May 2007 – Page 7 – Shall Not Be Questioned

Ice Cream Trucks

It’s been a while since I posted a random conversation. It’s spring, which means it’s time for my neighborhood to be treated to the pleasures of ice cream truck music. You know, those sing song tunes that stick in your head to the point where you’re ready to sharpen a pencil and stab it in your ear.

Sebastian: I think it takes a certain kind of person to drive an ice cream truck
Lachrymite: a truly demented one?
Sebastian: They almost have to be. I mean, if I had to listen to the song the one in my neighborhood plays all day long, it wouldn’t be too long before I decide to drive my ice cream truck off a bridge just to end my misery.
Lachrymite: yeah
Sebastian: So I was thinking of what really motivates someone to drive an ice cream truck
Sebastian: I narrowed it down to two possibilities
Sebastian: 1) You really like eating your own inventory
Sebastian: 2) You really like little boys
Lachrymite: yep
Lachrymite: so either your ice cream truck driver is fat
Lachrymite: or he’s a child rapist!
Sebastian: Yeah, that’s basically how I see it
Sebastian: If your ice cream truck driver isn’t fat, I’d pay careful attention to his reaction when your kid orders a fudgesickle.
Lachrymite: haha
Sebastian: You also have to think that the fat ice cream man is eating his own profits.
Lachrymite: so he’ll probably go out of business soon
Lachrymite: which only leaves the pedophile ice cream truck drivers
Sebastian: So really, this could be an entire industry driven by people who like kids a little too much
Sebastian: I mean, anyone else, and they’d be handing the inventory out to the kids, because at the end of their shift, they planned to close the garage door with the truck still running, just so they can get that awful ice cream truck music out of their heads forever.
Lachrymite: hahaha
Sebastian: If I had an ice cream truck, I’d play death metal out the loudspeaker.
Sebastian: It would be the only way to maintain sanity.
Sebastian: And it would drive the hippies away.

Apologies to anyone who might be reading, who ever drove an ice cream truck, isn’t fat, and doesn’t want to touch children. I did not mean to malign your noble, if misunderstood, profession.

Which World I’d Rather Live In

Even though I think some tasks are best left for the police, I’d much rather live in a world where a few people are a little too eager to throw themselves into dangerous situations, than one where everyone cowers in the corner, crippled with fear, and then afterwards complains about how long it took the police to show up.

I think one thing that separates us from other people is we’re a bit more cognizant, and maybe even a little more accepting, of human limitations and failings. I’ve long thought that one of the key features of the left is a belief in the perfectibility of man, whereas we tend to think that’s a fool’s errand.

A person of the left would look at the two citizens, who tried to stop the killer in Idaho, and think “See, that’s exactly why only the police should have guns.” I’m sure many of us at least understand the motives that drive someone to go hunting after a killer, and therefore don’t see things that way.Â We may think it’s foolhardy, but view it as a consequence of human nature, and not something we can, or really should, try to weed from the population.

The left tends to place a great deal of faith in government, and tend to be the most surprised when it fails.Â Government failings aren’t simply an inevitable consequence of a system made up of imperfect humans, but are somehow the fault of those in positions of power. Put the right people in charge; people who have faith in, and are competent in the exercise of governmental power, and the world’s problems can be solved.Â Mankind can be perfected!Â This attitude, taken to the extreme, leads to Marxism. We deal with a much softer manifestation of that, but I’m convinced it all erupts from the same intellectual well.

It explains why the left is eager to trust police as the only ones with the means and authorization to engage in violence. The police are an organ of the state, which is the left’s primary tool.Â The idea that the police are just a collection of imperfect humans that we hire to do the job of keeping law and order, well, that idea is giant wrench thrown into the intellectual works.Â If the police make mistakes, if sometimes they fail to or cannot protect, indeed, if sometimes they actually even harm, then maybe those folks who demand that they have the means to act when the government can’t, or won’t, have a point, don’t they?

But accepting that means accepting you can never end crime, stop foolhardy people from trying to be heroes, prevent the idiot from accidentally shooting himself, or the depressed from doing it on purpose. It means accepting that man is not perfectible, and that’s a tough pill to swallow, especially if you’re, say, a politician or other person of means and influence, that fancies himself as one of those smart, competent people who is just the right person to tug on the levers of power.

Personally, I like living in a world with other imperfect human beings, and where people have the freedom to make decisions and take action, even if in hindsight we find that action foolish or reckless. I think most of the time, most of the people will do the right thing. I’d rather with a government that finds ways to work with its citizens rather than live under a government that just wants to manage them. To me it’s the difference between actually being free, and just saying you are.

Getting Involved

Earlier today I posted about the young man who was shot by the shooter in Idaho. I had presumed the man saw the shooter nearby his house, grabbed his pistol, and tried to take a shot at him. This post by Joe Huffman indicates that he did exactly what I advised not doing in my post yesterday, and went looking for the shooter. Apparently, he as not alone in this:

Another citizen became involved at the scene, Moscow Police Chief Dan Weaver said. The man, who had a handgun and a semi-automatic weapon in his car, was stopped by police as he drove through the crime scene.

Weaver said police initially mistook the man for a shooter and brought him to the police station in handcuffs to be interviewed.

The chief said he was concerned that the two men got themselves involved, especially with law enforcement already at the scene.

A good rule of thumb would be, if you aren’t close enough to the shooter to be able to engage him immediately, then you’re not doing anyone any favors by getting involved. Definitely, once the police arrive, it’s their situation. Uniforms are an important safety feature here, which is why police wear them. If you’re not wearing one, you don’t have any business being at the scene.

I am a big believer in an active citizenry, and I do think the citizen has a role to play in a situation like this, but that role involves keeping himself, his family, and his immediate vicinity safe from the shooter. Bringing someone to justice, that not our job, it’s the reason we hire police officers.

Better Choice Democrat Gun Owners

From Instapundit, quoting Gallup:

Although Rudy Giuliani is the front-runner for the GOP nomination, Republican gun owners are less likely than non-owners to support him. On the Democratic side, both gun owners and non-owners rate Hillary Clinton as their top choice for the party’s presidential nomination by similar margins over the rest of the Democratic contenders.

Democratic gun owners might want to take notice of Hillary Clinton’s atrocious record on guns, and instead look to New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson, who’s record on guns is better than any of the current candidates, Republican or Democrat. Yesterday, he formally announced his candidacy.

More From the Tinfoil Hat

I think it’s quite possible that, rather than an astroturfing campaign, we’re seeing the fact that newspapers just love this “I’m a gun owner, but I support gun control” articles.Â I should be clear that if it is astroturfing, I don’t think the Brady’s are behind it.Â My guess would be the AHSA, but this is the tin foil hat talking.Â It very well may be that the newspapers just dig this gun owners for gun control meme, and are giving people with this idea preferential treatment.

But something sure does smell funny.

More Astroturfing?

Jeff Soyer finds another article, this one in the Roanoke Times, that follows the same pattern I’ve been mentioning here before. As I mentioned in Jeff’s comments:

I have a theory that all these editorials and letters to the editor are part of a coordinated campaign of astroturfing on the part of our opponents. I donâ€™t have much evidence for this, but it seems to me that all of these have been following the same pattern. Itâ€™s like someone took a template and played it out over and over with only slight variations. I just happen to feel that real people have different ways of approaching an argument. I have no doubt there are gunnies out there who believe this stuff, but every one of their letters follows the same template? Color me skeptical.

Here’s another thing that raises my level of suspicion. I think they might have screwed up with this one by trying too hard:

High-capacity magazine ban. I own a Super Nine, or high-capacity 9mm. It can carry 16 rounds, plus one. It never seemed inappropriate, until now. Even for personal defense, a simple eight-round magazine would be fine. Also, a high-capacity magazine ban for all weapons would negate the need for a gun ban.

I have never heard of any 9mm pistol called the “Super Nine”. Has anyone else? There’s a Super 90, but that’s a tactical shotgun. ~~Saying he carries a gun that doesn’t exist~~ [See SayUncle’s comments below] is more evidence that either a lot of these people are lying sacks of shit, or this is, in fact, a coordinated astroturfing campaign by our opponents. What say you all? I won’t feel offended if you tell me it’s time to put away the tin foil hat.

Urban Renewal

With the City of Philadelphia wanting to take guns away from honest people, and certainly make it difficult if not impossible for them to carry them for self-defense, I’m always happy to highly Pro-Gun Progressive’s efforts to clean up his neighborhood in Baltimore:

All of this is risky, but itâ€™s what needs done. Unfortunately, my truck and a ballistic vest is all the protection Iâ€™m allowed in the State of Maryland. Why is it so hard to understand that people will find it a lot easier to fight for their own neighborhoods if the law doesnâ€™t make them do it empty handed? I donâ€™t want to be a vigilante; I just want to give the police the help they need in turning this neighborhood aroundâ€“and have a fighting chance if some miscreant decides to try to take my life for doing so.

I’m glad the other Sebastian wears body armor for his neighborhood cleanup effort, but I have to say, in a similar situation, there’s no law that’s going to keep me disarmed. Â I fail to understand why the Philadelphia politicians want to make sure the good people in their city are stuck in the same situation as Pro-Gun Progressive, unable to legally provide for their own self-defense.

Another Hero Who Needed a Rifle!

I have to tell you folks, I admire the hell out of anyone who has the guts to put himself in the line of fire.

On the positive side, if you can call it that, we found out who the wounded citizen is. He is a mechanical engineering student here at UI, and when he heard gunshots he grabbed his â€œsemi-automatic .45 pistolâ€ and ran outside to try to help. He didnâ€™t get a chance to return fire before he was wounded. That story alone almost brings tears to my eyes. There are many who might call him stupid, or emboldened by his firearm and a fool for putting his life in danger. I call him heroic. He had absolutely no obligation to do what he did, but as a concerned citizen he ran into danger instead of away from it. I canâ€™t help but compare that behavior to the images we saw of cops at Virginia Tech, hiding behind cars and trees as 32 people died. Same goes for officers Newbill, Shield and Jordon, who all perceived a threat and ran to do their duty instead of worrying about their own safety.

I’m in total agreement. I also think the media are shits for failing to recognize people like this for the deeds they have done. But folks, when there’s an active shooter in your neighborhood, don’t go grabbing the pistol. Grab yourself a rifle. I think somewhere there’s a rule in gun fighting that goes “Bring a rifle. Bring 5 friends with rifles.” This is especially true when going up against someone else armed with a rifle. If you have a pistol, he’s going to be able to reach out a lot farther than you can, and you’ll be relying on him not seeing you in order to get close enough. If you don’t have a rifle, it’s time to get one. You can get an old surplus SKS for under 200 bucks. It’s a great investment, and they shoot reasonably well.

Hat Tip: SayUncle

Argh! It’s a Hard Target

I decided to spend tonight at the range to see if I could get a last minute entry in for Mr. Completely’s e-Postal match. This time I decided to try out my new acquisition, the Ruger Mk.III Hunter. I’m liking it so far. I think the trigger is a little cleaner on my Mk.II, but the Mk.III I think will do fine once I get used to it. I was late getting home from work tonight, so my range time was limited, which is unfortunate. I have to say, this golf target was a lot of fun. I’d shoot it even recreationally, but much like the actual sport of golf, the target it also very frustrating in its difficulty. The aim point is smaller than my front sights, so it’s difficult to get a good sight picture. My targets final submitted targets are here and here. Some frustrations:
Continue reading “Argh! It’s a Hard Target”

Ammo Prices vs. Metal Prices

Color me skeptical about metal prices being a prime driver of ammo prices.Â I’m sure rising metal costs definitely have some effect, but let’s do some math for a bit.Â You can get 100 rounds of unprimed .223 Remington brass for 17.00 from Cabela’s.Â Each case weighs about 90 grains, which means a bag of 100 would weigh about 1.3 lbs.Â The current price for brass is about $2.20 per pound.Â Â Strictly on metal costs alone, that brass should cost about $2.85.

If you look at bullets, figuring an FMJ bullet is roughly 1/3rd copper and 2/3rd lead (I have no idea if this is the case, but I suspect it’s the case), lead is going for about a buck a pound, and copper for about 3.40 a pound.Â So 100 rounds for the bullet is going to be 89 cents for the copper and about 50 cents for the lead.Â So the total price of 100 rounds of .223, in terms of material cost, is about $4.25.

So I think there’s a lot more going into the cost of ammunition that just rising metal costs.Â Â Surely that’s had some small effect, but I think the cost of ammo is going up because demand has gone up.Â Rising fuel prices also probably have something to do with it too. Â Ammo is heavy, so carting it around places is expensive when fuel is expensive.Â Overall, demand is high, both because civilians are shooting a lot, and because the military is consuming large quantities of ammo. Â This will drive up prices for all calibers, since machine tools used to make ammunition will be busy with military orders in military calibers, rather than making ammunition for civilians. Â I suspect that new production capacity may not end up coming online, since manufacturers probably expect military demand to be short lived.Â We may have to live with high prices for a while.