Saturday, April 16, 2016

Meet "Little Bill*"


(*That moniker is a tip of the hat to legendary gunsmith, gun designer, gun builder Bill Laughridge, the President of Cylinder & Slide, Inc., who is alleged to have helped Colt with the design of the Colt Defender.)

Recently, after completing a thorough range-session with a different pistol, I put a quick six rounds of Federal 230-grain Hydra-Shok through this lightweight, 45 ACP, 3'' barreled early vintage Colt Defender.  This was simply a preliminary function test; it is a used pistol but it looked to be unfired or nearly so when I bought it a few months ago.  The first round that I fired hit red-center but the muzzle-blast shifted my subconscious into the dark world of bad habits and I pushed the next two rounds low.  I had to settle myself in and focus on sight, breathing, and trigger in order to bring the final three rounds into the zone of "good enough."

Six rounds do not a reliable pistol make, but I did not bring it along to the range that day for a full shakedown; mostly I just wanted to see how the extractor on this pistol performed in realtime (poorly tuned extractors, or those made from poor material or with substandard production quality control, cause some of the common reliability issues with 1911 pistols of all sizes). So far, so good.  Time will tell if this pistol is going to work out for me.

EDITED TO ADD:  There are different brands of these 3'' 1911 pattern pistols.  CLICK HERE to read a good article regarding the spotty reliability of these little pistols.






Wednesday, April 13, 2016

I am shocked to hear that Hillary lied. There must be some mistake ... or a conspiracy ...


"Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton was called out Tuesday for an attack she levied against opponent Sen. Bernie Sanders, saying his state of Vermont supplies “per capita” most of the guns used killings and other crimes in New York some 350 miles south."
Well, I suppose it is ever possible that she was trying to tell the truth and then remembered at the last moment that the truth never got anyone elected.  
Perhaps she can call in some favors and convince the New York Attorney General to use RICO against Bernie for something or another.










Tuesday, April 12, 2016

Monday, April 11, 2016

Unholy Hell, I'm a believer NOW! OMG! OMG! The Consensus is Clear and the Science is Settled! Climate Change is gonna mess up our sex lives! Outta bed you Deniers! Your good times are over!!


Heh, yeah, as if I have a sex-life to worry about.

Well, although often amusing, the endless proclamations of "CLIMATE CHANGE CAUSES THIS, THAT, AND EVERYTHING!" really don't help sell the concept; they are mind numbing.  The Climate Change cause, as noble as it is or isn't,  has become a joke. Advocates really need to rethink the packaging of their message.  Anyhoo, everything above and below my text was copied (Fair Use) from THIS ARTICLE.


Sex and climate change
Temperature impacts the sexual patterns of human beings for two reasons, according to Professor Barreca.
One reason he gave was that human beings did not want to exert themselves physically in hot weather, due to possible discomfort.
The second reason was more scientific.
"The effect of temperature on the production of sperm — that's been shown to be pretty strong in animals," Professor Barreca said.
"When you expose a bull to high temperatures, sperm motility and sperm count fall right off."
He said with the onset of climate change and global warming, the implications could grow.
"According to a state of the art global circulation model, there is going to be about 90 hot days per year by the end of the 21st century — that's about 60 more days than we currently experience," he said. 
"Using our estimates, we project that the number of births will fall by about 107,000 per year in the United States by the end of the 21st century."
He said this implied climate could have an impact on the seasonal variation of births, and ultimately change when we have to attend the most birthday parties.


Sunday, April 10, 2016

Alleged inquisitors to the left of me, alleged deniers to the right, here I am stuck in the middle without truth


Well, I kinda agree with old Charlie on this.  There is the MEDIA OF THE LEFT and the MEDIA OF THE RIGHT, and not much in the middle.  Sure seems to be more of the media steering to port than to the starboard; I could be wrong ... but I don't think so.  

Is there any merit to THIS CLIMATE SKEPTIC ARTICLE or is it just more partisan blather?  Many folks only search for news that supports their views and they take what they read, see, and hear on pure faith.  I've been burned far too often to accept anything on faith.

Then there is this INQUISITION ARTICLE making big waves.  IMHO is a kinda a bit of a stretch to compare the actions of the 16 PARTISAN State Attorney Generals to The Inquisition,  but one could argue that it is no more of a stretch than the stuff peddled by Al Gore et al.  Which side uses the most blatant propaganda?  Each side will point across the aisle.  We now have the "INQUISITORS" to support the "ALARMISTS" against the "DENIERS."  "Heh, good times, Baby!  Good times!  Where's the whiskey?"


To me, above all else regarding the 16 "Inquisitors," the partisan misuse of RICO is what I find to be chilling and shameful.  I expect each side will ultimately wind up attempting to use RICO against the other.  This game of charades will continue to be sadly comedic.  

CLIMATE is an interesting science, and the science regarding the theory of Climate Change (once commonly known as Anthropogenic Global Warming) is certainly not settled; there is no consensus.  No, my credentials on the subject are not equal to those of a scientist but neither are the credentials of most other citizens / voters, pundits, and politicians.  Yes, there is truth to the rumor that my IQ score is lower than the number of years I have been alive, but nearly each day I do read scientific articles on the Climate Change subject written by heavily lettered folks from both camps (yeah, I gotta get a life; I spend far too much time reading online).  Politically and (to a large degree) scientifically, the Climate Change issue has taken on the cloak of religion on one side and religious denial on the other.   Zealotry does make our world go around.  If you are a mindless zealot on any issue, please have the decency to keep your First Amendment rights out of my face.

Google the topic of Al Gore’s property and you will find that his "carbon footprint" is hypocritically gargantuan.  It is hard to take ANY of this Climate Change stuff seriously when most of the major pundits (the notable politicians, activists with the status and financial resources of Soros, and the parade of Hollywood icons) are each flying in energy inefficient private jets and living in MULTIPLE palatial mansions.  They all preach that there is an urgency regarding Climate Change but nobody acts that way.   If some dude yelling "FIRE" is standing still in the middle of a crowded theater while asking for money so he can extinguish a blaze that only he can foresee, I'm going to be a cautious skeptic while I evaluate the situation.  However, if the dude is yelling "FIRE" and running like hell toward the exit, count me in as potential believer as I claw my way over your sorry ass while I skedaddle on outta there. 

I will believe there is an urgency when the governments of the world preemptively destroy ALL of the private jets and ALL of the palatial mansions and subsequently force everyone into living quarters no larger than a common three-bedroom home, and into using air-travel that is no-better than common first class. Telling lies is what politicians do; until voters find a way to use RICO against untruthful politicians and their respective untruthful political party, we are stuck with the liars and their mindless, zealous disciples.  

Selfishly, I do often wish for a federal ban on fireplaces and wood burning stoves in populated areas that have ready sources of fuel oil, natural gas, propane, or electricity for heating and cooking.  Good Lord, it often gets hard to breathe around the area where I live and the stench is horrible.  If the USA and all inhabitants of Mother Earth are TRULY in deep trouble with this Climate Change issue, the politicians could get me on the road to being a believer by just having the fortitude to heavily restrict wood burning stoves and fireplaces.  If they cannot do that convincing first step, I'll just tolerate the smoke and the stench and figure that there is no emergency and that Climate Change is just nothing more than typical partisan political rhetoric.

I'll conclude this diatribe by offering that it was a huge tactical mistake for the advocates, politicians, and pundits to make the leap from "Air Pollution" to "Climate Change."  Controlling Air Pollution is much easier to sell politically; banning coal because it pollutes the air and the land is a more convincing argument than banning coal because it puts carbon dioxide in the upper atmosphere.  IMHO, it IS high time to incrementally move away from coal.  Elon Musk has done more than anyone else to demonstrate that mankind is creative enough to use technology to wean our society from dependence on fossil fuels.   The politicians could do far worse than to collectively look to Elon Musk for leadership.