(By the way, I think that's a pretty cool ammo pic -- of Federal .45 Hydra-Shok -- I photographed this morning...)

We now resume our regularly scheduled programming...

There isn't a whole lot of other gun news about right now so I guess this is a wrap for this week. Seven kind people have made donations to the cause and I hope a few more of you will consider doing the same if you support what I'm blathering away about here at Alphecca.

As usual, I take weekends off to recharge and reload so I'll see you all Monday. Thanks for stopping by!

I discussed California's (L.A. county) trying to ban the .50 caliber gun last week. Now a new item from the Press Telegram forwarns it might be a statewide ban:

SACRAMENTO The Assembly approved a bill Wednesday that would add a high-powered rifle to the state's list of dangerous weapons. The .50-caliber BMG rifle is currently classified as a long gun, just as a hunting rifle, but is far more powerful, said Assemblyman Paul Koretz.

"This rifle can accurately hit targets more than one mile away,' he said.

Under the bill, a criminal using the weapon would face up to 12 years in prison.

People who already own the guns would be allowed to keep them, but would have to register with the state Department of Justice.

Once again, we have a liberal state legislature taking another step towards banning all guns. How's that, you say?

Because by their very nature, all guns are "dangerous weapons" when used by mutant criminals. Or to use Feinstein's lame bill, "assault weapons." And as I've said before, they (the guns) aren't dangerous when used by law abiding citizens correctly. Once again we have legislation based on a "scary sounding caliber" or on cosmetics or on magazine capacity. They are trying to outlaw a verb rather than a noun.

The problem is that this just let's their big ugly foot further in the door. After all, if they are going to ban "dangerous weapons" (or require "stand on your head" permit processes to acquire one) and all weapons are dangerous, what's to stop them from banning any other gun. A well aimed .22 is just as deadly. And under normal conditions, there are plenty of ammo types out there that can travel a mile or more. So what's to stop them from banning all guns? Remember, England is trying to ban air-guns!

The only thing "assaultive" (is that a word?) around here is the assault on the Second Amendment by liberal lawmakers. I'm sure N.Y., N.J., and MA will be next in line to pass bogus bills like this... Thank God I live in Vermont.

Dateline England. From the Telegraph, how gross is this?

The Government food watchdog is to launch an investigation into salami, chorizo, pastrami and other exotic sausages after an investigation found that one in eight salamis contained undeclared horse or donkey meat.

Concerned that many people could be eating horse or donkey meat unwittingly, the Food Standards Agency said yesterday that it would examine more than 100 salami and similar products to check that horse meat was not being passed off as something else.

Speaking of which, have you ever read the ingredients on a package of hot dogs? What exactly does "mechanically seperated" meat mean?

(Yes, it's a slow news day...)

From Yahoo:

The Dow Jones industrial average closed above 9,000 Wednesday for the first time in nearly 10 months, soaring more than 100 points following a pair of positive economic reports.

The gains were surprising given some bad news from DaimlerChrysler, which warned of a big loss in its struggling Chrysler division, and the fact that many analysts believe stocks were due for a pullback following weeks of heavy buying.

"People are now looking for reasons to buy stocks, not sell them," said Michael Murphy, head trader at Wachovia Securities in Baltimore.

And:

Bob Armknecht, portfolio manager of the Liberty Equity Growth Fund at Columbia Management Advisors in Boston, said the stock market was gaining momentum as investors anticipated further signs of a recovery later this year.

"People have a sense that everything is there for things to get better," Armknecht said.

Boy, I hope this is really true. I work in the "durable goods" sector and the company I work for, like many furniture companies, has suffered mightily from the weak economy. We've all been on "pay freeze" for over two and a half years and on pay cuts for over a year. Just one of the many reasons for my financial woes.

And speaking of which, a couple more kind folks hit the donation button today, thank you! That brings the total to six great people who are helping me get my root-canal work done. I still have a long way to go before I can afford it but maybe some more of you will help out, and in the process, help Alphecca to continue to spread the word of defense of the Second Amendment. Thanks!

From today's Washington Post:

Surgeon General Richard H. Carmona said yesterday that he supports the banning of tobacco products -- the first time that the government's top doctor and public health advocate has made such a strong statement about the historically contentious subject.

Testifying at a House Energy and Commerce subcommittee hearing on smokeless tobacco and "reduced risk" tobacco products, Carmona was asked if he would "support the abolition of all tobacco products."

"I would at this point, yes," he replied.

Now granted, the Surgeon General doesn't actually have the power to do that. And Bush officials have distanced themselves from his position. But this still goes to show how much of a Nanny State we've become when the very idea of this would even be brought up.

I have no intention of defending tobacco or it's use. It's a stupid habit. But it just seems a bit hypocritical to me that lawyers, legislaters, and most liberals make such a fuss over smoking (and guns, for that matter) but seem to give a free pass to alcohol. Could it be because they like to drink?

Why aren't cities and states suing liquor and beer makers? How many folks die each year from liquor related diseases? How many work days are lost because of it? How many cases of spousal abuse and how many crimes in general were "enabled" because of inebriation? And talk about second-hand smoke, how about second hand booze? How many folks die on our highways each year at the hands of drunk drivers? I'll bet you (unfortunately) know someone who did.

Now please understand that I am NOT in favor of banning tobacco or alcohol. We're supposed to be adults who should suffer whatever we inflict on ourselves. We don't want to turn into England. I just find the dichotomy of the two interesting.

Prohibition of booze didn't work. Prohibition of marijuana isn't working. Why would the Surgeon General even consider it for tobacco?

This has been a rather quiet week, gun control story wise. Anyway, for those just discovering Alphecca, here's what this is: Every Wednesday I review all of the stories and editorials linked to on the Yahoo Gun Control Debate Page. The name of the page would imply that a fair debate is being waged. So much for a perfect world. The reality is that the folks at Yahoo choose which items to link to and most of the time they choose to link to news stories (and editorials) that promote "more gun control" or are "anti-gun."

All week long I discuss these articles here at Alphecca, and on Wednesday morning, I present a table showing just how biased Yahoo is. So here's this week's chart:

Yahoo Gun Control Debate Page Articles
Sample Date	For More Gun Control Or Is Anti-Gun	Not More Gun Control Or Is Pro 2nd Amendment	Neutral Articles	Concurrent Events Notes
06/04/03	10	3	8	Mostly Minn. CCL law
May Avg.	11	2	9	NAACP loses, Bush vs NRA, Denver fights new CCL law, Heston
Apr. Avg.	11	2	6	NAACP suits, Heston retires, Wal-mart
1st qtr '03 weekly avg	12.5	5	5	Good news Il & CO, CA judge dismisses gun makers in suit, ATF prosecutions, Sniper victim lawsuits, England gang murders
4th qtr '02 weekly avg	15.5	3.5	2.5	DC Snipers, Canadian Registry fiasco & NJ "smart-gun" law

There were plenty of links left over from last week from various Minnesota papers decrying the new CCL carry law. I've covered some of them in the past and frankly, they now bore me.

One editorial that really bugged me was this one from the Christian Science Monitor. Here's a quote:

Even without this report, lawmakers had enough evidence to address the issue. An Al Qaeda training manual - now in lawmakers' hands - spells out ways terrorists can get around US gun laws. And the FBI has arrested a man who purchased weapons at a gun show in Michigan for the Lebanon-based terror group Hizbullah. Moreover, the FBI also has arrested a Seattle man - allegedly with connections to Al Qaeda - looking to set up a firearms-training camp in Oregon.

New Jersey's two senators, Frank Lautenberg and Jon Corzine, both Democrats, commissioned the CRS report. They have introduced a bill that would require lengthier background checks and longer waiting periods to buy firearms during heightened terrorist alerts.

"Hizbullah?" Never mind... Of course, since this "report" was sponsored by a couple of screaming anti-gun liberals from N.J., it's no surprise that the report somehow determined that America is about to be attacked by terrorists wielding guns. Never mind that this would be a first, here in the U.S. Never mind that terrorists prefer to use far more destructive means to make their insane point. Such as blowing up buildings, crashing planes into buildings, releasing deadly diseases... The likelyhood that they would simply stand there with a gun randomly shooting people is rather small. It could happen, but it's not their M.O.

Rather, this is just another desperate attempt by illegally elected Lautenberg and "buy me a seat" Corzine to scare the general public into enacting more needless gun laws.

Along the same lines, there was this story from Reuters about how the instant check has become more instant... Well, at least now, the response to a background check comes quickly for more than 90 percent of applicants purchasing firearms, up from 71 percent just a few years ago.

Of course, this isn't nearly good enough for Democrats who again claim that the "gun show loophole" allows... well here:

But some lawmakers and others complain that loopholes in the gun laws make it easy for extremists to get powerful weapons for a deadly attack.

A recent study by the Congressional Research Service showed the background check system did not include terror watch lists that have been created by various different government agencies.

Remember, this is the same report commissioned by Lautenberg and Corzine. And again, most terrorists aren't even U.S. citizens and can't purchase firearms anyway. But even if they do, so far, none have used it as a weapon of terrorism. (Yes, there was that shooting by an Egyption at the El Al counter last year, but he was a U.S. citizen for something like 15-20 years. Nobody and no law could have stopped that.) Certainly not a "gun show loop hole law." He bought his gun from a dealer and had a valid California gun license. And as we all know, California has some of the strictest gun licensing procedures in the world.

One neutral post came from the Washington Post and dealt with pilots possibly being armed with Tasers, the "stun guns" that quickly immobilize attackers by (various means) discharging an electrical charge. Here's a quote:

The two airlines, along with discount carrier American Trans Air, have pushed to allow the weapons in the cockpit as a safer alternative to arming pilots with lethal weapons, a measure that was overwhelmingly approved by Congress last fall. The TSA [Transportation Security Agency] has trained 44 commercial airline pilots to carry guns in the cockpit and plans to expand the voluntary program this summer.

I think this is a good idea. Maybe even better then guns since it won't kill an alleged terrorist but simply stun and paralyze him, allowing passengers, etc., to restrain him. This would allow for the "perp" to be tried in a court of law and would (hopefully) lessen lawsuits for unlawful deaths and accidents, etc... So Alphecca International fully supports this program. Well that should clinch it...

By the way, there are many stories here that I don't discuss in this specific post because I've already blathered about them during the past seven days. OF COURSE you all know that since you religiously stop by every day and read my pearls of wisdom, my bon-mots of lore, my... Oh, never mind.

There was, of course, this item from the Twin Cities Pioneer Press that launched a huge rant by yours truly last week. I promise not to repeat that now (you can just go read it if you like) but the premise of this story (and I included this article in the "pro-gun" column) is that it's just ordinary, everyday folks applying for concealed carry permits in Minnesota. Gotta keep the ol' blood pressure down...

Meanwhile, North of the border, Nova Scotia Justice Minister Jamie Muir tells Quebec to go pound salt. Here's a long quote from the CBC:

Justice Minister Jamie Muir said on Tuesday that he will tell the province's prosecutors to forward to their federal counterparts all charges against people who haven't registered their rifles or shotguns.

"It's their law - let them enforce it," Muir said at a news conference.

Exceptions could be made for people who have a history of firearm-related offences, or who blatantly ignore police warnings, Muir said.

The move follows similar announcements in Saskatchewan and Manitoba. Alberta has said it will enforce the Criminal Code but also told its police forces to use discretion and only lay charges under the Firearms Act - which it won't prosecute.

"People in Nova Scotia, by and large, have found that this particular requirement of long gun registration was unnecessary, it was a political mistake and a boondoggle," Muir told CBC Newsworld. "It cost outrageous amounts of money. If they're talking about public safety, the money could be better expended in so many ways."

The gun registry, which came with an advertised taxpayer cost of $2 million, has sucked up about $1 billion.

The ballooning costs gave more ammunition to those opposed to the registry.

Opponents say requiring people to register guns, even those that aren't restricted firearms, only turns otherwise law-abiding citizens into criminals. Muir said the law has been "flawed from the start."

Nova Scotia and seven other provinces have called for a suspension of the registry. Muir said he hopes the federal government will get the message as provinces line up in refusing to enforce it.

"Perhaps they'll see that what they have done is not supported by the majority of Canadians, is not fully in the public interest and make amendments that would be needed," he said.

Oh man, I love it. I love it! I could almost move there with this guy in charge! Could we have a replay of that quote?

"It's their law - let them enforce it," Muir said at a news conference.

Better than buttered lobster at a July picnic. And so the revolt against universal gun registration continues in Canada. I've discussed this quite a bit here at Alphecca. Why gosh, have you checked out the comprehensive catalog of gun posts I've done around here? So quickly go donate something to me and then come back.

Okay, this is why universal gun licensing and registration will never work in the United States. You would have all sorts of folks refusing, states refusing, it would simply magnify the fiasco that is happening right now in Canada. And if this scheme has had a fifty thousand percent (!!!) cost overrun there, think of what will happen here! Anyway, that's the kind of story I love mentioning.

But for every peak, there has to be a valley... From the Seattle Post-Intelligencer (what a stupid name) comes this drek of a news article. First the quote, then the rant:

A national organization that supports the right to own firearms sent letters yesterday to Washington state's two U.S. attorneys criticizing them for failing to enforce the majority of federal gun laws.

The letters from the Americans for Gun Safety Foundation come after a recently released study it conducted that slammed the Bush administration for giving rhetorical support to tough enforcement of gun laws but not following through.

and:

The Justice Department accused the study of fundamentally disregarding the fact that there has been a 38 percent increase in gun prosecutions under the Bush administration. But Americans for Gun Safety said that a 38 percent improvement over the prosecutorial record of the Clinton administration is "akin to a .100 hitter in baseball claiming credit for increasing his average to .138. He's still a lousy hitter..."

Alright, it's about 11:40 pm Tuesday as I write this and I don't want to throw too many breakable items around. But can I just say that this fake, phony, fraud of a lobbying group (Americans for Gun Safety) is as bogus as they come? I feel like ralphing when this stupid newspaper claims they are a "gun rights" organization. What total, absolute bullshit. They are one of these sneaky groups that claim they support the Second Amendment but spend all of their time trying to get more gun controls passed. Go ahead, follow those links to their website.

This group is no friend to gun owners and certainly is not a "gun rights" group. They are a fraudulent bunch of anti-gunners who pretend they simply want "sensible" gun control.

Sort of like French looking -- served in Vietnam by the way -- John Kerry with his "possum stuck on my head" hair-do. See my rant a few days ago about him.

Oh well, it's late, I'm all worked up about stuff I have no control over... But at least I'm trying in my own small way -- with this website -- to debunk some of the baloney passing for news stories out there. So I'll call this a wrap for this week's report. See you all soon. Thanks for stopping by!

---

Update: Several alert readers pointed out my math error in regards the Canadian registry cost overruns. I'd like to claim that it was because it was late at night when I wrote it, but the reality is that I'm just dense when it comes to math. I've corrected it. Thanks!

---

Some comments received:

If the numbers provided by the CBC quote are correct, they are OBSCENE, and in actuality reflect a 50,000% increase from the advertised taxpayer cost. At this point, I think it is not untoward to suggest that some confiscated Canadian ammunition be put to the appropriate use in arranging a firing squad for the geniuses who instituted this monumental fiscal irresponsibility. At the very least, it should be used to load the weapons needed to guard their (very, very small) prison cells, eh?

The loss of $998,000,000 in taxpayer funds (not to mention the slated two million) has to have resulted in significant damage to multiple critical programs (and possibly even a loss of life) somewhere in the Canadian system, especially if you consider the current condition of Canada's state-run medical system. Where are the lawyers to sue the Canadian govt. on behalf of the Canadian people for this debacle?

--Tommy the Mole
"Though we die, La Resistance lives on!"

Thanks also to Parker S. and Jim L. for their corrections. I should make more mistakes, since it gets folks writing in... (Ahh... a clever marketing ploy on my part.)

An interesting post! I wanted to comment on one aspect of it -- the prospect of Hizbullah raising money and/or acquiring weapons and training in the United States.

Is it a real and serious danger? Absolutely. Contrary to what you said, it most certainly *IS* a terrorist MO to spray automatic gunfire in crowded public places, if they think they can get attention that way. (They've been doing just that in Israel for years, when they can get away with it. They can't anymore, which is why suicide bombings are more prevalent there now.)

Sure, it hasn't happened here YET. But we already know that the terrorists are pissed at us. It would be foolhardy on our part, at this point, to assume that ANY tried-and-true terrorist tactic is out of bounds, merely because we're Americans.

I do agree with you, actually -- this is a stupid reason to argue for stricter gun-control regulation, in New Jersey or elsewhere. But I disagree with your reasons.

You see, the only real defense against such acts of terrorism is an armed citizenry -- and a citizenry willing to defend itself (and not dial 911 at the slightest provocation). THAT is why gun attacks against Israelis have ceased... because many Israelis go armed, and terrorists who tried it (spraying machine-gun fire at a shopping mall, for example) usually got shot in the back by ordinary citizens. The citizens knew what had to be done, and did it without waiting for the police. (Ordinary citizens in Israel have had a surprisingly good success-rate in stopping suicide bombers too, which is a lot harder and scarier.)

In other words -- if someone want stricter gun control, in New Jersey or anywhere else, they should give reasons that make sense. For example, show me studies that clearly show higher crime rates in areas with no gun control, and lower crime rates where there is stricter gun control. (The studies I've seen show precisely the opposite.) But don't scare me with talk of terrorists acquiring weapons in the US.

Terrorists will acquire weapons, one way or the other. Our laws won't stop them, as the CSM points out. What our laws CAN do is to stop us from defending ourselves AGAINST the terrorists. (What would have happened on September 11th 2001, had just ONE private citizen on each plane had a gun?)

--Daniel S.
1st. sergeant, Israel Defense Forces (res.)

And another:

I found this one in a post at Rachel Lucas' blog:This story It's a news item about a mass killing (22 people) in TX. At the time, it was illegal to carry a concealed weapon.

The focus of the story is on one of the survivors, who had a gun, but because of the TX law, left it in her car.

She could have saved around 20 lives if she had had it with her.

"Basically if you can vote, yeah, I think you ought to be able to keep and carry," she says. Long guns or handguns, it's all the same to her.

"People who are basically law abiding people are going to be law abiding whether they have one gun or 60 guns," she says. "It doesn't matter."

She's now a TX legislator.

--Mike Zorn
Santa Ana CA
Rigoletto

and:

I was involved in a Web Board discussion (bar.baen.com) regarding Tasers with several pilots, and all of them were horrified at the concept of generating upward of 100KV anywhere near the avionics. It seems that actually putting a bullethole in anything but the windshield is less likely to bring the plane out of the sky than frying the avionics suite. The lightning resistance factors are from the outside, not protection from a "lightning strike" from the inside. If you hit the target, well and good (although a half dozen Tazer hits didn't seem to put Rodney King down). If the first "hit" doesn't work, and heavy leather jacket and sweater combo would insulate the target, as would a briefcase or clipboard carried as a shield; there could well be a struggle in the cockpit and a second Taser (they are the definition of single shot) might get triggered into the delicate electronics that keep the plane in the sky.

--John P.

and in regards the Seattle PI article:

Speaking as someone who has grown up in the Pacific Northwest, I must point out that compared to most of the locals, that *is* a pro-gun rights position. Which is amazing, considering that Washington is still at or near the top in per-capita CCW permits. We're a little strange out here...

--Steve

I generally prepare my Weekly bias check late Tuesday evening. I'm doing it now. I might have to change this because it always seems as if Yahoo throws up a bunch of new links during the day on Wednesday. But anyway... I'm sitting here typing away and Rainbow Cat is sprawled out on the rug beside me.

Here I am, the rough and tough gun-toting gay conservative homocon, considered a regular guy, and I love this cat. She is now -- incredibly -- 19 years, 2 months old. She still sees and hears fine. Still walks, eats, makes it down the stairs to "the box" fine, still likes to play, still grooms herself and seems healthy. And still (as she has for 19 years) curls up beside me every night to sleep. I love her unconditionally -- forever and beyond. I've already let our Almighty God know that I want her with me in heaven for all eternity. I'd like to think her longevity is due to my doting care, but in reality I have to suppose it's just her blessed genetic makeup. She's been with me almost half of my life. And because of her, that's been the best half of my life.

Enough of this mush... I now return to my snarly ways...

So I'm over at Time Magazine (on line) reading this report about Eric Rudolph, one of the bigger nut-cases of our times. And I come across this paragraph in the story:

Rudolph did epitomize the modern militiaman. After his father died in 1981, his mother moved the family from Florida to rural Nantahala, N.C. When she enrolled Eric and his siblings in school, she refused to give their Social Security numbers, fearing the government could track them. She introduced them to several churches that followed "Christian Identity," a rabidly anti-Semitic philosophy; in ninth grade, Eric wrote an essay denying that the Holocaust took place.

Well. Well! That's a pretty broad brush-stroke painting a whole lot of people including -- myself. Not all militias (in fact, probably few of them) are involved in anything like the aforementioned. Most are just ordinary folks who like to get together and have fun. Some are even into "period" re-enactments of our historic battles.

I'm president of The Upper Valley Militia. We're just a gun club. We don't wear uniforms or march around in formation and we don't plot or scheme against the federal government.

We get together once a month to make a lot of noise. We try out each other's guns. We target shoot. We make jokes about each other's scores. We barbeque. We have a good time. That's it. Most of us see each other in our day-to-day lives or meet at the local pub for a few at night.

Incidentally, we came up with the name for the club one night when thinking of what to call ourselves. We wanted "Upper Valley" of course since that's where we live. We thought of "gun club" but that was boring. "Hunting and Fishing club" but few of us still hunt or fish. Finally, one member said, "I don't care but I want the word 'militia' in there..." So we're the Upper Valley Militia. As a bonus, we can buy clothing from the University of Vermont rather then going to the expense of producing our own...

No secret handshakes or passwords here...

---

Just a reminder that tomorrow -- Wednesday -- is my Weekly Update on gun story bias over at Yahoo... See you then. And thanks for stopping by!

---

Comments:

Time magazine's description of Eric Rudolph as epitomizing the modern militiaman is even more absurd than you realize. the U.S. code defines a huge swath of the adult male population as members of the militia. you're probably a member of this group (there's no statutory restriction regarding homosexuals, unlike the regular armed forces), and I will be a member in a week and change. for that matter, Daren Fonda (the author of the time article) probably is or was a militiaman. I'm sure we all have a lot in common with [alleged] terrorists...

--Raphael B.

Boone Country has this item which I meant to link to the other day. Craig reviews a Stephen Hunter novel (The Pale Horse) and makes the telling point that Hunter actually knows his guns.

This has always been a bug-a-boo with me about many mystery and detective stories (which I compulsively read.) Even when writing fiction, it should behoove the author (or at least the editor) to check a few facts. After all, it's not like we're talking the New York Times where facts and accuracy don't matter anymore.

And let's face it -- many mystery/detective story readers KNOW guns. So I'm always bugged that a writer will come up with something like, "flicking off the safety on his revolver..." Grrrrr...

The movies are no better. Remember all those old flicks where someone could shoot two dozen bullets out of an 8-shot pistol? Never reloading?

Or those TV shows where the protagonists are involved in an indoor gun-battle with the bad-guys. And after a flurry of shots are fired, there's quiet and they're shown "listening" and saying something like, "shhh... did you hear that?" Friends, the only thing you'll hear after firing off a volley of shots is a loud ringing in your ears. You won't even hear what the guy standing next to you is saying. That's why smart shooters wear ear protection. But for obvious reasons, TV cops don't.

Whaddaya say we have some fun here? Email me with the biggest "howlers" involving guns tht you've seen in the movies and on TV. I'll print them all here. God knows we could all use a laugh...

---

Comments:

I have read a lot of crime and action fiction. I tend to get immersed in the story and when there is a totally inaccurate gun reference, the cognitive dissonance usually makes it impossible for me to get back into the story. Such things as .25 caliber revolvers (with and without safeties) just kill a story. That is probably one of the most glaring.

The stupidist movie ever made has to be "The Quick and the Dead" (Gene Hackman, Sharon Stone). One shot sends someone flying 30ft in the air. Not to mention the whole plot is idiotic.

And in the original Dirty Harry movie, Clint Eastwood is carrying a S&W Mod27 in .357, not .44mag. It's obvious from looking at the muzzle. (But they did get the shot counts right as best I can tell.)

I howled while watching The Mummy and all the shooters using 2 guns at once and firing blindly. I guess if you know nothing about guns and can't shoot anyway, the best place to be might seem to be behind a wall of lead. (shrug)

But the one that really gets me on TV is when someone points their Colt 1911 at someone and then, to show they really mean business, they cock the hammer! Right.

--Jim Hart from KipperCat

---

The one that comes immediately to mind is in the recent Road to Perdition when Tom Hanks's character executes his quarry by shooting him while he bathes.

Shown in profile, Tom's 1911 in clear view, Tom empties the magazine - firing each shot with the hammer DOWN. Oh, and neither the hammer nor the slide appear to move.

I didn't know Para-Ordinance made double-action 1911's back that far.

--Kevin from The Smallest Minority

Okay, but this is a rather broad subject. Bear with me for a minute.

UNENDING AMMO
The prize has to go to "Showdown in Little Tokyo", where Dolph Lundgren and Brandon Lee, armed with M16's loaded with 20 round clips, go into a full-auto duel with about 30 Los Angeles Yakuza thugs....and they never change their magazines!!!

Near as I can figure it, they both fire off about 400 rounds from those 20 round clips. They must have really compressed the springs in the clips something awful to get that much ammo in there.

HENCHMEN FROM THE LAND OF THOSE WITH TERMINALLY BAD AIM

Got a three way tie on this one. First is "Showdown in Little Tokyo" again, where Dolph walks past a corner where a Yakuza thug is lurking. Suddenly the thug cuts loose with his mini-Uzi, emptying all 30 rounds and missing with all of them! Range? Maybe ten feet.

Arnie the Barbarian has made some real howlers, but nothing is worse than "Commando". In the final battle with the hordes of henchmen, he arms himself with an M60 and takes on no less than 50 henchies armed with full-auto AK47's. About three thousand rounds are fired in his general direction, all with no result. My fave is when he breaks cover and lumbers across a bare lawn while 15 henchies spray-and-pray at a distance of maybe 20 yards. All the speeding bullets are foiled by Arnie's Increased Gravity Field, since they impact at his feet instead of into his back like they should have.

Let's not forget "Beverly Hills Cop II". Eddie Murphy and two sidekicks take cover behind three strategically placed 50 gallon drums and engage in a gunfight with twenty henchies. The henchies liberally spray the trio with full-auto fire from a variety of weapons, yet no one is shot even though the range is a bare 25 feet or so. Eventually the henchies run out of ammo and give up.

THE TWO GUN SALUTE
One of my favorites, this is where the hero mows the bad guys down with a pistol in each hand by firing them with machine-gun like speed and sniper-rifle accuracy. The winner of this category is Bruce Willis in "Last Man Standing" .

Bruce also manages to get 15 or 20 rounds out of each 1911 he weilds, even though they're loaded with 7 round magazines. This is rather pathetic when one considers the way that Dolph managed to get 400 rounds out of a 20 round clip in "Showdown", so Bruce isn't even considered for that category.

Anyway, these are just a few of the things that bug me the most. Name a specific impossibility that you see during Hollywood gun fights and I'll weigh in with my own favorites.

--James R. Rummel from Hell in a Handbasket

Although an otherwise good gun movie, "The Usual Suspects" has one of the more unique firearms in moviedom. As they are hijacking the jeweler, the bodyguards have P226s. One of them is ordered to put his gun down and kick it over to the protagonists. The gun magically morphs into a Browning Hi-Power along the way.

I can't count the number of scenes in movies where somebody is firing away when the gun has the slide locked back and is visibly empty.

Also, while not a movie, I always enjoyed the hero of Robert Ludlum's Materese Circle whose sidearm was a Browning BAR Grade IV in 7mm Magnum. I bet that guy was tough to spot as a spy, eh?

--Bartholomew R. (location unknown)

Just cruising around the web, seeing what's up with some of my friends...

By the way, Acidman is back to blogging. As Martha would say, "That's a good thing."

---

And just a reminder that my friend Leigh over at HanlonVision covers the Chicago scene (with lots of pictures) better than anyone I know. I point this out because (for new readers) I was born in Chicago. While I would never move back there, since Daley and his minions don't believe in the Second Amendment, it would be nice to visit again...

---

The Smallest Minority has a post (blogSpot link points to something else) about this article from the Guardian (UK) about how smokers and obese folks in England will be "encouraged" to sign statements with their doctors stating that they understand they are responsible for their own health.

You know, between police cameras on every street corner, disarming the populace, a failed public health system, a useless queen (stop that!) and everything else that goes on there including preparing to join the socialist European Union... Why would anyone want to live there? It's hard to believe that this is the same country that came up with the Magna Carta...

---

Speaking of Europe, which I was, Bitter Bitch has been bopping all over it and has a couple of brief posts over at (where else!) The Bitch Girls. She still hasn't worn her NRA shirt in public yet, though. In the meantime, Bitchy Mom has been filling in admirably. And Spooky, Preppie, etc. as well...

---

Over at KipperCat, a great post about the importance of the Second Amendment. Jim Hart does a fine job of defending it, much better and more lucidly then I generally do... Go read and link to it.

---

Meanwhile, honerable blogson Eric has an interesting post that starts off by (rightfully) praising David Horowitz. But then it mutates into Eric's own personal experiences at being excoriated for being gay but not following the agenda of the "gay left." Sort of the same fate I suffer. Eric, like myself, supports the original intention of the Second Amendment. Smart fellow!

So there's a bunch of good reads for you. Between my tooth, my gouty knee, and my bad back, I'm going to try to take it easy today. We'll see how long that lasts...

Okay, so I'm not going to blog tonight. I feel like watching TV. Of course, I only get two channels here in the middle of nowhere. NBC is out of the question with their Fear Factor drek. So that leaves PBS and surprise, surprise, it's once again Pledge Week. Gosh, has it been three weeks already? And so instead of showing all their regular shows that I enjoy watching, I'm subjected to all sorts of boring "specials" featuring shrieking opera singers. *Gag.*

[Now before you all jump on my case since it's my pledge week too... This is the first time I've done this. And let me thank the three kind folks who have responded to my tooth emergency. Of course I email real thanks to them via email but I like to publically acknowledge their generous response. Three kind folks. One one-hundredth of my daily readership. If I could just convince one-tenth of you to do the same I could have the first (of two) root-canals next week and end the pain on one side... Hard to believe I'm anxious to have a root-canal... Pain is good at changing attitudes...]

Anyway, back to my post here. If I ever win the lottery, the first thing I'll buy is a satellite-dish so I can watch some real TV. Fox, MSNBC, Football Games, anything but PBS and NBC. *Sigh.*

See you all here sometime tomorrow...

I guess that's enough for today. I have to be at work early tomorrow so I'll see you all here Monday night. Thanks for stopping by!

So something non-gun related. Something I'll make personal. First, some history. By the way --he said to no one in particular...-- have you noticed how my morning posts are quick and "dirty" because I'm under-the-gun to get to work? [You said, "gun." --ed.] [Oh shut up, this Kaus routine is getting tired... --js] And my evening posts are long, rambling, drunken well thought out...

I started Alphecca last October. Now the very first person to ever link to me was my blogfather, Glenn Reynolds. The very first blog to blogroll me were my blogsisters at The Bitch Girls. The second was Glenn, and the third kind soul, who also corrected some of my lame HTML was Aubrey Turner. These three blogs will always have a special place in my blog heart and will always occupy the top of my "good friends" blogroll.

Before I continue with my history of linkage, let me mention that the Acidman, who has a blog named Gut Rumbles has suddenly declared that he's through with blogging.

Wait! More history. I have been blessed with some wonderful friends in the blogosphere who have perma-linked me and mentioned me. You can see their names on the "good friends" blogroll on the sidebar. Now, I'm pretty small potatoes in the blogosphere (I'm going to owe Quick so much money by the time this post is done...) and for the last three months or so I've averaged only about 320 unique visitors each day -- I say only but these folks are precious to me and I thank them.

One weird thing... One day last fall, Bill Quick gave a very nice mention to me and then in the very next post declared that because someone had hacked his site, he was quitting blogging. Fortunately, that only lasted about 12 hours and then his site (Daily Pundit) was fixed and he was back at full steam. Shortly after that, Arthur Silber gave me a mention and then he too went on hiatus. Again, thankfully, that ended quickly. And then, last winter, Rachel Lucas gave me a swell link and a day or so later she went into hibernation... I started suffering from Medusa syndrome.

Now. I have never had any interaction with Rob, the Acidman at Gut Rumbles. I don't know him, neither of us has ever linked to each other. I do read him regularly but I doubt if he can say the same about me. So this isn't a Medusa thing. And I have no ventured good-will here. But I'll be sorry if he does really quit blogging. I like his stuff. In a way, he's a lot like me -- no, not that way, -- I know he's straight. But we both rant a lot, joke a lot, and go over the top a lot -- and many of our readers don't always realize which of those modes we're in. I have a feeling that if we ever met, we'd both enjoy sitting on the porch, pounding down a few, and bullshitting each other royally...

But he says he's throwing in the towel:

You want to get famous fast? I've seen how that's done. You suck off people's knowledge about how to set up a site, ditch them when you've sucked the goodie out, run through their blogrolls and mass email everybody with links to your posts, troll constantly and show your titties. Then, turn around and shit on everyone who helped you get started because you are BIG TIME now, and you don't need those little shits anymore.

When NZ Bear offers a chance for "microbes" to be noticed, elbow everybody out of the way and sit your already-primate ass in the driver's seat. Behave like a combination of a whore and a used-car salesman. Use every trick in the book. Never rest in your quest to climb, using whoever you have to step on to do it.

If that's what blogging is about, I want no part of it.

He also says he started out not caring about whether anyone read him or not or what they thought of him.

I can only relate my own thoughts about all of this. I'm a writer. I wish I could do it for a living but I can't. So I do it on the great new "cheap" airwaves of the blogosphere. I bought a domain name and hired a web host and taught myself HTML and designed this site and started blabbing away. I write about what interests -- and bothers -- me. But I would be a total liar if I said that I didn't care whether anyone read me or not. OF COURSE I CARE if I have readers. I want more. AND MORE. Every writer -- fiction or fact -- wants as much audience as can fit in the hall.

Every real singer, artist, writer, rock-star, actress, sculptor, anyone involved in the creative arts (and yes, I think bloggers are VERY creative) wants to have people to view their works. Yeah, I suppose you could chant your mantra in the middle of a forest with no one around but that's not very validating. There's no point in creating, or thinking aloud (which is what we bloggers do) if there's no one listening, seeing, responding to our prose. To claim that you would just as soon speak in a vacuum is preposterous.

So the next point is -- promotion. Well, All you have to do is watch any morning show such as NBC's Today, or an evening show such as Jay Leno, to witness what all creative artists must suffer for their art -- promoting it. If you're a writer, you go on long road trips of book signings. Sometimes no one shows up at the bookstore but you do it anyway because you (and your publisher) know that this is what sells books.

This is what capitalism is all about. You create something -- a new gizmo, a better mouse-trap, a rock album. You have to plug it to sell it because the only way you know your message is getting out there is if folks are buying. Yah -- even in the blogosphere, capitalism rules.

I don't promote nearly enough. I tout my own blog in my posts. Once a week I email (only) a couple big guys about my Wednesday Weekly gun story bias post. And I encourage new blogs (really all blogs) to blogroll me.

And I do try to encourage new bloggers on Alphecca. I quickly link to those who make their presence known to me. I'll quickly do mutual blogrolling. I give them an initial plug. If they do likewise I plug them some more. It's called promotion and while it might be somewhat self-serving, it also helps all of us get our message out. And I think that if you were to poll many of the bloggers on my blogroll, they would say that I have been generous in my mentions and linkage. I'm trying to do my part. Granted, I favor and mostly pay attention to blogs that pay attention to me. That's capitalism and the free market too.

Look, at last estimate, there are about two million blogs out there. That's a lot of bandwidth noise. We need to help each other. And use whatever tools become available. I'm not good at that but I try...

I want to defend the Second Amendment. I want a million billion people to read my posts and maybe I can sway enough of them that we never lose the right (in this country) to keep and bear arms.

And if there's another blogger out there who feels the same way, I'll help them too. I wish more of them could get past my being gay and would link to me but so it goes.

And promotion (capitalism) can also be fun. I have NO problem (and by the way, Rob, neither did you, a couple days ago) helping an ambitious blogger such as Jay Solo run his rat race. And to that end, here's another link to his site. What the hell. It's fun! I think it's fun. It's what our country is based on. And in this totally cool medium of the net, it doesn't cost us anything. And we make new friends. And get our message out.

So hey! Rob! Get back to work on your blog. I enjoy it and so do a hell of a lot of other folks.

So now he probably hates me and is preparing to tear out another one on me...

Oh well, I blog about what interests me, and his site interests me. Go easy on me, Rob...

Another new blogger who has kindly added me to his blogroll, Boone Country, another pro-gun guy (his name's Craig) who has kindly become a good friend of Alphecca. His masthead reads, "Eastern Hunting and Shooting" and I hope you all will visit him and encourage him as he has just started on the strange road to blogdom... I would love to see more of Craig's writing, especially posts about hunting -- something sorely missing from most (including my own) pro-gun blogs. Thanks Craig, and welcome to the "blogosphere" (another nickel to Daily Pundit!)

Via Keep And Bear Arms, I found this article from the Ohioans For Concealed Carry PAC website reprinting a letter by an Ohio policeman where he reveals:

As to the question of open carry, when I was in the police academy we were told by our instructors to arrest citizens who open carried and charge them with disorderly conduct or inciting panic. While this is not a written rule I have seen it followed throughout my career as a police officer.

Read the whole post. By the way, his letter was in support of a law to allow concealed carry.

The point is, this is outrageous behavior on the part of any cop. If a citizen is doing nothing wrong -- and Ohio statutes clearly allow for "open carry" -- and a policeman fabricates a false charge against that citizen, well -- words can't describe what I think should happen to that cop. Actually they probably could but I better not print them here.

Most cops in this country are good and honest. But there are some cops, especially in large cities, that take the law into their own hands or act as if they're really stationed in some third-world country. Since in a court of law, the cop's word is almost always taken over that of the defendant (especially in misdemeanor cases such as traffic stops, disorderly persons charges, etc.) it behooves all of the honest police to break that "blue line" and speak out against such behavior by the rotten few. You're the only ones who can.

Your reward? More respect and assistance from the populace at large. Just as (to use an analogy) it has far more significance when a Muslim speaks out against Islamic terrorists, so too all of the good cops in this country need to weed out the bad ones themselves.

Anyway... I have to get to work (yup, on a Sunday) so I'll see you all back here soon.

French looking Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry -- who served in Viet Nam, by the way -- is portrayed in this sycophantic story by Laura Blumenfeld in today's Washington Post as this "alpha male" who loves to hunt. As if implying that he's on the side of hunters and gun supporters in general. Here's a quote:

John Kerry eats dove. Even better, he shoots them. From behind the stalks of a Southern cornfield, he'll watch them flutter and dart, and fire.

"You clean them. Let them hang. It takes three or four birds to have a meal," said the Massachusetts senator. "You might eat it at a picnic, cold roasted. I love dove."

Dove, quail, duck, deer. Kerry described how to hunt and gut them, talking as he sliced through a steak at midnight after campaigning all day in Iowa for the Democratic presidential nomination. Carve out the heart, he said over dinner, pull out the entrails and cut up the meat. Bad table manners, perhaps, or good politics. After Sept. 11, 2001, some Democrats argue, they can't take the White House if they sound like doves. That is not a problem for the dove hunter. Kerry, 59, is the only combat veteran in the field...

What a fake, phony, fraud. Later in this puff-piece "news article" Kerry describes himself as a "citizen soldier." Yet he would deny the average American the right to bear arms in defense of themselves. Let's hop into the Alphecca Time Machine and head back to last November and this post by yours truly about this guy. Go read it. But let me quote from myself here:

If the Democrats really think the way to recapture the voters' hearts is to swerve to the left and continue with their campaign of fear, they will get trounced in 2004. And let me just say that Kerry has one of the worst voting records on gun control issues. There can't be enough restrictions on firearms to please him and remember, he supported The Million Mom March including:

* "cooling off" periods and background checks;
* registration and licensing of handgun owners;
* safety locks for handguns;
* a limit of one-handgun purchase per month per person;
* enforcement of current laws.

Democrats made a show of support for the Moms with a hearing on May 15 called "Cease Fire: End Gun Violence Now." Co-chairing the hearing was Senate Democratic Leader Tom Daschle and Senators Byron Dorgan, Barbara Boxer, and John Kerry...

He also supports "ballistic fingerprinting."

Read the rest, too, since he supports CAFE standards for SUVs. See how far ahead of the curve I was? Hell would have to freeze over and melt again before I would even consider voting for this guy. In fact, I would write-in the name of a dead cow before I would pull the lever for Kerry.

[So how do you really feel about him, Jeff?]

A few new bloggers for you to check out.

Firstly, Kippercat is a pro-gun site and has been kind enough to add me to his blogroll, so of course he goes into my "friends" mutual blogroll. Good site so check it out.

The Second Amendment Expert himself, Dave Kopel has kindly added me to the weblog links on his site. Cool!

Two new bloggers, also supporters of the Bill of Rights: Geek On A Mission who has given a couple kind mentions to Alphecca. And The Smallest Minority, who has this post in the running over at N.Z. Bear's new blogger thing. So I'm adding these last two to my "interesting sites" blogroll and hopefully I can soon move them up to my "good friends" mutual blogroll.

Speaking of Rat Races, which I wasn't, but N.Z. Bear is (see above link) I guess I better repeat my ode to Jay Solo, in response to his challenge to me:

I've just got a challenge from Jay,
A dare is a dare, what the hay,
He says don't link "Maripat,"
By Golly, I won't do that,
It's just not a nice thing to say...

I'm always impressed by Verbosity,
Plenty of comments, not viscosity,
He's always quite active,
His posts are most factive,
And appear with a lot of velocity.

Good Luck Jay, I've done what I can... I'm just a man...

By the way, there's quite a few new blogs listed on my "good friends" mutual blogroll. Check them out! Since here at Alphecca, my commentary is mostly of "big media" stories about gun control, I'm not always the most linky person around but I do recommend all of them highly.

And don't forget my gun posts page. It lists and links to every post I've had in defense of the Second Amendment here at Alphecca! (Which makes me wonder why more pro-gun sites don't link to me. It couldn't be because I'm (*gasp*) gay could it?)