Saturday, January 14, 2012
But I'll comment on one thing:
What the Marines did was wrong–and possibly a symptom of problems in unit leadership–but let’s keep some perspective as punishment is weighed.
As to 'leadership', that would include a President negotiating with a Taliban bigshot for our virtual surrender, and some ROE that seem at times tailormade to get our guys killed; I guarantee that crap is not helping matters. Add into that hearing- while you're being shot at- that the President and a bunch of other clowns want to cut your numbers, and there are still 'can we cut their health care or pay?' questions being quietly passed around(heard that from the son), and, well...
Friday, January 13, 2012
To those who live in the PROM, you have my sympathies. And I'm NEVER going to live there. For that matter, I don't even want to visit the damn place anymore.
Now, that dog knows whose side he's on.
“He got a bite out of the guy’s leg,” Elizabeth said of the burglar, who had already cut the phone and cable line to their house. “He ripped his pants and tried to tug him down. But the guy got away.”
Good dog, have a bone!
Another MAIG criminal
This is not a surprise. At all.
He must have known why I was calling.
Asked the same question again. This time the reply I got this time was different: “Senator Schumer is in favor of censoring the internet.”
….whhhhhhat? Up until now, most of the statements from congresspeople have done that neat thing politicians do where they say words but don’t actually answer the question. They do the “censorship” dance very well – never say it out loud, but vote for the bill nonetheless. From what I can tell “anti-piracy” and “pro-censorship” are actually the same thing here, though politicians usually argue the former so as not to seem anti-first-amendment. No one has been brazen enough to drop the C-word without hesitation. But this dude apparently had no problem with it. I said again: “So you’re saying Senator Schumer is in favor of censoring the internet?”
“Yes.” He then backpedaled a bit, and mentioned that Schumer is in favor of censoring illegal activities on the internet. But still, the C-word.
Yes, the assholes and haters of the military are in charge.
Just to pick on one: Karzai. Let's see, in his country
Little girls of 7 can be married to adult males and
Little boys are used as sex toys,
Raped women can be condemned to death for 'illegal sex', but may have the sentence commuted if they marry the rapist,
The Taliban teaches teenage boys to behead a live human being and considers it good parenting,
The routinely mutilate our troops bodies if they can, and booby-trap them,
and that miserable, corrupt little bastard calls us names? Fuck him. With a splintery shovel handle.
And Obama's official campaign vehicle
The Times notes that White Gun had been “previously unreported.” It appears to have been on a much smaller scale, and the newspaper says there were three arrests.
Reportedly mounted at the same time as Operation Fast and Furious, the White Gun investigation is on the radar screen of congressional investigators who have been working on the Fast & Furious scandal. Some familiar names surface right up front, according to the L.A. Times:
In the late summer of 2010, the ATF agent leading the failed Fast and Furious gun-smuggling operation in Arizona flew to Mexico City to help coordinate cross-border investigations of U.S. weapons used by Mexican drug cartels.
Hope A. MacAllister wanted access to police and military vaults for American weapons recovered by Mexican authorities in raids and at crime scenes. She especially was interested in firearms from another ATF investigation, code-named White Gun, that she was running…
… MacAllister was the lead agent. Her supervisor, David J. Voth, was head of the ATF's Group VII field office in Phoenix. His boss was William D. Newell, then the special agent in charge in Phoenix.-Los Angeles Times
When he made his little Presidential trip to Iraq, remember the basketball game? Son knew a guy there; said Obama played maybe five minutes to get pictures and left, never saying a word to any of the troops.
Strangely, now that the case against me is over, the authorities refuse to return my firearm. There is no law that allows them to confiscate a weapon in this manner. They simply say “no” when you ask for your weapon back. This is apparently their “policy.” It is done regularly in New York. This is government robbery. Not only is New York City anti-Second Amendment rights, but they are depriving citizens of their legally owned property. My lawyer has advised me that I can attempt to pursue the return of my firearm, but that to do so would cost me more than the firearm is worth. I am not alone in facing this tyranny. It has happened to hundreds of people in the New York metro area. My lawyer, Brian Stapleton, has handled over 400 of these cases himself, so he is an expert on the subject.
"We're New York Effing City, and we don't have to obey laws we don't like. And we can steal your property and you can't afford to do anything about it." Theft under color of law- well, no, you can't call it that because there's no law for them to hide this theft behind; it's just theft because the thieves can get away with it.
Thursday, January 12, 2012
Registration: it ALWAYS leads to at least some level of confiscation
On the subject of DGU and the gun bigot reaction to Weer'd's project. You know, that's about the most polite way of saying 'Piss off' I think I've ever read.
By the way, remember former Officer Harless?
Wednesday, January 11, 2012
Also, from the Irishman,
Thanks to the True King of France
Note: both sites may be somewhat NSFW
I think that, especially with public money funding it, all this research SHOULD be available to the public.
Oh yeah, this is a GREAT idea...
But the tea party is full of 'terrorists'... yeah.
"Use a product that doesn't exist for you to buy, or you'll pay a fine!" Every politician and bureaucrat involved in pushing this should be horsewhipped. Which reminds me:
"There's no way to rule innocent men. The only power any government has is to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren't enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws. Who wants a nation of law-abiding citizens? What's there in that for anyone? But just pass the kinds of laws that can neither be observed nor enforced nor objectively interpreted - and you create a nation of lawbreakers - and then you cash in on guilt. Now that's the system, Mr. Rearden, that's the game, and once you understand it, you'll be much easier to deal with."
And last, it appears that the Progressive Gun Bigots are all butthurt by Weer'd's candle idea. Ever notice that their 'thoughts' are much like the mess in Dr. Who? "Don't try to protect yourself, don't have a weapon, you must wait for The Power or Someone Official to save you." As Kevin says, Fuck That.
Somebody with Photoshop or something needs to put a German helmet on her: between the name and her know-nothing mind, it would fit nicely.
The Turks blame The JOOOS! Which reminds me of something:
..."It seems if you are Vorkosigan enough, you can even get away with murder."
...Instead, he stared up unblinkingly, and breathed, "So if you truly believe that, why are you standing in my way?"*
Which reminds me of how, if the various slanderers had actually believed Bush was a dictator, murderer, etc., they'd have been in hiding because not one of them would've had the balls to pull the crap they did.
Heard something about this the other day, the Italians have declared that paying cash for anything of more than €1000 is illegal; I wonder when they'll propose making it illegal to pay for ANYTHING with cash? Or when someone else somewhere else will call for it?
I really don't want to hear some UN clown calling for us to be sanctioned for 'crimes against humanity' and such until the bastards do something about their raping 'peacekeepers'.
Yeah, we're supposed to trust these professional journalisters- er, journalists- to decide what we need to know...
*A Civil Campaign
At issue is the EPA’s enforcement of the Clean Water Act through so-called administrative compliance orders, which are government commands that allow the agency to control the use of private property without the annoyance of having to subject its actions to judicial review.
The Sacketts contend that the compliance order was issued erroneously and they would like the opportunity to make their case in court. Yet according to the terms of the Clean Water Act, they may not challenge the order until the EPA first seeks judicial enforcement of it, a process that could take years. In the meantime, the Sacketts risk $32,500 in fines per day if they fail to comply. And complying doesn’t just mean they have to stop building; they must also return the lot to its original condition at their own expense.
You'll love this:
For its part, the EPA argues that old-fashioned judicial review would simply get in the way. As the agency states in the brief it submitted to the Supreme Court, “A rule that broadly authorized immediate judicial review of such agency communications would ultimately disserve the interests of both the government and regulated parties, by discouraging interactive processes that can obviate the need for judicial action.”
Translation: "You want us to actually be answerable? In court? We don't want to!"
More on the hearing here: including
So far, all the lower courts that have reviewed such claims agree with the government that the agency’s compliance orders are not subject to judicial review. They have said that because the EPA must prove a violation to a judge for the court to levy fines, that is the proper time for the courts to get involved.
The Sacketts counter that the compliance order is mandatory; they say it requires action to avoid the potential of ruinous fines. Even the prospect of waiting to see whether the EPA will go to court — it has years to make the decision — deprives the couple of their land and leaves them “to the mercy and whim of EPA.”
So the lower court judges say "We shouldn't let judges get involved(we shouldn't let the peasants challenge EPA in court) until EPA actually 'proves a violation'. So it's just fine for EPA to ruin you with fines and fees and take your land away from you so long as they haven't actually gone to a judge themselves." Which is such a level of bullshit that if it were all piled in one place the EPA would order you to clean it up or be fined a million bucks a day.
I like it. Even with the somewhat-high rings, no problem keeping a solid sight picture, and nothing shifted/twisted/loosened. True, these loads are lighter than ball; still, I don't foresee any problems with the mount not staying where it should. Looking forward to weather and time so I can take this to the 100-yard range for some more work. And everyone who saw it really liked the appearance, as well as the ability to put a optic right over the bore.
While I'm thinking about it, thought I'd pass this along on the Rock Island 1911 pistols. A while back son decided he wanted a .45, and he wanted a 1911. He and his sister both have really good research abilities: give them something they want/need to find out about and they'll find everything. Everything he found on these said 'they're solid, they work, and if you are one who has a problem they fix things fast'. Plus, he wanted something he could try his hand on a modification/tuning without worrying that he might screw up a expensive pistol, so he got one of their Officer's Model size. That was a year or so ago, and he's had zero problems, ball and hollowpoints both.
Tuesday, January 10, 2012
So, we need two things:
Meddling politicians thrown out of office, and
DEA canned for screwing with people with chronic pain.
Monday, January 09, 2012
The Australian media, being mostly urban and easily scared, is generally hopeless when reporting on firearms. This piece is a classic example. Note the seamless linkage between gang-related events in Melbourne’s northwest suburbs and legal gun ownership in such places as Harrow – a small rural town nearly 400 kilometres from the Victorian capital.
Note also the prominence given to the gun control lobby’s claim that more guns lead to more crime. This should be easy to verify. Simply review the crime statistics for those gun “hot spots” identified by the Herald Sun. At least the paper did some basic checking in Swifts Creek:
Welcome to Swifts Creek, home to about 278 people, 774 guns and a tank.
Firearms outnumber the local population more than two to one, but there has not been a single shooting - accidental or otherwise - in recent memory.
They’ll no doubt have found a similar situation in Harrow, had they inquired. According to these figures, the area is massively below state averages for homicide, rape, robbery, arson, burglary and theft.
Rifle with mount installed and scope mounted:
A closer look
Here's the underside, with the two clamps pointed to
The mount blends in very well, and nowhere does it come close to interfering with free movement of the oprod. On the forward end it butts against the rear ferrule, so it can't shift forward under recoil. The screws for the clamps go in from the top, and have large hex-key heads for adjusting. And there's plenty of clearance to put on a scope with a big objective, just pick suitable rings. These are high enough that I'll get some lower ones later on.
Really looking forward to sighting this in. Among other things, when I test those cast-bullet loads this will remove some of the 'load or my aim at fault?' question.
Yeah, they probably are helping push for a ban; also probably trying to help distract from Gunwalker.
Some, ah, problems with the Obama Chop The Military plan. Aside from the fact that he and minions would rather just chop the forces up than actually try to get rid of waste or duplication.
I'm going to try to get some pictures of the Garand with mount today; good chance of rain later but the sun is pushing through the clouds right now.
Sunday, January 08, 2012
Pictures later, when I can set up in better light. For now, installation was pretty straightforward: remove the action/barrel group from the stock(if you're unfamiliar, go here and choose Field Stripping); remove the rear handguard; remove op rod and spring; put mount in place and install the two clamps, just snug the screws; roughly level; install op rod and spring, replace barrel unit in stock. Then level the mount and tighten the screws.
Here's how it looks on mine:
That may be your rifle; MINE had to argue about it. Specifically, the 'remove rear handguard' instructions didn't work, as the spring was so bloody tight you could not pop it off that way; I had to detail strip the barrel(remove gas tube/sight unit, remove front handguard, pull pin and remove ferrule) to get the thing off; the mount, however, went on exactly as listed. I used a level to compare the mount to the receiver and true it up.
Except for the rail on top, at first glance you could think it's a black-stained wood guard, it fits in that well.
The two clamps that fit around the barrel seem perfectly machined,
there's zero slop in the fit. The iron sights are not obstructed by the rail. Right now I've got a LER 2x scope mounted, and the rings are a little high(only ones I had); down the road I think I'll need some lower ones, but these will do to try it out.
*Friend: "I thought you were retired from that place?"
Me: "Me, too."
My real thought: If I'm one of those rich retired people, why aren't I on a beach somewhere with Sandra Bullock?