I've been thinking about this for quite a while. Not exactly a pleasant subject. And some of the words being thrown about after the revelation that the Pakastani authorities may have used it to get some of the information used to cut off the airline-bombing plot are, let's say, intemperate.
Torture is not a nice word, describing things that are about as nasty at they get. Let me make something clear, I am NOT speaking of coercive interrogation, NOT speaking of loud music or sleep deprivation; an awful lot of people have expanded the definition to include anything including hurting someone's tender feelings. I am talking about the deliberate infliction of pain and bodily injury on someone. Burns, torn skin, cuts, chemicals, broken bones and all the other ways of causing pain.
This is one of those situations in which you may find yourself with no 'good' choice. If you don't use it and something horrendous happens because you didn't get the information to stop it, how do you deal with that? And if you do it, and get the information and stop it, you have to deal with what you did to get the info.
Put me in a situation where I know I'm dealing with someone who has the information to stop a plot like this. If we don't get the information, hundreds to thousands of people may die. You do get it and stop the plot, you've stained yourself with something that won't wash or wear off. I've been thinking about it, and put in that situation, with no time for anything else?
I'd do it.
Not saying it lightly. I'd be sick as hell afterward, and I'm not sure how I'd deal with what I'd done. But with that choice; stay in the rules and don't get the information and many die, or break the rules and ruin another human and save those lives, I'd do it.
I've known people who truly believe that violence is always bad, no matter what. That using violence to defend yourself against attack makes you as morally wrong as your attacker. I think they're either deluded or nuts. And the blanket statement that torture can never be used no matter what the potential cost is equally so. No, I don't like it. No, I don't want it to be done. Yes, in extreme circumstances I agree to see it done.
And please don't play games with 'extreme circumstances'; I know what I mean, and I think everyone else does, too. Boils down to, I am not willing to salve my conscience with "We stayed the high course" to excuse not doing the nasty things when nothing else will stop the bad guys.
Not as a routine thing. Not because we're in a hurry; if you've got time(and the idiots stay out of the way) standard interrogation can usually get what you need. In extreme situation, yeah.
And no, I don't like saying that.
Thursday, August 17, 2006
About Murtha and the 'cold-blooded murder' statements,
and his defense on them. It had been reported that he made the statement after being briefed by the General Hagee. Well, Ace points to this at Patterico, who had checked on the matter. More specifically, on the reports from the L.A. Times.
It seems that the General's office specifically says the General DID NOT brief Murtha until a week after he spewed on that news show. And after being shown the proof, the paper insists the story was accurate.
I always thought that honesty and professionalism insisted that errors be corrected. You could say especially on such a matter as this. Apparently not.
It seems that the General's office specifically says the General DID NOT brief Murtha until a week after he spewed on that news show. And after being shown the proof, the paper insists the story was accurate.
I always thought that honesty and professionalism insisted that errors be corrected. You could say especially on such a matter as this. Apparently not.
Tuesday, August 15, 2006
And speaking of critters,
a friend sent me this, found outside a town north of Amarillo, TX
That is one freakin' HUGE diamondback
Whining and threats from hoplophobes,
and answers to them.
This is one of those 'this took me here which led me here' things. The Pistolero had this response to one gun-fearing nanny-state type who, besides hating guns, hates that freedom of speech allows people to tell her to go to hell.
A link there took me here, which led me here. This last piece is from 2000, a response to a piece at Salon.com calling for all firearms to be banned frompeasantcivilian ownership. Apparently the shrieking starts with 'ban handguns' and quickly turns out to be 'ban guns'. Which isn't a surprise; that's what most of the GFW types mean, but so many don't have the balls to say outright.
I remember seeing the Salon article years ago, but I haven't gone there in a long time; they went to a 'registration' to read their stuff that was far too intrusive for my taste. If you want to read it now, Codrea has a link at the bottom of the page.
This is one of those 'this took me here which led me here' things. The Pistolero had this response to one gun-fearing nanny-state type who, besides hating guns, hates that freedom of speech allows people to tell her to go to hell.
A link there took me here, which led me here. This last piece is from 2000, a response to a piece at Salon.com calling for all firearms to be banned from
I remember seeing the Salon article years ago, but I haven't gone there in a long time; they went to a 'registration' to read their stuff that was far too intrusive for my taste. If you want to read it now, Codrea has a link at the bottom of the page.
Hopefully, the enviro-argument is over,
after the last few e-mails from that friend. They had asked why I wasn't willing to 'see the other side'; I pointed out I'd read a lot of stuff, and pointed out that, among others, Bjorn Lomborg, who had quite good credentials as both a scientist and enviro-type, had pointed out lots of progress had been made, etc. This brought a response that caused me to throw up my hands and give up. Friend had contacted the environmental science student daughter for information, and daughter had sent her the information on ONE of the hearings on Lomborg. The one where he was derided as a phony, of course(can you say 'PC Science'?); no mention of the later hearing where he was exonerated and the first board chewed out royally for their methods.
So today I sent a link to that and said didn't want to argue this any more; would be happy to talk about and dispute other things, but not this. Remember the saying "Don't try to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and annoys the pig"? That's where this was at, and I ain't wasting any more time on it.
So today I sent a link to that and said didn't want to argue this any more; would be happy to talk about and dispute other things, but not this. Remember the saying "Don't try to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and annoys the pig"? That's where this was at, and I ain't wasting any more time on it.
Monday, August 14, 2006
Ranger 34A .22 rifle
Here it is in all its 70-year old glory:
Please ignore the toes in the bottom of the picture
Blued steel, walnut stock, polished bolt & charging handle. 22" barrel, 41" overall. Has the standard for the time front bead and rear notch sights, the notch being a wide, shallow v. Take a closer look at the receiver:
Bolt closed, you can see the magazine and takedown bolt. Hard to see is the magazine release; in the floorplate even with the rear edge of the mag, it pulls to the rear to release. Safety is a lever on the left side, push forward for safe, pull back for fire. Now to get to a couple of the more unusual features of this thing.
If you're not familiar with semi-auto .22's, they generally work like this: you insert a loaded magazine; pull the bolt back and release it. Pulling the bolt back either cocks the hammer or compresses the firing pin spring, and the recoil spring drives the bolt forward where it strips the top cartridge out of the magazine and drives it into the chamber, the extractor snapping over the rim in the process. You pull the trigger, the hammer or spring drives the firing pin forward to fire the cartridge, the bullet goes down the barrel and the recoil energy pushes the bolt back. As the bolt travels back the extractor pulls the fired case out, it strikes the ejector which throws it out. That's basically it for every semi-auto .22 out there, pistol or rifle. Except this one and a very few others.
You'll notice the bolt is locked back; this is cocked. As I mentioned before, it fires from the open-bolt position. From what I understand very few firearms were made this way outside of automatic or select-fire stuff. If you expand the picture, see that bright spot in the ejection port? That's the ejector, nothing more than a pin extending in from the sidewall and fitting into a groove in the bolt body. Speaking of the bolt,
The hole in the side is for the charging handle. Two big things here are a: there is no firing pin. See that ridge along the bottom front? Can't really tell from the picture, but it extends into a ridge machined into the face of the bolt; when the bolt falls this ridge strikes clear across the base of the cartridge. If this won't fire the cartridge, nothing will.
Now, notice anything else about the bolt? Like something missing? There's no extractor. Which freaked me out at first, especially since the Gun Parts catalog shows a 'old-style extractor'. Which I could not figure out because there's no place for one to go on the bolt or fit into the breech face; apparently there's a different version that does have one. On this one, when you pull the trigger it releases the bolt. As it moves forward it strips the top cartridge out of the magazine and drives it into the chamber; as the rim seats in the chamber the firing ridge strikes the rim and fires the cartridge. Recoil then not only drives the bolt back, it drives the fired case back out of the chamber, it following the bolt until the left side strikes the ejector pin which throws it out of the ejection port. Elegantly simple.
Take a look at the trigger:
It has a resemblance to the design of the K31, doesn't it? In this case the housing is dovetailed into the bottom of the receiver, and instead of the vertically-sliding sear of the K31 the sear pivots down to release the bolt. No, I did not take the mechanism apart.
Everything else about taking it down is simple(see the picture here). The receiver bumper plug screws into the back of the receiver; pull a screw in the bottom of the receiver to unlock it and it unscrews. Remove it and the recoil spring comes out, followed by the balancing block. Pull the bolt to the cocked position and the charging handle pulls out to the right, then turn the rifle breech down and shake a couple of times and the bolt comes out, and that's it.
There's a hole in the back of the bolt the balancing block fits into, and a smaller hole in the bottom of that one where one of the pins on the block fits; it extends far enough to fit into a groove in the charging handle, locking it in place.
I know, neat though the mechanism may be, how's it shoot?
I'll admit that shooting this made me nervous at first. Images of standing at the firing line using a rod to knock stuck cases out of the chamber came to mind. So I loaded one round only the first time, lined up and pulled the trigger. The empty ejected perfectly, not as far as many others but with no problem. So I loaded fully(the magazine will hold seven, but the last one is a bitch to get in; I stuck with five after the first load) and continued. This was just resting the forend at about 20 yards for general trial, not a serious accuracy test. Between the lousy(for my eyes on a slightly dim indoor range) sights and the bolt slamming forward during the shot, I didn't expect much. This is, as I recall, 25 rounds:
Once I got used to the idea of this thing working with no extractor, it was just as fun as any other .22. I didn't notice much difference in firing, though the open-bolt setup did give it a different feel.
I put about 75 rounds through it, with no failures to eject. I had one fail to feed; it seems that you can get the magazine in at a slight angle from the proper position, which will cause this.
Of the last ten, I fired five at about fifteen yards offhand and got this(circled) group
which with these sights and my eyes I was quite happy with. So for the last five I ran it out to twenty yards, and got this:
which made me very happy.
Hopefully, I'll get a chance to shoot this again, with a solid bench to see just what it can do at longer ranges. Overall it's a fine old rifle with an unusual action that still works quite well. And considering this was made at least 70 years ago, it's in beautiful shape; very little wear on the bluing, and the stock hardly has a mark on it. Definately something that would be worth running across.
Please ignore the toes in the bottom of the picture
Blued steel, walnut stock, polished bolt & charging handle. 22" barrel, 41" overall. Has the standard for the time front bead and rear notch sights, the notch being a wide, shallow v. Take a closer look at the receiver:
Bolt closed, you can see the magazine and takedown bolt. Hard to see is the magazine release; in the floorplate even with the rear edge of the mag, it pulls to the rear to release. Safety is a lever on the left side, push forward for safe, pull back for fire. Now to get to a couple of the more unusual features of this thing.
If you're not familiar with semi-auto .22's, they generally work like this: you insert a loaded magazine; pull the bolt back and release it. Pulling the bolt back either cocks the hammer or compresses the firing pin spring, and the recoil spring drives the bolt forward where it strips the top cartridge out of the magazine and drives it into the chamber, the extractor snapping over the rim in the process. You pull the trigger, the hammer or spring drives the firing pin forward to fire the cartridge, the bullet goes down the barrel and the recoil energy pushes the bolt back. As the bolt travels back the extractor pulls the fired case out, it strikes the ejector which throws it out. That's basically it for every semi-auto .22 out there, pistol or rifle. Except this one and a very few others.
You'll notice the bolt is locked back; this is cocked. As I mentioned before, it fires from the open-bolt position. From what I understand very few firearms were made this way outside of automatic or select-fire stuff. If you expand the picture, see that bright spot in the ejection port? That's the ejector, nothing more than a pin extending in from the sidewall and fitting into a groove in the bolt body. Speaking of the bolt,
The hole in the side is for the charging handle. Two big things here are a: there is no firing pin. See that ridge along the bottom front? Can't really tell from the picture, but it extends into a ridge machined into the face of the bolt; when the bolt falls this ridge strikes clear across the base of the cartridge. If this won't fire the cartridge, nothing will.
Now, notice anything else about the bolt? Like something missing? There's no extractor. Which freaked me out at first, especially since the Gun Parts catalog shows a 'old-style extractor'. Which I could not figure out because there's no place for one to go on the bolt or fit into the breech face; apparently there's a different version that does have one. On this one, when you pull the trigger it releases the bolt. As it moves forward it strips the top cartridge out of the magazine and drives it into the chamber; as the rim seats in the chamber the firing ridge strikes the rim and fires the cartridge. Recoil then not only drives the bolt back, it drives the fired case back out of the chamber, it following the bolt until the left side strikes the ejector pin which throws it out of the ejection port. Elegantly simple.
Take a look at the trigger:
It has a resemblance to the design of the K31, doesn't it? In this case the housing is dovetailed into the bottom of the receiver, and instead of the vertically-sliding sear of the K31 the sear pivots down to release the bolt. No, I did not take the mechanism apart.
Everything else about taking it down is simple(see the picture here). The receiver bumper plug screws into the back of the receiver; pull a screw in the bottom of the receiver to unlock it and it unscrews. Remove it and the recoil spring comes out, followed by the balancing block. Pull the bolt to the cocked position and the charging handle pulls out to the right, then turn the rifle breech down and shake a couple of times and the bolt comes out, and that's it.
There's a hole in the back of the bolt the balancing block fits into, and a smaller hole in the bottom of that one where one of the pins on the block fits; it extends far enough to fit into a groove in the charging handle, locking it in place.
I know, neat though the mechanism may be, how's it shoot?
I'll admit that shooting this made me nervous at first. Images of standing at the firing line using a rod to knock stuck cases out of the chamber came to mind. So I loaded one round only the first time, lined up and pulled the trigger. The empty ejected perfectly, not as far as many others but with no problem. So I loaded fully(the magazine will hold seven, but the last one is a bitch to get in; I stuck with five after the first load) and continued. This was just resting the forend at about 20 yards for general trial, not a serious accuracy test. Between the lousy(for my eyes on a slightly dim indoor range) sights and the bolt slamming forward during the shot, I didn't expect much. This is, as I recall, 25 rounds:
Once I got used to the idea of this thing working with no extractor, it was just as fun as any other .22. I didn't notice much difference in firing, though the open-bolt setup did give it a different feel.
I put about 75 rounds through it, with no failures to eject. I had one fail to feed; it seems that you can get the magazine in at a slight angle from the proper position, which will cause this.
Of the last ten, I fired five at about fifteen yards offhand and got this(circled) group
which with these sights and my eyes I was quite happy with. So for the last five I ran it out to twenty yards, and got this:
which made me very happy.
Hopefully, I'll get a chance to shoot this again, with a solid bench to see just what it can do at longer ranges. Overall it's a fine old rifle with an unusual action that still works quite well. And considering this was made at least 70 years ago, it's in beautiful shape; very little wear on the bluing, and the stock hardly has a mark on it. Definately something that would be worth running across.
Sunday, August 13, 2006
The real 'press release' in Cuba
will be when feedel's body is staked and burned.
Not a sad piece of official crap like this which Val reported on.
Meant to put this up a couple of days ago when 'Where's Feedel?' was being played along with 'Where's Raul?' Denny found Feedel:
'Course, from the look of things Feedel will currently class more as either 'anchor' or 'bait' than 'oarsman'.
Not a sad piece of official crap like this which Val reported on.
Meant to put this up a couple of days ago when 'Where's Feedel?' was being played along with 'Where's Raul?' Denny found Feedel:
'Course, from the look of things Feedel will currently class more as either 'anchor' or 'bait' than 'oarsman'.
That .22 I asked about the other day?
Kevin and a guy at Rimfire Central and a guy at The High Road all came up with similar info: it appears to be a rifle made by Marlin for Sears. It was sold by Sears, Roebuck from 1931 to 1935, and Marlin made it under their own name as the Model 50.
And that is ALL the information available. I just spent an hour running searches, and the only thing I could find was an old post at a shopping board on a guy looking for a magazine and a place selling them.
In a day or two I'll be able to put up some personal findings; afterbegging and pleading for a while asking nicely, I was allowed to take it to the range today and try it out. Which of course called for taking it down and cleaning it. Found out a couple of more odd things about this firearm. Right now, with my connection, it'd take all bloody evening to get the pictures posted, so I'll hold off until I have access to a faster line.
About it being made for Sears, this was done with a LOT of firearms over time. There were shotguns and rifles of all types sold under the Sears, Roebuck name which were nothing more than a different name & model number stamped on someone else's product. I remember seeing what appeared to be a standard Winchester Model 94 with the Sears name & model on it when I was a kid.KevinPaul provided this link(good thing because I didn't think of checking this) to a cross-reference chart; go take a look at this piece of the past.
And that is ALL the information available. I just spent an hour running searches, and the only thing I could find was an old post at a shopping board on a guy looking for a magazine and a place selling them.
In a day or two I'll be able to put up some personal findings; after
About it being made for Sears, this was done with a LOT of firearms over time. There were shotguns and rifles of all types sold under the Sears, Roebuck name which were nothing more than a different name & model number stamped on someone else's product. I remember seeing what appeared to be a standard Winchester Model 94 with the Sears name & model on it when I was a kid.
Cleaning
There's a post listed in the Carnival on cleaning, I thought I'd throw in a couple of things. I may expand on this later.
First thing, cleaning rods. There's a couple of steel rods pictured in the post, and they do work. I've got one of those sectioned ones in the cleaning kits in the butt trap of my M1 and 03A3; but I will not use them for cleaning unless I've got no other choice, especially on a firearm that has to be cleaned from the muzzle. It's too easy to ding the rifling at the crown, and that is a Bad Thing.
Some of the best rods out there are steel, either small enough diameter to reduce the chance of rifling damage or coated with something. And there are the sectional rods; I've got one of those in my range servant Just In Case. You want to start an argument? Go to one of the gunboards and say you just got a new three-piece aluminum rod; you'll be told all about its drawbacks, and an argument will get started about bare steel vs. coated, and so forth. There are choices, which brings me to my current rods.
About a year ago I was pushing a tight patch down a bore, and the push got a touch out of line, and the damn rod bent. Not flexed, bent. It was a good-quality stainless rod, which I could never get completely straight again. Frustrating as hell. Part of the problem was that with a long barrel you need a longer rod, and that, combined with the small diameter, did it. So I looked around, and at a store found one of the Tipton carbon-fiber rods. Different diameters for a range of calibers, different lengths, solid rods(not hollow). I've been using it since, and got another one for the .22's and up. And they will NOT bend. Flex, yes, but they return to straight when the pressure comes off. And they've got the best swivels I've ever used. If you've cleaned many, rifles in particular, you know about pulling out a rod with a bare end because the swivels on the rod didn't and the jag or brush unscrewed. Or it falls off when it exits the bore. I've never had one come loose on these rods.
If you're cleaning something that must be done from the muzzle, use a bore guide. There are different designs, some for specific firearms, and they keep any rod from touching the crown. And on clean-from-the-breech rifles, you really should use some kind of guide to keep the rod centered. They range from the one I linked to to caliber-specific ones to homemade. I made one for the Enfield by taking a fired case, drilling a hole through the base and soldering a few inches of copper tubing on. Fits very nicely. I'm going to get a piece of small-diameter tubing and make one for the .22 rifles; I think if I work carefully I can grind off the base of a fired case- leaving the rim- and attach the tubing. We'll see.
Cleaning solvents
These range from basic stuff like Hoppe's #9 to newer non-toxic and good-smelling types, some for powder fouling only(despite what the label may say) and some that'll guarantee to strip your bore to bare steel atoms. Here's what I've been using:
Blue Wonder is a gel that comes in a tube. Outside of the FoulOut I've mentioned before, it's the best remover of lead fouling I've ever used, and cleans out powder fouling nicely as well. I don't think it works as well on copper fouling, a problem primarily of medium- to high-velocity rifles. It seems to do a pretty good job on the plastic fouling you get in shotgun barrels. It will also, combined with some fine steel wool, do a marvelous job of removing rust from steel.
Sweet's 7.62 is more specifically for cleaning copper fouling. It works. Be warned, it also stinks strongly of ammonia(which most good copper solvents do). Good stuff.
Ballistol is a water-soluble oil. Pretty good general cleaner, not as good as the above at lead & copper removing. Where I really like this stuff is cleaning after corrosive-primed ammo. Mix it in the proper proportion with water(1 to 9 if I remember right). I've got a small bottle of the mix in the range servant. When I'm done shooting I shake the bottle, run two or three patches damp with the mix through the bore, a couple of dry ones, then an oily one. Seems to do a very good job of flushing out the salts, and if I can't clean soon after I get home, no problem. It may very well be that this would be enough all by itself; I'm paranoid about rust, so I do my usual cleaning with Sweet's at home.
So far, these three have taken care of everything nicely.
Lube and protectant
You have places that need oil, places where a grease is better, and places that may not need lube but do need corrosion protection. Three products I mainly use.
Eezox is interesting stuff. It's a cleaner-lube-protectant that goes on wet, and if you leave just a very thin layer after cleaning the carrier evaporates leaving a dry film lube which does a very good job of protecting from rust. I use it on the outside of guns, and on the pivots of folding knives since it won't attract dust.
Corrosion-X is primarily a lube. It stays wet, is heavier than water so rain or whatever beads up on it and rolls off, and is a very good lube.
Tetra is my grease of choice. Comes in a tube, easy to use, and seems to do a good job of bonding to the metal and staying in place. Pivot pins and such inside actions, bearing surfaces of trigger/sear and such, it's good stuff.
There are a LOT of cleaners and lubes out there; many of them are good, some better than others. Tetra makes lube and cleaner besides the grease, but I have no experience with them. Same for some other copper-solvent cleaners and lubes. These seem to work very well. Hoppe's came out a while back with a new solvent that's supposed to be non-toxic, smell nice, and still do a good job of cleaning, for instance; Hoppe's is a good brand, and I'll probably try it one of these days.
One other thing I'm trying is Kroil. This is, from all reports, the slickest penetrating oil around. Something about the formulation breaking the surface tension of the stuff, so it can seep into the tiniest of cracks and crevices. I haven't had anything frozen to check it on, but I will say this; you can put a drop at the junction of nut & bolt and the stuff seems to disappear. I can see lots of uses for that.
I now have to go move the hose to try to keep some of the rest of the garden alive. I may touch on the subject of brushes and jags later, you lucky people.
First thing, cleaning rods. There's a couple of steel rods pictured in the post, and they do work. I've got one of those sectioned ones in the cleaning kits in the butt trap of my M1 and 03A3; but I will not use them for cleaning unless I've got no other choice, especially on a firearm that has to be cleaned from the muzzle. It's too easy to ding the rifling at the crown, and that is a Bad Thing.
Some of the best rods out there are steel, either small enough diameter to reduce the chance of rifling damage or coated with something. And there are the sectional rods; I've got one of those in my range servant Just In Case. You want to start an argument? Go to one of the gunboards and say you just got a new three-piece aluminum rod; you'll be told all about its drawbacks, and an argument will get started about bare steel vs. coated, and so forth. There are choices, which brings me to my current rods.
About a year ago I was pushing a tight patch down a bore, and the push got a touch out of line, and the damn rod bent. Not flexed, bent. It was a good-quality stainless rod, which I could never get completely straight again. Frustrating as hell. Part of the problem was that with a long barrel you need a longer rod, and that, combined with the small diameter, did it. So I looked around, and at a store found one of the Tipton carbon-fiber rods. Different diameters for a range of calibers, different lengths, solid rods(not hollow). I've been using it since, and got another one for the .22's and up. And they will NOT bend. Flex, yes, but they return to straight when the pressure comes off. And they've got the best swivels I've ever used. If you've cleaned many, rifles in particular, you know about pulling out a rod with a bare end because the swivels on the rod didn't and the jag or brush unscrewed. Or it falls off when it exits the bore. I've never had one come loose on these rods.
If you're cleaning something that must be done from the muzzle, use a bore guide. There are different designs, some for specific firearms, and they keep any rod from touching the crown. And on clean-from-the-breech rifles, you really should use some kind of guide to keep the rod centered. They range from the one I linked to to caliber-specific ones to homemade. I made one for the Enfield by taking a fired case, drilling a hole through the base and soldering a few inches of copper tubing on. Fits very nicely. I'm going to get a piece of small-diameter tubing and make one for the .22 rifles; I think if I work carefully I can grind off the base of a fired case- leaving the rim- and attach the tubing. We'll see.
Cleaning solvents
These range from basic stuff like Hoppe's #9 to newer non-toxic and good-smelling types, some for powder fouling only(despite what the label may say) and some that'll guarantee to strip your bore to bare steel atoms. Here's what I've been using:
Blue Wonder is a gel that comes in a tube. Outside of the FoulOut I've mentioned before, it's the best remover of lead fouling I've ever used, and cleans out powder fouling nicely as well. I don't think it works as well on copper fouling, a problem primarily of medium- to high-velocity rifles. It seems to do a pretty good job on the plastic fouling you get in shotgun barrels. It will also, combined with some fine steel wool, do a marvelous job of removing rust from steel.
Sweet's 7.62 is more specifically for cleaning copper fouling. It works. Be warned, it also stinks strongly of ammonia(which most good copper solvents do). Good stuff.
Ballistol is a water-soluble oil. Pretty good general cleaner, not as good as the above at lead & copper removing. Where I really like this stuff is cleaning after corrosive-primed ammo. Mix it in the proper proportion with water(1 to 9 if I remember right). I've got a small bottle of the mix in the range servant. When I'm done shooting I shake the bottle, run two or three patches damp with the mix through the bore, a couple of dry ones, then an oily one. Seems to do a very good job of flushing out the salts, and if I can't clean soon after I get home, no problem. It may very well be that this would be enough all by itself; I'm paranoid about rust, so I do my usual cleaning with Sweet's at home.
So far, these three have taken care of everything nicely.
Lube and protectant
You have places that need oil, places where a grease is better, and places that may not need lube but do need corrosion protection. Three products I mainly use.
Eezox is interesting stuff. It's a cleaner-lube-protectant that goes on wet, and if you leave just a very thin layer after cleaning the carrier evaporates leaving a dry film lube which does a very good job of protecting from rust. I use it on the outside of guns, and on the pivots of folding knives since it won't attract dust.
Corrosion-X is primarily a lube. It stays wet, is heavier than water so rain or whatever beads up on it and rolls off, and is a very good lube.
Tetra is my grease of choice. Comes in a tube, easy to use, and seems to do a good job of bonding to the metal and staying in place. Pivot pins and such inside actions, bearing surfaces of trigger/sear and such, it's good stuff.
There are a LOT of cleaners and lubes out there; many of them are good, some better than others. Tetra makes lube and cleaner besides the grease, but I have no experience with them. Same for some other copper-solvent cleaners and lubes. These seem to work very well. Hoppe's came out a while back with a new solvent that's supposed to be non-toxic, smell nice, and still do a good job of cleaning, for instance; Hoppe's is a good brand, and I'll probably try it one of these days.
One other thing I'm trying is Kroil. This is, from all reports, the slickest penetrating oil around. Something about the formulation breaking the surface tension of the stuff, so it can seep into the tiniest of cracks and crevices. I haven't had anything frozen to check it on, but I will say this; you can put a drop at the junction of nut & bolt and the stuff seems to disappear. I can see lots of uses for that.
I now have to go move the hose to try to keep some of the rest of the garden alive. I may touch on the subject of brushes and jags later, you lucky people.
Carnival of Cordite #69, and I ain't arguing it any more
up at Gullyborg.
Friend mentioned before sent more e-mails last night. Various references to the '3 or 4' real scientists who are the only ones who don't think man-caused global warming is happening, if I would just read the REAL research and the information from the UN, and some various 'we shouldn't be in Iraq' notes thrown in. I'm just going to drop this- didn't even complete reading the last one- and hope friend drops it; this is at the point of teaching a pig to sing, and I ain't got the time or will for it.
Now for the weather. It's partly cloudy outside, temps in the high 80's as of 10 a.m. and humidity high enough to frizz Cher's fake eyelashes. Supposed to be a chance of rain, and God I hope so.
Friend mentioned before sent more e-mails last night. Various references to the '3 or 4' real scientists who are the only ones who don't think man-caused global warming is happening, if I would just read the REAL research and the information from the UN, and some various 'we shouldn't be in Iraq' notes thrown in. I'm just going to drop this- didn't even complete reading the last one- and hope friend drops it; this is at the point of teaching a pig to sing, and I ain't got the time or will for it.
Now for the weather. It's partly cloudy outside, temps in the high 80's as of 10 a.m. and humidity high enough to frizz Cher's fake eyelashes. Supposed to be a chance of rain, and God I hope so.
Saturday, August 12, 2006
Identification help, please
A few months back someone posted a comment mentioning some .22 rifles, semi-autos that fired from an open bolt. An acquaintance turned up with one today, and I can't find that comment to check the information.
This is marked 'Ranger .22 Long Rifle Model 34A' on the barrel, no other makers mark. Uses a box magazine, safety is on the left side of the receiver, push forward/pull back. The magazine latch is set into the floor plate; it's spring-loaded, pull back to release, and fits into a slot in the mag body.
Anyone know anything about this thing? I searched Rimfire Central, The High Road and did some web searching with negative results.
This is marked 'Ranger .22 Long Rifle Model 34A' on the barrel, no other makers mark. Uses a box magazine, safety is on the left side of the receiver, push forward/pull back. The magazine latch is set into the floor plate; it's spring-loaded, pull back to release, and fits into a slot in the mag body.
Anyone know anything about this thing? I searched Rimfire Central, The High Road and did some web searching with negative results.
Friday, August 11, 2006
This is bloody depressing
And it touches on the previous post. A few days back I had a(I thought) small argument with a friend about the environment, pollution, etc.
Starting about a day later, I started getting e-mails from friend listing how the Antarctic is actually melting, Bush is trying to trash a treaty to save the Ozone Layer(Kyoto), etc. 'Industry is dismantling the EPA, industry is being deregulated, all the parklands are being opened to logging, etc. I don't know whether to argue the points or just drop it all.
Depressing thing? One of friend's daughters is majoring in environmental science in college, and friend is a grade-school teacher.
Starting about a day later, I started getting e-mails from friend listing how the Antarctic is actually melting, Bush is trying to trash a treaty to save the Ozone Layer(Kyoto), etc. 'Industry is dismantling the EPA, industry is being deregulated, all the parklands are being opened to logging, etc. I don't know whether to argue the points or just drop it all.
Depressing thing? One of friend's daughters is majoring in environmental science in college, and friend is a grade-school teacher.
I was familiar with some of the mess in education
from my kids and their friends. Now Kevin points to this article by a college professor. There were some positive results, of course. Sixty percent knew Nixon was the president who resigned in office, 95 percent chose Sacramento as their state's capital, and 81 percent more or less knew what the Holocaust referred to. ("When jewes were killed" and "killing of ethnical group" are actual quotes from soon-to-be university grads.) And 76 percent knew what happened on Pearl Harbor Day ("There was a bombing in the shape of a mushroom which killed many people and destroyed lands.")
And that's among the better results... This is among the outcomes we get when we have 'teachers' who are more interested in playing 'esteem' games and getting the right 'feelings' in students than teaching them things like how to read, and write, and history. 'Course, when some of these clowns teach history it's from a politically-correct perspective, of course; can't have the little kids thinking there's something better about Western society than others, or that the US is a better country than anywhere else.
And that's among the better results... This is among the outcomes we get when we have 'teachers' who are more interested in playing 'esteem' games and getting the right 'feelings' in students than teaching them things like how to read, and write, and history. 'Course, when some of these clowns teach history it's from a politically-correct perspective, of course; can't have the little kids thinking there's something better about Western society than others, or that the US is a better country than anywhere else.
Thursday, August 10, 2006
Islam: why it takes several hours to get on a plane,
as Steve put it.
Got up this morning to the news of the Hitler butt-monkey mass-murder wannado members of the ROP wanting to blow up a bunch of planes. Preferably over cities to increase the death count, but over the ocean would have been good enough for them. That's bad.
Just as bad in a way was the level of idiocy from people who were saying that a: there was no real bombing plot, b: this was all cooked up between Bush Chimphitlerburton and his poodle Blair because- and this was REALLY stupid- Leiberman lost the primary in CT the other day and c: they just grabbed some muslims to jail to take attention away from polls on the war. My first exposure to this idiocy- there's got to be a better word for this kind of insanity but I don't know what it is- was listening to Glenn Beck for a while. His first caller of the day hit all the above points ALONG with how this all started because the government bombed the Trade Center so as to have an excuse to invade Afghanistan.
I truly despair for the western countries. We're facing a bunch of child-murdering thugs who want to live in the 7th century and will kill anybody who won't go along, who repeatedly TELL US they want us converted or dead, and people with college educations either don't believe it or make excuses for them. And think the government is so incompetent we can't win in Iraq, while believing it's so devious that it can send a team of engineers and demolition experts into public buildings for a couple of weeks to wire them for demolition and NOBODY will notice either them or the work they're doing AND keep the whole thing secret for years.
And the people who believe these things think they're so superior in intellect and ability that they should beruling over governing us all. For our own good, of course.
In one of David Drake's books a character refers to some people in Turkey as having 'no connection to civilization beyond knowing how to fire a machine gun', I think was the phrase. Here we've got people who don't WANT any connection to modern life other than methods to kill as many unbelievers as possible; and if some believers get in the way, well, they'll be considered martyrs so it's no problem to kill them too. The Iranians working like hell to get some nukes are of the same type- in some cases the same people- who sent herds of children in front of combat troops so the kids would set off the mines during the war with Iraq. We've got subhumans who think dressing their kid up as a suicide bomber is good training for his future(I don't give a rat's ass if you don't like the phrasing, as far as I'm concerned people who do this ARE subhuman).
We've got 'moderate' muslims who do one of two things: make excuses for the murderers or refuse to speak of them at all, and then bitch and whine that people don't trust them. People, if you want to be trusted STOP MAKING EXCUSES FOR MURDERERS AND TORTURERS. For the most part nobody would give a damn what your religeon was, but by your actions you both draw attention to it and give people reason not to trust you.
Couple all this with a bunch of people in government who would rather see a mass murder occur in this country than be accused of bigotry by CAIR for daring to say "Muslims who support jihadi terrorists are part of the enemy".
I think it was Beck who pointed out that muslims who do NOT agree with the murderers need to get off their ass and start reporting the dirtbags in their mosque planning terror and stop making excuses for them, or they're going to wind up in the same position as the Americans of German descent who were big supporters of the German-American Bund in WWII. It wasn't pleasant.
And there was a lot of talking about the apparent liquid or gel explosives the terrorists planned to use. There are so many possible ways to make an incindiary or explosive out of common stuff, along with the more exotic materials, it'll be difficult to screen out. I remember reading that during WWII the OSS used an explosive that had been developed to be hard to spot; it looked like, and apparently smelled like, flour. They even baked a cake with some to demonstrate it. But add a detonator... It would help if, with that idiot Minetta gone, the airport security people would trash the politically-correct feeling-up of women and searching of grandmas, but I'm not holding out much hope.
Got up this morning to the news of the Hitler butt-monkey mass-murder wannado members of the ROP wanting to blow up a bunch of planes. Preferably over cities to increase the death count, but over the ocean would have been good enough for them. That's bad.
Just as bad in a way was the level of idiocy from people who were saying that a: there was no real bombing plot, b: this was all cooked up between Bush Chimphitlerburton and his poodle Blair because- and this was REALLY stupid- Leiberman lost the primary in CT the other day and c: they just grabbed some muslims to jail to take attention away from polls on the war. My first exposure to this idiocy- there's got to be a better word for this kind of insanity but I don't know what it is- was listening to Glenn Beck for a while. His first caller of the day hit all the above points ALONG with how this all started because the government bombed the Trade Center so as to have an excuse to invade Afghanistan.
I truly despair for the western countries. We're facing a bunch of child-murdering thugs who want to live in the 7th century and will kill anybody who won't go along, who repeatedly TELL US they want us converted or dead, and people with college educations either don't believe it or make excuses for them. And think the government is so incompetent we can't win in Iraq, while believing it's so devious that it can send a team of engineers and demolition experts into public buildings for a couple of weeks to wire them for demolition and NOBODY will notice either them or the work they're doing AND keep the whole thing secret for years.
And the people who believe these things think they're so superior in intellect and ability that they should be
In one of David Drake's books a character refers to some people in Turkey as having 'no connection to civilization beyond knowing how to fire a machine gun', I think was the phrase. Here we've got people who don't WANT any connection to modern life other than methods to kill as many unbelievers as possible; and if some believers get in the way, well, they'll be considered martyrs so it's no problem to kill them too. The Iranians working like hell to get some nukes are of the same type- in some cases the same people- who sent herds of children in front of combat troops so the kids would set off the mines during the war with Iraq. We've got subhumans who think dressing their kid up as a suicide bomber is good training for his future(I don't give a rat's ass if you don't like the phrasing, as far as I'm concerned people who do this ARE subhuman).
We've got 'moderate' muslims who do one of two things: make excuses for the murderers or refuse to speak of them at all, and then bitch and whine that people don't trust them. People, if you want to be trusted STOP MAKING EXCUSES FOR MURDERERS AND TORTURERS. For the most part nobody would give a damn what your religeon was, but by your actions you both draw attention to it and give people reason not to trust you.
Couple all this with a bunch of people in government who would rather see a mass murder occur in this country than be accused of bigotry by CAIR for daring to say "Muslims who support jihadi terrorists are part of the enemy".
I think it was Beck who pointed out that muslims who do NOT agree with the murderers need to get off their ass and start reporting the dirtbags in their mosque planning terror and stop making excuses for them, or they're going to wind up in the same position as the Americans of German descent who were big supporters of the German-American Bund in WWII. It wasn't pleasant.
And there was a lot of talking about the apparent liquid or gel explosives the terrorists planned to use. There are so many possible ways to make an incindiary or explosive out of common stuff, along with the more exotic materials, it'll be difficult to screen out. I remember reading that during WWII the OSS used an explosive that had been developed to be hard to spot; it looked like, and apparently smelled like, flour. They even baked a cake with some to demonstrate it. But add a detonator... It would help if, with that idiot Minetta gone, the airport security people would trash the politically-correct feeling-up of women and searching of grandmas, but I'm not holding out much hope.
Wednesday, August 09, 2006
No, I'm not getting paid for this
but I'm passing it along. If you're looking for a Finnish M39, go here. Good prices and good rifles. Damn sure better prices than I've seen other places.
(and if they're seeing this, I WOULD appreciate something. Oh, a cleaning kit? Or maybe... never mind)
(and if they're seeing this, I WOULD appreciate something. Oh, a cleaning kit? Or maybe... never mind)
Tuesday, August 08, 2006
Being lazy, and not able to find this on a quick search,
can somebody tell me how to post a picture on the sidebar? I was thinking of something tasteful like this for a start:
Artwork from Kim
Update: Cowboy Blob to the rescue! it's there!
Note: you should not screw with your template whilst sampling Dad's homebrew.
Artwork from Kim
Update: Cowboy Blob to the rescue! it's there!
Note: you should not screw with your template whilst sampling Dad's homebrew.
Let's talk about sanctimonious BS for a moment
In specific, that in this post by Michelle Malkin. It's Bill Clinton buttmonkey Lanny Davis, talking about the primary fight between Leiberman and Lamont. He's taken notice of the, shall we say, nastiness some of Lamont's people are displaying, and says this:
This kind of scary hatred, my dad used to tell me, comes only from the right wing--in his day from people such as the late Sen. Joseph McCarthy, with his tirades against "communists and their fellow travelers." The word "McCarthyism" became a red flag for liberals, signifying the far right's fascistic tactics of labeling anyone a "communist" or "socialist" who favored an active federal government to help the middle class and the poor, and to level the playing field.
and
I came to believe that we liberals couldn't possibly be so intolerant and hateful, because our ideology was famous for ACLU-type commitments to free speech, dissent and, especially, tolerance for those who differed with us. And in recent years--with the deadly combination of sanctimony and vitriol displayed by the likes of Rush Limbaugh, Ann Coulter and Michael Savage--I held on to the view that the left was inherently more tolerant and less hateful than the right.
Apparently Mr. Davis has a very selective memory. None of the name-calling and threatening indulged in by his 'compassionate liberals' in the past counts at all, not even noticable. For that matter, the absolutely vile crap coming out of Air America has registered at all with him. But now that someone is saying bad things about Leiberman, well, this is terrible! This has to stop!
Screw you, Davis. I remember the crap that has come out of your mouth over the years, including when you were helping your old boss cover up all kinds of crap. I remember the garbage your boss said about anyone- hell, IS saying about anyone- who doesn't agree with or won't go along with what he says should be. Anyone else remember what Clinton was saying after the OKC Bombing? And how much upset that stirred up?
For that matter, some of the "...favored an active federal government to help the middle class and the poor, and to level the playing field, since he's apparently forgotten, included trashing people and their beliefs in order to hand more power to the government. As for the 'ACLU-type commitments', the list of BS coming out of that organization has filled books on its' own, including their intolerance for anyone who doesn't agree with them and their commitment to defending those rights that they agree with, but not others; those don't count as 'individual' rights(2nd Amendment, anyone?)
Lanny Davis can kiss my ass. Nothing done by the Left in the past counts, but now that someone gored his ox, he's 'discovered' nastiness on his Left, and he's not happy. Two-faced little weenie.
This kind of scary hatred, my dad used to tell me, comes only from the right wing--in his day from people such as the late Sen. Joseph McCarthy, with his tirades against "communists and their fellow travelers." The word "McCarthyism" became a red flag for liberals, signifying the far right's fascistic tactics of labeling anyone a "communist" or "socialist" who favored an active federal government to help the middle class and the poor, and to level the playing field.
and
I came to believe that we liberals couldn't possibly be so intolerant and hateful, because our ideology was famous for ACLU-type commitments to free speech, dissent and, especially, tolerance for those who differed with us. And in recent years--with the deadly combination of sanctimony and vitriol displayed by the likes of Rush Limbaugh, Ann Coulter and Michael Savage--I held on to the view that the left was inherently more tolerant and less hateful than the right.
Apparently Mr. Davis has a very selective memory. None of the name-calling and threatening indulged in by his 'compassionate liberals' in the past counts at all, not even noticable. For that matter, the absolutely vile crap coming out of Air America has registered at all with him. But now that someone is saying bad things about Leiberman, well, this is terrible! This has to stop!
Screw you, Davis. I remember the crap that has come out of your mouth over the years, including when you were helping your old boss cover up all kinds of crap. I remember the garbage your boss said about anyone- hell, IS saying about anyone- who doesn't agree with or won't go along with what he says should be. Anyone else remember what Clinton was saying after the OKC Bombing? And how much upset that stirred up?
For that matter, some of the "...favored an active federal government to help the middle class and the poor, and to level the playing field, since he's apparently forgotten, included trashing people and their beliefs in order to hand more power to the government. As for the 'ACLU-type commitments', the list of BS coming out of that organization has filled books on its' own, including their intolerance for anyone who doesn't agree with them and their commitment to defending those rights that they agree with, but not others; those don't count as 'individual' rights(2nd Amendment, anyone?)
Lanny Davis can kiss my ass. Nothing done by the Left in the past counts, but now that someone gored his ox, he's 'discovered' nastiness on his Left, and he's not happy. Two-faced little weenie.
Monday, August 07, 2006
I did go back
to the gun show Sunday. And my favorite ammo dealer(the bastard) made me a deal on some stuff, so I wound up getting more than I'd planned on. And damn near a hernia carrying it out. He threw in a can opener, too. Very handy, since I'd loaned mine to a friend and keep forgetting to get it back.
His .308 and .223 military ball had mostly evaporated. He said he'd brought in a pallet of mixed stuff Sunday morning, and by the time I got there(it opened at 9:30 or ten, I got there about eleven) all the .308 and most of the .223 was gone. His last can of Polish 7.62x54R ball went right after I walked by, and when I wandered back a bunch of other stuff was gone, too.
One guy had a Romanian PSL sniper rifle, their version of the Russian SVD. I'd kind of like to have one, but the guy wanted $900 for it, and that's far too high.
I noticed that between the time I left Saturday and the time I arrived Sunday most of the reasonably-priced SKS rifles were gone, what was left was Norinco and Russian models at $300+.
Only thing I didn't see that I was looking for was some cleaning jags, but local places carry those; just thought I'd look while there. Overall, not a bad show for a moderate-size one this time of year.
His .308 and .223 military ball had mostly evaporated. He said he'd brought in a pallet of mixed stuff Sunday morning, and by the time I got there(it opened at 9:30 or ten, I got there about eleven) all the .308 and most of the .223 was gone. His last can of Polish 7.62x54R ball went right after I walked by, and when I wandered back a bunch of other stuff was gone, too.
One guy had a Romanian PSL sniper rifle, their version of the Russian SVD. I'd kind of like to have one, but the guy wanted $900 for it, and that's far too high.
I noticed that between the time I left Saturday and the time I arrived Sunday most of the reasonably-priced SKS rifles were gone, what was left was Norinco and Russian models at $300+.
Only thing I didn't see that I was looking for was some cleaning jags, but local places carry those; just thought I'd look while there. Overall, not a bad show for a moderate-size one this time of year.
Sunday, August 06, 2006
Before I forget
found this at the Drumslinger's place:
"Another good thing war is good for: Peace. This year the Peace Corps accepted 7,810 volunteers--the largest number in 30 years. That's great news. The Peace Corps identifies people who hate America, then ships them overseas. Hard to camp out with Cindy Sheehan when you're digging a well in Burundi." --Stephen Colbert
"Another good thing war is good for: Peace. This year the Peace Corps accepted 7,810 volunteers--the largest number in 30 years. That's great news. The Peace Corps identifies people who hate America, then ships them overseas. Hard to camp out with Cindy Sheehan when you're digging a well in Burundi." --Stephen Colbert
Saturday, August 05, 2006
Gun show
at the Fairgrounds this weekend. Not one of the biggest ones, but a fair amount to look at. And, wonder of wonders, my favorite two ammo vendors were both there.
So I have a bag of stuff, and I may go back tomorrow; trying to decide about that. I'm tempted to stock up on a couple of things, because the prices of ammo are not exactly stable lately; and they almost always go up.
Also, my #1 vendor was low on a lot of stuff that he did have, and out of a few things.
So I have a bag of stuff, and I may go back tomorrow; trying to decide about that. I'm tempted to stock up on a couple of things, because the prices of ammo are not exactly stable lately; and they almost always go up.
Also, my #1 vendor was low on a lot of stuff that he did have, and out of a few things.
Carnival of Cordite #68 is up
Again at Gullyborg. Hot chicks with guns, hot guns and various information. And ladies, you REALLY need to check out the contest:
Next week I'll be announcing the FOR WOMEN ONLY incredible Barrett .50 BMG 1000 yard shooting class, complete with a FREE .50 BMG Barrett from SHOOTING GALLERY and Barrett Rifles... Barrett is running a For Women Only class at the Whittington Center in Raton, NM, on November 7-9. SHOOTING GALLERY, because we love our viewers, will be giving away an expense-paid slot in that class; the lucky winner — who must be a woman...and I mean it! — will also get a Barrett Model 99 .50 BMG to take home for CONTINUED PLINKING.
I mean, damn, that's almost worth trying a sex-change.
I said ALMOST, leave me alone.
Next week I'll be announcing the FOR WOMEN ONLY incredible Barrett .50 BMG 1000 yard shooting class, complete with a FREE .50 BMG Barrett from SHOOTING GALLERY and Barrett Rifles... Barrett is running a For Women Only class at the Whittington Center in Raton, NM, on November 7-9. SHOOTING GALLERY, because we love our viewers, will be giving away an expense-paid slot in that class; the lucky winner — who must be a woman...and I mean it! — will also get a Barrett Model 99 .50 BMG to take home for CONTINUED PLINKING.
I mean, damn, that's almost worth trying a sex-change.
I said ALMOST, leave me alone.
If it's not there already, (updated at the bottom)
put Hornady on your list of good places to do business with.
I've had several pieces of their equipment for reloading over time, and it's all worked well. With no problems, no need to find out about customer service.
Until now
My own damn fault, I was depriming/resizing my .45 brass from the last trip to the range and didn't notice there were some .380 cases mixed in, and one was inside a .45 and when I tried to deprime...
So I said words, then figured I'd get a new pin the next day or two. Except that the decapping rod had the pin set in permanently, no way to replace it. So I looked up the Hornady site looking for the rod assembly. Not listed. So I sent a message to their customer service asking about it. Next day, I had a response saying "We'll replace it at no charge with the new Zip Spindle for your 45 ACP die set. The Zip Spindles are designed with the pins separate from the spindle. What is your address?"
That was on the second. It was in the mail today; the new zip spindle which includes the new collet nut AND a spare pin.
Can't ask for better support than that.
Update: I just remembered one other time I had to contact Hornady. I've got one of their priming tools(put in the correct shellholder, dump primers in the tray, snap on the cover and start squeezing), and a couple of years ago I broke it. Got a little 'enthusiastic' taking the cover off and the split pin that holds it in place broke one leg off. As I recall I sent to them asking "do you have it, can I get one, how much?" and once they'd made sure of the piece in question simply sent "We'll replace it under warranty, what's your address?"
Again, my fault, they made it right. Quickly. Service like that is a Good Thing.
(especially when you do things like this...)
I've had several pieces of their equipment for reloading over time, and it's all worked well. With no problems, no need to find out about customer service.
My own damn fault, I was depriming/resizing my .45 brass from the last trip to the range and didn't notice there were some .380 cases mixed in, and one was inside a .45 and when I tried to deprime...
So I said words, then figured I'd get a new pin the next day or two. Except that the decapping rod had the pin set in permanently, no way to replace it. So I looked up the Hornady site looking for the rod assembly. Not listed. So I sent a message to their customer service asking about it. Next day, I had a response saying "We'll replace it at no charge with the new Zip Spindle for your 45 ACP die set. The Zip Spindles are designed with the pins separate from the spindle. What is your address?"
That was on the second. It was in the mail today; the new zip spindle which includes the new collet nut AND a spare pin.
Can't ask for better support than that.
Update: I just remembered one other time I had to contact Hornady. I've got one of their priming tools(put in the correct shellholder, dump primers in the tray, snap on the cover and start squeezing), and a couple of years ago I broke it. Got a little 'enthusiastic' taking the cover off and the split pin that holds it in place broke one leg off. As I recall I sent to them asking "do you have it, can I get one, how much?" and once they'd made sure of the piece in question simply sent "We'll replace it under warranty, what's your address?"
Again, my fault, they made it right. Quickly. Service like that is a Good Thing.
(especially when you do things like this...)
Thursday, August 03, 2006
We're getting some rain, finally
and I'm wondering what my son is doing tonight. Sleeping now, or running some exercise? No idea.
I haven't received any phone calls along the "Papa(or "Sir,"), something really bad happened", so I figure he's fine. He was really looking forward to it when he left, and since he had some idea of what was coming- far more so than a lot of the others, I imagine- I doubt he's lost that. One thing I did tell him was some stories I'd heard about what happened to people who, upon being issued a rifle, made the mistake of calling it a 'gun' where the DI could hear them, so he should avoid that.
I am looking forward to hearing from him when he's finally allowed a call/letter/e-mail, although as I mentioned before it's liable to be "Not enough sleep, not enough time, and I want some REAL food".
One of the things I really like about Oklahoma is that so far, if his joining up comes up, it's followed by some combination of the following:
What branch?
When did he start?
God bless him, and I'll keep him in my prayers.
I don't know if prayers help; I do tend to believe in God, but sometimes I'm not too fond of Him. But this makes me feel good.
Ah well, I need to figure out a design and get that shirt made.
I haven't received any phone calls along the "Papa(or "Sir,"), something really bad happened", so I figure he's fine. He was really looking forward to it when he left, and since he had some idea of what was coming- far more so than a lot of the others, I imagine- I doubt he's lost that. One thing I did tell him was some stories I'd heard about what happened to people who, upon being issued a rifle, made the mistake of calling it a 'gun' where the DI could hear them, so he should avoid that.
I am looking forward to hearing from him when he's finally allowed a call/letter/e-mail, although as I mentioned before it's liable to be "Not enough sleep, not enough time, and I want some REAL food".
One of the things I really like about Oklahoma is that so far, if his joining up comes up, it's followed by some combination of the following:
What branch?
When did he start?
God bless him, and I'll keep him in my prayers.
I don't know if prayers help; I do tend to believe in God, but sometimes I'm not too fond of Him. But this makes me feel good.
Ah well, I need to figure out a design and get that shirt made.
Among the reasons why gun licensing is bad
Being my usual organized self I can't remember who linked to this, but it is very worth reading and passing around. It's a very good account of the costs, time, bureaucracy and runaround involved to some extent in EVERY gun licensing scheme. Be sure and check the comments for more.
God-cursed nannies strike again
Heading out to take care of some things this morning I heard one of the most irritating, scare-mongering commercials ever on the radio.
Some clown was speaking of the horrors of playgrounds. "In too many playgrounds there are sharp corners, there are hard surfaces to fall on, THERE IS NO ADULT SUPERVISION!!" and so on.
This is one of the kinds of BS that Acidman used to go off about. There are people out there with budgets to do radio campaigns- and probably tv in some places- about how playgrounds must be redone and ALWAYS have an adult around. Generation after generation grew up using playgrounds without a smothering adult watching over them, with dirt and grass to fall on, and they survived, but no, that's no longer good enough. Childhood must be made without risk, or it will scar the little children, emotionally if not physically.
This is such a load of crap it's scary. And these clowns would have had shrieking fits if they'd seen how I grew up, and my kids for that matter. Out in the woods, at the park, in the yard with tools and dogs and cats and dirt. When they were about 8 and 6 they decided they wanted to be elves, and elves needed spears. So I made two spears(throwing darts for adults) and they used them in the yard, and carried them when in the woods and had a ball. Nobody died or bled, but of course that doesn't count; such things shouldn't be allowed for children(and preferably not for adults according to the nannies).
This did lead to interesting things, like the time when daughter was thirteen and, at Med Fair, said she was going to wander around, picked up my spear(seven feet long and sharp) and headed out. Some guy asked me if I really allowed her to carry that, and I replied that I trusted her not to stick it in somebody unless they really needed it. The look on his face was priceless; he couldn't decide if I was serious or kidding and was horrified either way.
She doesn't carry a spear for everyday, of course; a 9mm and Gold Dots is much easier to carry around for general use.
Some clown was speaking of the horrors of playgrounds. "In too many playgrounds there are sharp corners, there are hard surfaces to fall on, THERE IS NO ADULT SUPERVISION!!" and so on.
This is one of the kinds of BS that Acidman used to go off about. There are people out there with budgets to do radio campaigns- and probably tv in some places- about how playgrounds must be redone and ALWAYS have an adult around. Generation after generation grew up using playgrounds without a smothering adult watching over them, with dirt and grass to fall on, and they survived, but no, that's no longer good enough. Childhood must be made without risk, or it will scar the little children, emotionally if not physically.
This is such a load of crap it's scary. And these clowns would have had shrieking fits if they'd seen how I grew up, and my kids for that matter. Out in the woods, at the park, in the yard with tools and dogs and cats and dirt. When they were about 8 and 6 they decided they wanted to be elves, and elves needed spears. So I made two spears(throwing darts for adults) and they used them in the yard, and carried them when in the woods and had a ball. Nobody died or bled, but of course that doesn't count; such things shouldn't be allowed for children(and preferably not for adults according to the nannies).
This did lead to interesting things, like the time when daughter was thirteen and, at Med Fair, said she was going to wander around, picked up my spear(seven feet long and sharp) and headed out. Some guy asked me if I really allowed her to carry that, and I replied that I trusted her not to stick it in somebody unless they really needed it. The look on his face was priceless; he couldn't decide if I was serious or kidding and was horrified either way.
She doesn't carry a spear for everyday, of course; a 9mm and Gold Dots is much easier to carry around for general use.
Wednesday, August 02, 2006
New grips, and a range report
A while back the Pistolero noted having put Hogue wraparound grips on a couple of pistols, a Ruger and a Kimber. I'd thought about this, but never having fired a pistol with this type grip I'd held off.
About a week ago, while wandering through a local store, I remembered to look at the things, and they had an Officer-size set of Hogues for a good price, so I broke down and bought them. After I put them on, did some dry-firing and draws, and they felt good.
Yesterday I took it to the range and put about 75 rounds through, mix of 230-grain handloads and 185-grain Gold Dots. And I wish I wasn't so damn cheap and had bought these a long time ago. They give me a much more stable grip during a fast draw, and more control during rapid-fire doubles. They were worth every penny.
Some of you who've been reading this for a while may remember that I reworked an old B-Square mount so I could use it on a WASR10 for a forward-mounted red dot sight. I've fired it twice before this, both times with the same damn problem; due(I think) to the crimped sides of the gas tube, the mount would start rotating to the left after a few shots. I thought I finally had this figured out so put about forty rounds through it yesterday. First, the mount did not shift on me, and second, I like this setup. Much faster to pick up in low-light conditions, and easier for accurate fire than the factory sights. Next time I make it to the outdoor range I'll settle in at a bench and test it properly, so far it looks promising.
About a week ago, while wandering through a local store, I remembered to look at the things, and they had an Officer-size set of Hogues for a good price, so I broke down and bought them. After I put them on, did some dry-firing and draws, and they felt good.
Yesterday I took it to the range and put about 75 rounds through, mix of 230-grain handloads and 185-grain Gold Dots. And I wish I wasn't so damn cheap and had bought these a long time ago. They give me a much more stable grip during a fast draw, and more control during rapid-fire doubles. They were worth every penny.
Some of you who've been reading this for a while may remember that I reworked an old B-Square mount so I could use it on a WASR10 for a forward-mounted red dot sight. I've fired it twice before this, both times with the same damn problem; due(I think) to the crimped sides of the gas tube, the mount would start rotating to the left after a few shots. I thought I finally had this figured out so put about forty rounds through it yesterday. First, the mount did not shift on me, and second, I like this setup. Much faster to pick up in low-light conditions, and easier for accurate fire than the factory sights. Next time I make it to the outdoor range I'll settle in at a bench and test it properly, so far it looks promising.
Tuesday, August 01, 2006
And for a more direct source on Africa,
commenter Keith has a blog, The Weather in Latin Africa. Go take a look, gunny stuff and the local people and fauna.
Monday, July 31, 2006
I hate buying factory parts
for cars. The tailgate latch for my truck? One arm of the handle broke, which means the tailgate won't open. So I call Ford to see if they have them and how much. Yes, says the parts lady, they have the handle only, and have one in stock. $40.
After I hang up I state "THESE PEOPLE ARE OUT OF THEIR F'N MINDS!!! IT'S A DAMN PLASTIC HANDLE!! THIS IS-"
Ahem.
After that I got out the epoxy, took off the inside cover of the gate, open it, take out the latch and handle, epoxy the handle together and clamp. Then find the drill and some loooong #6 screws, and after the epoxy has cured drill a hole through the broken arm across the break, front to back of the handle, and put the screw in. Then do the other side.
It's back together now, and working. If this doesn't hold, I'll hit the salvage yard for an intact handle, but damned if I'll pay Ford that much for the thing.
After I hang up I state "THESE PEOPLE ARE OUT OF THEIR F'N MINDS!!! IT'S A DAMN PLASTIC HANDLE!! THIS IS-"
Ahem.
After that I got out the epoxy, took off the inside cover of the gate, open it, take out the latch and handle, epoxy the handle together and clamp. Then find the drill and some loooong #6 screws, and after the epoxy has cured drill a hole through the broken arm across the break, front to back of the handle, and put the screw in. Then do the other side.
It's back together now, and working. If this doesn't hold, I'll hit the salvage yard for an intact handle, but damned if I'll pay Ford that much for the thing.
Sunday, July 30, 2006
Tomatos
Anyone have any idea why they wouldn't get very big? I've got the same kind my dad grows, Arkansas Traveler, and he gets humongous tomatos, but the biggest mine get is two to three inches across. Mind you, they've got a flavor that absolutely blows away what you buy at the store, but they just don't grow very large.
More about lions and people-munching
A while back I posted some of a e-mail I received on the subject of lions developing bad table manners. The subject of what happened to Joy Adamson of 'Born Free' fame came up, and I finally remembered to dig up what I'd read before.
It's in Peter Capstick's book Maneaters. He mentions that he'd first heard of it in a news article in the Miami Herald of January 5, 1980, which I'll excerpt:
AUTHOR OF 'BORN FREE' KILLED BY KENYA LION
NAIROBI, Kenya- Joy Adamson, who's born free awakened millions to her beliefs that "once wildlife is gone, it is gone forever," was mauled to death by a lion, it was reported Friday.
Friends said that Mrs. Adamson, 69, had taken her customary evening stroll tThursday night in the bush outside her tent camp in a remote area of northeast Kenya, and came across a lion chasing a buffalo.
The lion turned and killed her.
...
"The lion is still at large, but we have tracker teams out looking for it," a police spokesman said.
Pretty cut & dried. Except:
"...Seems that all those tracker teams spooring up the lion that killed Mrs. Adamson must have been mistaken. Apparently, the mention of a buffalo was all wrong, too? From an apparently confirmed story of death by lion, the "official" verdict was now that Mrs. Adamson had been murdered by a human since some of her belongings were missing.
You may have noticed that you never heard much more- if anything- about the matter. That, in itself, is as weird to me as the abrupt change of cause of death....I guess the murder of a famous authoress in the midst of the African bush just wasn't interesting enough for the press to pursue. Don't you think?"
Capstick specifically says he didn't know, but he suspected that there was something of an agreement among various news types and officials to let the story go away, because it might be seen as a bit embarrassing for such a famous saviour of beasts to have been whacked by one of the big cats. It wouldn't surprise me.
In other of his books Capstick noted various incidents of people-munching by various African critters that were noted in local papers, but never made big news. Including the lion that jumped into a photo safari tour bus and dragged a man out. Or the leopard that snuck up on a bunch of people taking pictures at a watering hole at night and killed the guard and dragged him away without anyone noticing the kill; someone heard a slight clatter that turned out to be the guards rifle hitting the ground, but it was a minute before he wondered what it was(happily, that man had a rush of intelligence and herded everyone back into the bus and straight back to the lodge to report it).
Ref that last; I've always wondered, did the guard just happen to be a bit away from the others and the lights so he could see better? Or did the cat recognize him as the only threat in the group?
Simple fact is, there are a lot of critters in the world that will happily have you for dinner if you cross their path at the right time. Or they're hungry and you look easier to kill than their usual prey. Or you just happen to irritate them by your presence so they kill you.
On the last, years ago I read an article in an old magazine of my grandfathers'(Sports Afield I think) about a group visiting Yellowstone. They'd been having an argument about whether grizzly bears attack unprovoked, ever. They found an old ranger who'd been in the park for many years and asked him. "Never unprovoked" he said. But when one of the group said "I told you so!" the ranger added "One thing you have to remember; YOU don't decide what 'provocation' is, the bear does. And you being there might be it."
I've mentioned him before, but you can't mention him too much: if you like stories about hunting and fishing in various places in the world, go to the library and find any of Peter Hathaway Capstick's books. Death in the Long Grass was the first, followed by Maneaters, Death in the Silent Places and a bunch of others. Then you'll need some money, because you'll want to buy them. How could you not like a man who wrote that elephants and Cape buffalo voted him "the one who got away"?
It's in Peter Capstick's book Maneaters. He mentions that he'd first heard of it in a news article in the Miami Herald of January 5, 1980, which I'll excerpt:
AUTHOR OF 'BORN FREE' KILLED BY KENYA LION
NAIROBI, Kenya- Joy Adamson, who's born free awakened millions to her beliefs that "once wildlife is gone, it is gone forever," was mauled to death by a lion, it was reported Friday.
Friends said that Mrs. Adamson, 69, had taken her customary evening stroll tThursday night in the bush outside her tent camp in a remote area of northeast Kenya, and came across a lion chasing a buffalo.
The lion turned and killed her.
...
"The lion is still at large, but we have tracker teams out looking for it," a police spokesman said.
Pretty cut & dried. Except:
"...Seems that all those tracker teams spooring up the lion that killed Mrs. Adamson must have been mistaken. Apparently, the mention of a buffalo was all wrong, too? From an apparently confirmed story of death by lion, the "official" verdict was now that Mrs. Adamson had been murdered by a human since some of her belongings were missing.
You may have noticed that you never heard much more- if anything- about the matter. That, in itself, is as weird to me as the abrupt change of cause of death....I guess the murder of a famous authoress in the midst of the African bush just wasn't interesting enough for the press to pursue. Don't you think?"
Capstick specifically says he didn't know, but he suspected that there was something of an agreement among various news types and officials to let the story go away, because it might be seen as a bit embarrassing for such a famous saviour of beasts to have been whacked by one of the big cats. It wouldn't surprise me.
In other of his books Capstick noted various incidents of people-munching by various African critters that were noted in local papers, but never made big news. Including the lion that jumped into a photo safari tour bus and dragged a man out. Or the leopard that snuck up on a bunch of people taking pictures at a watering hole at night and killed the guard and dragged him away without anyone noticing the kill; someone heard a slight clatter that turned out to be the guards rifle hitting the ground, but it was a minute before he wondered what it was(happily, that man had a rush of intelligence and herded everyone back into the bus and straight back to the lodge to report it).
Ref that last; I've always wondered, did the guard just happen to be a bit away from the others and the lights so he could see better? Or did the cat recognize him as the only threat in the group?
Simple fact is, there are a lot of critters in the world that will happily have you for dinner if you cross their path at the right time. Or they're hungry and you look easier to kill than their usual prey. Or you just happen to irritate them by your presence so they kill you.
On the last, years ago I read an article in an old magazine of my grandfathers'(Sports Afield I think) about a group visiting Yellowstone. They'd been having an argument about whether grizzly bears attack unprovoked, ever. They found an old ranger who'd been in the park for many years and asked him. "Never unprovoked" he said. But when one of the group said "I told you so!" the ranger added "One thing you have to remember; YOU don't decide what 'provocation' is, the bear does. And you being there might be it."
I've mentioned him before, but you can't mention him too much: if you like stories about hunting and fishing in various places in the world, go to the library and find any of Peter Hathaway Capstick's books. Death in the Long Grass was the first, followed by Maneaters, Death in the Silent Places and a bunch of others. Then you'll need some money, because you'll want to buy them. How could you not like a man who wrote that elephants and Cape buffalo voted him "the one who got away"?
On the subject of 'microstamping' fired cases,
the gentleman at mAss Backwards says it pretty well. Summed up by a future conversation:
"Hi, is this Mr. Bill Johnson, of 149 Elmwood Drive in Albany?"
"Yes it is. Who's this?"
"This is Detective Schifferbreins with the Boston Police Department. We recovered some shell casings at the scene of our city's latest homicide, and we traced them back to the Smith & Wesson .45-caliber handgun you reported stolen five years ago."
"Wow, that's amazing!"
"I know. It's this great new microstamping technology that made it all possible."
"So...you were able to catch the bastard who broke into my house, raped my wife, and stole my guns while I was out of town?"
"Well, um...not exactly."
"Oh. Well, did you catch the shooter from the homicide you're investigating?"
"Um...not exactly."
"But, you have a good idea who it was, right?"
"Um..not exactly"
"Oh. Well, did you recover the gun?"
"Um...not exactly."
"Oh. Well, when you do, can I have it back?"
"What are you, retarded?"
What else is there to say?
While you're over there, check out his other stuff, in particular on the idiot-level messed-up project known as the Big Dig. Start here. When I first found his site, one of the first posts I read was on his experience with this project early on. And it gave me another reason never to go to Massachussetts.
"Hi, is this Mr. Bill Johnson, of 149 Elmwood Drive in Albany?"
"Yes it is. Who's this?"
"This is Detective Schifferbreins with the Boston Police Department. We recovered some shell casings at the scene of our city's latest homicide, and we traced them back to the Smith & Wesson .45-caliber handgun you reported stolen five years ago."
"Wow, that's amazing!"
"I know. It's this great new microstamping technology that made it all possible."
"So...you were able to catch the bastard who broke into my house, raped my wife, and stole my guns while I was out of town?"
"Well, um...not exactly."
"Oh. Well, did you catch the shooter from the homicide you're investigating?"
"Um...not exactly."
"But, you have a good idea who it was, right?"
"Um..not exactly"
"Oh. Well, did you recover the gun?"
"Um...not exactly."
"Oh. Well, when you do, can I have it back?"
"What are you, retarded?"
What else is there to say?
While you're over there, check out his other stuff, in particular on the idiot-level messed-up project known as the Big Dig. Start here. When I first found his site, one of the first posts I read was on his experience with this project early on. And it gave me another reason never to go to Massachussetts.
Saturday, July 29, 2006
About the current "There’s nothing to indicate that it’s terrorism related"
mass-murder attempt, people like Malkin have pretty much covered what happened. For opinion about this crap, I don't think you can do better than the words of the Hoginator, "I don't know why the left calls conservatives "chickenhawks" and claims we're afraid of Muslims because we don't all join the military. When you're in a war with Muslims, the military is the safest place to be, because the military is the thing Muslims are least likely to attack.
Come on, how can I better that? I could be more obscene about it, but say it better? Not really.
Come on, how can I better that? I could be more obscene about it, but say it better? Not really.
Thursday, July 27, 2006
My last post on the Indian .308
I decided to compare the weight variation of the cases to some others. So I took five Federal .308 cases and weighed them:
146.9
147.7
148.5
147.1
145.9, max variation of 2.6 grains. This in five cases picked at random, likely including stuff from different manufacturing lots.
Then five cases from Austrian military ammo:
143.9
142.0
142.6
142.4
142.7, max variation of 1.9 grains. All these were from the same battlepack, so I assume the same lot.
Compare that to the variation in the Indian of 5.3 grains, in cases- I think- of the same lot.
146.9
147.7
148.5
147.1
145.9, max variation of 2.6 grains. This in five cases picked at random, likely including stuff from different manufacturing lots.
Then five cases from Austrian military ammo:
143.9
142.0
142.6
142.4
142.7, max variation of 1.9 grains. All these were from the same battlepack, so I assume the same lot.
Compare that to the variation in the Indian of 5.3 grains, in cases- I think- of the same lot.
Crooked and/or treasonous politicians
Both international and domestic
I'll start off with 'international', in this case that sorry excuse for a man Kofi Annan of the UN. Right now I'm not speaking of the previous stuff(Jew-hatred at Turtle Bay, bribes, etc.) but of his current bs. When some peacekeeping troops were killed the other day he loudly accused the Israelis of deliberately targeting them. Obvious lie, but the kind of thing that sells to the people he's sold his soul- such as it is- to. Well, I was looking at Michelle Malkin today and, among other things, found this:
A Canadian U.N. observer, one of four killed at a UNIFIL position near the southern Lebanese town of Khiyam on Tuesday, sent an e-mail to his former commander, a Canadian retired major-general, Lewis MacKenzie, in which he wrote that Hezbollah fighters were "all over" the U.N. position, Mr. MacKenzie said. Hezbollah troops, not the United Nations, were Israel's target, the deceased observer wrote.
Now, the most obvious question is what the HELL did Annan think he was doing leaving these people in the positions they were in? 'Peacekeeping' troops would be someone put in a place when the fighting is over to keep things quiet, NOT someone left in the middle of a war zone where they're almost certain to take casualties and get in the way. Which is probably why Annan left them there. Personally, I think he hoped some of them would get killed so he could blame the Israelis. I think he has a personal dislike/hatred for Israel and is happy to send some disposable people(anyone other than himself) into danger if he can use it against Israel.
Why the dislike? No idea. The fact is he could have shut down the hate-the-Jews festival at Turtle Bay and did not; combine that with some of his other actions, and I have no doubt that he hates them.
Happily, nowadays there are ways to get information out that might not have made it before. In this case, one of the poor guys this evil bastard left in danger sent an e-mail to a friend, and the friend made it available. And there are news people- actual reporters- who get this kind of information out.
I will throw in, this liar is the same guy who said the UN had 'no intention of trying to disarm the American people'. Why would ANYONE believe a word that comes out of his mouth?
Domestic division, yesterday I read this at Kim's place. Key quotes:
Evil Party side
Several of them tended to see Latin American immigrants and even Latino constituents as both more dependent on and accepting of active government programs and the political class guaranteeing those programs, a point they emphasized more than the voting per se. Moreover, they saw Latinos as more loyal and “dependable” in supporting a patron-client system and in building reliable patronage networks to circumvent the exigencies of political life as devised by the Founding Fathers and expected daily by the average American.
...
Stupid Party side
Instead, these legislators seemingly believed that they could weaken the restraining and frustrating straightjacket devised by the Founding Fathers and abetted by American norms. In that idealized “new” United States, political uncertainty, demanding constituents, difficult elections, and accountability in general would “go away” after tinkering with the People, who have given lawmakers their privileges but who, like a Sword of Damocles, can also “unfairly” take them away. Hispanics would acquiesce and assist in the “natural progress” of these legislators to remain in power and increase the scope of that power.
I realize a word I used in the title of this post is looked at askance; it's been used by a lot of people the same way some use 'racist'; it just means you disagree with them and that shouldn't be tolerated. I'm not using it that way, and I do not use it lightly. We are talking about politicians deliberately, intentionally seeking to destroy the Constitution they are sworn to protect so as to give themselves greater power.
At the LEAST they should be removed from office for violating their oath; ideally there would be a way to prosecute them for what they've done/are doing. I'm not kidding about calling them traitors, if trying to destroy the Constitution for their own power doesn't count as such, then the definition should be changed.
As Kim points out, this would explain something: the fact that even though hordes of people wrote/called their senators to say 'close the borders, throw out illegals, etc.', so many of these senators ignored them and passed a bill certain to infuriate those people. The bastards think that if they can get this through, it'll allow them to ignore the people back home; because the new 'people back home' will keep them in office.
I consider that treasonous, and they should be thrown the hell out for it. And forbidden from holding any elected office ever again.
I'll start off with 'international', in this case that sorry excuse for a man Kofi Annan of the UN. Right now I'm not speaking of the previous stuff(Jew-hatred at Turtle Bay, bribes, etc.) but of his current bs. When some peacekeeping troops were killed the other day he loudly accused the Israelis of deliberately targeting them. Obvious lie, but the kind of thing that sells to the people he's sold his soul- such as it is- to. Well, I was looking at Michelle Malkin today and, among other things, found this:
A Canadian U.N. observer, one of four killed at a UNIFIL position near the southern Lebanese town of Khiyam on Tuesday, sent an e-mail to his former commander, a Canadian retired major-general, Lewis MacKenzie, in which he wrote that Hezbollah fighters were "all over" the U.N. position, Mr. MacKenzie said. Hezbollah troops, not the United Nations, were Israel's target, the deceased observer wrote.
Now, the most obvious question is what the HELL did Annan think he was doing leaving these people in the positions they were in? 'Peacekeeping' troops would be someone put in a place when the fighting is over to keep things quiet, NOT someone left in the middle of a war zone where they're almost certain to take casualties and get in the way. Which is probably why Annan left them there. Personally, I think he hoped some of them would get killed so he could blame the Israelis. I think he has a personal dislike/hatred for Israel and is happy to send some disposable people(anyone other than himself) into danger if he can use it against Israel.
Why the dislike? No idea. The fact is he could have shut down the hate-the-Jews festival at Turtle Bay and did not; combine that with some of his other actions, and I have no doubt that he hates them.
Happily, nowadays there are ways to get information out that might not have made it before. In this case, one of the poor guys this evil bastard left in danger sent an e-mail to a friend, and the friend made it available. And there are news people- actual reporters- who get this kind of information out.
I will throw in, this liar is the same guy who said the UN had 'no intention of trying to disarm the American people'. Why would ANYONE believe a word that comes out of his mouth?
Domestic division, yesterday I read this at Kim's place. Key quotes:
Evil Party side
Several of them tended to see Latin American immigrants and even Latino constituents as both more dependent on and accepting of active government programs and the political class guaranteeing those programs, a point they emphasized more than the voting per se. Moreover, they saw Latinos as more loyal and “dependable” in supporting a patron-client system and in building reliable patronage networks to circumvent the exigencies of political life as devised by the Founding Fathers and expected daily by the average American.
...
Stupid Party side
Instead, these legislators seemingly believed that they could weaken the restraining and frustrating straightjacket devised by the Founding Fathers and abetted by American norms. In that idealized “new” United States, political uncertainty, demanding constituents, difficult elections, and accountability in general would “go away” after tinkering with the People, who have given lawmakers their privileges but who, like a Sword of Damocles, can also “unfairly” take them away. Hispanics would acquiesce and assist in the “natural progress” of these legislators to remain in power and increase the scope of that power.
I realize a word I used in the title of this post is looked at askance; it's been used by a lot of people the same way some use 'racist'; it just means you disagree with them and that shouldn't be tolerated. I'm not using it that way, and I do not use it lightly. We are talking about politicians deliberately, intentionally seeking to destroy the Constitution they are sworn to protect so as to give themselves greater power.
At the LEAST they should be removed from office for violating their oath; ideally there would be a way to prosecute them for what they've done/are doing. I'm not kidding about calling them traitors, if trying to destroy the Constitution for their own power doesn't count as such, then the definition should be changed.
As Kim points out, this would explain something: the fact that even though hordes of people wrote/called their senators to say 'close the borders, throw out illegals, etc.', so many of these senators ignored them and passed a bill certain to infuriate those people. The bastards think that if they can get this through, it'll allow them to ignore the people back home; because the new 'people back home' will keep them in office.
I consider that treasonous, and they should be thrown the hell out for it. And forbidden from holding any elected office ever again.
Wednesday, July 26, 2006
To you all,
for your thoughts and prayers and kind words, I thank you.
And soon as there's a way to, I'll pass them on to him
And soon as there's a way to, I'll pass them on to him
Tuesday, July 25, 2006
This is a combination moment,
both "Damn, I'm proud of him!" and "Damn, I'm worried!"
Early tomorrow morning, my son begins Basic Training in the U.S. Army.
Family reaction is somewhat mixed. Grandparents are seriously worried for him, the world situation being what it is. Sister isn't worried, and expected him to sign up at some point. And his mom is somewhat pissed he chose Army instead of Air Force.
In any case, he's on a new path. Well, somewhat new. He spent several years in the Civil Air Patrol, including summer encampments, so he's got a pretty good idea of what's coming. As to doing Basic this time of year? The warehouse he's worked at the past while gets up to 115F or so in the upper level on days like today, so hot weather outside won't be a particular problem.
Og suggested I get him to send me updates, if he does I may post bits & pieces. Although I think they may largely amount to "It's hot, I'm tired, and I want to go to a real restaurant and eat! And I can't talk about some of what we're doing." But if something interesting and postable comes in, I'll see about putting it up.
I may have to get a shirt that says "My son can target a terrorist at ten miles" or something.
Early tomorrow morning, my son begins Basic Training in the U.S. Army.
Family reaction is somewhat mixed. Grandparents are seriously worried for him, the world situation being what it is. Sister isn't worried, and expected him to sign up at some point. And his mom is somewhat pissed he chose Army instead of Air Force.
In any case, he's on a new path. Well, somewhat new. He spent several years in the Civil Air Patrol, including summer encampments, so he's got a pretty good idea of what's coming. As to doing Basic this time of year? The warehouse he's worked at the past while gets up to 115F or so in the upper level on days like today, so hot weather outside won't be a particular problem.
Og suggested I get him to send me updates, if he does I may post bits & pieces. Although I think they may largely amount to "It's hot, I'm tired, and I want to go to a real restaurant and eat! And I can't talk about some of what we're doing." But if something interesting and postable comes in, I'll see about putting it up.
I may have to get a shirt that says "My son can target a terrorist at ten miles" or something.
Final report on that lousy .308 ammo
Well, excuse me, 7.62x51mm ammo.
I pulled five more. These powder charges varied from 42.0 grains to 43.9, in five rounds from the same bag of ten. I thought I'd post the entire 15 here.
First five, all in grains:
40.8
41
42.3
42.5
42.6
Second five:
42.4
42.3
42.6
41.0
42.2
Last five:
43.9
42.0
42.6
42.4
42.7
All were ball powder; three of them had some kind of waxy-looking crud stuck on the base of the bullet. So that's a max variation of 3.1 grains within fifteen rounds out of two ten-round bags from the same can, all with identical headstamps.
I weighed twelve of the bullets, three having rolled out of reach for the time being. They weighed from a low of 145.9 grains to 149.2.
Keith asked an interesting question, so I weighed the ten cases that were immediately in reach:
188.1
190.3
191.5
188.1
188.6
187.3
189.4
189.4
188.5
193.4
So a max variation in primed cases of 5.3 grains. I've never weighed cases before, so I'm not sure how that fits in as far as acceptable variation.
So be at ease, Kevin, the rest of this will not be fired by anybody. And I'm damn glad a: it was cheap and b: I only got 100 rounds.
I pulled five more. These powder charges varied from 42.0 grains to 43.9, in five rounds from the same bag of ten. I thought I'd post the entire 15 here.
First five, all in grains:
40.8
41
42.3
42.5
42.6
Second five:
42.4
42.3
42.6
41.0
42.2
Last five:
43.9
42.0
42.6
42.4
42.7
All were ball powder; three of them had some kind of waxy-looking crud stuck on the base of the bullet. So that's a max variation of 3.1 grains within fifteen rounds out of two ten-round bags from the same can, all with identical headstamps.
I weighed twelve of the bullets, three having rolled out of reach for the time being. They weighed from a low of 145.9 grains to 149.2.
Keith asked an interesting question, so I weighed the ten cases that were immediately in reach:
188.1
190.3
191.5
188.1
188.6
187.3
189.4
189.4
188.5
193.4
So a max variation in primed cases of 5.3 grains. I've never weighed cases before, so I'm not sure how that fits in as far as acceptable variation.
So be at ease, Kevin, the rest of this will not be fired by anybody. And I'm damn glad a: it was cheap and b: I only got 100 rounds.
More India .308 powder measurements
I just pulled bullets from five more rounds, weighing each charge.
All five were ball powder, none of the bullets had the cake of whatever-it-was on the base. Powder weights were:
42.4
42.3
42.6
41.0
42.2
So on these five, variance of 1.4 grains from highest to lowest. From anywhere that's scary, from a government arsenal making this stuff for their troops, it's insane.
I also weighed the bullets, they range from 146.7 to 149.2 grains.
I repeat, I ain't shooting any more of this stuff.
All five were ball powder, none of the bullets had the cake of whatever-it-was on the base. Powder weights were:
42.4
42.3
42.6
41.0
42.2
So on these five, variance of 1.4 grains from highest to lowest. From anywhere that's scary, from a government arsenal making this stuff for their troops, it's insane.
I also weighed the bullets, they range from 146.7 to 149.2 grains.
I repeat, I ain't shooting any more of this stuff.
Ref tempering a knife
Keith asked a question in comments a while back on this. I think I covered this at some point, but I'm too lazy to check so here's a quickie.
For 5160 spring steel, I vary the tempering color by use and size. A big blade for heavy cutting I temper to a medium/dark bronze color; smaller general-use blade a dark yellow to light bronze. I take the hardened blade, clean off the quenching oil and use a fine grinding belt or buffing wheel, no coarser than 220 grit, to shine up the surface, then stick it in the oven at about 375-400F; if you're not certain of the accuracy of your thermostat start low. Leave it in for at least 45 minutes, long enough for the whole piece to get up to heat, then take it out and look at it. If not dark enough, let it cool, shine it back up, turn up the heat about 25F and do it again. When the color is what you think it should be, give it another heat at that temperature, preferably two heats, and after the last turn off the oven and let it cool off inside.
One of the best tests to see if you've tempered it correctly is a real simple one that I first read about in an article by Wayne Goddard. After tempering, sharpen the blade as you would for use. Get a piece of brass rod(I keep a piece of 1/4" brazing rod for this) and clamp it lengthwise in a vise so about half is above the vise jaws. You need good light for this test, as you lay the blade so the edge itself is resting on the brass; not the bevel, and not like you're chopping into it, as though you were going to slice a layer off lengthwise, and press straight down, watching the edge closely. If properly tempered, the edge will flex, and return to straight when you release the pressure, kind of amazing to watch. If it's too hard, it will usually chip slightly; back to the oven and add another 25F. If it bends, as in flexes when you press but stays bent when you release, it MAY be too soft.
I say MAY, because it's subjective. In a big blade for heavy chopping, a lot of people prefer one that's easier to sharpen when it does dull, and unless you've really overheated it this may work out perfectly for you. This is where experimenting comes in, especially with steel you're unsure of. You can temper it once, check the color, and try it on the brass; if it chips, back to the oven. If it flexes, give it the two more heats and then use it to see how it works. If it's a touch too hard, you can go back to the oven for a heat at higher temp and try it again.
I can't give a hard 'use this color' because I don't know what steel you might use it with; an old file has to be tempered down a bit more, but with the wear resistance added by the high carbon content will work quite well. Spring has lower carbon than file, so it might have to be tempered a bit harder to do what you want.
To see the colors mentioned, best thing I know of it to take a piece of steel, thin and long with as shiny and clean a surface as possible(not stainless), and stick one end into a torch flame or something else hot. As it heats you can watch the colors move out away from the heat source, paler colors meaning less heat, darker as the temp in the steel rises.
For 5160 spring steel, I vary the tempering color by use and size. A big blade for heavy cutting I temper to a medium/dark bronze color; smaller general-use blade a dark yellow to light bronze. I take the hardened blade, clean off the quenching oil and use a fine grinding belt or buffing wheel, no coarser than 220 grit, to shine up the surface, then stick it in the oven at about 375-400F; if you're not certain of the accuracy of your thermostat start low. Leave it in for at least 45 minutes, long enough for the whole piece to get up to heat, then take it out and look at it. If not dark enough, let it cool, shine it back up, turn up the heat about 25F and do it again. When the color is what you think it should be, give it another heat at that temperature, preferably two heats, and after the last turn off the oven and let it cool off inside.
One of the best tests to see if you've tempered it correctly is a real simple one that I first read about in an article by Wayne Goddard. After tempering, sharpen the blade as you would for use. Get a piece of brass rod(I keep a piece of 1/4" brazing rod for this) and clamp it lengthwise in a vise so about half is above the vise jaws. You need good light for this test, as you lay the blade so the edge itself is resting on the brass; not the bevel, and not like you're chopping into it, as though you were going to slice a layer off lengthwise, and press straight down, watching the edge closely. If properly tempered, the edge will flex, and return to straight when you release the pressure, kind of amazing to watch. If it's too hard, it will usually chip slightly; back to the oven and add another 25F. If it bends, as in flexes when you press but stays bent when you release, it MAY be too soft.
I say MAY, because it's subjective. In a big blade for heavy chopping, a lot of people prefer one that's easier to sharpen when it does dull, and unless you've really overheated it this may work out perfectly for you. This is where experimenting comes in, especially with steel you're unsure of. You can temper it once, check the color, and try it on the brass; if it chips, back to the oven. If it flexes, give it the two more heats and then use it to see how it works. If it's a touch too hard, you can go back to the oven for a heat at higher temp and try it again.
I can't give a hard 'use this color' because I don't know what steel you might use it with; an old file has to be tempered down a bit more, but with the wear resistance added by the high carbon content will work quite well. Spring has lower carbon than file, so it might have to be tempered a bit harder to do what you want.
To see the colors mentioned, best thing I know of it to take a piece of steel, thin and long with as shiny and clean a surface as possible(not stainless), and stick one end into a torch flame or something else hot. As it heats you can watch the colors move out away from the heat source, paler colors meaning less heat, darker as the temp in the steel rises.
Monday, July 24, 2006
Oooh, it's Shiny!
But I'm restraining myself.
H&H range had their Dealer Days last week, and I made it by Saturday for a bit, and saw this:
It's the S&W 1911PD, a compact-size 1911 in .45acp, with their Scandium-alloy frame. Light and well-balanced...
And dammit, I want one! Bad.
But so far, I am nobly beating temptation back. Hell, it would only ruin my budget for, what, a few months or so?
But LOOK at it! It's so purty, and shoots so well.
H&H range had their Dealer Days last week, and I made it by Saturday for a bit, and saw this:
It's the S&W 1911PD, a compact-size 1911 in .45acp, with their Scandium-alloy frame. Light and well-balanced...
And dammit, I want one! Bad.
But so far, I am nobly beating temptation back. Hell, it would only ruin my budget for, what, a few months or so?
But LOOK at it! It's so purty, and shoots so well.
Sunday, July 23, 2006
'Hizballah's Filthy Methods'
Found this over at Little Green Footballs, it links to a blog that says it's by Lebanese Forces members. Short excerpt:
We ve seen Israel for example hitting a factory for tissues in a small village in the South. It appeared that Hizbullah guys operate using trucks, meaning they move around with a missile in a truck, park nearby a factory for ex and shoot the rocket and flee. The origin of the rocket being the factory, Israelies respond by hitting it.
A witness for a similar action urged on TV the Hizbullah fighters to stop coming into his village to shoot rockets and then run away since the village is being destroyed.
Same for the truck that was carrying civilians and that became very suspicious when it was not allowed to enter the UN offices.
It's been known for a long time that this is the kind of tactic these dirtbags commonly use, to run up civilian casualties and damage to make Israel- and us- look bad. My question is, when is the Lebanese Army- including the Muslims- going to get tired of this crap and tell Israel "Ok, we'll be the anvil, you the hammer; we can get rid if this scum once and for all"?
We ve seen Israel for example hitting a factory for tissues in a small village in the South. It appeared that Hizbullah guys operate using trucks, meaning they move around with a missile in a truck, park nearby a factory for ex and shoot the rocket and flee. The origin of the rocket being the factory, Israelies respond by hitting it.
A witness for a similar action urged on TV the Hizbullah fighters to stop coming into his village to shoot rockets and then run away since the village is being destroyed.
Same for the truck that was carrying civilians and that became very suspicious when it was not allowed to enter the UN offices.
It's been known for a long time that this is the kind of tactic these dirtbags commonly use, to run up civilian casualties and damage to make Israel- and us- look bad. My question is, when is the Lebanese Army- including the Muslims- going to get tired of this crap and tell Israel "Ok, we'll be the anvil, you the hammer; we can get rid if this scum once and for all"?
.22s from range day Updated
(Awright, awright, I admit it. The Western Field wasn't cleaned up for a guy; IT'S MINE. "Hi, I'm Firehand and I'm a gunaholic. I was at the flea market and I COULDN'T HELP MYSELF!!! It was hot, and it needed work, and he kept lowering the price...")
In the range day post I mentioned a couple of .22s that needed sighting in. Well, here's the first one.
It's a Western Field model 850A. This is one of the 'made by/made for' rifles you used to see a lot of. Sears and Montgomery Ward and other stores would have a rifle or shotgun made for them- in this case by Mossberg, I believe- with the stores' name and model number on it.
This one is a semi-auto that feeds from a box magazine. The mag holds seven, but loading the last one or two is a pain so I only loaded five. One of the interesting things about this is it's marked '22 SHV-L-LR' it's supposed to be able to function with high-velocity shorts and longs as well as long rifles. The stock is some kind of hardwood, birch I think, stained dark. It was in quite good shape, it just needed smoothing with steel wool and a coat of the linseed oil/mineral spirits mix to take care of it. I may use something like Tru-Oil on it later.
The metal was a different story. The bore is in fine shape, but the outside was worn shiny and had some fine pitting on the barrel and magazine. After figuring out how to disassemble the thing I cleaned the outside off, hit it lightly with a buffing wheel with 400-grit greaseless compound to clean it, then used Birchwood Casey cold blue on it. It worked very well, gave a nice, even blue.
The scope is a 4x Western Field, God knows who made it for them. It's got a horizontal crosshair and a vertical post that ends just above the horizontal. After I cleaned the dust off the lens, it proved to have a pretty good image, and a little adjusting made the reticle nice & sharp.
Happily, the guts, while showing no sign of lubrication, had no rust or gathering of dust(the bore had been really dusty from spending years in a closet). Cleaned and oiled, it all worked nicely. The one thing I don't like here is the trigger; it's a two-stage with a long takeup and heavy second stage. It breaks cleanly, but the curve of the trigger and the distance it pivots through seems to accentuate the pull weight and causes your finger to move into the bottom of the stock. If the curve were a lot less, it would feel better; it's also pretty narrow and has fairly sharp corners. I don't know about polishing, but I may either make a shoe or reshape the trigger to straighten and widen it.
More on that scope: the adjustments have no clicks(just reference marks) and they are not consistent. Turn it one way and it moves so much; turn it the other and it moves a lesser amount. Pain in the ass to zero. Good thing is when you make an adjustment, it does not wander around after a few shots.
With a better trigger design this would have been more fun to shoot but as it was I got pretty good results. With Federal Champion about 1.25 to 1.5" at 50 yards. Then, since I didn't have any shorts, I tried it with the Eley Sport, which is a subsonic target ammo and got about 1-1.25" groups and it functioned flawlessly; the empties didn't go far, landing about six or eight inches to the right, but they did eject and the new round chamber with no problems. I'd never seen an autoloader that would function with any kind of reliability with this ammo before.
Overall, it's a nice .22, that with a little trigger work would be even better.
The other rifle to sight in was that Remington model 34 I found at the flea market with a jammed bolt. I'd gotten the bolt out and figured out the problems; happily the couple of parts I needed, with two possible exceptions, were available from Gun Parts(more on those in a later post). It functioned nicely with one exception; the magazine spring seems to be a bit weak, and once did not push the cartridge all the way into the carrier. All it took was catching the rim with a punch and pulling it back a touch; I think I'll see if can stretch the spring a bit, if that doesn't work replacements are easy to find for it. Good clean trigger, and gave about 2" groups. Nothing to cheer about, but part of the problem is a tiny front bead; I may see if I can find or make a post to replace it with. I may clean up the crown, but I don't know if it really needs it, better sights(or eyes) would probably cut the group size down a bit.
The stock darkened nicely with a bit of oil; you find some nice walnut on some of these old rifles.
So that's the .22 report. Two(three counting the trainer) old ones that all worked out nicely.
In the range day post I mentioned a couple of .22s that needed sighting in. Well, here's the first one.
It's a Western Field model 850A. This is one of the 'made by/made for' rifles you used to see a lot of. Sears and Montgomery Ward and other stores would have a rifle or shotgun made for them- in this case by Mossberg, I believe- with the stores' name and model number on it.
This one is a semi-auto that feeds from a box magazine. The mag holds seven, but loading the last one or two is a pain so I only loaded five. One of the interesting things about this is it's marked '22 SHV-L-LR' it's supposed to be able to function with high-velocity shorts and longs as well as long rifles. The stock is some kind of hardwood, birch I think, stained dark. It was in quite good shape, it just needed smoothing with steel wool and a coat of the linseed oil/mineral spirits mix to take care of it. I may use something like Tru-Oil on it later.
The metal was a different story. The bore is in fine shape, but the outside was worn shiny and had some fine pitting on the barrel and magazine. After figuring out how to disassemble the thing I cleaned the outside off, hit it lightly with a buffing wheel with 400-grit greaseless compound to clean it, then used Birchwood Casey cold blue on it. It worked very well, gave a nice, even blue.
The scope is a 4x Western Field, God knows who made it for them. It's got a horizontal crosshair and a vertical post that ends just above the horizontal. After I cleaned the dust off the lens, it proved to have a pretty good image, and a little adjusting made the reticle nice & sharp.
Happily, the guts, while showing no sign of lubrication, had no rust or gathering of dust(the bore had been really dusty from spending years in a closet). Cleaned and oiled, it all worked nicely. The one thing I don't like here is the trigger; it's a two-stage with a long takeup and heavy second stage. It breaks cleanly, but the curve of the trigger and the distance it pivots through seems to accentuate the pull weight and causes your finger to move into the bottom of the stock. If the curve were a lot less, it would feel better; it's also pretty narrow and has fairly sharp corners. I don't know about polishing, but I may either make a shoe or reshape the trigger to straighten and widen it.
More on that scope: the adjustments have no clicks(just reference marks) and they are not consistent. Turn it one way and it moves so much; turn it the other and it moves a lesser amount. Pain in the ass to zero. Good thing is when you make an adjustment, it does not wander around after a few shots.
With a better trigger design this would have been more fun to shoot but as it was I got pretty good results. With Federal Champion about 1.25 to 1.5" at 50 yards. Then, since I didn't have any shorts, I tried it with the Eley Sport, which is a subsonic target ammo and got about 1-1.25" groups and it functioned flawlessly; the empties didn't go far, landing about six or eight inches to the right, but they did eject and the new round chamber with no problems. I'd never seen an autoloader that would function with any kind of reliability with this ammo before.
Overall, it's a nice .22, that with a little trigger work would be even better.
The other rifle to sight in was that Remington model 34 I found at the flea market with a jammed bolt. I'd gotten the bolt out and figured out the problems; happily the couple of parts I needed, with two possible exceptions, were available from Gun Parts(more on those in a later post). It functioned nicely with one exception; the magazine spring seems to be a bit weak, and once did not push the cartridge all the way into the carrier. All it took was catching the rim with a punch and pulling it back a touch; I think I'll see if can stretch the spring a bit, if that doesn't work replacements are easy to find for it. Good clean trigger, and gave about 2" groups. Nothing to cheer about, but part of the problem is a tiny front bead; I may see if I can find or make a post to replace it with. I may clean up the crown, but I don't know if it really needs it, better sights(or eyes) would probably cut the group size down a bit.
The stock darkened nicely with a bit of oil; you find some nice walnut on some of these old rifles.
So that's the .22 report. Two(three counting the trainer) old ones that all worked out nicely.
Friday, July 21, 2006
Ref the Indian .308
I mentioned here, Kevin from Smallest Minority warned me off firing any more of it; he'd posted on the stuff here.
So just to check it, I took one bag of ten cartridges, pulled the bullets on five and weighed the charges on each. All were a ball powder; three had a cake of something stuck on the bottom of the bullet, in two of those it had broken up and was mixed with the powder(waxy-looking stuff). I got the following weights in grains:
40.8
41
42.3
42.5
42.6
That seems like a lot of variation to me. All headstamps were OFV opposite M80, with 7.62 opposite 96.
I get the time I'll pull more and weigh them. I'm eventually going to pull all the bullets and dump the powder and recycle the brass; I'm damn sure not going to fire any more of them.
So just to check it, I took one bag of ten cartridges, pulled the bullets on five and weighed the charges on each. All were a ball powder; three had a cake of something stuck on the bottom of the bullet, in two of those it had broken up and was mixed with the powder(waxy-looking stuff). I got the following weights in grains:
40.8
41
42.3
42.5
42.6
That seems like a lot of variation to me. All headstamps were OFV opposite M80, with 7.62 opposite 96.
I get the time I'll pull more and weigh them. I'm eventually going to pull all the bullets and dump the powder and recycle the brass; I'm damn sure not going to fire any more of them.
Carnival of Cordite #66
Up at Mr. Completely. Guns short and long, news, cutdowns of idiot 'journalists' and general good stuff. Find it all here.
Hot
It's been over 100 the last ten days or so, every day. When I left for the range around 8 yesterday, it was 90; by the time I headed home about noon it was 101, and the high for yesterday was 107. It's been at least 103 or 4 every day for the last week. Today's expected to hit 110, just ahead of a front moving through and pushing the ridge of high pressure that's been causing this away(Move, you bastard!), with tomorrow expected to be mid-90's for highs, seasonal norm.
This kind of thing happens, just part of summer. One of the more uncomfortable parts. Like everything else, it changes back & forth.
So for today I'm going to do as little outside as possible, it's just too damn hot.
This kind of thing happens, just part of summer. One of the more uncomfortable parts. Like everything else, it changes back & forth.
So for today I'm going to do as little outside as possible, it's just too damn hot.
Thursday, July 20, 2006
Polish Training Rifle
After I wrote about the Enfield trainer, a commenter told me about a Polish WZ48 trainer. It's made to look like the M38 Mosin Nagant, only made to shoot .22. And today I had a chance to shoot one.
What? Well, I... Oh, alright, I didn't just shoot one, I BOUGHT IT! Are you happy, dammit? Gerry, I blame you for this. You told me how neat it was. YOU told me how well it shot. YOU didn't care about my budget, oh no, and now it's blown and...
Ahem...
Where was I? Oh yes, after the bastard told me about them, while browsing around I checked the site of Military Gun Supply in Fort Worth. Clicked on 'New Arrivals' and there it was.
About the size & weight of a M38, but it's not as simple a change to .22 as the Enfield. There, they a: bored a barrel for .22, b: modified a bolt head to work the rimfire cartridge, c: took the spring & follower out of the magazine to catch the empties. Here, it's based on the MN action but...
Here's the barreled action out of the stock:
See that long, shiny bar attached to the trigger? That's the sear & trigger spring, with the sear pivoting on a pin through the spring just ahead of the trigger. The trigger is not set into the receiver like the MN; the spring holds it in place and it simply bears on the receiver. You pull the trigger, it flexes the spring and sear down until the striker releases.
Speaking of the bolt, it looks much like the MN bolt, but while the striker is offset for the rimfire cartridge, there is NO extractor or ejector as part of the bolt mechanism. Instead, riding in a slot in the bottom of the receiver is this:
It's somewhat similar to the extractor for the Martini; the bottom half of the breech face is milled out, and the extractor piece is shaped to match. In this case, to load you place the nose of the cartridge into the chamber and the rim over the extractor piece like so:
and close the bolt- it cocks on closing- and fire. When you open the bolt, as it rides back it pulls the extractor with it which extracts the empty and ejects it. Ejection is vertical and very positive.
The front sight is the MN-style round hood with a post inside. The rear sight
is much like the MN, only calibrated for .22. Lowest setting is 25 meters, longest is 100. And it is well-calibrated.
So how's it shoot? I tried two brands today, Federal Champion and Eley Sport, my two standards. I found that this is one of the few rifles I've tried that did not like the Eley, but it very much got along with the Federal. Set the rear sight for 50 meters, and here's the first ten shots at 50 yards:
Then I tried the Eley, not good. So I went back to Federal and a smaller target(I'd run out of the 3" bulls), and here's the next 5:
Not bad at all. So after I took care of some other things, I moved to 100 yards and fired ten:
Counting the one pulled off to the right, exactly 4". Not counting it, the other nine are in 2.5" by my caliper.
So it's a basic 'train the recruits' rifle made in 1954, and it shoots like this. I'm happy.
There are a few small dings in the wood, otherwise the stock is in great shape, and while the bluing is worn around the muzzle, stock bands and trigger guard, the rest of the metal is in fine condition. And the bore is spotless.
I'd never fired a Polish-made arm before. If everything they made is like this, I want more. Stands to reason; if you'd spent that long with Russians on one side and Prussians/Germans on the other, you'd want your arms up to snuff.
So my budget is blown. Do I care? Well, yeah. Sorry I grabbed it? Hell, no. As various people have written about, it's a terrible feeling to see something you really like, decide to think about it 'just a little bit', and when you go back it's gone. I decided not to wait till too late this time.
Damn you, Gerry, I STILL blame you.
What? Well, I... Oh, alright, I didn't just shoot one, I BOUGHT IT! Are you happy, dammit? Gerry, I blame you for this. You told me how neat it was. YOU told me how well it shot. YOU didn't care about my budget, oh no, and now it's blown and...
Ahem...
Where was I? Oh yes, after the bastard told me about them, while browsing around I checked the site of Military Gun Supply in Fort Worth. Clicked on 'New Arrivals' and there it was.
About the size & weight of a M38, but it's not as simple a change to .22 as the Enfield. There, they a: bored a barrel for .22, b: modified a bolt head to work the rimfire cartridge, c: took the spring & follower out of the magazine to catch the empties. Here, it's based on the MN action but...
Here's the barreled action out of the stock:
See that long, shiny bar attached to the trigger? That's the sear & trigger spring, with the sear pivoting on a pin through the spring just ahead of the trigger. The trigger is not set into the receiver like the MN; the spring holds it in place and it simply bears on the receiver. You pull the trigger, it flexes the spring and sear down until the striker releases.
Speaking of the bolt, it looks much like the MN bolt, but while the striker is offset for the rimfire cartridge, there is NO extractor or ejector as part of the bolt mechanism. Instead, riding in a slot in the bottom of the receiver is this:
It's somewhat similar to the extractor for the Martini; the bottom half of the breech face is milled out, and the extractor piece is shaped to match. In this case, to load you place the nose of the cartridge into the chamber and the rim over the extractor piece like so:
and close the bolt- it cocks on closing- and fire. When you open the bolt, as it rides back it pulls the extractor with it which extracts the empty and ejects it. Ejection is vertical and very positive.
The front sight is the MN-style round hood with a post inside. The rear sight
is much like the MN, only calibrated for .22. Lowest setting is 25 meters, longest is 100. And it is well-calibrated.
So how's it shoot? I tried two brands today, Federal Champion and Eley Sport, my two standards. I found that this is one of the few rifles I've tried that did not like the Eley, but it very much got along with the Federal. Set the rear sight for 50 meters, and here's the first ten shots at 50 yards:
Then I tried the Eley, not good. So I went back to Federal and a smaller target(I'd run out of the 3" bulls), and here's the next 5:
Not bad at all. So after I took care of some other things, I moved to 100 yards and fired ten:
Counting the one pulled off to the right, exactly 4". Not counting it, the other nine are in 2.5" by my caliper.
So it's a basic 'train the recruits' rifle made in 1954, and it shoots like this. I'm happy.
There are a few small dings in the wood, otherwise the stock is in great shape, and while the bluing is worn around the muzzle, stock bands and trigger guard, the rest of the metal is in fine condition. And the bore is spotless.
I'd never fired a Polish-made arm before. If everything they made is like this, I want more. Stands to reason; if you'd spent that long with Russians on one side and Prussians/Germans on the other, you'd want your arms up to snuff.
So my budget is blown. Do I care? Well, yeah. Sorry I grabbed it? Hell, no. As various people have written about, it's a terrible feeling to see something you really like, decide to think about it 'just a little bit', and when you go back it's gone. I decided not to wait till too late this time.
Damn you, Gerry, I STILL blame you.
"I'm not responsible enough to own guns,
so YOU'RE not, either!"
Which is what a lot of 'guns are bad' thinking boils down to. Kevin has a piece here on the subject; in particular read the general run of comments, which ALL come down to "I don't trust myself, why would I trust you?"
It constantly amazes me the lines people draw. I've known people(back when I played in the SCA) who spoke with great enthusiasm about the knife, sword or axe they kept by the bed; but mention firearms and they'd come unglued. As if there's something 'noble' about giving a burglar/rapist/murderer 'honorable combat'(BIG thing in the SCA, fine for the game but downright stupid when carried over to real life); something fine about sticking a couple of feet of steel through someones' intestines or an axe into their brain; but shooting an attacker? Why, that's downright terrible!"
Take this comment: "I started a sword collection a few years back (amazingly it's more than just *gasp* katanas!) and toyed with the idea of starting a gun collection as well. I knew though that I probably wouldn't have the responsibility and intelligence it takes to safely own them." So this one thinks having long, sharp steel weapons around is just fine, but apparently his brain wouldn't be up to the task of a: checking guns for loaded and b: not pointing them at people. Personally, I don't see why that's so much more difficult than not waving sharp blades around at people, but hey, maybe I'm just not smart enough.
How about this: if you're so unstable you can't trust yourself with weapons, why the hell should we trust you to drive a vehicle on public roads? Or handle any hazardous substance? Or own/use ANYTHING that might be harmful to somebody?
Which is what a lot of 'guns are bad' thinking boils down to. Kevin has a piece here on the subject; in particular read the general run of comments, which ALL come down to "I don't trust myself, why would I trust you?"
It constantly amazes me the lines people draw. I've known people(back when I played in the SCA) who spoke with great enthusiasm about the knife, sword or axe they kept by the bed; but mention firearms and they'd come unglued. As if there's something 'noble' about giving a burglar/rapist/murderer 'honorable combat'(BIG thing in the SCA, fine for the game but downright stupid when carried over to real life); something fine about sticking a couple of feet of steel through someones' intestines or an axe into their brain; but shooting an attacker? Why, that's downright terrible!"
Take this comment: "I started a sword collection a few years back (amazingly it's more than just *gasp* katanas!) and toyed with the idea of starting a gun collection as well. I knew though that I probably wouldn't have the responsibility and intelligence it takes to safely own them." So this one thinks having long, sharp steel weapons around is just fine, but apparently his brain wouldn't be up to the task of a: checking guns for loaded and b: not pointing them at people. Personally, I don't see why that's so much more difficult than not waving sharp blades around at people, but hey, maybe I'm just not smart enough.
How about this: if you're so unstable you can't trust yourself with weapons, why the hell should we trust you to drive a vehicle on public roads? Or handle any hazardous substance? Or own/use ANYTHING that might be harmful to somebody?
Stand with The Jawa Report
about websites being banned in India. Very good post here on the subject, both the reasons behind the action and why it's not a good idea.
Very short: India is scared of the Muslim population because they have such a tendance toward violence when they decide someone has not shown 'proper' respect for Islam. Problem is, 'proper' respect in the minds of many means 'on your knees, begging to convert and not be killed'. And no society that wants openness and debate and free speech can give in to that kind of crap.
Very short: India is scared of the Muslim population because they have such a tendance toward violence when they decide someone has not shown 'proper' respect for Islam. Problem is, 'proper' respect in the minds of many means 'on your knees, begging to convert and not be killed'. And no society that wants openness and debate and free speech can give in to that kind of crap.
Firearms and ammo can be weird
I having the day off, and it being too damn hot to do anything in the yard, I headed out to the range early today. Had a couple of .22 rifles to sight in(more on that later), wanted to try some of the cast-bullet loads in the 1903 Springfield, and run some through the K31.
I wrote about the original try of the cast loads in the K31. Good grouping, but they hit about 4" to the right of the point of impact of the Swiss ball. So today I set up a target, fired five, and looked through the scope. To see not a mark on the paper. I finally put up a big 2x3' target intended for scoped rifles so as to have a big background and stuck a bullseye target in the middle, which showed that the shots were hitting a full 12" to the right. Good grouping still, but damn! Maybe the wind today, I don't know. Put three rounds of ball through to check zero, and couldn't ask for better, they hit nicely in the bull, so the sights didn't get bumped.
Then I tried the loads in the 1903. Low, which I expected since they're much lower velocity than ball, but these hit about 4" to the left at 50 yards. Adjusted the sights and got very good results for a light practice load.
So one hits left, one right, and the one hit further right today than before. Sheesh.
I wrote about the original try of the cast loads in the K31. Good grouping, but they hit about 4" to the right of the point of impact of the Swiss ball. So today I set up a target, fired five, and looked through the scope. To see not a mark on the paper. I finally put up a big 2x3' target intended for scoped rifles so as to have a big background and stuck a bullseye target in the middle, which showed that the shots were hitting a full 12" to the right. Good grouping still, but damn! Maybe the wind today, I don't know. Put three rounds of ball through to check zero, and couldn't ask for better, they hit nicely in the bull, so the sights didn't get bumped.
Then I tried the loads in the 1903. Low, which I expected since they're much lower velocity than ball, but these hit about 4" to the left at 50 yards. Adjusted the sights and got very good results for a light practice load.
So one hits left, one right, and the one hit further right today than before. Sheesh.
Tuesday, July 18, 2006
Wow, I'm not a Flappy Bird anymore
I'm a Slithering Reptile.
Honest to God, don't really care; hadn't looked at this in months.
In any case, hopefully will be able to hit the range the next few days. Got some loads to try(among other things) but it's so damn hot- 105 yesterday and today, the same expected tomorrow- I don't know if I want to go until the temp breaks a bit.
Honest to God, don't really care; hadn't looked at this in months.
In any case, hopefully will be able to hit the range the next few days. Got some loads to try(among other things) but it's so damn hot- 105 yesterday and today, the same expected tomorrow- I don't know if I want to go until the temp breaks a bit.
Monday, July 17, 2006
Status
Go into attic before it gets too hot.
Lose track of things in shadow and bang head into beam.
Finish and go downstairs.
While typing, wonder why you're sweating?
Find out the sweat is red.
I just love mornings like this...
Lose track of things in shadow and bang head into beam.
Finish and go downstairs.
While typing, wonder why you're sweating?
Find out the sweat is red.
I just love mornings like this...
Why I don't trust the major media, ESPECIALLY on guns
Pistolero noted this from the Houston Chronicle blog, which sums up their thoughts on the UN gun-grab conference in one statement:What about the second amendment rights of Americans? Well, what about them? That wasn't the focus of this conference, unless an American is buying a shipment of machine guns from an arms dealer overseas.
Think about that. With all the information out there on the aims of this conference, he totally ignores all the statements from delegates and says "Nothing to worry about".
Either ignorant of what was said and written, in which case he didn't research it; or actively ignoring all that, which says what about the aims of the writer?
Think about that. With all the information out there on the aims of this conference, he totally ignores all the statements from delegates and says "Nothing to worry about".
Either ignorant of what was said and written, in which case he didn't research it; or actively ignoring all that, which says what about the aims of the writer?
Sunday, July 16, 2006
If there was any question which side the NY Times was on,
this takes care of it.
I'll let others better with words than I get to specifics. To me it simply boils down to they will do anything to get a story, including standing by while American troops are being attacked; and then will use that story to puff themselves up and say laudatory things about the enemy.
'Course, apparently the NYT doesn't really think they ARE the enemy.
Over at Protein Wisdom, "Writes Times assistant managing editor for photography Michele McNally of a photo taken by NYT photographer Joao Silva showing an al-Sadr army sniper in the act of firing on US troops, “Right there with the Mahdi army. Incredible courage.”
Incredible courage? Well, far be it for me to question such self-congratulatory enthusiasm, but it seems to me that actual “incredible courage” would have entailed, say, Joao Silva getting word to US troops, or bumrushing the sniper and beating him unconscious with a heavy telephoto lens.
Whereas what we’ve witnessed here is the product of (admittedly) dangerous opportunism in the service of plaudits and cocktail party invites."
At Powerline, "t would have required courage to hang out with the Mahdi Army, if there were any likelihood that a member of the Iraqi "insurgency" would regard a representative of the New York Times as an enemy.
Finally, I found a post I remembered at Winds of Change about 'journalists' and where their loyalties lie. There was a show(saw it at the time) on the subject of ethics, and the journalists were given the scenario they're travelling with a bunch of enemy troops(enemy to the U.S. and allies, that is). They see them about to attack U.S. troops, what would they do? Would they warn the troops?
"Even though it would almost certainly mean losing my life, Jennings replied. "But I do not think that I could bring myself to participate in that act. That's purely personal, and other reporters might have a different reaction." Immediately Mike Wallace spoke up. "I think some other reporters would have a different reaction," he said, obviously referring to himself. "They would regard it simply as a story they were there to cover." "I am astonished, really," at Jennings's answer, Wallace said a moment later. He turned toward Jennings and began to lecture him: "You're a reporter. Granted you're an American"-at least for purposes of the fictional example; Jennings has actually retained Canadian citizenship. "I'm a little bit at a loss to understand why, because you're an American, you would not have covered that story." Ogletree pushed Wallace. Didn't Jennings have some higher duty, either patriotic or human, to do something other than just roll film as soldiers from his own country were being shot? "No," Wallace said flatly and immediately. "You don't have a higher duty. No. No. You're a reporter!"
As they say, read the whole damn thing. This is just another case of a bunch of 'journalists' telling us that being members of U.S. society doesn't mean a damn thing to them, getting their 'story' means more. No matter who dies.
I'll let others better with words than I get to specifics. To me it simply boils down to they will do anything to get a story, including standing by while American troops are being attacked; and then will use that story to puff themselves up and say laudatory things about the enemy.
'Course, apparently the NYT doesn't really think they ARE the enemy.
Over at Protein Wisdom, "Writes Times assistant managing editor for photography Michele McNally of a photo taken by NYT photographer Joao Silva showing an al-Sadr army sniper in the act of firing on US troops, “Right there with the Mahdi army. Incredible courage.”
Incredible courage? Well, far be it for me to question such self-congratulatory enthusiasm, but it seems to me that actual “incredible courage” would have entailed, say, Joao Silva getting word to US troops, or bumrushing the sniper and beating him unconscious with a heavy telephoto lens.
Whereas what we’ve witnessed here is the product of (admittedly) dangerous opportunism in the service of plaudits and cocktail party invites."
At Powerline, "t would have required courage to hang out with the Mahdi Army, if there were any likelihood that a member of the Iraqi "insurgency" would regard a representative of the New York Times as an enemy.
Finally, I found a post I remembered at Winds of Change about 'journalists' and where their loyalties lie. There was a show(saw it at the time) on the subject of ethics, and the journalists were given the scenario they're travelling with a bunch of enemy troops(enemy to the U.S. and allies, that is). They see them about to attack U.S. troops, what would they do? Would they warn the troops?
"Even though it would almost certainly mean losing my life, Jennings replied. "But I do not think that I could bring myself to participate in that act. That's purely personal, and other reporters might have a different reaction." Immediately Mike Wallace spoke up. "I think some other reporters would have a different reaction," he said, obviously referring to himself. "They would regard it simply as a story they were there to cover." "I am astonished, really," at Jennings's answer, Wallace said a moment later. He turned toward Jennings and began to lecture him: "You're a reporter. Granted you're an American"-at least for purposes of the fictional example; Jennings has actually retained Canadian citizenship. "I'm a little bit at a loss to understand why, because you're an American, you would not have covered that story." Ogletree pushed Wallace. Didn't Jennings have some higher duty, either patriotic or human, to do something other than just roll film as soldiers from his own country were being shot? "No," Wallace said flatly and immediately. "You don't have a higher duty. No. No. You're a reporter!"
As they say, read the whole damn thing. This is just another case of a bunch of 'journalists' telling us that being members of U.S. society doesn't mean a damn thing to them, getting their 'story' means more. No matter who dies.
Saturday, July 15, 2006
I just saw the tiniest 4-wheel vehicle I've ever seen
on a public road. Bright red, right-hand drive, boxy shape with a hatchback, the door windows slid fore & aft, I think the little red wagon my kids used to have had wheels almost as big as this car, and on the back it said 'Mini-Minor'.
Only picture I can find of one in a quick search is this from an Ebay ad:
It actually looks smaller in person. I'd be afraid somebody on a Segway wouldn't see me and would run over me.
Only picture I can find of one in a quick search is this from an Ebay ad:
It actually looks smaller in person. I'd be afraid somebody on a Segway wouldn't see me and would run over me.
Can you say "greedy"?
They're having some kind of drag-boat meet in the Bricktown area of downtown this weekend.
It was 100 yesterday, same expected today & tomorrow, with swamp-level, "the gators are thinking about travelling north" humidity. And they announced the other day that you're not allowed to bring water.
Oh no, you have to buy it there. At, if past experience is a guide, probably $2-3 for a 20oz bottle.
Fat effin' chance.
It was 100 yesterday, same expected today & tomorrow, with swamp-level, "the gators are thinking about travelling north" humidity. And they announced the other day that you're not allowed to bring water.
Oh no, you have to buy it there. At, if past experience is a guide, probably $2-3 for a 20oz bottle.
Fat effin' chance.
Friday, July 14, 2006
To the girls in the low-rise jeans
and bikini top at the laundromat:
Darlin', I realize you enjoy being looked at. Now, don't give me that crap about "No I don't!"; nobody who doesn't like it would walk around in public that way. To do laundry, no less.
Bikini top, ok. But those jeans... You took low-rise jeans, left the top button undone and rolled the waistband down so it barely coverd your pubic area in front and left the top of your buttcrack open to public view. And I've got news for you: you didn't look real good dressed that way.
Fact is, there's damn few who really would, that's a tough look for a woman to carry off without looking like either a hooker or music video background-wannabe. No, you're not fat, that's not it, you just don't look good dressed like that.
Darlin', I realize you enjoy being looked at. Now, don't give me that crap about "No I don't!"; nobody who doesn't like it would walk around in public that way. To do laundry, no less.
Bikini top, ok. But those jeans... You took low-rise jeans, left the top button undone and rolled the waistband down so it barely coverd your pubic area in front and left the top of your buttcrack open to public view. And I've got news for you: you didn't look real good dressed that way.
Fact is, there's damn few who really would, that's a tough look for a woman to carry off without looking like either a hooker or music video background-wannabe. No, you're not fat, that's not it, you just don't look good dressed like that.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)