A recent topic seen in the blogosphere deals with how to own and bear arms. The topic surfaced after threats were made against bloggers exercising their first amendment rights, and one blogger asking how he might act to exercise his second amendment rights. Here are my thoughts on the subject.

Why have guns? Well, first, there is the growing concern over illegal aliens and violent groups including terrorists like MS13 and Hisb’Allah. Both factions have gangs and cells throughout the country, with intent to do harm to the United States and it’s citizens. And you certainly can’t ignore the garden-variety domestic creeps among us. With these potential threats and with law enforcement spread too thin, having an in-home defense plan makes a lot of sense.

Given the premise that owning guns is a good idea, let’s discuss firearms, what to get, how to get and how to operate guns safely. First, choose a firearms dealer (one with an indoor shooting range is good). Once you select a dealer, make your purchase. In California, there is a ten-day waiting period for your initial gun purchase. You must be given a handgun safety quiz (mostly common sense answers) and briefed on the answers to questions you missed. 70 percent is a passing score. I’m not sure about other states/territories rules, but those should be similar.

To ensure safety (yours and others around you), be sure to take private or group instruction. The National Rifle Association website has links to affiliated training and instructors. For advanced learning you ought to consider taking some tactical training in home defense — seriously, you should be trained for, and prepared to use, deadly force if faced with a life-threatening encounter.

Now, let’s discuss gun selection. For most home defense, a simple shotgun will often fulfill the role. A 12 or 20 gauge model (like the Remington 870 pictured above) with number four or six shot cartridges will discourage most threats. A shotgun is easy to operate, but has a considerable recoil — smaller people should consider the 20 gauge version since the 12 gauge has a larger “kick.”

A good entry choice for a handgun is a .357 revolver. The short-barreled Smith and Wesson model 686 is pictured to the left. The advantages of this type of gun is that it’s compact, easy to point and shoot and uses either .38 special or .357 magnum ammunition. The .38 loads produce less recoil than the .357 loads. One disadvantage is after six or seven shots, you’re done until you can manually unload brass and insert six or seven unspent rounds into the cylinder. Some of us remember the drama from western movies while John Wayne or Audie Murphy would reload their Colt revolvers.

Often, a semi-automatic pistol is a good choice. The Smith and Wesson model 908S nine millimeter semi automatic pistol pictured at the right is a reasonable choice. Advantages of this type of gun include the ability to quickly reload the 8-round magazine with a standby magazine, compact size, light weight and easy to use. The disadvantages are that 9 millimeter loads have a greater recoil than .38 special and the magazine mechanism can become worn and will need replacing from time to time. Another possible disadvantage is the ejection of spent shells or “flying brass.” (Damsel actually considers this a positive effect!)

Acquire your guns, learn about them and shoot them often. Keep them clean and for goodness sake keep them away from where kids or strangers can get them. When you have this type of home protection, with the proper training, you may have confidence that you and your family will be secure. I place emphasis on recurrent training, regular use and proper maintenance of your protection investment.

A bright red Gerbera blooms in a pot next to a Cereus cactus.

Update - 04 August 2006 - GRIM, posting at Blackfive comes up with an interesting essay about the scientific community and various scientists’ persuasions about global warming and climate change.

Beware when the words scientific and consensus are used together.

It’s interesting how Newsweek Magazine, long known in conservative circles to be politically left, seems to have changed it’s mind about long-term climate change. They couldn’t be merely harping about the latest trends in junk science, could they?

Image (Courtesy NASA SOHO): A three-day movie of the Sun reveals why this seething monster is the main source of climate effects on Earth. After watching this for a few moments, the notion that mankind could have a more significant effect than the Sun seems patently ridiculous. Just look at the bubbling cauldron of the photosphere and the massive plasma ejections! Awesome!

Dan Walters of the Sacramento Bee writes an interesting editorial about current climate junk science and the political outcroppings in California:

Global warming, whether theory or fact, spawns political heat

Thirty-one years ago, Newsweek magazine published an extensive account of what it described as a growing scientific consensus of global climate change.

“There are ominous signs that the Earth’s weather patterns have begun to change dramatically and that these changes may portend a drastic decline in food production,” Newsweek said, adding, “The evidence in support of these predictions has now begun to accumulate so massively that meteorologists are hard-pressed to keep up with it” and “to scientists these seemingly disparate incidents represent the advance signs of fundamental changes in the world’s weather.”

Global warming? Not quite. The Newsweek article about the emerging scientific consensus was about global cooling and the potential onset of a mini-ice age, akin to the one that chilled the Northern Hemisphere between 1600 and 1900. [See the facts about the Maunder Minimum and mini-ice-age — Ed.]

Now we are told, of course, that there’s a growing scientific consensus about global warming, with hydrocarbon emissions from humankind’s economic activities the chief culprit, although there’s a significant body of contrary opinion.

Whether global warming is a scientific fact or, alternatively, a theory being propagandized for ideological reasons is still an open question. But it clearly is a political fact and in politics, perceptions are always more powerful than reality, whatever it may be.

Walters goes on to write about how all this plays out in California politics.

Now, it’s no surprise to me that the politically-left Newsweek jumped all over the latest junk science in their October 1997 issue devoted to global warming. Shame on them for being junk science mongers.

The words scientific and consensus used together are always a sham. True science requires that proof be demonstrated — quad erat demonstratum — which is never the case with scientific consensus.

This nice little collage of panoramas came from our trip to Arizona this summer. Please enjoy these nice views from the majestic Grand Canyon. If the show is over, click on “Replay.”

When it comes to masculinity, the French always seem to fall short of the mark.

There is a dispute in the recent Tour de France (the Cap’n says “Turd duh Fwance”) with regard to high testosterone level in the winner of the race, Floyd Landis. This indicates that he is, indeed, masculine — an attribute that the average Frenchman seldom seems to possess. Landis produces testosterone – naturally, unlike most EUnachs, I guess.

Image: Floyd Landis

From Little Green Footballs:

Landis Says He’s Clean

Floyd Landis said the high testosterone levels that caused him to fail a drug test at the Tour de France are the result of his natural metabolism — not doping of any kind — and he will undergo tests to prove it.

Read the rest of the article.

Let’s see — Grand Canyon or Tattoo Expo? Hmmmm . . .

For a long time now. I have been threatening to create a sidebar item for the all-important issue of Climate and Global Warming. Ultimately, I want to transfer most of the resources I have used into a database of relevant articles sorted by article type. Well, that hasn’t happened yet, but I managed to get a few articles posted and a database window to all articles on this site that reference the “Global Warming” topic. The reference page may now be found on the sidebar under “information” as Climate and Global Warming. Click on it and go to the page and have a look around.

Please, please offer any suggestions, articles and any other information that I can add to this page — I already have used several articles to email my hippie moonbat congressperson’s staff debunking their insane position on these issues. I’m not certain if it ever gets to her, but at least I’m inserting some sanity into their space.

Use caution — still under construction.

Somebody out there is circulating a three-year-old tip about a close encounter between Mars and Earth. The tip is about the 2003 Mars-Earth encounter. This August, Mars will be a long, long way away, at about seven times the 2003 distance.

From SpaceWeather.com

BEWARE THE MARS HOAX: Just when you thought it was safe to read your email, a new Mars Hoax is spreading. The widely-circulated message tells us “the Red Planet is about to be spectacular. On August 27th, Mars … will look as large as the full Moon.” Not!

Fact: On August 27, 2006, Mars will be on the other side of the solar system, 385 million km from Earth and very dim. So forget about Mars. If you want to see something truly astronomical on August 27th, look east before dawn for a pretty conjunction of Venus and Saturn.

More information from NASA (from about a year ago).

UPDATE: (May 11, 2007) Catalina Fire Pictures Here.

Firefighters responding to a brush fire on Catalina Island get a lift from the US Marine Corps:

Firefighters struggle with Catalina Island brush fire

A stubborn lightning-sparked brush fire that has charred hundreds of acres since Saturday night on Catalina Island was 50 percent contained Monday, but authorities said full containment will not come today as crews had hoped.

Full containment is now expected sometime Thursday, said Los Angeles County Fire Department Inspector Sam Padilla.

Lightning ignited two fires in the central part of the 76-square-mile island shortly after 8 p.m. Saturday, Padilla said. One of those fires was contained a short time later at about 130 acres.

[. . .]

Marines from Camp Pendleton ferried Los Angeles County firefighters to the island in four hovercraft Sunday to assist the Avalon Fire Department, Los Angeles County Fire Department Supervisor Ed Pickett said.

The hovercraft were used because severe lightning made helicopter travel dangerous.

This is another example of how versatile and vital our military is to our nation.

I see that I’m not the only person that thinks ALGOR is a weirdo. I discovered this article on Ken Jennings‘ blog (remember Ken, the all time Jeopardy Champ?)

ALGOR, you’re creeping us out!

Looook into my eyes!

I’m a little late on this, since it took a few days for my copy to get forwarded from my old address, but what the @#$% is up with the cover of the new Entertainment Weekly?

The cover story is a profile of The New Cool Al Gore, and no matter what you personally think about Gore, there’s no getting around one fact: he looks creepy!

Most people gain weight and look friendlier. Jolly, even. But in this photo, Gore looks like Satan! Yeah, no wonder the icecaps are melting. It’s the heat from the swirling hellfire of His Satanic Majesty here.

[more]

These are blooming in the back yard now. Tomorrow, I’ll harvest some of the stems and put them in a vase with with my Sunflowers. They will add both beauty and fragrance to my bouquet.

From Wikipedia

The tuberose (Polianthes tuberosa) is a plant of the agave family Agavaceae. It appears as a rosette of thin leaves up to 45 cm (18 in) long, and puts out a spike of fragrant tubular white flowers in summer.

The common name is the source of some confusion; it derives from Latin tuberosa, meaning swollen or tuberous in reference to its root system, but it has come to be thought of as derived from “tube + rose”.

Faux Brass: a class of former military officers who have shed the honor and pride of their commissions in favor of retreatist and defeatist policies.

In recent times, a few former military officers have rendered negative opinions on the War on Terror which includes ongoing skirmishes in Iraq and the current trouble in Gaza and Southern Lebanon. Now, let’s be clear that most current and former military “brass” support efforts worldwide in the certain-to-be-lengthy War on Terror. The major media, however, fail to show the overwhelming support for the effort among military brass.

Jack Murtha comes to mind as a former military-turned-politician who gets it wrong — redeploy, he says, to Okinawa(?!). Murtha also shamefully convicts our military prior to any charges being made.

It’s the same with John Kerry who offers that he could have done better if he were president — the trouble is, he offers no ideas, but only the same retreat and concede policy that has been his lifelong pursuit. Thank God that America caused him to concede the last election.

Another ex-military general-turned-presidential-candidate-turned-pundit, Wesley Clark, always portrays the administration in the anti-internationalization light. This from a former NATO Commander — not actually a U.S. Military function. Clark will always defer to the “international community” for policy answers.

Murtha, Kerry and Clark fail to put America first. American interests must first be served before worrying how the “international community” views things. After all, has the UN ever succeeded with anything they attempt, other than stealing from children’s programs and Iraqi oil profits? Nope.

These three examples of Faux Brass, Murtha, Kerry and Clark, each remind me of a certain loudmouth cartoon chicken trying to look like an eagle.