A National Day of Strike

Contrary to the image presented of gun owners in the media, that is the gun owner is a sub-grade illiterate back woods hick, many if not most gun owners are well educated, well to do (guns are an expensive hobby) and extremely competent.

In the last ten years, I have met gun owners who are engineers, doctors, lawyers, government executives, business owners, millionaires..... you get the point. Gun owners are a big part of what makes our society work. They are your friends, co-workers and neighbors as many in New York found out when their addresses were published by the Journal News.

All this being the case, I have a modest suggestion. Maybe gun owners should have a national day of strike. The NRA or SAF should organize a day when gun owners stay home from work. We can all call in sick that day. Let them know how many of us there are and how much what we do affects their lives.

How when it gets down to it: They need us more then we need them.

YS

The wind is at their wings

In the last few weeks and certainly since the beginning of the current troubles, I have seen a surprising amount of what I feel is a very peculiar sentiment. In short, the idea that if Mitt Romney had been elected president he would be just as earnest in eviscerating our 2nd Amendment rights as the current occupant.

Since this is among friends I'll be polite and to the point. Bullshit.

But some of you will probably say: But he signed an Assault Weapons Ban(AWB). That's more than Obama ever did. Yes, you are right, he did sign a state continuance of the Federal AWB as governor of Massachusetts. He signed a bill that would have passed regardless of his support or rejection. Now, that was a very naughty thing to do and I will certainly agree that Mitt Romney is a two-faced flip flopper (e.g. a politician) but I still strongly disagree that he would have been as bad as Obama.

Why is that, you are probably saying? Several reasons. Firstly, that Mitt Romney is a politician. If he had been elected president and if he hoped to get reelected he had better keep his base happy. A big part of his base is us. People who care deeply about our freedom to keep and bear arms. Romney is a smart guy. He wouldn't have dared alienate a huge chunk of his voters to push what is essentially a Democratic Party issue.

Secondly, if Romney was a newly elected president he would be a newbie in the White House. He would be spending all of his time learning the ropes. A new president usually doesn't get all that much done in the first year. The last thing on his mind would be pushing a Democratic agenda item that most non-Democrats find anathema.

That takes care of the Romney side of the equation. What about the O Man? Well, his re-election has energized his base. They are frothing at the mouth to enact their agenda and gun control is at or near the top of their list. The wind is at their wings. Events have played right into their hands. If Romney had been elected they would be demoralized and in the corner licking their wounds. Unfortunately we don't live in that alternative reality.

The unfortunate truth is that elections are almost always the choice between two choices that are far from ideal. Romney for all his faults would have been far better than the choice we are stuck with.

--YS

Cuomo lied, freedom died

The first round of the blood danse-macabre ended yesterday when the New York Senate at the instigation of New York's Governor Cuomo rammed through the most restrictive set of gun laws in this nation's history. With one fell swoop, gun rights in New York passed Canada and dropped somewhere in central Europe circa 1925.

As I mentioned in a previous post this act depriving the people of most of their rights to arms stands in direct opposition to the fundamental principles that this country was founded upon. The last shred of sovereignty left to the people of New York has been stripped away. Cuomo and company could care less. As they say, that's a feature not a bug. They want the people, the hoi-polloi, put in a nice box and to do as they are told by their betters. That's not a surprise or the real problem.

If the problem was Cuomo, Bloomberg and the rest of the kleptocracy running the prison camp called New York then they could be simply voted from office and replaced with politicians who minded their P's & Q's.

No, the real problem is that the vast majority of people in New York State want this. They want their rights taken away, their rights and concomitant responsibilities. They want mommy government to take care of them and wipe their faces and bums and kiss their boo-boos. The remainder who can take care of themselves scare the crap out of the dependent majority. Read the comments of any New York Times article about guns or anything having to do with traditional self-reliant American culture to see what I mean.

There is a self-reliant minority in upstate New York but they are aging and dwindling fast.

The gist is that New York is almost assuredly doomed.

If you are a gun owner in New York you have two choices, leave or fight.

 If you leave, be careful when you choose your new home. Don't choose a place where you will be going through this all over again in a few years.

If you stay, you will have to fight. Remember, the media is the prime enemy. They are driving all of this. Fight then with every ounce of your strength. Do what you have to do. Throw a monkey wrench in their works. Protest them constantly. Don't make this easy for them.

Realize that it won't stop with New York. These tyrants will each try to one up each other to make their state gun control central. We will have to be perpetually vigilant.

Remember that gun rights are just a part of this. We now have two cultures in this country trying to share the same geographical location. Conflict is guaranteed.

Pittsburgh Bound

Well. It's been awhile. I guess it's more than past time to dust off this blog and put up a new post. As the title implies, we are on our way to Pittsburgh tomorrow at noon. This will be our seventh NRA convention. Time sure does fly by.

We are planning on doing things a little different for this convention. We are going to take our time and not rush as we usually do on the exhibit floor.

We also are not going to attend the Celebration of American Freedom Mom and Apple Pie Experience or whatever they call it.

This year I am calling it the Hucklefuck.

I really have no desire to listen to Mike Hucklebee gas on about whatever he gasses on about. I particularly don't want to partake the experience from uncomfortable stadium seats.

Denise and I really miss the banquet. But I suspect the banquet in Phoenix is the last one we'll enjoy. No, Denise and I will spend Saturday having a nice dinner at one of Pittsburgh's better restaurant's.

We'll raise a toast to the memory of banquet's past and T. Bubba Bechtol (I miss that guy).

We also plan to attend more of the seminars than we have in the past. We've always had to cut short our attendence to one seminar or the other because we were always rushing hither and yon to one event or the other. We plan to rush alot less this time around.

One of the plans we have for this convention is to sample a few of Pittsburgh's eating establishments. One of the places that we might try is famous locally: Primanti Brothers
Unfortunately, they have seem to have been involved in hosting a local event of Mayor Bloomberg's anti-gun jihad, MAIG(Mayor's Against Illegal Guns) More Here

Now my knee jerk reaction is to say: No way in hell am I going to visit this establishment.

But, my more thoughtful side has this reaction: Wouldn't it be better to kill them with kindness as the saying goes.

Think about it.

Instead of empty shops, thousands of hungry, POLITE, gun owners sporting NRA T-shirts and caps show up at Pittsburgh area Primanti Brothers shops and spend money like its going out of style. This shows the owners of Primanti Bros. that NRA members blow away :) the anti-gun community in both wealth and influence.

In fact this policy works well wherever we go in Pittsburgh. Let's show the dour, doommongering bitter enders that gun owners are happy, wealthy forward marching people and that the other side represents the ass end of history.

Couldn't hurt to try.

Anyway, hope to see some of you there!

YS

Collecting and Taking Guns Apart

I haven’t mentioned my collecting activities as of late. I guess this is time to unveil my newest purchase.

A rifle, the Swiss Schmidt-Rubin 1896/11 bought at Collectors Firearms in Houston, Texas while I was on a trip for family business. I haven’t taken it apart yet for cleaning and it was missing a magazine, but the price was decent and it fills a gap in my collection. Besides, somehow or another I’d already acquired the proper bayonet for it. Now I have the gun that fits the bayonet. Pictures and commentary will follow.

My collection activities are slowing down lately. I’ve acquired most of the guns that fascinate me. That’s not to say there aren’t more out there. There are always more. It’s just that I’ve bought those guns I’ve wanted to own.

I may need to expand my horizons. For instance, I prefer handguns over rifles (most of the time) and semi-auto pistols over revolvers. The mechanism of a pistol is so much more interesting to me than that of a revolver. You see, I take all my guns apart, basically to the screws. There are a few sub-assemblies that have daunted me in the past. But, the Internet now has disassembly/reassembly instructions for almost every gun imaginable and I bull forward with my punches and screwdrivers. What can’t the Internet do?

Because I take my guns apart, I see how the fifty-odd parts (sometimes more, sometimes less) intermesh to operate that firearm. It must be something like the thrill a gearhead has when he (or she) takes an old and cranky engine apart, fixes it, and reassembles it into something that purrs like an overgrown kitten. Guns are my gearhead fix.

I have taken revolvers apart and I do get some of that thrill, but for me the semi-auto rocks. Some have cams machined into the barrels, others have a cam attached to a little ear (looking at you John Moses Browning’s 1911).

Some you take apart by pushing the slide back just so and then jiggering the barrel until a slot aligns with a groove. Others you have to hold together while you slowly separate the parts lest a spring launch itself into the air, bounce off your forehead, and roll under the heaviest piece of furniture you own.

There are even some that are a true jigsaw puzzle of intricately machined parts that lock into place without benefit of pins or screws. I love broomhandle Mausers and already own three of them—more please.

So, do I expand my horizons? That’s the question. That will mean more “Ones From the Vault” (and I have guns that aren't featured on the site). That will mean more money diverted from unnecessary items like food toward the truly necessary like guns. Decisions, decisions.

The Next Hunting Magazine--The New York Times

Knock me over with a feather, a piece of string, or a small pillow. The New York Times is becoming the next hunting magazine. In the last three days, they've published two largely favorable stories on hunting. The first came out on November 22 and covered a new turkey hunting season on Long Island. Yes, Long Island.

Turkeys were almost extinct on the East Coast, but careful introduction and management brought them back with a vengeance. In fact, there's so little hunting in some parts of the East that in the words of one hunter, "They have been dying of old age out here." This hunter struck out, but that's turkey hunting for you.

Then, the Times somehow found another reporter who wrote a story on "urban" hunters. Most of these hunters are deer or wild boar hunters. Most never grew up with hunting. Many had never shot a gun in their lives.

They are coming to hunting as part of the locavore movement. Hunting is the ultimate in local eating. These new hunters are foodies looking for high-quality protein and trying to reconnect with their food. A few believe that they need to hunt to reconnect with their humanness. These people are from New York City, San Francisco and places in between.

I suspected that locavorism could lead to more hunters. Maybe hunting will make a comeback. Also, these new hunters are dusting off inherited guns, buying new guns, going to gun ranges, and sharing shooting and hunting tips. All around a win-win.

Today in History

128 years ago a small event in the great scheme of things happened. This event launched several movies, books, cowboy action shooting "handles," and saved a town from extinction. Yes, today is the anniversary of the "Gunfight at the OK Corral."

If you look at the actual fight, there is little that should resonate so many years later, but it does. Yosemite Sam and I were in Tombstone, Arizona in May. We'd like to go again not because of something that is linked to Wyatt Earp, Doc Holliday, the Clantons, or any of the other bigger than life figures that roamed the town's streets. We liked it because it felt like America.

We are a nation that values our wild west heritage, even if it didn't happen exactly like we think it did. The values of self-defense, independence, gun ownership (and yes I know that the Earps wanted to disarm the Clantons and their relatives while they were in town) are important and being lost. Still, long may that heritage last.

Interesting Article on Hain and Open Carry

I only have a few minutes for a quick post here--while the boss is away, yadda yadda.

I stumbled on a story in Salon Magazine about Meleanie Hain. For the most part it's a dispassionate story about her recent murder, her involvement in the Open Carry movement, and that movement.

The author, Steve Kingaman, obviously doesn't like open carry and warns that it may be coming to a town near you. He mentions the laws that exists in 43 states and that 7 states ban open carry pointing out that most of them are in the South and the laws "...were enacted precisely to prevent African-Americans from carrying weapons in public."

The article is not snarky about Ms. Hain's murder, although that's not true of many of the commenters. Klingaman does show his true colors at the end. He refers to a handful of postings on a pro-open carry site that he considers ugly with their cites of "Molon Labe," confederate flags, etc. From that, he concludes, "The problem with open carry is that you never know who is on the other end of that holster. It comes down to competing visions of what constitutes a civil society." He advocates that people who don't want to see gun-toting on their streets advocate for their vision.

My biggest takeaway: Klingaman is less concerned about open carry per se than he is about those who carry and have views he finds repugnant. He would ban the whole thing than to have "those people" be armed. This attitude is little different from Southern states passing laws to disarm blacks.

Let's close with "civil society." That's progressive-speak for wanting a world where lions lie down with lambs. They fault Republicans, gunowners, hunters, and many others for not allowing them to move closer to that vision. We believe that such a society does not and cannot exist. There will always be criminals who will happily relieve you of your money, goods, "sacred honor," life.

We can strive to improve society, but we must realize that being armed doesn't prevent a civil society, it's only being realistic.

A Quiet Moment: Annie Oakley

As we go through our busy day, on this day we should all pause and reflect. For 149 years ago today, in 1860, the American markswoman extraordinaire, Annie Oakley, was born.

I have a lot of respect for Annie Oakley, born Phoebe Ann Mosey. This woman who stood five foot nothing became a sharpshooter putting on public exhibitions, as a member of Buffalo Bill's Wild West Show, and won many competitions. All this when most women were considered too frail to do much more than crochet.

In her later life, she trained women to shoot. She carried a revolver for protection at times in her parasol (never heard of parasol-carry until I read a book about her sometime back).

Her picture is on the right side of the Ten Ring's photo montage. She was an American icon and we still remember her 149 years later.

Re-Post of WinM-94 Parody

I don't have time today to do a real blog post, work and all that. I am working on another "Gunnie Book Review," so please bear with me.

Thanks to Instapundit's link yesterday, a large (for us) number of visitors are seeing the Ten Ring for the first time. In lieu of new content, I want to re-post my favorite piece of writing. It has been lost in the dim reaches of time (2005, which in blog-years is practically the Middle Ages). This was a parody. Enjoy reading about the WinM-94, the newest, most deadly assault weapon to hit the market.

Even on TV, Signs We Are Winning

Sometimes you just know when we're winning. Last night, Yosemite Sam and I were bored and watched the NBC show “Life.” I’d seen it once before and knew it stars Damian Lewis who played Major Richard Winters of “Band of Brothers” fame. In “Life,” Lewis plays a Los Angeles police detective.

I dreaded what would come when Lewis and his partner are called to a missing woman report and find her dead in a hot tub. The dead woman was running for Senate on an anti-gun platform called Initiative .38 (also the name of the episode). Hence the dread—not another Hollywood anti-gun screed, thought I.

Yosemite and I ended up being pleasantly surprised. The detectives visit a gun maker’s office after being pointed there by the dead woman’s political operative, a rabid gun banner. To make a long story short, the female president of the gun company was innocent.

It turned out (spoiler alert--highlight for spoilers) that the political operative and the woman’s husband were guilty. He decided to run for Senate. He even destroyed the two guns he and the operative had used, among other guns, on television as a campaign stunt. Thus, the anti-gunners not the gun company president were the bad guys.

It is refreshing to see a show take a different tack. The link to “Life” above includes a way to play the episode. As I said, we are winning when even Hollywood doesn’t use trite anti-gun formulas.

A Gun Nut Weekend

Yosemite Sam and I were busy enjoying our gun-nuttiness to its fullest. That also means that we spent more money than we planned. Oh well, such is life. After all, what’s the point of working if you can’t spend the proceeds of that work on something you enjoy?

Friday night, Yosemite Sam and I joined yet another gun club, an Izaak Walton League Chapter here in Maryland. The chapter is also engaged in conservation work, supporting fishing and hunting rights, and other good works. All in all, we believe it’s a good fit. Still a year’s worth of membership and initiation fees does make the pocketbook a bit lighter.

Saturday, we went to the Nation’s Gun Show in Chantilly, VA (thanks to Matt at Armed Canadian for offering to pick stuff up early for us—we saw his comment to this post too late to take him up on it).

Yesterday was cold with a raw wind. We arrived at the Dulles Expo Center around 10:30and faced full parking lots. After parking, we stood outside in line for about 15 minutes with the wind chapping our faces, the concrete chilling our feet. We paid the $12.00 each admission fee and roamed around.

We bought some books, several magazines for our ARs and a semi-auto handgun of mine. We didn’t buy ammo partly because we had recently bought some and because they had few individual boxes. Dealers had good supplies of 1000 round cases of .223, but we’re waiting for pay day and we’ll be in tax-free New Hampshire over Thanksgiving (wink wink.

We saw lots of guns in this huge show. Dealers showed $25,000 muskets, and $25,000 Thompson submachine guns (not the same dealers). Disturbingly, there was no beef jerky. Sad, but true. Ammo dealers and black rifle dealers were doing a brisk business.

We saw media camera crews interviewing dealers and customers. I hope they don’t focus on militaria vendors with their German helmets and swastikas, but that’s probably too much to hope for. We witnessed the humanity that you see at guns shows; ordinary people who simply like to shoot and go to a gun show for wide selections of guns, gear, and accessories all at 15% included.

In short, we came home poorer, tired, and today I am reading about the competitive AR-15, one of the books I bought at the show.

Sad Commentary

In going through the referrals in Sitemeter, I noticed a sad commentary on today’s attitude toward gunnies. A Google searcher was looking for how society views people who choose “riflery.” I may be reading too much into it, or even reading it wrong (see screenshot and you can interpret it as you wish).

At one time in America owning a rifle and mastering it was not something that you would even question. For various reasons people valued those skills. The book I reviewed here has a chapter on a famous rifle match in the 1800s held at Creedmoor and how the public was entranced with the plucky American team.

It’s a shame that nowadays we even after worry about society’s attitude toward us. It’s even worse that we have to worry about gun bans and other such nonsense. Life in America today. Sigh.

Voting with Our Pocketbooks

We have all read of increases in gun, ammo, and accessories sales. Stores are running out of guns, prices are going up, magazines are getting hard to find. The anti-gun people are fuming in numerous editorials and on places like Democratic Underground.

I believe most of the increase stems from concerns that the incoming administration will pass laws that ban sales of black rifles, ban sales of normal capacity magazines, and who knows what they might pass to decrease ammo sales.

The best way to let the incoming administration know how we feel is to continue “voting with our pocketbooks.” When people open up their wallets and plunk down $1,000.00 for a rifle, $100.00 for magazines, and $200.00 for ammo it means that people are serious about owning all three. It means more guns in American hands. It means that enforcing future bans will be a nightmare.

Today is National Ammo Day. If you can’t buy ammo today, get out this weekend and buy at least 100 rounds. In Michael Bane’s words, “Buy, Buy, Buy.”

Yosemite Sam and I are going to a gun show in Virginia this weekend and we’ll be buying magazines (if available) and more ammo. Who knows, maybe another booomstick will follow us home.

Fudds Redux

(NOTE: Yosemite Sam put up a post on this subject just as I was finishing this one. Rather than toss it in the bit bucket, here it is.)

Bill Schneider has gone and started the whole Fudd thing up again. We all know what a Fudd is. Well, don’t we? Just in case, “Fudd” is derived from Elmer Fudd the hapless hunter of Bugs Bunny. It often describes people who are lukewarm on at least some aspects of gun rights, but could mean more depending on the reader.

I think the name Fudd is too encompassing to be useful. Yosemite Sam said recently “Fuck the Fudds” a sentiment not well received by some. By Fudds, Yosemite didn't mean all hunters, bullseye shooters, silhouette shooters, or others who don’t do “tactical.” Instead he defined Fudds as those gun owners who actively work against gun rights—or at least rights to own some guns (see comment #14).

Schneider went ahead and proved Yosemite right. He said, “Losing some of my gun rights doesn’t make my top twenty concerns. If that makes me a ‘traitor,’ well, we have a pandemic of treason in this country.” He would gladly trade some of his gun rights in order to have Obama fight corporate greed, homelessness, and stop “unwinnable” wars. He even takes us to task for saying we would not buy from Cooper Firearms because company president Dan Cooper supported Obama.

Have you noticed that when union members or others on the left agree not to spend their hard-earned money for a cause it’s noble. When gun owners do it, it’s somehow “a mean-spirited attack” (yes Schneider said that).

I have no argument against Fudds if it means only hunters. Yosemite Sam and I hunt and often have as much luck in the field as good ole Elmer had against Bugs. But I do have plenty to say, none of it nice, about gun owners who would throw me and mine under the bus.

These gun owners aren’t Fudds, they’re turncoats who want to register/license guns, ban black rifles or handguns, and support “common-sense restrictions.” We have enough of these laws that don’t work.

Here’s a big difference between them and me. You see, I’ll gladly protect their rights to own an over/under shotgun and a scoped Cooper rifle. In fact, I own guns that the Fuddiest Fudd would love. But, they’re willing to ban other guns that I own and like to shoot.

Oh, Schneider also took the NRA to task and believes that 99% of us gun nuts belong to it. Let's prove him right. If you're not a member, clicky.

There’s a gun show coming up, I think I need more magazines, ammo, maybe another black rifle. Hmmm….

Fudd the Fudds

Sebastian has a short post that questions the use of this term. What can I say, I disagree. I think the word Fudd is a useful term for the subset of hunters who just don't get it and will gleefully vote for someone like Obama and throw every other shooter under the bus as long as they get to keep their precious hunting rifles and shotguns.

As I said in a comment on his blog:

I for one have never seen the term Fudd ever used as a general term for all hunters. If that was the case, I would be a Fudd as well. I just can’t get with the program of making nice with a group(Fudd’s & western Democrats) who hold my rights in disdain and tell me that the government would never take away my guns(unless I own a military style “assault weapon” or a handgun or a bb gun or ……).

We (the non-Fudd's) didn't create the wedge in the shooting community. I have absolutely no problem with them as long as they leave me and mine alone. But they don't want to do that. They have been selling our rights down the river for the last 40 years and I for one have no desire to play nice-nice with them.

How many of you out there have a story about a Fudd at the gun club that was giving you crap because of your black rifle or your less than pricey shotgun? I bet just about everyone has a story.

Maybe when Fudds stop looking down on the rest of the shooting community as nothing more than dog shit on their shoes, I can make nice. Anyone see that happening anytime soon?

American Rifle: A Biography (Gunnie Book Review)

Alexander Rose is an American-born military historian who grew up in Australia, was educated in Great Britain, once lived in Canada, now lives in New York, and a former journalist. He wrote American Rifle as a biography of well, American rifles. Given his own mini-biography (see his website) you might think we would decry the role of rifles in America (given that there is an “America Sucks” school of history).

Instead, Rose has maintained an admirable objectivity. He concerns himself primarily with military rifles. Sometimes he makes room for discussions of what was going on in the civilian market, but mainly as that market would then or later affect the military.

American Rifle opens with a vignette. In 1772, Charles Wilson Peale is painting a portrait of the youngish George Washington who insisted that a rifle be included in the background. The book then backtracks into earlier history of the rifle. Later, Rose states that Washington learned to appreciate rifles as an Indian fighter on the colonial frontier.

Washington became the model of what Rose describes as the tension between sharpshooting and mass firing philosophies. As commander of the colonial forces during the American Revolution, Washington at first stressed aimed fire by small bands of marksmen. He learned that battle still had to be joined with soldiers bearing muskets (in fact, the army had too many rifles and scrambled to find muskets). The conflict between marksmanship and mass-firing continued to affect rifle development throughout United States history.

Rose names the advocates of marksmanship the “progressives” (no relation to people who use the name today) who believed that war could be fought by small cadres of marksmen who would surgically destroy an enemy through long-range carefully aimed shots. He names the mass-firing disciples the “diehards” who believed in throwing a great deal of lead while fighting at closer ranges—much like 18th century lines of musket wielding troops who pointed their weapons but did not aim them.

Rose discusses the development of most of America’s military rifles and shows how the tension between progressives and diehards explain some truly surprising choices in military rifles. For instance, after the Civil War the Ordnance Department believed the “Trapdoor” Springfield had reached the absolute zenith of accuracy and fire discipline. Small bands of marksmen could use it to hit officers and enemy soldiers at 1,000 yards. In this context, former Union officers and others formed the National Rifle Association to increase marksmanship and lead the way to such a military.

Unfortunately for progressives, soldiers experienced something quite different in the Indian Wars. Instead, Indians attacked quickly and tried to get among the soldiers. The soldiers needed repeating rifles that could throw a lot of lead. They pushed the military to consider repeating arms such as the Winchester and others.

Slowly, the army began to adopt repeaters, but even as late as 1900 kept a magazine cut-off that would force a soldier to load one cartridge at a time (as on the 1903 Springfield rifle). Another five rounds were kept in “reserve” in the internal magazine.

Today, we still have arguments between very accurate guns and rapid-firing guns and tactics that take advantage of one or both (see the chapter on the M-14 versus the M-16 especially).

I wish Rose had included more discussion of civilian guns. Granted, most civilian makers have tried to get the military interested in their guns. Also, military developments certainly impact the civilian market (less so now with banning civilian ownership and development of new fully-auto rifles).

American Rifle explains how our rifles came into being. It describes the successful innovations and the failures. It shows that their development was not just one straight line from the Kentucky Rifle to the M4 Carbine. At any point, another road could have been taken. It tells of lost opportunities such as the early breechloader invented by John H. Hall. It is well written and a valuable addition to any gunnie’s library.

Remember what I said about Fudds(or Blue Dogs)

via Sebastian, we have a new name to add to the growing list of so-called pro-gun, Obama supporting Democrats.

John Patrick Williams is a former Congressman from Montana who wrote another one of those screeds about how I support gun rights, but the NRA is now so radical and partisan and Obama isn't going to take your guns.

They must have a form letter keyed up on the server at the DNC.

He starts by asserting his pro-gun creds:

"During my nine terms in the U.S. House of Representatives, I had a 100 percent
voting record with the National Rifle Association. Not once did I vote for gun
control; ..."

He goes on to say how the NRA endorsed him in each of his elections.

Now we come to the BUT.

"Thus, I have been both saddened and alarmed to watch that organization's
three-decade-long lurch toward the political Far Right"

But they still supported him, a Democrat and they still support pro-gun Democrats, like Dan Boren from Oklahoma who spoke at the 2008 NRA convention.

He goes on:

"The organization's primary focus should be on vastly improving game habitat in
America, advancing hunting fair play, and the safety of our youngest hunters."

No, the primary focus of the organization should be what the membership vote for it to do. The membership see the 3 decade long attack on their right to bear arms and they want the NRA to fight that.

Now he really gets out the smoke generator:

"First the good news: The federal government, your elected officials, never have
and are not now conspiring to take our guns."

You have to wonder where this guy was throughout the 1990's, on Mars? Does he not remember the Assault Weapon Ban, Diane Feinstein's famous remark about Mr. & Mrs. America to turn them all in. The confiscations in California, which his party runs, lock, stock & barrel.

Finally:

"The urge to blame President-elect Obama is a transparent example of how utterly
partisan the gun groups and far too many of their adherents have become."

Wow, did he really say that. Sorry to be rude, Mr. Congressman, but have you looked on your President-elect's transition web site. It says, right there, that he wants to restore the "assault weapons ban. And we are the ones that are paranoid and partisan for taking the man at his word?

He goes on to say that Obama's record "somewhat favored gun control" Somewhat! The man is on record saying that he wants to ban concealed carry, ban so-called "assault weapons", the list goes on & on & on. He is without a doubt the most anti-gun individual to be elected President in American history.

But Congressman Williams, I'll make you a deal.

If Obama would say the following, maybe a little faith and trust could develop about your party's commitment to the 2nd Amendment to the Constitution:

I will sign no bill or issue no executive order that in any way, shape or form infringes on Americans rights & freedom to own any firearms or firearm paraphernalia they may so choose to own that are legal at the time I was elected.

Guess what, it isn't going to happen.

Folks, get used to this. The Democrats are going to go whole hog to discredit the NRA and gun owners. They are going to trot out their pet Blue Dogs and get them to write editorials like this which I term I support gun rights but.....

It's going to get worse before it gets better.

Vote For Pedro (er...Vote for Me)

In these times of political strife, there's another election. ParaOrdnance is having a contest for the bloggers who attended the "blogger bash" at this year's NRA Convention. People who vote also enter a drawing in which one person will also go to the session. It closes on July 1, so vote early and vote often.

I am unused to asking for anything on Ten Ring and I had to really think about how to approach this post. I could play the guilt card:
“I’ve given you almost four years of free ice cream. Give me this vote. I don’t ask for much…whine, whine, whine.” I decided I don’t like the guilt card.

I thought about playing the humble card:
“Well, I know I haven’t posted much lately, but I’ve gotten better and though I don’t really deserve it, I would like you to vote for me.” Things to be said for that approach, but not a whole lot.

Then there’s the political approach:
“Okay, vote for me because in your heart you know it’s the right thing to do. A vote for Denise of the Ten Ring will mean there’s a chicken in every pot, a car in every garage, and a revocation of all gun laws.” I can’t keep those promises, so that approach is out.

Then there’s the manically aggressive pitch:
“Vote for me or I’ll shoot Cooper the wonder basset.” That idea is completely out the window, down the street, and heading out of town.

I thought about the noble approach:
“There’re other bloggers who work harder, write more, have more readers than I do. Be sure to vote for them.” I like that approach, because it’s all true. Just look at the list of blogs for which you can vote. Yosemite Sam of Ten Ring is listed separately from me, so be sure to vote for him too.

Then I decided not to be too noble. I decided to say vote for me and if I’m a selectee, I will write the best I can about training sessions, the people I meet, and all that stuff. There that’s the right approach.

Deadly Antiques

I read a post on Say Uncle about a collector who blew himself up with a Civil War era cannonball. I started leaving a comment there. It got so long; I turned it into a post. There that gives me something to write about!

I used to work in a history museum. People sometimes brought in "cannonballs" they had found for advice on cleaning or to donate or sell to the museum. Once in a while, they would bring in a shell.

A shell looks like solid shot, can be fired from the same cannon, and once corroded is difficult to recognize. A Civil War shell is hollow and filled with black powder. It has a hole in which a gunner placed a wooden cone that had a fuse inside (pointy-side into the hole). The base had numbers on it and little holes drilled by the numbers. A gunner could prick a hole by a number thus cutting the fuse to set a rough time.

They would load the shell into a cannon with the plug facing out. If you placed the fuse against the powder charge and fired the cannon, you'd end up with a Wile E. Coyote shredded cannon (if you were lucky). The fire from the cannon blast was supposed to "wrap" around the shell and ignite the fuse. Relying on the fire to act like this is not the most reliable ignition method. When it didn't work, the shell acted like a cannonball, did whatever damage it could to whatever/whomever it hit and then settled into the dirt. Many duds have stayed intact over time.

Cannonballs are collectable as is any Civil War artifact. Someone finding one decides to clean the dirt off and sees only a rusty blob of metal. Some use grinders to polish it up. A few get out a propane torch and heat the rust in order to scale it off. Occasionally, their work does what the cannon blast failed to do so many years ago.

Black powder has a long life expectancy. Even if it gets wet and doesn't get washed out, it can remain potent once dry. Granted, a lot has to happen for a shell to go off: it has to be found, it has to be cleaned, it has to have an intact charge and fuse, and it has to be exposed to heat/fire/spark. As the story illustrates, all of this can happen even after 140 years.

When shells came to the museum, we explained to the finder what they had. We photographed them, measured them, wrote down the finders' stories, and then turned them over to the bomb squad. No collector in my experience disagreed with that decision.

Once in a while the bomb squad would let us watch the bang. Since they placed the shell in a bunker, it was not too exciting. Still, it was enough to prove that ordnance is nothing to fool around with.