Friday, March 17, 2006
Sorry 'bout the doubles
Blogger is bloggered, and I don't have time to work through it to clean it up right now
Thursday, March 16, 2006
A wonderful story from the Geek
Says it was music to his ears...
My friend tells me that the hall grew quiet, as people listened. In that silence, just about everyone in the show simultaneously arrived at the same decision, and for the next 30 seconds, all you heard was the kerplopple of steel on kydex and leather, the snips of zipties coming off, and the glorious ka shink! of a thousand people simultaneously racking rounds into chambers.
My friend tells me that the hall grew quiet, as people listened. In that silence, just about everyone in the show simultaneously arrived at the same decision, and for the next 30 seconds, all you heard was the kerplopple of steel on kydex and leather, the snips of zipties coming off, and the glorious ka shink! of a thousand people simultaneously racking rounds into chambers.
Also ref the idiots in NO and their accomplices
And also found at The High Road(scroll down for the full article):
"NEW ORLEANS, Dec. 14 /U.S. Newswire/ -- A New Orleans woman is recovering from surgery this week from injuries resulting from when she was roughed-up by authorities who forced her to leave her home a week after Hurricane Katrina. Patricia Konie, 58, has filed a Federal lawsuit over the injuries and other violations of civil rights.
"My client was severely injured in a needless removal from her home," stated attorney Ashton O'Dwyer. "Patricia Konie had food, plenty of water, and a roof over her head. The police who illegally entered her home and imposed their will on a frail, middle-aged female should have been out apprehending armed, male looters instead."
Konie was greeting a reporter and photographer from a San Francisco TV station and a journalist from the London Times when police unexpectedly entered her home. When she refused to leave as ordered, they confiscated a firearm used for defense and according to Konie, "slammed" her to the ground, both displacing and fracturing her left shoulder."
One thing I wrote before and still hold to: I'm ashamed that OK National Guardsmen helped carry out this crap. And I hope those responsible- which would include the officers who told them to carry out these orders- get their ass handed to them.
"NEW ORLEANS, Dec. 14 /U.S. Newswire/ -- A New Orleans woman is recovering from surgery this week from injuries resulting from when she was roughed-up by authorities who forced her to leave her home a week after Hurricane Katrina. Patricia Konie, 58, has filed a Federal lawsuit over the injuries and other violations of civil rights.
"My client was severely injured in a needless removal from her home," stated attorney Ashton O'Dwyer. "Patricia Konie had food, plenty of water, and a roof over her head. The police who illegally entered her home and imposed their will on a frail, middle-aged female should have been out apprehending armed, male looters instead."
Konie was greeting a reporter and photographer from a San Francisco TV station and a journalist from the London Times when police unexpectedly entered her home. When she refused to leave as ordered, they confiscated a firearm used for defense and according to Konie, "slammed" her to the ground, both displacing and fracturing her left shoulder."
One thing I wrote before and still hold to: I'm ashamed that OK National Guardsmen helped carry out this crap. And I hope those responsible- which would include the officers who told them to carry out these orders- get their ass handed to them.
Can you say 'perjury'?
I knew you could
Found a link to this at The High Road:
"BELLEVUE, Wash., March 15 /U.S. Newswire/ -- In a stunning reversal, the City of New Orleans revealed today to attorneys representing the Second Amendment Foundation and National Rifle Association that they do have a stockpile of firearms seized from private citizens in the wake of Hurricane Katrina."
You know, those guns that didn't exist? Those guns Mayor Dipstick and Police Chief Jackass said weren't seized? From those seizures they claimed never happened?("Never mind the video and the testimony! Ignore the man behind the curtain and listen to me!!"). I admit to not following all the details as they came along, but didn't city officials and the lawyers say- in sworn documents- that the seizures a: were not ordered and b: did not happen and c: they did NOT have any seized firearms?
I'm not a lawyer(nor do I play one on blog or tv), but I thought lying in court, and lying on sworn documents, was a big no-no. ESPECIALLY for an officer of the court like a lawyer.
What's that? It IS a big deal, you say? Well, then let's see about criminal charges as well as the civil charges already filed, why don't we?
Apparently the NO officials have been taking lessons from some of the BATF and other feds caught in the act. Lie, deny, etc., until you have no other choice than to admit the truth. Unfortunately, too many times congresscritters who secretly or blatantly want the agencies to get away with crap have set a precedent of ignoring or excusing this crap; let's hope this court doesn't put up with it.
Found a link to this at The High Road:
"BELLEVUE, Wash., March 15 /U.S. Newswire/ -- In a stunning reversal, the City of New Orleans revealed today to attorneys representing the Second Amendment Foundation and National Rifle Association that they do have a stockpile of firearms seized from private citizens in the wake of Hurricane Katrina."
You know, those guns that didn't exist? Those guns Mayor Dipstick and Police Chief Jackass said weren't seized? From those seizures they claimed never happened?("Never mind the video and the testimony! Ignore the man behind the curtain and listen to me!!"). I admit to not following all the details as they came along, but didn't city officials and the lawyers say- in sworn documents- that the seizures a: were not ordered and b: did not happen and c: they did NOT have any seized firearms?
I'm not a lawyer(nor do I play one on blog or tv), but I thought lying in court, and lying on sworn documents, was a big no-no. ESPECIALLY for an officer of the court like a lawyer.
What's that? It IS a big deal, you say? Well, then let's see about criminal charges as well as the civil charges already filed, why don't we?
Apparently the NO officials have been taking lessons from some of the BATF and other feds caught in the act. Lie, deny, etc., until you have no other choice than to admit the truth. Unfortunately, too many times congresscritters who secretly or blatantly want the agencies to get away with crap have set a precedent of ignoring or excusing this crap; let's hope this court doesn't put up with it.
Wednesday, March 15, 2006
Rimfire Roundup #6
Up for your viewing pleasure, thanks to Mr. Completely. While you're there, be sure to check out the postal matches; links at the top.
Tuesday, March 14, 2006
Ok, here's something scary
from Britain:
ENGLAND: The day is coming when British Muslims form a state within a state
Very interesting article(found here) on what's happening there, summed up by this quote: "They believe that the British Government has capitulated to them, because it feared the consequences if it did not.
Very damn dangerous. A lot of people have pointed this out before; there are people and groups who see tolerance of them and their actions as weakness, and they see weakness as something to exploit. For instance, a couple of weeks ago a big march by BPMs calling for death to anybody who annoys them, and a few cops around watching; about a week later a march by people calling for defense of free speech and etc., and the cops were everywhere and a bunch of people were arrested as I recall. The Brit government has demonstrated that they're either too politically correct, too stupid or too scared(or all the above) to stand up for their own history, and the BPMs are using it against them. I've kept hoping that the British people would finally say 'enough' and stand up, but it just hasn't happened.
And at this point I doubt it will.
ENGLAND: The day is coming when British Muslims form a state within a state
Very interesting article(found here) on what's happening there, summed up by this quote: "They believe that the British Government has capitulated to them, because it feared the consequences if it did not.
"The cartoons, you see, have not been published in this country, and the Government has been very critical of those countries in which they were published. To many of the Islamic clerics, that's a clear victory.
"It's confirmation of what they believe to be a familiar pattern: if spokesmen for British Muslims threaten what they call 'adverse consequences' – violence to the rest of us – then the British Government will cave in. I think it is a very dangerous precedent."
Very damn dangerous. A lot of people have pointed this out before; there are people and groups who see tolerance of them and their actions as weakness, and they see weakness as something to exploit. For instance, a couple of weeks ago a big march by BPMs calling for death to anybody who annoys them, and a few cops around watching; about a week later a march by people calling for defense of free speech and etc., and the cops were everywhere and a bunch of people were arrested as I recall. The Brit government has demonstrated that they're either too politically correct, too stupid or too scared(or all the above) to stand up for their own history, and the BPMs are using it against them. I've kept hoping that the British people would finally say 'enough' and stand up, but it just hasn't happened.
And at this point I doubt it will.
Sunday, March 12, 2006
Linky goodness
The first isn't really 'good', it simply notes one of the side issues of the 'all faiths are equally good' crap: women who are not of the Moslem faith are seen as fair game for rape by some of the BPMs out there. As the comedian pointed out, "Some people would just look better dead".
And second, a fairly new place called The Lawdog Files from that part of the country known as Texas(and sometimes Baha, Oklahoma). Anyplace that starts a post with this has to be read:
"Today I would like to rant about a particularly irritating habit I've noticed developing amongst the horde of carpet-bagging, mouth-breathing, bunny-hugging, veggie-gnawing, mono-synaptic, close-minded dacoits who are tip-toeing through my fair State like a horde of lobotomized, politically-correct, apron-hanging rhinocerii."
And second, a fairly new place called The Lawdog Files from that part of the country known as Texas(and sometimes Baha, Oklahoma). Anyplace that starts a post with this has to be read:
"Today I would like to rant about a particularly irritating habit I've noticed developing amongst the horde of carpet-bagging, mouth-breathing, bunny-hugging, veggie-gnawing, mono-synaptic, close-minded dacoits who are tip-toeing through my fair State like a horde of lobotomized, politically-correct, apron-hanging rhinocerii."
Saturday, March 11, 2006
Well, well, lookie here...
Went by the Geek's place and found this, with a link to the original at The High Road. Basically, a very nice, detail-filled whacking of some foul-mouthed 'pacifists' who've been e-mailing their droppings to people. Really good info, including notes of just how useful non-violence is when you're dealing with actual bad guys.
Side note: years ago I read an interview someone did with Ghandi, and he noted that his methods succeeded because he was dealing with a people as basically civilized as the British; people in India and back in Britain saw film and read the details of what was happening and had fits, and things changed. He specifically said that if he'd been dealing with the Soviets, not only would it not have worked, he and many of his followers would have disappeared into camps from which they would never have returned.
Like the poster says:
Side note: years ago I read an interview someone did with Ghandi, and he noted that his methods succeeded because he was dealing with a people as basically civilized as the British; people in India and back in Britain saw film and read the details of what was happening and had fits, and things changed. He specifically said that if he'd been dealing with the Soviets, not only would it not have worked, he and many of his followers would have disappeared into camps from which they would never have returned.
Like the poster says:
Friday, March 10, 2006
And we now know MA wants to be "Just like (formerly)Great Britain
How do we know this? Read and see. And be nauseated.
What's that? Why not stick the crooks in prison and keep them there for robbing and raping and murdering? What kind of barbarian ARE you, anyway?
What's that? Why not stick the crooks in prison and keep them there for robbing and raping and murdering? What kind of barbarian ARE you, anyway?
Ref the 1903 Springfield sights,
Take a look at this:
This is the rear in the laid-down position. At the right bottom, that large knob? Windage adjustment; it turns a pinion gear which meshes with teeth in the front of the sight and rotates it right or left; at the far left end you can see adjustment marks. Just right of the marks, see that hole? For 100 yards up to a couple of hundred, you were supposed to flip the ladder up and use the aperture for aiming. From that range(and there was an exact distance for these, but I'll look that up later, if I can find it again) on for a ways you used the notch in the base of the triangle above the aperture. For serious long range, that smaller knob is for elevation, loosen it and the whole notch/aperture setup slides up & down; please note that the elevation marks run all the way up to 2700 yards.
Now, if you look at the top of the aforementioned triangle, on the slider, you'll see a notch that's on top when the ladder is down, that's your battlesight. Remember I mentioned that most military rifles were set so that, with the sight in its' lowest position, it was actuall sighted for 300 yards/meters? Well, when this sight was designed for the original 1903 cartridge, it was. That one used a 220 grain roundnose bullet at about 2200 feet per second. Then the word came that the Germans had gone from a heavy roundnose bullet to a sharply-pointed bullet(spitzer) of much less weight, dropping from 220 to 150 grains. That allowed much higher velocity out of the Mauser, which meant a much flatter trajectory over distance, and- this bullet being more aerodynamic- longer effective range. So we did the same. The experiments led to the case being shortened .10", a 150 grain bullet was adopted at a velocity of about 2800 fps, giving us the ever-popular .30 Government 1906, later renamed the .30-06. However...
I can't remember the details(I do know where I can get a book that covers it, though) but the ballistics data for the new cartridge wasn't available in time for the sights to be made, so they were- mostly, at least- made with the markings from the 1903 cartridge. Which, with the higher velocity, more efficient projectile, meant that a battlesight originally designed for 300 yards actually was on at 500-something. Which means that at 100 yards, it's WAY high; where most are 3-6" high at 100, this hits about 8-10" high(rough numbers). And I have to point out that while that aperture for 'short' ranges works, that dinky little hole ain't worth crap in low light or bad weather(at least for me). Combine that with a thin front blade...
Gerry in comments brought up an old saying from WWI that the Americans had the best target rifle, the Germans had the best hunting rifle, and the Brits had the best battle rifle. Largely seems to cover it.
By the way, I've wondered for years, why did the Germans keep using that inverted 'V' front sight with the sharp point? THAT is also a bitch to use at times. The Swede Mausers use a similar, but it's got a flat top that's wide enough to use in low-light conditions, so why didn't the Germans use it?
For that matter, when the British were looking at a new rifle and designed the 1915(?) Enfield, I understand the different sights, but why did they go to a 5-shot magazine with it? The 10-shot of the #1 Mk3 worked so nicely, why change that?
Note: nice picture of 1903 sight found here, along with lots of other good pics of the rifle and parts.
This is the rear in the laid-down position. At the right bottom, that large knob? Windage adjustment; it turns a pinion gear which meshes with teeth in the front of the sight and rotates it right or left; at the far left end you can see adjustment marks. Just right of the marks, see that hole? For 100 yards up to a couple of hundred, you were supposed to flip the ladder up and use the aperture for aiming. From that range(and there was an exact distance for these, but I'll look that up later, if I can find it again) on for a ways you used the notch in the base of the triangle above the aperture. For serious long range, that smaller knob is for elevation, loosen it and the whole notch/aperture setup slides up & down; please note that the elevation marks run all the way up to 2700 yards.
Now, if you look at the top of the aforementioned triangle, on the slider, you'll see a notch that's on top when the ladder is down, that's your battlesight. Remember I mentioned that most military rifles were set so that, with the sight in its' lowest position, it was actuall sighted for 300 yards/meters? Well, when this sight was designed for the original 1903 cartridge, it was. That one used a 220 grain roundnose bullet at about 2200 feet per second. Then the word came that the Germans had gone from a heavy roundnose bullet to a sharply-pointed bullet(spitzer) of much less weight, dropping from 220 to 150 grains. That allowed much higher velocity out of the Mauser, which meant a much flatter trajectory over distance, and- this bullet being more aerodynamic- longer effective range. So we did the same. The experiments led to the case being shortened .10", a 150 grain bullet was adopted at a velocity of about 2800 fps, giving us the ever-popular .30 Government 1906, later renamed the .30-06. However...
I can't remember the details(I do know where I can get a book that covers it, though) but the ballistics data for the new cartridge wasn't available in time for the sights to be made, so they were- mostly, at least- made with the markings from the 1903 cartridge. Which, with the higher velocity, more efficient projectile, meant that a battlesight originally designed for 300 yards actually was on at 500-something. Which means that at 100 yards, it's WAY high; where most are 3-6" high at 100, this hits about 8-10" high(rough numbers). And I have to point out that while that aperture for 'short' ranges works, that dinky little hole ain't worth crap in low light or bad weather(at least for me). Combine that with a thin front blade...
Gerry in comments brought up an old saying from WWI that the Americans had the best target rifle, the Germans had the best hunting rifle, and the Brits had the best battle rifle. Largely seems to cover it.
By the way, I've wondered for years, why did the Germans keep using that inverted 'V' front sight with the sharp point? THAT is also a bitch to use at times. The Swede Mausers use a similar, but it's got a flat top that's wide enough to use in low-light conditions, so why didn't the Germans use it?
For that matter, when the British were looking at a new rifle and designed the 1915(?) Enfield, I understand the different sights, but why did they go to a 5-shot magazine with it? The 10-shot of the #1 Mk3 worked so nicely, why change that?
Note: nice picture of 1903 sight found here, along with lots of other good pics of the rifle and parts.
Thursday, March 09, 2006
Tuesday, March 07, 2006
Not having enough problems,
I shot a round in the current rifle postal match Mr. Completely & Friends has up. Not knowing when/if I'd have another chance on this one, I took the Martini 12 along the other day and shot this at 50 yards
First, let me say (whine)the wind was blowing strong, and it was gusting, and I didn't get much sleep the night before, dammit!(/whine). That being said, biggest problem was the size of the targets and my vision. At 50 yards, these suckers are little blurs, and I'm frankly amazed I did as well as I did. Usually, for an iron sight target at that range I use a black bullseye about 2.5" across; lots better contrast than this multi-colored !!&*%!.
In any case, there's mine. Where's yours?
First, let me say (whine)the wind was blowing strong, and it was gusting, and I didn't get much sleep the night before, dammit!(/whine). That being said, biggest problem was the size of the targets and my vision. At 50 yards, these suckers are little blurs, and I'm frankly amazed I did as well as I did. Usually, for an iron sight target at that range I use a black bullseye about 2.5" across; lots better contrast than this multi-colored !!&*%!.
In any case, there's mine. Where's yours?
Monday, March 06, 2006
Range day
Having once again decided to hell with various things I probably should have done, I went shooting today. Nice day for this time of year, though a bit windy and gusty. No serious testing or whatever, though I did get to try out a Finnish M39
Short version, this is the rifle the Finns made using Mosin-Nagant receivers. I've heard that they're the best version made of this rifle type, and having shot this one I believe it. For the full rundown on these go over to Head's Bunker and look down the sidebar; he's got a lot on them. Short version:
heavier stock, particularly in the forend. Instead of a long, skinny one it's a heavier piece dovetailed into the buttstock.
Better sights. Instead of a shallow notch in the rear and a post up front, it's a wing-protected front blade and a very clean rear notch. And where every other rifle of the type, although the low setting says '100' is actually set for 300 meters? This Finn rifle has a low setting marked '150', and it means it; with the ammo I used(Czech and Polish light ball) it hit just about dead-on at 100, I'd guess would be on at 150.
Windage adjustment on other Mosins means drifting the front sight in the dovetail, and if you've ever done that you know it's a bit touchy at times to get it just right. With this? There's a screw on each side of the sight base; to move the sight left, you'd back the left screw off a bit, then tighten the right screw. Presto, very controlled, positive adjustment. I like it.
And it's got the best trigger I've personally seen on a Mosin, long first stage, positive stop, then a light, clean second stage. Very nice. I've fired much newer sporting rifles with worse.
First five shots were done at 50 yards
Which impressed me. Then moved back to 100
The flier I blame on myself, which gives a 1" group. Which was not a fluke, I got several more this tight with it, though the rifle showed a bit of a preference for the Polish ammo.
If I were going to set one of these up for target shooting, I think the main thing I'd do is get another front blade and mill it a bit thinner. These are battle-rifle sights, not match sights, and for the purpose I imagine they served- would serve- very well.
As an aside, I read that when the M1 Garand was first officially introduced to the public at the Wimbledon matches, the two big gripes were the coarse sights and 'too heavy' trigger. The Springfield people kept telling them "It's not a match rifle, it's a battlefield rifle, too fine a sight and too light a trigger can be a problem". This is my big gripe with the 1903 and 1903-A3 Springfields; fine rifles with lousy sights for woods or battlefield use. With the -A3, a fine rear aperture sight combined with that damn thin front blade; with the '03, skinny front blade and a too-complicated rear. Excellent on a target range, a pain anywhere else. In my humble opinion, anyway.
In any case, back to the M39, this is a fine rifle, and happily there are a bunch of them out there. I get my finances back on track, I may have to search around for one.
Short version, this is the rifle the Finns made using Mosin-Nagant receivers. I've heard that they're the best version made of this rifle type, and having shot this one I believe it. For the full rundown on these go over to Head's Bunker and look down the sidebar; he's got a lot on them. Short version:
heavier stock, particularly in the forend. Instead of a long, skinny one it's a heavier piece dovetailed into the buttstock.
Better sights. Instead of a shallow notch in the rear and a post up front, it's a wing-protected front blade and a very clean rear notch. And where every other rifle of the type, although the low setting says '100' is actually set for 300 meters? This Finn rifle has a low setting marked '150', and it means it; with the ammo I used(Czech and Polish light ball) it hit just about dead-on at 100, I'd guess would be on at 150.
Windage adjustment on other Mosins means drifting the front sight in the dovetail, and if you've ever done that you know it's a bit touchy at times to get it just right. With this? There's a screw on each side of the sight base; to move the sight left, you'd back the left screw off a bit, then tighten the right screw. Presto, very controlled, positive adjustment. I like it.
And it's got the best trigger I've personally seen on a Mosin, long first stage, positive stop, then a light, clean second stage. Very nice. I've fired much newer sporting rifles with worse.
First five shots were done at 50 yards
Which impressed me. Then moved back to 100
The flier I blame on myself, which gives a 1" group. Which was not a fluke, I got several more this tight with it, though the rifle showed a bit of a preference for the Polish ammo.
If I were going to set one of these up for target shooting, I think the main thing I'd do is get another front blade and mill it a bit thinner. These are battle-rifle sights, not match sights, and for the purpose I imagine they served- would serve- very well.
As an aside, I read that when the M1 Garand was first officially introduced to the public at the Wimbledon matches, the two big gripes were the coarse sights and 'too heavy' trigger. The Springfield people kept telling them "It's not a match rifle, it's a battlefield rifle, too fine a sight and too light a trigger can be a problem". This is my big gripe with the 1903 and 1903-A3 Springfields; fine rifles with lousy sights for woods or battlefield use. With the -A3, a fine rear aperture sight combined with that damn thin front blade; with the '03, skinny front blade and a too-complicated rear. Excellent on a target range, a pain anywhere else. In my humble opinion, anyway.
In any case, back to the M39, this is a fine rifle, and happily there are a bunch of them out there. I get my finances back on track, I may have to search around for one.
Refugee asked, so
Here's a closer shot of the blooms
And I must correct myself; the blooms open from the bottom up
And I must correct myself; the blooms open from the bottom up
Sunday, March 05, 2006
Ever seen an aloe vera bloom?
I hadn't, until my parents gave me this one. About nine years ago, I believe; as much hot metal as I handled at the time, it came in very handy for burns. I moved it indoors when winter came, and sometime in February I noticed a stalk rising from the center. It grew to about a foot or so higher than the rest of the plant, the head opened up into lots of little buds, and they finally started opening from top to bottom, each a small bloom.
No scent that I could catch. After opening, they withered and fell off, again from top to botttom. First time that I'd ever seen it.
And so far, the first time of anyone I've told about it. Every year, about the same time, it sends up a stalk. The first couple of years just a single head, since then it's branched off and produced two.
Just think it's interesting.
No scent that I could catch. After opening, they withered and fell off, again from top to botttom. First time that I'd ever seen it.
And so far, the first time of anyone I've told about it. Every year, about the same time, it sends up a stalk. The first couple of years just a single head, since then it's branched off and produced two.
Just think it's interesting.
Friday, March 03, 2006
A good place to check out
is Samizdata. I hadn't been over there in quite a while, then today remembered to go by. You should check it out, if for no other reason than that it'll scare hell out of you by noting things happening in once-Great Britain. If you've ever though we should copy where they're going, this should cure you of it.
Carnival of Cordite #50!
The fiftieth one of these things, up at guest host AnarchAngel. Including a really good video for those who've thought "I could end that movie right now!"
Hello? Illinois, Chicago? You paying attention?
Probably not; one of these items the clowns will probably see as a bonus, and the other they'll ignore.
'These items' being the following: while over at the High Road I found a thread "More job losses for Illinois, YYYEEEAAAHHH!!" It seems that a number of gunmakers have said flatly that if Illinois passes the current 'Ban the Eeeville Guns' law, they'll leave the state. Taking their jobs and revenue with them. Guys, may I suggest Oklahoma? I think I'd like to work for Springfield Armory or ArmaLite. Full story here.
Second item was an article also on the Illinois State Rifle Assn. site, "Brady Gun Control Campaign All Wet Say Nation's Top Cops". Good reading in general.
So the National Association of Chiefs of Police says the Bradys and their buttmonkeys are full of crap, and if the IL legislature doesn't have a moment of intelligence(in Daley-Land, how likely is that?) I might have a place moving here that I'd take early retirement to get a job at.
Speaking of liberal asshats('redundancy alert' as Kim says), mAss Backwards notes this: "Security Grates Cause Crime". I have to ask, how does that idiot Mumbles get into and stay in office? Jeez.
'These items' being the following: while over at the High Road I found a thread "More job losses for Illinois, YYYEEEAAAHHH!!" It seems that a number of gunmakers have said flatly that if Illinois passes the current 'Ban the Eeeville Guns' law, they'll leave the state. Taking their jobs and revenue with them. Guys, may I suggest Oklahoma? I think I'd like to work for Springfield Armory or ArmaLite. Full story here.
Second item was an article also on the Illinois State Rifle Assn. site, "Brady Gun Control Campaign All Wet Say Nation's Top Cops". Good reading in general.
So the National Association of Chiefs of Police says the Bradys and their buttmonkeys are full of crap, and if the IL legislature doesn't have a moment of intelligence(in Daley-Land, how likely is that?) I might have a place moving here that I'd take early retirement to get a job at.
Speaking of liberal asshats('redundancy alert' as Kim says), mAss Backwards notes this: "Security Grates Cause Crime". I have to ask, how does that idiot Mumbles get into and stay in office? Jeez.
Thursday, March 02, 2006
And if you're as sick of the UN as I am,
Mark Steyn lays out everything you need to tell people who still trust it here.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)