If you've not gone by Steve's place, you have no idea what you're missing. Recipes, thoughts on virginity and sex and women and men and, under the heading 'How to Annoy a Muslim' you find this:
"Tell me I'm not wonderful. I'm sitting by the pool with my Koran, half in the bag, smoking tobacco, drinking beer, cooking swine, and listening to a Jew play the piano."
Go there. You'll regret it if you don't.
(C'mon, all the cool kids are doing it...)
Saturday, November 12, 2005
Friday, November 11, 2005
Range report: Enfield Trainer
You ready for this, Og?
I had a chance to take this rifle to the range where I could give it a proper try. Wednesday a front came in, so it was a chilly and windy morning. The wind was blowing downrange, however(mostly), so it wasn't too bad. And I needed to sight in my .308 in case I have a chance to go out after deer.
Here's the star of the day:
Along with all the other crap on my bench and the one next to it. Ammo used was Eley Sport and Federal Lightning. Started off at 50 yards with the Ross aperture sight flipped up, and at the lowest position:
Then with the open rear sight. You can remove the Ross from the mounting bracket by pulling one screw, so it's easy to get it out of the way. This is with the sight at the lowest setting(200 yards):
The #1 rear sight has a straight-sided notch; this one has the notch widened out to a 'V' because with the aperture all the way down(which put it just a touch high at 50) the notch would be in the way. It's a little bit in the way as is.
The Federal shot about the same size groups, but about 3/4" higher. So after sighting in the deer rifle, I set up some targets at 100 yards. No, I don't have those targets. Did I mention it was a bit windy? 'Nuff said. I was getting 3-4" groups with both brands, and considering the light, the wind and my eyes I thought that was pretty good. The sights aren't up to the Parker-Hale match sights on the Martini, but this rifle still shot quite well. I'll note that I shot at 100 with both rear sights, and the widened notch on the open sight didn't help matters, but it still did a quite respectable job for a 91 year old rifle. I'll also note that recoil, as expected is almost non-existent; with the weight of a rifle designed for .303 plus the extra weight in the barrel from the smaller bore, it shifts the piece- slightly- when you fire. The trigger is the standard two-stage military, kind of heavy on the break; I've got a Enfield trigger, so I think I'll do a bit of careful polishing and fitting and see how it comes out.
Especially after this, I'm damn glad that Ross sight caught my eye. I'm going to enjoy being the caretaker for this piece for a while.
As a side note, the .308 I was sighting in was the Savage Scout. After the last time I shot it I found that the scope mount was loose, so I needed to make sure it was shooting where it was supposed to. Damn good thing I checked; it was off. Shooting this rifle is a pleasure, it's got a wonderful trigger and the three-point sling setup is great for steadying your aim. If I am able to go out, and get a shot, all my excuses are gone.
I had a chance to take this rifle to the range where I could give it a proper try. Wednesday a front came in, so it was a chilly and windy morning. The wind was blowing downrange, however(mostly), so it wasn't too bad. And I needed to sight in my .308 in case I have a chance to go out after deer.
Here's the star of the day:
Along with all the other crap on my bench and the one next to it. Ammo used was Eley Sport and Federal Lightning. Started off at 50 yards with the Ross aperture sight flipped up, and at the lowest position:
Then with the open rear sight. You can remove the Ross from the mounting bracket by pulling one screw, so it's easy to get it out of the way. This is with the sight at the lowest setting(200 yards):
The #1 rear sight has a straight-sided notch; this one has the notch widened out to a 'V' because with the aperture all the way down(which put it just a touch high at 50) the notch would be in the way. It's a little bit in the way as is.
The Federal shot about the same size groups, but about 3/4" higher. So after sighting in the deer rifle, I set up some targets at 100 yards. No, I don't have those targets. Did I mention it was a bit windy? 'Nuff said. I was getting 3-4" groups with both brands, and considering the light, the wind and my eyes I thought that was pretty good. The sights aren't up to the Parker-Hale match sights on the Martini, but this rifle still shot quite well. I'll note that I shot at 100 with both rear sights, and the widened notch on the open sight didn't help matters, but it still did a quite respectable job for a 91 year old rifle. I'll also note that recoil, as expected is almost non-existent; with the weight of a rifle designed for .303 plus the extra weight in the barrel from the smaller bore, it shifts the piece- slightly- when you fire. The trigger is the standard two-stage military, kind of heavy on the break; I've got a Enfield trigger, so I think I'll do a bit of careful polishing and fitting and see how it comes out.
Especially after this, I'm damn glad that Ross sight caught my eye. I'm going to enjoy being the caretaker for this piece for a while.
As a side note, the .308 I was sighting in was the Savage Scout. After the last time I shot it I found that the scope mount was loose, so I needed to make sure it was shooting where it was supposed to. Damn good thing I checked; it was off. Shooting this rifle is a pleasure, it's got a wonderful trigger and the three-point sling setup is great for steadying your aim. If I am able to go out, and get a shot, all my excuses are gone.
Law enforcement problems in Merry Olde England, too
I'm still stewing about the lastest information about the OKC Bombing coverup, and today the Gun Guy linked to this and this about conditions between police and citazens(or is it still 'subjects of the Crown'?) in Britain. It seems like lots of bureaucrats and politicians(with and without badges) are doing all they can to make relations between the cops and commoners as bad as possible.
A couple of years ago at a gun show I heard a couple of guys talking about the new uniforms some agency was going to. They'd decided to go from dry-clean only wool to a cotton/poly that could be washed(good) in a dark color. What color? Dark green or blue or something? Hell no, it had to be black. One of the guys was recounting telling a local officer that that cost them his respect; his words were something like "there's enough idiots in black uniforms and masks running around without you adding to it". And I see his point; the uniform does affect attitude in all too many cases, on both sides. We've got enough trouble with the militarization of law enforcement without adding to it. How many cases have we heard of in the last decade or so where, on an anonymous tip or just bad information, the local tactical team blew into someone's house in a no-knock raid and killed some innocent? And then nothing happened to them because 'they followed proper procedure'? Do these idiots think that this crap doesn't affect how people deal with them? How about the pull someone over on a traffic stop and then pressure them for 'consent' to search? And making someone sit by the side of the road for however long while waiting for a drug dog becuase the cop is mad that the driver won't be intimidated into 'consenting'? That does NOT leave members of the public with any great willingness to cooperate with the next badge-holder that they come in contact with.
The crap in England and the frenzied attempts of the feds to cover up their screwups in the OKC Bombing case are related: "We need to be able to do whatever we want whenever we want and not be held accountable; how else can we do our jobs?" How many people reading about this crap, especially family & friends of the dead and wounded, have any great desire to trust the FBI and ATF?
And why should they?
A couple of years ago at a gun show I heard a couple of guys talking about the new uniforms some agency was going to. They'd decided to go from dry-clean only wool to a cotton/poly that could be washed(good) in a dark color. What color? Dark green or blue or something? Hell no, it had to be black. One of the guys was recounting telling a local officer that that cost them his respect; his words were something like "there's enough idiots in black uniforms and masks running around without you adding to it". And I see his point; the uniform does affect attitude in all too many cases, on both sides. We've got enough trouble with the militarization of law enforcement without adding to it. How many cases have we heard of in the last decade or so where, on an anonymous tip or just bad information, the local tactical team blew into someone's house in a no-knock raid and killed some innocent? And then nothing happened to them because 'they followed proper procedure'? Do these idiots think that this crap doesn't affect how people deal with them? How about the pull someone over on a traffic stop and then pressure them for 'consent' to search? And making someone sit by the side of the road for however long while waiting for a drug dog becuase the cop is mad that the driver won't be intimidated into 'consenting'? That does NOT leave members of the public with any great willingness to cooperate with the next badge-holder that they come in contact with.
The crap in England and the frenzied attempts of the feds to cover up their screwups in the OKC Bombing case are related: "We need to be able to do whatever we want whenever we want and not be held accountable; how else can we do our jobs?" How many people reading about this crap, especially family & friends of the dead and wounded, have any great desire to trust the FBI and ATF?
And why should they?
Carnival of Cordite #38
Up at Gullyborg. .223's, .45's, the mess in San Francisco and(to wash the bad taste of the last out of your mouth) this week saw the Birthday of the U.S. Marines and Veteran's Day.
Thursday, November 10, 2005
The French riots are 'overblown' according to some,
and reports of fewer cars being burned are supposedly one indication. However, the Captain points out "The rioters in these areas have begun targeting the French infrastructure instead of just parked cars." That could mean that they're not burning as many cars because a: the weenies who took it as a chance to just destroy things are tired or scared now and b: they're saving their stuff up now for serious targets. Not good.
And Little Green Footballs notes something for us to worry about here: the MEChA assholes are expressing their admiration for the riots and predict(more look forward to) the same here. Oh joy, the BPMs and MEChA weenies all wanting to riot together. I know about AZ, but you folks in CA have some ammunition laid by? You may need it.
And Little Green Footballs notes something for us to worry about here: the MEChA assholes are expressing their admiration for the riots and predict(more look forward to) the same here. Oh joy, the BPMs and MEChA weenies all wanting to riot together. I know about AZ, but you folks in CA have some ammunition laid by? You may need it.
Found it! Article on OKC Bombing Updated
KTOK has it on their site today here, and at the bottom is a link to the original article by the McCurtain County Gazette. I don't have much time right now, basically it notes that:
ATF had informants in a neo-Nazi compound.
One informant told ATF about the threat to bomb federal buildings in OKC.
The judge in an informants trial(and that's a messy damn story by itself) ordered the information not made available to lawyers in the McVeigh trial 'so it wouldn't affect the trial'.
More later. I'm already disgusted as well as mad about this.
Ok, with more time to read the article, it's summed up in the first two paragraphs:
Unearthed by a Salt Lake City, Utah, attorney, statements made by a Tulsa Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco and Firearms (BATF) agent in a federal courtroom confirm that a confidential informant did warn the agency of plans to bomb federal buildings before the attack in Oklahoma City that left 168 dead and hundreds more injured.
Moreover, a federal judge in Oklahoma ordered that the information be kept sealed because of its potential impact on the trial of bomber Timothy McVeigh, records show.
That covers it pretty well. Despite all the denials, despite all the crap, federal agents knew there were specific threats to federal buildings in OKC. They even saw the buildings: "Howe was debriefed and then taken to Oklahoma City to show Graham the areas she visited with the individuals who were part of a wide-ranging terrorist investigation that was receiving substantial funding and attention in Washington, D.C." And while some of those who testified in court or gave statements may not have known, others did. And they lied about it, under oath. They gave sworn statements in which they lied. They testified in court, and lied.
And then, just to make this really, truly wonderful, the judge in the case had this exchange with a federal prosecutor(Burrage is the judge):
Burrage: "With that McVeigh trial going on, I don't want anything getting out of here that would compromise that trial in any way."
Brewster: "What do you mean by 'compromise?' Do you mean snared with McVeigh's lawyers?"
Burrage: "Yes, or something that would come up - you know, we have got evidence that the ATF took a trip with somebody that said buildings were going to be blown up in Oklahoma City before it was blown up or something of that nature, and try to connect it to McVeigh in someway or something."
Brewster: "That would be up to their representation of the client in some regard, Your Honor. If you are asking me not to share any documentation from these files with those lawyers, then I won't."
So, let's see, federal agents and lawyers lying under oath, a judge witholding information from defense lawyers that had bearing on the case... and before all that, hundreds of people dead and injured in a bombing the feds had been warned about.
People, we're talking about perjury by agents and lawyers, we're talking about a judge breaking law. People should be prosecuted for this, lawyers should be disbarred for life for this. And you could probably make a good case for negligent homicide cases against those who knew of the warnings and didn't, from the sound of it, do squat about it.
Think any of that'll happen? Me neither. And crap like this is why I despair for my country.
ATF had informants in a neo-Nazi compound.
One informant told ATF about the threat to bomb federal buildings in OKC.
The judge in an informants trial(and that's a messy damn story by itself) ordered the information not made available to lawyers in the McVeigh trial 'so it wouldn't affect the trial'.
More later. I'm already disgusted as well as mad about this.
Ok, with more time to read the article, it's summed up in the first two paragraphs:
Unearthed by a Salt Lake City, Utah, attorney, statements made by a Tulsa Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco and Firearms (BATF) agent in a federal courtroom confirm that a confidential informant did warn the agency of plans to bomb federal buildings before the attack in Oklahoma City that left 168 dead and hundreds more injured.
Moreover, a federal judge in Oklahoma ordered that the information be kept sealed because of its potential impact on the trial of bomber Timothy McVeigh, records show.
That covers it pretty well. Despite all the denials, despite all the crap, federal agents knew there were specific threats to federal buildings in OKC. They even saw the buildings: "Howe was debriefed and then taken to Oklahoma City to show Graham the areas she visited with the individuals who were part of a wide-ranging terrorist investigation that was receiving substantial funding and attention in Washington, D.C." And while some of those who testified in court or gave statements may not have known, others did. And they lied about it, under oath. They gave sworn statements in which they lied. They testified in court, and lied.
And then, just to make this really, truly wonderful, the judge in the case had this exchange with a federal prosecutor(Burrage is the judge):
Burrage: "With that McVeigh trial going on, I don't want anything getting out of here that would compromise that trial in any way."
Brewster: "What do you mean by 'compromise?' Do you mean snared with McVeigh's lawyers?"
Burrage: "Yes, or something that would come up - you know, we have got evidence that the ATF took a trip with somebody that said buildings were going to be blown up in Oklahoma City before it was blown up or something of that nature, and try to connect it to McVeigh in someway or something."
Brewster: "That would be up to their representation of the client in some regard, Your Honor. If you are asking me not to share any documentation from these files with those lawyers, then I won't."
So, let's see, federal agents and lawyers lying under oath, a judge witholding information from defense lawyers that had bearing on the case... and before all that, hundreds of people dead and injured in a bombing the feds had been warned about.
People, we're talking about perjury by agents and lawyers, we're talking about a judge breaking law. People should be prosecuted for this, lawyers should be disbarred for life for this. And you could probably make a good case for negligent homicide cases against those who knew of the warnings and didn't, from the sound of it, do squat about it.
Think any of that'll happen? Me neither. And crap like this is why I despair for my country.
Wednesday, November 09, 2005
Ref the OKC Bombing
This is pissing me off on several levels, not least that I heard about this on the radio, but KTOK doesn't have anything on their web site about it. So I looked around and found this on the site for the McCurtain Daily Gazette, only the damn link is broken and the whole article won't come up. Full text of what does come up is:
Judge sealed testimony that ATF was warned before bombing
McCurtain Daily Gazette
By J.D. Cash
Unearthed by a Salt Lake City, Utah, attorney, statements made by a Tulsa Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco and Firearms (BATF) agent in a federal courtroom confirm that a confidential informant did warn the agency of plans to bomb...
and when you try to bring up the rest of the article you get a blank. And I can't find the damn thing anywhere else. If I can find anything from wherever it's been hidden, I'll add it in.
Update:
I still can't find the complete article, but KTOK just had an interview with the McCurtain Daily Gazette reporter who did the story. Basically, an BATF agent admitted in a trial that they'd been warned of bomb threats against federal buildings in OKC. They judge decided didn't want the information to get to the Timothy McVeigh's lawyers because it would show there was a wider conspiracy than the governments' case said, so he sealed the record. Think about that. My understanding is that it's unethical at least and, in at least some cases, illegal to keep information of this type from a defense attorney, yet the judge sealed the record of this testimony so the defense couldn't get hold of it.
I have to think that another consideration of this judge is that this would show how ATF and FBI fell down on the job, and he didn't want that coming out. May be wrong about this, but I tend to believe it.
Judge sealed testimony that ATF was warned before bombing
11/9/2005
McCurtain Daily Gazette
By J.D. Cash
Unearthed by a Salt Lake City, Utah, attorney, statements made by a Tulsa Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco and Firearms (BATF) agent in a federal courtroom confirm that a confidential informant did warn the agency of plans to bomb...
and when you try to bring up the rest of the article you get a blank. And I can't find the damn thing anywhere else. If I can find anything from wherever it's been hidden, I'll add it in.
Update:
I still can't find the complete article, but KTOK just had an interview with the McCurtain Daily Gazette reporter who did the story. Basically, an BATF agent admitted in a trial that they'd been warned of bomb threats against federal buildings in OKC. They judge decided didn't want the information to get to the Timothy McVeigh's lawyers because it would show there was a wider conspiracy than the governments' case said, so he sealed the record. Think about that. My understanding is that it's unethical at least and, in at least some cases, illegal to keep information of this type from a defense attorney, yet the judge sealed the record of this testimony so the defense couldn't get hold of it.
I have to think that another consideration of this judge is that this would show how ATF and FBI fell down on the job, and he didn't want that coming out. May be wrong about this, but I tend to believe it.
The Captain calls it Falluja-sur-Seine
and points out that it's now spread to over 300 towns and cities in France. This is not just some 'disaffected youth' acting out their frustrations, this is a serious, widespread action. Clive Davis thinks that calling it an Islamist uprising is incorrect; other people state that at center that's exactly what it is. In either case, it's a bloody mess that's getting worse with every night.
I think it's, depending on where it's coming from, either dishonest or hoping for the best to discount the islamist roots of this. And barring the French government finally saying "enough" and turning the army and security services loose... Not just France, but a lot of Europe is in real trouble with this.
I think it's, depending on where it's coming from, either dishonest or hoping for the best to discount the islamist roots of this. And barring the French government finally saying "enough" and turning the army and security services loose... Not just France, but a lot of Europe is in real trouble with this.
To borrow from Wizbang,
it's time for the 'anti-war' crowd to sit down and STFU
I could remember some bits and pieces of nuclear and chemical weapons and/or materials found in Iraq, but Jay Tea has this link to Summary of WMDs and WMD material found in Iraq after the invasion
Isn't it just wonderful how the 'news media' has ignored or downplayed every bit of this?
I could remember some bits and pieces of nuclear and chemical weapons and/or materials found in Iraq, but Jay Tea has this link to Summary of WMDs and WMD material found in Iraq after the invasion
Isn't it just wonderful how the 'news media' has ignored or downplayed every bit of this?
Tuesday, November 08, 2005
A new term of reference for ragheads!
Little Green Footballs pointed to this article by Mark Steyn which contains this marvelous passage: "They look like LA gangsters, not beturbaned prophet-monkeys."
This is a good week. I got my first "it's all Bushs' fault"(thank you Robert), and now a wonderful term for the islamist butt-monkeys among us. From now on, they shall be 'beturbaned prophet-monkeys', or BPM for short.
On the bad side, this close from Steyn:
"If the insurgents emerge emboldened, what next? In five years' time, there will be even more of them, and even less resolve on the part of the French state. That, in turn, is likely to accelerate the demographic decline. Europe could face a continent-wide version of the "white flight" phenomenon seen in crime-ridden American cities during the 1970s, as Danes and Dutch scram to America, Australia or anywhere else that will have them."
Oh, lots of places will have them. Far better would be for the people of these and other countries a: tell their governments to get off the multi-culti bs and DO SOMETHING, b: add a 2nd Amendment to their constitutions and c: make sure it's in law that self-defense, including lethal force when necessary, is recognized as a basic human right no matter what the 'elites' think of it. You know, the 'elites'? The ones with lots of money and condescending attitudes toward the peasants, and armed security guards all 'round? Screw 'em- metaphorically, of course, God knows what diseases besides idiocy some of them carry.
Speaking of self-defense and muslim corsairs, I've been thinking about the 'what weapons on your boat' question. It partly depends on what you have room to hide; after all, doesn't do any good to have a legal BAR or something if the Coast Guard boards you on a drug search and confiscates it because the captain doesn't think your paperwork is good enough. So...
If you have the room, some type of machinegun. Not a sub-gun, the real thing. Mention was made of an M2 Browning, but I think a .30 Browning would work quite well instead, and be easier to move. If there's a small pirate craft that can withstand mixed ball, incindiary and AP they should sell the design to the Navy. I'd say nay on a Barrett; long-range precision shooting ain't gonna work on a boat. Or one of the other good GPMG's should do.
Shotgun. Definately a shotgun. Mixed load of buckshot and slugs, probably leaning toward buck. One of the Mossberg or Remington or Winchester stainless jobs would do nicely. 12 guage of course, and if someone else in the crew has trouble with a 12 go with a 16 or 20. Yeah, 16 guage ammo would be hard to find many places, but restock isn't really going to be a problem here.
Handguns. Plural. What you're best with, and practice reloads under non-ideal conditions. Ammo that'll punch through light armor and damage boats. Lots of ammo.
And, if you have the space/money/connection, a few grenades would be rather nice. Just the thing to toss into the pirates' craft as they close, don't you know?
And, oh hell, if you're going all the way, a good compound bow and some arrows with either explosive or incindiary heads, or something suitable taped to the shaft up front. Again, long-range accuracy isn't a factor hear; blowing a hole/starting a fire in the other boat is. Just the thing for toasting BPMs.
Opinions?
(no, I don't care how cool it looks, parrots and cutlasses are a last resort. You really want to clean up after a seasick bird?)
This is a good week. I got my first "it's all Bushs' fault"(thank you Robert), and now a wonderful term for the islamist butt-monkeys among us. From now on, they shall be 'beturbaned prophet-monkeys', or BPM for short.
On the bad side, this close from Steyn:
"If the insurgents emerge emboldened, what next? In five years' time, there will be even more of them, and even less resolve on the part of the French state. That, in turn, is likely to accelerate the demographic decline. Europe could face a continent-wide version of the "white flight" phenomenon seen in crime-ridden American cities during the 1970s, as Danes and Dutch scram to America, Australia or anywhere else that will have them."
Oh, lots of places will have them. Far better would be for the people of these and other countries a: tell their governments to get off the multi-culti bs and DO SOMETHING, b: add a 2nd Amendment to their constitutions and c: make sure it's in law that self-defense, including lethal force when necessary, is recognized as a basic human right no matter what the 'elites' think of it. You know, the 'elites'? The ones with lots of money and condescending attitudes toward the peasants, and armed security guards all 'round? Screw 'em- metaphorically, of course, God knows what diseases besides idiocy some of them carry.
Speaking of self-defense and muslim corsairs, I've been thinking about the 'what weapons on your boat' question. It partly depends on what you have room to hide; after all, doesn't do any good to have a legal BAR or something if the Coast Guard boards you on a drug search and confiscates it because the captain doesn't think your paperwork is good enough. So...
If you have the room, some type of machinegun. Not a sub-gun, the real thing. Mention was made of an M2 Browning, but I think a .30 Browning would work quite well instead, and be easier to move. If there's a small pirate craft that can withstand mixed ball, incindiary and AP they should sell the design to the Navy. I'd say nay on a Barrett; long-range precision shooting ain't gonna work on a boat. Or one of the other good GPMG's should do.
Shotgun. Definately a shotgun. Mixed load of buckshot and slugs, probably leaning toward buck. One of the Mossberg or Remington or Winchester stainless jobs would do nicely. 12 guage of course, and if someone else in the crew has trouble with a 12 go with a 16 or 20. Yeah, 16 guage ammo would be hard to find many places, but restock isn't really going to be a problem here.
Handguns. Plural. What you're best with, and practice reloads under non-ideal conditions. Ammo that'll punch through light armor and damage boats. Lots of ammo.
And, if you have the space/money/connection, a few grenades would be rather nice. Just the thing to toss into the pirates' craft as they close, don't you know?
And, oh hell, if you're going all the way, a good compound bow and some arrows with either explosive or incindiary heads, or something suitable taped to the shaft up front. Again, long-range accuracy isn't a factor hear; blowing a hole/starting a fire in the other boat is. Just the thing for toasting BPMs.
Opinions?
(no, I don't care how cool it looks, parrots and cutlasses are a last resort. You really want to clean up after a seasick bird?)
Ref the Trentadue case
I couldn't find anything more recent than this at World Net Daily. Yeah, I know, but it seems to mesh with what I'd heard on the radio about this. I found this, too; it's a couple of years old, but does summarize a good bit of what's turned up, including harassment of witnesses.
I keep coming back to why this isn't more of a story. You've got someone almost certainly murdered while in federal custody; you've got evidence destroyed; you've got a medical examiner harassed into testifying how the authorities in charge wanted him to; you have a quite possible connection to what was at that time the worst terrorist attack on U.S. soil; and you have evidence that various federal agents/officials may well have known an attack was going to take place and have covered up and lied about it since. All the kinds of things screenwriters go to rediculous lengths to put into a script, all happening in real life. And nobody wants to cover it or talk about it, other than some blogs and some OK news agencies.
I probably shouldn't be surprised. When the 're-enactment' of the last day of the Branch Davidian mess at Waco was done, they did it at a different time of day, different weather conditions, different ammo, etc., and the major media didn't mention that that I ever heard. Not to mention the other things that, if ever, were mentioned once and then forgotten.
Of course, lately they're real busy talking about the mess in France in the most neutral way possible with little or no mention of the fact that it's primarily Moslems burning things, breaking things, shooting at police and setting people on fire. Mustn't say anything offensive to the little bastards, you know.
I keep coming back to why this isn't more of a story. You've got someone almost certainly murdered while in federal custody; you've got evidence destroyed; you've got a medical examiner harassed into testifying how the authorities in charge wanted him to; you have a quite possible connection to what was at that time the worst terrorist attack on U.S. soil; and you have evidence that various federal agents/officials may well have known an attack was going to take place and have covered up and lied about it since. All the kinds of things screenwriters go to rediculous lengths to put into a script, all happening in real life. And nobody wants to cover it or talk about it, other than some blogs and some OK news agencies.
I probably shouldn't be surprised. When the 're-enactment' of the last day of the Branch Davidian mess at Waco was done, they did it at a different time of day, different weather conditions, different ammo, etc., and the major media didn't mention that that I ever heard. Not to mention the other things that, if ever, were mentioned once and then forgotten.
Of course, lately they're real busy talking about the mess in France in the most neutral way possible with little or no mention of the fact that it's primarily Moslems burning things, breaking things, shooting at police and setting people on fire. Mustn't say anything offensive to the little bastards, you know.
General roundup
Been busy and, being lazy, haven't anything wonderfully interesting to write about. But, assuming all three of you haven't already seen this stuff, here's some things to check out:
Ace of Spades has a bit on the New York Times telling the family and girlfriend of the late Corporal Starr to basically screw themselves. Aren't they just a wonderful buch of people at the worn-out whore--excuse me, Grey Lady? Best paper around, they insist so themselves.
He also has this on the wonderful tolerance of the left in academia for speech they don't like. Which means if you don't agree with them they'll cry and stamp their feet and try to ruin your life. After all, they're better than everyone else, and you know it, you dirty right-wing fascists! And don't confuse things with the actual fascists being socialists, you're just trying to twist things!
And this covers a variety of stuff, CIA leaks and CIA working against this administration and- oh hell, just check it out.
Captain's Quarter's has a roundup of the mess in France, and the terrorist arrests in Australia and the possible links between them. Just start at the top. By the way, a state of emergency and curfew(?!?) was declared. After twelve nights of this? Where the hell was this declaration the first night?
I need some powder and .30 cal bullets. Not news, just reminding myself.
Smallest Minority has a lot of stuff recently. It's another start at the top and work down, beginning with(you ready for this?) DU with a guns forum. No, I'm not looking there, I haven't eaten yet. I won't look later, because I will have eaten recently; there's only so much my fagile psyche can take.
There was a link somewhere to some good info on the French mess- no, the current one-, and if I can find it I'll add it in.
There's been some new stuff on the Trentadue case recently, but it's been hard to find stuff to link to. A couple of weeks ago KTOK said that the judge had finally been given(I'm tempted to say 'allowed to read') the unredacted documents to study, but by the time I got home that evening I couldn't find anything on their site. I remain amazed that the national media seems to be pretty much ignoring this case, and I'm still wondering why? I'm not big on conspiracy theories; it could well be that, for some reason, it just doesn't fit their collective template of 'what people should hear'. In any case, I'll keep looking for the new stuff.
Ace of Spades has a bit on the New York Times telling the family and girlfriend of the late Corporal Starr to basically screw themselves. Aren't they just a wonderful buch of people at the worn-out whore--excuse me, Grey Lady? Best paper around, they insist so themselves.
He also has this on the wonderful tolerance of the left in academia for speech they don't like. Which means if you don't agree with them they'll cry and stamp their feet and try to ruin your life. After all, they're better than everyone else, and you know it, you dirty right-wing fascists! And don't confuse things with the actual fascists being socialists, you're just trying to twist things!
And this covers a variety of stuff, CIA leaks and CIA working against this administration and- oh hell, just check it out.
Captain's Quarter's has a roundup of the mess in France, and the terrorist arrests in Australia and the possible links between them. Just start at the top. By the way, a state of emergency and curfew(?!?) was declared. After twelve nights of this? Where the hell was this declaration the first night?
I need some powder and .30 cal bullets. Not news, just reminding myself.
Smallest Minority has a lot of stuff recently. It's another start at the top and work down, beginning with(you ready for this?) DU with a guns forum. No, I'm not looking there, I haven't eaten yet. I won't look later, because I will have eaten recently; there's only so much my fagile psyche can take.
There was a link somewhere to some good info on the French mess- no, the current one-, and if I can find it I'll add it in.
There's been some new stuff on the Trentadue case recently, but it's been hard to find stuff to link to. A couple of weeks ago KTOK said that the judge had finally been given(I'm tempted to say 'allowed to read') the unredacted documents to study, but by the time I got home that evening I couldn't find anything on their site. I remain amazed that the national media seems to be pretty much ignoring this case, and I'm still wondering why? I'm not big on conspiracy theories; it could well be that, for some reason, it just doesn't fit their collective template of 'what people should hear'. In any case, I'll keep looking for the new stuff.
Sunday, November 06, 2005
'Category 7'; oh yeah, no bias here...
Year or so ago there was a disaster movie about weather going to hell. It was bad enough I forgot the name, and I'm not going to waste time looking it up. Well, the next installment has its' first half on tonight, called Category 7: The End Of The World. On, where else?, See-BS.
Huge and extremely powerful storms, all over the world. Global warming causing part of it but 'something else' making it spin up to the extremes. Put-upon FEMA director fighting the government. Put-upon scientist whose theory seems to be working out, but can't get funding from the eeeevil government(his current grant is from Greenpeace). Wicked presidential chief of staff who's mean, nasty, and loves the energy industry. Wicked evangelists using disaster to call for money. Add in a rain of poison frogs and a plague of flies and a member of the evangelists staff talking about bringing more things about(plagues of Egypt, anyone?). Oh, and tornados in Egypt destroying the Great Pyramid.
I will eat a large bite of my favorite hat if this doesn't turn out to be the evil bible-thumpers behind the mysterious something making the weather worse.
UPDATE! My hat is safe, the prediction has just been proven true.
Oh, and an SR-71 being used as a weather-chasing plane. Yeah, real likely.
Ok, this is, if anything, a bigger piece of crap than the one before, with bias showing through every seam. Add in a lot(a LOT) of jerky, stop-action photography that's supposed to add to the drama but just makes for irritation, and you have a tv event that should be missed at all costs. If I were into self-abuse I'd go to check out the Kos kids and DUmmies later; I'm sure they're wetting their pants over the way this piece of crap 'speaks truth to power' and so forth. Understand, I like disaster movies, but when the movie is primarily a propaganda piece, and not even believable, with every evil-government and etc. you can think of thrown in, forget it.
Ok, they just had a Cat 5 hurricane pop up out of nowhere, with some news weenie in the winds playing Dan Rather and saying "It's a definate category 5! Winds are gusting to 150 miles per hour! If there's a hell on earth, this is it!!" I can't take anymore, the tv's going off.
Huge and extremely powerful storms, all over the world. Global warming causing part of it but 'something else' making it spin up to the extremes. Put-upon FEMA director fighting the government. Put-upon scientist whose theory seems to be working out, but can't get funding from the eeeevil government(his current grant is from Greenpeace). Wicked presidential chief of staff who's mean, nasty, and loves the energy industry. Wicked evangelists using disaster to call for money. Add in a rain of poison frogs and a plague of flies and a member of the evangelists staff talking about bringing more things about(plagues of Egypt, anyone?). Oh, and tornados in Egypt destroying the Great Pyramid.
I will eat a large bite of my favorite hat if this doesn't turn out to be the evil bible-thumpers behind the mysterious something making the weather worse.
UPDATE! My hat is safe, the prediction has just been proven true.
Oh, and an SR-71 being used as a weather-chasing plane. Yeah, real likely.
Ok, this is, if anything, a bigger piece of crap than the one before, with bias showing through every seam. Add in a lot(a LOT) of jerky, stop-action photography that's supposed to add to the drama but just makes for irritation, and you have a tv event that should be missed at all costs. If I were into self-abuse I'd go to check out the Kos kids and DUmmies later; I'm sure they're wetting their pants over the way this piece of crap 'speaks truth to power' and so forth. Understand, I like disaster movies, but when the movie is primarily a propaganda piece, and not even believable, with every evil-government and etc. you can think of thrown in, forget it.
Ok, they just had a Cat 5 hurricane pop up out of nowhere, with some news weenie in the winds playing Dan Rather and saying "It's a definate category 5! Winds are gusting to 150 miles per hour! If there's a hell on earth, this is it!!" I can't take anymore, the tv's going off.
Saturday, November 05, 2005
Pirates
Real ones. No, I'm not kidding.
I've been reading about this for years. It's been worse in the southwest Asian waters where piracy is a looong tradition, but it's never actually gone away anywhere, including the Caribbean. What brought it back to mind was a post at Publicola on an incident off the coast of Somalia, pirates attacking and trying to board a cruise ship(Muslim corsairs strike again!). That made me look around, and I found this at Hell in a Handbasket.
Which, in particular, makes me wonder what the rules are on cruise ships. I know some have shotguns for skeet shooting, are the crew told/allowed to use them to repel boarders? Birdshot wouldn't be that good, but if you had a case of 00 buck on board, pirates and inflatable boats like those in this incident would be vulnerable. 'Course, the lawyers and weenies in a cruise company would probably have fits at the idea(why wouldn't the idea of having several hundred people with no defense except running bother them?), and some countries would have cows at the idea of a non-naval ship with arms for self-defense.
The latter has been a problem for a lot of people. I think it was last year a guy leaving Singapore(I think) was chased down and boarded by police because a crewman the owner had fired told the police he had guns on board. Turned out to be a shotgun and handgun(again, I think) specifically for pirates. That's a wonderful thought; he's leaving, almost out of their territorial waters, and they chased him down over this. Jeez, don't you just love it? Being Singapore, if the ship was looted and burned the pirates- if caught- would probably have been hanged or something, but that wouldn't have done the crew any good. A lot of countries get real snippy at the thought of someone having guns of any kind on a ship in their waters, including small private boats. They won't protect you if someone's coming over the rail in the middle of the night, but they'll damn sure jail and/or fine you to death for being armed.
Over time I've seen several reports of people repelling boarders with shotguns and/or rifles, and in some of them I remember they waited until they were home to talk about it; being worried about being jailed by the local authorities(when you can find them in some cases) will cause you to do that. The two cases I remember best, one woke up in the night to find them coming into the hold(he grabbed a Mini-14 and opened up) and in the other the ship was attacked in daylight; while one guy handled the boat the other used a shotgun and 00 buck to take care of business.
I've never had a chance to take an ocean trip. On a cruise ship I'd think the risks from run-of-the-mill pirates would be less, but nowadays the chance of terrorists trying to grab and/or sink the ship is greater; on a small ship(no, I can't remember the difference between a ship and a boat other than size) in many parts of the world pirates would be a real concern. In the case of a boat of my own, I'd damn well have at least a shotgun and handgun with a sufficient amount of ammo, and good places to hide them from customs inspectors, coast guard, etc. Damned if I'd trust my and other people's lives to the hope that if I call for help the cavalry will arrive in time.
Which does bring up a question: you're a member of crew or passenger on a ship sailing through an area where pirates(or just call them theiving assholes on water) could be a concern; what weapons would you take? In addition to the shotgun and handgun, I'd also like a semi-auto rifle, preferably something with a large magazine. I have little experience with automatics, and the paperwork for getting one is a pain and some places that would choose to ignore other things would break out in spots and handcuffs if you had a select-fire weapon on board. Since you'd be thinking of damaging their boat as well as the pirates, for the shotgun 00 buck and slugs in plenty. For the handgun, probably heavy hollowpoints like the Federal 230-grain Hydra-Shoks in .45; good stopping power on people and good penetration on their vessel. For the rifle? I'd lean toward something .30-caliber, this being a place where an SKS might be good. Reliable, plenty accurate for the work, ammo sufficiently powerful for both boat and people, and if it was damaged or lost overboard you wouldn't have the same level of screaming and upset as if you lost a $1000+ AR15 or something. What do you think?
(Yes, I know the U.N. has forbidden piracy and other such anti-social acts. I don't think I trust the bad guys to obey the U.N. Hell, nobody obeys the U.N. Except us, in too many cases where we should tell them to kiss our ass. But that's another post)
Update 11/9: Les Jones had a piece here that included some piracy information, including a link to The High Road that has the story of the sailing ships with the shotgun, here. Thank you Les!
And speaking of .50 Brownings and pirates
I've been reading about this for years. It's been worse in the southwest Asian waters where piracy is a looong tradition, but it's never actually gone away anywhere, including the Caribbean. What brought it back to mind was a post at Publicola on an incident off the coast of Somalia, pirates attacking and trying to board a cruise ship(Muslim corsairs strike again!). That made me look around, and I found this at Hell in a Handbasket.
Which, in particular, makes me wonder what the rules are on cruise ships. I know some have shotguns for skeet shooting, are the crew told/allowed to use them to repel boarders? Birdshot wouldn't be that good, but if you had a case of 00 buck on board, pirates and inflatable boats like those in this incident would be vulnerable. 'Course, the lawyers and weenies in a cruise company would probably have fits at the idea(why wouldn't the idea of having several hundred people with no defense except running bother them?), and some countries would have cows at the idea of a non-naval ship with arms for self-defense.
The latter has been a problem for a lot of people. I think it was last year a guy leaving Singapore(I think) was chased down and boarded by police because a crewman the owner had fired told the police he had guns on board. Turned out to be a shotgun and handgun(again, I think) specifically for pirates. That's a wonderful thought; he's leaving, almost out of their territorial waters, and they chased him down over this. Jeez, don't you just love it? Being Singapore, if the ship was looted and burned the pirates- if caught- would probably have been hanged or something, but that wouldn't have done the crew any good. A lot of countries get real snippy at the thought of someone having guns of any kind on a ship in their waters, including small private boats. They won't protect you if someone's coming over the rail in the middle of the night, but they'll damn sure jail and/or fine you to death for being armed.
Over time I've seen several reports of people repelling boarders with shotguns and/or rifles, and in some of them I remember they waited until they were home to talk about it; being worried about being jailed by the local authorities(when you can find them in some cases) will cause you to do that. The two cases I remember best, one woke up in the night to find them coming into the hold(he grabbed a Mini-14 and opened up) and in the other the ship was attacked in daylight; while one guy handled the boat the other used a shotgun and 00 buck to take care of business.
I've never had a chance to take an ocean trip. On a cruise ship I'd think the risks from run-of-the-mill pirates would be less, but nowadays the chance of terrorists trying to grab and/or sink the ship is greater; on a small ship(no, I can't remember the difference between a ship and a boat other than size) in many parts of the world pirates would be a real concern. In the case of a boat of my own, I'd damn well have at least a shotgun and handgun with a sufficient amount of ammo, and good places to hide them from customs inspectors, coast guard, etc. Damned if I'd trust my and other people's lives to the hope that if I call for help the cavalry will arrive in time.
Which does bring up a question: you're a member of crew or passenger on a ship sailing through an area where pirates(or just call them theiving assholes on water) could be a concern; what weapons would you take? In addition to the shotgun and handgun, I'd also like a semi-auto rifle, preferably something with a large magazine. I have little experience with automatics, and the paperwork for getting one is a pain and some places that would choose to ignore other things would break out in spots and handcuffs if you had a select-fire weapon on board. Since you'd be thinking of damaging their boat as well as the pirates, for the shotgun 00 buck and slugs in plenty. For the handgun, probably heavy hollowpoints like the Federal 230-grain Hydra-Shoks in .45; good stopping power on people and good penetration on their vessel. For the rifle? I'd lean toward something .30-caliber, this being a place where an SKS might be good. Reliable, plenty accurate for the work, ammo sufficiently powerful for both boat and people, and if it was damaged or lost overboard you wouldn't have the same level of screaming and upset as if you lost a $1000+ AR15 or something. What do you think?
(Yes, I know the U.N. has forbidden piracy and other such anti-social acts. I don't think I trust the bad guys to obey the U.N. Hell, nobody obeys the U.N. Except us, in too many cases where we should tell them to kiss our ass. But that's another post)
Update 11/9: Les Jones had a piece here that included some piracy information, including a link to The High Road that has the story of the sailing ships with the shotgun, here. Thank you Les!
And speaking of .50 Brownings and pirates
Friday, November 04, 2005
Paris(while it's still there)
Ok, it probably won't be that bad, but it's pretty damn bad. I've been looking at different places and different accounts, first- and second-hand. So far, this seems to be the worst:
"A handicapped woman was doused with petrol and set on fire by youths during another night of rioting in Paris. The 56-year-old suffered third degree burns to 20% of her body in the attack."
I've had second and third-degree burns; they hurt like a sonofabitch, and mine were over nowhere near 20%. And any burns over that large an area can kill you. But let's ignore that for a moment, and try to figure this: what kind of asshole does it take to do this?
And this is one incident of many. Instapundit and Michelle have a lot of links on this mess, and it's pretty bad. It looks like the incident of the two kids being electrocuted was the excuse these bastards needed to start this; they've been building up to it for a long time. For the last several years there've been articles about the mess in these parts of French cities; gangs ruling, police afraid to go in except in groups with automatic weapons, gang rapes, Jewish cemetaries and places of worship damaged and burned, Jews attacked, the whole damn list. I can't remember where the article was, but about a year ago read where there's been a regular circular trade going on; ragheads in France stealing high-dollar cars, smuggling them to eastern Europe to sell, taking part of the price in and/or taking money and buying automatic weapons and RPGs, then using those to knock off banks and armored cars and such. And, as one or two people have pointed out, here for instance, a lot of big media have gone way out of their way to avoid mentioning that muslims are the rioters; to the point that it slaps you in the face that instead of reporting news they're actively trying to manage and control what people hear and how they'll hear it. Which means, more than ever, what you get from the BBC or whoever has to be viewed with great suspicion and cross-checked('course, we've been doing that for a while anyway, but still...).
A guy who wrote to Insty wrote this:
"There's just no damn jobs. White college grads can't get jobs, what hope do immigrants from regions with bad schools have? I think this is more like the LA Rodney King riots -- there's people there who want the French dream, just as in LA people wanted the American dream, but they just don't see it when they look around, and they resent the fact enormously."
There's an amount of bullshit there, the King riots were a bunch of assholes using that trial as their excuse to loot and burn(much like these clowns and the electrocuted kids).From what he says, though, the muslims in question in France have no choice where to live or go to school and little chance of getting out, which would definately push things toward 'worse'. Especially with the fundy kiss-the-prophets'-ass people stirring it up further.
And, if what can be dug out is correct, the French government is making it worse by, instead of taking concrete action to stop the rioting, arguing about whether 'tis better to appease the assholes or actually, maybe, making them stop.
The French really have two options; play appease and pay and plead and watch the rioting get worse, or do something hard and nasty that , while it'll cause condemnation by the usual suspects, might actually help. 'Course, if the commenter at Insty is correct, one of the things that would have to happen to really make a difference would be to make big changes in the French government and society, and barring a flat-out civil war that ain't gonna happen.
At least not in time.
"A handicapped woman was doused with petrol and set on fire by youths during another night of rioting in Paris. The 56-year-old suffered third degree burns to 20% of her body in the attack."
I've had second and third-degree burns; they hurt like a sonofabitch, and mine were over nowhere near 20%. And any burns over that large an area can kill you. But let's ignore that for a moment, and try to figure this: what kind of asshole does it take to do this?
And this is one incident of many. Instapundit and Michelle have a lot of links on this mess, and it's pretty bad. It looks like the incident of the two kids being electrocuted was the excuse these bastards needed to start this; they've been building up to it for a long time. For the last several years there've been articles about the mess in these parts of French cities; gangs ruling, police afraid to go in except in groups with automatic weapons, gang rapes, Jewish cemetaries and places of worship damaged and burned, Jews attacked, the whole damn list. I can't remember where the article was, but about a year ago read where there's been a regular circular trade going on; ragheads in France stealing high-dollar cars, smuggling them to eastern Europe to sell, taking part of the price in and/or taking money and buying automatic weapons and RPGs, then using those to knock off banks and armored cars and such. And, as one or two people have pointed out, here for instance, a lot of big media have gone way out of their way to avoid mentioning that muslims are the rioters; to the point that it slaps you in the face that instead of reporting news they're actively trying to manage and control what people hear and how they'll hear it. Which means, more than ever, what you get from the BBC or whoever has to be viewed with great suspicion and cross-checked('course, we've been doing that for a while anyway, but still...).
A guy who wrote to Insty wrote this:
"There's just no damn jobs. White college grads can't get jobs, what hope do immigrants from regions with bad schools have? I think this is more like the LA Rodney King riots -- there's people there who want the French dream, just as in LA people wanted the American dream, but they just don't see it when they look around, and they resent the fact enormously."
There's an amount of bullshit there, the King riots were a bunch of assholes using that trial as their excuse to loot and burn(much like these clowns and the electrocuted kids).From what he says, though, the muslims in question in France have no choice where to live or go to school and little chance of getting out, which would definately push things toward 'worse'. Especially with the fundy kiss-the-prophets'-ass people stirring it up further.
And, if what can be dug out is correct, the French government is making it worse by, instead of taking concrete action to stop the rioting, arguing about whether 'tis better to appease the assholes or actually, maybe, making them stop.
The French really have two options; play appease and pay and plead and watch the rioting get worse, or do something hard and nasty that , while it'll cause condemnation by the usual suspects, might actually help. 'Course, if the commenter at Insty is correct, one of the things that would have to happen to really make a difference would be to make big changes in the French government and society, and barring a flat-out civil war that ain't gonna happen.
At least not in time.
Carnival of Cordite #37
At the usual place, the wondrous Gullyborg, and including a couple of pieces by yours truly.
Wednesday, November 02, 2005
Ah, the tormenting of friends...
Also a range report
As mentioned before I wasn't able to make the NoR shoot(forgive me, K, for I have sinned), but there was a, ah, slight compensation. Which leads to the 'torment' above.
There was a small gun show I went to. Didn't know it was small until I got there, but a nice one in any case; found some things I needed/wanted, including the item in question here. I mentioned to Og what I'd found, he replied "!!*%#! Not a .22?" I said yes, and he called me unkind things, some of which referred to my family and parentage.
What I found was this, an Enfield training rifle:
Looks just like a standard #1 Mk3, except it's bored for .22 long rifle. One of the interesting things about the Enfield series is the two-piece bolt, body and head. With a standard rifle, if excess headspace developed a larger(longer) bolt head could be installed to correct it. In this case, a standard bolt head had an insert fitted to the inside with an off-center hole extending through the face. A firing pin was placed in the hole; the standard striker was cut off in front of the wide section near the front, so when you pull the trigger the striker hits the pin and bang. The extractor was modified to reach and hold the rimfire cartridge, and there's no ejector; the magazine is just the shell, and when you pull the bolt back the empty is pulled out of the chamber and falls into the mag body. So you have a rifle that is slightly heavier than the same rifle in .303(more steel left in the barrel), same sights and all, so you could start trainees off with a fairly quiet arm with virtually no recoil. A friend of mine got hold of one of these a couple of years ago, and it's a fun rifle to shoot, so when I ran across this one I was quite happy.
What caught my eye originally, though, was one of two unusual things about this one. In the rack it looked like another #1 until I saw this:
That is the rear sight from a Ross rifle. The Ross is a straight-pull bolt design, so what was that sight doing on it? Then I found that it was a .22 and... You'll notice in this picture the other oddity: that sling swivel in front of the magazine. It's not on my friends' rifle, or on a standard #1. The swivel base is part of the trigger guard, and if it was welded on it was a damn nice job; I'm thinking it was forged this way originally. I'd seen this third swivel on the WWII sniper rifles, but not on anything else. So it's a training rifle with the standard front and rear sights, with this bracket mounting a Ross sight on the receiver and a third swivel. Which information caused Og to say more unkind things about me, the brute, because these indicate it's one that was set up as a match rifle.
But the big question is, does it shoot? Yeah, yeah, collectable, blah blah. If it won't shoot well, I don't really want it. There are things I would make exception for, but a .22 that won't hit anything? So today I hied myself and it off to the range. Being short on time I went to the indoor range(H&H) where I mostly practice handgun. They have a 30-yard rifle side, and you have a rest for the forend, so I wasn't trusting to my somewhat wavering offhand style. The following four targets were:
First, with the Ross sight removed(pull one screw and it slides off the base) and the standard rear sight, using Eley Sport ammo:
This one was the same ammo with the Ross sight:
That high one was a called flyer.
Third was some of the Sellier & Bellot ammo that's on the market:
Last was shot with my favorite: Federal Lightning(now Champion):
Low shot was called flyer.
So yeah, it shoots. When I can I'll put it on a solid benchrest at 50 and 100 yards and see what it'll do, and I think it'll do well. This is about the same accuracy I get with this ammo and the Martini match rifle under the same conditions, so I'm quite hopeful of the results.
It doesn't make up for missing the shoot, but it's very nice anyway. A fine rifle, a variation of an already hard to find piece, with some undoubtedly interesting history behind it, and I get to care for it for the next however long.
Steam, Og. Mwahahahahaha!
Additional: The Eley Sport ammo seems to be very good stuff, it's one of the two most accurate in every rifle I've tried it in. And while the top-grade Eley Tenex runs about $11/box, the Sport can be had for $1.50 or so. And I remain amazed by the results from the cheap(pricewise) Federal ammo. In several rifles, from a Remington bolt to Martini match to Marlin semi-autos, it's consistently shot at least equal to and in most cases more accurately than anything else, including some $5/box match stuff. No, I'm not spending fifty dollars to get several boxes of the Olympic-grade stuff to test, not when these two give such good results. If you're shooting serious matches, it may well be worth it to you; it ain't to me, not now.
As mentioned before I wasn't able to make the NoR shoot(forgive me, K, for I have sinned), but there was a, ah, slight compensation. Which leads to the 'torment' above.
There was a small gun show I went to. Didn't know it was small until I got there, but a nice one in any case; found some things I needed/wanted, including the item in question here. I mentioned to Og what I'd found, he replied "!!*%#! Not a .22?" I said yes, and he called me unkind things, some of which referred to my family and parentage.
What I found was this, an Enfield training rifle:
Looks just like a standard #1 Mk3, except it's bored for .22 long rifle. One of the interesting things about the Enfield series is the two-piece bolt, body and head. With a standard rifle, if excess headspace developed a larger(longer) bolt head could be installed to correct it. In this case, a standard bolt head had an insert fitted to the inside with an off-center hole extending through the face. A firing pin was placed in the hole; the standard striker was cut off in front of the wide section near the front, so when you pull the trigger the striker hits the pin and bang. The extractor was modified to reach and hold the rimfire cartridge, and there's no ejector; the magazine is just the shell, and when you pull the bolt back the empty is pulled out of the chamber and falls into the mag body. So you have a rifle that is slightly heavier than the same rifle in .303(more steel left in the barrel), same sights and all, so you could start trainees off with a fairly quiet arm with virtually no recoil. A friend of mine got hold of one of these a couple of years ago, and it's a fun rifle to shoot, so when I ran across this one I was quite happy.
What caught my eye originally, though, was one of two unusual things about this one. In the rack it looked like another #1 until I saw this:
That is the rear sight from a Ross rifle. The Ross is a straight-pull bolt design, so what was that sight doing on it? Then I found that it was a .22 and... You'll notice in this picture the other oddity: that sling swivel in front of the magazine. It's not on my friends' rifle, or on a standard #1. The swivel base is part of the trigger guard, and if it was welded on it was a damn nice job; I'm thinking it was forged this way originally. I'd seen this third swivel on the WWII sniper rifles, but not on anything else. So it's a training rifle with the standard front and rear sights, with this bracket mounting a Ross sight on the receiver and a third swivel. Which information caused Og to say more unkind things about me, the brute, because these indicate it's one that was set up as a match rifle.
But the big question is, does it shoot? Yeah, yeah, collectable, blah blah. If it won't shoot well, I don't really want it. There are things I would make exception for, but a .22 that won't hit anything? So today I hied myself and it off to the range. Being short on time I went to the indoor range(H&H) where I mostly practice handgun. They have a 30-yard rifle side, and you have a rest for the forend, so I wasn't trusting to my somewhat wavering offhand style. The following four targets were:
First, with the Ross sight removed(pull one screw and it slides off the base) and the standard rear sight, using Eley Sport ammo:
This one was the same ammo with the Ross sight:
That high one was a called flyer.
Third was some of the Sellier & Bellot ammo that's on the market:
Last was shot with my favorite: Federal Lightning(now Champion):
Low shot was called flyer.
So yeah, it shoots. When I can I'll put it on a solid benchrest at 50 and 100 yards and see what it'll do, and I think it'll do well. This is about the same accuracy I get with this ammo and the Martini match rifle under the same conditions, so I'm quite hopeful of the results.
It doesn't make up for missing the shoot, but it's very nice anyway. A fine rifle, a variation of an already hard to find piece, with some undoubtedly interesting history behind it, and I get to care for it for the next however long.
Steam, Og. Mwahahahahaha!
Additional: The Eley Sport ammo seems to be very good stuff, it's one of the two most accurate in every rifle I've tried it in. And while the top-grade Eley Tenex runs about $11/box, the Sport can be had for $1.50 or so. And I remain amazed by the results from the cheap(pricewise) Federal ammo. In several rifles, from a Remington bolt to Martini match to Marlin semi-autos, it's consistently shot at least equal to and in most cases more accurately than anything else, including some $5/box match stuff. No, I'm not spending fifty dollars to get several boxes of the Olympic-grade stuff to test, not when these two give such good results. If you're shooting serious matches, it may well be worth it to you; it ain't to me, not now.
Remember that guy Ritter?
Scott Ritter? The 'former Marine Officer', as the 'anti-war' people liked to put it? Who turned out to be both a liar and a jerk who talked-up kids? Tim Blair compared some of his statements from 1999 and last month here. Example:
"Scott Ritter last month:
Be it said, I have a huge respect for the Marines and the men they turn out. Be it also said that, being a big organization, there's no way it can avoid having its' share of jerks. And just because someone was a good Marine doesn't mean they'll be wonderful at all other things. Look at John McCain; fine officer, fine service to his country, but look at what he's done as a Senator. Financial scandals, selling out people who trusted him and so forth. Ritter seems to be one of the bad ones, selling out when he saw benefit in it. And this is a good example of his selling out, and of how a lot of the 'peace and anti-war' people use the military when they take notice of them at all; he said what they want to hear, so he's a 'former Marine who should be listened to' when their usual reaction toward the military is moaning about fascists and those who allow the U.S. to ruin the world.
Ok, that's enough bitching on my part. Read Blair's post.
Additional: I mentioned yesterday the Democrats taking the Senate into closed session and the bullshit involved. Here's some interesting quotes from the 1998 Iraq Liberation Act. Let's see, Bush wasn't President then, was he?
"Scott Ritter last month:
[B]y 1995 there were no more weapons in Iraq, there were no more documents in Iraq, there was no more production capability in Iraq because we were monitoring the totality of Iraq’s industrial infrastructure with the most technologically advanced, the most intrusive arms control regime in the history of arms control.Scott Ritter in 1999 (extract from Ritter’s Endgame):
In 1995 Unit 2001 conducted tests on live human subjects taken from the Abu Ghraib prison, using BW and binary CW agent. Around fifty prisoners were chosen for these experiments, which took place at a remote testing ground in western Iraq. The purpose of these experiments was to test the toxicity of available agent to ensure that the biological agent remained viable. As a result, all the prisoners died."
Be it said, I have a huge respect for the Marines and the men they turn out. Be it also said that, being a big organization, there's no way it can avoid having its' share of jerks. And just because someone was a good Marine doesn't mean they'll be wonderful at all other things. Look at John McCain; fine officer, fine service to his country, but look at what he's done as a Senator. Financial scandals, selling out people who trusted him and so forth. Ritter seems to be one of the bad ones, selling out when he saw benefit in it. And this is a good example of his selling out, and of how a lot of the 'peace and anti-war' people use the military when they take notice of them at all; he said what they want to hear, so he's a 'former Marine who should be listened to' when their usual reaction toward the military is moaning about fascists and those who allow the U.S. to ruin the world.
Ok, that's enough bitching on my part. Read Blair's post.
Additional: I mentioned yesterday the Democrats taking the Senate into closed session and the bullshit involved. Here's some interesting quotes from the 1998 Iraq Liberation Act. Let's see, Bush wasn't President then, was he?
Tuesday, November 01, 2005
I's back
And a bit rested. So I need to catch up on some stuff.
First, the Carnival of Cordite(number 36 yet!) is up at Gullyborg. The announcement came out after I left town, so this is a late notice. And I don't care; I couldn't make it to the NoR shoot, but it was a good trip.
Speaking of the NoR, Gun Guy has pics up the the NoR site, plus his reaction to a presentation a lot of us put something into, plus his usual observations and a fine bunch of blog links. Start at the top and work your way down, it's worth it.
Speaking of Gullyborg, he's got a fine post on the Democrat weenies taking the Senate into secret session here.
So the Pres chose a guy named Alito as his pick to the SCOTUS. I admit that before I read anything about him, the fact that Reid and Schumer were speaking solemnly of their 'disappointment' and generally having the vapors(along with the usual suspects) told me a lot of what I needed to know.
I had a whole list of things in mind last night, but after sleeping and eating and taking care of things around the house, I can't remember most of them. Shut up. It'll happen to you, too.
I'll add some of them in when they come back to mind.
addons:
Remembered a big one. Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership(here) found that when ATFE was questioned as to their testing manual for firearms, they came back with this: they ain't got one. Think about that; their 'experts' are testifying in court, people go to jail and/or have their lives ruined, and they don't have a standard testing procedure... There is no excuse for this kind of crap. Remember when all the screaming after the 'sniper murders' in MA tended to center on "ATF can't audit a firearms business more than once a year"? Bullshit. My understanding is they can make as many announced audits as they want, but can only do one unannounced audit a year, and the reason is their own past. A few years back a bipartisan congressional committee that investigated ATF slapped them with this restriction, among others, because they'd been abusing their authority. This feeds right into it; how can a law enforcement agency have their people testifying in court, under oath, when they don't even use a standard procedure? Because it's easier to jail people that way, I guess. There were reports in the past of ATF 'testers' taking semi-auto rifles, putting in a light firing pin spring or a heavier pin and using ammo with sensitive primers to 'test' them; if they got it to double once, "Well, we got us an illegal machine gun here!" and somebody winds up on trial. It's a lot easier to get away with crap like this if you don't have a standard procedure that a: you have to follow and b: can be pointed out in court. JPFO has the document available here, and you really should read it.
I'll add that this is another case of the assholes making is hard for the honest. I've dealt with some ATF people who were as helpful and easy to deal with as you could wish, and their job gets harder every time something like this comes out.
Addon:
Little Green Footballs has this and this on the rioting by primarily muslims in France. You know, that multi-culti heaven where all is well, and we should follow their example? Like this example, I guess:
"Sarkozy says that violence in French suburbs is a daily fact of life.
First, the Carnival of Cordite(number 36 yet!) is up at Gullyborg. The announcement came out after I left town, so this is a late notice. And I don't care; I couldn't make it to the NoR shoot, but it was a good trip.
Speaking of the NoR, Gun Guy has pics up the the NoR site, plus his reaction to a presentation a lot of us put something into, plus his usual observations and a fine bunch of blog links. Start at the top and work your way down, it's worth it.
Speaking of Gullyborg, he's got a fine post on the Democrat weenies taking the Senate into secret session here.
So the Pres chose a guy named Alito as his pick to the SCOTUS. I admit that before I read anything about him, the fact that Reid and Schumer were speaking solemnly of their 'disappointment' and generally having the vapors(along with the usual suspects) told me a lot of what I needed to know.
I had a whole list of things in mind last night, but after sleeping and eating and taking care of things around the house, I can't remember most of them. Shut up. It'll happen to you, too.
I'll add some of them in when they come back to mind.
addons:
Remembered a big one. Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership(here) found that when ATFE was questioned as to their testing manual for firearms, they came back with this: they ain't got one. Think about that; their 'experts' are testifying in court, people go to jail and/or have their lives ruined, and they don't have a standard testing procedure... There is no excuse for this kind of crap. Remember when all the screaming after the 'sniper murders' in MA tended to center on "ATF can't audit a firearms business more than once a year"? Bullshit. My understanding is they can make as many announced audits as they want, but can only do one unannounced audit a year, and the reason is their own past. A few years back a bipartisan congressional committee that investigated ATF slapped them with this restriction, among others, because they'd been abusing their authority. This feeds right into it; how can a law enforcement agency have their people testifying in court, under oath, when they don't even use a standard procedure? Because it's easier to jail people that way, I guess. There were reports in the past of ATF 'testers' taking semi-auto rifles, putting in a light firing pin spring or a heavier pin and using ammo with sensitive primers to 'test' them; if they got it to double once, "Well, we got us an illegal machine gun here!" and somebody winds up on trial. It's a lot easier to get away with crap like this if you don't have a standard procedure that a: you have to follow and b: can be pointed out in court. JPFO has the document available here, and you really should read it.
I'll add that this is another case of the assholes making is hard for the honest. I've dealt with some ATF people who were as helpful and easy to deal with as you could wish, and their job gets harder every time something like this comes out.
Addon:
Little Green Footballs has this and this on the rioting by primarily muslims in France. You know, that multi-culti heaven where all is well, and we should follow their example? Like this example, I guess:
"Sarkozy says that violence in French suburbs is a daily fact of life.
Since the start of the year, 9,000 police cars have been stoned and, each night, 20 to 40 cars are torched, Sarkozy said in an interview last week with the newspaper Le Monde."
The caliphate, anyone?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)