The Rationale As To Why She Opted To Defend Herself

The below video was posted on YouTube back in 2012. So, the incident depicted happened that year or before. Too bad the word of why the pharmacist had decided to acquire pepper spray, and not just any pepper spray, has not been spread to more people. It is the same exact argument that can and should be used to arm yourself with a firearm for self-defense purposes.



Luckily all that was needed in this situation was pepper spray but had it been me, in a first encounter with the guy, then as soon as I had read the note I likely would have opted to have taken cover and then drawn my sidearm and depending on what happened may well have shot him. I would have had all the evidence, in that note, that I would have needed to have shown I had probable cause to believe that he posed an imminent threat of serious bodily harm or death to me.

As for the pharmacist, her rationale was flawless - she knew how long it would take for law enforcement to answer a 911 call and by that she obviously meant it was too long.

All the best,
Glenn B

I Think A Hammer Is The Solution...

..the head not the claw.


It's Not About the Nail from Jason Headley on Vimeo.

A hat tip and my thanks to Mike McC for this one.

All the best,
Glenn B

On The Fence About A Bear Gun

I have been considering a 357 Magnum revolver instead of a 44 Magnum as a bear defense gun for our upcoming Alaska trip. That would be as backup to bear spray and to a Remington 870 shotgun.

The reasoning behind me even considering a 357 is that while the 357 not as powerful as a 44 Magnum, it is probably easier to control and thus much quicker with which to get off an aimed 
second shot or possibly third - which in all likelihood would be the outside highest number of rounds you could get off at a charging Brown Bear (1). Note that I put the word reasoning in italics because the reference article containing that opinion seemed based upon little more than an opinion with little to back it up. Then again, I suppose each of the three articles I present as references in this blog post are opinions although the other two seem somewhat more substantial in the amount of thought put into them.

Getting back to the caliber choices, the 357 is also considered by some, to be suitable for defense in Brown Bear country (2). Adding that consideration t the premise of the first article I indexed, I started to lean to the 357. While you might be able to get off two or even three shots with a 44 Magnum, reacquiring the target, and then reengaging with a second well aimed shot, after the recoil of the initial shot, will take a bit longer with the 44 than with a 357. A good aim, at the central nervous system is an absolute must to stop one of those steam rollers with huge teeth and bigger claws. If you can get that on the first shot all might be well and fine and result in a one shot kill. I tend to doubt that - when my or Brendan's knees are giving out, or when our bladders have let go a warm stream down our legs and the pucker factor has just let loose behind us - either one of us might get off a perfectly aimed first shot as we are being charged by one of the great bears. It may be that well aimed but who can tell until it happens and you actually shoot that well under such fearfully intense pressure. Even if we were able to stand our ground with steely and icy cold reserve and a belly full of the grittiest true grit, while facing one of those monsters eye to eye, I would hope for at least two shots and better yet three. Thus, lately, I have been leaning toward a 357 from my precarious perch on the fence.

I suppose it was inevitable that the next article I would find on the subject did not completely discount the use of a 357 but blatantly said that at best it is marginal for large bears. The writer of that opinion openly admitted to not being an expert (maybe his advice is best) and also admitted to never having hunted bears. Yet he rather eloquently said one of the most thought provoking things out of all the authors whose works I have read on the subject of whether or not a 357 is suitable for great bears:

"A note on grizzly bears: they are smart, strong, mean, bulky, motivated and fast. The grizzly bear is the one predator in North America that truly inspires terror in my heart. No matter what you can do, he can do it better. He or she can be merciless in defending turf or litter, and may just kill you for kicks." (3)

After reading that I have to admit the 357 may not be enough. That is true especially if one shot is all we could take. In that scenario, it seems logical we would rather have all the power we could get out of 44 Magnum. Some of the gun gurus consider the 44 magnum to be the low end of a bear defense caliber (4). The fourth referenced article completely rules out 357 Magnum and 41 Magnum rounds. Now that I reminded myself of these last two references, here I am again not leaning either way - sitting straight up on the center of the fence - and my arse is starting to hurt because I have been sitting here so long trying to make up my mind about which to get. I definitely am not going to go for a larger caliber revolver than a 44 Magnum, no matter that some believe it the low end for great bear, if only because I truly believe the revolver would be both too heavy and have too much recoil. It is not easy making up your mind with all these experts out there with differing advice. What makes it more difficult is living in an area where there are no guns shops/ranges at which I can rent a 44 to test fire it and see how well I do. There is one in PA, at least a couple of hours away but I have not had the chance to visits it and time is running short to order a revolver. I may not order one today as I had hoped but I hope to order it at least by the middle of the week and am determined to do so by the end of the week at the latest! Decisions, decisions...

One of the things, other than the actual guns and caliber of the ammo, that is talked about in some of the reference materials I have looked over, is the bullet type in any given bear defense caliber ammunition. From what I can gather, hollow points (in handgun rounds) should be avoided as bear defense rounds and solid points of one type or another should be chosen. If I go with the smaller caliber 357, I think I would opt for a round with a solid lead core bullet. Corbon offers this one, their 357, 200 grain, Hunter HC. HSM offers this one, a 180 grain, hard cast, RNFP-GC Bear Load. The Chuck Hawks article also made mention of a similar round by Federal but I searched for it and it does not seem to be available in the current market. I would also go for a similar round in 44 Magnum if available, but right now they do not seem available from any manufacturer.I n lieu of that, I would go with something like this, the Prvi Partizan 44 Remington Magnum, 300 grain semi jacketed soft point. Decisions, decisions...

So, I am still on the fence. I don't have to make up my mind by the time I get to my dealer today but I would like to select one before then or at least have a much better idea of which I want. Either way - decision made or not - I am going to talk this over with Bruce, from Hunter's Essentials. Bruce is the owner and is also a very experienced hunter from what I can tell. His experience may be able to convince me one way or the other and I don't think the price difference (as in profit difference) will sway his judgment to steer me toward the one that would make him a few more bucks.

All the best,
Glenn B

Footnotes:
1. http://www.outdoorlife.com/blogs/game-changers/how-pick-right-sidearm-backup-bear-protection
2. http://www.chuckhawks.com/protection_field.htm
3. http://www.snubnose.info/docs/grizzly_357.htm
4. http://www.americanhunter.org/articles/2014/8/13/packing-pistols-in-bear-country/

Did You Make A Firearms Purchase On BAG Day?

Yesterday, was tax day, for all of us here in the USA who are required to pay personal income taxes, or for at least those of us who follow the law. It was also BAG day; otherwise known as Buy A Gun day. I have not seen anything on it as of late but I figured why let what should become a good, all American, tradition fall by the wayside.

While I did not buy a gun, and that only because I had difficulty with the website from which I was trying to order a revolver, I did order some ammunition. Yeah, I know, it's not the same as getting a gun but I hope to complete the gun order today; I did not want to let the actual day of BAG Day go by without at least celebrating it in spirit by ordering something at least related to guns thus an ammo order.

After ordering that ammo, a case (200 rounds) of Remington's 35 Remington, 200 grain, Core-Lokt soft points, there is little if anything left with which to buy a gun in my checking account. In fact, there is zilch that I can put toward a gun. The solution to that is to buy it with my American Distress Express card and then take the money out of my suPer sekRit saving account meant for our upcoming Alaska trip. I had thought that the 35 REM ammo would be the last I was going to buy online (or anywhere for that matter) but if I buy a revolver today, I am going to need to buy ammo for it. Had I been thinking, I would have ordered ammo for the revolver but something told me to wait until I actually have it in hand before buying ammo for it. 

I'm certain though, it will be the last batch of 35REM ammo I buy in a long, long, long, long time. That is not only because I probably will have enough to last me about 5 or maybe even 10 years but because it is so darned expensive. Right now, the elusive 200 grain Remington Core-Lokt is going for $1.50 per round and that was the best price I could find because it comes with free shipping. Free shipping or not, just thinking I paid that much for it makes my wallet say ouch. I had not seen that particular ammo for sale, from a dealer that would ship it to NY, for over 6 months - maybe closer to a year.

So there it is - my BAG day purchase and as I said, before this day is over I hope to purchase a revolver too. I had been thinking of getting a Ruger Redhawk stainless steel revolver, with either 4.2" or 5.5" barrel, in 44 magnum; however, I am on the fence and leaning over toward buying a stainless steel Ruger GP100, with a 4.2" or 6" barrel, in .357 Magnum. Decisions, decisions...

All the best,
Glenn B

Everyman's Evening Eyeful

All the best,
Glenn B

Had Anyone Understood The Seriouness...

...of these so called simulated attacks, then the jet that came in wing below the bridge would have been blown out of the sky long before it got in that close. We are ruled by folks who would rather have put the whole crew of a U.S. Navy ship (and the ship itself) at risk rather than shoot down a Russian plane probably manned by one or two. Yes, I understand ,it could  have led to war and many more would be at risk of losing their lives; however, our failing to act is such a sign of weakness that it may soon lead to war itself. Shooting down that plane would have been a sign of strength, and may indeed have prevented an imminent war, had the arsehats in Washington had the backbone to back it up!

You can bet that the Chinese, the Iranians, North Koreans and every other country with which we are at odds are watching intently with their fingers next to, if not already on, the triggers. I just hope we don't get caught with Obama's golf pants down and Kerry with his head buried firmly into Obama's ass.

All the best,
Glenn B

Gun Buyer Beware

I was looking through ads on GunBroker.com, just minutes ago, trying to get an idea of what High Standard Dura-Matic M-101s are selling for in the land of reality. I came across an ad for one that was just a tad self contradictory. It was for a "Mint In Box High Standard M-100 Dura-Matic With Extra Barrel And Magazine". I read on a little further and saw that the condition of the pistol was shown as: "Tip of the barrel has a bit of pitting Overall Condition of the is good". Go figure but the last time I heard something called "mint" it meant that it was in perfect condition not overall good condition with pitting.

Read everything and then ask questions, check the seller's feedback too is what I do. Out of over 7,000 feedback ratings for this particular seller, he had a 99% positive rating. However great that sounds, I always check further. When I looked at the actual ratings he had, 10 were neutral and 43 were negative. That is more than enough in the minus column to make me avoid a seller. The most recent negative rating I could find stated that the seller had said the gun was NIB (new in box) but then admitted there was actually damage to it when the potential buyer made inquiries. That could be true or not but it was not refuted by the dealer.

Besides not ever buying from said dealer, at a good price or not, I certainly would never consider offering his asking price on this particular pistol. He was asking $879.99 as a starting bid and $899.99 as a buy it now price. The Blue Book of Gun Values has it listed at $325 in 100% condition, with an additional $150 for it when it has the second barrel. I figure an extra magazine, if there is an extra one (that's not clear to me from the ad) is worth another $50 or a bit more. If the pistol was 100%, had the extra barrel that was also 100% and had an extra magazine that was also 100%, I might go as high as $550, if I wanted it badly enough and I would only offer that much if the box they say comes with it was actually serialized for that particular pistol.

Buyer beware.

All the best,
Glenn B

Everyman's Evening Eyeful

All the best,
Glenn

Dog Allegedly Kills Pet Iguana - Iguana Owner Then...

...reportedly raped (is it rape when you sexually abuse dog) and then killed the dog by hanging it. The dog was reportedly an emotional support dog for a child, and was in the suspected dog killer's care until its owner could find housing that allowed dogs. I will not say more about it, except to say folks, you just cannot make this stuff up; there are just way too many sickos out there!  You can read more here.

All the best,
GB

I Don't Think I've Lost An Ounce...

...but I have pretty much stuck to my diet for the past two weeks, with only a few very small deviations from it. In essence what I have been doing is eating somewhat healthier. I have cut out almost all junk food (and I do mean sugary, high carbohydrate, kinds of junk). That means I have not eaten any: cakes or pastries, no candy, no potato or corn chips, very few pretzels. I think I have had about 10 small pretzels rings in lieu of  some bread on the two days I had them.

I have also cut back on non-sugary carbs as well. Yes, that means no beer either. Damn, two weeks of not even one beer although I must admit I cheated once and had a cider but other than that nothing like it. I have been able to survive that drought by drinking whisky, vodka and by having some moonshine cherries. Yes, the moonshine cherries do contain sugar but only 1.9 grams apiece based on what I could find about them. It is so little sugar compared to what I used to eat every day it is probably negligible overall but I hope to cut out even the urge for them and my sugar urges have been fading. Anyway, I've only had about a dozen and a half of the cherries in that two weeks. I also had two protein bars, and am thinking of not having any more of them because they have 17 grams of carbs, 3 of which are sugars; still though - much better than candy, cakes, or chips and I again did with less bread those two days. I have eaten some fruit but not much. I will have more of it once I lose some weight and get my blood sugar down.

As for what I have been eating, it is not your typical low-fat diet stuff. I have a couple to three eggs with one piece of dry toast or bread in the morning, with black coffee and a bottle of water.
I have been exercising too. Been doing that longer than the diet. Then I usually don't eat until late afternoon when I have whatever meal my wife cooked or if she didn't then I make for myself. I also buy pre-cooked stuff from Costco. Costco has some huge roasted chickens at only $4.99 each, an has some decent mesquite flavored ribs and seasoned wings. I usually have those things with a salad with some veggies thrown into the mix. Had a salad yesterday into which I threw half of a very thick NY strip steak.

I did this same kind of diet while working out in Arizona back in 2009  for 4 1/2 months and lost about 30-35 pounds in less than 4 months of watching what I ate and drank. I even wound up eating a McDonalds, or other fast food, burger and fries most weekdays, with water and an apple and kept shedding pounds because even while eating them, my carb intake had been reduced greatly.

I am hoping it works again. The big difference from then to now is that back then I exercised religiously - ONE TIME PER WEEK (yes sometimes I did it twice but that was rare). I went hiking in the mountains around Tucson, I started walking anywhere from about 3 to 3.5 miles per hike and increased to a minimum of about 5 miles up to 10 miles each hike. I even hit 12 miles a couple or few times. I have been working out recently, actually for a month and a half or two before I started the diet; before that I had been gaining weight and it got up quite a few pounds. As for the walking I am doing now, walking in the street and on a treadmill are not the same as hiking in the Arizona mountains. It will have to do though, cause to get to a decent mountain to hike in NY, where there will not be a lot of assholes hiking all around me, I'd have to drive at least 2 to 3 hours from home.

While it would be nice to actually start losing some weight, I was recently weighed in at my second highest weight ever, I am doing this mostly for two other reasons. I want to lower my blood sugar which has been at borderline pre-diabetic levels and by borderline I mean at the top end not at the bottom. Only a point or two more and I'd be in diabetic territory. I don't need diabetes fucking me over so am trying to avoid it. I am also doing it for another reason, to be ready to do some casual hiking and running from Brown Bears in Alaska. At the end of May is when Brendan and I will go on what will likely be my once in a lifetime dream vacation. He is young and I imagine he may yet have many more dream vacations to come but I don't foresee many more like this one for me.

With that said, I am off to the gym to hit the treadmill set on a decent incline.

All the best,
Glenn B

Everyman's Evening Eyeful

All the best,
Glenn B

A Real Zombie Apocalypse...

...at least for this girl, who was recovering from pain killers given to her during oral surgery. Let me just say that her brothers deserve whatever it is she figures out to get back at them. This is truly fucked up but funny as all heck.



All the best,
GB

Everyman's Evening Eyeful



Oh my goodness, look at them.

 

All the best,

Glenn B

Spent Some Time Deanalizing Today And It Feels Good

Yes, I spelled deanalizing (de-anal-izing) correctly since I just made up the word. I've been a records keeper for a long time, at least since my college days when it was important to keep copies of things like my transcripts. The need to kept records also was necessary for my tax returns, not so much before and during college but afterward when I got into my federal LE career as a Border Patrol Agent many frigging moons ago. Of course, being a federal agent required a lot of record keeping for the job too, both official records and personal personnel records relative to it and health insurance records and tax records and personal records for renter's insurance and auto insurance and yada yada yada. That all expanded even more after my transfer into the U.S. Customs Service, especially after I became a criminal investigator and Special Agent; there were lots more official records relative to my work. Then I got married and bought a house and got several more credit cards than the one I had up until then, added family health insurance, medical bills, mortgage payments, life insurance records, auto and homeowner's insurance records, and on, and on, and on, and on, and on...ad infinitum it seems. Then there were also the firearms records for guns I bought and sold over the years.

In general, my record keeping was less than perfect. It's not like I neglected to keep records but that my filing system absolutely sucked - at least for personal records related to any of the above. At work, I was required to maintain a certain level of proficiency in keeping records and while I maintained my files within regulations (for the great part) that is not to say that the files kept were as good as they could have been. The required stuff was virtually in my files but sadly sometimes in a bit of a shambles. Well, when it came to me keeping personal records, it was worse, those files were often a mess. Yeah, I was pretty friggin anal in that I kept things for many years that others may have destroyed after a year or two at most and my records were probably not anywhere as neatly pigeon holed away as they should have been. Thus I often kept records, in my files, that just were not needed within them, just thrown into them in any random manner and as I said to excess. Every now and then I would go through what I had and deanalzie my files, or in other words, I'd try to remove the shit that I did not need in them and organize what I did need to keep for awhile longer.

I did that today for most of my archived records. It took me most of four hours of my otherwise not so precious time. I enjoyed a cocktail or thee after finishing up with it. What it amounted to was me throwing away, things mostly like bill payment records, that I have had since as far back as 2009. I guess that must have been the year I last did so. There were a few records dating even further back, such as an electricians bill/receipt from September 1995. I will likely never throw that one out, it was from the first or second year (I think the first year) that we have owned our current house and the work was performed by an electrician I had known for at least 25 years before that who had dome work for my mom and before her for my great-grandfather. Some things, even records hold a place in the nostalgia of my life. Anyway, I narrowed down most of my records to those from the last year or two depending on what type of record. I will keep some records that are much older, such as tax records (probably for 5 to 7 years) and firearms records (probably for my forever relative to those records I have archived). So, as it wound up, I probably threw away 10-15 pounds or so of what amounted to useless paperwork. That was a lot of deanalizing! I feel better now, a bit like someone gave me an enema (which is uncomfortable at best when being undertaken just as was the purging of my records). I just feel a great relief because the after effects of the deanalzing make me feel as if I finally shit out  whatever it was that had once constipated my file keeping life.

I am now enjoying a cocktail of success because I am less of a filled up asshole than I was before. Hopefully I will not revert to that state of archived constipation ever again.

All the best,
Glenn B

Ammo Corrosion

Six years and six months ago, and I mean that most literally minus only a day, because on October 13, 2009, I wrote up a blog post about corroded ammunition that I had laying around in my basement.  I showed a photograph of ten rounds consisting of a few different calibers. All of the ammo in the pic was lightly to maybe moderately corroded.


The corroded ammo as it appeared in October 2009.

The ammo was in that condition because it had been exposed to slightly to fairly humid air over the course of at least a few to several years in my basement. I took that ammo, and placed it into a tin ammo box, the type they give you with a few hundred rounds of cheap 22LR, with a deck of playing cards or an even cheaper small knife, and that they call a collectors tin. After putting the pictured rounds and many other corroded ones in that box, I put the lid on the box. There was no desiccant inside the box and no special seal. It sat in my basement these last six and a half years. I had planned that at some time or another I would dispose of all the rounds in the box properly. As I think you may have read here before, I am The Great Procrastinator. Since then, I have opened an closed the box a few times a year to add more ammo to it and most of those pictured rounds have remained in there.

Yes, that means I still have the ones in the picture; well, I have 8 rounds of the 10 anyway. When I went through that box recently, I could not find the pictured 7.62x54R round nor the blank 22 rimfire round. I have no clue what happened to the 7.62x54R round. As to the blank, I am almost certain I fired that one, it was only slightly tarnished.

I decided to take another photo of those rounds, from the 2009 image, to show you how much, if any, they changed in the last 6 1/2 years during which time they remained in the mostly closed tin. The only round, in the current photo, that I am not fairly certain is the same as the one in the original is the 22LR round, there were several of them in the box all with about the same amount of corrosion, so I grabbed one of them. As to the seven other rounds in today's pic, I am pretty certain they are the same exact rounds as shown in the 2009 photo because of the corrosion patterns on them. I was pretty surprised when I took a look at them and compared them to the ones in the picture that I took of them back in October 13, 2009 - they were almost identical! Despite being in that box, down in my basement with no desiccant of any type and no special seal for the lid, it is amazing how little they have changed. Why is that? I am guessing because they were in a box with a fairly tight fitting lid that did not admit almost any moisture or air into the box; the box remained closed for the most part - maybe being opened and closed a few times a year at most but was kept relatively dry. Take a look yourself at what they look like today.

This is the 2016 photo of at least 7 of the same rounds from the 2009 photo.
(the 22LR is questionable as being the same round). It amazes me how
little the corrosion advanced over the course of six and a half years.

So, what is the point of all this? Well the number one point is that you should store your ammo in a dry and relatively cool condition, air free if possible, to avoid corrosion in the first place. The second point, the one more relative to this particular blog post is that just because ammunition is corroded, it does not mean it needs to be destroyed because you think it can only get much worse in a short time. Yes, if you keep your ammo under less than desirable conditions and it becomes slightly corroded and then continue to keep it under those same conditions it will likely continue to corrode at a fairly rapid pace. However, if you take that lightly corroded ammunition and store it properly, chances are the corrosion will cease to worsen. The ammo in question, those rounds in the photos, were never kept under ideal conditions but even once slightly corroded and then placed in improved storage conditions, the corrosion worsened only minimally.

So why keep corroded ammo in the first place if not merely because you are a procrastinator like me? I think all of the pictured ammo could possibly be cleaned up and fired; although, I would not attempt to use any of it in a self-defense situation. There is just too much chance of some sort of a failure with it. It might be okay for plinking or hunting in a survival scenario but still why take the risk unless it is the only ammo you have on hand!

So what risk is there, what could go wrong? Chances are some of it may not fire if the corrosion allowed moisture to get inside the casing and corrupt the powder or primer. Firing badly enough corroded rounds could also lead to a catastrophic failure of the shell casing. While this is just my opinion, I do not think any of these particular pictured rounds are corroded so badly to cause a catastrophic failure of the casing when fired. Yet, there is always that potential risk with corroded ammo, that the shell casing fails and either cracks or has the head separation and things like that can cause an excess buildup of pressure that could destroy your gun and injure you. There is also a chance that if the bullet is too corroded it may not pass through the bore and may cause a blockage. If you did not realize the bullet was lodged in the barrel and tried to fire another round, it could result in the barrel blowing up and could cause injury to you or others nearby. Cleaning corroded casings and bullets may or may not help along those lines but you certainly don't need to risk any of these things happening so maybe it is best not to use ammo that is in any state of corrosion beyond being more than just somewhat tarnished. Yet, if you absolutely need it to survive, it may be worth cleaning and storing but remain aware of the potential dangers if doing so.

All the best,
Glenn B

Shit Happens - Especially When An Idiot Is Factored In

A Pakistani judge asked a police officer (he is the idiot in this case), in a court proceeding, if the officer knew how grenades worked. So what does the idiot do but pull the pin from a live grenade that was in evidence. More here.

All the best,
Glenn B

Move To Cover

The officer in the video did a lot right and the shoot was fully justified but he did not do everything right. Don't be blinded because it was a justified shooting.

So what did he do that was not the best thing to have done? He totally disregarded cover and instead of keeping it between him and his assailant he moved away from it. Thus, he did what too many do - used the weapon as a shield by holding it out in front of him and giving his attacker verbal commands. Could have done both of those while also using what would have amounted to a real shield -  he could have used his cruiser as cover. 

Many people somehow believe that the weapon out accompanied by commands is all it will take to deter an attack. As can be seen here that was not the case. It did not work and he had to shoot her. I repeat the shoot was good, totally justified. Yet, look at his failure to use cover, look at how he moves away from cover by moving backwards instead of moving around his vehicle to maintain cover. 

Therein is a lesson anyone can learn by watching the video. That does not mean that even if behind cover he should not have shot, in that close of a proximity, cover offered some but still minimal protection as she kept advancing. It was indeed a good shoot but it would have been just as good from behind cover and there would have been less of a potential for the officer to be wounded. Yes, as it was, there was a greater chance he could have been wounded because he moved away from cover. Imagine something went badly wrong for the officer. Imagine he had tripped while moving backwards and dropped his firearms or it jammed when it hit the ground. Imagine he fired and she took 1, 2, 3, 4, shots and kept coming in a rage or drug induced frenzy. What if he had a misfire or catastrophic failure of his pistol.

In any of those scenarios, she may have gotten to him and whacked him a few times with the axe because he would not have had time to recover from whatever just went wrong. If he had been behind cover, he may have had a second or even split second more to recover. In an encounter with an assailant holding a bladed weapon, cover provides not only what will stop the weapon but can also, in effect, provide distance and time to the person being attacked. 
Making the assailant have to move around something to be able to reach you could be a lifesaver. Move to cover is a mantra not to be forgotten when one is faced by an assailant and one to be practiced often. Practicing it a lot helps to rid your mind of that crap you see in the movies where almost all the heroes shoot from out in the open; so, practicing moving to cover may save your life, then you can watch more of those movies.

Please bear in mind, I am not saying, or even hinting, that had the officer been behind cover he could have avoided shooting his attacker to assure she did not harm or kill him. In a case like this, shooting her would have been just as necessary from behind cover had she kept advancing like that. What I am saying is that cover potentially provides more protection than no cover and that you should use it whenever available and to your advantage.

Hat tip to Murphy on whose blog I first saw the video.

All the best,
Glenn B

Everyman's Evening Eyeful

 

All the best,
Glenn B

Fear The Walking Dead - Decisions, Decisions, Decisions...

...it can sometimes really suck to have to make decisions. Like tonight for instance - should I watch the season opener of Fear The Walking Dead or should I play it safe and protect my TV by watching something else instead? If I watch it, and it's not any better (and by that I really mean a hell of a whole frigging lot better) than the any and all of the episodes in the first season, I may take out the TV with the 870 before the show is over tonight. This show was has been one of the most hyped zombie shows ever and it sucks more than Zombie Honeymoon and believe me that sucked really bad. I tried to watch it few times but could never make it through it all the way, not even once when nothing else but crap was on the screen that night. Even drunk, I could not watch it.

Even with all its inconsistencies, I still watch The Walking Dead. That one is entertaining, it has good actors, good scripts and directors and excellent special effects. On the other chewed off hand, Fear The Walking Dead has been a like what I imagine a documentary about Millard Fillmore would be like - BORING AS ALL HELL! Damn, I'd rather watch reruns of Romper Room than season one of Fear The Walking Dead again. Yet, as with most zombie flick fans I know, I probably am going to watch it because its a zombie show after all! Still though, I have not completely made up my mind.

Any which way, it starts in less than an hour. Just in case I do decide to watch it, I guess I had best start putting away all of my guns and any ammo. The machete ought to be locked away too. It would not be good if I destroyed the television, it was my Father's Day gift just last year, it's not even a year old yet!

All the best,
Glenn B

Everyman's Evening Eyeful

 

In case you had not noticed, I went for a white theme yesterday, figured I go for red today.

All the best,
GB

Never Take Viagra...

...if you don't need it.

All the best,
Glenn B

22LR Ammo Report

Alright, I was up and at em at 0700 this past Friday. That's fairly early for a retired lazy man like me. Even better than that was that I decided to forego my morning laptop session, of two ours or so, and get my arse out of the house. I was in the parking lot of my local range by 0845. I soon met someone there to whom I handed off 2K of 22LR ammo. All legal, all okay, it was a face to face private transfer of ammo here in the Socialist Rebooblik of New Yorkistan and it went smoothly as expected. That being done, it was time to shoot.

Before leaving home, figuring I'd be in the range parking lot, I had decided why not get in some shooting too. So, I took along something to shoot. Besides what I had strapped on my hip, which I would not be shooting, I decided on my S&W Model 17-8 revolver in 22LR. I also had a decent assortment of 22LR ammo from various manufacturers. That ammo included:

CCI Blazer                                                              - 50 rounds
CCI Mini Mags                                                       - 100 rounds
Federal Value Pack (from December 1993)            - 250 rounds
PMC Score Master                                                  - 50 rounds
Remington 22 Target                                               - 250 rounds
Remington Golden Bullets                                      - 50 rounds

I set the my target at 50 feet (just over 16.5 yards). It was an NRA B3, official rapid and timed fire pistol target, meant for that distance. I used about 5 with the blank side facing me and the other 5 with the bullseye winking my way. I always figure that if I am plinking at cans, shooting a rabbit or defending myself against an armed intruder - none of them is going to be wearing a bullseye (unless the intruder is very stupid). So, I like to shoot the blank side a lot.

A few times past, when I have shot the Model 17, using various different ammo on each of several range trips, it liked two of the cheapest brands/makes of ammo imaginable. One of those was CCI Blazer ammo and the other was Remington Golden Bullets. I don't know what happened yesterday, it all but told me it detested the Golden Bullets. Accuracy sucked with them, I had a hand sized group or larger at 50 feet. It certainly was nothing to brag about. The Remington 22 Target Ammo was fairly accurate, at least for the ones that actually fired (more on this below). The CCI Blazer was okay in the accuracy department,for plinking or hunting. I did not shoot as good with it on Friday as I have in the past through the Model 17. The Federal Value Pack was also acceptable for plinking and probably hunting. The CCI Mini Mags were an improvement over everything else so far.

The hands down best of the bunch yesterday was the PMC  Score Master ammo. This stuff was old but not as old as the Federal. I figure the PMC ammo had to have been at least 12-15 years old and it was my last box of it (too bad since it is impossible to find now). I had three groups the about the size of a silver dollar, or a tad larger, each with a flyer or two, while shooting it at 50 feet. At 7 yards, I shot a slowfire grouping of about the size of a quqrter, that group consisted of 20 shots with a few flyers. The three other groups at 50 feet consisted of 10 rounds each, the Model 17-8 holds that many in the cylinder.

This ammo report though is not as much about the inherent accuracy of any of the brands or types of 22LR ammo I had with me as it is about quality control and the reliability of the ammo. While shooting, I had several no go bang moments that just should not have happened and that's what I am targeting right now. Except for the PMC and Federal ammo, all of the 22LR ammunition I fired yesterday was purchased within the last 1 to 6 years, all stored dry and relatively cool. 

Federal Value Pack: The Federal had zero, I repeat ZERO, failures to fire. This ammo is from December 1993, over 22 years old. Despite it being that old and a relatively inexpensive ammo, every round fired; some of the recently manufactured stuff did not even come close to that. There was one failure to feed, the round would not go into the chamber. That was due to the shell casing being bent. One round that I found in the box had turned blacked and had crusty oxidation on it, I disposed of that one. Strange since none of the others resembled that one.

PMC Score Master: The PMC (a brand made in S. Korea) had no, I repeat NO, failures to fire. This particular PMC ammo had the oddest smelling gunpowder, its aroma is unlike anything I have ever shot before. It was fairly clean shooting too. Again, this ammo had to be at least 12 to maybe 15 years old.

CCI Blazer: Every round went bang. The Blazer ammo is dirty as all heck, a lot of unspent gunpowder came out of the cases when ejected. The Mini Mags fired much cleaner. The Blazer ammo was purchased in 2014.

CCI Mini Mags: The CCI Mini Mags did not have even a single failure to fire. It was much cleaner than the Blazer. This was probably the oldest of the more recently manufactured ammo, I figure I got this 5 to 6 years ago when CCI still had it in the amber plastic boxes.

Remington Golden Bullets: There were four misfires, with the Remington Golden Bullets. They failed to fire on the first hit of the firing pin but I kept pulling the trigger until their chambers came round again and on the second hit each one of them fired. That is a failure rate of 8% and is totally unacceptable even for plinking, let alone hunting or self-defense. These were purchased new in 2013 and that does not say anything good for Remington's quality control nowadays. I have another batch from 2015 that I hope is better in that department.

Remington 22 Target Ammunition: - This stuff was surprisingly horrendous. I had at least 10 failures to fire and the second strike on each of those cartridges also failed to fire them. I even tried a third hammer fall on a few of them but to no avail. Out of 40 rounds that I tried to fire, about 1/4 of them were duds; that is terrible. Oddly enough, I have used this type of ammo in the past with zero problems.

Since there were no major problems with any of the other ammo, except another type from Remington, and since even that Remington ammo went off on the second try, I seriously doubt this problem with the Remington 22 Target ammo was in any way due to a malfunction of the Model 17. I think it had to have been the ammo, either hard brass (although the rims looked dented enough to have fired) or the primer. My bet is on the primer being the likely thing to have failed. This ammo was bought new four years ago. It had been stored with all the other 22LR ammo fired during this range trip, so method of storage likely has nothing to do with the failures to fire.
 
I already was aware that Remington Golden Bullets and Remington Thunderbolt have only fair reputations at best, mostly because of misfires and failures to fire, but I never before had a problem with the Remington 22 Target ammo and have never heard of there being such problems with it. I have about 200 rounds of it left over. I plan to try to shoot some of it out of other 22 pistols and some of my rifles to see if the problem replicates in them. If so, I will rest assured it was the ammo and not the Model 17 that caused the issue. If it is the ammo, in the bad ammo bin at the range it will go.

All the best,
Glenn B
 

Everyman's Evening Eyeful

All the best,
Glenn B

As A Kid Always Tried Putting Square Peg In Round Hole

All the best,
Glenn B

Justifiabe Firearms Arrest Or Not?

I think not but I will leave it to my readers (and if it comes to it to a judge and or jury). I encourage you to chime in with your comments to what your think happened. I, for one, would love to see the reactions of both LEOs (current and retired) and non-LEOs to this arrest but please if you do reply do it respectfully.

An off duty Houston PD officer claims a man pointed a gun at him twice while in a gas station and arrested the guy at gunpoint. The guy claimed his gun fell out of the side panel of his vehicle as he rushed out of the vehicle to go to the rest room. Sounds like a pretty lame story,  on the guy's part, doesn't it!
 
It seems that there may be evidence that the officer was the only one violating rules or regulations. What it says near the end of the article makes me wonder if anything else, other than the guys gun, influenced the officer to make that arrest. Well, watch the video at the below link. THEN and ONLY THEN, read the accompanying article.
 
http://www.khou.com/news/local/man-claims-he-was-wrongfully-arrested-for-pointing-gun-at-off-duty-officer/126858009
 
I  watched the video about 20 times, and froze it almost as often at the point where the guy's right hand moves over the steering wheel as he exits he vehicle. I did that mostly to look at the 'suspect's" right hand to see if it was holding a gun. I cannot see a gun in that hand. The door latch was evidently in his other hand. Thus I did not see any chance for the 'suspect' to have pointed his gun at the officer once as he exited his vehicle, let alone that he got out of the car holding it and pointing it at the officer, then dropped it, then picked it and again pointed it at the officer (as the article says is claimed in court documents). To me, it sure looks like what the 'suspect' said happened is what really happened. What do you think?

On the other side, maybe the cop actually saw it or maybe he truly believes he saw it that way after the fact of it really having been otherwise. What I mean is that maybe he did not see the gun pointing at him but as the guy picked it up the officer's mind played a trick on him. It happens, and in the current state of affairs with all the anti-cop sentiment in this country (real or imagined), maybe he saw it that way. Of course, it could be he is just rabidly anti-gun for non-law enforcement and lying his arse off - who can tell. A video from another angle might show that when the guy picked it up, it was pointed at the officer but the video we can watch, at the provided link, sure does not seem to support the claim. The claim reportedly was that the guy pointed a gun at the officer as the guy got out of his vehicle, then dropped it, then picked it up, then pointed it at the officer again. Once more, I just don't see that in the video. So, is there anything else, even something possibly just hinted at in the report, something that possibly could have influenced what the officer saw?

I have to wonder about the actions of the officer right before the incident since he reportedly was shown, in the store video, buying beer just before it happened. I don't think they meant root beer. If buying beer is it also it possible he had also drinking before the incident? It certainly would be something for the PD, if truly being objective, to look into. Had he been drinking before the incident it could put this in a whole new light.

Regardless of whether he was drinking or not, what goes against the officer, besides the video and the statement of the guy who was arrested, is the reported violation of departmental policy/regulation for buying beer while in uniform. If he can violate one regulation, as was reported, then why not another. This possibly will all be brought to the jury's attention, if it goes to trial, in the form of a rebuttal to any testimony by the officer or as a way to discredit the officer's integrity. I will guess that, in the absence of any other video evidence or witnesses, if this goes to trial by jury, the 'suspect' will be exonerated of an assault charge or any lessor charge related to pointing a gun at the officer.

Of course, if the 'suspect' has  prior conviction and lied on his permit application that will go against him and his integrity; however, that already seems to have been addressed in as much as it was reported that those charges had been dismissed. Then again, that is giving a lot of credit both to the media and to the defense attorney. I mean, when have attorney's or the media ever gotten it wrong, right!

However it winds up, it goes to show you need to really give some thought to where your gun is located, why it is there and if it could be better positioned. It may also well go to show that if you are a LEO, you really need to be sure of your probable cause before making an arrest and before swearing to it in court or on an affidavit and you had best follow departmental policy instead of being seen violating it immediately prior to an arrest.
 
All the best,
Glenn B