Hey Hey Kids! It’s that time of year again!

Lets play finish the article!  Here’s the headline:

University of Idaho student in stable condition after fall from roof

No cheating first we need to collect ideas of what happened.

First up it’s a student so my immediate guess is this individual was at a Fraternity or Sorority when this incident occurred.  Write down if you agree or disagree, the answer follows.

… after falling from the roof of his fraternity shortly after midnight Wednesday morning. 

I am shocked, I say shocked that an upstanding young student from the Greek system would find himself in such a position.  It’s not like this thing hasn’t happened before.  As a note, there was an individual that fell at WSU August 23rd, though it was just a party house not associated with the Greek system.

Next wild ass guess, though I will admit it’s not really that wild… Alcohol was a factor in the accident!  What say you gentle reader, do you think this individual was sober when he decided to venture across the top of his humble abode?

… but there was also alcohol involved,” said Moscow Police Chief David Duke. 

[sarcasm]Damn, I was really thinking he was stone cold sober![/sarcasm]

How sad is it that I can just read the headline and know exactly what happened like a standard write-up with fill in the blanks.  The only difference in the name of the individual, frat house, school, and responding agency.

Why would I bring this all up though?  Well remember though that these individuals are not the majority of students and yet they are the shining examples used by the anti-rights cultists that concealed carry shouldn’t be allowed on campus.  Unsurprisingly though their examples are often criminals as well.  Not to mention the criminal incidents that don’t get reported by the media, some so horrible  they should issue hunting tags for the animals who did it.  All the while the school looks the other way or attempts to blame the victim (seriously).  (As a FYI, that references two different independent incidents believe it or not.)  WSU doesn’t like the black eye these types of events bring and does anything it can to hide it.

I find it interesting though that the example group our opponents use against college carry often find themselves in situations that would otherwise preclude them from carrying.  Drunk, underage, drug use, etc.  Yet our opponents use them as their example to disarm others who merely go to class and go home.  Ensuring that they can remain easy victims for the predators they oh so clearly support.

As a side note, we often talk about self-defense and avoiding risky situations.  Going into Greek row, more specifically attending any kind of party there I consider high risk, especially for the fairer sex.  It’s not the way it should be, but it’s the way it is.  Know that it’s high risk and act accordingly, preferably just avoid the damn thing.

Zero Tolerance is Really Zero Brains

Via A Girl comes this wonderful bit of idiocy.

A Nebraska preschool is asking a three-year-old deaf boy to change his name because it violates the school board’s weapons policy.

Hunter Spanjer signs his first name by making what looks like shooting gestures with both hands. He crosses his fingers when he does it – a modification to show it’s his proper name.

Think about that.  They are so intolerant of people and cultures they are insisting that a deaf child change his name.  This is what our opponents are like.  They don’t hate guns, they hate us.  They hate our culture, they to destroy it.

Speaking of zero brains was this wonderful individual on twitter today:

image

 

Remember my rant yesterday?  Yup, he was another delusional individual of from that bunch.  How delusional?  You’ll be glad to know that JayG does not have a series on defensive gun uses.  Evidently none of those incidents were justified use of a firearm.  (Remember read bottom up)

image

Note that bottom tweet links to JayG’s DGC.  I then also link to this story about a man defending a police officer with a firearm.  To which he has no reply and starts stating how he wants to make all guns disappear.  Because some how that’s going to stop violent criminals from being violent?

I ask again, why are these people so insistent on disarming and preventing citizens from obtaining arms?  It’s like they need us disarmed so they can more effectively redistribute our wealth without our consent.

I keep trying to restrain this comment but I can’t any more.  After Amy’s comment I think it makes perfect sense.

The reason Beta Males support gun control is because the only way they can effectively attempt to reproduce is by means that would usually result in a case of lead poisoning.

I state the above because often anti-gunners talk as if it is going to be me shooting them.  That I am going to shoot them at any point.  As I have said though, in the words of Malcolm Reynolds:

If I ever do kill you, you’ll be awake, you’ll be facing me, and you’ll be armed.

The solution to not getting shot by law abiding citizens is simple.  Don’t try and victimize them.  Don’t steal, wrong, defraud, assault, rape, or otherwise attempt to do harm me or my family and my gun is going to stay right in it’s holster where it belongs.  Get it?!

The real kicker though is this bit of PSH:

image

Why I Get Angry…

Recently I had an individual engage me in debate on twitter and he couldn’t understand why I felt like I was being victimized for him saying firearms should be taken from law-abiding citizens.

Today I stumbled across something that put it oh so well. (Emphasis mine).

There is a perception that a gun will turn a sane man, or woman, into a crazed, trigger-happy criminal, or that a gun is a gross over-reaction to the threat of rape. I contend that the gun is a great equalizer. Why do only criminals, police and nut-cases get to have guns? Do we, the potential victims, not get access to these same implements, so that we might properly defend ourselves? In fact, might we have these tools so we no longer have to be victims? Maybe we can take some action in preserving our own safety instead of just staying in well-lit areas and hoping for the best.

The other side of this debate doesn’t seem to understand that they are forcing potential victims to have to be complicit in their own attack.  The arguments are “for the greater good”, often because they think that crime merely exists because of the firearm.  First it assumes that the limitation on access will have an effect on criminal access to arms.  That’s impossible and history in both England and Australia both have proven that. Also it ignores the truth about collective punishment and responsibility.

Further, how do you effectively ban something that can be made from simple materials available at Home Depot and soon will not need much more than the ability to hit print?  What effect does gun control accomplish other than provide methods to prevent the law-abiding from carrying defensive arms?

Honestly, those who support gun control, answer the question, criminals and crazy people can obtain a weapon if they so feel like it, what good do gun laws do?  If someone is intent on killing someone else, they have numerous weapons to substitute even if they cannot get a firearm.  I also love how some people call for “reasonable restrictions on firearms” and then compare it to cars as if they are some how more regulated.

So, let me get this straight:

I could continue but why bother?  The fact is there is law after law that does nothing to stop criminals, but does everything possible to prevent law-abiding citizens from obtaining effective arms for their own defense.  The idea that cars are some how more regulated than firearms is false.  While they are “registered” that is done as a tax measure as the vehicle is considered titled property.  Further obtaining a license is simple and easy and it is recognized in all 50 states.  I am required by law to muffle my vehicle, however the law prevents me from muffling my firearms.  My license is recognized in all 50 states without question while my CPL is not.  My vehicle is required to meet a minimum standard of safety requirements, read headlights, tail lights, blinkers, seat belts, but the remainder of the car can be left up to my imagination.  Further if I buy an old car frame, some of the safety requirements are lifted.

The fact is, guns are extremely heavily regulated and it is the law-abiding who is on the short end of the stick.  It is the law-abiding who’s access is restricted.  Think I’m pulling your leg?  Let’s as some members of a gang in Chicago (h/t Sebastian).

Another source of stolen guns is “the freights,” Chris said.

He was talking about the freight trains parked on easy-to-access rail yards on the South Side.

“You bust the lock,” he said. “Once you get in there, you may get the wrong thing. You may get shoes or something. You feel me? But you keep trying. We tried it before and we know what kind of containers they in. They’re carrying all type of handguns — in crates.”

Consider that, with my comments from above.  Then consider how hard it is for a law-abiding citizen to get a firearm within the City of Chicago, even post Heller and McDonald.

You can not look at these facts and then tell me with a straight face that gun control has anything to do with “public safety”.  The public is in no way safer disarmed while the criminals are still able to obtain weapons.  You cannot stop them.

So yes, when you go off spouting your mouth about how gun control would help the world, yes I take it personally and yes I will call you on it.  Because the day may come where my wife, my daughter, my son, any of my friends, and lastly even myself may have to call upon my firearm to defend ourselves or our families.  And no one has any business telling me, my family, or my friends what tools we should or shouldn’t be using to defend ourselves.  Firearms and this community do something no other tool or group can.

Most importantly, the act of shooting and owning a gun has a profound impact on the way most women see themselves and the world around them. Shooting a gun is empowering, energizing, stress-relieving and confidence-building. In my experience, women who shoot walk taller and apologize less. They are also sensitive, caring and protective of their loved ones. Women who carry guns have already decided that their lives and their bodies are valuable enough to protect.

To which Mom With A Gun adds the following:

To this I would add only that the above is doubly true if you’ve already been a victim of rape or other violence and you’re trying to reclaim your sense of empowerment, energy, confidence and competence. For twenty years after I was raped, I became meek, submissive, withdrawn, terrified. The worst thing my rapist took from me on that terrible July afternoon was my sense that I was worth defending, that I was worth fighting for. That I was worth the space I took up in the world. That I was anything other than prey.

To which we then look at the comments made by A Girl about this community and the start contrast to our opponents.

You, you who hate guns, you gave me nothing.

No hope.

No tools.

All that was offered me was a life of fear, of resentment, of bitterness, of dependance…

The gun community has offered me hope and strength, and courage.

They have taught me to have belief in myself.

They have asked nothing of me in return and, yet, I would give them my life.

Funny thing is, they would never ask me to.

This is where I belong.

These are my people.

So yes I take it personal, yes I get angry, and yes the mere suggestion is an insult and a disgrace to humanity.  Only a cold-blooded animal would wish real victims to continue suffering after an attack.  We see how each side of this debate treats victims of violence.  One wants to rebuild them, make them stronger, and faster, because we have the technology.  The other side would rather bury their heads in the sand and use the force of government to make everyone else do it too.

*For those who don’t know, a collapsible stock, barrel shroud, and pistol grip are actually safety features.

  • A barrel shroud protects the user from burns from the hot metal of the barrel.
  • The collapsible stock allows the weapon to be easily modified to properly fit the shooter, especially handy when you regularly deal with new shooters of different sizes.  The wrong size can result in injury to the face and shoulders.
  • The pistol grip allows disabled shooters to more easily and effectively hold and use a weapon and depending on the disability prevents injury.

Repeat After Me…

If I carry a concealed weapon, I will not be a dumbass and will use a holster unlike this individual.

A Flagstaff man accidentally fired his gun inside a crowded McDonald’s into a wall, which ended with debris hitting fellow customers, police said.

The 24-year-old man had the firearm in his waist band, the police report states, and when he leaned against the back wall, the weapon discharged.

Young man, tell me you aren’t a sports fan because you should have learned from Plaxico’s mistake.  This is not how responsible people carry firearms.  We use a good sturdy holster.  Not that cheap nylon crap from Uncle Mike either.  It should be in a real freaking holster.

You were aware of the mass shooting and you did not want people freaking out about your gun, yet you couldn’t be bothered with using a real holster?  Tell me, how did that negligent discharge work for keeping it all on the down low?

I would like to point out however this is yet another example of the hole in “training requirements” assuming boy wonder here had a CCW, which he probably is, obviously satisfied the training requirement but evidently he skipped class on buy a holster day.*  The bottom line is there are many people that live in states that have no training requirement and they don’t do this type of crap.  Then within states with the training requirement you still have people who do.  Maybe it isn’t as much the training but the attitude of the person carrying the gun.  You can lead a horse to water but you can not make him drink.

My guess on what happened given the description is that clothing got within the trigger guard and when he leaned back it applied pressure and went bang.  The other option is he violated rule 5 but I don’t think he would have put a hole through his jeans without also penetrating himself.

*Though it seems that military service satisfies the requirement, maybe they never told him to use a holster for sidearms.  About the best alternative option is participation in organized shooting sports.  I do not know specifically what sports they consider acceptable, however if it’s IDPA or USPSA they don’t let you do Mexican carry.  They tell you to use a freaking holster and what happened is exactly why.  Small-bore rifle and bullseye on the other hand, that just means you can hit the broad side of a barn, not that you know how to carry.

What Stupid Looks Like

I have done some not too bright things around explosives.  Last week a particular individual did something incredibly stupid.

Initially I was going to just leave it at the comment I made over at Caleb’s place.  Then there was this incident brought to my attention by Lyle.  That gave me the inkling to do a post, then Weer’d posted the video of what exactly happened in the FPS Russia incident.   After watching the video I had to pick my jaw up off the floor at this idiocy.

First a note, do not recreate anything in this video, if you survive it will be either because of blind dumb luck or because God has a soft spot for you and your idiocy.

If you want to skip to 4:46 to save yourself 4 minutes and 46 seconds of pure garbage.

Does anyone see what he did wrong there?  Anyone?  Bueller?

He violated the first rule of explosives.  He placed something between him and the explosive.  You see when you detonate an explosive inside of something it propels the surrounding material out at extremely high velocity.  This is the basic principle behind a pipe bomb.  The pipe itself becomes extra shrapnel in the explosion.

This is why when we Idaho Stress test an object we ALWAYS place the explosives in front of the target.  We never place the object in front of the explosive, that is how you take shrapnel to the face.

This is serious and this isn’t a joke.  That camera man is lucky he isn’t dead or more seriously injured right now.  Just because the object is larger in size doesn’t mean that it’s safe.  What is a safe distance then?  Lets use the 2008 toilet as an example.

We shot that toilet from approximately 400 yards away.  When I say we in this case, I mean the entire shooting line.  We found pieces of that toilet well over 100 yards away.  Note we found them in a field meaning they had to be big enough to be easily seen above the grass.

We can also look at the pumpkin examples.

I know we had approximately 6 lbs inside the large pumpkin in the second video.  We found chunks, not bits, 125 yards away.  Many of those chunks were also relatively light in weight and had a lower B.C.  In that case we were shooting from about 30 yards, however it should be noted the object was not metal or dense in nature.   Metal merely rips and turns in to shrapnel which is nothing more than a knife flying through the air.

Given those above examples, I honestly wouldn’t blow anything up that had metal in it from within 200 yards, and due to my love of cushion, I’d double it to 400 for extra safety.

Joe, Ry, and I all almost made this fatal mistake by accident.  That is a wonderful example of how much power and force there is behind explosives and why you really need to pay attention.  So please, if you want to go out and play with explosives, pay attention and pay heed to the first rule:

Never Place Anything Between You and The Explosive.

Remember to be careful out there and use your head.  Sometimes well all forget to think things through, but the more you think about it, the better off you’ll be in the long run.

Update: Ry just posted a reminder of the results of an experiment he and Lyle did.  Note what it did to the steel and how far it went.

Yeah I’ll be on and off this week…

I am currently on “vacation” visiting friends and family.  Yesterday I met up with Phil and Scott from RNS down on the Tacoma water front.

Phil’s awesomeness was just radiating from him while at the restaurant.  It was a fun evening and was nice to catch up with friends I usually only see once a year at Boomershoot.

Earlier in the day though the wife and I went to Point Defiance Zoo and Aquarium for the first time since our wedding.

I wasn’t smiling because well, I don’t normally smile.  Don’t know why, but I just don’t smile that much if it’s a staged photo.  We paid a visit to where we had our reception too. 

The Gibbons were out just the same as they were during our reception.  Just as adorable too.

We also found the Sumatran Tiger that was on display at our reception.

Here she is now, evidently she is most likely pregnant too.

And there’s even more cubs at the zoo, here’s baby snow leopards.

Yes, they were just as adorable in person.  There were a couple other cats that were adorable but I only have pictures.  If you have kittens, that’s exactly how they were acting but they were bigger.  I wanted to play with the kitty cats.  We did however stumble across a red wolf puppy.

Yes I know all of these are wonderful cell phone quality, I didn’t feel like lugging around my SLR and backpack.  Yes I had an urge to shoot the little bastards.  The only good wolf is a dead wolf however I consider a zoo a sanctuary and given they are nothing like the Timber Wolf or Grey Wolf.   That brings me to a story of someone who needed blunt force trauma to the face.

You see there are peacocks that run around the zoo uncaged.  They’re beautiful with gorgeous tails. When we finally ran across one it looked like it was shedding its feathers, but still seemed odd.  As Janelle and I were talking a couple overheard us and told us that a woman was chasing the peacock earlier and stepping on its tail to get its feathers.  Yeah I was filled with rage when I heard that.  While I am not fond of some animals in the wild, I understand their role and don’t want to drive their extinction.  That said, something like that just disturbs me on so many levels.

So yeah, I’m going to be visiting other friends all this week and will blog when I can.

Stupid Should Hurt (Your Morning Laugh)

So Jay G posted this video and I’m sure there are a few of you who won’t find this funny.  Watch the video and then let me explain, my sympathy meter is as low as possible.

You can watch the video here in case embedding fails.

You watched it all the way through right?  Up till the end where you could tell she was walking around.  What we all just saw was the epitome of a lazy person.  There is no lazier person in the world, too lazy to walk, too lazy to read, so lazy and in a rush that she didn’t want to take the elevator.  Instead she goes and tries to balance her scooter on the escalator and fails.

I am at a loss for words since sadly Jay G is right that this woman probably will get a settlement for her negligence, but it’s a stark reminder that there is stupid in this world.  Not only is there stupid, but there is always going to be a bigger idiot.

Who know’s, maybe she’s done it many times before and this time she pushed her luck.  This woman is lucky she walked away from her moment of stupidity and all that she will have is a blow to her pride and probably a larger bank account.

Either way, I got a good laugh out of it because I’m sure it hurt as it rolled over.  Why am I laughing, because frankly, stupid should hurt.

*As an FYI for those who would dare to tell me I don’t know what it’s like to be confined to a wheelchair, listen carefully.  Shut the hell up, you don’t know me or my history.  I spent 2 months confined to a wheel chair non-weight bearing in both legs.  So yeah, been there, done that, got the freaking t-shirt.

Update:  Email from “The Short Lady With The Grey Hair” (otherwise known as my mom).

I saw a quick take on the news but was sidetracked and missed the entire episode.  BOSTON—should have known.  She better not get compensation; if anything she should be fined.  Anyone who is so stupid as to try to take a motorized wheelchair—or non-motorized wheelchair—up an escalator does not have sufficient operating brain cells to be using the wheelchairs unaccompanied.  Brain dead stupid!

I was laughing as I read that, mainly because she’s right.

Quote of the Day – Munchkin Wrangler (07/19/2012)

Nobody builds a business alone, that’s true. But Bob didn’t make all those people work for free, and he didn’t make use of public resources without writing hefty tax checks for the privilege. Bob paid everyone, including his local, state, and federal government, before he even got to make his first dollar of profits. And Bob carries all the risk here. If his business tanks, his contractors aren’t going to return the money he gave them for their work, his employees aren’t going to give back their wages, and the government isn’t going to return the taxes and fees he paid. So why is it OK that when he’s successful enough to make a profit, some populist asshole politicians can stand up and say that “he hasn’t paid his fair share to society yet”?

Munchkin Wrangleryou didn’t build that
July 16th, 2012


[I do love the comments about what it took to build a business coming from a man who’s never built or run a business in his life. Businesses take work, period. There is risk and there is one person who takes that risk and the reward for the risk is the potential for profit. But profit is the result of greed and corruption right?  That person who has poured blood sweat and tears working their ass off so they don’t fail shouldn’t get any reward.

Why should they get no reward, you see someone else actually built their business. The business owner didn’t spend late nights with no bonus pay keeping the ship afloat.  They haven’t spent hours working on a website with zero income coming from it at the beginning.  Who cares that the business operator has paid anyone who works for them a fair wage in exchange for their goods and services?

That’s the crux, people who are paid by the business owner didn’t build the business.  People who build a business invest considerable time and effort without the guarantee of a reward.  That in and of itself is the very nature of business and is known as your Return on Investment.

Building a business means you invest a lot of time and your own money that in the future you may end up with more than you had.  Evidently our fearless leader has some other shining example of what building a business looks like.

*Most annoyingly is some places charge you a fee merely for permission to conduct business.  You see you need a business license to sell things to people who would like your goods and services.  You pay for the privilege but if for one reason or another you take a year off, you get to pay the tax man for the privilege again.  See how that works?  The government has to get theirs or you can’t get yours. -B]