Month: February 2010

Best Meme Ever

There is a new gun blogger meme started by none other than Uncle:

The commercial should have ended with a guy in a big ass Ford Earthfuckertm that gets 5 miles per gallon with seats made from baby seals blowing past the roadblock billowing smoke. And, for effect, the driver flips them off. I’d buy that car. Not this little compliant pansy car. You appeal to Americans in an ad by showing rebellion and general orneriness. Not passiveness, compliance, or sheepishness.

Sadly I drive a Ford Ranger which hardly comes close to being an Earthfucker but I plan on moving up some day. It appears as though Random Nuclear Strikes has found somebody who does own an Earthfucker though.

Are You A South Carolinan Planning to Overthrow the Government, Better Register

File this under the goofy category. Last year South Carolina passed the Subversive Activities Registration Act. On February 5th the clauses of those acts took effect. Now if you live in South Carolina and are planning on overthrowing the government you need to register… with the government. Oh and there is a $5.00 registration fee.

What I’ll get a kick out of is seeing the number of people on the registration list a year from now.

A Novel Idea

I found a rather novel idea today. A person by the name of Darrel Ince is requesting scientists to release the source code for applications used in their research. It’s mostly directed at the Al Gore’s Apocalypse group of “scientists” but is a good idea in general. From the article:

Computer code is also at the heart of a scientific issue. One of the key features of science is deniability: if you erect a theory and someone produces evidence that it is wrong, then it falls. This is how science works: by openness, by publishing minute details of an experiment, some mathematical equations or a simulation; by doing this you embrace deniability. This does not seem to have happened in climate research. Many researchers have refused to release their computer programs — even though they are still in existence and not subject to commercial agreements. An example is Professor Mann’s initial refusal to give up the code that was used to construct the 1999 “hockey stick” model that demonstrated that human-made global warming is a unique artefact of the last few decades. (He did finally release it in 2005.)

A software application is, in essence, little more than a series of mathematical algorithms. No scientist will be taken seriously if they come to a conclusion but refuse to publish the math. Seriously try to get a scientific paper published without including the algorithms you used to come to your conclusion. You’re research paper will hit the shredder faster than the speed of light (Which will require some research into how that happened).

But somehow when the math is done on a computer nobody thinks it needs to be published. Software is never perfect. Computers aren’t good at doing most tasks outside of basic arithmetic. Doing floating point math on a computer without writing a library specifically aimed at the task is an estimation at best. At least if the code is published other people can see the logic being performed and find any bugs that could lead to an improper result. The scientific process need to remain an open debate otherwise it’s no longer science.

I would also go so far as to publish the exact specifications of the computer the software was run on. There have been quite a few problems found in processors that lead to incorrect answers under specific conditions.

Gunnies and Gamers

There is a rather interesting story linked on Says Uncle. The story is an article in the Escapist where they find it funny that gunnies are complaining about the Call of Duty Effect. The story itself isn’t nearly as interesting as the comments made on it though. It does show quite a divide between gunnies and gamers.

I’m one of those people who happen to be in both categories. Granted I’m far more of a gunnie than a gamer these days but when I was younger and had a combination of more free time and less money I played a lot of games. I was also pretty involved in what could be called the gamer culture. Yes I was on clans (That’s gamer speak for teams) for many different video games. I competed in Command and Conquer Red Alert, Team Fortress Classic, MechWarrior 3, and MechWarrior 4. It was a lot of fun and gave me something to do without having to spend a lot of money (You can get a lot of entrainment time out of a single game). I still retain ties with many of my former team mates who are still gamers through and through.

I don’t have to explain my involvement as a gunnie as that is the major theme of this blog. Needless to say I’ve always found the divide interesting between the two groups. On one hand you have the gamers who think through their playing of video games that they are experts on many different weapons platforms. On the other hand you have gunnies who are very angry that somebody who plays video games dare claim to have knowledge in the field of firearms. Then you have the gamers who get mad when gunnies explain the fact that their game derived knowledge of video games isn’t so much knowledge but wrong.

What is funny is the divide between the two groups is warranted. Gamers claim to have detailed knowledge in the use of firearms even though most have never touched a gun. Then you have gunnies who simply call the gamers idiots and don’t take the time to properly educate the gamers on firearms.

I have a proposal. First you gamers out there please understand that if your knowledge on firearms comes from video games you have no understanding of firearms. Second you gunnies out there stop calling gamers idiots when they talk about guns in your presence and take time to properly educate them and even offer to take them to the range. We can all get along if both sides realize that they’ve been acting like idiots.

Heck if there are any gamers out there who want to try some guns out I’m more than willing to take you. The only conditions are you have to be willing to drive to the Twin Cities area, be at least 18 years of age or accompanied by a parent, and obey all range and safety rules which you will be briefed on.

Are IDPA and IPSC Good Practice

Caleb over at Gun Nuts Media has a great post dealing with the old argument that IDPA and/or IPSC will get you killed. I agree with his post entirely. His post states that no IDPA and IPSC are not going to teach you tactical skills, they are going to give you practice at handling a firearm under stress. I think that kind of skill is far more important for your average armed citizen than learning how to enter a house while coordination with fellow team mates. I may have to defend myself some day but chances are I’m never joining the SWAT team.

I think it was Massad Ayoob that said IDPA isn’t good training, it’s good practice.

Brady Bunch Cost California Pizza Kitchen 100 Customers

Says Uncle let’s us know that compliance with the Brady Bunch can cost you a lot of customers. The Brady Campaign didn’t have any luck with Starbucks but they certainly had some luck with California Pizza Kitchen in getting the restaurant to ban openly displays firearms on the premises. Unfortunately for them it cost them 100 customers who moved their open carry meeting to somewhere that likes their money. This is what you can look forward to if you decide to deny people their constitutional rights.

Good on You Starbucks

Previously I mentioned the Brady Bunch were trying to cost Starbucks money by shoving a petition under their nose to ban open carry in their establishments. I’ve since learned from Alphecca that Starbucks has further shown the Brady Bunch’s irrelevance by telling them to sodomize themselves with retractable batons (I may be paraphrasing slightly here):

“Starbucks does not have a corporate policy regarding customers and weapons; we defer to federal, state and local laws and regulations regarding this issue,” Starbucks’ customer relations department said in response to the Brady Campaign’s request.

You know I’m actually starting to like Starbucks. Good on you guys.