Gunpowder Treason

11.05

2010-11-05T08:53:00.001-04:00

Can you hear the cannons, Nancy?

OFFICER CHARGED WITH BEATING CITIZEN

2010-04-17T13:53:00.007-04:00

After the altercation, Officer James Mandarino charged the motorist with DUI and Resisting Arrest (the charges were later dropped.) Imagine how this case would have ended up if the patrol car had not been recording video.

2ND AMENDMENT : EXTREME

2010-02-20T13:05:00.009-05:00

I've not a fan of Bill O'Reilly. I'm not going to waste time listing the reasons why. But on Thursday night he did an interview with the founder of Oath Keepers, and in the process stated that swearing to uphold the Bill of Rights is "extreme".

In previous posts, I've often written critically of a situation involving police officers. On other sites, I've been labeled a troll, a cop hater, a cop lover, a liberal, and a closet Obama supporter. So let's clear something up:

My grandfathers were WWII vets. My father is a vet. My stepfather was a vet. My favorite uncle was a cop, who was shot in the line of duty (and thankfully, survived and went on to have a great life with his future family). I am not anti-military or anti-cop. What I am is someone who despises people who are entrusted with protecting American citizens, and abuse that power through either ineptitude or advancing/protecting their own self-interests.

In case you aren't familiar with Oathkeepers, here's a description from their website:

Oath Keepers is a non-partisan association of currently serving military, reserves, National Guard, peace officers, fire-fighters, and veterans who swore an oath to support and defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic … and meant it. We won’t “just follow orders.”

Oath Keepers deserves respect, not a condescending brush-off from Bill O'Reilly. They are the best of the good guys, taking a public stand and saying "We will do what we swore to do." The men and women of Oath Keepers will not trample the rights of their fellow citizens, merely because a superior orders them to. They will use their own morals, their intelligence, and their love of their country's Constitution to protect the rights of everyone. Their views are not "extremist"; they are the epitome of professionalism and personal honor.

After the illegal confiscations in New Orleans after Katrina, several good laws were passed to protect 2A rights from being disregarded in the future. Bill O'Reilly believes this is extreme. One wonders how he would feel if he was told that during a state of emergency, he would not be allowed to broadcast his views. I doubt he would support the same "part time" validity of the First Amendment.

EZ-JECT

2010-02-18T19:52:00.006-05:00

My upgrade kit arrived in the mail this afternoon, along with some spare parts I'd ordered. So armed with an allen wrench and a clamp, I installed it just after I got home tonight. The process is very simple and took no longer than 20 minutes. The instructions are easy to understand. If you'd like a video step-by-step, stop by Ultimate Reloader and you'll find what you're looking for.

The only part that is tricky is removing the spent primer tube, but it's not exactly a trick - it's just a step you need to do carefully. Hornady includes a small tool to assist in the process, to keep the tube from being crushed during removal. It's very easy to remove the tube, just be sure to do it the right way.

There are a couple of modifications beyond the ejection. The trench that the retention spring moves through (near station #1) has new bevels around the edges. I suspect this is to help the spring rotate more freely. There's also a new bolt for attaching the shell plate to the hub. It uses an allen wrench instead of a standard wrench for removal - conveniently, one is included in the bag. I don't know the reason for this change, but it does look nicer.

The shell plates have been sent to Hornady for the machining, and I hope they'll be arriving next week... I can't wait to try it out.

PRICE CHECK

2010-02-16T22:02:00.004-05:00

Ever since the Presidential election and the subsequent "Buy Before They Ban" shopping started, gun owners have been buying ammo faster than retailers can restock it. The highest I've seen someone charging for 9mm was $35 for a 100rd box. This wasn't high-end defensive ammo... no, this was the same budget ammo that "normally" sells for around $22/box.

Those of us that reload our own ammo think paying $22 for a box of WWB is incredibly amusing, by the way. But I digress.

Along with the fear of future bans, there's always talk of the increasing price of ammo. This is reportedly due to one or more factors: the war, China's manufacturing, EPA regulations, increased orders by law enforcement, price gouging retailers, global warming, the economy, the price of oil, sunspots, etc. It's often said that whatever your reasons for buying 10 more cases of 9mm - the sooner, the better - as prices never go down.

I was reading The Firearm Blog and came upon this picture. It's an advertisement from a gun magazine, in 1959. Note the price of 9mm: $9.50 for a hundred rounds.

In 2010 dollars, that comes to $70.99.

It kind of deflates that "ammo prices never go down" argument.

1A VS 2A?

2010-02-14T10:50:00.010-05:00

From MercuryNews.com:

East Palo Alto cop takes heat for Facebook remarks

An East Palo Alto police detective is taking heat in online forums for allegedly posting comments from his Facebook account that advocate shooting Open Carry gun advocates.

Detective Rod Tuason apparently made the remarks in response to a friend's status update, which joked that gun advocates who carry unloaded weapons in plain view as a political statement should start doing so in places such as Oakland, Richmond and East Palo Alto "and not limit themselves to hoity toity cities."

"Haha, we had one guy last week try to do it!" Tuason replied, referring to a Redwood City man who strolled into the Mi Pueblo Food Center in East Palo Alto on Jan. 27 with a gun on his hip. "He got proned out and reminded where he was at and that turds will jack him for his gun in a heartbeat!"

After several more comments in the thread, Tuason apparently joked that officers should shoot the advocates, who have made recent headlines throughout the Bay Area for sipping coffee at cafes and performing other everyday acts with visible weapons.

"Sounds like you had someone practicing their 2nd amendment rights last night!" Tuason wrote. "Should've pulled the AR out and prone them all out! And if one of them makes a furtive movement ... 2 weeks off!!!" [Ed: IE, shoot them]

For those unfamiliar with California law, it's illegal in most cases to Open Carry with a loaded firearm. However, one may Open Carry if the gun is unloaded - this is often abbreviated "UOC".

Further down in the article is a mention of the forum at calguns.net, a discussion forum for 2A supporters in California. A member named .45Shooter claiming to be Det. Tuason has made at least 2 posts trying to both apologize and clarify his remarks.

While I find Det. Tuason's facebook comments to be troubling, his department's reaction is no less so:

East Palo Alto police Capt. Carl Estelle said the department's professional standards division is looking into the Facebook remarks to see if they violate any rules or policies.

"We have to be careful because they're on his own personal private Web page," Estelle said. "We have to be careful not to violate his First Amendment rights."

Capt. Estelle, it's irrelevant that his comments were on a "personal private Web page." You seem to be taking the same position that Det. Tuason holds in his "apology", when he stated "I know now that there are certain comments or expression of views are better off not said!".

This isn't a problem of privacy or First Amendment. It's the matter that of one of your officers finds it amusing to forcefully detain citizens who are not breaking a law, and his only regret appears to be that he vocalized his enthusiasm for such things on Facebook. It's offensive that you're more concerned about the 1A rights of your officer than the abuses your officer has been directly involved in.

EJECT

2010-02-04T22:54:00.004-05:00

As regular readers know, I reload my ammo on a Hornady LNL-AP press. Though it's quite capable of reloading rifle ammunition, I don't shoot my rifles enough to bother with reloading for those. Perhaps it seems a bit of a cardinal sin to a few, but buying $100 worth of dies and equipment instead of buying 2 boxes/year doesn't seem like a great financial idea to me.

I do load all my own centerfire pistol ammo, of course... both 9mm and 44mag. I use Hornady dies almost exclusively, with the exception of an RCBS powdercop die. I've found that they are of very high quality, and with proper maintenance will keep performing as the day they were new.

The press itself is also very solidly built, and almost perfect in my opinion... solid, smooth action, and predictable behavior. For example, I've never had a primer insert upside-down... nor any other kind of feeding strangeness that I've read with about other presses.

But if there's one thing that the LNL-AP has been not-so-great at, it's been ejecting the finished round. Their ejection wire works fine with larger calibers, but smaller ones (such as 9mm) have a tendency to bind at the last moment, and not eject into the bin. There are several home-made fixes for this; most involve bending the wire itself:

However, it's not a perfect solution. In my case, the modified wire won't work with 44mag - so in addition to changing the shellplates, dies, and primer seating pin, you also have to change the wire.

A few months ago, Hornady finally fixed this problem by modifying their subplates and shellplates. Owners of an "old" LNL-AP can purchase a conversion. Nearly everything I've seen from owners that have the new parts are very enthusiastic about it.

I've been putting it off, as it would require sending my shellplates to Hornady for modification. In the meantime, I'd be unable to reload anything. I'm told the first 2 are done free, so it wouldn't cost me anything but a couple of dollars in shipping. The new EZ-Ject replacement parts are only $30.

I think I may reload some extra boxes this weekend, just in case my press is out of commission for the next 2-3 weeks - but for that price, I think it's time to take advantage of the deal.

QUOTE OF THE DAY

2010-01-12T23:10:00.006-05:00

Rudy Giuliani, on terrorism:

“What he [Obama] should be doing is following the right things that Bush did -- one of the right things he did was treat this as a war on terror. We had no domestic attacks under Bush. We’ve had one under Obama.”

Except for the one on September 11, of course.

PRORITIES

2010-01-09T20:08:00.002-05:00

Why does it seem as if Congress is more concerned with how the Salahi couple attended a White House dinner, than with how Janet Napolitano's agency allowed a suspected terrorist to board a flight with explosives?

P99 FACTORY MAGS, PT 2

2010-01-01T15:56:00.006-05:00

Note to self: next time there's a 2-part question, stick to the self-imposed original deadline. My apologies for the delay.
Moving on...

In the previous post, the question was posed as to which of the magazines in the image were factory/OEM magazines... and the answer is: only the 10rd mag, which is the horizontal one. The mag inserted in the gun, and the rest along the bottom row are all aftermarket products.

I haven't seen the first 2 in person, but based on the oval indent near the floor plate I believe those are made by National Magazines. The last 3 are clearly ProMag.

So the question becomes: without being able to examine them in person, or read the markings in an image (if there are any), how can one tell the difference? It isn't the side of the mag, as the 10, 15 and 16 capacity mags have different indents along the sides. The answer is: look at the floorplate.

OEM Walther magazines are nearly flat, as opposed to the wedge shape you'll see in the others. This is important, as it relates to how the mag will fit into bottom on the grip when inserted. While I have no personal experience with ProMags, I have read on several occasions that they don't fit very well into the P99. I suspect it's due to the fact that the floorplate is too high and binding against the bottom of the grip. This is likely to cause feeding problems.

OEM mags also have a more tapered front edge on the floorplate. Without personal inspection, I don't know if this is a factor. However, I suspect it cannot be a good thing to deviate that much from factory dimensions.

On a side note: the actual markings on an OEM mag will vary. Some will have a Walther banner, while others will say Mecgar, or perhaps nothing at all except "MADE IN ITALY". All 3 are true OEM products. Mecgar is the official mfg of P99 magazines. Though I've no idea why they've changed their markings several times over the years, it's not a factor to be concerned with.

If you own a P99, this is something you should be aware of. I've seen people on GunBroker (and other places) try to pass off a ProMag product as a "factory OEM mag". I've also seen online stores selling such mags with no distinction at all. Given the sketchy performance of aftermarket mags, it's important to know what you're buying.

For the record: the seller whose gun is pictured did not misrepresent the magazines as OEM. In addition, he was asking a very good price for the package - the aftermarket mags were practically thrown in at no cost. So his buyer got a very good deal.

P99 FACTORY MAGS, PT 1

2009-12-15T00:02:00.008-05:00

Not all of these are factory Walther magazines. Anyone care to guess which ones aren't?

And no fair cheating with Google images. ;)

Answer coming tomorrow...

IT'S JUST UNSUSTAINABLE DEBT, AFTER ALL.

2009-12-11T00:59:00.007-05:00

From The Washington Post:

Democrats to seek higher limit on the federal debt

With the national debt projected to soar by nearly $1.4 trillion this year, congressional Democrats are planning a year-end push to dramatically increase the legal debt limit so they don't have to revisit the politically uncomfortable issue before facing voters in November.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) said Thursday that she will include legislation to raise the debt ceiling in a must-pass defense spending bill headed to the House floor next week.

In other words, do it now so it won't affect the incumbents' chances in November, and attached to the must-pass Defense bill so that it makes it more difficult (if not impossible) for the more fiscally responsible members to vote against it (and thus be painted in the future as "not supporting the troops).

Here's an alternative radical plan, that I often employ when dealing with my own budgetary matters: when you don't have enough money to cover your expenses, spend less.

TRUTH AND ANGER

2009-12-08T19:30:00.008-05:00

America is in that awkward stage.
Soon the awkward stage will be at an end.

You just keep right on pushing, fascists.
I want you to.

Because I want to see your heads on pikes.

:: Anonymous forum poster

There's quite a bit of anger in America these days... and not all of it unjustified. Americans are only willing to bend so far, when they believe their freedoms and liberties are at risk. From climate to healthcare, the new government is doing everything they can to rewrite the laws before the next election. When facts and history don't support their agenda, they simply misrepresent the facts or ignore history altogether.

Senator Harry Reid recently compared those of us that oppose nationalized health care to those that supported slavery, and opposed civil rights.

"You think you've heard these same excuses before? You're right," he said. "In this country there were those who dug in their heels and said, 'Slow down, it's too early. Let's wait. Things aren't bad enough' -- about slavery."

One may note that it was the Southern Democrats that opposed the 1964 Civil Rights Bill. Senator Robert Byrd - who still sits in the US Senate - filibustered for 14 hours to stop the bill. Yet Senator Reid conveniently forgets this truth - as well as forgetting that it was a Republican president that freed the slaves.

I find it ironic that Senator Reid chose to invoke the slavery analogy... especially in a time when he's seeking to create a new class of slaves.

11.05

2009-11-05T16:44:00.004-05:00

People should not be afraid of their governments.
Governments should be afraid of their people.

30-30, NEARLY 30 YEARS LATER

2009-10-11T17:58:00.010-04:00

When I was around 10-12 years old, my Dad bought a new deer rifle... a Winchester Model 1894. I can't remember if I ever shot it back then. If I did, it was probably only once. I was a very small kid, and even a 12ga was more than I could handle without fear of recoil.

After he died about 16 years ago, my mom arranged for a family friend to take custody of his guns. Last year, I was able to make arrangements to have them returned to me. The friend had kept them in pretty good condition. They needed some cleaning and removal of long-expired gun oil, but there was no "bad" damage due to age nor neglect whatsoever.

I started shooting his Ruger 44Mag a few months back, and have since developed a nice soft load I can enjoy shooting occasionally. It's a massive gun with a mile-long barrel... a bit larger than my hands can control for too long, but it's a fun range toy every month or so for a few shots.

Today I decided it was time to shoot his 30-30, possibly for the first time in nearly 15-20 years. I didn't even know where to start on different bullet specs for it. A gun store employee I trust asked about my goals for the rifle, and I replied it was just for some quick enjoyable shooting. He suggested some Remington 150gr rounds, advising they'd be easier on my shoulder than some of the other rounds normally used for hunting.

I admit there was a bit of boyhood fear in me as I raised it up... would it hurt like that old Browning 12ga did? Did I look like an idiot, standing there shooting offhand, without even a sling to steady my shot? Was the scope (apparently mounted upside down long ago for reasons I can't determine) even remotely still close to accurate?

I put the target around 10 yards, set up on the iron sights... slow squeeze... wham-thud hits my shoulder. But apparently I have grown up a bit over the years - it wasn't scary nor painful... it was a pleasant hard-push recoil, if such a thing makes sense. The bullet had hit somewhere around the "X" - and honestly I was just pleased I hadn't missed the paper entirely.

I decided to try the scope on the next shot... and this time, I've no idea where the bullet went, as the paper was undamaged. I smirked at myself, fully confident the problem was with the shooter. So for the final 3 rounds, I pushed the target to the range limit at 25 yds, and scoped the X. 3 Careful slow shots, and I had about a 4" group.

Great marksmanship? Definitely not. But highly enjoyable. I decided to keep the other 15 rounds in the box, for a time when I can more properly shoot the rifle on an outdoor range.

It was a good day of shooting.

BURGLAR 1, HOMEOWNER 0

2009-10-10T13:06:00.002-04:00

Unfortunately, mistakes do happen. Equally unfortunate is how often it's only the victim that pays for the mistake.
It's amazing how much latitude comes with a badge.

CARRY DIFFERENT.

2009-10-02T13:52:00.011-04:00

Normally I'd try to compose some witty comment to lead into a news article, but this time... it's kind of hard to top the story itself.

A frustrated customer at the Kenwood Towne Centre Apple store Thursday afternoon ended up going to jail after police say he showed an employee a gun.

He told the employee he was, "So mad, I could pop a 9mm at it."

The employee allegedly told Goodrich there was no need for that, then Goodrich allegedly told the employee, "I'll do it right now. Look!"

Goodrich then allegedly opened the right side of his shirt, displaying a black, 9mm handgun.

[Full Article]
Now that I think about it, about this time yesterday I was at Kenwood Towne Centre getting some Chick-fil-A for lunch. When leaving the mall, we walked by 5-7 deputies cuffing a guy and putting him into the back of a squad car. I'm guessing it was probably this guy with the problematic iPhone.

MORE ON KOSTRIC

2009-08-21T00:05:00.004-04:00

John Lott has an nice followup article on William Kostric's appearance at the President's recent town hall meeting.

Have a preview:

Yet, the most amazing thing about the news coverage was how much the media missed. Far from being a hot head, Kostric and a friend had been roughed up by a union member. The union member had spit on and kicked the person who was with Kostric. But Kostric didn't threaten the union member, and didn't respond physically in any way. Kostric and his friend notified the police of the incident, but the police officer shrugged and went away. Kostric's gun did however defuse the volatile situation with the union member -- once the union member saw Kostric's gun in its holster he backed up and moved away.

Anti-2A Americans regularly discuss the potential horror of a gun owner losing their cool, and violence erupting... but time and again, citizens that legally carry fireams prove that they're able to deal with verbal conflict without clearing leather.

Of course, this rarely merits a headline.

FALSE ASSUMPTIONS

2009-08-15T18:06:00.008-04:00

A few days ago, the President held a town hall meeting in New Hampshire to discuss his proposal for health care reform. Among the many Americans that decided to protest at this event was William Kostric, who decided to open carry his firearm during the event.

MSNBC offered a fair amount of coverage on this event, and soon afterwards Kostric was interviewed by Hardball's Chris Matthews.

Some of you may agree with me when I note that Chris Matthews' demeanor appears a bit crazier than Kostric; the interviewee is patiently trying to answer questions, while the interviewer is practically spraying froth all over the screen.

In any case.

After the interview, Kostric did a small one-on-one interview with a friend. It's been posted on YouTube... fairly low vid quality, but the clip is good enough that the message itself is clear.

Several sites on the internet (such as Salon) have begun to delve into Kostric's personal life... posting his MySpace page, various forums that he's had discussions in, etc. Depending on your point of view (and your politics), he's either a level-headed FreeStater or a closeted wingnut.

But one thing I've noticed in all of this is the assumption by many in the media (reminder: I'm a member of the media) that merely carrying a gun during a protest automatically means that violence is going to follow. This has no basis in fact whatsoever.

One could assume that a man that was nominated and confirmed to be the Secretary of the Treasury would himself have a clean, pristine personal financial background. However, this isn't true... as Timothy Geithner failed to pay $35,000 in self-employment taxes for several years, and only did so after his confirmation hearings started.

One could assume that the Chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee - the committee which writes the tax code - would be not only familiar with tax law, but follow the law as well. This isn't the case.... as Charles Rangel failed to declare $75,000 in rental income, and owed back taxes for at least 3 years.

When the President of the United States attends a public function, he is surrounded by people with firearms - not only his personal bodyguards of the Secret Service, but local law enforcement as well.

Why does the press assume that each and every one of these LEOs presents absolutely no threat to the President, but a private citizen does? Why does a badge automatically remove any and all suspicion from a person's inner politics and motivations?

In other countries throughout history, leaders have certainly been killed by people they trusted to protect them; historically, being given a badge and label of bodyguard does not automatically ensure that their safety is guaranteed.

Please let me be clear on this: I am not questioning the motives of some unnamed police officer, nor am I implying that somewhere out there is an LEO with thoughts of violence towards our leaders. I'm simply pointing out that there's no factual reason to believe that a peaceful, armed citizen presents more of a threat to the President than a a cop that's pissed off how the Crowley/Gates situation was initially handled by the White House.

Merely carrying a gun doesn't make one an assassin.

QUOTE OF THE DAY

2009-08-12T16:15:00.001-04:00

The problem with socialism is that eventually you run out
of other people’s money.

:: Margaret Thatcher

WORK HARD, FLY RIGHT INDEED

2009-08-10T19:33:00.008-04:00

This past weekend, 47 Passengers on Continental's ExpressJet Airlines spent 9 hours trapped in a plane on the tarmac - waiting to travel 87 miles. I'm familiar with airline regulations, policies, TSA, the laws regarding interfering with flight crews, etc etc - yet I find it hard to believe no one tried to get off the plane.

At what point would you, personally, decide you weren't going to stay in such a situation any longer? 3 Hours? 6 Hours? A couple of days? I suppose it's one thing when you're on the runway, waiting for your plane's turn to take off. But it's another matter entirely when the plane is just sitting there doing nothing at all, with no plans in the near future to get airborne again.

I wonder if this the real reason Congress wants more private jets.

SMILE.

2009-08-09T15:11:00.002-04:00

JET SETTING

2009-08-07T14:10:00.007-04:00

As I was having the morning coffee, I came across this article whilst catching up on everything that had happened since I went to bed last night. Sen. Claire McCaskill (a Democrat) is standing up to some fellow Congressional members and pointing out the poor judgment they're demonstrating by planning to purchase jets that the military doesn't even want.

When I first saw the headlines on this a couple of days ago, I (wrongly) assumed that these were fighter jets; the F22 is either being killed or being renewed, depending on the day. But no, these aren't fighter jets - these are passenger planes. Specifically, a govt/mil version of the Gulfstream V business jet.

My favorite bit from the article:

Though two of the C-37s reportedly are to be assigned to units at Andrews Air Force Base that routinely transport government officials and members of Congress, the aide disputed the notion that Congress was just awarding itself an upgrade, saying both types of jets can be used for "many purposes" including transport of military personnel -- not just elected officials.

"It's not like Congress is buying Congress planes here," the aide said.

That's not how McCaskill saw it. Her statement said the jets would be "dedicated to travel for government executive-level personnel."

I'm reminded earlier this year when executives from Detroit flew to Washington DC for hearings on bailing out the auto industry... Congress and the President were pushing each other out of the way to be the first to decry the use of private jets during a time of potential bankruptcy in these companies.

And yet during a time of massive deficit spending in Washington, buying private jets for govt use is perfectly acceptable.

But the topic of over-spending in the military budget is a sensitive one. Cutting funds doesn't just raise concerns about national security -- it affects jobs.

It also affects the personal finances of American Taxpayers, who are ultimately the ones paying for Gulfstream business jets so that govt executives don't have to take commercial flights like the rest of us.

Sen. McCaskill - please keep fighting the good fight.

SITE UPDATES

2009-08-02T14:29:00.006-04:00

I've been playing around with the look of the site, and in the process managed to destroy some of the sidebar code. And as luck would have it, my backup wasn't a complete backup.

Looks like I'll be spending some time rebuilding widgets.

Update: I just noticed Google's cache snapshot contains yesterday's HTML. Small victory.

NICE LINK

2009-07-27T19:41:00.005-04:00

If you're reloading on Hornady equipment (or curious about getting one of their presses), here's a nice site to take a look at. Lots of nice videos and info there. Check out the "products" section as well - there are some custom accessories there that may interest you, especially the roller handle.

(I wish my own online videos had compression of that quality.)

COMPLIANCE

2009-07-22T23:01:00.005-04:00

This video made the rounds on the internet a few weeks ago; it shows an altercation between a highway patrolman and a paramedic. The patrolman had pulled the ambulance over for failure to yield (while the ambulance was carrying a patient), and a choke hold by the officer ensued during the following minutes.

Today, it's been announced that the patrolman is being put on 5-day unpaid suspension. Whether this is justified, over-the-top, or barely any punishment at all - I'll leave for readers to decide. But I did find this bit interesting:

(Officer) Martin's attorney says the trooper either didn't hear that there was a patient in the ambulance or it didn't register. He says (Parametic) White failed to comply with the trooper's orders.

Perhaps Mr. White was so preoccupied with his duties of transporting a patient to the hospital that he either didn't realize he'd not yielded to the trooper, or it didn't register...

How well do you think that argument goes when it's a trooper giving commands to a citizen...?

FLARE

2009-07-19T22:49:00.003-04:00

There are a lot of good reloading presses out there, each with their own advantages. Lee's equipment has a lot cost of entry. Dillon's warranty is legendary. Personally, I'm a fan of Hornady's LNL-AP. It's a bit less expensive than a Dillon 550, and has 5 stations as opposed to 4. In addition, it auto-indexes the shell plate. Some feel this isn't a requirement, and that's fine - but I personally feel it's not only more convenient, but safer. It's much more difficult (though not impossible) to double-charge a case when the shellplate is automatically advancing.

One disadvantage the LNL-AP has had in the past is flaring cases. Granted, most die sets come with a die which will expand the case for bullet insertion, but this ties up a station. This can limit your options, should you want to use something like an automatic bullet feeder, or a powder-check die; if you're already using 4 dies for the brass + the powderdrop, you're out of stations.

Hornady offers a "PTX", which is a small tube that replaces the powder insert. The tube is tapered, and the purpose is the flare the case mouth while simultaneously charging with powder. It's a good idea (and one offered by other companies), but unfortunately their execution was rather poor.

Hornady's PTX is caliber-specific. If you're reloading multiple calibers, you'll quickly need a $20 PTXs for each caliber. Secondly, their part does not flare cases wide enough to use lead bullets. Generally, lead bullets are slightly wider than FMJ or plated versions, and need a wider opening to properly seat - otherwise, the brass will "shave" the edges of the lead off as it is seated. This isn't exactly desired.

A few month's ago, an LNL-AP user with a talent for engineering decided he could solve this problem. He asked other users for some input, drew up some plans, and made a prototype for his own version. The end result was the Universal PTX.

On the left is the standard non-flaring powder insert that comes with an LNL-AP. In the middle, a 9mm Hornady PTX. And on the right, the Universal PTX.

It's made of steel and has a quality finish. You can easily notice the wider cone on the Universal PTX. Not only does it flare much more than the Hornady PTX - it can also flare multiple calibers... for 30 all the way to 50.

It also has a very gradual slope, allowing more minute adjustments to how much flare you're applying. In addition, this will stress the brass less. Depending on your favorite loads, you may get a few more shots out of them before they hit the recycling bucket.

Installation is simple; it replaces the standard powder insert under the drop tube of the powder dispenser. Adjusting the amount of flare is merely a matter of lowering the height of the dispenser (by screwing in/out of the die collar) until you get what you're looking for - just like a standard flare die.

I haven't done much reloading since it arrived last week, but I did get to test it reloading some .44 Magnum. From start to finish, the installation took less than 2 minutes. Another minute or so to find a good flare amount, and I was making some rounds. I'm completely confident that I'll have the same experience with 9mm.

You can read more about it at PowderFunnels.com. If you're using an LNL-AP, this is absolutely something you should consider purchasing. Oh - the price: $25, including shipping.

And if anyone's in the market for 9mm and .44 flaring dies - let me know, as I have a couple I won't need anymore. ;)

THE NEXT JUDGE?

2009-05-28T23:17:00.008-04:00

Judge Sonia Sotomayor has been accused early on as judging based on what she wishes the law was, instead of what the law is. Her actions in this particular case seem to support that criticism.

Sotomayor's Gun Control Positions Could Prompt Conservative Backlash

Judge Sonia Sotomayor could walk into a firestorm on Capitol Hill over her stance on gun rights, with conservatives beginning to question some controversial positions she's taken over the past several years on the Second Amendment.
...
The chief concern is her position in the 2009 Maloney v. Cuomo case, in which the court examined a claim by a New York attorney that a New York law that prohibited possession of nunchucks violated his Second Amendment rights. The Appeals Court affirmed the lower court's decision that the Second Amendment does not apply to the states.
The ruling explained that it was "settled law" that the Second Amendment applies only to limitations the federal government might seek on individual gun rights.
Despite last year's landmark Supreme Court ruling in the District of Columbia v. Heller, in which the court ruled that the Second Amendment protects an individual right to bear arms, the Maloney ruling determined that case "does not invalidate this longstanding principle" that states are not covered by the Second Amendment. (Another appeals court since the Heller case reached the opposite conclusion.)

Although this case involved martial arts weaponry and not firearms, the 2nd Circuit did not make this a distinctive point to debate. Sotomayor's interpretation of Heller is simply wrong; one wonders how Heller states it's individual right, yet the 2nd Circuit appears to state that the right only applies at the federal level.

Her reasoning in Maloney also cited Presser v. Illinois, to reinforce her opinion that the 2A is not a right applied to the states. Citing Presser is taking a vary narrow view of the precedent that it set; it wasn't specifically a 2A case to begin with. Beyond that, even the 9th Circuit - normally not a court loved by gun owners - has chosen to uphold Heller.

You can read the full decision here - it's a PDF, 6 pages longs.

REMEMBER THEM.

2009-05-25T11:53:00.000-04:00

2 TRILLION ALTERNATIVES

2009-04-01T17:54:00.007-04:00

Some quick math:

Estimated stimulus spending: $2 Trillion Dollars (and counting)
Current US Population: Approx 303,824,640

The Government could send every single citizen a check for $6,582.74.

Personally, I'd rather skip the new infrastucture, the government programs, the auto bailouts, and watch Citi and AIG burn.

Mr. President, just send me a check.

METAPHORICAL BATTLES

2009-01-07T00:36:00.002-05:00

PROPOSITION 8

2008-11-15T12:08:00.006-05:00

The passage of Proposition 8 is generating a lot of post-election protesting around the county. I understand the fury of the gay community. Having a majority forcefully apply their own beliefs onto you is never an enjoyable experience.

Everyone should be able to enjoy all of their civil rights, and no group should be particularly catered to - neither gay, straight, atheist, nor religious.

But San Francisco lefties cheered when citizens were forbidden to own a firearm. They’re quite comfortable with taking away rights, and have a long history of doing it.

They’ll take your weapons, because they don’t like them. They’ll limit your property rights, because they don’t like the way you wish to use it. They’ll take your money, because they want to give it to someone else.

California is one of the most regulated places in America, and it’s been that way for years. It should be taboo for anyone to suggest that your rights be regulated, let alone vote for such a thing. In California, (and other places of course) it's standard practice. But if you give the government a big enough sword, eventually it will cut you too.

Creating an environment in which rights are no longer something solid... something off-limits... is a very dangerous game. They simply lost their own game this time around.

Stings, doesn’t it?

THOUGHT FOR TODAY

2008-11-03T09:52:00.004-05:00

"The hardest thing to explain is the glaringly evident which everybody had decided not to see."

Ayn Rand

And now I see.

NOTES

2008-10-21T22:55:00.000-04:00

It's been a few years... and time to finish a few things I started.

CHARGE.

2008-10-15T22:03:00.009-04:00

Today was payday, and as always I checked my banking account online to make sure the transaction had cleared. It seems someone has acquired my banking information and started on a shopping spree sometime late Monday, as my current balance was approximately -$4,600.

Among the various charges the intrepid thief has racked up in the past 30 hours or so:

$348.26 to Lord & Taylor Online, an apparel retailer. I've checked out their website; at least someone has some taste.

$232.15 spent online at Estee Lauder. Presumably that amount will qualify for a free gift basket of some sort. Once you've got all those cosmetics, you'll need something to carry them around in... Hermes of Paris (famous maker of handbags) must have a suitable choice for $192.01.

Not content with only Lord & Taylor's offerings, another $110.98 was spent at G&L Clothing and $324.85 at The Level Collection. Apparently the latter store is highly prized, as the charge has been attempted at least 4 times.

$436.93 went to some sort of computer equipment... an external USB drive, as best I can determine.

It's possible that some of these items are meant as a gift, as our shopper then attempted to pay UPS $238.51 to ship a package. Of course, it's best to call and tell the recipient the box is coming. No phone? No worries... Boost Mobile was happy to set up cellular service for $221.38.

And finally, $60.85 spent at (I'm not making this up) Padlocks4Less.

FifthThird's fraud department is going to have a very busy week.

RENDERED & BURNED.

2008-09-22T21:43:00.005-04:00

ECLIPSE

2008-09-16T11:26:00.009-04:00

In a former life, I was heavily involved in music. I began taking piano lessons in 10th grade, and by the time I got to college I'd acquired my first synthesizer and was playing with the first of several bands which were to come. Their styles were rather different; my first band was sort of a standard-80's type rock sound. Later on, I also experimented with both subdued, atmospheric sounds as well as a very tightly-written electronic approach. But throughout all of my musical explorations, you can trace my influences to two or three accomplished musicians.

One of them was Richard Wright, of Pink Floyd.

Wright was a master of layering subtle tones, and had a distinct talent for creating melodies and jazz-style chord progressions. Though he wasn't one of the more public members of the group, this seemed to be just how he wanted it. He was a rather private person, and preferred to see his music as a craft and not a complete lifestyle.

Though Gilmour and Waters are the best-known faces of Pink Floyd, albums like "Dark Side of the Moon" and "Wish You Were Here" are unquestionably filled with Wright's contributions. Gilmour's guitar is always easily recognized, and Waters' sardonic vocals are a trademark... but it was Wright's work that helped created such musical classics as "The Great Gig in the Sky" and "Shine On You Crazy Diamond".

Rick Wright died yesterday, at the age of 65.

Light seems a bit dimmed today.

He will be missed.

7 YEARS

2008-09-11T09:08:00.004-04:00

In the passing years, some have become a bit jaded to the event... it's become a talking point in politics, in some ways more than anything. "A terrible tragedy", or some term which makes the person speaking of it look like an opportunist.

That is another tragedy.

It was a morning just like this one... having coffee, running a bit late for work just as I am now, listening to the same radio station that's currently playing on the same clock radio in the bedroom.

I turned on the TV to see what was going on, and saw the first tower on fire. The coverage had an element of curiosity; the initial belief was that a small plane had accidentally collided. The camera shot itself not so great - but after all, no crews had planned to shoot that day. I can't recall which station I chose to watch, but I still remember the horrified disbelief in a woman's voice as she screamed, "Oh my God, there's another one" as the second plane entered the picture and exploded.

Today, there will be endless reports on the news about that day 7 years ago reminding us what happened. I understand why, but I also know that I remember exactly what happened.

Watching a plane hit the World Trade Center live on television is something I'll never forget.

CHANGE, INDEED

2008-08-29T13:36:00.005-04:00

When George Bush was seeking the presidency nearly a decade ago, he faced some criticism regarding his lack of foreign policy experience. While he certainly had executive leadership experience as Governor of Texas, and business experience - his resume showed a lack in dealing with world affairs.

His solution was to choose Dick Cheney as a running mate - a man who could certainly assist in areas in which Bush was lacking.

Conservatives love Cheney, liberals detest him. However, one point that simply cannot be argued: Cheney has been a very effective VP. The fact that Democrats have long amused themselves by pointing to Cheney as actually running the show proves that even they know his effectiveness.

You may love what Bush & Cheney have accomplished, or it may scare the hell out of you... but the fact remains that Cheney performed his job with flying colors: to implement the President's agenda.

John McCain has faced a similar image problem.

Some see him as an old-school Washington "part of the problem" politician. Others believe he's just another old white guy. He's been described as out-of-touch, and in the past has certainly done more bargaining with Democrats than the conservatives would have liked. Members of his own party have questioned his resolve to protect the Second Amendment.

A few hours ago, McCain didn't just solve that problem. He set it on fire and threw it off a cliff.

Her name is Sarah Palin, the Governor of Alaska... who incidentally is a Lifetime Member of the NRA.

Barack Obama spokesman Bill Burton responded to her nomination saying, "Today, John McCain put the former mayor of a town of 9,000 with zero foreign policy experience a heartbeat away from the presidency."

True enough, Palin has no foreign policy experience. But attacking her lack of experience is going to be a serious mistake. Criticizing her as a "former mayor" and "two-year governor" is simply going to reinforce something rather important: She has more executive experience in government than Obama.

Palin has only been Governor for two years? Obama is a first-term US Senator. Palin has no foreign policy experience? Perhaps not, but McCain certainly does.

As Governor of Texas, Bush had little foreign policy experience. As Governor of Arkansas, Clinton had little foreign policy experience. As Governor of California, Reagan had little foreign policy experience. As Governor of Georgia, Carter had little foreign policy experience.

One could argue that Governor Sarah Palin is more qualified to be President than Barack Obama.

If Democrats try to make leadership and foreign policy an issue, they may have to start explaining why their ticket is backwards.

SCALIA'S CLOSE

2008-06-26T14:41:00.004-04:00

Opinion of the Court
Justice Scalia, writing for the Majority

We are aware of the problem of handgun violence in this country, and we take seriously the concerns raised by the many amici who believe that prohibition of handgun ownership is a solution.

The Constitution leaves the District of Columbia a variety of tools for combating that problem, including some measures regulating handguns, see supra, at 54–55, and n. 26.

But the enshrinement of constitutional rights necessarily takes certain policy choices off the table. These include the absolute prohibition of handguns held and used for self-defense in the home.

Undoubtedly some think that the Second Amendment is outmoded in a society where our standing army is the pride of our Nation, where well-trained police forces provide personal security, and where gun violence is a serious problem. That is perhaps debatable, but what is not debatable is that it is not the role of this Court to pronounce the Second Amendment extinct.

We affirm the judgment of the Court of Appeals.

It is so ordered.

HELLER PREVAILS.

2008-06-26T11:30:00.002-04:00

Supreme Court says Americans have right to guns
By MARK SHERMAN, Associated Press Writer

The Supreme Court ruled Thursday that Americans have a right to own guns for self-defense and hunting, the justices' first major pronouncement on gun rights in U.S. history.

The court's 5-4 ruling struck down the District of Columbia's 32-year-old ban on handguns as incompatible with gun rights under the Second Amendment. The decision went further than even the Bush administration wanted, but probably leaves most firearms laws intact.

The court had not conclusively interpreted the Second Amendment since its ratification in 1791. The amendment reads: "A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed."

The basic issue for the justices was whether the amendment protects an individual's right to own guns no matter what, or whether that right is somehow tied to service in a state militia.

Writing for the majority, Justice Antonin Scalia said that an individual right to bear arms is supported by "the historical narrative" both before and after the Second Amendment was adopted.

The Constitution does not permit "the absolute prohibition of handguns held and used for self-defense in the home," Scalia said. The court also struck down Washington's requirement that firearms be equipped with trigger locks or kept disassembled, but left intact the licensing of guns.

More here.

OBAMA BLOGS - A RESPONSE

2008-06-08T22:43:00.008-04:00

I don't normally write responses to other blogs here... instead, I leave responses as a comment. But in this case, the blog only allows comments from "team members" - and as I'm not a member of their team, I can't leave a comment.

For Reference : The Original Article:
NRA Smears Obama's Stance on Gun Ownership

Barack Obama is trying to walk a fine line between protecting the right to bear arms guaranteed under the Second Amendment and clamping down on more than 30,000 deaths from firearms that happen every year in the United States.

However, the National Rifle Association is against any limitations on gun rights, including banning or controlling any kinds of ammunition...

So is the Constitution.

they are also protecting the right of criminals to have easy access to automatic weapons and high kill rate ammunition

No one has easy, legal access to automatic weapons in this country - except people working for the govt.

Making a statement like that shows how clearly ignorant you are about firearms laws that already exist in this country.

I challenge the author to call a gun shop in this country - ANY gun shop, or hell - even go to a gunshow - and try to legally purchase an automatic weapon. Prepare for a stack of govt paperwork, fees, background checks. Prepare to pay $5000-25,000 for such a weapon.

Relatively speaking, there aren't that many automatic weapons in this country available for the average citizen to purchase. It's difficult, time-consuming, and highly expensive to legally own an automatic weapon.

You're asking for laws to be made that already exist.

And furthermore, what the hell is "high kill rate ammunition"?

The laws Barack Obama supports that the NRA are vehemently against include sensible acts like:

Mandatory waiting periods to purchase a gun

Good idea. People in fear of danger shouldn't have easy access to self-defense. Women being harassed by violent ex-husbands should just rely on hope, or perhaps 911 if the line isn't busy.

Requiring citizens to actually register their firearms

So that if the govt decides to ban them, confiscation will be easier.

Mandatory micro stamping of guns to aid tracing weapons

A technology that only works according to - surprise - the manufacturer. Forensic scientists by and large report that such an effort would have a minimal advantage - if any - in helping to solve crime. Furthermore, microstamping is incredibly easy to defeat. Stop watching CSI and do some research.

Banning inexpensive handguns that make it easier for criminals to acquire

Ok, I'm confused - earlier you implied that criminals don't buy guns; they steal them. Are you also against lower-income families being able to legally purchase a firearm?

Limit gun purchases to one gun a month

Why not 2 per month? Why not 1 per quarter? How exactly have you (or Obama) determined that 30 days is the magic number?

Require training for gun owners

Quite honestly, nearly every gun owner I know is well-trained in the use of their firearm. This is a non-issue in most respects.

Restrict gun ownership to citizens 21 and older

Why not 18 years? Why not 31 years? How is 21 years the magic number? Do criminals wait until they are 21 years old to steal guns and kill people?

Eliminate right to carry concealed weapons

Criminals are already forbidden to carry a weapon - concealed or otherwise. So clearly you are attempting to disallow law-abiding citizens from carrying a concealed weapon.

So - how do you feel about me just carrying a gun around town in a holster on my belt, openly for the world to see? You cool with that?

Ban gun shops from operating within 5 miles of a school

Now this is just complete stupidity. The only reason to create such a law is to be able to close gunshops. There's no safety advantage for the school whatsoever.

Ban resale of police firearms which include high powered assault weapons

I don't buy guns that the police have worn out. Nonetheless, I fail to see what you're concerned about such a thing. Police cannot sell a citizen a gun that the citizen cannot purchase (yes, legally) from a store.

Ban high capacity ammunition magazines that are often used by gang members in drive by shootings and not needed to kill a deer

Here's an idea - why not just ban gang shootings? Or shooting out of cars driving down the road?

Oh, wait. There are already laws against such things. Odd that laws against murder and prisons and death penalties haven't stopped gang shootings, yet you think microstamping will.

By the way... to a few of the other posters, who use terms like "KKK" - gun owners' feelings about Obama's gun control agenda have nothing to do with race.

The fact is, Clinton's agenda is no different when it comes to guns. She wants to ban them all as well - she's just less overt about it when making speeches.

A SMALL VICTORY

2008-05-15T20:55:00.003-04:00

Credit can seem to be a gift at times, but far too often it becomes a rope that many people hang themselves with. I've been somewhat responsible over the years paying my bills; though not always perfect, my record is sufficiently good that companies are still willing to loan me piles of money.

But several months ago, I came to the decision that I wanted to carry as little debt as possible. Though I have a salary sufficient to pay my bills, I've lived too long with monthly payments that seemed to never end. And due to some life changes I'd hoped to make, it was paramount to bring my monthly expenses down in such a manner that I wasn't wasting 10-20% of my monthly salary on interest payments.

After hearing Dave Ramsey's radio program for a few weeks, I decided that much of his advice was rather sound. Though I've not been starving myself on beans and rice, I have cut down my recreational spending significantly and put those funds towards killing off debt.

Last month was a milestone: paying of one of my two credit cards. Today was another - a few moments ago, Kawasaki was paid off and I officially own my motorcycle. I've still one thing left to pay off, but having the others taken care of frees up even more money to quickly erase my final debt. I expect I can be completely debt-free within the next 12-16 weeks.

The last bike payment was significant; I'd looked forward to this day for several months. Not only to own the bike, but to be free of the billing cycle. In light of recent events in life, though... somehow the victory is bittersweet.

I suppose it's a victory nonetheless.

FIRST TARGETS

2008-05-03T15:35:00.002-04:00

Somehow this post stayed in the Draft folder and never got published... perhaps it's a bit late to be adding it now, but I was rather pleased with the results of my first attempt at making ammo so I'll still share the pics:

The first batch of reloads:

And the first 10 targets:

Over the past month I've been experimenting with powder levels, and have also tried cheaper lead bullets. So far, 5.9gr of HS-6 shoots the best. FMJ-ENC bullets have given me more consistent rounds - both dimensionally and in groupings. Overall, buying a press has greatly improved my shooting. Though it was a much greater expense than a couple of boxes of WWB, it was a very good decision in the end.

ON MATTERS OF SACRIFICE

2008-04-02T21:42:00.009-04:00

Two views:

Success, wealth and celebrity gained and kept for private interest is a small thing. It makes us comfortable, eases the material hardships our children will bear, purchases a fleeting regard for our lives, yet not the self-respect that, in the end, matters most. But sacrifice for a cause greater than yourself, and you invest your life with the eminence of that cause, your self-respect assured.

John McCain
Address at the Naval Academy
April 2, 2008

...

It only stands to reason that where there’s sacrifice, there’s someone collecting the sacrificial offerings. Where there’s service, there is someone being served. The man who speaks to you of sacrifice is speaking of slaves and masters, and intends to be the master.

Ayn Rand

CRIMINAL DEFICIT

2008-03-25T21:58:00.011-04:00

There's no way to rule innocent men.

The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren't enough criminals, one makes them.

One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws. Who wants a nation of law-abiding citizens? What's there in that for anyone?

But just pass the kind of laws that can neither be observed nor enforced nor objectively interpreted and you create a nation of law-breakers.

Ayn Rand

READY TO LOCK-N-LOAD.

2008-03-14T13:12:00.013-04:00

The final box of necessities arrived this week, and I was able to take the first steps away from "relying" on factory 9mm. I'm taking the process very slowly - not only for safety reasons, but also to be become very familiar with how to best approach the process.

I've spent a few hours with some cleaned shells, the seating and crimp dies, and a caliper. Along the way, I've learned that OAL for 9mm is a rather relative thing depending on who writes the load data. It's a place where the process becomes a combination of science and intuition, backed up by a lot of careful testing and observation at the range. Most people entering the world of reloading have little difficulty understanding the importance of min/max powder loads, but proper seating depth takes more study and research.

After much reading and seeking advice from experienced reloaders, I believe I have a good starting point for loads. My first rounds will be using HS-6 powder, CCI primers, and Hornady 124gr FMJ bullets. I'm also going to stick with small batches - perhaps 5-10 of each version, using near-minimum powder levels.

I'm still pondering which variable to adjust first, but I believe that I'll leave the powder weight as a constant, first concentrating on finding the best OAL for my P99. Once that's established, I'll slowly experiment with varying the powder amount.

Though I'm anxious to begin, it will be put aside for a couple of days... I'm getting away for the weekend with The Bethy, and quite honestly the reloading can wait a bit longer. ;)

On a side note - if you want to learn more about reloading and are looking for a good community of people to discuss it with, I recommend stopping by a recently-created forum - GlockPost.com. Don't let the name fool you... it isn't a Glock-specific forum in the least. No one cares what gun you own nor what press you use; you'll find fun conversation with a very diverse membership, as well a lot of valuable advice for starting this hobby. Whether you are new to the hobby or have reloaded for years, we'd like to have you stop by.

You won't find a lot of KoolAid at GlockPost.com... but if you BBQ, we'd love to hear your recipe. ;)

ALMOST THERE

2008-03-05T21:45:00.001-05:00

When I decided to start reloading, I made the decision to purchase the equipment in stages. Budget-wise this was a smart thing, and gave me extra time to do a lot of reading before starting to work with explosive components. In the meantime, I'd created shopping lists on Midway and Midsouth Shooter's Supply. Dies, a shellplate, a caliper and other various parts were on the lists. A couple of items - such as the pistol measuring rotor - were on "out of stock", but I decided by the time I was ready to purchase the retailers would have everything available.

Last week, I checked the lists again for completeness and was troubled to see that not only were certain items still not in stock, but others had either become "out of stock" or gone on backorder. Apparently I'm not the only person taking a step away from factory ammo, as rather common items (such as 9mm dies) were completely out of stock.

After a lot of searching, I came upon Grafs.com and found everything I needed was in-stock. However, some items were nearly sold out. I decided it was time to finish purchasing what I needed, else run the risk of having to wait until retailer back orders arrived (whenever that might be).

The package arrived on Monday, and I spent the evening prepping all the dies and installing them into the press. Along with the parts, I ordered a can of Hornady One-Shot Gun Cleaner & Dry Lube. It absolutely degreased the parts, and left a very slight dry film for protection and lubrication. Avoid the brake cleaner, the teflon spray and the alcohol... this product is simply wonderful, and I wish I had used it from the beginning.

The caliper, scale, and a small order of bullets should arrive by Friday - so unless I've left something off the list, I'll be ready to start making some test rounds.

AEROSOL TEFLON

2008-02-24T23:33:00.005-05:00

I called Hornady on Monday to order a replacement powder rotor. The conversation went something like this:

thorn: Hi Karen. A screw in the rotor was too tight, and by the time I removed it I'd stripped the hole. I need to order a new rotor and some screws.

Karen: Ok, let me start with your address.

thorn: Blah blah blah Cincinnati, Ohio.

Karen: I'll ship it today. Need anything else?

No charge, even for shipping. This is how a company creates a customer for life.

The parts arrived on Friday afternoon, and today I degreased the powder funnel system and installed everything into place. Observant readers will notice a few things are missing in the photo... for example, dies and a shellplate. I'll be ordering them sometime in the next week or so, and should actually be making ammunition within a couple of weeks.

Oh, as to the title...

If you should ever find yourself lubricating steel parts with aerosol teflon drylube - read the can. It probably says "shake well". Be sure you do this. And while spraying: if you start to see the spray take on the appearance of white foam, stop spraying and shake the can for a minute. The foam is NOT your friend.

Should you forget this quality advice, be aware that the parts will be coated in solidified white gunk. Brake cleaner will not remove this substance. Scrub with a towel and rubbing alcohol.

Dried teflon foam is a very bad thing.

LOCK-N-LOAD, DAY 1

2008-02-17T21:09:00.011-05:00

Saturday morning arrived, and I was anxious to get the new press off the top of the filing cabinet and mounted. The first problem was where to mount it; I had absolutely no flat surface suitable for such a purpose... nor a basement or spare closet to add a table. One might think I would have solved that particular problem before buying a press, but no.

Finally, inspiration struck. I decided to place a board on top of a counter hutch, and keep it in place with weights instead of clamps. I headed off to the hardware store and purchased a large sheet of 3/4" MDF along with various bolts and a couple of large drill bits, cans of brake cleaner and drylube to prep the components.

Several things I learned in the first few minutes:

- It helps to have someone hold the press while you're putting in the bolts.
- 7/16 Wrenches don't fit on the heads of 7/16 bolts.
- Holes drilled in MDF are much cleaner when the drill speed is fast instead of slow.
- Reading the directions 3 times beats taking the bolts out twice.
- You can indeed use too many washers.

I was a bit worried that the press would be too heavy for the counter-weight i was relying on, but it worked out well. Feeling victorious, I turned my attention to the powder measure assembly.

Hornady ships the parts coated in grease/oil to protect from rust, and the manual instructs the user to clean it off before use. The manual could be a bit more descriptive, but after a couple of minutes the method to disassemble was clear.

- Remove powder measure - check.
- Remove hex bolt #1 from rotor with included wrench - check.
- Remove hex bolt #2... remove hex bolt #2... why won't the damned bolt turn...?

The bolt was stuck. And by stuck, I don't mean difficult to turn. It was stuck to the degree that the wrench was nearly stripping the hex hole without turning. After 20 mins and nearly ripping the skin from my palm, I gave up. It would have to be exchanged for a replacement part. I put the other pieces back in. Hex #1 didn't quite fit in the hole anymore, and in my annoyance i just turned it hard a couple of times and went on about my evening.

This morning, a bit of inspiration struck. I grabbed a small hammer and tapped the bar that hex #2 was holding. It rotated just a bit, and as a result the bolt began turning freely. With amazement and glee, I put the wrench in hex #1 and ... oh, great. Hex #1 had gone in the hole diagonally the night before, and the hole was stripped at the crown and no longer straight. It's now unusable. I need another powder rotor and 2-3 hex screws.

So in the end of all this, ordering a new part is more due to my breaking it that the part being defective from the factory. I'm told Hornady's customer service and warranty is outstanding, so tomorrow at 9am I'll find out how forgiving they are in such matters.

GOODBYE, WINCHESTER WHITE BOX.

2008-02-14T19:15:00.007-05:00

Dear WWB,

When our association began some 2-3 years ago, I found you to be a somewhat acceptable candidate for the position of "target practice ammo". Though you arrived crudely packaged in an unimpressive box, your regular availability combined with affordable pricing nonetheless gained my respect.

Unfortunately, your performance has become less satisfactory with each passing month.

Your hygienic practices have always been undesirable, ranging from unclean to completely filthy. While many of your peers occasionally share a similar problem, they nonetheless have generally offered something you can only deliver in brief spurts:

Accuracy.

Certainly, there were times in the early days in which I cursed myself or the gun for the poor results on the target. But over time, I have realized that although I and the Walther are not always in sync - you are never in sync with yourself from month-to-month.

When combined with your recent demands for a 30% salary increase, I find that our relationship must come to an end. Please clean out your desk immediately; your replacement will be starting this weekend.

Regards,

thorn

BEST OF CINCINNATI

2008-01-29T21:00:00.000-05:00

Four places in or near Cincinnati that you might not be aware of, but should be:

BEST GUN STORE:
Peterson's Gun Shop
11338 Reading Rd, Sharonville

When you tire of looking at endless rows of the latest tactical offerings that debuted at SHOT and wish for something a bit different - drive over to Peterson's for a real treat. While they do have a respectable collection of new handguns, it's the items inside the back counter that you should spend some time studying. You'll likely find a treasure or two, whether you're looking for a vintage revolver or a more modern used weapon.

The pricing is fair, and the store offers 90-day layaway. If you're concerned about the reliability of their used guns - don't be. They have a gunsmith on premises to examine things before they're offered for sale, and offer a money-back guarantee on their used guns.

It's a small shop, and may not look like much from the street... you may have even driven past it and not noticed it. Nor do they do heavy radio advertising like the large store/range just down the road. But their large, unique selection and great personable service make it the perfect destination on a Saturday morning.

BEST INDOOR RANGE:
Shooter's Supply
3450 Richardson Rd, Independence KY

Shooter's is relatively new to the scene, and I'll admit a bit of trepidation in revealing their location... they almost seem like a well-kept secret; a place that real gun owners go to shoot with others of their kind, instead of having to deal with long lines and the occasional questionable customers at the range a few miles north of Petersons. ;)

To be fair, I've done a lot of shooting at TargetWorld. The staff is very friendly, and I'll quickly admit they've always treated me more than fairly - both when I've used their range or purchased guns. But as with many things, popularity tends to bring population - and on many weekends, waiting 30-60 mins for a lane is not unheard of. Also unfortunate is the condition of the range. It's not uncommon for multiple lanes to be "down", and the customers range from older gentlemen with excellent skills, to college kids perfecting their spray-and-pray technique.

Such is not the case at Shooter's.

The range has excellent lighting and plenty of room behind the firing line. It's kept cleaner than your basement, and I've yet to see a lane out-of-service. You'll find your fellow shooters will be a bit more mature in their attitude and safety practices, as well quite friendly should a conversation arise.

Extra bonus: if you reload, you'll have no problem sweeping up your brass as there's nothing cluttering up the range and most customers I've seen are very good about policing their own brass. Finally - if you enjoy shooting rifles larger than rimfire, Shooter's may be just your ticket. While they don't allow higher-velocity rounds such as 22-250, feel free to bring your .223 AR15.

While the store doesn't have the the wealth of inventory ala TargetWorld, you'll find that their range is worth the drive.

BEST SUSHI:
Wild Ginger Asian Bistro
3655 Edwards Road, Cincinnati

For years, I had a rule about eating seafood in the Midwest: I didn't. Growing up 30 minutes away from the Gulf of Mexico gives one a different opinion of "fresh seafood" compared to the fare in Ohio. But every rule has an exception, and in this case it's in Norwood.

It's fresh, it's tasty, and the prices are - well, strangely affordable. It's fairly packed around lunchtime, so if you're hoping for some quiet conversation over a Spicy Tuna Roll - prepare to hear quite a few conversations in addition to your own. However, once the food arrives you'll have little time to talk... the flavors will win the contest of talk vs eat.

If you happen to have a lunch partner that doesn't enjoy the perfection that is raw seafood - not to worry, as there's also an extensive menu of noodle and rice dishes. I highly recommend the Thai Garlic Chicken. PF Chang's does have its merits, and Bangkok Bistro does have a loyal following... but if you truly want the best Asian food, you'll be at Wild Ginger.

BEST LIVE ENTERTAINMENT:
Shadowbox Cabaret
Newport on the Levee, Newport

Shadowbox isn't a bar with live entertainment; more accurately, it's a theatre that happens to serve drinks. While I could type a couple of paragraphs describing the stellar entertainment value, I really wouldn't be able to do it justice. It may be the best live music and sketch comedy presentation you'll ever see in Cincinnati.

If you're hoping to impress your date/girlfriend/boyfriend/spouse (and don't mind more adult-oriented humor) Shadowbox is hands-down going to earn you some Cool Points. But consider yourself warned... if you're anything like me, don't be surprised when you go from being a "first timer" to nearly an "all the damned timer".

Note: this list is Bethy-approved.

7 MONTHS, 7 YARDS

2008-01-27T22:10:00.000-05:00

In June of last year, I decided it was time to sell my Glock 19 and acquire a handgun I felt better suited me... I wrote about it here. While the G19 is a fine gun, I could never get any consistent accuracy. Some shots would be good, while others flew to the left with annoying regularity.

When I first fired the P99, I knew I had found something better for me. While I don't consider myself to be a great shooter by any means, I've steadily improved over the months... getting my stance more consistent, raising the gun to the same height every time, and forcing myself to focus more on the front sight and less on the target.

Normally I place targets around 3-5 yards, but today I decided to push out to 7 yards. I was doing well at the shorter distances, and decided to see how it would translate a few feet further. I raised the gun up, got a good sight picture, and started pulling the trigger.

The results basically shocked me.

In the recent past, I've usually managed 3-4" groups at 5 yards, and around 5-7" groups at 7 yards. But today, everything really came together. I fired 10 rounds into a 2.5" group. I looked up a bit amazed, and reloaded. On the second pass, I popped a flyer on the 6th shot. After silently cursing myself for rushing it, I raised the gun back up and put the last 4 through the red.

I retrieved the target and smiled.

I shot about 40 rounds after that, most within 3-4" at that distance. Finally my hour was up - I packed up, collected all my brass and headed home. It was a good day for shooting.

THE GIRL AND A GUN

2008-01-05T02:20:00.000-05:00

The Bethy flew up to Cincinnati to celebrate the New Year, and on Sunday we went on her second trip to the range. Her first time ever was nearly a year ago, and she was eager to punch some more holes in paper.

Before we left home, I quickly gave her a refresher course on how the guns worked. It had been a long time since she'd held one, and I wanted to make sure she was comfortable. I handed her the Walther P99, and was impressed; she immediately remembered her trigger and muzzle discipline, indexing her finger on the slide and keeping it pointed in a safe direction.

We stopped by Walmart and picked up 200rds of WWB, some extra .22 for the Ruger MkII, and a pack of reactive targets. Normally I use regular paper targets, but I thought seeing the holes brightly pop out would make it easier for her to track her shots.

Her shooting was impressive. She hadn't fired a gun in nearly a year, yet her form was good and her groups respectable for someone so new to the sport. Her first few shots were always very close to the center. She did have a tendency to drop her aim near the end of the magazine, but her lack of an obvious flinch is indeed a strength.

I'm fairly sure she shot more that day than I did, but for me it wasn't about trigger time... it was just about spending time with my girl. She's without a doubt my favorite range partner, and I can't wait for our next trip.

MR. 9/11

2007-12-27T18:50:00.001-05:00

Morning exchange via MSN...

Bethy: I think I may vomit.
(link)

thorn: btw
thorn: did you know that Giuliani was Mayor of NYC on 9/11?

Bethy: really? i should vote for him then.
Bethy: but....
Bethy: did he walk thru the rubble?

thorn: i believe he may have even seen people working in rubble

Bethy: no!
Bethy: that makes him my president.

thorn; in fact, he may even know barney rubble.

Bethy: well I'm glad my decision is made

ANYONE?

2007-12-26T21:21:00.000-05:00

Ask the average group of gun owners who they're hoping the next President will be, and it is not unlikely that the answer will be "Anyone but Hillary Clinton". While I agree that yet another President Clinton would be a nightmare for America, I find myself thinking that "anyone but..." isn't a great answer.

Anyone?

The general idea of "anyone" is of course "anyone but a Democrat" and therefore a Republican. But I find it troubling that at this point in the campaign - during the primaries - that any Republican would be better. Too often, Americans pay far too much attention to the party that a candidate belongs to and not enough attention on their voting record. Having a Republican as the Head of State doesn't automatically mean that your gun rights are in good hands.

For example:

President George H. W. Bush (R) expanded the ban on imposed a ban on the importation several different semi-automatic rifles.

Governor Bob Taft (R) fought an ultimately losing battle against lowering restrictions on carrying concealed handguns in Ohio.

Governor Rudy Giuliani (R) has a substantial anti-gun history.

President George W. Bush (R) clearly stated that he would re-authorize the Assault Weapons Ban if Congress passed the bill and delivered it to the White House.

Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger (R) recently signed a bill which allows the state to begin requiring the micro-stamping of cartridges.

I could probably fill a few pages with more Republican names... Republicans who spoke of supporting gun owners, yet turned their backs on us once elected. But by now, the point should be clear: during the primary elections, your concern should not be "who can beat Hillary Clinton?". Your concern should be "Which candidate's record shows a clear history of supporting the 2nd Amendment? Which candidate will continue to support my right to own and use a firearm?".

Party labels are of little concern; it is the candidate's record which is paramount.

Do not vote for Anyone.

RANDOM UPDATE

2007-12-05T22:45:00.000-05:00

November was a rather busy month for me, so please forgive my lack of posting. When I wasn't occupied with daily life, I was suffering from writer's block. That still may be the case, but I'll make the effort anyway...

I've created a new channel on LiveVideo. Currently there are two videos related to the Walther P99 - one discussing the AS trigger, and the other demonstrating how to perform a slide strip for detailed cleaning. Check them out... hopefully they'll be helpful to someone out there.
New addition to Notable Sites: Somewhat Intelligent. Clay is a fan of Ron Paul and Walthers, as well as a Florida resident. I wonder if we're related... but I do fear he could also be a Gator fan. Hm. For now, enjoy his postings while he begins to discover the superiority of the Florida State Seminoles. ;)
Old news that you've already heard, but I feel compelled to mention: On November 5, Ron Paul raised over $4.2 Million Dollars during the one-day fundraiser. Tres cool, no? One wonders at what point the media and America will start realizing the man is a viable, real candidate.
Layaway is wonderfully evil... expect a picture or two in the coming weeks.

NOVEMBER 5

2007-11-05T01:02:00.001-05:00

A few months ago, I had a discussion on a forum regarding the nature of politics and how to get involved; how to not merely complain from the sidelines, but how to actively change the political landscape. I considered rewriting my thoughts into some sort of long article, but instead I'll simply copy/paste my original post.

I often wonder how much the average gun owner actually does - in a qualitative way - to keep their rights.

It is one thing for people to preach to each other on web forums and blogs. It is another thing to actually contribute money to candidates and PACs that can measurably affect the future in a beneficial way.

I know that many people here can and do contribute their hard-earned dollars to such causes, as well as send letters and make phone calls when the need arises.

But for those that do not, I challenge you to begin doing it.

The next time you're buying 10 boxes of ammo, consider buying 9 boxes instead - and join the NRA.

Instead of spending 10 hours at the range, spend 8 hours - and join OFCC.

Instead of purchasing your 48th 30-rnd AR15 magazine, consider being satisfied for the moment with having 47 mags - and donate money to a candidate who actually agrees with you.

Support the groups and the leaders who will work to ensure you will continue to be able to purchase ammo, shoot at a range, and own an AR15.

Truly - think about this for a moment:

There are just over 2000 members of this forum. What if every member donated $100 - the average cost of 3 of my Walther mags, for example - all to the same cause or candidate?

Do the math. That's nearly a quarter of a million dollars.

Glocktalk.com has just over 72,000 members. If every one of them sent the cost of ONE GLOCK MAGAZINE to the same candidate or PAC, that's nearly 2 MILLION dollars.

People say they are sick of money in politics... and I agree that it's somewhat sickening that the one with the most dollars is the one most-listened to.

But that's reality. Television ads cost money. Radio ads cost money. Print ads, fliers, stickers, buttons, phone lines, campaign trips to Iowa, gas for the vehicles - it all costs money. Reaching everyone in America enough times to not only draw their vote - but convince them TO vote - costs millions of dollars.

Despise it or wish it to be untrue - but ignore it at your own peril.

Today, on November the 5th, I challenge each of you to stand up and fight.

AFTERNOON AT THE GUN SHOW

2007-10-13T19:59:00.000-04:00

Bill Goodman's gun show stopped in Cincinnati this weekend. It's been a few months since the last one, and I'd marked the date on the calendar. I'm not in the market for anything in particular, but I've been looking forward to the show hoping that something interesting would catch my eye.

To summarize the show today:

If you're looking for a Mosin M44, Walther P22, any handgun made by Taurus, an AR15, or some cheap bejeweled pocket knife: the doors open again tomorrow at 9am, but don't worry about being the first in the line. They have so many to choose from that there's no chance you'll miss out on buying one.

Unfortunately, I'm not interested in any of those weapons.

To be fair, there were many new guns for sale from the companies you'd expect: Glocks, Smith & Wesson, Springfield, and the aforementioned Taurus... but I can easily find those in the gun shop, for nearly the same price. It's the used guns that attract me to the show, but sadly the selection wasn't too diverse. S&W revolvers were scarce, as were ones from Ruger. Hardly any 1911s, and guns made by Jennings/Lorcin/Highpoint easily outnumbered the Walthers 10-1.

A couple of things did catch my attention, though.

I passed a table and noticed an HK VP70, priced at $365 - quite a deal; nearly half the price of ones I've seen on Gunbroker. I took a close look at it, and the inner excitement turned to depression. The edges on the slide were worn far beyond what counts for holster wear, and even without a borelight I could see the rifling was in fairly poor condition. The magazine showed similar signs of neglect, with splotches of rust competing with the steel for dominance. I briefly considered purchasing it and having the slide refinished, but the condition of the bore and magazine killed the deal for me.

An hour later, I came upon a Walther P5 selling for around $650. I wasn't prepared to spend that much today, but thought it was worth a look. The finish wasn't bad, but did show some moderate use - this was definitely not a "lived in a police officer's holster" specimen. I pulled the slide back to check the chamber, and was horrified to notice that the feed ramp had been polished. No, "polished" is the wrong word... "butchered with a grinding wheel" would be more accurate. After noticing that, the rest of the gun's condition was of little interest to me.

Finally, I came upon a display containing three Nagant M1895 pistols made in 1944-45. At least one had the original holster, complete with cleaning rod. Though I didn't ask to examine one, all appeared to be in very good condition and had a fair price of $109. They were interesting, but would be little more that a conversational piece for me. I debated it a bit, and eventually decided I'd just leave the $100 in my pocket.

After about 2 hours of walking the aisles, I purchased a box of 9mm +P hollow points and drove home for lunch a bit depressed. Tomorrow I'll be hitting the range for some good practice. I'm sure after a couple hundred rounds I'll mostly forget that there was nothing to buy, and be happy with the gun I'm shooting.

15 vs 16

2007-09-19T23:48:00.000-04:00

I recently purchased a 16rd magazine for the P99. Though I've put a budgetary hold on my gun purchasing funds (due to other priorities), the price was too good to pass up. I've read that the P99 originally shipped with 16rd magazines, but the magazine was later redesigned to a 15rd capacity. This one is particular has a Walther-labeled baseplate, and was manufactured by Mec-Gar.

In case you're unfamiliar with the differences - and there are a couple - I thought a couple of pictures might be useful:

The lips at the top have been reshaped. The 16rd is on the left, the 15rd on the right. Note the more angular cut on the left. I'm not sure if this modification has any effect on feeding the rounds (my tests show no difference), but it does make loading the mags more difficult for sure. The first round is especially harder to quickly insert and seat onto the follower.

The cases themselves have differing vertical indentations, but I've no idea if these differences affect the mags' reliability.

The springs are different as well:

The 15rd (top) has a standard uniform coil, while the 16rd (bottom) has a staggered coil approximately 1/5 down from the top.

Curiously, I've been unable to load 16 rounds into the magazine. I'm not sure if it's due to a spring issue (perhaps it was replaced by the previous owner), or if it's naturally difficult to get the 16th round in - something you'll notice in Glock magazines, when they are new.

Because the magazine will only be used for range trips, I'm not too concerned about the unexpected capacity limit. It was a great deal, and it will do the job just fine. But if you're in the market for a used mag, hopefully this might give you a bit more info on the fact that the 16's and 15's are quite different in construction.

SHOOTING ON A BUDGET

2007-08-22T20:54:00.000-04:00

If you shoot with any sort of regularity, or read posts by people that do, you've probably noticed that the price of ammunition is rising.

I've read several reasons for this.

Some people say that it's due to the war, and the military's increasing needs for ammo is driving up the price. American law enforcement agencies are also placing larger orders for ammo, which of course plays into the laws of supply and demand. Others point out that raw materials such as brass and copper are in higher demand in other countries (such as China), which increases the costs of the metals worldwide. Other factors come into play too - the price of fuel affects everyone, from the producer to the shipper to the retailer.

There are several ways the average gun owner can deal with this problem, but simply complaining about it isn't one of them. So instead of just adding another post to the internet's archives about how much ammo costs annoy me, I thought I'd share a few of the things I do to keep the cost of my range trips down.

In no particular order:

SHOP WISELY
The most expensive place I've purchased ammo was from the range itself. A 50rd box of Blazer Brass 9mm sells for around $14. At Walmart, the same box sells for around $8. A 100rd box of Winchester WhiteBox is around $15. In other words, you can buy twice as much ammo for the same price by simply choosing where to purchase it.

Online vendors typically offer good prices, but be sure to add shipping costs into the overall price. Gunshows can also sometimes be a good source for cheaper ammunition - especially self-defense ammo.

In addition, I purchase more ammo than I need for one range trip. Usually I buy 500-1000rnds at the time. A local store you wont give you a multi-box discount, but you will save time and gas money by combining several store trips into one.

MAKE YOUR OWN TARGETS
Range targets are sold at a premium, usually going for .75 - $1 per target. It may not seem like much, but over a year you might end up spending $40-50 just on sheets of paper. There are a number websites out there with PDF targets you can download and print at home. Even better, print one target at home and make the rest on a copier (inkjet supplies are very expensive - copies can be made at Kinko's cheaply, or depending on your workplace - for free.) Buy just one B27 at the range and use tape to place your homemade target over the COM.

If you do a lot of bullseye shooting, you dont need a B27. Get some large index cards, and use an ink marker to make a small circle in the middle. Some shooters use paper plates as a cheap target. Whichever solution you use, try to limit the number of fullsized expensive targets you purchase.

DON'T WASTE AMMO
Every time you empty a magazine, you've basically thrown $2 down the range. I've seen casual shooters come into the range with a rental gun and 2-3 boxes of ammo... they finish in an amazing amount of time. One moment they're loading the first mag, and 10 minutes later they've emptied all 3 boxes by pulling the trigger as quickly as possible without much regard to accuracy or technique.

Granted, rapid-fire can be a lot of fun. But always keep in mind that rounds are practically dollar bills. Don't waste ammunition anymore than you would randomly light piles of money on fire.

PLAN YOUR RANGE TRIP
Simply stated: if you're going to the range for half an hour, try to guage how much ammo you will shoot... and don't take much more than that. For me, that's about 100-150 rnds of 9mm and 50-100 rnds of .22. If I take 500rds of each, then mentally I'll be trying to use it all before my time is up. Back to the previous point: don't waste ammo. Better to have a few unused minutes on the clock, than waste 30 more rds just trying to kill some time.

Shoot until you've accomplished your goal for the day - don't just shoot until you're out of ammunition.

SHOOT FEWER CALIBERS
If you have a .22, a .357, a .45, a 9mm and a .44 magnum with you every time you hit the range - you're going to spend a lot of money feeding them. I've read posts by people seeking to consolidate their guns into just 2-3 calibers at most, and I believe it's a good idea. The more calibers you own and actively shoot, the more boxes of ammo you're going to have to purchase.

BUY A .22 PISTOL
Anyone that owns a .22 will tell you it's a great investment for shooting cheaply - and they're right. .22 Ammo is very inexpensive, and the skills necessary to be accurate with a .22 will translate into a larger caliber. If you want to shoot a LOT every time you hit the range, use a gun that isn't expensive to shoot.

Some of these might be something you can try, while others may not help at all... competitive shooters have different needs than someone who just owns a gun for self-defense. So consider these suggestions, or freely ignore them.

IN THE DARK

2007-08-16T01:14:00.000-04:00

Here's a test for you...

1. How quickly can you field strip your carry weapon, and reassemble it?
2. Can you do it in the dark?

There's not necessarily a correct answer for the first question. It's not a task that one normally has to do in under 20-30 seconds. But if you cannot perform a field strip without referring to your manual, then take some time this weekend and learn to do it.

Once you can do it effortlessly, try putting on a blindfold. Learn to check the chamber without your eyes. You may find, as I did, that replacing the slide is a bit harder when you can't visually line it up... or perhaps you'll need to learn how each end of the recoil spring feels, so that it's not put in backwards.

I don't know that it's a skill that I'll ever need, but it's nice knowing that I have it... and I believe that every gun owner can benefit from learning it as well.

BULLETS ALWAYS FIND A TARGET

2007-08-06T12:47:00.000-04:00

I was about 11 years old when I entered the woods with my Dad for my first hunting trip. I was raised in the South, where for many people hunting is as much of a regular activity as going to work or having a large family dinner every Sunday. I don't remember what we were hunting; it might have been squirrels or birds, and I'm sure we would have come home with a deer on the off-chance we'd have been lucky enough to take one, given the amount of racket I made walking about the woods.

As I grew older, Dad's interest in hunting also grew. Many areas of the South are farmland, and it's not uncommon for the farmers to lease their land for hunting to small groups of people. One morning we got up far before dawn, and drove to a small cabin in the middle of nowhere to go deer hunting. It was chilly and dark in the cabin, and 3-4 other men were sitting around a small woodstove when we arrived.

We spent most of the day in the woods, and came back empty handed. I was cold, damp, dirty, and rather tired of the whole experience as we unrolled our sleeping bags. As I began to fall asleep, the men were recounting their various tales of the past couple of days. One man had a brief story I'll never forget.

"We were out last night, didn't see anything though. So finally we decided to come back to camp. But we're walking though the woods, and I heard some noise to the left in the distance... I kneeled down and leveled my rifle, and fired off 3 shots. Never did find anything, so I guess I missed. Was pretty dark out there."

We left the following day, and never hunted with that group again.

I remembered that story as I read about this boy being killed in Oklahoma yesterday. Two police officers were trying to shoot a snake out of a tree, and missed their target. Sadly, one of their bullets found another target: 5 yr-old Austin Haley, who died in his grandfather's arms.

I find this part of the news report to be rather troubling:

(City Manager Bob) Wade refused to identify the officer suspected of firing the shots but said the officer has been placed on paid administrative leave pending the outcome of the investigation.

As I've mentioned before, I work in the media... specifically, I create graphics for the newscasts. Each and every day, I receive photographs in my email from various law enforcement offices - photographs of people suspected of a crime. The law enforcement community creates press releases, and sends them to us hoping that we'll put the information and the photographs on television so that the public will be well-informed about possible criminal activity and the people responsible.

Austin's grandfather has this to say:

"I'm not saying the cop shot him on purpose,” Tracy said. "It was an accident. But let me tell you — if I had a kid and put him in this car and didn't put him in a car seat and he got killed on the way to town, they'd charge me with murder ... and what this cop did is a lot worse than that. ... There was no reason for him to kill my grandson.”

Mr. Tracy is quite correct - that's exactly what prosecutors have done, and continue to do, when children die due to negligence. From the moment a child dies, the party suspected of responsibility has their picture transmitted over the airwaves as quickly as possible.

City Manager Bob Wade will not identify the officer suspected of killing Austin Haley?

I would like to remind Mr. Wade of something. I'd like to remind the Officer, the Noble Chief of Police, their Mayor, their City Council members, and their City Prosecutor: All of you are public employees. You are not royalty. You are not above criticism and your positions do not absolve you of responsibility. You have your jobs because the citizens of Noble gave those jobs to you, in the hope that you would perform your duties with honor and in the best interests of the City of Noble.

And in this circumstance, all of you are failing miserably.

So here's Mr. Wade's contact information, should you care to let him know your opinion on his job performance:

Bob Wade, City Manager
City of Noble
P.O. Box 557, 304 S. Main
Noble, OK 73068
(405) 872-9251; Fax: (405) 972-9363
Email: bobwade@sbcglobal.net

Let Mr. Wade know how you feel about this negligent shooting. And while you're at it, you might ask him about his feelings on government hypocrisy.

AUGUST 3

2007-08-03T12:38:00.000-04:00

August 3 is a rather unique day, and like all the other days of the year has many events associated with it:

- In 1942, Christopher Columbus set sail from Palos de la Frontera, Spain.
- In 1527, the first known letter was sent from North America by John Rut while at St. John's, Newfoundland.
- In 1678, Robert LaSalle built the Le Griffon, the first known ship built in America.
- In 1852, the first Boat Race was held between Yale and Harvard as the first American intercollegiate athletic event.
- In 1900, the Firestone Tire & Rubber Company was founded.
- In 1923, President Warren G. Harding (deceased) was succeeded by Vice President Calvin Coolidge as the 30th President of the United States.
- In 1936, Jesse Owens won the 100 meter dash by defeating Ralph Metcalfe at Berlin Olympics.
- In 1946, the National Basketball Association was founded in the United States.
- In 2004, the pedestal of the Statue of Liberty reopened after being closed since the September 11, 2001 attacks.

Several notable people were also born on this day:

1770 - King Friedrich Wilhelm III of Prussia
1811 - Elisha Graves Otis, American inventor
1887 - Rupert Brooke, English poet
1900 - John T. Scopes, American defendant
1926 - Tony Bennett, American singer
1940 - Martin Sheen, American actor
1941 - Martha Stewart, American media personality
1963 - Isaiah Washington, American actor
1963 - James Hetfield, American guitar player (Metallica)
1971 - DJ Spinderella, American rapper (Salt-N-Pepa)
1977 - Tom Brady, American football player
1979 - Evangeline Lilly, Canadian model/actress
1984 - Carah Faye Charnow, American singer (Shiny Toy Guns)

But for me, there is one event which eclipses all of them.

At 5:05am on a Thursday morning, the love of my life entered this world.

Happy Birthday, Bethy.

May you wish upon every star you see tonight,
and may all your dreams come true.

CLARITY

2007-07-31T13:59:00.000-04:00

Contradictions do not exist. Whenever you think you are facing a contradiction, check your premises.

You will find that one of them is wrong.

Ayn Rand

INTERLUDE

2007-07-03T11:59:00.000-04:00

I've always approached this site with a dual purpose... both as a job for myself, as well as recreation. Though I've not set demands on myself to post on a particular schedule, I've tried to write with some sense of regularity.

So on the eve of Independence Day, I feel the need to say that I doubt I'll be posting for the next two weeks. I have some personal matters to attend to, and won't have the time nor mental focus that I feel is necessary to post as I would like.

I hope to return in late July, with a renewed focus. Time will tell.

ACQUISITIONS

2007-06-27T13:41:00.001-04:00

A couple of months ago, I bought this from a gentleman in Louisiana - a Wilkinson Arms 9mm Linda pistol, with 4 full-sized magazines. I have no particular use for it, but there's a bit of satisfaction that comes with owning a gun that is banned in several states. (Legal disclaimer: I have carefully researched the laws in Ohio regarding this gun and the magazines' capacities. The gun is completely legal to own in Ohio, and the magazines fall under the legal limit for assault weapon capacity.)

Wilkinson began making weapons in California, but later moved his factory to Ohio. This particular one was made at the Parma factory in 1989. I've read that the quality of the weapon went down after he moved to Ohio - particularly the sights. Instead of nicer target sights, he began installing much cheaper ones made of tin. This must have happened at a later time, however, as mine does have the adjustable sights.

I took it to the range last week, and fired 60 rounds through it without a single malfunction. The recoil is very tame, which is no surprise given the gun's hefty weight. It has a bolt/blowback action, and ejects spent cartridges in a manner similar to the AR15 system. The 8.3 inch barrel is very accurate, and it quite a lot of fun to shoot.

It's hard to find information on it, as they haven't been made in a very long time. Even finding a schematic or manual has proved to be very difficult. Removing and cleaning the barrel is a simple matter, but I've no idea how to properly detail strip the weapon in order to clean it.

I doubt I will take it to the range again - given the age of the gun, the lack of spare parts available, and the inability to properly clean and lubricate it. While I enjoy shooting it, I don't wish to abuse it by not maintaining it after each range trip. But it's a wonderful weapon to hold and admire, and I'm glad I was lucky enough to find it.

9MM REDUX

2007-06-25T00:41:00.000-04:00

I began shooting almost 30 years ago, but it wasn't until last year that I purchased my first handgun. As with other interests in life, I did a lot of research before deciding on which one to purchase. When I decided I wished to own a handgun, I didn't expect it to be the first of several... therefore it needed to be one that I would be satisfied with for a very long time.

After much online reading, I was leaning towards the Walther P99. I examined one in the store, and liked the ergonomics a lot. However, the price was higher than I wished to pay. A friend took me shooting, and I tried his Sig 9mm. The DA/SA trigger had a very heavy first pull, and I found the decocker to be difficult to manipulate. The range we shot at had several guns for rent, and I decided to try the Glock 19. The gun was a good size for my hand, and I preferred the constant weight of the trigger pull compared to the Sig. I decided it was the best choice.

Two weeks later, I found a G19 for sale on Glocktalk. As luck would have it, the seller was a a local guy who was planning to attend a Bill Goodman show here in Cincinnati that weekend. We made arrangements to meet at the show. The gun was in very good condition and had night sights installed. The price was fair, so we exchanged IDs and I became a new gun owner.

Since then I've become a fairly regular shooter. Though the range is not a place I require myself to go religiously, I do try to shoot at least twice a month. I would estimate I've shot about 1500 rnds through the G19, and over time my skill has improved. It's been a very reliable gun, and lives up to the reputation as being tough as well as easy to strip and clean.

But as many gun owners know, it's often the case that over time you find yourself looking at other guns. Though I've been happy with the Glock, I've never loved it. While I couldn't determine exactly what it was, something was missing... I didn't have any special fondness for it. If one can "bond" with their weapon, I never bonded with the G19.

Over the past few weeks, I'd found myself thinking back to the Walther. After a range trip, I spoke with a salesman. He removed a P99 AS from the gun case, checked the chamber, and set it on the counter. I held it my hand, and was again surprised how "right" it felt. The grip was perfectly sculpted, the action of the slide was precise as Swiss clockwork. The trigger - though DA/SA - was far more smooth than the Glock. The only problem was that the store had no P99 available for rent. I'm a firm believer that if a gun is intended for self-defense, it should be fired before purchase. Online reviews and examinations at the counter only go so far.

A week later the Smith&Wesson/Walther rep was at the store and had samples of all their weapons. He was more than willing to let me try the P99 on the range. I purchased a target, loaded 10 rounds in the magazine, and put the target to around 5-7 yrds. I slowly pulled the trigger, feeling a smooth takeup and predictable breaking point. The round fired, and I was amazed at how close to the bullseye the hole was.

19 Rounds later I retrieved the target, looked at the groups - and couldn't stop smiling. I returned the Walther to the factory rep, and he asked me how I liked it. I told him I was about to buy one.

3 Weeks and 450 rounds later, I believe I've found my gun. I'm still getting familiar with the sight picture, trying to consistently present the gun with the front sight placed correctly above the POA. It's taking some adjustment, due to having a higher axis than the Glock as well as the DA/SA trigger... but the groupings don't lie. The Glock is a fine handgun, for sure - but in the past 3 weeks, I've been more accurate with the P99 than I ever managed to be with the G19.

Sometimes our first choice is actually the best one... yet we choose other things before realizing it.

TWO SIDES OF THE IMMIGRATION COIN

2007-05-21T19:42:00.000-04:00

The White House and Congress have feverishly worked over the past few days to reform immigration. It's a task that some have said would be very long, difficult process - if not impossible. But as with many things governmental, "impossible" can quickly become "possible" if one is merely willing to move the goal post.

Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff, on immigration:

Anyone who enters the United States illegally should be expelled without exception, Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff told a Senate hearing today.

"Our goal at DHS is to completely eliminate the 'catch and release' enforcement problem, and return every single illegal entrant, no exceptions," he said.

"It should be possible to achieve significant and measurable progress to this end in less than a year."

Chertoff said U.S. authorities are immediately returning thousands of Mexicans entering the country illegally, but "other parts of the system have nearly collapsed under the weight of numbers."

"The problem is especially severe for non-Mexicans apprehended at the southwest border," he said.

"Today, a non-Mexican illegal immigrant caught trying to enter the United States across the southwest border has an 80 percent chance of being released immediately because we lack the holding facilities," Chertoff explained.

"Through a comprehensive approach, we are moving to end this 'catch and release' style of border enforcement by reengineering our detention and removal process."

Opps... my apologies for posting the wrong quote. That's what he said 18 months ago. Let's try that again.

Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff, on immigration:

"If someone has a better solution that's realistic, they should come forward with it", Secretary of Homeland Security Michael Chertoff, 53, said about the immigration debate on Cable News Network's "Late Edition" program. "But if all people want to do is complain and say, well, this isn't good enough, that's the Goldilocks solution, where it's always too hot or too cold."

Chertoff was joined with Commerce Secretary Carlos Gutierrez. Secretary Gutierrez demonstrated that he doesn't understand the concept of "amesty" with this interesting bit of insight:

Commerce Secretary Carlos Gutierrez insisted that the immigration bill, whose backers hope to hustle through a debate in Congress from Monday, did not amount to an "amnesty" for the millions now in the country unlawfully.

"They would have to pay fines and undergo a criminal background check", he said on CNN Sunday.

"I have the impression that perhaps for some people, the only thing that would not be amnesty is mass deportation," added Gutierrez, whose family fled to the United States from Cuba when he was a child.

"We don't think that is practical. We don't think that's logical. We don't think that's humane. And that would hurt our economy."

Secretary Chertoff - here's the solution you've been grasping for. Take the people that are in my country illegally, and remove them from my country. When you have removed all illegal aliens, then we can all go back to the debate table and revisit the situation.

Perhaps you believe it's not practical, logical, nor humane. I'll tell you what it is, though:

Legal.

Laws necessary to deal with illegal immigration are already in place. There is law and there is precedent. All that is required of you, Secretary Chertoff, is to enforce the existing law. Second Amendment supporters shouldn't be too surprised with this approach, however, given that governments so often choose to create new gun control laws instead of properly enforcing the ones already on the books.

The President set several goals for his administration. Among them were revamping the situation with prescription drugs, improving public schools and reforming immigration. The prescription drug plan is one of the most costly entitlement programs created in the modern era, and the "No Child Left Behind" program has generally been regarded as yet another federal program having lackluster results. With those efforts fading into the twilight, the White House has now spearheaded a disastrous immigration bill.

One hopes that the President has no other improvements on his to-do list.

DO YOU LIKE MUSIC, MR. FINCH?

2007-05-17T21:20:00.001-04:00

Quite a few hardcore Bush conservatives are gleefully slapping each other silly in the twilight of the last debate, over Rudy Giuliani's heated remarks towards Ron Paul on the matter of 9/11.

My initial feeling is that Bush supporters are afraid of Paul, because he's rather skilled at offering solutions to problems that the Republicans have failed to solve. Giuliani supporters don't like him because he's not liberal enough. Both groups have been praying for a moment to come for Paul to "screw up" in front of a camera, and thus clear the way for them to gain the nomination without ever having to give straight, informed answers to anything. During the debate, many thought that moment had finally come.

In case you've missed the media uproar, here's a partial transcript of the exchange:

Paul: Non-intervention was a major contributing factor. Have you ever read the reasons they attacked us? They attack us because we've been over there; we've been bombing Iraq for 10 years. We've been in the Middle East -- I think Reagan was right. We don't understand the irrationality of Middle Eastern politics.

Giuliani: Wendell, may I comment on that? That's really an extraordinary statement. That's an extraordinary statement, as someone who lived through the attack of September 11, that we invited the attack because we were attacking Iraq. I don't think I've heard that before, and I've heard some pretty absurd explanations for September 11th.

The astute observer will note that Paul did not say that we invited anyone to attack us. He asked, "Have you ever read the reasons they attacked us?" and then summarized the terrorists' own stated reasons.

Giuliani's chastising of Paul is seen by many as a touchdown in the arena of politics. The problem these people going to face - hopefully sooner than later - is what to do when it begins to hit the news cycle that Paul's answer was quite accurate.

From the Canada Free Press:

Equally important, it turns out that Paul's point - that the 9/11 attacks were linked to U.S. involvement in Iraq and the Middle East - was factually correct. Osama bin Laden's 1996 "Declaration of War against the Americans Occupying the Land of the Two Holy Places" specifically mentioned the situation in Iraq, blaming the U.S. for the impact of economic sanctions on the Saddam Hussein regime. Bin Laden accused the U.S. of "aggression" against Iraq and the record shows that his anti-Americanism was motivated, at least in part, by the U.S. military presence in Saudi Arabia.

Yet, Giuliani claimed "I don't think I've heard that before," in reference to Paul's citation of some of these facts. One would think that "America's Mayor" and "Mr. 9/11" would understand the genesis of the attacks that took almost 3,000 American lives.

The blind followers of Republican dogma should stop their victory dance for a moment and consider who actually lost this exchange. Giuliani looked passionate, for sure. But in a rush to defend his image as "America's Mayor", he also looked rather uninformed on the deeper background of the terrorists' motives behind 9/11.

It's been said that if you repeat a lie long enough, and loudly enough, eventually people believe it to be the truth. Those of you that believe we were attacked because we watch Mtv, let our women wear skirts, and drink alcohol are sadly mistaken. The terrorists had their reasons to attack us; they've even gone to the trouble of writing them down for easy reference. If one wishes to understand their hatred, it would be prudent to read what they themselves offer as explanation.

The full article is here, and well worth reading. Thanks go to Radley for pointing the way.

WINDFALL PROFITS

2007-05-15T21:11:00.000-04:00

It is often said that there are two constants in the world: death and taxes. Based on the news of late, I believe we can add yet another constant: than Americans will forever complain about the price of gasoline. I can recall a time when gasoline was relatively cheap, by any measure of economy. When I was in college (1989), I distinctly remember paying .82 cents/gallon for regular unleaded. Here in May 2007, it's nearly quadrupled.

I'm no different than anyone else. I have a monthly budget, based on the salary my employer pays me. The more I have to pay for gasoline, the less money I have for other things... be it necessities, or leisure spending. However, the nonstop drone of people complaining about the price of fuel has reached an all-time high. Today I saw a media poll asking "Should the government regulate gas prices?" The results are either astounding or horrifying, depending on your point of view: 76% of respondents answered "Yes".

Quite frankly, it's time for Americans to stop complaining about the Evil Big Oil Companies and pay more attention to who actually makes the most money from the sale of gasoline. So here are some facts about gasoline and the profits associated with it. In case you're a skeptic and don't care for these numbers, be aware that I've personally researched and sourced each one.

According to AAA, today's national average price of a gallon of gas is $3.087. In Cincinnati, I saw the price hovering around $3.15; it's higher in places like California, where laws requiring special blends of gasoline increase the price.

How much profit does Big Oil make for every gallon sold? According to Conoco-Phillips:

A multitude of factors can affect an individual oil company's profit on gasoline sales. However, data from the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) indicates that when the average price of unleaded regular peaked at about $3 a gallon in the middle of 2006, major companies were making a profit of about 10 cents a gallon on their U.S. refining and marketing operations.

But let's not forget the tax revenue. The national average is 45.8 cents/gallon. New Yorkers pay the highest rate of 60.8 cents/gallon, while Alaskan residents pay quite a bit less of 26.4 cents/gallon.

So how much money are we talking about? The Energy Information Administration lists U.S. Motor Gasoline Consumption for March 2007 at 384,700,000 gallons per day. Yes, that's 11.9 Billion gallons used in that month.

We'll do some quick math for March 2007, using the national tax average of .458/gallon and the average oil company profit of .10/gallon.

Big Oil's Profit: $1,192,570,000
Local, State, & Federal Profit: $5,461,970,600

No, that isn't a typo. In March 2007, the government's profits on gasoline were 4.58 time greater than that of the oil companies - or, 4.2 Billion dollars more. And by the way, we're only talking about gasoline. Diesel fuel and heating oil also come from crude, and of course those are taxed as well.

You'll note that I've consistently referred to the government's tax revenue as "profit"... because that's exactly what it is: profit. The government doesn't spend money to search for the oil, drill for it, extract it, ship it to a facility to refine it, and finally ship it to consumers. Oil companies spend billions of dollars on research, drilling, shipping, and marketing... the IRS simply collects a check.

The naysayers will speak of "federal oil subsidies". My answer to you: do some research of your own, and you'll find that the amount of subsidies awarded by Congress is hysterically minuscule compared to the tax revenues received.

Oil companies make quite a lot of money... I've no argument with that. But the facts are crystal clear - it's not Exxon-Mobil earning windfall profits.

It's Washington.

FREEDOM UNDER SIEGE

2007-05-12T14:01:00.000-04:00

One of the most notable turning points in my life came about when one of my closest friends gave me a copy of "The Fountainhead", by Ayn Rand. I still recall the day. It was a late afternoon in early December of 1996. We were sitting in the cafe area of Barnes & Noble on Apalachee Pkwy in Tallahassee, FL having some coffee. I was preparing to move to Cincinnati, and this was to be one of our last long chats together.

Right before it was time for us to depart, he excused himself for a moment and walked back into the store area. Within a few minutes, he returned with a newly purchased book: a parting gift, and gave it to me saying "This is my bible."

Michael Chiang changed my outlook on life that day.

It wasn't a matter of developing a new way of thinking, exactly... more accurately, it was an experience in which you find yourself reading things that echo your own thoughts. Thoughts and opinions I'd held in a very disorganized internal fashion were explored and defined. Rand's philosophy of reason, rationality, and the innate truth that man has the intrinsic right to exist and live for his own well-being are beliefs which drive every day of my life.

I've experienced a similar feeling recently, upon reading this: the first chapter of Freedom Under Siege, by Ron Paul. Find a few spare minutes this weekend. Pour yourself a cup of coffee or open a bottle of your favorite beverage, and read 27 pages of brilliance.

In previous posts, I've focused on the shortcomings of some of the Republican candidates for President. Now I present to you something different: the views and opinions of a man who does not say things to acquire votes, but instead says what he believes.

Stay tuned.

FAMILIAR WORDS

2007-05-07T21:45:00.000-04:00

"Freedom is about authority. Freedom is about the willingness of every single human being to cede to lawful authority a great deal of discretion about what you do."

Rudolph Giuliani
March 16, 1994

Hm... where have I read something like that before... oh, yes.

War is Peace
Freedom is Slavery
Ignorance is Strength

George Orwell, "1984"

Perhaps that is yet another belief that Rudy will gloss over in his quest for electoral votes. Hat tip to Arracos at the OFCC Forum for finding the speech online.

DOMAIN NAME CHANGE

2007-05-04T12:02:00.000-04:00

Small site-related update... on the off-chance that you've bookmarked this page, you can now find it at my newly-registered address:

http://www.gunpowder-treason.com/

Using the older blogspot URL will continue to work and just redirect here. So since I'm still using Blogger for posting and the URL is redirecting, what's the point of getting the domain name in the first place?

I'm not sure, except I like the solidity of having it published under my own address. It was a good enough reason for me. ;)

Well - that's all for now. Busy day ahead. I've got to give my FFL a call and go to the post office to mail a money order to a gentleman in Louisiana.

CONDITION CORRECTIONS

2007-05-01T20:08:00.000-04:00

Those that choose to carry a concealed weapon often speak of Col. Jeff Cooper's "Color Code". It's a very interesting system of approaching conflict. But as it happens with many things over time, the intended lesson has been somewhat misunderstood. Rather than write my own interpretation of the Color Code system, I'll let Col. Cooper speak for himself. (Article reproduced as original. Paragraphs have been reformatted for ease of reading.)

I have been teaching the Color Code for about 30 years now, but I have not been teaching it well. I keep seeing something handed back to me which purports to be what I have taught, but which is not. Clearly I am not as much of a teacher as I would like to be.

I believe I can speak freely of the Color Code because as it applies to defensive pistolcraft I invented it. I cannot, of course, say that what I think is right, but only that what I have preached is just that - what I have preached. It works, and it satisfies me, but not all the time. I have scores of cases now from men I have taught and who have reported back to me that their understanding of a Color Code saved their lives. This, of course, is very satisfying, but I do wish the matter were more clearly understood.

The Color Code refers not to a condition of peril, but rather to a condition of readiness to take life. Fortunately most people are very reluctant to take lethal action against another human being. Most people are reluctant to shoot for blood on a harmless game animal, until they become used to it.

To press the trigger on a human adversary calls for a wrenching effort of will which is always difficult to achieve and sometimes apparently impossible.

Thus we live our days in Condition White, which may or may not have anything to do with our danger, since quite frequently we are in deadly danger and do not realize it. Any time you cross directions out on a two-lane highway you are at the mercy of that character coming towards you in the opposite direction. Usually he is okay, but when he is under some sort of chemical influence, or is psychologically upset, he may only twitch his wheel to produce a multiple fatal accident.

Most of us would prefer to live in Condition White permanently, and many do, but those who are more aware of the nature of things are often in Yellow, which is a condition in which we are aware that the world is full of hazards which are human, and some of which may be obviated by our own defensive action. When one is in Condition Yellow he is aware that today may be the day. He is not in a combat mood, nor is he aware of any specific situation which may call for action on his part.

There is a vital difference between White and Yellow, and it has to do not with any specific enemy or a set of circumstances, but rather with your awareness that you individually may have to take decisive action on this very day.

If you are attacked in Condition White, you will probably die, or at least need a stretcher. If you are attacked in Condition Yellow, you will probably win, assuming that you are armed, awake and aware. The difference does not lie in the deadliness of the hazard facing you, but rather in your willingness to take a very unusual action.

If in the course of events you become aware of the possible existence in your presence of a lethal adversary, you switch from Yellow to Orange. The difference lies in the specific nature of your presumed antagonist, not in his evident competence or attitude. In Yellow you say to yourself, "I may have to shoot today." I may actually have to press my trigger on a human adversary, but I don't know who or where.

When you detect the presence of a target who may be the one you will have to engage, you shift from Yellow to Orange. In Yellow your mind-set is "I may have to shoot today." In Orange it is "I may have to shoot him today." At this point your normal reluctance becomes easier to overcome. Legal and moral aspects of the conflict are lowered and have been dismissed from your mind. Your attitude is dictated by the presence of that enemy standing there. You may have to shoot him, now, today.

What is needed is a trigger. The trigger is the act establishing that the situation is indeed a matter of lethal conflict. This is Condition Red, and in Red you have solved the psychological problem and have no further concerns beyond the technical. In Red you are go, and your mind is concerned only with front-sight and surprise.

Moving from the various Conditions into each other is easy to accomplish once it is understood. If you are attacked in White you will lose the fight. In Yellow you will have the advantage of initiative response over your antagonist. In Orange you are pretty safe, provided you are armed, alert and aware. In Red you win.

Simple, isn't it?

Clearly you cannot go any further than Red because in Red you have already made the lethal decision.

Complications are unproductive.

NEW LINK ADDITION

2007-04-26T19:34:00.000-04:00

There are many blogs out there; the ones worth reading are far outnumbered by the ones you can safely ignore. Faisca's site is definitely worth your time to take a look at. I hope you'll find his observations as well-written as I have.

WHO IS TO BLAME?

2007-04-25T20:52:00.000-04:00

While the truncheon may be used in lieu of conversation, words will always retain their power. Words offer the means to meaning, and for those who will listen: the enunciation of truth.

Fairness, justice, and freedom are more than words.

They are perspectives.

SHERYL, CONT.

2007-04-23T22:13:00.000-04:00

Late update: After some more research, I've found a line on Sheryl's personal blog that says she was joking about the toilet paper and sleeve napkins. I wonder if she was joking before the world began to mock her, or afterwards. As I recall, Don Imus said he was joking too... right before a few thousand people demand he be fired. ;)

These people, however, are not joking about a lifestyle free of toilet paper.

But Sheryl's overall environmental activism is not a joke (at least not to her, anyway). She and Laurie David are quite serious as they tour the countryside in the Bio-Diesel bus. So in light of their campaign to stop humanity from enjoying the advantages of modern life (while fully enjoying it themselves), I'll leave my original post below.

4 SQUARE INCHES

2007-04-23T20:31:00.000-04:00

Regular readers will note that most of my posts have a common theme, relating to firearms in some way. Either the guns themselves, or the laws that affect gun owners and the politicians that write the laws. So you'll have to forgive me for straying off the path a bit... this one is just too much to grind my teeth and ignore.

Today we were treated from a new revelation from musical artist Sheryl Crow. She's currently on some type of environmental tour with her friend and cohort Laurie David, a wealthy environmental activist. To pass the time, Sheryl has been writing down different ideas that occur to her - ways in which we can all save the planet.

Here's the one making the biggest news:

I propose a limitation be put on how many squares of toilet paper can be used in any one sitting. Now, I don't want to rob any law-abiding American of his or her God-given rights, but I think we are an industrious enough people that we can make it work with only one square per restroom visit, except, of course, on those pesky occasions where 2 to 3 could be required.

4 Square inches per bathroom visit should suffice, except for "pesky occasions". One is left to wonder if it's double-ply. The idea itself is rather ludicrous, but I'd like to draw attention to one particular part: "I propose a limitation be put on how many...". Everyone catch that? A limitation, not a suggestion. How exactly would she propose we be limited in our paper usage? Will this be voluntary, or will there be a ration per-week based on family size? Will one have to apply for an exemption in the event a family member becomes stricken with stomach flu? Will one be able to purchase "toilet offsets" in the same manner than Al Gore has justified his electric bill?

But wait - Sheryl's not finished. Now that she's leaving behind all social rules regarding bathroom hygiene, she moves on to the dinner table:

I also like the idea of not using paper napkins, which happen to be made from virgin wood and represent the height of wastefulness. I have designed a clothing line that has what's called a "dining sleeve." The sleeve is detachable and can be replaced with another "dining sleeve," after usage. The design will offer the "diner" the convenience of wiping his mouth on his sleeve rather than throwing out yet another barely used paper product. I think this idea could also translate quite well to those suffering with an annoying head cold.

We're to continue saving paper by wiping our mouths (and runny noses when sick) on our sleeves. I'm not sure which is more disgusting - a person walking around with their head cold all over their sleeve, or the lack of cleanliness associated with their bathroom visits.

It's little wonder Karl Rove said "Don't touch me", when Sheryl reached out to touch his arm at the Annual White House Correspondents' Association Dinner earlier this week. If she's already experimenting with these strange ideas, I'd rather she not touch me either.

Perhaps her oncologist should schedule some tests for brain cancer...

Laurie David is a special case as well.

While (Robert Jr.) Kennedy admiringly calls her "relentless," others say she's over the top. "Laurie can be effective, but also heavy-handed and a browbeater," said one politically active Hollywood insider, who spoke on condition of anonymity. "She'll go so far as to say that people who drive SUVs are terrorist supporters. That turns people off."

Such criticism doesn't faze Laurie, who indeed produced a set of controversial 2003 television commercials that equated people who buy big SUVS with backers of terrorist training camps. This is a woman who's not afraid to chase down Hummer drivers so she can flip them off from the seat of her Prius.

This from a woman who regularly flies cross-county in a Gulfstream 200, using 1200-1500 gallons of fuel in the process. That's about equal to driving a one Hummer 15,000 miles in a year.

Now don't get me wrong: I have no problem with Laurie David flying around in a private jet, nor do I particularly care that she owns mansions on both the east and west coasts. I'm not bothered that Sheryl's last North American tour consisted of three tractor trailers, four buses, and six cars. And if Al Gore is happy with his 10,000 sq ft home, burning through 18,000+ kWh per month - hey, it's his money.

Here's what I have a problem with: the damned hypocrisy.

I live in a relatively modest condo, and drive a small Japanese car. I don't take a convoy to work, Sheryl. I don't pay $1200 electric bills every month, Albert. And Laurie - I fly on Delta.

When the three of you cut your "carbon footprint" down to the size of mine (without your Purchase Carbon Offsets scam), then you can begin to offer me suggestions on what I can do to stop destroying the planet.

Until then, shut the hell up.

FIRST-TIME SHOOTERS

2007-04-21T22:02:00.000-04:00

One of the reasons some people have an aversion to firearms is merely a lack of proper exposure to them. They've seen them in movies, television, and music videos but haven't ever actually fired a weapon. The depiction of guns in film is often tightly married to feelings of fear, domination, and gratuitous violence... emotions which are quite rightly something that people don't feel comfortable with.

Those of us that actually own firearms know that the real experience of going to the range has nothing to do with fear nor violence. Learning to shoot is a very fun-filled experience. It can give you a feeling of accomplishment as you improve, and at the same time give you a skill that may someday save your life.

The best way I've found to get someone over their fear and dislike of guns is to invite them to the range and let them experience what firing a gun is really all about. A few months ago, I took The Bethy out to shoot a gun for the first time. She was worried that she might not do well, and as a result not enjoy the experience. We started off with the Ruger MKII, and after she got comfortable she tried the Glock 19. We had a lot of fun, and she did great.

Today, it was my co-worker Aaron's turn. I'd casually asked him at one point a few weeks ago if he'd like to try shooting. He said he'd never shot a gun before (except an air pistol), but would like to try it. Today was the day, and we hit the range with plenty of .22 and 9mm ammunition.

Aaron is the type of guy that likes to know all the details of what he's doing... how everything works as it does, and why it was designed that way. We had to wait about 20 minutes for a lane, but that gave me plenty of time to completely explain the mechanical workings of the guns... and most importantly, discuss ALL the aspects of gun safety.

When we finally hit the range, I could tell he had taken all of that talk to heart. His muzzle and trigger discipline were outstanding. Though his stance and grip are something we'll continue to work on, he certainly had the fundamentals down. It showed in his targets. We started with the Ruger, and once I felt he was comfortable we moved onto the Glock. For a first time shooter, Aaron was a great student.

As we packed up for the day, I could tell he had enjoyed it - especially when he mentioned that the next time I go shooting, he'd like to come along again. I'll be taking him up on that... range trips are always more fun if you have someone to shoot with.

Find a co-worker, a friend, or a neighbor that's hasn't shot a gun before. Invite them on your next range trip, and show them what firearms are really about. At the very least, you can mitigate some of the fears they have about guns. Even better: you may even introduce them to something they'll enjoy for a lifetime.

PREVENTATIVE MEASURES

2007-04-19T19:00:00.001-04:00

One of the benefits - or downsides - of working in the media is that you are treated to hearing the news throughout the day. Most people that watch the news do so at their leisure, and watch a particular news program at a particular time. Some people make it a point to always watch Shepard Smith on FoxNews; at least 139 people watch Katie Couric on CBS every night.

But those of us that toil every day to create the news have a slightly different perspective. We hear and read all the news - not just the snippets that are edited together for broadcast. Furthermore, we hear all of the broadcasts throughout the day - not just the 6pm newscast. And believe me, the news pieces that air at 11pm are sometimes quite different than those airing at noon or 6pm.

It's not really a conspiracy matter. The news programs have different content based on market research. For example, morning news is typically "lighter" than the evening. People don't like to wake up to gloom and doom... it's not the type of thing that gets them in the mood to drive to work.

Perhaps I should start getting to the point...

Over the past 3 days, I've heard an incredible amount of news related to the Virginia Tech shooting. As the story continues to develop and mature, I'm beginning to sense a particular slant or trend that involves the motivations of Cho Seung-Hui. Writers, researchers and reporters are all scrambling about to learn the details of Cho's past, in an effort to find out what events in his own history led to his final murderous actions.

I've seen reports discussing the fact that Cho came from a poor family, and that he felt a derision towards rich people. I've been informed that Cho was bullied in Junior High School, because he was Korean. I've read that Cho suffering from deep depression. I've seen news reporters remind us all of the symptoms of depression - how to recognize it, and interact with a depressed person. I've listened to people talk about Cho's feelings in inadequacy, as it relates to his mastery of speaking the English language. I've heard his classmates at VT describe him as a loner, and socially withdrawn... rarely talking, and having no friends (nor apparently wanting to form friendships with others).

Quite frankly, I'm sick of hearing about Cho's past and I'm insulted that somehow I'm supposed to feel a bit of pity for the man.

Forgive a quick tangent on an important, but minor matter: please note I called him a "man" in the sentence above. Not a child, not a college kid. He was neither a child nor a college kid. Cho was 23 years old. He hadn't been a "kid" for several years... so please, let's have no more descriptions of him which imply that somehow his age was a factor.

When Cho's victims were staring down the barrel of his gun, his past history was of no consequence. His motivations did not matter. There were only two relevant factors:

1. He had a deadly weapon, and was intent upon killing as many people as possible until he was stopped or became bored with killing.

2. How could one stop such a person from continuing to kill people?

One of the most saddening things about that day was that no one in the building had an effective way of stopping Cho's rampage. Virginia Tech has a firm policy in place which forbids students who are licensed to carry a concealed weapon from bringing a gun onto campus. Virgina Tech is what people call a "designated gun-free zone". Depending on your locale, bringing a weapon into such a place can lead to expulsion or arrest.

It's nothing if not obvious that Cho had no concerns about VT's gun-free policies. Someone who is anxiously planning the death of 32 people is not concerned with any such policy. Gun-free policies only affect one type of gun owner - the ones that would never commit such a crime to begin with.

Some politicians, such as Carolyn McCarthy and Barbara Boxer have already begun to talk about new legislation which will somehow prevent this kind of thing from happening again. They're discussing waiting periods, gun shows, registration, and banning "high capacity" magazines.

Where did Cho purchase his guns? No, he didn't take advantage of the mythical "loop hole" at a gun show. He purchased them from a licensed gun dealer, after undergoing the required federal background check.

How did the waiting period affect him? Virginia prevented Cho from purchasing both guns at the same time; I've read the state has a "1 handgun a month" law. That wasn't a problem for Cho. He purchased his first handgun in early March, and then purchased the second one a month later. He had planned this attack for weeks; a three-day waiting period was of no corcern to him.

High-capacity magazines? Would it have really made any difference if Cho had to reload twice instead of once? Cho wasn't discretely carrying one handgun with a magazine inserted; he was carrying two guns and had extra magazines stuffed in his pockets. I don't believe that his killing spree would have been any less effective if he had to carry five magazines instead of four.

With all their talk of creating more restrictive gun laws, it seems that many lawmakers, colleges, and a few law-enforcement brass are overlooking the one solution hasn't been tried: allowing people more latitude to arm themselves in self-defense.

They made laws to restrict Cho in nearly every way possible. They made him wait to purchase his guns, they declared he could not bring a weapon on campus, and most certainly they've made murder illegal. Cho showed patience with the laws that were inconvenient, and completely ignored the other ones.

That day, the laws only denied the victims their means to defend their lives.

I'm not clairvoyant. I cannot say with certainty that if one student had been armed, Cho would have been stopped. Perhaps that one student would have been the first victim.

However, I can say with certainty what the result will be when no one but the murderer is armed. Watch the news, Carolyn McCarthy. Watch the news, Michael Bloomberg. Watch the news, Sarah Brady. The result is 32 dead college students... all of whom followed your pathetic laws, all of whom were unarmed and unable to offer any effective defense.

You believe that if we can somehow come to "understand" what led to Cho's actions, and further restrict American gun rights, we can prevent such things from happening again. Here's another newsflash for you: crazed murderers don't care about your laws. Once a person has decided they are willing to break one of the highest laws - the one against murder - it's laughable to believe that your law banning guns at school will have any effect.

And finally:

To all the politicians, writers, pundits and police captains who believe guns could not have stopped this tragedy, I ask this question:

When the students were dialing 911, who were they calling for help?

People with guns.

YES, SHE'S PAID TO MAKE LAWS

2007-04-19T13:02:00.000-04:00

If you're trying to ban something, you should at least have a clue as to what it is you're trying to ban. Carolyn McCarthy is one such clueless person.

No, Carolyn. A barrel shroud is NOT that "shoulder thing that goes up". It doesn't make the weapon more deadly. It doesn't allow the weapon to fire more bullets, or fire at a faster rate.

Carolyn, a barrel shroud is simply a piece of sheet metal with holes it. When you fire a gun, the barrel heats up. The shroud covers the barrel so that the shooter can't touch the hot barrel and burn their hand.

In other words, Carolyn: it's a safety feature.

The resulting safety factor is no different than the plastic guard on a document shredder. The guard doesn't help the machine shred any faster. It just protects the user's fingers from accidentally being shredded along with the paper.

Kudos to Tucker for not letting her evade the question until she had demonstrated her complete ignorance.

TOO MANY GUNFIGHTS

2007-04-16T22:02:00.000-04:00

There are far too many gunfights going on far too regularly. I could be in the minority here, but I tend to doubt it. Everyday, another one seems to start here and there. Never a winner, never a loser - yet the participants seem to think there can and will be a victor at some point and the battle will end.

I'm not talking about people who fight with guns, by the way. I'm talking about people who fight about guns.

Humankind has a lot of passion, and one thing we all seem to be passionate about are the choices we make... even to the point of fault. For example, it's often not enough to be satisfied with a choice; some feel that their choice has to be constantly reinforced as the "correct" one by telling someone else that their choice is wrong.

Visit a random forum that deals with firearms, and you'll doubtlessly find one of these endless battles.

...

The posters that believe the revolver is a simple, yet superior handgun will argue with the fans of the semi-automatic.

The semi-automatic fans argue amongst themselves about which is better, the 1911 or a more modern polymer handgun.

The polymer crowd argues the merits of Glock vs XD.

The Glock owners argue which caliber Glock is the best, 9mm vs .40.

The 9mm guys argue over which is the better choice, a G17 or a G19.

The ones that own a G19 argue about whether it's better to go with a fast & light 115gr or a slower & heavier 147gr.

And I'm sure at some point there's been a heated discussion over which brand of 147gr hollowpoint is the most effective.

...

It's one thing to be passionate about your choice of handgun, but it's also important to remember that your choice is exactly that: YOUR choice. One person's reasons for choosing to carry an HK do not necessarily have anything to with why another chooses to carry a Kimber.

When people choose to enter an internet gun battle, it should be for the right reason. It's good to offer knowledge and experience about a particular firearm, in order to help someone learn more about it. It's rather pointless to carry on a flame war, acting as if someone's dislike of your gun is akin to them spitting on your mother.

Or to paraphrase a succinct post I came across in one of those 12-page flame wars:

"What if people spent as much time writing to politicians, demanding fewer gun control laws, as they do yelling at each other about which gun is the best?"

It's worth considering.

INTENTION VS RESULT

2007-04-01T12:44:00.000-04:00

The Bethy and I have a few debates we occasionally return to. I doubt either of us may ever change our opinion to the other's, but it's always a good discussion ;). One of our disputed topics is the notion of Intention vs Results.

Beth maintains that if one's intentions are good and noble, there is virtue in attempting to solve a problem... even if the problem itself remains unsolved. I take the opposite view; unless you've solved the problem (or actually done something tangible to improve it), there's nothing virtuous about it at all.

To put it in the simplest terms, Beth will give you credit if you try to do something good - even if in the end you fail. I'll only give you credit if you succeed.

So it was interesting this morning when I read that there has been a new discovery in the matter of Amelia Earhart's disappearance... someone has found the diary of a reporter who was covering her ill-fated trip around the world. (IMHO, this diary won't give much insight to Amelia's actual fate. It's a good headline, though.)

As I stepped out onto my balcony for the day's first smoke, I began to think about Earhart. And then it suddenly occurred to me: who was the first woman to circle the globe solo?

Countless books have been written about Earhart, and though I don't feel like checking Google or IMDB, I'm sure there have been a few movies or TV specials. Certainly the History Channel has taken up her story. Back in the days when children actually learned history in school, all of us knew the story of the brave female aviator who attempted to prove that flying around the globe was not only something a man could do.

The only problem is: she didn't prove it.

Our culture remains intrigued by the fate of Amelia Earhart, yet we've mostly forgotten who actually accomplished flying solo around the world.

Jerrie Mock was the woman that succeeded. Go on and click the link for her story... it's a very good one.

We remember Earhart for her intentions, but have forgotten Mock's results.

How strange.

THE ART OF THE DRAW

2007-03-31T11:52:00.000-04:00

I've always found this clip entertaining. Due to the frequency that gun owners post it on the internet, I suspect I'm not alone.

I believe the reason it's so popular is because of the scenario it depicts: a close-quarters encounter with an armed opponent. Hollywood has filmed countless gun battles, but typically the scenes range from improbable to completely unbelievable.

Nearly every street encounter that people will experience will be with an armed thug standing within just a few feet, if not right in your face. There won't be any Matrix-type spins and flips along the wall. The bad guys won't be emptying several magazines from their automatic weapons (all bullets missing the hero), while the hero dives to the ground, rolls into a crouching stance and methodically takes each bad guy down with a headshot.

The encounter will be quick, it may be unexpected. The odds are good that your opponent has had these encounters in the past, with other victims. It's quite possible that the opponent has used his weapon before. It's also possible that he's been shot in the past, and doesn't experience petrified fear at the sight of your weapon.

When you practice with your handgun, keep this video in the back of your mind. How often do you practice dry-firing your weapon? How often do you practice your draw? How quickly can you fire from rest and put a bullet in the COM?

In a street encounter, we won't have time to check our shooting stance, correct the grip, double-check our sight alignment and slowly squeeze the trigger. All of those actions must practiced until they are completely automatic.

The thought process cannot contain several sequential steps.

It must be one word: REACT.

GIULIANI ON REGISTRATION

2007-03-29T19:38:00.000-04:00

Those of you that will be voting in the Republican primary should remember this clip as you step into the booth. Whether the next President has a (D) or (R) next to their name matters little. What matters is their dedication to preserving your rights.

On his campaign website, Giuliani writes this as his position on the 2nd Amendment:

Rudy Giuliani is a strong supporter of the Second Amendment. When he was Mayor of a city suffering an average of almost 2000 murders a year, he protected people by getting illegal handguns out of the hands of criminals.

Here's the problem: Giuliani's method was not just to take handguns away from criminals. He took it several steps further and sued most of the firearms industry.

He seems to wish to sit on both sides of the fence. On one hand, he says he believes in the 2nd Amendment. On the other hand, his support for that right appears to be limited to certain uses of firearms; ie, he supports the use of guns when hunting, or by law enforcement - but appears to firmly believe that Americans should be restricted in owning a gun for self defense.

Fortunately, the lawsuit was effectively ended after President Bush signed the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act in 2005.

Beyond the lawsuit, New York requires a license to own a handgun. Not just to carry one concealed - to own one. If you wish to own a handgun, and keep it IN YOUR HOME - prepare to apply for a license. The license may take up to 6 months to be processed. Furthermore, the decision of whether or not you will be granted a license is solely up to the licensing officer. If you are denied a license, the denial can only be overturned in court by proving that the denial was "arbitrary and capricious."

The 2nd Amendment is clear: your right shall not be infringed. I see no difference in New York charging $439 for a handgun license, and the poll tax which was eliminated with the 24th Amendment.

Don't let the Republican label fool you - Giuliani is no friend to gun owners.

BRILLIANT

2007-03-19T21:41:00.000-04:00

Virginia Gun Dealers Hold Contest to Protest New York Mayor Bloomberg's Gun Policy

"Ask about the Bloomberg Gun GiveAway" reads a sign taped to the gun shop's register, beckoning customers to enter the drawing named for New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, whose federal lawsuits against gun dealers in five states have drawn the wrath of Virginia's gun enthusiasts.

Bloomberg says the dealers holding the contest are sick. The dealers call Bloomberg names that aren't fit to print.

You can read the rest here.

Michael, here's a bit of advice for you - trying spending more time worrying about your own police slaughtering unarmed citizens and less time worrying about gun stores in other states.

9MM FAILURES: BEHIND THE STORY

2007-03-19T19:41:00.000-04:00

New shooters often ask which handgun and/or caliber is "best" for self-defense. It's inevitable that they'll get as many answers as there are handguns and calibers.

Some people mention their own gun as the best... whether it's a Glock, a 1911, an XD, or a revolver.

In answering the caliber question, one popular answer is "anything that begins with .4". Another is "a 9mm may expand, but a .45 will never shrink".

The answer we should always begin with is "The best firearm for you is one that is reliable, feels comfortable, and that you can afford." The best caliber is "the one you can can shoot with consistent control, and afford to practice with." Once we've established these two points as key, then we can begin to move into other areas of manufacturer, type of action, and the size of the bullet.

Some shooters are partial to revolvers, and for good reason: generally speaking, they are the most reliable and the easiest to operate. A good revolver can also be more accurate than some semi-autos, given that the barrel is connected directly to the frame; there's no "play" between the two pieces to affect accuracy.

Other shooters prefer the semi-auto, and within that camp there are various sub-camps that will declare the 1911 to be the only pistol worth shooting, or that the 1911 is a old-timer's gun which (while a notable firearm) has been far eclipsed by polymer guns in terms of reliability, ease-of-maintenance, and cost.

No one can really decide for someone else which gun is best for that shooter... all we can offer is advice and feedback on what our own experience has been. The advice I always give someone is to shoot various guns, and determine which one feels the best in their own hand.

Caliber is yet another choice to be made, especially if your chosen gun is available in multiple calibers. While the shooting community generally agrees that anything less than a .38 isn't a good defense round, we tend to endlessly debate the best higher-end choice. Some won't carry less than a .45, while others feel the 9mm is a proven round. Some shooters have decided to follow the lead of law enforcement and carry the relatively new .40.

While reading posts in the countless gun forums out there, I've often read the story of the Miami Bank Robbery incident. It was this incident which prompted LE to find a replacement for the 9mm round, due to the poor performance of the round in this incident. Shooters who malign the 9mm in favor of larger rounds often mention this case as "proof" that the 9mm lacks power and penetration.

Until recently, I'd found the story mildly interesting... although it didn't affect my choice in carrying a 9mm. But yesterday I came upon a link which shed some new light on the subject. Especially interesting was this diagram, which shows how the 9mm failed to stop the assailant.

Here's the part I find especially notable: the "failed shot" entered the man's arm, went through it, entered the right side of the torso, went through the ribs, and then stopped just short of the heart.

Now in terms of failing to hit the heart (and kill the man) - yes, the 9mm round did fail. But I want to point out two things. First, the round itself was 115 gr. That's rather small compared to what is currently available in 9mm... both 125 gr and 147 gr are popular choices. Secondly, while the round did fail to penetrate the heart - it penetrated his arm, back out again, and then went through the ribs! While I'm not a pathologist nor a ballistics expert, my opinion is that if the round had begun it's fateful journey from the front of the chest - we might not be having this conversation.

Details of the entire incident are available here, so there's no need in restating the whole matter. But to sum up: shot placement by the LEO's was fairly non-existent due to many factors. The shot that "failed" certainly had a lot of penetration - just not enough in this circumstance. And finally, the round itself was a very light 115 grains. Might a 147 gr might have reached the heart...? Perhaps, perhaps not. But it's worth considering.

Gun owners should base their decisions on many factors, and the story above is indeed a factor to consider. But it's not the end of the story. Countless people have been stopped with every caliber from .38 special to .44 magnum... and while this one incident did change the climate in law enforcement, it is not a universal verdict on the lethality of the 9mm cartridge.

THE TRUTH ABOUT REGISTRATION

2007-03-05T20:34:00.001-05:00

Gun control advocates have a lot of areas from which to begin legislation. Their attack method varies, depending on the demographic of people they're attempting to disarm.

In the inner-cities, they try to ban inexpensive firearms. The "Saturday Night Special" is a favorite target, and often mentioned by name in their list of banned guns. Some cities have placed limits on magazine capacity or ban combat rifles like the AR15. Lately, a few legislators have come up with a rather unique solution to the problem of banning guns without having to deal with 2nd Amendment issues: requiring a license to purchase ammunition.

Some states pass laws requiring a citizen to register their firearms, and other states have limits on how many firearms you are allowed to purchase in a given time frame - you may only purchase 1 firearm/month.

If one path of attack isn't successful, the anti's simply change to a different plan. If asking the state to maintain a NICS database isn't successful, a city will simply deny a business license to entrepreneurs who wish to open a gun store.

As with any proposed law, supporters of gun rights tend to have a list of standard responses which they'll use to debate the issue.

For example, we continue to fight against registration of firearms.

Many times I've read something like this:

"Registration will not work, because criminals will not register their guns. Only law-abiding citizens will comply. Therefore, crime will not be reduced."

This is certainly true. However, it's missing the point. To adequately fight this battle, you have to understand the goal of the anti-gunner.

Once again, I need you to think.

The goal of the hardcore anti is not to reduce crime. Reducing crime is merely a hopeful afterthought. The goal of the anti is to get rid of guns. Most don't believe they'll ever be rid of all the guns... and they're not bothered by that. So long as they collect and destroy as many guns as possible, they'll believe it's a worthy cause.

Think about this for a moment, and then think about why the standard response above doesn't remove their desire to take away your gun.

I'm going to make up some numbers for the sake of illustration. Let us assume there are 10 million guns in America. Let us also assume that 1 out of 10 guns is owned by a criminal. I suspect I'm being very liberal, and the number of guns owned by criminals is a far lower percentage. But for the moment, let's go with 1 out of every 10 guns.

Now, let's say that all the law-abiding citizens registered their guns. And after the registration, somehow the anti's were able to confiscate and destroy all of the registered guns.

Are the dots beginning to connect?

Given our fictional numbers above, the anti's have destroyed 9 million guns.

The criminals still own 1 million guns, but that is not important to the anti. Their goal was not to disarm the criminal... their goal was to confiscate and destroy as many guns as possible, and using that logic - registration was a HUGE success!

I'm not testing the limits of reality. Consider this quote from Tom Gresham's site:

When Tom Diaz, of the Violence Policy Center, was on Gun Talk, I forced him to admit that he would like to ban all guns. What about the police, I asked. Once we get all the other guns, he said, the police won't need their guns, either.

They want to be rid of all the guns, end of story.

Let's ponder a secondary point, which expands on my earlier article on the 2nd Amendment:

What a criminal will or will not do with his illegal gun has no bearing on my right to own one. To state it a different way: if all the criminals alive today were to give up their guns, would YOU give your gun up as well?

I certainly wouldn't.

When anti's are told this:

"Registration will not work, because criminals will not register their guns. Only law-abiding citizens will comply. Therefore, crime will not be reduced."

...they are also being inadvertently told that your reason for owning a gun is because criminals own guns. And if the lawmakers could remove the guns from criminal hands, you'd be happy to consider it.

There will always be criminals. Many haven't even been born yet. It's a fact that anti's are loathe to admit, but a fact nonetheless. Some of them illegally wield guns; others wield knives and some carry steel pipes. Others need no weapon at all, and rely on their physical size, strength, and the element of surprise.

A gun can be a resource with which to protect your life.

My life, and the worth of my life, is not defined by whether or not a criminal decides to carry a gun. My right to own a gun and protect myself is not dependent on a criminal's preferred method of assault.

Remember the anti's true goal.

It's not about reducing crime. It's about reducing the number of guns.

YOU CALL THIS A "CHOICE"?

2007-03-04T18:54:00.000-05:00

FatWhiteGuy is about a big of fan as John McCain as I am. But to be fair, I have about as much interest in having McCain winning the election as the rest of them. The biggest issue I have with the 3 Republican candidates is that I can't determine why they expect conservatives to be excited about the chance to vote for them.

The Democrat candidates are easy to understand... the Republicans, not so much. Let's go down the list:

- Hillary Clinton
If you've hated nearly everything that happened in America from 1980-88, or since 1992, Hillary is your candidate. If your most secret desire is to see Ted Nugent killed with his own black rifle and his remains ground up and used as fertilizer for organic produce - she's your choice.
- Barack Obama
If you're a liberal that wants to win the White House, but think Hillary is far too polarizing - Obama fits the bill. He's fairly unassuming, and to many appears to be the one who can take an even-handed liberal approach to leadership. He's also a new player in the game, so there isn't as much baggage in his closet.
- John Edwards
Erm... given that Edwards lost out the last time he was in a primary, and lost the last time he was on the VP Ticket... I'm not sure why you'd vote for him. The only reason I can think of is that he's a white guy, and you can't bring yourself to vote for a woman or a black guy. Or maybe you just really like millionaire personal injury lawyers.

...onto the RINO's...

- John McCain
Do I really need to retype it all? Nah. Check the post below.
- Rudolph William Louis Giuliani III
Wow. Long name. Almost sounds like royalty. Anyhoo... let's take a look at Rudy's positions: Gay Marriage - Supports It. Abortion - Supports It. Gun Control - Supports It. Now, let me be clear on one particular point: I support gay rights. But it's not stretching reality to point out that the average Bush Conservative doesn't. Nor do they support abortion or gun control. Which begs the questions: a) why is Giuliani a Republican b) how exactly does he plan to convince Republicans that he's not really a Democrat?
- Mitt Romney
I can't tell if Romney is the Republican version of Obama (no huge marks against him yet) or Edwards (white guy.) Possibly it's just a combination of both. Overall, it looks as if Romney is your candidate if you can't stand McCain and think Rudy is one of those New York RINOs.

So which one of the above will I be voting for in the primaries?

None of them. I'm a registered Libertarian.

GLOCK MADNESS

2007-03-04T12:09:00.000-05:00

Something that continues to mystify me is the strange over-obsession with Glock handguns. I'm not talking about the people that own a full-sized for range use and a compact for daily carry; I'm talking about people that seem to collect them like Pokemon.

I understand the desire to collect unique, old, historical, or rare firearms. Or sometimes you'll find something that you can't explain your desire for, but nonetheless you'll pull out the wallet and take home a new prize. Some wants and needs have no justification. Nor is it required.

I don't need an H&K VP70-Z, but I do want one. I also don't need a Ruger revolver, but I'm still kicking myself for not buying the one that I saw for sale last week in a forum. Nor do I have a practical need for a Walther P99-AS 9mm, but the gun feels so nice in my hand that I hope to buy one some day.

But some Glock collectors make me wonder. People that own duplicates of the same model, and multiple models. Keep in mind that we're talking about a handgun with a design that is virtually identical across the spectrum. There's no functional nor size nor aesthetic difference in a G19 and a G23; the only difference is caliber. Yet it never fails to amuse me when someone proudly states they own a G17, two G22's, three G19's, two G23's, and they're on the hunt for another G23 "to join the brothers in the safe".

I wonder even more about Glock fans that constantly bemoan the fact that Glock doesn't innovate often enough. They generally post messages on forums begging for Gaston to offer some combination of caliber and features that isn't available.

Here's the part I have trouble with:

Glock makes 23 different models (not even counting the 380, which generally isn't available for import) in various slide lengths, calibers, width, and capacity.

I seriously believe that if Glock offered every caliber in every slide length (from compact to longslide) with every capacity (single-stack to hi-capacity) with both types of rails... some people would still find some variation that Glock hadn't thought of and still not be happy.

Here's my point: whatever your reasons for collecting Glocks - they're your own reasons, and likely none of my business. But sometimes it doesn't look like "collecting"; it looks more like "compulsive buying".

If you can't find the perfect combo that you're after, then perhaps it's time to look at another brand of firearm. Or even better, take 1 of the 18 Glocks you own out of the safe, go to the range, and shoot 200 rounds through it.

And for the record: in case any readers think I just don't like Glocks... my defensive handgun of choice is a G19.

THE LIE OF THE 2ND AMENDMENT

2007-03-03T14:02:00.001-05:00

I need you to think.

Gun owners have been defending their rights for quite awhile. Long before Carolyn McCarty's current bill. Long before Bill Clinton's 1994 ban. Some believe that United States vs Miller (1939) was the birth of modern gun control.

All of that legislation has certainly impacted gun owners, though of course there have been other laws passed. There are literally thousands of laws in America at the federal, state, and local level which affect your right to own and carry a firearm.

But for the moment, let's put the legislation aside. Let's forget about House Bill 10-22 and focus on something we all hold dear - the 2nd Amendment of the Constitution.

Like many of you, I read a lot of blogs and participate in various web forums. And over the years, I have heard many people argue about their right to own a firearm. Unfortunately, many of the arguments I've heard aren't correct.

Let's examine a couple of them.

1. "The 2nd Amendment gives me the right to own a gun."

...and a slightly reworded version...

2. "The 2nd Amendment guarantees my right to own a gun."

Both arguments are completely wrong. This isn't a matter of opinion, and it's not a matter of semantics. Every time someone tells an anti-gun activist or politician that the Constitution gives them a right to own a firearm, they're wrong. That is not what the Constitution says, and using those two statements in debate actually weakens your argument.

I need you to think.

Let's look at what the 2nd Amendment actually says. Many people can quote it, but far too many people don't understand it.

"A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed."

I can hear someone in the back of the room muttering "What's your point, thorn? It's the same damned thing."

Here's the point. And it's very important one: the 2nd Amendment does not GIVE you the right to own a firearm. It forbids the government from taking that right away from you.

Semantics? Splitting Hairs?

No.

Words mean something. And here's what the words of the 2nd Amendment mean:

You intrinsically have the right to own a firearm. For whatever reason you choose. Perhaps you enjoy owning a gun because of it's historical nature. Perhaps you enjoy the mechanical aspects and work on them as a hobby. Or perhaps you own a gun to defend your life.

It really doesn't matter why you own a gun. The Constitution does not require you to justify it. It doesn't give you a right to own it. What it does do is specifically forbid the government from taking that right away.

I need you to think.

Your mere existence gives you the right to own a firearm, just as your existence gives you the right to breathe. The right to think, and the right to speak.

The Constitution doesn't give you any rights. Rather, it specifically lists the rights that you have which the government is not allowed to take away from you.

Here's the point - stop telling people that the 2nd Amendment gives you the right to own a gun. Stating that is also stating that the government has the "right" to take it away.

Instead, tell the anti-gun activists, the politicians, the friend, and the co-worker that your right to own a firearm is guaranteed by the fact that you exist.

AND THE ANSWER IS...

2007-03-02T12:51:00.000-05:00

The Bethy took a shot in yesterday's game of "Name the Candidate" with an answer of Barack Obama.

Her reasons were pretty good:

I'm going with Obama, because everyone seems to be in love with him right now, and you think that his leftist views are being overshadowed by his charming personality. You don't want people to be deceived.

Unfortunately, I suppose it was a trick question... given that the answer wasn't one of the Democrats I listed at the end of the post.

The correct answer is:

John McCain. Seen here impersonating a pirate.

Yes, one of the front-runners for President in the Republican party has views so far to the left that one can easily mistake him for a Democratic candidate.

No doubt his supporters will do everything possible to obscure his past voting record.

IN CASE YOU MISSED IT...

2007-03-01T23:29:00.000-05:00

This is a bit old, but it will never get old.

David Wu (D) Oregon
January 10, 2007

ON MATTERS OF PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATES

2007-03-01T22:11:00.000-05:00

Ah, the joys of the presidential elections. That wonderful point in democracy where common people from common places travel to other common places to convince other common people that one is the best choice to be the next president of the United States.

Let's play a game, shall we?

I like to call this "name the candidate".

This candidate is notable for the following positions:

1. This candidate was against the Bush tax cuts in 2001.
2. This candidate believes in limiting free speech.
3. This candidate favors granting citizenship to the approximately 12-20 million illegal aliens in America.
4. This candidate is against drilling for oil in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, which would significantly lower American dependency on foreign oil sources.
5. This candidate supports legislation to require background checks at gun shows, for sales between private individuals.
6. This candidate supports forcing television and radio stations to give free airtime to political candidates as a public interest.

So... who's the mystery candidate?

Clinton? Obama? Edwards?

READY, AIM...

2007-03-01T21:45:00.000-05:00

Hi there.

I'm thorn.

Let's get started.