Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - 230RN

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 75
General Discussion / Re: I was in the shower and.....
« on: May 01, 2016, 05:52:46 PM »
Quote I am standing in my living room glock in 1 hand and not my glock in the other.

Another magazine?  A flashlight?  Was it something tactical?  What?
General Discussion / Re: remington 700 locked up at range today
« on: April 28, 2016, 12:13:21 AM »
Was going to say it sounded like pistol powder was loaded, saw that was posted already.

Ayup.  30-40 gr of pistol or shotgun powder in almost any CF cartridge that will contain it and you don't need a disassembly manual.

At least not any more.

I'll bet that load was over 120,000 PSI.

Most of those pix of wrecked rifles looked like barrel obstructions.

Terry, 230RN

In a reply to the court order barring enforcement, the Commonwealth Senate passed a strict 57-page gun control proposal last week to which the House added a $1,000 per pistol excise tax, which the Senate approved unanimously on April 7, sending the bill to Gov. Ralph DLG Torres for expected signature.
Shades of Chicago !  I wonder what other parallels to Chicago's attempts to inhibit gun ownership after the SCOTUS decisions could be made here.*   They (Chicago) tried to make laws deliberately intended to inhibit gun ownership.despite the Court's decisions.  Oh, little things like an incredibly unreasonable "training" law, excessive fees, etc...

58,000 population? Gee, that means they only need 29,580 votes (51%) to boot those bastards out of office ! :D 

(Yeah, I know, really only 51% of those who vote.)**

I poked around a little to see what the voting rate in the Northern Marianas was and after I rejected their request to look at my computer clipboard ( Good G-d !) I found this:

(You have to click either the "Allow" or "Don't Allow" button to get in.  I don't know about you, but I don't like the idea of allowing access to my Clipboard.)

Well, thanks, Election Commission.

Terry, 230RN

* Like Chicago's reputation for voting by deceased persons and multiple voting and other fraudulent voting practices.

** I don't know which of them may be appointments as opposed to being elected to office.
Well, frankly sometimes I wonder if it's worthwhile posting political stuff here at all.  Maybe it's my style or something, or the fact that I'm a mainlander, but I certainly expected some response to that decision.

Maybe that case is not as big a deal as I think, but other positive 2A legal stuff seems to be mostly ignored too... whether I post it or not.  This, with the possible exception of the Baker case, where the site owner himself kept the discussion alive and where many of you know him personally.

I've noticed this for most of the 7 years I've been on this board.  It's almost as if the fact that the historically relatively easy living of tropical and subtropical islands, with food readily available from both land and sea, and with mostly mild weather, has resulted in a cultural "shaka," a willingness to let things go, an "it's all good" attitude.

It's almost as if the easy living for centuries has dulled down that sense of independence and the "don't tread on me" fire in the belly attitude necessary to win back some of the freedoms that "Authority" has taken away... at least for most of the Hawaiian population.  Maybe it's a result of the plantation culture?  Or the Royalty structure of days past?  Whatever.

I don't know.  I don't think I'm being a crybaby here, and I don't care if I have 100 posts or 10,000 posts or 10 likes or 100 likes, but it just seems to me that Hawaiians don't care that much about how the laws have subjugated them... or keeps them subjugated.

This is not to say that I'm going to pull a drama queen bit and withdraw from the site, but I'm just commenting on the excessively (to me) easygoing attitude of the general Hawaiian population.  Maybe that's just good for tourism, though, and I'm misinterpreting the situation altogether.

Terry, 230RN

Goin' good, except for my car being blocked in from the snow pile the plows leave in front of my car.  Not normally a problem (4WD) , but somebody parked an enormous motor home next to me and it was hard to maneuver out of my space.  Damned thing was big as a battleship. Had to zig-zag, foward-reverse kind of stuff to blast my way through the snow pile.

I drift around the boards and sometimes pay more or less attention to each one.  Depends on what's being said.  No offense, but I'm surprised nobody commented on the court case in the OP.

Terry, 230RN

View looking due south from my balcony:  My little car blocked in by snowbank (barely discernible in front of it  --everything's white.)  The battleship's prow shows under my neighbor's balcony.  The thing sticking out from my car is an old broom I leave on the hood when it's going to snow.


Alan Gottlieb of the Second Amendment Foundation (SAF) says this may have an impact on 9th Circuit Court decisions.  Like Peruta and Baker.

Gottleib  added:

This ruling makes it harder for the gun prohibitionists to get around these important Supreme Court victories. This is one more Second Amendment Foundation victory in an unprecedented string of court victories.  But we still must make sure that President Obama or a Hillary Clinton do not stack our courts with anti-rights judges.

Terry, 230RN
Off Topic / Re: I'm just gonna drop this video here.
« on: March 10, 2016, 11:03:38 PM »
^ "City version was to just grab the bumper of any bypassing car or bus. <snip> Oh to be young again."

Ditto on that.  Nowadays I could just hook my cane to the car's bumper.  Wheeeee !  :thumbsup:

I practice starting, stopping, turning whenever I can find a safe place to do it.  I had an Audi 5000  where you could turn the Automatic Braking System (ABS) on or off.  I found I could do better on stopping with it off by feathering the brakes instead of pumping them.  I reckon more modern cars have better slip sensors, though.  I still practice that with my 97 Subaru in which the ABS doesn't work.

Fun doing figure eights and such in deserted parking lots.  I've even seen a cop or two having fun practicing in snow-covered parking lots from time to time late at night.  I'm sure it's against policy, though.

But it ain't all fun.  Colorado leads the nation in avalanche deaths.   
Off Topic / I'm just gonna drop this video here.
« on: March 09, 2016, 10:39:37 PM »

Snow fun with cars
...nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws

Well, see, the way it works is, all they have to do is make a law that says incarceration without charges is "due process of law." 

See my signature line below.

Terry, 230RN
General Discussion / Re: Texas Gun Store Smash and Grab Robbery
« on: March 03, 2016, 09:58:41 PM »
From the video, it looked like they had a lot of guns in the cases.  I guess it's a business decision to either pay employees the time it takes to lock up all the inventory in the (expensive) safe, or install a set of bars and leave the regular inventory out.

The owners were probably insured, but at a reduced rate because of the bars, but now their insurance rates will go up, at least incrementally.  And probably the rates for other gun stores will go up, too, bars or no bars, as a matter of actuarial fact. 

So guess what? 

That means your prices go up, too, across the board, everywhere.  Including your islands and my mountains.

Terry, 230RN

General Discussion / Re: Texas Gun Store Smash and Grab Robbery
« on: March 03, 2016, 07:39:53 AM »
Regardless of whether they were/will be caught, that was pretty well organized.  That's very scary to me.

They even switched vehicles a short distance away.

Gee whiz, couldn't they have just gone through the Fast And Furious program set up by the U.S. government to get their guns?  Would have saved them a lot of trouble.

Terry, 230RN
General Discussion / Re: Questionable ammo
« on: February 28, 2016, 05:57:42 AM »
I'd recommend you hand it all over to an experienced ammo disposal technician.

Yeah, right.  Me too, I'm a certified experienced ammo disposal technician for the mainland.

Just be careful with it.  Corrosion that funky-bad on a case in spots like that  might mean that whatever corroded the case might corrode your gun/chamber.  Wipe it down, try it out, then clean the gun as if it had definitely fired corrosive ammo.
General Discussion / Re: Top Ten Skills Everyone Should Have
« on: February 22, 2016, 12:39:28 AM »
I seem to always have trouble with lists of this kind since I always seem to miss some of the "requirements."

I poked around a little and found this reference to Robert A. Heinlein's famous list of "things a man should be able to do":

A little searching reveals that plenty of similar lists exist for men as well. One of the most famous comes from Robert Heinlein’s 1973 science-fiction novel, Time Enough for Love. The protagonist Lazarus Long opines that a man ought to be able “to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, conn a ship, design a building, write a sonnet, balance accounts, build a wall, set a bone, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations, analyze a new problem, pitch manure, program a computer, cook a tasty meal, fight efficiently, die gallantly.” “Specialization,” Long concludes, “is for insects.”


Well, as tongue in cheek Heinlein might have been, the business of conning a ship kind of threw me. 

I could maybe row a boat in a straight line, but I doubt I could ever qualify for a Master's license and conn "any vessel in any waters."

Anyhow, they're right in terms of humans being list makers, but I take any list I see with a grain of salt.

My high suspicion is that anyone who puts together a list like that includes only the things he himself can do.  Faced with anyone else's list, chances are he would be demoralized.

Specialization is for insects.

Terry, 230RN
^ Yeah, ya wonder sometimes, Doncha?  :rofl:

Now, speaking as if you weren't being sarcastic, as I recall, your State Constitution has exactly the same language.  Maybe it's different in the Hawaiian language translation, though.

I cannot conceive of how anybody can read the Preamble to the Bill Of Rights and not  interpret the first ten Amendments under the Strict Scrutiny scheme.

I am pleased to note that two out of the higher Court review judges saw it as needing strict scrutiny.  But I am sore disappointed that one out of those three didn't.  And I'm very disappointed that the lower Court didn't, either.

Terry, 230RN

NOTE:  There were two versions of the second Amendment, the "three comma" version and the "one comma" version.

As passed by the Congress and preserved in the National Archives, with the rest of the original hand-written copy of the Bill of Rights prepared by scribe William Lambert, it reads:

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

But as finally ratified by the States and authenticated by Thomas Jefferson, then-Secretary of State, it reads:

A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

This difference has been a bone of contention.  If you want to wade through it, see the discussion at:


This latter notes that there was even a "four comma" version
Technical Support / Testing --ignore
« on: February 10, 2016, 11:35:26 PM »


[1F494] ksfjlksdjf[/1F494]
From an article by Dove Kopel (a pro-firearms attorney of some little prominence) at:

Short story: a federal appeals court says a Maryland law banning semi-auto firearms — defined as so-called "assault weapons" — must meet a "strict scrutiny" standard.

The case was sent back to the lower court on the grounds that the lower court had applied the "wrong standard" in reveiwing the case and should have been reviewed under the rules for 'Strict Scrutiny." when reviewing constitutional cases:


 All of the first ten amendments to the Constitution, also known as the Bill Of Rights (BOR) should only be reviewed under "strict scrutiny."

 The reason for this is found in the Preamble to that BOR, which reads:

Constitution as Ratified by the States
 December 15, 1791


 Congress OF THE United States
 begun and held at the City of New York, on Wednesday
 the Fourth of March, one thousand seven hundred and eighty nine.

 THE Conventions of a number of the States having at the time of their adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added: And as extending the ground of public confidence in the Government, will best insure the beneficent ends of its institution

 RESOLVED by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America, in Congress assembled, two thirds of both Houses concurring, that the following Articles be proposed to the Legislatures of the several States, as Amendments to the Constitution of the United States, all or any of which Articles, when ratified by three fourths of the said Legislatures, to be valid to all intents and purposes, as part of the said Constitution; viz.:

 ARTICLES in addition to, and Amendment of the Constitution of the United States of America, proposed by Congress, and ratified by the Legislatures of the several States, pursuant to the fifth Article of the original Constitution.
^(Bolding mine)

This powerful and emphatic statement regarding the limitations on the power of the federal government (and inorporated to the States, as well)  automatically disallows "interpretation" under any but the strictest of scrutiny.

 With respect to an armed populace, the Preamble tells me they meant exactly what they said in the shortest, most succinct, and unequivocal amendment (2), that is, "A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed."

 So there.

 Terry, 230RN


General Discussion / Re: Meanwhile, back on the mainland....
« on: January 20, 2016, 02:56:26 PM »
Quote's pretty obvious to me that one day things will get bad enough with the entrenched Democrats that a sea change will take place on the same level as the other big shake-ups in Hawaii's history.

From your keyboard to the Deity's monitor.*


*Modern version of the old expression "From your mouth to God's ears."
General Discussion / Meanwhile, back on the mainland....
« on: January 17, 2016, 06:34:13 AM »
More higher-up Law Enforcement Officers ( heriffs, Police Chiefs) seem to be advocating an armed populace to reduce crime:

At least one of them is waiving the Sheriff's Department fees for licensing.

Maybe your folks running Hawaii politics and law enforcement ought to listen up!

Get with the program !

Terry, 230RN

General Discussion / Re: Is this guy a terrorist or what?!
« on: December 21, 2015, 12:32:57 AM »
I always thought "member" was an adequate description of those in Congress, gender notwithstanding!   :rofl:

I see what you did there.  Double roffle.

Thanks for the info.  Stuff like that should be easier to find, I guess.

Terry, 230RN

General Discussion / Re: Is this guy a terrorist or what?!
« on: December 21, 2015, 12:03:45 AM »
Kinda old news, but well worth bumping.

Typically lawmakers only make the laws... They don't have to follow them.
There may be exceptions, but they are scarce.
Wish I didn't feel that way.
Would like to trust our politicians, but experience teaches...

I'm pretty sure that Congress-critters are not subject to the "Affordable Health Care Act," but I'm not sure.  I think there are other laws that Congress people have exempted themselves from,  Might be interesting to find a list somewhere, but my google-fu sucks.

Terry, 230RN

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 75