Sunday, April 29, 2007
If you just peeled off one of the blood blisters from slapping mags into your Glock and now you have a new one you might have a redneck.
Fun and educational. The fun was moving and shooting, knocking down poppers and steel plates. The education was finding out how horribly slow I draw and re-load and how utterly poorly I re-load my magazines when under the clock.
Two areas to work on that don't require actually being on a range since one can dry-practice both of them.
A VERY simplified El Presidente taught me about the slow draw and slow reload. Later on when running our little 32 round IPSC field course for the second time I found that I hadn't seated my magazine on my re-load. I found this out when the full magazine hit the ground while I was firing the round still in the chamber. Then the second full magazine also slid free of the chute as I was cycling the slide. Another was finally slapped home, slide racked and I finished the course of fire. The instructor did the course in 15 seconds. My second run was over 40. The instructor cut it to under 11 on his second run but missed one target.
Yes, my first run was under the 40 that I ran up due to re-loading errors. And it's a LOT better to find my errors in this atmosphere than if I ever need to do it in real crisis.
My shooting had acceptable accuracy, better than most of the other 5 students. I had a few misses on the steel and I had some early in the day when trying to fire 6 rounds at .25 seconds each. Distance to steel was 10 yards. I didn't hit the no-shoots.
I'm not clear to actually participate in IPSC matches and hope to be in one soon.
'Bout time I find out I'm the 142nd fastest gun in the west.
Monday, April 23, 2007
An adjunct professor was fired after leading a classroom discussion about the Virginia Tech shootings in which he pointed a marker at some students and said "pow."
This professor wasn't threatening anyone. It was clear that his marker wasn't a real gun. He didn't even use the phrase "nappy headed".
The five-minute demonstration at Emmanuel College on Wednesday, two days after a student killed 32 people on the Virginia Tech campus, included a discussion of gun control, whether to respond to violence with violence, and the public's "celebration of victimhood," said the professor, Nicholas Winset.
During the demonstration, Winset pretended to shoot some students. Then one student pretended to shoot Winset to illustrate his point that the gunman might have been stopped had another student or faculty member been armed.
I don't think that it was the pointing and saying "pow, pow" that the college objected to. Not so long as the professor was pointing at students, playing the part of Cho the Coward.
No, I think what got the professor fired was continuing the discussion to the point where a student pointed and "pow"ed right back. The professor allowed the students to think about what might have happened if some of the deliberately disarmed victims of Cho the Coward had been armed.
Allowing students to think isn't what liberal arts colleges are for. They exist to TELL students what to think.
The college issued a statement saying: "Emmanuel College has clear standards of classroom and campus conduct, and does not in any way condone the use of discriminatory or obscene language."Do you see any discrimatory or obscene language mentioned in the news article?
No, there is none mentioned. Unless you consider the concept of fighting back as obscene.
I think that's exactly what the college meant with their statement.
Saturday, April 21, 2007
A Navy Blue Angel jet crashed during an air show Saturday, plunging into a neighborhood of small homes and trailers and killing the pilot, the county coroner said.
Nancy Pelosi has called an emergency session in the House to lead the Democrat party in setting a deadline for withdrawing all U.S. forces from airshows.
In a related story the Democrats offered the troops they bring home from Iraq money for college. A spokesperson for military personnel reportedly told Speaker Pelosi that the troops would rather use the money to stay in Iraq. "At least in Iraq we get to shoot back!"
Nancy Pelosi vowed to make sure that this situation is corrected by disarming our troops in Iraq.
Wednesday, April 18, 2007
Whether 'tis nobler in the press to suffer the slings and errors of having to post facts or to take up arms and weild a sea of lies.
On 4/17/07 in the Denver airwaves Craig Silverman, a former prosecutor made an assertion without evidence. You'd think a lawyer would know better but since he was a prosecutor I guess that is part of the job description.
Silverman asserted, on the air, that the Clinton Assault Weapons Ban saved lives.
He the further compounded his assertion by stating that criminal gangs are arming with "assault weapons" in "burgeoning numbers."
Since I'm not a lawyer I have to actually work for a living. I listen to this radio show sometimes when the two co-hosts aren't being totally lame. I do have to deal with real life and can't hang around hoping these two self-inflating egos would deign to take my call.
I went home and when I could I used the contact button on the KHOW website to issue a challenge to Craig Silverman. I challenged him to back up his assertion that the AWB saved lives by posting actual crime statistics from the Justice Department or FBI. I also challenged him to post from the same sources evidence that criminal gangs are using assault weapons in large numbers.
I'm just a hard working person with a small blog. Craig Silverman is a lawyer who doubtless already pays for access to Lexis and has law enforcement contacts. He has a radio show and a website for that radio show. He has a staff to put things on that website.
I don't consider such a challenge to be onerous to someone who draws money from being a talking head. If he makes an assertion on the air then he should be able to back it up.
If, as I suspect, that he can't back up his claims then I demanded a full apology be posted on the same venue.
The ball is in Craig Silverman's court. Is he a man of honor or a Nifong?
Sunday, April 15, 2007
I decided against buying a gun for BAG day this year. I'm focusing on specific shooting activities and attempting to avoid distractions that would lessen the impact of specific training I'm working on.
Well, that and I couldn't decide what I really wanted.
I did not spend BAG day without putting something into action, however. I gave myself training.
I took a course from a local instructor in defensive shooting with a handgun. The instructor isn't a gun-store commando or a mall ninja. He is a retired police trainer. Since he is not instructing civillians I'd have to say he doesn't fit the "Only Ones" mold. In point of fact he showed my fellow students Lee Paige's performance on the "Glock Foty".
Yesterday was all class room with almost no hands-on. We watched some videos and listened to the instructor. There were 8 people in attendance (2 more had registered but did not show up). Seven men and one woman (the wife of one of the men). We had some friendly times and a lot of fun on both days but nothing compares to trigger time and we got a lot of that in today.
This morning started with a drive down back country roads to a private shooting range. The owner and his son were very friendly to us and we had no problems from neighbors even when making lots of loud noise on a bright, sunny, very windy Sunday.
Safety was of primary importance. While some in the class were seasoned shooters there were some who were relatively new to the task. It was very wise of the instructor to start off with slow warm ups and to emphasize safety over realism at this phase with such a group.
Thankfully incredibly bad habits I had in my early years are not part of my current life. I did not get a "talkin' to" about my trigger finger or muzzle control. Some did, both early on and much later in the day when we were all rather tired.
Part of the warm up was to shoot a somewhat reduced PPC qualification round. The course of fire was 18 rounds from 20 yards, 18 rounds from 15 yards, 12 rounds from 10 yards and 6 rounds from each hand at 3 yards.
I've thought about posting about something I'd noticed over the past year and a half for some time. Each time I deleted such posts.
Not everyone shoots very well.
I probably got a complex about it because I made it a point to shoot with a group of people who really do shoot very well. I would occaisionally happen to see other people, though, who had the "spray and pray" philosophy down. Sometimes I would try to give some help if they seemed receptive.
The 8 people I was with today don't fall into that category. Everyone shot a very respectable score. After the warm up we shot the reduced PPC qualification course again for final score. No one turned in less than 80%. I've seen much worse at the gun clubs.
My target from the second qualification round is posted above. After shooting a 298 in practice I was able to turn it around and pull 300 or 100%. The lone woman in the class was second with 295 final score. Her good-natured husband had to put up with a lot of ribbing as she continued to surpass him. He was not bad, she was just better.
The really impressive score, to me, was turned in by another experienced shooter who was using his real carry gun, a S&W PD DAO with 1 7/8" barrel. Since several shooters had full-sized 1911 clones he turned in a very, very respectable performance. I don't think I could do as well with my 3" J-frame.
We did some reloading drills, first with one round in each magazine, then with three. My reloading speed sucks at 5.3 for the time between shot 1 and shot 2. I need to work on that. Six second to fire 3 and reload, then fire another three. It's clearly not the shooting that's taking up my time.
We took a break for lunch and after the break we went into some MILD simulations of the two-way range (as Fits calls it). We had plastic barrels we had to use for cover while firing at "threat" targets.
This was all done in a mild way. This portion was not done for score and we were not graded on our accuracy during this phase. We were being graded on tactical skills and handling our weapons.
The instructor did not allow drawing "hot" from the holster for the students at this level of training. That's another step up. Again, I consider this wise as he could not expect everyone to have good trigger and muzzle discipline, yet.
The first challenge involved moving at a run up to the first pair of targets and taking concealment (plastic barrels may be called 'cover' but are not by definition). We then drew, loaded and engaged, three rounds in each. Speed reload, move to the next concealment, engage with three rounds to each target, speed reload and then engage a single paper target consisting of three figures, two hostile and one don't-shoot.
My first runthrough I committed the same sin as everyone, I got too close to the concealment. Score B+. The plus was because I knocked over the middle barrel but continued to act, not siezing up.
We were treated to some "why you don't get up close on your cover" lessons and then it was time for another run-through. Some lost a + over forgetting to stay off the concealment but everyone did better the second time around. My grade was A++. I was granted this because after my initial loading I realized that I had not seated my magazine and did an immediate action drill and continued the exercise.
The final activity was more simple and rightly so as many errors that people hadn't been guilty of for most of the day started to come out. From a hot ready engage one target with six rounds, reload, move to the next station, engage with six, reload and then move to the final station and engage with your remaining six. This one didn't have as much realism but it was less a tactical exercise as a weapons-handling one. The instructor wanted to see people reloading without taking their eyes off the targets. I met that goal.
Today wasn't a typical BAG Day celebration but I'm happy with what I spent my money on. I may only have some paper to hang up to show for it but training is harder to come by than firearms. I've been shown areas that I need to improve upon and will be working on. Better to learn those lessons now than if I ever need them later. I have a chance to practice the rougher areas in the meanwhile.
Glocking report. My G 23 aquitted itself very well. There was one failure to load and I blame that on the ammo. I had taken my big can of Miwall factory reloads, not the new stuff I'd been saving. I burned up a lot of it and the only somewhat mechanical issue was that failure to go fully into battery with one round. When we got that round to seat it fired and extracted without any difficulty.
My problem with not fully seating magazines was evident and is another rough spot to work on. That happened twice.
Saturday, April 07, 2007
Carrying signs saying "Amnesty Now," about 15,000 people danced to Mexican ranchera music and passed large American flags over their heads.The photograph shows a U.S. flag, but it also shows a Mexican flag.
The issue I have here is that this isn't about immigration. It's about invasion. Now the invaders don't think that the too-generous plan to reward them for breaking the law is generous enough.
Organizers said many illegal immigrants [ALIENS! NOT IMMIGRANTS!] were angry about a White House plan that would grant them work visas but require them to return home and pay thousands of dollars to become legal U.S. residents.
"Charging that much, Bush is going to be even more expensive than the coyotes," said protester Armando Garcia, 50, referring to smugglers who transport people across the Mexican border.First up, boo-f*ckin'-hoo. They are angry that they are being offered too much and want more? Then show us how angry you are. Go home. Don't let the door hit ya where the Good Lord split ya! What, are you still here?
More whining. Is that a job American's won't do? I thought liberals pretty much gave that away. I don't know why we needed to let an illegal alien come here to do it.
Um. Alfredo, is it? Or is that what is printed on the phony papers you are carrying this week? Maybe YOU should take care of your daughters. In Mexico. They are you children, right? If we send you back then why shouldn't your illegal brats go?
Alfredo Gonzalez, 33, an illegal immigrant from Mexico, marched with his wife and daughters, ages 6 and 8. He said he fears the stepped-up immigration raids occurring across the country.
"If they kick me out, who is going to take care of my daughters? The government? I don't think so," he said. "We need full legalization and need it now."
Ah, yes. That misinterpretation of the 14th Ammendment. Funny how people who can't read the clear words in the 2nd somehow read in entire paragraphs that don't exist in the 14th. Because you managed to enter this country illegally you now claim your kids are citizens by dint of geography.
You know what? I have no problem with that. We'll just toss them into a state run orphanage until they are 18. They won't have any contact with you or your illegal alien wife. Okay? Sound fair? We'll keep the citizen and throw back the illegal. Okay, Alfredo? Your daughters will grow up just fine without anyone teaching them to speak Mexican Spanish. When they ask we'll tell them that mommy and daddy didn't want to take them with them when they went back home. That's the truth, isn't it, Alfredo?
If I take my wife down to Mexico and she has a baby while we are LEGALLY visiting what citizenship is that baby? Just one. U.S. citizen. We take the baby home with us because the baby isn't Mexican. You don't want to see it that way, Alfredo so we'll continue to be generous and accomodate you. Your daughters will be great in that orphanage with all the other babies their parent's didn't want.
Immigrant rights advocates say many of the area's illegal immigrants feel betrayed by President Bush, who they had long considered an ally.
Betrayed, Alfredo? You aren't a citizen, according to the article. How could a man you can't vote for betray you? I can consider him as having betrayed ME because I can vote and he is MY president. YOUR president is down in Mexico City. If you did cast a vote in a U. S. election then you have committed yet another crime. Is that what you are saying, Alfredo? Did you commit additional crimes since you invaded my country?
Bush can't betray people he doesn't work for. You can't (legally) vote. He doesn't work for you. The ONLY way in which you can claim that he betrayed you is if you provided him a vote which you can not legally cast.
Yet more whining. I swear by all that is holy that we have enough Americans willing to whine. We do NOT need to import aliens to do that job!
Hey, Maria, have you met Alfredo? You two have so much in common.
"Last year, we were fighting for legalization, and this year we are fighting for legalization and against all these raids," said Maria Lopez, 50, an illegal immigrant who works as a seamstress and sends $200 a month home to family members in Mexico.
"We have no way to come up with that much money, and Bush knows that," she said. "He is doing this on purpose so we don't ever become legal residents."
Listen, both of you. Everyone else waving Mexican flags, too. You don't like this deal. I don't like this deal. We have found common ground. So let's come up with a common solution to a common problem.
You go home. You build a wall to keep us from "luring" (per Geraldo The Short) you up here. Just put up a great big wall on YOUR side of the border. We want one but we can't get our politicians to put first things first. You can build it cheaper, right? Lower cost labor and all that? Isn't that what you are offering to this nation that you are invading? Lower cost labor? Now we are just wanting you to put that labor to use on your own soil to solve a problem both nations have.
You go home, build the wall and wait for me to call upon you to tear it down. You won't have to worry about a man you can't legally vote for betraying you. You don't have to worry about how much we might fine you for breaking the laws while giving you something you couldn't buy in the first place.
Wednesday, April 04, 2007
No, John Kerry wasn't one of them. This time.
Three Yale University students, including a Briton and a Greek national, have been charged in a case involving the burning of a U.S. flag outside a Connecticut house, a court official said on Wednesday.These three miscreants didn't have the descency to buy their own flag to burn. They decided to torch one someone else was flying from their own place.
I'm reminded of how American citizens, righteously perturbed at illegal aliens, vented their anger on a Mexican flag they were called racists. Was there any charge of racism against the Briton or Greek? Nope. Not being called a hate crime.
Don't you know that only white people can commit hate crimes? And if the person is a liberal or from another culture the perpetrator is magically not able to be committing a hate crime even if the only conceivable motive is hatred?
What is the motive for someone to set fire to another person's property when the only thing they know about that person is that they are flying a U.S. flag? Is that not hatred?
Were I to travel to Boston and set fire to a common gay symbol, the rainbow flag hanging from a stranger's house would I be charged with a hate crime? I'd bet money that I would.
Oh, and the U.S. citizen?
Akbar, a senior, was born in Pakistan but is a U.S. citizen,...The Briton? One "Farhad Anklesaria". I'm sorry, but I don't recall many Anklesarias among the guys William the Bastard brought over from Normandy. Just how British is he?
What I see is two Muslim-appearing names and one Greek who are all enjoying the priveledges of going to a U.S. university that I couldn't afford to go to who decided that they wanted to show how much they hate the U.S.
I'm sure that some people would call me "racist" for thinking ill of these asswipes. How dare I think that jerks who are buying an education in my country should have some respect for it.
Let me ask one more intemperate question. What would happen to me if I were to go to Pakistan and burn their flag? What about in Greece? I'm not talking about arson, as these jerks did. I mean one I bought with my own money and then burned? Chances are lynching would be one of the lighter likely outcomes.
Would the people of Greece or Pakistan be accused of racism for doing it to me?