just so I can piss off people like these.
Hundreds attended a campus forum on March 1 organized by seven Asian women who’ve led the attacks on Kaplan. Many came expecting a fair airing of views at what was billed as an “open forum.” Instead, they witnessed further condemnation of Kaplan at what professor Howard Schweber afterward called a “political rally.”
At the forum, Moua acknowledged that her initial e-mail was misinformed as to precisely what Kaplan had said. Nonetheless, scores of speakers drew from it over the next two hours to peg Kaplan as racist and ignorant.
Two women in the class, who’ve since transferred out, described their shocked reactions to Kaplan’s comments. Mai Der Yang, a first-year student who missed class that day, said the real harm came in a meeting days later when Kaplan gave “insult after insult.” Among those insults, Yang said, was that Kaplan “believed his statements to be true.”
Nancy Vu, another organizer, stressed the women’s collective victimization, saying they’ve felt “so intensely alone” and “at every corner have been dismissed” by faculty and students. “You have made us feel alienated.”
Additional speakers from student and community groups accused university leaders of not doing enough to promote diversity and sensitivity. Madison school board member Shwaw Vang, who is Hmong, said Kaplan’s speech “degrades and dehumanizes me.” Activist Peng Her drew parallels between the seven women and Rosa Parks and the civil rights marchers in Selma, Ala. And the women were called the “Magnificent Seven” to great applause.
Near the end, Dean Davis again apologized to students, saying they’ve exhibited a “remarkable thoughtfulness and grace that makes me proud.” He did not bother to put in a good word for the idea of academic freedom.
The big things here:
People who had no personal experience with the professor or what he said somehow magically 'knew' what he 'believes'. All from e-mails of bitching by students who "said Kaplan’s speech “degrades and dehumanizes me.” and- here's the big one- :
"...another organizer, stressed the women’s collective victimization..." Got that? It's the standard-issue "I am a VICTIM! You cannot doubt what I say or my FEELINGS!!!" bullshit that's destroying what schools are supposed to be.
And this Dean is apparently one of the eunuchs in the lead, "I understand your feelings, and your feelings are all that matters. Especially when I can use them."
On the other hand, if I go back, I might get thrown out. Or attacked by hordes of aggrieved lefties. Which might be fun, if I had a good cane.
Friday, March 09, 2007
Well, damn!
| | ||||
| Total | 100,433 | |||
| Average Per Day | 183 | |||
| Average Visit Length | 1:32 | |||
| Last Hour | 28 | |||
| Today | 121 | |||
| This Week | 1,282 | |||
Sometime in the past couple of days it rolled over. Which is kind of amazing. I can't decide if people keep coming here from actually wanting to hear my bitching(tend to doubt), pick up the occasional nugget of actual information(quite possible) or to watch the ongoing BS(likely).
In any case, keep coming. Because I am going to grandly ignore the above and assume you all come here to bask in my brilliance. So numbers count, people.
Thursday, March 08, 2007
1911 firing pin stop modification
A while back I was browsing through the 'Handguns: Autoloaders' forum at The High Road and found mention of a change to the firing pin stop on a 1911 that was said to make a big difference in felt recoil. So I dug around some more, which led me to the M1911.Org site. Which led me to the gunsmithing sticky threads, this one in particular.
This sounded interesting, especially since my hands sometimes bother me after a box or so through mine. So I went to Brownells and ordered two of these EGW stops.
If you're not familiar with the 1911, the firing pin stop fits into a slot in the back of the slide
and holds the firing pin(center) and the extractor(circular piece on the right) in place. The bottom of it
on the factory piece has a nice, round curve; this is where, as the slide moves back, it cams the hammer back to cock it. The idea is that if you take a stop like the EGW which is square on the bottom,
fit it to the slot of the pistol and then give it just a slight bevel at the bottom edge
it changes some things. When the slide moves back under recoil, the factory stop makes the camming action a smooth operation that doesn't take much energy away from the slide; but if you give it a much smaller bevel like this- from what I've read the way John Browning originally designed it- it takes more of the energy the slide carries to cam the hammer back, which slows the slide down, which changes the way the energy moves around with- I read- some good changes.
These stops are made oversize so they can be fitted to your pistol. This one was a touch too thick, so I stoned a bit off the back. Then I started stoning the sides to narrow it a bit. Lock it in a padded vise, cut a bit, flip it over and cut the same number of strokes on the other side, try. Black the shiny area(I used Sharpie) and repeat until you get a good fit.
For the bevel, I'd suggest reading that thread at M1911 for specifics. Basically, cut a very small 45-degree angle with a fine file, and it HAS to be same angle and width across the face, otherwise it'll cause some nasty twisting(torsional?) stress to the hammer and hammer pin. I then gave it just enough strokes on a stone to break the corners, cleaned and oiled it and installed.
After shooting the carbine I tried this out. And it really works. Recoil on this pistol is now straight up- no twist- and a smaller jump. It also throws the brass straight up and back instead of to the side, which I was not expecting. Although it makes sense when you think about it. I only put about thirty rounds through(only so much time), but the difference was kind of amazing.
Definately glad I tried it.
This sounded interesting, especially since my hands sometimes bother me after a box or so through mine. So I went to Brownells and ordered two of these EGW stops.
If you're not familiar with the 1911, the firing pin stop fits into a slot in the back of the slide
and holds the firing pin(center) and the extractor(circular piece on the right) in place. The bottom of it
on the factory piece has a nice, round curve; this is where, as the slide moves back, it cams the hammer back to cock it. The idea is that if you take a stop like the EGW which is square on the bottom,
fit it to the slot of the pistol and then give it just a slight bevel at the bottom edge
it changes some things. When the slide moves back under recoil, the factory stop makes the camming action a smooth operation that doesn't take much energy away from the slide; but if you give it a much smaller bevel like this- from what I've read the way John Browning originally designed it- it takes more of the energy the slide carries to cam the hammer back, which slows the slide down, which changes the way the energy moves around with- I read- some good changes.
These stops are made oversize so they can be fitted to your pistol. This one was a touch too thick, so I stoned a bit off the back. Then I started stoning the sides to narrow it a bit. Lock it in a padded vise, cut a bit, flip it over and cut the same number of strokes on the other side, try. Black the shiny area(I used Sharpie) and repeat until you get a good fit.
For the bevel, I'd suggest reading that thread at M1911 for specifics. Basically, cut a very small 45-degree angle with a fine file, and it HAS to be same angle and width across the face, otherwise it'll cause some nasty twisting(torsional?) stress to the hammer and hammer pin. I then gave it just enough strokes on a stone to break the corners, cleaned and oiled it and installed.
After shooting the carbine I tried this out. And it really works. Recoil on this pistol is now straight up- no twist- and a smaller jump. It also throws the brass straight up and back instead of to the side, which I was not expecting. Although it makes sense when you think about it. I only put about thirty rounds through(only so much time), but the difference was kind of amazing.
Definately glad I tried it.
Ain't it purty?
Some of you who've been dropping in here might remember that a while back I bought a M1 Carbine receiver when SOG got some in. I've been collecting parts since, and finally put everything together.
The barrel is an aftermarket(GI barrels in good shape are now at prices that are flat amazing in some cases), the stock- a flat beautiful piece of walnut- was obtained through the good offices of Og. Everything else is GI, from the springs to the sights to the magazine.
Most of the assembly is no big deal, but I'd never installed a barrel before; turned out not to be as bad as I'd feared. Driving the front sight on was an experience of its own(I don't think you actually need the pin to hold it in place), but everything else fitted in just like it should.
Took it to H&H right after I finished it to function-test it, and all went well. It was hitting well below point of aim, the sight blade being deliberately made high. Back home I did some fitting to tighten things up between stock and receiver/barrel, following the suggestions in this piece by the fine people at CMP. Then, afterbitching and moaning about the weather and time a short delay, today I had the chance to get it to a 100-yard range and do some shooting and filing. Started off at 50 yards, shot two and filed, shot two and filed until it was a couple of inches low, then moved to 100.
To give you an idea of how much had to be taken off- and the accuracy of this thing- , please note the four shots top left:
That's a sub-2" group using GI-spec Lake City ball. Just to compare I adjusted windage and fired two rounds of Wolf ball(shut up, Cowboy). As to the elevation, I was actually aiming at the target above this one, so they were hitting about seven inches low. After having cut the front down a bit at fifty yards.
Finally got it just right, as the baby bear said, and it sat there through the rest of the day. Just before packing it in I loaded two rounds and fired them:
I think I'll keep it.
The barrel is an aftermarket(GI barrels in good shape are now at prices that are flat amazing in some cases), the stock- a flat beautiful piece of walnut- was obtained through the good offices of Og. Everything else is GI, from the springs to the sights to the magazine.
Most of the assembly is no big deal, but I'd never installed a barrel before; turned out not to be as bad as I'd feared. Driving the front sight on was an experience of its own(I don't think you actually need the pin to hold it in place), but everything else fitted in just like it should.
Took it to H&H right after I finished it to function-test it, and all went well. It was hitting well below point of aim, the sight blade being deliberately made high. Back home I did some fitting to tighten things up between stock and receiver/barrel, following the suggestions in this piece by the fine people at CMP. Then, after
To give you an idea of how much had to be taken off- and the accuracy of this thing- , please note the four shots top left:
That's a sub-2" group using GI-spec Lake City ball. Just to compare I adjusted windage and fired two rounds of Wolf ball(shut up, Cowboy). As to the elevation, I was actually aiming at the target above this one, so they were hitting about seven inches low. After having cut the front down a bit at fifty yards.
Finally got it just right, as the baby bear said, and it sat there through the rest of the day. Just before packing it in I loaded two rounds and fired them:
I think I'll keep it.
Wednesday, March 07, 2007
Shocking numbers
brought to us by The Englishman:
Illegally held guns are flooding Britain’s inner cities and a spate of fatal shootings in London has highlighted gun culture’s allure to disaffected youth. This comes despite the best efforts of the law and its enforcers to restrict the supply of guns. Yet, any man, woman or street urchin could own a gun in Victorian Britain — at least until 1870 when a licence fee was charged if they wanted to carry the weapon outside their home. And, surprisingly, there was very little gun crime.
Personally, I don't think it's surprising at all; someone checked the actual homicide rate of Tombstone, AZ back in the wild days and it was very low. And most were between gang members and general outlaw types(sound familiar?).
Well worth reading. Then go read Kim, who has some interesting comparisons and comments.
Yeah, I'm late on this. I first saw it a couple of days ago, late so I didn't post on it then. Yesterday had a couple of things I HAD to take care of, and being the the final(I hope) throes of whatever plague is going around, by the time I was done I gave up, read a bit and crashed. So I'm getting it done today.
Illegally held guns are flooding Britain’s inner cities and a spate of fatal shootings in London has highlighted gun culture’s allure to disaffected youth. This comes despite the best efforts of the law and its enforcers to restrict the supply of guns. Yet, any man, woman or street urchin could own a gun in Victorian Britain — at least until 1870 when a licence fee was charged if they wanted to carry the weapon outside their home. And, surprisingly, there was very little gun crime.
Personally, I don't think it's surprising at all; someone checked the actual homicide rate of Tombstone, AZ back in the wild days and it was very low. And most were between gang members and general outlaw types(sound familiar?).
Well worth reading. Then go read Kim, who has some interesting comparisons and comments.
Yeah, I'm late on this. I first saw it a couple of days ago, late so I didn't post on it then. Yesterday had a couple of things I HAD to take care of, and being the the final(I hope) throes of whatever plague is going around, by the time I was done I gave up, read a bit and crashed. So I'm getting it done today.
Tuesday, March 06, 2007
Damn you, Goreacle!
I was expecting a visit from the Brown Truck of Happiness yesterday, bringing a package of goodies from Brownell's. But I get home and no package! No Brown Truck has come! So I turn on the computer and check the tracking and find Rescheduled in the delivery. Why?
ADVERSE WEATHER CONDITIONS CAUSED THIS DELAY
Oh, joy. I'd planned on opening my box and checking out the goodies, hitting the grocery store, making dinner and spending the rest of the evening using my new stuff. But NOOOO.
For all the Globulist Warmering doomtalking, you'd think the damn blizzards would be over by now, or at least changed to drowning rain(got to make those sea levels rise somehow, you know). But no. The Goreacle is going to freeze the whole place if he keeps this up.
ADVERSE WEATHER CONDITIONS CAUSED THIS DELAY
Oh, joy. I'd planned on opening my box and checking out the goodies, hitting the grocery store, making dinner and spending the rest of the evening using my new stuff. But NOOOO.
For all the Globulist Warmering doomtalking, you'd think the damn blizzards would be over by now, or at least changed to drowning rain(got to make those sea levels rise somehow, you know). But no. The Goreacle is going to freeze the whole place if he keeps this up.
Monday, March 05, 2007
The son has been heard from
New friends and nice things to play with
It seems some friendlies showed up at the range while they were qualifying and, after business was taken care of, some "Can I try that?" went on. It's a G36(more on it here) and he said it's an interesting piece.
Yes, as you may be able to tell, he's doing just fine.
Cable damascus
It's what it sounds like, instead of bars or sheets of steel you take one or more pieces of cable, forge-weld them into a bar and then forge it into a blade. Makes a nice 'snakeskin' pattern when it's etched.
It has one real problem in the making that's worse than a standard pattern-welded piece: getting and keeping crap out of the pieces. With standard you can clean the bars, stack them together, heat and flux and the flux both carries out any traces of scale or whatever from between pieces and seals the surface(until you hammer it and drive the stuff out and off). When cable comes to you, brand new it'll be greasy; used, greasy and cruddy with the stuff having worked all through the wires.
Cleaning the stuff out of new isn't too bad, use a good degreaser, soak it in kerosene or whatever. Old cable, it's a bit more involved. I've read of everything from degreaser, boiling it in soapy water and pretty much anything else you can think of. What I used to do was fairly simple, since I used new cable: I burned it off. Be warned, smoky and smelly, but it works. I'd stick about six inches into a low fire and let it burn out, then push the next six in and so forth until the whole piece was done(I usually used about an eighteen inch piece). This does have the bad point of sometimes leaving some ash inside, but the fluxing seemed to take care of it nicely. Also, if you used low heat the grease tended to melt and run out before it burned, leaving the inside pretty clean. Several smiths I've read of would take a day to burn clean and flux a lot of cable, so as to have enough to keep them a while.
To flux it- I used borax- first I'd get the very end to welding heat and set the weld. Then heat a few inches to low red and unwind the section slightly(doesn't take much) and, while still good and hot, sprinkle it heavily with borax; you want the stuff to melt and flow throughout. Repeat heating and fluxing if needed, then twist it back as tight as you can. Move to the next section and repeat.
Remember, the flux does two things: it seals the surface of the steel to keep scale from forming, and it causes impurities that may be trapped between pieces to melt at a lower temperature than otherwise, which means when you hammer it the liquid flux and impurities(if any) spray out. Yes, it will burn the crap out of you, an apron and eye protection highly recommended.
To actually make the billet, I'd heat four to six inches of cable up to welding heat and hammer it from the welded end back the first pass, then turn it 90-degrees and go back up the other way; remember, this has to both set the weld and drive out the flux. When this section cooled I'd inspect, and if well set I'd do the next section.
When I had enough for the purpose, I'd fold it two or more times- usually in a 'Z' shape- then flux and weld that into one piece. Then I'd fold that once more, either in half or three and weld it again. You have to be CERTAIN that you've closed any voids between wires and driven all the flux and any impurities out.
When done, you'll have a solid bar of sufficient mass for the blade you want to make, and forge it out, heat treat and so forth as you would any other.
I haven't made any of this in a while and have no pictures, but I did find this picture at this man's site:
This is a beautiful example, with a section of cable left on to make the hilt.
You can make it as I described, or you can cut pieces of cable and wire or arc-weld them around a bar for a handle(which is the first way I read about this being done). In the latter case, one man I saw some information on took one-inch cable, cut four pieces about four inches long, arc-welded them to a handle and brought the whole mess up to heat and did the billet making with a power hammer(Damn, the times I've wished for one of those...).
Besides a different appearance, some who've used it say they've found blades made this way to be a bit more aggressive in cutting; I never tested for that so I can't say. Although if I'm able to make some more, I'll give it a shot.
That's really about it, fairly simple process. Just remember that bit from Murphy's Laws of Combat: the simple things are never easy.
It has one real problem in the making that's worse than a standard pattern-welded piece: getting and keeping crap out of the pieces. With standard you can clean the bars, stack them together, heat and flux and the flux both carries out any traces of scale or whatever from between pieces and seals the surface(until you hammer it and drive the stuff out and off). When cable comes to you, brand new it'll be greasy; used, greasy and cruddy with the stuff having worked all through the wires.
Cleaning the stuff out of new isn't too bad, use a good degreaser, soak it in kerosene or whatever. Old cable, it's a bit more involved. I've read of everything from degreaser, boiling it in soapy water and pretty much anything else you can think of. What I used to do was fairly simple, since I used new cable: I burned it off. Be warned, smoky and smelly, but it works. I'd stick about six inches into a low fire and let it burn out, then push the next six in and so forth until the whole piece was done(I usually used about an eighteen inch piece). This does have the bad point of sometimes leaving some ash inside, but the fluxing seemed to take care of it nicely. Also, if you used low heat the grease tended to melt and run out before it burned, leaving the inside pretty clean. Several smiths I've read of would take a day to burn clean and flux a lot of cable, so as to have enough to keep them a while.
To flux it- I used borax- first I'd get the very end to welding heat and set the weld. Then heat a few inches to low red and unwind the section slightly(doesn't take much) and, while still good and hot, sprinkle it heavily with borax; you want the stuff to melt and flow throughout. Repeat heating and fluxing if needed, then twist it back as tight as you can. Move to the next section and repeat.
Remember, the flux does two things: it seals the surface of the steel to keep scale from forming, and it causes impurities that may be trapped between pieces to melt at a lower temperature than otherwise, which means when you hammer it the liquid flux and impurities(if any) spray out. Yes, it will burn the crap out of you, an apron and eye protection highly recommended.
To actually make the billet, I'd heat four to six inches of cable up to welding heat and hammer it from the welded end back the first pass, then turn it 90-degrees and go back up the other way; remember, this has to both set the weld and drive out the flux. When this section cooled I'd inspect, and if well set I'd do the next section.
When I had enough for the purpose, I'd fold it two or more times- usually in a 'Z' shape- then flux and weld that into one piece. Then I'd fold that once more, either in half or three and weld it again. You have to be CERTAIN that you've closed any voids between wires and driven all the flux and any impurities out.
When done, you'll have a solid bar of sufficient mass for the blade you want to make, and forge it out, heat treat and so forth as you would any other.
I haven't made any of this in a while and have no pictures, but I did find this picture at this man's site:
This is a beautiful example, with a section of cable left on to make the hilt.
You can make it as I described, or you can cut pieces of cable and wire or arc-weld them around a bar for a handle(which is the first way I read about this being done). In the latter case, one man I saw some information on took one-inch cable, cut four pieces about four inches long, arc-welded them to a handle and brought the whole mess up to heat and did the billet making with a power hammer(Damn, the times I've wished for one of those...).
Besides a different appearance, some who've used it say they've found blades made this way to be a bit more aggressive in cutting; I never tested for that so I can't say. Although if I'm able to make some more, I'll give it a shot.
That's really about it, fairly simple process. Just remember that bit from Murphy's Laws of Combat: the simple things are never easy.
Saturday, March 03, 2007
What hath the GFWs wrought?
A buttload of people buying guns and ammo
Gun show this weekend, and my Dad was able to get up here for it. Small show(I'll get into that later), but busy as hell. We got there a little after it opened at 9, not too many people: by 11 when we left for lunch it was packed. Young, old, men & women, etc., and lots of buying going on; guns and ammo being carried out in large numbers.
You always have to be careful at shows, there's always some people pricing things for more than they're worth. Noticed two things on this line: more people doing this, and their prices were higher. Which, unless you have something someone is just dying for, means people buy from someone else. Some guy was selling 500-packs of 7.62x39 for $120(gack!) or $5/box. Don't think he sold much of it. Someone else was selling Mosin Nagant M44 rifles for $125.
On the other hand...
Place called Big Boy's Toys here in town had a bunch of stuff, including DPMS AR15 rifles in various configurations, including a 16 or 18" barrel carbine with collapsing stock, 2 magazines, cleaning kit and a hard case for $695; if I were in the market for one and had the cash I'd have checked that out. Some other people had good prices on things, too. Higher than in the past overall, but realistic-level higher, not "I'm gonna gouge people while they're worried" higher. Lots of used stuff, including a guy who had both a 9mm and a .45acp Marlin Camp Carbine in very nice condition for a very good price.
Overall, it proved something someone said a few years back: the GFW politicians are a businessman's best friend in one way: every time they open their mouth and start making threats and demands, business goes up.
On the small size, you've got three groups that have been doing shows in town. One of them does two shows a year, spring and fall- sometimes one or two more during the year- and they're always good sized with lots of dealers. The other two seem to alternate doing a show every 2-3 weeks, and because of that they're almost always small. Guy that did this weeks show for example: every so often one of his is big and busy, but most are like today, not too many vendors. I really wish they'd start just doing one a month or something.
In any case, this one was a: small like I'd feared(when Dad has a chance to come up for one, I hope it'll be a good one), but b: busy as hell because of the political climate. Overall, had a good visit. And ran him to Sportsman's Warehouse to get some reloading stuff he needed since there wasn't any at the show.
Oh, and the only things I saw for .30 Carbine were three magazines(two 30's and a 15), two bayonets and some ammo.
I got the 30's.
Gun show this weekend, and my Dad was able to get up here for it. Small show(I'll get into that later), but busy as hell. We got there a little after it opened at 9, not too many people: by 11 when we left for lunch it was packed. Young, old, men & women, etc., and lots of buying going on; guns and ammo being carried out in large numbers.
You always have to be careful at shows, there's always some people pricing things for more than they're worth. Noticed two things on this line: more people doing this, and their prices were higher. Which, unless you have something someone is just dying for, means people buy from someone else. Some guy was selling 500-packs of 7.62x39 for $120(gack!) or $5/box. Don't think he sold much of it. Someone else was selling Mosin Nagant M44 rifles for $125.
On the other hand...
Place called Big Boy's Toys here in town had a bunch of stuff, including DPMS AR15 rifles in various configurations, including a 16 or 18" barrel carbine with collapsing stock, 2 magazines, cleaning kit and a hard case for $695; if I were in the market for one and had the cash I'd have checked that out. Some other people had good prices on things, too. Higher than in the past overall, but realistic-level higher, not "I'm gonna gouge people while they're worried" higher. Lots of used stuff, including a guy who had both a 9mm and a .45acp Marlin Camp Carbine in very nice condition for a very good price.
Overall, it proved something someone said a few years back: the GFW politicians are a businessman's best friend in one way: every time they open their mouth and start making threats and demands, business goes up.
On the small size, you've got three groups that have been doing shows in town. One of them does two shows a year, spring and fall- sometimes one or two more during the year- and they're always good sized with lots of dealers. The other two seem to alternate doing a show every 2-3 weeks, and because of that they're almost always small. Guy that did this weeks show for example: every so often one of his is big and busy, but most are like today, not too many vendors. I really wish they'd start just doing one a month or something.
In any case, this one was a: small like I'd feared(when Dad has a chance to come up for one, I hope it'll be a good one), but b: busy as hell because of the political climate. Overall, had a good visit. And ran him to Sportsman's Warehouse to get some reloading stuff he needed since there wasn't any at the show.
Oh, and the only things I saw for .30 Carbine were three magazines(two 30's and a 15), two bayonets and some ammo.
I got the 30's.
New book out
Hogboy got it done, it's actually published and everything.
Now if he'll get the damn second cookbook done...
Now if he'll get the damn second cookbook done...
Friday, March 02, 2007
Just bloody freakin' wonderful
I’m not doing justice to the story, but, if not an attempt on the cockpit, this was a serious probe.
I get the money and time together to go to Britain/Europe or Australia, I think I'm going to take some close-combat training before I go. I didn't doubt it, this just points out that the bastards are still working at it.
Found thanks to Sondra
I get the money and time together to go to Britain/Europe or Australia, I think I'm going to take some close-combat training before I go. I didn't doubt it, this just points out that the bastards are still working at it.
Found thanks to Sondra
I gave up on TV news too, Jeff
Jeff notes his reasons(some of them) here. Mine... Didn't have a particular one incident, but there was a trigger to saying "Screw you!" and flipping the bird to the major media.
After my '2x4 to the head' moment of realizing there were a bunch of people who'd never let me go shooting or hunting with my Dad again, I got more and more sick of the news: I concentrated on the bullcrap they always threw out about firearms, but that also led to being far more critical about what they put out about anything. Then came the day...
This was during the O.J. Simpson trial. At the time, as I recall, the media was playing up everything possible(so it seemed to me) to justify us jumping into the Balkans. On this day, the first time in about two weeks that people in one city had been able to go to market, somebody dropped a couple of mortar shells into the marketplace. Lots of bodies and blood. And 'The CBS Evening News with Dan Rather' started: "Horror in the Balkans as a marketplace is bombed, many dead and more wounded;" and at that point his voice shifted and became almost a touch, cheery, "but first, in the O.J. Simpson trial"-
Which was as far as I got. Happily there were no heavy objects handy to throw or I'd have had to get money together for a new tv. As it was, I was on my feet screaming at the screen and that jackass Rather just exactly what I thought of him and his network and his 'news' reporting. And I don't think I've paid attention to their broadcasts(or trusted 60 Minutes after the Alar bullshit) since. Or much else of the major media. Local news, in particular for weather, but the rest from reading and from this here innernet.
After my '2x4 to the head' moment of realizing there were a bunch of people who'd never let me go shooting or hunting with my Dad again, I got more and more sick of the news: I concentrated on the bullcrap they always threw out about firearms, but that also led to being far more critical about what they put out about anything. Then came the day...
This was during the O.J. Simpson trial. At the time, as I recall, the media was playing up everything possible(so it seemed to me) to justify us jumping into the Balkans. On this day, the first time in about two weeks that people in one city had been able to go to market, somebody dropped a couple of mortar shells into the marketplace. Lots of bodies and blood. And 'The CBS Evening News with Dan Rather' started: "Horror in the Balkans as a marketplace is bombed, many dead and more wounded;" and at that point his voice shifted and became almost a touch, cheery, "but first, in the O.J. Simpson trial"-
Which was as far as I got. Happily there were no heavy objects handy to throw or I'd have had to get money together for a new tv. As it was, I was on my feet screaming at the screen and that jackass Rather just exactly what I thought of him and his network and his 'news' reporting. And I don't think I've paid attention to their broadcasts(or trusted 60 Minutes after the Alar bullshit) since. Or much else of the major media. Local news, in particular for weather, but the rest from reading and from this here innernet.
No-knock progress in Georgia
Too bad it took an old lady being killed to do it.
ATLANTA (AP) -- A group of lawmakers wants to make it harder for police to use "no-knock" warrants in the wake of a shootout that left an elderly woman dead after plainclothes officers stormed her home unannounced in a search for drugs.
The measure would allow judges to grant the warrants only if officers can prove a "significant and imminent danger to human life."
and near the end:
"Every citizen ought to be safe and secure in their homes," Fort said. "A no-knock warrant should be a special warrant, not a standard. And that's what it's evolved into."
This last is the key: these warrants are only supposed to be used in cases of actual need: not because someone likes them, or likes breaking in doors, or whatever. They're like tactical teams, a very useful tool that's been overused, and too often for crap where a hammer is not called for.
ATLANTA (AP) -- A group of lawmakers wants to make it harder for police to use "no-knock" warrants in the wake of a shootout that left an elderly woman dead after plainclothes officers stormed her home unannounced in a search for drugs.
The measure would allow judges to grant the warrants only if officers can prove a "significant and imminent danger to human life."
and near the end:
"Every citizen ought to be safe and secure in their homes," Fort said. "A no-knock warrant should be a special warrant, not a standard. And that's what it's evolved into."
This last is the key: these warrants are only supposed to be used in cases of actual need: not because someone likes them, or likes breaking in doors, or whatever. They're like tactical teams, a very useful tool that's been overused, and too often for crap where a hammer is not called for.
Thursday, March 01, 2007
From The Englishman,
we get a link to this article, well worth reading: Gun law and common sense:
More rubbish is written about 'gun control' than about almost any other subject. Allegedly 'tough' gun and knife laws are the liberal substitute for the death penalty, the left's way of trying to stop criminals from killing.
Like most 'liberal' solutions, they don't work against their intended target, and they attack freedom. It helps a great deal to be liberal about this if you a) don't think about it and b) know no history at all. Until 1920, Britain's gun laws made Texas look effeminate. There was no effective restriction at all on owning a firearm. Yet there was virtually no gun crime. Now we have some of the most restrictive anti-gun laws in the world, and gun crime is a serious and growing problem. Interestingly, the laws came first, the problem afterwards, and the recent ban on handguns was a completely logic-free response to the Dunblane mass-murder which preceded it.
On the subject of owning one himself, we get a touch of the 'I don't want the responsibility' attitude:
Actually, I don't want us to become a gun-carrying, gun-owning society at all. I have absolutely no desire to own a gun or have one in my house. They are even more dangerous (which is saying something) than motor cars, which I - likewise - don’t much like using because of the heavy responsibility of being in control of such powerfully lethal machinery. And any burglar who arrives at my house will be given a cup of tea (choice of Indian, China or herbal) and a biscuit, and asked to sign a release form stating that he has not been harmed, intimidated or upset in any way. I understand the liberal criminal law well enough to know that this is the only sensible approach for a British burglary victim, who doesn't want to be handcuffed and put in the cells.
Note that he does NOT say "I don't like them! Ban everything!", just that he doesn't want one. Which would be a fine thing, if he actually had the choice; but the government has made the 'choice' for him. And he full well understands that as things sit now, defending himself from a burglar could get him more time in jail than the burglar will get. Which is absolutely insane. And he'd better hope the burglar will settle for tea, cookies, and walking out with anything valuable.
And I also think that strict gun laws are wholly ineffective against their targets. The guns used in crime are hardly ever legally obtained. The people who use them almost invariably have criminal convictions, which would disqualify them from legal gun ownership anyway. So you can pass as many laws against gun ownership as you like. It will have precisely no effect on the level of gun crime. In which case, why do it?
Well, partly to keep the dim liberals happy, of course, which is important these days. But could there be another reason? If the state and the people broadly agree, about most matters, then the state can license the people to do such things as defend themselves, make citizen's arrests, thump burglars, even keep weapons. (Every Swiss home contains arms and ammunition, and the Swiss crime problem is minor, to put it mildly).
But if the state believes that criminals are to be pitied and treated, while the people believe that criminals need to be punished, then the state cannot trust the people any longer.
And there you get it: the state cannot trust the people. Which, of course, means the people need to be restricted in every way possible, and their lives controlled in every way possible. Like deciding that they need to be licensed to defend themselves, make citizen's arrests, thump burglars, even keep weapons. Mr. Hitchens seems to hold to the view that, even if things were loosened up, you should still have to get a license from the government to own arms, which- especially with a government like that which the British state has become- is too much; it allows the government to deny you for whatever reason they choose, or jerk your license 'just because we want to'. Like Bloomberg in NYFC* ordered the police to cut the number of licenses, just because he said so because he doesn't like them. And you have no recourse. In any case:
And the people, likewise, cannot trust the state, which is becoming - increasingly - a tyranny which watches, dockets, snoops and generally pries into our lives, and grants us smaller and smaller limits within which we may live if we wish to avoid being interfered with by its agencies.
Say it, brother!
Yet the one thing that will bring a rapid and powerful police response to a phone call is a claim that guns are being used by private citizens. And the one offence the courts will always punish severely is the one they call 'taking the law into your own hands'. Why? Because they are much more worried about their monopoly of force than they are about protecting us. Is that a good sign?
Actually, I object strongly to the expression 'taking the law into your own hands'. The law is ours and we made it for ourselves, to protect us and govern us, as a free people. Our freedom to defend ourselves against criminal violence is part of our general freedom to live our lives lawfully. We hire the police to help us enforce the law, not to tell us that we cannot do so. Sadly, the modern British law is not our law, but an elite law, based on ideas which most of us do not share. And the modern police are the elite's police, not ours, which is one of the reasons why they have vanished from the streets, where we want them to be. The disarming of the people, and the cancellation of all their rights to defend themselves, are bad signs.
I do have my disagreements with him, like here:
I don't want my neighbours to own guns, either. It shouldn't be necessary in a properly law-governed country.
Our small, easily-policed and largely urban society is deeply unlike the USA, where many people live hours from the nearest police station and can expect no immediate help if they are in dire trouble
"...shouldn't be necessary..." should have NOTHING to do with whether a citizen owns arms or not. It is a Right of free men, period. And he's noted a problem that is the same here or there: it doesn't matter if you live next door to the police station or miles away, if the police cannot or will not be there when you are in danger, you are on your own. And as has been pointed out by many, the best single method of self-defense, especially if you have any kind of physical handicap, is a gun. Like it or not.
Overall, a very good piece of thinking by Mr. Hitchens. Which will- predictably- cause the nanny-staters to scream and hold their breath.
*NYFC: New York Effin' City, per Kim
Speaking of which, The other day on Glenn Beck's radio show he had the former NYFC police chief on, interviewing him about- among other things- Rudy Giuliani, and asked about ownership of guns, specifically how difficult(as in 'damn near impossible') it is in NYFC for someone to get a permit. And he got the same song and dance that Giuliani has given: NYFC is 'special', like places like LA, Rudy was actually 'very friendly' to gun owners, and that- the real kicker- you had to make sure that only the 'right people' could own guns. Which in NYFC has meant, especially for carry permits, people with lots of money/fame/influence, and screw everybody else. As Beck put it, "I don't remember reading anything in the Constitution about only the 'right people' getting to have guns".
More rubbish is written about 'gun control' than about almost any other subject. Allegedly 'tough' gun and knife laws are the liberal substitute for the death penalty, the left's way of trying to stop criminals from killing.
Like most 'liberal' solutions, they don't work against their intended target, and they attack freedom. It helps a great deal to be liberal about this if you a) don't think about it and b) know no history at all. Until 1920, Britain's gun laws made Texas look effeminate. There was no effective restriction at all on owning a firearm. Yet there was virtually no gun crime. Now we have some of the most restrictive anti-gun laws in the world, and gun crime is a serious and growing problem. Interestingly, the laws came first, the problem afterwards, and the recent ban on handguns was a completely logic-free response to the Dunblane mass-murder which preceded it.
On the subject of owning one himself, we get a touch of the 'I don't want the responsibility' attitude:
Actually, I don't want us to become a gun-carrying, gun-owning society at all. I have absolutely no desire to own a gun or have one in my house. They are even more dangerous (which is saying something) than motor cars, which I - likewise - don’t much like using because of the heavy responsibility of being in control of such powerfully lethal machinery. And any burglar who arrives at my house will be given a cup of tea (choice of Indian, China or herbal) and a biscuit, and asked to sign a release form stating that he has not been harmed, intimidated or upset in any way. I understand the liberal criminal law well enough to know that this is the only sensible approach for a British burglary victim, who doesn't want to be handcuffed and put in the cells.
Note that he does NOT say "I don't like them! Ban everything!", just that he doesn't want one. Which would be a fine thing, if he actually had the choice; but the government has made the 'choice' for him. And he full well understands that as things sit now, defending himself from a burglar could get him more time in jail than the burglar will get. Which is absolutely insane. And he'd better hope the burglar will settle for tea, cookies, and walking out with anything valuable.
And I also think that strict gun laws are wholly ineffective against their targets. The guns used in crime are hardly ever legally obtained. The people who use them almost invariably have criminal convictions, which would disqualify them from legal gun ownership anyway. So you can pass as many laws against gun ownership as you like. It will have precisely no effect on the level of gun crime. In which case, why do it?
Well, partly to keep the dim liberals happy, of course, which is important these days. But could there be another reason? If the state and the people broadly agree, about most matters, then the state can license the people to do such things as defend themselves, make citizen's arrests, thump burglars, even keep weapons. (Every Swiss home contains arms and ammunition, and the Swiss crime problem is minor, to put it mildly).
But if the state believes that criminals are to be pitied and treated, while the people believe that criminals need to be punished, then the state cannot trust the people any longer.
And there you get it: the state cannot trust the people. Which, of course, means the people need to be restricted in every way possible, and their lives controlled in every way possible. Like deciding that they need to be licensed to defend themselves, make citizen's arrests, thump burglars, even keep weapons. Mr. Hitchens seems to hold to the view that, even if things were loosened up, you should still have to get a license from the government to own arms, which- especially with a government like that which the British state has become- is too much; it allows the government to deny you for whatever reason they choose, or jerk your license 'just because we want to'. Like Bloomberg in NYFC* ordered the police to cut the number of licenses, just because he said so because he doesn't like them. And you have no recourse. In any case:
And the people, likewise, cannot trust the state, which is becoming - increasingly - a tyranny which watches, dockets, snoops and generally pries into our lives, and grants us smaller and smaller limits within which we may live if we wish to avoid being interfered with by its agencies.
Say it, brother!
Yet the one thing that will bring a rapid and powerful police response to a phone call is a claim that guns are being used by private citizens. And the one offence the courts will always punish severely is the one they call 'taking the law into your own hands'. Why? Because they are much more worried about their monopoly of force than they are about protecting us. Is that a good sign?
Actually, I object strongly to the expression 'taking the law into your own hands'. The law is ours and we made it for ourselves, to protect us and govern us, as a free people. Our freedom to defend ourselves against criminal violence is part of our general freedom to live our lives lawfully. We hire the police to help us enforce the law, not to tell us that we cannot do so. Sadly, the modern British law is not our law, but an elite law, based on ideas which most of us do not share. And the modern police are the elite's police, not ours, which is one of the reasons why they have vanished from the streets, where we want them to be. The disarming of the people, and the cancellation of all their rights to defend themselves, are bad signs.
I do have my disagreements with him, like here:
I don't want my neighbours to own guns, either. It shouldn't be necessary in a properly law-governed country.
Our small, easily-policed and largely urban society is deeply unlike the USA, where many people live hours from the nearest police station and can expect no immediate help if they are in dire trouble
"...shouldn't be necessary..." should have NOTHING to do with whether a citizen owns arms or not. It is a Right of free men, period. And he's noted a problem that is the same here or there: it doesn't matter if you live next door to the police station or miles away, if the police cannot or will not be there when you are in danger, you are on your own. And as has been pointed out by many, the best single method of self-defense, especially if you have any kind of physical handicap, is a gun. Like it or not.
Overall, a very good piece of thinking by Mr. Hitchens. Which will- predictably- cause the nanny-staters to scream and hold their breath.
*NYFC: New York Effin' City, per Kim
Speaking of which, The other day on Glenn Beck's radio show he had the former NYFC police chief on, interviewing him about- among other things- Rudy Giuliani, and asked about ownership of guns, specifically how difficult(as in 'damn near impossible') it is in NYFC for someone to get a permit. And he got the same song and dance that Giuliani has given: NYFC is 'special', like places like LA, Rudy was actually 'very friendly' to gun owners, and that- the real kicker- you had to make sure that only the 'right people' could own guns. Which in NYFC has meant, especially for carry permits, people with lots of money/fame/influence, and screw everybody else. As Beck put it, "I don't remember reading anything in the Constitution about only the 'right people' getting to have guns".
Wednesday, February 28, 2007
As Esmay, having gone over the edge, proves gravity
by continuing downhill.
I haven't read his stuff since the basically unhinged mess I wrote about last year. Finding the stuff linked above makes me glad I haven't gone back. That he either ignores or refuses to acknowledge that there are a bunch of muslims out there, in this country and out, who really ARE the enemy precisely because they do believe in islam as written in the Koran and hadiths...
Damn.
I haven't read his stuff since the basically unhinged mess I wrote about last year. Finding the stuff linked above makes me glad I haven't gone back. That he either ignores or refuses to acknowledge that there are a bunch of muslims out there, in this country and out, who really ARE the enemy precisely because they do believe in islam as written in the Koran and hadiths...
Damn.
Tuesday, February 27, 2007
The dangers of the 'hunting vs. other' guns arguments
well illustrated in this from the Geek. I'm going to qoute a passage from his piece:
From THR member Daniel of Australia:
-----------------------
I've been following this entire incident with interest, because what has happened closely mirrors something that happened here. In the aftermath of the Port Arthur massacre in 1996, when there was intense debate about proposals for tightening gun laws, a spokesperson for a group called the Professional Hunters Association said words to the effect of "Anyone who needed a semi-automatic to kill animals was a 'City Boy', who shouldn't be out there with a gun in the first place!"
This was extremely damaging to arguments against wholesale bans on semi-automatic firearms, and was trumpeted loudly in the media: here were professional hunters, giving the lie to any legitimate reason or need to own these evil weapons, and it came up repeatedly in the media and in parliamentary debates on the proposed legislation. How could our position be maintained in light of this comment from within, from professionals?
Rebecca Peters is still using this quote too, eleven years later, as she tries to sell the same story internationally. The huge irony is that in fact professional shooters always did use semi-automatic longarms, particularly in control shooting of ferals (pigs, buffalo etc) from choppers - and they ended up being one of the few groups who still can own them
Personally I think the damage done by this sort of thing, from within the firearms community - in fact from people in the role of spokesmen - is incalculable.
As we've seen, not counting the bullshit between groups who shoot different firearms/styles, the Brady Gun-Ban Group and Violence Policy Center types are just waiting and looking for stuff like this to use against us. At this point, anybody who thinks 'MY guns will be fine' is a fool; the banners are after ALL of them.
From THR member Daniel of Australia:
-----------------------
I've been following this entire incident with interest, because what has happened closely mirrors something that happened here. In the aftermath of the Port Arthur massacre in 1996, when there was intense debate about proposals for tightening gun laws, a spokesperson for a group called the Professional Hunters Association said words to the effect of "Anyone who needed a semi-automatic to kill animals was a 'City Boy', who shouldn't be out there with a gun in the first place!"
This was extremely damaging to arguments against wholesale bans on semi-automatic firearms, and was trumpeted loudly in the media: here were professional hunters, giving the lie to any legitimate reason or need to own these evil weapons, and it came up repeatedly in the media and in parliamentary debates on the proposed legislation. How could our position be maintained in light of this comment from within, from professionals?
Rebecca Peters is still using this quote too, eleven years later, as she tries to sell the same story internationally. The huge irony is that in fact professional shooters always did use semi-automatic longarms, particularly in control shooting of ferals (pigs, buffalo etc) from choppers - and they ended up being one of the few groups who still can own them
Personally I think the damage done by this sort of thing, from within the firearms community - in fact from people in the role of spokesmen - is incalculable.
As we've seen, not counting the bullshit between groups who shoot different firearms/styles, the Brady Gun-Ban Group and Violence Policy Center types are just waiting and looking for stuff like this to use against us. At this point, anybody who thinks 'MY guns will be fine' is a fool; the banners are after ALL of them.
Og asked what critters those were in the 'Spring' post,
Kiki the ferret and Bun-Bun the(Glock & switchblade packin') mini-lop. Of Sluggy fame.
Ever finish the backlog, Cowboy?
Sunday, February 25, 2007
Medieval Fair is coming up,
and thinking about that made me think about smithing, and how I got started in this mess.
Partly I was always fascinated with the idea of actually making things. And then I found out my grandfather on Dad's side had been a smith for many years, and his father. Which brought that specific way of making things very much into my mind. No idea what to do about it, but it was a wonderful thought. Then I got a taste of doing it.
Back when, Dad was working part-time at a local salvage yard to pull in some extra money. Once day, after I'd said something about wanting to try forging, he brought home a round, bowl-shaped piece of cast iron with a smaller bowl in the bottom which had a hole in the side for grease. He thought it was some kind of cover for a shaft end on some machinery, and it ought to work for a forge bowl. So we propped it up on some bricks, took the refrigerator compressor he had from somewhere(I don't remember what he'd used it for) and ran the output line into the grease hole, broke up some charcoal briquets and lit it off. Not much air flow, but enough to get small pieces hot.
Understand, I had absolutely no idea what I was doing, and Dad didn't know much; by the time he was born Grandpa had started working at a different job and didn't do much forging anymore. No books, either. So I just fooled around with it, burning up more charcoal than was really affordable, with the only real product I remember being a small javelin head I made out of a screwdriver shaft.
A little while after that we moved, and it was years before I had the chance or inclination to try it again. By that time I was grown(physically, at least), married and had- if anything- even less money free for crap like that. Then-wife and I were playing around in the SCA(had been when we met, so that was nothing new) and a guy we knew was interested in smithing, too. And he had the money and time to collect tools and had put a forge together. So when opportunity allowed I'd go over to his girlfriend's house(his stuff was in the yard) and we'd hammer on things. And by that time there were actually some books out on the subject, and from looking at objects in history and craft books we figured out some things, and it went from there.
I wound up with my own forge, made of some steel framing holding a cast iron sink; I cut a hole in the bottom and set in a brake drum for a firepot, and rigged up a squirrel-cage blower to that. And I actually started getting good at it.
The feeling of figuring out how to make something correctly, and then creating it... it's wonderful. And amazing. The first time of making something, or figuring out a way to make something better(in both senses), it's just indescribable. The first time I hardened and tempered a blade, and it WORKED! The first time I actually forge-welded two pieced together and they didn't fall apart under stress!
Another part of that is taking some rusty scrap you picked up off the street, or from a salvage yard, and making something. Then you wire-brush it, and oil it or polish it or however you finished it off. And you display it and people say "Oh my God, that's wonderful! How can you do that?!?" It's actually kind of addictive.
My favorite thing to make is blades. Knives, chisels, axes, swords. Taking some spring steel and making a chef's knife that holds an edge better than anything the owner had ever had before. Making a chandelier for either candles or oil lamps that you find out has the place of honor in someone's home. It makes you want to make more, and better. I started making pattern-welded blades- also called 'damascus'- because I just had to do it myself. And then you can manipulate the pattern in the blade.
And tools. Need an oddball wrench? A punch? Odd-shaped or sized screwdriver? Light the fire and make it. Need a specially-shaped hammer? You can make it. A spring you can't find a replacement for? Tricky at times, but you can create it.
There is just no other feeling like it.
That's one reason- other than the general- that I bitch about my hands and elbow and shoulder. I flat cannot work like I used to, and I miss it.
But, to quote somebody, "I'm not dead yet!" So I still fire the forge and hammer when I can work it..
Damn, I wish there were blacksmith groupies.
Partly I was always fascinated with the idea of actually making things. And then I found out my grandfather on Dad's side had been a smith for many years, and his father. Which brought that specific way of making things very much into my mind. No idea what to do about it, but it was a wonderful thought. Then I got a taste of doing it.
Back when, Dad was working part-time at a local salvage yard to pull in some extra money. Once day, after I'd said something about wanting to try forging, he brought home a round, bowl-shaped piece of cast iron with a smaller bowl in the bottom which had a hole in the side for grease. He thought it was some kind of cover for a shaft end on some machinery, and it ought to work for a forge bowl. So we propped it up on some bricks, took the refrigerator compressor he had from somewhere(I don't remember what he'd used it for) and ran the output line into the grease hole, broke up some charcoal briquets and lit it off. Not much air flow, but enough to get small pieces hot.
Understand, I had absolutely no idea what I was doing, and Dad didn't know much; by the time he was born Grandpa had started working at a different job and didn't do much forging anymore. No books, either. So I just fooled around with it, burning up more charcoal than was really affordable, with the only real product I remember being a small javelin head I made out of a screwdriver shaft.
A little while after that we moved, and it was years before I had the chance or inclination to try it again. By that time I was grown(physically, at least), married and had- if anything- even less money free for crap like that. Then-wife and I were playing around in the SCA(had been when we met, so that was nothing new) and a guy we knew was interested in smithing, too. And he had the money and time to collect tools and had put a forge together. So when opportunity allowed I'd go over to his girlfriend's house(his stuff was in the yard) and we'd hammer on things. And by that time there were actually some books out on the subject, and from looking at objects in history and craft books we figured out some things, and it went from there.
I wound up with my own forge, made of some steel framing holding a cast iron sink; I cut a hole in the bottom and set in a brake drum for a firepot, and rigged up a squirrel-cage blower to that. And I actually started getting good at it.
The feeling of figuring out how to make something correctly, and then creating it... it's wonderful. And amazing. The first time of making something, or figuring out a way to make something better(in both senses), it's just indescribable. The first time I hardened and tempered a blade, and it WORKED! The first time I actually forge-welded two pieced together and they didn't fall apart under stress!
Another part of that is taking some rusty scrap you picked up off the street, or from a salvage yard, and making something. Then you wire-brush it, and oil it or polish it or however you finished it off. And you display it and people say "Oh my God, that's wonderful! How can you do that?!?" It's actually kind of addictive.
My favorite thing to make is blades. Knives, chisels, axes, swords. Taking some spring steel and making a chef's knife that holds an edge better than anything the owner had ever had before. Making a chandelier for either candles or oil lamps that you find out has the place of honor in someone's home. It makes you want to make more, and better. I started making pattern-welded blades- also called 'damascus'- because I just had to do it myself. And then you can manipulate the pattern in the blade.
And tools. Need an oddball wrench? A punch? Odd-shaped or sized screwdriver? Light the fire and make it. Need a specially-shaped hammer? You can make it. A spring you can't find a replacement for? Tricky at times, but you can create it.
There is just no other feeling like it.
That's one reason- other than the general- that I bitch about my hands and elbow and shoulder. I flat cannot work like I used to, and I miss it.
But, to quote somebody, "I'm not dead yet!" So I still fire the forge and hammer when I can work it..
Damn, I wish there were blacksmith groupies.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)