Never stomp a downed cop

Off-duty motorcycle cop hits 4-year-old girl, then shoots, kills her angry dad : Sandra Rose:
(August 13, 2012)

An off-duty Chicago motorcycle cop is under investigation after he shot and killed an angry dad after hitting the man’s daughter with his motorcycle. According to the NY Daily News, the officer “ditched” his motorcycle when he saw Taniyah Middleton run into his path. But the motorcycle slid into the 4-year-old and her 18-year-old cousin John Passley, who had rushed to help her. Taniyah’s father, Christopher Middleton, ran out of a nearby restaurant to help his daughter. Witnesses told the Chicago Sun-Times that Middleton was “visibly upset” when he saw Taniyah’s bloody face. Witnesses say that when the 34-year-old, eight-year police veteran identified himself as a cop, Middleton punched him in the face, knocking him to the ground.

"Old News", but perhaps instructional to us all.

This article doesn't tell the whole story: perhaps after reading the gamut of stories nobody can know the "Whole Story".

Here's the synopsis, from what I've gathered after reading several days versions of Chicago (and other) news sources:


Chicago Cop goes off duty and is riding home on his scooter.  Apparently (off duty, dig?) not uniformed.

A beautiful 4-year-old girl is crossing the street, in the company of her 18-year-old cousin. 

Cop sees folks in the crosswalk (?) and hits the brakes; it's too late to stop in time, so he drops the bike in hopes that it will be "the ultimate braking system".  Bike skids, slides and tumbles, knocking cute little girl down and scraping her cheek.

Cop still on the ground, Father rushes out of nearby building and (overwhelmed with outrage that his daughter has been injured) assaults downed scooter-pilot; apparently either unaware or uncaring that said scooter-pilot is a cop.  Father punches cop, cop says 'hey, I'm responsible, I'm a police officer' or words to that effect.

Some story versions (from the family of the beautiful little girl) differ in that they do not acknowledge that the scooter-pilot identified himself as a cop.  Well ... hell, who knows?  Maybe he didn't say it, maybe the family didn't hear it.

Anyway, while 26-year-old father beats up on scooter-pilot, 18-year old nephew (?) joins the party and also beats on scooter-pilot.  Scooter-pilot still on the ground when the dynamic duo start putting the boots to him.  Aware that he's getting the shit kicked out of him, the duo isn't showing signs of letting up, and said scooter-pilot is losing consciousness ... scooter-pilot draws service pistol and applies groin-shot to outraged father.

Father dies, scooter-pilot goes to hospital for treatment, pretty little girl receives treatment for scraped face, and not-all-that-helpful 18-year-old nephew (?) is no longer mentioned in the news stories.  Apparently, scooter-pilot didn't shoot him.

Now, family of pretty little 4-year-old girl is outraged.  Bad scooter-pilot!  No run over pretty little girl!  No shoot Daddy!  Bad Bad Bad scooter-pilot!  Go straight to hell, no collect $200!

Well, pretty little 4-year-old girl is apparently an orphan.  No word on where mama is, although it seems safe to assume she had one.  Family is voting unanimously to crucify scooter-pilot.  Scooter-pilot pretty well recoverd, as is nephew and girl.  (Apparently ... did I mention it was an Old Story?)

The lesson for the day, Children, is that if you come upon a police officer on the ground, and you start putting the boot to him ... it doesn't really matter how justified you feel.  Cops are experientialy trained to expect that if they are down and getting the ever-loving shit kicked out of them, if they lose consciousness they may realistically expect to wake up in a kinder, gentler world than that in which they lost consciousness.

In order to prevent that (to their personal understanding) undesirable resolution, said cop / scooter-pilot may (and probably will) resort to deadly force ... in the form of a .40 S&W round in your  groin.  You will not only not like it, you will likely not survive it.

RECAP:  No lose cool;  no stomp cop; no stop somebody who even claims he's a cop.

You don't know if he's got a .40 in his hip pocket or not, but you should know that if you bet against it and you're wrong ... your problems are over.

And if you have a pretty little 4-year-old daughter?  You've just made her an orphan, and you have nobody to blame but yourself.

(This is called "The Darwinian Theory"; if you're stupid enough to get yourself killed, chances are your un-born children will not.  If you have a child already, you should pray that she's not as butt-ugly stupid as  you are.)

Gun Free Zones: A Prevalent Delusion

Gun Free Zones: A Prevalent Delusion: Newsroom: The Independent Institute:

The Aurora, Colo., movie theatre [sic]; the Sandy Hook, Conn., kindergarten, the Columbine, Colo., high school and dozens of other sites throughout the world, have two things in common: 1) they were “gun free zones”; and 2) consequently they were the sites of massacres committed by gunmen who knew they alone would be armed. 

It has even been suggested that “gun free zones” actually attract killers who know they will meet only helpless victims rather than anyone able to effectively oppose them. Whether or not gunmen so calculate, it is true as shown by massacres that have occurred in recent years in “gun free zones” not only in the United States, but in England, France, Germany, Sweden, Australia, Korea and Japan. 
“Gun free zones” never work for they disarm only those who obey the law. 

Gunmen just laugh at “gun free zones.” When confronted by armed police, gunmen sometimes surrender though more often they kill themselves. At the risk of belaboring the obvious, what neither terrorists nor lunatics ever do is kill themselves (or surrender) when faced by unarmed victims. Those they just kill. 

Contrast an incident from the Clackamas Mall in Oregon. Having shot two unarmed victims the killer was confronted by an armed Oregon gun permit holder. Apparently fearing capture, the shooter killed himself,

Or consider the absence of school massacres in Israel. Years ago Israeli children were the first targets of the Palestinian intifada. Israel’s response was arming teachers and school bus drivers, as well as parent-volunteers, to guard the children. When a few terrorists were killed, attacks on schools and busses [sic] ended—and have never resumed.

 [Please forgive the lengthy quote.  I only include it because it lists most of the 2nd Amendment talking points which I have discussed here over the past several months.]

The thing is ... this country has been inundated in recent years with "mass shootings".   Never mind that more shootings and more fatalities have been the result of "individual shootings"; the mass shootings are the darlings of the press (I know that sounds callous, but it was the editorial choice of the editors of the MSM, not mine) and also they tend to prey upon the most vulnerable among us.

Or do they?   Consider the January, 2013 "drive by" (actually a "Walk By") shooting in a Chicago park, documented here, in which a 15 year old girl was killed ... when she wasn't even the intended target?   It doesn't get much more "innocent" than that.   This was not a mass, shooting, it was an idiot out to just shoot "anyone" .. because he could.  That is not an isolated example; it's a typical example of the shit that goes down EVERY DAY on our city streets.   Actually, the Mass Murders are the "Isolated Examples"; yet they are the incidents which garner such extreme attention from the MSM.

And why is that?

No, we know why the mall and church and kindergarten shootings get so much attention.  What we do not know is why the day-by-day "walk by" shootings don't get as much attention, since they account for more victims.

The answer is that America is essentially one gigantic Gun Free Zone.  Perhaps not to the degree of England, for example, but still ...  I have a Concealed Handgun License, and I am rarely allowed to take advantage of it because even in the small college town in which I live most of the place has laws  restricting my right to carry a firearm on the premises.

Do I feel safer in these places?  Decidedly not!  I feel like a target there, and I am a target there.  I am not permitted to defend myself in a Gun Free Zone, and (as the leading article suggests), that is precisely the "target rich environment" which crazy people so love.

Take for example the local college campus, where I worked every day for 15 years.  I was legally permitted (by virtue of my CHL) to carry a concealed firearm there.  However. the college had its own rules, and they included as a matter of policy that anyone who carried a firearm on campus was subject to termination (if an employee) or dismissal (if a student).  Even if I legally had a  firearm in my vehicle, unloaded and locked away, the university policy made me subject to termination.


Since I've been retired for a couple of years now, I can safely reveal that I carried a pistol on campus every damn day.    It wasn't because I expected to be attacked (if I did, I would have carried a rifle!)

It was because it was a declared and dedicated Gun Free Zone!

Remember Virginia Tech?

The Virginia Tech massacre was a school shooting that took place on April 16, 2007, on the campus of Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University in Blacksburg, Virginia, United States. Seung-Hui Cho, a senior at Virginia Tech, shot and killed 32 people and wounded 17 others in two separate attacks, approximately two hours apart, before committing suicide (another six people were injured escaping from classroom windows).^[1][2] The massacre is the deadliest shooting incident by a single gunman in U.S. history.^[3] It was the worst act of mass murder of college students since Syracuse University lost 35 students in the bombing of Pan Am Flight 103,^[4] and the second-deadliest act of mass murder at a U.S. school campus, behind the Bath School disaster of 1927.

Virginia Tech was a "Gun Free Zone", too.  That didn't protect anybody, any more than did Columbine.

So ... yeah.  I carried.  Nobody ever knew, nobody every got freaked out when I showed up at the office.  In fact, everybody in my office knew I was a "Gun Nut", but nobody seemed all that concerned;  if anything. I suspect that they found some comfort there.  Hell, I hadn't shot anybody in the15 years I was on campus;  that's a pretty good record of "NOT going postal"!
 _______________________________________________________________________

Researchers have found that the homicide rates at postal facilities were lower than at other workplaces. In major industries, the highest rate of 2.1 homicides per 100,000 workers was in retail. The next highest rate of 1.66 was in public administration, which includes police officers. The homicide rate for postal workers was 1.48 per 100,000.^[14]
However, not all murders on the job are directly comparable to "going postal". Taxi drivers, for example, are much more likely to be murdered by passengers than by their peers. Working in retail means one is exposed to store robberies. In 1993, the United States Congress conducted a joint hearing to review the violence in the U.S. Postal Service. In the hearing, it was noted that despite the postal service accounting for less than 1% of the full-time civilian labor force, 13% of workplace homicides were committed at postal facilities by current or former employees.

 (I know .. not really very reassuring.  Did you note that all post offices are "Gun Free Zones"?)\

______________________________________________________________________

No, I'm not patting myself on the back for declining to descent into workplace rage.  It's awkward to feel proud of oneself for not being a lunatic, or an evil person.

The point is that most people aren't evil.

The point is also that some people ARE evil.  And those of us who are 'on the scene' have the best chance to protect ourselves, our children and others against those whack-jobs who are evil.  Hence, my support for the concept that armed guards are NOT an unacceptable a sufficient method of protecting people in Gun Free Zones.   Look what England has done to protect children's playgrounds, for example (even though I freely satirized it because ... hey, they're The Brits and by definition they are hypocritical!)

I think Great Britain is on the right track, at long last.  Sure, I think they should give up the whole "gun control" thingie, but they are at least recognizing that "Gun Free Zones" equate to "Target Rich Environments".   That's a step that our own U.S. Federal Government has not yet had the testicular fortitude to acknowledge, which puts The Brits one giant step ahead of The Amies.

Perhaps it's time to look at the "Money Quote" from the original argument, and not merely dismiss it out of hand:

Gunmen just laugh at “gun free zones.” When confronted by armed police, gunmen sometimes surrender though more often they kill themselves. At the risk of belaboring the obvious, what neither terrorists nor lunatics ever do is kill themselves (or surrender) when faced by unarmed victims. Those they just kill.

I think they might just have something there.

'Will you apologize to Muslims you've killed?': Obama's speech heckled - YouTube

'Will you apologize to Muslims you've killed?': Obama's speech heckled - YouTube:

Published on May 24, 2013 Obama's ironclad way of battling terrorists sparked heated debate during his speech in Washington. At one point the president was stopped in his tracks by an angry audience member. RT's Ivor Crotty outlined what made the woman break Obama's script.

 I do have a couple of things to say about this.

(1) "... Obama's ironclad way of battling terrorists ..." ?   Really?   This is a Russian describing Obama's method of dealing with anything other than his own Obama-socialist programs as "Ironclad"?  One wonders what he thought of Margaret Thatcher, or Ronald Reagan.

(2) The woman (audience member protester/heckler) asks if Obama is going to apologize for the Muslims he has killed.   Consider the worldwide distribution of videos of Muslims dancing in the streets in hysteric joy on 9/11 ... when Muslims killed thousands of Americans.  If this is what they consider an "apology", I for one am certainly willing to do the Wooley-Bully in the main street of my small town to show my own contrition.


(Not to say that there weren't sufficient American "Useful Idiots" fully willing to support that point of view)

Oh, and as for the question of "compensation"?  I'm amazed that Obama didn't offer "Forty Acres And A Mule".    This is one of those occasions when supreme irony would have been supremely satisfying.

PS:  it's not as if we're without emotion on this issue:



.... lest we forget ...

Benghazi Who?

Whoa: Devastating CBS News Benghazi Report Slams Obama Administration - Guy Benson:

There were so many critical elements of this CBS News report on Libya, I wasn't sure which one to highlight in a juicy headline. Just watch:

 There have been so many lies conflicting statements about Benghazi in the past month that I completely avoided attempting to address the subject here.

I just ran across a September 20, 2012 TOWNHALL commentary which at least gives me a less-confused (albeit certainly not CLEAR) understanding of the initial controversy.

This doesn't answer many questions .. actually, it presents the earliest questions to the White House original statement(s).  It may not help much, and I'm not prepared to offer any comments myself.

I'm just grateful I have some perspective on the subject.

This England

British Soldier Beheaded Outside London Barracks:

A man believed to be a British soldier was beheaded and hacked up with a meat cleaver by two men, who were then shot by police in London Wednesday afternoon, authorities say. The victim was cut up "like a piece of meat," said one eyewitness to the slaughter, which occurred in broad daylight near an Army barracks. The shocking slaughter in the Woolwich area of southeast London was being treated as a possible terrorist attack. 

 The Times of London reported that one of the attackers screamed "Allahu Akhbar," Arabic for "God is Great," as he and an accomplice hacked away at the defenseless victim.

England, you must cleave to your literature:

This blessed plot, this earth, this realm, this England,
This nurse, this teeming womb of royal kings,
Fear’d by their breed and famous by their birth,
Renowned for their deeds as far from home,
For Christian service and true chivalry,
As is the sepulchre in stubborn Jewry,
Of the world’s ransom, blessed Mary’s Son,
This land of such dear souls, this dear dear land,
Dear for her reputation through the world,
Is now leased out, I die pronouncing it,
Like to a tenement or pelting farm:
England, bound in with the triumphant sea
Whose rocky shore beats back the envious siege
Of watery Neptune, is now bound in with shame,
With inky blots and rotten parchment bonds:
That England, that was wont to conquer others,
Hath made a shameful conquest of itself.
Ah, would the scandal vanish with my life,
How happy then were my ensuing death!

(John of Gaunt's speech, from Act II of Richard II)

England, have you forsaken your heritage?  Do you no longer listen to The Great Bard?

You suffer now in ignominy, for you have taken unto your bosom a nest of vipers.

Your forefathers curse you from their graves, they take some small comfort that they are not here to witness your descent.   They weep from shame for your weakness.

You have suffered the advent of the vile upon your homeland.  You accept known evil, your enemies delight in your suffering, they glory in their martyrdom, for you have welcomed them to your shores and provide them sustenance while they slaughter your innocents and dance upon the shattered bodies of your subjects ... who are no longer your citizens; you have forsaken them.

Have you no shame?  Have you no pride?

Your only value today is to serve as an example to the world, how the mighty have fallen when they so worship "the good" to the point where they accept evil men of no value into your society.

Because you seem to have forgotten your heritage, here is what England once exemplified:




UPDATE: May 25, 2013
The soldier killed in Wednesday's brutal attack in London's Woolwich neighborhood has been identified by the U.K. Ministry of Defense as Drummer Lee Rigby, Sky News reports.
According to the outlet, the 25-year-old from Manchester was part of the 2nd Batallion the Royal Regiment of Fusiliers. He is leaving behind a 2-year-old son, Jack.
In a profile released on Thursday, the British Ministry of Defense noted that Rigby or 'Riggers' was born in July 1987 and had joined the army in 2006.
Rigby served in Cyprus, Germany and Afghanistan's Helmand province and had taken up a recruiting post in London in 2011.

Accused Fort Hood Shooter Paid $278,000 While Awaiting Trial

Accused Fort Hood Shooter Paid $278,000 While Awaiting Trial:

Accused Fort Hood shooter Maj. Nidal Hasan is receiving full pay while he awaits trail, but some of the shooting victims struggle to pay their bills because the Army will not classify the attack as terrorism.

Hasan has received $278,000 in pay since the Nov. 5, 2009 incident that killed 13 and wounded 32 on the Texas Army base, NBC5 in Dallas/Fort Worth reports. The station obtained the data under the Freedom of Information Act.

The Army said the Military Code of Justice prevents it from suspending Hasan's pay unless he is convicted.

If Hasan, a psychiatrist, had been a civilian Defense Department employee his pay could have been suspended after seven days, NBC5 reports.

While Hasan continues drawing his salary, many of the wounded still face medical bills they have trouble paying. Soldiers wounded in combat get pay and medical benefits, but the Fort Hood shooting has been labeled "workplace violence" by the Army rather than a "terrorist attack."

Well, isn't that Special?

I'm all for defending the rights of our brave men in uniform; but this goes beyond the pale of "common sense legislation".

(Oh .. sorry; I'm confusing 2nd Amendment rights with the Federal Government's determination to defend the rights of self-confessed terrorists, as opposed to providing defense of our Military members.)

In case you don't remember, Military personnel on CONUS bases are not permitted to have access to firearms on military bases.  That's how Hasan managed to kill and injure so many warriors.  He broke the law by carrying a weapon; his fellow soldiers observed the law, and they died because they were denied the right to defend themselves.

How is it reasonable to declare military bases a "Gun Free Zone"?  Easy ... it's the Golden Rule.

Those who have the gold, get to make the rules.

Note that this restriction is not uncommon.  In Viet Nam, when grunts came back to their Division Base Camp for a "Stand Down" after walking in danger through the jungles for a week or two .. they were invariably dis-armed.  They were required to turn in all weapons, which were locked in CONEX containers until they armed themselves moments before they began their next mission.

I know; I was a platoon sgt in Vietnam, and it didn't make much sense to me then, except that we (the "grunts") were expected to get drunk and 'let off a little steam'.   I note in passing that none of the military personnel at Fort Hood were drunk when they were busily being murdered by the evil Major Hasan.

So now, Hasan is being paid for being a traitor to his nation, and his victims ... the innocent unarmed soldiers he killed and wounded?

Sorry, Folks.  You're on your own.  Can't defend  yourself against your erstwhile comrades? 

Tough Shit; Man up!

Can't pay your bills while you recuperate from wounds you received on active duty?

Tough Shit; Man Up!

______________________


In the 1932 "Bonus Army Strike",  veterans of WWI gathered at a park in Washington D.C. to demand their bonuses due them from their combat experience.  The Federal Government gathered mounted Calvary troops (including fledgling officers George S. Patton and Dwight David Eisenhower) to drive out the veterans, existing in tents in a D.C. park.  The results of that rout was that two veterans were shot, and later died of their wounds.

This was, at the time, the Federal Government's response to soldiers' demand that they be compensated for their service to their country.   Combat pay?  Never Happen.

Now, today, this same government (different president, same arrogant attitude) refuses to compensate American Soldiers for injuries received while on active duty.  Well, they were in uniform, on the grounds of a domestic Army base, and being paid for their time .. although, admittedly, they weren't being "awarded" Combat Pay at their current station.

Nobody expected Fort Hood to become a combat zone .. perhaps because the troops expected their government to protect them in lieu of providing the means to protect themselves?

Oh, hell.  You can do the rest of the argument in your sleep.  American troops were on-station, on-duty, and forbidden to protect themselves.  Their Commander-In-Chief refuses to intervene to insure that wounded veterans are not compensated for their wounds?

Only a Commander who has no respect for the soldier he leads would fail to insure that they are not supported in their hour of great need.

Did you vote for Obama?  Are you satisfied with his "war record:"?

I didn't, and I am not.  You can expect his lackeys, the MSM, to make as small an issue of this egregious failure to assume responsibility as Commander in Chief as possible.

Your President doesn't respect the men and women who are willing to lay down their lives for their country.

But he expects the respect which they ... not he .. has earned.  Because, after all, he IS "The President".

He has no respect for his office,or for his responsibilities.  As a veteran, I wonder why he continues to be allowed the respect of his high office.

Another Fishing Scam

Hello,

I'm writing this with great grievance, My family and I came down here to Manila, Philippines on a short vacation to visit  resort. unfortunately we were mugged at the park of the hotel where we stayed,all cash and  credit card including cell phone were stolen away but luckily for us we still have our passports with us. My credit card can't be charged by the hotel as I already reported it as a stolen card and the card company had  canceled it, so I can only get a new one when we make it back home safely.

   We’ve been to the Embassy and the Police here but they’re not helping issues at all and our return flight leaves soonest but we’re having problems settling the hotel bills and the hotel manager  won’t let us leave until we settle the bills.Now am freaked out, I will really need your financial assistance I promise to pay back as soon as we get back. Please let me know what you can do so i can proceed to give you all the details on how to get the funds to me here.

Thanks.

xxx

This is the context of another email I have received, obviously an attempt to either get me to send case to a bogus address (yet to be named), or to offer personal information.

Please, don't respond to these kind of emails.  In this case, there are certain details which are not consistent with my friend's personal life.   It's easy for me to ignore this ... we all want to help our friends and family when they are trouble; these people rely on our humanity to bilk us out of billions of dollars a year.

I just want you to be aware that the email address from which you receive similar emails may be valid (as this was), but the person sending the email is not your friend, not your family.

If you receive a similar email, be very careful about how you respond.  Above all, do not reveal personal information which may lead to you being robbed.  You're not helping anyone, other than the people who are too greedy to appreciate how they victimize nice people.

English Cops Carry Guns into the neighborhood, because ....

The Smallest Minority:

Where they now have some cops foot-patrolling carrying honest-to-jeebus assault rifles: Playground gun law: 

In a grim portrait of modern Britain, rifle-toting police mix with children on estate plagued by gang shootings / Bedfordshire town suffers nine shootings in four month crime wave 

Police say armed patrols in place for 'foreseeable future' to deter violence / Officers with guns and dogs will also be increasing searches to find weapons / With a heavily-armed policeman guarding the playground, assault rifle at the ready, it could be the scene of a terror alert. /  In fact, this is a routine patrol just yards from a suburban primary school. 

The show of force is designed to calm residents of an estate plagued by gang shootings. In the past four months there have been nine gun-related incidents in Luton linked to the Marsh Farm and Lewsey Farm estates. In the latest, a 16-year-old boy was shot in the back early on Saturday morning. He may never walk again. The violence has left law-abiding families so terrified they welcome the patrols, even if they risk scaring children.

Oh dear, this sounds terribly familiar somehow.  Where have I heard it before?

hmmm  could it be that people in America have been saying for YEARS that ... when you guns are illegal, only criminals will have guns?

As usual, Kevin Baker is on the cusp of "What Crap Is Happening Now", and he has presented more content in less words than a team of monkeys could produce in a year of random keyboard-pounding ...... which sounds a lot like Obama's "ObamaCare" bill.

Just our luck; in America, when societal breakdown becomes a fact of life Our President is right there with a sledge hammer to pound his constituency into the Mud and the Blood and the Beer.

Fortunately, we have Great Britain to serve as a horrid example of what we can expect if "The Great One" is allowed to have his way with us.  (Can you say "bend over and smile", children?  I thought you could.)

In the meantime, it seems as if my great purpose in life is to take the example which the estimable Mr. Baker profers via hard work and dedicated research .... and push our collective faces into it until we make soap bubbles in the shit.

Yes, it's a nasty job; but somebody had to do it. And nothing says loving like saying "I Told You So".

What are YOU going to do about it?
____________________________________________

BTW .. after I completed this (atypically  SHORT blog article) I noticed that I had attached the following laels:

• Second Amendment
• Gun Control
• Brits
• Terrorism
• Bad Things

Upon reflection, this all seems terribly ... redundant.  Once you've assigned 'almost' any two of the five categories, the rest follow logically.

Which doesn't say much good for "The Brits", does it?

Notice that I have, in a momentarily admirable show of restraint, I DID manage to avoiding the temptation to add "Obama" to the list of categories.  (I'm just a little proud of this.)  A moment of silence, please, in memory of the LAST time when I resist the quite understandable urge to automatically add "OBAMA" to almost anything which includes any of the other five categories.

After all, he IS The President!  He has shown little restraint when yielding to the temptation to point this out upon the slightest provocation .. as if we could forget!

Reunion

I'm going to.. actually, I just returned from the first event of ,,my last High School Reunion.

Fifty years. FIFTY!

I remember when my mother was planning to attend her 50 year High School Reunion. I thought: "Why? They're all so old, they probably don't ever remember anybody!"

That was several decades ago. Today, I have a somewhat different perspective.

I'm old.

Damn! That's a hard one to get past.

I can do this.  I was a little excited,  a little dubious.  And  a lot apprehensive.  I was, in high-school, not a popular boy.  Got good grades, scored high in my Scholastic Achievement Tests.  (They now call them "SAT" and I suspect they're a lot different.)   But I've always been lazy, and I sure was in high school.

Reunions are a SOCIAL event, and SATs don't do a good job of measuring that.  I was so skinny that my friends use to call me "Zipper".  As in:  "Hey, Zipper!  You're standing sideways to the sun; turn around so I can see you!"  I was never popular with the girls, even though I liked them just fine.

The last time I went to a high school reunion, many of my contemporaries were fat;  I wasn't.  Not revenge, but it was sweet when the ex-cheerleaders came up to ask me how many miles I ran a day.  Yes, I did run regularly, but my body type was protecting me from criticism, not my work-out regimine.

I weighed 170# then; now I weigh over 200#.  Life happens, as well as retirement, age, change in life style.  Some of us, it just takes longer to catch up with us.

Not that I'm worried any more about what people think about me.  You've been reading this blog before?  You may have noticed that I Have An Opinion.  It's a double-bladed sword, Opinion.  When my own matters more than others, does it become "An Issue"?

I don't think so, I'm no longer concerned if my opinion doesn't agree with that of others; but I've had a lot of decades to evaluate myself based on experience ... a factor which was sorely lacking in high school.

Today, I'm not really worried about economic level, body fat index, or other "image" issues.

What I'm worried about is my classmates.

One of whom (JO)  has been doing a terrific job keeping track of her classmates.  She sent group notices (it's something of an "E-List") when something significant happens to a classmate, or their family.  This has been going on for about the past five years, so we kind of are still getting caught up.  She posted a list of classmates who have died .. I was appalled at the decimation of our class!  In the past six months, there have been another half dozen fatalities, mostly due to debilitating disease (heart disease, cancer .. you know the litany of "old people" diseases.  Mostly, the friends and acquaintances who are dying now are the victims of chronic illness.    Very few die due to accident, or violence.  Are we becoming more sedentary, more cautious in our lifestyle?  Or are we just becoming more mundane?

I guess the thing which pulls me back to my high-school classmates is, more than anything, curiosity.  We have been exchanging emails via the E-List for a couple of years.  One of the more creative suggestions was that we contribute a thumb-nail digest of our life . That happened a couple of years ago, and when I posted my bio I was surprised at the way my life had turned.

War, devastating illnesses lost of family and close friends and other loved ones.  Marriage, divorce, jobs won and lost, you name it.  My high school class is a window into the American Experience.

People who wouldn't talk to me in school, are now so mature that our status differences (then) have nothing to do  with today.  Old girl friends, people who were leaders and are now "just people" .. time is the great leveler.   Everybody knew who we were "then"; today, we have no idea, except .. we are survivors.

I have to say, I have a lot more respect for the people we are NOW, than I did when we were "THEN".   Myself included.  The things which were important, seem to be "not so much" now.

Physical Attraction (we're all a lot older, perhaps wiser?)  Who we associate with.  What we do?  

 Our priorities are different.  We're no longer concerned so much about status, as we are about family.  Actually, even being able to participate in this artificial group activity confers an amount of status.   To my great surprise, everyone who met everyone (even though we usually had to consult our name tags to be sure who w e are/were) were delighted to see each other again!  Funny ... the characteristics we demonstrated in high school were a reasonable indicator of who we are today.  Maybe we can talk about "The Formative Years" with a little more authority now, but we are far to polite to say so.

No, that's not quite it.  Subject to future reconsideration, I'm going to go out on a limb and say that --- we were freakin' KIDS then!  Now we still feel like kids, but everyone i met tonite had obviously Learned Something.


Yesterday and Today: two different things!
For the first few reunions, it was all about what college we attended.  Then it was .. what job we were doing, and how much money we earned.  Then we quit bragging about jobs, and money, and the cars we drove.  We started bragging about our kids.  That's when I quit going to reunions, because my children were more important to me than my friends ... my "so-called" friends.

No, I'm understating it.  Simple longevity counts more than we would ever have expected, "THEN".

Interestingly, of the people I use to hang out with in high-school, very few of them have 'publicly' suggested that they will be attending the reunion.  But the information I have is based on this select set of people who have made their email address known, so maybe it's meaningless data.

That's why I was looking forward to the reunion.  I want to see who shows up.  My college roomie .. yeah, I thought he'd be there.  He wasn't tonite  One of my other roomies didn't attend the same school.  One of them was married to a classmate .. he's dead now.

Yesterday I went out to the garage and pulled the box with my high-school and college yearbooks.  I don't have them all, but I wanted to put the names together with the faces.  Curiously, I didn't open a single yearbook;  I just packed them into a cardboard box from a liquor store and set it aside to take with me.  In case anyone is interested in matching faces "THEN" with faces now.   When I packed my car this morning, I didn't put that box in there.  It's not really about "THEN".

It's probably not important to me who the were "THEN".  I'm more interested in who they are "NOW".  It's not that I didn't like them, in high school.  It's that .. I suspect we are not the same people.  Photos are only interesting in retrospect;  they don't even begin to meter "potential".

There are a scant half-dozen people I'm really anxious to meet again (for the first time).  The rest are total strangers who shared only a small number of important experiences.  I met most of them tonite, and I was absolutely delighted to find them warm and welcoming. Some of them even actually knew me!  Well, not until they read the name tag.  In these events, it's a disadvantage to be TALL:  Short People can read the names without being obvious about it;  they don't have to stoop to identify.

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


Oh, well.    This is pretty much a trip down memory lane, so far.  I'm looking forward to going back.  (Even though according to Thomas Wolfe we "can never go home" .. because home isn't there, any more.)

TOMORROW, the first event is a mile walk down main street, followed by a general meeting at "The Rainbow" (apparently a cafe ... I haven't spent an hour in this town for the past 20 years and it has changed considerably!).  Most of the people at the First-Night Get-Together ( I certainly didn't get my $15 worth of wine .. but it wasn't what I was there for) generally agreed, in whispered private conversations, that "Eight AM and I've got to walk for a mile down Main Street?  No way!  I'll see you for breakfast."

Damn!  

They're not only older , but they're smarter too!

Suicide

Sheriff: Ex-NASCAR driver Dick Trickle dead at 71 | Comcast:

CONCORD, N.C. (AP) — There is that lasting image of Dick Trickle in the Winston 500 lighting up a cigarette while driving his stock car with his knees during a caution lap. He places the cigarette through a hole he carved in his helmet for a quick toke and exhales. The green flag hits and out the window goes the cigarette butt and back to racing goes Trickle. ``Dick always had a cigarette lighter in his car,'' said fellow NASCAR driver Geoff Bodine. 

Trickle was a unique driver with a unique name who found cult-like status before his death Thursday. 

Trickle, whose larger-than-life personality and penchant for fun won him legions of fans despite a lack of success beyond the nation's small tracks, died of an apparent self-inflicted gunshot wound, authorities said. He was 71. 

The Lincoln County Sheriff's Office said authorities received a call believed to be from Trickle, who said ``there would be a dead body and it would be his.'' Authorities tried to call the number back, but no one answered. 

Trickle's body was found near his pickup truck at Forest Lawn Cemetery in Boger City, N.C., about 40 miles northwest of Charlotte. Sheriff's Lieutenant Tim Johnson said foul play was not suspected.

I've said it before and I'll say it again:  I hate suicides!

Not just the act: the people who commit it.

Suicide is the most selfish, uncaring act one person can commit.  It goes directly against the people who care about the person.  In a way, it's worst than rape, treason, murder --- because the suicide cannot be punished more than he punishes himself .. and his victims.

Suicide. "Self Murder", to be precise, supposes that the suicide is the only victim.  That's not true.  Anyone who cared, even tangentially,  is affected.  I've known people who killed themselves, and I've see the effect on family and friends, and friends of family, and families of friends ... oh, it's too much like the "six degrees of separation" to define.

It's complicated.

I do understand that sometimes a suicide is a person who has learned that they have contracted an inoperable disease leading to a painful and ignominious end.  I get that.  And I also know what it's like to watch a loved one die slowly; that person, at the end, has nothing left at all, not even dignity.

Nothing, except integrity.

The family understands, the family eventually accepts, and the family has this last slender thread to help them eventually accept:  "He went down fighting, right to the end."  Or "... he never gave up."   Or "... anyone can live, anyone can die when it's easy; he showed us what courage is all about".

I had an uncle, the meanest man in the world, who never gave a damn for anyone else.  He was a bully, a brute, an abusive husband and father.  A drunkard, a liar, and a cheat.  He would say anything to anyone, and laugh loudest when his crude remarks hurt his victim the most.

But when he was diagnosed with Cancer, he went through the thirty months without a complain.  No, he was not cheerful; he was no less abusive, or unkind, or cruel.  But he never whined. He could have ended his life easily, but he refused to take the "easy out".

I won't call him a man, but I will give him credit for having the backbone to die as he lived; he fought often, he didn't win all or even most of his fights, but he never gave up.

I watched my father die.  I watched my lover die.  Often confused, usually in pain, and it hurt like hell when they died.  We all, family and friends, breathed a private sigh when they finally died.  Nobody said anything of the sort, but we knew that it was a blessing that they didn't have to suffer any more.

And we had respect for them. Our love for them remains untarnished by any last minute of ignominy.

You  can live a life of perfect harmony, and blow it in the last second.

I'm no a Catholic, and I do not agree with many of the tenets of that religion.  But I understand that the Catholic church does not countenance suicide, to the point that they will not allow a suicide to be buried on sacred ground.  I think I understand that. (Am I wrong?  Has the Catholic church changed its policy?  If so, I think it was/would have been a wrong move.  Suicide is Murder.)

There's  also another version of  "suicide".   When, for example, a soldier gives up his life to save his companions.  (I said it was complicated!)  Selfless actions may be 'suicidal', but noble at the same time.   We all recognize this, and know the difference.

One is noble, one is craven.  Even a suicidal person knows the difference.  The difference is in caring more for others than for oneself.

Animals don't suicide; they fight for life unto the very end   Suicides are less than animals.

Lotto Mania in "The State of Fruits and Nuts"

California fuels $550 million Powerball jackpot | General Headlines | Comcast:

SAN DIEGO (AP) — The numbers sum up the frenzy that has taken over the Golden State since it became the newest in the nation to join the madness over Powerball, which saw its jackpot soar Thursday to $550 million.

California has sold $83 million worth of Powerball tickets since it started selling them in April and overall has accounted for 11 percent of the game's sales in the country, fueling such fast-growing mega-jackpots like the latest one that has the potential to be a record-breaker.

The state expects to generate well above the originally estimated $50 million for public education, California lottery director Robert O'Neill told The Associated Press.

 There are only two things one can say about this:

1. This is what happens when too many people consider the State Lottery as "My Pension Play";
2. Note the odds of winning are approximately the same if you don't play.

... and that's all I have need to say about it.

It's an I-Pad World. Not!

The Paperless Future - "Emma":

A TV spot from France takes up the debate between 'all digital' and the die-hard defenders of paper.




"The job isn't over until the paper work's done."

(Thanks, & a hat-top to The G-Man)

Why I cancelled my subscription to Time Magazine 25 years ago

A Time for Impassioned Politics - TIME:

    (By Joe Klein Monday, May 13, 2013 ... I know, it's now Saturday, May 11, 2013, but that's the dateline.  Chalk it up to the fact that Time can't even tell the truth about the date, let alone about the TIME)

During the chaotic week of the Boston bomb attacks, Barack Obama finally did something a lot of people had been waiting for: He got angry. In public. In the Rose Garden. It happened after the Senate had shamefully failed to pass a bill, favored by the overwhelming majority of Americans, requiring background checks for gun purchasers. "The gun lobby and its allies willfully lied about the bill," he said. "They claimed that it would create some sort of Big Brother gun registry even though the bill did the opposite ... Those lies upset an intense minority of gun owners, and that in turn intimidated a lot of Senators." 

Assorted Republicans were put off by Obama's passion. The conservative columnist Charles Krauthammer falsely claimed that the President had falsely claimed that the background-checks bill would have prevented the Newtown massacre. Krauthammer also said that helping the victims' families lobby for the law was "emotional blackmail." The conservative pundit and former Bush functionary Pete Wehner--who occasionally professes a desire for moderation but just can't help himself when it comes to the President--called Obama's behavior "demagoguery" and described it as a "Lear-like" rage.

 [emphasis added]

 THERE WAS A TIME when I subscribe to both TIME and NEWSWEEK magazines.  I was young, and ignorant/naive, and living in an apartment house in Oakland, California.  (Thank goodness the "Three Strikes Law" doesn't apply to non-felons!)  Besides, my neighbors stole my magazines from the mailbox so frequently, I didn't get to read most of the magazines I had paid for.

Eventually, though, even the highly filtered contend I DID read got through to me.  I realized that the things they were saying in their articles were not "factual reporting" but "emotional reporting".  In a word every political article was slanted ... slanted in a way which was directly opposite of my own personal convictions.

Today, I don't even have my television hooked up to cable, and I get the same or more 'content' from the Internet .. as my access to this article demonstrates.

There's a saying that "no cops are Democrats"; and I suspect the same is true of Military, both active and past-service.  This article is a sterling example why those of us who have put our lives on the line for our community, or for our nation, have rejected the Liberal/Progressive/Democratic party line.

Looking back at the article (scroll back, or check the link), you'll notice that I've high-lighted some of the comments in the original article in red.

Okay, here's the point:

I don't have an issue about the President getting angry, or about TIME applauding his lack of perspective.

Okay, maybe I do, but I get angry all the time and I seem to always be able to justify it, at least in my own mind.  I'm not the President of the greatest nation in the free world, though, so maybe I'm a little bit peeved that the President can't control his own emotions, and couch his expressions in a more civilized manner than a guy in a sloppy home-office in Oregon.

I find it disconcerting that our political leader cannot say that he's unhappy that he hasn't universal approval from his subjects the citizen of his nation without accusing them of lying.

Going back to the original quote, when a media source which is internationally recognized for its integrity uses such phrases as ".... the Senate had shamefully failed to pass a bill   ...", that's a sure sign that this media source has renounced its claim not only to impartial reporting, but to integrity itself.

And when the President claims publicly that some of the media constituents " ... willfully lied ... ", that goes beyond the gentile bounds of public discourse.

The TIMES article goes on to throw the phrase "Shamefully" at least once more.  Where's the Civility?  Where's the Impartiality?  Where's the journalistic integrity?

Gone, in sixty seconds,  like a 1971 Mustang Fastback.

I'm not surprised that TIME magazine could throw its integrity under the bus ... and not even all that surprised that the President would do the same thing.   I'm just really disappointed.

Ike wouldn't have done that.  Nor would even Nixen or Carter.  Or Reagan.  Okay, maybe Clinton; maybe even Ford .. we will never know ... but not Truman or ...

Get the picture?  It's not PRESIDENTIAL!  It's Presidential.

I don't like it when I have to evince respect for a President who seemingly makes every effort to undermine my respect for the office.  I've already given up respect for the man, but I'm loath to give up respect for The Office.

What is going on, when I think about meeting the leader of our nation, and I'm appalled by the prospect that I might actually be expected to shake his hand .. and smile?  There was a time when I thought it would be the greatest honor of my life.

I've given up my dream of going to our nation's capital, to visit The Wall and honor my fallen comrades.  The odds are slim, but still possible, that I might actually meet the President.

It's no longer a dream;

It's a nightmare.

I'm sorry for the demagoguery, but I  just can't help (myself) when it comes to the President.


(Thanx to TIME MAGAZINE for the quote.)

Moving Target, controlled remotely

Shooting Wire:

The Target Is Moving (T.I.M.™) line of electronic target systems features a compact, portable target base which features an interlocking cardboard target. The T.I.M. system offers several operating modes with adjustable speeds and can operate in a 360 degree fashion. With the optional remote control users can control a single target or multitude of targets wirelessly. The system runs for hours on rechargeable AA batteries for ease of use and maximum uptime. Because the target surfaces are cardboard the system is safe to operate at indoor ranges as well as outdoor. T.I.M. can also be deployed in the classroom as a dry fire training or instruction tool.

The T.I.M. target looks good for an indoor training aid.  The target system comes with light-weight cardboard targets on a LOOOOOOOONG arm.  I noticed that in their demonstration video  they have an IPSC "Metric" target propped up in the background.  This suggests that the system WILL handle the bulk and weight of the large cardboard target ... but even though it looks like a fun addition to the variety of shooting challenges presented in IPSC matches, I'm unconvinced that such a small unit can be useful in a competitive environment.

Picture sixty or more competitors running through the stage in a few hours in a hot Summer day.  Worse, during rainy weather (and we have enough of them here) will it function even when wet?

I'm ... not sure.  So I answered their "Contact Us" website page and asked for more information on these and other questions.

At $500 per unit (including remote controller), they're going to have to prove that they're reliable AND durable before any club is going to risk the expense ... even though they do have a free "loaner' program for certified instructors.

My best guess?

The mechanism looks pretty good for indoor training ... but who (other than, perhaps, LEO trainers) is going to put up that kind of money for a pretty toy?

Despite my pessimism, it may be that the manufacturers could use this question to advance development of something that IS applicable to competition.

The first thing is .. we build a very strong shield so I can't hit the motor!

Here's the video:

Gun Crime is DOWN? Who knew?

Have you seen this yet?  Posted TODAY (May 7, 2013), from Allahpundit @ HOT AIR:

 Two new studies: Gun crime has dropped dramatically over last 20 years — and most Americans have no idea � Hot Air: Despite national attention to the issue of firearm violence, most Americans are unaware that gun crime is lower today than it was two decades ago. According to a new Pew Research Center survey, today 56% of Americans believe gun crime is higher than 20 years ago and only 12% think it is lower.

 The article goes on to comment:

And yet, per Pew, just 12 percent of the public has any clue about the dramatic decline in gun crime. On the contrary, a clear majority thinks it’s gone up — despite dutiful news reports whenever the FBI releases its crime data, despite endless (and justified) coverage of the “broken windows” theory and NYC’s celebrated turnaround in crime under Giuliani and Bill Bratton

We talked here about the Broken Windows theory, exactly three months ago today; that was mainly in reference to the slaughter of innocents in Chicago.  You and I are obviously not the only ones who are aware of the theory, and how it has been supported by good results upon its application my municipal authorities.

It's not that there aren't answers to Gun Violence; it's just some people would rather compromise our civil and constitutional rights, than to do something that has been shown to work?

Why is this?  Other than that our "leadership" is arrogant and arbitrary?

The answer is that it's a lot easier to pass more laws than it is to do an honest day's work, for some people.

When all you have is a hammer, every problem looks like a nail.

Is your life better now than it was in 2008?

Dillon Precision: Reloaders, Reloading Equipment, Bullet Reloading, Bullet Reloaders


We keep hearing that the demand for firearms, ammunition, reloading supplies is due to 'normal' market pressure.

(click on the image to view it full size)

I've never seen anything like this on Dillon's website before, not even in 2008, when Obama was first elected.

Not that it matters much, since we can't get brass, powder, primer or bullets lately ....

An "APP" to help you keep from bumping into stuff while texting

Type n Walk: Type n Walk displays a transparent viewport of what's directly in front of you. This combined with your peripheral vision is just enough visual information to help you avoid obstacles -- like walking face-first into a tree! Despite the name, Type n Walk is useful while you're sitting or standing too. Use it anytime you would like to keep an eye on your surroundings while you type.

 I understand, from something that I heard on the Radio today, that there is an "app": which will help ou recognize that you are texting while walking, and will keep you from bumping into "things" during that process.

I didn't believe it .. it sounds far too bizarre to be true.

Just goes to show that I don't really understand this year's definition of "perfectly understandable" activities.

It's real.

I'm as "old school" as I can get, and still own a cell phone.  This is as .. I don't know.  Unreal?  Useless? Silly?  as can be.  But it's real, it's out there, and somebody expects to make a ton of money from it.

I spent decades working on a university campus.  I admit that there are people who are so lost in own private world (especially while they are texting) that they lose all contact with reality.

I suppose that this "App"  (WTF is that?) could provide good value for enough of the population that they would subscribe to it.

For myself?\

I think that any civilization (.. "community" .. "group of people who are so entirely out-of-touch with the "Situational Awareness")  which NEEDS this, and thinks it's worth buying ... are the "ELOI"  of our times.

   They are so out-of-touch with reality that they serve no higher purpose than to be a food source for the Morlocks!

Am I the only one who thinks that "Facebook Is The Devil"?

So ... does this make this app the Devil Incarnate?

All I know is that I don't trust it.  No .. not "not trust it to keeping my nose from bumping the Lamp Post", but " not trust it because it belittles the State Of Man".

Ring Ring: Anyone There?

I woke up this morning at oh-dark-thirty with the most shrill ringing in my ears .... I lay in my bed thinking "Geeze, I never thought Tintinitis could be this bad!"   Finally I got up, thinking that maybe it was a blood pressure issue, or something.   One thing I knew for sure after a few minutes, it couldn't get much worse.

But it did.  I walked out of the bedroom heading for the Dark at the top of the Stairs and it got louder.
It sounded electronic, so I headed for the spare bedroom (a.k.a. "The Hell Room) where my desktop computer is stored.  It got louder, but the computer was in sleep mode.  I had already figured out that the cause was external, nothing to do with me.   The sound was coming from the floor, to the left of the roll-top desk.  There was a red light flashing in the dark ... I reached down and pushed a button: the sound stopped and the red light changed to green. 

Pushed the button again: "SHRILLLLLLLLL!"

So I turned on the lights.  The UPS (Uninterrupted Power Supply) unit, with it's power button, warning light, and label were there.   The label said: "Red Light: Replace Battery".

Turned the light off, unplugged everything and plugged the lines into the wall socket, and went back to bed.

Since then, I pulled the battery out of the UPS.  It's like a motorcycle batter, weighs about 3 pounds, and a liquid electrolyte battery.  Non-rechargeable, I found, when I looked up the literature.

The manufacture offers a replacement battery for $40 on their website.  Shipped from the Phillipines.

Bought a domestic replacement from Amazon for $20, including shipping.   Problem solved, it'll be here by the end of the week.

After all the problems I've had in the last six weeks (gun, computer, car) it's a relief to have something fixed so easily.  Well, I still haven't actually done the replacement but it looks simple enough, with just two leads which are pull-off/push on.   On the other hand, that's what I thought when I tried to fix my toilet 20 years ago ...

Oh, BTW ... my car?  I hadn't heard from the dealership where I had it towed for repair last Thursday.  They said "We couldn't find a problem.  We got into the car and it started right up!  Drove it around to warm it up, and every time it started right away."

They have had it for two full days and hadn't bothered to notify me.


So I explained that it happens intermittently (I know, the worst kind of problem to track down.)

"This only happens to me under specific circumstances. (I said.)  I'm on the freeway for a while, then I pull off at an exit into urban traffic.  I try to make a sharp turn at low speed ... like, a u-turn, or parallel parking ... and it dies.  At first it would restart in a few minutes, but this time it wouldn't start after a 40 minute wait.  I want it FIXED, even if it seems to run okay NOW."

They said they would try that.

I'm still waiting.

Damned Old Ford!

Buy View - DHS Ammunition Buy

Using a link provided by the source for a previous article ( "Why can't I find ammo in the store?"), I found myself accessing (perfectly legally) a purchase order  "FEDBID"  (offer to buy?) for "Training Ammo" from the Department of Homeland Security.

I say this is "training ammo" because of the line description,

... and because of the specified buyer:

Buyer : DHS Federal Law Enforcement Training Center 

Here are the salient items:

Buy View:
Line Item(s) Item No Description Qty
 _________________________________________________________________
Unit 001 
 Commercial Leaded Training Ammo (CLTA)
Pistol Cartridge .40 caliber 165 Grain, jacketed Hollow point(Jhp)
p/n P40HSTS3G OR EQUAL. BRASS CASING
100,000 ROUNDS PRICE PER 1000 ROUNDS WILL INCLUDE DELIVERY.
 _________________________________________________________________
Unit 002
100 MX 002 Commercial Leaded Training Ammo (CLTA)
9MM 115 GRAIN JACKETED HOLLOW POINT P/N 9BP-115 GRAIN JHP OR EQUAL
BRASS CASING
100,000 ROUNDS PRICE PER 1000 ROUNDS WILL INCLUDE DELIVERY.
 _________________________________________________________________
Unit 003
100 MX 003 Commercial Leaded Training Ammo (CLTA) PISTOL CARTIDGE (sic) 9MM BALL 124 GRAIN P/N AE9AP OR EQUAL BRASS CASING 40,000 ROUNDS PRICE PER 1000 ROUNDS WILL INCLUDE DELIVEY (sic)
_________________________________________________________________

(Sorry for the awkward formatting ... I couldn't reliably post a screen-shot of the offer in legible size within the narrow format of this website.)


So .. the Department of Homeland Security is seeking to buy, in lots of (apparently .. I could be wrong) 100,000 rounds, the following:

1. .40 S&W ammo, 165 gr JHP
2. 9mm ammo, 115 gr JHP
3. 9mm ammo, 124 gr ball

Note that these requisites are specifically described as TRAINING AMMO.

Note also that they are buying 100,000 rounds each of the .40 S&W165 gr JHP and 9mm 115gr JHP, but only 40,000 rounds of the 9mm 124gr BALL.  And even that line-item seems to have been added almost casually.

Now, even a cranky old curmudgeon like me knows that JHP is more expensive than BALL ammunition.  Yet, the smallest order is for the cheaper BALL Training Ammo (40k rounds), and the other two line-items are for training ammo in JHP in 100k quantities.  Given the typo in the description of that line-item, it seems to have been added hurriedly and perhaps almost as an afterthought.  And item 003 specifies "Pistol Cartridge"; are items 001 and 002 not intended for use in pistols?  If not .. what?  An MP5?

("EVIL ASSAULT WEAPON ALERT!")


Who buys JHP for "training"?

And why do each of the two line-items specify quantities 2-1/2 times the amount of BALL ammo?

I'm thinking, the BALL ammo is legitimately for training, and will be expended in that matter.

But the hollow-point ... which, by the way, is  NOT forbidden in War by the Geneva Convention (of 1949:  is referenced in Article 23 of the Hague Convention:

Article 23

Besides the prohibitions provided by special Conventions, it is especially prohibited:--

• To employ poison or poisoned arms;

• To kill or wound treacherously individuals belonging to the hostile nation or army;

• To kill or wound an enemy who, having laid down arms, or having no longer means of defence, has surrendered at discretion;

• To declare that no quarter will be given;

• To employ arms, projectiles, or material of a nature to cause superfluous injury;

• To make improper use of a flag of truce, the national flag, or military ensigns and the enemy's uniform, as well as the distinctive badges of the Geneva Convention;

• To destroy or seize the enemy's property, unless such destruction or seizure be imperatively demanded by the necessities of war

 These conventions are typically understood to be legal 'rules of war' by all civilized.

 In fact, this is the document which requires enemy soldiers to  be identifiable as soldiers, to fight under a flag and at the behest of a recognized legal authority (a nation), and to carry arms openly.  This is why the United States treats terrorists as .. well, not soldiers and therefore not eligible for honorable treatment as a soldier.

Article 1
The laws, rights, and duties of war apply not only to armies, but also to militia and volunteer corps, fulfilling the following conditions:
To be commanded by a person responsible for his subordinates;
To have a fixed distinctive emblem recognizable at a distance;
To carry arms openly; and
To conduct their operations in accordance with the laws and customs of war.
In countries where militia or volunteer corps constitute the army, or form part of it, they are included under the denomination "army."

 (Sorry ... that's another digression, isn't it?)

The question remains, that if the United Stated policy is to abide by the Hague Convention, why are they purchasing huge quantities of Hollow Point Bullets?  DHS has said that they are buying huge lots of ammunition to save money, but buying the more expensive bullet (for "training") would not be expected to save money; rather, it is  a conspicuous extra expense.  There is no advantage in either cost-effective training, reliability of function, or accuracy when using JHP rather than BALL ammo for "training".

However, JHP bullets are much more effective than BALL ammo for combat.  They provide a greatly enlarged wound cavity, and therefore tend to cause more serious injuries.

Who is DHS going to shoot with hollow-point bullets?  Paper targets?  They make the same size hole.
Why do they need five times as much more JHP ammunition than BALL ammunition for "Training"?

Just asking .....

OBAMA APPEARING PISSED OVER GUN CONTROL FAIL

OBAMA APPEARING PISSED OVER GUN CONTROL FAIL - YouTube:
Published on Apr 17, 2013 http://thecount.com

OBAMA SAID, "All in all a shameful day for congress.." hummm... REALLY? Not what my friends are saying..

This is a bit dated, but I haven't seen the clip (below) before today.  I found a shorter version, but it's just too short.  It's the preamble before he gets to the main points ... the first couple of minutes ... where he shows his petulance.

I'm wondering, where's the civility?   You DO remember how the "progressives" blamed gun violence on conservative incivility, don't you?  After Gabby Gifford was shot in Arizona?    Now Obama is calling pro-second amendment advocates "liars", saying that they lied about the Obama Gun Control Bill.  Actually, in this video He shows Himself to be a consummate liar, as He misrepresents the provisions of the bill.

Is it any wonder He had trouble passing legislation?  We've come to know Him far too well over the past four-and-a-half years;  we don't trust Himto be open with us when He discusses the content and the purpose of His bills.   Even if it's less than a thousand pages long, we know the there are hidden agendas there;  there always are.

The thing is ... well, actually there are two things

(1) He made promises (such as giving Congress time to study bills before voting) which He clearly had no intention of keeping.

(2) You can tell He's a Democrat just like Al Gore; 
                      a Sore Loser.







 I'm not going to count the number of times He misrepresented the bill, nor the times He sounded like a petulant child because he didn't have His way..

but I AM going to comment on poor old Unhappy Joe, in the background of this video.

Does he remind you of any one?   Could it be ......  WALTER?