Thought of the Day

Does anyone know what happened to this gun?

I wonder if it was destroyed or somehow escaped back into the market.
If the latter, I’d find it amusing to buy it, pose like that (only with my finger off the trigger), and send a photo to Dianne Feinstein. Preferably with a few dozen other people standing around me with similar guns, in similar poses.

Boogeyman

Fark recently showed a headline about how the NRA just endorsed C-rated McCain over F-rated Obama, and the submitter worked in some bias implying that the NRA is basically a republican tool.
As is usual for Fark threads relating to political issues discussions on the internet, a whole bunch of crap started flying around the comment threads almost immediately.
Some choice bits, paraphrased:

  • The AHSA opposes the NRA. Since the tiny AHSA represents ordinary people (only they don’t -AZR), as opposed to the 4+ million-strong NRA, this clearly means the NRA is a bunch of extremists.
  • Scary looking guns (“assault weapons”) = machine guns.
  • References to male reproductive organs, mostly related to relative size as a function of number of guns owned.
  • Claims that Obama is pro-gun, has always-been pro-gun, and supports the right to keep and bear arms.
  • Claims that the VPC is actually better than the NRA, as the VPC wants to prevent gun violence.

While there’s a lot of partisan mud-slinging in the thread, a bunch of outright falsehoods, and so forth, there’s also a remarkable number of people who are calmly providing facts, references, and citations showing that the NRA has a long history of endorsing any reasonably-electable candidate (i.e. Democrats or Republicans, except in small elections) that is pro-gun, regardless of the letter that comes after their name.
I find it rather amusing that for anti-gun people, the NRA is some sort of extremist boogeyman, a tool of the republican party, and someone who wants to arm anyone, anywhere, anytime, with any gun.
For pro-gun people, the NRA seems to be considered to not be doing enough, too willing to make compromises, and while generally doing the right thing (promoting gun safety, helping range operations, etc.), not being pro-gun enough.
It’s more troubling that the AHSA is being quoted in media as being representative of moderate gun owners, rather than being a front for anti-gun groups. At least the NRA and other pro-gun organizations are clear about who they are and what they stand for. The media should be widely denouncing the AHSA for being devious and sneaky.
In this particular case, there’s no conspiracy involved: the NRA is concerned with guns, and McCain is more pro-gun than Obama. Thus, it makes sense that the NRA would endorse McCain. The fact that the NRA endorses more republicans than democrats is more a reflection of the fact that republicans tend to be more pro-gun than democrats, rather than any sort of political bias with the NRA.
In short, nothing to see here, move along.

Dear Congress

Dear Congress,
Want to know a little secret? You suck.
The majority of Americans disapprove of the way you’re running the country. If you were the Board of Directors for any company, the shareholders would have thrown you out long ago. The only reason that We, The People haven’t done so yet is because:

  • Your opposition, for the most part, sucks more.
  • While you suck, you don’t suck enough to justify us shooting you. (I’m channeling Claire Wolfe‘s “awkward stage” quote here.)

Personally, I’m of the opinion that essentially all members of Congress should be clapped in irons, taken out to the National Mall, placed into stocks, and have the citizenry directly petition their Congressmen for the redress of grievances. Hot tar and feathers will be sold by vendors for a nominal price.
Recall the response from the citizenry regarding the financial bailout bill? Surely you must –? the influx of emails crippled the House of Representatives email system. I was unable to submit an email, telephone call, or fax for two days due to the huge volume of inbound messages…the majority of which were strongly against the bill. What did you do? You voted for the damned thing. While my representative voted against the bill, he did so because the bill didn’t do enough. What the hell is wrong with you people?
Democrats, you’ve held the majority in the House and Senate for the last few years. What have you accomplished that differs significantly from the oft-maligned Republicans? As far as I can tell, nothing. Quit saying you’re for “change” when you’ve done nothing, even when you’re able to do so.
Republicans, until recently, you’ve held the majority in the Legislature, as well as having Republicans in key positions (the president, for example) in the Executive Branch for nearly a decade. What have you done over the last 8 years? Squandered huge amounts of money (yet you claim the Democrats are the “tax and spend” party), invaded the privacy of American citizens, and generally screwed things up. The only good thing I can recall you doing is letting the “assault weapons ban” expire in 2004…and that was mostly because nobody actually did anything except wait for it to expire. It’s pretty bad when you accomplish more good things by being apathetic than when you’re actually trying to be productive.
The federal government is now over $10.2 trillion dollars in debt…a number so great that the National Debt Clock had to add an extra digit to accomodate your fiscal irresponsibility. The annual budget of the federal government exceeds $3 trillion dollars. What the hell are you spending it all on? That’s a lot of hookers and blow.
In short, you all suck.
Get your collective heads out of your collective asses,
-AZR
P.S. Your roadside campaign signs, postal mailings, and telephone calls annoy me. That is, it makes me dislike you more.
P.P.S. Any candidate, ballot initiative, or other entity sending me unsolicited email immediately and permanently loses my vote. I may or may not vote for your opponent, but I certainly won’t be voting for you. My email box is mine, it exists for person-to-person and solicited bulk mail, and you need to ask for permission before using it to market to me.
P.P.P.S. I’ve already voted. Even if I wanted to change my vote, I can’t. Quit calling me and mailing me crap.

Reduced recoil loads for self-defense?

I live in a small studio apartment, and my primary self-defense firearm is a 12ga Mossberg 500 shotgun.
For years, I’ve kept Winchester Super-X buckshot loaded in it, and have had good experience with said ammo at the range. While it certainly has been effective against water jugs and other range targets, the full-power loads really pound my shoulder after a while. Getting back on target is slower than I’d like.
When I was buying powder and primers today, I picked up some of Remington’s “Managed Recoil” slugs and 00 buckshot. The marketing information suggests that they maintain the same effectiveness as full-power loads out to about 40 yards (far more than I need), yet have about half the recoil. Sounds pretty good. I’ll save the slugs for the range and use the buckshot for self-defense at home.
Has anyone had any experience with reduced-recoil loads in a self-defense situation, real or simulated? I’d imagine that they’d be similarly effective at closer ranges, but would love to hear from others.

Protip: Don’t Buy Stun Guns

Non-TASER stun guns like this one are essentially worthless for self-defense. They do make really handy “spark plugs” for igniting the fuel of a potato gun, but that’s about it. Oh, they also look really, really scary.
They can only be used at up-close-and-personal distances, can be easily wrested away from the holder, and don’t penetrate clothing very well.
They do not incapacitate an attacker. Instead, they feel like someone is pinching you quite hard in that area. That’s it.
How might I know this? Well, a friend of mine has such a stun gun that he uses for, not surprisingly, igniting his potato gun. At a small party this evening, some of the more intoxicated individuals decided it would be fun to shock each other. They also insisted that I, as a former military guy, should try it out as well as I’d “be able to handle it”. I originally declined, but eventually succumbed to peer pressure (mostly because I knew I could write this post afterward) and agreed. (Note to self: perhaps I should avoid situations that, if they made the newspaper, would have the phrase “alcohol was a factor”, even if I’ve only had two beers over a few hours.)
Even while being shocked, I was able to move in such a way that broke contact with the stun gun. There were no lasting effects — as soon as the contact was broken, the pain stopped. If I were an actual attacker, I would be able to continue my attack without any issues.
Actual TASERs are quite effective, even against determined attackers, though you only get one shot before needing to reload.
Jacketed hollowpoints tend to send get the “leave me alone” message across loud and clear, and most magazines come with a suitable amount of ammo in case you miss.
In short: if you’re going to buy some product for self-defense, make sure it’ll work. Basic stun guns don’t do that. They look scary as all hell, but they’re woefully ineffective.

Question of the Day

I found this in my search engine query logs:

can a silencer chambered in .223 be used on a .22lr

Assuming the silencer is physically threaded the same (1/2x28tpi, I believe, is quite common), then yes.
The .223 can will likely be heavier and larger than the .22 can due to the former having considerably greater powder volume (and thus resulting gas volume).
However, do not attempt to use a .22 silencer to suppress .223. Most .22 cans are made out of lower-strength materials like aluminum to save on weight. Their construction is perfectly adequate for .22 loads, but they are likely to be seriously damaged if used with higher-power rounds like .223.
In addition to having your expensive NFA item explosively self-disassemble in your face, there’s also the issue of having said exploding metal cylinder send sharp pointy bits into your body or the bodies of the people around you. Most people don’t like to be near things that are exploding that aren’t designed to be.
Heck, most people don’t like being near things that are exploding, period.

On the Importance of Elections

Why is it that every presidential election I’ve witnessed is always claimed to be “a very important election, quite possibly the most important one of our time”?
Granted, elections are important, but how much influence does a president have on the everyday lives of an everyday citizen? Essentially nil. Whether it was Reagan, Bush I, Clinton, or Bush II, the role of government in my life hasn’t changed much. Granted, I was born a year after Reagan took office, and my life as an adult is obviously different than my life as an infant, but that’s thankfully not something government had much say in.
More important would be for voters to look at the incredible flow of crap coming out of Congress and see how that affects their lives. I suspect that the effect that the actions of a president have on the lives of ordinary citizens pale in comparison to the actions of Congress.
Folks, we’re electing a president, not a king. Contrary to popular belief, the president is not personally responsible for all of the nation’s ills. A much greater amount of thought and effort should be put into choosing suitable Congressmen to represent you. That, and actually writing to your representatives to ensure that your voice is heard.
Again, elections are important. This one is no exception. But claiming that this election is the “most important of our lives” is silly; that same claim has likely been made about every election in every government since the dawn of governments. Get over it already.

Foolishness

The University of Arizona has just released their annual “Campus Security Report”, describing all the various crimes that took place on campus last year, as well as a bunch of other information.
One of the most foolish things I read in the document was this:

UAPD, in conjunction with ASUA, have available and distribute a combination whistle, light and key chain. The program is intended to give people another method of drawing attention in the event of an emergency. If you feel threatened, or are injured and need to summon help, and you cannot call for help via a cell phone or regular phone, blow the whistle. If you hear a whistle, please call 9-1-1 and report that you are hearing a whistle being blown, and the location from where the sound is coming.

Somehow I suspect a whistle/light/keychain will not be a terrible effective method of preventing crime.
I suspect that if they simply repealed the “weapon-free zone” policy for those holding carry permits, they’d notice that people would be better able to protect themselves if chose to do so. At least they’d have a better chance than if they simply had a whistle.
Another choice quote:

NEVER GO ONTO THE LEDGES outside your window. It?s a long but very quick trip to the ground.

Science, it works.

I just saved a bunch of money on my car insurance…

…by switching away from GEICO.
That’s an extra $300/year I can put into savings, or maybe spend on ammo.
Update: On a similar note, I’m curious what, if any, insurance you have to protect your firearms. All the renters insurance policies I’ve seen have a $2,000 limit on firearms. I augmented my Allstate renters policy with a “sporting equipment” rider that upped the limit to $5,000 for an extra $20/year. USAA has a similar limitation (and optional add-on rider) for firearms. Any recommendations?