Hindsight is Bullshit, Or ...

"Hindsight is 20/20," or it's just plain wrong.

I was flipping through the September 2002 edition of American Riflman - the NRA's premier rag.

I stumbled upon what should rightly be called a glowing eulogy to William Batterman Ruger. Many took Ruger to task for going along the magazine-capacity partial ban of the early '90s (or so). I am still uncomfortable with any such accommodation (or, in Ruger's case, an apparent overabundance of self righteousness), BUT that was a different political climate, a different social climate, and the apex of Second Amendment dilution that ironically allowed for an abundance of pre-ban "banned" items.

Now in hindsight, when the worm has turned, people are recognizing that a right to arms is a Constitutional right at the lease and a natural right at the best, but we are stuck with draconian regulations and laws.

I fault Bill Ruger, Sr. for accommodation, but it seems his heart was in the right place. He was a good, though apparently harsh, guy.

If there is a lesson to be learned it is this: A right is a right, and it is folly to let it be abrogated in trade or to prevent a greater assault.

Mr. Ruger wasn't perfect, but he made great guns, supported the gun culture, contributed more than he took.

Hundreds Vs. David Friedman's Minicity

In Machinery of Freedom, David Friedman proposes breaking down cities into 100,000-constituent minicities.

My first reaction: What about hundreds?

My second reaction: That's pie-in-the sky idealism, thinking that 100,000 people can make any system work.

But I do understand economies of scale, and that 100,000 is much better than 1 million or more, but there is a certain appeal to "hundreds." I don't fully understand the concept, but I'm certain it had to do with a manageable "political" organization, like New England small-town direct democracy, that came very much after the original concept.

Also, my feeling is that "hundreds" would most likely be composed of 100 families, of whatever composition, because the original "hundreds" were composed of only men.

An interesting contrast. Something to look into.

The Armed Society Cycle: Armed, Polite, Safe

The armed society cycle: An armed society is a polite society, a polite society is a safe society, a safe society is an armed society ...

 Second amendment. Natural law. Real rights.

Duty To Retreat

Under natural and common law - but apparently not Missouri statute - Officer Darren Wilson had an obligation to retreat, if he was the aggressor. If he struck Michael Brown with his car door (battery) and threatened Brown (assault), then Brown had the right to defend himself, regardless what "government" authority Officer Wikson had.

Police Militarization Is a Symptom

Police militarization is a symptom of the growth of centralized morality, not universal morality but the implementation of a government definition of morality sponsored by the federal government - and other central states.

Unnamed Cop/Michael Brown Fight - And Social Norms

A recurring thought I have had, since I first heard about the killing of Michael Brown by an unnamed Ferguson, Missouri cop is:

The confrontation wouldn't have occurred, if the police were not enforcing victimless, petty "crimes."

Others are thinking along the same lines. Reason.com's Ed Krayewski penned this gem:

"America's various polities pass laws that demand cops police what used to be understood as harmless (selling loosies) or at-your-own-risk (walking in the street) behavior, these encounters will continue, especially among poor and marginalized communities, whom these laws tend to effect and in whose communities they tend to be more strictly enforced." from "Some Thoughts on Ferguson, Newark, State Violence, Insurrections, and Democracy"

Apparently, Michael Brown and his friend were jaywalking. According to Brown's friend, they were instructed in some manner to get out of the street, then the cop started to drive away. But apparently, the two friends did not move quickly enough, because the cop reversed his car to confront the two about leaving the street.

Now, I'm sure that there are plenty of people out there that think a "young punk" deserves to be slammed to the ground for disrespecting authority. But respect is earned, and it is not by being a petty dictator forcing petty victimless "laws." Respect is learned, when one is respected, and one is taught to respect others - in a respectful way.

As far as I have heard, the two dominant versions of the incident quickly diverged. Brown's friend said that, when the cop had reversed his car back to their position, he swung open his door so swiftly that the door hit the friends rebounding and hit the cop. The "official" version is that the two nonsupercitizens slammed the door against the cop.

The friend claims that the cop pulled Brown into the cop car and threatened to shoot Brown. The "official" version claims that Brown attempted to seize the unnamed cop's gun.

The friend and other witnesses claim that Brown was shot multiple times while he had his hands up. The "official" version obviously claims something else.


I used to be a big proponent of police enforcing petty "laws." I used to be a big "there aught to be a law" kind of guy, and cheered when cops confronted those littering, speeding, or being general assholes.

I loved it when Mayor Rudy Guiliani was clearing the NYC streets of drug dealers and "illegal" gun possessors by enforcing victimless license plate "laws" and other moving "violations." But I also believed at the time that the government should be locking people up for the victimless "crimes" of drug dealing or exercising their 2nd-Amendment-enumerated right. (And yes I know that drug dealers do sell poison, but the Drug War actually encourages more dangerous drugs - look it up.).

It all comes down to this: Should we allow government agents to force victimless "laws" with  violence? Should we allow government agents to lock people up for victimless "crimes," allowing the cops to commit the violent, forceful act of imprisoning the petty nonlaw breaker? There are a myriad way of getting people to abide by social norms without turning those norms into ordinances, statutes, and "laws" that are backed up with the force of government agents.

Oh, yeah. If you believe in the nonaggression principle and freedom in general, then the answer to the last couple of questions is an absolute NO.

Political Affiliation Reduction

A recent post on The Federalists Papers blog featured an app available through iTunes. The app allows you to scan products and determine the political contributions of the products' manufacturers (and I also assume the brands' owners, if they vary from the manufacturers).

My key problem with the app is that it breaks down donations by "Republican," "Democrat," and "Others." My reaction? I want to see a version that breaks down donors by "libertarian" and "Other."

And that led me to think: In the final analysis, your political affiliation only really matters on a one-dimensional scale from "libertarian" to "Other." I like political charts that are multidimensional, but when you parse things too far then you miss the forest for the trees.

And what could possibly be represented by only those the two categories of "libertarian" and "Other?"

libertarian
small "L" libertarian
Libertarian
minarchist
anarchist
voluntaryist
agorist

Other
Democrat
Republican

Tea Party
Green
Socialist
Communist
Fascist

I know that there are libertarians that are affiliated with the Republican AND Democrat parties, and there are all shades in between "libertarian" and "Other," so the lists above are just maps NOT the terrain.

When The Law Breaks The Law

credit: Universal Network News

When policemen break the law, then there isn't any law at all - just a fight for survival.
- Billy Jack, (played by Tom Laughlin) in "Billy Jack"

I saw that quote rephrased today: "When the law breaks the law then there is no law."

There is wisdom in this idea, but it is simplified. It accepts, at least superficially, that laws are good, and that they apply to everyone, including cops. Now I do believe that cops need to have their rights treated the same as other citizens and not be treated as supercitizens, but many of the laws they force are victimless, rights violating, self serving, evil, or collectivist.

But in its simplicity, the requirement that police, politicians, and bureaucrats be held to the same legal standards as other citizens are is gaining popular support. Even if we accept the manufactured (unnatural) laws as they are, then the least we can do is expect those self-styled supercitizens fall under the same blind gaze that the rest if us "enjoy."

Happy friggen day when you see something like this, but it was long time in coming - according to the indictment. If they are innocent, then I hope they get their friggen day in court, but I bet they're guilty of at least a little corruption. Cops get a free ride, when it comes to petty and felonious abuses of fellow citizens' rights, so it either takes a camera, a gaggle of witnesses, or racketeering to snag cops for violating the run-of-the-mill (victimful, natural) laws.

credit: NY Daily News

Las Vegas Copycatish Shooting - And Reaping What You Sow

I'm not big on collective guilt, and that is an understatement, but when "the police" shit everywhere, then they attract people with a bone to pick (to mix metaphors mercilessly).

Here's my point and prediction, which I was afraid to make for months, for risk of appearing to promote "blowback:" The abusive behavior of police in our country will lead to more fatal attacks on police. People can only put up with so much shit, and I am surprised that more LEOs have not been justifiable killed by their victims or bystanders (while police stole from, assaulted, and murdered fellow citizens), but the pipers call needs a payer, and too many LEOs are tooting their horns begging for blowback.

In no way do I endorse premeditated murder, or political killings. But the madness of cops running around with a false belief in an entitlement to run roughshod over other civilians' rights, "forcing" statutory and ordinance rules, and a false faith in the rule of (manufactured) law will lead to more LEOs deaths - and an even more entrenched bunker mentality among them. And this is even more ironic, because law enforcement is NOT the most dangerous job in America.

Clearly those two beasts in Las Vegas chose an enemy to facilitate their own destruction, but cops are too often making themselves false demigods. They have drank the professional LEO KoolAid that they are separate from other civilians, that they are the sole legitimate practitioners of violence, that they can use violence to force rules for victimless crimes, and that noncompliance with their demands is a crime - to name just a few outrages.

Individual cops do themselves a great service, when they treat others with respect, focus on real crimes, and question others up the chain of command that demand enforcement of victimless "laws."

I want to reiterate my opposition to collective guilt, despite the fact that it is probably true that the sentiment might not be mutual. But cops need to understand that bad eggs and institutional-moral decay with reflect poorly on them - individually.

They aren't all pure as the driven snow when it comes to protecting individual rights, but here are a few organizations that address police violations of rights - and the Constitutionality of police and government actions:

Cop Block
Constitutional Sheriffs and Peace Officers Association (CSPOA)
American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU)
National Rifle Association (NRA)

Obama Blindly (or Recklessly) Reaps What He Sows

The mounting irony is: If Congress won't act, then the courts and the states will. How's that for Obama reaping what he sows.

Obama's executive orders and drive to implement his agenda is compelling act for the opposite ends. Hows that for irony - and justice?

And once again, Obama sounds like he is on opposite sides of the fence on executive power - and separated by time AND unified by his struggle for relevance. This time Obama has flip-flopped on  immigration - or at least he flip-flopped about his willingness to use his executive power.

Let's see how the courts and the states, and hopefully Congress, react to Obama's renewed willingness to act like a dictator.

No Genealogies

If I recall correctly, there is a directive in the New Testament to suppress an "Old Testament" practice of making priesthoods ("rabbihoods")  hereditary. Has the Catholic Church - and protestant denominations, for that matter - replaced biological genealogies with bureaucratic ones?

And do we celebrate civic genealogies, also?

Private Policing: A History of Policing

My goal in this exercise is to develop a private-policing system concept.

As I vaguely remember, Critical Issues In Policing (an early edition), places the genesis of policing at the development of the position of sheriff in England. The "shire reeve" was the chief law-enforcement official for the king in a county.

Whether that book presented that origin, or my selective memory did, there are many problems with that interpretation of the origin of policing. For one thing, it's impossible, because humans were policing themselves on the tribal level and as illustrated in religious texts - the evidence cannot be ignored. Defining policing as descending from a king denies the natural rights of man and replaces them with the "rights" of kings - something that the Magna Carta, Parliament, congresses, communities, and gobs of stand-up individuals have fought against.

I've heard that policing and courts in Ireland existing as a free market, before England put the kibosh on Irish culture and self governance.

NEXT: Defining Policing

Fascist This, Fascist That: "Friendly Fascism"

It would be fascism with a smile. As a warning against its cosmetic façade, subtle manipulation, and velvet gloves, I call it friendly fascism. What scares me most is its subtle appeal.

- from Bertram Gross's Friendly Fascism, former presidential advisor to Truman and Roosevelt, as quoted in John Whitehead's Government of Wolves

It's so hard to call our present system "fascism," for all the usually negative connotations. "Friendly Fascism" at least acknowledges the subtly of our present creeping totalitarianism. And it is "ours," whether we like it or not.

Happy Independence Day. And read the Declaration - and not just the blasé preamble "meme."

Sherlock Holmes and Names

There is something obsessively compelling about Sherlock Holmes and names.

Sherlock - sure to lock up the guilty.
Holmes - sure to home in on his quarry.
Sir Arthur Conan Doyle - [need to pick this one apart]
Benedict Cumberbatch - [and this one]
Dr. John Watson - [and this one]
Martin Freeman - [and definitely this one]

Anti-Federalist's Argument Against Collectivism

The present moment discovers a new face in our affairs. Our object has been all along, to reform our federal system, and to strengthen our governments--to establish peace, order and justice in the community--but a new object now presents. The plan of government now proposed is evidently calculated totally to change, in time, our condition as a people. Instead of being thirteen republics, under a federal head, it is clearly designed to make us one consolidated government. Of this, I think, I shall fully convince you, in my following letters on this subject. This consolidation of the states has been the object of several men in this country for some time past. Whether such a change can ever be effected in any manner; whether [such a change] can be effected without convulsions and civil wars; whether such a change will not totally destroy the liberties of this country--time only can determine. [emphasis added]

- Federal Farmer, no. 1, 8 Oct. 1787

Well, holy crap.

Federal power (and arguably a desire for martial glory and blood cleansing) did lead to Civil War I - Federal power that turned the country against itself by allowing one side to impose its economic order on the other side.  Is federal power handing the reins of power to those that favor one side over the other, again?

Are the statists - those who want to progressively use government power to force their belief system on others - begging for a Civil War II (or, realistically a Civil War III, if the Revolutionary War is included in the count)? Are the libertarians begging for the same? Should the Federal government acquiesce loss of power to states rights and individuals, in order to preserve some kind of union?

It is simple to state that our form of government has gone beyond the strictures of the Constitution, but as so many anarchocapitalists, anarchists, and libertarians have implied: The Constitution invited the overstep of its specific limits to power, because government power begets more government power.

One unfortunate problem with the aims outlined by the Federal Farmer: a belief that strengthening the governments was legitimate.

Global/Personal, Environment/Backyard, Healthcare/Wellbeing

We are living in a bipolar world. Collectivist push for an environmental policy. The individual pushes for protection of personal property - your backyard. Collectivist push for healthcare policy.The individual   pushes for protection of the body - your wellbeing. The examples go on. But we are in a cultural battlefield that pits the wants of the collective verses the "wants" of the individual.

The collective gives us the ridiculous gift of "corporate personhood," which brings a clear example of what collectivism offers - the false promise that groups can have clearly defined wants, and needs, exclusive of the desires of the individual. Oh, wait. I mean in place of the desires of the individual.

I love Star Trek, but Spock's quote, "The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few - or the one." begs the question: Can a group feel, and need, and think?

It is easy to think in terms of sweeping problems and solutions. THE SURVIVAL OF THE SPECIES DEPENDS ON IT. But our existence is based on the individual, individual choices, individual rights. And when we abdicate responsibility of every problem - even the ones that could benefit from "collective" action - the the government hammer treats every perceived problem as a nail. Rights get violated, and problems multiply.

Most Elegant Rifle, Most ...

This most-list will be restricted to smokeless-fed cartridge firearms, for no particular reason.

Most Elegant Military Rifle

photo: Wikipedia.org

Karabiner 98 Kurz (aka Mauser 98k). The Mauser has a "whittled" sling attachment in the stock, has a cleaning rod that looks in place, and looks streamlined, while still being made out of wood and steel. And it looks oh-so-more proportional than the original Gewehr 98.

Most Steampunk Military Rifle

photo: Wikipedia.org

L85A1, (aka Enfield bullpup). It has plastic parts, so it is not truely steampunk, but the SA80 family of weapons just look like they are cobbled together with an assortment of parts to make bullet engines.

photo: IMFDB.org

Most Elegant Military Pistol

photo: AustriaArms.com

 SIG P210 (aka Pistole 49). The machined lines of this pistol are just awesome. And look even more beautiful, when you hold it in your hand. Like the CZ75, it has internal rails. I should have said the 1911, or the Luger. But the 1911 is too rounded, when you are holding it. And the Luger is too menacing. Of course, the P210 is handicapped, because the original military grips are not too attractive. And its profile is hampered by that giant trigger blade. But trust me, when you handle it, it is a marvel of machining.

Most Steampunk Military Pistol

photo: Wikipedia.org

Mauser C96 (aka Broomhandle). This pistol just screams Victorian Era. On a modern pistol, the slide would recock the hammer, if a modern pistol had a hammer. The C96 has a BOLT instead. The integral magazine and pencil barrel combined with the "broomhandle" just screams steampunk. And what other gun with scant modifications could serve as Han Solo's blaster?

photo: Tested.com

TO BE CONTINUED
 

Critical Issues In Policing

... was the title of a textbook for a college course that drove me away from a career in "law enforcement." Now we are at a critical time for policing. State-sponsored and protected policing is making itself dangerous for and irrelevant to the actual goals of policing. The best solution for policing is privatization, and not government contracted policing - private policing, private dicks, private security, private mediation and arbitration, blood money.

The Glorious American Rifle of WWI

Recently, my dad unlocked his cedar-lined closet, and we were going through the guns that he inherited from his dad. I pulled out an old military rifle, and he told me it was a M1903 Springfield. I said, "Uh-uh." I could tell by the less-elegant shape of the receiver, for one thing.

credit: Wikipedia.org

And it took me another couple minutes to convince him that it was an M1917 Enfield. It helped that "M1917" was stamped on the receiver.

I listened to the last couple episodes of Guns of Hollywood podcast. I am impressed with Allie Howe and Sam Azner's podcast, especially since their up to only 3 episodes. But what has bugged me through "The Wild Bunch" and "Saving Private Ryan" episodes has been the glossing over of the Enfield in U.S. military service. I understand that the episodes are not all inclusive, that they focus primarily on the guns used in the movies, but the mention of the Springfield, especially as the primary U.S. rifle during WWI, got the paddlewheels of my historical memory churning.

As I recall, Remington was producing Enfields for the British military in .303 during WWI. The USA decided to enter the war, and instead of retooling Remington started producing Enfields chambered for .30-06. And as I recall, there were more Enfields fielded by the U.S. than Springfields in WWI. Also, there is some debate whether Sgt. York used a Springfield or an Enfield to captured the gobs of Germans he temporarily imprisoned.

Am I right?

Well, according to Wikipedia's article about the M1917 Enfield, Remington AND Winchester were producing Enfields for the Brits. And both manufacturers produced M1917s. And fascinatingly, by the time of the armistice, 75% of the Americans in France were armed with Enfields. So it is quite easy to say that the M1917 Enfield, of British design was America's primary fighting implement during WWI.

credit: Wikipedia.org

Yes, the M1903 Springfield continued on as America's bolt-action rifle through WWII, Korea, and Vietnam (along with the M40 Remington, by this point) - having been transitioned to sniper-rifle duty, but the Enfield WAS America's WWI battle rifle.

The "More Perfect" Gun

"Glock Perfection" is Glock perfection - not necessarily everyone's perfection. You first might assume that it is the best that Glock could do, and that - when Glock dragged its feet about reasonable innovations, like nested recoil springs and adjustable backstraps - Glock thought HE knew better than you. But "Glock Perfection," at its core, is a marketing slogan, an advertising tagline. 

There is no perfect gun. Everyone has to adapt to the weapon they choose, for multiple reasons.

But When The Balloon Goes Up blog asked if there is a perfect gun, Ron Larimer went through a laundry list of guns that are close, but are not quite there. And the Glock 19 was at the top of his list.

credit: Wikipedia.org

I think with guns we are where all forms of attempting perfection will be: not quite there.

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America. [emphasis added]

- Preamble to the U.S. Constitution

So what gun would be my perfect gun? Well, here was my input to Mr. Larimer's essay:

Ruger SR9 would PROBABLY be my “more perfect” choice. It fits my hand perfectly, but - for me – it’s extremely top heavy, so I’d probably exchange the adjustable backstrap for a lead one. Three dot sights make my eyes wig out, so I’d have to get rid of a couple dots. Oh, and wait, I’ve never fired one. D’oh!

Time to try one out and see if the SR9 is perfect - for me.

credit: IMFDB.org

Two Americas

We are awakening to two Americas: free and slave.

I know that the word "slave" is a charged term that has a biblical force for many people in our country, especially since slavery was framed by race in our country for hundreds of years. But !!!

If the banks that kowtow to FDIC regulation that frames gun dealers as "high risk" not slaves, then I abandon all future attempts to frame a debate - or understand my outrage - unless someone can offer another term. "Robots?" "Lackeys?" "Cronycapitalists?"

We are sliding toward two Americas. The market will fill the void that banks will surrender for want of candy and Coke, privilege and pussification. The market will rise to the occasion with cryptocurrencies and crowdfunding. Mark - my - word.

Reckless Functionality

The AK-47 is a mechanical marvel of reckless functionality.

Nation-State Democracy and Nice Things

Why do incumbents get reelected? Because people think they represent their local interests. And that is why we can't have nice things like representative democracy. Throw in  the nation-state's proponents using gross simplifications like "village" and "community" to push its meddling, giving us the illusion that one-size-fits-all solutions are viable, and we will be forever saddled with a idiotic Congress.

credit: Reason.com Blog

Government "Solutions," Part 2

Government "solutions" are new problems in cheap disguises.

The chief reason that government fails is: it violates the "nonaggression principle."

Solutions are infinitely better, if they are achieved through voluntary exchange, cooperation, and just plain volunteering. Government solutions are poisons: mandates, regulations, "laws."

Name your elixir, but they are pretty much the same thing: libertarianism, anarchocapitalism, anarchy, voluntaryism.

Plausible JFK Theory? Part 3

SPOILER ALERT

I really suggest watching "JFK: Smoking Gun," before learning too much about what the documentary offers. If it proves to be just a bunch of falsehoods and amateurish stupidity, then at least it is entertaining. The #1 reason to watch a movie: entertaining escape.

Here is the gist of the movie:

Wondernine 2.0

"Wondernine 2.0" on fledgling sister blog The .35 Caliber Solution.

I read gobs of articles about the miraculous 9mm round in the early '90s, albeit the majority were in a  Handguns or Guns & Ammo 9mm one-off magazine, so the validity of the arguments were tainted by a need for conformity and esprit de cartouche. For a short time, everyone was on board with theadvantages of the parabellum. The U.S. military had adopted the Beretta to conform to NATO standards and to replace the old warhorse that "technically" had not been manufacturer for the military since 1945 (but had "technically" been "remanufactured" for decades). U.S. police departments had finally "caught up" with "some" European police departments by switching to autoloaders predominately in 9mm. Concurrently Glock burst on the scene with marketing schemes that included strippers and generous trade in programs (that made Glock the biggest gun wholesaler of firearms for a while).

read more

Government "Solutions"

Government "solutions" are new problems in cheap disguises.

Plausible JFK Theory? Part 2

My Frame of Reference for "JFK: The Smoking Gun"

I do not have a unique frame of reference for analyzing or forming an opinion about the Kennedy Assassination, especially for my age.

I'm sure I heard something about it, while still in high school. Well, maybe. The 20th anniversary of Kennedy's death would have been the year before I started high school. But I digress.

I distinctly remember sitting through Oliver Stone's "JFK" with friends in college. It must have been during the first few days of my final semester of my senior year. I'm sure I had plenty of time for entertainment, because I was only taking two classes and doing a pretty poor job at my second internship.

credit: Wikipedia.org

I found the Oliver Stone's version of the events to be quite compelling. Though I was quite irritated with the use of a composite character by the name of "X" played by Donald Sutherland. That story-telling tool negated from the believability of a grand government conspiracy in my mind. BUT the behavior portrayed by Joe Pesci playing Jack Ruby made the possibility of a group of conspirators, though bungling - as opposed to a lone Lee Harvey Oswald - appear undeniable.

After watching (or maybe before) Oliver Stone's "JFK," I bought the Groden and Livingstone's High Treason. I thumbed through the photos, started to read it, and then put it down. Maybe I just didn't want the drama or consistency of Oliver Stone's treatment to be sullied. Maybe I wasn't that interested.

credit: Amazon.com

Then sometime in the next few years, I picked up a copy of Don DeLillo's Libra. I only made a few pages into that novel, and then I was done with the JFK Assassination for a few years - or a couple decades.

credit: Wikipedia.org

My general concern with our over-reaching federal government - illustrated by the Fast and Furious and Benghazi scandals and the Snowden NSA revelations, among many other transgressions - combined by Netflix's streaming of new JFK conspiracy documentaries piqued my interest again about one of the two biggest (alleged) government coverups during the twentieth century (The other being Pearl Harbor).

"Dark Legacy" alleged George H.W. Bush's involvement in the Kennedy Assassination in ways that I forgot, because I did not find them that compelling. But it was intriguing that Bush appeared to be a CIA operative in the 1960s, even though he later claimed that before becoming CIA director that he had never been "employed" by the CIA. Combine that revelation with the truth about Obama's mom's CIA connections and you've got a regular old Illuminati-like cabal. But I digress, again ... and I don't even think I finished that documentary. Was it too implausible to digest?

credit: MakingTheMovies.info

 So finally, through Netflix's see-into-your-soul-and-know-what-you-want-next algorithm, I ended up watching "JFK: The Smoking Gun."

Previous Post In Series: Plausible JFK Theory? Part 1
Next Post In Series: Plausible JFK Theory? Part 3

Plausible JFK Theory? Part 1

I finished watching "JFK: The Smoking Gun" yesterday. It presents a compelling theory explaining the inconsistencies in the official Warren Commission story and counters some of what is generally accepted among conspiracy theorists.

I found some of the information about frangible ammo a little misleading, but I do not believe that those "errors" give sufficient grounds to negate this "new" theory.

If I only had this movie as a reference for the theory it presents, then I would find the theory to be even more plausible than those theories that focus on the "grassy knoll," LBJ, George H.W. Bush, etc.

Though the theory presented in this movie does not seem to have gotten a lot of press (or I have been living under a rock without MSM), I feel that it is worth looking further into, especially since it points to a growing problem that we have in our country, in a round-about way.

The documentary is currently available on Netflix.

credit: IMDB.com

 Next in Series: Plausible JFK Theory? Part 2

Statute of Limitations on Administration Corruption?

What is the statute of limitations on Federal Administration corruption? The Obama Administration seems to think - or at least, wants to get away with - crimes that have been committed in the recent past, BECAUSE they have devised their own impromptu statute of limitations.

"What difference does it make" that the Administration is responsible for deaths, as long as they are before an election and serve the Greater Good?

It is coming to a point where Federal "officials" could be subject to arrest in component states of these united States, BECAUSE the Administration feels fit to snub its nose at the separated powers WITHIN the Federal government.

NPR Versus Ruger

Tom Gresham interviewed Mike Fifer of Ruger at the NRA show for his Gun Talk podcast (4-27-2014 Part A).

During their discussion, it came up that Mike Fifer had done an interview, and that NPR had later taken that interview, inserted its own interviewer's questions, and had published the interview as its own.

A side-by-side comparison of the real interview and the "manufactured" interview , I hope, will be very informative.

Civil Rights Versus Tyranny (Correction)

Moms Demand Action Ignorance is about to lose the Facebook "like" race to a pro-gun news site. LOL. And a hardy-har-har for the fact that the "official" Everytown For Gun Safety "likes" have been cut down to a realistic 37, from the borrowed number that was originally showing in its retreaded Moms Demand Ignorance page.

The Truth About Guns: 156,300 likes vs. Moms Demand Ignorance: 157,200 likes

The Truth About Guns on Facebook.
The Truth About Guns @ TheTruthAboutGuns.com

Correction 5/2/14
Apparently I was wrong. The "real" Everytown for Gun Safety has over 300,000 "likes." But it is just about impossible to find on Facebook. Weird. Bloomberg, Moms Demand Action, Mayors Against Illegal Guns, and Everytown for Gun Safety appear to have a social-media mess.  More on this later.

Power and Responsibility

If you have power without responsibility, you have tyranny.

If you have responsibility without power, you have absolute pathetic futility.

- Massad Ayoob, The Safety Solutions Academy podcast, episode 345

Government Profiteering

Fascism, crony capitalism, statism, socialism, communism - all terms that in someway describe our current state of affairs in our country, but they are each in someway incomplete. "Government profiteering" - or "state profiteering" - seem to be a better fit.

I've favoring "crony capitalism"and "fascism" (and less inflammatorally, "statism") as the terms to describe our current political system, but one falsely indicts capitalism by default, the second is too inflammatory, and the third is just gaining traction.

"State profiteering" seems to be the most correct term. But in our country, people confuse the individual states with the federal state, when one refers to "the state." It would be an easier sell, if "statism" was part of term, and maybe it should be. But for now, lets explore "government profiteering."

When you hear "government profiteering, " you might think of corporations profiteering from preferential taxation schemes, sweetheart contracts, favorable regulations,  or protectionist tariffs. But what led me to the term was recent news about Harry Reid, cattle, a Chinese solar-energy company, and the BLM. There are questions about where he got his money. Is Reid a "government profiteer?" So, this could be a term that can cover the abuses of those inside AND outside the government to turn a profit.

And in point of fact, "cronycapitalism" could cover the illegitimate behavior of elected officials and bureaucrats. But again, that's bad for capitalism and its promotion. Then again, "profiteering" in this new term might be bad for the promoting of making a profit and the free market and capitalism.

So, maybe something with "corruption" would be better.  The "corruption state?" "Corruptionism? " "Centralized corruption?"

How about: Take back the language.

A Game of Numbers, Fantasy & Reality

$50,000,000X1 VERSUS $25X4,300,000.
Manufactured grassroots VERSUS real grassroots.
Fantastical safety through ignorance VERSUS real safety through education and training.
Bloomberg VERSUS NRA.

Harry Reid And Misuse Of Language

Harry Potter Reid is a schmuck, as far as I can tell.

Harry Reid threw out this gem:

“Those people who hold themselves out to be patriots are not. They’re nothing more than domestic terrorists,” Mr. Reid in remarks at a luncheon, according to the Las Vegas Review-Journal, which sponsored the event. “… I repeat: What went on up there was domestic terrorism.” - Washington Times, 4/18/14

Bundy supporters might be "insurgents," but they are not "terrorists."

Terrorism (n.) -  the use of violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, especially for political purposes. - Dictionary.com

The BLM's behavior appears to be a better fit for that definition.

Taurus (Airsoft) PT92 by KWC Review: Unboxing

(Mock) Unboxclamshelling
I bought this airsoft pistol some time last year, so this is a mock first look at the airsoft springer Taurus PT92 manufactured by KWC.

I was looking for an analog for my Ruger P95, but the only thing available were airsoft replicas of the Ruger P89, and they were of much lower quality. Also, I didn't want to spend a lot of money on my first airsoft pistol, so I went for a spring-powered pistol with a metal slide.

Specs
Taurus PT92 airsoft handgun manufactured by KWC for Softair (Cyberguns)

Overall length: 8-5/8"
Overall height: 5-5/8"
Overall width: 1-1/2"
Weight w/magazine: 18 oz
Caliber: 6mm
Velocity: 328 fps
muzzle energy: .44 ft-lbs
Capacity: 12
Sights: fixed
Action: Single, slide cocking, spring powered

The hammer cocks but has no function in firing the gun. The trigger is about 3 lbs, has progressive tension, and is gritty, so it is not a perfect analog for any real gun that I have fired -  well, except for the grittiness (Ruger P95) and the progressive tension (DAO Beretta 9mm PX4 Storm).

Other issues for using this as an analog for a real gun: The frame-mounted, ambidextrous safety is a dummy. Next to the trigger guard is the actual safety. The gun is light compared to a real full-size pistol, but not distractingly so. And of course, the recoil is "non existent," but it does shake when fired.

 To Be Continued, NEXT: Range Review

Self Defense Against Snipers?

Ukraine made it present. Nevada "Range War" brought it home.

It's an oft stated maxim that you don't need to shoot in self defense past 15 yards - or 100 on a rural piece of property in special circumstances - or somewhere in between, in special circumstances. But if your assailant could be a sniper, then maybe it's time to practice with your scoped hunting rifle in .30-'06, or think about an AR-10-style rifle; bolt-action .50 would be better.

"Strange days indeed - strange days indeed." - John Lennon

BLM Snipers. Credit: DailyPaul.com

Federal Reserve: Crony Capitalism Writ Large

The Federal Reserve is the biggest, most well orchestra, most well planned example of crony capitalism in the history of the United States - and probably the world. Its continued existence will be the coup de grace for the remnants of the free market under a national currency in the United States.

Boot Review: Diehard - or Easy?

My second pair of boots for my under-employment employment: DieHard tactical-look boots.

credit: Sears.com

This is my second pair in less than a year. The first pair - black Rothco classic jungle boots - split across both soles. I attempted to repair them with super glue and Gorilla glue to no avail. So I gave up and trekked down to Sears to get a higher-quality pair - in black, per company policy.


The boots I settled on were the DieHard Men's 8 inch Duty Lace-To-Toe Work Boot. They were on sale for $40 - half off. So I got a complete set of boots for the same price of the jungle boots, after I bought insoles for the jungle boots.

The DieHards have zippers, which I wanted to avoid, because I occasionally have to clean a room with a high-pressure hose. But I grew to appreciate the zipper. It makes the boots relatively easy to get on and off, helping me avoid unlacing the top several holes. And the boots never leaked through the zippers, though I never submersed the boots that deep.

The soles have much better cushion than the jungle boots, so my feet felt less fatigued throughout the day. And the uppers provide better ankle support than the jungle boots, which just flop over if you attempt to stand them up.

credit: Rakuten.com

But then after several months, things started to go south. The soles started to split. I attempted using super glue, before the splitting progressed too far, but the glue wouldn't hold. I tried Gorilla glue with a negative result. Then I started to research what people use to repair split soles online. I stumbled across barge cement. It's used for boat repairs. But originally, it was used as a shoe-manufacturing adhesive.

So I tried the barge cement - a couple times. The adhesive, at least some of it, would hold for a couple days, then fail. Also, though the packaging says it takes overnight to dry, it took at least 48 hours, which concurred with what I read online about doing shoe repairs. Side note: on another pair of shoes, I have had better luck reattaching soles to the bottom of shoes, as opposed to repairing split soles.

So in the end, I am left with two pairs of split soles after using them at a job for less than a year. In all fairness, I do kneel and "fold" my feet quite often, so that is an obvious contributor to the downfall of the Rothcos and DieHards, but I still would have expected more wear from both of them.

DieHard or DieEasy?

Previous Boot Review:  Jungle Combat Boots
Next Boot Review: Third Tacticool Work Boots COMING SOON

Beretta 9mm Full-Size PX4 Storm: Yawn? Part 1

My wife and I have been members of the NRA for years. And we both did a lot of shooting before we met, but:

For the first time ever a few days ago, my wife and I went to the range together. We had looked at the guns there a few days before that, and she had picked out one that she wanted to shoot: a compact Beretta PX4 Storm in 9mm.

Beretta PX4 Storm Compact DA/SA, credit: BerettaUSA.com

When we actually went to shoot, we asked for the Storm and realized that the one they said they had available to rent wasn't the exact same gun: it was the full size. No biggy. We were there to have fun, and to familiarize my wife with our own 9mm, anyway.

Beretta PX4 Storm Full Size DAO, credit: BerettaUSA.com

I really wanted to love that Beretta. I like the concept of the rotating barrel, instead of a tipping barrel. It's suppose to reduce muzzle flip and felt recoil. The gun looks nicely contoured, and I like the "speed" cuts on the slide. Also, as a bonus: not only was the rental gun not a compact, but it wasn't traditional double-action/single-action; it had a double-action-only trigger system. I've thought about switching to a DAO, like the Sig P250, or a striker-fired pistol (of course), so it was nice to try one. But:

I was left unimpressed. In all fairness, I didn't put that many rounds through the gun. And as a tool, once I spent more time with it, I would most likely have adapted to the gun AND accessorized it - a little.

So with the caveat that I was shooting the Storm again the P95 that I am developing growing confidence with, here are my initial impressions.

Initial Impressions
Initial Handling
Like I stated above, I really like the lines of the gun, though the slide combined with the dust cover and accessory rail looks a little chunky. The grip is nicely contoured and fits the hand well, though it feels a little slick. I guess that's what skateboard tape, grip sleeves, and stippling is for - or just getting used to the feel. I felt like the slide serrations were not pronounced enough, when I racked the slide, but my wife was racking my P95 from the front of the slide, so I guess that I could man up and deal with it. On the flipside, those serrations are snag free.

Initial Shooting
The DAO trigger was surprisingly light, and the long pull was no distraction compared to the single-action trigger on my P95. With the P95, I kept a string of ten rounds of "moderate" (a little under 1 round per second, while trying to abide by the one-round-per-second range rule - with requisite crusty looks from fellow range participants) fire within the center 4"x6" on a silhouette. With the Storm, a ten-round string was double that. I blame the generous light around the front post in relation to the rear sight. I was able to maintain much better accuracy, if I slowed way down and concentrated on the keeping the front post centered in the rear notch. Generous light around a front post has been touted as a good facilitator for acquiring the sights in a high-stress situtaion.

The gun felt good, but the frame felt too smooth. With such a nice looking gun, I expected cooler looking magazines - for some reason.

My wife had multiple jams with the gun, so she preferred shooting our P95. But in all fairness, she also had multiple jams with the P95 - but fewer. We worked on her technique more with the P95, and she even mentioned that she felt that she would do better with the Storm, if she had spent more time with it.

To Be Continued, NEXT: After-Range Thoughts

What You Might Want To Know Before Buying Your (First) Gun, Part 2

Previous Post

More food for thought over at Misfires and Light Strikes blog. Exurban Kevin listed 10 things I wish someone had told me about guns.  And I pretty much agree with more of his points, but with caveats.

4. Spending $100 in ammo on a rental range saves you a lot more money in buyer’s remorse.

I think trying some guns make sense, but firing the guns, like I suggested in my previous post, isn't the whole story. Practicing goes a long way toward making the gun fit you, and you fit the gun, and you can't do that at a gun range - or most gun ranges.

5. Unless you’re a collector, never buy Generation 1 of any gun.

Someone's gotta try the beta version, and sometimes you want to try the latest/greatest. I would trade my P95 for an SR9 that was recalled, because it fits my hand so much better. A cheap used gun could have filled the gap.

To Be Continued

What You Might Want To Know Before Buying Your (First) Gun, Part 1

Food for thought over at Misfires and Light Strikes blog. Exurban Kevin listed 10 things I wish someone had told me about guns.  I pretty much agree with most of his points, but with caveats.

1. Buying the gun is the cheap part. Feeding it is the expensive part.

But it didn't matter when I was single and had cash to burn.

2. Accessory availability matters. I love my CZ’s, but there’s just not the range of add-ons for it as there is for a Glock or M&P.

I wish I would have thought about this when I was actually planning to buy one of my guns, instead of when I was just reading gun-magazine articles and fawning over those glossy photos. Even though the P95 had been made for almost two decades, I did not realize that it did not attract massive accessorizing and customizing like Glocks and 1911s.

3. It’s okay to take a LOT of time before buying a gun.

Yeah, I have spent exorbitant amounts of time trying to decide what gun to get. Unfortunately, you really - if you're lucky- you have 80% of the information to make your monumental decision. But in the end, you have just bought a tool that has been designed to fit the needs and bodies of an average of some people. The next step is learning how to use, adapt to, and take care of the tool. The 1000-round trigger job, as described on Bob Mayne's Handgun World Podcast, goes a long way towards those ends (substitute dry-fire practice to cut ammo costs).

 To Be Continued

Top Ten Civilian Defense Arms ... Of All Time, Part 1.1

Everyone has the right and responsibility to defend themselves and their community. A civilian-defense arm is the bedrock of that defense, a "badge of office," and a deterrent to those who want to violate the other rights of the individual.

But what is a "civilian defense arm?" Or is it "civil defense arm?" First, let's look at the use of civilians for a common defense looks like in modern America.

In the USA, there is an impulse and tradition to keep the populace armed with civilian weapons, to keep civilians trained in martial skills, and to call up civilians for a common defense. Also, the origin of the militia and continuous martial preparedness did not spring spontaneously into existence in the North American colonies of the British Empire, and the right to civilian arms ownership was not invented by the 1791 Bill of Rights.

The call up of true civilians has largely been relegated to informal non-state, self-defense actions, such as neighborhood watches during national disasters. State Guards (not to be confused with National Guards) cannot be called into national service and the members can refuse orders without punitive action outside of dismissal, but they are not exactly the same as the unorganized militia mentioned in the U.S. Code. On the flipside, even though most states have ignored using the militia, several states have forbade militias from practicing outside of direct state control or marksmanship activities (which so protected within the U.S. Code).

The NRA was formed by former Civil War officers out of concern for maintaining marksmanship skills.

Based on the U.S. Code for unorganized militia, should the USA be required to supply arms to all adults and ammo at least at cost?

A Preliminary List:
In no particular order.
Longbow
Glock
Musket
.22 Anything
12-gauge Shotgun
AR
AK
Spear
Rock
Knife

Honorable Mention:
Ax
Kentucky Rifle

Top Ten Civilian Defense Arms ... Of All Time, Part 1.0

A Preliminary List:
In no particular order.
Longbow
Glock
Musket
.22 Anything
12-gauge Shotgun
AR
AK
Spear
Rock
Knife

Honorable Mention:
Ax
Kentucky Rifle

Cappuccino: Breakfast Only?

I call bulls hot on that. After a day of full-tilt joe, I would appreciate a little sweetness. 'Bout to put a little sugar in my coffee (with half and half). Take that for modern traditional, Italy.

Bill Wilson's Compact 1911 and My Grandfather's Cheap Pocketwatch

Bill Wilson defends compact 1911s, and gets attention from one of my favorite blogs.

For years, my grandfather carried extremely-cheap, windup, grocery-store pocket watches. On a daily basis he would reset his watch. As a "tinker's" gun, it seems like the compact 1911 falls into the same category of user/tool interaction.

It seems that a purveyor of highend 1911s and those who deride his wares are overstating their cases, but ...

My grandfather knew how to accommodate the shortcomings of the tool he selected and enjoyed whatever advantages he found. Any gun must be so employed to be useful, whether it's shaped like a brick or eats like a runway model.

Gear versus Practice

I've come to the realization that I focus way too much of my time on gear, and realistically 5% of my time on training, tactics, and mindset - which is ludicrous!

I started to get a clue - though I had heard something that laid it out for me  by the likes of Bob Mayne for a couple years - I started to get a clue, when I saw a video by someone like Max Michel, where he was talking about how to hold a pistol. One hand is pushing/pulling and the other is squeezing, or something like that (Really need to find that video). So I was thinking about practice my grip and stance. Then my wife said we should go to the range this coming weekend (Need to find that gift certificate). Then I saw a video by James Yeager, where he mentioned his "hierarchy of survival:" mindset, tactics, skill, gear. Also, I've been working on an article about prepping.

So I started dry firing everyday, and already I feel more comfortable with my pistol.

The 9mm Revolver Predicament, Part 1

My first service-caliber handgun was a revolver. I went with advice, probably from a Guns & Ammo article, that if you are treating a handgun as a fire extinguisher (student of the gun take on this) that you should probably go with a revolver. Though everyone is now screaming Glock, striker fired, and long double action, back then a semi auto still meant levers etc. At the time, I was planning to carry the gun on my hip.

I finally did end up with a semi auto, but with double action and manual safety/decocker. Not surprising, since my first autoloader had all that stuff, too. But I have become enamored with pocket carry, and my current service-caliber semi auto is too big for pocket carry, though I have done that before. If I were to jump feet first I would have just sprung for a Glock G26 and called it a day, and especially after an article in a handgun annual that stated that compact 9mms beat snubnose .357s in the muzzle energy department.

But then the "buts:"
But (1) semi autos don't like pocket lint (And revolvers do?).
But (2) I'd like a long double-action trigger to make drawing from a pocket safer (OK.).
But (3) a G26 is a chunk of a gun to stick in your pocket - weight and size wise (I can fit my Ruger P95 in most of my front pockets - really).
But (4) does muzzle energy really matter that much? Am I splitting hairs?
I think that's enough.

To Be Continued ...

Fill In For The Government

I told my kids today: "We're going to start homeschooling you today - to fill in for what the government is not doing." Schools are closed two straight days for snow one day and possible ice patches on side streets, where the school buses must venture, for the second day. The second day is just ridiculous, because the ice patches are few and far between.

The liberal [statist] mantra goes something like this: What private industry cannot accomplish government will step in and provide. But of course, a bold statement like that is doublespeak. What it really means is: What government cannot accomplish government will blame private industry for the failure and hobble the free market even more.

We have been lulled into the uncomfortable but suffocating embrace of government. Though most libertarians and conservatives deride one of Hillary Clinton's favorite (sic) proverbs: "It takes a village [central government] to raise a child," we have all been along for the ride.

How about this: What private industry cannot accomplish an entrepreneur will step up to the challenge, create a method or product that fulfills the want or need, and others in private industry will quickly copy or imitate the innovator and accomplishment new great and not-so-great things.

The Ultimate Viral Video: "The Viral Song"

Now for something completely useless:

Viral videos are addictive. It is easy to view them as a monumental waste of time, but during one of my recent layoffs (Yes, I have had more than one in the last five years, and you could call them firings lite.), I read that a budget for the recently unemployed should include "entertainment." So the viral-video craze might not be totally useless. It gives us a sense of belonging on a global scale, like global warming, yadiyadiya.

But I digress. The best viral video of all time ... Is ... "The Viral Song." It lays the genre bare. It provides a blueprint for future generations. It is inane. It lacks the need for further analysis. Brilliant.



It beats out the current rival, "What Does The Fox Say," hands down.



But you be the judge. This is important for your mental health, er, something!

Constitutional Rights for the Individuals of the World (Intro 1.0)

Do U.S. Constitutional rights extend to individuals who are NOT citizens of the United States, who live outside the United States?

I feel that those rights are everyone's, regardless of nationality, regardless of locale. Why? Because - based on my accepted definition of rights - rights are inherent to the individual, not privileges granted by a group or government.

That's my opinion - or interpretation. But what does the U.S. Constitution say? ...

Well, after a cursory review of the original articles of the Constitution, I have found no mention of rights. So what about the Bill of Rights?

Well, the Bill of Rights does not say how far the rights extend, but it does mention rights for the "people," which was explained contemporaneously to mean "individuals." And it was also assumed contemporaneously that the rights in the Bill of Rights were "enumerated," meaning that they were being "counted," therefore already inherent to individuals. Therefore, if the rights are inherent to individuals, being naturally owned by individuals, then it is logical to conclude that those rights are Constitutional rights that were simply enumerated by amendments to the Constitution, and therefore they are violated by our government, when our government does to foreigners in foreign lands what it says it can't legally do to U.S. citizens on the partial(more on this later)-sovereign soil of the United States of America.

(Note: I know that this is not an exhaustive argument for U.S. Constitutional rights protection for those traditionally not afforded protecting from rights violations outside USA borders, so comments are definitely welcome, and I will be revising this post.)

Political Affiliation (Bend) Polls: Biased Toward Mediocrity

I'm not crazy about most political polls, because they are biased toward the status quo. To ask someone if they are conservative or liberal lends itself toward the same right/left, Republican/Democrat paradigm.

A recent Gallup poll seems to follow the same pattern. It asked respondents to choose between "Republican," "Democrat," and "Independent" as responses.

I think it's great that "Independents" have reached 45%, but of course there is a glaring problem. "Independents" lumps together moderates that oscillate between the two dominate U.S. parties, "Libertarian Party" members, members of all non-bipolar parties, and the other non affiliated, such as hardcore communists and anarchists. So, on this homepage that gives a few more options.

UPDATE 1/8/14 
An additional poll option, including a choice for "single-issue voter/proponent."

Create your free online surveys with SurveyMonkey , the world's leading questionnaire tool.

(Sort Of) A Lifehack: Lost Your Roku Remote?

This is not really a lifehack, because it doesn't require scissors or repurposing recyclables, but here goes:

If you lose your Roku remote, then you can download the Roku remote app for your Android phone or iPhone. It works over wifi, so your Roku and your smartphone have to be connected to wifi.

Roku Android Remote App

Roku iPhone Remote App

Independence Day

Should April 19 (1775) be the real Independence Day? Why should it take an act of Congress for a people to say that they are free?

Boot Review: Jungle Combat Boots

Rothco Desert GI - MilitaryBoots.com

After being out of work for a few months at the beginning of last year, I took a job at a grocery store. I work in a couple departments including the meat market. One of the meat cutters recommended that I get boots, because we literally soak the entire cutting room when we clean it.

So I started looking for some inexpensive boots. They had to be black, and I wanted lightweight ones, because my feet sweat a lot. I naturally gravitated to jungle boots, because I was really interested in military desert boots, but they were too expensive for my budget, and the early desert boots were actually tan jungle boots.

Twisted logic, but I also used to like the original boots, because I read and watched a lot about the Vietnam War. So I settled on the Rothco Jungle Boots. I went to the local Army/Navy store, tried on a pair undersized one size per a recommendation online. The boots do not come with insoles, and the inside of the the sole looks like it is made out of paper, so I bought some semi decent Dr. Scholls insoles. I also bought Scotchgard, because - as I mentioned before - I work, at times, in a very wet environment. So through the process, I turned a $41 pair of boots into a $55 pair of boots. Wait! It gets worse.

10 seconds from trashcan

I Scotchgarded the boots, kept them polished, and they lasted about a month and a half.  I do a lot of kneeling, and that broke both soles within a month. I glued both with superglue, and that lasted about a week. So for my next pair of boots, I went to Sears. More on that later.

TO BE CONTINUED