Letters, I Get Letters

People who have trouble logging in through WordPress’s byzantine process, or people who just couldn’t be bothered with that, or people who don’t want to post publicly:  all these send me letters.  What follows is a reply to some of them, grouped more or less  by topic.

1) “Oh Kim, why do you post pictures of insanely-expensive guns, when you know that none of us could ever afford them / no gun is worth that much anyway?” 
— for the same reason I post pictures of, say, Salma Hayek.  Both objects of desire are way too expensive for ordinary men, would cost far too much to maintain, and are ripe targets for thieves.  Nevertheless, we have Ms. Hayek and a matched pair of Holland shotguns below — the guns, in this case, are likely far cheaper than Salma would be.  (Both pics may be right-clicked to embiggen.)

2)  “Have you considered the 6.5mm Creedmoor / 6.5mm PRC for the ULD rifle project?”
    — if I wanted to shoot a 6.5mm bullet at Boomershoot, I’d use my Mauser in 6.5x55mm Swede.  However, I’ve seen what a strong wind does to the 6.5 boolet, which is why I wanted something just a little heavier (like the .3x offerings), especially as Joe Huffman says they tend to work better than the lighter ones up there.  Also, I’m starting to get the feeling that the 6.5 Creed is going to end up like other exotica such as the .300 Win Short Mag and others:  a historical curiosity which may prompt future gunnies to ask, “What the hell were they thinking?”  (And yes, I know the .dotmil are looking at the cartridge, but let’s be honest:  historically, the military have not been renowned for their cartridge choices anyway — especially when after WWII they didn’t adopt the eminently sensible .276 / 7mm caliber, as the Brits suggested we do.  So we ended up eventually ditching the manly .30-06 and choosing the 5.56 poodleshooter, when a middle course — such as, now, the 6.5 Creedmoor — would have been a better choice at the time anyway.)

3)  “Can we get access to your earlier articles in the Nation of Riflemen / Other Side Of Kim websites?”
— sadly, no.  As it happens, even I can’t get hold of the posts — the link thereto seems to have disappeared — and other than the ones I’ve already reprinted, consider them gone.  (Frankly, most of that old content — even that of the Gratuitous Gun Pics — is very much dated by now, so it’s not as great a loss as you might think.)

4)  “Why do you link to the horrible Daily Mail so often?”
   —  mostly, it’s my guilty pleasure (I love reading trash), and also because it’s free (unlike most U.S. newspapers, who have decided that their content is more valuable than I think it is and want me to pay to read it).  I mean, where else could one find priceless headlines such as these, literally right next to each other?

Finally, the DM  offers me Train Smash Women on at least a weekly basis, and I am completely helpless in that regard.

Keep on writing, folks.

Oh, and one last thing:  if you wrote and haven’t yet got a reply from me, please resend your letter.  I get close to a hundred Reader emails per day, and in many cases, I put them aside for “I need to research that more before replying” or “I need to think about that a little before replying” reasons.  And of course, some fall through the cracks, for which I apologize profusely.  It’s not rudeness or even carelessness;  it’s just being a little too busy to keep them all in the air, so to speak.

7 comments

  1. WordPress’s byzantine process…. now there’s an understatement. Many years of procrastination finally overcome with 20 minutes of wading thru BS to get the login sorted. Now you are stuck with me…… at least until WordPress screws things up.

    The impetus was that I found an email from you circa 2007ish wherein we discussed SNO’s first shooting adventure. You did the happy dance and I toasted with Rum! Good memories from a time when Mr Freemarket had a blog sharing his wit and insights.

    Keep up the good work olde sport!

      1. No, but you could download the entire archive of 7055 posts and then search it to your heart’s content. The internet never forgets.

  2. “…the guns, in this case, are likely far cheaper than Salma would be.”

    Amen.

    Once purchased, save for a little oil, some Hoppe’s and patches, the shotguns would be a finite expense, and ammunition cost only when used. Ms. Hayek, on the other hand, desirable as she may be, is guaranteed to come with a very substantial, and frequent, periodic outlay requirement.

    My father’s watchword on purchasing only quality tools rings true: Buy once, cry once.

    And combining this with some of your advice column entry, what if one were fortunate enough to procure the shotguns and Ms. Hayek, and learned that she really liked shotgunning and one was forced into purchasing a second set ? (No, not those, a second set of shotguns.)

    1. > My father’s watchword on purchasing only quality tools rings true: Buy once, cry once.

      I had an uncle who was a contract plumber–built large buildings.

      His attitude was completely different for most tools: “Why should I buy something nice, it’ll just get stolen off the job site.” All of his hand tools were painted bright yellow.

Comments are closed.