Author: Kim du Toit

Lessons Learned

The Gun Thing

So a couple days back I went off to DFW Gun Range to get a little practice / exercise my Second Amendment rights / piss off the anti-gunners / all the above.

It was Handgun Day (not a holiday, although it damn well should be), because it was time I reminded myself which part of my handguns I need to press to make the boolet emerge from the naughty end.  Here’s what I learned, from the three I took for an outing.

1) If I’m going to use the S&W 637 snubbie for self-defense, the distance between me and the thing I’m defending against should be no more than six inches further than arm’s length.  Seriously:  the combination of that lightweight frame, lengthy DA trigger pull, .38 Spec+P hollowpoints and teeny lil’ barrel  does not lend itself to 1″ or even palm-sized groups in the target — at least, not if I’m trying to get off more than one shot per 5 seconds.  That, or I need to start practicing weekly with the damn thing.  I love the little gun:  it’s light, compact and behaves like a fork — you pick it up, and it works — but it really is a backup gun.

2) Next came the old warhorse, the modified Springfield Mil-Spec 1911.

I blasted off over a hundred rounds of the lighter 185-grain .45 ACP (as opposed to the normal 230-grain stuff which has started to beat up my elderly wrists if I shoot more than a box at a time).  Thankfully, the 185s are wonderfully accurate and target reacquisition is really quick.  I practiced with El Cheapo (Monarch) JHP, which worked just fine;  and when I switched to my hotter carry ammo (Hornady XTP, also 185-grain), my groups shrank still more.  Now that, my friends, is a carry piece.

3) Finally, to cool off, I pulled out the newbie, my Ruger Mk IV 22/45 (reviewed here) because I’ve only fired a couple hundred rounds through the thing since I got it over a year ago, and I’m pretty sure that’s against some state law.

And then the problems started.  I fired a couple-three mags without too much regard for bullet placement, just to get used to the Ruger’s trigger again — it’s better than earlier Ruger triggers, but not by much — and finally figured out where the sear would break in the pull.  Fine.  Time to get serious.

I should point out that for familiarization purposes, I was using Browning BPR .22 LR ammo, and when I did get serious, I started to get nervous:  shooting offhand, I couldn’t get all the rounds into a 1″ circle at 7 yards.  Indeed, no matter how hard I tried — and we’re talking five mags’ worth, 50 rounds), I’d get two inside the circle, then one low and left, then one back into the circle, then three low and left again, and so on.

Folks, I will readily admit that I’m not a good pistol shot;  but I’m not that bad.  I was just about to break out the old jeweler’s screwdriver and start screwing up adjusting the back sight, when I had a flash of insight.  I asked the guy in the next lane if he would pop a mag downrange for me, just to see if it was the gun, or me.  (He, by the way, was shooting a CZ 75B and putting all those 9mm Europellets into pretty much a palm-sized group, at 15 yards.)  So he fired away with the Mk IV, and lo and behold, he too couldn’t shoot it for shit:  either on target, or low and left.

Could it be the ammo?  I pulled out my go-to .22 LR ammo (CCI Mini-Mag), loaded up and let two mags’ worth fly.

One-inch groups, dead inside in the circle.  I switched to the Federal “Auto Match” (reviewed here) — a box of which had followed me to the range unnoticed:  same result as the CCI Mini-Mags.  [long sigh of relief followed]

So as far as the Mk IV is concerned, it’s going to be either Federal Auto Match or CCI Mini-Mag from now on.  The Browning stuff will henceforth be relegated to tin-can plinking duties.  (I don’t have much left, maybe 200 rounds, so it will go quickly.)

But:  I’m still not crazy about the Mk IV’s trigger.  Maybe I’m spoilt, having lately been shooting guns with excellent triggers, or maybe I just need a couple thousand rounds’ more practice to get used to it;  but the Mk IV is on notice — which means that if I find a good deal / trade opportunity on a heavy-barrel Browning Buckmark (with its trademark exquisite trigger action) sometime, I may just go back to familiar territory, so to speak.  The Browning is a bigger PITA to clean than the Mk IV, but them’s the breaks.  Priorities, right?

I’ll keep y’all posted.

5 Worst Things You Can Say To New Parents

Friday Feature, The Worst

Ranked in order of increasing horribleness:

  • “Why do all newborn babies look like Winston Churchill?”

  • “Where did the red hair come from?”
  • “Well, that’s a relief:  he doesn’t look at all like me…”
  • “Now I know why you guys got married so quickly.”
  • (about a baby girl ) “Wow… now that’s what I call a circumcision!”

Your suggestions in Comments…

Big Picture

Bad News, Business

Yesterday I bitched about Levi Strauss and their support for gun control.  Then, on reading about the new Nike marketing campaign featuring that asswipe quarterback as a symbol, I stumbled on this gem at The Last Refuge which, as always, put both events into perspective:

The bigger risk to Nike has nothing to do with Black Lives Matter, U.S. Consumers, or Antifa-like political advocacy. The bigger financial risk to the Nike Corporation has everything to do with geopolitics and a reset of international trade agreements.

You must read it all;  but as a spoiler, let me just hint that both Nike’s and Levi’s campaigns are being driven by a secret textile manufacturing agreement with… North Korea through China.  In fact, instead of bringing the manufacturing of their products back to the United States (which is actually a viable option), it seems that both corporations would rather undermine the U.S. government’s trade policy, just to keep their own foreign business deals going.

Bastards.  Bastards.

Prevention

Crime, Gummint, Politics

The next time some whining liberal tells you that capital punishment doesn’t prevent murder, feel free to quote this article (once you have done kicking them in the balls, that is):

In March, two men were convicted in Newcastle Crown Court of the murder of a 29-year-old mother of two, Quyen Ngoc Nguyen. In a pre-meditated crime of unimaginable depravity, Stephen Unwin and William McFall robbed, raped and bludgeoned this 5ft-tall nail bar manager.
They dumped her — possibly still alive — in her own car, which they then set alight. They posed for ghoulish selfies at the scene.
Both men were already convicted killers, released as a result of parole board hearings.
McFall, now 51, had been freed after serving 13 years for battering to death with a hammer an 86-year-old woman whose home he had burgled.
Unwin, ten years younger, had been released after serving 14 years of a ‘life sentence’ for stabbing to death a 73-year-old retired pharmacist in the course of a burglary — on Christmas Day, 1998. Unwin had sought to cover up his tracks by setting fire to his victim’s bungalow.
There is no parole board on earth which can know if someone is truly remorseful (pictured: Nick Hardwick, former Parole Board chair) +6
There is no parole board on earth which can know if someone is truly remorseful (pictured: Nick Hardwick, former Parole Board chair)
He was released in 2012, because the parole board had believed his claim to feel ‘deep remorse’.

Yeah, he was remorseful, all right.  It bears no reminding that had these two bastards (and the others in the article) been executed, their subsequent victims would still be alive.  Prevention at its finest.

Frankly, I think that the parole boards who freed these animals should also face the needle / chair / gallows.  This was a basic precept of Hammurabic Law, and I for one regret its passing, in this respect at least.

Remember too that our Liberal Class want us to be more like Europe or Britain, and the modern-day “democratic socialists” have included the abolition of the prison system in their election manifesto.

Communistatis delenda est.

Slobbery

Grooming

I’m not talking about your mouth when the smell of steaks grilling over the fire hits your nostrils.  Nor am I talking about Harvey Weinstein’s reaction to seeing a fresh young actress who wants a part in a movie.

Nope, I’m back to my old gripe about people who dress like slobs.  Theodore Dalrymple takes up the cause:

Indeed, if there is one thing that unites mankind today it is casual slobbery in dress.
This is rather odd, considering that so many people seem to spend a lot of their spare time shopping for clothes. The fact is, though, that however much time they spend on shopping, they will always look just as much a mess as ever. They choose, but they do not discriminate.
Our unwillingness, and increasing inability, to dress elegantly represents the triumph of self-esteem over self-respect. We dress to please ourselves, not others, and not looking like a slob takes effort, especially keeping it up through the day. Convenience is all, and it is easier to throw on a few casual clothes than to dress well.

What sparked Dalrymple’s ire was his experience at a couple of airports:

Sitting in two airports last week, in Paris and Riga, it suddenly occurred to me that I had not seen a single person who was smartly, let alone elegantly, dressed.

Now I seldom disagree with Teddy about much, but I do on this occasion.  Imagine this scenario:

You get dressed to go to an important business meeting, so you do it properly:  ironed shirt, tie, decent navy-blue suit, leather belt and shiny black lace-up Oxfords.  You check yourself in a mirror and damn, you look good.

But did I mention that the important business meeting was out of town, and you’d need to catch a flight there?

Now go back and reflect how difficult it’s going to be when you’re confronted by the surly TSA apparatchiks at the airport.  Belt? Take it off.  Shoes? Unlace them, and take ’em off.  Jacket? Run it through the X-ray.  And that gold tie-clip?  We’re going to pat you down and run you through our Magical Cancer-Generating Full-Body Scanner, bub.

All of a sudden, a tee shirt, sweatpants and slip-on moccasins make a lot more sense, don’t they?  And the net result is that you look like a slob, because it’s a big enough chore to dress properly in the first place without having to do it all over again at the airport in front of hundreds of people.

However, while I may make a (grudging) allowance for looking like a slob under the above circumstances, the next scenario is absolutely unforgivable.

You’e married to one of the most beautiful women in the world — an actress, as it happens — and you have to attend a promotional red carpet event with her, to hype up her latest movie.  So you both get dressed and let the limo sweep you off to this important event.

Your wife, of course, looks sensational:

You?  Not so much:

It’s even worse when you look at the pair of them together (and small wonder she’s not looking at him, I imagine, out of pure embarrassment):

This is “dressing up”?  A shabby cardigan, an untucked golf shirt, too-short casual trousers, socklets and sneakers?  Are you fucking kidding me?  

What bemuses me (and I’ve had this thought before) is why Anne Hathaway didn’t take one look at this slob and tell him either to change into a tux or stay the fuck at home.

I don’t care how “fashionable” this little fart thinks he is, or how important he may be in the business, or any of that crap:  there is no excuse for this.

What this is, folks, is a total lack of respect;  for the event, for the occasion, but most of all, towards his wife.  In the old days, he would have been horsewhipped for looking like this outside the home — which is one of the many reasons I hanker for the old days.

Now:  where did I put that sjambok?