Sunday, March 22, 2015

SPHINCTRE. Score one for David.

OMG, this has to be the funniest thing I have seen in a long time.  Shamelessly re-provided via David Codrea at WoG:



The tears.  They cleanse.

Dude sez: Onlier Operatorers don' need no steenking Four Rules.

Quite a comment spectacle on one of David Codrea's Facebook posts, linking to one of his Examiner articles, which then became its own WoG entry.  The topic was originally of the "Look at the hypocrite Daniel Craig" genre, but commentary exploded into something else.

Among other things, David said:

"...and would like to see some corroboration from an official source."

At the very least.  Maybe it's just me, but this Facebook fella's whole argument seems reducible to "Onlier Ones gonna be Onlier, and they should be".  A sample, from the Facebook comment stream:

[W]with all due respect, at the SMU level, they don't care if you have your booger hooker on the bang switch, with your sidearm pointed at your leg. SOP at that level is to disregard Rule 3 entirely, whether they're in the shoothouse, on the range or hitting a target downrange. Furthermore, it's also SOP to keep your weapon on kill in all training and operational environments, in violation of Rule 4. Not to mention the fact that they don't care if you're flagging guys in training or on mission, because at that level, you're moving too fast NOT to flag your teammates, and they know for a fact that you're not gonna shoot your buddy. They also regularly have teammates sit next to "Tangos" during live fire runs through the kill House, especially considering the fact that IEHR inherently involves pointing your weapon directly at a hostage.

And finally, seeing as how they're expected to know the weapons condition that they're in at all times, drills like this one from my old unit at the 27 second mark, in direct violation of the first weapons safety rule, are extremely common at that level:

Oh, there's a lot more.  Of basically the same.  (Maybe you can find something impressive in that video.  I can't.)  And the "due respect" level takes a few dives from the above.

I've little reason to doubt that all this above-the-rules tacticaler-operatorer stuff may well be SOP for what Grigg might call "the anointed", but "SOP" doesn't automatically imply excellence, either.

Cooper wrote frequently enough about people who would boast of both marksmanship prowess and of gunhandling technique elevating them above safety concerns of the Mundanes.  His usual response was "Show me.  I have the range, and the time."  Now, of course, we have YouTube.

I admit, I simply do not believe that anyone, at whatever level, can be functionally faster by NOT observing The Golden Rule, than he can while observing it.  Or maybe I could phrase it this way:  I cannot believe that anyone can reliably align a weapon faster than he can engage the trigger from a Rule Three position.  Hey, perhaps I'm wrong.  So:  show me.  Then show me where it made a difference.

(No no, don't tell me, let me guess.  That would be classified.)

Look, for me at least, it's mostly the "above Rule Three" mention that really gets my goat.  Observance of Rule Three can prevent disasters even when being in an actual fight with real people means you must stretch Rule Two (or Four) to its limits.  And you can do any of this while still faithfully observing Rule One. 

Ultimately, I'm technically unconvinced.  At best, I can see what people are getting at by saying that some "in extremis" tasks may arguably require a foot-fault on Rule Two or Rule Four--and that's it.  But here what we seem to have (tell me if I'm wrong, here, 'cos it seems clear enough to me) is a loud-and-proud blanket statement that The Almighty Onliest (however you may care to define that) are simply above safety considerations designed for peons--they are simply too good for that, and won't make mistakes.  (They'll "bet your life on it", they will.)  It would have been one thing to note that, say, hostage rescue might get difficult and painfully cost/benefit with Rules Two and Four, but to simply and without offering any evidence (other than "SOP, QED, N.A.T.C.H.") state that they're above it because they must be, rises beyond the merely unconvincing.  It also sounds very familar to the logic offered by certain others that this fella would probably not appreciate being compared to.

It's well enough known that Hollywood, Bond certainly included, is famous for "nobody who knew what he was doing would ever do that" cinema.  The details are so common they're frankly boring.  I suppose it is at least a little more interesting to have someone of the special-ninja class (I'll presume veracity in that, 'cos I'm sporting that way) drop in to a public place and dish on about all the things We The Unwashed don't know and he can't tell us more about anyway. 

But just a little.  There's already plenty enough to do to deal with Only One arguments from traditional gungrabbers.

Friday, March 13, 2015

Another 'target of opportunity' fun shop visit.

We were up the road in Soldotna today for a prenatal visit (Wilmethlet V3.0 is due in May) and I had occasion to take the 6yo up to the newly-relocated gun counter, at which we ran into the one counter-fella on the Peninsula that I've actually grown to like (the guy who introduced me to the Walther PPQ).

I was happy to confirm that my daughter is ergonomically fully ready for the Chipmunk-sized rifle.  She let me know that she'd like the pink one, which, if that design is the way we go (this was the Savage edition, with the no-joke Accu-Trigger), I'll probably be happy to indulge. 

Also met my first Rossi Trifecta, a simple break-top that comes with three interchangeable barrels:  .22LR, 20 gauge, and .243 Winchester.  Cost is just three bills, which seems like a great value.  This stock was still a little long for the munchkin, but it won't be for too much longer.  I find myself intrigued by this design, and I liked what I saw today.  The safety is a little weird, but more in the realm of unusual than truly non-ergonomic or counterproductive--and it is positive.  Had I the funds to spend on a real project, it would be interesting to see where one could take this design, in terms of optimizing sights, ammo cuffs and shooting sling.

In handguns, they didn't have a Browning 1911-22 to look at (I'm almost certain at this point that I'll go to one of the "Black Label" editions when the time comes), but they did have a SIG P938, and that one is only slightly too large for the kid's hand--she could just barely get her fingertip onto the trigger face, with the gun properly aligned with her forearm.  (Interestingly, her thumb was nearly perfect on the safety.)  Then we tried looking at a Ruger LCR in her hand, and I was a bit surprised to see how much too big that one is.  Perhaps a lot of it is the rubber grip, sized for adult hands rather than for minimum bulk (I'll re-check her at home on my Boot-Grip J frame just to see), but at any rate she could barely fingertip the trigger on the LCR as well.  Okay, data point!

I also happened to note a few Ruger Gunsite Scout magazines behind the glass, offered for seventy bucks a pop!  Jeez Louise, I admit I was not expecting that degree of owch.

Which reminds me:  I am still hopeful to get back my completed 03 Springfield.  Not too long ago now, I confirmed with the smith that built it, that they still have not made the video about it that they want to, and that he would be happy to agitate to get it on the front burner now that everyone is mostly caught up from SHOT.  Ah, patience.  So I happened to check on Gunsmoke's YouTube channel last night, and noticed that they do have a new video out...which is a segment of Rich talking with Janelle Cooper and Lindy Cooper Wisdom at SHOT. 

...And I've got no problem being in line behind that.  No problem at all.  (Jeff Cooper referred to Janelle as "The Countess", and she is indeed an impressive personality.  Not for nothing does my second daughter have Janelle for a middle name.  :-) 

Tuesday, March 10, 2015

Look, I'm no minarchist...

...and it's been some years since I "played one on TV".  As the old saw goes, at some point I ran out of excuses.

Still, I cannot deny that I'd nonetheless like things a whole lot more than they are now, with more people like Kit Lange running around.  Consider the open letter to the Washington state governor that she posted yesterday:

What is our crime?  The exercise of rights protected—not granted—by the WA State Constitution and that of the United States of America.  The exercise of rights you promised to uphold when you took office.  We dare to speak of liberty, we dare to stand against tyranny, and now we are being threatened with the same fate that Anthony has already undergone once.

We, the patriots of Washington, appeal to you now.  We want no fight.  We want no conflict.  We wish to be left alone in peace, to raise our families and live in liberty.  We ask that you stand with us and stop this violation of our rights, as is your duty.  Under no circumstances do we seek violence, nor will we start violence.  We are not, in any way, “anti-government” as the SPLC claims.  We simply demand that the government adhere to its Constitutional limits, protecting and maintaining the rights of the governed.

Please understand this: We will not comply with these continued infringements.  We will no longer be controlled and have our rights violated.  There is no more compromise.  If an inch of liberty is taken from us, we will take back a mile.  Because of this, we face persecution, arrest, and even death.

You can stop this from happening.  It is your job to stop this from happening, by upholding your oath to the Constitution.

The very word "patriot", any more, just makes my teeth grind, and of course I would argue that being "anti-government" should be the quintessential American mindset, not a derogatory epithet that we concede to authoritarians in our very speech.  And then there's the whole tilting-at-windmills thing with approaching Master to ask Master to restrain Master from abusing the plebes.

Still, there is a lot of good in this.  It speaks plainly, declaratively, and reads like the double-dog-dare that it should be.  And, to quote David, cum ulla sella in pugno taberna.  Indeed.

And Lange has been consistent and eloquent in this, from what I've seen of her thus far. 

Excellent.  May the ranks continue to swell.

Tuesday, March 3, 2015

Bummed for David.

I learned this morning, first from David himself on Facebook, and then again via...everyone else, that he has now had to follow through on his promise to leave the new Gottlieb-controlled JPFO, if it ever got to the point where he felt censored in writing content.

Gives me no joy to hear it, but it sounds like that's exactly what happened.  (Yes, I understand that the backbreaking straw was at KABA, not JPFO, but I cannot fault Codrea for recognizing the very clear writing on the wall.)

Well, there it is, then.  I can't say it's a surprise, but I suppose I did want to be proven at least a little wrong at least a little...or at least a little longer.  In the end, that didn't take long at all, and that just makes me bummed for David. 

I can say this:  Codrea has handled this whole unfortunate affair with a considerable amount of class, and has reaffirmed for me why he is one of the lasting giants of gun rights.  Long may he ride, shoot straight, and speak the truth.

I never knew him personally, but from what I understand, I do suspect Aaron would have backed him on this.

Sunday, March 1, 2015


Seen on Facebook.  Bill Whittle beats the "gun ownership rate and murder rate" canard into a fair pulp.

It's hardly perfect.  I've never liked Whittle's insistence on the standard left/right red herring (there are disarmers and there is everyone else, period), and of course it's no secret that in the end I care as little for statistics as the Force! Helplessness! Now! crowd--our arguments each being wholly moral ones rather than statistically reversible.  (That is, neither of us is going to suddenly change our minds over the matter because of some measurable threshold at which the unacceptable suddenly becomes acceptable.)

But the whiny canard (which basically reduces to "US has more gunz.  US has higher murder rate than some place that bans them.  Therefore US is barbaric.  'Murica!") has been around for at least my whole life, and it is so fantastically tired, facile, and hackneyed that, I admit, I do take some visceral pleasure in seeing it dismantled, and Whittle does seem to have his own style at turning the sanctimony around.

Especially at a time in which the feeding frenzy seems nearly inexhaustible, I'll take it.  It's not that Bill Whittle "speaks for me", but that is hardly required to recognize that what he says here is...simply true.