Latest Posts

Control

Bad News, Technology

Regular Readers all know that I treat the Internet Of Things (IOT) with deep and hostile skepticism.  I hate the idea of driverless cars, “remotely-controlled” appliances and -household systems, and don’t even get me started on “smart” guns with embedded chips.

Here’s a decent takedown of the concept:

After a week of tinkering, he effectively turned the coffee maker into a ransomware machine.  When the user tries to connect it to their home network, it triggers the machine to turn on the burner, spew hot water, endlessly spin the bean grinder, and display a pre-programmed ransom message while beeping incessantly.  The only way to get it to stop?  Unplugging your now seemingly possessed coffee maker entirely.

I know that all this is The Coming Thing, and we should all just bow down and accept its inevitability.  My standard response to this kind of attitude has always been quite simple:

  or the more heated

or even

Stick shifts and car keys, bolt-action or pump action rifles, revolvers, “dumb” coffee machines, house keys, pen and paper… y’all get my drift, right?

Fuck automation, and fuck the Internet Of Things or Skynet or whatever the hell they want to call it.

This post comes to you courtesy of the Internet… goddamn it.

Translation

Politics

From one of the Socialist Party’s prime gun-confiscators:

Translation:  we can’t dig up any dirt on this chick, so there’s no point trying to hold up her nomination.  Therefore, I’m just going to hold my breath till my face turns blue.

Nitpicking

Advice

Via Insty, I read yet another one of Larry Correia’s inspired rants (go thou and read it too, yea even before thou readest further in this here Blogge), but this did catch my eye:

As a former accountant, please allow me to explain why all of today’s newly formed tax experts are fucking morons, and we should metaphorically put a brick in a sock and beat them over the head with it until they shut up.

Far be it for me to gainsay anything that the Mighty Correia has said, but even a half-brick  in a sock will only yield a couple of whacks before the sock frays and breaks.  (And yes, I know he said “metaphorically”, but I’m a literal kinda guy.)

For sustained head-whacking with enhanced hosiery, I suggest a good old Idaho potato, the fresher the better.  When the potato starts getting mushy with use (which takes a surprisingly long time), it’s a matter of a moment to replace it with a fresh one.

And if the local supermarket is closed and a potato is not to hand, gravel or beach sand will work equally well, especially if dampened before half-filling the sock. And if all else fails, take a D battery out of your MagLite, and insert into the Sock Of Doom.  (The D is the optimal size — larger will break the sock, smaller doesn’t achieve the proper velocity or momentum.)

Don’t ask me how I know all this.  We can discuss at some other time whether your Easton Marlowe is better than Calvin Klein, or whether dress socks are a better fit [sic]  for purpose than athletic ones.

No need to thank me, it’s all part of the service.

News Roundup

Bad News

Stuff barely worth commenting on, like Michelle Obama’s nude scene in her Network movie*.


…Jeffrey Epstein was unavailable for comment.


…may as well try to explain Quantum Theory to a dog.


…and why shouldn’t she?  She’s about as qualified as Barack Obama was, when he announced his candidacy.


…which leaves me somewhat conflicted:  ordinarily, I’m all in favor of chopping up random journos in the street.


…which is the primary reason people get followers:  limitless access to pudenda.  And as always, Monty Python supplies the mot juste.


…because they’re mostly a bunch of insufferable nannies who always know what’s best for you.


…good.  The only way this could be any better is if “flogging” was included in the punishment.


…FFS Bobby, just stick to making Mafia movies.


…and imagine the actual level of support if the poll were conducted in Middle America, and not on the Harvard University campus.


…and about damn time.


…hell, why not just call for public vivisection and arena-based child molestation spectacles, while you’re there?

And speaking of child molestation:  if we’re going to comment on something truly newsworthy, how about young Ariel Winter’s buttocks?

*Sorry.

 

Quote Of The Day

QOTD

From Angelo Codevilla:

Let there be no doubt: the ruling class’s focus on Donald Trump has been incidental.  America’s potentates do not fear one pudgy orange-haired septuagenarian.  They fear the millions of Americans whom they loathe, who voted for Trump, who gave his party control of House and Senate, and who will surely vote for folks these potentates really should fear.

Which is all the more reason for millions (upon millions) of Americans to vote for Trump in November, and for people who support his agenda.

Do not refuse to read Codevilla’s article because it’s “too long”.  It isn’t, because his exposition can’t be fitted onto a bumper sticker, and the stakes are too important.

 

The “Guy With One Gun” Myth

The Gun Thing

In this piece, the old saw gets recycled:

As the old saying goes, you should beware the man with only one gun because he knows how to use it.

He explains:

A person who shoots hundreds or thousands of rounds through a particular rifle and spends countless hours carrying that same rifle afield becomes intimately familiar with it. That sort of familiarity quite often means that the rifle almost becomes an extension of the hunter, which usually translates into good results afield.

Frankly, I think that’s bollocks.  While it’s possible that the above may be true, the reality is that a “one gun” guy probably doesn’t practice all that often with it, often relying on ingrained habits to shoot the thing, and if he does practice at all, it’s a few rounds popped off a day or two before the hunting season opens.  I knew a guy in Pennsylvania who boasted to me that he could make a box of .30-30 last for three years.

This is not a committed shooter.  I know that among my Readers, almost all of y’all (except the Brits) own a lot more than a single rifle, shoot a lot of them all year round, and are constantly tinkering with loads, bullet weights and powders — or if not reloaders (like me), at least different brands of ammo — and even scopes, always trying to wring the best possible performance out of their guns.  These are committed shooters, and likely to be far better shots than the guy with one gun.

The only time I’d agree with the old saying is in the area of self-defense pistols, where complete familiarity with your weapon is an absolute necessity.  (If I were restricted to only one centerfire pistol, I’d be fine with my 1911, but I still wouldn’t be happy about it.)

As for the article’s premise  (“If you could take only one rifle out into the field, which one would it be?” ), well, it all depends on the “field”, doesn’t it?  Hunting bighorns in the northern Rockies is different from whitetails in Pennsylvania and Cape buffalo in Africa.

The problem with a “general purpose” rifle — e.g. Jeff Cooper’s Scout Rifle concept — is that it may do a lot of things reasonably well, but not much very well.  It’s a concept that all my Longtime Readers encounter in the hypothetical situation of Crossing America which has been a feature of my writing many times over the years.  (By the way, I re-read the post linked here, and I wouldn’t change anything.)

And while I picked my beloved 1896 Swedish Mauser for that specific occasion, and I know it about as well as any gun I’ve ever owned, I would still not be satisfied with it, and only it, in Ye Olde Gunne Sayfe.