…and possibly of all time:
“I bonked her so hard I broke her gears.” — Brick Dollbanger
Also, the best name ever.
Author: Kim du Toit
Too Many Words, Mozart
My dear friend Sarah spends way too much time, devotes way too much empathy and writes far too many words talking about 0.0005% of the population.
There is a similarly-sized percentage of the population who consider voluntary amputation of limbs as a worthwhile life choice, but (so far) this bunch of sad people hasn’t been elevated by progressives and their media lickspittles to a topic for national debate and enforced social accommodation.
Me, I’m sick of hearing about how “transitioning” people get offended when people either don’t recognize their “status” or (like me) refuse to give them the recognition and “caring” that they demand by, for example, using nonsensical pronouns (xir? xey? xooey? they sound like 50s comic book sound effects) in describing or addressing them.
As far as I’m concerned, this whole “trans” bunch may be a group worthy of sympathy/empathy, or alternatively a collection of pathetic, dysfunctional people; but either way, as a percentage of the populace they fall so far down the bell curve numerically that there’s no point in talking or even thinking about them. We have better things to do with our time.
And I too have spent way too much time on this particular topic, so now it’s back to guns.
SHTF Guns: Interesting Take
I stumbled on this article a little while ago, and the author makes an interesting proposition in his selection of decent alternatives in the SHTF (survival) scenario, in that his list includes the Usual Suspects (AR-15, AK-47, M1 Carbine, large-caliber lever rifle), but also suggests the… semi-auto .22 rifle.
Say what?
Now I know, one should embrace the power of the word “and” with the idea, and indeed, the idea of an EBR coupled with a .22 rifle makes all sorts of sense, but I’m not at all sure that relying on a .22 rifle alone would be a wise thing. Here’s Cody Griffin’s take:
The .22-caliber rimfire ammunition doesn’t deliver any kickback or recoil, but can hit targets at 100-yards with deadly precision and ease.
…
One of the biggest advantages of a .22-rimfire long rifle is the abundance and affordability of ammunition. This will allow you to enjoy endless days of target shooting before SHTF and the opportunity to stockpile plenty of backup rounds to have on hand when disaster strikes.
No issue with any of the above, but here’s the (unspoken) kicker: is it better to drop a small bullet into an eyeball out to 100 yards, or to have a decent stopper with “reasonable” accuracy operating at the same range?
I myself have embraced the first scenario, only I’ve attempted to increase the oomph somewhat by having a small-caliber rifle in .22 WinMag (rather than .22 LR) which can, and does, drop bullets into a dime-sized target all day. (I also have a Harris bipod for it, just to assist in the process.) Not only does the .22 WMR boolet arrive with more authority than the .22 LR’s, it nearly doubles the effective range thereof.
“But Kim,” you wail, “what about rate of fire? A boltie is nowhere near as quick as a semi-auto!”
Which is why I have that covered (embracing the power of “and”) by also having my little Taurus 62, with a dozen rounds of .22 LR goodness in the tube mag:
Here’s my final take on the topic, and it should be well known to all Loyal Readers by now.
The .22 rifle (of whatever action type) is not a firearm, but a household appliance like a frying pan — and its ammunition is not ammunition, but a household commodity like sugar or salt.
In short, every home should have one, and under such circumstances, a “survival” scenario will always include both the EBR and the rimfire options.
And as such, Cody Griffin’s list needn’t include the .22 LR rifle, for the same reason that a list of survival items needn’t include “clothing” because duh.
You all do own at least one rimfire rifle, don’t you? One for each family member, yes? And an elegant sufficiency* of rimfire ammunition on hand?
*over 1,000 rounds (two bricks) per gun.
Hearing Protection
From Longtime Brit Reader Quentin:
How often should you practice shooting without ear protection? Every photograph and video of people practising I’ve seen has people with ear and eye protection. But when necessity strikes, you’re not going to have protection. And if you’re in an enclosed space, can not the sounds and flashes be disorienting? So, how do you prepare for that?
It’s an interesting question, and I must confess that I don’t have the real-world experience to answer it properly: people have only ever shot at me out in the open (earning return fire, so to speak) and while my ears did ring a bit afterwards, it didn’t last long.
Indoors? ‘Nother conversation altogether, I suspect.
My thought is that in a dire self-defense situation, the typical nervous response (tunnel vision, slowed-down time etc.) will tend to muffle or even ignore the sound of gunshots*. Certainly, while hearing damage may well occur in such situations, the perception may not be that disorienting — but I will gladly be corrected by anyone who has been exposed to gunfire in a confined space, e.g. soldiers or policeman, either current or veterans. I do once remember talking to a WWII vet who’d been involved in house-to-house fighting in Italy, and apparently it was a common sight to see men sitting around afterwards, completely deafened, and some men with blood running from their ears.
All that said, however, the immediate answer to “How often should you practice shooting without ear protection?” is, unequivocally, never. Not even out of doors. The damage to one’s hearing is far more critical than practice for a situation which, quite frankly, is statistically rare. Suffering some hearing damage from wasting a goblin in your home is, I would suggest, not important. Deafening yourself unnecessarily is silly. (I have serious tinnitus from decades of unmuffled .22 shooting in the outdoors. Large-caliber indoors shooting practice? I wince at the very thought.)
So, my Readers, what say you?
*The noise of gunfire in an indoor shooting range is different, of course, in that this situation is a non-stress one and using hearing protection is not negotiable
Old And New
I see that Honda’s trying to make a go of the wonderful NSX again. For a refresher, here’s a sample of the previous generation (+/- 1995):
…and the reincarnation thereof:
To probably nobody’s surprise, I think I prefer the lines of the older one: more understated, yet still beautiful — especially compared to the supercars of the late 1990s, e.g. the Lambo Diablo and Ferrari 355:
In fact, given that the Ferrari 355 is generally regarded as one of Maranello’s most beautiful designs, I would suggest that the 1995 NSX compares quite well in the looks department.
The new NSX seems to have gone more towards the dramatic lines of the Diablo (and of most modern supercars, for that matter), which is fine, I guess.
(Note that I’m not talking about performance, here: the 2019 NSX has well over 500hp, the 1995 a mere(!) 340hp or so. Yet I would suggest that for the average, or even above-average sports car driver, 340hp should be more than adequate.)
I just prefer performance cars to look understated rather than being schoolboy racecar-poster types. Once again, this should come as a surprise to absolutely nobody.
And of course, when it comes to reliability, I expect that the new NSX will have a mean time-between-failures rate (MTBF) measured in geological time units, just like its predecessor. And its competitors won’t.
Beyond Redemption
When we moved from Chicago to north Texas back in 2002, I have to admit to some mixed feelings. On the one hand, there was conservatism, no gun-prohibition laws, non-intrusive state government, no union bullshit, no Communist representation in the U.S. House; and on the other hand: all the above.
But there was this, the dawn view from our apartment in Lakeview:
…and the view to the south (it was a 10th floor corner apartment):
…and let’s not forget the Chicago River (view of my office window, back when I worked downtown):
But time has passed, and now we have shit like this:
Deerfield Sen. Julie Morrison introduced Senate Bill 107 on Wednesday. It would prohibit a range of rifles, pistols and shotguns and require every such weapon in the state to be registered with the Illinois State Police. Owners would pay a $25 fee for that registration. A person found in possession of one of the prohibited weapons without registration could face a Class 3 felony, which carries a prison sentence of up to five years and a $25,000 fine.
In other words, you have to register your “illegal” rifle in order to be grandfathered into “forgiveness” of your “crime” — and in return the state of Illinois would promise, cross its heart, never to come and confiscate said rifle in the future.
Uhhhh, sure.
Now I am glad I left (and tossed my Illinois Firearm Owner ID — the hated FOID card — into the Mississippi River on my way down to Texas) — and not for the first time, either.
I could live with the freezing winters, I could even live with the Commie Bitch In The House (Jan Schakowsky). But as for the rest? Fuck that.