Live from the Alamo City

I was doing my thing at work last Saturday night listening to Rowdy Yates' classic country show on KILT, and he made mention of the fact that the show would be moving to Sunday nights starting this weekend. That night's 7-to-midnight time slot was occupied by Leslie T. Travis's Texas Roadhouse, a five-hour weekly spotlight on music from Texas artists. And I thought they might just be switching the time slots of the two shows -- which would have been fine. Well, apparently the station's management has decided to give the Texas music fans the finger yet again...

Much to my big surprise the KILT Texas Roadhouse is over.

At least the 5 hour, request intensive show I've been hosting there the last few years. The management at the station has decided to move Rowdy's Yates hugely popular "Solid Gold" show to the 7 to midnight spot on Sunday night.

While they have not completely done away with the Texas music on KILT, they are cutting the show back to 2 hours 10 to midnight Saturday's.

It will now be hosted by Steve Rixx, who is very knowledgable about the music. I do believe that the music will change drastically with the time restraints.

KILT Music Director Greg Frey will now be chosing ALL the music for the show. He takes phone calls regarding music every Friday from 10am until Noon (Central time).

So we're going from five hours of music largely chosen by listeners to two hours of music that's all ultimately chosen by some corporate hack. (As an aside, nothing against Steve Rixx here, but if he's not even choosing the music for the show, what the hell does it matter what he knows about it?) Thanks a lot, y'all. Leslie T. and the Texas Roadhouse was one of the best things KILT had going for them and you threw it away. Let me guess, some consulting firm told you it'd boost the bottom line. I know it's a business and as such its purpose is to make money, but I was under the impression that the niche programming such as the Texas and classic country was exiled to weekend nights in the first place was the fact that not as many people were listening. I mean, it was bad enough that we only got five hours a week, but now just TWO hours where we can't even ask for something to be played? Is Texas music really THAT unprofitable?! What the hell, over?

Well, how about this, a column -- from a member of the editorial board of a major American newspaper -- that says gun control doesn't work!...

...If there are too many guns in Chicago, it's not because of any statutory oversight. The city has long outlawed the sale and possession of handguns. It also forbids assault weapons. If prohibition were the answer, no one would be asking the question.

The recent spate of killings gives a misleading impression. Since the peak years of the early 1990s, the number of murders in Chicago has fallen by more than half. In the first three months of this year, homicides were down by 1.1 percent. No one would describe the current murder rate as acceptable, but the city has made huge progress.

It has done so despite the alleged problem cited by Weis, which is the availability of guns, and particularly one type of gun. "There are just too many weapons here," he declared at a Sunday news conference. "Why in the world do we allow citizens to own assault rifles?"

Actually, in Chicago, "we" don't allow citizens to own assault rifles. Elsewhere, they are allowed for the same reason other firearms are permitted. The gun Weis villainized is a type of semiautomatic that has a fearsome military appearance but is functionally identical to many legal sporting arms....

...Gun control hasn't worked as a remedy for crime. So what makes anyone think the answer is more gun control?

Well done, Mr. Chapman, well done. Welcome to the Dark Side, my friend.
This is not to say that I think the media types are any more enlightened than the rest of us -- in fact, on some issues, such as gun control, I think they're considerably LESS so -- but the question needs to be asked, what does it say about the gun issue that a big-city mainstream media type such as Steve Chapman sees the "solutions" of Sarah Brady, Josh Sugarmann, etc. as the craven acts of political posturing that they are? He never really said as much, but I think it's safe to say that if Chapman didn't see it that way he wouldn't have written the column that he did. And in a town so infested with gun-haters as Chicago is? Talk about a watershed moment. I'd like to think so, anyway. Not that I think Springfield Armory and all the rest of the gun manufacturers in Illinois should stay put just because of this one editorial piece, but maybe if the idiot politicians pushing meaningless crap like bans on "assault weapons" -- that aren't even used in crime in the first place -- read it and re-thought their "solutions," then that wouldn't be a bad thing at all. But then that would require said politicians not to have an anti-freedom agenda in the first place.

Looks like I was not the only one who was disturbed about the lack of coverage of San Jacinto Day, as evidenced by a smattering of letters in this morning's Chronicle...

Thank you for your excellent coverage of San Jacinto Day. Oh, that's right, there wasn't any.
I don't think you covered the anniversary of the Alamo, either. I remember when people in Texas cared about Texas history.
...

Happy San Jacinto Day! How come I didn't see you recognize the Texans who fought for your freedoms? Is it because:
a) You don't care?
b) You don't know your history?
c) You are scared it will anger your Hispanic readers?
...

Based on how a certain demographic pissed and moaned when the idea was floated of naming Houston's professional soccer team after the year the city was founded, I'll take C, and that's my final answer. And once again, I think it's perfectly legitimate to ask where exactly the aggrieved demographic's allegiances lie.

On April 21, 1836, in a decisive battle that lasted but 18 minutes just east of where the city bearing his name sits today, Sam Houston and some 940 Texans defeated a 1,200-strong detachment of the Mexican Army led by General Antonio Lopez de Santa Anna, who had led the victorious Mexican campaign at the Alamo on March 6 of that year. Houston exhorted his men to remember the battle of the Alamo and the subsequent Goliad massacre. And remember they did, catching the Mexicans by surprise as they were taking their afternoon siesta about 3:30 local time. Only nine of the Texans died in the fight, compared to 630 Mexican troops killed and 730 taken prisoner. The Battle of San Jacinto was a critical one, not just in Texas history but American history as well -- Texas won its independence that day, and nine years later became the 28th state in the U.S. Shortly after that, after the Mexican War of 1846-47, Mexico ceded the state of California and New Mexico to the U.S. These territories also comprised present-day Colorado, Utah, Arizona and Nevada as well as parts of Wyoming.
All of which makes these words something to ponder...

...the silence we celebrate in continues to boggle my mind. We loudly celebrate Cinco de Mayo - the 5th of May - where a Mexican army defeated an imperialistic venture of Napoleon III on May 5th, 1862.
The United States was too preoccupied with its own Civil War to react to a French attempt to take over Mexico, and a smaller Mexican army defeated a much larger French army, ending Napoleon III's venture before it got out of hand. In many ways, we should be thankful that Mexico defeated the French. I mean, after all, could you imagine having a French state as a neighbor? It's bad enough to have Quebec so close to American shores!
But still - we celebrate with sales, parties, and lots of drinking the 5th of May. Why is it that April 21st passes in such silence? The 18 minute Battle of San Jacinto was, without much exaggeration, one of the most important battles in the history of the United States...

Celebrating Cinco de Mayo is all fine and good, I suppose...but still I think that San Jacinto Day should be celebrated with at least as much fanfare, delicate sensibilities of a certain demographic be damned.

More mainstream media arrogance, via The Line Is Here, regarding the cover of Time magazine in which a tree replaces the flag the Marines were raising in the famous Iwo Jima photo, from Richard Stengel, the magazine's managing editor...

"I think since I've been back at the magazine, I have felt that one of the things that's needed in journalism is that you have to have a point of view about things...You can’t always just say 'on the one hand, on the other' and you decide. People trust us to make decisions. We're experts in what we do. So I thought, you know what, if we really feel strongly about something let's just say so."

Which leads to the question I posed in the title to this entry...experts in WHAT, exactly? On just about every issue under the sun, these people always, ALWAYS toe the socialist line, on issues from global warming to gun control, and if the facts belie that socialist line, well that's just too damned bad. Case in point, we have this little snippet from this anti-gun, anti-freedom diatribe from Don Campbell, a lecturer in journalism at Atlanta's Emory University:

...if Congress had the guts to take the lead, it would appoint a commission of reasonable people who I believe would agree on:
* The optimum firepower and configuration needed in a weapon to defend your home, bring down any critter from a quail to a moose or shred a paper target.
* Banning civilian ownership of all automatic weapons and all semiautomatic weapons that hold more than six rounds of ammunition. Six rounds is enough for any serious hunter, let alone a gangbanger.

Really now, are those the musings of a man who knows anything about guns or how they're used in real-life situations? Are these the recommendations of one who's experienced -- not just studied -- self-defense scenarios from home invasions to riots to Hurricane Katrina-type situations? Or are they a part of just another lecture from some self-righteous ivory-tower elitist who presumes to know what's best for the rest of us? I'd say the latter. Maybe it's just me, but I didn't think any caliber in existence would be equally suited to taking down a quail and a moose...and really, would you want your moose gun to defend your home with? But I'm getting way off track here. If these people knew what they were talking about that'd be one thing, but in so many instances they don't have a solitary clue! On just about every issue under the sun these people are NOT experts in any sense of the word. They just more or less tell what other experts are thinking, and even then THAT is a best-case scenario. Likely as not they'll go to someone who is more than a little bit biased and who has an agenda. I think it's safe to say that the lion's share of mainstream media professionals are degree-certified experts in journalism and nothing else. I've heard it said that to have the most credibility as a journalist, your best bet would be to learn another field in addition to journalism, so you could -- wait for it! -- at least speak credibly on topics related to that field. For Richard Stengel to stand there on his perch and say that journalists are experts at what they do is quite the height of arrogance, no?

....In 1943, during World War II, tens of thousands of Jews living in the Warsaw Ghetto began a valiant but futile battle against Nazi forces. (link)
More information here. And now for my thoughts on that...
There are many disarmament advocates who claim that a citizenry armed with small arms such as rifles and pistols is no match for a tyrannical government armed with weaponry such as B-52 bombers and M1 Abrams tanks. Which, in a very general sense, is true. But as Mike Vanderboegh observed some time ago at David Codrea's place, "...artillery and nuclear bombs are of limited utility to a government when the battlefield is its own cities, towns, transportation hubs and commercial centers. Then it becomes like Iraq, only far worse. It becomes a rat hunt where the rats outnumber you, and often, at the point of decision, beat you in the one thing that is most fundamental in an up-close infantry fight: rapid and deadly accurate rifle fire."
No doubt many would look at what happened in the Warsaw Ghetto as a failure, and perhaps in a sense it was -- the wrong implementation of the right strategy, in a way, the wrong implementation being in the fact that the Jewish resistance was not as well-armed as it could have been. But -- and I could well be wrong here -- I think THAT was partially due to the extent to which the Jews in Germany were disarmed before the slaughter commenced. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals judge Alex Kozinski offered an oblique recognition of this in his dissent to Silveira v. Lockyer (emphasis mine -- ed.):

The majority falls prey to the delusion—popular in some circles— that ordinary people are too careless and stupid to own guns, and we would be far better off leaving all weapons in the hands of professionals on the government payroll. But the simple truth —born of experience— is that tyranny thrives best where government need not fear the wrath of an armed people. Our own sorry history bears this out: Disarmament was the tool of choice for subjugating both slaves and free blacks in the South. In Florida, patrols searched blacks’ homes for weapons, confiscated those found and punished their owners without judicial process. See Robert J. Cottrol & Raymond T. Diamond, The Second Amendment: Toward an Afro-Americanist Reconsideration, 80 Geo. L.J. 309, 338 (1991). In the North, by contrast, blacks exercised their right to bear arms to defend against racial mob violence. Id. at 341-42. As Chief Justice Taney well appreciated, the institution of slavery required a class of people who lacked the means to resist. See Dred Scott v. Sandford, 60 U.S. (19 How.) 393, 417 (1857) (finding black citizenship unthinkable because it would give blacks the right to "keep and carry arms wherever they went"). A revolt by Nat Turner and a few dozen other armed blacks could be put down without much difficulty; one by four million armed blacks would have meant big trouble. All too many of the other great tragedies of history—Stalin’s atrocities, the killing fields of Cambodia, the Holocaust, to name but a few—were perpetrated by armed troops against unarmed populations. Many could well have been avoided or mitigated, had the perpetrators known their intended victims were equipped with a rifle and twenty bullets apiece, as the Militia Act required here. See Kleinfeld Dissent at 5997-99. If a few hundred Jewish fighters in the Warsaw Ghetto could hold off the Wehrmacht for almost a month with only a handful of weapons, six million Jews armed with rifles could not so easily have been herded into cattle cars.

Indeed, it's something to consider. It would have been interesting and quite instructive to see what would have happened, had the Jews been armed as well as many Americans are. There are those who say the side armed with little more than small arms is going to lose, but then Arizona attorney David Hardy made a pretty good point in the comments to Vanderboegh's essay -- "To maintain a republic, you don't have to have the citizenry capable of fighting the worst-case government and winning 100% of the time. It's enough that those who might be tempted to abuse power see that abuse as sufficiently risky and costly to where they'd rather not roll the dice."
Still, though, it makes one wonder, how far the individuals who aspire to power in this country are willing to go, to see the implementation of their schemes through...

Or alternately titled, You Get What You Pay For, And That Goes For Ammo Too...
So I went shooting yesterday. I took out my Dan Wesson Razorback and didn't have any handloads on hand for it (note to self -- always load more than you shoot), and so I decided to swing by the local Academy and pick up a couple of boxes of the 200-grain Blazer 10mm ; at 1060 fps and 499 ft-lb of energy it's not balls-to-the-wall like I like it, but it'll do in a pinch. So I got up there, set up the target & started merrily blasting away. Seems like I was shooting low and a bit to the right, but I had some pretty good groupings.
But on about round 61 or 62, things went south for the day. I thought I had shot my last round, but I looked and the pistol was almost back into battery, but not quite. The cartridge was at an angle, and the pistol was locked up tighter than Dick's hatband. The slide would go back and forth just a little bit, but it wouldn't go all the way back, no matter how hard I pulled it. I had to get this old guy to help me with it, and he braced the bottom of the muzzle on the bench there and pressed down as hard as he could. It took a couple of tries, but we finally got it out. The case was bulged slightly toward the middle, and the bullet was set back further in the case than it should have been. I am thinking that had to have been the cartridge itself, because the recoil spring on the Razorback is only about 20 pounds, if I remember right. After I got home, I inspected the pistol as I was cleaning it and it looked like nothing was amiss, including the extractor. I remember thinking, "if it messes up my extractor, I am gonna be ticked!" It looked fine, but the next time I take it out I am going to take some of the Federal American Eagle or Remington UMC 180-grain FMJ. Both of those have the reloadable brass case as well, so I can recoup some of that extra cost. In any event, I don't think I'll be messing with the Blazers anymore. Oh, I bet you wanna see the pistol....

She's a beauty, and shoots as good as she looks! 5" barrel, chambered for the 10mm, fits 8 rounds, all steel with beautiful cocobolo wood grips. I had considered getting a set of Hogues for her like I have for my Kimber Stainless Target II, but I am thinking I'd rather save up for the wood grips with the finger grooves in the front. It may be a while before I get those, but even so I am more than happy with this pistol in its stock configuration.

From this morning's Chron...

Lt. Darren Mitchell, a Northern Illinois University officer who was on duty Feb. 14 when a gunman killed himself and five others at a lecture hall there, said his NIU comrades feel so strongly about preparation that even though they went through crisis training before the shooting, they went through more about a month after the killings to help answer a question: "How can we do it even better if we were to have something happen again?"
Last year's inaugural summit also took place at the University of Central Oklahoma in Edmond, a suburb of Oklahoma City. Speakers this year emphasized that it has become increasingly clear since a gunman killed 32 people and himself at Virginia Tech that people from all parts of a campus must remain vigilant and communicate to identify threats and try to prevent violence.
Steven Healy, the chief of police at Princeton University, said it is "absolutely essential" for colleges to develop a behavioral threat assessment process. The trick, he said, is keeping a campus secure while respecting the open academic environment.

You'll carefully note that they've been asking themselves that question, but at least one option seems to still be off the table -- the option of letting students be their own last line of defense as the laws of Nature and Nature's God demand. I read that whole threat assessment bit and thought to myself, ok, what happens when that threat is assessed and it's too late to do anything about it? No matter what, there are always going to be those who fall through the cracks, and the public deserves better than to be forced to wait on other men with guns to ride to the rescue. More people will die, and of this you can be certain. As I was writing this I just thought of a rather interesting comparison...
Before the Virginia Tech slayings, the worst mass shooting in the history of the United States was this one. One of the results of that shooting was the later institution of a shall-issue concealed-carry law in the state of Texas. And as far as I remember the only reason it took so long to get the Concealed Handgun License laws instituted was the opposition of Democratic then-Gov. Ann Richards. Gov. George W. Bush signed the bills into law not quite a year after his election in November 1994. No doubt many have wondered over the last year if we'll ever get a dose of common sense and allow students to carry their sidearms on campus just as they can carry everywhere else. Judging from the fact that almost a year later the people in charge are still convening summits and tossing around meaningless mumbo-jumbo like "remain(ing) vigilant" and "behavioral threat assessment process," I'd say it looks like it's going to take at least as long to get any kind of similar results on the nation's college campuses that we got here in Texas. Now, a threat assessment process is by no means a bad thing, but without immediate, near-instantaneous deployment of, say, 230-grains of copper-jacketed lead at 850-875 feet per second, I'd say such a process is damned near useless. But what do I know, I'm just a bloodthirsty, warmongering, trigger-happy Texan...

I was doing the blog-run a few minutes ago, and via David over at The War On Guns, I ran up on the op-ed piece USA Today's Walter Shapiro wrote a couple of days after the Virginia Tech massacre calling for the repeal of the Second Amendment. But that isn't what got me to put my fingers to the keys today. This was:

Why oh why do you accept that you cannot buy alcohol on Sunday (here in GA), but have an absolute right to buy a gun at the WalMart next door ?

Bit a straw man argument there. I've heard no one accept or advocate the continued existence of the "blue laws" in Georgia or anywhere else. There are probably more than a few of us so-called "gun nuts" who find the fact that you can't buy alcohol in some places on Sundays to be a load of crap too -- and I'd be willing to bet there are those who agree on THAT point who will advocate the repeal of the Second Amendment. Many of us who advocate expansion of liberty in one area advocate that same expansion of liberty in other areas as well. We subscribe to the theory of "trust the people until they prove they can't be trusted, and don't punish the many for the actions of the very few." And by the same token, there's no shortage of people and organizations who hold certain liberties in much higher regard than others. Witness the mainstream press hacks like Walter Shapiro using the First Amendment to the Constitution to shit all over the Second Amendment on pretty much a daily basis. Regarding THAT particular outrage, I keep thinking of the words of the great Bill Whittle (emphasis mine --ed.):

...reality (is) that compassion, culture, law and philosophy are precious, rare and acquired habits that must be defended with force against people who understand nothing but force. The great failure and staggering tragedy of European Jews is that they could not accept that some of their neighbors were not as decent, humane and educated as they were. A culture that learned to survive by turning inward simply never was willing to face the reality of what they were up against...A people of astonishing internal beauty simply could not look into the face of such ugliness without turning away. And now they are dead.
And there are many intelligent, enlightened, gentle and good-hearted people today who believe exactly the same thing. If we let this moral blindness continue to gain ground, then they will get us all killed, too.

I have to wonder sometimes, if it's going to take another honest-to-God shooting war for the intellectual elites to see the folly of their so-called "solutions" to the "problem." I'd like to think it wouldn't, but only time will tell.
Also today, via Rustmeister, we have this from Candy Lightner, the founder of Mothers Against Drunk Driving, on letting 18-year-olds in the military drink alcohol:

They will follow the leader, they don't think for themselves, and they are the last ones I want to say, 'Here's a gun, and here's a beer.' They are not adult—that's why they're in the military. They are not adults.

Wow, what does one say to that? Follow the leader? Don't think for themselves? I must beg to differ on that point. When I was 18 I had a pretty good idea of who is was and what I believed in, and I formed all those opinions for myself. I wasn't brainwashed or anything like that. I damned sure did know how to think for myself at that age, and even though I am long past 18, I still find Lightner's comment to be a profound insult. The words of Marko Kloos come to mind...

MADD is no longer against drunk driving, they're against all forms of alcohol consumption that could conceivably result in someone driving while intoxicated--which means they're against alcohol consumption, period.

Yep. Just as any organization with the words "gun violence" in its name is at its heart against gun ownership, period. And as you see, MADD resorts to the same ad hominem slurs the so-called "gun violence prevention" groups use. I am not a heavy drinker by any means -- really, if I had to choose to buy beer or ammunition it'd be the latter any day of the week and twice on Sundays -- but sooner or later, if we're going to keep banning people from doing something based on what MIGHT happen, we are well and truly going to be slaves. Even if we're not in chains made of steel.

...over at Matt G's place, as he notes that 97 years ago Friday, the U.S. military adopted the Government Model 1911 as its official sidearm. I did not know the military rejected the 9mm cartridge eight years before. It would be interesting to see some intrepid Authorized Journalist ask the brass why political expediency took priority over what had been proven time and time again to, y'know, actually WORK in the field....

Sometimes you just have to ask, what the world's coming to...

Sometimes sobbing and sometimes feisty, 86-year-old Tillie Black recalled on the witness stand Wednesday how she awoke to find two men dragging her out of bed.
"Something hit me on the head in the doorway," Tillie Black said. "It was something really hard. It laid me open here," pointing to a place beneath her white hair where she received 10 or 12 stitches.

Other evidence indicates she was hit with the handle of a ball-peen hammer so hard that the hammer's head snapped off.

She said she slipped in and out of consciousness as the two men beat and kicked her and tied her to a chair as they ransacked her rural Brazoria County home where she has lived alone since her husband's death 11 years ago.

When the more slender of the two men pulled on her diamond ring and said he'd have to cut it off, "I was afraid he was going to cut my finger off," she said.

Her testimony came during the trial of Vincent Woodard, 22, who, along with Eddie Jermaine Johnson, now 19, is charged with beating and robbing Black and stealing her pickup before dawn on July 25.

Just think, y'all. If Paul Helmke, Michael Barnes, Josh Sugarmann and their ilk had their way, this story would be playing out in the households of the elderly, weak and otherwise defenseless among us even more than it already is -- as some might put it, it really would be rule by the young and the strong, or "might makes right." She did exactly what they suggest, nay, demand under force of law, law enforced by other men with guns -- she had no arms for her defense. I really can't find the words to say just how morally repugnant, how evil, these people are for peddling the damnable lie that we can't and shouldn't be trusted to provide for our own safety. And it's just one more reason that I honestly believe there's a special place in the deepest, darkest, hottest pits of hell for those who advocate the sheep mentality of thinking someone else is responsible for your safety.

Or, alternately titled, "One Of the Joys of Living In A Red State..."
Yesterday when I was at Walmart I saw a guy shopping. He had on a t-shirt. Guess what that t-shirt had on the back of it? A pistol. And not just any pistol, but a Springfield Armory Professional Model 1911. Straight from the Springfield Custom Shop, made entirely in the United States, it's at the very top of the Springfield pistol line -- and that's reflected in the pistol's $2,500 price tag. And you know me. I had to pipe up.
"You know, I'd love to have one of those Springfield Professional Model 1911s, but those things are EXPENSIVE."
He turned around and it was off to the races. We stood there and talked guns for a good 10 minutes or so. He competed in IPSC at the Orange Gun Club, loaded his own ammo for the.40 and .45 and was a big 1911 guy, of course; he said he got his first 1911 at the tender age of 12 but that he also liked the HK pistols. We talked about everything gunnies talk about, including all the hooey published in the gun rags. That particular topic came up as we were discussing the Taurus 1911 and I told him I'd heard nothing but good things about it both in the gun rags AND on the Internet gun boards.
"Yeah, places like that, they don't hold anything back," he said, speaking of the boards. I told him about my almost getting one of those Taurus 1911s but barely missing out on it, as it was gone just a couple of days after I decided to put it on layaway at Shooters Supply.
But I thought that was pretty cool. I've never before been one to just talk to complete strangers out of the blue, and it's not so often someone makes it so obvious he's a fellow gunny. It made me think of an instance of someone asking on (I think it was) the High Road, what he should say to someone he thought might have been a fellow gunny -- in Massachusetts. The guy was afraid of being ostracized if the guy wasn't a gun person because of the political climate in Massachusetts. I'm sure it'd be a lot less likely that I'd run into a guy at Walmart with a Springfield Armory t-shirt -- and the same could probably said for Springfield Armory's home state of Illinois, too. It's good to live in Texas. I bet it'd be just as good in Kentucky, though.
;-)

From the brain-cell-frying corner of Algore's Internets known as the Huffington Post...

30,000 is not too many. Ah, I see.
What to do? As invited previously, both poles (as in polar opposites, but Poloks as well) owe it to 30,000 fatalities a year to hammer out a life-saving compromise.
The primary function of government is to advance the public welfare, NOT make sure every nut-case has a gun.
But the NRA crowd won't even TALK about licensing, registration, and gawd ferbid that such result in anyone being denied their sacrosanct right to bear arms, whether "for the purpose of maintaining a well-ordered militia" or otherwise.

Actually, no. As far as I am concerned those of us who own guns and cherish our right to self-defense don't owe anyone a damned thing. Those 30,000 deaths are a tragedy, but I've said it before and I'll say it again -- how many of those 30,000 people met their Maker by their own choice? From what I remember that number is at least 18,000 -- the number of suicides committed annually with firearms. So let's just talk about the other 12,000. Of those, how many of those who pulled the trigger did so to get themselves out of a jam created by their own bad choices? And why is it that we don't ever talk about the circumstances surrounding and influencing those bad choices? Somehow I think the answer to that is if we did, the leftists among us would have to face some cold, hard facts that they quite simply are afraid of. They're just a bunch of chickenshits. And so they take the easy way out and blame the inanimate object. And those people have the stones to call US the irrational ones.
As for licensing and registration...once again, oh ignorant one, we will not countenance such nanny-state schemes because we know where they ultimately lead, as sure as night follows day, or as Tam put it, sure as God made little green apples. And of course the NRA might well sound unreasonable to many, but that's all right. I for one would rather strangle that "reasonable restrictions" dragon in its crib than have to fight it with hot lead later. Now and then, though, I can't help but think that the hot-lead option is ultimately where we are going, especially as our would-be overlords prattle on about teh "public safety."
Oh, and this was just priceless.

If we elect another Republican in November, I am getting some guns.

You can't make this stuff up, friends. They raise ten kinds of hell about what the Republican-controlled government is doing to our country, yet they want guns regulated to the point that said government is the only group who has them. I am not entirely sure what that says about their thought processes, but it sure as hell isn't anything that would make me comfortable with trusting them with anything sharper or harder than a Nerf ball.

...there's absolutely nothing I could say that the 'Dog didn't say here, and a hell of a lot better.

Sigh...
From Loving, Texas, this referral, handguns better than Kimber?
There are those who say the Kimbers are the best production 1911s out there, but I am not sure I agree with that. They are great guns indeed, but I'm not so sure that they're really worth the higher prices than, say, a comparably equipped Springfield Armory or Dan Wesson. (More on that in a moment, stay tuned!) I've heard good things about the Smith & Wesson 1911s but as of yet I don't have one. Although I've heard lots of hell-raising about the external extractors featured on the S&W pistols, from some of what I've read, Kimber was the company that soured the American gun buyer on that deviation from the original design. They had it on their 1911s for a while but eventually went back to the internal extractor. I will say that the only trouble I've had with either of my Kimbers was a weak magazine spring on the Tactical Ultra II -- and that gun is not only one of the external extractor models, but it is also one of those infamous 3-inch-barreled pistols. And if you visit the gun boards for any length of time you'll find people raising ten kinds of hell about the micro 1911s. They're either very good or very bad -- if you get one that runs you're golden, but if you get one that doesn't run, it'll NEVER be 100%. Fortunately mine works, but again, I've heard a lot of people say that the shortest 1911 you'll be able to deal with is one of the Commander-size pistols with the 4.25" barrel. I'd say that for the .45 or the 10mm that's a pretty good compromise -- anything shorter and I'd be more worried about the corresponding velocity loss, more so with the .45 since it's big and sloooow to begin with. But then many of the worries about said velocity loss, from what I understand, come from the fact that many if not most people use hollow-points in their personal defensive weapon. I've never driven anything across the chrony with my micro 1911, and no matter what, at closer ranges with ball ammo it's still going to beat the hell out of a sharp stick.
Back to the Kimbers in general, though (back to you, Bob!)...I've heard people say that when you buy a Colt, you pay a premium for the name. To what extent that's true of the Colts I do not know, but I tend to think you definitely pay for the perceived prestige of the name Kimber when you plunk down the cash for one. I still would like to have an Eclipse Custom II in 10mm one day, though.

After the Sabbath, at dawn on the first day of the week, Mary Magdalene and the other Mary went to look at the tomb.
There was a violent earthquake, for an angel of the Lord came down from heaven and, going to the tomb, rolled back the stone and sat on it.
His appearance was like lightning, and his clothes were white as snow.
The guards were so afraid of him that they shook and became like dead men.
The angel said to the women, "Do not be afraid, for I know that you are looking for Jesus, who was crucified.
He is not here; he has risen, just as he said. Come and see the place where he lay.
Then go quickly and tell his disciples: 'He has risen from the dead and is going ahead of you into Galilee. There you will see him.' Now I have told you."
So the women hurried away from the tomb, afraid yet filled with joy, and ran to tell his disciples.
Suddenly Jesus met them. "Greetings," he said. They came to him, clasped his feet and worshiped him.
Then Jesus said to them, "Do not be afraid. Go and tell my brothers to go to Galilee; there they will see me."

I ran up on this thought-provoking commentary from Houston deejay Leslie T. Travis on her blog re: the Texas Roadhouse and the music she plays on it.
Interesting how even the Texas music fans have the same complaints that mainstream music fans do about certain artists getting too much or too little airplay. But as she said, they're the superstars of our movement and not playing them wouldn't be a very smart thing to do. Besides, I think the argument about certain big stars drawing in the audience and keeping them around for more holds a hell of a lot more water here than it does in other contexts. Just as an example, I've heard it argued before that people like Shania Twain and Faith Hill were good for country music because they drew people to country radio that otherwise wouldn't be listening. (For me, that's what evoked the term "country music for people who don't like country music.") I never could understand that argument, because if these people are tuning in for Faith Hill and Shania Twain, do we honestly believe they're going to go out and buy George Strait, Alan Jackson or Billy Currington? I suppose there are a few who will, but still I don't understand why this argument is given so much validity by certain fans.
But with the Texas country it's different. If you listen to what Leslie T. plays on her show you'll find out, for example, that there's not that much difference -- musically speaking -- between the bigger artists like Pat Green and Kevin Fowler and the lesser-known artists like Todd Fritsch and Max Stalling. Of course you'll have the rockers like Cross Canadian Ragweed, but from what I've heard they seem to be the exception to the rule. (That is most definitely not to say that I do not like CCR or consider them unworthy of being called a Texas country-rock band. I farkin' lurrrrve me some Ragweed, as you should know if you're a longtime visitor -- although I know some might not.) So if Pat, Kevin and Cory Morrow are what it takes to draw people in to hear Aaron Watson, Todd Fritsch or Brandon Rhyder, then I am all for that. Truth be told the biggest problem I have vis-a-vis Texas artists on the radio is that they're not played enough. The Texas Roadhouse is great, but still it would be wonderful if more of the music Leslie T. played on Sunday nights was put in regular rotation during the week. I understand somewhat the reasons that it isn't, but still it irks me a bit and I blame that more on the state of radio these days than anything else.
And then there's another excellent point:

Still to many listeners, some of the OLD songs are new. For those that listen every week it seems like we just play a bunch of old tunes. To those that are hearing it for the first time (or even the 5th) it's all new to them.

She's exactly right, of course...and just as in mainstream country, the older music is every bit of worthy of being played as is the newer stuff. All the older stuff from Pat Green, Cory Morrow and Roger Creager, she's exactly right when she says all of it is going to be new to some people. I'm sure when I first heard songs like "Take Me Out To A Dancehall," "Nashville Blues" or "The Everclear Song," by that time they were old hat to a lot of people -- but it was that early stuff, that's so familiar to so many people now, that got me to stay and check out more of the Texas artists. And I am reasonably certain that I am not the only one. Leslie's hamstrung in a big way, I'll admit it -- she does work for a country station in a major market that is owned by a big corporation, so of course she's not going to get to play as wide of a variety of the Texas stuff that she wants to, nor is she going to get to play as much of it. Basically she only has five hours a week to work with -- if she had a few of the other 163, or if the Texas music was mixed more into the other 163, things would be a lot different. As it is, though, I think she does a great job with what she has to work with and I for one appreciate that. It could be a lot worse. We could have one of those cookie-cutter countdowns full of the music we hear the rest of the week.

here: "Walking along, whistling a song, half foot and fancy free...a big riverboat, passing us by, she's headed for New Orleans, there she goes, disappearing around the bend...roll on Mississippi, you make me feel like a child again..."

Via just about everyone, it seems American Hunters and Shooters Association rep and NRA turncoat Bob Ricker is haunting the gun blogs and casting aspersions on those of us who believe in that whole "shall not be infringed" business, saying things like "AHSA is reaching out to a more educated, sophisticated and straight thinking hunter and shooter demographic."
Well, let's see here.
Educated. I have a bachelor's degree in communication from Lamar University and work in a communication-related field in which other college-educated professionals seem to think I am pretty good at what I do, in several aspects. It took me ten years to get that degree, but that was due to changing majors and having to work to pay my rent, tuition and car payment. I'm guessing that Ricker would imply that education makes one intelligent, so I'll also note that after I took the ASVAB military aptitude test in high school, I had the local Army recruiter call me and tell me I scored so high on it I could enter into any MOS I wanted to. However, due to factors beyond my control, I was unable to take that route. But I've said it before and I'll say it again -- education doesn't necessarily lead to intelligence or enlightenment. This is proven once again by the fact that Bob Ricker and his ideological soulmates are always resorting to ad hominems, straw men and other such bad arguments -- if they were as smart as they like to think, they would admit the lack of validity of their arguments.
Sophisticated. Well, ya got me there. I'm just a good ole Texas country boy more than anything else. I do love me a good red wine, but if I had my way I'd rather be drinking iced tea on the porch. I drive a pickup truck and as opposed to opera, classical or whatever, you'll find George and Merle Haggard on the iPod, as well as some of my down'n'dirty Texas favorites like Deryl Dodd and Cross Canadian Ragweed. So I guess that leaves me out of THAT.
Straight-thinking. Well, I busted my arse in college for ten years for a reason -- I knew that to get anywhere and make a decent living I'd have to have that piece of paper in my hand. But I'm guessing in Bob's world when you get right down to it even that doesn't mean shite.
Really though, all of that is perfectly ok with me, because Bob Ricker and the rest of those frauds are little more than a bunch of elitist pricks. And all of their word vomit is little more than verbalization of their frustration at the fact that they've pretty much been nailed to the wall. If Ricker and his elitist Fudd buddies don't think people like me worthy of their organization, well, I must say, I'd consider that a badge of honor.

Via just about everyone, comes this and this from Sebastian, the Pro-Gun Progressive. In the clips linked here, he debates Rebecca Peters of the International Action Network on Small Arms, and well, she quite clearly got her ass handed to her. I am biased, but still it should be noted that she just breezed right over some critical points Sebastian made -- so even by the academic rules of debate she came up on the short end of the stick.
The one that immediately comes to mind is toward the end of the first segment, where Sebastian speaks of the court rulings that the police have no duty to protect the individual. How does Peters answer this?
"Well, they can't protect everyone, if a large portion of everyone is carrying a gun....it's a scary sort of image...that you're only able to enjoy your rights as a person in a democracy if you're only able to shoot everybody who might potentially be a threat to you, that is not the way that democracies come about. The basis of society should not be that every person should be able to kill anyone else that they want to."
Well, first off, how about that straw man! Me, I don't WANT to kill anyone. With apologies to Charlie Daniels, "I'm the kind of man who wouldn't harm a mouse, but if I catch somebody breakin' in my house, I got a big ole .45 a-waitin' on the other side." And I sure as hell won't be happy about it -- though I'll be thankful if I live. I've heard it said that those forced to make the choice between killing or being killed in the context of violent, immediate crime don't ever really get over being forced into that. The basis of society ISN'T AND NEVER WAS that "every person should be able to kill anyone else that they want to." And it's more than a little disingenuous of Rebecca Peters to cast a free society as such.
And then there's that woeful ignorance of history -- "you're only able to enjoy your rights as a person in a democracy if you're only able to shoot everybody who might potentially be a threat to you, that is not the way that democracies come about." Well, actually, that kinda IS the way that democracies come about, and constitutional republics as well for that matter. It was only by armed revolt that our forebears threw off the yoke of the British monarchy -- and that's just one example. Not only is being armed and willing to use force the way free societies come about, it's also the only way they will actually STAY free. This is the way it's always been, ever since Cain slew Abel. There are those who argue that violence and tribal war are the natural state of man, and once again, the evidence is in abundance with even a cursory examination of history -- it's always been one tribe wanting to rule over or exterminate another, or seize their assets, right on up to this very second. One could even argue that on the micro level, one tribe is that of the violent criminals and the other is the tribe of the law-abiding citizens. There are always going to be certain groups of people who want to rule over and impose their will on others, and the only way they'll be able to do this is if their desired subjects are unarmed and unable to resist. And Peters said nothing about even this, let alone situations such as the one mentioned here.
But beyond all of this, well, let me say what I said to James, the Texas Gun Nut --
Sometimes the only thing left to say is...
"You can't have my guns. If you come for them I will kill you and as many people you bring with you as I can. And that is not a threat -- it's a promise."
It might sound extreme -- SayUncle referred to it as "scaring the white people" -- but sometimes the only thing you can do is rattle the sabers and rattle them hard. Sometimes it's just the only argument the other side will listen to. And ultimately, once again, it's the whole rationale behind the RKBA -- "if you screw with me bad enough, I will kill you."
Sebastian, if you're reading this, good job, my friend! Bravo!

The title of this post was Robb Allen's response to this claptrap, which he characterized as "almost too much to fisk." But me, I love a good fisking, so line 'em up and buckle up, boys and girls, here we go...

For the public health community, the question isn’t what the framers intended, but what works.

And of course we all know that "what works" for most public health professionals seems to be ever more restrictions up to and probably including more or less a total ban on firearms probably much like the one D.C. now has in place. You know, for teh childrenses. But I would bet that "what works" in the opinions of public health professionals is probably just as much a function of their political beliefs as it is what they were taught in their formative years, and this seems to be backed up by the author's later bitching about teh eeeevil "gun lobby." Beyond all this, though, why does "what works" and "what the framers intended" have to be mutually exclusive? And if you don't think that's what the author is implying, check out this nugget:

...blaming individual users is counterproductive

Contrast this with what John Adams said in the early days of the Republic:

Our Constitution is made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.

I think it's safe to say that part of that morality -- arguably one of the things at the core of that morality -- is being accountable for your own actions and holding others accountable for theirs. And this, of course, runs directly counter to what the author of the linked piece is saying. She's basically saying that it's "counterproductive" to "blame" the criminals and, presumably, to lock them up and throw away the key or put them down like the rabid animals many of them are. (and now that I think about it, that's actually an insult to the animal, because the animal didn't have a choice in getting to that rabid state -- the criminal does have a choice.) She might call it blaming them, but as one who cherishes liberty and individual freedom, I'd like to call it holding them accountable.

No matter what kind of gun laws are eventually allowed, DC needs to do something about gun violence.

Ah, yes, the eternal cry of the anti-liberty nanny-stater: "Somebody needs to DO something!" They did do something, 31 years ago, and it didn't work. You think it might be time to, y'know, try something else?

And, of course, a final insult in the comments, where the author's beliefs are put out there in all their resplendent glory:

There’s no way for us to have a functioning society if we insist on absolute liberty to do anything we please. I’m glad that there are restrictions on driving drunk, driving at excessive speeds, and shouting “fire” in a crowded theater. Maybe some of us will just fundamentally disagree about this, though.

I was unaware that any of us were insisting on the liberty to drive drunk or at 90mph through a school zone. It seems as if that's all these people have is insults and faulty arguments. Who in the bloody fuck does this, this person *spit* think she is, comparing me and those like me to drunk and reckless drivers? DAMN these people. All I can say is, what about the tens of millions of gun owners who didn't kill anyone yesterday? What about their rights? Yes. Liberty is inherently dangerous. It appears they don't like that and don't care about those of us who are willing to deal with it. And once again, I am reminded of the classic exchange:

"Why don't all of you gun-nuts go off and start your own country?"
"We did. Who let you in?"

Who let them in, indeed...and can we throw them the fuck out?

Now playing here: "How bluuuuue, can you make me...how looooong, till I heal...how can I go on, loving you, when you're gone...how bluuuuue, can I feel...."
Can't relate to that song, but I love it still, my favorite Reba McEntire tune, a No. 1 hit the week of Jan. 19, 1985. I still think Reba's a great singer, but her newer stuff can't hold a candle to what she did back in the '80s when she was still carrying the neo-traditionalist banner with George Strait.

Awww, yeah! 9:12 pm: "Sometimes I think about leavin', do a little bummin' around...I wanna throw my bills out the window, catch a train to another town, but I'll go back workin', gotta buy my kids a brand-new pair of shoes..."

Via The Shooting Wire, we have this....

“It’s a simple case to me,” Heller said, “It is wrong for the government to tell me that it is OK for me to have a gun during my work hours, but illegal for me to have a gun when the only thing I want to protect is me.”
At that point, a reporter interjected: “the Mayor (DC Mayor Adrian M. Fenty) says the handgun ban and his initiatives have significantly lowered violent crime in the District. How do you answer that, Mr. Heller?”
The initial answer certainly wasn’t expected – Dick Heller laughed. Ruefully.
Pointing at the Mayor who was making his way across the plaza, surrounded by at least six DC police officers, Heller said, “the Mayor doesn’t know what he’s talking about.”
“He doesn’t walk on the street like an average citizen. Look at him; he travels with an army of police officers as bodyguards – to keep him safe. But he says that I don’t have the right to be a force of one to protect myself. Does he look like he thinks the streets are safe?”
There was no follow-up question.

I don't care who you are, that was just awesome. As Tam might say, SNARK FOR THE WIN!
In all seriousness, though, Heller was right on the money -- he nailed that son of a bitch Adrian Fenty right in the ass. If Fenty actually believed what he said, he wouldn't be traveling with a gaggle of armed bodyguards everywhere he goes. It's easy for him to say that, as he lives a completely different life than his subjects. I'd love to know who that reporter was and if Dick Heller's answer to his question will actually make it into his or her story. I'd bet the cost of my plane ticket to Kentucky that it won't. And I'd also bet that no reporter asked Fenty why he feels his subjects shouldn't be allowed the same rights to lethal force that he has. So much for the press being a watchdog over the .gov. Of course, we all know that particular role was made into a sick joke a long time ago.

A search for you know what yielded this, with an interesting bit of information...

The First release of the Fortis is being developed in both 10mm Auto and .45ACP, there will be other calibers available in the future.

Interesting, very interesting, especially if all one has to do for a caliber change is to change uppers. As of yet the only pistol line I've seen that has this capability is EAA's Witness line, which is basically a clone of the highly-esteemed CZ75. Coincidentally, the Witness is one of the very few non-Glock and non-1911 pistols out there chambered for the 10mm. The reports I've seen on the Witness have been mixed, evocative of the old poem...

There was a little girl who had a little curl
Right in the middle of her forehead;
When she was good, she was very, very good,
And when she was bad she was horrid.

Contributing to the horrid part of that equation is what I've heard about EAA's customer service, which is pretty much that it's the absolute worst in the gun business. From what I've heard about the Witness it's built like a bank vault, much like the Ruger P-Series pistols, and for that reason I had considered making a Witness my first 10mm -- but I heard about said customer service and decided to bite the bullet, so to speak, and get a Kimber. For what I paid for that gun I probably could have bought TWO Witnesses. It'll be interesting to see how much of a dent in the sales of the Witnesses the new Fortis will put in, and how said dent causes EAA to respond vis-a-vis customer service. If it causes them to change things that would be nothing but a good thing, even if the Fortis is priced competitively with a mid-level 1911, as Fortis GM Eric Kincel said on the blog. I'm guessing that would be between $700-900, compared with about $450 for the Witness from what I remember when I was looking for a 10mm way back when. I'd pay for it. Quality costs money, but when it comes to things like firearms, that quality is -- at least up to a point -- always worth more than you pay for it.
More info on the Fortis here.

Anybody having trouble reading the blog after I upgraded and tinkered with the template? Seems to be coming out all screwy with Internet Exploder, but I know it works fine in Firefox and Safari.
UPDATE, 3-19: I changed the template completely, to a different one. How's it look now? That question would be for the Internet Exploder users, but I know this one looks fine in Firefox and Safari as well.

...that DC v. Heller is argued before the Supreme Court (liveblogged here), the most significant Second Amendment court case this generation's ever seen. Ultimately, I believe, the question is -- are we a free people, who can and will be left to our own devices? Or do the courts believe us to be a people to be shepherded, whose rights may be sacrificed on the altar of the oh-so-nebulous concept of "public safety"? I said a while back that I'd bet it was going to go 5-4 either way...word is that Anthony Kennedy's leaning toward the individual-right interpretation, which makes it at least 5-4 for the IR. Robb Allen suggests that should Messrs. Gura and Levy prevail, a national holiday should be held in their honor -- a suggestion with which I wholeheartedly agree. In any event, Joe Lemire's words still ring true...

A disarmed man is a subject of the state, not a citizen. I refuse to be a subject, and because I am a free man, I am therefore an armed citizen. Here in the Carolina mountains, I am surrounded by other free men. This is our birthright, and something sixteen generations of my family have defended. We don’t much care what you overpaid, supposedly “public servants” in D.C. think of that.
But if the Supreme Court wants to pretend that “shall not be infringed” doesn’t mean exactly what it says, us Carolina boys will be glad to re-enact the burning of D.C. for ya. I’m pretty sure the decendants of the Green Mountain boys will want to help, too, and we might even find some of Sam’s kin with an itch to set you straight. There’s plenty of us decended from the founders still around, you know. And we have a message for you:

From our cold, dead hands, motherfuckers.

Or, once again, as my Texican brethren told the Mexicans at Gonzales in 1835,

"Come And Take It."

More referrals here, via the Google search for Raven jamming problem, or something along those lines. One of those affordable defensive arms the media and politicians are always pissing their pants over.
If you're having that much trouble with it, hell, just go buy another one. I guess one could say that's the one redeeming feature of those inexpensive pieces is the fact that having to replace it will not put a dent in your wallet. But if you're going to take that route, who's to say that you won't have to replace the next one? I don't know what the odds are, but considering the prices I've seen on the used market I'd recommend going with something used from one of the more reputable makers like Ruger, Taurus or Smith & Wesson -- something I personally would feel much more comfortable depending on. YMMV, of course.

Now playing here: "She kissed him while I got a beer, she didn't think I'd show up here...I'm a crazy ex-girlfriend..."

A-yep, this'll do too, 11:25 pm: "He was born, in Oklahoma...his wife's name, is Betty Lou Thelma Liz...he's not responsible for what he's doin', 'cause his mother made him what he is...and it's up against the wall, redneck mother..."

Via the Site Meter, this one from Lubbock, Texas Tech Red Raider country, torrent +"songs we wish we'd written" .
Dude, I know what you want, and now that I think about it, it kinda pisses me off. You want the music but you don't want to pay for it. I mean, it's bad enough when people go looking to rip off music from big-name artists, but I figured down here in Texas the audiences of singers like Pat Green and Cory Morrow would at least be loyal enough to support them with their money. I know they make more from the live shows than the record sales, and for all I know some of the Texas artists might not even mind their music being downloaded for free, but still it just rubs me the wrong way. And I don't mean to imply at all that it's less okay to go looking for free music from someone like George Strait, but it just amazes me that someone would go looking to get something free from the likes of a Texas artist with a much smaller audience, who doesn't have the backing of a major label and/or country radio. You wanna download the music? Fraggin' go to iTunes and pay for it. It's about a buck for a song. If you can't afford that, well, maybe you should cut back on the pizza and Shiner Bock? Just a thought...

And now, for more on something else that bothers me...the delicate sensibilities of some people.
Over at his blog, AD's been catching hell the last couple of days for a rather trenchant observation:

...one of the speakers (at an EMS conference --ed.) will be James Hyatt, Executive Vice President and C.O.O. of Virginia Tech University.

The title of his presentation? Campus Security and Emergency Preparedness.

The program doesn't say whether it's supposed to be informative or humorous, but in any case, it oughta be a short lecture.

Then proceeded the wailing and gnashing of teeth. "Tasteless! Words fail me! Too many college students can't be responsible!"
Right, okay, because *some* college students can't be responsible we should disarm everyone. What. The. Hell. Ever. Let's see, here in Texas, well, let's just say I chose to carry my Springfield GI 1911. Factor in the cost of that weapon with the cost of ammunition to become proficient with it. For purposes of the argument we'll define that as minute of goblin at 15 yards, and 1,000 rounds of 230-grain ball. And then there's the cost of the concealed-handgun license class, which here in Texas is $140. Assuming $17 for the cost of 50 rounds of said ammunition and $420 for the sidearm, and taxes, we're already north of $800. You think anyone's going to invest that kind of money and gamble it by not being personally responsible for it? Everyone's different indeed, but in the case of someone who's going to carry a weapon, I'd like to think that person is going to be thinking on a deeper level than your stereotypical college student who gorges himself on pizza and beer every night. Some might call this a good argument for a CHL requirement and the accompanying costs that go with it, and really, I don't mean it like that. I think the only permit we need to carry is the the one we get under the natural law of self-preservation, which could be stated as "everyone has the right to own the most effective self-defense tools he or she can manage." Furthermore, even the exorbitant Texas CHL fees are but a fraction of the cost of a good weapon. I got that Springfield cheap and I know there's no way in hell I could get it now for the price I got it in early 2006.
As for the "tasteless joke" complaint...cry me another Ohio River. If someone gets offended because of such an offbeat observation, and it makes them think, well then all I can say is so much the better. I don't know how often that would be the case -- likely as not it would make the Perpetually Offended retreat back into their shells -- but it can't be anything but bad if we as a society can't say what we think about things (in whatever way we deem necessary to trigger thought and debate) just because someone, somewhere, might get offended. But maybe that's just me. I know that if I was a Virginia Tech parent, before the shots stopped on that April day I'd have been on the horn to my legislators demanding to know how in the hell this was supposed to happen considering the fact that Virginia Tech officials were on record as effectively saying the campus was safer because everyone was disarmed. Tasteless joke? Hardly. I'd say that considering the fact that everyone's STILL disarmed at Virginia Tech, they're still just as vulnerable and that there's little if any point in VT's James Hyatt bothering to show his face there.

It would seem leftists are good at that, as evidenced by some of the comments here. For those who don't want to click, and really, I don't blame you, one Ray Schoenke of the American Hunters and Shooters Association goes into a full-fledged bitch-and-moan session about the NRA exposing and calling out his sham organization for what it is, a Trojan Horse full of virulent anti-gunners. It's been done over and over, so I think that for now I'll leave that particular dead horse alone, though I will say some of the commenters do a fine job of calling out Schoenke and his people for the lying frauds they are. But, naturally, more than a few of them are quite clueless:

...the greatest threat to our gun rights is not the Democratic Party, but the continued loss of hunting lands to unchecked development.

As the owl would say, O RLY? The leading Democratic candidate for president of the United States says he supports a ban on the sale, transfer and possession of all forms of semi-automatic firearms...
this candidate is very likely going to be lending his sympathetic ear to certain big-city mayors agitating for ever-tougher gun laws because they can't keep their crime problems under control...
hunting is and has been on the decline for a while...
self-defense handguns like the Glock and 1911 and semi-automatic rifles such as the AR-15 and M1A are the best-selling in the country...
..but the biggest threat to Americans' right to keep and bear arms is the continued loss of hunting lands. Good grief, but I have had it with these cretins. If I were a bit more Pollyanna-ish I would say that the reason anyone would say that the biggest threat to gun rights was hunting-related was that they were confident of a favorable ruling before the Supreme Court later this year, but I know better than that. These people willfully have their heads quite firmly wedged in their asses. It's all about teh Party to them, clear records of teh Party members be damned. I am all for unity, but every now and then I don't think it'd be such a bad idea to play dirty.
"Hey, Sparky, you can go to the grocery store to get meat. You don't need to engage in such a bloody, barbaric sport as hunting. Let alone with an intermediate sniper rifle."
Oh, and Ray Schoenke? You can go straight to hell, Scooter. You and all your anti-gun and Fudd buddies, too.

...if it weren't for the lyrics, "Saturday Night Special" would actually be a pretty good song. My favorites from Skynyrd, though, are and have always been "Gimme Back My Bullets" and "Tuesday's Gone."

Ahab said in comments here:

I despise (voting for McCain). But like KDT says, I love my country more than I hate John McCain, which is why I'll be punching his name into the infernal machine come November.

Once again, I can see his point, but still I do not agree. Personally, I agree a lot more with Tam's translation of that -- "I love my country so much that I'll screw it by encouraging the GOP to nominate more statist tools like John McCain." And although I don't think any less of many who are going to vote for McCain because of Kim du Toit's sentiment, I still think Tam's interpretation is dead on. When you have someone like John McCain who so gleefully betrays conservative ideals, then really, what's the point of voting for him? We survived eight years of one Clinton. Would more of another, or Barack Obama, really be all that bad if we could at least counterbalance them in Congress? I'd be willing to try to find out. I really don't see how it could be any worse.
(more here...)

here:
"You ask me what I like about Texas, I tell you, it's the wide open spaces, it's everything between the Sabine and the Rio Grande....It's the Llano Estacado, it's the Brazos and the Colorado, it's the spirit of the people, who share this land..."

Ooooh, CLASSIC George Strait! 8:03 pm: "...Well, I woke up this mornin', looked outdoors, I can tell my milk cow, I can tell by the way she 'loowwwwwws...if you see my milk cow, please drive 'er on home....'cause I ain't had no milk and butterrrrrr, since that cow been gone..."

I love all kinds of music, though my tastes run towards what many people might think of as unpolished. So there's more than a bit of irony in the fact that my favorite song of all-time, from any artist, from any genre of music, is from one of those artists whose music was not quite so raw, or traditional, for that matter -- although he certainly had it in him to do that kind of music. This favorite song leaned more that way, even if it wasn't quite Jones- or Haggard-esque:

"Some fools never learn,
Play with the fire, and you're gonna get burned
It's only love, when you're loved in return...some fools never learn,
Some fools never learn."

I heard long ago that there was a video for the song so last night I went to Youtube to see what I could find...and while I did not find the video, I did find something else.
One of my new favorites I've been hearing on KILT's Texas Roadhouse and other places is the Randy Rogers Band. "Kiss Me In The Dark," "Better Off Wrong," and "Tonight's Not the Night" are the songs I've been hearing more than anything else, and they're all great songs. "Yeah, tonight's not the night, to play it safe or take it easy..."
So I was looking for the Steve Wariner video for "Some Fools Never Learn," and what did I see as the No. 1 result?
"Randy Rogers performing 'Some Fools Never Learn' by Steve Wariner."
And I thought, hmmm, could this be the same Randy Rogers who's made a name for himself down here? So I clicked on it, and sure enough it was! Just Randy strumming his guitar and singing, and it's actually very good. Not quite as good as the original, but I would love to see a cover of this from them down the road. To say the least it was completely unexpected. Most times when you see one of the new Texas artists covering an old song live it's something from an artist like Billy Joe Shaver, Waylon Jennings or Guy Clark, or even Neil Young in the case of Cross Canadian Ragweed. I would never have guessed I'd see a cover of this from one of our guys, even if it is one of Steve's more traditional numbers. Much less that it'd be that good. The things one finds when one goes looking for something completely different...

...from an old source, Cornell Sun blogger Tony Manfred:

Usually I don’t bother with comic books due to an overriding suspicion that everyone associated with comic books is a gigantic nerd, but now that Captain America packs heat I have to delve into the gag-inducing world of tighty-whiteys and moldy retainers to stand against guns.

You really shouldn't bother with the written word either, Sparky. Were I a potential employer I would have some serious reservations about hiring you after seeing this and your previous scribblings.

Superheroes fly or shoot web out of their forearms or don purple short-shorts and smash people or do just about anything other than shoot people. Shooting people is in no way super. Comic book readers all over America are overturning coffee tables in their mother’s basements in rage; they are interrupting sixteen-hour World of Warcraft sessions to rant about Captain Copout on some of the least-read message boards in the universe.

Despite its embarrassing lameness, this Captain America saga has some relevance to Cornell as the Student Assembly is considering a resolution that would allow licensed gun owners to carry their arms on campus. The passage of this resolution would effectively transform the student body into the new Captain America — armed and paranoid and ready to pump some nutty grad student full of lead in the name of justice.

Actually, I would argue it has absolutely no relevance. Zero, zilch, zip, nada. If I am not mistaken, unlike the fictional Captain America, Cornell students licensed to carry a sidearm don't have any kind of superpowers. They're just normal, everyday people who try to be prepared for any contingency they can be.

How can I envision a world where everyone is happy and safe and packing heat if I’ve been brainwashed by California liberals to be anti-gun?

Great Scott! A sensible question amidst all the asshattery! There may well be hope for you yet, grasshopper, once you get out into the real world.

A peaceful place with dozens of loaded guns is less safe than a peaceful place with zero guns. No matter your position in the gun debate, whether you’re as conservative as that smutty coke-whore Ann Coulter or as liberal as the overweight hippies at the Million Mom March, you have to agree with that.

No, I don't have to agree with that, because I am in the real world, a place far more tolerant of opposing viewpoints than many so-called learning institutions. And I don't agree with it. I am at the shooting range all the time around people with loaded guns and I have no doubt that I am just as safe there as I am as I sit here in my bedroom. The old question is quite apt -- of all the places people go on a rampage, why don't they ever do it at NRA meetings or gun shows, or places like Knob Creek, Camp Perry or the Golden Triangle Gun Club?

A campus without guns is a safer campus with the lone exception of a Virginia Tech situation — a situation that has never happened on this campus and is remarkably rare.

It may well be remarkably rare, but I am sure that before last April, every single one of the people on that campus thought, "nothing like that could ever happen here..." But it sure as hell did.

We are Captain America 2.0 — lame and self-conscious in a goofy red, white and blue suit, clutching our gun tight and panting the heavy pants of a paranoid not-so-super hero.

I believe this would be called projection. For after all, I think it's safe to say that you, Tony Manfred, are the paranoid one here if you think your gun-owning classmates are going to pull their weapons out and use them on you just because. And of course you're free to think and say what you want, but another old saying comes to mind:
"Better to stay silent and have people think you're a fool than to open your mouth and remove all doubt."

I must admit I found this quote from John McCain in this morning's Houston Chronicle rather ironic:
"The American people's patience is at a end for politicians who value ambition over principle..."
Quite empty words indeed, coming from a man who has sold the principles out repeatedly of the people who he proclaims to be his ideological compatriots for the sake of a false "bipartisanship." Which is why I find Caleb's admonition to "Get on the McCain train kids, because it’s our only ride away from HillBama Town" to be rather disheartening. I guess we're just going to have to agree to disagree on this one, because considering how many times McCain has sold out the conservative and libertarian wings of the Republican Party, I fully believe he will have no compunction about doing it yet again. And I'd put money on it, whether it be in the form of a Supreme Court judge nomination after consultation with the likes of Charles Schumer and Dianne Feinstein, or a renewed Assault Weapons Ban with no grandfathering and no 10-year sunset clause. I suppose I might have a change of heart between now and election day, but if the election were held tomorrow Fred Thompson would still be getting my vote, protests about "throwing away your vote" be damned.

...here: "This old porch is a big ole red and white Hereford bull, standin' under a mesquite tree in Agua Dulce, Texas...he keeps on playin' hide and seek with that hot August sun, sweatin' and a pantin', 'cause his work is never done..."
I don't remember offhand which Robert Earl Keen album the studio cut of this song is on, but the one I've always heard was from Keen's first live album, recorded at the Sons of Hermann Hall in Dallas back in 1989 when he was still doing the bluegrass music. What he's doing now is completely different than what he was doing back then. I remember when I first heard the original version of "The Road Goes On Forever" and thinking, "this is nothing like the live cut!" Which, of course, was on Keen's second live album, No. 2 Live Dinner. Taken together they're quite the contrast. If I had to choose I think I'd take Keen's bluegrass-flavored music over the Americana country-rock, but then the new live versions of "The Road Goes On Forever" and "Goin' Down In Style" are damn good.

It would seem Marian Wright Edelman thinks Washington, D.C.'s draconian gun laws should be upheld, for teh childrenses, of course...

This year, the U.S. Supreme Court will decide whether to overturn a lower court decision striking down the District of Columbia’s 1976 handgun ban designed to reduce violent crime. If the Court reverses the lower court and upholds the ban, it will keep in place a crucial measure for the protection of the health and safety of our children in our nation’s capital, and in communities nationwide.

There are few things quite as disgusting as hiding the advocacy of one's agenda behind a pious concern for the health and well-being of innocents. But now that I think about it, I really don't think Marian Wright Edelman cares nearly as much about teh childrenses! as so many have been suckered into thinking she does. When one gets right down to it, the main reason kids get into trouble with guns -- defined as playing around and accidentally shooting a playmate or something of that nature -- is the fact that they're ignorant of guns, how they work, and the safety rules followed by millions of people who use guns on a regular basis. So one could argue that Marian Wright Edelman not only doesn't have a problem with kids being ignorant, she wants to keep them ignorant, and by extension dependent on into their adulthood on other people with guns to ride in and save them the day the wolf comes knocking at the door. If Marian Wright Edelman cared nearly as much about teh childrenses! as she likes to make people think she does, she would be advocating that kids be educated about the potential dangers of guns instead of being kept in the dark. Either way, she and those like her will have much to answer for.
Oh, and I almost forgot to mention this:

It is important to note that the D.C. ban does not prohibit shotguns or rifles.

I find it...interesting that Ms. Edelman did not find it important to note that D.C. regulations mandate the shotguns and rifles be unloaded, disassembled and locked up in D.C. subjects' homes, thereby preventing those arms from being used as they were intended to be. But that would have been the honest thing to do, which is of course far beyond the ken of a gun grabber...

(h/t Rustmeister)

here: "I hope you're enjoyin' the scenery, I know that it's pretty out there...we could go hikin' on Tuesday, with you I'd walk anywhere....California has worn me quite thin, I just can't wait to see you again, come Monday, it'll be all right, come Monday, I'll be holdin' you tight..."
It seems that when someone mentions Jimmy Buffett to most music fans, invariably his 1977 smash "Margaritaville" comes to mind. I always liked that song, and still do despite the fact that it's wildly overplayed compared to the rest of his catalog, but "Come Monday" has always been my favorite Buffett tune, from the first time I heard it. I saw this comment from Buffett long ago:
"...A song of mine like 'Come Monday' is a direct result of me trying to write a Gordon Lightfoot song."
I never thought about that before, but it does make a lot of sense.

...was he?

CINCINNATI — Republican John McCain quickly denounced the comments of a radio talk show host who while warming up a campaign crowd referred repeatedly to Barack Hussein Obama and called the Democratic presidential candidate a "hack, Chicago-style" politician.

*snip*
"I did not know about these remarks, but I take responsibility for them. I repudiate them," he said. "My entire campaign I have treated Senator Obama and Senator (Hillary Rodham) Clinton with respect. I will continue to do that throughout this campaign."

McCain called both Democrats "honorable Americans" and said, "I want to dissociate myself with any disparaging remarks that may have been said about them."

Asked whether the use of Obama's middle name — the same as former Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein — is proper, McCain said: "No, it is not. Any comment that is disparaging of either Senator Clinton or Senator Obama is totally inappropriate."

McCain said he didn't know who allowed Cunningham to speak but said he was sure it was in coordination with his campaign. He said he didn't hear the comments and has never met Cunningham, but "I will certainly make sure that nothing like that happens again."

Later, on his radio show, Cunningham expressed disappointment with McCain's apology and said he would endorse Clinton as a result.

"Did John McCain repudiate me? When he didn't hear the remarks at all? He didn't hear them. He just threw me under the bus to the national media," Cunningham said on local radio station WLW. "I've had it with McCain. I'm going to endorse Hillary Clinton. I'm going to throw my support behind Hillary Clinton."

Cunningham also disputed McCain's assertion that the two had never met.
*snip*
Aside from using Obama's middle name, Cunningham also mocked the Illinois senator's foreign policy statements about his willingness to meet with the leaders of rogue nations. He said he envisions a future in which "the great prophet from Chicago takes the stand and the world leaders who want to kill us will simply be singing Kumbaya together around the table with Barack Obama."

Wow, what a lesson in Media Bias 101. Talk-show guy calls out Democratic presidential candidate for what he is, and what does the reporter use as the main thrust of her story? The talk-show host's use of the candidate's middle name. I will say that I think Mr. Obama's middle name really shouldn't be of any consequence, though. There are plenty of other reasons not to vote for him, many other things to call him out on, not the least of which is the fact that he never met a gun control scheme he didn't like. (Speaking of that, see more about the latest anti-gun asshattery from the junior senator from Illinois here, here and here.) I guess it just goes to show that skilled writers can skew anything the way they want it to go. And I am a writer myself, but still I have to marvel at that.
As for Cunningham and his astonishment at McCain's actions after his comments, all I can say is, what the hell did the guy expect? You pick up a snake and you should fully expect to get bitten. And by the same token, if you throw your support behind a craven panderer like McCain, you should expect to be thrown under the bus when McCain sees such an action as politically expedient. If I was someone whose endorsement he had been seeking, that would have been one more reason he would not have gotten it, Party apparatchiks like The Anchoress be damned.

...here: "Now, I'm the kind of man that wouldn't harm a mouse, but if I catch somebody breakin' in my house, I got a 12-gauge shotgun waitin' on the other side...so don't go fightin' me against my will, I don't wanna have to fight ya, but I dern sure will, if you don't want trouble, then ya better just pass me on by..."

From Boise, Idaho, "opinions of Ruger P90."
It's an awesome gun, perhaps the most underrated non-1911 .45-caliber sidearm on the market. I've said it before and I'll say it again. The Ruger P-Series pistols are probably the best value out there if you're looking for a rugged & reliable personal defensive arm. They're bulky and top-heavy due to the steel slide and aluminum frame (or polymer for the P95, P97 or P345), but as far as I am concerned those are small concerns when looking at that platform's virtues. My P89 will even feed empty cases, and I have no doubt the P90 would do the same thing if I ever slipped them in the magazine. After all, they're pretty much the same gun; from what I've read about the P90 it has a different trigger mechanism and the slide's a little taller & thicker to accommodate the .45 cartridge. I want one in the cartridge it was originally designed for, 10mm. It wouldn't surprise me the least little bit to find that gun could handle all day long the nuclear loads that by now are legendary among the cartridge's devotees. C'mon, guys, Colt re-introduced the Delta Elite, another company is rolling out another one of these, that has to be a sign of some sort...

So I ask 45superman to tell us about his 1911 in the comments to this post, and he says...
"Which 1911?"
Good answer, my friend, good answer. ;-) One will certainly do, but you just don't know true gun-nut nirvana until you have at least two. I've heard good things about the Paras but don't have any in my safe as of yet. Gonna need at least one more 10mm 1911 in the safe before that, maybe another Dan Wesson Razorback...the RZ I picked up in October was my fifth 1911, and I also have two parkerized Springfield 1911s, a GI and a Loaded, and two Kimbers, a Tactical Ultra II with a 3" barrel and a 10mm Stainless Target II. And all this gun talk reminds me, I have a box of Blazer 230-grain ball, and it's a sunny late-winter day here on the Texas Gulf Coast...yes, it's a good day.

I'm thinking that for $2900 before tax, this thing had better be able to go downrange and change my targets when I am out shooting it, and detail strip & clean itself when I get it back home. The .50GI is a pretty nifty idea, I reckon, but I don't know if I'd be willing to trade off that reduced magazine capacity even for that hot 300-grain load listed here. It was quite amusing how they compared that load to a relatively mild .44 Magnum load. Talk about stacking the deck. If I needed something at that level I think I'd just run with my 10mm loaded with something like the Buffalo Bore 200-grain load at 1200 fps. And I guess I've missed that "big concussion blast" of the 10mm, but I just can't fathom how it would be as bad as some people try to make it out to be. Talk about a fable that's gotten long in the tooth. Can't be any worse than .357 Magnum out of the Ruger SP101's 2.25-inch barrel. My hottest 10mm loads have felt like a pussycat compared to those.

here: "Doodle-doo-doo-dooooo, a-doodle-doo-doo-doooo.....Who, is the girl wearing nothing but a smile and a towel in the picture on the billboard in the field, near the big ole highway...rollin' down the highway in my Jimmy hauling freight from Chicago to St. Louis, Lord, I see her every day..."

Oooh, 12:01 pm, another good one! "Bet it ain't rainin' back home, bet your sister's still on the phone...bet Mama's in the kitchen, a-cookin' fried chicken, wishin' that I hadn't done wrong..."

From Dallas, a referral, "m1a m14 rifle hog hunt texas".
No clue as to what the laws are for hunting those here in Texas, but I imagine the M1A would take pretty much any Texas game a hunter wanted to. 150 grains of 0.308-inch goodness at 2600 feet per second, I reckon that'd take care of most wild hogs here or anywhere else. I've heard of them being taken with pistols as well, as small as my beloved 10mm if one uses the right ammunition. I always got a bit of a chuckle about the fact that a pistol called the Razorback could be used to hunt razorbacks...

"The next time someone asks me what I'm compensatin' for, I think I'm gonna tell 'em, 'The fact that I can't throw a rock at 1400 feet per second...'"

From the letters in this morning's Chronicle:

Way to go, Chronicle! It has endorsed a Democrat for president who doesn't fully support space exploration and who has no plans to work with the oil and gas industry. The Chronicle is a regional newspaper, yet it completely ignored two incredibly important aspects of our region in order to be part of the so-called "Obama phenomenon."Well, phenomena come and phenomena go, and when this one has played out, Texas will still need strong energy and space industries. But by then, unless Texas Democrats do the right thing on March 4 and support Hillary Clinton, it could be too late.

Right, because as opposed to no plans to work with the oil & gas industry, Hillary "wants to take those (oil & gas industry) profits." Which is so much better than leaving the oil companies to their own devices (sarcasm!), but of course I'm betting Senator Obama is going to do the exact same thing. He'll just probably funnel those profits into some sort of "Hope and Change" initiative instead of those alternative energy programs Hillary says she wants those profits to go to. Which IS better, I suppose, but if there's money to be made in alternative energy programs, I'd guess the oil companies would pursue them without government aid or coercion and with the added benefit of less government REMFs. But either way, Clinton and Obama are two sides of the same worthless coin. Much like John McCain and Rudolph Giuliani...

Saturday, April 26, 2008

Thursday, April 24, 2008

Tuesday, April 22, 2008

Monday, April 21, 2008

Saturday, April 19, 2008

Thursday, April 17, 2008

Tuesday, April 15, 2008

Friday, April 11, 2008

Sunday, March 30, 2008

Thursday, March 27, 2008

Tuesday, March 25, 2008

Monday, March 24, 2008

Sunday, March 23, 2008

Saturday, March 22, 2008

Friday, March 21, 2008

Thursday, March 20, 2008

Wednesday, March 19, 2008

Tuesday, March 18, 2008

Monday, March 17, 2008

Sunday, March 16, 2008

Saturday, March 15, 2008

Wednesday, March 12, 2008

Tuesday, March 11, 2008

Sunday, March 09, 2008

Saturday, March 08, 2008

Wednesday, March 05, 2008

Sunday, March 02, 2008

Saturday, March 01, 2008

Wednesday, February 27, 2008

Tuesday, February 26, 2008

Sunday, February 24, 2008

Thursday, February 21, 2008

Wednesday, February 20, 2008

Tuesday, February 19, 2008

Unorganized Militia Propaganda Corps

About Me

Need some gear?

Wanna get ahold of me?

People I make it a point to read every day

Other folks with guns who like to talk about 'em

Funny stuff

Other gun-related sites

Fellow Texans, neighbors & other like-minded folk

Labels

Blog Archive

Essential Reading

Echo