Author Archives: Joe

Quote of the day—Elizabeth Price Foley

Posted on by

Alumni of the UC system should immediately cease wasting their charitable dollars on such an anti-intellectual, fascist institution. And any intelligent young person should avoid it like the plague. The system has clearly been captured by individuals with micro-brains possessing micro-tolerance and micro-confidence. It is–like too many institutions of “higher” learning–a place where critical thinking goes to die.

Elizabeth Price Foley
June 16, 2015
SO BASICALLY EVERYTHING IS A MICROAGGRESSION
[Examples from the “faculty training guide” (if they pull that copy I have another here) include:

  • “America is the land of opportunity”
  • “America is a melting pot”
  • “I believe the most qualified person should get the job.”
  • “Affirmative action is racist.”
  • “Everyone can succeed in this society, if they work hard enough.”
  • “When I look at you, I don’t see color.”
  • “I don’t believe in race.”
  • “Gender plays no part in who we hire.”

And my favorite part is from the Fox News story on the training guide, “According to psychological and public health research, micro-aggressions can lead to negative  health consequences including heart disease, diabetes, depression and substance abuse.”

Outward appearances suggest people that came up this must have solved all the other problems in their utopia and had to mine for nuggets in the world’s deepest mines to find the concept of “micro-aggressions” worthy of more than a few milliseconds of their time.

But Occam’s Razor tell us the simpler hypothesis is the most likely to be true. Therefore I have to conclude the real explanation is “crap for brains”.—Joe]

Quote of the day—George M. Lee and John R. Lott

Posted on by

Despite assertions that the benefits from waiting periods and background checks are obvious, the complete lack of empirical studies to support those claims is stark. No evidence is offered that either of these laws reduce violent crime, nor that they reduce overall suicide rates. Even more striking, the discussions that Appellant and amici use are not relevant to the case before the court.

Evidence provided in this brief shows that for at least concealed handgun permit holders, one of the classes of plaintiffs in this case, are demonstratively law-abiding, and that it is unlikely that waiting periods or background checks for additional gun purchases could lower crime rates.

George M. Lee
John R. Lott
June 2, 2015
BRIEF OF AMICUS CURIAE CRIME PREVENTION RESEARCH CENTER
IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFFS AND APPELLEES JEFF SILVESTER, ET AL., AND SUPPORTING AFFIRMANCE
JEFF SILVESTER, et al.,
Plaintiffs-Appellees,
vs.
KAMALA D. HARRIS,
in her official capacity as the Attorney General of California,
Defendant-Appellant.
[This is about California having 10-day waiting periods for people purchasing a gun even though they already have one or more existing guns and/or a concealed weapons permit.

You might be interested in reading the whole brief but it can be paraphrased as:

Kamala D. Harris and the supporters of this law must be living in an alternate universe. Not only don’t they have any data to support their half-baked ideas, they aren’t even talking about the topic at hand, and they misconstrue the data they do offer.

And if we were talking about what they want to talk about, which we are not and never were discussing, here is the data which destroys their view and proves they have at best a tenuous grasp on reality.

Lee and Lott were much more polite in their choice of words but that is what they said.—Joe]

Steel challenge match results

Posted on by

Despite having a cold I participated in a Steel Challenge match yesterday. I shot two different guns (not at the same time). Here are the results:

Main Match

Stage # SCSA ID Stage Name
1 SC-103 Smoke & Hope
2 ?? Saving Ammo
3 SC-106 Pendulum
4 SC-108 Roundabout
 
Place Name Comp SCSA Division Aggregate Total Stage 1 Stage 2 Stage 3 Stage 4 DQ Additional
1 Steve M 32 A86909 OPN 64.17 64.17 13.65 14.48 20.21 15.39   Senior
2 Alexander W 6 3362 OPN 73.46 73.46 13.51 19.08 25.79 14.64   Junior
3 Bradley M 2   PROD 79.62 79.62 15.09 22.28 24.85 16.96   Junior
4 Connor P 8 A87260 PROD 86.28 86.28 14.18 19.97 33.08 18.61   Junior
5 Daniel C 17   PROD 93.81 93.81 20.04 23.59 28.99 20.75    
6 Heather S 38 TY86040 PROD 98.51 98.51 17.79 28.38 29.87 22.03   Lady
7 Michael M 44   PROD 102.00 102.00 23.53 25.67 28.46 23.90    
8 Joe H 28 TY29386 ISP 102.79 102.79 19.16 35.86 28.66 18.67   Senior
9 Matt H 40   PROD 110.62 110.62 19.43 32.85 32.52 25.38    
10 Jeffrey K 30 A84426 PROD 110.77 110.77 18.51 34.77 31.42 25.63   Senior
11 David B 39   PROD 111.37 111.37 19.05 41.60 29.01 21.27    
12 Earl B 24   ISP 111.51 111.51 16.23 39.53 34.23 21.08    
13 Greg M 41   PROD 112.41 112.41 19.15 29.37 36.90 26.55    
14 Brad M 11   ISP 112.94 112.94 20.68 34.57 33.23 24.02    
15 Dan P 13 A87261 ISP 123.24 123.24 17.44 47.69 32.99 24.68    
16 Theresa D 43 TY65454 OPN 125.78 125.78 22.97 33.72 42.37 26.28   Lady
17 Tod R 12   ISP 127.72 127.72 20.13 43.36 37.89 25.90    
18 Jim S 14 A91246 ISP 131.87 131.87 22.29 30.58 48.01 30.55    
19 Bob L 10   ISP 136.66 136.66 20.05 45.77 39.12 31.28    
20 Jesse P 1   PROD 143.77 143.77 22.04 52.61 37.64 31.04    
21 Jason F 25   PROD 147.80 147.80 21.22 48.26 48.55 29.33    
22 Susan E 16   PROD 150.20 150.20 22.55 43.04 56.38 27.79   Lady
23 Daniel C 15   OPN 216.63 216.63 52.23 52.68 57.26 54.02    
24 James W 19   PROD 236.98 236.98 58.67 50.62 90.49 39.79   Senior

 

Rimfire Pistol

Stage # SCSA ID Stage Name
1 SC-103 Smoke & Hope
2 ?? Saving Ammo
3 SC-106 Pendulum
4 SC-108 Roundabout
 
Place Name Comp SCSA Division Aggregate Total Stage 1 Stage 2 Stage 3 Stage 4 DQ Additional
1 Alexander W 5 3362 RFPI 49.07 49.07 11.35 10.26 15.96 11.50   Junior
2 Bradley M 3   RFPI 55.05 55.05 17.07 10.54 13.95 13.49   Junior
3 Cel A 21 4893 RFPO 57.28 57.28 12.18 11.24 21.81 12.05    
4 Joe H 27 TY29386 RFPI 74.63 74.63 13.30 22.70 22.50 16.13   Senior
5 Theresa D 42 TY65454 RFPI 75.38 75.38 13.91 13.70 28.96 18.81   Lady
6 Earl B 23   RFPI 82.38 82.38 13.23 24.32 25.86 18.97    
7 Addison L 9   RFPI 82.50 82.50 14.54 23.10 30.01 14.85   Junior
8 Heather M 26   RFPI 248.60 248.60 49.06 53.69 87.78 58.07   Lady

 

I’m not sure shooting two different guns was a good idea. The trigger pull on the two was quite different and several times my new STI went off before I expected it to and I missed the targets. I also had problems with jams on the new STI. The cartridges would just start into the chamber and then stop. There were also some rounds that were very tight in the chamber. I suspected my handloads were the problem.

When I got home I looked at the ammo. I think I don’t have enough crimp on my handloads. The factory ammo has a noticeable crimp. My handloads are crimped just enough to have a straight case wall. I also know that not all my handloads would pass the case gauge. If they didn’t I would test them in the chamber of my old STI and throw them into the ammo can anyway. Since that barrel is history I need to run all my rounds through the case gauge again. I probably should crimp them a little more too. I’m going to the International Steel Shooting Association Washington State Championship (ISSA is different from the Steel Challenge Shooting Association) on Saturday so I need to get my gun working this week.

Despite not feeling well, the trigger pull issue, and the jamming problems I did manage to decrease my times on Pendulum and Roundabout. Previously I had times of 30.87 and 23.43. This time I achieved times of 28.66 and 18.67. Smoke and Hope was slightly worse with 19.16 when I had a time of 18.76 in March. I also won my division with the STI.

I wish the club would use some different classifier stages. I need 5 to Go, Showdown, Outer Limits, and Speed Option before I can really know my level compared to other people.

Quote of the day—©Wonder Sammon™ @WonderSammon

Posted on by

@goodgreg42 @andreajmarkley @wallsofthecity All I know is that gunowners have tiny cocks. That’s why they spend their life cowering in fear.

©Wonder Sammon™ @WonderSammon
Tweeted on January 16, 2015
[It’s another Markley’s Law Monday! Via a Tweet from Linoge.—Joe]

Pacifist makes terrorist threat

Posted on by

The title could also be “Why are anti-gun people so violent?” From here:

After a gun-control advocate posted “Which one do I need to shoot up a kindergarten?” on a pro-gun Facebook page, Missouri police arrested him illegally, he claims in court.
     James Robert Ross posted the remark in the comments section of a pro-gun article on a Facebook page on Jan. 25.
     Jackson police arrested him the next day, for disturbing the peace and making a terrorist threat, Ross says in his federal lawsuit.
     Ross, 20, sued the City of Jackson, and its police Officers Ryan Medlin, Anthony Henson and Toby Freeman, on June 5.
     Ross says in the lawsuit that his comment “was worded in the form of a rhetorical question and did not make any specific, direct threat against any specific, identifiable person or persons.”

He was held in jail for 72 hours and was released on a $1000 bond. The charges were dropped a little over three months later on April 7. I agree with the prosecutor’s decision but still it was a stupid thing to say. It was pushing the envelope a little bit, but had it been someone who owned guns I could see it going the other way. Especially if it had been in New Jersey, New York City, Maryland, or California.

I’m inclined to say he should lose his lawsuit. I think it was appropriate that the police investigate but I’m torn on the arrest. I think it would depend a lot on his attitude when they went to talk to him.

Quote of the day—Gaia’s Dancing Indigo Children

Posted on by

#GunOwners cry about their #SecondAmendment rights but they don’t give a shit about the fact that thousands of innocent people are killed each year by their sinister death machines. It is time for us to do away with private gun ownership entirely. The only people who feel the need to own guns are paranoid, mentally ill people. If you own a gun, you are a terrible human being and if you own a firearm and you have children you should be absolutely ashamed of yourself. A child who is raised in homes with firearms is 43% more likely to die of a gun shot wound. It should be considered abuse to keep firearms in a home with children and the state really should step in and take them into custody. Every gun owner in America is a potential #MassShooter, it’s only a matter of time before the snap and start spraying innocent children.

Repeal2A

Gaia’s Dancing Indigo Children
Posted on Facebook June 11, 2015
[Via a Facebook post from Sean Sorrentino.

This is what they think of you.

There is speculation this is the work of a troll. But it’s consistent with other anti-gun people.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Andrew Scott

Posted on by

We’ve seen massive decreases in violent crimes over the past two decades, but that hasn’t appeased gun controllers in the slightest. So we know that no matter how low the crime rates drop, no matter what legislation has already been passed, they will always want to further encroach on our 2nd Amendment rights.

This is why we’ve drawn the line in the sand. This is why we don’t want to give up another inch. We know that gun controllers will simply never be satisfied until there are outright bans and confiscations. It will be done piecemeal, using every “mass shooting” as an opportunity, with acknowledgements made the whole way that “this won’t solve the problem, but maybe it will help.” And then, when the problem isn’t completely solved, they will do it again. And again.

Andrew Scott
June 12, 2015
Gun Control Negotiations & the Lack of Compromise Claim
[Scott is correct. But there is more.

When they say “…maybe it will help” I don’t think the politicians believe it anymore than I do. I think they have some other reason for infringing upon this specific enumerated right. And I think they need to be asked, “What’s the real reason you are doing this?” And their response, whether it be silence, excuses, feigned insult, whatever, needs recorded and remembered.

Then, when the time comes, that response should be used as evidence at their trial. The evidence that they knew they were lying and doing something wrong at the time they were doing it will demonstrate premeditation.—Joe]

Quote of the day—The Onion

Posted on by

Saying there were no other options remaining and that continued intervention would only prolong the nation’s suffering, experts concluded Tuesday that the best course of action is to keep the United States as comfortable as possible until the end.

According to those familiar with its condition, the country’s long, painful decline over the past several decades has made it clear that the most compassionate choice at this juncture is to do whatever is possible to ensure America is at ease during its last moments.

The Onion
Experts Say Best Option Now Is Keeping Nation As Comfortable As Possible Till End
[I’ve been listening to By the People: Rebuilding Liberty Without Permission. I’m about half way through I now and one of the things that really stood out was essentially what The Onion says in their humor piece. It’s probably not possible to restore the U.S. to it’s original state of liberty. It has to have its government completely destroyed and then rebuilt.

The examples Murray, the author, gives are post WWII Germany and Japan. They were forced into unconditional surrender and then rebuilt. Within a few decades they were in better shape than the victors such as Great Britain and France. No mention was made of Italy but they did not unconditionally surrender as did the other axis powers so I suppose it is reasonable to exclude it from comparison.

Currently I’m listening to Murray talk about civil disobedience of stupid regulations. He better have something better than that to get us back to a state of liberty. And unconditional surrender to another nation would not appear to be a promising option either.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Randy Barnett

Posted on by

If all this evidence of original meaning is not enough to persuade you, then you are simply not persuadable by evidence.

Randy Barnett
June 5, 2015
More evidence that the “judicial power” included the power to nullify unconstitutional laws
[Via a Tweet from Alan Gura who says, “Slaaaaaam dunk.”

Barnett’s article is about the power of the judiciary, in general, to declare laws “null and void”. Some people are apparently questioning this and Barnett supplies “Slaaaaaam dunk” evidence showing they are wrong.

The quote above was in reference to those people but it is also applicable to people who advocate for infringement upon the right to keep and bear arms.—Joe]

Gift idea

Posted on by

If someone wanted to get me a gift (Father’s Day is coming up) I thought I should let you know that I really like this shirt (I wear a large):

ayn_rand_who_is_going_to_stop_me

It works on so many levels.

Update: Barb read this post and reminded me of something. I referred her to the statement on the shirt in the picture above.

Quote of the day—Cody Fenwick.

Posted on by

It’s time we start thinking a little more boldly and demanding much more. We should consider abolishing private gun ownership.

…

We don’t need an alternative to guns, we just need people to realize that guns aren’t needed.

Cody Fenwick
June 7, 2015
Let’s Talk About Abolishing Gun Ownership
[Never let anyone get away with telling you that no one wants to take your guns.

Any efforts along these lines will be significantly less successfully than prohibition of recreational alcohol and other drugs. And those were total disasters. I am certain an attempt in “abolishing private gun ownership” will be an even greater disaster.

Why?

Because I and millions more will refuse to give them up.

In the spirit of full disclosure I’ll share that I’m going to the range this week to practice. Then this weekend I’m going to a match to see who can hit five head sized objects the fastest. I think I can draw and hit all of five of them in four to five seconds. Or if they are close enough I can do it in under three seconds.

I can hit a man-sized target on my first shot from 957 yards away.

I also make explosives.

Your move Mr. Fenwick.—Joe]

This is what they think of you

Posted on by

Via a Tweet from Robb Allen we have this Tweet:

@ItsRobbAllen @DLoesch lol there is no need to de-humanize a gun-toting xtian conservative, that’s as far from human as you can get.

An attitude like this makes it all the easier to justify loading up the trains.

I would like to suggest that with this particular minority the task is much easier said than done.

Quote of the day—Tamara K. @TamSlick

Posted on by

When liberal democracies collapse, someone comes along who promises to make the trains run on time if we load the right people into them.

Tamara K. @TamSlick
Tweeted and posted on her blog June 6, 2015
[It’s so chilling because it’s mostly true.—Joe]

Barrel analysis

Posted on by

After my gun barrel split open I had a reader request that I send the barrel to him for analysis. This is what I know so far:

May 21, 2015:

I cut the end off the barrel to expose the fracture surfaces.  I see no evidence of fatigue at the macroscopic level, the barrel will have to go under the microscope.  I took the intact muzzle section and put it under the hardness tester.  KKM advertises their barrels as being heat treated to 45 HRC.  I measured an average value of 42 HRC with a minimum value of 40.9 HRC.  Heat treatments on small parts are generally +/- 3 HRC meaning a barrel in spec will range between 42 and 48 HRC.  I would state at this point that this barrel was in spec for heat treatment, but just barely and on the low end.  Of course I will send the data out to my senior engineer for review.  He was the chief metallurgist for Remington and I’ll get his opinion on the heat treat spec.

June 4, 2015:

I put the fracture surfaces of your barrel under the microscope today, as well as having the chemistry done.  The chemistry was within specifications, but the manganese to sulfur ratio was low.  What I saw the was most interesting was a crack at a 45deg angle coming down from the front of the first locking lug into the barrel, almost 1/4 of the way through the thickness of the barrel.  This crack looks to have been formed during the repeated firing/cycling of the gun and caused the barrel to rupture in front of the chamber and at the 12 o’clock position.  As the top surface of the barrel came free, this imparted a bending moment on the opposite side of the barrel and caused it to split at the 6 o’clock position.  

I am frankly amazed at this failure.  I have never seen shear fatigue in a gun barrel before.  I’m going to send this off to my firearms expert, he’ll find this interesting. 

June 8, 2015:

LHS is “left hand side” and RHS is right hand side (breach towards you, muzzle away, in the as-assembled orientation), the barrel having been split in half along the major fracture surfaces.  As you can see there is a crack at about 45 deg from the front of the first locking lug going in the muzzle to chamber direction.  It goes about a quarter of the way though the thickness of the barrel.  I am having the barrel cut by our machinist to expose that crack fracture surface to look for evidence of fatigue.

The color pics are optical microscopy, the black and white are scanning electron microscopy (SEM).

He sent me 18 pictures. I’m posting the more interesting ones:

LHS_003
LHS 003

LHS_01
LHS 01
LHS_02
LHS 02

LHS_08
LHS 08

RHS_01
RHS 01

RHS_002
RHS 002

RHS_04
RHS 04

They don’t want a discussion

Posted on by

From Half of Gun Owners Support an Assault Rifle Ban, So Why Are Politicians Still so Afraid of the NRA?

now that I’ve mentioned the unmentionable, those readers in the pro-gun community will please do everyone a favor and keep their comments to themselves.

Don’t ever let anyone tell you they are interested in a “discussion” about gun control. Always remember that the phrase “reasoned discourse” used by the anti-gun people was a euphemism for blocking and/or deleting comments by pro-gun people.

They just want you to shut and listen to them display their ignorance.

Sex and happiness

Posted on by

From here:

It is Carnegie Mellon professor George Loewenstein’s firm belief that, generally, married couples would be happier if they had more sex.

But a study that he published this month in the Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization found just the opposite.

Interesting.

The way the study was carried out could have biased the results:

For three months, half of the 64 married couples who participated in the study were told to double their current level of sexual activity, and half were given no instruction on changing their sexual frequency.

Those who increased their frequency had a slightly lower happiness level than couples whose sexual frequency remained unchanged. “They were, if anything, less happy,” said Mr. Loewenstein, a professor of economics and psychology. “They ended up wanting sex less and enjoying the sex that they did have less.”

The sample size seems a little small, and it would seem to me they should have divided their subjects into three groups and told one of the groups to reduce their sexual frequency by half.

Another thing that could be an issue is perhaps “double” is too much to see the benefits Loewenstein expected. Perhaps breaking the subjects into nine groups and have four increase by 25%, 50%, 75%, 100% and four groups decrease by 25%, 50%, 75% and 100%.

Loewenstein himself offers some other rationalizations for why he didn’t see the expected results.

I have to give Loewenstein credit for publishing his study results which contradict his expectations.

Posted in Sex

Quote of the day—Rowan‏@therowanlee

Posted on by

@ItsRobbAllen @DennisWalkerJr Nah, this has nothing to do with racism or sexism – just blowhard rednecks and their penis replacements.

Rowan‏@therowanlee
Tweeted on June 2, 2015
[It’s another Markley’s Law Monday!

Via Robb Allen.—Joe]

Another Boomershoot 2015 fireball video

Posted on by

Continuing my email cleanup I found this:

The Insidious Semantics of “Gun Control”

Posted on by

I was taking care of my backlog of unread email and found The Insidious Semantics of “Gun Control” from JPFO. Here is part of it:

guncontrol-poster-450

“Gun Control” advocates fall into only two categories: the Liars and the Ignorant. There is no third category.

The Liars invent the lies. The Ignorant believe the lies and repeat them.

…

“Gun Control”: This is the “big daddy”, the cornerstone, the very foundation of the gun prohibitionists’ deceptive artifice. The phrase, on first hearing, sounds innocuous. After all, why wouldn’t people carefully “control” their firearms?

…

“Personal Arsenal”: This is owning anything over two guns. Two guns is “Multiple Weapons”.

A “Weapons Cache”: This seems to be three or more guns. A “Hidden Weapons Cache” means you don’t leave your guns on the kitchen table all day long.

A “Stockpile of Ammunition” is anything over twenty rounds of any caliber. It’s really a “stockpile” if you have several calibers in your “cache”. That makes you a “Survivalist” or a “Militia Member”.

There is more but the above is what jumped out at me.

ITAR is being updated

Posted on by

I’ve written about ITAR before (and here). It is being updated for the age of the Internet. With the current administration in power you know that doesn’t mean it’s an improvement from our viewpoint.

The NRA explains:

Commonly used and unregulated internet discussions and videos about guns and ammo could be closed down under rules proposed by the State Department, amounting to a “gag order on firearm-related speech,” the National Rifle Association is warning.

In updating regulations governing international arms sales, State is demanding that anyone who puts technical details about arms and ammo on the web first get the OK from the federal government — or face a fine of up to $1 million and 20 years in jail.

One could dismiss this as tin-foil hat fears but there does appear to be reason to be concerned when you read the actual proposed changes which include things like this:

This rulemaking proposes that the electronic transmission of unclassified ‘‘technical data’’ abroad is not an ‘‘export,’’ provided that the data is sufficiently secured to prevent access by foreign persons. Additionally, this proposed rule would allow for the electronic storage of unclassified ‘‘technical data’’ abroad, provided that the data is secured to prevent access by parties unauthorized to access such data.

It is easy to read the proposed changes as my reporting accuracy issues with some ammo on my blog as sufficient grounds to be subject to felony charges. Gun and ammo manufacture websites appear to be covered as well, but they would be in a much better position to pay the annual $2000 ITAR fee and get permission before posting their material.

Government is way out of control. Contempt for and ignoring our government at a very broad level will only increase until it collapses.

If you can tolerate getting angered every minute or two read By the People: Rebuilding Liberty Without Permission. I’m listening to it now via an audible book. I about a third of the way through and the situation with stupid, stifling, obvious (to me) unconstitutional  regulations is being presented. ITAR hasn’t been mentioned so far but probably 99% of the Federal regulations could qualify.

I think the author is going to tell us to ignore the regulations and wait for the collapse as the best way out. That would appear to me to be just as good as advice as anything I can think of.

Update: Sebastian agrees it is a very serious issue.