quarters

Captain's Quarters

It appears that the Canadian Government has a teensy little political scandal going on, which has reached the courts. The judge imposed a gag order. An American blogger discovered some of the details, and posted them on his website. Then a Canadian blogger (are you following this?) linked to the American blogsite.

When the Canadian Government, and the Canadian judge, found out about this they were very upset. What's the good of a gag order if it doesnt' work? (Good question, eh?)

Now Canada is thinking about prosecuting the Canadian blogger for spilling the beans, and they would really like to get their hands on Captain Ed, the American blogger who broke the story.

Can Canada prosecute an American for violating a Canadian gag order? Can the prosecute a Canadian for publishing the fact that an American has information that is not available to the average Canadian? Will Monty of the Mounties save Tess Truehart OR Little Nell before the train runs over here?

Gah!

In the hope of obfuscating the issue, such as it is, I have provided a link to Captain Ed's Big Story. And in the tradition of W ... "Bring It On".

I like "the average Canadian", but I do not like the average Canadian Government. Let's give them a few more targets to shoot at. Remember: "Style Points Count!"

I wonder how many Americans the Canadian Government will have to prosecute (after they have petitioned the American Government to arrest and extradite), before their national budget collapses? Remember, they're up to something on the order of hundreds of millions of dollars attempting to impose their draconian gun buy-back laws ... where were budgetted at not much more than one million Canadian dollars. (What's that in real money?)

Anybody else want to buy into the game? The chips are cheap.

It seems worth the effort, to me.

Another Evening WASTED Sitting At My Computer!

People often ask me:

"Hey Geek! You spend all day in front of a computer. You're a Systems Analyst, you write programs eight hours a day. Don't you have something better to do when you get home?"

Actually, nobody has ever asked me this. But if anyone ever noticed that this is how I spend my evenings, five nights a week, they might wonder.

The thing is, you can do a lot of 'stuff' with a computer. There's games like Minesweeper, etc. for those times when you're just bummered out and want some totally mindless thing to do and you don't feel like reading.

But you can do some social things, too.

For example, I spend some time every night writing emails. Sometimes to my family, and often to The Unofficial IPSC List. (In fact, it was to reduce the level of Geek-Length Posts to the IPSC List that I started this Blog.)

Sometimes, during the day, I think up questions that can easily be answered via the Internet. A few of my favorite links are listed on the sidebar. For example, I can look up the results of the latest IPSC match I shot, by calling up www.columbia-cascade.com. Or I can check to see if I've yet made GrandMaster in Open Division at www.uspsa.org. (Hint: I'm lucky I'm still a B-class shooter!)

Also, since I don't have television and my radio-listening hours are limited by the requirements of working for a living, and I refuse to pay those leftist-pinkos who write for the newspapers in Red-State Oregon, I can check out the news at a world-wide selection of news websites. In fact, if I'm curious about politically slanted interpretations of the breaking news, there are a number of commentators who are woodified in hopes that I'll check their website to find out what THEY think. (They're entertaining ... especially Anne Coulter ... but they don't form my opinion. Rather, I look to see if THEY know anything I don't know; more often, I check to see if have achieved the zen-state of understanding which compares favorably with my own "God-like" talent to interpret the news.

Or, you can look up the cinematic contributions of Forrest Tucker, which is one of the oddball things I did to support my Geeky READING post yesterday ... believe it or not.

Occasionally, I put the resources of the Internet to more productive purposes. Tonite was one such night. Here's what I did:

April First. Tonite, I pay my bills. Mostly, I make payments online.

AOL is an automatic deduction, as are car insurance, life insurance, and renter's insurance.

Credit card ... paid it.
Electricity ... not due yet. I'll pay it next week.
Land-line phone ... paid it.
Cell Phone ... not due yet. I'll pay it next week.

All of these bills are paid online. I also checked my bank account to ensure that my paycheck had been credited.

Car payment ... not an issue any more, Brother. Paid it off early ... online.

Rent ... wrote a check. I'll put it in the landlord's mailbox in the morning. It's easy to forget this, but I just write the check when I pay my other bills. Some of the websites load slowly, there's enough time to write a check and stuff it in an envelope.

Water and Garbage: included in the rent. Oh, the joys of non-home-ownership!

Gun Club Membership ... wrote the check and put it in the mail.

Othe bills: there ain't none. I live a minimalist life. Money for Nothin' and Checks for Free (which I order from my bank ... online.)


There are a couple of new things this month, tho.

Income Taxes ... paid it, online, for a $5 fee. My bank has a deal with TurboTax which accepts online tax filing requests from bank customers at a reduced rate. Unfortunately, I could only file my Federal taxes with TurboTax. When they calculated my State Taxes, they decided I owed the state of Oregon another $1680. By my calculations, I owed $106. I wrote TurboTax a curt note on their "feedback" website, indicating most graciously that I couldn't afford their services in this area because it would require that I overpay by 1500%. I'll do my state tax return tomorrow, on paper, and still grumble about the absurd socialist tax structure in Oregon.

At least I don't have to pay Property Taxes anymore, since I'm renting. Oh sure, I DO pay Property Taxes, because it's part of the way my rent was calculated. But I've lived in the same place for 9 years now, and my rent hasn't gone up one penny. Tell me, you folks who own your own home ... habe your property tax, maintenance fees, garbage service and water/sewage bills stayed the same for the last 9 years? And when your diswasher breaks, do you have to buy a new one? Or does some kind neighbor (in my case, the owner) replace it for free?

That's what I though. Oh, the joys of non-home-ownership!


Next, my car registration is due to be renewed.

Paid it ... online ... in the comfort of my home and on a secure website. Computers are better than hanging around the DMV waiting for your number to be called. Did you know you can't smoke in a public building in Oregon? Screw them. I smoked a cigarette while I renewed my car registration. Life is good when you're a Geek.

Finally, I received an email telling me that a bill has been introduced simultaneously in both the House and the Senate (by Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist and Senator Lamar alexander, both of Tennessee), intended to help the Boy Scouts of America (BSA) with their fund-drive problems. You are probably aware that, thanks to the American Civil Liberties Union, the United Way fund-drives no longer support the BSA in fund-raising activities. Further, the ACLU has taken direct action to insure that the BSA can no longer hold meetings or conduct recruitment campaigns on school grounds. The have lost access to many of the public venues where they once held "Jamborees" and meetings. This bill will, hopefully, return their right to use these public facilites.

The “Support Our Scouts Act of 2005” guarantees the Boy Scouts’ right to equal access in a number of ways. The legislation removes any doubt that Federal agencies may welcome Scouts to hold meetings and go camping on federal property. It ensures the Defense Department can continue providing support consistent with U.S. law. The legislation also ensures state or local government entities do not deny Boy Scouts equal access to public facilities, programs, or forums. Finally, the act clarifies that federal agencies cannot provide less support to the Scouts than the agency has in the past.

So I wrote to my Senators, Ron Weyden and Gorden Smith. And I also wrote to my Representative, Peter DeFazio. (You gotta love FIRST.GOV)

I told them that back in the '50s and the '60s, when I was growing up, it was EASY to be a kid. My parents were married. We had scouting, where we could go places and do things with other kids, and we didn't have to wonder if whether the scout-master was there to help us or to do bad things to us. We knew we could trust them.

I told them that kids today don't have it so good. Their parents are making babies, then going their separate ways. Children aren't 'given' good role models, they have to take 'em where they find 'em. I said that the BSA is finding pedofiles in their upper ranks even when they try real hard to weed 'em out. The Catholic Church in Portland, Oregon, has declared bankruptcy because of the civil suits they had to pay out due to the predations of pedophiliac priests ... PRIESTS! For Christ's sake, can't we do better than that with the Boy Scouts of America? These people are trying to hold the line, to protect our children and teach them the values of common decency, but there are people out there who want to put our children at risk for the sake of chimera .. a freaking PHILOSOPHIC CONCEPT ... called "diversity".

And I said that there wasnt' a damned thing I could do about it. I'm nothing but a balding, over-aged misanthropic Geek, and all I can do is write letters to people. But this bill could help the Boy Scouts at least regain some access to facililties which were available to them before the 'diversity' thing got blown out of proportion, and I think it's worth the effort to support it. Maybe they could do something to help a worthwhile cause.

Do it for the children.

Of course, I didn't put it quite that way, but that was the general gist of my comments.

. . . . . .

So there it is. How I Wasted My April Fools Night, Sitting In Front Of A Darned Ol' Computer.

How did you spend YOUR evening?

We Few

Here's a first: instead of talking about IPSC, RKBA, current events, cultural issues or any of The Usual Subjects, I want to talk about books.

(Most of the people, websites, etc. I talk about here are represented on the sidebar ... that bunch of links you see over on the right side of your screen.) ==========================>

If it can be said that I am 'into' IPSC, then it must be also said that I am WAY into books.

I keep several books in my desk at work, for reading on breaks or on weekends. I keep books in my briefcase. Beside my bed. In my car. Anywhere I go where I may have a few unfilled minutes, I can reach out and lay my hand on a book. Or two, or three ...

At any time, I have at least three books 'going'. And I don't have any problems with keeping the story-line or theme separate. Where books are concerned, I'm not only vociferous, I'm omnivorous. I choose 'themes', or 'authors', and I read a slew of books in this category until I burn out. I have (as far as I know), and re-read frequently, every book that Robert Heinlein ever wrote. I'm currently working my way through a 10-volume set of the works of Rudyard Kipling (printed 1923), and earlier this month I bought two more volumes of Kipling because I learned that he had written a lot of his best work after that publication date.

Science Fiction has been my first love, since I discovered an omnibus of the works of Lewis Padget's (the pen name Henry Kuttnerand his wife Connie "C.L. Moore") in the Pendleton, Oregon, Umatilla Ccounty library about 1960. I had previously read Phillip Wylie's "Generation of Vipers" and "Tomorrow" and "The Disappearance" and "Gladiator" (a progenitor tale of the 'Superman' myth), and found them fascinating although I didn't realize that what I was reading was social commentary often disguised as Science Fiction; but when I read Padget I was hooked forever.

(Incidently, Wylie also wrote the "Crunch and Des" stories, which was made into a brief television series starring Forrest Tucker, he of later "F-troop" fame. Wylie also wrote the scripts for a number of movies and television shows. Can you tell I'm a big fan of this misunderstood writer? He died in 1971, somewhat after I was drafted. I blame Lyndon Johnson for Wylie's untimely death.)

When I got to high school, I discovered the Russian Novelists:, Anton Chekov, Ivan Turgenov and the unreadable - in - any - language Dostoevsky (not to mention the equally uncomprehensible, but charming, German and/or Bohemian and/or Chech author Franz Kafka) ; my classmates were wading through Mark Twain, whose works I had read years before ... right after Doctor Doolittle. But that's another story (Aren't county libraries wonderful?)

My latest SF discover is John Ringo, who is . . . surprise! . . . still alive! He's ex-embassy kid, ex-military, and he writes "Military SF" with a gritty sorta-realism that makes me believe that he knows he meaning of the term "The Sharp End" (not to be confused with a David Drake novel of the same name.)

Ringo has written about a dozen books by now, mostly in a couple of series. The best of them is the "Marching ..." series (Marching Upland, Marching Upland, Marching to the Stars) and the final book is "We Few", the subject of this post.

You're probably waiting for the punch line by now. Expecting there to be a "point" to this.

Well, the point is that I enjoy this author so much that I ordered his latest book (We Few) in September of last year, expecting it to be published on schedule in November. It didn't happen. In fact, this book has been republished for an April, 2005, release date, but Amazon.com received a shipment and filled my order early enough that I finally received it today.

So I'm going to close my little "I Like To Read" post, finish cooking dinner, and curl up with my latest literary acqusition. It'll probably mean I'll read through the night, get to work late tomorrow morning, and not be worth a damn because I'll only have had a couple of hours sleep.

Or maybe I'll only read a couple of hours, turn the lights out, and get a good night's sleep.

It could happen.

Bent Targets and All

2003 Area 1


Last Saturday we went to an IPSC Club Match on the rainiest March 26th in Fifty Years.

No, this picture isn't from that match. The sky is too clear, and the targets are un-bagged . . . and in better shape.

But it serves to illustrate how necessary it is to take special precautions during 'inclement weather'.

You'll notice that most of the target stands have sandbags holding the legs down; this is so the wind doesn't blow them over.

Also, the cardboard targets have been warped by the moisture they have absorbed.


This is hardly an extreme condition; we saw what 'extreme conditions' can do to cardboard targets last weekend.

This is nothing new to those of us who compete in IPSC matches in Oregon year 'round. When the air is excessively humid (as during a constant drizzle, which we experienced Saturday), the cardboard absorbs the moisture and curl, as you see here.

More important, when the rain is allowed to fall on the targets, they become so saturated that it is difficult to keep the tape, which covers the bullet-holes caused by previous shooters, to stick to the surface.

One solution (sorry, pun not intended) is to 'bag' the targets. That is, clear plastic bags are pulled over the targets to keep the rain away. And of course, stormy weather typically includes wind, so the target stands must be either staked down or held down with sandbags, rocks, extra target stands, or whatever heavy material is available to help resist the efforts of sudden gusts to tip the targets over. (When targets are tipped over, the bags often are blown around so that at least some of the target is exposed to the rain, so they quickly become soaked.)

Unfortunately, when the targets are bagged it's hard to see the hits ... shots through the bags often leave dark grease-marks, so it's necesssary to lift the bags to determine which dark marks are new bullet holes.)

And taping the bullet holes becomes particularly difficult, as the person doing the taping needs to lift the bag to reach the holes, then carefully smooth the plastic down over the target. Sometimes an impatient taper will cut or tear a slit in the bag, to facilitate access to the surface; this slit can be opened by the wind allowing rain to soak the target.

In this particular match, the Match Director had made careful plans to avoid as much as possible the conditions which would slow down the match, or make it difficult to accurately score the targets.

All targets were bagged before the match began. All target stands were either weighted with sandbags (or rocks, etc.) to prevent their tipping under the influence of the expected wind. Extra targets were made immediately available at each stage, so if a target became too saturated with water it could be replaced with a minimum of disruption to the match. (Staple Guns and new bags were stored at each stage, also, so the targets could be replaced quickly.)

However, the weather was so windy and rainy that the advanced planning sometimes proved less than completely adequate.

First, not all targets were fixed firmly to the ground. During the walkthrough, we found that all of the targets on one stage had been blown down by the wind ... all of the targets had to be replaced before the match even started.

During the match, we discovered that the stage construction crew, in their drive to prevent the bags from blowing off the targets, had placed the bags over the targets before stapling the targets to the supporting wood sticks. This met their goal, but it made it very difficult to tape. In frustration, some squad members applied their own Gordian solution by tearing the bags covering the front of the targets. This allowed them to easily tape the bullet holes, but the rain quickly soaked the targets ... and it wasn't an unusual occurance for bullets striking the wet targets to blow tape off previous bullet holes, making it difficult (or impossible) to determine which hole had been made by the current shooter.

We were thankful that extra replacement targets and were available on the stages, but the frequent need to replace targets soon exhausted the supply. By the last half of the match, everyone seemed to be so tired that few squads made the extra effort to find a member of the hosting club to find out where new targets could be found. The last couple of stages were sometimes very difficult for Range Officers, tapers and competitors.

There was two other situations which slowed down the match. First, the classifer which had been scheduled for this match was CM99-14, "Hoser Heaven". In this stage, there are three strings ... and the targets must be scored and taped before each string. In retrospect, the need to disrupt the stage twice for each shooter greatly increased the stage-clearance time, and delayed the match significantly.

Second, because of the weather some out-of-state competitors didn't arrive at the range until after the match had started. They joined the squad which started on the stage just before the classifier stage, changing the size of the squad from 11 (which was the approximate size of the other four squads) to 17. Apparently, this was their own arbitrary decision; the Match Director wasn't informed until that squad was half-way through the classifier. One person left early in the match, the rest split up into two squads . . . but not before the back-up on the classifier stage had become impossible to resolve.

I realize that this this litany of events may seem critical of the pre-match choices of the host club, but in retrospect there were few decisions which didn't seem reasonable at the time. The INTENT was to have all targets bagged, staked, and replacement targets allotted on all stages.

Unfortunately, the weather was so inclement that the events strained all prior planning. The extenuating circumstances are that Oregon had, for the previous two weeks, experienced an unseasonably warm and dry situation which looked more like early summer than late winter / early spring. We had become complacent, not least because the media had been predicting the worst draught in 60 years because so little rain & snow had fallen over the winter.

There are two lessons which might be learned from this experience:
(1) During seasons which are typically inclement, plan for the worse, marshall your reserves . . . then double it!
(2) It might have been a good idea to have a "Mr. Fixit" roaming the range during the entire match, to spot potential trouble-spots before they became critical.

This last measure, while prodigious of limited personnel, may have resolved many unforseen situations which eventually delayed the match.

In an all-volunteer sport, it's difficult to forsee the worst possible scenario and provide the staffing needed to counter it. However, if the goal is to provide a safe, enjoyable match to the participants, it may be necessary for the host club to schedule some non-competing personnel to insure the goal is met.

Cowboy Blob's Five Question Grenade

I love tests!

I even take tests in magazines. Well, except for the "compatibility tests" ("Is Your Man Man Enough For You?") in the Cosmopolitan Magazine that my ex-wife use to force me to take. Maybe that's why she's my "ex".

Not too long ago, I took Frank IMAO's "Who The Hell Do You Bloggers Think You Are?" quiz. I failed miserably. Like Robert B. Parker's "Spenser for Hire", I wasn't as funny as I think I am. Except I don't look as good slurping up a spaghetti noodle.

Perhaps that's why I'm girding my loins here to take the Cowboy's Five Question Grenade. I'm looking for redemption here.

Are you with me?
Let's see how we do:

1. Multi-part question: Marilyn Monroe or Grace Kelly? Sandra Bullock or Marisa Tomei? Nicole Kidman or a slice of pepperoni and sausage pizza and a Heineken?

Definately neither Marilyn Monroe OR Grace Kelly. They once looked good, but they're a little yucky now. Dead, you know.

Sandra Bullock or Marisa Tomei? That's a hard choice. I thought Tomei looked great in "My Cousin Vinny, but maybe that was only because she was always in the same scenes with Joe Pesci, and Fred Gwynne. No contest there.


On the other hand, Sandra (Sahn-Drah?) looks good in everything she ever did, even in what appears to be the first movie she ever made .. "Hangman". The movie was a dog. Twenty-three year old Sandra hadn't lost her baby fat, but she had "Personality", y'know. (H/T - The Sandra Bulock Picture Site)


"Nicole Kidman or a slice of pepperoni and sausage pizza and a Heineken?"

Another tough one. I think I could survive the pizza and beer, but could I please substitute Abby's Linguica Pizza and a Blue Boar Ale?

2. What was the crowning achievement of your professional career?

That had to be 1990 when I was the "Data Security Officer" for Freightliner Corporation, and I secured all IMS transactions using the ACF2 Data Security software.
"Implimation Day" was a day that we agonized over for weeks. Management expected a LOT of problems when workers attempted to access online forms. I had spent six weeks setting it up, but the Pointy-Haired Managers assigned me 3 workers to handle the phone calls and I was there from 6am to midnight to field help-desk phone calls from people who couldn't access the information they needed to do their job.

We had not one single phone call. Everyone who needed access, had it. The people who weren't authorized to, for example, remove $10,000 diesel engines from the inventory ... couldn't.

It was a "non-event", which is the ultimate accolade for a Geek installing new software.

3. What was your low point?

Oh, that one is easy.
That would be April of 1991, when I was one of the 20% of all Freightliner employees who were laid off. They didn't need a dedicated Data Security Officer. I had done my job too well.

4. You're going to spend six months on the International Space Station as an amateur mission specialist. Besides members of your family or close friends, pick three non-astronauts to join you.

Oh great! This is an easy question.
They would be Sandra Bullock, Marisa Tomei, and Nicole Kidman.
(SWMBO is going to kill me for this one!)

5. It's your stage...every broadcast, cable, and satellite TV network in the world has the feed from a camera/mike in your living room for two minutes. What do you say?

"I suppose you are all wondering why I called you together for this meeting ...."

(Damn! I blew it again, didn't I?)

And this, too, is The Police

Yahoo! News - Most Emailed - Photos

Gabriel Keys (foreground) is arrested by police officers for trespassing in Pinellas Park, Florida, March 23, 2005. The young protester attempted to take a glass of water into the Woodside Hospice for the brain-damaged Terri Schiavo. A federal judge rejected a request from the parents of Schiavo to order her feeding tube reinserted, dealing a blow to attempts by the U.S. Congress and the White House to prolong her life. REUTERS/Carlos Barria

Ten-year-old Gabriel Keys was not the only juvenile arrested today, according to the Mercury News:

About a dozen people, including some children, submitted to arrest after making the symbolic gesture of carrying water toward the hospice.

'Jesus said, `Whatever you do to the least of men, you do for me,' '' said Josie Keys, 14. ``I'm a little nervous, but I think this is what God wants me to do.''

Also arrested were her brothers Cameron, 12, and Gabriel, 10.

I'm thinking there must be some very embarassed police officers in Pinellas Park, Florida, tonight.

This .. is the police!

Yahoo! News - AFP Top Photos




Haute Couture, Hair Curlers, and a Heater.

"I'm out of estrogen, and I've got a gun. Don't mess with me, Fellows".

No terrorists were injured during the filming of this fashion show!

Yahoo! News - Minnesota School Shooter Wore Bullet-Proof Vest

Yahoo! News - Minnesota School Shooter Wore Bullet-Proof Vest

EMIDJI, Minn. (Reuters) - A 16-year-old boy who killed nine people and then himself on a Minnesota Indian reservation was wearing a bullet-proof vest when he chased a teacher and fellow students into a classroom and gunned them down, the FBI said on Tuesday.

As much as I dislike quoting Yahoo, Reuters or AOL, this is confirmed by at all three sources:

The boy accused of killing nine people in a shooting spree first shot his grandfather and his companion, then donned the man's police-issue gunbelt and bulletproof vest before heading to the high school, where he shot students and teachers at random, authorities said Tuesday.

AOL has used the above cherubic photo to headline its news item, and Yahoo has specifically captioned it as "Jeff Weise" although neither AOL nor Yahoo has stated that it is a recent photo.

FBI agent Michael Tabman gave the first official account of the worst school killing in the United States since the Columbine massacre in 1999 in which two teenagers killed 13 people.

Tabman told reporters that Weise started by shooting dead his grandfather Daryl Lussier, 58, a sergeant in the local police, and Lussier's companion Michelle Sigana, 32.

The teenager took his grandfather's police bulletproof vest, gun belt and police car, "and drove to the school, driving up right to the door," Tabman said. He was armed with the handgun, another .40 calibre handgun and a shotgun.

There he was confronted by two unarmed security guards. Weise shot dead one of them, Derrick Brun, while another fled inside.

Inside the school Weise fired at a teacher, Neva Winnecoup-Rogers, 62, and a group of students in the corridor and followed them.

"He pursued them into a classroom. It is there he opened fire, killing a number of students and the teacher. Shortly after that, Mr. Weise continued to roam through the school, firing randomly," Tabman said.

One of the dead students was 14 and four were aged 15. At least three were girls.

Weise fired into the door of other classrooms where teachers and students barred the doors to stop him getting in.

A student, Sondra Hegstrom, heard shooting from an adjoining classroom, she told the local newspaper, The Pioneer.

"You could hear a girl saying, 'No, Jeff. Quit! Quit! Leave me alone. Why are you doing this?' Boom, boom, boom, and then no more screaming," she said.

"I looked him in the eye and ran in a room, and that's when I hid," she said. "I called 911 from a cell phone and they said, 'Just sit there and wait until the cops come.'"

The Pioneer quoted another student as saying the killer pointed his gun at a boy, changed his mind, smiled, waved and shot somebody else.

The police and fire departments received several emergency calls from students and teachers trapped in classrooms.

Four police arrived, Tabman said, and one opened fire at the gunman who shot back.

Weise then withdrew to the classroom where he had killed the teacher and students and took his own life, the FBI agent said.

This young maniac ("Mr. Weise"!) presented his armed self to two (unarmed) security officers and a number of teachers, and nobody was able to defend either themself or the students whose safety was entrusted to their care.

This resulted in " ... the worst school killing in the United States since the Columbine massacre ..."

Columbine was six years ago, and what have we learned from it?

Nothing.

Our country is still determined to forbid armed teachers and security officers ... or anybody else .. access to school property.

Even though we KNOW that students can be bullied to the point of desperation, we are still unwilling to take common-sense measures to defend the general body of students, and faculty and staff, from deadlyl assault.

This, after September 11, which taught us terrorists need not be home-grown to be deadly.

This, after the Russian school shootings which taught us that police are powerless once terrorists have established themselves in a school in a hostage situation.

This, after Columbine, which taught us that if non-mainstream students are ignored, if their derision by their fellow students is ignored, their anger and adolescent angst may cause them to lash out in the most extreme manner,

Instead of addressing the root-cause of these attacks, instead of being on the lookout for these 'children left behind', our leaders have decided to resolve the situations by limiting the ability of responsible people to defend themselves and their charges.

It's a sad day when teachers in our schools are unable to defend their students. The consequences are, now, predictable.

We wonder who is responsible for this kind atrocity. The Brady People say it's our national leaders, because the Federal Government is unwilling to apply extreme measures of Gun Control. They have said that the only American Citizens who should possess firearms are the military and the police.

But this boy killed the police, and stole the firearms from the 'governmental agency' which even the Brady People say should possess them.

When we are all unarmed except for the military and the police, and criminals resort to taking firearms from the military or the police, what does that make of the rest of us?

Lambs ... to the slaughter.

I don't want to be slaughtered. And I don't want my children to be slaughtered. It seems that my choices are to be either an armed criminal, or an unarmed victim.

I'm not happy with my choices.

What do you think I should do about it?

I work on a college campus, and I am required to NOT carry firearms even though I have a CCH (Carry Concealed Handgun) permit. If I do carry a handgun, I can be prosecuted and I can lose my job ... even though the laws in this grey-area are vague.

I sure hope someone else in my work area has more courage of his convictions than do I, because I'm too concerned about keeping my job, and maintaining my non-incarcerated status (I won't say "Liberty" or "Freedom") to carry a handgun on school property. For my survival, I rely on the good will of any random person who may or may not choose to walk onto the school grounds and start killing people.

This is probably ... nay, apparently ... not a good bet. And I'm not proud of myself for caring more about preserving my job than for preserving the lives of the people around me.

Personally, I think that the best solution to securing the safety and well-being of people is if everyone who was able to be 'vetted' as a responsible person (the mechanism has already been established, in the CCH licensing process) to openly carry. I believe this would not only send a message to potential attackers that they would not be able to carry out their warped plans to murder innocents, but also provide the means to stop the predations of those who are too sick, too angry, or otherwise too fanatic to be warned away from our children.

Albany Democrat-Herald : Olson Against Firearms Bills

.: Albany Democrat-Herald :. Archives

Olson against firearm bills

By Hasso hering
Albany Democrat-Herald

More than two dozen bills dealing with firearms are pending in the Legislature, and Albany's state representative takes a dim view of most.

"The bottom line, the way I look at it, is that I don't want bills just chipping away at the Second Amendment," Rep. Andy Olson, R-Albany, said in an interview Friday.

According to his count, 14 gun-related bills have been introduced in the Senate and 15 in the House.

Except for a couple, Olson said they would all be heard by the House Judiciary Committee, on which he serves.

Among the bills Olson said he would oppose is SB 335, which would allow school districts to prohibit persons with permits to carry concealed weapons to carry them on school property.

He called the bill a "solution looking for a problem."

Olson spent his career in the Oregon State Police before he retired and later ran for office. He said he had not heard of any firearm-related problems caused in schools by people with concealed-weapons permits.

Olson also spoke against proposed bans on so-called "assault weapons" and large-capacity magazines.

"I'm opposed to that," he said. "These are not automatic weapons we're talking about."

The guns targeted by the proposed bans don't often figure in crimes, according to him.

"The majority of time suspects use handguns," he said. "They want to keep them concealed."

If any of the Senate bills make it to the House, Olson predicted that most of them would be opposed in House Judiciary.

Our congratulations to Rep. Andy Olson, who is willing to stand up and say :

"I'm opposed to that," ... "These are not automatic weapons we're talking about."

Well, yes. As far as he gies in his opposition, that's true.

Currently it is not a CRIME for a person with a Concealed Carry Handgun (CCH) in Oregon to possess a handgun on school property. This includes a person who is a CCH holder (as I am) who workes on the premises of a State University (as I am) and, for example, places said handgun in the trunk of his car preparatory to going to work at, and parking on the premises of, a State University for the purpose of having it immediatelly avaliable for the purposes of driving immediatelyl to and off-site location to engage in practice. (Which I have, of course, never done and will never in the future do! Even though I would not be in immediate control of the handgun, I have moved said handgun to a location within the confines of a University, which is a School ... wheter or not I recognize that this constitutes "A School" and which is not, at the moment, a felonious crime.)

Hwever, SB 335 is a bit more far-reaching than evern Rep. Olson has noticed.

Note here some details of the proposed Oregon Senate Bill 335:

  SECTION 1. ORS 166.370 is amended to read:
166.370. (1) Any person who intentionally possesses a loaded or
unloaded firearm or any other instrument used as a dangerous
weapon, while in or on a public building, shall upon conviction
be guilty of a Class C felony.

Note the differences here? The title of the bill seems to involve only a "firearm", but the actual text of the bill includes "...any other instrument used as a dangerous weapon ...".

This opens up an entire other can of worms.

First, let's back up and talk about "firearms" and "Concealled Carry Handgun Permit Holders:

  (d)  { + Except as otherwise provided in subsection (5) of this
section, + } a person who is licensed under ORS 166.291 and
166.292 to carry a concealed handgun.
(e) A person who is authorized by the officer or agency that
controls the public building to possess a firearm or dangerous
weapon in that public building.
(f) Possession of a firearm on school property if the firearm:
(A) Is possessed by a person who is not otherwise prohibited
from possessing the firearm; and
(B) Is unloaded and locked in a motor vehicle.
(4) The exceptions listed in subsection (3)(b) to (f) of this
section constitute affirmative defenses to a charge of violating
subsection (1) of this section.
 { +  (5) A school district board may prohibit persons licensed
under ORS 166.291 and 166.292 from possessing firearms in or on a
public building that is a public school or the site or premises
of any student program or activity that is sponsored or
sanctioned by a public school.

Yes, that's right. Subsection 5 says that even if you hold a CCH license, you can't posssess a firearm at a pubilc school, or on the grounds of a public school or even at a place where a school-sponsored activity (such as an unannounced field trip to a park!) is taking place.

That is, if a school decides to schedule a field-trip to a park, and you live next to that park, any firearms in your place of residence are ipso facto grounds for charging YOU with violation of state firearms control law, even if your guns are locked up in your gun-safe.

But wait, it gets better~

So, what's about this "dangerous weapon" stuff?

Within the context of the bill, this term is actually defined THUS:

    { - (5) - }   { + (6) + } 'Weapon' means:
(a) A firearm;
(b) Any dirk, dagger, ice pick, slingshot, metal knuckles or
any similar instrument or a knife other than an ordinary pocket
knife, the use of which could inflict injury upon a person or
property;
(c) Mace, tear gas, pepper mace or any similar deleterious
agent as defined in ORS 163.211;
(d) An electrical stun gun or any similar instrument;
(e) A tear gas weapon as defined in ORS 163.211;
(f) A club, bat, baton, billy club, bludgeon, knobkerrie,
nunchaku, nightstick, truncheon or any similar instrument, the
use of which could inflict injury upon a person or property; or
(g) A dangerous or deadly weapon as those terms are defined in
ORS 161.015.

Okay, this may seem relativelyl innocuous.
Except that some of the terms in sub-subsection (f) aren't defined.

Why should you care?

Consider a hypothetical:

Assume that you are living in a 'university town' such as my current residence community, Corvallis Oregon, home of Oregon State University.
Assume that you have a family with 2.5 children, and one of these children is an 18-year-old girl who has registered to attend classes at OSU.
Assume that you live further than 'walking distance' from the University, so your daughter-the-student consideres it too far to walk to school ... so she buys a parking permit and parks on campus while attending classes.
Assume that your daughter is aware of the current lawless state in Corvallis, where expensive bicycles are stolen daily and automobiles are stolen less regularly, but on occassion.

Is it not reasonable that your daughter considers her personally owned transportion, being subject to theft, could better be protected from theft by means of a device which locks the steering wheel so it cannot be used to drive said vehicle away by a person who has no permission to used said vehicle?

What's one common way to protect an automobile from theft?

That's right: The Club!

The Club ... made of metal and used to prevent automobile theft by virtue of its abiltiy to fix a steering wheel in place ... is (other than the fact that it is made of metal rather than of wood) is the typification of the term "knobkerrie".

<>Being admittedlyl club-like in nature, and having a"'knob" (or reasonable facsimile thereof) at one end, "The Club" is readily construed as either a "club" or a "... knobkerrie". As such, it is
" .. [a]. truncheon or any similar instrument, the use of which could inflict injury upon a person or property... "

You don't think so?
If you were drafted to jury duty, and were specifically required to define "the Club" in terms of a weapon, how would you rule?