We on the spectrum do tend to be a bit mentally myopic -- things that are obvious to everyone else can be completely beyond us. I had one of those moments today when riding home on the subway this evening.
Like many DC area commuters, I use my Metro time to read. In the mornings, it's typically my notebook as I read all the email I've received overnight. In the evenings, it's usually magazines. This evening, I pulled a pile of magazines out of my backpack...
And the only incongruous entry in the list, "America's First Freedom" (the NRA publication dedicated to Second Amendment rights).
So. This is the way others see me... hmm. (And I haven't even mentioned the fact that I've actually been published in most of those periodicals, too...)
Posted by Zathras at May 20, 2003 07:06 PMYou were published in PCMall and MacConnection? Amazin'.
Where you ever published in High Times? Just curious. . .
Posted by: Shaw at May 20, 2003 07:28 PMYes, it was a rather difficult challenge, but I'm capable of rising to just about any occasion.
Posted by: Zathras at May 20, 2003 08:43 PMThought so. The more y'write, the more you get yer name out there, the more folks will recognize you.
Speaking of which, how's the piece coming? ;)
Posted by: Shaw at May 20, 2003 09:34 PMMmmm...Nachoes
Posted by: Shaw at May 20, 2003 11:24 PM"So. This is the way others see me... hmm."
Errrrr, maybe others that have only known you within the past year. Those of us that have been around a while have quite a different perspective. People that only know you through me, for example, would figure that it's 45% tech, 45% NRA, 5% Pretentious Stuff. *grin*
Posted by: Moggy at May 21, 2003 12:04 AMI haven't seen Parrish in over 5 yrs., so, literally, that's not how I see him.
Posted by: Shaw at May 21, 2003 12:21 AMI'm a big supporter of second amendment rights myself but you can keep the NRA; I don't want any part of the blasted organization.
Now I go to sleep and rest up for cleaning all the cosmoline out of the new AK (really truly new, not second-hand like all the other firearms here. Brand new, in the box, wood still oily-feeling.) I've never had a new firearm before. This is pretty exciting.
I know... it's funny about the firearms, since guns aren't even actually a very big part of my life anymore. I only own three of them; I have plans to buy a fourth (a rifle) at some point, but it's a low priority. And I only go shooting about two or three times a year.
As to the NRA... well, yeah, they are basically sucky, and I'm only reluctantly a member since they are not as principled as they should be. The only real reason I'm a member is that it's a shorthand way of saying I'm a Second Amendment supporter. That and the fact that it's one more number on their list to outnumber organizations like the Brady Campaign.
Never owned a new gun, eh? All of mine have been new purchases... I don't like the idea of buying a used gun. You don't know where the thing has been or what its previous owner did to it, even if you strip it and inspect it thoroughly. Be sure to let me know how everything goes.
Yes, the general idea behind writing a lot to the industry publications is to get name recognition. :-) I hope to write professionally someday, although that's some years off yet, and I see writing to the periodicals as a first step. It's to the point now where many of the columnists I write to recognize me and say that they enjoy hearing from me. It's a start.
The piece for Feed is going thru my noggin. I'll be sure to let you know when it's ready. Needless to say, studying for my exam has to have a higher priority, since the test is in thirteen days and I am very determined not to push the date back, even by a few days.
Never owned ANY gun. The NRA really disturbs me - ever seen their "Eddie The Eagle" children's programs? Real scary . . .
It doesn't take much to "write professionally". All y'need to do is start writin'.
We're gonna be updatin' around late Sun., early Mon. Just give me a yell...
Posted by: Shaw at May 21, 2003 11:06 AM> "Eddie The Eagle" children's programs? Real scary
Have to disagree with you there. It's a four-point safety program for children. If a child sees an unattended firearm, they should:
1) Stop!
2) Don't touch;
3) Leave the area;
4) Tell an adult.
Hardly controversial, especially since it's the same advice that HCI, a gun *ban* lobby, recommends teaching to children as well. They just don't like to admit it because it would mean publicly acknowledging that they agree with the NRA about anything at all.
Posted by: Zathras at May 21, 2003 12:55 PMWhat about #0.5? Which would be "Adults get a gun lock"? That would solve #s 1-4 right there.
Here's something from the Eddie Eagle website:
"Like swimming pools, electrical outlets, matchbooks and household poison, (firearms are) treated simply as a fact of life."
Um, I've never seen anyone throw a swimming pool, matchbook, an electical outlet or even a bottle of Clorox at someone else as a weapon before. Of course, I dunno what they do in those urban areas anymore. So anything goes . . .
Posted by: Shaw at May 21, 2003 02:18 PMWaitaminute WAITMINUTE . . .
1) Stop!
2) Don't touch;
3) Leave the area;
4) Tell an adult.
Aren't those the rules for when you have Michael Jackson as a babysitter?
Maybe it should be Tito The Eagle - or maybe even Latoya the Bi*ch?
Posted by: Shaw at May 21, 2003 02:20 PMYes, obviously, the gun lock is a good idea -- my guns are all locked as well. Even so, however, accidents will happen; it's simply a fact that no matter how careful and conscientious you are, you will occasionally forget to lock your gun. It's that simple, and that's why when you receive gun safety training, you receive a lot of instructions that would seem to be redundant (for example, not putting your finger on the trigger *and* keeping the gun pointed in a safe direction... the other rules are meant to compensate in case you happen to forget one, which inevitably happens no matter how well trained you are).
> Um, I've never seen anyone throw a swimming
> pool, matchbook, an electical outlet or even a
> bottle of Clorox at someone else as a weapon
> before.
True, but then the NRA didn't say they were all weapons, it said they were all *facts of life*. And they are.
Posted by: Zathras at May 21, 2003 02:43 PMNo - they said that a gun was a fact of life just like a swimming pool, matchbox etc. - yet they made it seem like they were weapons; they were comparing apples to oranges.
That and da art on the page stinx. Looks like some bad early 80's nephew art dude's drew for them...
Posted by: Shaw at May 21, 2003 03:06 PMWell, there are more homes with guns than there are with swimming pools (a lot more, in fact... guns are present in 55% of all homes in the US, and we know that 55% of all homes don't have swimming pools). Plus, more children die in swimming pools than die from firearms accidents, so the comparison doesn't really strike me
I can't speak to the skills of the NRA webmaster, however.
Posted by: Zathras at May 21, 2003 03:20 PMWell, I dunno about that. I just think that you can't compare throwin' an electrical outlet at someone to shooting a gun. That and satistics seem to always be wrong about everything.
NRA artist, not webmaster...
Posted by: Shaw at May 21, 2003 03:23 PM*throws an electrical outlet at Shaw and pushes him into the swimming pool, then lights a match*
Posted by: Zathras at May 21, 2003 03:26 PM*AAAAAAIEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!!!*
Wait - waitaminute?! I'm not hurt! I'm only wet!
At least you didnt get Michael Jackson as my babysitter - that woulda hurt...
Posted by: Shaw at May 21, 2003 03:48 PMAt the risk of being a 'sissy' :) I like adult air guns. You can shoot all day for pennies (1000 rounds for $15) even indoors :-0, no loud noise, and they are some of the most accurate guns in the world.
I have a Beeman R-7 with a telescopic sight. When I want to go "big game hunting" I put out some rotten meat and pick off the yellow jackets and flies from about 20 feet :) I can do "she loves me, she loves me not" with a daisy at around the same distance :)
Posted by: Matt at May 22, 2003 05:43 PM>>
There's not much point in my joining the NRA because they are not for me. The NRA is in the breast pocket of U.S. firearms manufacturers. The organization encourages snobbery against imported firearms, lower priced firearms and used firearms. The NRA actively lobbied to make importation of certain firearms illegal and the NRA is behind the California ban of "ring of fire" handguns (which are now, ironically, guns manufactured in a state where no one can legally buy them.) As for the legal protection the NRA promises, this is a FOAF story, but I have heard from several life-long NRA members that the NRA did not step up to bat for them. Why would I want to join an organization that is against every gun I own (I don't have a single U.S. made firearm) that I can't trust to keep their promises to me?
>>
I say I'm a second amendment supporter by voting and owning firearms.
I'd guess my membership in Women Against Gun Control sends a message, too, but not as loud as message as voting and bearing arms.
Heh, that reminds me of a quote. I don't know who said this, but I like the saying:
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of Liberty and Religious Freedom: Soap, Ballot, Jury, and Ammo. Use in that order."
>>
Numbers will only affect the Brady bill if those numbers all remember to vote.
>>
Buying a used gun is little different from buying a used automobile or a used house. You have to have a little better idea of what you're doing and it doesn't hurt to have a professional check it out before you pay for it, but there's no real reason why a used firearm can't be a good firearm.
Also, I prefer the old military rifles, especially the ones from communist countries. They are elegant in their simplicity and there just isn't that much that can go wrong with them without it being obvious from just looking at it. I have a 1916 Spanish Mauser and it is a wonderful rifle. I couldn't have a 1916 Spanish Mauser if I only insisted on buying new guns. I have a 1937 Turkish Mauser that appears to be reworked parts from Mauser 98 GEW World War I-era rifles, with some Imperial inspection marks and crests remaining on the receiver bottom and bolt pieces. It's fascinating to have a piece of history and to fire a weapon that was used before my grandparents were born. And I do trust these rifles implicitly. They are fine pieces of machinery and will probably still be working just fine long after I am dead (assuming there's still ammo available for them. I use surplus ammo in them as it is.)
Another reason I love old military rifles is that they have been proven to function well under crap conditions. Here in the high deserts of Idaho, it gets hot and dusty and windy and I just can't use a firearm that's finicky and delicate and craps out on me when it gets a little bit of dust or dirt in it.
>>
I'm very pleased with it. It's so easy to take apart, even for my small hands! After grumbling at the SKS, dismantling the SAR for cleaning is a delight (no tools required!!!!) This is a rifle that was specifically designed for women in combat and it shows. I don't feel like I'm playing with daddy's guns with this one - it fits me. And the little details are so nice. Everything is designed to be idiot-proof and that makes using and maintaining the weapon so much smoother than I'm used to.
And it's just pretty. Here are a couple of impromptu photos of it:
http://www.realm-of-shade.com/sparrow/photos/firearms
I'm quite pleased.
>>
I don't have children, I don't plan to have children, I don't allow children in my home. I see no need to put gun locks on my guns. All a gun lock means is that a criminal breaking into my home gets that much extra time to get the jump on me while I'm busy unlocking and loading my firearm. I keep my firearms loaded and unlocked at home and within easy reach of the bed. Should an intruder break into my home, I don't want to be fumbling with a gun lock key while they shoot me.
>>
That's why I like my .22 rifles and pistol. .22 is quiet (you can even get subsonic), accurate (I can put a bullet in the same hole as the last one at 20 yards three times out of seven) and, while not as cheap as an air gun, inexpensive to shoot (about $30/1000.) Additionally, you can get tracer bullets in .22 which can be a lot of fun.
While my little .22s seem tame in comparison to guns firing 7.62x54R (ten cents per round) and 7.62 NATO/.308, I do keep in mind that a .22 can still kill. California's notorious Zodiac Killer committed all his murders with a .22, often killing victims with a single shot. The .22 is even more insidious because it can be legally silenced with subsonic ammunition.
Yet lawmakers don't seem to feel threatened by my little, easily concealed .22 pistol, focusing their energies on firearms like my Intertec Tec-9 AB-10 (there's a picture of it in the above-mentioned firearms directory as well) that's very difficult to conceal and very loud when used. Go figure.
Posted by: Sparrow at May 22, 2003 07:56 PMWell, I can see that I'll have to come up with a different way to quote passages. I used the "AOL method" of enclosing quoted text in sets of angle brackets but that just ended up deleting the quoted text and opening brackets. I can't use italics here and quotation marks aren't vivid enough to set quoted material apart. Different monitors wrap at different points so I'm not sure where to line break for carats. Maybe next time I'll try asterisks.
Sparrow, I largely agree with everything you've said... yes, the NRA is a compromise lobby -- as I said above, they are not as principled as they should be. (Although I've never heard of them disparaging imported firearms, I'll have to look into that... now that you mention it, the only domestic I own is my Mossberg.)
As to gun locks -- no, I have no children in my house either and typically don't allow them, but I also live alone, so I keep the guns locked when I'm not there. When I said I "keep my guns locked", I meant that I keep them locked when they're not in use. When I'm at home, at least one gun *is* in use in that I keep it ready for home defense, as you do.
BTW, I am also a member of WAGC. :-)
You have a Tec-9, eh? How does that work for you? I haven't heard very many good things about that one.
"yes, the NRA is a compromise lobby -- as I said above, they are not as principled as they should be."
I get so tired of their opinions being presented as some monolith of "our side" of the debate. If more people looked at what the NRA supports and decided to join or not join based on the real issues, maybe the NRA would become a little smaller and instead of every single article about guns quoting Mr. LaFoote or however you spell his name, we'd see a diversity of opinions - military experts, university professors and so on - that would more accurately reflect the real views of the gun-owning American citizen.
The NRA leader doesn't present well to the other side and the opinions put forth are often half-truths. I've got to go now but I'll say more when I get home.
"now that you mention it, the only domestic I own is my Mossberg."
I've been curious about what you have (if you don't mind saying.) If you want, I'll list out what I have, but be prepared for a long list.
"BTW, I am also a member of WAGC. :-)"
Why?
"You have a Tec-9, eh? How does that work for you? I haven't heard very many good things about that one."
It's very durable. I'm about to go out to the range and am planning on doing some target shooting for photographs because everyone keeps telling me it's "not very accurate" but so far that hasn't been my experience. Of course if you're just spraying bullets higgledy-piggledy, pretending to be Al Capone or something, well, no, it's not going to be very accurate (unless you are.)
It's not as easy to take apart as our Makarovs, but it's not too terrible. My partner made a photoessay explaining how to disassemble it and put it online:
http://robert.furtkamp.com/tec9-disassembly/index.php
Okay, I'm back home again. One of the tec-9 mags doesn't work right - jams when you put more than 19 bullets in it - but the gun itself works beautifully. We took several different pieces out with us and one thing I noticed with amusement is that the tec-9 has less than half the kick of the Makarov or Tokarev. I've got a photo of my target that I'll be putting online later tonight.
The AK is really nice. There's a noticeable kick (halfway through the 30-round magazine I had to re-seat the rifle on my shoulder) but not a bad kick -- definitely nothing like a mauser! LOL!
We came home and sat on the porch cleaning our firearms and both noted that neighbors who previously (before ever seeing us with firearms) had never spoken to us or only given us dirty looks when they saw us were suddenly very nice, smiling and greeting us. How odd.
Posted by: Sparrow at May 23, 2003 11:28 PMRob put up a photo showing what I hit when spraying bullets at 20 yards with the Tec-9. Not too bad for a firearm I'm not yet familiar with.
small version:
http://robert.furtkamp.com/guns/bird-tec-9-target-small.jpg
bigger version:
http://robert.furtkamp.com/guns/bird-tec-9-target.jpg
Overall, I'm pleased. It does the job and we didn't get it for precise target shooting so I don't expect it to be as accurate as an Olympic target rifle.
Posted by: Sparrow at May 24, 2003 12:03 AMHmm - most on target, and one up the silhouette's left nostril :)
Posted by: Matt at May 25, 2003 12:28 AMUp its nostril? LOL. I thought my two head shots were roughly neck and eyebrow but I'm not so hot at gauging where face elements are on a blank blue head.
I reckon a nostril shot could be counted as a kill shot.
