Month: February 2011

on DOMA and the DOJ

/ hsoi / 3 Comments

So the DOJ is no longer going to enforce DOMA.

On the surface, that’s fine with me. I think DOMA is an embarrassing sham. “Defense of marriage” my fanny; its sole intent is to treat GLBT as lesser citizens; to legalize discrimination because you think it’s icky or some sort of abomination (geez.. didn’t we do this to Blacks and other non-Whites some years ago?? how’d that turn out…). Homosexuals aren’t a threat to marriage. The exact numbers vary depending whom you ask, but most have it that the divorce rate (of heterosexual couples) is over 50%. So uh… I think THAT is more a threat to marriage than any fag, n’est-ce pas? I also think that a loving couple in a long-term dedicated relationship where they support and care for each other, and then support and encourage and care for their children, that does more for the positive health and well-being of the children.  That statement applies, regardless of the sexual orientation of the parents. I’d rather see a child in a loving household run by two gay men, than in an abusive, destructive, and unhealthy household run by two heterosexuals. It’s about love and other matters, not sexual orientation. Those concepts are orthogonal.

And now… I’m sure I’ve pissed off my conservative friends and readers, and confused my liberal friends and readers. 🙂

But I’m not here to talk about that.

Nor am I here to talk about the fact that, while people (that support this) are reporting this with a rather broad brush, you have to realize the actual reading of the DOJ statement is VERY narrow. It’s not as big a win as you think it is or want it to be. All it really is is a political statement on Obama’s part, trying to shore up votes for the 2012 re-election. It is a very small baby-step in the right direction, but really folks… you have to look at the actual statement and movement and realize that it’s pure political posturing.

And that’s the real issue here.

Obama is vulnerable for the 2012 election. So long as the Republicans find someone who has a good shot (read: not Palin), Obama is certainly in trouble. Now is the time for him to start doing things to pander to his voter base, and that’s all this is.

But what’s worse? You have a sitting President instructing the Attorney General to not defend the law of the land. That is unreal! If Obama wants to question the constitutionality of DOMA, how about questioning the constitutionality of this overreach of Executive authority! How would anti-gun people react if  a President opted to instruct the DOJ to no longer enforce the 1934 National Firearms Act? Or a President instructed the DOJ to not enforce the anti-discrimination policies and laws? People would be screaming about abuse of Presidential power! But why aren’t we hearing that now?

A tainted win is not a win, and again if you read the actual statement it’s not really much of a win at all. If you really want DOMA to go away, you need to go through proper means to make it go away. If you want to demonstrate it is unconstitutional, then that has to be taken up properly within the court system. This is political pandering and an abuse of Executive power; it should not be allowed to stand.

Updated: BTW, this is the same AG that said he’ll prosecute marijuana users even if state law permits it. You’ve got to love this selective enforcement of the law, don’t you?

And to all you liberal progressive types… why are you standing for this? Or is it OK to do bad things when you benefit, and not OK to do bad things when it injures you?

KICK HIM IN THE NUTS!!

/ hsoi / 2 Comments

People think kicking someone in the nuts is the be-all-end-all solution to fighting or ending an attack (e.g. you’ll hear this countless times in “women’s self-defense” classes).

Well, watch this:

All the controversy about “Combat Ki” aside (if you don’t know and are curious, click here), it sure seems that the guy is taking one hell of a nut shot and barely flinching.

Granted, most people will get hit in the nuts and drop to the ground in a fetal position. But the takeaway here is you can’t necessarily expect a nut shot to have a 100% success rate.

But for all the “Combat Ki” in the world…. I doubt they’re able to condition themselves to withstand a good dose of lead…. Sometimes there are better self-defense tools out there.

That aside, I love watching the video. I love the use of “blue balls” (har har) and the little up and down animations. The constant over and over and over and over and over replays of the nut shot, full speed, slow motion, different angles. Amusing.

Killed by coyotes? What can we learn.

/ hsoi / 2 Comments

I was flipping through TV channels and came across a show on the National Geographic Channel called “Killed by Coyotes?”

 

A talented young folk singer, Taylor Mitchell, is killed by coyotes as she hikes alone in a Canadian national park. It’s the first fatal coyote attack on an adult human ever recorded, and it shocks not only the surrounding community but coyote experts as well. Highly intelligent and generally timid around people, coyotes have traditionally not been considered a threat to human communities. But are they becoming more habituated to us and are they losing their fear of us? In the wake of the attack, scientists, police and park rangers try to develop a clear picture of what happened – and why. And with coyote numbers increasing throughout North America, we explore how humans and coyotes co-exist.

 

 

I remember when this story hit the news. I only caught the last half of the show, but it was interesting. They came to the conclusion that Taylor was killed as a result of a predatory act, that is, they were hunting her… not defense, not a rabid animal acting out of character, but she was hunted. They said these yotes were “Eastern Coyotes”, a hybrid of coyote and wolves; consequently, they have a different behavior, one that’s not afraid of larger quarry. Furthermore they asserted that in a protected forest, there’s no fear of predatation by humans, and in fact there is likely chances for “friendly” interaction with humans thus critters become less afraid of humans. Consequently, any attempts to “scare them off” just wouldn’t work because they have no fear of humans; that you are bigger means nothing.

We’ll never know the truth of what happened to Taylor Mitchell, but it does go to show that the world can be a dangerous place. We are so insulated, so isolated from the reality of the world… most people don’t want to acknowledge or are ignorant of how the world really is (including human predators that surround us on a daily basis). And yes it’s true that Taylor’s case is a first in recorded history. But you know… it’s little comfort to know you’re a statistical anomaly while in the midst of being attacked.

I did take a few things from this.

First, they hypothesized based upon their findings that Taylor detected she was being followed and started to run, throwing her keys, her camera, all in an attempt to flee. It’s very natural to choose one reaction: fight or flight. They hypothesized that Taylor chose flight, and that triggered a stronger predatory response in the coyotes. What if she had chosen to fight? Granted the results may have been the same, but you can’t help but wonder if standing your ground and fighting could have yielded a better result. I also consider that one’s response to such a situation may be biological, but one thing we humans have is an ability to overcome our biological programming. If instead you train and condition yourself to fight, if your first reaction might be “OH SHIT!” but then your second reaction is “YOU’RE GOING DOWN!!”, what sort of difference could that make? There’s often discussion of the wussification of America, how we’re teaching kids to go fetal instead of fight… how could things be different if we raised fighters, not flighters?

Second… I can’t help but think about all those people who freak out over the whole “concealed carry in national parks” issue. For me, it’s not about wild animals, but still about predators. It’s quite common for drug manufacturers to grow marijuana on public lands in national parks. Of course, they don’t want to be found, so if you stumble upon them, it’s unlikely the rest of your day will go well. But I think back to a camping trip with my family at a Texas State Park. We’re just walking down the road in the park and suddenly a coyote runs across the road in the middle of the day. Odd behavior, but it happened. Thankfully nothing came of it, but what if the yote thought otherwise? Do you have a plan to deal with that situation? Do you have a means to handle it?

.44 Magnum does a good job of addressing the situation. Imagine of Taylor was armed. Imagine if she had such an equalizer. Might she be alive today?

 

Mead – my first experience

/ hsoi / 5 Comments

It caught my eye one day while strolling down an aisle at Spec’s,

Mead.

I’ve heard about it throughout my life. One of the oldest beverages. The nectar of the gods. Vikings. Ren Fairs. And so on. But I’ve never tasted or experienced it in any way, other than lore. After seeing it for sale that one day, I figured one of these days I’d have to try it.

Today is that day.

There wasn’t a lot of variety on the shelf. And having no idea what’s what, I picked this one from Redstone Meadery. I picked it because it was “traditional”. The others all appeared to be mead with stuff, like fruits or herbs or whatever. I figure for a first time, I ought to try just “plain old mead”.

The first thing that struck me was reading the label: honey wine. I admit, I had no idea that’s what it was. Sounded interesting.

So I got home, put it into the fridge for a few hours. It was quite helpful that the label explained a few things, like serving temperature. I get the feeling the folks at Redstone know mead is obscure and most people won’t know how to deal with it. So it’s cool they dedicate some label space to the essential questions. A few minutes ago I popped open the bottle and poured some.

The first thing that struck me was, of course, the honey. Wow. The smell is wonderful, if you like honey. That’s what it smells like: a good honey. Then there are other smells, including the “wine/alcohol” that hits you. Not in a bad way, just that it’s not honey. Of course, it’s much less viscous than honey.

The taste?

Honey. Drinkable honey.

It’s actually more complex than that, but of course, that’s the dominant flavor. Even the mouthfeel is honey-like, tho again, not as viscous.

There’s something about it I don’t like. I’m not sure where to place it. It may be the “alcohol-ish overtones” that just don’t jive to my brain: honey isn’t supposed to taste like that! But there’s also something that I really like, because when you bring the glass up to drink and your nose enters the glass and inhales, all that honey smell is wonderful. If I just sit and smell it for a while, it’s really a nice smell; so many subtle overtones. I will say, after having consumed a bit now, I’m starting to feel like I’ve consumed too much sweet stuff. It’s rich. Very vibrant and alive. So while my brain and tastebuds are still figuring things out, the simple fact I keep going back for more tells me there’s certainly something I like and certainly something I wish to continue to explore.

I may end up not liking it. But for now, this is… an adventure. I’ll finish this bottle. Then I’d like to try some of their other “flavored” meads to see what those are like. Then I’d like to try other brands. Might even try it really cold, and maybe even warm it a bit. I figure after once I explore it enough, I’ll know if I really like it or not. But I do like it enough to want to finish this bottle, continue to make sense of the flavors and smells and overall experience, and then go back for more.

One thing that perked my interest. I’ve always thought beekeeping would be kinda cool. Wouldn’t it be interesting to have my own bees and make my own mead? Ah, what fun. 🙂

Off to pour another glass.

Unicorn City

/ hsoi / 2 Comments

I’m not into LARPing, but I did play D&D as a kid, played MUD’s in undergrad… so I jive with all of this.

Co-worker just showed me this trailer for a movie called Unicorn City

Looks like that could be enjoyable to watch.

Fred Flintstone helps me write software

/ hsoi / 6 Comments

Software developers: what do you use for placeholders?

The traditional programmer placeholder is foo followed by bar, baz, and qux. Certainly I use them, but there are times I need something more, especially if I need names.

That’s where The Flintstones come in. 🙂

I don’t know why I opted to use Fred, Wilma, Betty, Barney, Dino, Hoppy, Pebbles, and Bam-Bam…. even Mr. Slate, Joe Rockhead, and any other silly names like Uncle Tex, Ann Margrock, and Stoney Curtis. But in 15+ years of professional programming, The Flintstones are my go-to.

I write this because right now I’m trying to fix a bug in some address book functionality, which means I need names, and so Fred, Wilma, and Barney came along. I got to wondering what other developers use. Thought I’d post here and troll for answers (either here or via the Facebook cross-post).

“That’s common sense, as far as I’m concerned.”

/ hsoi / 5 Comments

Spare me.

“We’re saying that you can’t have more than 10 [bullets in a clip],” she said. “That’s common sense, as far as I’m concerned.”

So please tell me… how is that “common sense”. How it is that 9 is then OK, but 11 is somehow suddenly evil?

Please tell me. Where is the “common sense” here?

Cripes.

Only 3 shots? or… 7? maybe 5 or 10. What’s statistically best?

/ hsoi / 13 Comments

Reader Mike left a comment that pointed to Dan Newberry’s Optimal Charge Weight website and reloading technique.  Thanx, Mike!

Reading through Dan’s writings, I have to say there’s a lot of sound reasoning in there — or what sounds like sound reasoning, because I’m still new to reloading so it may be my naivetĂ© talking. Googling on the topic turns up a lot of people who use his technique and that are satisfied with the results, and I’d like to try Dan’s approach especially since prior attempts at using the ladder technique didn’t quite get me what I was after. But I’m struggling with one point.

Backing up a moment, I do think there’s something to what Dan says. For instance, he points out how Federal Gold Medal Match .308 ammo is a top performer out of so many rifles. But how can this be? A lot of handloading lore revolves around the notion that every rifle is different, even two of the same rifle model that came off the production line physically adjacent to each other. I don’t deny that, but if truly that mattered so much, there’d be no way factories could develop such high-performing ammo, right? One place Dan really gets on with this is the issue of “seating off the lands”. He doesn’t deny there’s something to it, but he doesn’t put tons of stress upon it like others do. Again, look at Federal GMM, because there’s no way it can be set at some ideal distance off the lands because every rifle is different. So while perhaps distance off the lands matters, is it that critical to the process? Dan argues there are other things more important. That isn’t to say the distance isn’t important; I figure if you are wanting to wring the utmost performance out of a particular gun then yes it’s another variable to tinker with to see how it affects your loads for that gun. But first, worry about other things. Read Dan’s website to understand his reasoning and approach.

I think the reason that struck me so much was when I first tried my hand at .223 Rem reloads, there was greater discussion of this issue because Barnes bullets apparently can have a little more of an issue with the distance they are seated off the lands. So I kept agonizing and wondering if this was my problem, if that distance from the lands (or conversely, the seating depth) was my issue in some way. But lack of money to keep buying those expensive Barnes bullets gave out (not to mention my patience). So going into this new round of reloading, I’ve been struggling to find a COAL. For instance, so much reloading recipe data out there mentions the bullet, the primer, the powder, the case… but so often there’s no mention of the COAL. It’d be nice to know the overall length! Most solid publishers of data always provide it, but people often don’t. As a further example, since I’m going to make plinking loads of a 55gr FMJBT and use Ramshot TAC, I discovered that m4carbine.net has a “board standard” of using 55gr FMJBT’s with 24.5gr of TAC to get a generally good-performing plinking load. But… what’s the overall length? I scour and have yet to find it. So I did some measuring of factory and other reloaded .223 rounds that I have and well, my conclusion is to not sweat it so much. These particular bullets have a cannelure, and I’m just going to load it there and see how it does, not sweating it until later in the process. Thank you Dan for freeing me of fretting about this particular issue. 🙂

But the thing about Dan’s technique that troubles me? Only firing 3-shot groups.

Granted, you shoot a lot of 3-shot groups, but each are different loads (powder amounts). So really, you are trying to determine performance of that load based upon a small set of data. I’ve done enough shooting to know that 3-shot groups are great for the ego, but 5 shot groups tend to be a little more honest. I think I read in the Speer manual (if not there, read it from some reputable source) that after much analysis they concluded that 7 shots was the statistically best balance between shooting enough to get a good picture of performance but also keeping the number of shots low for cost, barrel wear, time, trouble, etc. purposes. Plus if I only load 3, what if I get an honest flier where I know I pulled the shot? That’s very easy to do when I’m testing loads at the indoor range… just as the trigger is about to break, someone opts to shoot their 300 Win Mag in the next bay and it rattles my fillings and there goes the shot. So now what? Does that mean I should load 10+ rounds of that powder charge just in case? and if something messes up, start that group over? But then, you’re supposed to fire in a round-robin fashion to try to combat effects of heat and so on, so if there’s one mess up do I have to start over?

All those questions aside, it just feels like 3 shot groups isn’t going to give me what I want. But then, maybe I’m looking at it wrong? Honestly… as I write this it’s making me think. If I’m perhaps (now better) understanding what Dan wrote, it’s not looking for a tight grouping but rather how the groups are generally printing… looking for groups hitting the same general area on the target. Thus, you start to find the harmonic vibration point for that rifle. Once you know that, then you can work to refine it to tighten up the accuracy part, fine-tuning the powder charge, fine-tuning the seating depth (which of course also affects distance off the lands).

Hrm. Is that the point?

Maybe then yeah, taking the more traditional Speer approach isn’t the way to go about it.

Hrm. Maybe I need to just shut up and blindly try Dan’s approach for myself and just see how it goes. 🙂

In related news, Mike also suggested I try out a Weaver T-36 to help me develop loads. I think that’d be great, but it’s going to have to wait. Too much money has gone out the door, so there’s no way I can afford that right now. I’m just going to pull the 3-9×40 and mount off my 6.8 hunting rifle and use that for now. It’ll just have to do. I figure it will be good enough since I am looking to make a plinking load and not wring out every last millimeter of accuracy.

HB 681 – time to be heard, Rep. Workman

/ hsoi / 2 Comments

HB 681 (Relating to an employee’s transportation and storage of certain firearms or ammunition while on certain property owned or controlled by the employee’s employer) is scheduled to be heard by the Texas House Committee on Business and Industry on Monday February 28, 2011.

Alright Paul Workman. You are my representative. You also sit on the Business and Industry Committee. You received an A grade from the NRA (and the TSRA), which I know helped you get elected. I’ve written you on other issues, but haven’t heard anything (sad, given how Valinda Bolton, who you beat, was very responsive). I just wrote you on this issue urging you not only to quickly pass the bill as written, but to also sign on as a co-author.

We are watching. And yes, we will remember when it comes time to vote again… or when you ask for campaign contributions… or otherwise generally go about your business. Remember, you were elected to represent us and do our bidding.

Updated: Good news everyone! Looks like Rep. Workman JUST signed on as a co-author. I checked the HB 681 co-authors page before writing this entry and his name wasn’t there. But it is now. And the date next to his name is today (2/23/2011) so he literally just signed on.

Excellent!