Showing posts with label asshats. Show all posts
Showing posts with label asshats. Show all posts

Monday, November 25, 2013

Quote of the Day

"If the squat rack were meant for curls it would be called the rest of the gym"
-CPT Crossfit

A coworker's thought after I shared my firm belief that attacking anybody using a squat rack for bicep curls or shrugs should allowed under the Uniform Code of Military Justice.

Thursday, November 21, 2013

Blah Day But Great Ammo Deal

It seems the Knock Out Game is spreading to Philly as well as most large eastern cities full of "urban youth". It is reaching critical mass to the point that even the MSM can't ignore it. Honestly this so called "game" played solely by young black men does not worry me at all personally. I do not live in a place where that sort of thing happens and are not out late anyway (sure some of these incidents are at 2pm on a Saturday but a lot also happen late). When it comes down to it I am not, nor do I physically look like a victim. That being said not everyone is a young aggressive guy with some training. Plenty of fine people fall into the broad victim category and happen to live in large urban areas. I'm not sure where this trend will go but it could easily get really bad. I fear "urban youth" do not know just how crazy whitey can get.

The Senate passed The Nuclear Option so basically the majority party can confirm whatever nominees they want. Aside from the short term power grab for a real long term risk I am ambivalent about what it means politically. That being said in my mind the senate's best quality has been that it's numerous committees, arcane complicated rules and customs made it so almost nothing ever happens so I'm not a fan of this.

On the plus side I got 2x 250rd boxes of Remington UMC 9mm for $69 a piece before tax. That is almost 30% less than the best deal on bulk 9mm FMJ I've seen lately. Range fodder has been in thin supply for so long I buy it whenever I find relatively good prices; though the situation finally seems to be improving.

Defensive 9mm ammo has been available for awhile but stuff for training, practice and just plain fun has been hard to come by for almost a year. This purchase sets me up 2/3rds of the way for an upcoming class at a good price without needing to dip into the stash. That makes me happy.

Other than that it's been a long day and I am pretty tired. Going to try to hit the sack early.

Wednesday, May 8, 2013

Pic Post

I really hope this one ends badly for the folks of Westboro Baptist. Those hate mongering assholes have been screwing around at funerals asking to get stomped for years. If there is any ambiguity in my statement I really hope a mob of angry Slayer fans inflict seriously bodily harm to every member of this protest old enough to legally drive a car.

Sunday, July 22, 2012

Mexico urges U.S. to review gun laws after Colorado shooting- Got To Be Kidding Me

You can read the story here. Mexico's moral high ground when it comes to violence and the murder of innocent people is about that of Charley Sheen on the use of crack cocaine. To put this in perspective roughly 4X the amount of people killed in this unfortunate episode had their heads cut off not too far back in what was depressingly a fairly average week down in Ole Monterey.

That nation is engaged in a defacto civil war against massive drug cartels which are regularly fielding platoon sized elements which are engaging government forces with heavy weapons. These aren't some rinky dink gangbangers who have to steal an AR-15 from some citizen's house. They can just get guns from Mexican Army deserters or buy them on the world market.

Something about glass houses and stones comes to mind here.

Wednesday, June 13, 2012

Fed: Recession kicked median household wealth to 1992 level

Here is the article. This is not suprising but still sort of depressing. What they fail to mention is that a buck is worth considerably less today than back in 1992.

I look at who benefited from this, the classic cui bono if you will. It is pretty clear to me. Big bankers and financiers made a killing. Politicians did well on campaign contributions from those folks as well as using the money flowing into their coffers to buy votes. Personally they also made a killing on insider trading their consistently and consistently lucky investment choices. Some normal folks did well, if just for awhile. Nobody was complaining when their homes went up in value 20, 30 or even 40%. Nobody was complaining when the construction industry was booming.

I realized in writing this that I have sort of looked at bankers in the wrong way. I think a bit too locally. The assistant manager of West lake Trust in Peduke, Iowa population 50,000 didn't wreck out economy. That guy gives people loans they come to the bank looking for. Now the big bosses at Citibank, B of A, WAMU, etc all on the other hand had to knew what was really going on. That is why they got rid of these loans like a kid playing hot potato. They made money hand over fist for years. When the game was up they dumped all the junk onto the public in a variety of ways both above and below board. After that we loaned them cheap money which they used to buy up the competion which was slightly worse off or couldn't get easy money friend loans.

Between politicians making laws, setting conditions (keeping interest rates artificially low for years) and supporting their friends in banking and finance a lot of the blame goes to our wonderful elected officials. Banksters knowingly gave bad loans which they repackaged to unrecognizability then sold as rock solid. They bought politicians to do them favors and provide mafia like protection. These two groups royally screwed normal everyday Americans out of tons of money.

I cannot however totaly absolve people of the choices they made or the situations those choices caused. Lots of folks used electronic/ paper gains in their homes to finance vacations, new cars or home improvements and such. Some of them are mad now because they are "underwater" and have to pay back the money they so prudently cashed out during the boom. Lots of normal folks made poor choices thinking that somehow the good times would never end and ended up in a bad spot. Others tried to get in on the game and lost too, by the time normal folks get into the game the smart money is already on it's way out. Normal folks are standing when the music stops in the proverbial game of musical chairs.

Today I may be more disenchanted, with the establishment for lack of a better word, than I have been since the height of this mess in 2008 or so. Not exactly sure what if anything I will do about it.

Sunday, May 27, 2012

Survival Blog Down

JWR sent me an email about Survival Blog being down. Below is the pertinent info.

This weekend, our server in Sweden was put under a "ping flood" Denial of Service (DOS) attack that resulted in 65% packet loss for a few hours.

This attack was most likely orchestrated by the man in Texas who last week anonymously sent me a racist rant and threats against both my blog site and my books. (His e-mail began: "You ni**er lover you have five days to take all links and any [sic] metion for [sic] links below off your site. If you [sic] dont [sic] do it I will post [sic] everyone [sic] of [sic] you [sic] cr***y books on [sic] prirate [sic] sites and kiss your ni**er loving income from them good [sic] by [sic] .")

The attack was timed for a three-day holiday weekend, because the miscreants expected that the staff at our ISP would be unavailable to help up reconfigure.

OBTW, the attack did not initially include our dotted quad backup address: (Which is explained here.)

At least this provided a good test for our Continuity of Web Services (COWS) defenses. Obviously, we are now going to need multiple mirror sites as well as an adaptive cloud server that can handle any future DOS onslaught.

The other lesson this teaches is the importance of having a backup. We provide an offline archive of the past six years of SurvivalBlog posts, available for a modest price.

~Jim Rawles~

TOR here: I tried to go to the site this morning and couldn't get there. I figured it was just one of those internet things that just happen. You know the kind where a little something is off on one side or another and you just can't get to a site, happens all the time. Apparantly it wasn't. Obviously this is lame. Hopefully it will get figured out sooner instead of later.

I guess this is a good lesson about relying on online information or resources. Between Survival Blog, stuff I have in the cloud and various sites I go to for this or that I am guilty of this. In the immediate future I will look to pull some stuff off the web. In particular I  will be ordering the Survival Blog archive and copying stuff out from other places.

Tuesday, March 20, 2012

Interesting Video

Tam linked to a video. Two young women are walking down the street and a staggering drunk spits at them, seeming to hit one. They walk off camera and her friend comes back to presumably yell at the staggering drunk who then KO's her with an elbow to the face. Warning, the video I am about to link to portrays real life violence, namely a chick getting KOed by a jerk. You can watch the video here if so inclined.

The gal really messed up by coming back and yelling at him. Of course I am not saying she deserved what followed but it could have been avoided. When the other person is clearly aggressive and a lot bigger/ stronger than you escalating a situation is not smart.

The legitimate options would be to A) call the cops, B) just leave, which only makes sense if you want to avoid interacting with cops due to warrants, being 18 drinking on a fake ID or have a pocket full of designer drugs, or lastly C) violence. I won't debate this one, I would send the guy to the ER for sure. However that option isn't so available for gals. Unless she wanted to shoot the guy or fastpitch a brick to the back of his head fighting with a drunk (even as drunk as this guy) jerk like that is a bad option for most women.  It is worth noting that cops look for someone that shoots a guy or cracks a skull with 50 mile per hour brick a lot more aggressively than for winners of late night fisticuffs.

Note that none of the options involved talking to this guy. Even a big healthy guy would be stupid to do that. You are not going to have a rational conversation so it is better to just act if you are so inclined. As Wifey said "you don't talk to crazy."

Friday, February 17, 2012

Mountain man invades remote cabins, tasting occasional luxury

Read the story here.  My thoughts are as follows:

This reinforces why I carry a pistol on me and keep a long gun handy in the woods..

If the idea of a cabin or "retreat" that is fully stocked just waiting for you to leave urban/ suburban life to ride out tough times has not already been sufficiently discouraged this may help.

Why does he have to be a survivalist, couldn't he have been a dimented vegitarian or a PETA nut or something?

Be careful if you spend time in rural Southern Utah.

Wednesday, March 16, 2011

Thoughts on Insurgencies Four

Thoughts on Insurgencies # Something
1) Occupiers or liberators (depending on which side you are on) can only have limited success when they willingly ceede terrain to the freedom fighters/ guerillas. If the Cong or Taliban are able to come into the village at night the occupiers will never be able to keep the populace safe or deny access to them to the guerillas.
2) If you are a guerilla or a partisan or really have picked any kind of side then keep it to yourself for a long time. In WWII parts of Europe (Holland and most of Russia come to mind) changed hands repeatedly. It would be very bad to have been loudly bragging about all the Germans you killed and how much stuff you broke to then have the tanks roll back in. If I was in a situation where some partisan shenannigans seemed appropriate I would certainly conduct them alone or in a very small group of people I trust deepy and would probably take them to my grave.
3) If you are anything except an occupier or a strait up hiding in the woods Red Dawn style partisan then be as grey as you can be. Grey will keep you alive.
4) American forces and to a lesser degree our allies that have been involved in the GWOT have learned some interesting skills. They have gotten really good at searching houses and structures. They are also using some very interesting technology in terms of biometrics. Getting a big enough database makes population and resource control very easy.
5) UAV's are suprisingly ineffective in weather that is less than ideal. In particular low level cloud cover and wind are issues for them.
Well that is all for now.

Tuesday, February 8, 2011

Food as a Weapon, Food and America

The idea of massive food shortages in America is an interesting one. I think there are fallacies as well as misinformation in play. Also it would be naive to say there is not at least some some intentional fear mongering involved.

Food as a weapon is a scary thing. It has been used by brutal governments to force a region or group of people into submission in the one of the most inhumane and brutal fashions. To me it is scary because it intentionally targets the civilian population in a widespread and determined way. The history of it probably goes back as long as their have been organized groups of people big enough to communicate and act cohesively at regional and national levels. The British starved the Irish, the Afrikaners, Kenyan's and almost surely some other groups I have forgotten.

The Soviet communists under Stalin starved the Ukranian peasants in the early 30's. The idea of giving up their land and relying on 'the collective' to support them didn't appeal to these peasants very much. The Soviet troops and police took all of their food and blocked the importation or delivery of food aid to the region. Needless to say bad times ensued. Garden Serf wrote about this more. There is a video here that you can watch if so inclined.

Like I said before this is scary stuff and I don't think anybody can watch it without being profoundly effected. It will likely remind you of why you hate communists and make you want to stock up on food and ammo. These are generally good feelings to have so I won't argue against them.

This is however on the balance not a scenario which worries me particularly. It is somewhere towards the bottom of my list of concerns. It is in the neighborhood of a full on genuine Bosnia or Africa style civil war and above war with Canada or anything involving aliens. Though it is true that Americans tend to have (even those evil liberals) a much higher value for human life than some that isn't really the reason. I honestly think Stalin and Mao (or maybe the Illuminati and Trilateral comission) had a running bet on who could kill more of their population. While different cultures (for a lot of reasons) do tend to act in different ways however events can bring about rapid and crazy changes so in that respect all bets are off.

There are two primary reasons this scenario doesn't worry me much. The first is that privately owned firearms are so numerous and more importantly so widespread in America. It is difficult for Europeans or folks from a couple of large anti freedom cities to fathom just how many guns are out there in the hands of normal people. A hunting rifle with the 3 full 20 round boxes of ammo in the gun cabinet and the 4 random partial boxes spread all over or even a pistol in a nightstand with a single box of bullets are enough to cause real problems.

Even if the second ammendment was totally thrown out or ignored (as well as the rest of the Constitution) it simply would not be possible to confiscate anywhere near enough guns to make a difference. It is pretty obvious to me that well armed people are very difficult to forcibly starve into submission. Shooting would start long before that. I cannot say exactly how it would end but this alone would likely rule out such an outcome here, at least on a big scale.

The next issue is America's ratio of government security forces to citizens. Even if you count all military personnel, federal, state and local law enforcement as well as IRS agents, meter maids and dog catchers (and it would probably be unlikely that they would ALL choose to get involved, but lets just go with it as a worst case scenario) in America the numbers don't work. The ratio of citizens to what could (again a gross oversimplification) be called security personnel just doesn't add up. One of the reasons communist and other totalitarian governments have economic issues is that the ratio of security personnel to citizens is really high. It is really high because people don't like that kind of government. There are also significant budgeting and structural problems because such a high percentage of GDP and the state's budget goes to security. The ratio of people who would be trying to (violently or not) circumvent and bypass any such system to those trying to enforce it would lead to a lot of circumvention.

Food prices are an interesting thing. If you were going to try and specifically design an event to cause massive unrest it would be hard to beat food prices swinging to be either painful or out of the hands of the lower class. Short of a bunch of NeoNazis and the New Black Panthers both deciding to go to the same Waffle house at 2am after a night of hard partying I can't think of a better way to make some crazy stuff go down. While civil unrest is different than an insurgency or revolution one often proceeds the other. This sort of civil unrest has lead to more than one regime change. As I learned from this recent article it isn't so much long term gradual changes like inflation that cause these problems but short term volatile swings. I am not entirely sure why this is. It could be that people have more time to adapt to long term structural changes while someone in true 3rd world poverty can't pay 30, 40 or 50% more for food, even for awhile.

What does this mean for Americans? Well it is a good reminder to use alpha strategy type techniques to use money now to buy goods that will be more expensive later. That sort of strategy also lets you take advantage of good sales. If you have to buy, just for example, a can of baked beans for dinner tomorrow you're stuck paying full price. However if you have a dozen cans of baked beans (or 5 dozen) you can wait until there is a sale in a month and buy 6 cans on sale. Saving .30 cents a can on baked beans isn't a big deal in and of itself but if you do that with a significant percentage of foods you regularly (try for all shelf stable and frozen stuff) eat it will add up to real money.

The more I think about it the harder time I have with Americans who "can't afford food". Now don't get me wrong there are a few Americans with absolutely no income who can not in fact afford to buy anything to include food. However if you really look at the majority of Americans in that boat it is not in fact their situation. According to some reputable seeming website 80% of the worlds citizens live on less than $10 a day. I looked with as much percistence as it was worth to figure out the percentage of their income these folks spend on food and didn't find it. However it is accurate to say it is a pretty high percentage. I want to say more than 50%.

My observation about the Americans who say they cannot afford food is that while their budgeting priorities are fairly sound (unlike say rent food is a flexible part of your overall budget in that if you are flush it can be steak, shrimp and the best of everything; if things are tight it can be pancakes, rice and beans) their actual priorities are completely skewed. The thing is that while to a certain point your food budget can be flexible it is pretty darn important. In reality your actual priorities in order of importance are food, fuel/ energy, housing, insurance and then all that other stuff. While admittedly painting with a broad stroke Americans who are in this situation typically are spending their money on stupid stuff instead of buying food. I would personally like to open face slap everyone who smokes or drinks alcohol and then says they can't afford food.  For heavens sake get your priorities strait. I like to have a drink as much as the next man, unless that man is Mel Gibson, but long before I couldn't feed my family I would be off the sauce.

I just don't see Americans who are one of the richest people on earth getting priced out of the food market at least in significant numbers. Even if the dollar and our standard of living drop significantly most Americans will be fine. According to something I read Americans spend a bit less than 10% of their income on food which is, if you look at world figures, rediculously low. If prices went up most Americans would cut something else out (entertainment, booze, whatever) or practice product substitution which is a fancy economist way to say buying cheaper stuff because the stuff you used to use got more expensive. It would be rough on the very bottom rung of society but the vast majority of Americans would still go to bed with full stomach's. My household spends 7% of our income on food including formula which is 1/4 of that. We could easily cut that by 1/4 if we didn't buy soda, the couple premade convenience foods we get as a luxury, and ate less meat. At subsistence levels with little meat or dairy we could probably spend 4% of our income on food including formula for Walker. We would eat a lot of oatmeal, pancakes, eggs, rice and beans but with some veggies and a little bit of meat now and then and a multi vitamin every day it would be fine for a long time.

So what food vulnerabilities do I see that should concern Americans? As I have said I am not worried about food being used as a weapon or getting priced out of the market. However the incredibly long supply chain between food producers and the end user coupled with JIT inventories is a pretty vulnerable system. A power outage here or a terrorist attack there or some bad weather can mess things up in a hurry. It doesn't take a couple days of trucks not being able to make deliveries and nobody will be able to buy anything.

To me the biggest concern about food security is disasters. A bad winter storm, earthquake or hurricane means the normal food supply is going to be disrupted. As we saw in Hurricane Katrina there is a very real possibility that a major regional disaster will put you on your own for weeks (I think 6 is an accurate number). The 72 hour kit that used to be suggested doesn't cut it. You need to be able to feed your family for a few weeks in case of that sort of event. If you are worried about a flu pandemic think in terms of months not weeks. A black swan event like an EMP or a successful NBC terrorist attack could disrupt all sorts of systems and supply chains for at least a couple years.

The great thing is that like most basic preps food is useful in a lot of scenarios. Assuming you buy things you actually eat worst case you can just eat the stuff. Rotate it by eating it and save a bunch because you can wait for sales. So in conclusion I think you should stock up on food, if just for different reasons than others do.

Sunday, January 16, 2011

Magazine Frenzy

That loser who shot the folks in Arizona couldn't have just used a revolver. He had to use a Glock 19 with a 33 round extended magazine. Information on this whole unfortunate mess seems really sparse but maybe that is because it is fairly close after the fact. I heard that he used generic Walmart white box ball ammo. Am unsure if that was a factor in peoples injuries or not. That could be interesting to read about later if/ when more information comes out.

Anyway back to the point. There are vigerous calls from the left and the MSM which owns them to ban this that and the other thing. Some gal named McCarthy from NY plans to introduce some sort of a new version of the AWB. Folks are buying up Glock mags, and in particular 33rd 'happy sticks' like it is two minutes before happy hour and they want another $3.50 Long Island ice tea. I thought about purchasing some more Glock mags myself. However after some consideration I decided against it.

I think in the firearm community and in particular those who make their living selling stuff there is kind of a Chicken Little syndrome. Either things are going fine and it is a buying opportunity or anything just happened and thus the sky is falling so you need to order everything TODAY. I do believe that those who rely on weapons that take evil non politically correct assault murder magazines should do what they can to square theirselves away. Unless they just recently purchased said weapons they probably should have done this some time ago.

Rarely have I regretted not spending money. While we aren't totally at a happy place we are at a pretty decent one. We have all the mags I feel we need for the weapons we currently have. That includes a decent stash of full capacity Glock mags as well as a handful of happy sticks. While we are young and thus not fully set up the deep redundancy (I'd like a lot of depth in a few platforms) like yet we aren't in a bad spot.

 Also last year my purchases were really firearm centric. We put a lot of money into mags, spare parts and ammunition. I don't regret that as I finally got a bunch of stuff squared away but this year we are going to put more resources into other directions. After some consideration I decided to just stick with my New Years Resolutions. Especially since a bill hasn't been introduced anywhere, gotten out of committee, or even been debated I am just not that worried. Also I don't see an opportunity to sell inventory at a 30% markup over the prices two weeks ago.
Is it time to go crazy, empty your bank account and max your visa card to fill a closet with all kinds of magazines? I just don't think so. However it might not be a bad time to revisit your magazine situation. If you have really been meaning to make a purchase to get your pistol or rifle set up then you should probably do so. I guess what I am trying to say is to think about your situation and correct any glaring defficiencies but not to go totally nuts.

Saturday, September 11, 2010

Never Forget

It has been 9 years since those fundamentalist Islamic asshats hijacked some planes and used them to killed a bunch of Americans. I am a lot older and wiser than I was that fateful day but I am still really pissed. We are still at war but we didn't choose this. Those who think we can pull the covers over our heads and that the monsters who hate us will magically go away are either idealistic or fools.


Thursday, July 15, 2010

Once Upon A Time In Afghanistan

An Afghani talks about how his country used to be. Lots of interesting pictures. Very worth reading.

Interestingly enough my Great Grandfather spent some time in Afghanistan in (I think) the 1950's building roads. My inner cynic does however note that the photographs and information from the article are of a sort of brief renaissance period for the country. Also probably more significant the pictures and information only involve the major cities. By far the majority of the population of Afghanistan is rural and I am not convinced that their lifestyle has ever changed that much. Of course some minor technology has been introduced but the fundamental patterns of life seem to be more or less the same as they have forever.

Take away a bunch of rifles, a truck or two, some radios and maybe a generator or a small scale hydro and I tend to think that a little Afghan village is probably about the same as it was 100, 200 or 500 years ago.

Monday, July 5, 2010

quote of the day

"Yeah, we waterboarded Khalid Sheikh Mohammed," the former president George Bush said
"I'd do it again to save lives," he added.

Link here. 

Wednesday, June 30, 2010

Vodka and Bikinis = Lawsuit? You Bet Your Ass

I have to post on this.

Legal Analysis (This will be short, I am very tired).

Commercial speech is a lesser protected form of speech, using the intermediary level of review, where the state must show an important government interest (this really means nothing), and the restriction is substantially related to that interest (this really means nothing). Cases are all over the place on this type of thing. One thing that is certain is that the government can prohibit false or misleading information from commercial speech.

Another wrinkle here is the public forum. Once the government opens up a forum to speech, it can't discriminate based on the speech. However, it can still regulate the manner of the speech.

The better suit here would be an Equal Protection claim. Discrimination based on religion is subject to strict scrutiny, and basically always fails. In fact, I am not sure if there is a single case where religion based laws have survived (I haven't done any research on the topic). The adverts were only pulled from Jewish communities, which is clearly unconstitutional. However, the vodka company lacks standing to bring the suit. If I was a 14 year old boy in that neighborhood, I would be in federal court tomorrow.

However, this solution would force the MTA into an all or nothing position, where it would either have to let the ads run in Jewish areas, or pull them all together.

All that said, Rabbi Shea Hecht told Fox that he has great respect for the First Amendment, but believes he also has a right to travel through his neighborhood with his children and not be offended. Basically, he says that he has great respect for the First Amendment, but only as far as he wants it to go... I nominate this guy for asshole of the night (which I am pretty sure he doesn't believe is protected under the 1st Amendment).
Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...

Popular Posts