A while back I picked up some of the military 172-grain boattail match bullets for .30-06: I wanted to put together some target loads, and dug around for recipes. One thing I consistently found mentioned was 46.0 to 47.0 grains of IMR4895, everyone who mentioned this load raved about accuracy. Tried it, and- depending on brass- the best I could get was about 4" at 100 yards. Which sucks from a rifle that'll put Greek or Korean ball into 2.5".
More digging, and looking in the Lyman manual, decided to try the low load they showed for that range, 43.0 grains of the same powder, as a starting point. Shazam! 1.5 to 2" groups as long as I do my part. And, while the M2 ball hits about 2" high(proper for that ammo and rifle), this load hits dead-on point of aim.
And it does it with more than one brand of brass. You can never tell what will or won't work in a particular rifle until you try it.
Saturday, May 10, 2008
I haven't sent anything to Burma
for precisely these reasons:
Burma, a former British colony, was once the rice-bowl of South-East Asia, but in 1962 a bunch of generals took over with a misty-eyed plan to impose on their 50 million people the "Burmese Way to Socialism".
Their brand of politics was of the kind still distressingly popular at RMIT and Victoria University, and produced exactly the misery it's inflicted from Cuba to Russia.
...
Two days before Cyclone Nargis hit, India's Meteorological Department warned the junta's minions it was coming, and where.
But Burma's state-owned media, one of the crudest propaganda outfits I've seen, issued no mass alerts. Indeed, illegal Voice of America broadcasts probably did more to warn Burma's civilians to take shelter than did Burma's own radio station
...
Even now, the junta is killing people with its paranoia. Disaster assessment teams and helicopters from the United States have been blocked from coming in to prepare a huge rescue, and foreign aid teams not already in-country had their applications for visas stalled and aid shipments stopped.
Foreign journalists, whose reports would help raise appeal money, have been banned.
The UN is now "intensely" negotiating with the junta to let in aid workers and ease customs regulations on aid - literally begging the junta to let the world save its people.
...
Why hand cash to thieves? I've seen for myself, on one of my trips to Burma, military heavies in shades openly demand bribes from Australian aid workers who were giving blankets to disaster victims.
In Mandalay, I saw a Red Cross ambulance, given by Japan, refitted for use as a taxi for military officials. The junta even today charges import duty on foreign donations.
With such tyrants in charge, the toll from Friday's cyclone - already horrific - can only keep rising.
...
Lots of people are dead, and lots more will die because they're 'governed' by a bunch of socialist idiots who care more about power- theirs- than lives. Which leads to this:
So slow has the junta been to let in help, that French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner, founder of aid group Medicins Sans Frontieres, suggested the UN Security Council adopt a resolution allowing aid to be flown into the country by force. China, naturally, is against such interference in the affairs of its "friend".
You can discount China: even without their influence, can you imagine the UN- the people who helped bring about the bloodbath in Rwanda, and would rather see people murdered, raped and enslaved in Sudan than actually do anything(and shits bricks at the very idea of arming the people being killed)- actually using force in Burma?
Fat friggin' chance. Among other things, the head of the UN is too busy trying to silence speech that might upset muslims(doesn't seem to mind interefering there) to do anything other than give speeches and ask for money.
Please note at the first of the article they go to town on the Goreacle:
THE vultures are circling over Burma's dead. Hey, isn't that fat one Al Gore?
Sure is. And - flap, flap, plop - there he lands, the first to go picking over carcasses for scraps to feed his great global warming scare campaign.
Found thanks to Sondra.
Burma, a former British colony, was once the rice-bowl of South-East Asia, but in 1962 a bunch of generals took over with a misty-eyed plan to impose on their 50 million people the "Burmese Way to Socialism".
Their brand of politics was of the kind still distressingly popular at RMIT and Victoria University, and produced exactly the misery it's inflicted from Cuba to Russia.
...
Two days before Cyclone Nargis hit, India's Meteorological Department warned the junta's minions it was coming, and where.
But Burma's state-owned media, one of the crudest propaganda outfits I've seen, issued no mass alerts. Indeed, illegal Voice of America broadcasts probably did more to warn Burma's civilians to take shelter than did Burma's own radio station
...
Even now, the junta is killing people with its paranoia. Disaster assessment teams and helicopters from the United States have been blocked from coming in to prepare a huge rescue, and foreign aid teams not already in-country had their applications for visas stalled and aid shipments stopped.
Foreign journalists, whose reports would help raise appeal money, have been banned.
The UN is now "intensely" negotiating with the junta to let in aid workers and ease customs regulations on aid - literally begging the junta to let the world save its people.
...
Why hand cash to thieves? I've seen for myself, on one of my trips to Burma, military heavies in shades openly demand bribes from Australian aid workers who were giving blankets to disaster victims.
In Mandalay, I saw a Red Cross ambulance, given by Japan, refitted for use as a taxi for military officials. The junta even today charges import duty on foreign donations.
With such tyrants in charge, the toll from Friday's cyclone - already horrific - can only keep rising.
...
Lots of people are dead, and lots more will die because they're 'governed' by a bunch of socialist idiots who care more about power- theirs- than lives. Which leads to this:
So slow has the junta been to let in help, that French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner, founder of aid group Medicins Sans Frontieres, suggested the UN Security Council adopt a resolution allowing aid to be flown into the country by force. China, naturally, is against such interference in the affairs of its "friend".
You can discount China: even without their influence, can you imagine the UN- the people who helped bring about the bloodbath in Rwanda, and would rather see people murdered, raped and enslaved in Sudan than actually do anything(and shits bricks at the very idea of arming the people being killed)- actually using force in Burma?
Fat friggin' chance. Among other things, the head of the UN is too busy trying to silence speech that might upset muslims(doesn't seem to mind interefering there) to do anything other than give speeches and ask for money.
Please note at the first of the article they go to town on the Goreacle:
THE vultures are circling over Burma's dead. Hey, isn't that fat one Al Gore?
Sure is. And - flap, flap, plop - there he lands, the first to go picking over carcasses for scraps to feed his great global warming scare campaign.
Found thanks to Sondra.
It seems Bloomberg(Tyrantwannabe-NY)
has problems with more of the Constitution than the 2nd Amendment:
Lawyers for Mayor Bloomberg are asking a judge to ban any reference to the Second Amendment during the upcoming trial of a gun shop owner who was sued by the city. While trials are often tightly choreographed, with lawyers routinely instructed to not tell certain facts to a jury, a gag order on a section of the Constitution would be an oddity.
Gee, ya think?
Miserable bastard, isn't he?
Lawyers for Mayor Bloomberg are asking a judge to ban any reference to the Second Amendment during the upcoming trial of a gun shop owner who was sued by the city. While trials are often tightly choreographed, with lawyers routinely instructed to not tell certain facts to a jury, a gag order on a section of the Constitution would be an oddity.
Gee, ya think?
Miserable bastard, isn't he?
Stephen King holds shovel,
keeps digging. Be sure to check out the comments, which include a quote in which King follows standard liberal method: accuse people of saying something they didn't and defend yourself from that.
Gee, I guess instead of reading the books we sent over, the son & others are just looking at the covers, while taking a break from patrolling, ambassadorial work, maintaining equipment(however do they do that without manuals?), etc.
Gee, I guess instead of reading the books we sent over, the son & others are just looking at the covers, while taking a break from patrolling, ambassadorial work, maintaining equipment(however do they do that without manuals?), etc.
Friday, May 09, 2008
Range day, further test on the plastic bullets
I wrote about here. While I was out I took the opportunity to try these at 50 yards. Being as how I had already put the chronograph up and did not want to dig it and the tripod back out I have no velocity numbers, so that'll have to come later.
The first batch had the same 5.0 grains of 2400 I tried before:
The top two are the first sight adjustment(had to raise the rear a fair amount), the others were all fired at the same setting. I don't know if the two off to the right are from me or the load, or possibly from a gust of wind: with a projectile this light and velocity this presumably low, I don't think it wouldn't take much to drift them off.
I had ten of those loads, and I'd loaded five with 6.0 grains:
Those grouped tighter, but this isn't enough testing to decide if this load is better(more testing needed, damn...) With the extra grain there was still zero recoil, as in the rifle didn't shift at all.
For small game or varmints, I think this would do a pretty good job out to maybe 50 yards(need to get some more water jugs to try), and, as mentioned before, if you wanted to introduce the kids to a 'big' gun with low noise and recoil, these would make very nice loads.
Let's see, try them in .30-06, .308... I wonder if they'd work in 7.62x54r or .303?
The first batch had the same 5.0 grains of 2400 I tried before:
The top two are the first sight adjustment(had to raise the rear a fair amount), the others were all fired at the same setting. I don't know if the two off to the right are from me or the load, or possibly from a gust of wind: with a projectile this light and velocity this presumably low, I don't think it wouldn't take much to drift them off.I had ten of those loads, and I'd loaded five with 6.0 grains:
Those grouped tighter, but this isn't enough testing to decide if this load is better(more testing needed, damn...) With the extra grain there was still zero recoil, as in the rifle didn't shift at all. For small game or varmints, I think this would do a pretty good job out to maybe 50 yards(need to get some more water jugs to try), and, as mentioned before, if you wanted to introduce the kids to a 'big' gun with low noise and recoil, these would make very nice loads.
Let's see, try them in .30-06, .308... I wonder if they'd work in 7.62x54r or .303?
Thursday, May 08, 2008
A good article on self-censorship
due to 'sensitivity'. Often another name for 'fear'.
In a thrillingly ironic turn of events, a shorter version of the very essay you are now reading was originally commissioned by the opinion page of Washington Post and then rejected because it was deemed too critical of Islam. Please note, this essay was destined for the opinion page of the paper, which had solicited my response to the controversy over Wilders' film. The irony of its rejection seemed entirely lost on the Post, which responded to my subsequent expression of amazement by offering to pay me a "kill fee." I declined.
In a thrillingly ironic turn of events, a shorter version of the very essay you are now reading was originally commissioned by the opinion page of Washington Post and then rejected because it was deemed too critical of Islam. Please note, this essay was destined for the opinion page of the paper, which had solicited my response to the controversy over Wilders' film. The irony of its rejection seemed entirely lost on the Post, which responded to my subsequent expression of amazement by offering to pay me a "kill fee." I declined.
Wednesday, May 07, 2008
And for an example of people who do NOT qualify as sheepdogs,
take a look at this:
About a month ago I got a call from a reporter for the Arkansas Times inquiring about my research into paramilitary drug raids. He'd been reporting on a raid in North Little Rock involving a 40-year-old man named Tracy Ingle. When he told me the story over the phone, I was floored, even given all the abuses and mistakes I've reported and read about over the last few years. What makes the case especially egregious is not that the police may have gotten the wrong home, that they shot a man, or that they were covering it up or going silent. We've seen all that before. What's mind-blowing about this one is that they've continued abusing the poor guy, even after it should have been clear for some time now that they made a mistake.
I'll bet every one of these people would state loudly that "I AM a sheepdog!" So would the people in their department who seem to be hellbent on screwing the victim, rather than have the people who screwed up held to account. Got news for you, guys: you may have qualified at one time, but this puts you in the 'feral dog' category, and that's not a good thing to be.
About a month ago I got a call from a reporter for the Arkansas Times inquiring about my research into paramilitary drug raids. He'd been reporting on a raid in North Little Rock involving a 40-year-old man named Tracy Ingle. When he told me the story over the phone, I was floored, even given all the abuses and mistakes I've reported and read about over the last few years. What makes the case especially egregious is not that the police may have gotten the wrong home, that they shot a man, or that they were covering it up or going silent. We've seen all that before. What's mind-blowing about this one is that they've continued abusing the poor guy, even after it should have been clear for some time now that they made a mistake.
I'll bet every one of these people would state loudly that "I AM a sheepdog!" So would the people in their department who seem to be hellbent on screwing the victim, rather than have the people who screwed up held to account. Got news for you, guys: you may have qualified at one time, but this puts you in the 'feral dog' category, and that's not a good thing to be.
Yeah, it's spring
I know this because I'm sitting here listening to
the rain outside
the wind
the tornado sirens
and the near-PSH on the tv weather warnings.
It started(the current twister) west of me, went northeast and doesn't appear to be on the ground anymore, just some very high wind gusts.
You know you grew up in this part of the country when you hear 'tornado warning' and go through the following sequence:
Where is it?
Which way is it going? Which is followed by either
Head for a 'fraidy hole or
Sit back and continue with what you were doing. With the news on, of course.
Used to have a neighbor who was originally from NY, and it drove her nuts that we'd hear 'tornado' and go out to look for it, instead of hiding.
Yankees....
the rain outside
the wind
the tornado sirens
and the near-PSH on the tv weather warnings.
It started(the current twister) west of me, went northeast and doesn't appear to be on the ground anymore, just some very high wind gusts.
You know you grew up in this part of the country when you hear 'tornado warning' and go through the following sequence:
Where is it?
Which way is it going? Which is followed by either
Head for a 'fraidy hole or
Sit back and continue with what you were doing. With the news on, of course.
Used to have a neighbor who was originally from NY, and it drove her nuts that we'd hear 'tornado' and go out to look for it, instead of hiding.
Yankees....
I have one question for the guy who wrote this article
pointed out by Michelle Malkin: why the HELL didn't you prosecute these people?
Gee, maybe the Stupid Party is finally
getting the message. Although I have doubts they've got enough brains to know people really mean "Don't act like the Evil Party and keep growing government and ripping us off. We MEAN IT."
Let's see, great unhappiness for a few years now, lots of people telling them 'knock it off', and they just keep going. Then people telling them, flat-out and repeatedly, just what they think of border security and McCain sucking up to the Evil Party, and being ignored. And insulted. And now, "Oh my, we have a problem!"
Several weeks ago I got one of those "You have been a strong supporter for years(the hell I have), now we need more of your money" letters with a 'survey' the NRCC sends out. I left the money at $0, and sent it back with a letter telling them exactly why I wasn't sending them a damn penny. I doubt they paid attention; they were too busy pushing pork and sitting around saying "Of course they'll vote for us, they have to." Not taking note of the question that "If you're acting just like the Evil Party, why should we vote for you, you morons?"
Let's see, great unhappiness for a few years now, lots of people telling them 'knock it off', and they just keep going. Then people telling them, flat-out and repeatedly, just what they think of border security and McCain sucking up to the Evil Party, and being ignored. And insulted. And now, "Oh my, we have a problem!"
Several weeks ago I got one of those "You have been a strong supporter for years(the hell I have), now we need more of your money" letters with a 'survey' the NRCC sends out. I left the money at $0, and sent it back with a letter telling them exactly why I wasn't sending them a damn penny. I doubt they paid attention; they were too busy pushing pork and sitting around saying "Of course they'll vote for us, they have to." Not taking note of the question that "If you're acting just like the Evil Party, why should we vote for you, you morons?"
Tuesday, May 06, 2008
Word from the son
So far, so good. Apparently it's hatching season, as there are lots and lots of little(4-6") camel spiders all over the place. And he spotted a hedgehog the other day, which was unexpected.It seems the big spiders have a habit of seeking shade, and if they find your shade they try to stay in it. Which means they follow you. Which caused a couple of people to think "IT'S CHASING ME!" Hilarity and loud noises followed.
I told daughter about that, which led to this exchange:
Her: Our troops. Scared of spiders.
Me: Everybody has something they're spooked by.
Her: True.
Me: He said one guy shot one twice, and was yelling "It won't die!" because it was still twitching. So I said he should tell them these are zombie spiders.
Her: He could tell them they're nocturnal, too. Then you'd wind up with sleep-deprived nervous troops.
Me: Hmmm... Sleep-deprived nervous troops looking for zombie spiders. What could go wrong?
He should have leave soon, it'll be nice to see him.
How to relax after work
There’s a ‘big trash pickup’ one day each month. You’ve planned to move this stuff from the back yard to the curb a day or two before, decide to do it yesterday because it’s supposed to rain today & tomorrow, so it goes like this:
Get home, check on dog, change.
Start hauling limbs and stuff around.
Halfway through, notice there’s a couple of branches that’ve grown- a lot- and are too close to the lines, so…
Out comes ladder, loppers and saw.
Spend time waving in breeze in trees, cutting limbs and getting them to ground.
Climb down, haul the last of the old and the new stuff out front.
Find some more stuff that needs to go.
Look for dog. Did she go out? No, she’s snoozing under that bush.
Notice part of yard needs mowing, do that.
Decide some weedeating needs to be done before rain, drag the ‘eater and cord out.
Realize A: I’m hungry and B: it’s later than you thought.
Put everything away.
Make dinner.
Realize that plan to ride bicycle to library and auto parts store is out, use motorcycle.
Get all that done, go online and find that Stephen King is not only a so-so author, he’s an arrogant little pissant. Probably gets along very well with John Effin’ Kerry.
That leaves about an hour to work on a reloading problem, after which to hell with everything else, get cleaned up, get a drink and then go to bed. I STILL haven’t finished watching Hot Fuzz, the disc of which I bought a freakin’ month ago.
That was yesterday, this evening considerably slower since I got all that crap done. So I shall now proceed to load up some more of those plastic bullets for further testing.
Get home, check on dog, change.
Start hauling limbs and stuff around.
Halfway through, notice there’s a couple of branches that’ve grown- a lot- and are too close to the lines, so…
Out comes ladder, loppers and saw.
Spend time waving in breeze in trees, cutting limbs and getting them to ground.
Climb down, haul the last of the old and the new stuff out front.
Find some more stuff that needs to go.
Look for dog. Did she go out? No, she’s snoozing under that bush.
Notice part of yard needs mowing, do that.
Decide some weedeating needs to be done before rain, drag the ‘eater and cord out.
Realize A: I’m hungry and B: it’s later than you thought.
Put everything away.
Make dinner.
Realize that plan to ride bicycle to library and auto parts store is out, use motorcycle.
Get all that done, go online and find that Stephen King is not only a so-so author, he’s an arrogant little pissant. Probably gets along very well with John Effin’ Kerry.
That leaves about an hour to work on a reloading problem, after which to hell with everything else, get cleaned up, get a drink and then go to bed. I STILL haven’t finished watching Hot Fuzz, the disc of which I bought a freakin’ month ago.
That was yesterday, this evening considerably slower since I got all that crap done. So I shall now proceed to load up some more of those plastic bullets for further testing.
Monday, May 05, 2008
On the subject of the UN- again- the question is asked
How bad does the UN have to get?
I’ve argued before that, for many Lefties, intentions seem to matter more than outcomes. But how bad do the outcomes have to be before intentions are no longer an excuse? What has to happen before people face up to the real UN (or EU or IOC or whatever) instead of fantasising about some abstract one?
I’ve argued before that, for many Lefties, intentions seem to matter more than outcomes. But how bad do the outcomes have to be before intentions are no longer an excuse? What has to happen before people face up to the real UN (or EU or IOC or whatever) instead of fantasising about some abstract one?
I don't care if Obama claims to only know him 'casually',
his long-time association with this bastard, and his defenses of it, should tell you a lot. Insty points out this post with the photo."Guilty as sin, free as a bird, it's a great country" is one of the Ayers quotes in the top clipping. Miserable little bleep.
Sunday, May 04, 2008
A link I forgot to add back to the blogroll
after the, ahem, 'accident' a few months ago: Havaria Information Service, or as Tim Blair once noted, 'All the trouble in the world'.
Some thoughts following up on 'On Combat' Updated
Got this in a comment from Saladman:
I have a concern, though. It seems to me that the ethos of the policeman as warrior is in direct conflict with the ethos of the police as the public, exemplified in Robert Peel's principles of policing. (http://thelawdogfiles.blogspot.com/2008/04/police-are-public-and-public-are-police.html)
And the same for his idea of sheepdogs, sheep and wolves. I get what he was expressing, and there's a great deal of truth to it. (I'm not so sure there's a hard line between his sheep and sheepdogs when you start considering civilians who provide for their own defense.) But when I hear people talking in the real world now about being a sheepdog, as often as not there's an arrogance or an elitism present that I would not expect to find in someone truly and firmly in the sheepdog category. Specifically including some police officers, unfortunately.
Not sure what to do about it, just something I've been thinking about.
Thoughts well worth working on.
As to the first, he's got a different definition of 'warrior' in this context than people tend to use. I can't get to the book right now to look it up, it was something like 'someone willing to take risks to protect others'(found it, it's added at the end). Much different from what you see in magazines with articles like "XXX-City SWAT: Street Warriors!" and the attitude of some who like to kick doors at every opportunity and generally treat anyone not carrying a badge as either the enemy or subhuman. Or both. An officer can definitely hold the Peel's Principles and be considered a 'warrior' in that respect.
On the second: though he mostly mentions LE and military in the book, he does say in the intro "Or perhaps you have chosen to be a martial arts practitioner or an armed citizen, seeking to defend yourself or your love ones in their hour of need?" I think he does consider those citizens as sheepdogs, I do think that since he primarily wrote this book for LE and military, that's what he concentrates on.
And yeah, you're right: some people will take any possible method to consider themselves superior to everyone else. In some cases it's probably just a bit too much pride: a man should be proud of a job well done, but as various religions and wise men have pointed out over time, too much pride can be a bit of a problem. And you will run into some who'll claim a title they may not have the best of claims to: I've known a few LE officers who were far more of feral dog or borderline(on the wrong side) wolf than sheepdog, but if they'd read this book or heard the description at the time they'd have loudly claimed that description. Usually as a way of either defending themselves or pushing the line of "All I go through to protect you, how dare you not kiss my ass?" We've got the bad ones as well as the good.
Thinking about it, there's a definite case to be made for using 'shepherd' instead of 'warrior': the shepherd is/was often alone, day and night, watching and tending and protecting the flock. After all, what was David in the beginning? A shepherd with a sling. And you know what he did.
* found it, as follows:
Page 176, Chapter 5, Modern Paladins Bearing the Shield
I use the terms “warrior” and “warriorhood” throughout this book. When you think of a warrior you might think of a Zulu warrior, an Apache warrior, or some other historic model, and while there are many models for a warrior, I use it to mean those who are willing to sacrifice themselves to defend others, those who move toward the sound of the guns, and those who continue in the face of adversity to do what needs to be done.
The warrior alone advanced toward interpersonal aggression and he is the only sane, rational creature who has any chance of functioning and even thrivingin the toxic realm of combat. The degree to which he can understand, master and function in that realm is the degree to which he will survive and accomplish his mission.
There are some people who do not like the term warrior, but if you are in a war are you not a warrior? Do we have a war on crime? Is there a war on drugs? Are we now engaged in a war on terrorism? Are there people who wake up every morning determined to send you home to your family in a box?
If you are in a war then you are a warrior. On a battlefield, there are warrior and there are victims. Decide now which one you are.
I have a concern, though. It seems to me that the ethos of the policeman as warrior is in direct conflict with the ethos of the police as the public, exemplified in Robert Peel's principles of policing. (http://thelawdogfiles.blogspot.com/2008/04/police-are-public-and-public-are-police.html)
And the same for his idea of sheepdogs, sheep and wolves. I get what he was expressing, and there's a great deal of truth to it. (I'm not so sure there's a hard line between his sheep and sheepdogs when you start considering civilians who provide for their own defense.) But when I hear people talking in the real world now about being a sheepdog, as often as not there's an arrogance or an elitism present that I would not expect to find in someone truly and firmly in the sheepdog category. Specifically including some police officers, unfortunately.
Not sure what to do about it, just something I've been thinking about.
Thoughts well worth working on.
As to the first, he's got a different definition of 'warrior' in this context than people tend to use. I can't get to the book right now to look it up, it was something like 'someone willing to take risks to protect others'(found it, it's added at the end). Much different from what you see in magazines with articles like "XXX-City SWAT: Street Warriors!" and the attitude of some who like to kick doors at every opportunity and generally treat anyone not carrying a badge as either the enemy or subhuman. Or both. An officer can definitely hold the Peel's Principles and be considered a 'warrior' in that respect.
On the second: though he mostly mentions LE and military in the book, he does say in the intro "Or perhaps you have chosen to be a martial arts practitioner or an armed citizen, seeking to defend yourself or your love ones in their hour of need?" I think he does consider those citizens as sheepdogs, I do think that since he primarily wrote this book for LE and military, that's what he concentrates on.
And yeah, you're right: some people will take any possible method to consider themselves superior to everyone else. In some cases it's probably just a bit too much pride: a man should be proud of a job well done, but as various religions and wise men have pointed out over time, too much pride can be a bit of a problem. And you will run into some who'll claim a title they may not have the best of claims to: I've known a few LE officers who were far more of feral dog or borderline(on the wrong side) wolf than sheepdog, but if they'd read this book or heard the description at the time they'd have loudly claimed that description. Usually as a way of either defending themselves or pushing the line of "All I go through to protect you, how dare you not kiss my ass?" We've got the bad ones as well as the good.
Thinking about it, there's a definite case to be made for using 'shepherd' instead of 'warrior': the shepherd is/was often alone, day and night, watching and tending and protecting the flock. After all, what was David in the beginning? A shepherd with a sling. And you know what he did.
* found it, as follows:
Page 176, Chapter 5, Modern Paladins Bearing the Shield
I use the terms “warrior” and “warriorhood” throughout this book. When you think of a warrior you might think of a Zulu warrior, an Apache warrior, or some other historic model, and while there are many models for a warrior, I use it to mean those who are willing to sacrifice themselves to defend others, those who move toward the sound of the guns, and those who continue in the face of adversity to do what needs to be done.
The warrior alone advanced toward interpersonal aggression and he is the only sane, rational creature who has any chance of functioning and even thrivingin the toxic realm of combat. The degree to which he can understand, master and function in that realm is the degree to which he will survive and accomplish his mission.
There are some people who do not like the term warrior, but if you are in a war are you not a warrior? Do we have a war on crime? Is there a war on drugs? Are we now engaged in a war on terrorism? Are there people who wake up every morning determined to send you home to your family in a box?
If you are in a war then you are a warrior. On a battlefield, there are warrior and there are victims. Decide now which one you are.
Trees! Ladders! They're EVERYWHERE!!
Ahem. Sorry 'bout that.
Just got back from visiting my parents, and what was the big thing Dad needed help with? At tree that needed cutting. Up high. Oh joy.
No, nobody fell out, or performed a self-field-amputation. Just some fun time in a tree with a chainsaw. Got some of it done, more will be done next time I make it down.
And how was your weekend?
Just got back from visiting my parents, and what was the big thing Dad needed help with? At tree that needed cutting. Up high. Oh joy.
No, nobody fell out, or performed a self-field-amputation. Just some fun time in a tree with a chainsaw. Got some of it done, more will be done next time I make it down.
And how was your weekend?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)