"Ghost Rider" Motorcycle?

I received an email from SWMBO yesterday which included images of a motorcycle of a most unusual design.



It reminded me of the Ghost Rider, which was a big Summer Movie for Nicholas Cage last year (2007).



True, the images would be frightening if you saw this custom motorcycle in your rear view mirror while driving down the freeway.



But it's obvious that the motorcycle is a 'Concept Vehicle', and will never be ridden on the road.



In the first place, the exhaust pipes are sited just in front of the rider's right leg. Can you imagine riding down the road with the pipes melting your chaps, and the exhaust slowly roasting your lungs?

Also, there's no chain on the chain-drive. Pretty hard to be 'riding down the highway, looking for adventure' without a chain.




Finally, there are a few 'Street Legal' requirements which have been omitted from the design.

Example: headlights, tail-lights, fenders. And the gas tank (under the 'rib cage'?) looks like it would hold about a quart of gas.




Still, it's an awesome creation, and you can't help admiring the artist for his creation. If those bones are made out of metal, someone is is a magician with a cutting torch.

Geek and SWMBO Medical

Thanks for all the friends, new and old, who have responded to the medical reports I've been sending out lately. Your support and concern is very much appreciated. I've not intended to play on your sympathies, I only wanted to let you know why we haven't been showing up at matches much lately.

SWMBO and I both had doctor appointments today, here's what is going on.

SWMBO:
... was in the hospital for a few hours this morning for a second Biopsy. You may recall that the last one, a Bronchoscopy (sp?) and biopsy was not successful in gathering enough material in the infected pocket of her right lung to determine the nature of the infection (I use the word advisedly ... so far, we don't know what it is that lingers from her 'walking pneumonia'.)

We were told that the first biopsy attempt was dramatically unsuccessful, and the second attempt would include an incision in the chest wall to insert a fiber-optic cable and 'surgical instruments'.

A consultation with the new surgeon revealed that a different procedure would be possible, where they performed the biopsy via a needle inserted into the lung via the chest wall. (Actually, through the back.) This was performed this morning, and as I was unable to accompany SWMBO to the hospital I waited nervously all morning to hear from her. About 12a:30 I called her on her cell phone. She was in a restaurant, eating lunch with her sister, who had accompanied her to the hospital as a driver.

She was fine, the procedure was a success and it provided sufficient material for a biopsy. Since the procedure was performed under a local rather than a general anesthetic, she was not groggy ... just hungry, because she had not been allowed to eat breakfast.

I saw her later in the afternoon and she seemed fine; no problems other than that she was very tender on her back. She'll receive more information about the results of the biopsy from her physician next week.

GEEK:
I also had a medical appointment this week. My exam by my new doctor earlier this week revealed no urgent need for treatment, so this was only an Ultra-Sound examination by a technician, to search for anomalies in the veins and artery in my left leg. After a 30-minute examination, the technician reported that she could see no signs of either an aneurysm or blockage, so I don't expect any immediate medical complications.

Of course, the results of the Ultra-Sound examination still needs to be interpreted by my doctor. However, he will be on vacation next week, so it will be the second week in August before he has the opportunity to review the results. That shows you how concerned he is. (Nothing against The Good Doctor, it's just that he doesn't consider my condition to be any kind of emergency.) My guess is that he will send me for a MRI (Magnetic Resonance Imaging) to search for a cause of the discomfort.

I'll keep you informed. Okay, it may not be very interesting to you, but it helps me to write it all down.

"Fire!" is not a Range Command

Fire burns grass on Saddle Butte - Albany Democrat Herald

Mike McCarter reports that a bullet fired on the Albany Rifle &Pistol Club (ARPC) Main Range started a grass fire.

"... [W]e had a lot of excitement on Wednesday with the north end of Saddle Butte behind the 200 yard line going up in flames. Yes Martha, steel jacket - steel core can start fires. We had talked to the Brownsville Fire Department about a practice burn on the hill and they could not because of the proximity to I-5, well this took care of the issue. The fire departments did a heck of a job putting the fire out on steep ground and poison oak then got called back out after 5pm to put out a flare up.

It's July, the grass is dry, the bullets fly, the grass will fry!

(Sorry, I couldn't resist. It seemed so obvious.)

This is a situation which can happen at any shooting range. A steel-core bullet hit a rock downrange at a bench-rest area of the Club, and the resulting spark started a grass fire.

From what I read, the ARPC leadership had foreseen the problem and attempted to take preventative steps, but County government was unwilling to accommodate the entirely practical fire-prevention plan.

For those who didn't understand the "I-5" reference:
ARPC is located at "Saddle Butte", a small two-peaked butte or hill in the near vicinity of Shedd, Oregon, and just East of the Interstate 5 Freeway ("I-5"). The Freeway is perhaps 200 yards west of the range boundaries, and the are in question is on the West side of Saddle Butte. There is a nut-tree (Hazelnuts?) orchard between the freeway and the range. The Bench-Rest range is 50 yards East of the western range boundary, and as stated the fire started in grass another 200 yards away from the benches.

Add the dimensions and the dry-grass area was 450-500 yards East of the freeway. The prevailing wind in this area is West-to-East (explaining why I am so determined to emphasize the East vs West location of landmarks relative to the freeway), so the fire would have tended to spread East and up-hill on Saddle Butte, not West and down-hill, toward the freeway.

I seems to me that ARPC did just about everything 'right', and there was never any chance that a fire on the range would have threatened the freeway traffic.

Just to put things in perspective:
The area along the freeway (10 miles south of Albany, Oregon) has been one of the biggest producers of Grass Seed in the nation. For years, "Grass-seed Farmers" have grown their crops, reaped the seeds, mown the hay, and then burned the stubble to kill any weeks which may have been blown in from West. This produced tremendous volumes of billowing smoke during the post-harvest season (July through August).

Typically, every few years the smoke was so dense and low to the ground that driver visibility along that stretch of the I-5 Corridor was so obscured that horrendous traffic accidents occurred every few years. In my memory, it was not unusual for twenty to fifty cars would be involved in multiple compound pile-ups.

First one car would slow down because of the decreased visibility, then a car behind would run into the slower car. More cars would run into the wrecks ahead, and inevitably a few 18-wheelers would crush the wrecked cars ahead of them. Vehicles which were mercifully able to see the carnage ahead would veer wildly off the road ... often only to tip and roll because of the occasional steep banks off the shoulder of the freeway. At 70 miles an hour, it doesn't take much to roll a car ... much less a tractor-trailer rig.

Oregon State University "Crop Scientists" developed a machine which could be pulled behind a tractor and would dig the stubble and weeds from the soil and compact the plant material to pellets. This would then be sold as fuel for fireplaces and wood stoves. This became a preferred fuel, as Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) regulations restricted using wood products for fuel.


Thus field burning is rigidly restricted near the I-5 corridor, and is become increasingly restricted in other areas of the state. Which makes it only reasonable that the local fire departments are reluctant to authorize "Controlled Burns", even on the downwind side of the I-5 Corridor.

It was a crap shoot, and this time the DEQ came up snake-eyes. Accidents happen, and what they tried to prevent (field burning near I-5) by refusing to authorize a 'controlled burn' turned into an 'uncontrolled burn'.

Maybe they should have permitted the request from ARPC, who clearly had a much better understanding of the potential danger.

To paraphrase my own Geek Aphorism:
"It's better to do it, and not need it, than to need it, and not do it."

Maybe next year ....

Ode To Joy

The Quotes

A couple of months ago, I discovered The Quotes Page.

I've had a lot of fun with it, and I think that citing a themed collection of quotes on the website establishes theme for blogging during the week.

It hasn't exactly worked out that way, but it's so much fun to search for and set up a collection of similar quotes every Sunday night (or Monday night, if I get behind) I look forward to selecting a few for the Blog once a week. In fact, it's sometimes hard to choose.

The unexpected consequence is that, during conversations with friends and colleagues I sometimes realize that I have immediately at hand an authoritative quote which precisely fits the moment.

An excellent example is this week's quote from Simon Cameron: "An honest politician is one who, when he is bought, will stay bought."

This was a very popular quote in the years when Jerry Brown was the Governor of California (and especially, his father before him).

No, I can't say why this should be. I only report my observations.

WiFi Router is Down! Oops, it's back up!

I live in a townhouse duplex. The owner of the building, and my Landlord, occupies the other half of the property.

Paul, the Landlord, is a pretty good friend. Last September we were chatting in the rose garden which separates our driveways, and he asked: "Jerry, you have hi-speed internet don't you?" He knows I spend a lot of time on the computer at night, partly because during warm weather when the windows are open he can hear the music I play while I'm working on the 'puter.

(Currently playing: Queen, the Platinum Album)

After a little artful dodging, he got down the the point of the question: "Is there any way I can hook up to your internet connection?"

"Sure", I replied. "You pay for a Router, I'll set up an encrypted Wi-Fi site and give you the access codes. Cost to you will be about $50 bucks."

He agreed to it, and the next day I stopped off at Bellevue Computer, Inc. here in town and spent $49.99 on a Netgear 54mbps wireless router.

When the Frickin' BlueBird of Happiness flew into the local power substation, shorting out the whole neighborhood and (not incidentally) frying my motherboard, Bellevue built me a new computer for about $75o to my exact specifications, including my old hard drive as a secondary drive. I've been completely satisfied with their work, and besides SWMBO works as a purchasing agent for Benton County Computer support and does a lot of business with them, to the satisfaction of Benton County and SWMBO. You can't get a better recommendation.

Although the router was a simple, entry-level bit of hardware it took me over two hours to install, configure and apply security to it. But when I was done, I took my laptop around the property and out into the street. As nearly as I could tell, the promise of a 100' perimeter was proven and I could use my laptop anywhere close to the house. This guaranteed that Paul would have the same success, and he was pleased when I presented him with a bill for $50 and the ID/Password for entry to the net.
_____________________________
Fast forward to last night, when I tried to access the Blog via Firefox ... and couldn't.

After about a half-hour of fussing with the cable modem and the router, I disconnected the router from the circuit and hooked the modem directly to the 'puter. Success, I could get online as long as I didn't go through the router. I sent an email to Paul (fat chance of him receiving it ... he had no internet access!) with promises that I would re-establish contact within 24 hours.

On my lunch break from work, I went back to Bellevue with my router in my hand and asked for advice. Kim suggested that I reconfigure the router with the DOS command ipconfig /release followed by ipconfig /renew. That didn't work for me, so I went back to Kim and bought a new Wi-Fi router ($75, 2x the data-transfer rate and 4x the coverage, according to on-the-box ratings).

When I got home from work tonite, I tried to set up the network again. Failure, failure, and failure after three attempts.

It took me two hours to decide that my problem wasn't with the new router, but with the new 14' cables I bought so I could physically position the router in a better place than on top of the PC case, in the footwell of my computer desk. I used the original 4' cables and got a reliable connection, and reconfigured the whole circuit just as I had set it up originally.

Now I have the Wi-Fi connection working for me, as confirmed by using the laptop to connect to the net.

I sent an email to Paul (this one he is more likely to receive, having an internet connection again) to announce that if he noticed an interruption in web access, it has been fixed now.

I never did figure out what caused the router to fail, but I don't much care. I can use my laptop anywhere on the premises, which is an occasional convenience to me. More important, I've provided a similar convenience to my friend and landlord, Paul.

Since he hasn't raised my rent since 1995, I figure this is an investment in the continuance of an amiable relationship, and I'm happy with that.

If it matters, I noticed during the process that there are eight other Wi-Fi 'hotspots' within range of my house. They're all encrypted, so I can't use them. Still, it's an interesting data-point which demonstrates, if nothing else, that the proliferation of Internet Technology is a vibrant part of small-town America.

(I can also access the Internet on campus with my laptop, via my ownership of an account on the Oregon State University website.)

Aren't computers fun?

Sticks and Stones ...

"Sticks and Stones may break my bones,
But words will never hurt me."

Remember that? Well, forget it. In this Politically Correct 21st Century, words can cut you to the quick because we've been told that.

Who believes it?

Bill Cosby believed it, in 2004:

[COSBY – speaks against the use of the word “nigger”; says it is analgesic to talk about what the white man is doing against us.]

Jesse Jackson believed it, in 2006:

Rev. Jesse Jackson is calling for entertainers to stop using the N-word.

He and other leaders held a news conference in Los Angeles Monday, calling for the voluntary ban. The move comes one day after comedian Michael Richards appeared on Jackson's radio show to apologize for his racial rant last week.

As CBS 2's Dorothy Tucker reports, Jackson is going after TV and film stars, as well as musicians.

Jackson says he plans to meet with TV networks, film companies and musicians to talk about what they can do to stop using the racial slur.

....

At Monday's news conference, Jackson and others said the insult highlights issues of racial problems in America.

"We will challenge and urge all artists and comics to stop using this word," Jackson said. "What other group is subjected to such a degrading terminology?"

(More at other sources, including here.)

But what does The Right Reverend Jesse Jackson believe in 2008?

First, he uses that same proscribe "N-Word" in his own personal conversation ...

and on the same day he verbally attacks Barack Obama, in a "private conversation", for the perceived crime of ".... talking down to black people", when Obama enjoins "Black People" to show more responsibility in their personal lives.

What does this mean? Is it an example of hypocrisy in Jackson's personal ethics, or it is a cultural phenomenon unique to American "Black people"?

I'm more inclined to believe the latter, although as an Oregon Redneck I can't profess any authority on the subject.

Still, it is a form of hypocrisy no matter what standard one uses.

Our society has become so engaged in Political Correctness that we can no longer depend on a standard of behavior, or even the Constitution of the United States of America, to provide us with basic guidelines of converse, let alone conduct.

In his famous "I Have A Dream" speech, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. said:

I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.

Sadly, we have not yet reached this goal. But the obstruction is not solely due to white men with dogs, and clubs, and fire-hoses. The self-styled leaders of Black Americans find themselves unable to move beyond antiquated patterns of speech even while they rant publically against the same abuses which they themselves practice in private.

We will never rise to the standards of Dr. King as long as the insincerities of the Jesse Jackson's among us mire us in the abyss of a Politically Correct Speech to which they themselves do not subscribe.

It is time for the Black Americans to throw off the chains of 'words which hurt us', as much as it is time for the Islamics of the world to disregard sloppy and unthoughtful speech, and join the community of "words which will never hurt us".

The First Amendment of the Constitution of the United States of America acknowledge Freedom of Speech. But this, the most precious of Rights acknowledged there-in, is the most elusive of rights and the most difficult, because it protects the speech of the most disagreeable sort.

We will never be truly free, until Jesse Jackson can call Barack Obama a "Nigger" without suffering from public approbation.

I regret that I must make the point so baldly.

PS: Jesse, I don't like Obama any more than you do (for entirely different reasons), but ... you got some Mouth on you. Don't you think you should take up the cause of Free Speech?

Keyword Activity

My statistics software is a never-ending source of information. Sometimes I think I should directly address the "Keyword Activity" hits ... which tracks the data searches which result in the correspondent visiting this website.

Tonite I found a few queries which reminded me that there are a LOT of people out there who desperately need information. I'll yield to temptation.

The first query: "Can you shoot .38 mm in a super 38"?

This resulted in a hit on the article "XL650: .38 Super", which probably did not provide the answer.

Here's the answer: no.

The .38 Special cartridge (which I assume is the cartridge referred to as ".38 mm", is much longer than the .38 Super cartridge. It would not fit into the chamber. Other apparently similar cartridges which will not fit include the 9x23 and .357 magnum.

There are several cartridges which would fit into the chamber of the .38 Super, but they would not cycle the action because the semi-automatic pistol action which typifies a .38 Super-chambered pistol headspaces on the cartridge case. This is decidedly different from those cartridges (usually revolvers) which slip into the chamber/cylinder until the rim of the cartridge case stops further forward movement. In the case of revolvers, this may leave a small distance between the leading portion of the bullet and the nose-cone, which funnels the bullet into the barrel. This is why you can shoot a .38 Special cartridge in a .357 revolver (the .357 case is longer, preventing you from shooting a .357 Magnum cartridge in a revolver chambered for the .38 Special cartridge.)

The .38 Super case is shorter than a 9x23 cartridge. Although they are very close to the same case length, the 9x23 will not chamber in a pistol chambered for the .38 Super cartridge.
(* ... see correction by Guy Neill in Comments, and the UPDATE below.)

On the other hand, the 9x21 cartridge is very close to the same length, and may actually fit into the .38 Super chamber. However, the 'jump' distance is too long, and other factors may make this an inadvisable experiment. For one thing, there may be a lot of 'flash' when the case does not headstamp correctly (picture lots of fire coming out of the parts of the gun which are not even close to the muzzle), resulting at least in much power being wasted before the bullet enters the barrel. Worse, the 9x21 cartridge when loaded to the Over-All Length of the .38 super, will most likely not seat the bullet firmly into case. In the first case, you may experience a "Squib-Load" malfunction, in which a bullet may be stuck inside the barrel. This is A Bad Thing, because a second round fired through the gun may blow up the gun because the barrel is obstructed. In the second case, chances are than the recoil of the gun may work the bullet out of the cartridge case. This dumps gunpowder into the magazine and the gun will not cycle correctly which might be the least destructive effect of attempting to shoot a short cartridge in a firearm chambered for a longer cartridge. (The .38 Super may be considered a "9x22" cartridge, referring to the diameter and length of the case.)

The 9x19 ("9mm Parabellum" or "9mm Luger") is even shorter than the 9x21. Any problems which you may experience by attempting to fire a 9x19 in a .38 Super would be even worse, but most likely the rimless cartridge would drop fully into the chamber and the firing pin would never reach the primer ... if you are lucky.

__________________________

Another query is "minimum shotgun shells take down pepper poppers", resulting in a 'hit' at the article "Practical Shotgun".

This question is much less fraught with peril than the first.

But not much less complicated.

First, one assumes that the question was asked by someone who contemplates participating in Practical Shotgun (rare), Multigun (less rare), or 3-gun competition (more common).

The answer, referring to shotgun ammunition, has three parts: caliber ("gauge"), length, and shot size/weight.

For competition, the standard is to shoot a 12-gauge shotgun. Shooting a 16-gauge shotgun may be possible, but ultimately frustrating.

The shotgun is a Hi/Lo Pressure firearm. In part this refers to High Base vs Low Base ammunition, meaning that some configurations of the brass base of the multi-component shell provides more pressure (and we assume higher velocity) than others. These are "high-base" vs "Low Base"; shooting the low-base ammunition presumably results in lesser recoil than high-base. Also it refers to the situation situation where a shotgun shell, when fired, starts out slow (primarily due to the big bore of the gun), and doesn't recoil as much as a rifle which attempts to accelerate a similar weight of metal to a sustainable velocity. As the shot load accelerates down the barrel of the shotgun, the powder continues to burn and continues to accelerate the shot. Because this activity doesn't occur with the suddenness of a pistol or rifle, the recoil is not as intimidating.

What this means is that the shotgun shooter can shot a heavy charge without suffering from the recoil penalties typical of, say a Magnum Rifle shooter. This allows the shotgunner to shoot a heavier bullet/shot weight than a rifle shooter without experiencing unbearable recoil.

In the context of this question, there is not much recoil penalty for choosing to shoot a 12-gauge vs a 16-gauge shotgun, but the downrange effect of the 12 gauge is more violent. That is to say, your chances of shooting a 12 gauge shotgun rather than a smaller gauge (16, 20, 410, etc.) and reliably knocking down a Pepper-Popper is better. There are more pellets, the shot-weight is higher, the pattern is tighter and you'll hit with more, bigger pellets.

How about the length ... of the shotgun shell?
Typically, a longer shotgun shell implies that more powder may be loaded behind a heavier shot-weight. Thus, a 3" shell may be more effective than a 2-3/4" shell. In the actual event, this is not usually a big factor. It is easy to reliably knock down a pepper popper with a 2-3/4" shell.

The ultimate factor: throw-weight and shot size.

In order to knock down a pepper popper with a shotgun, the goal is to hit the target with the most weight at the greatest velocity. Almost everything you have read so far ... high-base vs low-base, 3" vs 2-3/4" shell, 16-gauge vs 12-gauge ... has to do with the velocity.

But what you want to do is to put as many pellets on the face of the steel as possible. There are reasonable arguments to use 1-1/2 ounce loads rather than 1-ounce loads. There are reasons why a #6 shot is better than #7 shot ... and vice-versa.

Shot density puts more pellets on the steel, which is one reason why you should consider using an Improve Choke or a Modified Choke (or other, see the chart) on the shotgun when engaging steel targets at a specified distance. But if you only consider ammunition, it pretty much depends on your ability to hit a 11-5/8" vs 8" target *(the largest diameter of a Pepper Popper vs US Popper) at that specified distance with the bulk of your shot pattern.

Are you confused yet?

Okay, I shoot a Mossberg 590 with an open (un-choked) barrel, and I get along just fine shooting a #6 shot from a low-base 2-3/4" shell at any steel target.

This may seem anti-climactic to you if you have read the whole thing, but you can break your heart trying to figure what is the best shot shell against a pepper popper. The whole point is, center your shot pattern on the target, and it will go down.

It really isn't the ammunition, or the gun, which makes the difference at the distances which we usually engage steel targets. It's whether you can center the shot pattern on the target and put the maximum throw-weight on the target.

What's that? You think I could have said this at the start? Sure I could have, but would you have been convinced that the ammunition is less important than accuracy?

One of the most difficult lessons to learn in shotgunning (or any shooting discipline) is that you have to work on accuracy first. Eventually, you may become so proficient that you can get a hit and defeat the target at extreme ranges by choosing the best combination of gun and ammunition.

But if you have to ask what is the "minimum shotgun shells take down pepper poppers", then you really needed to work your way through the reasoning to reach this conclusion.

I am so pedantic. Sometimes I don't like myself so much.
______________________________________
* UPDATE: 23-JUL-2008
Corrections from Guy Neill in Comments:

Sorry, Jerry, the 38 Super case IS 23mm long, just like the 9x23.

The 9x23, however, has a larger diameter at the base than the 38 Super ahead of the semi-rim.

Thanks for keeping me honest, Guy.

(NB: Guy Neill writes the "Neill on Reloading" column in the USPSA House Magazine, Front Sight. In any apparent contradiction between what Guy says and what The Geek says, always go with what Guy says.

Toy rocket inspires variable-speed bullets

Toy rocket inspires variable-speed bullets - tech - 21 July 2008 - New Scientist Tech

A gun that fires variable speed bullets and which can be set to kill, wound or just inflict a bruise is being built by a US toy manufacturer. The weapon is based on technology used to propel toy rockets.

Lund and Company Invention, a toy design studio based near Chicago, makes toy rockets that are powered by burning hydrogen obtained by electrolysing water. Now the company is being funded by the US army to adapt the technology to fire bullets instead.

The US Army are interested in arming soldiers with weapons that can be switched between lethal and non-lethal modes. They asked Company Invention to make a rifle that can fire bullets at various speeds.

The new weapon, called the Variable Velocity Weapon System or VWS, lets the soldier to use the same rifle for crowd control and combat, by altering the muzzle velocity. It could be loaded with "rubber bullets" designed only to deliver blunt impacts on a person, full-speed lethal rounds or projectiles somewhere between the two.

Bruce Lund, the company's CEO, says the gun works by mixing a liquid or gaseous fuel with air in a combustion chamber behind the bullet. This determines the explosive capability of the propellant and consequently the velocity of the bullet as it leaves the gun. "Projectile velocity varies from non-lethal at 10 metres, to lethal at 100 metres or more, as desired," says Lund.

The company says that the weapon produces less heat and light than traditional guns. It can also be made lighter and could have a high power setting for long-range sniping.

Sounds pretty kewl, eh? And New Scientist Tech reports it with breathless enthusiasm ... until they get to the "fair and balanced" part where their house liberal manages to cast a shadow on the technological improvement with his non-sequitor "Jump The Shark" moment:

Steve Wright, a security expert at Leeds Metropolitan University, UK warns of the potential risk of variable lethality.

"In a high-stress, high-personal-risk zone, there will be a real temptation for soldiers to turn the tuneable lethality switch up to 'kill' mode so that all doubt is removed."

Well ... duh.

When you find yourself in 'indian country' (which may well be a domestic riot) and the goblins are over-running your position with blood in their eyes, if they're ignoring the obvious warning shots this may be God's way of telling you that you're no longer in a "non-lethal" situation.

Is this a good thing or a bad thing? It could turn out either way, depending on the situation. If you're at at Global Eight convocation, the National Guard may better be armed with different technology. But if you're at a roadblock in Baghdad, the ability to revert to Lethal Force when a truck-load of high explosives is refusing to stop may make the difference between a propaganda coup for Al-Queda and a laudible increase in body-count for the Good Guys. It's always situational, when you're on the defense.

New Scientist tends to present weapons technology in the context of a predictable format. First they highlight the innovations as if they are the greatest thing since sliced bread, and then they throw in the kicker, which is that 'somebody may get hurt'.

"Pain-maximizing weapon could be abused"

"Safety testing of non-lethal weapons must be tightened"

"Pentagon reveals rejected chemical weapons"

"Taser-proof clothing creates new hazards"


But my favorite article is the one on "Password-Protected Bullets"

Here's an article on a microwave weapon in their 'weapons technology special report' folio:
Microwave Weapon Controls Crowds With Sound
A microwave projector bombards 'rioters' with microwaves, causing a burning sensation within 3 to 5 seconds which strongly encourages the mob to move out of the way of the projector.


N.S. suggests:

James Lin of the Electrical and Computer Engineering Department at the University of Illinois in Chicago says that MEDUSA is feasible in principle.

He has carried out his own work on the technique, and was even approached by the music industry about using microwave audio to enhance sound systems, he told New Scientist.

"But is it going to be possible at the power levels necessary?" he asks. Previous microwave audio tests involved very "quiet" sounds that were hard to hear, a high-power system would mean much more powerful – and potentially hazardous – shockwaves.

"I would worry about what other health effects it is having," says Lin. "You might see neural damage."

I don't know. Maybe it's only responsible to point out the potential dangerous side-effects of these purportedly 'non-lethal weapons'. Maybe the folks who are responsible for defending a nation's infrastructure aren't aware of the not-so-nonlethal possible effects of these new weapons.

On the other hand, maybe those folks figure that they've made an effort to provide warnings that this area is prohibited, as in Robo-Cop's warning: "Step away from the vehicle, or there will be trouble".

Sometimes bellowing out verbal warnings and reading the Riot Act through a bull-horn aren't enough to get the message across.

When defending an Iraqi police station, with a queue of potential recruits threatened by charging suicidal bombers, it may advantageous for the troops to have a certain lethality component in your non-lethal weapons.

If you're unconvinced, either way, read the articles ... and then read the comments.

Doctor Doctor, Give Me The News ....

..... I've got a bad case (Robert Palmer)

Unfortunately, I've also got a bad case of being addicted things which are Bad For Me.

Alcohol, nicotine, caffeine, meat and potatoes, pasta, did I mention that I can't abide fruits and vegetables?

Also extreme sports such as motorcycle riding (terminated when I couldn't find a decent mechanic to maintain my 1200cc Yamaha Venture, so I gave it to my nephew-in-law), and USPSA Practical Shooting Competition, etc.

The point is, I've been a Bad Geek for most of my life, and it is finally catching up with me.



Last month I noticed an 'odd sensation' in my upper leg / groin area, which seemed to be a 'bubbling' feeling in my femoral artery. It was a tingling sensation, which seemed to be timed precisely with my heartbeat.

Saturday, last weekend, this sensation (no, it was not titillating) was so pronounced that I spent much of the day 'listening' to the non-aural sensation. Finally, around 5pm, I decided that this was Not Good and I hied myself to the emergency room of the local hospital.

"Doctor Dan", the ER man, asked my what my greatest fear was. I replied that I suspected either a congestion, leading to a heart attack, or an aneurysm; either of which could render me hors de combat by the morning.

Doctor Dan performed a physical examination and announced that I exhibited no signs of congestion of the femoral artery, and that an aneurysm would have resulted in several secondary symptoms which I had not demonstrated. He then referred me to a Doctor Foley in a medical clinic associated with the hospital.

My appointment with Dr. Foley is for 1:30 Monday Afternoon, and I anticipate that the Good Doctor will recommend several life-style changes, which I will be reluctant to establish.

There is a guilt-trip just waiting to happen to me, and I find myself willy-nilly preparing myself to Just Say No.

Depending on the ability of The Good Doctor to terrify me (I've managed to frighten myself to a considerable degree over the past ten days), I may have some interesting news to share this week about my medical condition.

SWMBO:
FWIW, SWMBO has been dealing with the unfortunate circumstances having to do with a case of Walking Pneumonia which has inflicted itself upon her for the past several months. She is lethargic, has no energy and little stamina, and is required by her Doctor (Dr. Cho) to take an oxygen bottle with her everywhere she goes.

She was subjected to a Bronscopy and Biopsy last Tuesday, and they almost "lost her on the table" during the biopsy. While they were attempting to scrape samples from the infected portion of her lungs, she went into a coughing fit due to bleeding at the site.

They discontinued the procedure (running a tube through her nose into her lungs), and have since decided that they collected an insufficient amount of diagnostic material. In the next couple of weeks, they will attempt to biopsy her lungs surgically. This involves a surgical incision through her chest wall, after which they will insert a fiber-optic tube and surgical micro-instruments to collect samples of the infected area of her lung.

SWMBO is bearing up under this frightening expectation as well as she can, and I have my own medical concerns. We both have appointments Monday afternoon, and it's difficult to tell whether we can both participate in each others diagnostic appointments.

Things are becoming more interesting here in Geekistan, medically speaking.

We'll keep you informed.

Note to Nancy (both of you): yes, SWMBO did receive your (Nancy A: get-well card) and (Nancy B: flowers). Thank you both for your support.
__________________________________________________
UPDATE: 21-JUL-2008

Well, my doctor's appointment today was a slow curve. Interview, physical exam, and I go into the clinic Friday for an Ultra-Sound. This doctor can't find anything wrong with my circulation, and the complete lack of other symptoms eliminates a lot of other possibilities. If they can't find anything on the Ultra-Sound, they'll put me in for an MRI. This seems like a soft tissue rather than a bone problem, so Xrays are a third possibility. The doctor is going on vacation next week, so you can see how worried he is.

SWMBO had a consultation today with her doctor, the surgeon. They decided to opt for a 'needle insertion' biopsy rather than the chest-wall incision, and this is much less invasive. If they still can't get a good biopsy sample, then they still have the other option.

She's feeling positive about it, and so am I.

Thanks to the fine folks who wrote and called with their support. I didn't mean to sound alarmist about all of this, but I'm not accustomed to requiring medical attention and SWMBO and I are both ready for a solution to her issues. We just want her to feel like her usual bouyant, energetic self.

You realize, of course, that this means I have to start loading up ammunition for when we can both get back to our normal three-matches-a-month regimen of competition. Even when I can go to the range, it's just not the same thing going by myself.

Heller the Hero Strikes Again

Dick Heller Doubles Down


Geek with a .45 scores a double whammy on DC's duplicitous denial.

Mr. Heller has (for the second time in recorded history) applied to the District of Columbia for permission to register a handgun.

Read the whole thing.

Chinese Police Shoot Reporters - Negligence?

BBC NEWS

Three Chinese reporters attending a police briefing on the success of an anti-gun campaign were accidentally shot, media reports say. [ed. emphasis added]

An officer picked up one of the weapons on show - a confiscated home-made gun - but it went off in his hand.

A reporter needed surgery for injuries to his ankle, crotch and chest, after being hit by what appeared to be pebbles fired by the gun.

Two others were slightly injured in the incident in Nanchong, southern China.

Well, it's a start.

This is a classic example of "Negligent Discharge", don't be mislead by the "accidentally shot". The only other possibility is that the police deliberately fired on the journalists. What were they doing handling loaded weapons, anyway? Did they not know how to unload it?

The report says it was a "home-made gun" firing "pebbles". Maybe the previous owner couldn't afford Encoded Ammunition or a firearm fitted with Microstamping Ammunition Technology.

Is this the future in America?
.

Jews and Terrorists: JPost

Yeah, I know this has nothing to do with Shooting Sports or RKBA.

Still, it's my blog and I think this is important.

A Jew who interviews Palestinian Terrorists, for years, and survives? I think this it worth some attention.

The Jerusalem Post interviews WND columnist Aaron Klein.

Klein has established his credentials as a bold journalist, and has survived in an environment which we would usually describe as 'suicidal':

"The one thing the terrorists don't like," says author Aaron Klein, "is being called terrorists."

This is why, says Klein - the Jerusalem bureau chief for the right-wing news Web site WorldNetDaily.com, and a columnist for the equally conservative Jewish Press - the subjects of his best-selling book, Schmoozing with Terrorists (published by World Ahead Media), are unhappy with its title.

"They prefer to be called 'jihadists,'" explains Klein, noting the apparent nuance that is a clear-cut distinction in the eyes of those who believe it is their religious duty to spread Islam throughout the world, by any means at their disposal.

"My response was to tell those who complained to me about my use of the word that when someone violently targets civilians, that's what he is."

That members and leaders of every major Palestinian terrorist organization ever agreed to talk (via translators) to Klein - a 28-year-old "nice Jewish boy" from Philadelphia - let alone continue to contact him after reading what he writes, seems surprising, if not unlikely. Klein disagrees. Not only does he insist that any journalist who wishes to interview terrorist leaders "can simply phone them up," but, he asserts, "they are proud of their goals and achievements, and glad to have a platform for promotion."

Klein talks about the reasons why Radical Islamics readily sacrifice themselves to kill Jews in Israel ... and non-Jews around the world.

What makes terrorists tick?

That's a good question. A lot of people think that terrorism is about pieces of territory - that Hizbullah just wants to get the Shaba Farms back, for example. Others think that Hamas, Islamic Jihad and the whole rest of the alphabet of Palestinian terrorists simply want to destroy Israel or that al-Qaida wants America out of the Middle East. But one thing that has really been driven home to me in all my talks with terrorists - which is the thesis of all of my work - is that they are looking to serve Allah by spreading Islam around the world. That's what makes them tick.

It is often said of terrorists that desperation and poverty - sometimes mental illness - is at the root of their actions. Is there truth to that?

It's true that if you watch CNN or read The New York Times, you would get that impression. Because whenever there's a suicide bombing in Israel, right away they present human interest stories about how the bomber is poor and living under Israeli occupation. And this is in spite of the fact that in the history of modern civilization, there's no other instance of people under occupation blowing themselves up.

But, about a year and a half ago, I met with a 22-year-old Palestinian who had been recruited to become a suicide bomber for Islamic Jihad and his recruiter in Jenin, and I specifically asked them whether they were carrying out their operations because of poverty and desperation. Their response was to get offended and call it Zionist propaganda. They explained that suicide is forbidden in Islam, and that blowing oneself up in the midst of innocent men, women and children does not constitute suicide, but rather jihad for Allah - that therefore it is not only allowed, but it is the creed.

Okay, so you're determined. But ... Suicidal?

Are you not afraid that these terrorists you interview will kidnap or kill you?

I understand that there's danger in what I'm doing. At the same time, if you look at the kidnappings of journalists in the Palestinian areas, you'll note that they were carried out by masked gunmen - not by a particular terrorist interviewed by a reporter. Believe it or not, when you go in, they protect you.

Okay, but still ...

How is it they're willing to talk to you if what you're doing is exposing them? Aren't you killing their lobby, in effect?

Maybe that's the way you see it, but they think I'm doing them a favor - and perhaps I am - by giving them a platform from which to explain themselves. I don't analyze what they say; I quote them, and they are very thankful for this.

What's the difference between the Jews and the Terrorists? They're still killing each other.

Couldn't one argue that there are plenty of Israelis who see Arabs in general, and Palestinians in particular, as all evil?

Maybe there are misconceptions on both sides, but on one side there are people telling their kids to become suicide bombers and kill Israelis indiscriminately in cafes, and on the other side, there are people advocating freedom and democracy. So you can't compare the two.

Geez, these guys are bad news. They're forty miles of bad road. How can they live with themselves?

But how do they envision their own society, in the event that their goals of defeating Israel and the US are achieved?

That's just it. They have no plan beyond jihad. Look, there are a million and a half Arabs in Gaza - some would say trapped there. Can you imagineif there were a million and a half Jews trapped there? They'd build Singapore. When I ask the terrorists about why they haven't built anything in Gaza, they say that they can't build anything until they get all of their land back. They don't seem to have a long-term plan beyond that.

And that, Children, is the root of the problem. They aren't rebelling against poverty or against being "second-class citizens". They just want everyone else to be just like them.

Firmly grounded in the sixth century. Mad as hell, ready to kill. And they don't very much care who they kill.

If you don't love Allah, you're just a target.

IDPA Will Get you Killed!!

The Michael Bane Blog: Thoughts on Competition...

Many years ago, one of the Major Gun Rags published an article titled "IPSC Will Get You Killed!" (or some equivalent verbiage).

The general thrust of the article was that IPSC competition (our local equivalent would be "USPSA Competition") teaches 'bad habits', such as engaging targets in the open, with no encouragement to 'seek cover' or 'failure to retain undepleted magazines to deny access to ammunition from the aggressor'. (I may not be quoting the IDPA content accurately, but the context is applicable.)

IDPA USE OF COVER - Appendix Five:

When barricades or other range props designed to allow the shooter to use them for cover are provided, make sure that they are used properly. Make the shooter use the cover area while actually shooting and reloading. Vision and physical barriers should be used to force the shooter to shoot from the specified positions (shooting ports also work well and tend to eliminate SO judgment calls). Use of props such as brief cases, tables (especially with drawers), automobiles, simulated ATM machines, bed/night stand combos, etc. is encouraged.

IDPA RELOAD WITH RETENTION (IDPA APPROVED RELOADS):

Reload with Retention (RWR) is recharging the gun during a lull in the action by:
A. Dropping the partial magazine from the gun.
B. Stowing the partial magazine properly (See “proper magazine retention” in the glossary).
C. Drawing a spare magazine.
D. Inserting the spare magazine into the gun.
NOTE: Should the CoF call for a Reload with Retention and the magazine is empty while a round remains in the chamber, the empty magazine must be retained.
NOTE: HQ urges course designers to draft scenario courses that do not require tac-loads or reloads with retention to be performed “on the clock”.

(NB: USPSA competitors reload whenever the mood moves them. They care not a whit what happens to the dropped magazine or whether the dropped magazine contains usable ammunition, neither do they care whether there is a round in the chamber.)

In a recent blog article, Michael Bane discussed self-defense issues. He is talking about the gun-handling skills which are part of training for competition. This is typically in reference to 'extreme shooting' sports such as USPSA and IDPA.

Having no intent to restart the eternal discourse over whether USPSA or IDPA provides better 'self-defense' training, it is still difficult to ignore Bane's cogent remarks on the "mind set" generated by the two similar, yet different, ingrained training.

...I think competition has a major effect in three specific areas:

1) Gun-handling skills
2) The ability to "game" a situation
3) Stress inoculation

As it happens, all three of those areas are critical in terms of Real Life shooting skills. First and foremost are gun-handling skills. Let me watch a shooter for 5 minutes and I can tell you if he or she shoots competition simply by watching the gun-handling skills.

I tend to agree on these points of discussion, although you will need to read the whole article (or the rewrite of the book) to decide whether you agree with the last.

To continue:

Second, the ability to "game" a situation...I know IDPA rants about how this is a bad thing, but that's bullshit. The difference between living and dying is measured by an individual's ability to perceive a situation, process the information and proceed to the correct action. That is the definition of "gaming." I strongly refer you to Malcolm Gladwell's book BLINK on how quickly we can truly process information. You might also consider Amanda Ripley's THE UNTHINKABLE: WHO SURVIVES WHEN DISASTER STRIKES — AND WHY or Larry Gonzales' DEEP SURVIVAL: WHO LIVES, WHO DIES AND WHY. I';d also recommend my book TRAIL SAFE, but you gotta pay too much for it on eBay these days...I will have an updated version in a couple of months. The ability to game is a fundamental survival skill, and all the shooting sports teach it. As we become more experienced on the range, our ability to game is drastically enhanced...I figure a good USPSA or IDPA competitor has a stage gamed out in less than half-a-second after seeing it...he or she doesn't need to walk around pointing a finger pistol at the target to understand what needs to be done.

Bane continues in a conciliatory mode, paying homage to IDPA even though he has already declared, in reference to 'gaming', that "... that's bullshit...".

But I do accept the statement "...I figure a good USPSA or IDPA competitor has a stage gamed out in less than half-a-second after seeing it...".

So what does it all mean?

Going back to the IDPA Rules of Competition:

C 4. Individual rehearsals of a CoF are not permitted.
C 5. Airgunning and/or sight pictures are not permitted. (See glossary for definitions.)
C 6. Competitors will use all available cover.

USPSA competitors are accustomed to having a five-minute 'walk-through' of any stage before engaging it. Sight pictures are permitted, all the other stuff is permitted and USPSA competitors are not constrained to engage targets behind "available cover".

(If we were to compare IDPA rules with USPSA rules, the IDPA constrictions obviously encourage much more 'defensive' activities, such as seeking cover, while the USPSA rules encourage 'aggressive' activities, such as moving in the open with no regard to the possibility that they may be under 'return fire'.)

The USPSA philosophy seems, at first blanch, to be more likely to "get you killed" in a defensive situation.

But Bane is talking specifically about the mind-set, in terms of 'gaming' a competitive stage, which may prove to be a viable asset in a defensive situation.

Think: "Finding an edge".

Think: "Cheating the other guy".

It is Bane's thesis that USPSA competition may better train a defensive shooter in the attitude needed to win a gunfight, rather than to survive it.

We can't get inside Bane's head here, and I'm not sure we want to.

(I've known and occasionally worked with M. Bane for several years, and I'm aware that this creative chaos is a way of life with him. There is no 'middle ground'; you either agree totally with his opinion, or you are repulsed by it. Michael Bane is the Dark Lord of Competitive Shooting, and while his competitive skills are not the best I've ever seen ... that's a matter of personal physical skills. He may not always be able to make it work for him; you may. The intelligent shooter will evaluate his own skills, and find his own personal best solution to any shooting problem. Isn't that what USPSA is all about?)

Essentially, Bane seems to be saying that USPSA competition cultivates the dark underworld of cheating in a gun-fight. IDPA, on the other hand, encourages "playing by the rules".

It's up to you which mind-set is most directly applicable to self defense.

But isn't it refreshing that someone has stepped up to the podium and declared that the best way to survive a gun-fight is to win it? And the best way to Win a Gunfight is to find whatever advantage you may perceive, using your own personal 'Best Skills' to gain an advantage over an opponent?


I, personally, don't ever want to get into a gunfight. There are not only no "Second Place Winners", but there are no winners at all, really.

But there are those who walk away, and those who stay ... lying in a pool of their own blood.

I know which resolution I prefer, and it's probably your first choice, too.

Think about it. Or, choose to be a victim.

Day of the Evil Drawstring: Part III

On July 31, 2005, I wrote a short article about a Marion County, Oregon, Deputy who "was not mishandling his sidearm when it accidentally discharged, striking him in the leg."

I found this so unlikely that I assumed that it was a case of a LEO covering up his own negligence.

Some time later, on September 5, 2005, I wrote a follow-up article in which I apologized for jumping to conclusions. I had received email and other information directly and indirectly (referring to the Deputy's comment to the original article), explained that the incident had been accurately described, and there was, in fact, no negligence involved in what turns out to be one of the few, true "accidental discharges" I have ever heard of. Most of the information came directly from Deputy Stephen Cooper, the victim of the incident, who was a convincing witness.

What's the difference between an "accidental discharge" and a "negligent discharge".

We almost never see the term "negligent discharge" in the press, because this is a phrase defining an incident when a firearm is discharged by virtue of the negligence of a person who possesses a firearm, and he does something either unsafe or stupid ... usually both.

Here are two examples of "negligent discharge":
The DEA agent who, while teaching a class on (who knows what) in a public venue, pulls his .40 Glock from the holster, announces that "As far as I know, I'm the only one here who is competent to handle this pistol." He then removes the magazine from the Glock, and walks around the classroom holding his 'cleared' Glock describing the dangers of gun-handling. Sometime during that process, he (for no clearly discernible reason) pulls the trigger on his 'unloaded' Glock. Since he neglected to remove the cartridge from the chamber, the Glock goes off, shooting the "Only One" in his own foot.

Accidental? Well, we assume he didn't intend the gun to go off. He certainly didn't expect to shoot himself in the foot ... literally.

Negligent? Absolutely.

The other example:
An officer forms the habit, when going "Number Two" in the Men's Room of the Precinct House, of removing his Glock pistol from the holster and hanging it on the coat-hook on the door of the toilet. When he completes his "Private Business", he reaches for his Glock and clumsily bumps it.

The coat-hook hits the trigger of the Glock with sufficient force to not only disengage the "Glock Safe Action" trigger safety, but to also 'pull' the trigger.

The result is that the Glock "Accidentally Discharges".

In fact, it "Accidentally Discharges" ever time the recoil from the preceding shot rotates it around the coat hook, so that it creates "Accidental Discharges" until the magazine is empty.

Fortunately, no persons were injured in this incident, although rumor has it that the LEO involved came close to drowning himself in the toilet bowl as he dived in, attempting to evade the fusillade of bullets which his "Evil Glock" launched ... due to his own negligence. For your future reference, never hang a loaded firearm from a hook.

These are the kind of incidents which are typically termed "Accidental Discharges", although we can all see that the incidents were caused by practices which were 'set up' by the firearm owners.

In other words, they resulted from the negligence of the people who were handling them, even if they didn't happen to be handling them at the time they went off.
_____________________________

"The Case of the Drawstring Deputy", however, is unique in that it did not result from unsafe practices which were chosen by the person involved.

I write this because all of the links to the original Main-Stream Press report, and the explanation from the Deputy, have been deleted by both the original reporting media (FOX News) and the comments on my own blog. The original content being unavailable, I want to set the record straight because I note that both of the articles on this subject have been logged in the past couple of weeks. I started to update the referenced blog articles, but it's clear that I need to replace original content with information that I recall having received by the injured Deputy.

...

I note that Deputy Cooper's comment to the original post (July 31, above), no longer exists. I don't know how long it has been a 'bad link', and I apologize for not having the foresight to quote the entire text here.

The best I can do is paraphrase Cooper's explanation to the best of my poor memory, which incidentally is a lot like the original news article ... also no longer available.

Cooper was a passenger in a department cruiser, on a day when it had been raining hard. He was wearing a rain jacket, which featured a drawstring at the waist. While he was riding in the car, the end of the drawstring (which was knotted) dangled in the vicinity of his issue holster. During the ride, it became lodged between the trigger ... the Glock "Safe Trigger" ... and the holster, and when tension was applied by the hunching of his shoulder as he raised his arm to open the door, the knot snagged on the trigger safety.

I'm not certain in my recollection that the holster was the type which doesn't completely cover the trigger, but it seems most likely to be the only way a knot could have been positioned in front of the trigger.

As the tension on the drawstring was increased, the trigger (having been activated by the release of the trigger safety), was pulled back until the striker was released, firing the pistol.

The duty pistol was, of course, carried in Condition One; round in the chamber, striker cocked, safety engaged. (See also here.) Unfortunately, these definitions refer to the 1911 (Single Action) type pistol, which assume that the pistol cannot be fired when the trigger is pulled because it depends on the reliability of a manual safety. This is not necessarily applicable to either a double-action pistol (when not equipped with a manual safety), or a double action revolver (which does not typically feature a manual safety). See more comments from SYD here.

In retrospect, one would not consider it likely that a pistol would be fired in the holster without some failure of the operator to observe safety procedures. Here, the conditions combined to produce a truly Accidental Discharge, which is distinctly different from a Negligent Discharge.

Ideally, the Marion County Sheriff Department will by now have reviewed the circumstances and taken corrective procedures, such as mandating that all holsters cover the trigger of the pistol.

___________________________________

After reading Deputy Cooper's comments, I regretted my dismissive attitude toward the official story. Cooper mentioned that "... if I had heard the story, I probably would have found it hard to believe, too."

In "Day of the Evil Drawstring - Part II", I invited Deputy Cooper to any USPSA match in the Columbia Cascade Section (NW Oregon), and asked him to look me up. I will issue a public apology, if he doesn't object. Perhaps more important, I would like to meet him and shake his hand. He accepted my blind criticism without flinching, and calmly described the facts with no apology.

I would like to know if he has recovered completely from his wound, and I would like to get to know him better. This is the kind of man I would be proud to call a friend.

2008 R&R Racing Multigun Match at ARPC

Saturday and Sunday (July 12-13, 2oo8) Bobby Wright will be hosting the "R&R Racing" multigun match at Albany Rifle & Pistol Club.

The match is limited to 85 competitors, and will involve using 'any' combination of 3 guns (pistol, rifle, shotgun) on each of the ten stages.

Here's the line-up of stages:

Stage 1: "Knock Knock" (Rifle & Shotgun)
Stage 2: "Watch Your Breathing" (Shotgun & Rifle)
Stage 3: "Long Range" (Pistol & Rifle)
Stage 4: "Corridor" (Pistol & Shotgun)
Stage 5: "Ports" (Pistol & Shotgun)
Stage 6: "The Fair" (Shotgun & Pistol)
Stage 7: "Big Shot" (Rifle & Pistol)
Stage 8: "Cubicles" (Pistol & Rifle)
Stage 9: "Survivor II" (Pistol & Shotgun)
Stage 10: "Junction City" (Shotgun & Rifle)

The following documents are currently available at the R&R Racing Website:
Sign Up sheet. (Word Document)

Stages. (Excel spreadsheet)

Rules. (Word Document)

Sponsors (unknown Word Document)

The Match Fee (after May 24) is $275, it may betoo late to get a room in the Match Hotel, but contact Bobby (see the website for contact information), but if you show up at the match at 8am on Saturday, 12 July, 2008, you may still may be able to make some accommodation.

As usual, I'm posting this notice later than I should, but I'm assuming that interested competitors have already signed up for the match.

I'm not really trying to tempt more competitors here, although if the match is not yet fully subscribed that would be nice. Instead, I'm identifying a pending match.

I'll be there, taking pictures and interviewing participants.

Although this is not a USPSA match, , because the strict USPSA rules are not being followed (see the above rules description) and Wright is therefore not paying Match Fees to USPSA), I will be submitting an article to the USPSA Front Sight Magazine, which will probably be published in the November/December issue..

Are there rules of competition which are not best represented by the USPSA Multi-Gun rules?

I don't know.

Come, watch the match with me as we compare the two sets of rules to determine which are most reasonable.

I'll have pictuers.

Night of Thunder: A Bob Lee Swagger Novel

Stephen Hunter has a new Bob Lee Swagger book coming out on September 23, 2008.



I just pre-ordered my copy from Amazon.

Michael Bane has a pre-release teaser.

Ari Conditioning as a Life Style

During the first hot weather of this year, I found it necessary to buy a new Air Conditioner for my mother. I chose a $400 "Portable" unit as most appropriate, and installed it in my Mother's 1976 model Double-Wide in The Trailer Park For Old Folks. (Mom turned 90 this year; don't go there, I'm warning you.)

As events occurred, it became obvious that her whole-house installed Heat Pump rendered the Portable Air Conditioner (hereafter to be referred to as "R2D2", because of the shape of the 100#+ unit) was superfluous to her needs. So I took R2D2 home, and stashed it in my garage.

Segue to This Week, when ambient temperatures exceeded 90 degrees for the second time in the year, with reasonable expectation that the trend would continue for months.

I had an el-cheapo 3,000 BTU air conditioner installed in my upstairs (2-level townhouse) Duplex Apartment, and it was entirely adequate to keep my bedroom cooled for sleeping.

But my Computer Room (the 2nd bedroom), also on the 2nd floor, was appropriately described as "The Hell Room", not only for the disorder typical of the Aging Bachelor, but also for the failure to provide heat-relief accommodations apart from a few fans.

Not working for me, Dude.

Yesterday, I packed R2D2 up the 14-step stairway and installed it in upstairs master bedroom. It worked fine, except when I got up in the morning I discovered the bedroom was sopping wet. Condensation on the condenser was my evaluation; after all, the R2D2 unit sits on the floor.

I soaked up the excess moisture from the rug using dry towels, and went to work assuming that the problem would correct itself in the anticipated ninety-degree heat.

Didn't happen.

[sigh]

When I got home from work this evening at 6pm, my first effort was to install the old window-style air conditioner in the Hell Room. Then I turned the R2D2 air conditioner on in "Dehumidifier" mode, to dry out the carpet in the Master Bedroom, installed the old 'casement-window' air conditioner in the Hell Room and turned on both air conditioners.

When I took the remnants from the cardboard boxes (used to block off the airflow from outside to inside) to the recycle bin, I noted that the hum of air-conditioners abruptly self-terminated.

The power demands of two air-conditioners (and an Edison Fan or two) on the 1970's design of cheap, easy and quick townhouse construction had exceeded design parameters, causing the circuit breaker (which assigned power requirements for the entire second floor) to fail.

I turned off all the obvious power-draining appliances ... both air conditioners .. and reset the circuit breakers.

Obviously, the electrical substructure of the apartment was not able to handle the power demands of two air-conditioners; and I had not even turned on the computer, which was the object of the exercise and the reason why I wanted to be 'comfortable' while residing on the 2nd floor.

So I can have two air-conditioners installed on the upper level of the apartment. I just can't have them both running at the same time.

I've turned off R2D2 in the bedroom, while I run the 'old' AC in the "Hell Room".


In a few minutes, I'll complete this blog article, which frees me to turn of the 'puter, and the window AC. I'll then turn on the R2D2 unit on "Dehumidifier" mode, to dry out the carpet.

Downstairs to cook and eat dinner while I watch the rest of the Terry Pratchett DVD, and off to bed.

The short story is that, while I have several hundred dollars worth of air conditioners installed, I can't run them both at the same time.

It isn't easy, being Geek.
___________________________________________
UPDATE: 10-JUL-2008

I'm proud to state that, in spite of the base canards of my detractors, the attempts to dry out the carpets in the Master Bedroom were completely successful. By morning the carpet was dry, and I had slept deeply and soundly in cool 52 degree comfort.


(DBD Cartoon for 2008/07/09 -- click for full size)
Yes, it is true that I am incompetent when it comes to machinery. But I've learned to compensate for my limitations.

And I get better looking every day.

The French are not reliable aggressors

June 30, 2008 - The BBC News
French shooting show injures 17

A military show in southern France has left 17 people wounded, after real bullets were used instead of blanks.

The injured included five children. Four people, including one child, were said to have been seriously hurt - though three have now stabilised.

The incident occurred during a public demonstration of hostage-freeing techniques at a barracks in Aude.

...

The soldier who fired the shots has been detained - though an official said it was probably an accident.

It is not clear why the wrong ammunition was used in Sunday's demonstration.

But it was "99.9%" likely to be "an unintentional fault," Colonel Benoit Royal, head of the French army's information service, told the AFP news agency on Monday.

'No psychological problems'

However, Defense Minister Herve Morin said: "I cannot rule out anything because we don't know what might be going on in a man's head."

He said "an experienced soldier" should not be able to confuse blanks with real bullets.

"According to initial findings of the inquiry, the incident involved a soldier with a perfect record, who had participated in operations and had seven to eight years of experience," he said.

"There is nothing that would make one think he had behavioural or psychological problems," he added.

Reports from the scene say the hostage scenario had been acted out five times before a crowd at the Laperrine military barracks, near Carcassonne, when on the sixth take real bullets began flying through the air, and onlookers fell to the ground.

In the military (at least in the U.S.), there are certain protocols in any 'training' situations involving blank-round firing.

The first is that every participant is individually required to show all loaded magazines before the situation begins, to prove that no live rounds are loaded.

The second is that, since blank ammunition is obviously different from live rounds, every participant is obligated to examine his own ammunition before loading the magazines.

The third is that no live ammunition is permitted on the premises when blank ammunition is being loaded into magazines.

Also (at least in the 1960's, when I was a member of the military), it was impossible to cycle he action of a military weapon in a full- or semi-automatic manner without inserting a special 'device' in the muzzle of the firearm.

A special 'device' was needed for the firearm to function in other than single-shot mode
Blank ammunition was deliberately loaded 'light' (very little gunpowder was inserted into the special-purpose, crimp-necked cartridge case) so that it would not cycle the action (move the rifle bolt to the rear to chamber another cartridge.)

In order to force the rifle action to cycle, it was necessary to insert a device into the muzzle of the rifle. This served two purposes: first, it restricted the gas pressure created from firing the cartridge from exiting the chamber/barrel assembly. This delay allowed the pressure to build up sufficiently for the stated purpose, which was not necessary with a full-power "Live Ammunition" round.

This device was so constructed that it provided a positive block to the exit from the barrel of any material object. That is, if a live round was fired from a rifle while this device was installed, it would hit the device, which was locked into the barrel forming a formidable obstruction.

The result of firing a live round through a barrel which was so obstructed would be to, essentially, blow the gun up. No second shot would be able to be fired from a firearm so obstructed. In fact, the most likely consequence is that the firearm would be damaged to the point of destruction, and the shooter would be injured by the consequences of the resulting back pressure.

[Note that military blank ammunition does not include a 'wad' to restrict pressure; rather, it looks very much like a cartridge case used for 'live' ammunition, except that (a) there is no bullet loaded; (b) the neck of the cartridge is squeezed together in a 'star-crimp' manner; (c) the blank ammunition has a shorter over-all length, lacking as it does a bullet; and (d) the cartridge is much lighter owing to the lack of a bullet and also to the amount of material included in the construction of the cartridge case -- it is thinner, because it need not contain such high gas pressures as does live ammunition.]

This leads us to consider a limited number of scenarios:

1. 
   
If the firearms and blank ammunition used by the French military in this public demonstration were constructed differently, so that they were able to fire both blank and live ammunition without the installation of a device such as is described above, then the French Military and the French Government are guilty of gross negligence, malfeasance of office, and liable to several criminal and civil actions. They should never have allowed such a demonstration without positively affirming that it was impossible to fire live ammunition with the effect that it could result in the injury of any participant or observer. This was, or should have been, their primary concern.
2. 
   
If the firearms and blank ammunition are similar to those used during my none-too-short military career, it would have been impossible to shoot 17 people using a firearm configured to shoot blank ammunition. Given that a typical military rifle magazine usually contains either 20 or 30 rounds, it seems reasonable to assume that much or all of a full magazine had been expended before the operator realized that he was producing carnage rather than 'sound and fury' in his demonstration. It is unreasonable ... impossible ... to assume that the shooter was not aware that he was shooting live ammunition for he would have had to perform several actions before changing the configuration of his firearm to permit the repeated firing of live ammunition. The only possible conclusion is that he deliberately made his firearm capable of shooting live ammunition, and then deliberately loaded and fired live ammunition at both his military colleagues, and at civilian observers.

In this scenario, the fault is entirely upon the shooter. The consequences had been his goal, and he intended to shoot anyone in the vicinity with the intention of injuring or killing as many as he could.
3. 
   
Regardless of whether the shooter deliberately, or accidentally, shot 17 people, the demonstration was set up without full consideration of the possibility of accident. It seems obvious that the area was not set up so that shooting would always be in a safe direction. (That is, at a minimum, that no civilian observers would ever find themselves 'downrange' of an operating firearm.) This event exhibits an appalling disregard for safety which would not be allowed on any reputable shooting range. You always assume that a firearm is loaded with live ammunition, and you always position non-participants where they will not be in the line of fire, and you always establish operational procedures with at least two, preferably three ways to insure that nobody can possibly be injured if 'something goes wrong'.

In the final analysis, it's impossible to believe that the military command will not be decimated as part of the fall-out from this tragedy; a commander is always responsible for the action of his troops.

And the individual shooter, the man who held the weapon and who loaded the live ammunition, cannot possibly be held to any lower level of responsibility. As a man who has been shooting for over 50 years, in military, hunting and competitive venues, I have always been taught that I am responsible for my own actions when holding a firearm (or at any other time).

In fact, when training shooters, I have stressed that: "You should always load your own magazines. If you allow someone else to load your magazines, you will eventually suffer the consequences, and you have nobody to blame but yourself."

That is the situation here, except that the Military incorporates a Chain of Command responsibility which is not part of individual competition, or hunting. They will pay for their assumption that their troops will always 'do the right thing'.

The Fall-out Begins:
Although it has been, as of this date, a week since the shooting, there are (so far) only two follow- up stories to report. The following are representative examples, chosen almost at random.

• "French army chief resigns after shooting blunder"
• "Sarkozy denounces French shooting spree"

True to predictions, the 'Chain of Command" sacrifices one of its own ... a Judas Goat, so to speak. And the French Government says "I'm really, really sorry".


Cover-Up?

This is not helpful. By now, they should have made some progress in determining how this happened, and should be releasing information which defines the circumstances about whether the "very experienced" trooper who did the shooting was a deliberate wanna-be murderer, or just stupid.

They (the French government) should be releasing details on their procedures for this kind of demonstration. They should have identified the shooter, his background, and his motivation. They should have identified the person who was responsible for insuring that no live ammunition was loaded and available, and defined the situation which lead to the failure of established procedures .


Most important, they should by now know what happened, and why. This should be supported by material evidence, such as examination of the brass found on the scene. The first thing to do is pick up the brass, which the French army has already done.

By now, they probably have this information. But they have not released it.

The Internet is not making this information available. Tomorrow, they probably will still not have this information. We need to ask ourselves why it happened, but we also need to be asking why it is all being covered up.
_______________________
UPDATE: 08-JUL-2008:
The only new information so far is that 16, not 17 people, were injured (or killed) in this shooting incident. This is information was originally reported on June 29, and more widely corrected on July 1, 2008.

It has been over a week since the incident, and no more information is available.

Don't expect to see much more explanation soon, if ever. This will be swept under the carpet and the press will not likely pressure the French government for more information ... ever.

Meanwhile, on July 8, 2008, the big news from France is:
"French President Nicolas Sarkozy will attend the opening of the Beijing Olympics next month."

July Blogmeat

Blogmeat: Stuff I find while surfing the 'net which is so interesting I can't bear not to share it, even if it's not interesting to anyone else.

I wrote a Blogmeat article a few days ago, but it was full of violent and negative 'stuff'. Let's try again.

June 18, 2008: Dallas News dot Com
Man accidently kills himself while trying to rob a Grand Prairie home.

A 19-year-old man accidentally shot and killed himself Tuesday morning while he was attempting to rob a Grand Prairie home, authorities said.

Cameron Sands, 19, of Fort Worth kicked in the door of the house and then shot himself in the stomach as he pulled a gun out of his pants to shoot the homeowner, Grand Prairie police said. The homeowner was not injured.

There, that starts us on a positive note.

June 19, 2008
John Kass of the Chicago Tribune opines that Of course it's fair that they have guns and you don't.

That Washington, D.C., gun ban that the Supreme Court should toss out any day now because it is unconstitutional is often compared to the handgun ban in Chicago.

But what's not often reported by the decidedly pro-gun-control media is that since Chicago's anti-handgun law went into effect in 1982, only two classes of people have had ready access to firearms:

The criminals. And the politicians.

Cynics who scoff at everything decent suggest these are one and the same, but taxpayers know the difference.

June 21, 2008 - NY Daily News
Thou shalt not swindle Charleton Heston

LOS ANGELES - A Hollywood business manager who broke the Eighth Commandment and stole more than $150,000 from actor Charlton Heston is headed to jail.

Sharon Walker, 56, Friday admitted embezzling $157,852 from the Academy Award-winning star of "The Ten Commandments" and "Ben Hur" before his April 5 death from pneumonia at the age of 83.

Walker also copped to stealing $567,614 from the account of Emmy-winning TV writer-producer Stephen Cannell and his wife, Marcia. Cannell's credits include "The Rockford Files," "A-Team" and "21 Jump Street."

"She was forging checks and using that money to pay off credit card debt. She signed Mr. Heston's name and his wife's name," said Jane Robison, spokeswoman for the Los Angeles district attorney.

June 22, 2008 - Fox News
"Harrier FA2 Fighter Jet Up For Auction on eBay"

The ultimate boys' toy could be yours at last - a Harrier fighter jet is being sold on eBay.

The decommissioned Royal Navy Sea Harrier FA2 was in service between 1987 and 1997.

It served with all three Fleet Air Arm Harrier squadrons.

But anyone wanting to take to the skies in the plane will be disappointed as it is not airworthy.

There is no engine fitted and many of the internal systems have been removed or made inoperative.

The cockpit is also stripped out but a mock cockpit has been created so, from the outside, it appears to have a seat fitted.

Despite this, the price has already exceeded $37,505.86.

The sellers say on eBay: "This is a rare opportunity.

June 23, 2008 - Telegraph.co.uk
"Fathers' Days cards banned in Scottish schools"

Thousands of primary pupils were prevented from making Father's Day cards at school for fear of embarrassing classmates who live with single mothers and lesbians.

The politically correct policy was quietly adopted at schools "in the interests of sensitivity" over the growing number of lone-parent and same-sex households.

June 27, 2008 - Telegraph.co.uk
"Justice Antonin Scala: Al Gore to blame for 2000 US election mess"

"Richard Nixon, when he lost to [John F.] Kennedy thought that the election had been stolen in Chicago, which was very likely true with the system at the time," Justice Antonin Scalia told The Telegraph.

"But he did not even think about bringing a court challenge. That was his prerogative. So you know if you don't like it, don't blame it on me.

"I didn't bring it into the courts. Mr Gore brought it into the courts.

June 27, 2008 - Telegraph.co.uk
Harness Volcano Power, energy experts say

June 27, 2008 - The Independent.co.uk
Exclusive: Scientists warn that there may be no ice at North Pole this summer