Ammo for sale was kind enough to send me a box of .45 ACP for evaluation.
I've been entirely too busy with the holidays and #1 Son being home from school to hit the range.
Test is coming, soon. I promise!
Click here to submit $0.00 US for a lifetime subscription
Posts
All Comments
05 January 2011
Timing
I don't have it.
I am getting so damn sick of the bills being monthly and the checks being bi-weekly.
With one crisis after another and the money only lining up with the due dates occasionally it gets stressful.
Another thing I am sick of is "due on receipt". It's not really. They have a real date that it must be paid by or extra charges will happen. They have a real date where if it's not paid they will shut off service.
Why can't they just tell me what those dates are? It would mean a much more orderly progression of things.
For-ex: Payday is friday. This morning the internet was off. I had planned on paying them Friday, when there is definitely enough money. But they got paid today, when I am not sure if there's enough money.
I am getting so damn sick of the bills being monthly and the checks being bi-weekly.
With one crisis after another and the money only lining up with the due dates occasionally it gets stressful.
Another thing I am sick of is "due on receipt". It's not really. They have a real date that it must be paid by or extra charges will happen. They have a real date where if it's not paid they will shut off service.
Why can't they just tell me what those dates are? It would mean a much more orderly progression of things.
For-ex: Payday is friday. This morning the internet was off. I had planned on paying them Friday, when there is definitely enough money. But they got paid today, when I am not sure if there's enough money.
02 January 2011
Reasons the M1911A1 does not suck...
The lanyard loop and a partially extended magazine can be used as a bottle opener!
Can your plastic fantastic do that?
Edit: I totally forgot to tip my hat to Tam about this.
Can your plastic fantastic do that?
Edit: I totally forgot to tip my hat to Tam about this.
Fair Trade
This is a retread of a post from my now defunct LiveJournal
I was reading Bill Whittle the other day and he hit on a simple truth; Fair trade is simply giving something that someone else wants for something you want. As long as you both get what you want, there is no problem.
If someone asks for more than I am willing to trade for something they have, again no problem. I don't get what I want because they don't get what they want.
If I offer far more than they would have asked, once again no problem. We are both getting what we want, they are just getting more than they expected.
If I offer far less than I expect to get the item for, and they accept, no problem. We both get what we want, I am just getting more than expected.
If I pay far more for something than the previous or next guy, no problem. There is nothing that says that value is absolute. And a seller who cranks up the price because I belong to a group I am member of is telling me that they do not want my business.
Problems surface when I demand the item for less than the seller is willing to part with it, or the seller demands more than I am willing to pay and we are forced to make the sale anyway.
Imagine gasoline being $5.75 a gallon and having to buy 30 gallons a week regardless of how much you use.
This is great for the seller if the market value of a gallon of gas is less than $5.75, especially if very few customers buy 30 gallons of gas a week.
This is great for the buyer if the market value of a gallon of gas is more than $5.75 and they use 30 gallons a week.
It is better than ideal if market value of a gallon is more than $5.75 and you use less than 30 gallons, and you can sell your surplus.
It is ideal if the market value is $5.75 and they use 30 gallons a week anyway.
It is neutral if the market value is $5.75 and they use more than 30 gallons a week.
It is less than ideal if market value of a gallon is $5.75 and you use less than 30 gallons, but you can sell your surplus.
It is less than ideal for the seller if the market value is more than $5.75 a gallon and many customers use more than 30 gallons a week.
It sucks for the seller if the market value is more than $5.75 a gallon, with many customers using more than 30 gallons a week and customers can sell their excesses to each other.
This sucks for the buyer if market value is less than $5.75 and they use less than 30 gallons a week regardless of being able to sell the excess.
This sucks for the buyer regardless of market value if they use less than 30 gallons a week and are not allowed to sell the excess, especially if they use far less than 30 gallons a week.
This sucks for the seller if the market value of a gallon is more than $5.75 and most customers use 30 gallons per week.
And there are other combinations and permutations I have not listed.
Now, if you enter into an agreement to buy 30 gallons a week at $5.75 a gallon for the next year, you have agreed to spend $8,790 and take delivery of 1,560 gallons of gas regardless of whether you can use or store that much (we'll assume that you can afford to spend $172.50 a week). The person selling the gas has agreed to give you 1,560 gallons of gas for $8,790. In this arraingement, you are hoping the price of a gallon goes higher than $5.75, and the seller is hoping the price falls below $5.75 because $5.75 is what is going to be spent for this transaction. If the price goes higher, you can sell your gas for a profit, if it goes lower the seller makes a profit selling to you. Welcome to the commodities market!
Now, imagine that gas sells for $5.75, but it's only $3.00 at the pump, with the government paying the seller $2.75 on every gallon. This is a subsidy. $3 a gallon? What a deal! Except, where does the government get $2.75 a gallon? Your taxes, of course. This is great if you pay fewer taxes than $2.75 times the gallons of gas you buy. This sucks if you pay more taxes than $2.75 times the gallons of gas you buy. Notice that I said that "gas sells for" and not "gas costs"? There are several commodities in the US where the price per unit is fixed and the government makes up the difference if the market value is below the fix point, corn for example. The government pays the difference between the market value of corn and $2.50 a bushel. So, even if corn is $0.01 a bushel, it sells at $2.50, with the government paying the farmer $2.49 and the buyer paying $0.01. Why doesn't the buyer have to pay $2.50? Because if he did, he would buy from overseas where it's still $0.01! Why not just charge a tarriff on the imported corn? Because the farmer here can't live on the fair market value his crop produces, so a tarriff would drive him out of business and we'd be buying imported corn anyway. The question here is: Is it worth it to keep US farmers farming?
Isn't economics fun?
I was reading Bill Whittle the other day and he hit on a simple truth; Fair trade is simply giving something that someone else wants for something you want. As long as you both get what you want, there is no problem.
If someone asks for more than I am willing to trade for something they have, again no problem. I don't get what I want because they don't get what they want.
If I offer far more than they would have asked, once again no problem. We are both getting what we want, they are just getting more than they expected.
If I offer far less than I expect to get the item for, and they accept, no problem. We both get what we want, I am just getting more than expected.
If I pay far more for something than the previous or next guy, no problem. There is nothing that says that value is absolute. And a seller who cranks up the price because I belong to a group I am member of is telling me that they do not want my business.
Problems surface when I demand the item for less than the seller is willing to part with it, or the seller demands more than I am willing to pay and we are forced to make the sale anyway.
Imagine gasoline being $5.75 a gallon and having to buy 30 gallons a week regardless of how much you use.
This is great for the seller if the market value of a gallon of gas is less than $5.75, especially if very few customers buy 30 gallons of gas a week.
This is great for the buyer if the market value of a gallon of gas is more than $5.75 and they use 30 gallons a week.
It is better than ideal if market value of a gallon is more than $5.75 and you use less than 30 gallons, and you can sell your surplus.
It is ideal if the market value is $5.75 and they use 30 gallons a week anyway.
It is neutral if the market value is $5.75 and they use more than 30 gallons a week.
It is less than ideal if market value of a gallon is $5.75 and you use less than 30 gallons, but you can sell your surplus.
It is less than ideal for the seller if the market value is more than $5.75 a gallon and many customers use more than 30 gallons a week.
It sucks for the seller if the market value is more than $5.75 a gallon, with many customers using more than 30 gallons a week and customers can sell their excesses to each other.
This sucks for the buyer if market value is less than $5.75 and they use less than 30 gallons a week regardless of being able to sell the excess.
This sucks for the buyer regardless of market value if they use less than 30 gallons a week and are not allowed to sell the excess, especially if they use far less than 30 gallons a week.
This sucks for the seller if the market value of a gallon is more than $5.75 and most customers use 30 gallons per week.
And there are other combinations and permutations I have not listed.
Now, if you enter into an agreement to buy 30 gallons a week at $5.75 a gallon for the next year, you have agreed to spend $8,790 and take delivery of 1,560 gallons of gas regardless of whether you can use or store that much (we'll assume that you can afford to spend $172.50 a week). The person selling the gas has agreed to give you 1,560 gallons of gas for $8,790. In this arraingement, you are hoping the price of a gallon goes higher than $5.75, and the seller is hoping the price falls below $5.75 because $5.75 is what is going to be spent for this transaction. If the price goes higher, you can sell your gas for a profit, if it goes lower the seller makes a profit selling to you. Welcome to the commodities market!
Now, imagine that gas sells for $5.75, but it's only $3.00 at the pump, with the government paying the seller $2.75 on every gallon. This is a subsidy. $3 a gallon? What a deal! Except, where does the government get $2.75 a gallon? Your taxes, of course. This is great if you pay fewer taxes than $2.75 times the gallons of gas you buy. This sucks if you pay more taxes than $2.75 times the gallons of gas you buy. Notice that I said that "gas sells for" and not "gas costs"? There are several commodities in the US where the price per unit is fixed and the government makes up the difference if the market value is below the fix point, corn for example. The government pays the difference between the market value of corn and $2.50 a bushel. So, even if corn is $0.01 a bushel, it sells at $2.50, with the government paying the farmer $2.49 and the buyer paying $0.01. Why doesn't the buyer have to pay $2.50? Because if he did, he would buy from overseas where it's still $0.01! Why not just charge a tarriff on the imported corn? Because the farmer here can't live on the fair market value his crop produces, so a tarriff would drive him out of business and we'd be buying imported corn anyway. The question here is: Is it worth it to keep US farmers farming?
Isn't economics fun?
01 January 2011
A sticky wicket
Everyone KNOWS the American Civil War was about slavery. Right?
Kinda.
Slavery was a component, but it had a lot more to do with the northern states telling the southern states what they were going to do about slavery than the actual slavery itself.
Maneuvering about how new territories were to decide whether slavery would be legal there or not had a lot to do with it as well. There was a real concern that the new territories would become states and then simply outvote the slave states on the matter. Massachusetts splitting Maine off as its own state just to get (prevent the slave states from getting one up really) more abolition votes reinforced the position.
Pressure was maintained on the issue until the southern states felt they had literally nothing to lose and everything to gain by leaving. They felt they had no options besides the path taken to have any chance at all at deciding their own fate.
If only the thing that we were talking about wasn't the horrible institution of chattel slavery.
But there's also things like messing with the price of cotton through tariffs and export restrictions.
Things like Texas that had only just left Mexico over the very matter of self-determination.
Things like Florida having quite recently being Spain and not liking the return of the dictatorial air from afar.
The war wasn't really about slavery to the everyday soldier until the emancipation proclamation. To the Union it was about preserving the union; to the Confederates it was about deciding how (and by whom) they would be governed at a national level.
Slavery was dying on its own too. Advances in agricultural technology were making it obsolete. The Jim Crow version of slavery (sharecropping) didn't survive the technological advances either. Brazil is a good proof of how slavery died in western civilization.
While we're talking about how evil slavery is, we should also consider the working conditions of an immigrant worker in a factory in, say, Pittsburg or New York City. Some of those bog-Irish might have considered a slave's "lifestyle" to be a step up.
Kinda.
Slavery was a component, but it had a lot more to do with the northern states telling the southern states what they were going to do about slavery than the actual slavery itself.
Maneuvering about how new territories were to decide whether slavery would be legal there or not had a lot to do with it as well. There was a real concern that the new territories would become states and then simply outvote the slave states on the matter. Massachusetts splitting Maine off as its own state just to get (prevent the slave states from getting one up really) more abolition votes reinforced the position.
Pressure was maintained on the issue until the southern states felt they had literally nothing to lose and everything to gain by leaving. They felt they had no options besides the path taken to have any chance at all at deciding their own fate.
If only the thing that we were talking about wasn't the horrible institution of chattel slavery.
But there's also things like messing with the price of cotton through tariffs and export restrictions.
Things like Texas that had only just left Mexico over the very matter of self-determination.
Things like Florida having quite recently being Spain and not liking the return of the dictatorial air from afar.
The war wasn't really about slavery to the everyday soldier until the emancipation proclamation. To the Union it was about preserving the union; to the Confederates it was about deciding how (and by whom) they would be governed at a national level.
Slavery was dying on its own too. Advances in agricultural technology were making it obsolete. The Jim Crow version of slavery (sharecropping) didn't survive the technological advances either. Brazil is a good proof of how slavery died in western civilization.
While we're talking about how evil slavery is, we should also consider the working conditions of an immigrant worker in a factory in, say, Pittsburg or New York City. Some of those bog-Irish might have considered a slave's "lifestyle" to be a step up.
Some odd things.
Fractions are more precise and concise than the decimal representation of them much of the time.
Digital gauges are easier to read quickly, but analog gauges give a better sense of rate-change. This is why we have electronic gauges that show a needle on a LCD display. Both are only as accurate as the sensor reading the condition they are measuring.
Digital gauges are easier to read quickly, but analog gauges give a better sense of rate-change. This is why we have electronic gauges that show a needle on a LCD display. Both are only as accurate as the sensor reading the condition they are measuring.
First post of the new year.
And the first post of the second decade of the 21st century!
Contracts: If the contract is more complicated than:
Party A will supply X currency to Party B for Y product or service to be delivered in Z time-frame.
Someone is trying to screw someone.
Really.
Most of what's in a contract is there because of people trying to get out of paying or delivering. The only people who benefit from that are lawyers, not the parties to the contract at all.
Contracts: If the contract is more complicated than:
Party A will supply X currency to Party B for Y product or service to be delivered in Z time-frame.
Someone is trying to screw someone.
Really.
Most of what's in a contract is there because of people trying to get out of paying or delivering. The only people who benefit from that are lawyers, not the parties to the contract at all.
31 December 2010
The M1911 debate
I had a long, impassioned, researched and linked post about how the M-1911A1 doesn't suck all written and ready to post. It's still in drafts as a matter of fact.
I am not going to post it.
It will not change anyone's mind on the matter.
The original thread that was posted is clearly an attempt to stir things up by making people angry. A troll. We should not feed the blue trolls as well as the red.
I am not going to post it.
It will not change anyone's mind on the matter.
The original thread that was posted is clearly an attempt to stir things up by making people angry. A troll. We should not feed the blue trolls as well as the red.
30 December 2010
Translated from the original German, I am sure.
Manditory DUI check-point. Hat-Tip: Jay G.
For your own good, of course.
Fuck your rights, this is for safety.
I am willing to bet that that more than two thirds of the people who will be busted in such a checkpoint will be illegally operating a vehicle without a license from a prior DUI charge. Fix that problem first and I will consider your new fascist check points.
The next, gigantic problem we have with DUI is thanks to groups like Mothers Against Drunk Driving. Do you know why the old legal standard was a blood alcohol content of 0.010? Because that was the BAC where most people's reaction speed and judgement become impaired.
MADD's campaign was to get harsh about punishing people caught legally drunk. That part worked. The number of people caught DUI went way down. The drunk drivers did not get craftier about avoiding the police, unless you count them getting a designated driver, calling a cab or letting it get out of their system before driving.
A busy-body advocate's worst nightmare is their program succeeding; so MADD demanded that BAC be reduced to 0.008. Lo and behold! more people got busted with DUI again! Just like before, people changed their habits and arrests dropped back to where they were prior to the change.
MADD has advocated that we now change BAC to 0.005. Fortunately this has not yet flown; but they are out there trying to find validity. The only thing that shows they are right is numerous arrests for DUI; they need that to promote their new prohibition.
At present, people who are between 0.008 and 0.010 are hard to spot. Most busts in this realm are from the officer noticing the smell of alcohol after pulling the driver over for a different primary offense, like speeding or a light out. Remember what I said about impairment starting at 0.010?
To get more busts, they have to pull more people over who are not obviously impaired. Enter the DUI check-point.
These are not new around here (Tampa area) the judge on hand is the new part. What they also do when they ask you to blow is enquire about guns, drugs or other things and then decide if you are acting twitchy enough to search your car. This is all excuse upon excuse to disregard my 4th and 5th amendment enumerated rights. Apparently, to a modern fascist, driving on a road on a particular day at a particular time is probable cause. I do not agree that since everyone is treated the same here that it is not a violation of individual rights, it's just a serial violation of them.
Try it this way [white robe on] "As long as we treat ALL [CENSORED] this way, it's OK?" [white robe off]
Still racist, isn't it?
When will it be time to slit throats?
For your own good, of course.
Fuck your rights, this is for safety.
I am willing to bet that that more than two thirds of the people who will be busted in such a checkpoint will be illegally operating a vehicle without a license from a prior DUI charge. Fix that problem first and I will consider your new fascist check points.
The next, gigantic problem we have with DUI is thanks to groups like Mothers Against Drunk Driving. Do you know why the old legal standard was a blood alcohol content of 0.010? Because that was the BAC where most people's reaction speed and judgement become impaired.
MADD's campaign was to get harsh about punishing people caught legally drunk. That part worked. The number of people caught DUI went way down. The drunk drivers did not get craftier about avoiding the police, unless you count them getting a designated driver, calling a cab or letting it get out of their system before driving.
A busy-body advocate's worst nightmare is their program succeeding; so MADD demanded that BAC be reduced to 0.008. Lo and behold! more people got busted with DUI again! Just like before, people changed their habits and arrests dropped back to where they were prior to the change.
MADD has advocated that we now change BAC to 0.005. Fortunately this has not yet flown; but they are out there trying to find validity. The only thing that shows they are right is numerous arrests for DUI; they need that to promote their new prohibition.
At present, people who are between 0.008 and 0.010 are hard to spot. Most busts in this realm are from the officer noticing the smell of alcohol after pulling the driver over for a different primary offense, like speeding or a light out. Remember what I said about impairment starting at 0.010?
To get more busts, they have to pull more people over who are not obviously impaired. Enter the DUI check-point.
These are not new around here (Tampa area) the judge on hand is the new part. What they also do when they ask you to blow is enquire about guns, drugs or other things and then decide if you are acting twitchy enough to search your car. This is all excuse upon excuse to disregard my 4th and 5th amendment enumerated rights. Apparently, to a modern fascist, driving on a road on a particular day at a particular time is probable cause. I do not agree that since everyone is treated the same here that it is not a violation of individual rights, it's just a serial violation of them.
Try it this way [white robe on] "As long as we treat ALL [CENSORED] this way, it's OK?" [white robe off]
Still racist, isn't it?
When will it be time to slit throats?
28 December 2010
On Not Selling Guns to Californians
There are a few companies that don't sell firearms to Californian customers.
This upsets quite a few people, mostly Californians.
I don't think the boycott is doing anything to help the situation, but I understand the "let them sink" feeling.
What would have an effect would be a refusal to sell to government agencies in California. Imagine if Glock refused to sell to Californian police agencies unless they would allow sales to normal citizens of the same guns.
Might just change some things.
Same goes for NY(f)C or Massachusetts.
This upsets quite a few people, mostly Californians.
I don't think the boycott is doing anything to help the situation, but I understand the "let them sink" feeling.
What would have an effect would be a refusal to sell to government agencies in California. Imagine if Glock refused to sell to Californian police agencies unless they would allow sales to normal citizens of the same guns.
Might just change some things.
Same goes for NY(f)C or Massachusetts.
XM Radio
My car came with a free sample of XM when I bought it.
I liked it enough to keep the service for almost three years.
In October, I decided that it was too much money for a luxury item and called to have it cancelled. The cheery girl on the phone said "no problem" and it would be taken care of.
Just about this time, my bank sent a new debit card. They'd decided to change from Visa to Master Card.
I had read on the Corvette Forum that the only way to get XM to stop charging a card was to get a new number, so my cancellation became an experiment.
Lo and behold! I start getting letters and emails telling me that they were unable to process my account information because the (old) card number was being rejected.
So I called back and reminded them I had cancelled. "We don't have a record of that call..." of course you don't. No record of the call in October, November and I'm willing to bet December when I call, again, in January.
Every time I call they remind me I owe them for the months after the cancellation I they didn't record. This is a classic, "not my problem when you screw up". I reaffirmed that I am not going to be held liable for their error and will not be mailing them a check.
Someday there will be a class action suit over their business practices. I will gladly join in that suit and collect whatever small crumb is left after the lawyers are paid.
I liked it enough to keep the service for almost three years.
In October, I decided that it was too much money for a luxury item and called to have it cancelled. The cheery girl on the phone said "no problem" and it would be taken care of.
Just about this time, my bank sent a new debit card. They'd decided to change from Visa to Master Card.
I had read on the Corvette Forum that the only way to get XM to stop charging a card was to get a new number, so my cancellation became an experiment.
Lo and behold! I start getting letters and emails telling me that they were unable to process my account information because the (old) card number was being rejected.
So I called back and reminded them I had cancelled. "We don't have a record of that call..." of course you don't. No record of the call in October, November and I'm willing to bet December when I call, again, in January.
Every time I call they remind me I owe them for the months after the cancellation I they didn't record. This is a classic, "not my problem when you screw up". I reaffirmed that I am not going to be held liable for their error and will not be mailing them a check.
Someday there will be a class action suit over their business practices. I will gladly join in that suit and collect whatever small crumb is left after the lawyers are paid.
27 December 2010
You're darn tootin' I'm angry!
Two years in a row, the registration for my car has gone up 50%.
Every year my car insurance goes up 10%.
Every year my house insurance goes up 10-15%.
Gasoline has gone up 30% in the last year.
Bread has gone up 29% in the last year.
Hamburger has gone up 22% in the last year.
Explain to me where we get "less than 2% annual inflation" from that?
The household income sure as heck isn't going up as fast as the bills and almost all of them increasing from government mandate rather than market pressure.
Every year my car insurance goes up 10%.
Every year my house insurance goes up 10-15%.
Gasoline has gone up 30% in the last year.
Bread has gone up 29% in the last year.
Hamburger has gone up 22% in the last year.
Explain to me where we get "less than 2% annual inflation" from that?
The household income sure as heck isn't going up as fast as the bills and almost all of them increasing from government mandate rather than market pressure.
Semi-Auto Versus Revolver for the Beginner
Jay G has been asked about what would be a good first gun.
One of his commenters has stated the new shooter should get a revolver, because it's simpler and the 1911 is too complicated for a novice.
The 1911 is just fine for a first gun. I watched over 200 people who'd never fired a gun before learn to disassemble, assemble, fire and clean a 1911 in less than a week.
It was called basic training (OSUT to be nitpicky)
If we'd just offer to TEACH the new people asking about semi-autos instead of dispensing "a semi-auto is too complicated for you, kid," from our Ivory Towers™ we'd have a lot more shooters.
There is nothing about the 1911 that is so complicated that a novice cannot get a functional level of skill in an afternoon.
I am not pulling this out of my rectal cavity either. There's a reason that the police's scores improved dramatically when the change-over from wheel-guns to autos started in the '80s. A single action semi is much easier to shoot well than a double action, making the initial shots more likely to be successful giving an more immediate reward to our novice shooter encouraging them to continue shooting rather than saying, "this is too hard," and quitting. Leaving their "simple" revolver to gather dust in a drawer someplace.
I've taught lots of people how to shoot. Not a single one has been overwhelmed by the complexity of the extra controls on an auto as compared to a revolver.
Most of the people I've taught to shoot I've taken to the range and let them fire a few rounds from every type I have. Revolvers and automatics. None of my students, save one, bought a revolver (and she later changed over to an auto when she found one she could operate; I mentioned her here).
I've watched others teaching their friends and families to shoot as well. All but a couple of my "students" are still shooting. A sad majority of the people taught by others are not.
Why?
Forcing the pupil to buy a gun that doesn't suit them is the number one reason; and the number one wrong gun is a snub-nosed revolver.
Why is that a wrong gun? Double action is harder to shoot well with, short sight radii are harder to shoot well with, and lighter guns recoil more unpleasantly. This is compounded by the super light .357's that are available. I believe Jay calls his the "snubbie from hell". The snubbie I carry from time to time is a S&W 640, hammerless and stainless. It's unpleasant to fire full power loads with, but it's still more pleasant than the alloy 642 with normal .38 Special loads.
I will not take the position that a revolver is never the right gun. A snubbie is not always the wrong gun. I carry one! I have just found that most people can readily learn an automatic and quickly become proficient with one, even a 1911. Truth be told, not one of my pupils has ever bought a 1911 because they find John Browning's masterpiece to be "too damn heavy".
My recommendation to the new (handgun) shooter is:
0. Decide what you want the gun to do for you. You may be in love with a .44 Mag that fits 1 through 3, but it's not a good choice for conceal carry under most conditions.
1. Find a gun that fits your hand.
2. Find a model of that gun chambered for "at least" .380 ACP.
3. Make sure you are comfortable firing it in the selected chambering and are comfortable with the controls. More than once I've had the student go for a 9mm over a .380 because locked breeches have lighter springs than blow-back; making them easier to manipulate.
4. Get to the range and practice! Pretty soon you will not be a new shooter.
One of his commenters has stated the new shooter should get a revolver, because it's simpler and the 1911 is too complicated for a novice.
The 1911 is just fine for a first gun. I watched over 200 people who'd never fired a gun before learn to disassemble, assemble, fire and clean a 1911 in less than a week.
It was called basic training (OSUT to be nitpicky)
If we'd just offer to TEACH the new people asking about semi-autos instead of dispensing "a semi-auto is too complicated for you, kid," from our Ivory Towers™ we'd have a lot more shooters.
There is nothing about the 1911 that is so complicated that a novice cannot get a functional level of skill in an afternoon.
I am not pulling this out of my rectal cavity either. There's a reason that the police's scores improved dramatically when the change-over from wheel-guns to autos started in the '80s. A single action semi is much easier to shoot well than a double action, making the initial shots more likely to be successful giving an more immediate reward to our novice shooter encouraging them to continue shooting rather than saying, "this is too hard," and quitting. Leaving their "simple" revolver to gather dust in a drawer someplace.
I've taught lots of people how to shoot. Not a single one has been overwhelmed by the complexity of the extra controls on an auto as compared to a revolver.
Most of the people I've taught to shoot I've taken to the range and let them fire a few rounds from every type I have. Revolvers and automatics. None of my students, save one, bought a revolver (and she later changed over to an auto when she found one she could operate; I mentioned her here).
I've watched others teaching their friends and families to shoot as well. All but a couple of my "students" are still shooting. A sad majority of the people taught by others are not.
Why?
Forcing the pupil to buy a gun that doesn't suit them is the number one reason; and the number one wrong gun is a snub-nosed revolver.
Why is that a wrong gun? Double action is harder to shoot well with, short sight radii are harder to shoot well with, and lighter guns recoil more unpleasantly. This is compounded by the super light .357's that are available. I believe Jay calls his the "snubbie from hell". The snubbie I carry from time to time is a S&W 640, hammerless and stainless. It's unpleasant to fire full power loads with, but it's still more pleasant than the alloy 642 with normal .38 Special loads.
I will not take the position that a revolver is never the right gun. A snubbie is not always the wrong gun. I carry one! I have just found that most people can readily learn an automatic and quickly become proficient with one, even a 1911. Truth be told, not one of my pupils has ever bought a 1911 because they find John Browning's masterpiece to be "too damn heavy".
My recommendation to the new (handgun) shooter is:
0. Decide what you want the gun to do for you. You may be in love with a .44 Mag that fits 1 through 3, but it's not a good choice for conceal carry under most conditions.
1. Find a gun that fits your hand.
2. Find a model of that gun chambered for "at least" .380 ACP.
3. Make sure you are comfortable firing it in the selected chambering and are comfortable with the controls. More than once I've had the student go for a 9mm over a .380 because locked breeches have lighter springs than blow-back; making them easier to manipulate.
4. Get to the range and practice! Pretty soon you will not be a new shooter.
26 December 2010
Nerf!
We have Nerf® weapons!
Mine is a mag-fed pump action modular design.
Harvey's (wife's nickname, long story) is BELT FED! We've only managed to lose one foam dart so far.
The interesting thing about mine is the instructions include a bit on how to work iron sights. The vernier sights are, um, optimistic. I can crank it up so far that it looks like I am launching a grenade, and it doesn't increase the range over direct fire more than a foot.
Gun toys are the bestest!
Mine is a mag-fed pump action modular design.
Harvey's (wife's nickname, long story) is BELT FED! We've only managed to lose one foam dart so far.
The interesting thing about mine is the instructions include a bit on how to work iron sights. The vernier sights are, um, optimistic. I can crank it up so far that it looks like I am launching a grenade, and it doesn't increase the range over direct fire more than a foot.
Gun toys are the bestest!
25 December 2010
A week late to the bandwagon, but hey...
Every Question and Answer Session on an Internet Gun Forum Part 1
Every Question and Answer Session on an Internet Gun Forum Part 2
Every Question and Answer Session on an Internet Gun Forum Part 3
SWAT Sniper
Internet Gun Transaction: Typical Type: 1 Each
24 December 2010
Christmas Eve!
Not "Holiday's Eve"!
We don't say happy holidays for MLK Day, Groundhog Day, Valentines Day, President's Day, St Patrick's Day, April Fool's Day, Earth (spit) Day, Cinco de Mayo, Mother's Day, Memorial Day, Flag Day, Father's Day, Independence Day, Labor Day, Columbus Day, Halloween, Veteran's Day or Thanksgiving.
Unless we mean Christmas and New Years when we say "Happy Holidays!" But I don't think we do.
Oh, but it's teh evol Xtians! OK, we can't say Christmas because 76% of the nation is Christian, 3.9% has a different religion, 15% have no religion and 5.2% refuse to say. Kids, this is not like saying 'CENSORED' or 'CENSORED' or 'CENSORED' or 'CENSORED'. Merry Christmas has not ever been used as an insult or slur by a Christian. They are merely wishing you well, why do you resent it so? Does it burn? No. Are you worried that being wished a merry Christmas will somehow compromise your belief that there is no Christian God? If so, how weak is your faith?
But I say that Christmas is as religious in the US as St Patrick's or St Valentine's days. It's not about when Jesus was born (which probably wasn't in December because that's not when the Romans did the get back to your home village for census and tax reasons); it's about family and friends and getting together to strengthen and renew those bonds.
So Merry Christmas!
From an Atheist married to a Pagan no less!
We don't say happy holidays for MLK Day, Groundhog Day, Valentines Day, President's Day, St Patrick's Day, April Fool's Day, Earth (spit) Day, Cinco de Mayo, Mother's Day, Memorial Day, Flag Day, Father's Day, Independence Day, Labor Day, Columbus Day, Halloween, Veteran's Day or Thanksgiving.
Unless we mean Christmas and New Years when we say "Happy Holidays!" But I don't think we do.
Oh, but it's teh evol Xtians! OK, we can't say Christmas because 76% of the nation is Christian, 3.9% has a different religion, 15% have no religion and 5.2% refuse to say. Kids, this is not like saying 'CENSORED' or 'CENSORED' or 'CENSORED' or 'CENSORED'. Merry Christmas has not ever been used as an insult or slur by a Christian. They are merely wishing you well, why do you resent it so? Does it burn? No. Are you worried that being wished a merry Christmas will somehow compromise your belief that there is no Christian God? If so, how weak is your faith?
But I say that Christmas is as religious in the US as St Patrick's or St Valentine's days. It's not about when Jesus was born (which probably wasn't in December because that's not when the Romans did the get back to your home village for census and tax reasons); it's about family and friends and getting together to strengthen and renew those bonds.
So Merry Christmas!
From an Atheist married to a Pagan no less!
23 December 2010
What makes a "good" 1911.
I am not going to compare brands.
We're going to assume for the sake of discussion that quality is moot. You've chosen a brand that you like and trust.
What features are must have?
What got me to thinking about this was a link to Kimber's Desert Warrior. It's real similar to Springfield Armory's Full-Size MC Operator. It's got a railed dust cover, ambidextrous safety, extended grip safety, skeletonized hammer, extended trigger and more visible sights. Everything you could need or want, right?
All I want over an issue USGI M1911A1 is sights that are easier to see. Honest.
I know that this is a contentious issue. But what do you like and why? You don't get to tell someone else they are wrong; just state your preference.
We're going to assume for the sake of discussion that quality is moot. You've chosen a brand that you like and trust.
What features are must have?
What got me to thinking about this was a link to Kimber's Desert Warrior. It's real similar to Springfield Armory's Full-Size MC Operator. It's got a railed dust cover, ambidextrous safety, extended grip safety, skeletonized hammer, extended trigger and more visible sights. Everything you could need or want, right?
All I want over an issue USGI M1911A1 is sights that are easier to see. Honest.
I know that this is a contentious issue. But what do you like and why? You don't get to tell someone else they are wrong; just state your preference.
Missed the point
I don't think I made my point clearly about regulatory agencies.
What they are doing is legislating, all are part of the executive branch. That's not the executive branch's job; that's the legislative branch's job. You know, Congress?
What they are doing is legislating, all are part of the executive branch. That's not the executive branch's job; that's the legislative branch's job. You know, Congress?
22 December 2010
WMD
Remember when "WMD" meant real weapons of mass destruction like nuclear, biological and chemical?
I hear a 40mm grenade LAUNCHER now qualifies (don't even need 40mm grenades for it).
I hear a 40mm grenade LAUNCHER now qualifies (don't even need 40mm grenades for it).
A thought
I read that the Department of Homeland Security will begin to start protecting us from glow bull warmering.
Just taking it on themselves to start regulating without a law to enforce.
I see this a great deal with government agencies.
It's called mission creep in some circles.
What we have is Congress not doing their jobs and pawning it off on the agency tasked with enforcing the laws. They make regulations that are supposed to have the effect of enforcing the law.
My favorite example is BATFE and there are oh so many examples.
Let's start with the form 4473. Where is the law that says you have to fill this thing out? There isn't one. What it is for is to keep prohibited people from buying guns. The law about that says who cannot own a gun, and you answer Y-E-S or N-O to each of the disqualifying things.
Not that a felon would lie or anything. Thanks to the Brady Act, we have NICS. NICS checks to see if you were being honest with your answers. Why do we still have the form?
If we are going to have such a thing as a NICS, we should just call them up, give them our name and address and it should give a GO/NO-GO for the sale. No need for a paper record at all to satisfy the law.
Next is anything having to do with the National Firearms Act (NFA). The law says I have to pay a tax to buy or make something regulated by the NFA. But there's no law requiring the extensive background check. It should be send in the $200, pass NICS and collect my gun.
There's lots more.
The real solution is to end regulatory agencies altogether.
Just taking it on themselves to start regulating without a law to enforce.
I see this a great deal with government agencies.
It's called mission creep in some circles.
What we have is Congress not doing their jobs and pawning it off on the agency tasked with enforcing the laws. They make regulations that are supposed to have the effect of enforcing the law.
My favorite example is BATFE and there are oh so many examples.
Let's start with the form 4473. Where is the law that says you have to fill this thing out? There isn't one. What it is for is to keep prohibited people from buying guns. The law about that says who cannot own a gun, and you answer Y-E-S or N-O to each of the disqualifying things.
Not that a felon would lie or anything. Thanks to the Brady Act, we have NICS. NICS checks to see if you were being honest with your answers. Why do we still have the form?
If we are going to have such a thing as a NICS, we should just call them up, give them our name and address and it should give a GO/NO-GO for the sale. No need for a paper record at all to satisfy the law.
Next is anything having to do with the National Firearms Act (NFA). The law says I have to pay a tax to buy or make something regulated by the NFA. But there's no law requiring the extensive background check. It should be send in the $200, pass NICS and collect my gun.
There's lots more.
The real solution is to end regulatory agencies altogether.
Short Barrels
Three of the AR projects I have require short barrels.
The XM177E2 is finished and has its tax stamp. 11.5" barrel with a 4.5" moderator on it, so it's actually just 5/8" shorter than 16" overall.
Kaylee (mentioned earlier) and Cheyenne (wife's retroish gun) will both be needing 14.5" pencil barrels.
Kaylee is going to be a clone of an IDF gun and Cheyenne is based on the carbine carried by SSG Barnes in "Platoon"
This is all just for looks. A 16" barrel looks just a little too long, especially in pencil weights.
Cheyenne will have some "farbs". The gun from "Platoon" is a Philippine R653P. It should be gray anodizing; not black and shouldn't have the brass deflector.
Kaylee might have farbs, but with the way the IDF mixes and matches parts; I don't think you'd ever know. There's a lot of choices for barrels, the IDF uses 14.5" pencil profile, 14.5" M4 profile and has been known to cut down an M16A1 barrel to 13" and reprofile it for a carbine gas system.
All for looks...
The overall lengths are not shortened enough to really make them all that much more handy. The weight removed is nearly negligible. It definitely reduces muzzle velocity. Seems like a losing proposition. But they will look right. Proper proportions and all.
Perhaps in the future a 9mm AR SBR will have to be done! At least a 10" barrel in 9mm is an improvement over how most 9mm's are.
The XM177E2 is finished and has its tax stamp. 11.5" barrel with a 4.5" moderator on it, so it's actually just 5/8" shorter than 16" overall.
Kaylee (mentioned earlier) and Cheyenne (wife's retroish gun) will both be needing 14.5" pencil barrels.
Kaylee is going to be a clone of an IDF gun and Cheyenne is based on the carbine carried by SSG Barnes in "Platoon"
This is all just for looks. A 16" barrel looks just a little too long, especially in pencil weights.
Cheyenne will have some "farbs". The gun from "Platoon" is a Philippine R653P. It should be gray anodizing; not black and shouldn't have the brass deflector.
Kaylee might have farbs, but with the way the IDF mixes and matches parts; I don't think you'd ever know. There's a lot of choices for barrels, the IDF uses 14.5" pencil profile, 14.5" M4 profile and has been known to cut down an M16A1 barrel to 13" and reprofile it for a carbine gas system.
All for looks...
The overall lengths are not shortened enough to really make them all that much more handy. The weight removed is nearly negligible. It definitely reduces muzzle velocity. Seems like a losing proposition. But they will look right. Proper proportions and all.
Perhaps in the future a 9mm AR SBR will have to be done! At least a 10" barrel in 9mm is an improvement over how most 9mm's are.
21 December 2010
A swing and a miss!
Gov Christie Commutes Brian Aitken's Sentence
While it's great that Mr Aitken is out of jail, he's still a felon with a commutation.
Pardon is the word you were looking for Gov Christie.
Especially since the judge appears to have instructed the jury to ignore the law.
While it's great that Mr Aitken is out of jail, he's still a felon with a commutation.
Pardon is the word you were looking for Gov Christie.
Especially since the judge appears to have instructed the jury to ignore the law.
20 December 2010
Gang oft aglave
I had intended to hit the range and test a box of .45 ACP ammo from the nice people at Ammo For Sale today.
Someone committed suicide in one of the stalls at the range I am a member of. They are closed today to allow things to be investigated.
I got a new driver's license today instead.
I am now Real ID compliant! Yippie, skippy. I also notice it seems to take more documentation to get an operator's license in Florida than to be elected to the presidency. I needed the old license, a birth certificate, Social Security card, and two proofs of residency (bank statement and voter registration card). I am now legal to drive for eight more years. I remember when I had a choice between a 2 year and 4 year license, now they only choice is 8.
Someone committed suicide in one of the stalls at the range I am a member of. They are closed today to allow things to be investigated.
I got a new driver's license today instead.
I am now Real ID compliant! Yippie, skippy. I also notice it seems to take more documentation to get an operator's license in Florida than to be elected to the presidency. I needed the old license, a birth certificate, Social Security card, and two proofs of residency (bank statement and voter registration card). I am now legal to drive for eight more years. I remember when I had a choice between a 2 year and 4 year license, now they only choice is 8.
19 December 2010
Slave reparations.
It's a touchy subject.
Especially so since approximately 360,000 men paid the fullest price to end slavery.
In my mind the former slaves owe them for the gift of freedom. From what I read, it was appreciated by everyone who'd actually been a slave.
Are there any still alive?
What we are talking about when we are talking about slave reparations are really Jim Crow reparations!
The injustice of slavery was made good by the sacrifices of the Civil War. Paid in full.
Jim Crow started after the war. Those laws are why we have a 14th and 15th amendments.
What you need to ask yourself is, what party passed all those laws and have they made amends? Have they even apologized? Didn't they honor an unrepentant Klansman when he died AFTER DECADES OF BEING IN OFFICE?
Or did they blame someone else?
This is why I am angry about the idea. It wasn't me who harmed the descendants of slaves. I did not vote for or support the people who did and do. But it will sure as hell be me who's going to be paying for it, isn't it? I don't like blame shifting. I don't like the innocent being punished. I don't believe that punishing me for the sins of my ancestors is just, for the same reason that enslaving someone because their ancestors were slaves is unjust.
I also don't like the precedent. If this flies, how long before we have woman's reparations? Gay reparations? Irish reparations? Indian? Jewish? Mormon? The guilty got away and imposing an injustice on the innocent is nothing more than a new injustice. Two wrongs do not make a right.
EDIT:
I am a firm believer in the premise that if you are going to punish me for something I have not done; I have nothing to lose by doing the thing I have been punished for. I have to wonder how many racists are so because they'd been treated so. The phenomenon is real, I've known several people who didn't care about homosexuals until they'd been punished for "gay bashing"; they sure as hell care now, and not in a pro-gay way.
If you are out to punish someone for injustice, make certain you get the guilty. Punishing the innocent just gets you resentment and breeds more of what you are trying to stop.
Especially so since approximately 360,000 men paid the fullest price to end slavery.
In my mind the former slaves owe them for the gift of freedom. From what I read, it was appreciated by everyone who'd actually been a slave.
Are there any still alive?
What we are talking about when we are talking about slave reparations are really Jim Crow reparations!
The injustice of slavery was made good by the sacrifices of the Civil War. Paid in full.
Jim Crow started after the war. Those laws are why we have a 14th and 15th amendments.
What you need to ask yourself is, what party passed all those laws and have they made amends? Have they even apologized? Didn't they honor an unrepentant Klansman when he died AFTER DECADES OF BEING IN OFFICE?
Or did they blame someone else?
This is why I am angry about the idea. It wasn't me who harmed the descendants of slaves. I did not vote for or support the people who did and do. But it will sure as hell be me who's going to be paying for it, isn't it? I don't like blame shifting. I don't like the innocent being punished. I don't believe that punishing me for the sins of my ancestors is just, for the same reason that enslaving someone because their ancestors were slaves is unjust.
I also don't like the precedent. If this flies, how long before we have woman's reparations? Gay reparations? Irish reparations? Indian? Jewish? Mormon? The guilty got away and imposing an injustice on the innocent is nothing more than a new injustice. Two wrongs do not make a right.
EDIT:
I am a firm believer in the premise that if you are going to punish me for something I have not done; I have nothing to lose by doing the thing I have been punished for. I have to wonder how many racists are so because they'd been treated so. The phenomenon is real, I've known several people who didn't care about homosexuals until they'd been punished for "gay bashing"; they sure as hell care now, and not in a pro-gay way.
If you are out to punish someone for injustice, make certain you get the guilty. Punishing the innocent just gets you resentment and breeds more of what you are trying to stop.
18 December 2010
Hypocrisy
Hypocrisy: the practice of claiming to have moral standards or beliefs to which one's own behavior does not conform.
Hypocrite: a person who indulges in hypocrisy.
I am extremely touchy about being accused of being a hypocrite. The reason, I think, stems from failing to live up to the standards I set for myself for so long. My behavior for a long time is what I would consider to be immoral today. Breaking those habits was not easy and I failed a great deal.
I am not sure I was a hypocrite because I believed in the morality I espoused and recognized my failing as being wrong; and I tried to make amends when I fell short. But my actions were not in accord with my beliefs.
I am a better person today than I was then.
Hypocrite: a person who indulges in hypocrisy.
I am extremely touchy about being accused of being a hypocrite. The reason, I think, stems from failing to live up to the standards I set for myself for so long. My behavior for a long time is what I would consider to be immoral today. Breaking those habits was not easy and I failed a great deal.
I am not sure I was a hypocrite because I believed in the morality I espoused and recognized my failing as being wrong; and I tried to make amends when I fell short. But my actions were not in accord with my beliefs.
I am a better person today than I was then.
17 December 2010
Teaching Gurls Ta Shoot
Since I am the person all of my friends know as "the gun guy" it's fallen to me to teach many of them how to shoot; nearly always a handgun.
I like to take my student out with one of my guns first. If they're having some fun and want to keep going the next stop is a gun show. Then I have them handle every single gun in the place. I figure if they buy one that doesn't fit, they will not shoot it and then never get any good at it.
I try to insist that they pick at least a .380 ACP. I don't think that .25 ACP or .32 ACP have enough zip to be counted on. So far it's been .38 Special, 9x19mm, .357 SIG and .40 S&W. Only twice have they picked a gun I would have bought for myself.
So far all but one has picked an auto, and she's a special case. The very first handgun I ever fired was an auto, my dad's Bauer .25. In basic training we trained on the M1911A1 and the M9. I figure if a recruit can learn auto without trouble, than it's within the reach of most anyone.
The only time I've recommended a snubbie revolver; the woman in question has nerve damage in her "strong" hand and literally cannot work the slide on an auto. Her good hand is her weak side, so we had to teach her to shoot with her off-hand from day one. There's damage to her shoulder so we had to get her as light a gun as possible too. We ended up with a S&W 642; alloy frame hammerless. The DAO trigger was very trying for her and the recoil from standard .38 was just about all she could take. But she put a lot of effort into it and became a fair shot after that. She later discovered that she can work a tip-up barrel Beretta Tomcat in .32 ACP and since it's lighter and has less recoil, that's what she carries now.
So far everyone has succeeded in learning. I am not teaching tactical shooting, just basic gun-handling and marksmanship. Two of my students have gone on to get their carry permits. Only one has stopped shooting. I consider that success; more shooters are better than fewer.
I like to take my student out with one of my guns first. If they're having some fun and want to keep going the next stop is a gun show. Then I have them handle every single gun in the place. I figure if they buy one that doesn't fit, they will not shoot it and then never get any good at it.
I try to insist that they pick at least a .380 ACP. I don't think that .25 ACP or .32 ACP have enough zip to be counted on. So far it's been .38 Special, 9x19mm, .357 SIG and .40 S&W. Only twice have they picked a gun I would have bought for myself.
So far all but one has picked an auto, and she's a special case. The very first handgun I ever fired was an auto, my dad's Bauer .25. In basic training we trained on the M1911A1 and the M9. I figure if a recruit can learn auto without trouble, than it's within the reach of most anyone.
The only time I've recommended a snubbie revolver; the woman in question has nerve damage in her "strong" hand and literally cannot work the slide on an auto. Her good hand is her weak side, so we had to teach her to shoot with her off-hand from day one. There's damage to her shoulder so we had to get her as light a gun as possible too. We ended up with a S&W 642; alloy frame hammerless. The DAO trigger was very trying for her and the recoil from standard .38 was just about all she could take. But she put a lot of effort into it and became a fair shot after that. She later discovered that she can work a tip-up barrel Beretta Tomcat in .32 ACP and since it's lighter and has less recoil, that's what she carries now.
So far everyone has succeeded in learning. I am not teaching tactical shooting, just basic gun-handling and marksmanship. Two of my students have gone on to get their carry permits. Only one has stopped shooting. I consider that success; more shooters are better than fewer.
16 December 2010
Name that party!
What was the party affiliation of the US President who raised an army and fought a war that ended chattel, race based, slavery?
What was the party affiliation of the US President who sent armed troops to ensure that black children could attend a previously all white school?
What was the dominate party in the former Confederate states that passed the so-called "Jim Crow" laws?
What was the party affiliation of the US President who sent armed troops to ensure that black children could attend a previously all white school?
What was the dominate party in the former Confederate states that passed the so-called "Jim Crow" laws?
15 December 2010
Exercise!
Today is Bill of Rights Day!
Get thee hence and exercise your enumerated rights!
Print a hand bill. Worship your God or Gods or not.
Buy, own or carry a firearm.
Kick a soldier out of your house, if you want to.
Lock the cops out of your house.
Don't talk to lawyers or judges.
Depend on the opinion of your peers, with a free lawyer.
Depend on the opinion of your peers over big money, more than $20!
Get out of jail, cheap. Receive the same sentence as anyone else (likely for trusting your peers and using a free lawyer).
Do something not mentioned here.
Twice, but let your state government do it too.
PS: I miss you Mom.
Get thee hence and exercise your enumerated rights!
Print a hand bill. Worship your God or Gods or not.
Buy, own or carry a firearm.
Kick a soldier out of your house, if you want to.
Lock the cops out of your house.
Don't talk to lawyers or judges.
Depend on the opinion of your peers, with a free lawyer.
Depend on the opinion of your peers over big money, more than $20!
Get out of jail, cheap. Receive the same sentence as anyone else (likely for trusting your peers and using a free lawyer).
Do something not mentioned here.
Twice, but let your state government do it too.
PS: I miss you Mom.
14 December 2010
Catastrophic, Anthropomorphic, Global Climate Change
First, the closest star is a main sequence variable; its output will vary. Literally by definition.
Second, because of our proximity to this star, the climate will ever be in flux.
Third, that means that while the changes may, indeed, be catastrophic, they are very unlikely to be anthropomorphic.
I've said it for years.
I note that the coldest winter I can recall since I moved to the Gunshine State is occurring right after the sun made almost no sunspots for better than a year.
Either that or what recycling and carbon crediting we did worked beyond our wildest imaginations.
I'm still betting on the sun.
Second, because of our proximity to this star, the climate will ever be in flux.
Third, that means that while the changes may, indeed, be catastrophic, they are very unlikely to be anthropomorphic.
I've said it for years.
I note that the coldest winter I can recall since I moved to the Gunshine State is occurring right after the sun made almost no sunspots for better than a year.
Either that or what recycling and carbon crediting we did worked beyond our wildest imaginations.
I'm still betting on the sun.
11 December 2010
On being a car guy...
The funniest thing I can hear about a car is "parts are no longer available" when talking about a common, popular car.
Especially wear items.
Perhaps Ford stopped stocking them, but Autozone has them. Betcha, betcha. Nine times out of ten they are identical quality and cheaper too.
I'm a hot-rodder. Parts abound! Of course, you have to take the time to learn about your car, find out what other lines used the same part, become buddies with the local junk yard, make contact with a club or forum about your car, etc...
A good example would be the front wheel hubs on an '88 Fiero. If you go to a GM dealer, discontinued. Places like Autozone don't carry them. If you are lucky, you can find a decent set at a salvage yard. But nothing new, right? Wrong. If you join the Fiero Forum and complain about not being able to find new hubs, you will be directed at The Fiero Store and they will be happy to sell you new ones they contracted to be made.
The Pontiac Fiero was not a high volume production car. The last year of production, 1988, has many items that are unique to it. Luckily there's a cult following.
But some cars, like a Ford Crown Victoria or Chevy Malibu were fleet queens. There were thousands upon thousands made. Anything that's a cop car or taxi has amazing parts support from the aftermarket.
The aftermarket routinely generates better parts than OEM too. Front steering components on my dear B-Body are in this realm. Moog mades a "problem solver" line that lasts as long as GM claimed theirs did.
So, if you love your car, don't give up on her! Learn how to fix it, learn where to get parts, buy some tools, and get wrenching! You'll save tons of cash in the long run too.
Especially wear items.
Perhaps Ford stopped stocking them, but Autozone has them. Betcha, betcha. Nine times out of ten they are identical quality and cheaper too.
I'm a hot-rodder. Parts abound! Of course, you have to take the time to learn about your car, find out what other lines used the same part, become buddies with the local junk yard, make contact with a club or forum about your car, etc...
A good example would be the front wheel hubs on an '88 Fiero. If you go to a GM dealer, discontinued. Places like Autozone don't carry them. If you are lucky, you can find a decent set at a salvage yard. But nothing new, right? Wrong. If you join the Fiero Forum and complain about not being able to find new hubs, you will be directed at The Fiero Store and they will be happy to sell you new ones they contracted to be made.
The Pontiac Fiero was not a high volume production car. The last year of production, 1988, has many items that are unique to it. Luckily there's a cult following.
But some cars, like a Ford Crown Victoria or Chevy Malibu were fleet queens. There were thousands upon thousands made. Anything that's a cop car or taxi has amazing parts support from the aftermarket.
The aftermarket routinely generates better parts than OEM too. Front steering components on my dear B-Body are in this realm. Moog mades a "problem solver" line that lasts as long as GM claimed theirs did.
So, if you love your car, don't give up on her! Learn how to fix it, learn where to get parts, buy some tools, and get wrenching! You'll save tons of cash in the long run too.
10 December 2010
And yet, nobody was killed.
The FAA lost track of 132k aircraft registrations and life has been normal. Makes me wonder if the registration was at all needed!
09 December 2010
Echo chamber, chamber, chamber, chamber...
I mentioned intractable gun decisions just the other day.
I forgot to mention the cannibal debates.
These are where people like a particular design, but feel the other person bought the wrong brand.
Tam's got a good comment thread going along those lines now.
Just makes you wanna say, "Why can't we just get along?"
My 1911 preferences are, I gather from reading some of these, odd.
I'm fine with the bare bones M1911A1. No extended controls, arched mainspring housing, and stubby beaver tail.
About the only change I would make is the sights. Perhaps on my next one...
The current one also serves a nostalgia role in that it's a clone of the gun I was issued as a tanker.
At any rate, I only have my personal experience to go on for this example. Springfield Armory did a good job with it. It's their GI model and the only upgrade I've made is a set of rosewood stocks. It's never failed to go bang and the only problem I've ever had was the $5 magazines I bought at a gun show dropping their baseplates.
I forgot to mention the cannibal debates.
These are where people like a particular design, but feel the other person bought the wrong brand.
Tam's got a good comment thread going along those lines now.
Just makes you wanna say, "Why can't we just get along?"
My 1911 preferences are, I gather from reading some of these, odd.
I'm fine with the bare bones M1911A1. No extended controls, arched mainspring housing, and stubby beaver tail.
About the only change I would make is the sights. Perhaps on my next one...
The current one also serves a nostalgia role in that it's a clone of the gun I was issued as a tanker.
At any rate, I only have my personal experience to go on for this example. Springfield Armory did a good job with it. It's their GI model and the only upgrade I've made is a set of rosewood stocks. It's never failed to go bang and the only problem I've ever had was the $5 magazines I bought at a gun show dropping their baseplates.
08 December 2010
Shame
I just realized that I only have one fully featured "assault weapon".
Kaylee is the only one with a telescopic stock, pistol grip, bayonet lug, threaded barrel, and a flash-hider / grenade launcher. I have two that come close, but the muzzle devices won't launch rifle grenades and one of those doesn't even have a bayonet lug.
Do I get bonus points that the lug on Kaylee is useless for mounting a bayonet because it's too far from the muzzle?
Kaylee is the only one with a telescopic stock, pistol grip, bayonet lug, threaded barrel, and a flash-hider / grenade launcher. I have two that come close, but the muzzle devices won't launch rifle grenades and one of those doesn't even have a bayonet lug.
Do I get bonus points that the lug on Kaylee is useless for mounting a bayonet because it's too far from the muzzle?
Hey, Andy!
If [semi-auto AK and M16 clones] are, "so difficult to control, their bullets often get sprayed beyond the intended targets, striking innocent victims even when they’re in their own homes." Then the last group of people who should have them are the police!
The vast majority of cops are mediocre marksmen. No slam intended, shooting is a teeny part of the whole job; and it shows at the range. If an AR is really that clumsy and random, then only a real expert should have them. Like teenagers straight out of high school wearing baggy clothes with bad hair-cuts (like a recruit in basic training).
But wait; the AR is not inaccurate. The AR is not difficult to shoot. The AR is not difficult to shoot well. Spraying beyond the intended target is a shooter problem, not a gun problem. The .223 round is also not good a penetrating houses, that's why it's a good home defense round, one sheet of drywall tends to stop it. My house has cinder blocks and then drywall for the exterior wall.
The AK is not renowned for its accuracy, but it's accurate enough that it's still a shooter problem.
But the ATF is all about things and rarely about actual criminals. Do something about the people breaking the laws with these guns and the problem with the guns themselves evaporates.
The vast majority of cops are mediocre marksmen. No slam intended, shooting is a teeny part of the whole job; and it shows at the range. If an AR is really that clumsy and random, then only a real expert should have them. Like teenagers straight out of high school wearing baggy clothes with bad hair-cuts (like a recruit in basic training).
But wait; the AR is not inaccurate. The AR is not difficult to shoot. The AR is not difficult to shoot well. Spraying beyond the intended target is a shooter problem, not a gun problem. The .223 round is also not good a penetrating houses, that's why it's a good home defense round, one sheet of drywall tends to stop it. My house has cinder blocks and then drywall for the exterior wall.
The AK is not renowned for its accuracy, but it's accurate enough that it's still a shooter problem.
But the ATF is all about things and rarely about actual criminals. Do something about the people breaking the laws with these guns and the problem with the guns themselves evaporates.
07 December 2010
Why I switched to Bing:
How Google commemorates Dec 7th.
How Bing commemorates Dec 7th.
Hans Rosling's 200 Countries, 200 Years, 4 Minutes - The Joy of Stats - ...
At the beginning of his presentation, all nations have similar wealth and life expectancies. It's not surprising that, as time progresses, that will become true again as advances propagate around the world. I think it's just a demonstration that it starts someplace and that place advances ahead of the others.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)