Monday, December 27, 2010

Glock Owner

I went to the huge gun store yesterday and went over to the Glock section, and, to my surprise, they had three Glock subcompacts. The Glock 30, 30SF, and 36 were are there. Wait a second... 30SF what the hell is that?

Apparently, there were lots of complaints about the Glock 30 grip being too large for small hands. So what Glock did was to slim down the back strap a bit:

Glock 30SF on the left

There was no price difference in any of the three pistols, so I asked the sales guy if I could put the guns through my main forms of carry.
I found that all three fit well in to my murse (heehee) pocket, and, while they were noticeably heavier, not so much as to cause me a problem.
I really noticed a difference when I put the pistols in to my preferred method of on body carry, the appendix carry position.

Example of appendix carry position

Here I really noticed the thickness difference between the Glocks and the Kahr. The Glock is a much beefier gun, so you really feel the extra metal.

Overall, the difference between the 30 models and the 36 was negligible. The 36 was definitely slimmer in my hand compared to the 30 models, but not so much as to really make a difference. I really didn't think that the changes in the SF model made much difference, but a woman in the shop said that it made a big difference when she shot the 30 and the 30SF.

In the end I bought the Glock 30SF. I wanted the extra shots, and maybe my wife would want to shoot it... Not likely, but if so the smaller grip may help her out.

After taking my new pistol home, I loaded it up, stacked the spare mag, and put everything in my murse (heehee), and went to the grocery store. After a short bit, I didn't notice the difference in weight.

So, I think this new pistol will work out well.

Saturday, December 25, 2010

Bitter Dissapointment

Have you ever had something that was so increadably awesome, that you overlooked everything that was bad about it? And when you finally realized that your awesome thing actually sucked, you were depressed with your loss of awesome?

This is how I feel about my Kahr CW 45. It was so thin, so light weight, so PERFECT for conciled carry. It was everything I wanted in a pistol, except for one thing... It didn't go boom everytime I pulled the trigger. On top of that, after about 30 rounds, it would stovetop, jam, and give other issues. I went shooting yesterday, and the thing had a complete breakdown. I am so depressed. Tomorrow I will go and try to buy a Glock. I am not a huge fan of Glock, but they go boom no matter what.

So here we have the comparison:

Kahr Arms CW 36:

This is Kahr's compact .45 ACP. I don't say subcompact, because they have one smaller.

Weight:19.9 oz.
Barrel Lenght:3.46"
Magazine Capacity:6

Glock 36

This is Glock's .45 ACP subcompact "slim" pistol. Slim because it deviates from Glock's standard double stack magazine. This pistol would be the direct competitor to my Kahr CW45.

Weight:20.11 oz.
Barrel Lenght:3.78"
Magazine Capacity:6

Glock 30:

This is Glock's subcompact .45 APC. It has a double stack magazine, so it can carry twice the ammo. It pays for that in added width.

Weight:23.99 oz.
Barrel Length:3.78"
Magazine Capacity:10

Glock 39

This is a subcompact that uses Glock's very own .45 GAP round (ACP stands for Automatic Colt Pistol, GAP is Glock Automatic Pistol). The GAP was introduced to find a medium between the stopping power of the .45 ACP round and the controlability of the 9mm Parabellum and .40 round. Difference:

GAP on the left.
I am not sold on this round, and if I want to get a full frame pistol, and want to keep the same ammo for all, it would mean buying another Glock (Ok, Springfield XD has a .45 GAP, but Beretta and HK do not, and those would be the ones I would buy.)
Anyway it is an option.

Weight:19.33 oz.
Barrel Lenght:3.46"
Magazine Capacity:6

So what do we come off with?

Kahr CW 45Glock 36Glock 30Glock 39
Barrel Length:3.463.783.783.46
Magazine Capacity:66106

The things that are the most important to me are length, height, and weight. This is my CCW pistol, so I need it to fit in to my man purse, or murse for short (heehee).

So we have the Glock 30 being actually 0.002 inches shorter than my Kahr. The 30 and 36 are both 0.45 inches longer than the CW45. This is important becuase my Kahr just barely fits in to my gun pocket the way it is, I don't know if I can handle another half inch. This makes the 39 an atractive prospect.

The big looser in the width catagory is the 30. That double stack is going to force the pistol to have a fat ass, but that junk in the trunk is very important to have... I am surprised that the 36 is thinner than the 39. They have the same single stack mag, but the 39 is 0.05 inches wider. Where does the extra come from?

Every body wins in the height catagory. This pleases me, as the most room I don't have to spare is in the width. The Glocks being a mite shorter means that they will be eaiser to draw from the murse (heehee).

Weight... The 36 is only 0.21 oz heavier, and the 39 is actually is actually 0.57 oz lighter. Again the fat ass is the 30 coming in at 4.09 oz heavier. That sucks, because when you factor in the weight with a full magizine the 30 weighs 33.86 oz. That is 2.1 pounds of metal, with an additional 9.87 oz if I take a long an extra mag... and I always do. That means hauling around 9 more ounces than I am used to. It means a sore shoulder after a long day.

So what do? I am going to take a close look at the 36 and the 30 tomorrow, if I can find them. I can understand a store carrying one or the other, but two Glock .45 ACP subcompact models? Unlikely, espically since they are so similar in look and feel. Right now I am leaning heavily towards the 30. Despite the extra weight and width I realllllly like the idea of having 7 extra shots with me (6+1 in the Kahr, 7 round extended mag reload. 10+1 in the 30, 10 round reload). Those extra rounds are simply worth the extras.
I will have an update tomorrow.

Thursday, December 23, 2010

The Reason For the Season

I am going to go off on a little atheist rant for a moment. First, I love Christmas. Who doesn't like gifts, and cookies, and eggnog, and Santa? All kinds of awesome there. However, DO NOT say that I don't have a right to celebrate the holiday if I am not Christian. The holiday itself has become a cultural celebration. If you choose to put religious significance fine, but don't harsh my groove with your religious indignation. Just to throw my pot of piss in to your campfire let us look at the Christmas holiday and figure out what is truth and what is fabricated myth.

First and foremost, it is unknown when and where Jesus of Nazareth was born. There is no record of his birth. Being born 2,000 years ago in to a peasant Jewish family in a time where only the wealthy and royal had their births recorded, this is not surprising. The origins of Christmas trace back to, like most things in Christianity, Roman Emperor Constantine. Constantine was a pagan. He worshiped the old Roman gods. However he found religious tolerance of the new Christian religion would be to his benefit. So, after a while he held a council at Nicaea to bring the different sects of Christianity in to a cohesive whole. From this council most of Christian tradition propagates.

Constantine wanted to unite his empire under one religion, to give the people a sense of shared culture. It also solidified his rule, as kings rule under divine providence. If you say you received the right of rule from one set of gods, the followers of the other set of gods say those gods are false, therefore we don't recognize your rule. Thus the incompatibility of religious tolerance and monarchy. Anyway...

Constantine wanted to blend the two religions as closely as he could. And the pagans had a winter solstice celebration every year. How can you celebrate an old religious holiday, while practicing another? You just say that your new holiday happened on the exact time as your old one! SWEET! You can have your cake and Santa too.

So, in actuality Christians, you are celebrating the Pagan holiday of the winter solstice, not the birth of Christ.

As an added note, the only record of Jesus being born in Bethlehem, the slaughter of the innocents, the exodus to Egypt, the Magi, and all of the other things that were supposed to have happened at that time are only found in the Bible, and conflict with one another. The simple fact is that, at the time Jesus could have been just another peasant religious nut who had delusions of grandeur. The only historical record we think we have on him is... was.... well... There aren't any historical records. Conveniently the Christians say all of the Roman records were burned up in Nero's fire. Understandable you say, it was a long time a go. BUT the Romans were perhaps the best record keepers in the ancient world. We know EVERYTHING about them, because they wrote EVERYTHING down. Seriously, they did. Yet no record survives about the hugely influential person of Jesus? You know who didn't get recorded? Unimportant people. Normal people. If Jesus existed at all, and was as influential as the Christian accounts say he was, there would have been something down on paper about him. There simply is not.

So, is it better to Celebrate the birth of a man that may or may not have existed, or to celebrate a time where we look to the best in people and express a desire for peace and freedom for all people?

Monday, December 20, 2010

Great Day

I am a lover of freedom, and equality under the law. Equality does not mean that others are more equal than anyone else. This is why I oppose all policies and laws that promote discrimination and segregation. Therefore, it is with profound pride that I read today that the policy that has discriminated against homosexuals in the military has finally been removed.

To be discriminated against because of a lifestyle choice is at the core of irrational intolerance. Does it really make a difference in how someone serves their country, does their job, flies an airplane, on who they choose to take in to their private bedroom, or which God they worship, or how?

It is good to see the country is finally ready to get past this. I applaud it, and welcome the change.

Sunday, December 19, 2010

The Face of the American Poor

Check out this picture:

This is Raymeica Kelly she is showing the two power bills that she did not get assistance in paying. Ms. Kelly has been out of work for over a year. Take a good look at Ms. Kelly. Take a look around the room she is in. What do you notice?

First... It looks like Ms. Kelly has not been missing any meals. She has money for enough calories to keep her very overweight.
If she went on a diet, she might be able to squeeze in a power bill or two.

Next... See the very large flat screen television? That is bigger than mine. She can't afford to pay her power bills, but she thinks that she can hold on to that massive television? I bet if she pawned that thing she could get at least enough to pay her power and heat bills for a few months.

Next... What is underneath the television? Microsoft XBox 360 gaming system. Multiple third party controllers. At least three games visible laying around. Each X-Box 360 game costs between $10 and $70. If you didn't get the games, could you have paid your electric bill? How many electric bills could you have paid for if you sold your XBox?

I won't speculate on what other luxury items Ms. Kelly has that she could get rid of before seeking assistance.

This is the simple fact of the American "poor." How many times have you watched a corpulent person purchase a grocery cart full of steak, while talking on their expensive cell phone, carrying a designer bag, with an EBT card? It happens nearly every time I go to the store. Why? Because Government programs provide so much for the "poor" they squander their money on these items. Why shouldn't they? It isn't like the money will be taken away from them.

It is time to change the way we do welfare once and for all.
The solution? Once you loose your job and file for unemployment, you get one month of benefits, during that time you must have had a minimum of one interview per week. After that month, you are to have one interview a week, accepting a salary 10% less than your last position. So on and so forth until a job is obtained. At which time ALL moneys remitted are paid back to the Government. These payments are garnished from wages. No more rewarding people for not working. No more endless hand outs.

Not having a job after a period of time is SHAMEFUL! It is time we made it so.


So, after the last post, you may have been thinking, Why do you get invited to Christmas parties? The answer: I make the most kick ass eggnog on the freaking planet. It is true. I am a humble guy, but facts is facts.
Good eggnog is like ice cream that has not been frozen. It is just all kinds of milk fat and eggy goodness. With the right combo of sugar and nutmeg, it is a thing of beauty. Now the following recipe actually works better if you double it, but that is a ton of nogg, use at your own discretion.
So, here you are, the recipe that will get you invited to all the parties, even if you are an intolerable asshole, just like me.
Now... You can get sick if you consume undercooked, or in this case, raw, eggs. So, take care in where you purchase your eggs, make sure they are well within the expiration date.

4 egg yolks (yes you have to separate the yolks from the whites. If you don't the texture sucks, and you don't get enough air in the mixture)
1/3 cup sugar, plus 1 tablespoon
1 pint whole milk (DO NOT SKIMP!!! Not 2%, not skim! You want the fat here. This is a holiday drink, not something you pound down every Tuesday)
1 cup heavy cream (Hells yeah!)
3 ounces cane Rum (You can use bourbon here, but I don't like the flavor that bourbon gives the mix. Make sure you use a good quality rum, and make sure that it is NOT spiced rum, No Captain Morgan.)
1 teaspoon freshly grated nutmeg (Imperative that it is freshly ground. As soon as you start to grate a spice, it looses its potency. Nutmeg is very powerful, and the flavor is absolutely essential to the drink. If you don't go with fresh nutmeg, then just drink some cream and milk with sugar, you get the same flavor and don't have to worry about the sickness from the eggs.)
4 egg whites

The drink:
In the bowl, beat the egg yolks until they lighten in color (I use a little hand mixer. Goes faster and does a better job). Gradually add the 1/3 cup sugar and continue to beat until it is completely dissolved. Add the milk, cream, rum and nutmeg and stir to combine.

Place the egg whites in a bowl and beat to soft peaks (Important that you use a good whisk here). Gradually add the 1 tablespoon of sugar and beat until stiff peaks form.

Whisk the egg whites into the mixture. Chill and serve bask in the awesome.

Tuesday, December 14, 2010

Progressives = Communists

I went to a Christmas party with the wife over the weekend, and I met a new liberal friend. He went nuts on me when I called him a Communist. After cooling down a bit, he asked me why I thought he was a Communist. Was it just because I called all "progressives" communist, or was there some other reason.
I was surprised... It is a rare thing that you get a progressive to ask the simple question "Why?" so this was a big deal to me. I asked him if he knew what Communism was. He said that it was a form of government where the state owns all property. I gave him full marks for knowing that, but I then persisted. I have, unlike most liberals, conservatives, and other, actually read Marx's book.

Karl Marks wrote the The Communist Manifesto in 1848. In it he stated the 10 things that the Communists stand for. So I asked my new friend these simple 10 questions:
  1. Do you believe in free education for all people, provided by the Government?
    • Yes, he said. Education should be free.
      • Marx: Free education for all children in public schools.
  2. Do you believe that the FCC should reenact the "Fairness Doctrine" keep radio and television balanced? Or do you believe that "Hate" speech should be banned outright?
    • Absolutely, he said. Hate speech has no place in our society, and what goes across the airwaves should be fair and balanced for both points of view.
      • Marx: Centralization of the means of communications and transportation in the hands of the State.
  3. Do you think the Fed should have more control over the US banking?
    • This is a stupid question, he said. Everyone knows the Fed should have more control to help stabilize the Economy, so that we don't have the bubbles burst and the market crash.
      • Marx: Centralization of credit in the hands of the state, by means of a national bank with State capital and an exclusive monopoly
  4. Should there be an inheritance tax?
    • Sure, the rich can afford to pay that tax, and most people won't be affected by it anyway, said my friend.
      • Marx: Abolition of all rights of inheritance.
  5. Do you believe in a graduated income tax over a flat tax or The FairTax?
    • Don't get me started on income tax, exclaimed my friend, millionaires and billionaires can afford to pay more, so they should!
      • Marx: A heavy progressive or graduated income tax
  6. Do you agree with the Kelo decision of the Supreme Court?
    • The one that said the government has the right to condemn property and then let others build on that land to get better tax revenue? Yes, that was a good decision.
      • Marx: Abolition of private property and the application of all rents of land to public purposes
  7. Do you think that all workers should be unionized?
    • Yes! Said my friend enthusiastically, All barriers to unionization need to be removed. The Card Check legislation is the first step to this and needs to be passed as soon as possible.
      • Marx: Equal liability of all to labor. Establishment of industrial armies, especially for agriculture.
  8. Should there be heavier oversight of large corporate farms? More restrictions on what they can produce?
    • Yes. Large corporate farms are evil and need more FDA oversight, and be able to unionize.
      • Marx: Combination of agriculture with manufacturing industries, gradual abolition of the distinction between town and country, by a more equitable distribution of population over the country.
  9. Should the EPA be given more power to confiscate property to extend the Superfund?
    • Yes. The EPA needs to be given much more power to clean up places that factories have ruined, for the betterment of everyone.
      • Marx: Extension of factories and instruments of production owned by the state, the bringing into cultivation of waste lands, and the improvement of the soil generally in accordance with a common plan
  10. Do you believe that the government has a right to take from the rich and give to the poor in the form of government assistance? Welfare and food stamps for instance?
    • In the interest of human compassion, Yes, said my friend.
      • Marx: From each according to his ability, to each according to his need
After answering these questions, I stated that he agreed with nine of the 10 planks of the Communist party, and wholeheartedly endorsed their slogan. After a bit of stunned silence, my friend said that he does believe in private property and the right of free speech, and that Communists do not believe it those things. However, I pointed out, you just said that you agreed with the Kelo decision, and that the Fairness Doctrine should be started up again. These things are free or they are not, there is no grey area.
At this point my wife yanked me away from the conversation.

The moral of this story? Don't invite me to Christmas parties.
Cool beard, brah!

Comments Back On

I turned comments back on... I hope blogger has their spam filters working.

Flame away!

Monday, December 6, 2010

How Does the TSA Get Away With It?? The 9th Circuit That's How!

I finally found out how the TSA so obviously violates the fourth amendment, and gets away with it.
Back in the 1970's, the frog was put in the water. A case came before the 9th Circuit of Appeals, the United States vs Davis.
One day in 1962, Mr. Davis attempted to board a Trans World Airlines flight with a loaded revolver. This revolver was in his briefcase, which was searched by TWA staff. Mr. Davis was taken in to custody. Blah, Blah, Blah the 9th Circuit decided that passengers gave "implied consent" when purchasing a ticket. Also the concept of "Administrative Searches" came in to effect, essentially saying that searches were OK, if they were a matter of routine... Seriously.
noting that airport screenings are considered to be administrative searches because they are conducted as part of a general regulatory scheme, where the essential administrative purpose is to prevent the carrying of weapons or explosives aboard aircraft

Later, in 2005, this president was cited, again in the 9th Circuit, in United States vs. Marquez. This case dealt with Marquez trying to get some Cocaine to Alaska. He was caught and said that his rights were violated by the TSA. The Davis case was cited as the president in where the TSA has a blank check as to how and what they can search.
The interesting thing to note here is that in Davis, the gun was found by a private company, but in Marquez the coke was found by a government worker. In the decision, this was not mentioned. Whether it was ignored by the Justices, or overlooked to me is of grave concern.
What was mentioned that the searches are only legal if passengers can opt out, and choose not to fly. In my opinion, this is a simple cop out. This case should go before the Supreme Court.

There you have it.

Wednesday, December 1, 2010

Holly Crap... U.S. Army Now Has Smart BULLETS!

I want one!!!

Here is the concept... The first thing they teach you in any type of combat school is how to get behind cover when the bullets start to fly. Why do you do this? You want to not get shot. Your cover protects you from the bullets. When everybody gets behind cover, that is when shooting them becomes problematic. They are behind cover how are you going to get at them?
All sorts of tactics have been tried. Giving your guys powerful guns to shoot through cover (bad guys just find better cover), using explosive rounds to shoot over cover and land on the bad guys (very difficult to do and very limited range), and, my personal favorite, calling in air planes or artillery to level anything within 200 meters of the target. You can imagine that these tactics cause lots and lots of collateral damage.

The idea behind this new weapon is having the weapon do all of the math and calculations of aiming rounds so that all the good guy getting shot at needs to do is pull the trigger. That is exactly what this new weapon does. It can actually shoot around corners, over cover and through cover. The Army says that it effectively eliminates cover as being a viable tactical option in the field. Very cool... And very very scary.

Here it is: