Friday, September 23, 2016
My late father lived in Maine for many years after he retired from the Army. Even though he was a born and bred Tar Heel he was accepted by the locals. He lived in Medomak which is on Muscongus Bay.
I spent my (first) honeymoon in the Rangeley Region at a camp on Mooselookmeguntic Lake. Rosanne and I gave serious consideration to moving to Maine. We joined the Sportsman's Alliance of Maine and took a local paper. We never did make the move but I still love the State of Maine. I guess that is why I am so afraid for them with Bloomberg's money trying to buy gun control there.
Ginny Simone does a good job of showing how Bloomberg and his money is trying to buy the election. I'm glad that there are organizations like the Sportsman's Alliance of Maine. politicians like Gov. Paul LePage, and others like my friend Genie Jennings who will be speaking at GRPC fighting this tooth and nail.
The Gun Rights Policy Conference starts tonight in Tampa, Florida. It will really swing into action tomorrow morning with the call to order at 8am. Below is the agenda for the conference. You can use it as your "channel guide", so to speak, for the livestreaming of the conference.
I will post my full presentation after the conference.
The Polite Society Podcast will once again be Livestreaming the content of the Gun Rights Policy Conference. Not only will each session be featured but there will be interviews with many of the speakers. The conference begins tomorrow in Tampa at 8:30am. Gov. Rick Scott (R-FL) will be giving a welcome around 9am according to the preliminary agenda.
We will be using YouTube for the streaming video of the event. The links for Day 1 and Day 2 are below. Paul Lathrop, Rob Morse, Rachel Malone, Gary Daugherty, and myself will be handling the hosting duties.
Sponsors of the livestream include the Firearms Policy Coalition, Ammoland.com, LFD Research, and Geeks Gadgets and Guns.
I will be again presenting at the Gun Rights Policy Conference on using new media to advance gun rights. That session begins at 10:20am on Sunday. I've written my presentation and will be practicing and editing it a few more times before Sunday.
Wednesday, September 21, 2016
I decided this spring to enroll in a graduate certificate program at Kansas State University related to financial planning. I thought the four classes in the certificate program would allow me to provide my clients with better planning advice.
After I started the first class, I got the following note that said I had to take a 45-minute, online "course" dealing with sexual violence and healthy relationship.
Course Due Date Think About It: Graduate Students 7/22/2016 We know you're excited about being at Kansas State University. To help create a safer global, online and on campus environment for you and other students, you must complete an online alcohol and sexual assault course referred as Think About It: Graduate Studentsfrom CampusClarity. YOU HAVE 20 DAYS FROM TODAY'S DATE TO COMPLETE THIS TRAINING.
Think About It: Graduate Students is an innovative, engaging, and informative online course, created with students for students. In the course, you will examine the interconnected issues of sexual violence and healthy relationships through a variety of interactive, realistic scenarios and guided self-reflection. The course promotes a healthier and safer university environment for all global, online and on campus students.
Think About It: Graduate Students takes about 45 minutes to complete. You can work at your own pace from any computer. You can leave and return to the course at any time, and when you return, it will open to the page where you left off. You may visit www.ksu.edu/asap for more information about ASAP or call the KSU Health Promotion Department at (785)532-6595.
The content of the sexual violence education portion ofThink About It: Graduate Students may be triggering for some individuals. Please direct triggering concerns and requests for alternative student training options to the KSU Center for Advocacy, Response and Education (CARE) at (785)532-6444 or email KSUCARE@ksu.edu prior to the first day of classes in the upcoming semester.
Please bear in mind while reading this that I live literally 1,000 miles from campus and am doing all the coursework online. I am also 59 years old, happily married, don't binge drink, act respectfully towards both men and women (politicians excepted), and have a wonderful 19-month old granddaughter along with two equally wonderful stepdaughters. My Fortune 50 company requires me to take annual sexual harassment training which I believe trumps anything dealing with binge drinking and hook-up sex.
The KSU Center for Advocacy, Response and Education (CARE) had a prior name. It was the KSU Women's Center. I would love to know how much it cost to develop this "course", how much it costs to administer, and how much it costs the university to nag me about it.
I respectfully declined to take this "course". I was referred to the Associate Dean and Director of Non-Violence Programs. This dean is the person who can make an exception to this federal mandate and works with "these students" as I was referred to in the e-mail chain.
I have made my request and am waiting to hear from the Associate Dean. In the meantime I received another missive stating that a "no enrollment hold" has been placed on me until I complete this "course" which has utterly no relevance to me or how I lead my life. To make sure I got the message, they included this all-caps line.
THIS HOLD WILL PREVENT YOU FROM REGISTERING FOR FUTURE CLASSES UNTIL YOU COMPLETE THE REQUIRED TRAINING.
I have already registered and paid for the fall course so this would only impact the final two courses for the certificate.
Frankly, I do not plan to cave or kow-tow to these social justice warriors in bureaucratic garb. Since this is a "federal mandate", I figure a letter or call from the offices of my senators and congressman might make them back off. It doesn't hurt that Sen. Richard Burr (R-NC) is on the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee or that Rep. Patrick McHenry (R-NC-10) is the Chief Majority Deputy Whip. I would hate to have to resort to that but you have to do what you have to do.
Monday, September 19, 2016
I first saw this on PJ Media and couldn't believe it. Then I found it on Chris Hayes' Twitter feed.
The anti-gun left has lost its frigging mind!
We're also very very lucky that the attackers tried to use explosives rather than guns.— Christopher Hayes (@chrislhayes) September 19, 2016
Sunday, September 18, 2016
Ian McCollum of Forgotten Weapons has recently published a series of videos on the sniper rifles used by the US Army and US Marine Corps in World Wars One and Two. One of the more interesting observations was that the Army had to start from scratch in WWII while the Marine Corps, who supposedly never throws anything away, pulled stuff out of storage.
From his WWI description:
The United States had two primary types of sniper rifles during World War One, although both were based on the M1903 Springfield rifle.
The most common optic used was the Warner & Swasey "Telescopic Musket Sight", a rather clumsy prismatic optic mounted on the left side of the rifle, on a detachable rail. The model 1908 W&S offered 6 power magnification, which was reduced to 5.2x in the 1913 model in an effort to increase field of view. These optics were also used on the M1909 Benet-Mercie light machine gun.
The second type is the Winchester A5 scope, an excellent commercial scope available at the time. Although usually associated with the US Marine Corps, several hundred of these were also issued by the Army. The A5 was a much more tradition type of optic, mounted centrally above the bore and preferred by competitive marksmen.
The third rifle we are looking at in this video is a very interesting example of a competitive rifle from the pre-WWI period. It is a 1903 Springfield fitted with a commercial A5 scope and Mann bases. This is the sort of rifle that would have been used by the career military shooters for competition, and would likely have accompanied many such men overseas in the American Expeditionary Force. Woe to the German who found himself in the sights of such a man with a rifle like this!
From the bolt-action sniper rifles of WWII:
The primary sniper rifle used by the United States in World War II was the M1903A4 Springfield, a version of the exisiting 1903A3 with the iron sights removed and replaced with a Weaver 330C scope (adopted by the military as the M73B1). This was a low-power optic, but was centrally mounted on the rifle to avoid and of the windage issues caused by prismatic scopes.
The 1903A4 was the US' first truly mass-produced sniper rifle, with more than 28,000 being manufactured during just two years of the war (1943-44). The rifle was taken out of production when the M1C sniper adaptation of the Garand was formally adopted, although production of the M1C would be delayed until the end of the war. The 1903A4 would remain in service after WWII, with later scopes being approved as replacements for the M73B1 (in this video, we will take a look at one equipped with an M84, the optic adopted for the later M1D).
The US Marine Corps, of course, had to be a bit different, and adopted their own sniper rifle variant in 1941, a 1903A1 fitted with an 8 power Unertl scope. These scopes were a tradeoff, being significantly more fragile than the M73B1, but also being much better for long range precision shooting. The USMC, taking much pride in their culture of marksmanship, was happy to make that trade, and the rifles served well throughout the war.
While the Army did adopt the M1C Garand semi-automatic rifle for sniping in 1944, according to Ian it never saw action during the war. It would make its debut in action during the Korean War.
Thanks to Ian for doing these histories of US sniping rifles as used during the world wars. If you want to help support the work he does, he has set up a Patreon account which can be found here.
Friday, September 16, 2016
I came across this video from Bloomberg's Everytown this morning. I thought in light of the Missouri General Assembly overriding Gov. Jay Nixon's veto of constitutional carry, it would be fun to show this waste of advertising dollars. It is obvious to me that the legislators listened to their own constituents rather than to Bloomberg.
Given that Shannon Watts (then Shannon Troughton) got her start after graduating Mizzou working for as a PR flack for Gov. Mel Carnahan (D-MO), you might be forgiven for thinking she would have a better feel for politics in her former state of residence.
Thursday, September 15, 2016
With the Show-Me State becoming the 11th state to adopt some form of constitutional carry, Rob Vance has updated the graphic we've been publishing since 2011. The latest graphic shifts Missouri from shall-issue concealed carry to constitutional concealed carry. They already had open carry.
Back in April, I said that I might have to update what I said a few years ago. To wit, that shall-issue is the new norm. I concluded that I might have to change this to constitutional carry is the new norm. I think that might be going a little far but one can always hope.
My fellow co-host of the Polite Society Podcast Rachel Malone is very active in Republican politics at the state level in Texas. She said in our last podcast that the Texas State Republican Executive Committee had adopted constitutional carry as one of their key legislative priorities in 2017. Imagine how the blue area would expand if the second largest state by both size and population adopted constitutional carry!
To illustrate how much things have changed since the original graphic was published, I am reposting the graphic. No issue (the red area) has gone to virtually nil and unrestricted (blue area) has grown exponentially.