Docwagon

On the indoor range, it's clearly marked. Other ranges are guessing. I did just learn that running it to the end of the wire is 15y, though. Dot Torture is designed for different difficultly levels. Beginner is 3y, then 5y, then 7y, then 10y. Bill Drills are also often done at 5y, 7y, 10y. Closer in and you don't need your sights or much recoil control. Further out you need more of each. Now, with all that said, I shoot at a variety of distances, from contact to 85y with handguns. 85y is as far as I can shoot on the police range without a spotter. 115 if you have a spotter to keep people from walking through an opening while you shoot. Something like this, I'll shoot at 7y: The goal is to see how much sight picture you need. You need to slow down and be more careful as the targets diminish in size. Learning that instinctively helps you know how fast you can run at a given distance for a given target without throwing shots. Hit the 1" sq, then the 2" circle, then the 3x5 card. The first shot will need more time, the last shot much less time. This was shot at 15y, although I thought it was as 12y (remember when I said I just learned if you run the target all the way back...) Basically simulating a head shot. 1" square and 7" circle. And some bull's eye work (ignore 12y, again...just learned....) (fingers are covering some earlier holes from revolver shots, not cheating on the group size. And 15y with my new target revolver. The first group of 5 shots was 2 and 1/16th inch, center to center. Again, 15y, not 12y as written. I started having anticipation issues and pushed the gun a bit, resulting in some low hits as I kept going. This was stemming from setting off a .357 in a small cubicle in an indoor range. Even with ear protection, it was loud, and I was starting to exhibit a startle reflex, which caused me to shove at the gun just enough to dip the point of impact 1-3". Got my flinch back under control and was good to go from then on.

As a follow up, I've got all the useful guns I need. At this point I'm just collecting a hand full of guns that I dig just because of what they are. Colt Detective Special S&W 29 (-2 or earlier) S&W 24 or 624 S&W 25 That's the remainder of my checklist.

It's a .38 Colt New Police (same as a .38 S&W, just different bullet profile), although they were made in .32 as well. It basically fell in my lap, like a gift from the revolver fairy. A friend's wife got it from an old woman with dementia who had no family and just wanted it gone. It was locked shut so they didn't know it it was loaded or not. They didn't want to pay a gunsmith to fix it, so they were just going to throw it away. My friend asked if I wanted to look at it and I said sure, I'll try to make it safe. He said if I could fix it I could have it, and I did.

I gave a good home to two revolvers today. A 1919 manufactured Colt Police Positive and a 1970 manufactured S&W model 19.

Enroute to me from Australia, hand made by a legend in the holster making industry. I told him what I wanted and gave him free reign to make it as he thought best. This is the result. Giggity giggity giggity, I can't wait for it to get here.

That's gotta be a set up...but it's hilarious.

Went out on a multiple person shot run, one kid dead. Dead kid runs are everybody's least favorite thing to do. Got back to the office after leaving the hospital where one of the adult victims was and found this: It's the best worst job in the world.

Why do you have what appears to be a high tech vibrator and a toy jack-o-lantern on your night stand? Actually...I withdraw the question.

They won't. This is the refuse for escapist fantasy "freedom fighters" who can then declare there badassery without ever actually getting hurt.

Yeah, you missed. Those lips...ick.

It's one thing to say "here's an isolated case of racism that ended in violence, which is a rarity in our society" vs the narrative of systematic slaying of black people that is being pushed. There is no "race war". The media really wants one, though.

I wonder if the media will accept any responsibility in this mess. There are a certain number of whack jobs who live on the border between being pissed off and being a rampage murderer. The constant narrative of racism sure helped push this whack-a-doo over that border.

Sometimes its easier to solve pretend problems than address real problems. You never have to deal with the consequences because there are no unintended consequences or penalties associate with pretend problems. The guys with 55 gallon drums of beans in their basement and on the edge of bankruptcy...

It depends. Is the customer willing to pay more? Or will they reject the price hike and substitute (eating at home more often, etc.) If not, you are right, some businesses will go under. Their margins will be insufficient to absorb the increased cost and they will die off. This will reduce supply until supply/demand re-equalize. Prices may go up, supply may go down, demand may go down. For aluminum, what's the nearest substitute? Does it now look more economically feasible? Can I use that substitute instead? Again, prices may go up, supply may go down, or demand may go down. Many things affect supply and demand...but supply and demand set price.

Nope. Overhead does not set prices. Supply/demand sets prices. Overhead may determine if you can stay in business or not, and ultimately may affect prices via reduced supply, but lower wages do not translate into lower retail prices. They may simply translate into better margins for the business. Without getting into competitive monopolies and the like, we can demonstrate this very easily. Can of corn "A" costs the manufacturer 20 cents to make. Can of corn "B" costs the manufacturer 5 cents to make. Assume no differences in quality or brand preference on your part. Both cans cost 50 cents. Which do you buy? Can "A" costs 70 cents. Can "B" costs 55 cents. Which do you buy? In the first one, its a toss up. Whichever one is closer on the shelf, maybe. In the second, you're buying can "B". You don't give a sideways poo how much it cost the manufacturer to make and the fact the margin is the same is irrelevant to you in deciding which can to buy. You will not buy the more expensive can simply because it costs more to make.

Because the media has lawyers and knows how to skirt it. If there are 50 incidents and I only pick the 5 that "prove" my point, that's perfectly legal. If I mention race in one incident but not another, that's perfectly legal. if I use the editorials for one sided opinion pieces, that's legal. There is very little ethics in media these days, and less objectivity.

Maybe. At the simplest level, controversy sells and therefore makes more money. If I write a book about Lincoln, no one cares. If I write a book about Lincoln being gay, I get attention, which results in sales, which results in money. Who gives a shit if its the truth, right?

The media is pushing a narrative. When cops get killed, the race is NEVER in the headlines. There is never a "white cop killed by black suspect" or "black cop killed by white suspect'" headline, period. If there aren't pictures, race is often left to the imagination of the reader. We've had two police action shootings in the past week. One some a-holes shot up a party and then shot at the responding cops in the stairwell, so the cops shot them back. The headlines read things like "5 shot in police shooting" making it sound like the cops shot everyone, and later they tried to insinuate the cops were reckless and some people were hit in the crossfire. You had to dig to figure out that anyone was shot by the suspects before the cops even got there, or that they shot at the cops first. The second was two black teens did an armed carjacking, the car is used in a driveby shooting, and when cops stop it the driver rams a cop car trying to get out of a dead end, tries to hit cops with his car, and is armed with a handgun. He gets shot by multiple officers at the same time, falls out the driver's side door and drops the gun. I can't think of a much more justified shooting. The narrative now is "where's the video?" We don't have dashcams, and never have except for a few DUI cars that got them as a grant back in the 90's. We don't have body cams, and never have except for a brief test program. You'd think we were hiding the video from the way the media spins the shit, not that there is no video, there never was any video, and there were no cameras to create any video. There are a lot of people pushing anarchy, often by different names, but that's the goal.

It's a bunch of giraffes standing on top of each other, right? Man, it's like I'm there.