Some New Year's Spew...

... um, I mean ... thoughts.

I'm not going to make any silly New Year's resolutions involving weight loss (not a bad idea, though) or anything like that.

What I do want is to try and be more mindful of how I think I should live as an American. Kind of the, "damn-the-torpedoes-full-speed-ahead" attitude. Our country was founded by rum-running, gun-toting radicals who weren't exactly inclined to pay their taxes. (That's not to suggest that I'm going to quit paying my taxes ... I don't think I'd do very well in prison...)

Rather, I think we've largely lost sight of the kinds of people who founded this country, and the kind of country they intended it to be. Those men were brash. They took risks. They craved liberty - true liberty. The kind that entailed consequences. We'd all do well to step outside our little boxes and take some risks, and if go down, we go down in flames.

Personally, I'm going to have some changes coming up in 2006 - mainly involving my job. I don't know what I'm going to do. But when I make my decision, I hope I'll do the right thing.

I don't think people who live truly happily, or who really love what they do, take the easy way out. They take a risk. I'd like to believe I have the spine to do the same.

With that in mind, some inspirational quotes:

"Is life so dear or peace so sweet as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take, but as for me, give me liberty, or give me death!" -- Patrick Henry

"...you may all go to hell and I will go to Texas." -- Davy Crockett
(No, I'm not moving to TX, but you get the idea...)

"Courage is being scared to death - but saddling up anyway." -- John Wayne

"The Egyptians could run to Egypt, the Syrians into Syria. The only place we could run was into the sea, and before we did that we might as well fight. " -- Golda Meir
(Gun owners take note)

And one of my all-time favorites:

"Never tell me the odds..." -- Han Solo

As if I needed another reason...

... to hate the "news" media.

Yeah - turn the guns into jewelry. Great idea. That'll fix all of Africa's problems. Art as salvation.

Never mind the grinding poverty, drought, starvation, history of tribal hatred or even European colonial exploitation. And I'm sure African "coming-of-age" rituals involving pain, beating young boys into men or that untidy female genital-mutilation thing don't contribute to the violence, either. Do I even need to mention AIDS? Take away the guns, beat the swords into plowshares, and you'll live in peace and sunshine and Californian bliss.

Please.

Africans don't need the guns to kill each other. Look at the Hutus and Tutsis in Rwanda. They turned hacking each other to death with machetes into an art of their own. I guess they figured machetes are cheaper than guns and require less maintenance.

You want to know what happens when you give up your guns when you live in an environment rife with tribal or ethnic hatred? Ask a Bosnian. Or a Jew who survived the Holocost.

That's the quick way to turn what would have been a civil war into genocide.

Fools.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10627036/from/RS.2/

"Only the dead have seen the end of war. "
-Plato

And certain members of my family...

... still can't seem to grasp why I "need" a handgun with a 14+1 capacity, or why I "need" an "elephant gun".

And this from an individual who has no blithering clue what an "elephant gun" is. Sheesh.

In case I have to kill more than one large man in order to save my own life.

The fact that I carry a gun does not make me paranoid. It does not make me evil. It does not mean I'm compensating for other .... shall we say, shortcomings.

It means I'm not so immersed in denial that I refuse to see that there is evil in this world. It means I acknowledge that bad people will do bad things to other people who are just minding their own business.

I carry a big caliber because I don't suffer from the delusion that somehow killing a man with a .22 is more acceptable than killing him with a .45.

Bigger, better tools get the job done faster. Last time I checked, I think that was called common sense.

In short: It means I'm prepared.

Living in denial and being unprepared can most certainly get you killed. You don't need to live in L.A. or the ghetto for it to happen, either:

http://cnn.netscape.cnn.com/news/story.jsp?idq=/ff/story/0001/20051228/0711783737.htm&ewp=ewp_news_1205milwaukee

Picture ...

... for my profile. I hope this will work ... I've posted pictures before, but the process of trying to get one into my profile has frustrated me to the point that I'm about to put a bullet into something...

Yeah, I've got a new "need"...

... for a suppressor. No, not a flash suppressor. A sound suppressor. And no, you ninnies, it's NOT a "silencer". Hollywood, CNN and "60 Minutes" lie.

One of my few friends asked (with some reluctance, since I figure he knew how this dance was going to go...), "why do you need a suppressor?" I wanted to break out the 'ol smartmouth, but considering how suppressors have been portrayed in Hollywood (the extent off most people's exposure to that kind of thing), and since most people have probably never actually even seen one (never mind never having heard one...), the question was understandable.

I "need" a suppressor for the same reason I "need" a muffler on my car. Because a .223 rifle is loud, and too much of that will make the neighbors mad, even if they're half a mile away (as in my case). Look at it this way: does this recent rash of lawyers-on-un-muffled-Harley-custom-chopper-clones roaring by the restaurant where you're trying to enjoy a nice quiet dinner get on your last nerve? Think about that. Generally, people like things quiet - and that applies to custom choppers or cars or stereos as much as it applies to guns. Besides, if I ever have to fire my rifle in self defense, I'd prefer that it not cost me (or my wife, or even my dogs) my (or their) hearing.

The Hollywood-tripe-myth of "silencers" gives most people the impression that only assassins and eeeevil people use them. "Ooooohhhh", they say, eyes wide, palms sweating, "then criminals can shoot people and the cops can't hear where the shots are coming from!"

Phooey. A suppressor on a .223 AR-15 will reduce the sound level to around that of a .22. That way 1. I don't piss off my neighbors while I'm practicing 100 rounds worth of double-taps, 2. I don't have to wear more-sweat-inducing muffs during the summer in order to shoot my rifle 3. I won't go deaf if I have to shoot in self-defense.

Besides, how many crimes have you heard of involving a suppressor? I bet none. Consider: The so-called "DC Sniper" didn't use one - he hid in a car trunk and shot people through a hole he cut in the back of the trunk. DC's finest took forever to catch him. Frankly, criminals don't seem to give a damn if the cops hear where the shooting is coming from. Aside from that, how often do the po-po actually make it to the scene while the shooting is actually still going on? Puh-leeze.

Suppressors have ALWAYS been legal (though difficult and expensive) to own. Lots of people have them. Stop listening to those lying sacks of excrement on the "news". Driving on the interstate should scare the living hell out of you. Suppressors shouldn't.

The downside is: on top of the cost of a suppressor (somewhere between $500 and $1500 for a top-of-the-line-Spec-Ops-and-ninjas-use-this-model), I'll have to go through ANOTHER background check, fingerprints, 2 photos AND pay a $200 "transfer tax". Never mind that I go through the NCIS background check every time I buy a gun, AND I've been through all this to get my carry permit. "Tax" indeed.

[Alpineman spits in disgust]

Educate yourself. Nothing angers me like fear driven by ignorance. Right now, I'm considering a model produced by Gemtech. Their Web site is one of the most informative I've seen. That alone makes me want to throw money at them. http://www.gem-tech.com/index.htm

The family that shoots together...

... stays together. Especially mine.

My mother-in-law recently aquired a Remington 870 with an 18-inch barrel. I am utterly green with envy. Yeah, I have an 870, but it's the Super Magnum (though you've gotta love a shotgun called "Super Magnum" .... makes me all warm & fuzzy just typing that...) but Remington doesn't even make an 18-inch barrel for that model.

[Side note to Remington: why on earth not? An 18-inch barrel, 3 1/2 inch shell capability super-magnum home-defense shotgun makes perfect sense to me... It would be practically home-defense artillery. I have some marketing ideas. Have your people call my people...]

Anyway, she seems pleased, which is a relief, considering that we both drove about 2 hrs to Coal Creek Armory (good people - check 'em out at http://www.coalcreekarmory.blogspot.com/) The federal background-check system was down for over an hour. We waited. And waited. And waited some more. (Can you believe I was in a gun store for that long, and the only thing I bought was a Bore Snake!?!??) A heck of a lot of trouble, but worth it.

All she needs now is a replacement fore-end with an integral weaponlight. We'll see what we can do to rectify that.

Shooting is on the agenda for the Christmas holiday. I'll post some pictures.

They want you to believe...

... that gun registration won't lead eventually to confiscation.

Bullshit.

http://www.canada.com/vancouversun/story.html?id=b5054582-7a73-42eb-94aa-a99a9cc4bf74&k=7384

The more information the powers-that-be have on you (see my prior rant on the "Patriot" Act), the more likely it is they'll turn you around and screw you with it. Wiretaps/surveillance cameras/gun registration - it's all the same. Don't kid yourself. Information is power. Power corrupts.

Thanks to K.d.T. for this tidbit at www.theothersideofkim.com.

Part of me wants to laugh...

... but the rest of me wants to cry and throw a hissy fit.

Congress is evidently poised to extend portions of the so-called "Patriot Act". Personally, I hate this sorry excuse for legislation with the same fury I direct at cameras and gun control; but therein lies my conflict.

One of my favorite quotations is:

They who would give up an essential liberty for temporary security, deserve neither liberty or security.
-Benjamin Franklin

What frustrates me is that most of America (and the "news" media, which I also despise) seems to understand what Franklin was saying when it comes to the Patriot Act, but they don't get it when the same perspective applies to surveillance cameras or gun control. I guess that's why part of me laughs while Congress runs roughshod over the non-gun-owning public. Welcome to the world of a gun owner, you wussies. This is how it feels to be a law-abiding citizen, but to be treated like a criminal-to-be.

All in the name of keeping you safe.

I'm certainly understating this, but the arguments for keeping the "Patriot Act" intact are the same ones used to endorse more cameras watching us and more laws restricting our right to own guns. Proponents say, "well, if you aren't doing anything wrong, you have nothing to fear. These laws will catch criminals, but will leave you alone" On the surface, that's totally true. The camera doesn't do anything to directly impact our liberties. A background check or retaining records of gun purchases doesn't directly impact my 2nd Amendment rights. And so what if Alberto Gonzales knows what books you checked out of the library last month? Big deal. The British live that way every day. Don't we all want to be safe and sophisticated like the Brits?

Actually, as most of America is ssslllloooowwwwwllllyy figuring out, it most certainly is a big deal. Now we see what happens when schools stop teaching "The Prince", "1984" and the like. We, as a society, jump on the idea that cameras and gun control keep us "safe", but we don't readily perceive the potential abuses down the road when you hand your government that much power on a silver platter. Gun control keeps you from the equalizing power of a firearm. The camera keeps tabs on you, robbing you of the privacy which is an essential element of your liberty. The "Patriot Act" does the same thing. It keeps tabs on you. See how this works? You give the government more power over you. Power corrupts .... remember that little phrase? Remember McCarthyism? (No, George Looney does NOT get it, so if you saw his crapola movie, get that little thought out of your head...)

Never mind that gun control and those damned cameras aren't really doing jack to keep you safe. Take just two examples: Oklahoma City and 9/11. Guns had nothing to do with either atrocity, and the perpetrators of both were seen on camera. Thousands died anyway. Safer, are 'ya? Are we expecting more from the Patriot Act?

So, when Congress re-authorizes these parts of that disgusting piece of crap legislation, I'd like to think the light (dim though it may be) will come on in the otherwise empty collective head of the ACLU (who won't defend our gun rights, and seem to think privacy only means the "right" to an abortion), the "news" media, and gun-fearing-wussy America. Gun control gives the government more power over you as a citizen. So do surveillance cameras. And so does the "Patriot Act". All should be despised and fought with equal fury, just as our forefathers intended. Otherwise, we end up British - powerless, constantly watched, stripped of the guns that allow us to protect ourselves, and bowing the knee to the very power which castrates us. The bad teeth and body odor can't be far behind. But at least we'll feel all smug, warm and fuzzy in our safety...

Where's the Tylenol?

My hat is off...

... to one of my few friends (who has been my closest friend for quite some time now) for getting his concealed-carry permit.

(Alpineman pauses for roars of approving applause to die down...)

Now, I'd probably get on my blog & go on & on about anybody I know if he got his permit, but any parrot can be taught to repeat the party line. This dude is different. The thing that makes me appreciate the fact that this guy took the step to get his permit is the fact that he may very well be the last person I thought would do something like that. Frankly, though, I'm ashamed of stereotyping him like that. He has truly come to this conclusion himself - on his own. He has stepped up, asked questions, weighed his options, thought it out, and took the course of action he felt was best. That's a thinking man, folks... and I'm ten times more pleased to see someone get a gun and a permit to carry it when that person has considered the option logically and acted on their conclusions. In today's gun-fearing society, that takes guts.

His actions give me the teensy-tiniest bit of hope for our society. If a man (or, certainly, a woman, for that matter), can consider the idea of owning and carrying a gun with an open mind - well, that's a big step in and of itself. This guy has taken a big step - and he's done so boldly. I saw his body language the first couple of times he handled a gun. To say he was "uncomfortable" with it would be quite the understatement. But for someone like that to go from discomfort with a gun to owning one and getting a permit to carry it (and doing so P.D.Q.) entails a degree of growth that I don't often see in people.

Oh, and he shoots his Springfield XD .40 very well. As Mr. T would say, I pity the fool who decides to invade that home.

As The Gun Guy K.d.T. would say, time for The Happy Dance!!

Thought for the day...

"I have sworn upon the altar of God, eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man."-- Thomas Jefferson

[Alpineman wipes tear from eye]

Can I get an "Amen"?