How low can he go?

Townhall.com::Blog

President Obama's "Strongly Disapprove" vs "Strongly Approve" poll difference has reached 14% - "a record" according to Kevin McCullough's Town Hall Blog.

McCullough based this comment on a recent Rassmussen Poll on Obama's "Presidential Job Approval".

ShieldsUP!

GRC�|�ShieldsUP! — Internet Vulnerability Profiling��

ShieldsUP! is a useful tool which collects no cookies and does no harm to your computer, but tests your internet connection to determine vulnerabilities (such as unshielded ports, etc.) The tests are free, you need not subscribe, they don't know who you are except that they do have your IP address and any information they can derive from that.

(You don't know what information is available from your IP address? Good reason to check it out. You don't know what your IP address is? I do. Go to the end of this website, scroll up half a screen, and check the little sign the danasoft.com mouse is holding up.)

It takes a while to run some of the tests, but in non-prime service hours I ran the full port test in 68 seconds. Result: all of my ports were found to be "stealthed", as opposed to "closed" or even (shudder) "open". That is, if someone tries to ping me the port pretends that I don't exist and doesn't even attempt to respond ... which some 'closed' ports may do.

My protection is from Norton Internet Security, a subscription service which I renew annually. It includes Norton Antivirus and Firewall protection. I recommend it highly, it's worth $45 $69.99 before $30 rebate a year to me.

You may not be interested in this, but it's a very Geek thing to do, don't you think?

Dems alarmed as independents bolt - Alex Isenstadt - POLITICO.com

Dems alarmed as independents bolt

Mounting evidence that independent voters have soured on the Democrats is prompting a debate among party officials about what rhetorical and substantive changes are needed to halt the damage.

Following serious setbacks with independents in off-year elections earlier this month, White House officials attributed the defeats to local factors * and said President Barack Obama sees no need to reposition his own image or the Democratic message.

Since then, however, a flurry of new polls makes clear that Democrats are facing deeper problems with independents -- the swing voters who swung dramatically toward the party in 2006 and 2008 but who now are registering deep unease with the amount of spending and debt called for under Obama's agenda in an era of one-party rule in Washington.
______________________________________

A few thoughts for the Democrats among us:

1. If the independents are dissatisfied, how must the Conservatives feel?
2. Democrats can't survive without the Independent vote. Time to pay attention to independent polls.
3. Hey, Democrats! Lose the Socialist program, start working on bills of less than 2000 pages and 2 trillion dollars. This would be a big, BIG help if you're really serious about the 'transparency' and 'hope & change' thingies. We hope you won't change us beyond recognition, okay?
   
4. Americans are proud of America. This would be better supported if our President didn't feel inclined (sorry for the pun) to bow subserviently to foreign rulers. How many 3rd World people want to immigrate to Saudi Arabia or Japan anyway, huh? Show a little backbone, Dude!
5. For our president to pubically appease Communist Radicals (Saul), native terrorists (Bill), and Home-grown America-Haters (The Rev) are not examples of the America that most Americans wish to be admired. Why can't the Pres change his ways and pay public homage to patriotic Americans? This would present a more consistent image of traditional American Values, which would be less confusing to people of other countries. If we aren't demonstrably ashamed of our country, and the people who made our country great, maybe people in other lands can understand why we are proud to be Americans. Most everyone else in this country is on track with this program, why shouldn't our President synchronize with American Pride?
6. Colgate sells toothpaste by telling the world about the benefits of its product. Shouldn't the American President sell America in the same way?
7. * "Local Factors" are local in the same way that Americans are local: we are all Americans, and should be marketed as an admirable, coherent product with universal appeal. Wall Street gets this; Madison Avenue gets this. Why can't our President understand this? When Local Factors demonstrate dissatisfaction, a smart CEO pays attention. When he doesn't, his company goes down the tube. This is almost as fatal to a government as it is to a business corporation. The difference is that a President has four years to prove his worth, while a corporation is only as viable as the next stock-holder meeting -- which is an annual event. Perhaps we should hold Presidential Elections more frequently?
   

You couldn't run a successful business the way Obama runs the greatest nation in the world.

Perhaps there is a lesson to be learned, by the man who has never been the Chief Executive of a business.

Perhaps there is a lesson to be learned by the electorate?

Liquor Store Clerk Shoots, Kills Suspected Robber

Liquor Store Clerk Shoots, Kills Suspected Robber

WILMINGTON, Del. - A liquor store clerk shot and killed a suspected robber overnight in Wilmington, police said.

Up to three men wearing masks entered the Favors Liquor Store on Walnut Street around 9:30 p.m. Guns were allegedly pointed at the clerk inside, and money was demanded.

Police said the 55-year-old clerk soon pulled out his own gun and started shooting.

One suspect was hit, dropped his .22-caliber gun, stumbled 40 feet outside of the store and died. Police don't know if the clerk's gunfire might have struck the other hold-up men, who fled.

Hartford vs New Orleans; 1-0

The USS Hartford, a submarine based in Groton, Connecticut, collided with the USS New Orleans, a Navy amphibious ship, on March 20 in the Strait of Hormuz. It caused a fuel leak and minor injuries to 15 sailors.

Go, Navy!

The Birdman of Vermont

Police Say Vermont Man Stole Bus, Posts Joy Ride on YouTube
Jake Rehm stole a half-million dollar bus from his former employer and took his girlfriend on a multi-state joy-ride. Apparently, he just wanted to share the grandeur of the fall colors with his GF and his birds. *

"It was inspired," Jacob Rehm, 38, said outside court Tuesday. "I felt inspired."

The vehicle's owner, Lamoille Valley Transportation, was not amused. Neither were authorities, who charged Rehm with theft of services, operating a vehicle without owner consent and trespassing. Neither was a judge, who ordered a competency evaluation for him

Rehm, a former bus driver for Lamoille Valley, took the bus from the company's depot Nov. 2.

Accompanied by friend Natalie Page, 38, he headed south toward Allentown, Pa., but turned around somewhere in Connecticut after he realized the $200 worth of diesel he had bought wouldn't get them to Pennsylvania and back. Police caught up with him in the northern Vermont town of St. Johnsbury after the company's owners were told he had been seen driving through a schoolyard waving at children.

And he took a video, which he posted on YouTube.

* Starting with a shot of guinea pigs and caged parakeets, in the last shot of his video Jake is shown cuddling with one of his no-longer-caged birds ... kissing it ... and then tucking it back into his shirt.

No word yet on whether the bird will take the full ride a la Burt Lancaster, but Jake is obviously riding for a fall.

PS:
On his YouTube video, Jake posted the following comment:

I am here going to set up some rules, for all who watch this vid and want to respond: THIS IS NOT THE PLACE FOR YOU TO SHARE NEGATIVITY, NAME CALLING, ETC. THIS IS A WHOLESOME, POSITIVE FORUM. WHATEVER YOU LITTLE PUCKASSES WANT TO SAY OTHERWISE, KEEP IT IN YOUR PIEHOLES OR SAVE IT FOR YOUR DIARIES. Only interesting, or civilized feedback is welcome (don't make me have to say it to you personally). Peace & Love, JS

Jake, I think you're going to experience enough "negativity" over the next few years to last you for a lifetime.

Next time you take the bus .... "Leave the Driving to US", eh?
______________________
Personal notes to Jake:
Dude, you are "Jake Rehm", not "Jack Kerouak". You're fifty years from Easy Rider. Also, you're not Ken Kesey, you're not a Merry Prankster nor did you steal the Majic Bus.

As much as we admire your 60's style hippie free life style, you have given it all up to spend the next few years in the pokey.

Oh, and when you get out? Your girlfriend won't be waiting for you. And neither will your guinea pigs and your parakeets.

Bummer, Dude!

SWMBO UPDATE: November, 2009

At the ARPC match last weekend, many people approached me to inquire how SWMBO is doing.

I think I have come up with almost the perfect response to these well-meaning inquiries:

She's doing about as well as can be expected, under the circumstances. But she misses her friends, going to matches, spending time on the range, and shooting.

She wanders around the house muttering "I've got to shoot something."

I assume she means targets, but in any case I'm safe. I robbed all of her .38 Super ammunition months ago so I could shoot matches.

She has lots of .38 Special ammunition left, but I'm still safe; those are reserved for her Home Defense guns. She's too proud to shoot Revolver under any but the most dire situation.

Geeks With Cameras

You've got to have the right camera ...


... if you want to get the right pictures.


Upon recomendation from SWMBO, I'm kinda looking at the Samsung TL220 at $299. The Samsung TL225 costs another $50, but the price difference doesn't include features I want. (They include PAL video format, for example, which are only useful outside the U.S.)

Both Samsung cameras cost more than I want to spend, but if I were certain that they include all of the features I want, I would be willing to pay the extra buck$.

As the saying goes: "The thrill of paying a low price is undermined by the disappointment of low quality".

Or perhaps more accurately: "Some people will by anything if they can get a bargain price; others will pay a higher price to get what they want."

But the bugger of the deal is, it doesn't tell me specifically that the video includes sound, or whether you can zoom while filming video. The good news is that there seems to be a 20 minute limit on the video length, while the Canon A1000IS seems to limit videos to 3 minutes.

Number of Recording Pixels
Still Image: 3,648 x 2,736 (Large), 2,816 x 2,112 (Medium 1), 2,272 x 1,704 (Medium 2), 1,600 x 1,200 (Medium 3/Date Stamp), 640 x 480 (Small), 3,648 x 2,048 (Widescreen)
Movie: 640 x 480 (30 fps/30 fps LP), 320 x 240 (30 fps) available up to 4GB or 60 minutes per clip, 160 x 120 (15 fps) up to 3 minutes per clip

No, I don't understand the seemingly contradictory specifications, but I'm not buying until I can work it out; it seems to me that the lower (15fps) density should provide a recording time than the higher (30fps) density.

And again, I don't know if either of the mentioned cameras allow zoom-while-recording in video mode.

Unfortunately, I can't find a reliable authority which can provide all the detail specifications I'm looking for. I would go to a camera store, which now-days seem to offer digital cameras at least as frequently as they to traditional 'film' cameras, for help -- except my experience in brick-and-mortar stores seem to demonstrate that:

1. the prices are almost invariably much higher than internet sales;
2. they don't provide any better customer service than do internet stores;
3. they are no more knowledgeable about digital camera specifications than are available online.

So I'm still looking for a real authority, who can answer my questions about the available digital cameras.

I was spoiled by the HP camera, until it died on me. With a little fiddling, I can still get it to work. Unfortunately, HP no longer makes or sells digital cameras, and their customer support is non-existant.

Apologies for the digression here from my usual USPSA-themed articles. Oh, wait ... I spend more times on politics and cultural themes than I do on shooting themes, don't I? Perhaps I'm less geekishly one-dimensional that I thought. Anyway, the purpose of my interest in photography is mainly involved with shooting USPSA matches with gun and camera, both.

At the last ARPC match, I had the best intentions of filming the New Shooters so they would have a record of their first match. The demise of my camera stopped that, just as my inability to find my bifocals stopped my ability to hit targets consistently.

I definitely have to get back to Open Division! Both in firearms, and in cameras.

Looking for a new Digital Camera

My HP R967 camera has bit the dust. Died. Given up. Failed to Function.

Whatever description you choose, it is no longer usable. The battery latch mechanism is no longer functional, and it just doesn't work.

This is the third HP camera which I have bought, but which broke for one reason or another.

My first HP (R767) was made unusable by my carrying it in my hip pocket on an extremely hot day. The display screen was electronically (though not physically ... I think) shattered. The viewfinder still works, but I can't see the image I'm recording. Well, it was unable to capture high-density photos .... every picture I took came out a little grainy, and the color was distorted toward the blue end of the spectrum.

The second HP (R867) was drenched when a bottle of water was dumped in the camera bag ... in which the camera was being carried ... during the 2007 Croc Match. After I dried it out, I discovered that videos are all captured in a 'reverse color' format.

This third HP (R967) will no longer hold the battery in place. I can't do a thing with it, it's totally dysfunctional. Too bad; it had some features which I liked (including the ability to zoom while recording videos).

I've wasted a lot of time searching for a replacement compact digital camera on the Internet, and in desperation I'm asking my readers if they can recommend a replacement. It's no good looking for a new camera from Hewlett-Packard. Apparently, HP no longer makes or sells digital cameras of any description.

Here's a list of the features I'm looking for:t

• Must not only take still pictures (preferably 10-12 MP density), but also be capable of recording video (motion) with sound.
• Must record videos in MP3 or similar format; I don't want QuickTime videos.
• Price Range: under $400.
• Must be able to zoom while recording Video .
• LCD (or similar) display should be over 2"; would prefer to also have a view-finder but this is not a deal-breaker.
• Still photo options must include delay, should include burst, and should include date/timestamping.
• I don't care much about "face recognition technology", but it should be able to shoot into the sun without color distortion.
• Should have a 'sports' or other stop-motion "high-speed capability to take still photos without blurring the image.
  
• Highly prefer SD-chip memory capability; I have several of them and replacement, while becoming increasingly inexpensive, would be inconvenient. I already have a battery recharger which is designed for this kind of flat battery. (I would include photos if I had a working camera.)
  
• Highly prefer "HP R07" rechargeable battery type, because I have several and spare batteries are expensive.
• Zoom lens is, of course, a 'given'.
  

Bottom line: I want a compact digital camera with both still and video (with sound) capabilities that I can afford and will give me some unique options when filming videos.

In other words, I want my old camera, but I can't find one. If you own, or know of a camera which fits all of these criteria, I hope you will let me know.
_____________________________________

UPDATE:
I finally found one on AMAZON - another used HP R967 for under $200. I bought it.

But I'm still disenchanted with HP Digital Cameras. I've gone through too many to be phlegmatic about their durability, and I would rather have something that is a but more robust. This new/used R967 is only a stopgap.

The request still stands: if you are aware of a compact digital camera with the capabilities I've described, please let me know.

I really want a good camera for taking pictures of USPSA matches.
____________________________________

Obama revives talk of U.N. gun control

Obama revives talk of U.N. gun control: "Arms Trade Treaty"

George Bush wouldn't have it, and George Bolton, his Ambassador to the United Nations fought it.

What is it?

It's the "UN Programme of Action on the Illicit Trade in Small Arms and Light Weapons".

Mildly stated as a series of "Whereas" and "Therefore", and professing the right of the "individual" to possess weapons for defense, this measure is cunningly designed to provide justification for 'states' (or nations) to rigidly control the commerce in small arms and ammunition to anyone who doesn't represent a state or a nation. (See UN A/Res/63/23, and UN A/64/228, and pp. 3-5 of A/63/PV41 for example.)

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton isn't Bolton, and President Barack Obama isn't Bush. Between the two of them, Hillary and Obama are deliberately moving this nation toward the signing of a treaty which would force the United States to accept the supremacy of the United Nations to dictate National Policy in regards to the Second Amendment.

Here are the lead paragraphs to the WND article:

Gun rights supporters are up in arms over a pair of moves the White House made last month to reverse longstanding U.S. policy and begin negotiating a gun control treaty with the United Nations.

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton first announced on Oct. 14 that the U.S. had changed its stance and would support negotiations of an Arms Trade Treaty to regulate international gun trafficking, a measure the Bush administration and, notably, former Permanent U.S. Representative to the United Nations John Bolton opposed for years.

Two weeks ago, in another reversal of policy, the U.S. joined a nearly unanimous 153-1 U.N. vote to adopt a resolution setting out a timetable on the proposed Arms Trade Treaty, including a U.N. conference to produce a final accord in 2012.

"Conventional arms transfers are a crucial national security concern for the United States, and we have always supported effective action to control the international transfer of arms," Clinton said in a statement. "The United States is prepared to work hard for a strong international standard in this area."

Gun rights advocates, however, are calling the reversal both a dangerous submission of America's Constitution to international governance and an attempt by the Obama administration to sneak into effect private gun control laws it couldn't pass through Congress.

This seems to reference to the "... international transfer of arms", but in fact it would affect the ability of every American to "Keep and Bear Arms". Or to purchase, exchange, trade or give firearms to every other person or merchant.

This isn't a Paper Tiger. You may be asking: "What's the big deal? The Second Amendment protects our rights. What we agree to in terms of International Trade has nothing to do with us."

The problem is that the United States is close to signing an International Treaty, and this is the single move which can immediately and irredeemably counter the U.S. Constitution, or any law.


Article 6 of the U.S. Constitution reads:

All Debts contracted and Engagements entered into, before the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be as valid against the United States under this Constitution, as under the Confederation.

This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.

The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.

In other words, if the United States (in the person of President Obama) signs this treaty, and it is ratified by Congress, then all existing laws ... up to and including the Constitution ... are over-ruled.

Remember the words:

all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.

That means exactly what it says.

If we enter into a treaty with the United Nations, and that treaty is or can be interpreted as disallowing the purchase or ownership of Small Arms, then that becomes the Law of the Land and it cannot be reversed by the Constitution, State Law, or any court in America.

This is exactly the kind of tool which any wanna-be Dictator would elect to impose his own private vision of a disarmed citizenry. In fact, I'm unclear on the process ... would it be necessary for this treaty to be ratified by Congress? Can the president sign this treaty and unilaterally impose disarmament on the strongest country on earth?

Introl to USPSA: 09-10 and 09-11

The ARPC match this weekend not only allowed the November Introduction to USPSA class members to complete their training and certification, but it also served as a forum for earlier class members to 'show their stuff' now that they are no longer under the burden of proving that they can shoot a match safely.

All five of the graduates from last weeks Introduction to USPSA class graduated with honors: they engaged all targets of the six stages safely, and at least one (Brandon) won an award for finishing high in his division/class.

We emphasize in the Live Fire portion of instruction that participants should conscientiously avoid trying to move and shoot fast, but Brandon is such an accurate shooter that he prevailed against several difficult stages; he certainly performed much better than I did in most stages.

(In my own defense, I mention that I competed without the bifocal glasses which permitted me a clear view of the sights. But Brandon shot accurately, avoiding the temptation to shoot faster than his skills and experience would permit; I was impressed by him, and I doubt I could have beat him even if I had been better able to see my sights.)

Ultimately, all of the class participants proved to be not only very capable/accurate shooters, but comfortable with the USPSA rules, gun-handling, and competitive priorities.

It's a joy to see competent shooters enter into the realm of USPSA/IPSC competition. I wish I had been able to watch all five of the class of 09-11 (November, 2009) during their First Match. Lord knows I was struggling to complete the match with a reasonable finish, but they not only did well on Standard stages, but also on the more bizarre Field Courses. (Match results available here.)

When I left for the match, the ambient temperature was 32 degrees; when I arrived at 8am, the temperature was 36 degrees and I had finally defrosted my windshield and the rear widow of The Egregious Explorer. I "armored up" with Rain Pants and Rain Coat, but in truth the weather was much more mild than I had expected. I kept telling my squad-mates that it would "rain before we get out of here", but it didn't rain all day -- disregarding the pessimistic forecasts of weather.com. In my mind, that only proved that even God was willing to ignore His previous intentions to prove me wrong.

I love it when a plan comes together. I often wear rain-gear and even carry an umbrellas, on match days which coincide with dubious forecasts. If it rains, I'm a reliable prognosticator; if it doesn't rain, I have obviously sacrificed my reputation to the benefit of my squad. This weekend, I may have appeared to be A Dolt but I consider myself a Weather Hero.

Well, we take our successes where we can.
___________________

Long story short: we had a lot of fun with 09-11 shooter Brandon (who kicked our butt), and 09-10 shooters Gerry-with-a-"G" and Luc. All new shooters learned a lot ... including the proper definition of "unsupported strong-hand shooting" and how to engage a multi-target stage when shooting Production Class. ("Don't count your rounds; determine where you need to reload and follow your ammo-management plan religiously. Except for when The Plan doesn't work.")

We always enjoy new shooters, and these were no exception.

Oh, and if you are a New Shooter, please feel encouraged to bring your Better Half to the range. We like to meet the family, and be assured that we will do our best to coerce her to start shooting the matches, too.

SWMBO says so.

DC Sniper: J.A. Muhammad Dies Whining

John A. Mahummad, the "D.C. Sniper", is dead.

And good riddance to him.

You probably remember that he and his adolescent side-kick, Lee Malvo, sniped random citizens of the Washington, D.C. area for several weeks before they were caught thanks to a citizen's phone call to the police "on suspicion of" being the people the police were eager to apprehend. (If it's a citizen, can they be "profiling"?)

But at the last few hours of his life, there was one final ironic item which deserves to be mentioned, if only to illustrate the huge gap between reality and Political Correctness, as exemplified by one of Mahummad's attorneys, Jon Sheldon.

I mentioned this during an idle moment at this weekend's ARPC match, and my squad members found it difficult to believe.

In the last hours of Muhammad's life, his attorney complained that the sentence was to be executed on November 10 ... the day before Veteran's Day. Apparently, Sheldon found it egrigious that Muhammad, a veteran of the Gulf War, would not be allowed to celebrate Veterans' Day before he was executed for the random murders of several innocent American civilians.

And several Supreme Court judges agreed, to some degree:

Although the execution will come seven years after the shootings, it will be less than six years after a jury found him guilty of capital murder.

Supreme Court justices John Paul Stevens, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Sonia Sotomayor objected to the court's haste in declining Muhammad's case Monday, saying it "highlights once again the perversity of executing inmates before their appeals process has been fully concluded."

Stevens, writing for the three, said Virginia had short-circuited the process by scheduling Muhammad's execution for Tuesday night, earlier than the court would normally have reviewed his petition.

"By denying Muhammad's stay application, we have allowed Virginia to truncate our deliberative process on a matter -- involving a death row inmate -- that demands the most careful attention," Stevens wrote.

He said he did not disagree with the court's ultimate decision that Muhammad's petition did not warrant the court's consideration.

After the court made its decision, Jon Sheldon, part of the team representing Muhammad, expressed a similar concern about the rapid pace of the review.

"In its effort to race John Allen Muhammad to his death before his appeals could be pursued, the state of Virginia will execute a severely mentally ill man, who also suffered from Gulf War syndrome, the day before Veterans Day," he said.

[emphasis added]

We do respect and honor our military veterans, but there is a limit to this. Military service is no excuse for murder, especially under the circumstances which characterized the predations of John Allen Muhammad and Lee Boyd Malvo.

Speaking as a veteran, my honor is besmirched by this man and this boy. Shooting unarmed civilians is not a legitimate act of war; it is, rather, an act of terrorism which conforms with the definition of terrorism.

1. the use of violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, esp. for political purposes.
2. the state of fear and submission produced by terrorism or terrorization.
3. a terroristic method of governing or of resisting a government.

The goal of these two villains, in my opinion, was nothing less than to establish "... the state of fear and submission produced by terrorism or terrorization." The John and Lee show had no apparent purpose above mayhem and intimidation.

To have allowed John Allen Muhammad to live to celebrate Veterans' Day would be to imply honors which he did not deserve.

I'm glad he's dead. He worked for his punishment, he earned it, and earlier would have been better. To me, delaying his much-deserved death for seven years was an undeserved delay of justice.

That he coerced his young protege' to acts of violence is not the least villainy of which he is guilty.

Obama Bows (Part II)

Obama Bows In Japan To Emperor Akihito and Empress Michiko

Not content to show obeisance to the Saudi Arabian King, President Obama this weekend bowed deeply and reverently to Japan's Emperor Akihito. Adding injury to insult, as it were, Obama also bowed to Empress Michiko ... albeit much less deeply, and with much less respect. Is Obama misogynous?

How low can he go?












Well he didn't prostrate himself.




This incident reminds us of Obama's bow to the Saudi king six months ago:


Consider this Saudi Incident to be "Obama Bows (Part I)". I declined to make much of this first incident, but today it seems as if our president is willing to show himself as subservient to other national leaders. I am not happy with this loss of "face".

Heller Resistance

In August of 2009, "[a]n appeals court in Chicago ... ruled that the federal, state or local government can require all citizens to register their firearms under penalty of law."

The U.S. 7th Circuit Court of appeals decided that the Heller decision does not affect the 'right' of local (Cicero) officials to mandate firearms registration. "[T]he Second Amendment is no obstacle to mandatory gun registration."

"There is a critical distinction between the D.C. ordinance struck down in Heller and the Cicero ordinance," the court said in an opinion written by Judge Diane Wood, a Clinton appointee. "Cicero has not prohibited gun possession in the town. Instead, it has merely regulated gun possession under Section 62-260 of its ordinance."

Apparently, the 7th Court (in a 3-0 decision) feels that "regulated gun possession" falls well within that inconvenient "shall not be infringed" thingie.
_______________________________________________

And in October of 2009,

A New Jersey appeals court has concluded that Americans have no Second Amendment right to buy a handgun.

In a case decided last week, the superior court upheld a state law saying that nobody may possess "any handgun" without obtaining law enforcement approval and permission in advance.

And ...

... New Jersey Appellate Division Judge Stephen Skillman wrote on behalf of a unanimous three-judge panel that Heller "has no impact upon the constitutionality of" the state law.

That's because, Skillman said, the Supreme Court did not strike down the District of Columbia's de facto handgun ban but instead simply ordered the city to issue a permit. In other words, while Americans may have the right in general to possess arms, the exact contours of that right have not been mapped, especially as the Second Amendment applies to state laws. (The court's majority opinion last year said: "We therefore assume that petitioners' issuance of a license will satisfy respondent's prayer for relief and do not address the licensing requirement.")

______________________________________________

Now, in November, 2009;

... a Maryland appeals court has followed suit. A three-judge panel ruled last Thursday that the Second Amendment does not interfere with a Maryland law that generally restricts state residents from carrying handguns.

That's not much of a surprise. What is remarkable is that Judge Albert Matricciani went out of his way to write that even if the Second Amendment applied to state laws, Maryland's statute would be perfectly constitutional in the wake of the U.S. Supreme Court D.C. v. Heller decision last year to invalidate the District of Columbia's handgun ban.

[Emphasis in the original CBS report]

If you're confused, it's probably about whether the involved judges are taking the narrow view to preserve States Rights, or they're deliberately interpreting Heller narrowly because they are loath to give up pre-existing personal bias in favor of Gun Control.

It would be nice to believe the former.

The 10th Amendment to the Constitution states:

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

Most of us are for States Rights even when they may walk a fine line between various Constitutional issues.

The American Constitution is unique among all nations in all history in that it recognizes the pre-eminent rights of "the people".

[Delete digressions pertaining to "rights of the people" and purported predations upon these rights by various presidents and branches of The Legislature.]

The Judiciary has been especially active in the past few years.

For example, in Roe v Wade the Supreme Court interpreted the constitution to allow for abortion ... although it is not specifically mentioned in the Constitution. The argument was that

"The Court held that a woman's right to an abortion fell within the right to privacy (recognized in Griswold v. Connecticut) protected by the Fourteenth Amendment. The decision gave a woman total autonomy over the pregnancy during the first trimester and defined different levels of state interest for the second and third trimesters. As a result, the laws of 46 states were affected by the Court's ruling."

(One wonders where in the American Constitution they found a citation to "the 2nd and 3rd trimesters" of a pregnancy.)

Moving quickly to 2nd Amendment interpretations, U.S. v Miller established the basis for disallowing 2nd Amendment protections, specifically in that a court case which was not even contested results in the prohibition of short-barrelled shotguns (and thus other 'special case' firearms restrictions; it's a 'slippery slope'.)

Essentially the decision was based upon the violation of a tax law., which required payment of a tax and acquisition of a 'tax stamp' on certain firearms. This has not changed in law.

Roe V Wade established the ability of the Supreme Court to interpret the constitutions however they wished. Perhaps more importantly, U.S. V Miller established the ability of a District Court to establish a precedence, under less than optimum conditions ("No appearance for appellees "), which attenuates the 2nd Amendment of the Constitution of the United States of America.

Now we see a new movement by local and District courts to undermine a finding of the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS).

Your personal opinion is probably a reflection of your personal bias. Yes, you are biased. Me too.

I like the Heller decision, although I don't think it went far enough.

I don't like the recent court decisions pertaining to Illinois, New Jersey, and Maryland. (I note in passing that these are among the states which, a year or two ago, proposed bills in favor of Microstamping Ammunition.)

Today, we have local and district courts passing decisions which seem to modify the 'original intent' of the Heller Decision. But do they? These courts don't think so. They think that the Heller Decision was itself a 'narrow definition' of a fine part of the law; in this case, a Constitutional Interpretation.

The points they make are:

1. The Heller Decision only applies to Federal Districts;
2. It does not apply to registration ("regulation"), but only to absolute refusal to allow ownership of a firearm; or
3. Heller permits ownership, but does not address 'possession' under all circumstances (carry outside one's own property).
   

Those are the three main points of the issues raised by these points, and should come as no surprise. When the Heller Decision was published, there was much discussion about the issues which were deliberately not addressed by the Supreme Court.

In effect, the Right to Bear Arms folks then, and do now, consider this our own 'slippery slope'.

• If DC can't prohibit possession, can any other locality or state?
• If a locality or state can't prohibit possession, can it 'regulate' possession by requiring registration and/or issue of a 'permit' to possess a firearm?
• Does the interpretation applies to 'firearms', are the laws equally applicable to 'handguns'?
• Does the 2nd Amendment then allow 'carry' or 'concealed carry' of firearms? And if so, to what extent and under what conditions?
  
• Can private businesses (and shopping malls, churches, schools/universities, court houses, restaurants which serve alcoholic beverages, etc.) prevent patrons/visitors from carrying firearms on the premises? If so, under what circumstances?

These are just a few ... a very few ... of the questions which must be addressed before we really know what the 2nd Amendment means, and how it is applicable in all circumstances of American society.

Brother, we have a long way to go before we have defined exactly what the 2nd Amendment means in Modern Society.

We who espouse a 'loose' interpretation of the 2nd Amendment can expect to lose a few, some, perhaps many of these contests. Most of them will probably be contested in the courts for decades.

And at first we should expect to lose more than we win.

But today, because of the Heller decision, the shoe is on the other foot.

Before, we could not afford to lose a single court contest. Now, we may lose a few decisions, but as more decisions accede to our "Right to Keep and Bear Arms" philosophy, it may be possible to revisit the 'lost' issues and win new interpretations of our rights.

We cannot win until specific decisions --- which restrict our rights --- have been brought to the courtroom. Having local and District courts find against the Second Amendment (under various interpretations) only provides us with the opportunity to appeal, and appeal, and appeal.

The Gun Control folks find themselves on the other side of the battle now. Depending upon the political make-up of the Supreme Court (and one is reluctant to depend on a trend toward 'Originalism' in SCOTUS), it may be possible in this century to prevail against "miss-interpretations" from the last century.

The bottom line here seems to be that we need to elect an Executive who is predisposed to seat Federal Judges who are Original Constitutionalists, rather than those who view the Constitution as a "Living Document".

Obama?

Unless we can recover control of the Executive Branch, we are so screwed!

Exploding Targets from Tannerite

Tannerite™ Exploding Targets from Tannerite™ Explosives Corporation - Manufacturer of High Explosives, Low Explosives and Fireworks


H/T Lawdog

I have never heard of Tannerite until tonite, when I read LawDog's post on "The Best Blogmeet Ever!", in which he mentions it as one of the fun-shoot aspects of the Blogmeet.

Looking at the website, and the included video, it looks like great fun if you have a rifle capable of hitting a two-inch target at 100 yards.

Practical? Maybe.

Fun? I think so.

Check out the website (link at the top of the page) and view the 8-minute instructional video.

Happy 234 USMC!

Today, November 10, 2009, is the 234'th birthday of the United States Marine Corps.
(see Commandant's Marine Corps Birthday Ball, scheduled for November 14; and History of Marine Corps Birthday.)

And then there's the following missive, which was sent to me by Randomly Hitten' Witten. I have no idea if this is an actual letter from a Marine in Afghanistan, or something made-up for effect. I suspect the latter, but I prefer to believe it is the former.

Still, it's colorful and interesting, and it makes a good read.

Happy Birthday, Marines!

Happy Birthday to the Marines!

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

From a Recon Marine in Afghanistan.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From the Sand Pit It's freezing here. I'm sitting on hard, cold dirt between rocks and shrubs at the base of the Hindu Kush Mountains , along the Dar 'yoi Pomir River , watching a hole that leads to a tunnel that leads to a cave. Stake out, my friend, and no pizza delivery for thousands of miles.

I also glance at the area around my ass every ten to fifteen seconds to avoid another scorpion sting. I've actually given up battling the chiggers and sand fleas, but them scorpions give a jolt like a cattle prod. Hurts like a bastard. The antidote tastes like transmission fluid, but God bless the Marine Corps for the five vials of it in my pack.

The one truth the Taliban cannot escape is that, believe it or not, they are human beings, which means they have to eat food and drink water.. That requires couriers and that's where an old bounty hunter like me comes in handy. I track the couriers, locate the tunnel entrances and storage facilities, type the info into the handheld, shoot the coordinates up to the satellite link that tells the air commanders where to drop the hardware. We bash some heads for a while, then I track and record the new movement..

It's all about intelligence. We haven't even brought in the snipers yet. These scurrying rats have no idea what they're in for. We are but days away from cutting off supply lines and allowing the eradication to begin.

I dream of bin Laden waking up to find me standing over him with m y boot on his throat as I spit into his face and plunge my nickel-plated Bowie knife through his frontal lobe. But you know me, I'm a romantic. I've said it before and I'll say it again: This country blows, man. It's not even a country. There are no roads, there's no infrastructure, there's no government. This is an inhospitable, rock pit shit hole ruled by eleventh century warring tribes. There are no jobs here like we know jobs.

Afghanistan offers two ways for a man to support his family: join the opium trade or join the army. That's it. Those are your options. Oh, I forgot, you can also live in a refugee camp and eat plum-sweetened, crushed beetle paste and squirt mud like a goose with stomach flu, if that's your idea of a party. But the smell alone of those 'tent cities of the walking dead' is enough to hurl you into the poppy fields to cheerfully scrape bulbs for eighteen hours a day.

I've been living with these Tajiks and Uzbeks, and Turkmen and even a couple of Pushtuns, for over a month-and-a-half now, and this much I can say for sure: These guys, all of 'em, are Huns... Actual, living Huns.. They LIVE to fight. It's what they do. It's ALL they do.. They have no respect for anything, not for their families, nor for each other, nor for themselves. They claw at one another as a way of life. They play polo with dead calves and force their five-year-old sons into human cockfights to defend the family honor. Huns, roaming packs of savage, heartless beasts who feed on each other's barbarism. Cavemen with AK-47's. Then again, maybe I'm just cranky.

I'm freezing my ass off on this stupid hill because my lap warmer is running out of juice, and I can't recharge it until the sun comes up in a few hours. Oh yeah! You like to write letters, right? Do me a favor, Bizarre. Write a letter to CNN and tell Wolf and Anderson and that awful, sneering, pompous Aaron Brown to stop calling the Taliban 'smart..' They are not smart. I suggest CNN invest in a dictionary because the word they are looking for is 'cunning.' The Taliban are cunning, like jackals and hyenas and wolverines..They are sneaky and ruthless, and when confronted, cowardly. They are hateful, malevolent parasites who create nothing and destroy everything else. Smart.. Pfft. Yeah, they're real smart.

They've spent their entire lives reading only one book (and not a very good one, as books go) and consider hygiene and indoor plumbing to be products of the devil. They're still figuring out how to work a Bic lighter. Talking to a Taliban warrior about improving his quality of life is like trying to teach an ape how to hold a pen; eventually he just gets frustrated and sticks you in the eye with it.

OK, enough. Snuffle will be up soon, so I have to get back to my hole. Covering my tracks in the snow takes a lot of practice, but I'm good at it.

Please, I tell you and my fellow Americans to turn off the TV sets and move on with your lives. The story line you are getting from CNN and other news agencies is utter bullshit and designed not to deliver truth but rather to keep you glued to the screen through the commercials. We've got this one under control The worst thing you guys can do right now is sit around analyzing what we're doing over here, because you have no idea what we're doing, and really, you don't want to know. We are your military, and we are doing what you sent us here to do.

You wanna help? Buy Bonds America .

Saucy Jack

Recon Marine in Afghanistan

Semper Fi

"Freedom is not free...but the U.S. Marine Corps will pay most of your share"

UPDATE:

One source is a January 7, 2009 post in Free Republic.

An interesting expansion on the theme is available from BlackAnthem dot com Military News. (October 12, 2009)

Also a similar source at The Military Family Network.

Finally, TruthOrFiction.com dates this at 2001 in it's 2002 post. Worth noting is that this website is unable to establish that it is either Truth or Fiction:

We have not found any origin or validation for the message. No identity is given.

Some versions indicate that the message was read on a radio program in San Diego. That is true, but the producer for Sully and Scooter at KOGO radio says they do not have any information on the identity of the Marine or whether the letter is authentic.

Last updated 02/4/02

I'm Only Gonna Say This Once ...

... so listen up, troops!

By now you have to be a troglodyte to be unaware of the Fort Hood Massacre. A freaked-out Psychiatrist, whose job seemed to involve helping soldiers from The Sand Box deal with their PTSS (Post Traumatic Stress Syndrome) found his own resolution to the dichotomy of "I am a U.S. Soldier" and I Am A Muslim"; he got a couple of guns and went out to shoot soldiers who were either rotating to, or rotating from, the previously mentioned Sand Box.

I remember the good old days of the Viet Nam War, when the returning veterans had to deal with sputum-expectorating hippies who accosted soldiers in airports and accused them of being "Baby Killers".

[sigh]

I never thought I would say this, but -- those were the Good Old Days.

SO I'm dropping my Geek persona, and moving back 40- years to when I was Sarge.

Guys, Nadal Sand Loser was just another candidate for Suicide By Cop waiting to happen.

What happened?

He killed a baker's dozen Good Guys, and seriously screwed up another 30 of them ... including the lady Rent-A-Cop who returned the compliment by punching his ticket in the most effective manner. Good on her, and I think she should receive a Major Medal plus Congress should give her a munificent Pension For Life.

Hell, they did that for John Murtha, didn't they? Its a "Get Out Of Jail Free" card for a congressman; it's a Job Well Done for a cop. (After they plug up the bullet-holes in both legs, which in my personal opinion should earn her a bourbon with a beer-back in any bar in the country, and I would be proud to buy her around and tell my grandchildren about the honor.)

But what's the real story here?

Gun Free Zones -- that's what we're talking about.

In a world of Brass (officers), the only Brass demonstrated was that expended by the Bad Guy's Five-seveN with the mucho-round magazine.

How come we have an army post with 40,000 troops, and they are nothing more than targets?

Looking back to the late 1960's, I recall that when the troops went on stand-down in the base camps, the first impulse of the Brass was to require field soldiers to disarm and store their weapons and ammunition in locked ConEx containers before we could even hit the luke-warm showers, let alone enjoy a single night hitting the EM clubs and NCO clubs. Yes, it didn't matter what rank you held; if it was Stand Down, America did not trust their troopers to carry weapons in a base camp.

Why? Because the Brass were then, as they are now, reluctant to trust their soldiers with weapons in a Base Camp (or a Fire Base ... the difference being a Division vs a Regimental fortification) while they were drinking.

Hmm ... well, maybe that wasn't such a bad idea. If the troops weren't disarmed on Stand Down, they might do something radical such as frag unpopular NCOs.

Oh, wait! That happened, didn't it?

But if the NVA or VC hit the base camp, they could be assured that the field-experienced troops had no way to defend themselves; they had to depend on the expertise of REMF soldiers on guard duty.

Hence the near-success of the Tet Offensive, if the Brass hadn't figured it out within a short 24 hours and armed the field soldiers to defend the bases.

(In the actual event, Field Soldiers on Stand-Down were more likely to be fodder for REMFs who would roll the field soldiers on their Drunkards-Walk back to the barracks.)

But I digress.

As Disney had the Crows say in DUMBO: "I've seen a Horse Fly, and I've seen a House Fly, but I've never seen an Elephant fly."

Well, these folks had been been around the world and They Have Seen The Elephant.

Now they have seen the Elephant fly. Or more accurately --- they have seen the Elephant, and they have fled the field, with various degrees of success.

All the time, Major Nadal Malik Hasan was shooting them in the back as they scrambled ... often unsuccessfully ... to exit the Kill Zone.

Nobody charged the murderer despite their training which ground into their psyches the basic Infantry Aphorism: "Run away from a 'far ambush', run toward a 'near ambush'".

Their training presupposed that they would be armed when they were ambushed. Their command had deserted them; they were subject to a 'near ambush', but they were dis-armed. What part of Military Training could possibly have prepared them to be ambushed when they were dis-armed?

It's preposterous. They weren't expecting to be attacked in their home base, in their DEROS station, on American Soil.

"I didn't read this in The Manual! What am I suppose to do now?"

Those soldiers in Fort Hood found themselves in the Kill Zone, when they thought they were safe. And they had every reason to belief that they were safe.

Didn't they?

Their commanders thought they were safe ... although there were no steps taken to ensure their safety. Nasal End Zone knew that he could bring firearms on base with no fear of detection.

Their commanders let them down.

Loyalty up, Loyalty down. That's the way it should be. That's what they were taught.

So, who's going to find their ass in a grinder over this. Certainly not their commanders. Certainly not ... well, how long is it going to take before someone begins blaming the victims?


Today, the base commander -- the egregious General Robert Cone -- described the attack as "... an isolated incident..."

Incident?

You have a maverick Islamic Officer who has protested being assigned to "fight his brother Muslims", who is a unanimously described 'loner', who has visited mosques where the imam was a Radical Muslim, and who the CIA knew had been attempting to contact Al Queda, who has publicly stated that Suicide Bombers were "right" to kill Americans, who spend the morning of the attack giving away his possessions (and a few Korans) to his neighbors, and upon whom you didn't even bother to watch closely ... and you call this "an isolated incident"?

Maybe he just fell through the cracks, eh?

Yeah, and the Grand Canyon is only the crack in the wall which you covered by hanging a big mass-printed reproduction of "The Scream".

I have no expectation that General Cone will ever be indicted for his failure to exercise his command efficiently. We can only hope that he will be quietly retired six months from now, which will be reported on Page C-13 of The New York Times as "choosing to seek new challenges in the Public Venue" and he will take an advisory position in some Washington Think Tank and be paid about a half-million bucks a year.

Bbecause I know, and maybe you know, that General Cone was only exercising the policies handed down to him from his commanders, which explicitely include not allowing soldiers on American soil to be armed on base.

We've talked before about Gun Free Zones:

• Why would anybody need to carry a gun in a shopping mall?
• Why would anybody need to carry a gun in a Church?
• Why would anybody need to carry a gun at a University?
• Why would anybody need to carry a gun at a Child-Care Center?
• Why would anybody need to carry a gun in a Restaurant?
  
• Why would anybody need to carry a gun at (fill in the blank _________________)

The sad fact is, people who feel the need to carry a gun in ANY situation are thwarted by Liberal Nanny-Staters, and yet people still get the shit shot out of them in all these, and many other venues.

Why don't they carry a gun?

Because the Nanny State thinks It's A Bad Idea.
What if somebody who is allowed to carry a gun in a "gun free zone" happened to shoot somebody? That Would Be Bad, right?

What if that person they shot was someone who was trying to kill as many civilians (or troops!) as they could in the shortest time possible?

Oh, well .... that would be bad, too.

That's what the police are for; To Protect and to Serve.

This is the second massacre in the past year which was stopped by, essentially, a Lady Rent-A-Cop. Thank God we still have a few of them left.

My solution: arm the ladies. They're Hell On Wheels when it comes to protecting The Flock.

Spelling is VERY important!

Piano Stairs

IN Scandinavia, they're experimenting with the idea of encouraging people to use stairs (to exit from the subway?) rather than the escalator. The results are shown here.

Not a bad idea, I guess, if the escalator is typically crowded.
But here's how it COULD work ... the Tom Hanks keyboard scene from the movie BIG.



(Sorry, this is obviously a dubbed version from a non-english version, dubbed back to english by actors who were not in the original ... well ... version. It lacks something without Robert Loggia's gravel voice.)

Intro to USPSA Class: November, 2009

We had six new shooters and two 'observers' show up at the November, 2009, Introduction to USPSA class on Saturday, November 7, 2009, at the Albany Rifle and Pistol Club.

The class was scheduled to run from 1pm to 4pm, and when I showed up on the range around 12:30 to begin setting up I was a little nonplussed.

All of the 7 bays on the North Range already had the little orange highway cones marked "In Use" place at the entry door to the covered bays, indicating that it was not available to anyone else. In recent months this class had been held in Bay 4, which shares an overhead covering with Bay 5 except that there was a plywood wall inside the 3-walls-with-a-roof steel construction, and a concrete barrier forming an eight-foot high wall between the shooting bays. Mac, the USPSA/Action Pistol director of the club was not easily found; but I talked to a couple of guys who had driven onto the range immediately before me and they said they had asked around and bays 5, 6 and 7 were reserved for a match and bay 4 was reserved for a class.

Bays 5, 6 and 7 were semi-set up for some sort of Action Shooting match, and there was someone (Jim P. who is a USPSA shooter of my acquaintance) using Bay 4.

The other bays were either being used by people practicing, or reserved for a "Introduction to Pistol Shooting" or "NRA Basic Pistol" class.

I talked to a revolver shooter who had taken my Intro class a few months ago, and he told me that the "match" for which 3 bays were reserved was an ICORE (Revolver) match.

The two guys who had arrived at the match just before me said that one of them had just bought a new pistol (Springfield XD) and they wanted to function test the pistol.

Since the 3 bays were not completely set up for the match (the target stands and sticks were in place, but the cardboard targets were not yet mounted), I invited the 2 shooters to use the plate rack set up in bay 5 to test their pistol, and I hung around while I was changing boots and putting on my gear. It was almost 1pm when the ICORE shooters showed up, and by then the 2 shooters had sighted in their laser sight and were convinced that the XD would work for me. They were very good about sweeping up their brass and leaving the bay clean for the match.

Then I went back to Bay 4 and informed Jim P. that I needed the bay to set up for a class. He wanted to know if I would be off the range soon, and I sadly informed him that the class would take three hours. I hated to boot him off the range so arbitrarily, but I had a schedule to keep and I needed to set up the stage props for the class.

By then my class members had begun to show up. I had six participants at one time, but one of them (Donald) had originally arrived for the ICORE match. He was reluctant to drop out, and I tried to make it clear to him that there was no penalty involved; he was welcome to come to the December class, or any later class. Bummer: he had already read the manual, and completed the test. (I still have his test; I'll bring it along for the class when he can make the time for it. This is one of the problems which arise when a club is so active that there is no alternative but to schedule two attractive events on the same day, in the same time period.

Eventually we sorted ourselves out. I asked a couple of the guys to pick up a Bianchi Barricade from the rack on Bay 7, and then took a few more guys to the Prop Room on Bay 6 to pick up our props.

For this course, we needed a 3'x3' steel starting box, 3 target stands, six sticks, and three cardboard "Metric Targets". Besides the Bianchi Barricade, we needed a U.S. Popper and a Pepper Popper, plus a 'stand' for each. We also needed the Army Surplus Locking Container with included stapler (our out of staples, we ended up using my stapler), timer (the battery was low, we ended up using my timer), brown target-tapes, and various consumables associated with setting up a stage. I also grabbed two more Metric Targets as demonstration aids, which I used to (1) demonstrate and mark out the scoring zones and their scoring values for both Major Power and Minor Power, and (2) a separate target where the participants entered their names with a black Sharpie Pen to simulate the squad shooting order.

After a short wait while the last participant was guided onto the range and through the coded gate, we ended up with three shooters: Shawn, Clint, Brendon, Andrew and Wil.

We also had two observers: Aaron-1, whom I didn't know and was just there to observe his friends, and Aaron-2, who has demonstrated a remarkable ability to steer friends and acquaintances to the Introduction to USPSA course over the past year.

Aaron-1 helped move the Bianchi Barricade from Bay 7 to Bay 4.

Aaron-2 helped as a 'demonstrator' for most of the stages. My training technique is the classic "Tell you, Show you, Let you, Critique you" style.
First, we explain each training exercuse.
Second, the demonstrator goes through the course of fire being sure to make each movement slow and easy to follow.
Third, each participant performs the functions being presented in the exercise.
Fourth, we discuss the events illustrated by each participant. Emphasis on the 'good things'; mention of the alternate approaches elected on each run; finally, discussion of 'errors' demonstrated, and why they are less than optimal.

Aaron-2 has helped me in this capacity in previous classes, and I was pleased that he showed up at this class because he is conscientious and talented. On one stage, when we presented two cardboard targets partially obscured by a No-Shoot, he put his first shot into the no-shoot. I'm not yet convinced that he didn't deliberately mis-place the shot, but it offered an excellent teaching opportunity to illustrate why it is a bad idea to hit a no-shoot, why it is a good idea to make up such an error, and why it is common not to notice that a shot has gone wide of the intended targets.

Shooting in Inclement Weather:

It's not unusual for a match day in Oregon to be marred by bad weather. Either Rain or Snow can make it more difficult to compete.

Today was an excellent example. Although the morning was almost Indian Summer clear, it was not warm. But during the oral presentation (the first hour of the 3-hour class) a severe rainstorm hovered over the ARPC range for about 20 minutes. I announced that we were going to extend the 'classroom discussion' for a while, in hopes that the rain would relent later. And I pointed out that we had deliberately declined to mount the cardboard targets so we didn't have to get wet, and the targets didn't have to get too wet to paste tape over the bullet holes in the targets. And I also mentioned that in an actual match, we wouldn't have this luxury.

When we could no longer put off the Live Fire Exercise, the rain was still heavy, so we decided to just shoot the stages and temporarily ignore the scoring-and-pasting efforts which are part of a 'real match'. I also avoided the small-step-at-a-time approach which had typified previous classes. We went right to a modified exercise which taught proper responses to range commands, mandatory reloads between targets, and indexing between targets.

The guys didn't seem to have any problems with the rapid transitions, which implies that I have been codding earlier classes.

In this class, we finished the basic scenarios in an hour with 5 participants.

Since we had an hour left in the allotted class schedule, we went into more advanced technicues.

First we set up a two-string stage. With two IPSC targets and two steel targets, we described a stage where the two paper targets would be engaged using one-hand (defined strong-hand or weak-hand), and then a second string in which the two steel targets are engaged one-handed using the other hand.

After a short discussion, all participants chose to engage the cardboard targets with their weak hand.

The second string (two steel targets) were universally engaged with the strong hand. After all, the targets were smaller, thus more difficult to hit.

Surprisingly, most participants elected to engage the US Popper first, rather than the larger Pepper Popper ... both steel targets were set the same distance away, at the same distance as the IPSC targets.

When we discussed this, it was after we realized that participants (most of whom had handguns most commonly used in Production Division) were just as comfortable using the much more difficult Double-Action mode as the Single-Action mode -- even Clint, who was competing with a Beretta 92, with the absolutely awful double-action trigger. (I didn't try the gun ... Beretta may have made some improvements since I last tried a Beretta 92 a couple of years ago.)

No criticism here. Everyone did an excellent job. The possible exception was Wil, who shot the stage AFTER I pointed out that I would have shot the bigger Pepper Popper first. He tried it that way and took 3 shots to take down the Pepper Popper, then got the smaller U.S. Popper on the first shot -- strong hand.

I asked him why it took him 3 shots to knock down the Pepper Popper, and he admitted that he was shooting too fast. That's a remarkable admission, considering that Wil had no problems at all hitting his targets during the rest of the live-fire exercises.

We still had a half-hour to shoot, so the class found a plywood board which had six very small ports through which they could shoot. I regret that I didn't use my camera to illustrate the challenge. We set up the two steel targets, and three IPSC targets. The rain had stopped by then, so we included the necessity to score and tape the paper targets, besides resetting the steel. The object of the exercise was to engage each of the 5 targets through a different port. I should mention that the participants set up the vision barrier with ports so that they would have to engage targets through ports which were ALL below waist level. This was an excellent test of their ability to engage targets from an 'uncomfortable' position.

One student even went prone, then proped himself up in a semi-push-up position with his weak-hand, and fired strong-hand-only through the lowest port. He did fine on it, but I pointed out that he had mud smeared on his hand when he finished -- and transferred much of it to the slide of his pistol when he unloaded. I encouraged everyone to be certain to clear slippery mud from their equipment after shooting a stage, because that could negatively affect subsequent stage performance.

That took us to the 4pm quitting time. A few participants were willing to continue, but a couple wanted to go to the Main Range bench-rest facilities to try out a new AR rifle. So we returned the props to the appropriate storage area, exchanged emails, and everyone went their separate ways.

All in all, this was another positive experience for me. I enjoy meeting new shooters, and try to not only teach them the many ways in which they can avoid violating safety restrictions, but also let them see that USPSA competition is not only free-style, but challenging and fun.

Before I released the class, I asked for a show of hands of those who didn't have fun during the class. Nobody raised their hands. I asked Aaron-1, who was only an observer, and he said "Hey, I was just watching and *_I_* had fun today.

That's the way it should be.

I love this game.

PS:
Speaking of "shooting in Inclement Weather", I include this video from the January, 2007, ARPC match. Lots of white-painted steel targets. which do NOT show up well against a background of snow ... especially while the snow is still falling!