Saturday, May 02, 2015
A Federal Police Force;
yeah, that's just what we need...
"Vote for the $15-per-hour minimum wage!
Waitaminnit, this is going to cost me HOW MUCH?!?"
"Vote for the $15-per-hour minimum wage!
Waitaminnit, this is going to cost me HOW MUCH?!?"
Amy Murphy is the Texas Tech Commissa- ah, Dean of Students,
and she has a real problem with that 'due process' thing. After all, how can you run a proper 'Men Are Always Guilty When Accused' kangaroo court when you have to worry about questions, and objections, and legal counsel?
Murphy told Texas Tech’s college paper that, as a part of the Student Code of Conduct, students at the university do not have the right to confront their accuser. More than that, they cannot have a representative ask questions of the accuser at all, and cross-examination is simply not allowed.
According to Murphy, this process is a “learning experience” that “will be conducted in the least adversarial way possible.”
Yeah, the accused will learn just how they can be screwed from an accusation. And have no recourse.
During Texas Tech hearings about alleged crimes, “students are not able to cross-examine witnesses, nor are the students’ advisers.”
“If cross-examination were to be allowed,” Murphy told the paper, “it would create a chilling effect for future possible reports.”
Translation: "How can we have people making bullshit sexual-assault reports if they know they'll actually face questioning? That they can't just accuse someone and get away with it?"
The official word from the Student Commissar:
“We already have the information,” she explained, “They (the students involved) don’t have to participate in the hearing.”
How many problems can you find in this idiotic statement?
Of course, she has the usual cheering section:
Jenn Davis, a freshman, said that if someone is accused of rape, they shouldn’t have the right to question their accuser: “I can’t imagine being a sexual assault victim, but if that were ever to unfortunately happen to me, I would not want people to ask me questions about it after I had already told my story. I’ve done some research on the topic and it can be traumatic to continue to relive the situation over and over again.”
Well, Miss Davis, guess what? You make a criminal charge against someone, they have the right to face their accuser. Whether you like it or not.
And as to the trauma, guess how traumatic is is to have your life trashed because someone decides days or weeks or months after the fact "It doesn't matter what actually happened, I now say I was raped!"
Such bullshit is amazing. And scary. Any student put through this crap should get a lawyer and sue their ass off. Eventually, the PC morons just might get the idea that, in the real world and with any kind of actual justice, accusation does NOT equal guilt.
Murphy told Texas Tech’s college paper that, as a part of the Student Code of Conduct, students at the university do not have the right to confront their accuser. More than that, they cannot have a representative ask questions of the accuser at all, and cross-examination is simply not allowed.
According to Murphy, this process is a “learning experience” that “will be conducted in the least adversarial way possible.”
Yeah, the accused will learn just how they can be screwed from an accusation. And have no recourse.
During Texas Tech hearings about alleged crimes, “students are not able to cross-examine witnesses, nor are the students’ advisers.”
“If cross-examination were to be allowed,” Murphy told the paper, “it would create a chilling effect for future possible reports.”
Translation: "How can we have people making bullshit sexual-assault reports if they know they'll actually face questioning? That they can't just accuse someone and get away with it?"
The official word from the Student Commissar:
“We already have the information,” she explained, “They (the students involved) don’t have to participate in the hearing.”
How many problems can you find in this idiotic statement?
Of course, she has the usual cheering section:
Jenn Davis, a freshman, said that if someone is accused of rape, they shouldn’t have the right to question their accuser: “I can’t imagine being a sexual assault victim, but if that were ever to unfortunately happen to me, I would not want people to ask me questions about it after I had already told my story. I’ve done some research on the topic and it can be traumatic to continue to relive the situation over and over again.”
Well, Miss Davis, guess what? You make a criminal charge against someone, they have the right to face their accuser. Whether you like it or not.
And as to the trauma, guess how traumatic is is to have your life trashed because someone decides days or weeks or months after the fact "It doesn't matter what actually happened, I now say I was raped!"
Such bullshit is amazing. And scary. Any student put through this crap should get a lawyer and sue their ass off. Eventually, the PC morons just might get the idea that, in the real world and with any kind of actual justice, accusation does NOT equal guilt.
And some at the IRS wonder why people actually hate them,
and want them gone.
But aggressive enforcement of these laws can ensnare small business owners whose only crime is dealing in cash. This video tells the story of Lyndon McLellan, a convenience store owner in rural North Carolina who had $107,702 seized by the IRS. The agency hasn't charged McLellan with any crime, but under controversial civil asset forfeiture rules the burden of proof is on him to prove he didn't violate the "structuring" laws. The video was made by the Institute for Justice, a libertarian public interest law firm that is representing McLellan.
Because you're thieves operating under color of law. Just like the cops who pull the same crap.
But aggressive enforcement of these laws can ensnare small business owners whose only crime is dealing in cash. This video tells the story of Lyndon McLellan, a convenience store owner in rural North Carolina who had $107,702 seized by the IRS. The agency hasn't charged McLellan with any crime, but under controversial civil asset forfeiture rules the burden of proof is on him to prove he didn't violate the "structuring" laws. The video was made by the Institute for Justice, a libertarian public interest law firm that is representing McLellan.
Because you're thieves operating under color of law. Just like the cops who pull the same crap.
Friday, May 01, 2015
One last thing I almost forgot: yes, that WOULD be a damn good idea,
wouldn't it?
It's a fundamental misunderstanding of the problem. Why do you think Apple and Google are doing this? It's because the public is demanding it. People like me: privacy advocates. A public does not want an out-of-control surveillance state. It is the public that is asking for this. Apple and Google didn't do this because they thought they would make less money. This is a private sector response to government overreach.
Then you make another statement that somehow these companies are not credible because they collect private data. Here's the difference: Apple and Google don't have coercive power. District attorneys do, the FBI does, the NSA does, and to me it's very simple to draw a privacy balance when it comes to law enforcement and privacy: just follow the damn Constitution.
Y'know, the Constitution? Something in your oath about upholding it, not trying to trash it at every opportunity, you bastards?
It's a fundamental misunderstanding of the problem. Why do you think Apple and Google are doing this? It's because the public is demanding it. People like me: privacy advocates. A public does not want an out-of-control surveillance state. It is the public that is asking for this. Apple and Google didn't do this because they thought they would make less money. This is a private sector response to government overreach.
Then you make another statement that somehow these companies are not credible because they collect private data. Here's the difference: Apple and Google don't have coercive power. District attorneys do, the FBI does, the NSA does, and to me it's very simple to draw a privacy balance when it comes to law enforcement and privacy: just follow the damn Constitution.
Y'know, the Constitution? Something in your oath about upholding it, not trying to trash it at every opportunity, you bastards?
Yes, it's that time.
And day. The project is cleaned, I'm done with work for the day; time for study
One of the reasons cops don't come across as 'Just a citizen doing the job'
to a lot of people:
Let's take a look at Maryland's Law Enforcement Officer Bill of Rights that Canterbury mentions, and contrast the rights and procedures cops demand for themselves versus their habits in dealing with us.
It's not a nice comparison. For instance
But for themselves, cops want the right to review evidence, especially in an age of omnipresent video cameras. In Los Angeles, cops are demanding the right to view videos of incidents before giving statements about them:
Maryland was one of the first states to enact a “bill of rights” for its police, and other states followed. In other jurisdictions, those protections are a result of collective bargaining and embedded in negotiated contracts.That's simply not true, unless Canterbury is using "the unique context of the law enforcement community" to mean "for people whose rights we actually respect and care about."
These laws and contracts do not protect the jobs of “bad cops” or officers unfit for duty. Nor do they afford police any greater rights than those possessed by other citizens; they simply reaffirm the existence of those rights in the unique context of the law enforcement community.
Let's take a look at Maryland's Law Enforcement Officer Bill of Rights that Canterbury mentions, and contrast the rights and procedures cops demand for themselves versus their habits in dealing with us.
It's not a nice comparison. For instance
But for themselves, cops want the right to review evidence, especially in an age of omnipresent video cameras. In Los Angeles, cops are demanding the right to view videos of incidents before giving statements about them:
The proposed policy would also allow officers to have a union representative with them when they review the video – and they can exclude the LAPD investigator looking into their actions during that process.Similarly, in Dallas, the police chief announced a new rule requiring officers to wait 72 hours before giving statements about use of force incidents so that they can review any videos or witness statements. That change just happened to follow an incident in which a video of a police officer shooting an unarmed man turned out to contradict the officer's immediate statement about the shooting.
The project has had its first few rounds
and nothing blew up. Always a comforting thing.
Only a few rounds today. I wanted to both make sure it worked, and get the scope roughed in. Both accomplished. There were a couple of times the bolt didn't lock back, but I'm not screwing with ANYTHING until it's had more rounds through it. Everything's new and a little wearing-in never hurt. Right now the bore's getting cleaned thoroughly, and next time I fire it should be on the 100 yard range.
Other reason didn't want to fire many: new barrel should be cleaned thoroughly after first use. DPMS says 'after every round for the first so many, then after each ten for the next so many', which is nice, but the range objects to people breaking out cleaning rods and solvent; therefore, just a few and cleaning it thoroughly now.
Only a few rounds today. I wanted to both make sure it worked, and get the scope roughed in. Both accomplished. There were a couple of times the bolt didn't lock back, but I'm not screwing with ANYTHING until it's had more rounds through it. Everything's new and a little wearing-in never hurt. Right now the bore's getting cleaned thoroughly, and next time I fire it should be on the 100 yard range.
Other reason didn't want to fire many: new barrel should be cleaned thoroughly after first use. DPMS says 'after every round for the first so many, then after each ten for the next so many', which is nice, but the range objects to people breaking out cleaning rods and solvent; therefore, just a few and cleaning it thoroughly now.
Some of the bullcrap from women in Ranger School
Myth: women are doing better than men, percentage-wise, in this class.
Fact: They’re not, even when you don’t account for the fact that some of the 8 survivors are being propped up. Remember that these women are the distillation of a pipeline of over 130 candidates, who got extra training no active-duty men can even apply for.
Myth: the Army has made no concessions to the women.
Fact: the concessions are many, ranging from the trivial (women’s hair is cut short, but not shaved like the men) to the serious (women are given extra chances and talked out of quitting; minor negative spot reports aren’t allowed to build up against them).
Etc. And an opinion on the Secretary of Defense:
Fact: You’re joking, right? Ash Carter makes Joe Biden look like the Great Gravitas Himself. He has no military experience whatsoever, and if he ever came out of the ivory tower, when he saw his own shadow we’d have six more weeks of winter. It’s not surprising he says stupid [stuff]. He didn’t stop there, either. He also hinted to the cadets that he intends to open all positions to women when the review is complete in 2016.
More on the leftists in Britain blowing up over some ads with bikinis:
Writer and co-founder of the Vagenda blog, Rhiannon Lucy Cosslett, had returned from Cuba to jarring reverse-culture shock in the “dark, putrid bowels of London’s underground system.”
It was only after visiting Cuba, a totalitarian country where there are no advertisements, that she realized “how much my field of vision is occupied without my consent by images and messages that want to sell me stuff (and, being a woman, it’s usually based on claims that it will make me look better).”
The emphasis here is mine. Cosslett is not simply deploying the language of sexual assault in a heavy-handed metaphor. She’s applying victimhood rhetoric to the larger feminist cause, depicting women as emotionally fragile and easily-traumatized, no matter how banal the offense.
Sounds like Cuba is her kind of place. Much like many of the clowns running universities here.
Simple: because this administration LIKES vote fraud. It counts on it.
On the New Democrat Hope for the White House:
The city eventually got sued by the ACLU and had to settle, but O’Malley defends the wholesale denigration of black civil rights to this day. Never mind what it did to your jury pool: now every single person of color in Baltimore knows the police will lie — and that's your jury pool for when you really need them for when you have, say, a felony murder case. But what it taught the police department was that they could go a step beyond the manufactured probable cause, and the drug-free zones and the humbles – the targeting of suspects through less-than-constitutional procedure. Now, the mass arrests made clear, we can lock up anybody, we don't have to figure out who's committing crimes, we don't have to investigate anything, we just gather all the bodies — everybody goes to jail. And yet people were scared enough of crime in those years that O’Malley had his supporters for this policy, council members and community leaders who thought, They’re all just thugs.
But he'll still vote for him. Because Democrat.
Speaking of, "The rich(except me, of course) should be paying more taxes!"
Still busy, and just about to go start it up again.
Fact: They’re not, even when you don’t account for the fact that some of the 8 survivors are being propped up. Remember that these women are the distillation of a pipeline of over 130 candidates, who got extra training no active-duty men can even apply for.
Myth: the Army has made no concessions to the women.
Fact: the concessions are many, ranging from the trivial (women’s hair is cut short, but not shaved like the men) to the serious (women are given extra chances and talked out of quitting; minor negative spot reports aren’t allowed to build up against them).
Etc. And an opinion on the Secretary of Defense:
Fact: You’re joking, right? Ash Carter makes Joe Biden look like the Great Gravitas Himself. He has no military experience whatsoever, and if he ever came out of the ivory tower, when he saw his own shadow we’d have six more weeks of winter. It’s not surprising he says stupid [stuff]. He didn’t stop there, either. He also hinted to the cadets that he intends to open all positions to women when the review is complete in 2016.
More on the leftists in Britain blowing up over some ads with bikinis:
Writer and co-founder of the Vagenda blog, Rhiannon Lucy Cosslett, had returned from Cuba to jarring reverse-culture shock in the “dark, putrid bowels of London’s underground system.”
It was only after visiting Cuba, a totalitarian country where there are no advertisements, that she realized “how much my field of vision is occupied without my consent by images and messages that want to sell me stuff (and, being a woman, it’s usually based on claims that it will make me look better).”
The emphasis here is mine. Cosslett is not simply deploying the language of sexual assault in a heavy-handed metaphor. She’s applying victimhood rhetoric to the larger feminist cause, depicting women as emotionally fragile and easily-traumatized, no matter how banal the offense.
Sounds like Cuba is her kind of place. Much like many of the clowns running universities here.
The cultural and political left is cocooning itself in a bubble of
ideological uniformity. This is intended to totally suppress dissent on
key issues by making it impossible for anyone to even express a
divergent opinion. The result is to entrench leftist dogma, in the hope
that a whole generation will graduate from college unable to engage in
thoughtcrime.
That’s the dilemma for anyone trying to overturn any aspect of this
dogma. How can you debate an issue and change anyone’s mind, when the
discussion has been rigged so that your viewpoint is dismissed as
illegitimate before anyone has even heard it? So the new orthodoxy seems
impenetrable and its hold on the young unbreakable.
Until they find themselves in a place where nobody cares about anything but getting the job done. That gets interesting.Simple: because this administration LIKES vote fraud. It counts on it.
On the New Democrat Hope for the White House:
The city eventually got sued by the ACLU and had to settle, but O’Malley defends the wholesale denigration of black civil rights to this day. Never mind what it did to your jury pool: now every single person of color in Baltimore knows the police will lie — and that's your jury pool for when you really need them for when you have, say, a felony murder case. But what it taught the police department was that they could go a step beyond the manufactured probable cause, and the drug-free zones and the humbles – the targeting of suspects through less-than-constitutional procedure. Now, the mass arrests made clear, we can lock up anybody, we don't have to figure out who's committing crimes, we don't have to investigate anything, we just gather all the bodies — everybody goes to jail. And yet people were scared enough of crime in those years that O’Malley had his supporters for this policy, council members and community leaders who thought, They’re all just thugs.
But he'll still vote for him. Because Democrat.
Speaking of, "The rich(except me, of course) should be paying more taxes!"
Still busy, and just about to go start it up again.
Thursday, April 30, 2015
Wednesday, April 29, 2015
And it's done
Here's how it went:
The last piece I needed, the crowfoot wrench, came in. So...
It was time(cue ominous tones).
I know, lots of people have done this with no problem; after lucking out on the barrel, and getting everything else together, I really didn't want to screw something up. So I hauled everything out to the post vise in the back yard(more space around it, better light for pictures, and this way I can pretend there's no bloody mess in the garage).
By the way, if you're thinking of building one I highly recommend the AR15 Builder site that's run by Brownell's; pictures, video, and instructions from experts on every step.
I was able to get the use of a DPMS Claw vise block for the upper;
machined nylon(it appears), you pull the pins, position the upper on it, insert the pins to lock them together, and clamp the block in the vise. Holds everything solidly and no chance of damaging the upper. The owner said that when it first came in an upper would not fit; it was oversize in a few places and it would've taken whacking with a mallet to get the uppper on. Which would be Bad. So he colored, tried, and did some scraping where needed(thus the red) and now it's a snug 'push it on' fit.
Upper installed and clamped.
That blue stuff on the receiver threads is Microlon assembly lube, I dabbed some on it and on the barrel nut threads.
Then slide the barrel into the upper, and install the barrel nut hand-tight.
The picture you can't see at this point is me with a torque wrench in hand thinking "Here goes." The instructions said a minimum of 35 footpounds, max of I can't remember(I'll look it back up later). I set the wrench for 35, and torqued it down. Which didn't feel that tight. At the Builder site they mentioned they generally got better accuracy closer to the minimum torque level, but I went ahead and reset the wrench to 40 and tightened the nut to that. Surprisingly easy to get this done(I know, silly statement, but I'm always happy when something I've worried about goes together that easily).
Now the gas block and tube. This is a setscrew block, when you have it in place there are two screws in the bottom you tighten against the barrel(two dimples on the barrel to match up). First you have to put the tube in the block, which is simple: slide the proper end into the block to the proper place. There's a hole through the block and one in the tube that align, then you drive in a roll pin to lock them together. Getting the pin started was a bitch, otherwise they went together no problem. Slide the block onto the barrel, guide the end of the tube into the upper, then put the block in position and tighten the screws.
Now for the handguard. This one comes with two curved wedges
that fit into the back end at the 5 and 7 o'clock positions,
bracing it against the barrel nut. I found the easiest way to be slide the handguard on until a little more than the wedge length from the nut, then slide the wedges in, then slide the handguard into place.
If you look closely at the barrel nut, you'll see two grooves running around it. When the guard is in place there are places for two bolts to slide through the guard from the right and through the grooves. Get the bolts snugged lightly in place, make sure the rail is level with the receiver rail, then tighten them up and it locks it in place.
And that's it, the upper is done*.
The upper and lower assembled
I don't have a scale so I can't give the weight; it's heavy compared to a AR-15, but nothing horrible. And it's nicely balanced. I'm looking forward to trying it out.
Among the things learned in this:
It's not that hard.
It's bleeping amazing how many brands and styles and whatever of parts there are for these.
I have a set of roll pin punches, but if I were going to do this very often I'd get a roll pin starter punch of suitable size; getting the damn thing started was a pain without one.
*One thing missing: there's a place for a forward assist, which I hadn't planned on putting in, so I need to get one of the plugs made to fill the hole.
The last piece I needed, the crowfoot wrench, came in. So...
It was time(cue ominous tones).
I know, lots of people have done this with no problem; after lucking out on the barrel, and getting everything else together, I really didn't want to screw something up. So I hauled everything out to the post vise in the back yard(more space around it, better light for pictures, and this way I can pretend there's no bloody mess in the garage).
By the way, if you're thinking of building one I highly recommend the AR15 Builder site that's run by Brownell's; pictures, video, and instructions from experts on every step.
I was able to get the use of a DPMS Claw vise block for the upper;
Upper installed and clamped.
Then slide the barrel into the upper, and install the barrel nut hand-tight.
The picture you can't see at this point is me with a torque wrench in hand thinking "Here goes." The instructions said a minimum of 35 footpounds, max of I can't remember(I'll look it back up later). I set the wrench for 35, and torqued it down. Which didn't feel that tight. At the Builder site they mentioned they generally got better accuracy closer to the minimum torque level, but I went ahead and reset the wrench to 40 and tightened the nut to that. Surprisingly easy to get this done(I know, silly statement, but I'm always happy when something I've worried about goes together that easily).
Now the gas block and tube. This is a setscrew block, when you have it in place there are two screws in the bottom you tighten against the barrel(two dimples on the barrel to match up). First you have to put the tube in the block, which is simple: slide the proper end into the block to the proper place. There's a hole through the block and one in the tube that align, then you drive in a roll pin to lock them together. Getting the pin started was a bitch, otherwise they went together no problem. Slide the block onto the barrel, guide the end of the tube into the upper, then put the block in position and tighten the screws.
Now for the handguard. This one comes with two curved wedges
that fit into the back end at the 5 and 7 o'clock positions,
If you look closely at the barrel nut, you'll see two grooves running around it. When the guard is in place there are places for two bolts to slide through the guard from the right and through the grooves. Get the bolts snugged lightly in place, make sure the rail is level with the receiver rail, then tighten them up and it locks it in place.
And that's it, the upper is done*.
The upper and lower assembled
I don't have a scale so I can't give the weight; it's heavy compared to a AR-15, but nothing horrible. And it's nicely balanced. I'm looking forward to trying it out.
Among the things learned in this:
It's not that hard.
It's bleeping amazing how many brands and styles and whatever of parts there are for these.
I have a set of roll pin punches, but if I were going to do this very often I'd get a roll pin starter punch of suitable size; getting the damn thing started was a pain without one.
*One thing missing: there's a place for a forward assist, which I hadn't planned on putting in, so I need to get one of the plugs made to fill the hole.
'Saving us' from the evil druggies,
no matter the cost.
Once more: we're supposed to trust ANY of these bastards why?
And take note of this from the Chronicle article:
The ruling by U.S. District Judge Lee Rosenthal, which was made public late Monday, heads off a potentially embarrassing civil trial that was supposed to start early next month at the federal courthouse.
Gee, I wonder how much that had to do with the judge saying "Screw you, citizen, stop bothering the feds" ?
But wait! There's more!
In the ensuing firefight, Patty’s truck was wrecked and riddled with bullet holes, and a plainclothes Houston police officer shot and wounded a plainclothes Harris County Sheriff’s Office deputy who was mistaken for a gangster.
I swear...
A Houston-based federal judge ruled that the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration does not owe the owner of a small Texas trucking company anything, not even the cost of repairing the bullet holes to a tractor-trailer truck that the agency used without his permission for a wild 2011 drug cartel sting that resulted in the execution-style murder of the truck’s driver, who was secretly working as a government informant.Isn't that just freaking wonderful? Take property, get it shot up(and someone killed, don't forget that), and tell the owner "Screw you, we're not responsible for anything." And a federal judge says "That's right."
Once more: we're supposed to trust ANY of these bastards why?
And take note of this from the Chronicle article:
The ruling by U.S. District Judge Lee Rosenthal, which was made public late Monday, heads off a potentially embarrassing civil trial that was supposed to start early next month at the federal courthouse.
Gee, I wonder how much that had to do with the judge saying "Screw you, citizen, stop bothering the feds" ?
But wait! There's more!
In the ensuing firefight, Patty’s truck was wrecked and riddled with bullet holes, and a plainclothes Houston police officer shot and wounded a plainclothes Harris County Sheriff’s Office deputy who was mistaken for a gangster.
I swear...
And final assembly begins
Yes, I know that those who've built AR rifles before have been laughing at my "I really don't want to screw this up" during this. I don't care. First one I've built(building) and that barrel I can't replace. Right now I can't really replace ANYTHING I screw up. So I'm going to have my shakes, deal with it.
Proving that Oklahoma has its share of dumb and/or corrupt legislators
of both parties, we have State Representative Kevin Calvey (R – Oklahoma City):
“The jurisdiction of a prosecution against a principal in the commission of a public offense, when such principal is a state elected official, state legislator, district court judicial officer, appellate judicial officer or an appointee of a state board or state commission at the time of the commission of the offense, is within the sole and exclusive prosecutorial authority of the Attorney General of Oklahoma. Such an action must be filed in the county of residence of the state officer.”
Plain language, 'Only the state can prosecute a politician, appointee, etc.'
Bullshit. Calvey, I don't care that you're concerned about the mess in Texas and Wisconsin; the way to handle that is to stomp hard on corrupt prosecutors and DAs, not make Politicians & Co. into a special class.l
If somebody tried to SWAT certain authors...
If only President Obama weren’t black, maybe he would realize that people don’t dislike him because he is black, they dislike him because he is a self-absorbed ass.
Yeah, O'Malley has a GREAT record to run on.
A: Can you think of reasons the Brady Campaign might be keeping lists of gun owners? I can.
B: You think they'd care about breaking state law?
“The jurisdiction of a prosecution against a principal in the commission of a public offense, when such principal is a state elected official, state legislator, district court judicial officer, appellate judicial officer or an appointee of a state board or state commission at the time of the commission of the offense, is within the sole and exclusive prosecutorial authority of the Attorney General of Oklahoma. Such an action must be filed in the county of residence of the state officer.”
Plain language, 'Only the state can prosecute a politician, appointee, etc.'
Bullshit. Calvey, I don't care that you're concerned about the mess in Texas and Wisconsin; the way to handle that is to stomp hard on corrupt prosecutors and DAs, not make Politicians & Co. into a special class.l
If somebody tried to SWAT certain authors...
If only President Obama weren’t black, maybe he would realize that people don’t dislike him because he is black, they dislike him because he is a self-absorbed ass.
Yeah, O'Malley has a GREAT record to run on.
A: Can you think of reasons the Brady Campaign might be keeping lists of gun owners? I can.
B: You think they'd care about breaking state law?
Tuesday, April 28, 2015
New gun tryout: Glock Model 26
As my first review for Grab A Gun, we have the Glock 26
'New to me' because while I've fired a Glock before(once), it was a full-size pistol in .45acp, and that consisted of five rounds. I'd not handled one of these. It's a compact 9x19mm, sometimes called the Baby Glock. By the factory specs it's 6.41" long, 4.17" high, and 1.18" wide, with a 3.42" barrel, and feeds from a ten-round magazine.
Being a Glock, there is no external safety: you keep your finger off the trigger and it doesn't make loud noises. Handle it just like a double-action revolver: aim, press the trigger, bang. They've got a reputation for reliability, which is really the single most important quality in a self-defense firearm.*
The one I fired has a magazine baseplate that gives a little more finger room, enough for a third finger. This thing IS compact in the vertical; if you've ever picked up, say, a Ruger LCP and thought "There's not room for all my fingers!", it's like that at first. The grip is wide so as to hold that short double-stack magazine, which makes it pretty hand-filling. That 1.18" width is the same as the full-size models; flat it's not.
Light it is; loaded it weighs just over 26 ounces. One pound, ten ounces for ten rounds of 9mm, not bad. White-dot front sight that stands out pretty well, no problem aiming.
How'd it work?
I put a box of CCI Blazer Brass ball ammo through it first. 25 rounds trying for accuracy(accurate as I get, anyway), the next 25 on a silhouette. First ten, fired offhand at ten yards
Second ten, same distance, from a rest
You may notice I actually shot better offhand. Yes, sometimes I am weird; no idea why these were all pulled to the left, unless my grip was doing something odd today, or I was putting my finger in a bad position. So I tried five more offhand, same distance.
Much tighter, still to the left. While I'm quite willing to say "This thing doesn't hit where you aim!" if I actually think the piece is at fault, this is pretty clearly on me.
The trigger was great; smooth and light, couldn't ask for better. And it was quite controllable; that short grip having that hand-filling size helped a lot. I like the 'dot on the front sight only' arrangement, makes it easier for me to focus on the front.
At that point I moved to the silhouette target at ten feet and started with pairs aimed at the center, then some Mozambique drills. Also fired some one-handed.
After finishing the ball I tried a box of Speer Gold Dot 124-grain+P. Definitely more oomph, and some of the spread from those was caused by the muzzle blast making the target dance like Remo Williams(you try keeping a tight group when the target's blowing around). I admit to being pleasantly surprised at how controllable the thing was with this ammo; you know you're firing powerful stuff, but no trouble keeping it aimed where you wanted it for fast second shots.
Some of these I ran fast, just looking at the front sight and pretty much ignoring the rear, which is where most of the spread came in. Taking a bit more time to line the sights up kept them nicely centered(see "I blame the stuff to the left on myself" above)
What do I think?
My first acquaintance with a Glock was early on in their becoming popular, a cop I knew showed me the one he'd just bought. I had two thoughts:
"Man, this thing is LIGHT!" followed by
"You know, this grip kind of sucks."
Those early models were blocky enough that they really weren't comfortable to me. That .45 I mentioned earlier? It put those five rounds in a nice, tight group, but wasn't very comfortable while doing it. This is much better to my hand, things have been rounded enough in the grip to make a big difference.
One more thing: yeah, this was only seventy rounds so not a long enough test for personal statements on reliability, but this is a rental gun at a very busy public range, it doesn't get daily, let alone 'every time fired' maintenance, but not the slightest problem. I didn't try to field-strip it(they frown on that), but the barrel that I could look at while the slide was locked back was pretty much dry. The insides weren't horrible, but it obviously had had a lot of rounds through it. I doubt anyone giving it a reasonable amount of care would ever have a problem with it.
It's a solid pistol. Small enough to not be a big problem for concealed carry, controllable, a much better trigger than I expected. I think it'd be a good one.
*Yes, above power and accuracy. Something with enough energy to stun a buffalo and accurate enough to pot a goblin through the heart at fifty yards is useless as a self-defense firearm if it can't be trusted to operate every time.
**If that's one you don't know, see here
'New to me' because while I've fired a Glock before(once), it was a full-size pistol in .45acp, and that consisted of five rounds. I'd not handled one of these. It's a compact 9x19mm, sometimes called the Baby Glock. By the factory specs it's 6.41" long, 4.17" high, and 1.18" wide, with a 3.42" barrel, and feeds from a ten-round magazine.
Being a Glock, there is no external safety: you keep your finger off the trigger and it doesn't make loud noises. Handle it just like a double-action revolver: aim, press the trigger, bang. They've got a reputation for reliability, which is really the single most important quality in a self-defense firearm.*
The one I fired has a magazine baseplate that gives a little more finger room, enough for a third finger. This thing IS compact in the vertical; if you've ever picked up, say, a Ruger LCP and thought "There's not room for all my fingers!", it's like that at first. The grip is wide so as to hold that short double-stack magazine, which makes it pretty hand-filling. That 1.18" width is the same as the full-size models; flat it's not.
Light it is; loaded it weighs just over 26 ounces. One pound, ten ounces for ten rounds of 9mm, not bad. White-dot front sight that stands out pretty well, no problem aiming.
How'd it work?
I put a box of CCI Blazer Brass ball ammo through it first. 25 rounds trying for accuracy(accurate as I get, anyway), the next 25 on a silhouette. First ten, fired offhand at ten yards
Second ten, same distance, from a rest
The trigger was great; smooth and light, couldn't ask for better. And it was quite controllable; that short grip having that hand-filling size helped a lot. I like the 'dot on the front sight only' arrangement, makes it easier for me to focus on the front.
At that point I moved to the silhouette target at ten feet and started with pairs aimed at the center, then some Mozambique drills. Also fired some one-handed.
After finishing the ball I tried a box of Speer Gold Dot 124-grain+P. Definitely more oomph, and some of the spread from those was caused by the muzzle blast making the target dance like Remo Williams(you try keeping a tight group when the target's blowing around). I admit to being pleasantly surprised at how controllable the thing was with this ammo; you know you're firing powerful stuff, but no trouble keeping it aimed where you wanted it for fast second shots.
Some of these I ran fast, just looking at the front sight and pretty much ignoring the rear, which is where most of the spread came in. Taking a bit more time to line the sights up kept them nicely centered(see "I blame the stuff to the left on myself" above)
What do I think?
My first acquaintance with a Glock was early on in their becoming popular, a cop I knew showed me the one he'd just bought. I had two thoughts:
"Man, this thing is LIGHT!" followed by
"You know, this grip kind of sucks."
Those early models were blocky enough that they really weren't comfortable to me. That .45 I mentioned earlier? It put those five rounds in a nice, tight group, but wasn't very comfortable while doing it. This is much better to my hand, things have been rounded enough in the grip to make a big difference.
One more thing: yeah, this was only seventy rounds so not a long enough test for personal statements on reliability, but this is a rental gun at a very busy public range, it doesn't get daily, let alone 'every time fired' maintenance, but not the slightest problem. I didn't try to field-strip it(they frown on that), but the barrel that I could look at while the slide was locked back was pretty much dry. The insides weren't horrible, but it obviously had had a lot of rounds through it. I doubt anyone giving it a reasonable amount of care would ever have a problem with it.
It's a solid pistol. Small enough to not be a big problem for concealed carry, controllable, a much better trigger than I expected. I think it'd be a good one.
*Yes, above power and accuracy. Something with enough energy to stun a buffalo and accurate enough to pot a goblin through the heart at fifty yards is useless as a self-defense firearm if it can't be trusted to operate every time.
**If that's one you don't know, see here
Got to try something new today
New to me, at least. Short time ago the people at Grab A Gun contacted me with an offer: "How'd you like to try out some of the guns we sell and write about them?"
First thought: "I's a BIGTIME gunblogger now!"(shut up, Erin, it was just for a moment)
Second thought: "Get to try some new guns and write about it? For free? Uh, yes please!"
So over the next while I'll be trying out some things and putting up what I think of them. Shot the first one this morning, I'll try to have it up later today.
Oh yeah: attention any federal types reading this: no, I'm not getting paid; they're covering the firearm rental and ammo, that's it. So go away.
First thought: "I's a BIGTIME gunblogger now!"(shut up, Erin, it was just for a moment)
Second thought: "Get to try some new guns and write about it? For free? Uh, yes please!"
So over the next while I'll be trying out some things and putting up what I think of them. Shot the first one this morning, I'll try to have it up later today.
Oh yeah: attention any federal types reading this: no, I'm not getting paid; they're covering the firearm rental and ammo, that's it. So go away.
Because nothing says "I protest a wrong!" like arson
The mayor of Baltimore is now saying she didn't say what she said. Really. Who're you gonna believe, the video or her?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)