A prediction

The Baby Boomers are getting to the point where they are going to demand the shit they were promised.

One clear way to get that shit paid for is to tax the people still working ever higher.

They will notice that there's a large number of people who are competing with them for the Federal Teat™.

People who could SHOULD be working to pay taxes to keep their asses in the shit they were promised!

Retirees are damn reliable about voting.  He who votes decides who is elected.

Just a thought...

Clean?

Do you think you keep your hands pretty clean?

Go clean your steering wheel.

Gross!

Something about being rich.

I've read several places now that the number of people reporting very large incomes has dropped quite dramatically.

This is based on income tax filings.

What group of people can handle just quitting and not having an income for a while better than someone who was filing for taxes on a multi-million dollar income last year?

If you made $200 million last year (after taxes) and had zero income this year, you still have that $200 million.  Think about that Mr Soaktherich.  I could make $200,000,000.00 last the rest of my life.

Basic Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearm Example.

This is a retread of a pic from my LJ days.

A list that supposed to be the top 100 SF/F books.

BOLD THE ONES you've read.

1. The Lord Of The Rings Trilogy, by J.R.R. Tolkien
2. The Hitchhiker’s Guide To The Galaxy, by Douglas Adams
3. Ender’s Game, by Orson Scott Card
4. The Dune Chronicles, by Frank Herbert
5. A Song Of Ice And Fire Series, by George R. R. Martin
6. 1984, by George Orwell
7. Fahrenheit 451, by Ray Bradbury
8. The Foundation Trilogy, by Isaac Asimov
9. Brave New World, by Aldous Huxley
10. American Gods, by Neil Gaiman
11. The Princess Bride, by William Goldman (Seen the movie lots, though.)
12. The Wheel Of Time Series, by Robert Jordan
13. Animal Farm, by George Orwell
14. Neuromancer, by William Gibson
15. Watchmen, by Alan Moore (Just saw the movie, thought the ending was all wrong.)
16. I, Robot, by Isaac Asimov
17. Stranger In A Strange Land, by Robert Heinlein
18. The Kingkiller Chronicles, by Patrick Rothfuss
19. Slaughterhouse Five, by Kurt Vonnegut

20. Frankenstein, by Mary Shelley
21. Do Androids Dream Of Electric Sheep?, by Philip K. Dick
22. The Handmaid’s Tale, by Margaret Atwood (Not SF, according to the author.)
23. The Dark Tower Series, by Stephen King
24. 2001: A Space Odyssey, by Arthur C. Clarke
25. The Stand, by Stephen King
26. Snow Crash, by Neal Stephenson
27. The Martian Chronicles, by Ray Bradbury
28. Cat’s Cradle, by Kurt Vonnegut
29. The Sandman Series, by Neil Gaiman
30. A Clockwork Orange, by Anthony Burgess
31. Starship Troopers, by Robert Heinlein
32. Watership Down, by Richard Adams
33. Dragonflight, by Anne McCaffrey
34. The Moon Is A Harsh Mistress, by Robert Heinlein
35. A Canticle For Leibowitz, by Walter M. Miller
36. The Time Machine, by H.G. Wells
37. 20,000 Leagues Under The Sea, by Jules Verne
38. Flowers For Algernon, by Daniel Keys
39. The War Of The Worlds, by H.G. Wells
40. The Chronicles Of Amber, by Roger Zelazny
41. The Belgariad, by David Eddings
42. The Mists Of Avalon, by Marion Zimmer Bradley
43. The Mistborn Series, by Brandon Sanderson
44. Ringworld, by Larry Niven
45. The Left Hand Of Darkness, by Ursula K. LeGuin
46. The Silmarillion, by J.R.R. Tolkien
47. The Once And Future King, by T.H. White
48. Neverwhere, by Neil Gaiman
49. Childhood’s End, by Arthur C. Clarke
50. Contact, by Carl Sagan
51. The Hyperion Cantos, by Dan Simmons
52. Stardust, by Neil Gaiman
53. Cryptonomicon, by Neal Stephenson
54. World War Z, by Max Brooks
55. The Last Unicorn, by Peter S. Beagle
56. The Forever War, by Joe Haldeman
57. Small Gods, by Terry Pratchett
58. The Chronicles Of Thomas Covenant, The Unbeliever, by Stephen R. Donaldson
59. The Vorkosigan Saga, by Lois McMaster Bujold
60. Going Postal, by Terry Pratchett
61. The Mote In God’s Eye, by Larry Niven & Jerry Pournelle
62. The Sword Of Truth, by Terry Goodkind
63. The Road, by Cormac McCarthy
64. Jonathan Strange & Mr Norrell, by Susanna Clarke
65. I Am Legend, by Richard Matheson
66. The Riftwar Saga, by Raymond E. Feist
67. The Shannara Trilogy, by Terry Brooks
68. The Conan The Barbarian Series, by R.E. Howard
69. The Farseer Trilogy, by Robin Hobb
70. The Time Traveler’s Wife, by Audrey Niffenegger
71. The Way Of Kings, by Brandon Sanderson
72. A Journey To The Center Of The Earth, by Jules Verne
73. The Legend Of Drizzt Series, by R.A. Salvatore
74. Old Man’s War, by John Scalzi
75. The Diamond Age, by Neil Stephenson
76. Rendezvous With Rama, by Arthur C. Clarke
77. The Kushiel’s Legacy Series, by Jacqueline Carey
78. The Dispossessed, by Ursula K. LeGuin
79. Something Wicked This Way Comes, by Ray Bradbury
80. Wicked, by Gregory Maguire
81. The Malazan Book Of The Fallen Series, by Steven Erikson
82. The Eyre Affair, by Jasper Fforde
83. The Culture Series, by Iain M. Banks
84. The Crystal Cave, by Mary Stewart
85. Anathem, by Neal Stephenson
86. The Codex Alera Series, by Jim Butcher
87. The Book Of The New Sun, by Gene Wolfe
88. The Thrawn Trilogy, by Timothy Zahn
89. The Outlander Series, by Diana Gabaldan
90. The Elric Saga, by Michael Moorcock
91. The Illustrated Man, by Ray Bradbury
92. Sunshine, by Robin McKinley
93. A Fire Upon The Deep, by Vernor Vinge
94. The Caves Of Steel, by Isaac Asimov
95. The Mars Trilogy, by Kim Stanley Robinson
96. Lucifer’s Hammer, by Larry Niven & Jerry Pournelle
97. Doomsday Book, by Connie Willis
98. Perdido Street Station, by China Mieville
99. The Xanth Series, by Piers Anthony
100. The Space Trilogy, by C.S. Lewis

H/T Baby Troll Blog

Full-Auto vs Semi-Auto

Weer'd is talking about the legality.

Be sure to watch the video!

He quotes the VPC about it too.

Semi-auto fire is more lethal than auto.

An aside, we have "full auto" because of the Browning Automatic Rifle.  Some versions have a "Slow-Auto" position on the selector; so you had "Full" and "Slow".

What does full-auto do that semi doesn't?

It keeps heads down.

The North Hollywood bank robbery is a decent example.  How long were those guys shooting?  How many people were killed?  In 44 minutes the robbers only managed to kill one person (one of themselves).  The only other person killed was the other robber and the cops shot him.  Eighteen people were wounded by the robbers, but not killed.

What they did manage was to hold up the police from arresting them for almost an hour!

This is what full-auto is good at in the real world.  The military would have had someone flanking the cops while they were being pinned down.

In the video, Mr Hickok fires 30 rounds to take out three targets in auto and 4 rounds for four targets in semi.

Belt-fed type machine guns aren't even designed to be all that accurate in a rifle sense.  They have dispersion built into them because a machine gun is an area weapon, like artillery and grenades, not a point weapon like a pistol or rifle.  It's undesirable to have all of your rounds go through a small area at range, you want them spread out more than with a rifle.  The good news about designing this in is an open bolt gun is shaking around a lot throwing off the aim pretty good and widening the pattern.

Most Tactical Loadout... EVER!!!

You may call me Ace.

I am kicking ass and taking names with Strike Fighters 2.

Currently playing the Rolling Thunder campaign flying an F-4C Phantom II out of Ubon Royal Thai Air Force Base with the 45th Tactical Fighter Squadron (Hoosier Hogs).

F-4C

I had previously been flying the  F-100C and F-100D from the same squadron in the '50's and early '60's campaigns.

F-100C

I loathe the F-100D.  It's just not the fighter I want it to be against the MiGs of the era.  Adding the AIM-9B Sidewinder doesn't help much since it's envelope is super narrow.

At present I have more kills in about a year of this campaign than there were in the entire ten years of the US being in Nam.  The rules of engagement aren't what they were in the real conflict and the Vietnamese are far better supplied with planes than they really were.  Aimed at making it more enjoyable to the player, I am sure.

Strike Fighters is a wonderful survey sim, realistic enough you have to learn some skills but not so real you have to learn to operate the actual systems.  Stop by Thirdwire and throw a measly $30 on a super enjoyable combat flight sim.  It's four stand-alone "games" (Fictional Middle East, What-If Europe, Vietnam and Israel) ranging from 1956 to 1982 that can be merged ($30 each) with two expansion packs (Israeli and Europe) for $25 each.  You can buy the games in any order and add the expansions to the appropriate game at your leisure.  On top of that there's some additional aircraft for $3-7 that just add to the fun.

Some other screen shots after the break.

First Amendment Rights.

In a nut shell, they are the right to say any gorram thing I want without fear the government will come an arrest me for saying it.

With political correctness, sexual harassment and hate crimes; we don't have much of this right left, huh?

The above are violations of the first amendment, they are keeping me from saying what I would like to say.  I cannot say those things anywhere where someone may be offended.

Refusing to link to a web site is not infringing on someone's right to say something.  They can still say it.

The first amendment is all about being able SAY what you want.  It gives no guarantees that anyone will listen or take what you say to heart.  It does not require that I tell people you've said things and where to find what you have said.

Here's your link, Bob.  Just so you can't say you were black-listed.

When I first started this blog I was a reader.  Weer'd told me the place was anti-gun.  I honestly didn't understand what he was talking about for a long, long time.  Then I heard a faint whistling noise.  Mr Farago is dog whistling pretty damn hard over there.  If you are cued to hear it, it's pretty blatant; if not you're like I was and just see the face value.  Obvious once it's pointed out really.  Weer'd has the examples that will tune your ear, so I will let him!

The first amendment doesn't let you steal others words.  Most of us bloggers will let you use them, but you have to give attribution, preferably a link to the original post.  Best practices is to quote a paragraph at your page and then make it a link to the original post, with a h/t to under it.  "They don't link to me!" is not a positive defense!

This is a place for ME to say what I want.  It is not a place for others to say what they want, but I have a pretty liberal comments policy.  I will allow debate, even if I am not very good at it.  I do have one caveat about comments, if your comment is longer than the post you are replying to and/or it contains scores of supporting links and data: you need to start your own blog because you clearly have something to say.  Your privilege to comment can be revoked for any and no reason without warning; because this is mine not yours.  I reserve the right to delete comments and posts, but I don't care for memory hole tactics.

Torn

I learned that the process of making scotch starts with making what is essentially beer.

The beer is then distilled to get the alcohol out.

HOW CAN THEY DO THAT TO BEER?  Poor beer.

But you get scotch.

Does this mean that in every beer there's a scotch trying to get out?

How can we NOT?

I am so confused.

I don't know why this baffles me so, I've known for years that this is how brandy is made.  You make wine and then boil the alcohol out.

I think I will have a shot of rye with my beer tonight to celebrate what could have been.

Socialism

Socialism does not work.  It has never worked; it will never work; it cannot work.  Putting the right people in charge will not make it work.

It is much like trying to breathe water; you're not going to find the right person who can do it.  That person doesn't exist, cannot exist and will never exist.

All you get from trying either socialism or breathing water is misery and death.

Idle hands, Devil's Workshop

My 14.5" conversion of Kaylee is on hold while I wait for ATF to lick the stamp.

I'm staring at my Early M16 (R604); Charlotte and wondering if I would prefer an XM16E1 (R603) clone.

Yes, I would.

Do I want to convert Charlotte?

At first I did.  It's real simple.  The difference between an early M16 and an XM16E1 is the upper receiver and the bolt carrier.

But I don't think I want to lose my R604 clone.

I realized that I enjoy it because just about nobody clones an early R604.  Lots of people have done and are still doing R601 and R602 clones which are the other two slick-side-upper rifles.  The retro rifle world is inundated with all the variations of the R603.  She's kind of a rarity.  Especially with the chrome plated bolt carrier.  That's a fairly scarce vintage part.

An attitude problem happens with clones of the R604, I think.  It's not associated with any "been there, done that" units.  The vast majority of them went to the Air Force, with a scattered few going to the brown-water Navy guys and the Seabees.  A very few are rumored to have gotten into Army hands when XM16E1 production was falling a bit behind.  The USAF units who "went there and did that" carried XM177's or GAU-5A's.

It's hard to summon romantic martial notions about a rifle that probably spent its entire life slung on some kid's shoulder in North Dakota guarding B-52's.

Grammar

It's very difficult to take someone seriously when every single post they make contains multiple spelling errors.

Like they let their word processor do the auto-fill on most words.

Thinks Things like 'our' when the context says it should be 'out'.

If you didn't take the time to review the text before you hit post, did you take the time to get your argument right?

Symbolism

There are some things you do just for the symbolic value in them.

They show resolve or that you didn't make an oversight.

Like tipping a poor waitress a penny.  It shows you didn't forget to tip.

I'd like Congress to vote themselves a 50% pay cut and a 50% reduction in pension payments to former congresscritters.

It's symbolic because it's not that large an item in the budget.

It shows, however, that they are serious.  That the pain is shared.

Commitment

I wonder what the primaries would look like if you were required to vote for the party that's on your voter ID card.

Something like marker that tells the polling place that you voted in the primary and that casts your vote for the party line automatically for every election you chose a primary candidate for.

It would certainly prevent people from changing party affiliation just to cast poison pills in the primary election.

I don't really advocate it, but it might be interesting.

The Power of Words

Words mean something.  They have definitions.  In a living language, the meanings can change, but they will still have meaning.

Some words are offensive.

Some words are an accurate description.

Some accurate descriptions are offensive.

It is impossible to live your entire life without giving offense.

If someone is offended at an accurate description the problem is not with the describer.  It is with the described.

We should not refrain from describing things accurately out of fear that someone may be offended.  Like in libel or slander the truth is a positive defense.

If you don't like being called a two bit whore you should stop having sex for quarters.

Forcing someone to use euphemism to say something does not make them civil.  I have seen a racist say "sir" with no doubt that he was saying "CENSORED" to the customer.  And the customer damn sure knew it.  The racist did not actually SAY CENSORED, so I guess everything is OK, right?

WRONG!

The racist was still a racist and was still free to be uncivil even though his choice of words had been truncated.

You will not be able to eliminate incivility by censorship or changing the meanings of words.

"Haters gonna hate," as it were.

Teaching New Shooters

For a decent sized segment of the people I know, I am "The Gun Guy".  I am the only person they know who owns a gun (that they KNOW; they'd be surprised...).

That means I get a lot of never-fired-a-gun-before questions.

I do my best to answer them honestly and simply.

Then we progress to going to the range and letting them shoot one of my guns.  I let them pick what they would like to shoot from my collection and bring a couple I like too.

If they have fun with that (most do) most of the time they progress to buying their own gun.

This means a trip to the gun show.  I advocate that they handle every single gun in the category of firearm they are considering and pick the one that feels best.

The evaluation by feel in the gun shop or show might not be a good indicator of how well that gun performs for an individual at the range; BUT it's nearly impossible to get a new shooter to buy a gun that feels wrong there.

It's only later, after they've been shooting a while, that they start considering other factors.

I'm not a super high end trainer.  I'm just the guy all my friends know is into guns.  With only a handful of exceptions, the ones that keep shooting after buying their first gun are no longer shooting that first gun.

I've noticed that most new shooters need to learn one thing at a time.  "This feels wrong" is too big of a distraction at first to let them learn.  Later once they've learned things like breathing and how to align the sights can you demonstrate why the "feels wrong" works better.  As was said here; "feelings lie."

Auction Rant

The purpose of an auction is to sell your item.  That is all.

There's a psychological component to auctions where there's competition in the bidding that can get more for the item than its market value.

On online auction places like ebay or gunbroker it is very common to have a reserve price.  Basically this is the minimum price the seller is willing to take.

An irritation that's surfaced for me lately is sellers who set a relatively high reserve price against an extremely token start price.  So if you make a token bid, it doesn't meet reserve and you have to keep rebidding until you cross the threshold price.

Wasting my time.

Time and time again, my $5 bid on your started at 1¢ but didn't meet reserve is the ONLY bid that item gets.  You relist and I bid $5 you don't make reserve...  I can keep not spending $5 forever, dude.  Why don't you set your start price at the min price and save everyone some time?

Hurrah For Our Side!

http://www2.tbo.com/news/news/2011/aug/08/7/police-victim-shoots-robber-at-st-pete-restaurant-ar-249096/

Since there's no death do the banners count this?

Nagasaki Day

66 years ago the last atomic bomb used in war was detonated.

We don't often think of it as such, but WW2 was the first nuclear war.  So far, it was the last.

NFA, some more...

Reading on Arfcom the other day about what takes so long for the BATFE to process a Form 1 or Form 4.

Link to thread.

It would seem that they really do only do the NICS background check and sign it.  Ten examiners for 120,000 NFA transfers?  Wow.

I think I will do the unthinkable and call my congress critter and ask for the funding for the NFA branch to be increased so they can get a bunch more people hired.

Perhaps even changing the NFA branch back to treasury would be a good idea.  After all, it is a tax.

I do love me some conspiracy

Execution of SEAL Team 6.

Was the RPG fired from a grassy knoll?

Do the shadows converge too quickly towards the horizon?

The posting speculates that a lot of things were known and announced too quickly to be believable.

While doing the same thing about what we know about the crash...

There might be a conspiracy there.  If there is, he's pissed off a group of people who are good at getting into heavily defended buildings and killing the source of their anger.  That would be hilarious!

Here's the originator of the story: Sorry, can't link to one article you have to scroll.

She clearly doesn't understand how Army works.  A National Guard CH-47 was a back up bird.  She wants to know where the 160th SOAR MH-47G went.  How about it went tits-up?  That happens with depressing regularity.  The MH-47 goes on the fritz, the NG CH-47 is called up BECAUSE IT'S THE BACK-UP and they in turn get whacked.

I also note that many pundits are talking about this NG aircrew like they were second rate.  National Guard pilots almost invariably have more hours in their type than the regular Army folks.  Almost all of them are in the Guard because of a love of the flying.

No amount of training will save you from the bullet with your name on it.  The golden bb is not a myth and sometimes there ARE snakes in the cockpit.  Helos crash for no reason at all all the time, getting shot at does not make them safer (although they are amazingly safe compared to the '70's).

Entitlements

We should be fair.

The problem with fairness in things like welfare is a matter of being deserving.

Most people know of at least one person (or family) who does not deserve the assistance.

Most people will agree that those who don't deserve the help should not receive it.

A principle problem with the way we are doing this is that a remote entity is making the decisions about what is fair and that the criterion for that determination is so broad that nearly anyone can qualify for the benefits.

Dragging this decision to a more local entity would have a positive effect in many ways, being closer to the people in need would allow the decision to be made more on merit than body temperature.

Traditionally this function was performed by religious charities.  This is the principle reason that churches got a tax exempt status.

Another positive thing about the churches running it was they could establish hard rules about receiving the assistance.  Break the rules and you're on your own.

There have been and still are non-religious charity organizations in America as well.  They enjoy the same tax-free status as churches.

What the secular and religious charities have in common is their financing is optional by the donors.  If they start supporting people I don't want to see supported, I can withdraw my support until they return to my way of thinking or I can simply give my money to someone more deserving.

With the government, at any level, providing the charity; the option of opting out of the program is eliminated.  They will take my money through taxes and give it to whom they decide is worthy of support regardless of my opinion of the matter.  I am left impotent in my objections because my only recourse is to vote against 1 of 235 representatives, two of 100 senators and the president at the national level.  Even if I get my way with the congress-critters I can vote for, there's 332 out there I have no say about.

I don't mind the idea of charity.  I have donated my time and money to several.  I have never claimed the tax exemption for my donation; my motives weren't to get that exemption.  I wanted to help.  I would not stop you from helping with your time or money even if I disagreed with the recipients of your generosity.

That's more than the government can say.  There are two charities I used to volunteer at that are no longer there because they were regulated away.

Sighting in.

What is it about zeroing that so baffles so many shooters?

Time and again I've helped people zero their rifles at the range and had them effusively thank me for performing my magic.

It's not that hard.  In fact, the instructions are marked on the sights for many guns and scopes.

In its most basic instance what we are trying to do with zeroing is to align the bullet's flight path with the line of sight.

This is a little complicated in principle, but pretty simple in application.  Bullets do not travel in a straight line, they travel in an arc.  If the barrel is level the bullet begins to descend as soon as it exits the muzzle.  If the sights are also level, then the round will hit below the point of aim.  To make them match you have to either point the sights down or the barrel up.  This actually amounts to the same thing.

Most people seem to get this part.

On a scope the adjusters are normally labeled telling you what direction makes the impact point go what way and how far per click at what range.  i.e. "1/4" Left at 100 yards".  Nearly every shooter I've seen can handle that no problem.  Most troubles with scopes seem to be getting on the paper in the first place because their scope is not mounted well.

Iron sights are where people have the most trouble heading the right way.  Even if there's an arrow pointing clockwise and an engraved 'R' they don't know what direction to turn the wheel.

Here's the "magic" formula for iron sights!  Move the rear sight in the same direction you want the impact to move.  Move the front sight in the opposite direction you want the impact to move.

Simple.

Example.  An AR-15.  The AR adjusts for elevation at the front sight and windage at the rear.  To make the impact move up I need to screw the front sight down, or clockwise.  To make the impact move right I need to turn the windage drum clockwise; thus moving the rear sight right.

I think what gets some folks confused with the AR is rear sights based on the M16A2.  These sights have an adjustment for range on them.  You don't adjust that to zero the gun.

Happy Hiroshima Day!

I can almost call this a day of lies.

You read about the nasty long term effects of radiation on people that don't reference the real-life experience of the residents of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.  People do indeed live in both places today.

For the most part a nuclear explosion is no different from any other explosion.  They are simply just larger. They do have some unique properties, but those are quite minor compared to the kaboom.

Context matters.

Sarah Palin has said, "shoot president Obama."

OMG!  We always knew she was a violent racist, didn't we?

But, wait, that's not the whole statement.

In context it's, "If we were really domestic terrorists, shoot, President Obama would be wanting to pal around with us wouldn’t he?"

Changes the entire character of what's said, doesn't it?

h/t Here.

Just in case...

Any of my twenty some regular readers don't read The Smallest Minority.

Read this whole thing:

The professionals and administrators who make up the progressive state are seen as a hostile power with an agenda of their own that they seek to impose on the nation.

Pretty damn stunning reading, I think.

Me too! Me too!

Sadly, this is typical not exceptional.

Pass this viral along.

I Just Fucking Shot Myself - The Musical

h/t Tam

Clarification.

In my earlier post, I mentioned a principled stand.

Standing against overwhelming odds in the face of defeat is one thing.

Declaring you are going against your party before a consensus is formed is a principled stand.

Waiting until your party is certain of victory without you and then declaring your opposition is not.

Public Transportation

http://www2.tbo.com/news/breaking-news/2011/aug/01/1/hart-board-oks-small-millage-increase-to-preserve--ar-247671/

Every home owner in Hillsborough County pays for the HART buses.

It's not a lot per year, less than $50.

Want to bet that HART's principle customers aren't homeowners?

How about we charge every single renter $45 a year to fund my car?

Oh yeah, my car is funding the roads that these buses are driving around on, isn't it?  HART gets their fuel road-tax free.

Explain to me again how this is a benefit to me and not just an unwilling subsidy to others?

I recall that buses and trains used to run at a profit in America.  What stopped that?  Who killed it?  The demographic that's dependent on them hasn't changed.

Is NFA, is made of money...

Robb is agog about the price of suppressors.

Every point he makes is true.  Sadly.

WizardPC's purchase of his suppressor includes the cost of establishing a trust.  It's expensive out of the box, but reusable.  He'll never have to establish that trust to buy an NFA item again.  Me too.

At least WizardPC is paying $200 to register SOMETHING.  I've paid $200 each to have nothing.

For the first SBR I paid about $44.44 per missing inch and the second is $133.33 per inch of air.

All of the stuff on the NFA list are "gangster" weapons.  Prohibition era gangsters.  Great Depression era gangsters.

These items really were being used by criminals.  Bonnie and Clyde used Colt Monitors (Browning Automatic Rifles) cut down for concealment.  The Thompson is notorious for its use by mobsters.  EVERYONE knows that only assassins use silencers.

Sound suppressors are on the gangster weapons list because the movie version of gangsters used them rather than in real life.

Are you a "gangster"?  I'm not.

That $200 tax was supposed to be a crushing burden that made you say, "screw this, that's not worth the money."  The background check is supposed to be onerous enough to make you say, "this is more trouble than it's worth."  The goal is to remove these items from common usage.  I don't accidentally use that phrasing.  Common usage is exactly how Heller v DC described what guns one had the right to own.

It's working isn't it?

Economics plays into it here too.  Every person who refuses to buy an NFA item that's still being manufactured makes them more expensive because that lowers the volume made.  If AAC sold twice as many cans they'd be cheaper.  That $200 tax and background per can are barriers to purchase that many people don't wish to climb.

But consider this: if you have a conceal carry permit, you've already submitted to this "anal probing."  You've also demonstrated that you can pass the probe.  What did that permit cost?  Is it an ongoing expense or one-time?  Virtually any cost or privacy objection to NFA can be applied to a carry permit.

CCW has something else in common with NFA: We shouldn't have to pay special for it!  The price of buying the gun should be the only cost to carrying it concealed.

Why do many meekly submit to the process of getting a carry permit then turn around and rage about the intrusiveness and excessive cost of getting a sound suppressor?

Sorry to pick on you, Robb.  You're not the first person I've heard with your complaint, you just happened to wake up my muse about it.

On the demise of Borders...

Truly it was Amazon.com what killed them.  They failed to adapt to the new paradigm and were as doomed as mainstreet v Wal Mart attempting to go head to head on price.

Brick and mortar v the internet has to be fought in terms of service.

The product will be the same and the physical store will charge more for it.  You have to offer the customer something to make that extra cost worth it.

Ever notice that gun shops stay alive in towns that also have a Wal Mart selling guns?  Gun shops sell expertise (founded or not) and customer care in addition to guns.  You ask the gun counter drone at Wal Mart, "Is x good for y?" and most of the time you won't get an answer.  The gun shop owner has an opinion and will happily share it with you.  Sometimes a BS answer is even better than a real one since the story is worth the time spent listening.

But I digress...

What the Borders failure means to me...

I hate Amazon for buying books.  Amazon is a poor place to go to get books on gun topics, for example.  Will the title, "Guns of the Navy SEALs" cover the Stoner?  The China Lake pump-action grenade launcher?  The cut down M60 they modified in the field?  The XM148?  Buying from Amazon, you don't know until you've paid your money and waited for shipping.

In a store I can see that I those items are not part of this book but will part of a future volume (that sadly didn't make print).  This is the future of books for me.  Spending more money on books that don't add to my knowledge due to repetition and likely more because fewer actual books are being printed.

A contributing factor to Border's demise though: people who treat the place like a library.  It was a business.  A business whose purpose was to sell books, not provide a space for people to read them in their entirety for free.  Every person who sat in the store reading and not buying has no room to complain that the place they weren't supporting financially is now gone.  And don't try to defend them by saying, "they bought other titles, so they were supporting them," in that case they are a bit less guilty.  Consider that the title they read instead of purchased could have been never stocked, saving the place the cost of having it there since they were never going to pay for it.

Only when it doesn't matter...

In the below video Sen Kerry confronts Sen Rubio about quoting then Senators Obama and Biden from 2006 saying they would vote against raising the debt ceiling.

Sen Kerry indicated that since the vote was a forgone conclusion, that Obama's vote was symbolic and didn't matter.

Yes, Senator Kerry, they took a "principled" stand against their party when it didn't affect the outcome.

To be considered a principled person, however, you have to maintain that stand.  What they really did was take a stand against the vote once it was a sure thing so as to secure their re-elections.  It's a common thing. It's done all the time and it's one of the reasons that we voters are so disgusted by politicians.

If they'd believed what they said in 2006 they would not be opposed to what the "Tea Party" Republicans are attempting to do.

Sen. Rubio: "Save the Whole House or It Will All Burn Down"

I sure like him a lot better than Christ. Surely I do!

h/t Ace

Doorbell

I am a pig.

I admit it, so you can't chastise me.

Occasionally my eye is drawn to an attractive member of the opposite sex.

Today I made note of a new principle of looking.

The eighty foot line of disappointment.

That's the distance where a jogger can change from promising to, well, not.

Fast and Furious

What will come of Rep Issa and Sen Grassley's investigation into Operation Fast and Furious aka Gunwalker?

Nothing.

Not.

A.

Goddamn.

Thing.

That.

Is.

Positive.

We'll prolly end up getting more gun control from it.

We'll prolly get some lower end ATF functionaries fired; but not jailed.

The people who put it together will walk, scott free.

I am sorry I am so damn cynical about it, but this is The Stupid Party doing the investigation.

Insurance BS

I am a homeowner.  Well, I am a mortgage payer.  I am 8 years into a 30 year note.

I am required by law to carry insurance on the property.

I am getting sick of my home being held hostage by the insurance company.

I have 22 years of paying whatever they decide to charge or I lose my house.  It changes every year and it's always up.

We paid $69,900 for our house, borrowing $66,400.  On the day of sale in 2004 it was valued at $72,500 (assessed market value).  Our mortgage is $487.22 and our payment was $562.30 for the first year.  Less than $100 for taxes and insurance a month (the escrow was flush at the time).

My annual taxes run just a bit over 1% of the assessed value about $65 a month when we signed.

Today the house is assessed at $49,538.  My payment is now $701.12.  My taxes are $532.38 a year ($44.37 a payment).  So, $701.12 - $487.22 - $44.37 = $169.53 a month for my homeowner's insurance.  When we signed it was $50.08 a month!

Why is it that my property has lost 31.6% of it's value but it costs three times as much to insure it?

There's a word for it.  FRAUD.  People making false claims.

Again, I am being punished for the actions of others who are not being punished at all.

To top it off there's going to be a 10% increase in my insurance rates forever and likely a 183% increase in the sink-hole portion of my coverage this year.  All because the state did nothing to prevent fraudulent claims.

I am even more cheesed off that the company I am forced to use is owned by the state.  The bastards make a profit.  Nothing owned by the government should make a profit; it should break even at best.

The main reason I am forced to use the government owned solution is because rates have been kept artificially low by law and most private insurers stopped writing new policies.  However, the actuarial calculations have been going up faster than the values of the properties they are underwriting.  And if value exposure is the key part of the equation, like they say it is, why don't my rates go down now that my house is worth less than when I bought it?  They sure as hell went up in 2006 when the assessed value of the place was $96,200!  And went up in direct proportion to the assessed value.

At some point we have to let insurance charge what it costs to insure people.  I no longer believe that either side, government or insurers, are being honest about that cost.

It appears to me that much of the actuarial equation is to sneak (needed) rate increases around laws that forbid rate increases.  Even if this is successful, the insurance companies still lobby to have the rate increase barriers removed.  If the government relents and allows that rate increase, the actuarial weasel increase remains.  Thus we are now paying more for the same coverage.  Government suspects this is true and puts a law in place forbidding increases...  lather, rinse, repeat.

Rifling

I'm going to wade into a controversial topic.

Rate of twist.

The AR-15 today is commonly found in 1:9 rifling.  What that means is the bullet will spin 360˚ every 9".

Originally the AR-15 was equipped with a 1:14 twist.

Lemme back up a bit more.

The entire point of the rifling is to spin the bullet, this spin is to stabilize it in flight so that it goes where you pointed it.

The 1:14 twist in the original R601 AR15 did stabilize the 55gr bullet developed for it.  The thing is the rate of spin required changes with the density of the air and the length of the bullet.  Longer bullets and thicker air need more spin.

1:14 did not stabilize the bullet in temperate even though it worked fine in tropical places like Vietnam or hot summer demonstrations for Air Force generals.

Hot, humid air is less dense than cold dry air.

For the AR-15 R602 the rifling was changed to 1:12; a change that held all the way through to the M16A1.

1:12 works great for the M193 and M196 rounds in all the conditions we'd send troops, from tropics to arctic.

This was all fine and dandy until NATO standardized on a different round altogether.  SS109 is a composite construction with a steel core surrounded by lead with a copper jacket instead of the normal all lead core with copper.  It weighs 62 grains, but is longer than an all-lead round would be.  As long as a 69 grain round.  Fabrique National of Belgium developed this round and determined that a twist of 1:9 was enough.  But then they tried the L110 tracer round under arctic conditions...  That round required a 1:7 rate to stabilize, and didn't have a too adverse an effect on the SS109.

The plan, at the time, was to issue the light machine gun with a 1:7 barrel and the rifle with 1:9 because the rifle would not normally use tracer ammunition.  However, it was decided that it was desirable for the rifle to be able to use any ammo issued, so the rifle got 1:7 as well.

That covers the military...

What about you?

Older .223 rifles come with 1:12.  Some older Ruger Mini-14s even come 1:10.  Since the most common loading is 55gr, this is fine.  1:12 does not stabilize NATO ammo at all, or other longer, heavier ammo.  The unstabilized flight-path is erratic to say the least; you can miss a man sized target at ranges as short as 20 yards!

Newer guns come with (mostly) 1:9 tubes.  This is fine for the common 55gr ammo and, as I mentioned earlier, fine for NATO spec ball ammo.  Depending on the manufacturing tolerances to the twist, 1:9 should be good for rounds up to 69 gr.  What you lose is the lighter 40-50 grain varmint rounds.  They become over-stabilized.

What's that?  Bullets travel in an arc.  To hit farther away you have to elevate the barrel.  A properly stabilized bullet will point along this arc.  An over-stabilized round will retain the orientation of the barrel, so it will be traveling at an angle to its flight path.  This is bad for accuracy and can cause unpredictable behavior in the target.

1:7 does this with 55gr ammo.  What you gain with it, in addition to being able to shoot tracers in northern Alaska in the winter, is the ability to accurately fire really long rounds like 77gr.

All other things being equal, heavier rounds do more to the target than lighter.  With varmint rounds, it's too much (unless you want a vaporized red cloud of rodent).  Heavier rounds also reach out farther and are less affected by wind.  All things are not always equal.

Heavier rounds normally are going slower, they take up more space in the case displacing powder capacity.  Even if they didn't keeping the velocity the same would lead to higher, perhaps dangerous, pressure levels.

Again, what about you?

You have to honestly assess what you are going to use the gun for.  What ammunition are you going to buy for it?  Committing to a twist commits you to a specific range of bullet weights.  Likewise, committing to a bullet commits you to a twist.

If you don't plan on arctic hunting trips or plan on using heavy rounds, there's nothing wrong with using 1:9 rifling, don't let anyone tell you that you MUST have 1:7 simply because that's mil-spec.  Unless you have plans that specifically require 1:7, don't pay extra to get it.  Getting a 1:7 barrel sets the most commonly available ammunition off your list.

Likewise, don't expect a 1:12 barrel to handle heavyweight ammunition!