Steel Challenge match results

Posted on by

Ry and I went to a Steel Challenge match today. I shot with a centerfire pistol and he shot a .22 Pistol.

I came in fourth out of 30 people which is significantly better than the seventh out of 36 last time with this group. I felt really good about almost all of my shooting this time. Well… except after stage 4 where I had no problems and it confounded almost everyone else in our squad and Taylor said she wasn’t going to hang out me with anymore. I completed it in 19 seconds flat and it took her over 49 seconds.

Ry made a video of me shooting one of the stages. It seems like my draw is really slow but it seems to be on the order of 1.5 seconds so that isn’t too bad.

Another thing of interest is that I was wearing a Boomershoot 2006 shirt and the R.O. said the Latin (Veni, vidi, BOOM!) was perfect.

Here are more detailed results:

Stage # SCSA ID Stage Name
1 ?? Go Fast
2 ?? Star Burst
3 ?? Concentrate
4 ?? In & Out

Centerfire Pistol

Place Name Comp SCSA Division Aggregate Total Stage 1 Stage 2 Stage 3 Stage 4 DQ Additional
1 Christian S 58 PROD 57.71 57.71 10.40 15.62 15.48 16.21 Junior
2 Alexander W 55 3362 OPN 62.61 62.61 9.71 15.71 21.12 16.07 Junior
3 Connor P 60 A87260 PROD 72.30 72.30 11.00 20.43 20.04 20.83 Junior
4 Joe H 23 3799 ISP 74.71 74.71 12.54 20.58 22.59 19.00 Senior
5 Bob S 2 PROD 78.06 78.06 13.02 20.21 22.55 22.28 Senior
6 Euan G 4 ISP 81.87 81.87 13.85 26.14 20.99 20.89
7 Jeff K 15 PROD 87.74 87.74 13.69 25.61 20.77 27.67
8 Matthew M 14 PROD 88.08 88.08 13.94 24.69 25.48 23.97 Military
9 Dan P 62 A87261 ISP 89.16 89.16 15.05 25.94 24.13 24.04
10 Eric W 63 3362 PROD 90.28 90.28 16.24 22.62 27.87 23.55
11 Lukasz T 35 5956 ISP 90.31 90.31 10.87 24.60 26.03 28.81
12 Bradley M 57 PROD 96.33 96.33 13.15 23.80 29.56 29.82 Junior
13 Lance B 16 PROD 97.86 97.86 18.22 26.53 25.52 27.59
14 Tim R 20 ISR 99.84 99.84 18.85 23.81 26.24 30.94
15 Earl B 10 ISP 100.32 100.32 19.27 24.08 28.13 28.84
16 Don C 33 A85736 PROD 101.26 101.26 16.96 27.43 29.15 27.72 Senior
17 Jason F 24 PROD 104.44 104.44 14.90 29.54 30.07 29.93
18 Jeffrey K 39 A84426 PROD 106.46 106.46 16.19 31.00 25.14 34.13 Senior
19 Jesse P 28 PROD 109.06 109.06 18.42 29.30 28.91 32.43
20 Mark B 3 OPN 112.01 112.01 18.79 30.51 29.48 33.23
21 Bryce K 8 PROD 114.50 114.50 18.86 26.12 30.76 38.76
22 Brad M 49 ISP 119.75 119.75 16.98 39.49 34.20 29.08
23 Jason G 27 A86456 PROD 121.79 121.79 17.35 32.19 35.62 36.63
24 Joel F 7 PROD 124.19 124.19 18.71 29.01 33.64 42.83
25 Euan G 9 PROD 125.53 125.53 23.00 31.80 37.14 33.59
26 Patrick D 5 PROD 155.65 155.65 17.15 40.77 49.57 48.16 Military
27 Denny M 25 PROD 164.79 164.79 27.78 50.18 38.22 48.61
28 Taylor C 18 ISP 170.22 170.22 20.46 47.90 52.83 49.03 Lady
29 Gail C 19 PROD 210.22 210.22 29.49 62.28 52.56 65.89 Lady
30 Paul B 29 A87020 PROD 248.23 248.23 18.95 120.00 42.46 68.43 Senior

.22 Pistol

Place Name Comp SCSA Division Aggregate Total Stage 1 Stage 2 Stage 3 Stage 4 DQ Additional
1 Christian S 59 RFPI 46.69 46.69 7.16 13.10 14.21 12.22 Junior
2 Connor P 61 A87260 RFPI 47.66 47.66 7.74 12.04 14.85 13.03 Junior
3 Lukasz T 34 5956 RFPO 50.86 50.86 8.54 14.39 13.33 14.60
4 Bradley M 56 RFPI 53.63 53.63 7.28 14.55 17.20 14.60 Junior
5 Jeff K 6 RFPO 55.02 55.02 9.39 14.23 15.63 15.77
6 Stephen D 1 RFPO 56.18 56.18 9.83 16.39 13.44 16.52
7 Alexander W 54 3362 RFPI 57.27 57.27 8.91 13.97 15.88 18.51 Junior
8 Cel A 48 4893 RFPI 58.49 58.49 11.97 15.46 15.82 15.24
9 Lance B 12 RFPI 72.81 72.81 12.20 17.27 21.37 21.97
10 Addison L 52 RFPI 73.83 73.83 9.14 20.13 26.24 18.32 Junior
11 Earl B 11 RFPI 79.23 79.23 9.65 19.77 24.54 25.27
12 Michael M 50 RFPI 93.87 93.87 17.92 26.63 23.32 26.00
13 Erik F 17 RFPI 95.71 95.71 14.51 26.51 30.53 24.16
14 Denny M 26 RFPI 103.69 103.69 11.45 29.27 36.83 26.14
15 Ry J 21 TY76202 RFPO 112.62 112.62 18.63 24.50 34.05 35.44
16 Adrian C 38 RFPI 113.81 113.81 15.13 25.98 35.98 36.72 Junior
17 James W 32 RFPI 116.89 116.89 13.68 40.04 35.67 27.50 Senior
18 Sara W 45 RFPI 117.25 117.25 30.42 30.62 30.36 25.85 Lady, Junior
19 Sabrina W 43 RFPI 125.27 125.27 19.81 37.65 36.21 31.60 Lady, Junior
20 Joey M 47 RFPI 143.40 143.40 44.56 42.90 26.41 29.53 Junior
21 Ezzy A 44 5478 RFPI 153.70 153.70 21.73 42.75 44.20 45.02 Lady, Junior
22 Isabelle M 42 RFPI 198.93 198.93 23.24 104.72 34.68 36.29 Lady, Junior
23 Paul B 30 A87020 RFPI 228.11 228.11 18.52 120.00 52.80 36.79 Senior

Quote of the day—Glenn Reynolds

Posted on by

Glamour is undermined by mockery. People steeped in multicultural respect will find that mockery difficult. The other thing that undermines glamour is crushing defeat. The Axis had glamour of its own, until Dresden and Hiroshima.

Glenn Reynolds
January 6, 2015
LIKE MOST SUCCESSFUL CULTS, IT LETS PEOPLE ACT LIKE DEMONS WHILE FEELING LIKE ANGELS
[The context above is the Islamic State but the concept also applies to the anti-gun people.—Joe]

Quote of the day—C.D. Michel

Posted on by

A regression analysis shows a strong correlation between handgun sales and falling crime (with statistically small odds that the covariance was based on random chance) positively certifies that California is safer when its people exercise their right to own the most effective tool available to defend themselves or their families.

Guns deter criminals and guns save lives.

C.D. Michel
March 27, 2015
More Guns = Less Crime; California Style
[As with the rest of the country gun sales in California have increased rather dramatically in the last few years. Read the post for the details.

This sort of evidence will, over the long run, make it more difficult to get repressive gun laws passed and to defend them in court. If we can get strict scrutiny at the SCOTUS level then it should just be a “mopping up” exercise.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Elizabeth Saunders

Posted on by

In all the years I have been in business, I have never seen anything so blatantly un-American as that agreement. The establishment of a government oversight commission with virtually unlimited authority and no accountability is in itself a violation of the basic American concept of free enterprise. No reasonable business person could possibly sign this thing.

Elizabeth Saunders
CEO of American Derringer
March 24, 2000
American Derringer – Statement regarding S&W defection
[Smith & Wesson signed the agreement and came very close going bankrupt after gun owners spontaneously (not the NRA or any other gun rights organization) boycotted them. There were many people who were of the opinion that Smith & Wesson Must Die even after they backed out of the agreement.

See also this quote of Neal Knox about the depth the gun rights movement had fallen to in the mid 1970s. We sometimes think we have it bad now, but remember that in those dark ages we were close to getting national handgun licensing with people openly salivating at the next step being handgun confiscation:

In July 1976, Shields estimated that it would take seven to ten years for NCCH to reach the goal of “total control of handguns in the United States.”

Pete Shields was the chairman of the National Council to Control Handguns (which later became Handgun Control, Inc. which then became The Brady Campaign).

While we do have a long way yet to go we have come a long way.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Rosa DeLauro

Posted on by

There is no reason on earth, other than to kill as many people as possible in as short a time as possible, that anyone needs a gun designed for a battlefield.

Rosa DeLauro
U.S. Representative (D-Conn.)
April 6, 2015
Bill would pay gun owners to hand over assault weapons
[Pictures of Rep. DeLauro from The Hill and the Washington Times:

TheHillDeLauroWashingtonTimesDeLauro

You would think they would get tired of rerunning these same tired arguments. Our standard responses are:

  • It’s a Bill of Rights. Not a Bill of Needs.
  • Since the police have them it must be in their job description to “kill as many people as possible in as short a time as possible”.
  • If you really believe this then you are extremely ignorant and/or lack imagination.

Her ignorance and malice is evident in this part of the article in The Hill:

DeLauro is in favor of stronger guns laws that would completely ban assault weapons and high-capacity ammunition, she emphasized this bill would not force gun owners to turn in their firearms.

“High-capacity ammunition”? And of course she makes it clear this is just step toward her real goal of a complete ban. Don’t ever let anyone get away with telling you that no one wants to take your guns.

Sebastian and most of the commenters over there don’t see a problem for gun owners in this proposed law. Say Uncle just says, “No, thanks.” TriggerFinger doesn’t seem much concerned about it either.

But I would worry about this giving the Feds a list of people that are verified previous owners of “assault weapons”. One might imagine, in her mind, these are the people that need to “dealt with”. The administration has already demonstrated they use the IRS as a weapon. So what better way to get a list of your enemies than pay them a little something to identify themselves to your “weapon”, the IRS?

It’s a variation of the Lenin quote, “The Capitalists will sell us the rope with which we will hang them.”—Joe]

Fail, fail, fail, fail…

Posted on by

I’m writing this after just getting off the phone with Great Big Gun Accessory Company That Everyone Knows. I’m not pissed, just a little disgusted. I got a 130 dollar tool made by that company, from an Idaho retailer, and the tool is defective.

I called the retailer about it immediately. After some vacillation (first fail) and some obvious back-and-forth amongst the person who took my call and someone else (second fail) they referred me to the manufacturer (third fail).

I then called Great Big Gun Accessory Company That Everyone Knows and got put on hold by a robot. OK; that’s sort of tolerable, as it’s a busy time of day for a busy company in a very busy industry. After only two or three minutes I got a person. I got directly to the point; I had ordered this tool and it has some bad threads.

She actually muttered under her breath at me, as though she’d been robbed few minutes ago and I had just threatened her for her wallet; “Oh, good God…” (fourth fail). She then had to put me on hold (fifth fail) to talk to someone else (sixth fail) after which she went on and on in her Eeyore/Marvin the Paranoid Android tone, (seventh fail) about oh, woe is us; we’re juuust swamped with customer service… (eighth fail) and that she’d take my name and number and someone would call me back, maybe today but probably tomorrow (ninth fail).

There’s a point to all of this, mind you. This isn’t so I can vent my frustration– I’m not frustrated. I got this tool on a lark, because I thought it would be something fun to try. Well, all the fun has been drained right out, but it’s not frustrating in any way because I really have no “need” for this item than can’t be served with tools I already have.

The point is; if you’re in business and you have a customer who has a problem, AND you’re capable of solving said problem, then DO IT, RIGHT NOW. Your customers will absolutely love you for it, and your service will have been so unusually simple and easy that they’ll tell everyone they know about you. That two or three dollars, to fifty or 60 dollars it actually cost you to SOLE THE CUSTOMER’S PROBLEM STRAIGHT AWAY will have been your cheapest and most effective advertizing ever!

The retailer could have solved my problem immediately, without even thinking about it, if they’d simply send me a new part. “No problem, Mister Keeney; we’ll get you another part out to you right now, and you’ll have it tomorrow. Sorry about the inconvenience.”

That is our goal, but we don’t always reach it (for one thing, there is internal disagreement on its merits, if you can believe that). It is an ideal, which will rarely be met in all cases, but it is none the less THE ideal.

This is so very simple, and so very obvious, that practically all businesses fail to consider it. The few who do will rule the retail world. All the rest will have every excuse in the book why they don’t do it, and they’ll all be very reasonable and thoroughly justifiable excuses.

If you HAVE THE ABILITY to solve the customer’s problem RIGHT NOW, that is an OPPORTUNUTY for you and your company. Don’t miss the opportunity.

Meanwhile, after talking to two people, at two companies, each of whom had the ability to solve my problem right then and there, each of whom had to talk to at least one other person who also had the ability to solve my problem right then and there, I’ll be waiting for a phone call (not a replacement part, mind you, not even a promise of a replacement part, but a phone call) that may or may not come in the next 24 hours.

The time it took either one of the two people I spoke with to hum and haw and consult with peers and finally get around to telling me to call somewhere else or to take my name and number for someone else to get back to me, THEY COULD HAVE SOLVED MY PROBLEM RIGHT THEN AND THERE, and so you see, it would be far MORE EFFICIENT just for them, which would free up more customer service representatives to help more customers.

This isn’t rocket surgery.

Quote of the day—Jawhorse

Posted on by

The only persons who fear firearms background checks are people who cannot pass background checks.

Jawhorse
April 2, 2015
Comment to Gun background check hearing: Does bill close loophole or create unenforceable law?
[This is another one of those mental defects who believe they can read the minds of other people.—Joe]

Quote of the day—obvious-if-you-read-carefully

Posted on by

The people fighting universal background checks are the people who deliberately want to be irresponsible.  Plain and simple.

obvious-if-you-read-carefully
April 1, 2015
Comment to Gun background check hearing: Does bill close loophole or create unenforceable law?
[The type of people who say things like this have mental problems. It is common in some personality disorders for the person to believe they can read your mind. I’ve had them insist they knew what I was thinking and/or meant even with the words I used were written down and visible in front of them and I insisted they were completely, totally, wrong. They just knew in direct disregard for all the facts.

This is why I sometimes ask how someone determines truth from falsity with stunning effectiveness. I have literally been told, “It depends on how I feel.”—Joe]

The one lie

Posted on by

I’ve updated the post Two truths and a lie with the answer and further explanation of a bunch of the truths. The short version is that I got second place instead first place in the chess tournament.

Quote of the day—Donnie Brasco ‏@D0NNIE_BRASC0

Posted on by

U need to stop fucking your sister & dildoing urself w/ guuuns

Donnie Brasco ‏@D0NNIE_BRASC0
Tweeted on December 19, 2014
[It’s another Markley’s Law Monday! Via a tweet from BFD ‏@BigFatDave.—Joe]

Boomershoot 2015 cups, shirts, hats, thongs, etc.

Posted on by

Get your Boomershoot 2015 swag here.

The image used is this one:

Boomershoot2015Image

You don’t have to attend Boomershoot to wear Boomershoot stuff or have a cool mug laying around on your desk at work.

Rounds in the last month

Posted on by

Here is an update on the total number of rounds I have reloaded:

223.LOG: 2027 rounds.
3006.LOG: 467 rounds.
300WIN.LOG: 1351 rounds.
40SW.LOG: 38807 rounds.
45.log: 0 rounds.
9MM.LOG: 21636 rounds.
Total: 64288 rounds.

This is a delta of 3064 rounds since last month. This is composed of 1,137 rounds of .40 S&W and 1,927 rounds of 9mm. So far this year I have reloaded 6,859 rounds.

This morning I ran some bullets over the chronograph using the ETR7 powder I got last month. Using the Montana Gold 180 grain JHP and the loads suggested somewhere else I tried 4.5 grains and 4.8 grains with an OAL of 1.135. The results were a little lower velocities than what I expected. All tests were with the muzzle 10 feet from the first screen of the chronograph and an ambient temperature of 32F. The low temperature may have affected the velocities some but I need to be able to make major power factor (165) even when it is cold out.

4.5 grains of ETR7:

Mean Velocity: 861 fps
Standard Deviation: 17.5 fps
Minimum Velocity: 832 fps
Maximum Velocity: 891 fps
Extreme Spread: 59 fps
Power Factor: 155.07

4.8 grains of ETR7:

Mean Velocity: 891 fps
Standard Deviation: 20.6 fps
Minimum Velocity: 864 fps
Maximum Velocity: 935 fps
Extreme Spread: 71 fps
Power Factor: 160.54

The suggested max load is 5.0 grains. But what I need to do is check the primers of the 4.8 grain loads before bumping the load up to the max. And if linear interpolation is valid for this range of loads 5.0 grains isn’t going to get me into major.

Quote of the day—Bob Owens

Posted on by

Brady’s attorneys simply had no viable case against the legal protections under federal law as provided by the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA), which prevents harassment and frivolous lawsuits from gun control cultists.

In addition to dismissing the case, the judge found that the plaintiffs owe the companies they attempted to harass an award of “reasonable attorney fees.”

Bob Owens
March 30, 2015
Brady Campaign Case Targeting Online Ammo Dismissed By Judge
[I find it interesting that as the Brady Campaign lawsuit backfired on them the last Brady (of the campaign) died.—Joe]

Huh…

Posted on by

It looks like I made the final ballot for the Campbell Award for best new sci-fi writer. With only one published book (and one short story, also in the same universe) I figure I’m a long shot, even if I have a re-write, a sequel, a prequel, and a children’s historical book scheduled for this year. In any case, even getting to the final ballot short-list is an honor… Well, interesting, anyway. No clue what the competition is like, but it should be fun to watch unfold. I can almost hear some brains exploding from here.

Also on the list: Wesley Chu*, Jason Cordova, Kary English*, Eric S. Raymond (*Finalists in their 2nd year of eligibility.)

Mixed words on making the short list for the Prometheus. But as I hear the competition is strong this year, so I’m a long-shot there, too. But how many people manage to make both a “best new X” list at the same time they make the list for some other category in the field competing against long-time pros?

Just getting nominated for either award is proof the universe has a twisted sense of humor. If I happen to win, I know that my little corner of the cosmos is a very strange one. Not a bad one, mind you, just more than a little bit odd.

Quote of the day—Sebastian

Posted on by

Constitutional Carry is the new frontier.

Sebastian
April 3, 2015
Then There Were Six: Constitutional Carry Now Law In Kansas
[I recently had a long chat with Mike B. our friendly lobbyist at Idaho Sport Shooters Alliance about this very topic. He doesn’t really understand why so much emphasis is placed on Constitutional Carry. His point is that more benefit for more people can be achieved while consuming less political capital by getting better reciprocity and carry in places like school campuses, parks, and state and Federal lands.

I find it hard to disagree with Mike from a practical basis but ultimately we want “constitutional carry”. And the more people we have carrying without a license or proof of training and there is no “blood in the streets” the easier it is to get more lenient laws in the repressive states.

But probably the most important reason Constitutional Carry is so popular issue these days that it’s easier to get people fired up about something big than it is something incremental. Sebastian captures that with “the new frontier”.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Adlai E. Stevenson Jr.

Posted on by

My definition of a free society is a society where it is safe to be unpopular.

Adlai E. Stevenson Jr.
October 7, 1952
Speech in Detroit
[At first glance this appears to be a decent one line definition. Some simple tests are as follows:

  • In some societies it is unpopular to be of a particular religion/ethnicity/sexual-orientation. But in a free society such people will not be harmed as long as they do not intimidate or harm others. In an non-free society they may lose their jobs, socially shunned, their property destroyed, or even killed for merely for being suspected of matching an unpopular attribute.
  • In some societies it is unpopular to be a gun owner. But in a free society such people allowed to go about their business without restraint as long as they do not intimidate or harm others.

It is clear that the U.S. is not a free society. It has various degrees of freedom depending on the relative popularity of the activities of the person. 100 years ago gun owners were relatively free but today in certain political jurisdictions we are at great risk of going to jail if we attempt to go about our business even though our actions harm no one.

100 years ago to be homosexual in many locations in the U.S. was very risky and Christianity very low risk. Today homosexuality is much lower risk and Christianity is at some risk.

Stevenson definition is a pretty good for those issues. But as you dig into things more your realize Stevenson definition is not really adequate. What about alcohol production? Beer and wine are quite popular but highly regulated. Cars are very popular but highly regulated.

I have a half-baked hypothesis that total freedom in our country is a near constant. As it increases in one area it decreases in another. People demand control over something.

In the beginning it was black slavery, indentured servants and intolerance of non-Christians. Then as those went away it was regulation of things like alcohol, guns, drugs, business, tobacco, and a million little things. It doesn’t seem to have any relation to public safety, economic prosperity, or anything of importance. It’s just control.—Joe]

Vampire season again

Posted on by

Last weekend Barb and I made our annual trip to Lowe’s for Boomershoot supplies. Here are 825 18” stakes in the back of my vehicle:

WP_20150329_001

As is usual I was prepared in case someone asked what I was going to do with all the stakes. The clerk did not disappoint me.

Clerk: What are you going to do with all the stakes?

Joe: Vampires.

Clerk: That makes as much sense as many of the other things people tell us.

And then there were…five?

Posted on by

Kansas Gubnuh signs “constitutional” carry bill.

There’s also talk about lowering the legal age for open carry to eighteen, some citing the fact that eighteen year-olds can fight for their country. Well, yeah. I havent seen any age restrictions in the second amendment, but maybe I didn’t look close enough. That sort of thing (for those under 18) should be up to the parents, and Uncle Sam is not my daddy or my kids’ daddy.

ETA: If we didn’t think she’d be arrested for it, my daughter would be packing right now. Instead we’re forced to decide whether we’re more concerned about her being judged by twelve (actually since she’s under age it would be judged by one) or carried by six.

“I believe we can lower the age to 18 at some point in the future. I think after everybody sees that there are not going to be any of the dire predictions coming true, and they relax a little bit, then we can talk about that.”

OK; why do some people need to be “relaxed” before others can exercise their natural human rights? Where in the constitution does it say that? There must be one hell of a long list of qualifiers that I haven’t seen yet.

I’ve mentioned “control by freakout” before, and this is an excellent example – media get people all hyped up and “un-relaxed” and our rights are violated as a result. I must say it is a brilliant tactic.

Quote of the day—Glenn Reynolds

Posted on by

If it weren’t for double standards the left would have no standards at all.

Glenn Reynolds
December 24, 2014
CHARLES C.W. COOKE: The Left’s “Climate Of Hate” Hypocrisy.
[There is more than a little truth in this even if it really should be “no principles at all”. But then the humor wouldn’t work.—Joe]

‘Well, you know what I meant!’

Posted on by

Actually no; quite often I don’t, so why not just come right out and say it clearly and directly?

From Vanderboegh. I like it. It illustrates exactly the sort of ridiculous things I picture in my mind when most people speak, about anything.

I was listening to a caller on a talk show this morning, for example, who went on and on and, so far as I could gather, never said anything. The host caught on right away and after several unsuccessful attempts to prompt the guy into saying something he ended the call. A lot of words were coming out of the caller’s mouth, amounting to nothing.

That little anecdote describes much of my life. Many times I’ve sat through a whole hour of some video someone or other thought I should totally see, searching for one little bit of clear meaning (anything that didn’t require some inference or projection or other) to end up with nothing.