This is either really tacky, or the coolest lamp ever:
Perhaps something Italian is more your style.
Year: 2007
Shotguns of Summer
I like the Berretta 1201FP on the fold up chair.  Nice touch.
Still Catching Up
I’m still catching up from being off most of last week. Sorry for the non-existent posting.
Citori Report
I finally got the Citori out to the trap field. I am very happy with how it feels and how it shoots. Single trap I managed 24 out of 25. Double trap I managed 19 out of 24.
I bet Bitter on the last shot of the box that I’d buy her dinner if I missed. I actually missed! I think deep inside I feel sorry that she has had to come up here so much that I must have subsonsciously gotten behind the clay too much and missed. Yeah… that’s the ticket.
I need more work on double, but I’m happy enough with the single score. It’s a lot more work on the arms operating the brake action than it is operating the pump on my Mossberg. But overall, I like the break action O/U better in terms of being able to hit. I still want to improve my double score, but it’s better than I was doing with my pump.
Rife With Innacuracies
I’m glad to see Jeff Soyer calling out this worthless AP article too. It’s very similar to the stories the media was pushing leading up to the 1994 federal assault weapons ban. No doubt that the media would love to see another one. Even the lies are the same:
“In the early ’80s to ’90s, it was more common to have a handgun in your waistband and the bigger the caliber, the more powerful you were,” Baixauli said. “Now it’s escalated to the assault weapons.”
Gee, that’s what they said about the ’70s and ’80s, when they were trying to pass assault weapons bans in the ’90s.
Another issue potentially at play is the 2004 expiration of the federal assault weapons ban, 10 years after its passage. The legislation outlawed 19 types of guns, including the semiautomatic AK-47.
Funny, I bought my semiautomatic AK-47 during the ban.
The guns are readily available on streets, [ATF agent Carlos] Baixauli said, or can be ordered by mail for under $200.
I would hope ATF agents would be aware that it is unlawful for someone to mail order a firearm. Only federal firearms licensees are permitted to ship firearms through common carriers. Ordinary citizens may do it only in very limited circumstances, such as sending a gun in for warranty service.  Does the ATF not teach federal gun laws to their agents? I’m betting they do, but a new assault weapons ban would be a very good thing for the ATF. It would mean more agents and resources getting involved in enforcing it.  I guess it’s OK to lie, if it’s for a good cause, isn’t it?
Shootings involving assault weapons were among the reasons U.S. Attorney R. Alexander Acosta set up an anti-gang task force of federal, state and local law enforcement officials this year. He assigned 15 federal prosecutors, led by Assistant U.S. Attorney Ben Greenberg, to the effort.
“These bullets are very powerful: they go through walls, they go through cars, and if you just spray the general vicinity you’re going to get innocent bystanders,” Acosta said. “A shooting that might have been an injury previously is now a death.”
Here we go with the spraying again. How exactly does a semi-automatic firearm “spray” bullets?  Any center fire rifle cartridge shares these properties. The press just eats this stuff up. No tough questions, no research, no bothering to seek out alternate opinions, or verifying anything they’ve been told. And they wonder why newspaper circulation is way down.
Guns In Schools: Inherently Dangerous?
One has to wonder whether the Brady Campaign is of the opinion that armed security guards in school are an inherent risk, considering their latest blog post:
I urge everyone, regardless of your point of view on the subject, to watch this short video.
The video clip shows a Federal law enforcement agent, doubtless fully trained in firearm safety, shooting himself in the foot in front of a stunned classroom full of people.
This reinforces the point that guns in school are inherently dangerous. Even trained law enforcement officers can have potentially serious accidents.
Paul Helmke is correct to point out that being in possession of a badge doesn’t automatically make you a safe gun handler. But one wonders why he then goes onto say “any guns [in schools] should be in the hands of trained law enforcement officers.” What magical properties does having a badge imbue its possessor with? Studies have shown that gun owners are far less likely to mistakenly kill someone than police officers.CITE
In my training, I was told that my pistol should never leave its holster unless I’m actively defending myself, engaging in draw and fire practice at a range designed to handle that safely, or removing and unloading it for safe storage. Clearly someone either never bothered to tell the DEA agent that basic rule, or he chose to ignore it. Perhaps he believed his wonderful training would prevent an accident while carelessly handling a firearm in front of a group of students.
My solution to these problems is to reinforce, over and over again, the rules of safe gun handling, for both people licensed to carry guns, and for police officers. Â The more you reinforce the rules, the less the likelihood of poor judgment leading to careless mistakes will be, for all classes of gun carriers.
I’m not honestly sure I understand the Brady position, which seems to be that even trained police officers can exercise poor judgment and have gun accidents, which is why only trained police officers should be allowed to carry guns in schools. Does that make sense to you?  Me neither.
Getting Caught Up
I will have to get caught up with what’s been happening on all your blogs over the weekend. I was essentially out of the loop for three days, unfortunately. Normal blogging will resume shortly.
It Has a Distinct Sound
Bitter has a distinct sound at the keyboard when she’s engaged in what I call “angry typing.” I can even somewhat gauge the intensity of her anger by the nuances of the keyboard pecks. It’s rather amusing, when not directed at me. :)
Schmoozing With the Triangle of Death
I had a productive second day. Bloggers are being treated very well, and very seriously by NRA. The Public Policy meeting spent a lot of time in executive committee, so I spent a lot of time outside. I talked a bit with Amy Lovato, who is Jeff Cooper’s granddaughter, while we were locked out of the meeting. Also got to talk a bit with a new NRA member that Sandy Froman invited along as a guest; hopefully soon to be Professor Lee. He seemed to have some interest in reaching out to the Asian community, and starting a campus shooting club when he ended up getting hired as a professor.  People who are that enthusiastic about the issue are always an asset, as are people who wear Springfield XDs under their suit jacket :)
Lunch table today was Congressman Bob Barr, who was seated away from me, unfortunatly, so I didn’t get a chance to talk to him much. I also managed to speak with Timothy Pawol, who is one of the Pennsylvania board members. You really can’t get two Pennsylvania gun guys together without the subject of Ed Rendell being a shit come up, and for good reason.  We talked about the recent PICS shutdown, which is making me more convinced I need to look into that issue in greater depth.  It was a good contact to make.
I would encourage any NRA member who doubts the organization’s commitment to the cause, or thinks they are selling us out to come to an annual meeting, or a board meeting, and sit in, and talk to some of the people who do this stuff. The NRA is not perfect. They are a large organization that can’t be turned on a dime, and there’s no such things as perfection in politics. But the people in the NRA, both board and staff, give up a lot of their time and money for the cause. I don’t think anyone would do this if they weren’t committed.
In Soviet Russia, Football Watches You!
The New England Patriots have been caught videotaping the New York Jets’ coaches giving defensive signals, and, as expected, we have the the flurry of questions about whether or not the Pats’ victories over the last 6 years have been on the level. A little level-headedness is needed here to separate the emotional responses, like former running back Terrell Davis suggesting that the Patriots be banned from the playoffs for two years, from those of the people who have permanent residence in Bill Belichick’s reality distortion field. It’s hard for myself to maintain level-headedness because I’m a fan of the Patriots and have been since I was 4.
While there’s no evidence that the Patriots have successfully recorded and deciphered every team’s defensive signals, it’s probably helped them a learn a little about teams’ preferences and various coaches’ tendencies. However, I don’t see how it helps you during a game. The only time one can look at the tape and decode everything is at half time. You have to load up the tape and sync it with your photos and videos of the opponents defense. You have to come up with some sort of pattern involved, notify your staff of what it is and then execute: all that in the span of a 20 minute half time. Plus, all of that effort goes to naught if the opposing team switches up the signals at half time. It doesn’t make sense logistically, and seems to be more of a distraction rather than studying photos and making normal adjustments.
Looking at a video tape of a team’s signs to later prepare for a rematch is of little value if the team changes the signs or formations. It’s not a guarantee of success, and it may be a hinderance if you, as an offensive coach, see the signals, put out a play to maximize potential yardage, and the resulting defense isn’t what you expected. I think that all football teams do too much practice and preparation for videotaped signals to be the deciding factor on what play to run or what strategy to take. Plus, all the strategies and preparation and knowledge in the world won’t do a darn thing if your team doesn’t execute. The best thing to do is have a guy with a photographic memory and a knack for stealing signals in the press box watch the other team with a pair of binoculars and quickly devise some way of decoding what the other team is doing.
Videotaping your opponents is akin to corking a bat in baseball. It doesn’t give you any real advantage, but it’s against the rules. It is because they blatantly broke the rules, that I think the punishment of the loss of a 1st round draft pick and a fines totalling $750,000 (half a million for Bellichick, 250K for the team) is fair. Don’t let’s jump to the inane conclusion that all of the Patriots’ wins over the last 6 years aren’t the result of a good football team armed with smart veterans who study and execute well. I don’t want to come across as a stupid homer Patriots fan, but if you’re going to call me that so be it.
Although, I have to ask: Why is that considered cheating? There’s video of every play. The coaches are mic’ed up, and there are shotgun microphones all over the field. There are assistant coaches and staff in the press boxes with cameras, taking pictures of formations and faxing them down to the quarterback. The cameras at the top of the stadium record everything. There are players on the field and on the side lines watching everything and trying to interpret the other team’s signs. There are 70,000+ people in every stadium, watching everything, and possibly recording this.
Because there are all of these cameras around and all of these eyes on them, teams take precautions to mitigate the risk of their signs being stolen. Coaches and coordinators hold play cards up to their mouths and are surrounded by taller people. Making taping against the rules when it’s already being watched, photographed and filmed is kind of silly. Teams are already expecting this kind of “psychological warfare,” and they are preparing for it.
Notice that you’re not hearing too many coaches and team officials publicly comment on this. To whit, King Kauffman at Salon writes “…it’s worth noting that this accusation came from the league, not the Jets, and that the Jets don’t seem to be using it as an excuse for having their hats handed to them on Sunday. I don’t think the Jets have a signal, after all, for ‘let Ellis Hobbs run a kickoff back 108 yards.'” It’s because that everyone has a group of guys on their team that do exactly what the Patriots were doing. Only they’re smart and less obvious about it.
Taping the other team in plain view doesn’t make you a cheater. It makes you an arrogant S.O.B., which doesn’t surprise me when Bill Belichick is involved.