...and no pun intended after having fasted for about 40 hours in total, being prepped, and then having my medical test today. The test was a colonoscopy. One polyp down the tubes - and hopefully that was all it was, time and a biopsy will tell but my doc did not seem concerned, and who am I to worry. I tell ya, I am just past the half century mark and I can't wait until the golden years set in, they must really be fun!
I wanted to rant a bit tonight but this will be it, more to come probably tomorrow evening or night. Maybe if I remember to take some extra ammo to the office tomorrow, I can stop at the range and do up a range report.
All the best,
Glenn B
Thursday, March 8, 2007
Wednesday, March 7, 2007
Arms Smuggling 101
Take a moment and visit Deb Schlussel's web site and see what an airline employee smuggled onto a flight out of Orlando, see:
http://debbieschlussel.com
Scroll to march 7th once on her site.
You can also click on this to see the news article about it:
http://www.local6.com/news/11187701/detail.html
Amazing isn't it. Let me correct myself:
It is not really amazing, but rather sad that it could happen so easily after 9/11. As you know I am as pro-gun as they come, but this was ludicrous on behalf of the TSA and airport security; or was it? Did they know this was happening, have the guy under surveillance, and hope the arms would be delivered at the destination so someone else could also be arrested. Time will tell.
All the best,
Glenn B
http://debbieschlussel.com
Scroll to march 7th once on her site.
You can also click on this to see the news article about it:
http://www.local6.com/news/11187701/detail.html
Amazing isn't it. Let me correct myself:
It is not really amazing, but rather sad that it could happen so easily after 9/11. As you know I am as pro-gun as they come, but this was ludicrous on behalf of the TSA and airport security; or was it? Did they know this was happening, have the guy under surveillance, and hope the arms would be delivered at the destination so someone else could also be arrested. Time will tell.
All the best,
Glenn B
A Day Of Fasting...
...is not something I do very often; but I did it today. No solid food at all since about 10PM last night, so I am just passed 24 hours now. I have had 2 glasses of apple juice, a glass or two of water, and two cups of green tea, but that has been it besides some Movi-Prep. Now despite what it may sound like to a connoisseur of old films, Movie-Prep is not something you eat while getting in the mood for the movies, although I guess a video might be made because I used it. You see it helps clear out a certain bodily area, and the video would be made by my gastroenterologist while doing my colonoscopy tomorrow. Pretty much just a check-up sort of thing, and I do not want to dwell on that subject all that much.
What I do want to talk about is the fasting thing. It has always amazed me that people fast for various reasons be they for: weight loss, religion, political statement making, because they are nuts, or whatever. It amazes me even more that it is pretty easy to do - especially for me, but only under certain conditions like the upcoming test tomorrow! It simply has befuddled me, now for the fourth time in my life (once before for a similar test, and twice before for operations), that I can just turn off eating like that. Yet, I am at least 50 pounds overweight at about 218 lbs and 5'11". Why can't I just turn off the desire to eat, or at least turn off the desire to eat junk food more often? If I knew the answer to that, then I might be able to either fast once a week, or at least cut back on the junk food, and really lose some weight.
Today though, yes this day in particular made this all the harder for me to understand. If you like Thanksgiving spreads, with almost all the fixings, and love the smell of roasting turkey, then maybe you can understand what I mean when I say: 'The relative ease at which I avoided food today was mind boggling'. You see, today my wife decided to cook a fresh turkey. Yes of all days, she chose today when I had to fast. Does that mean she hates me even more than I had thought. Well maybe so, and maybe not. She was almost as surprised as me to find out I could avoid eating any of it. Apparently, I had forgotten to tell her about the test tomorrow, and my need to fast today. The smell of that roasting turkey was about the only thing that really made it at all tough, just a bit though, for me to hold off on eating today. Well the smell of it roasting, and then me actually carving it for everyone else. I cannot explain it, I may never understand it, but if I could turn on the appetite suppressant and turn off the appetite, like I did today, at least once weekly, well - I would be a slimmer guy.
Of course I would make certain never to turn on the appetite suppressant when there was a turkey roasting in the oven, and I can assure you that the leftovers will be severely depleted once I get to them tomorrow; but I still wish I could figure out how to do this fasting thing more often - without extremist religion, without making a political statement, without becoming more of a nut job than I am already, just doing it by will power I guess. I had it today, that is will power, now how do I exhibit it on a weekly or daily basis when it comes to junk food and overeating in general???
Please, if you know the answer to my conundrum, don't tell me until after about 3PM EST tomorrow. I want to pig out on the turkey leftovers before I find out.
All the best,
Glenn B
What I do want to talk about is the fasting thing. It has always amazed me that people fast for various reasons be they for: weight loss, religion, political statement making, because they are nuts, or whatever. It amazes me even more that it is pretty easy to do - especially for me, but only under certain conditions like the upcoming test tomorrow! It simply has befuddled me, now for the fourth time in my life (once before for a similar test, and twice before for operations), that I can just turn off eating like that. Yet, I am at least 50 pounds overweight at about 218 lbs and 5'11". Why can't I just turn off the desire to eat, or at least turn off the desire to eat junk food more often? If I knew the answer to that, then I might be able to either fast once a week, or at least cut back on the junk food, and really lose some weight.
Today though, yes this day in particular made this all the harder for me to understand. If you like Thanksgiving spreads, with almost all the fixings, and love the smell of roasting turkey, then maybe you can understand what I mean when I say: 'The relative ease at which I avoided food today was mind boggling'. You see, today my wife decided to cook a fresh turkey. Yes of all days, she chose today when I had to fast. Does that mean she hates me even more than I had thought. Well maybe so, and maybe not. She was almost as surprised as me to find out I could avoid eating any of it. Apparently, I had forgotten to tell her about the test tomorrow, and my need to fast today. The smell of that roasting turkey was about the only thing that really made it at all tough, just a bit though, for me to hold off on eating today. Well the smell of it roasting, and then me actually carving it for everyone else. I cannot explain it, I may never understand it, but if I could turn on the appetite suppressant and turn off the appetite, like I did today, at least once weekly, well - I would be a slimmer guy.
Of course I would make certain never to turn on the appetite suppressant when there was a turkey roasting in the oven, and I can assure you that the leftovers will be severely depleted once I get to them tomorrow; but I still wish I could figure out how to do this fasting thing more often - without extremist religion, without making a political statement, without becoming more of a nut job than I am already, just doing it by will power I guess. I had it today, that is will power, now how do I exhibit it on a weekly or daily basis when it comes to junk food and overeating in general???
Please, if you know the answer to my conundrum, don't tell me until after about 3PM EST tomorrow. I want to pig out on the turkey leftovers before I find out.
All the best,
Glenn B
Captain America - Dead???
Yep folks, that is what I just read in: Captain America Killed Off in Latest Comic @ http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,257398,00.html. I don't know about all of you, but when I was a kid, Captain America was my absolute favorite comic book hero. That was pretty long ago, but I think that it already showed how I was going to grow up feeling about the USA, patriotism, and so forth. No alien with powers and abilities far beyond those of mortal men from the planet Krypton, no Metal Men made of iron or tin, no four so fantastic, no one fast as a flash, no one shining a green lantern - as to be better than, more powerful than, outshine, out crime fight, be more moral and honest, or better protect the United States of America than Captain America himself.
Now he is dead! Yes he was only a comic book hero, but he symbolized an America that may be dead or at least dying itself. He symbolized the will of the people, as a whole, of the USA to fight that which was unjust, and outright evil; yet he also symbolized the importance of the individual in that fight. He symbolized what virtually most every American boy wanted to grow up to be when an adult. And now he dies, reportedly shot by a sniper, while he was protecting someone else.
He died the way he lived, as a hero, but should he have been killed off. I will admit I have not read a Captain America comic in quite some years now. As I understand from the article to which I linked above, the comic had become so immersed in the politics of today as to have had a story line that the U.S. government required superheroes to register their secret identities. Then what happens, he gets shot! Does that sound familiar to the rest of you. To me it sounds just like gun control. Maybe, with or without knowing it, those responsible for having him killed off in the comics, have shown just how ludicrous is gun registration and gun control. Those who have to register weapons, get licenses for them, or maybe even have their rights regarding weapons restricted - are not the ones who then do the evil deeds in the world. Had captain America not had his powers restricted, would he have been able to have survived; my bet is sure he would have survived, and kicked some more bad guy butt along the way. The analogy is there whether intentional or not.
Of course, in the comics, anything can happen. Maybe Captain America will return, my bet is he will. (If I ever hit the mega-millions jackpot for enough, maybe I'll buy the rights and then you know he will return, but I am not banking on hitting the lotto.) It is a pity though that it worked out this way. America is in need of heroes who demonstrate heroic deeds, carried out based upon morals, ethics, and patriotism, now as much as any time in her past. Whether they are imaginary heroes or real heroes, we need the inspiration they generate to be instilled into our children so they grow up to help keep America strong. Captain America was, back in the day, the penultimate comic book hero/patriot. I mourn the loss of an American hero - even a comic book hero - whom millions of kids grew up loving, learning from, and emulating as far as patriotism goes. Captain America's death is a symbolic loss, even a real loss in a sort of a way, that we in the United States of America would be better off without.
All the best,
Glenn B
Now he is dead! Yes he was only a comic book hero, but he symbolized an America that may be dead or at least dying itself. He symbolized the will of the people, as a whole, of the USA to fight that which was unjust, and outright evil; yet he also symbolized the importance of the individual in that fight. He symbolized what virtually most every American boy wanted to grow up to be when an adult. And now he dies, reportedly shot by a sniper, while he was protecting someone else.
He died the way he lived, as a hero, but should he have been killed off. I will admit I have not read a Captain America comic in quite some years now. As I understand from the article to which I linked above, the comic had become so immersed in the politics of today as to have had a story line that the U.S. government required superheroes to register their secret identities. Then what happens, he gets shot! Does that sound familiar to the rest of you. To me it sounds just like gun control. Maybe, with or without knowing it, those responsible for having him killed off in the comics, have shown just how ludicrous is gun registration and gun control. Those who have to register weapons, get licenses for them, or maybe even have their rights regarding weapons restricted - are not the ones who then do the evil deeds in the world. Had captain America not had his powers restricted, would he have been able to have survived; my bet is sure he would have survived, and kicked some more bad guy butt along the way. The analogy is there whether intentional or not.
Of course, in the comics, anything can happen. Maybe Captain America will return, my bet is he will. (If I ever hit the mega-millions jackpot for enough, maybe I'll buy the rights and then you know he will return, but I am not banking on hitting the lotto.) It is a pity though that it worked out this way. America is in need of heroes who demonstrate heroic deeds, carried out based upon morals, ethics, and patriotism, now as much as any time in her past. Whether they are imaginary heroes or real heroes, we need the inspiration they generate to be instilled into our children so they grow up to help keep America strong. Captain America was, back in the day, the penultimate comic book hero/patriot. I mourn the loss of an American hero - even a comic book hero - whom millions of kids grew up loving, learning from, and emulating as far as patriotism goes. Captain America's death is a symbolic loss, even a real loss in a sort of a way, that we in the United States of America would be better off without.
All the best,
Glenn B
Tuesday, March 6, 2007
Is Hunting in New York State Doomed...
...to a dismal future and quite possibly a not too distant end. One has to wonder with the nomination of Alexander “Pete” Grannis to the post of commissioner of the NYS Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC). Grannis evidently is not hunter friendly. He has opposed many hunting rights in the past, and is also in opposition to firearms ownership. Should that come as a surprise after he reportedly spent 32 years representing the east side of Manhattan as per: the article Too Smart by Half in The Village Voice @ http://www.villagevoice.com/news/0708,barrett,75838,2.html! The Village Voice article goes on not to speak so much about any lack of qualifications on Grannis' part for the job, though it certainly does mention this point, but rather to discuss how he was ramrodded into the nomination for the position of Commissioner of the DEC by now Governor Elliot Spitzer of NY. It seems to be big time politics as usual in Albany with little regard as to anything else but back stabbing and back scratching when some high level and very important positions like DEC Commissioner are filled. Grannis was expecting to be nominated for the post of NYS Comptroller, but Spitzer decided said post should go to someone with a lot of financial experience; so why was Grannis with little real DEC experience pushed into that spot. Seems like payola, or incompetence in the selection process, but those are just my guesses.
My guesses are based upon some facts though and I guess I should spell them out. Fact one was already mentioned above but bears repeating:
1) Grannis represented the east side of Manhattan, not a mecca of issues that are covered by the DEC though there are some.
Now onto the other facts:
2) As per the Village Voice article cited above, Grannis himself testified before a selection committee regarding his hoped for selection as Comptroller: "Noting that there was "no more appropriate place" for an independent reformer like him "than the comptroller's office," Grannis had just finished testifying that his selection would be "the natural evolution of what I have been doing for the past 30 years." " Or in other words Grannis thought the job of comptroller was one for which he was most qualified.
3) Again, as per the same Village Voice article: ""As soon I came back, an aide to the governor called," Grannis later told the Voice. The aide "said the governor would like to offer you the job of Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) commissioner." Grannis was stunned. "I didn't put in an application. I didn't ask anyone to advance my name. I didn't even know I was under consideration." " Why would he have believed he had not been in consideration, probably because there were so many others who were qualified more than he, and possibly because he did not see himself as qualified, but that is a guess.
4) Grannis was the chairman of the state's insurance committee for 15 years - see anything related to becoming the head of the DEC yet?
5) Grannis was reportedly picked to lead DEC on his qualifications, were they that he had been a lawyer for them many, many years ago and then had a career shift toward finance? His name had reportedly not been among the top candidates under consideration, those who had already been interviewed for the post, and some of them already having background investigations performed in anticipation of their possible selection. Grannis avoided the interview system altogether. Yet he was selected - go figure.
There are other reasons that make it difficult for me to understand how it is that Grannis was found qualified to get selected for the position of DEC Commissioner:
6) As per a petition to block Grannis from this position, there is an online at: http://www.petitiononline.com/mod_perl/signed.cgi?nogranni. In that petition one can find the following: "Further, Mr. Grannis has worked to DENY access to NYS Residents to public trails and parks, enjoyed by many thousands of hunters, anglers, snowmobilers, ATV enthusiasts, campers, hikers, climbers, et al., while denying basic protection services in the Adirondack State Forest, through his continued blocking of construction of Cell Phone Towers to provide communications coverage to NYS residents and non-residents alike, who enjoy and learn from the natural beauty of this region. Through his actions to block such construction of very non-invasive cell phone towers, two individuals lost their lives as they could not call for help. " Does not sound like Mr. Grannis is very pro anyone enjoying what NY State has to offer, does it?
As per the New York State Rifle & Pistol Association there is even more to make one wonder, what was Spitzer thinking by offering Grannis this position:
7) From the NYSR&PA web site @ http://www.nysrpa.org/ we find actions that Grannis allegedly took: "Sponsored vaguely-worded legislation in the past (A-1850) that would have effectively banned hunting as cruelty to animals." Can you imagine that as being environmentally friendly. If you are an experienced hunter, or an experienced conservationist, or an experienced wildlife biologist, I am sure you cannot. Cessation of hunting in most cases results in excessive habitat destruction by the same species of animals we are trying to conserve through regulated hunting. In addition, the fact is that about 80% of all wildlife funding comes from hunters and fishermen. From where else could the money to support habitat come? Increased taxes most likely - do you think hunters might be missed then.
8) In addition to the above, Grannis is evidently anti-gun. According to the NYSR&PA he: "Sponsored and voted for numerous bills designed to restrict firearms ownership and usage among law-abiding New Yorkers, consistently siding with anti-gun organizations such as New Yorkers Against Gun Violence."
9) Spitzer apparently was hotly opposed to any state legislator winding up on the selection list for comptroller. How to get rid of Grannis may have crossed the governor's mind. He found a way to do so, so as to get what he wanted into the comptroller's office (in other words not Grannis in that position) without regard for the DEC ad its functions (by placing Grannis into the DEC), or maybe with an ulterior motive in mind since as far as I am aware Spitzer himself is no friend of the hunter, fisherman, or NYS gun owners. This can be seen in The Village Voice article as well as in: The Times Union.com at http://blogs.timesunion.com/capitol/?p=3787.
As I see it this is U.S. state level politics at its worst, and it will almost surely not be of any benefit to the DEC, to the avid sportsmen of any type be they campers, rock climbers, snowmobilers, fishermen, hikers, hunters, cross country skiers, canoeists, or whatever. I strongly support anything in opposition to Alexander Pete Grannis as the commissioner of the NYS DEC; and I would ask other New Yorkers, and those from out of state who enjoy NY State lands for recreation, to do likewise.
All the best,
Glenn B
My guesses are based upon some facts though and I guess I should spell them out. Fact one was already mentioned above but bears repeating:
1) Grannis represented the east side of Manhattan, not a mecca of issues that are covered by the DEC though there are some.
Now onto the other facts:
2) As per the Village Voice article cited above, Grannis himself testified before a selection committee regarding his hoped for selection as Comptroller: "Noting that there was "no more appropriate place" for an independent reformer like him "than the comptroller's office," Grannis had just finished testifying that his selection would be "the natural evolution of what I have been doing for the past 30 years." " Or in other words Grannis thought the job of comptroller was one for which he was most qualified.
3) Again, as per the same Village Voice article: ""As soon I came back, an aide to the governor called," Grannis later told the Voice. The aide "said the governor would like to offer you the job of Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) commissioner." Grannis was stunned. "I didn't put in an application. I didn't ask anyone to advance my name. I didn't even know I was under consideration." " Why would he have believed he had not been in consideration, probably because there were so many others who were qualified more than he, and possibly because he did not see himself as qualified, but that is a guess.
4) Grannis was the chairman of the state's insurance committee for 15 years - see anything related to becoming the head of the DEC yet?
5) Grannis was reportedly picked to lead DEC on his qualifications, were they that he had been a lawyer for them many, many years ago and then had a career shift toward finance? His name had reportedly not been among the top candidates under consideration, those who had already been interviewed for the post, and some of them already having background investigations performed in anticipation of their possible selection. Grannis avoided the interview system altogether. Yet he was selected - go figure.
There are other reasons that make it difficult for me to understand how it is that Grannis was found qualified to get selected for the position of DEC Commissioner:
6) As per a petition to block Grannis from this position, there is an online at: http://www.petitiononline.com/mod_perl/signed.cgi?nogranni. In that petition one can find the following: "Further, Mr. Grannis has worked to DENY access to NYS Residents to public trails and parks, enjoyed by many thousands of hunters, anglers, snowmobilers, ATV enthusiasts, campers, hikers, climbers, et al., while denying basic protection services in the Adirondack State Forest, through his continued blocking of construction of Cell Phone Towers to provide communications coverage to NYS residents and non-residents alike, who enjoy and learn from the natural beauty of this region. Through his actions to block such construction of very non-invasive cell phone towers, two individuals lost their lives as they could not call for help. " Does not sound like Mr. Grannis is very pro anyone enjoying what NY State has to offer, does it?
As per the New York State Rifle & Pistol Association there is even more to make one wonder, what was Spitzer thinking by offering Grannis this position:
7) From the NYSR&PA web site @ http://www.nysrpa.org/ we find actions that Grannis allegedly took: "Sponsored vaguely-worded legislation in the past (A-1850) that would have effectively banned hunting as cruelty to animals." Can you imagine that as being environmentally friendly. If you are an experienced hunter, or an experienced conservationist, or an experienced wildlife biologist, I am sure you cannot. Cessation of hunting in most cases results in excessive habitat destruction by the same species of animals we are trying to conserve through regulated hunting. In addition, the fact is that about 80% of all wildlife funding comes from hunters and fishermen. From where else could the money to support habitat come? Increased taxes most likely - do you think hunters might be missed then.
8) In addition to the above, Grannis is evidently anti-gun. According to the NYSR&PA he: "Sponsored and voted for numerous bills designed to restrict firearms ownership and usage among law-abiding New Yorkers, consistently siding with anti-gun organizations such as New Yorkers Against Gun Violence."
9) Spitzer apparently was hotly opposed to any state legislator winding up on the selection list for comptroller. How to get rid of Grannis may have crossed the governor's mind. He found a way to do so, so as to get what he wanted into the comptroller's office (in other words not Grannis in that position) without regard for the DEC ad its functions (by placing Grannis into the DEC), or maybe with an ulterior motive in mind since as far as I am aware Spitzer himself is no friend of the hunter, fisherman, or NYS gun owners. This can be seen in The Village Voice article as well as in: The Times Union.com at http://blogs.timesunion.com/capitol/?p=3787.
As I see it this is U.S. state level politics at its worst, and it will almost surely not be of any benefit to the DEC, to the avid sportsmen of any type be they campers, rock climbers, snowmobilers, fishermen, hikers, hunters, cross country skiers, canoeists, or whatever. I strongly support anything in opposition to Alexander Pete Grannis as the commissioner of the NYS DEC; and I would ask other New Yorkers, and those from out of state who enjoy NY State lands for recreation, to do likewise.
All the best,
Glenn B
Monday, March 5, 2007
The Job Search Continues...
...and in about the last two months I have applied for about 50 jobs of various sorts. So far not even a nibble from propsective employers. My guess is that not too many places are looking to hire retirees, and maybe just maybe they think I am over qualified. The problem for me is that while I may be over qualified for a bunch of starting level positions, I really am not qualififed at the managerial level. Of course, I'll keep lloking and stay hopeful that something will turn up that pays reasonably well, so as to supplement my retirement - that is once I actually retire. If I find a job like that, my current job will see the door close as it misses slamming me in my butt.
I am still very hopeful that my upcoming interview with the New York City Teaching Fellows Program will be productive. I think teacher would be a grande retirement job, what with doing good for the kids, decent pay, and summers off.
Oh well enough about my job hunt, although I will add that if anyone knows of a decent entry level position in anything that pays around 40 to 50K, please be so kind as to pass along the opportunity to me. Now onto Monster.com for me.
Later for you.
All the best,
Glenn B
I am still very hopeful that my upcoming interview with the New York City Teaching Fellows Program will be productive. I think teacher would be a grande retirement job, what with doing good for the kids, decent pay, and summers off.
Oh well enough about my job hunt, although I will add that if anyone knows of a decent entry level position in anything that pays around 40 to 50K, please be so kind as to pass along the opportunity to me. Now onto Monster.com for me.
Later for you.
All the best,
Glenn B
Saturday, March 3, 2007
Aiming Versus Point Shooting In A Gunfight...
...could be an important decision you may have to make some day if you are an armed citizen and are willing to defend yourself, loved ones and other inocents from an armed bad guy.
I am not going to write a lengthy rant about which I think is better, I know how I would shoot at 7 yards in various situations. If and how you shoot should depend upon the totality of circumstances in each situation. What I am saying is it can be different each time depending on the facts presented to you in each situation.
Sometimes you might not shoot at all, sometimes you might need to shoot slowly, sometime more rapidly. Sometimes you may need to take careful aim using proper sight alignment and sight pictire, other times you may not use your sights at all. You need to, or at least should, get training to know how and when to shoot if only because the situation can call for different tactics.
What I am about to do here is show you 4 scans of targets I shot at the range yesterday to show the effects on hitting the target as caused by different types of shooting at 7 yards. I chose 7 yards as this is one of the most common ranges within which actual gunfights take place, and because it is a safe distance, albeit about the maximum safe distance, at which to point shoot. I will show how I shot slowfire aiming, rapid fire aiming, and rapid fire point shooting (basically aiming by pointing the gun and looking over the top of it without using sights). Please don't try point shooting at much further distance.
Take a look at the targets, and imagine yourself in a gunfight, facing an opponent. When would you shoot slowfire, if ever, at 7 yards? When would you shoot rapid fire and aim with your sights? When would you shoot rapid fire and p
oint shoot? If you do not know, then you really need training to learn such basic tactical shooting because each type of shooting could be called for at 7 yards.
oint shoot? If you do not know, then you really need training to learn such basic tactical shooting because each type of shooting could be called for at 7 yards.The first target, to the left, is 45 shots aimed slowfire at 7 yards. Not my best, my eyes are not what they once were and that front sight is fuzzier and fuzzier, but not bad shooting - especially considering how little I have been to the range lately. I shot at the bullseye as many of you would do.
The next one (the one to the right) is 45 shots, aimed rapidfire at 7 yards. Yes that is all 45 on the paper, and yes I shot at the blank side of the paper since a bad guy is not likely to wear a bullseye on his chest. It opens up quite a lot from the slowfire group, but look at that quarter, then imagine that group size aimed at center of mass (as in chest cavity) of a bad guy. Even the fliers were in the center of mass zone.
The next one is 38 shots (all the ammo I had left), rapidfire point shooting. It opens the group somewhat more, but again look to that quarter. These were pretty much center of the paper, and all would have been in the center of mass on your real life bad guy.If the bad guy is not holding a hostage, if there is no one else within the possible line of fire, and the bad guy was within 2 to 7 yards of you, which way would you choose to shoot. Would you shoot slowly, would you take the time to use your sights, or would you try to get your shots out as quickly as possible. Remember I had to reload twice on each of these rapid fire targets.
Yes I did say I would show 4 pics, so let me show one more of slowfire at 7 yards. This was actually the 2nd target at which I shot, the one right after I shot 45 rounds at the bullseye. This one was only 15 rounds, and it too was at the blank side of the paper (just to show that it is not shooting at the blank side of the paper that effects group size). Its not a bad group. Some folks would think it a great one though it is not great for slow fire, since some can do it rapid fire. What I am trying to show though is you don't need to think you have to shoot a hole like that in a bad guy to be effective at ranges from 2 to 7 yards. Of course you need to be proficient to point shoot at 7 yards, but point shooting can be a very viable option as opposed to aimed shooting using your sights at that distance.
If you are wondering about why I keep saying from 2 to 7 yards, instead of from a shorter distance out to 7 yards, well then you really need some trining in tactics. Think about it like this, if a guy is closer than 2 yards, are you going to offer him your pistol to grab away from you by placing it in front of you in either aimed or point shooting position? Get some training, then Practice, Practice, Practice. Even with my poorer vision nowadays, I probably would have shot even better had I been practicing lately myself. I had not been to the range in a couple of months or so, and I had not shot the Beretta 92FS that I used for these targets, in well over 4 months.
All the best,
Glenn B
Enjoying Some of The Finer Pleasures of Life...
...is usually dependent upon one's income; but that does not mean that finer things are out of reach of those who don't make all that much. In saying that I should also point out that what is defined as one man's finer thing, may be defined as another's crude crud. Well if what I am about to describe is crude crud to some, all the better, because that will likely leave more for folks like me and most of you.
Today I am going to drive into the old neighborhood in Glendale/Ridgewood in Queens which is part of New York City. Yes it really should be 'neighborhoods', but neighborhood fits the feeling better that I have for those adjacent once upon a time German-American neighborhoods. Once there I plan to do a little shopping for a dinner we are having this weekend. My wife, Linda wants to cook a German dish for our daughter Celina's boyfriend. It was his birthday yesterday. So the wife will be cooking schweine fleisch (spelling?). Basically that means pig's flesh, mmm good. She uses a pork tenderloin for an out of this world roast. Most places around here do not sell pork tenderloin as it should be sold, fresh with a nice amount of fat. Nowadays the supermarkets and most butchers cut a pork roast missing all the fat. That is not good, too dry. So I'll head off to a German butcher, one of 3 choices that still remain open there, to pick up the proper cut of pork, and then probably spend another $50-$75 or more on German smoked meats and cold cuts (almost all made right at that butcher), some great mustard with horseradish in it, some great Lithuanian Bread and a corn rye bread (probably two of the heaviest breads known to man), and some other fine tidbits.
Then I'll be off to Rudy's Bakery to pick up some Lindser Tarts, the best I have ever eaten, along with some other delectable baked goods of the sweet type. This place has butter cookies actually made with butter as opposed to a butter/shortening combo. It has great crumb cakes, other cakes, pies, cookies, pastries, and Black Forest Cake too. All out of this world delicious.
The thing about these two places, besides them selling great ethnic foods (ethnic from Western Europe at that) is that these two neighborhoods have changed markedly in ethnicity over the years, but these places and a handful of others have been able to remain in business. Many of the folks in theses neighborhoods nowadays do not shop at these businesses, especially the German butcher. I am guessing a lot of their business comes from people like me who moved away, but yet travel back for those things we cannot get where we live now. Yet they carry on, and I am darned happy to shop there at least a few to several times a year.
Of course anyone could enjoy these great foods, but as it stands now most places are being overrun by things like fast food joints, and ethnic food establishments from the third world. I like many different types of food, but I'll be damned if I am only going to eat the ethnic types of food that seem to be popular today. Yes I do eat them, but I do not forgot my own heritage, the or old neighborhood and the great things of which it was made - so I go back when I get the chance to enjoy some of the finer things it has to offer; and hopefully to help assure through my little bit of shopping there that those things keep being offered. In that way my family and I enjoy some of the finer things life has to offer.
All the best,
Glenn B
Today I am going to drive into the old neighborhood in Glendale/Ridgewood in Queens which is part of New York City. Yes it really should be 'neighborhoods', but neighborhood fits the feeling better that I have for those adjacent once upon a time German-American neighborhoods. Once there I plan to do a little shopping for a dinner we are having this weekend. My wife, Linda wants to cook a German dish for our daughter Celina's boyfriend. It was his birthday yesterday. So the wife will be cooking schweine fleisch (spelling?). Basically that means pig's flesh, mmm good. She uses a pork tenderloin for an out of this world roast. Most places around here do not sell pork tenderloin as it should be sold, fresh with a nice amount of fat. Nowadays the supermarkets and most butchers cut a pork roast missing all the fat. That is not good, too dry. So I'll head off to a German butcher, one of 3 choices that still remain open there, to pick up the proper cut of pork, and then probably spend another $50-$75 or more on German smoked meats and cold cuts (almost all made right at that butcher), some great mustard with horseradish in it, some great Lithuanian Bread and a corn rye bread (probably two of the heaviest breads known to man), and some other fine tidbits.
Then I'll be off to Rudy's Bakery to pick up some Lindser Tarts, the best I have ever eaten, along with some other delectable baked goods of the sweet type. This place has butter cookies actually made with butter as opposed to a butter/shortening combo. It has great crumb cakes, other cakes, pies, cookies, pastries, and Black Forest Cake too. All out of this world delicious.
The thing about these two places, besides them selling great ethnic foods (ethnic from Western Europe at that) is that these two neighborhoods have changed markedly in ethnicity over the years, but these places and a handful of others have been able to remain in business. Many of the folks in theses neighborhoods nowadays do not shop at these businesses, especially the German butcher. I am guessing a lot of their business comes from people like me who moved away, but yet travel back for those things we cannot get where we live now. Yet they carry on, and I am darned happy to shop there at least a few to several times a year.
Of course anyone could enjoy these great foods, but as it stands now most places are being overrun by things like fast food joints, and ethnic food establishments from the third world. I like many different types of food, but I'll be damned if I am only going to eat the ethnic types of food that seem to be popular today. Yes I do eat them, but I do not forgot my own heritage, the or old neighborhood and the great things of which it was made - so I go back when I get the chance to enjoy some of the finer things it has to offer; and hopefully to help assure through my little bit of shopping there that those things keep being offered. In that way my family and I enjoy some of the finer things life has to offer.
All the best,
Glenn B
Wednesday, February 28, 2007
The Importance of Proper Ammunition
In recent years the rules of firearms safety have been edited down so that there are now what is considered to be the 4 Rules of Gun Safety. These so called 4 Rules overlook one of the most important rules of safety with firearms, one that seems to be common sense to those familiar with guns, but yet may not be all that much mumbo jumbo to those unfamiliar with firearms. The important rule of which I write is:
Always be absolutely sure to use the proper ammunition in each firearm you are shooting. Now while this may seem like common sense, the topic of using proper ammunition can be confusing to a newcomer. It can be confusing because there are often several different sizes of ammunition with similar names. If for example you have a 9MM pistol, you can find 9MM Luger, 9MM NATO, 9MM Largo (also called long), 9mmShort (also called Corto, Brevia and so on). Some of these are the same as one another, others are quite different. Many other calibers of ammunition also have names or numbers close enough to one another to be confusing. The down side of using the wrong ammunition is that it can jam your firearms, can cause damage to the firearms, and can cause injury to the shooter.
The best ways to make sure that you are using the correct ammunition (in modern commercial firearms) is to check on the gun itself, or check in the manual for that particular firearm, or contact the manufacturer. Most commercially made modern firearms are stamped (marked) with the caliber size somewhere on the metal surface of the firearm. When you buy ammunition make sure to buy a box full of ammunition that has the same caliber marked on the box as is marked on the gun itself, or that is in the manual for that gun.
It is a simple rule, but the large amount of ammunition types out there that have similar numbers to designate their calibers and cartridge sizes can be somewhat of a boondoggle for the novice to have to figure out. If you are still uncertain after looking at the firearm, and are still uncertain after reading the manual, then call the manufacturer if still in business. If not still in business, then you may have to go to a competent firearms retailer or gunsmith to determine the correct ammunition for your gun. Don't rely simply on posting a question online in a forum or chatroom, don't make a guess, don't ask a friend who is unfamiliar with that type of gun, and so forth.
Remember that with any firearm, mostly military ones though, the actual firearm may have been modified to accept a caliber other than that for which it was originally intended. Some of these are marked (they all probably should be) and others are not can be changed, and these may have to be checked by a competent gunsmith before firing. I do not recommend buying such by the novice, stick to commercially manufactured guns first, until you have learned more about them, or at least buy a gun certified by the dealer to be in the caliber as it is sold.
Another thing you may want to avoid, especially when new to firearms, is reloaded ammunition. Many firearms enthusiasts, and some businesses, reload spent shell casings, so that they can be fired again. It saves money because new shell casings are expensive, and so is newly manufactured ammunition; the components are less expensive when you do the work yourself. The problem that can arise here is if a round (or rounds) were given an improper powder charge. This can lead to various problems, that includes injury to the shooter. Unless you are thoroughly trained in how to reload ammunition, don't do it. It might also be wise not to accept reloaded ammunition from others, unless you know they reliably reload to factory standards.
As I said above, this is one of the most important rules of firearms safety, so please don't forget to only use the proper ammunition in your firearms.
All the best,
Glenn B
Always be absolutely sure to use the proper ammunition in each firearm you are shooting. Now while this may seem like common sense, the topic of using proper ammunition can be confusing to a newcomer. It can be confusing because there are often several different sizes of ammunition with similar names. If for example you have a 9MM pistol, you can find 9MM Luger, 9MM NATO, 9MM Largo (also called long), 9mmShort (also called Corto, Brevia and so on). Some of these are the same as one another, others are quite different. Many other calibers of ammunition also have names or numbers close enough to one another to be confusing. The down side of using the wrong ammunition is that it can jam your firearms, can cause damage to the firearms, and can cause injury to the shooter.
The best ways to make sure that you are using the correct ammunition (in modern commercial firearms) is to check on the gun itself, or check in the manual for that particular firearm, or contact the manufacturer. Most commercially made modern firearms are stamped (marked) with the caliber size somewhere on the metal surface of the firearm. When you buy ammunition make sure to buy a box full of ammunition that has the same caliber marked on the box as is marked on the gun itself, or that is in the manual for that gun.
It is a simple rule, but the large amount of ammunition types out there that have similar numbers to designate their calibers and cartridge sizes can be somewhat of a boondoggle for the novice to have to figure out. If you are still uncertain after looking at the firearm, and are still uncertain after reading the manual, then call the manufacturer if still in business. If not still in business, then you may have to go to a competent firearms retailer or gunsmith to determine the correct ammunition for your gun. Don't rely simply on posting a question online in a forum or chatroom, don't make a guess, don't ask a friend who is unfamiliar with that type of gun, and so forth.
Remember that with any firearm, mostly military ones though, the actual firearm may have been modified to accept a caliber other than that for which it was originally intended. Some of these are marked (they all probably should be) and others are not can be changed, and these may have to be checked by a competent gunsmith before firing. I do not recommend buying such by the novice, stick to commercially manufactured guns first, until you have learned more about them, or at least buy a gun certified by the dealer to be in the caliber as it is sold.
Another thing you may want to avoid, especially when new to firearms, is reloaded ammunition. Many firearms enthusiasts, and some businesses, reload spent shell casings, so that they can be fired again. It saves money because new shell casings are expensive, and so is newly manufactured ammunition; the components are less expensive when you do the work yourself. The problem that can arise here is if a round (or rounds) were given an improper powder charge. This can lead to various problems, that includes injury to the shooter. Unless you are thoroughly trained in how to reload ammunition, don't do it. It might also be wise not to accept reloaded ammunition from others, unless you know they reliably reload to factory standards.
As I said above, this is one of the most important rules of firearms safety, so please don't forget to only use the proper ammunition in your firearms.
All the best,
Glenn B
A Little Rearranging...
and a few new links have been added to this site over on the right side of the page. I split up how I list the linked sites, and I now have link sections for:
1) U.S. Government - so you can learn more about the government, and maybe more importantly learn how to contact your elected officials.
2) News and Other Varied References - pretty much just what it says.
3) Firearms Interests - Links all types of sites that support firearms ownership and the RKBA; these include: Groups that protect our right to keep and bear arms, information pages about firearms, firearms forums, firearms manufacturers, auctions sites and so on.
4) Grumps, Geeks and Geniuses - a list of bloggers whom I believe are worth reading.
5) My blog archive.
I have some more links to list, but would also appreciate any suggestions. Thanks.
All the best,
Glenn B
PS: Thanks to reader Greybeard who made me aware I had not included some information in one of my recent blogs. That made me think I should have a more comprehensive link list.
1) U.S. Government - so you can learn more about the government, and maybe more importantly learn how to contact your elected officials.
2) News and Other Varied References - pretty much just what it says.
3) Firearms Interests - Links all types of sites that support firearms ownership and the RKBA; these include: Groups that protect our right to keep and bear arms, information pages about firearms, firearms forums, firearms manufacturers, auctions sites and so on.
4) Grumps, Geeks and Geniuses - a list of bloggers whom I believe are worth reading.
5) My blog archive.
I have some more links to list, but would also appreciate any suggestions. Thanks.
All the best,
Glenn B
PS: Thanks to reader Greybeard who made me aware I had not included some information in one of my recent blogs. That made me think I should have a more comprehensive link list.
Tuesday, February 27, 2007
H.R. 1022 - A New Assault Weapons Ban...
...has been proposed and put forth by Representative Carolyn McCarthy. My understanding is that in it she proposes to resurrect the old assault weapons ban, add on numerous types of firearms (that are sportsmans' guns and really have nothing to do with being assault weapons - not that weapon type matters under the 2nd amendment, I am just mentioning what she wants to do), and add a 10% tax on ammunition by each round sold. Yes folks you read that right, a 10% tax on each and every bullet that is sold. Maybe someone ought to remind Rep. McCarthy about the founding of this nation, and the Declaration of Independence. Said document was penned for various reasons, and one of them was because of the excessive taxes imposed upon the colonists by the tyrannical government at the time.
Wake up folks, not simply by buying ammunition now before this bill can pass, but to take action and call the elected officials in Washington so they know we oppose any such legislation. Call to voice, write and then send by mail or email, your opinion to the elected officials in Washington, D.D.. Let them know you oppose such a law, and believe it to be an outrageous attempt to infringe upon your liberties and rights. Get it done folks, do it like you mean it. Write and call weekly until this thing is defeated. If they get an avalanche of mail and calls, you can be sure that passage of such a law will never come about. If you say, 'hey, my one letter cannot do anything, neither can a bunch of them' well then think what a few hundred thousand might do.
**********************
My blog certainly does not get an awful lot of hits, so please spread the word about getting the message to Washington that we oppose such legislation. Let other bloggers know that they ought to put something on their sites about this if not already done, put something into your own blog, put it onto online forums, talk to it with folks at the gun range or club, talk to your neighbors about it, do whatever you can legally do to help defeat this tyrannical piece of legislation from ever becoming law.
Keep up the good fight to keep and bear arms without infringement of your rights and liberties, otherwise tyranny in democracy's clothing may rule us yet.
All the best,
Glenn B
Wake up folks, not simply by buying ammunition now before this bill can pass, but to take action and call the elected officials in Washington so they know we oppose any such legislation. Call to voice, write and then send by mail or email, your opinion to the elected officials in Washington, D.D.. Let them know you oppose such a law, and believe it to be an outrageous attempt to infringe upon your liberties and rights. Get it done folks, do it like you mean it. Write and call weekly until this thing is defeated. If they get an avalanche of mail and calls, you can be sure that passage of such a law will never come about. If you say, 'hey, my one letter cannot do anything, neither can a bunch of them' well then think what a few hundred thousand might do.
************************
Edited 02/27/2007 to add:
Greybeard got in touch by way of a comment and asked for the info on the bill so that folks can write to their politicos and say which bill they oppose. Brainfart alert on my part in that I forgot to include such in the post originally. So I am now editing it (02/27/2007) to include that info along with some informative and helpful links. If you go to Representative McCarthy’s website @ http://carolynmccarthy.house.gov/index.cfm?ContentID=686&ParentID=0&SectionID=32&SectionTree=32&lnk=b&ItemID=675, she writes about her wanting to reinstate the Assault Weapons Ban, but I did not see an obvious link to the bill, not even under her legislation link.
I was able to find the bill on the Library of Congress website at this address: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?c110:8:./temp/~c110VcFgc2:: but for some reason when I try to click on the link for that address I get noting. You can go to the home page for the site and do a search for H.R. 1022, or simply for the Assault Weapons Ban and Law Enforcement Protection Act of 2007 (Introduced in House)[H.R.1022.IH] (oh lookee they just supplied a link in the title of the bill, how nice).
If you would like, you can go to the site at this link http://www.thepetitionsite.com/takeaction/409898348?ltl=1172617322 to file an online petition as your first step in opposition to said bill. Please note that the effectiveness of online petitions is highly questionable, so you must follow that up with emails, letters and or phone calls to your elected officials to oppose this bill.
**********************
My blog certainly does not get an awful lot of hits, so please spread the word about getting the message to Washington that we oppose such legislation. Let other bloggers know that they ought to put something on their sites about this if not already done, put something into your own blog, put it onto online forums, talk to it with folks at the gun range or club, talk to your neighbors about it, do whatever you can legally do to help defeat this tyrannical piece of legislation from ever becoming law.
Keep up the good fight to keep and bear arms without infringement of your rights and liberties, otherwise tyranny in democracy's clothing may rule us yet.
All the best,
Glenn B
Monday, February 26, 2007
By Sheer Coincidence...
...Kim du Toit wrote today about someone complaining they had been overcharged for Chinese food in a restaurant in NYC, while I on the other hand went to New York City's Chinatown for an excellent lunch and one at a great price at that. I missed my chance to celebrate Chinese new year this past weekend, and I wanted to make sure to go to one of my favorite Chinese restaurants to wish the folks there a Happy New Year, before it got stale, so off we went today.
Lunch for myself and a friend of mine from work was only $10 in total, plus tip. There is no way we were overcharged, and I know for a fact, despite what is said by some about other restaurants, the Chinese folks who eat in the same restaurant in which I ate today get charged the same prices. Heck I have eaten there often enough to have seen that personally many times. As a matter of fact, I have eaten in quite a few restaurants in NYC's Chinatown wherein everyone gets charged the same prices. I also shop in a few of the butchers, fish markets, and in the grocery stores and I am fairly certain I pay the same prices. There is no racism or price gouging going on, but of course maybe it happens in other places like the one in the article How mean for chow mein to which Kim linked at: http://www.nydailynews.com/front/story/500668p-422094c.html, and I agree with Kim that it is racism if they do it because you are not Chinese when you order there.
After reading the article, my guess is yes the couple who complained about being charged a dollar more may have been overcharged, but THEN AGAIN they may have not been overcharged and may have gotten a larger portion than those on the Chinese language menu. This is a common practice with the various menus in some Chinese restaurants. If you get a bowl of rice, it costs more than a smaller serving of rice on your plate as it would be served if ordered from the Chinese language menu. This could be easily misconstrued as unfair pricing by someone not that familiar with Chinatown and its restaurants who did not realize theya ctually got a larger serving.
Kim went on to describe his wife's experiences while she lived in NYC (maybe in Chinatown) in what they, or at least he, commonly refer(s) to as New York Fucking City. She apparently knew of restaurants charging different prices for Chinese folks than for other races of folks when she lived there. I am not saying it does not happen; but I just don't see that as happening in my experience, at least not in the several Chinese restaurants that I frequent in Chinatown, and not in the one's outside of Chinatown either. So I figured I'd give them a plug from the other side since as I said, we had a really nice lunch today for $10.00 for two people, and mine was only $4.50, tax included. I had roast pig and roast pork over rice with a side of Chinese greens. (The guy got my order wrong as I had asked for roast pig and roast duck over rice, but it was great nonetheless, and they usually get it right.) The lunch came with complimentary bowl of hot tea, a bowl of house soup, and with a fortune cookie afterward. As is customary, they offered us a 2nd pot of tea (no charge) once we had finished the 1st one.
Now it may be that others have different experiences in Chinese restaurants, for whatever reasons, but I have got to say that restaurants in New York City's Chinatown are one of the best deals in the city as far as inexpensive great tasting meals go; that is of course, if you avoid the yuppie and tourist traps; and of course, if you avoid the ones in New York Fuckin City - wherever that may be.
All the best,
Glenn B
Lunch for myself and a friend of mine from work was only $10 in total, plus tip. There is no way we were overcharged, and I know for a fact, despite what is said by some about other restaurants, the Chinese folks who eat in the same restaurant in which I ate today get charged the same prices. Heck I have eaten there often enough to have seen that personally many times. As a matter of fact, I have eaten in quite a few restaurants in NYC's Chinatown wherein everyone gets charged the same prices. I also shop in a few of the butchers, fish markets, and in the grocery stores and I am fairly certain I pay the same prices. There is no racism or price gouging going on, but of course maybe it happens in other places like the one in the article How mean for chow mein to which Kim linked at: http://www.nydailynews.com/front/story/500668p-422094c.html, and I agree with Kim that it is racism if they do it because you are not Chinese when you order there.
After reading the article, my guess is yes the couple who complained about being charged a dollar more may have been overcharged, but THEN AGAIN they may have not been overcharged and may have gotten a larger portion than those on the Chinese language menu. This is a common practice with the various menus in some Chinese restaurants. If you get a bowl of rice, it costs more than a smaller serving of rice on your plate as it would be served if ordered from the Chinese language menu. This could be easily misconstrued as unfair pricing by someone not that familiar with Chinatown and its restaurants who did not realize theya ctually got a larger serving.
Kim went on to describe his wife's experiences while she lived in NYC (maybe in Chinatown) in what they, or at least he, commonly refer(s) to as New York Fucking City. She apparently knew of restaurants charging different prices for Chinese folks than for other races of folks when she lived there. I am not saying it does not happen; but I just don't see that as happening in my experience, at least not in the several Chinese restaurants that I frequent in Chinatown, and not in the one's outside of Chinatown either. So I figured I'd give them a plug from the other side since as I said, we had a really nice lunch today for $10.00 for two people, and mine was only $4.50, tax included. I had roast pig and roast pork over rice with a side of Chinese greens. (The guy got my order wrong as I had asked for roast pig and roast duck over rice, but it was great nonetheless, and they usually get it right.) The lunch came with complimentary bowl of hot tea, a bowl of house soup, and with a fortune cookie afterward. As is customary, they offered us a 2nd pot of tea (no charge) once we had finished the 1st one.
Now it may be that others have different experiences in Chinese restaurants, for whatever reasons, but I have got to say that restaurants in New York City's Chinatown are one of the best deals in the city as far as inexpensive great tasting meals go; that is of course, if you avoid the yuppie and tourist traps; and of course, if you avoid the ones in New York Fuckin City - wherever that may be.
All the best,
Glenn B
14 Years Ago Today...
...the World Trade Center was attacked by terrorists who had hoped to basically blow it to smithereens. They had a small success in that they killed 6 people and wounded many, many others. The shame of this all, besides the attack and losses themselves, is that most people tend to forget this terrorist attack on U.S. soil; the one that set the stage for 9/11.
Take a moment now, and in your own way give a thought or a prayer to those who lost their lives, and who were injured on that day, and of course to the heroes who saved many lives.
All the best,
Glenn B
Take a moment now, and in your own way give a thought or a prayer to those who lost their lives, and who were injured on that day, and of course to the heroes who saved many lives.
All the best,
Glenn B
It Was A Quiet Sunday...
...at least for me. I got some small chores done on Sunday morning, and spent the rest of the day at leisure. Took care of my critters, went to the monthly Long Island Herpetological Society meeting, came home, had a nice dinner with the wife and son, watched some TV (way too much), really enjoyed The Dresden Files and Battle Star Galatica, and am up right now way too late (or would that be way too early) at 1:36 AM, on Monday morning waiting for sleep to overtake me as the snow is overtaking everything outside. Gosh darned insomnia stinks, and it happens now and then, lately more now than then. Probably because I dread going to work, especially on Mondays, and since I am eligible to retire. So I usually have a hard time of even getting tired Sunday nights through until about 2:00AM on Mondays. If I was a real drinking man, I'd have a 2nd glass of Scotch, but I think one should be enough - I don't need bad habits and crutches to finally hit the hay, sleep comes sooner or later. If it comes too late, I'll go in late and work later than usual. Maybe I ought to try a hot cocoa or an herbal tea, or maybe just crawl under the covers next to the wife and wait. Decisions, decisions. Oh well, goodnight.
All the best,
Glenn B
All the best,
Glenn B
Here Is A Gun Trivia Question...
...to which I seek an answer because I do not know the answer.
In the 1941 film version of the Maltese Falcon, what make and model of pistol did Joel Cairo hold on Sam Spade? I am hoping to get the correct answer backed by some sort of factual reference other than just getting guesses, or answers like: 'Hey it looks like a Colt' or whatever.
Thanks,
Glenn B
In the 1941 film version of the Maltese Falcon, what make and model of pistol did Joel Cairo hold on Sam Spade? I am hoping to get the correct answer backed by some sort of factual reference other than just getting guesses, or answers like: 'Hey it looks like a Colt' or whatever.
Thanks,
Glenn B
Saturday, February 24, 2007
Jim Zumbo, and David Petzal...
...are two of the reasons I will probably never again enjoy an issue of Outdoor Life or Field and Stream magazines as much as I used to. There has been a lot of fuss made about recent statements by Zumbo in which he basically implied that they who shoot military style weapons or assault weapons are terrorists as he called those weapon terrorist weapons. It was a truly unintelligent thing for an Outdoor Life writer, hunter, sportsman, and gun enthusiast to write. He is now paying the price. Just because someone who likes the gun sports, or who chooses to be prepared for self defense, or defense of country chooses one type of firearm over another, does not make that person bad or good. That is the mistake made by Mr. Zumbo as he apparently tried to mimic a loose cannon. David Petzal then tried to say that Zumbo had every right to do so and I believe he faulted others for hammering Zumbo's opinion. Well, I think Petzal is right in how he feels about free speech, but he forgot that free speech does not just apply to Mr. Zumbo, it applies to all of us who disagree with Zumbo too. The truth is both Petzal and Zumbo are, in my opinion, apologists to the left for they who would want to own assault or defensive type weapons. I will not write a lot about this because so many others have already done so, and simply put someone has done it better than I could. Read the blog: Both Wrong by Kim du Toit @ http://www.theothersideofkim.com/index.php/tos/10266/ that puts all of this in the perspective of a logical argument.
All the best,
Glenn B
All the best,
Glenn B
Friday, February 23, 2007
The World's Largest Shotgun...
...and I do mean the absolute largest, may be in the making and yet its creators may not even realize what they are doing. As you may or may not be aware shotguns fire different types of projectiles, one of them being known simply as 'shot'. Shot, or a load of it, is usually and basically made up of a number of pellets. When you fire the shotgun, the ignition and very rapid burning of the gunpowder in the shotgun shell creates gasses that rapidly expand, this expansion of gasses in essence pushes the pellets out of the barrel at a high speed.
In Indonesia, authorities have created hundreds of concrete balls that in a way resemble
shotgun pellets. The fact that the authorities there intend to take hundreds of these concrete balls and place them into a fissure that has been erupting and spewing hot noxious mud is sort of analogous to them loading a shotgun. You see the fissure has been spewing that hot noxious mud has been spouting out enough of it to fill over 50 Olympic swiming pools a day for over 9 months according to the article: Giant Weights to Be Dropped Into Indonesian Mud Volcano Friday, Officials Say at FoxNews.com, see: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,253831,00.html.
In other words, it appears as if the fissure has been venting an awful lot of pressure. The hope is, of course, that the heavy concrete balls dropped into the fissure will prevent it from spewing forth any more mud. My concern is that all the pressure that has been vented over that 9 month period, still has a lot of pressure coming behind it, or in other words that there is a lot more left to come out of that hole. Filling the hole with 550 pound pellets may just turn it into a large shotgun, and when enough pressure builds up under the concrete balls, the whole thing may just go kaboom sending those balls into flight.
Now, there is a chance that this plugging up of the hole will work. There is also a chance that if it does not work it will not go kaboom either, but will rather just crack open some distance away and continue to spew mud. My imaginative guess is though, that there is a chance it could go kaboom and turn those concrete balls into deadly projectiles coming out of the world's largest shotgun. That is a scary thought and I hope someone has already figured out that there virtually is no chance of that happening. I must say though, if it does go kaboom, I hope to be in the comfort of my living room - safe at home - watching it on the evening news when it blows.
All the best,
Glenn B
In Indonesia, authorities have created hundreds of concrete balls that in a way resemble
shotgun pellets. The fact that the authorities there intend to take hundreds of these concrete balls and place them into a fissure that has been erupting and spewing hot noxious mud is sort of analogous to them loading a shotgun. You see the fissure has been spewing that hot noxious mud has been spouting out enough of it to fill over 50 Olympic swiming pools a day for over 9 months according to the article: Giant Weights to Be Dropped Into Indonesian Mud Volcano Friday, Officials Say at FoxNews.com, see: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,253831,00.html.
In other words, it appears as if the fissure has been venting an awful lot of pressure. The hope is, of course, that the heavy concrete balls dropped into the fissure will prevent it from spewing forth any more mud. My concern is that all the pressure that has been vented over that 9 month period, still has a lot of pressure coming behind it, or in other words that there is a lot more left to come out of that hole. Filling the hole with 550 pound pellets may just turn it into a large shotgun, and when enough pressure builds up under the concrete balls, the whole thing may just go kaboom sending those balls into flight.
Now, there is a chance that this plugging up of the hole will work. There is also a chance that if it does not work it will not go kaboom either, but will rather just crack open some distance away and continue to spew mud. My imaginative guess is though, that there is a chance it could go kaboom and turn those concrete balls into deadly projectiles coming out of the world's largest shotgun. That is a scary thought and I hope someone has already figured out that there virtually is no chance of that happening. I must say though, if it does go kaboom, I hope to be in the comfort of my living room - safe at home - watching it on the evening news when it blows.
All the best,
Glenn B
Thursday, February 22, 2007
Your Guns - are they basic or modified?
If modified I put forth that maybe you best had reconsider those modifications. Mine, for the most part are pretty much of the basic sought (but this is within my own definitions of basic versus modified as I will soon explain). I have never before really seen a need to modify any of the guns I own with the exception of adding different grips to them (or one time I changed a stock), and until recent years needing to add optical sights to them as my eyes are not those of a teenager any longer. This has not been because I have striven to be a purist, but simply that I have not had the need to change any of the guns I own, nor have I seen the real benefit when others have made modifications, at least not in street carry type guns. As far as I have been concerned, all of my guns, the ones I have kept have worked just fine, for how I intend to use them; and that was/is just as they were made or came to me with the exception of the grips, stock (on one occasion, or the sights). If they did not work fine, then I either got them fixed (without modifications as in fixed to original specifications), am still fumbling with them trying to fix them, got rid of them and got another one to replace it.
Before I go further I guess I should explain the difference that I see between a basic (or as manufactured) and a modified firearm. To me there can be certain modifications made to a firearm whereby it still remains basically an as manufactured gun; in other words the mechanics of the gun have not been altered. These changes would include changing the grips (but note on some pistols the grips are integral to how the firearm functions so make sure your replacements work correctly), doing minor repair work to actually fix a fault (such as replacing a worn spring with an original spec spring, and so forth), changing the stock of a long arm, and possibly changing the sights such as adding night sights or an optical sight. Changes like the ones here do not change the way the actual firearm operates, but may enhance the shooter's ability to use that firearm proficiently. These changes usually do not have a great potential to cause the mechanical operation of the firearm to fail if good parts are used - especially if original manufacturer parts are used when available (same manufacturer as the ones who made the gun that is being changed).
As to modifying a firearm, I believe you are doing what I refer to as modifying a gun when you go pretty much beyond those things. For instance, when you file/grind down metal pieces such as a spring or a sear, when you remove springs and replace them with custom made springs that are not to original specs, when you add a different type of barrel, when you replace the trigger assembly with a custom made one, when you cut the length of a barrel, when you add a weight compensator, when you rechamber a firearm for a new caliber, when you change the finish, or even something as simple as using an aftermarket magazine, and other things like that. Doing things like these can change the actual performance of the firearm itself, and I consider such things to be modifications that go beyond the basic.
Now I realize that there are an awful lot of folks out there who love to modify there firearms, and they do so for various reasons. It is okay by me that they do so with their guns, but as I said I am not a big fan of such things. Let me tell you why, in my own round about way.
I have been a firearms enthusiast since I have been about 9 or 10 years old. It all started back in summer camp many years ago. I started with BB guns, graduated to .22LR's, then had a break of many years after camp, until I again found myself wanting to shoot while in my young 20s. I did not really pick up on the practical side of shooting again though until I was 24, just after I was hired to be a Border Patrol Agent. Until then it had been off and on again shooting guns of friends, or just bow hunting, and reading Outdoor Life and some gun mags. Once I was hired by the Border Patrol, or I should say, once they taught me how to shoot a revolver, I was hooked. I guess a lot of that had to do with the fact that I had moved out of New York City and buying guns became ever so easy for me; along those lines the federal creds helped too.
I worked for the BP for just over 4 years. In that time I bought about 3 revolvers, 5 or 6 pistols, 1 rifle, and a shotgun. Not many guns, but on the money I was making at the time, not bad. I enjoyed shooting sports a lot back then, and I shot at a few matches, and also hunted quite a bit. After that I moved back to NYC, and I worked for the US Customs Service. I continued to enjoy shooting sports, but mostly hunting and plinking, the matches were out, just too far to travel. I continued to buy guns, not all that many over all the years since I came back to the NY area, but enough for me. I have a few rifles, a few pistols, a revolver, and a shotgun. Most of my guns are in 22LR caliber.
In all I have been a federal agent for 27 plus years now, about 14 of them spent doing collateral duties as a firearms instructor in the Customs Service and later a short time in ICE. I have had a good amount of tactical training and actual experience, but thank the heavens I have never had to shoot anyone at work. I have fired shots but missed once (had broken glass in my eyes); but I did nonce shoot a guy, in self defense, while off duty. I was pretty happy my pistol worked that one time when I needed it, and I am pretty sure one of the reasons it that it had been more likely to work as it did, rather than fail on me, was because it was in its basic configuration except for the grips. I had never made any mechanical changes to it other than those made at the factory of the manufacturer when they changed a spring and the recoil guide rod. I never made those changes because of my training and because of my experiences observing the problems others had had with their 'modified ' guns.
One of the first problems I ever saw first hand, with a modified firearm, was a pretty serious one - or at least would have been very serious had the gun's owner ever needed to use it in any sort of defense situation. A guy I knew, way back in the days of yesteryear, went out and bought himself a brand news, shiny blue steel, Dan Wesson revolver. It was a nice revolver and it came in a fancy box, and if I remember correctly it even had interchangeable barrels (but maybe that is my imagination). What I do remember for sure is that my friend thought the amount of force required to squeeze the trigger was excessive. He talked to some of the other gun guys about it, then he brought his gun to a gunschmidt for a trigger and spring job. Well the gunschmidt, in his infinitely greater wisdom than the gun design engineers at the Dan Wesson facility, decided to either file a bit here and to grind a bit there or change the springs to aftermarket. (I seem to recall he may actually have done both, that is if I have it right after about 25 years; so I'll write it as I remember it.) I do know that my friend was ecstatic with the results. He loved it. He showed it to me at his place, and told me to go ahead and dry fire it. It was, I will admit, smooth and crisp, and probably had about a 4 pound let off or whatever you call it. In single action it was like 2 pounds, if that much. My buddy paid good money for that job and he figured it was money well spent.
Well, he figured it was money well spent until he went to the range. As it turned out the beautiful Dan Wesson revolver fired a few rounds, and failed to fire a few others. That was in just one cylinder of rounds. Yes that means that the 6 shot revolver failed to fire 50% of the rounds in the gun. He figured it was a fluke and tried again. The next time around it failed to fire at least a couple of rounds. Once or twice though a few boxes of ammo, it may have fired all the rounds in the cylinder. All the other times there were failures to fire, the primers on the unfired rounds being barely dimpled. He was lucky because this happened at the range. Now while you may think, oh heck anyone would test fire the revolver at the range after a spring and trigger job, well maybe and maybe not. Even in that case, the gun could have worked at the range and failed later. You see a couple of days later, my friend hosted the gunschmidt, remember he is the one who knew better than the folks at the Dan Wesson factory, to a day at the range to demonstrate the failures. The revolver did not fire more than once or twice that day out of many more tries. So what if it had worked well on day one after the 'gunschmidt job', then failed to fire 50% of the time in a defense situation. My guess is it would have been possible. Anyway, the gunschmidt refunded my buddy's money, then gave him a set of new aftermarket springs. Those aftermarket springs seemed to do the trick. They were smooth and crisp and fired the revolver every time - that is for about a few months. Then the Dan Wesson started to have more failure to fire problems. It seems those wonder springs gave out. Bottom line - new springs had to be ordered from the factory to solve the problem.
A pal of mine in the Border Patrol liked to shoot 45's. He was a big fan of the Colt 1911. He was always tinkering with his guns. He was a certified (trained somewhere or another) 'Colt' gunschmidt, and I should also point out he was also a certifiable gun nut. He grinded and filed this and that, and polished here and there. He fixed up original parts, and also replaced some of the parts with aftermarket ones. He had a couple of .45's that were his favorites and worked on them incessantly. Look up the meaning of incessant - please. The reason he worked on them in that manner was because he apparently never got them just right to his liking or to the point were it was pretty much 100% reliable; yet he carried them while off duty. He is not alone, there are plenty of other folks who do just like him including carrying a weapon which they constantly have to repair or work on to make it function better. Now I have to wonder why anyone who did not like the way a firearm functioned so much as to have to incessantly tinker with it would ever decide to carry that particular firearm as a self defense weapon on which his or her life might depend.
All throughout the years, since those days long ago, I have known quite a few other firearms enthusiasts who decided that their guns, as they were, were not good enough, and that they needed mechanical modifications. I could give a lot of other examples other than those first two (from my experience), but they are sufficient to illustrate the fact that some guys just have to make them better - instead of going with something that is already good enough. Now while a lot of those modifications proved to be great and many of the modified guns worked fine, there were an awfully high percentage of those modified firearms, as witnessed by me personally, to have had failures to feed, fire, extract, and or eject; this of course includes revolvers having such failures too. A very important thing that seemed very apparent to me was that the amount of failures in modified guns far outnumbered the failure in factory spec guns. I saw this time and time again when I performed collateral duties as a firearms instructor.
While any firearm can have a failure that leads to catastrophe, it seems evident, at least to me, that such is much more likely if you have first tinkered with a gun's mechanical operation to change it from factory specifications. You can even make modifications that do not change the factory specifications of the mechanics, such as changing the grips, that can lead to such failures, but usually only when you don't use a high quality replacement. Now while you may that sticking with quality always prevents FUBAR, such as by using the services of high quality gunsmiths, and using only high quality replacement parts, for mechanical modifications, the chances evidently still seem to be higher that you will risk failure of your firearm if mechanical changes have been made, and I base this on personal experience over the years I was an instructor.
I am not saying that my personal thoughts on this matter should have you stop using your favorite self defense firearm if it has been modified outside of the original makers facilities, but rather that you think about what can and often does happen with mechanically modified firearms, at least apparently more so that factory spec firearms that are from a reliable manufacturer and of a reliable design. Think about that before you get all gung ho about mechanical modifications, think about the implications for a shootout situation and your survival. Then, if you have not already done so, take your modified gun to the range, and put it through at least a 500 round test.
Shoot safely.
All the best,
Glenn B
Before I go further I guess I should explain the difference that I see between a basic (or as manufactured) and a modified firearm. To me there can be certain modifications made to a firearm whereby it still remains basically an as manufactured gun; in other words the mechanics of the gun have not been altered. These changes would include changing the grips (but note on some pistols the grips are integral to how the firearm functions so make sure your replacements work correctly), doing minor repair work to actually fix a fault (such as replacing a worn spring with an original spec spring, and so forth), changing the stock of a long arm, and possibly changing the sights such as adding night sights or an optical sight. Changes like the ones here do not change the way the actual firearm operates, but may enhance the shooter's ability to use that firearm proficiently. These changes usually do not have a great potential to cause the mechanical operation of the firearm to fail if good parts are used - especially if original manufacturer parts are used when available (same manufacturer as the ones who made the gun that is being changed).
As to modifying a firearm, I believe you are doing what I refer to as modifying a gun when you go pretty much beyond those things. For instance, when you file/grind down metal pieces such as a spring or a sear, when you remove springs and replace them with custom made springs that are not to original specs, when you add a different type of barrel, when you replace the trigger assembly with a custom made one, when you cut the length of a barrel, when you add a weight compensator, when you rechamber a firearm for a new caliber, when you change the finish, or even something as simple as using an aftermarket magazine, and other things like that. Doing things like these can change the actual performance of the firearm itself, and I consider such things to be modifications that go beyond the basic.
Now I realize that there are an awful lot of folks out there who love to modify there firearms, and they do so for various reasons. It is okay by me that they do so with their guns, but as I said I am not a big fan of such things. Let me tell you why, in my own round about way.
I have been a firearms enthusiast since I have been about 9 or 10 years old. It all started back in summer camp many years ago. I started with BB guns, graduated to .22LR's, then had a break of many years after camp, until I again found myself wanting to shoot while in my young 20s. I did not really pick up on the practical side of shooting again though until I was 24, just after I was hired to be a Border Patrol Agent. Until then it had been off and on again shooting guns of friends, or just bow hunting, and reading Outdoor Life and some gun mags. Once I was hired by the Border Patrol, or I should say, once they taught me how to shoot a revolver, I was hooked. I guess a lot of that had to do with the fact that I had moved out of New York City and buying guns became ever so easy for me; along those lines the federal creds helped too.
I worked for the BP for just over 4 years. In that time I bought about 3 revolvers, 5 or 6 pistols, 1 rifle, and a shotgun. Not many guns, but on the money I was making at the time, not bad. I enjoyed shooting sports a lot back then, and I shot at a few matches, and also hunted quite a bit. After that I moved back to NYC, and I worked for the US Customs Service. I continued to enjoy shooting sports, but mostly hunting and plinking, the matches were out, just too far to travel. I continued to buy guns, not all that many over all the years since I came back to the NY area, but enough for me. I have a few rifles, a few pistols, a revolver, and a shotgun. Most of my guns are in 22LR caliber.
In all I have been a federal agent for 27 plus years now, about 14 of them spent doing collateral duties as a firearms instructor in the Customs Service and later a short time in ICE. I have had a good amount of tactical training and actual experience, but thank the heavens I have never had to shoot anyone at work. I have fired shots but missed once (had broken glass in my eyes); but I did nonce shoot a guy, in self defense, while off duty. I was pretty happy my pistol worked that one time when I needed it, and I am pretty sure one of the reasons it that it had been more likely to work as it did, rather than fail on me, was because it was in its basic configuration except for the grips. I had never made any mechanical changes to it other than those made at the factory of the manufacturer when they changed a spring and the recoil guide rod. I never made those changes because of my training and because of my experiences observing the problems others had had with their 'modified ' guns.
One of the first problems I ever saw first hand, with a modified firearm, was a pretty serious one - or at least would have been very serious had the gun's owner ever needed to use it in any sort of defense situation. A guy I knew, way back in the days of yesteryear, went out and bought himself a brand news, shiny blue steel, Dan Wesson revolver. It was a nice revolver and it came in a fancy box, and if I remember correctly it even had interchangeable barrels (but maybe that is my imagination). What I do remember for sure is that my friend thought the amount of force required to squeeze the trigger was excessive. He talked to some of the other gun guys about it, then he brought his gun to a gunschmidt for a trigger and spring job. Well the gunschmidt, in his infinitely greater wisdom than the gun design engineers at the Dan Wesson facility, decided to either file a bit here and to grind a bit there or change the springs to aftermarket. (I seem to recall he may actually have done both, that is if I have it right after about 25 years; so I'll write it as I remember it.) I do know that my friend was ecstatic with the results. He loved it. He showed it to me at his place, and told me to go ahead and dry fire it. It was, I will admit, smooth and crisp, and probably had about a 4 pound let off or whatever you call it. In single action it was like 2 pounds, if that much. My buddy paid good money for that job and he figured it was money well spent.
Well, he figured it was money well spent until he went to the range. As it turned out the beautiful Dan Wesson revolver fired a few rounds, and failed to fire a few others. That was in just one cylinder of rounds. Yes that means that the 6 shot revolver failed to fire 50% of the rounds in the gun. He figured it was a fluke and tried again. The next time around it failed to fire at least a couple of rounds. Once or twice though a few boxes of ammo, it may have fired all the rounds in the cylinder. All the other times there were failures to fire, the primers on the unfired rounds being barely dimpled. He was lucky because this happened at the range. Now while you may think, oh heck anyone would test fire the revolver at the range after a spring and trigger job, well maybe and maybe not. Even in that case, the gun could have worked at the range and failed later. You see a couple of days later, my friend hosted the gunschmidt, remember he is the one who knew better than the folks at the Dan Wesson factory, to a day at the range to demonstrate the failures. The revolver did not fire more than once or twice that day out of many more tries. So what if it had worked well on day one after the 'gunschmidt job', then failed to fire 50% of the time in a defense situation. My guess is it would have been possible. Anyway, the gunschmidt refunded my buddy's money, then gave him a set of new aftermarket springs. Those aftermarket springs seemed to do the trick. They were smooth and crisp and fired the revolver every time - that is for about a few months. Then the Dan Wesson started to have more failure to fire problems. It seems those wonder springs gave out. Bottom line - new springs had to be ordered from the factory to solve the problem.
A pal of mine in the Border Patrol liked to shoot 45's. He was a big fan of the Colt 1911. He was always tinkering with his guns. He was a certified (trained somewhere or another) 'Colt' gunschmidt, and I should also point out he was also a certifiable gun nut. He grinded and filed this and that, and polished here and there. He fixed up original parts, and also replaced some of the parts with aftermarket ones. He had a couple of .45's that were his favorites and worked on them incessantly. Look up the meaning of incessant - please. The reason he worked on them in that manner was because he apparently never got them just right to his liking or to the point were it was pretty much 100% reliable; yet he carried them while off duty. He is not alone, there are plenty of other folks who do just like him including carrying a weapon which they constantly have to repair or work on to make it function better. Now I have to wonder why anyone who did not like the way a firearm functioned so much as to have to incessantly tinker with it would ever decide to carry that particular firearm as a self defense weapon on which his or her life might depend.
All throughout the years, since those days long ago, I have known quite a few other firearms enthusiasts who decided that their guns, as they were, were not good enough, and that they needed mechanical modifications. I could give a lot of other examples other than those first two (from my experience), but they are sufficient to illustrate the fact that some guys just have to make them better - instead of going with something that is already good enough. Now while a lot of those modifications proved to be great and many of the modified guns worked fine, there were an awfully high percentage of those modified firearms, as witnessed by me personally, to have had failures to feed, fire, extract, and or eject; this of course includes revolvers having such failures too. A very important thing that seemed very apparent to me was that the amount of failures in modified guns far outnumbered the failure in factory spec guns. I saw this time and time again when I performed collateral duties as a firearms instructor.
While any firearm can have a failure that leads to catastrophe, it seems evident, at least to me, that such is much more likely if you have first tinkered with a gun's mechanical operation to change it from factory specifications. You can even make modifications that do not change the factory specifications of the mechanics, such as changing the grips, that can lead to such failures, but usually only when you don't use a high quality replacement. Now while you may that sticking with quality always prevents FUBAR, such as by using the services of high quality gunsmiths, and using only high quality replacement parts, for mechanical modifications, the chances evidently still seem to be higher that you will risk failure of your firearm if mechanical changes have been made, and I base this on personal experience over the years I was an instructor.
I am not saying that my personal thoughts on this matter should have you stop using your favorite self defense firearm if it has been modified outside of the original makers facilities, but rather that you think about what can and often does happen with mechanically modified firearms, at least apparently more so that factory spec firearms that are from a reliable manufacturer and of a reliable design. Think about that before you get all gung ho about mechanical modifications, think about the implications for a shootout situation and your survival. Then, if you have not already done so, take your modified gun to the range, and put it through at least a 500 round test.
Shoot safely.
All the best,
Glenn B
Sunday, February 18, 2007
Ballseye's Boomers - Marlin 336 CS Disassembly & Reassembly
Hope these are informative:
All the best,
Glenn B
All the best,
Glenn B
Saturday, February 17, 2007
I Updated My Link List...
...to other blogs that I think are worth a read. They trly all are either Grumps, Geeks or Geniuses, some are all three!
Newly added blog links are:
Ace of Spades HQ @ http://ace.mu.nu/
An Englishman's Castle @ http://www.anenglishmanscastle.com/
Greybear's Gripes @http://greybeard.igogg.com/
Cap'n Bob & The Damsel @ http://capnbob.us/blog/
Enjoy them as I intend to do.
All the best,
Glenn B
Newly added blog links are:
Ace of Spades HQ @ http://ace.mu.nu/
An Englishman's Castle @ http://www.anenglishmanscastle.com/
Greybear's Gripes @http://greybeard.igogg.com/
Cap'n Bob & The Damsel @ http://capnbob.us/blog/
Enjoy them as I intend to do.
All the best,
Glenn B
It just dawned on me...
...that the major flaw in the thinking of liberals, especially those further to the left, is that while they really want to make things right, they can never agree as to what is right. So they just keep changing things, getting wackier and wackier as they become more and more liberal. As to liberalism, there is no bedrock for it to stand upon, there is no backbone with which to build itself up into a lasting, strong, and better way of living. This in brief is the essence of why a liberal way of thinking, a liberal slant on morality, a liberal stance on politics, will never ultimately succeed. Liberalism is simply self defeating; in the greater scheme of things it must fail eventually. That failure will come in the face of a realistic conservatism, one that is able to bend and change when it must, but yet that is built upon a sound constitution that truly protects the rights and liberties of the people from tyranny in any form.
All the best,
Glenn B
All the best,
Glenn B
Who is/was Your Favorite President?
Being it is President's day weekend, I figured asking the above question was a good topic to ponder; and yes I do mean out of the U.S. Presidents, not any foreigners please.
I think my favorite was either Ronald Reagan, or Theodore Roosevelt. It is really difficult for me to decide between the two. Even though their politics were somewhat different - they were very much the same. Their love of the USA and their realizing the importance of being a patriotic American above all else were equal from what I can tell. Both were staunch supporteers of strong foreign policy and I like that immensely. Maybe Roosevelt has a bit of an edge in how much of an outspoken outdoorsman he was in that he hunted, shot, fished regularly; and in that he created many of the national parks, and protected many other natural areas. Of course when you think about it, Ronnie put a stop to the cold war, and brought the Soviets down, thereby protecting us all. Both of them knew how to keep our nation strong and face down our enemies.
So even though I asked you, who is/was your favorite president, here I am giving a double whammy type of answer. I can't help myself, they were both truly great Americans, and I think about the best presidents we ever had. I guess the only other one who comes very close would be George Washington if only because he probably had the toughest job of them all, his being the first. Of course there were other great ones, and other good ones, somebad ones and some terrible ones, but as for the best - those first two mentioned above are my picks. I feel quite privileged to have lived through the presidency of one of these men and to have voted for him too.
All the best,
Glenn B
Couch Potatoes Take Note:
This is, or should be, a sad day for couch potatoes everywhere. Robert Adler, the co-inventor of the television remote control has passed away. He lived a long life, passing at 93 years of age. That makes me wonder if a sedentary lifestyle may have prolonged his life, but then again I really have no idea if he was one of whom he helped to create - a couch potato. Well I have a bit of an idea, since in the article: Inventor of the TV Remote Dies, a FoxNews.com, his wife is quoted as saying that while he did not watch a lot of television, he read an awful lot. He was in fact a pretty prolific inventor, and according to the article he had over 180 patents to his name, some with military applications, some with aero-space applications, and some with applications that directly effected just about anyone who watches television.
Without making a joke out of it, I should point out his place of death was in Boise, Idaho. Probably a fitting place for a couch potato farmer to pass. I guess it just an amazing coincidence that the man some claim is responsible for creating the couch potato, passed away in the state famous for its potatoes.
My condolences to his wife and other loved ones.
All the best,
Glenn B
Without making a joke out of it, I should point out his place of death was in Boise, Idaho. Probably a fitting place for a couch potato farmer to pass. I guess it just an amazing coincidence that the man some claim is responsible for creating the couch potato, passed away in the state famous for its potatoes.
My condolences to his wife and other loved ones.
All the best,
Glenn B
Thursday, February 15, 2007
Is He An Islamic Terrorist/Jihadist?
Go to Debbie Schlussel's site at http://debbieschlussel.com/ and read this rant, that was posted on 02/15/2007: DISTURBING: What You Don't Know About the Muslim Trolley Square Terrorist. It kind of answers a question I had in one of my own rants a day or so ago @ http://ballseyesboomers.blogspot.com/2007/02/good-man-steps-forward.html when I asked if the media knew anything they were not reporting about the alleged 'Trolley Square Mall' killer, Sulejman Talovic, in Salt Lake City. It really is disturbing to see that the main stream media jerks who constantly yammer about their "Freedom of the Press" are quite the censors themselves; and they apparently don't freely print pertinent information when it comes to protecting the identities of those whom they seemingly favor. The shame of it is that they seem to favor dirtbags, whackos, criminals, and terrorists.
Fine job that woman does reporting on, and exposing, such things. Keep up the good work, Debbie!
All the best,
Glenn B
Fine job that woman does reporting on, and exposing, such things. Keep up the good work, Debbie!
All the best,
Glenn B
A Few Small Cosmetic Changes...
...here and there to the Ballseye's Boomers page have taken place over the last several hours or so. I switched to the newer version of Blogger, and I will admit I did so with some trepidation, but so far all seems to be okay in the land of virtual reality, or so I hope. If anything seems to be missing, that had been on the older version of my page, please let me know in the comments section to this post.
Some new things that came with the new version of Blogger, that my readers can use, are: a search this blog feature, and an email this post to a friend (or an enemy I suppose) feature.
One thing that changed, which had nothing to do with the switch to the newer version of Blogger is the Never Forget slide show on the right side of my page. I picked that up at another web site: Cap'n Bob & the Damsel, and you can too if you click on the link under the pictures of 9/11, or if you visit their site. It was a freebie as they say, and a decent remembrance of 9/11 at that. My thanks to the kind folks who run said site.
All the best,
Glenn B
Some new things that came with the new version of Blogger, that my readers can use, are: a search this blog feature, and an email this post to a friend (or an enemy I suppose) feature.
One thing that changed, which had nothing to do with the switch to the newer version of Blogger is the Never Forget slide show on the right side of my page. I picked that up at another web site: Cap'n Bob & the Damsel, and you can too if you click on the link under the pictures of 9/11, or if you visit their site. It was a freebie as they say, and a decent remembrance of 9/11 at that. My thanks to the kind folks who run said site.
All the best,
Glenn B
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)