Category Archives: Follow up, Part 2

Back in 2012, I was contacted by and asked if I’d be willing to review some ammunition. I said yes and then promptly got busy with life. Well, at long last, here is the review!


As a quick reminder, this is Fiocchi .357 Magnum 125gr SJHP.

We were shooting it out of my Smith & Wesson 686, with a 4″ barrel, and my dad’s Marlin model 1894c.


My past experience with Fiocchi it’s that it’s loaded hotter than other types of factory ammunition. However, the 686 handled the recoil just fine and the Marlin was a joy to shoot.

Deer Hung Marlin

The only hang up that we had was with the Marlin. If the action was not cycled quickly, the front of the round would catch on the upper lip of the chamber, deforming the lead. Greater than usual force was then needed to chamber the round. However, when cycled quickly, no hang ups were experienced.


Whatever the use, Fiocchi .357 Magnum 125gr SJHP from is a solid buy.

Leave a comment

Posted by on November 17, 2014 in Follow up, Guns


Sebastian’s News Dumps

They’re full if good information: “Monday Morning News Dump”


Must Read

Tim at Gun Nuts Media has written a must read article. The Idiocy of “Outdated” discusses Michael Bloomberg’s idiotic comments about the Bill of Rights being outdated and needing to be rethought.

Go. Read. Now.


Nanny Bloomberg

Bloomberg now wants all of New York state to ban big soft drinks via @msnNOW


Civil Rights Victory

Via Joe:

“[T]he Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals let stand a December ruling by a three-judge panel of the court that forces Illinois to adopt a concealed carry law, thus affirming that the right to bear arms exists outside the home.

As Joe notes:

This is a stepping stone to slap down California, New York, New Jersey, Rhode Island, Massachusetts, Washington D.C., Maryland, and others that have “May Issue” permitting for carry. It may even enable nationwide Constitutional Carry.

Hooray for civil rights!


A Response

Earlier today, I tweeted Sebastian’s post regarding the House Democrats’ 15-point gun safety plan. One of my closest friends responded on Facebook:

So, I’ve been quiet on a LOT of gun stuff lately, because I’ve felt that things needed to settle a bit–that I should wait until some actual plans ere put forth rather than speculation about what plans would be. Can I ask you a question now?

Looking at these 15 points, with the important exception of numbers 3 & 4, which I grant are easily infringements on the 2A, how is this a bad plan? Allowing sales among the law abiding, strengthening background checks, cracking down on illegal purchasing…how are these things bad or infringements? The Fathers did’t write, and i don’t mean this with any sarcasm, “the right to easily purchase arms,” (I know there’s still the problem of the AW ban…but let’s put that aside for now), a law that slows but does not prevent purchase of a gun doesn’t seem to me to be an infringement.

The gun rights activists that I hear all say that we cannot in any way keep guns from the hands of law-abiding citizens, and I agree with that. But we must find ways of at least TYRING to keep them out of criminals hands. And the mentally incompetent. How is “Clos(ing) the holes in our mental-health system and make sure that care is available for those who need it” a reduction of the Second?

And I must say that the blogger’s opinion that democrats don’t support the First because the want to “Address our culture’s glorification of violence seen and heard though our movie screens, television shows, music and video games.” That’s not a ban. That’s not a restriction. Wanting to talk about the problems that these kinds of speech create is not against the First, it’s addressing the use of the First–it’s having a dialog about how we as a society view and value violence and in what ways. Is talking about that a breach of an amendment?

These and similar questions are ones that I want to understand the answers to. I believe I”m simply operating on a different paradigm that prevents me from seeing how these things are troublesome. Honestly, it seems that the problem is that it came from the mouths of Liberals.

For the sake of these arguments, let’s say that there is NO way of getting a ban passed, and that it’s a non-issue. I know it IS an issue, and I’m against that ban mostly, but I”ve heard so many of the other things attacked that I can’t understand why.

I am answering his questions here because my response is too long for Facebook. I also want to broaden the discussion. If you choose to participate, please be courteous to all parties involved. Discourtesy is not only unproductive, it also shows that you are not yet ready for the discussion.

Here are the 15 points and my response to each:

  • Support the 2nd Amendment rights of law-abiding Americans

Appears okay, on the surface. However, when laws become too restrictive, you can instantly turn the “law-abiding” into criminals.

  • Support citizens’ rights to possess firearms for hunting, shooting sports, defense, and other lawful and legitimate purposes

Again, sounds okay. Comes back to your definition of “lawful” and “legitimate.” As I understand the antis, there is no legitimate reason, or purpose, to own a magazine that holds more than 10 rounds. In the case of New York, 7.

  • Reinstate and strengthen a prospective federal ban on assault weapons
  • Reinstate a prospective federal ban on assault magazines

Violation of the Second Amendment, as previously mentioned.

  • Require a background check for every gun sale, while respecting reasonable exceptions for cases such as gifts between family members and temporary loans for sporting purposes

Ah, the much discussed “gun show loophole.” The argument usually goes as follows: “Who could possibly be against a universal background check? What are you afraid of? Or what are you trying to hide? Background checks will prevent criminals or the mentally ill from getting firearms.”

Except, they won’t. Background checks didn’t prevent Newtown, Virginia Tech, or Columbine. One can always wonder how many shootings have been prevented, but that’s all one can do is wonder. A concern arises in that a right can be removed simply by bureaucratic fiat. All it takes is the stroke of a pen to declare that anyone who has taken or is taking an anti-depressant to be determined “mentally ill” and thus unfit for firearm ownership.

  • Strengthen the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) database

Strengthen how? I say let the states coordinate with each other. The Federal government does not need to be involved in this any more than it already is. When I purchase a firearm from a dealer, the state of Utah runs a background check on me through both the state and federal databases. A firearm cannot be legally purchased by an out-of-state resident without the firearm being transferred from one FFL (Federal Firearms License) to another, and a background check must be passed before the FFL can release the firearm to the purchaser.

  • Prosecute those prohibited buyers who attempt to purchase firearms and others who violate federal firearm laws

Is this not currently being done? While we’re at it, we should prosecute every single person in the BATFE, Justice Department, Legislative Branch, and Executive Branch who knew about Operation Fast and Furious.

  • Pass legislation aimed specifically at cracking down on illegal gun trafficking and straw-purchasing

Oh, I know, let’s make it MORE ILLEGAL! Also, see #7

  • Restore funding for public safety and law enforcement initiatives aimed at reducing gun violence

Like the funding of school resource officers that the Obama Administration cut.

  • Support initiatives that prevent problems before they start

What does this even mean? Hopefully, it means that the Federal government will start supporting initiatives like the National Rifle Association’s Eddie Eagle GunSafe Program.

  • Close the holes in our mental-health system and make sure that care is available for those who need it

Something that probably shouldn’t have been taken away from the states. Too late now. I’m sure that they’ll find a way to leverage this through the Affordable Care Act, which will continue to push premiums and costs way up. I’d like to know what the “holes” are.

  • Help our communities get unwanted and illegal guns out of the hands of those who don’t want them or shouldn’t have them

This just sounds like a massive smoke screen. “Hopefully, if we keep screaming nonsense about ‘assault magazines’ (I don’t even know what that is), and scare people enough, they’ll demand that we do something.”

  • Support responsible gun ownership

What does “responsible” mean? Is keeping firearms disabled and locked away “responsible?” Are mandatory trigger locks “responsible?” Are magazines with no more than 10 rounds “responsible?”

  • Take steps to enhance school safety

See #9

  • Address our culture’s glorification of violence seen and heard though our movie screens, television shows, music and video games

If they are serious about this, then I applaud them. Unfortunately, our country would have to admit that our two largest economic drivers are pornography and small arms, and by small arms I mean arms sold to foreign military establishments; comparatively, civilian sales are just a drop in the bucket.

“Talk[ing] about the problems that these kinds of speech create…” does not necessarily equal addressing the issue. Addressing may be discussion. Addressing may be doing something because well, it’s what you do instead of something (as SayUncle says). A constructive dialogue is the place to start. Unfortunately, this issue will not be solved legislatively. Not until the people have said, here, this far and no further, will the issue begin to change culturally.

As to some other points. “A law that slows but does not prevent purchase of a gun doesn’t seem to me to be an infringement.” A right delayed is a right denied. Apply this logic to other rights protected by the Bill of Rights.

  • Needing to pass a background check before you can practice your religion, practice free speech, peaceably assemble, or petition the government for a redress of grievances
  • Needing to pass a background check before you can be tried by a jury

When states try to enact voter ID laws, those laws are attacked. All the state is trying to do is run a background check, to verify that person can legally vote.

In the end, this 15-point plan appears to be little more than House Democrats saying, “We support the Second Amendment, but…” and that’s the problem. When you say but, then you don’t support it. Take a look at your significant other. Look deep into his/her eyes and say, “I love you, but….”

This cuts across both political parties and across the political spectrum and forces us to call into question what we truly believe. I encourage us all to do so.


Contact Your US Senator!!!

Sebastian says the fight is shaping up in the Senate. I echo his call:

Every gun owner’s voice must be heard…STARTING WITH YOURS!!!

Call the Capitol Hill switchboard at 202-224-3121 and ask for your Senators by name. Or, email your Senators by going to NRA-ILA’s “Let Your Voice Be Heard” webpage.

He continues:

We are not facing the anti-gun crowd, save Bloomberg. We’re facing the left-wing of the Democratic Party, and they mean to destroy us. They are betting this trend is real, that the country will be increasingly urban, left of center, and more in favor of gun control. They are betting the farm that we’re on our way to extinction. Are we?

Do. Your. Part.


The Once and Future… Part II

I’ve been re-reading Mead’s article and thinking on it quite a bit. What he is saying is resonating with me. One of my Facebook friends commented that she is disappointed that Mead did not provide any solutions. For my part, I think that outlining the problem is one of the largest parts of the solution.

What I understand Mead to say is that our current society has outgrown the structure of liberalism 4.0 and that 4.1 is working against the true nature of liberalism. The next logical step is to move on to 5.0. He frames his argument in these terms:

A liberal is someone who seeks ordered liberty through politics—namely, the reconciliation of humanity’s need for governance with its drive for freedom in such a way as to give us all the order we need (but no more) with as much liberty as possible. In this sense, liberty isn’t divided or divisible into freedoms of speech, religion, economic activity or personal conduct: Genuine liberals care about all of the above and seek a society in which individuals enjoy increasing liberty in each of these dimensions while continuing to cultivate the virtues and the institutions that give us the order without which there can be no freedom.

The question becomes then, where do we go from here? Many claim that America’s two party system is broken and propose moving toward a more European type system with many parties. That might be an answer. My primary issue with Parliamentary systems is that parties tend to focus solely on narrow wants and desires, rather than seeking broader bases. The American system creates, or used to create, coalitions within the party structure. We see this breaking down as the divide between Left and Right continues to widen. As the two primary American parties now stand, I see and understand why voters feel disenfranchised and unheard by their political representatives.

Have we simply outgrown the two party political model that we inherited?

Mean concludes his article:

Now it has happened again. The success of our institutions and ideas has so changed the world that they don’t work any more. We cannot turn back the clock, nor should we try. America’s job is to boldly go where none have gone before, not to consume our energies in vain attempts to recreate the glories of an unattainable past. We need to do for our times and circumstances what other Americans have done before us: Recast classic Anglo-American liberal thought, still the cultural and moral foundation of American life and the source of the commonsense reasoning that guides most Americans as they evaluate policy ideas and party programs, in ways that address the challenges before us.

For those blue Democrats clinging to liberalism 4.1, this is a time of doom and gloom. For those red Republicans longing for a return to liberalism 3.0, it is a time of angry nostalgia: Ron Paul making a stump speech. This should be a time of adventure, innovation and creativity in the building of liberalism 5.0. America is ready for an upgrade to a new and higher level; indeed, we are overdue for a project that can capture the best energies of our rising generations, those who will lead the United States and the world to new and richer ways of living that will make the “advanced” societies of the 20th century look primitive, backward and unfulfilled.

We’ve wasted too many years arguing over how to retrieve the irretrievable; can we please now get on with the actual business of this great, liberal, unapologetically forward-looking nation?

Perhaps this is what the Tea Party (in its original incarnation as a fiscal movement) and No Labels movements are trying to do: move beyond our current political structure of stiff, ridged parties, and seeking common ground solutions to the problems that our country is facing.

The American Republic is the greatest nation in the history of the world. Let’s find a way to continue that success.

Leave a comment

Posted by on January 23, 2013 in Follow up, People, Politics, Really Excited


This is what happens…

… when you sneak legislation through in the middle of the night.

NEW YORK (WABC) — A troubling oversight has been found within New York State’s sweeping new gun laws.

The ban on having high-capacity magazines, as it’s written, would also include law enforcement officers.

Magazines with more than seven rounds will be illegal under the new law when that part takes effect in March.

As the statute is currently written, it does not exempt law enforcement officers.

Nearly every law enforcement agency in the state carries hand guns that have a 15 round capacity.

It’s only troubling because you know that limiting magazine capacity is a stupid ideas.

HT – Sebastian

Leave a comment

Posted by on January 18, 2013 in Crazy Left, Follow up, Guns, Humor


More on New York

Ron at When the Balloon Goes Up! provides a breakdown of New York’s fisking of the infringement on the 2nd Amendment.

I second the notion that any manufacturer of firearms or firearm related products that currently resides in the state of New York should pull out. Come on out to Utah. Our tax incentives should be to your liking and we have the workforce that you need!

*Edited to add:

This bill was passed in the middle of the night by the New York legislature and signed by Governor Cuomo before most New Yorkers had had their morning coffee. My primary fears are these:

  1. Other liberal states like Massachusetts, Connecticut, Rhode Island, New Jersey, and California, will simply use this bill as a template and quickly pass similar legislation before this law is ever challenged in court.
  2. A sudden, radical restriction of firearms and ammunition could lead to radical action being taken and bullets flying. I am actually experiencing some anxiety over this possibility.
    • A brief civil war which threatens the future of the Republic and the Liberties protected in, and not granted by, the US Constitution, or
    • Apathy on the part of gun owners, thinking that the above could never happen, which threatens the future of the Republic and the Liberties protected in, and not granted by, the US Constitution.

It has been said that the Second Amendment guarantees the rest. I fear that the American population at large has been too soft in allowing our civil liberties to be slowly eroded with time. Municipal and state governments, along with the Federal government, constantly attack the First Amendment, whether by seeking to regulate religion or free speech, or by limiting freedom of assembly. The Patriot Act has destroyed the Fourth, Fifth, and Sixth Amendments, and the Ninth and Tenth Amendments have been largely ignored for decades.

The stupidity of gun control is that it doesn’t work. Gun Restrictions Have Always Bred Defiance [and] Black Markets. Gun control is what you do instead of something. The Left admits that gun control will not prevent mass shootings, yet they push it regardless.

Federalism is a delicate system that requires balance. Right now, the system is out of balance. I call on my local representatives, Representative Becky Edwards, Senator Todd Weiler, and Governor Gary Herbert, as well as my Federal Representative, Chris Stewart, and Utah Senators Mike Lee and Orrin Hatch, to work to restore this balance.


“It’s a Big F***ing Deal”

Sebastian talks about the current gun debate and why it’s so important. A couple of gems from his post:

… One reason [gun grabbers have] struggled over the past 12 years is that they haven’t had someone in the White House willing to push gun control. You have a President who is very popular with a segment of American society now pushing it in a big, big way.

Very true. We’ve been winning the battles for the last decade and the war is about to take a nasty turn.

… I think even people in deep red states with solid representation need to be heard from, because we might need their courage if the GOP leadership starts to look weak. I might also need your legislator twisting the arm of my legislator, to hold the Republican caucus together. If your letters focused on general anxiety about the Republican Party, and an expectation that your representative will be a leader in fighting gun control, that would be very helpful to those of us in blue states in Republican-held districts.

You know everything we’ve laughed at the gun control movement about? No money? No supporters? All that has changed…

This is also very important. The 2010 US Census gave Utah an additional seat in the House. I live in the newly redrawn 2nd District and my new congress critter is Chris Stewart. I did not vote for him and I will hold his feet to the fire for the next two years, then work to get someone else nominated if I’m still living in the district.

The Salt Lake Tribune reported:

Congressman-elect Chris Stewart is willing to support some limited gun-control measures if they are packaged in a bill to boost outreach and treatment for the mentally ill.

… Stewart said he would oppose any legislative attempt to restrict ownership of handguns and other common weapons but could bend on banning high-capacity gun magazines for the sake of having a broader discussion on violence.

So, even before he was sworn into office, he’d already thrown gun owners under the bus. Not a surprise for a man who cheated his way into his first Federal office.

It’s a different world. Welcome back to the 90s. Now you know why they were so desperate to get leadership from the White House. Because leadership from the White House is, to quote our Vice President, “a big f**king deal.” A lot of folks don’t know how much we’ve benefitted by having no PAC money in gun control for the past 12 years.

If you know someone sitting this one out because they think the anti-gun groups don’t matter, slap them silly. We’re not facing the anti-gun groups, we’re facing the White House and the whole Obama coalition, and if you think that doesn’t matter, just ask Mitt Romney whether he agrees with you.

Contact your Federal representatives and let them know that we will not stand by and allow the White House to move on this unilaterally!


A right that can be taken away by the state…

is not a right, but a privilege.


The Things I Do For My Job! (Follow Up Edition)

Went to Moab and had a great time.  I got 230 pages into Dracula during the ride there and back.  While there, we spent almost 4 hours kayaking roughly 13 miles of the Colorado River from Hittle Bottom to Take Out Beach.  I went in the drink twice and even managed to lose my wedding ring during my second dunk.  Yes, I know, I shouldn’t have been wearing it but I didn’t think about it because it never comes off my finger.  I didn’t even know it was gone until I was trying to get back into my ducky.  We then hiked up to some fossilized dinosaur tracks and saw some really cool petroglyphs.

All in all, not a bad way to earn 18.5 hours of over time.  It was nice to see some of the residents in a setting out side of the treatment center and to do something that seemed a little detached from “therapy” or “treatment.”

Oh, and my broken finger held up fine.

Leave a comment

Posted by on September 22, 2010 in Follow up, Life


Getting Around To It

Remember a while back when I talked about the RAD Walther P99 that is produced in Poland?  Well, it would appear that Walther will be producing P99’s with similar features here in the US.  From Handguns Blog:

The Night Defense Kit moniker comes from the tritium night sights—as well as from an extended, ambidextrous slide release lever that you’re going to be able to work under any condition. The second I picked up the P99AS I fell in love with the polymer grip, which is sculpted on the frontstrap (almost but not quite finger-grooved, thank God) and has a gentle swell on the backstrap toward the bottom of the grip.

Nothing yet on the Walther America website however.

1 Comment

Posted by on July 20, 2010 in Follow up, Guns


Seen in the Wild

Back in May, Uncle linked to this crazy story about license plates in Tennessee being issued with WTF suffixes.  Oddly enough, I saw one of them today at the Smith’s Market Place in Bountiful.  I think the Blackwater (now Xe) license plate holder adds a little bit of pizazz, don’t you?

1 Comment

Posted by on July 5, 2010 in Follow up, Humor, Language

%d bloggers like this: