Tag Archives: defense

The Danger of a “Little Knowledge”


According to this entry in the Huffington Post, The Bible passage of Romans (chapter) 13: (verse) 1 does NOT justify the use of military force against North Korea intimidation by use of their – North Korea’s – nuclear ability.

Once again, non-believers make the mistake of thinking they have an overwhelming knowledge of God’s Message and will (agenda/program/plan) for mankind.  One is amazed how some cite a particular passage in the Bible and then claim their view is correct, while denying much of the rest of the Bible and ignoring the contextual and historical implications in all passages.

Such is the case here.  The author of the article, identified as “Peter Henne, Assistant Professor at the University of Vermont (in the Department of Political Science)” admits “Now, I am neither a theologian nor a religious studies scholar.”  That part, I believe.  Then Professor Henne goes on to make theological and ‘religious’ comments and conclusions based on his admitted ignorance.

One is forced to the conclusion Professor Henne is coloring God’s Message and agenda with the Leftist program of Karl Marx and Bill Ayers.

One – Professor Henne, for instance – should stick to one’s sphere of knowledge and expertise.  Which seems to be wishful thinking based on Leftist pipe dreams.



Leave a comment

Filed under Bible, Idiot Politicians, Nation, Political Correctness, Politics, United States

Ladies and Gentlemen, Obamanomics!

As if there were any doubt, the current President wants to tax everyone in the country with any sort of income. With the familiar coded message of ‘tax the rich’, the President now seeks to increase income taxes on every person in these United States with any sort of financial gain at all. Make no mistake, the catch phrase ‘tax the rich’ is understood as ‘anyone not on government support’.

If anyone has any ‘income’ from working, or from a pension or earned Social Security, or investments, or capital gains – any possible excuse – they will see a tax increase. Where will the money go? To pay for the progressive left’s dream of paying off those who voted for the leftist agenda of crippling the economy of the United States. All those who depend on the Democrat Collective to feed and house them.

The agenda of the progressive left is clearly and without doubt that of ‘class warfare’; depending on the idle, indolent and gullible to riot, demand and vote – perhaps often – for socialism.

If there were any doubt, I reject Obamanomics and the socialist dream.

Please understand, the taxation of ‘the rich’ – a nebulous phrase indeed – will undertake to destroy the ability of private industry to generate jobs. Not the ‘minimum wage’ jobs so beloved of the progressive left, but real jobs that pay actual living wages, thereby impoverishing all those who seek to earn a living.

Presumably, the Republican controlled Congress will not allow these tax increases to occur. One hopes. However, no person should be in doubt as to the real goal and agenda of the progressive left. More taxes, less actual jobs, a weakened national defense and a total dependency on the Federal Government for shelter, food, clothing and anything to make life more palatable.

The left derided President Reagan’s vision for a strong United States. A United States that had a strong industrial and business basis that employed a majority of working people and ensured a strong national defense. The progressive left called his plan ‘Reaganomics’ and ‘trickle-down’ prosperity.

The progressive left promotes Obamanomics and trickle up destitution.

Take your pick.

Leave a comment

Filed under Civilization, History, Idiot Politicians, Politics, United States

Really Stupid Things Said by Attornies, Who Should Know Better

First, one might want to read the original article to get the background. It is short, maybe three minutes to read.


May I direct the reader’s attention to paragraphs six and seven, which read thusly:

Muto’s attorney, Florian Miedel, said Muto should not have been treated like a criminal, despite admitting he stole material from his employer.

“Making him accept a criminal conviction is unfortunate for conduct that is fairly commonplace in the industry,” Miedel said.

Mr. Muto committed acts which are in violation of the criminal code, and are morally repugnant – treachery against an employer or other person who trusts the betrayer. Why should he not be “treated like a criminal”? Mr. Muto did ‘criminal actions’, isn’t that the definition of a criminal? To plead our society should not treat criminals like criminals is both idiotic and counter productive.

However, let’s address Mr. Meidel’s thinking for a moment. Mr. Meidel seems to think Mr. Muto’s conduct should be allowed, because such deeds of treachery are “… fairly commonplace in the industry”. In other words, ‘every one does it!”

Mr. Meidel; robbing banks by force and threatening people in the process is “… fairly commonplace in the [bank robbing] industry”. Should we as a society therefore not treat bank robbers like criminals? Does the same apply to rapists? After all, rapists do what is ‘commonplace’ in the rape industry.

Here’s another thought for Mr. Meidel; is that the best defense one can muster for an accused? Not even, “My client was under a great deal of stress and wasn’t thinking clearly at the time” or “My client is very ashamed and repentant of his despicable actions”; simply “Everybody does it”. That’s the defense? My mind boggles and my stomach lurches.

Hopefully, this event will be remembered when Mr. Muto attempts employment again. “Oh, yes; you’re the one who steals information and sells it to line his pockets. Interesting resume, sir.”

The same applies to Mr. Meidel. “I’m in serious trouble and looking for an attorney to get me off. Oh, yes; you’re the ‘everybody does it’ defense guy. Thanks anyway.”

This is a free market society. People are free to spend their money as they see fit. (Except for taxes, of course.) Perhaps if more people pay attention to whom they hire, and demand a certain level of both integrity and competence, we’d be better off as a society.

If we as a society start forgiving crime as ‘too popular to prosecute or convict’, we’re done as a society and a nation. We’re already much to close to that status as it is.

Leave a comment

Filed under Attornies, Civilization, Life in General, Political Correctness

The Three Basic Rules of Gunfighting

I put this together some time ago and just realized I’ve never posted it here. Therefore:

Rule One: Cooper’s Law
Have a gun.

The late Jeff Cooper needs little introduction. He was an advocate of self defense for the common man. This rule comes from an essay he did on self defense.

Please note a firearm is not a magic talisman or amulet; simply having ‘a gun’ is not the totality. “Have a Gun” connotes possession of a properly maintained firearm, loaded with proper ammunition and the holder possessed of the ability to properly effect use thereof.

Cirillo’s Corollary:
When you need a gun, a bigger gun is better.

The Jim Cirillo worked for NYPD on the Stake-out Squad for a number of years. He’s shot more people in line of duty than most of us don’t like. This might be considered odd, as he carried a .38 Special revolver most of his career. Still, the point is well taken. When a defensive gun is called for, one desires the most gun one can get. It’s your choice.

Rule Two: Pittock’s Law
Be Alert! The world needs more lerts.

Tim Pittock ran the best gun shop in the known Universe once upon a time. He has long since sold out the shop and moved away. I’ve lost track of him and don’t know if he’s alive anymore. However, in that marvelous gunshop hung a sign displaying Rule Two. It wasn’t described as a Rule of Gunfighting, but it applies and so I have applied it.

Just as in driving in traffic or on a freeway, keep track of what is going on about. Especially ahead and closing quickly. Keep looking around and pay attention. One can either avoid or make better preparations when one can see trouble on the approach.

Rule Three: Tuco’s Law
When you have to shoot, Shoot! Don’t talk!

Sometimes, direct and ruthless action is required. Any questions on that one?

Old Man Montgomery’s Corollary
Any one worth shooting is worth shooting well.

It is not possible to ‘shoot someone a little bit’. Shooting in self defense means there is an immediate, deadly threat to one’s person or family, and all other means of avoiding the problem have been ineffective. Therefore, the ultimate, final and only option left is deadly force. If that is what is demanded, that is what must be delivered.

These are just basic precepts, not a full and comprehensive course of instruction. I’ve tried to keep it simple.


Filed under Firearms and their use

I Bought A New Gun

There I was, minding my own business, enjoying life and contemplating the meaning of life when I saw it. Then I bought it.

I bought a new pistol.

If the reader understands anything about this old man, it is that I am not particularly impressed by new guns. In fact, I consider most new guns inferior to those of past times and generally speaking, new guns are boring. No style, no class, little to recommend them for serious usage and no staying power.

I bought a new pistol.

Of course, it’s really an old pistol. However, this one was newly made and put up for sale. It is – if one can credit such a thing – a newly made Colt pistol. It is a semi-automatic pistol in the finest of semi-automatic pistol calibers, .45 ACP. It is the Colt 1911 Anniversary pistol.

Being the nit picker that I am, I found a mistake on the packaging. No kidding. The hang tag from Colt reads “Colt WWII Reproduction Pistol, Model No. M1911A1 ™”. However, it is not. It is a reproduction of a WWI pistol, model M1911. (There is a second tag warning me I “…risk injury or death by handling this firearm.” I suppose that is correct, but I risk injury or death by being alive. When is the government going to mandate that warning in automobiles? Then we’ll have something else staring us from the visors instead of – or in company with – the airbag and child car seat warning. I digress.)

It is a blue steel, all-steel, line for line reproduction – if such is the word; it is made by the same company as made the original – of a 1911 pistol as purchased and issued by the U. S. Government one hundred years ago. It has the tiny front sight and ‘U’ shaped rear sight. It has the beavertail hammer. It has a short grip safety, flat mainspring housing, unscalloped trigger access and long trigger. It does NOT have the Divinely Cursed firing pin safety mistake of the infamous Series 80.
It is finished in a deep blue that reminds one of the gorgeous bluing jobs of the past century, when hand labor wasn’t prohibitively expensive. Make no mistake, it is not as finely finished as those of 100 years ago, but it’s very nice just the same. The grips are real wood, checkered in the ‘large diamond’ pattern of the original. If looks mean anything, this is a really fine pistol.

Colt included two magazines, a ‘multi-tool’ screwdriver and pokey-thing; the modern paranoid, panty-wetting safety manual and a reprint of the 1912/1914 Army manual. The magazines are more or less modern one color (not historic two-tone or even look alike) magazines without marking as to manufacturer. They are stamped ‘.45 ACP’ and look pretty much like a generic blued 1911 magazine.

It fits my hand. I cannot think of how to expand on that. It just fits my hand. It fits my hand just exactly like most other modern handguns don’t. To be politically incorrect – like that’s something new – it gives me that ‘…let’s find the minions of evil…’ feeling when I pick it up.

Dry firing the pistol displays a moderate to heavy trigger – depending on to what one is accustomed. It is certainly heavier than the four and one half pound triggers on the ‘hardball’ pistols I have. However, it is manageable. Probably not more than six or seven pounds, perhaps twelve, it breaks clean. I’ll have to test it to be sure.
Tomorrow is supposed to be middle 50s and sunny. Sounds like a range day to me. A bag of hardball, the chronograph and a few targets and we’ll see what the pistol says.


I have now returned from the range, as it is the ‘tomorrow’ referred to in the previous paragraph. Short version results: The pistol goes bang on schedule and to right where it ought.

Somewhat more detailed results.

NRA B27 target

I shot all the following on an NRA B27 target. For those of you who don’t know, it is the Police Practical Combat course target; a vague human silhouette with old style Olympic rapid fire scoring rings superimposed.

All the ammunition was my own reloads, duplicating U. S. Department of War specifications for .45 caliber ball ammunition. In other words, 230 grain full metal jacketed bullets at a velocity of 850 feet per second, more or less. For those interested in such things, I used a couple different loads for this test and break in period.
– 230 grain FMJ bullet with 5.3 grains of Alliant Green Dot powder; WLP primers and Federal nickel plated cases.
– 230 grain Plated bullet (Berry’s, I think) and 5.3 grains of W231 powder; either WLP, Remington LP or Wolf LP primers (all three primers are virtually identical in resultant velocity in my testing) and Winchester brass cases.
– 225 grain Nevada Bullet Company bullets, 5.3 grains of W231, LP primers (as noted prior) and Winchester brass cases.

All this shooting was fired on an indoor range. The lighting is good, but not like outside in daylight. The little sights of the 1911 are a little rough in dim light.

First sequence fired was from seven yards at the X ring of the target. I fired ten rounds, aimed, deliberate, two handed shots to see if the sights were regulated. They are. Nine of ten rounds packed neatly into the upper half of the X ring, with one escaping to the lower left curve. The sights, tiny as they may be, are on.

Second sequence was also from seven yards. I fired fourteen rounds – two full magazines at the center of the target in ‘quick point’ mode. Firearm in hand down at a forty-five degree angle, raise pistol and fire one quick shot – one handed – at the center of the target. They all hit the scoring rings in about a six inch group centered in the nine ring at 8 o’clock. I’m famous for pushing to the left when shooting one handed. I obviously need more range time, he said in a self-indulgent manner.

Third sequence was ten shots at fifteen yards at the center. The shots were centered in the ten ring with a couple shots drifting into the nine ring. I recall having a problem keeping the front sight in good view; I was probably dipping the front sight a bit. Those little bitty black sights are hard to see on a black target background. I will also note here – as well as anywhere – the rounded front sight shows a decided glare on the top. This may cause one to hold the front sight a bit higher than proper. However, even with me losing the front sight from time to time, the gun grouped admirably.

Forth sequence was ten shots at twenty-five yards aimed at the head of the target. Shot two handed, deliberate timing and aimed. All ten shots printed on the head. The center of the group was somewhat low and left, but all were on the black of the target. Again, the little bitty sights didn’t help, but the sights are properly regulated.

Fifth sequence was fourteen rounds fired one handed at twenty-five yards. Point of aim was the high chest area. This was fired in a timed fire cadence, about as fast as I could get what looked like a sight picture. Again, all shots were pretty much where they were supposed to be. The shots were primarily in the top end of the nine ring, drifting down into the ten and X rings, with some in the eight and seven rings.

Accuracy: The pistol shoots where it is pointed. Considering the sights, I find accuracy more than adequate for self-defense purposes. Were this a ‘totally modern’ fighting handgun, I would want better sights, to be specific, patridge sights not much higher than those on the pistol, but wider. The trigger should be a little less in weight. I would not seek a three pound trigger, but a clean five or six pounder would be very manageable in real life. With all that, the gun – using my aged eyes and trigger finger – can make head shots at twenty-five yards.

Reliability: The single malfunction derived from a 200 grain SWC setting back in the case and hanging up on the feed ramp juncture. Not a gun problem, an ammo problem. One I point out that was very easily reduced.

Handling: I am happy to report this pistol does not ‘bite’ the web of my hand as much as other variations I have shot. One does need to roll the hand into the grip from the bottom up, but once in place, the hammer and grip safety do no damage to my rather chubby hand. (Some pistols ‘bite’ me even when I was younger and thinner.) Recoil with hardball is normal for a 1911 or Government Model design. Solid and full, but not painful or overly difficult to control.

As a side note, empty cases went in pretty much all directions. Most of them were behind me and to the right. However, a sizable minority flung forward and to my left. I noted with some curiosity that when shooting left handed, empties ejected further behind me than shooting right handed. (I’m normally a right hander.) This is not really a problem, unless one is gathering fired brass for reloading. Since this pistol is primarily a defense pistol, gathering brass is secondary in importance. Perhaps tertiary or lower priority. (Surely in an actual self-defense event, one leaves everything in situ as much as possible for the following police investigation.)

All in all, I’m happy with this pistol. It fires upon demand; always a good thing. It puts bullets where directed. And it has history and class unknown in plastic gun circles.

Returning to my comment about picking up the pistol and the feel it conveys … I still feel like seeking out evil-doers and instilling the fear of the Almighty into them. I have the proper hat, and I can even do the mocking laugh.

ADDENDUM: I now have a trigger pull gauge. The trigger pull is a bit uneven in weight; showing a range from 5.25 pounds to 6.25 pounds required to trip the sear. I repeat, the sear breaks cleanly and fully, no sliding or creeping between initial pressure and sear trip. I am expecting the weight to stabilize, hopefully on the lower end with more use.

One last comment: The John M. Browning designed, Colt built Government Model – or M1911 in governmental issue form – is not a pistol for the timid, semi-trained or not fully motivated. It is a masterful tool for self defense, but can only be used by those who hold it in esteem and caution. A single action auto-pistol is dangerous; were it not dangerous, it would not be of much use. One views the pistol – all pistols – much in the same way as chainsaws, power tools, motor cycles and red-headed women. They are very useful when properly handled and rather treacherous when treated in a lackadaisical manner. See the following:

The Government Model – M1911 family of handguns require even more attention to handling.


Filed under Firearms and their use