Tag Archives: shooting

A Decent Human Being with a Gun

24 January 2017. Thomas Yoxall, age 43, tattooed and pierced, was driving West on Interstate 10 near Tonopah, Arizona. He saw a man (later identified as Leonard Penneles-Escobar) ‘savagely’ beating an Arizona State Trooper (Edward Andersson). Mr. Yoxall could not ignore the situation and stopped.

He called to the man beating the trooper, presumably to stop beating the trooper. The man kept beating the trooper and Mr. Yoxall fired his personally owned sidearm at the attacker, stopping the attack. While tending the trooper, Mr. Penneles resumed the attack on Trooper Andersson; Mr. Yoxall fired one more round, incapacitating Mr. Penneles permanently; Penneles died later from his wounds.


Ladies and Gentlemen, Girls and Boys; Mr. Thomas Yoxall is the sort of man to be admired and encouraged. Seeing a serious problem, he acted swiftly and surely. Victorious in the conflict, he declines the title ‘hero’ and says the aftermath of killing another human is difficult mentally and emotionally.

A telling comment, Mr. Yoxall says he was “…put there by God.” A good man clinging to his guns and his God.

Not much else to say.


Leave a comment

Filed under Civilization, Crime, Firearms and their use, God, Heroes and Heroism

Rare Glock Wanted!


If anyone knows about these pistols, I have two buyers who will pay cash for one each.

In the above referenced video, the U. S. President reports the existence of a Glock pistol with “… a lot of clips in it …” Aside from the rather uneducated errors in the comments, I am aware of no Glock pistol which will accept more than one ‘clip’ at one time. Nor am I aware of any Glock pistol which uses a ‘clip’; they use magazines. I am companioned in this mystification by a good friend who is a Glock collector and – at least for me and the girls I accompany – rather an expert in the world of Glock.

However, since it is proper to keep an open mind about such matters, I am prepared to be educated. So, if anyone knows of such a device, please bring it to my attention. And I want to buy one. I like firearms oddities. (Please include photos and asking price.)

In the same CNN interview, the President also made reference to an ‘assault weapon’ carried by the radicalized Islamic who conducted the murders in Orlando, Florida over the weekend. This also confuses me. The rifle carried by the Islamic shooter is not an AR 15; nor is an AR 15 an assault rifle. Notice I used the term ‘assault rifle’ vice ‘assault weapon’.

The U. S. Armed Forces – and other armed forces about the world – have used the term ‘assault rifle’ for a number of years. It is NOT a particular rifle, but a category of rifle employed by soldiers under certain conditions. Among other considerations, an assault rifle is capable of fully automatic fire at the desire of the user. The weapon carried by the Islamic shooter does not have that capability. One also notes the absence of the use of term ‘assault weapon’ in the Armed Forces. There are no ‘assault pistols’, no ‘assault shotguns’, no ‘assault potato peelers’ or other such items. There is a class of fully automatic weapons which can be used in an assault (a noun as opposed to a adjective), but these are properly referred to as ‘light machine guns’; not ‘assault machine guns’.


I applaud the President’s decision to not identify the rifle used by the Muslim shooter; it was not as reported in the initial reports as an AR 15, but is a SIG-Sauer MCX Carbine. This rifle is not fully automatic either. Nor has anyone in a position to report the incident – witnesses – reported any fully automatic fire delivered. The two hours, more or less, the Muslim shooter had unrestricted control over his victims surely explains the number of victims killed and wounded rather than the rate of fire of the weapon or weapons involved.

Of course, the term ‘assault weapon‘ has long been used by the ‘media’, but only in the attempt to vilify weapons and the people who own them. I cannot believe our President would use incorrect and biased language in such a manner.

What also strikes me as odd is the President’s reluctance to associate an Islamic shooter targeting what appears to be homosexual men, with the Islamic, Koran based teaching that homosexuals are evil and should be killed. The President says this was an act of terror, but not Islamic or Muslim terror.

I suppose the comments of the shooter’s father shed no light on the matter, either.

The President did admit the profusion of laws prohibiting all manner of people – U. S. veterans who have someone else balance their check book for instance – do nothing to prevent this sort of terror attack. But then he went on to suggest ‘more’ is needed to curb the availability of firearms to normal U. S. citizens. Since the Muslim shooter passed a background check – never having been convicted of a crime or misdemeanor associated with domestic violence – the President hinted this standard was too permissive and needs to be more restrictive.

Perhaps as a nation we should not allow those who refuse our cultural norms – like murdering homosexuals, Jews, or anyone not a Muslim – to live in this nation? Perhaps the President is not looking at the real problem. What a shocking thought!

1 Comment

Filed under Civilization, Firearms and their use, Idiot Politicians, Islam, journalists, Political Correctness, Politics

I accept the challenge!

In reality, the challenge wasn’t issued to me specifically. See the video on youtube, ‘Challenge: Can you pass the qualification test? Part I”. I searched and cannot find a Part II yet. The author notes Part II will be a couple more handguns in his stable.

Fire twenty (20) rounds at a bullseye type target at 45 feet. (That’s the same as 15 yards, by the way.) No time limit noted. The guns used are limited to those one actually carries.

I’m up for a challenge. It’s either that or move to the ‘home’ and wait to die.

I’m trying to think of all the guns I consider as ‘normal carry handguns”. My normal carry pistol is a lightweight Commander in .45 ACP. Probably the dinkiest gun I carry is a Smith & Wesson Chief Special. (A two inch barrel, five shot revolver in .38 Special.)

My immediate thoughts are the Commander, the Chief Special, a two-inch K frame .38 Special revolver and that .44 Special Second Model I keep bragging about. That’s four handguns. One of the .32 auto collection will make it a total of five. That sounds indicative and responsive. Hmmm. Perhaps Monday. Anything to get out of cleaning the house!

I’ll get back to you all.


Filed under Firearms and their use

Reloading – Lessons Learned – New Case Preparation

I’ve been looking for more brass – empty cases for the unjargoned – for my .22 Hornet’. (That is pronounced with the accent on the second syllable to give it a European and therefore classier sound.) To my joy, I found 200 pieces of unfired .22 Hornet’ brass, made by Prvi Partizan of Uzice (the town or city, I don’t know how things are categorized there.) (It was the Kingdom of Yugoslavia at the time – 1927 – in the beginning the country now is Serbia. Same physical place. Borders may have been changed to protect the innocent. Or guilty.) This explains the headstamp of PPU. It is also sometimes in Cyrillic and looks like ‘nny’.

All that aside, new brass is new brass. It is properly formed and reasonably ready for loading.

Unless one suffers from obsessive compulsive disorder or is a reloader seeking ultimate accuracy. But I repeat myself. I pulled out my special equipment and proceeded to trim to length, deburr, uniform and de-flash all the primer holes prior to loading.

Allow me to explain. Cartridge brass is ‘formed’ from metallic brass alloy. Such alloy being a combination of copper and zinc, essentially. The alloy can be varied to achieve certain qualities or results. The special qualities desired for cartridge cases are tensile strength to withstand the internal pressures and malleability for forming the initial shape.

Brass cartridge cases are made by high pressure ‘extrusion’ of the metal. Essentially beating on it with a special machine with specially designed ‘dies’ until it fits the shape required.

However, this process often times leaves the length of the individual piece of brass – the empty cartridge – not precisely square at the mouth – where the bullet fits – and not of exact and uniform length.

So one ‘trims’ the case mouth by use of a device which is in reality a small, hand powered lathe. The device is adjustable for length of cut desired. This process both square the case mouth and makes the cases uniformly long. One desires a square mouth so the bullet is free of the case uniformly and no sideways forces are imparted. The length of case allows for consistent resizing of the case and a consistent crimp if desired.

Then, one employs a ‘chamfering tool’ which removes all the leavings of the cutting from the mouth of the case. Among other things, this process keeps the wire edge developed in the cutting process from snagging on other items, like the bullets inserted later and one’s fingers.

Additionally, the flash hole, the small ‘tunnel’ through which the igniting flame of the primer ‘flashes’ to ignite the gun power is normally ‘punched’ through the typically one-eighth inch of brass between the primer pocket and the main chamber (interior) of the case. The hole itself is not always of uniform size and roundness AND there’s a collection of brass hanging on the interior end of the flash hole.

By using a small tool from the interior of the case, through the case mouth, one can make the flash hole uniform in size and circularity AND trim off the bit of hanging brass in the interior.

So why don’t cases come from the factory already trimmed, chamfered and reamed? Mostly cost. I spend probably eight hours doing all that. So the manufacturer would have to add that much pay for a somewhat trained and conscientious worker to do the job. Also, it isn’t always needed. Most commercially manufactured ammunition does not go through the additional steps of processing and shoots quite well in spite of the lack. Did I mention something about OCD conditions earlier.

Following these processes, done by – in this case – your humble correspondent, the finished cases are then weighed on an electronic scale and sorted by weight.

Why? In the instance of a specific caliber – which in general use is more a description of the brass case than the actual diameter of the bore – all cartridge cases are the same external size. For instance, in the instance of the .22 Hornet’ herein involved, the case must have a rim of a specified thickness and external diameter; the body must be a certain external diameter at the juncture of the rim; it must taper at a specified angle for a certain distance, then taper at a greater – also specified – angle to the neck where it must continue to a specified length. All these external dimensions are needed in order for the cartridge to fit into the chamber, but be snug enough in the chamber not to rattle about and possibly react poorly to the sudden internal pressure of firing.

But all those dimensions are external. The internal dimensions can vary to some degree. But when the internal dimensions vary, the internal volume varies. The pressure generated by the burning powder increases in a smaller volume. (Look up Boyle’s Law.) By weighing the individual cases, one can determine a uniformity of internal volume.

Uniformity is one of the great goals of the accurate reloader. The ideal is that everything is exactly the same from loaded round to loaded round. The cases all weigh the same, the bullets all weigh the same, powder charges are all the same and primers are all the same. In reality of course, it doesn’t work that way. (No pun intended.) However, cases can be easily with one percent variation. Commercial bullets are remarkably uniform; weighing them cannot hurt, but may not pay off a great deal. Powder charges can easily be held within one percent uniformity. Primers are pretty much beyond the control of reloaders, but are remarkably uniform as far as manufacturers can manage.

So. Back to the cases and what did I learn?

First. The Cabela’s electronic scale I purchased a year or two ago really isn’t up to the task. Probably the greatest problem is repeated weighings of the same item – one case at random – resulted in several different shown weights. In five readings, the particular case weighed 56.2, 56.3, and 56.4 grains. This without moving the scale, without turning the scale off, and without re-calibrating the scale. The Cabela’s scale is also ‘slow’. By this, I mean the scale takes a bit of time to decide the demonstrated weight of the item. Sometimes, it took several tries to determine if the item in question weighed “56.4” or “56.5” or “56.6” grains. It would show one weight as ‘final’ (a signal icon appears indicating the scale is finished) then change the displayed weight, showing that as ‘final’.

I have recently purchased another Dillon D-Terminator scale. I had one, used it for years with excellent results and dropped it at some point. Note: Dropping electronic equipment is NOT recommended. I bought the Cabela’s unit when my dropped Dillon scale failed, and I succumbed to time panic. Time panic is source material for another blog.

Second. The Lee Precision Reloading shell holder wears out quickly. The holder consists of two parts. The base is a steel machined part which is universal. The variable ‘holder’ is an aluminum piece which screws onto the steel base. The holder is the part that actually fits the case in question. Sadly, being aluminum it tends to wear out on the interior of the top portion of the holder. Consequently, the case doesn’t hold well. Which means the user’s fingers has to take up the slack.

This isn’t so bad for the case length trimming function or the chamfering function. But the flash hole cleaning is really problematic. The cutter gets ‘stuck’ and requires some force to trim the excess from the egress end.

My fingers are worn out. And sore.

The good news is the cases are all prepared and sorted – which only needs be done once. Flash holes and weights do not change with use. The case length can change – usually longer with rifles – and may need trimming again in time.

The good news is that from the 200 cases initially, I have two groups of 50 cases (two boxes) which are within .3 grains difference (lightest to heaviest) each. The other 100 rounds are safe and useful for reloading, but are suited more for non-precision loads; which include small game and predator control and general familiarization with the rifle.

Final note: The above process is most effective when the ammunition is to be used in a specially prepared firearm designed for maximum accuracy. For rifles, this usually includes ‘squaring’ the action, carefully bedding the action and barrel into the stock, trigger work, properly mounted sights (iron or optic) and so forth. For an off the shelf rifle, it usually will not dramatically increase accuracy. But it won’t hurt accuracy either.

In some years of pistol shooting in various disciplines I find pistol cartridges do not appear to benefit from the above functions. I do segregate cases by manufacturer for precision shooting. I have a lingering suspicion even that is mostly superstition.

So if the reader is a new reloader or beginning reloader, please do not feel guilty about not performing any of the above.


Filed under Firearms and their use

In the ‘Doggonit!’ Category

I’m back from the range.  This morning was our last club ‘bowling pin shoot’ for the summer.  All done until spring of next year now; snif…

I turned in my typical mediocre scores.  Good enough to keep wearing a gun, not good enough to make money shooting in public.  I had a good time and talked with some of my shooting cronies and such.

I did, however, have a cunning plan.  I was going to video some of my shooting strings in order to determine – hopefully prove – a point.  Amongst the other weapons I took – predominately the McGivern twins McGivern Twins
– I also brought a two-inch barreled Chief’s Special (M36, the old pinned barrel revolver),Smith & Wesson Chief's Special left side (2) a Beretta 1935 pistol in .32 ACP (featured in its own report on this very blog),

1935 Beretta pistol

1935 Beretta pistol

and a Beretta 418 pistol in .25 ACP (also featured on this blog).
James Bond's original pistol

James Bond’s original pistol

It was a cunning plan, honest.  Since .22 long rifle handguns can, and regularly do, knock pins off the table, I speculated a .25 ACP would as well.  And a .32 ACP has to have at least as much momentum as a .25 ACP or .22 long rifle, right?  Of course they do.

So I packed up my stuff, including [this time, anyway] all the pistols I wanted to feature AND ammunition for them.  I even remembered the digital camera, tripod AND remembered to check the charge!  My plan was shaping up perfectly.  [Insert evil Mad Scientist laugh here.]

All went well.  Okay, I missed a couple of pins with the McGivern Brothers revolvers.  I got in a hurry, didn’t watch the sights as well as I should have, all those sorts of things.  Still, all the pins went off the table in a reasonable amount of time.

I had a chance to shoot my friend’s Desert Eagle pistol in .44 Magnum.  Contrary to internet rumor, they actually do exist and are shot from time to time.  Also contrary to what some might think from reading postings on the internet, not all Desert Eagle pistols are owned by Mall Ninjas.  (Only the ones marked ‘Deagle’.)  The recoil wasn’t nearly as serious as shooting the Ruger Super Blackhawks I own.  Apparently the recoil operation cushions a good deal of the recoil.  The muzzle blast is pretty serious.  Nor would touch such a firearm off without noting a disturbance in the sight picture.  However, it’s really quite easy to shoot.

I also had an opportunity to shoot another friend’s Ruger 22/45 pistol with a reflex sight.  This sight is very easy to use; so easy in fact I didn’t even have to change over to reading glasses to do it.  Although I must say one must work with the sight a few times to get the idea of just exactly where the red dot appears.  I tend to hold it pointing too high.  Still, the sight delivers well.

Finally, I can shoot my three ‘little’ handguns to see if they will work on bowling pins.  Instead of shooting four ‘tables’ with each pistol, I decided to try one table each with the guns, just to see if the accuracy and ability to knock down the pins exist.  So I set up with all my stuff and the range officer tells me to load.  The first run was the Chief’s Special; I hit all the pins, but didn’t clear them from the table.  Rather than reload and carry on, I let it go.  Second run was the Chief’s Special again; I cleared all the pins with five shots.  (Note:  the trademark just below the ‘neck’ is the best place to hit pins to get them off the table.)  Third run was the Beretta 1935 7.62mm (for the Europhiles) pistol; all pins off table with five shots.  Fourth run was the Beretta 918 6.35mm pistol; all pins off table with five shots.

Just for the tally book, I was very careful in grasping the pistols and I did NOT get slide-bit (for a change.)

The sad part is the digital camera did NOT engage and perform its function on this episode.  I have no record of the event – save in memory.  I’ll have to wait until Spring to attempt it again.

Still, the pistols performed well.  I was a bit surprised at how well.  Both the .32 ACP and the .25 ACP shot right to the sights – at the very least they hit the pins on each try.  And each pin hit dutifully tipped over backwards and went off the table.  Depending on how ‘square’ I hit the pin, some went off rather briskly.

And I still don’t know why the camera didn’t record.  I know I pressed the chicken-plucking button!


Filed under Firearms and their use

Results of Inquiry Into the Shooting Death of Andrea Rebello

The reported facts do not seem to be in question: Dalton SMITH held Andrea Rebello captive in a residence, physically holding Miss Rebello in a headlock (according to AP account) while holding a ‘loaded gun’ to her head. Smith then pointed that ‘loaded gun’ at an unnamed Nassau County Police Officer who fired in response, killing SMITH and Miss Rebello as well.

Andrea Rebello was a student at Hofstra University. Her entire involvement in this event seems to be that of random victim. Nothing seems to indicate she invited this problem in any manner, save being ‘convenient’ to attack. One must also note under the laws of New York, she was barred from being able to defend herself from violent attack by the myriad of ‘gun laws’ preventing citizens owning firearms. This also applies to the other two victims in the event – who happily escaped physical harm. The late Miss Rebello was twenty-one years of age when she was killed.

Dalton SMITH has been identified as thirty years of age. One news account (http://newyork.newsday.com/news/region-state/cops-hofstra-student-andrea-rebello-armed-suspect-dalton-smith-fatally-shot-by-officer-1.5289639) reports SMITH as a convicted felon with an extensive criminal history wanted for violating parole. Please note, under Federal law – and most states as well – a convicted felon cannot lawfully purchase or possess a firearm. The account notes the serial number on the handgun in question was obliterated; in itself a Federal violation and an indication the possessor (or perhaps the seller in this case) is attempting to prevent back tracking the ownership of the firearm.

The Nassau Police officer has not been named, a common practice at this stage of the investigation. (No doubt some unscrupulous ‘journalist’ will obtain the name by some mechanism and publish it to gain a bonus or raise.) According to the account cited above, he worked for the New York (City) Police Department for seven or eight years prior to joining the Nassau County Police, where he has worked for twelve years. So the officer has nineteen to twenty years of police experience and training. He is currently on medical leave and will be monitored and offered counseling.

Addressing the shooting proper, as a long time armed law enforcement officer, shooter and student of armed force application, I note the following:

The report of the shooting is very sketchy. One sentence says Miss Rebello was being held in a ‘headlock’, but other comments indicate SMITH was holding Miss Rebello in front of him, as a shield. No mention is given of the distance of the shooting encounter, but it took place in a single room of a residential dwelling. Therefore, the range was most likely no further than seven yards (twenty-one feet). For an untrained handgun shooter, seven yards can be daunting for any precision; for a competent shooter, seven yards is not too difficult and for an advance shooter, seven yards is uncomfortably close.

Firing eight shots in rapid succession is demonstrative of one of two factors: Either lack of effect on target, or fear.

When confronted by an armed adversary who in the process of attacking or committing a dangerous action, one fires a shot to render the adversary incapable of continuing the threat, attack or dangerous action. If the adversary does not immediately abandon his threatening action(s), one fires another shot and re-assesses the result. This continues as needed. Please note, there is no time limit required for the assessment; do not get the incorrect idea that a defensive shooter must pause a certain amount of time between shots. The typical reason fired shots do not affect the attacker is a lack of power in the round itself, or poorly delivered hits.

When a defensive shooter is overcome by fear, he shoots rapidly and repeatedly in order to end the threat. This fear is normally generated by a lack of self-confidence due to a known lack of ability to hit the target. This is referred to in the discipline as ‘panic shooting’.

In the instant case, the caliber of the police officer’s weapon is not known. Commonly issued in the area – notably NYPD – are pistols in caliber 9×19 NATO (also known popularly as 9mm Luger and 9mm Parabellum.) Also unknown is the type of ammunition issued and used. One notes the specific ammunition has a great deal to do with the effectiveness of a shot delivered. The military style, Full Metal Jacket (FMJ) ammunition – used by NYPD as recently as the Amadou Diallo shooting in 1999 – is noted for a lack of ability to render an attacker unable to carry out further attack.

It is possible the combination of firearm and ammunition used by the Nassau County Police officer was ill-considered for ability to stop the illegal actions of a determined attacker. Further discussion on this point is purely conjecture and I will stop here on that aspect.

Another reason recipients of gunshot wounds (note I do not use the term ‘victim’) are not incapacitated is the shots were not delivered to a critical portion of the anatomy. The commonly accepted ‘desired’ bullet placement is in the Central Nervous System (CNS), comprised of the portion of the brain that controls volitional movement and the spinal column. Disrupting the function of the CNS will prevent the attacker further independent movement and render such attacker incapable of continuing a threat. However, as shown by shooting reports, not all ‘head shots’ are CNS shots. Body shots, which may in time cause death from blood loss, are not CNS shots and will not reliably stop an attacker from further threat. Mere pain may indeed end an attack, but will not in the case of a determined attacker and will certainly not deter an attacker under the influence of a host of pain suppressing agents, including alcohol and surely many mood altering drugs. Shots to limbs may or may not be fatal in time, but cannot be relied upon to instantly stop an attack. This paragraph is the reason behind many reports of a person being shot multiple times prior to death or other end of an encounter. This is the legitimate reason for law enforcement officers shooting a suspect multiple times; the suspect was shot X number of times because after being shot X-1 times, the suspect was still posing a threat.

However, the common reason for multiple shots fired in such circumstances is basic fear.

Between any given agency’s budget and manpower allocation requirements, and the abusive power of unions, law enforcement officers are given what can be generously described as ‘minimal’ training in the serious use of firearms.

Make no mistake; law enforcement agency management view all training as ‘down time’. The officer being trained is not on duty and therefore ‘wasted’. An officer being trained must be replaced ‘on line’, requiring hiring of an additional officer or overtime payments to another current officer. This cost is in addition to the direct costs of training; the trainers (typically officers who also are not on line), the equipment (a range and attendant facilities), the materials (ammunition, targets, alternate firearms and various props) and potential for added medical expenses for injuries suffered in training mishaps. From a management standpoint, these are all additional expenditures not directly related to the goal of ‘enforcing the law and preserving the peace’. Even more frustrating, the ‘value’ of such training cannot be directly applied to the yearly budget report. (From time to time, an officer will use the CPR training to save a life, providing a positive image of the agency to the populace served; however, the cost of the CPR training is still substantial and must be paid, up front.)

At the same time, all agencies can claim their employees are trained to the ‘required level and criteria’. What that means is the arbitrary standards of proficiency established by either the agency itself or a politically oriented and governed, over-seeing body. I have shot – and fired qualifying scores – on no less than nine different courses of fire over my life time. The only ones I felt ‘challenging’ were those I fired as a new shooter. They all deal with ‘ready’ positions, static problems, little stress and very little attention to firing a single, reactive shot – the first shot under stimulus – rather than multiple shots in a specific time period.

What can I say about law enforcement unions? From my own observations, law enforcement unions have the goal of raising wages while reducing the effectiveness of the individual officer. In specific, unions constantly protest against firearms qualifications as ‘too difficult’ and unreasonable in scope.

So: Here’s what the ‘inquiry’ will announce as findings.

1. The officer acted in the best interests of all involved. He did the best he could under horrible circumstances and is exonerated of any wrong-doing or culpability.

[This is true, but only in a limited sense. He acted in his own best interests first; he didn’t engage the suspect while the suspect was pointing the gun at the victim and announcing his intention to kill her. The officer only engaged when the suspect shifted the gun toward the officer. The officer did the best he could based on the rather basic and infrequent training provided by the agency; he fired rapidly and repeatedly at the suspect (and victim). The officer probably never did any individual training or practice for such an encounter on his own.
This will not be mentioned.]

2. The primary cause of the incident and subsequent deaths was the suspect, Dalton SMITH.

[Again true, in a limited sense. SMITH was loose on the streets because the State of New York turned him loose. Based on his rather questionable past, one wonders why in the world anyone would allow such a man any degree of freedom among relatively decent citizens? Ah, I have it! The ‘law’ demands it. The laws of the State of New York are written in such a way that such predators cannot be incarcerated to protect the citizenry. Did anyone notice SMITH’s photo? He appears to be a black male.
This will not be mentioned.]

3. The suspect was armed in violation of various laws, thereby endorsing even more stringent gun control laws.

[It’s a boilerplate statement in New York and other Leftist controlled areas; part of the Leftist dogma. Ignored in this sentiment are the facts that this suspect obtained a firearm in violation of extant state and federal laws, and such laws prevented Miss Rebello and her friends from defending themselves.
This will not be mentioned.]

4. The inquiry will mention the need for more study of hostage events and considerations of how to handle those events.

[One has no idea of how much tax money will go into such ‘study and consideration’, save that it will far outstrip the money spent on actual training. One also has a suspicion the actual training will degenerated into a touchy-feely discussion of how to interact with ‘less fortunate’ and ‘deprived’ members of the community who feel disenfranchised, victimized and discounted. That they are ‘disenfranchised, victimized and discounted’ solely on the basis of their personal decision to commit felonious acts of a violent and predatory nature will be ignored. No additional training on shooting the malefactor while not shooting a hostage will be provided. Or even considered.
All of this will not be mentioned.]

To the family and friends of Miss Andrea Rebello, may I offer my deepest regrets and condolences. You are also victims of this hideous event. Not just of SMITH; not just of the lackadaisical firearms training of Nassau County (and most agencies), but also of the State of New York, who decided it was better to let SMITH run loose with an unregistered firearm while preventing any of you from defending yourselves or your loved ones. So much for a government driven by political correctness. I will be praying for you all.

1 Comment

Filed under Crime, Firearms and their use, Idiot Politicians, Political Correctness

Another Shooting in New Orleans; Nothing Learned


According to the article, the New Orleans Police Department has identified one suspect in the Mother’s Day Parade shooting.

The suspect, believed to be actively shooting at random people, is one Akein Scott, 19 years of age, of New Orleans. Mr. Scott is described in part as “no stranger to the criminal justice system”, having prior arrests for firearms and drug charges. What a shock! From the picture shown, Mr. Scott appears to be of a predominately negroid genetic background; this of course is politically incorrect to mention.

Of particular offensive nature, yet politically correct is the article citation of ‘angry residents’ citing ‘gun violence’. Ladies and gentlemen, there is no such thing as ‘gun violence’. I own – um – several firearms. None of them are violent. In fact, all of them are quite peaceful and passive. Not one of them, EVER, has committed an act of violence on its own.

VIOLENCE is a human behavior. VIOLENCE takes an act of human will to happen; not an inanimate object taking over. VIOLENCE is caused by a human acting on self-centered desires while ignoring the safety and well-being of others.

This is a lesson not learned. Human behavior is not dependent on objects.

The article also cites ‘angry residents’ mentioning ‘poverty and urban blight’ as problems along with ‘gun violence. This means what? If someone else cleaned up their neighborhoods and gave them money, the problems would cease? Here’s the second unlearned lesson: Being a victim. As long as one is a victim, one shirks all responsibility for one’s actions.

“Poverty”? Why are people in poverty? Despite all the excuses and Marxist rhetoric, the main reason people live in poverty is the inability or unwillingness to produce anything. In simple terms, they do not work; at anything. Yes, all kinds of excuses; lack of education – which they chose not to follow, dropping out of school because learning was too hard; not finding a suitable job – because all that is available to a non-reader is manual labor that is both hard and low-paying… the list goes on and on, but they are all excuses.

The real reason (in the U. S.) is those in ‘poverty’ don’t want to work and demand someone else give them money. Since 1964, when President Johnson began the “Great Society” programs, this approach has been shown to NOT work. The U. S. has spent billions (if not trillions) of dollars of tax money on ‘poverty’ programs. The net result is the U. S. has more people living in the poverty levels – and a higher rate of people living in the poverty levels – than existing in 1964.

Another unlearned lesson: Simply giving money to those who will not work does not help society or the populace. Or even the recipient of the money.

One last thing and I’ll give it a rest.

Mr. Scott – the suspect in the parade shooting – as you recall has been arrested before on firearms and drug charges. No mention if he has been convicted or plead guilty to any of these charges. If he has, he is barred from owning or possessing a firearm. At the age of 19, he may not purchase a handgun under federal law. Therefore, no further ‘gun control’ laws are needed for this problem. Further ‘gun control’ laws will target me – a retired federal lawman who is no threat to public peace and security – and raise taxes to pay for more ‘oversight’ while doing NOTHING to stop thugs from shooting up public places.

That is the last unlearned lesson for today: Human behavior (misbehavior – violence) cannot be deterred by vilifying an inanimate object. Pretty simple, but difficult for the Leftists to grasp.

Leave a comment

Filed under Crime, Idiot Politicians, Politics