Global Warming Update

• "Utah sees record cold of -43.6 ºF – ‘Perhaps the lowest October temperature ever recorded’ in continental U.S."--Climate Depot. That's -42 ºC for those readers outside the United States.
• "96-year-old snowfall record smashed in Chicago as Halloween storm sweeps across US"--AccuWeather. Just a couple, few inches in Chicago and its environs after dumping most of its snow farther west. 

Pasteurizing Your Water

The general answer given for killing the germs in your water is to boil the water for a period of time. But I came across an interesting article at Blue Collar Prepping which pointed out that you can actually do the same through a pasteurization process. The article explains:

      The boiling point of water is 212° F or 100° C, but the pasteurization point of water is 149° F or 65° C. That's a tremendous amount of savings of both time and energy, and can be easily achieved through solar cooking techniques as well as the traditional "pot on the fire" method.

     However, a significant drawback to pasteurization is that, unlike boiling,  there is no visual indicator for when water has reached that point. This is easily corrected with the purchase or manufacture of a Water Pasteurization Indicator, or WaPI.

The remainder of the article discusses how the WaPI works and how to use it.

     This is an intriguing idea because bringing water to boil requires far more energy than what the difference in temperature would indicate. The boiling comes from the water going through a phase change from liquid to gas; phase changes take a lot more energy than simply heating the water. It is also helpful to those living at higher altitudes, because the boiling point of water is lower at higher altitudes, and so the recommended boiling times are longer--meaning you are using even more energy to boil the water.

    In looking for more information on the topic, I came across this article, "A SUMMARY OF WATER PASTEURIZATION TECHNIQUES" (PDF) by Dale Andreatta, Ph. D., P. E. The author writes:

      Contrary to what many people believe, it is not necessary to boil water to make it safe to drink. Heating water to 65° C (149° F) for 6 minutes, or to a higher temperature for a shorter time, will kill all germs, viruses, and parasites. This process is called pasteurization.

      In this document we describe several pasteurization techniques applicable to developing countries. Pasteurization is not the only technique that can be used to make water safe to drink. Chlorination, ultraviolet disinfection, and the use of a properly constructed, properly maintained well are other ways of providing clean water that may be more appropriate, particularly if a large amount of water is needed. Conversely, if a relatively small amount of water is needed, pasteurization systems have the advantage of being able to be scaled down with a corresponding decrease in cost. In other words, if you have only a little money, you can use pasteurization to get a little clean water, perhaps enough for a family but not a village. As always, the selection of the right system should be based on local conditions. 

The article also describes how the Water Pasteurization Indicator (WaPI) works, and describes several improvised methods to pasteurize water including using a solar box cooker, a flow-through pasteurizer, and "solar puddle" which can be scaled up to provide water for a large number of people.

The Elusive K-Frame Snubby

Greg Ellifritz at Active Response Training is showing some love for revolvers with his article, "K and L-Frame Snub Revolvers." Most of you probably familiar with the 5-shot J-frame revolvers from Smith & Wesson. They are popular with concealed carry folks as well as serving as back-up guns for those in law enforcement. But S&W, as well as other manufacturers, have produced snubbies in larger frames sizes capable of holding 6 or 7 rounds of .38 Special or .357 Mag., depending on weapon. And these are what Ellifritz discusses.

Kyle Lamb On Using A Flashlight With A Pistol

My knowledge of using a flashlight with a firearm is probably antiquated because most of what I learned first came from Massad Ayoob's excellent book, "Stress Fire, Vol. 1" or are based on those same techniques. Great techniques and still foundational. But flashlights have gotten smaller, the layout is slightly different (i.e., a tailcap switch is now normal instead of a side mounted switch), and there are some items or accessories that simply were not available before. In the video below, Kyle Lamb discusses some variants on older techniques and some new techniques for running a handheld flashlight with a handgun.

      I personally like the one where he uses a flashlight with a bit of bungee cord to search, but just simply turns his hand down to get a solid two-handed grip on the handgun and resorts to the pistol light when there is a threat. He suggests that this is a technique for law enforcement, but it should work well for anyone that has a "nightstand" gun with a weapon mounted flashlight. Enjoy!

"Using a Hand-held Light with a Handgun. Kyle Lamb, Field Notes Ep. 42"--Surefire (5 min.)

Two Different Takes On The Threat Posed By CMEs

You may not have realized it, but on July 23, 2012, scientists witnessed a massive flare and CME discharge from the Sun that was probably as big as that of the Carrington Event of 1859. As Modern Survival Blog notes, we missed bearing the brunt of the 2012 CME by 9 days, and "UC Berkeley research physicist Janet G. Luhmann and their colleagues reported their analysis of the magnetic storm, and determined that the huge outburst (of the July 23, 2012 CME) resulted in release energies equivalent to that of about a billion hydrogen bombs."

     The article goes on to discuss the dangers of CMEs. Quoting information provided by NASA:

      Extreme solar storms pose a threat to all forms of high-technology.

      They begin with an explosion–a “solar flare”—in the magnetic canopy of a sunspot.  X-rays and extreme UV radiation reach Earth at light speed, ionizing the upper layers of our atmosphere; side-effects of this “solar EMP” include radio blackouts and GPS navigation errors.

      Minutes to hours later, the energetic particles arrive.  Moving only slightly slower than light itself, electrons and protons accelerated by the blast can electrify satellites and damage their electronics.

      Then come the CMEs, billion-ton clouds of magnetized plasma that take a day or more to cross the Sun-Earth divide.

       Analysts believe that a direct hit by an extreme CME such as the one that missed Earth in July 2012 could cause widespread power blackouts, disabling everything that plugs into a wall socket.  Most people wouldn’t even be able to flush their toilet because urban water supplies largely rely on electric pumps. 

The two primary effects of the CME, according to the article, will be the loss of the electrical grid and damage to electronics, and fires resulting from shorting or damaged electrical equipment or electronics.

     But will it be as bad as all of that? I came across the video embedded below ("Should We Fear The Next Big Solar Storm") at the Real Engineering channel on YouTube and it doesn't seem to paint such a scary picture. According to the video, the electrical currents set up in power lines from CMEs is due to the CME distorting and pushing on the Earth's magnetic field. As the field flux moves through power lines, it generates a DC electric current. There is a potential for damage to transformers, but there are also protective mechanisms that have been incorporated into the most vulnerable portions of the power grid in countries in the extreme north such as Finland and England. Also, because of satellites that are now in place to warn of solar weather, we would have up to an hour's warning which might allow the opportunity to preemptively shut down sections of the grid to protect against damage.

"Should We Fear The Next Big Solar Storm"--Real Engineering (13 min.)

    A 2018 article from CNET summarizes the most likely problems we face from a CME:

      The basic problem stems from electrical currents that solar storms generate in the Earth's ionosphere. Those, in turn, induce currents in the power grid that can lead to two unfortunate outcomes. One is voltage collapse — a type of power blackout that can affect entire electric grids. The other is transformer failure.

      Transformers change one voltage to another — increasing it for long-distance power transmission and decreasing it for household use. Solar storms could destroy power grid transformers, which can be as big as a house, cost more than $10 million and take 12 to 18 months to replace. It's one reason a science and engineering firm called Metatech warned in 2008 that a massive solar storm could cost the US economy between $1 trillion and $2 trillion and take four to 10 years to recover from.

      That projection is too dire, though, say transformer experts at the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) as well as Scott Backhaus, an expert in grid resiliency at LANL.

      "Of the potential impacts, the one everybody is concerned about is a large power transformer overheating," says Backhaus. "What would probably happen before that would be voltage collapse."

      While not as devastating, voltage collapse can still cause regional problems. And the more widespread the blackouts, the harder a recovery becomes because broader outages require power plants to initiate a "black start": using their own power sources, like diesel generators, for the electricity needed to restart the whole plant.

      Solar storms cause other problems, too. Satellites beam navigation radio signals to everything from your phone and your car's sat-nav system to oil rigs and airplanes. Massive bursts of charged particles can hobble those services, as well as phone calls and internet data transfers.

      Space weather also can expose aircraft to high levels of radiation. The Earth's magnetic field ordinarily provides protection except near the north and south magnetic poles, but CMEs push that radiation down toward the equator. That means transcontinental flights that usually travel over a pole must detour to less direct routes.

The article also notes that, in addition to early warning from satellites, our power grid is becoming more resilient:

We're adapting our electrical grid in North America — helped politically by the fact that those fixes also help ward off attacks involving high-altitude nuclear weapon explosions. A 2016 rule, for example, requires utilities to test transformers for vulnerabilities to big disturbances in the Earth's magnetic field and replace problematic hardware within four years.

History: The Assassination of German Jimenez Panesso

An interesting article at Guns America, "Drugs, Guns, and Money," that describes the 1979 assassination of drug kingpin German Jimenez Panesso in Miami. Panesso was a Columbian who headed a drug smuggling syndicate in South Florida. As befits an article in a gun magazine, there is particular attention to the firearms used in the "hit": a silenced .380 Beretta Model 70S, and a Mac 10 machine pistol. Check it out.

Was There Some Truth To The Allegations In The McMartin Preschool Case?

Back in the 1980's there was a panic about the sexual abuse of children as part of Satanic rituals. One of the main cases that prompted the public panic involved allegations of the abuse of hundreds of children at the McMartin preschool in Manhattan Beach, CA. As Wikipedia describes it:

The McMartin preschool trial was a day care sexual abuse case in the 1980s, prosecuted by the Los Angeles District Attorney Ira Reiner. Members of the McMartin family, who operated a preschool in Manhattan Beach, California, were charged with numerous acts of sexual abuse of children in their care. Accusations were made in 1983. Arrests and the pretrial investigation ran from 1984 to 1987, and the trial ran from 1987 to 1990. After six years of criminal trials, no convictions were obtained, and all charges were dropped in 1990. When the trial ended in 1990, it had been the longest and most expensive criminal trial in American history. The case was part of day-care sex-abuse hysteria, a moral panic over alleged Satanic ritual abuse in the 1980s and early 1990s.

And to be sure, the case presented some very strange accusations that were too incredible to believe, like something from a bad LSD trip. There was also evidence that the investigators had used leading questions and other techniques to get the "information" they wanted from the children.

Videotapes of the interviews also showed that MacFarlane and other therapists relied heavily on leading questions and subtle pressure to persuade children to join the chorus of accusers. The defense played tapes that showed therapist Shawn Connerly telling a child interviewee that 183 kids had already revealed "yucky secrets" and that all the McMartin teachers were "sick in the head" and deserved to be beaten up.

Some of the children's accounts included being taken into tunnels and hidden rooms beneath the school.

No evidence was found of the "secret rooms" where massive instances of sexual abuse were said to have taken place. In March 1985, a group of nearly fifty McMartin parents, determined to unearth the fabled secret tunnels, began digging at a lot next to the school. A few days later, the parents were joined in their efforts by an archeological firm hired by the District Attorney's office. Still, no secret rooms were ever discovered.

(Source).

     But was that true? Brian Niemeier reports on files released by the FBI about a cult called "The Finders" that indicate that tunnels were, in fact, found. (H/t Western Rifle Shooters Association). The FBI file contains a report stating that large hand dug tunnels and subterranean room were found beneath the McMartin Pre-School's structure. (You can download a copy of the FBI file here--the report is on page 49 of the PDF). The inclusion of the material also suggests that someone at the FBI thought that the McMartin pre-school incident might be connected to The Finders.

     As Vox Day writes about this, "[t]he world is not only more evil than you believe, it is more evil than you probably imagine."

Are Revolvers Obsolete?

"Why Revolvers Are LESS Reliable Than Autos"--TFB TV (10 min.)

     The host, Andrew (who also does videos for AR15.com and his own channel, the Chopping Block) is normally a straight shooter, which is why this video puzzles me: it is pretty much click bait.

      Of course, we know why why revolvers gained a reputation for reliability, which was mostly an issue of poorer quality ammo in past years and poor design/manufacturing of semi-autos and their magazines. I'm old enough to remember when buying a new pistol meant at least 200 rounds to break it in before you could expect it to shoot reliably, and even then, many designs were intended to only function with ball ammo. And I have books from before my time that discuss how a factory 1911 would need to have an experienced gunsmith to work on it before it could be counted on to shoot reliably. Now we are spoiled, to a certain extent, because handguns typically work reliably straight out of the box. But in the past, out-of-the-box reliability was typically limited to revolvers.

     So, are revolvers more reliable than modern semi-auto pistols? Andrew argues "no" and demonstrates as much by burying a semi-auto and a revolver in some sandy soil and then attempting to shoot them. Both choked up on the sand and grit, but the revolver, arguably, did worse. And even then, Andrew was able to get the semi-auto running reliably again with a bit of oil in the right places. (He didn't attempt to the same with the revolver, assuming without explanation that he would have to remove the sideplate to perform any lubrication and maintenance). From this, he made the leap that revolvers are less reliable and then, from there, the further leap that revolvers are obsolete.

    It is true that revolvers have largely been supplanted by semi-auto pistols among police and citizens alike. Yet revolvers still hold on in two major areas: the small snub-nose revolvers and larger revolvers for hunting and backwoods. And, just based on what I see at gun stores and read online, there seems to be a resurgence of interest in compact and mid-size (i.e., duty) revolvers.

    So what advantages do revolvers hold? Well, on the small end, a fully loaded S&W Airweight or similar is lighter than most 9 mm. semi-autos, even those with similar magazine capacity. They are much thinner in most respects (other than the cylinder) and, in my opinion, tend to conceal a bit better. On the large end, they can handle much larger and more powerful rounds at smaller sizes and weights than semi-auto pistols. A S&W N-Frame or Ruger GP100 is not a small gun, but they are a lot smaller than a Desert Eagle.

    But are there other advantages? Well, I would say that their insensitivity to ammunition is still a plus for some shooters. With the revolver, you have the option of using different types of ammunition and/or ammo with different power (due to different charges of power). For instance, you can load shot rounds for dealing with a snake, you can load light weight round-nose or wad-cutter for small game, rounds intended for self-defense against a human, or more powerful rounds for dealing with a larger animal, without any worry as to whether it will function. If you, as a prepper or survivalist, think that you might someday be forced to scavenge for ammunition, the issue of reliable ammunition may again be relevant.

    Revolvers are more reliable when shot with imperfect holds or presentation of the firearm. Have you ever seen someone limp-wrist a revolver and have it fail to function properly as a result? (In fact, the Bisley style of revolvers were designed to be shot with the arm bent). Have you ever seen a revolver get pushed out of battery when shoved up against a target or other object? Do you think you could fire a semi-auto from inside a pocket and have it function from one shot to another?

    I'm not arguing that revolvers are generally superior to semi-autos. I'm just saying that firearms are tools, and there are circumstances, situations and times that a revolver may be the better tool than a semi-auto pistol.

Jackie Clay: "Put Your Garden to Bed for the Winter"

An article from Backwoods Home Magazine on the end of season harvest (right before the first hard freeze), and what to do with the blackened remains of the plants killed by the first freeze. Surprisingly for many, the author generally recommends destroying the old plants (e.g., burning them), to kill pests (or their eggs or spores) rather than tilling them into the soil or composting them. Leaves are a different matter, and she recommends saving your garbage bags and simply till the fallen leaves into the garden bed (multiple times, if necessary). This is also a good time to fence in your garden, enlarge the garden, and do other maintenance work that you couldn't do earlier for fear of damaging the plants. Anyway, she covers a lot of other topics and ideas for preparing your garden for the winter and getting ready for next spring, so check it out.

     The same author has another article on the topic of "Garden Seeds — A Great Winter Pastime." She likes to review the seed catalogs and plan her garden in the winter, order her seeds early, and get the plant starts going before the planting season. 

"Spy & Counterspy"

I came across a resource that I thought I would share. It is a site called "Spy & Counterspy" which has a collection of articles on recognizing and neutralizing surveillance, particularly focusing on techniques of those organizations that can roll out large scale surveillance against a subject.

     If you find the articles useful, there is a link that allows you to download a .zip file of all of the articles as well as a couple well-known books on the basics of lockpicking.

     This information seems to pair well with the series of articles on "Dark Arts for the Good Guy" at Matthew Allen's blog.

Those Who Vomit Up The Teachings Of The Left

There is a short colloquy in the movie Dragonheart that has stuck with me over the years. In the movie, Bowen is a knight that lives and breaths the code chivalry; and Einon is a prince, a former pupil of Bowen, who has become evil. In a fight between the two, Bowen tries to remind Einon of the noble code he had been taught.

Einon: Lay down, Bowen! You're the sad remains of dead systems and dead beliefs!
Bowen: They were your beliefs!
Einon: Never! Never mine!
Bowen: [heartbroken] But... you spoke the words...you spoke them from your heart!
Einon: I vomited them up because I couldn't stomach them! Because I knew it was what you wanted to hear!
Bowen: Lies! Liar! I taught you!
Einon: You taught me to fight, that's all! I took what I needed from you. You taught me to fight! [stabs Bowen in the shoulder, disarming him] You taught me well.

I think of Einon's words whenever I hear or read about the Alt-Right: that the Alt-Right is the result of Leftists and the Cuckservatives forcing a non-reality down the throat of the younger generations, and these younger generations have vomiting it up, but they don't believe it.

     I've written before of the insidious influence presented by the Cultural Marxists and the Frankfort School of moral relativism. In a June 2018 post, I noted that in the past the Cultural Marxists had relied on our passivity and goodness--essentially a "live and let live" attitude--to advance their cause.

But today, with the march through the institutions complete, we are seeing a shift from appealing to our goodness and generosity, to threatening us should we speak out. Thus we see social justice warriors attempt to shame us into acquiescence and passivity. Don't speak up, or you will be labeled a bigot, racist, deplorable, or some other label. 

I concluded:

      The left has mostly won: abortion is firmly the law of the land, two-parent families and stable marriages are so far in the past that most of us cannot remember when it was the norm, Christianity has been driven from the public square and most Christian religions are now in the process of self-destructing in order to avoid the "sin" of offending a special snowflake or victim group. The left can shame the right all it wants, but the opposite is denied. The only thing left for the cultural Marxist is to destroy "whiteness"--the vestiges of Western civilization and the hold-outs among Christians. And to ensure continued passivity, we that are of European descent are told we are guilty of some irredeemable sin, and that we just need to shut up and listen ... and confess our guilt.

       The first step in this is to reject the idea of white guilt. There is no such thing. One of the basic Biblical teachings is that the child is not answerable for the sins of the parents. So, even if Western civilization was not the second best thing to have ever arisen (Christianity being the first), there is still no need for guilt, apology or reparations. SJW's always lie, as Vox Day has written, and its time to stop passively accepting their lies, but actively reject it and defend rightness.

    Philip Carl Salzman, writing at Minding the Campus, asks the question, "Where Does the Impulse to Vilify America and the West Come From?" He notes that it seems to go back "to the idea of 'cultural relativism,' first articulated in the 1930s by foundational anthropologist Franz Boas and his student Ruth Benedict. Instead of judging other cultures in terms of one’s own values, the anthropologist should suspend his or her own value perspective in order to understand the world in terms of the culture studied." It didn't stop there:

But the idea of cultural relativism did not remain static. Rather, it was taken up and expanded to mean moral relativism, in which someone from one culture cannot make a valid moral judgment about someone or a culture with a different morality. In 1946, the American Anthropological Association went so far as to reject the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights on the grounds that it reflected Western values and was thus ethnocentric. Then relativity was expanded to epistemological relativity, which means that a way of knowing in one culture is not more valid than a different way of knowing in another culture. Thus, for example, science is deemed to have no more validity than individual subjectivity, or prophets, or witchcraft doctors, or chicken oracles. Cultural relativism was a major step in undermining our cultural basis for judgment

     A second source, according to Salzman, was feminism. He explains:

     The Women’s Movement of the 1960s, consequent to the arrival of the birth control pill, modestly strove for equality for females. ... But in less than a decade, the Women’s Movement became second-wave Feminism. Along with a change in label came a change in orientation, from striving for a universal value to partisanship on behalf of females vis a vis males. Quickly that feminist partisanship became female supremacism and a war against men. ... Men were characterized not as supportive fathers, brothers, husbands, and sons, employers, and mentors, and fellow citizens, but as insensitive, brutal, toxic, and evil. The most recent slogans of feminism are “men are trash,” now set to music, and “kill all men,” also set to music.

More importantly, for our discussion here was the rise of a "feminist ideology":

... Feminist ideology generated feminist strategies, which included special consideration and benefits for females. For example, women were to be given preferences in college and university admissions, in employment, and in government, as well as disputes over child custody. Feminist law professors championed laws benefitting females, at the expense of males, such as redefining both undesired advances and violent rape as “sexual assault.” Feminists argued that any consensual sexual congress that a female regretted was rape. Males, as always, hoping to curry favor with females, supported or remained silent about the feminist attacks on equality and fairness.

      The feminist view of American culture ignored its basic values of freedom, equality, and democracy, claiming that American culture was a “rape culture.” Nor was American society deemed to be one of free citizens enjoying equality of opportunity to gain standing and prosperity. Rather, feminists adopted the Marxist model of society featuring a hierarchy of classes in which the higher class exploits and oppresses the lower classes. Feminists exchanged the Marxist economic classes with sex classes, the male patriarchy oppressing the subordinate females, discriminating against females at every opportunity. The alleged sexist American society was thus characterized as fundamentally unjust and corrupt, and salvageable only through the overthrow of the patriarchy and its replacement by feminist supremacy. As females make up half of all Americans and half of all voters, a movement claiming to represent all women could not be ignored, and, as we have seen, could not be resisted.

 According to Salzman, this same ideology was adopted by other interest groups:

      The Marxist feminist model of American culture and society was quickly adopted by minorities aiming to improve their positions by claiming victimhood. African American activists replaced the feminists’ claims of sexism with racism, and patriarchy with white supremacism. ...

      The campaign of homosexuals, including gays, lesbians, bisexuals, and other varieties, for acceptance and equal legal status framed American culture as heteronormative, and bigoted against LGB++ individuals. It, too, adopted the Marxist model, with heteronormative oppressors and LGB++ victims. Trans activists claim to be victims of oppression by the biologically literate, and demand that they could be whatever sex they wanted to be, and that this become sanctioned by law.

Native American and [especially] Canadian First Nations activists claim to be victims of non-natives. ...

      All of these minorities claim discrimination against them because of their origin or characteristics and identity. As proof, they point to “underrepresentation” in relation to their percentage of the population. Their argument is that in every field or organization, they should be represented at least in the same percentage as their percentage in the general population. The cover label for this demand is “diversity and inclusion.” The justification is labeled “social justice.”

     These claims reinforce the Marxist identity politics vision of America as a bigoted, sexist, racist, oppressive society run by evil white male supremacists. The white majority is thus regarded as tainted, and the rights of individual members of the white majority are disregarded in favor of benefits for the “underrepresented.”

* * * 

     While feminist and minority claims have not been ignored, because equality is a central value of American culture, feminists and minority activists have greatly exaggerated their victimhood and the evil oppression by men and by the white majority. Partisan activists and their supporters strive to gain power for their group, as well as power and status for themselves. Those on the political left see the campaign for “social justice” as a path to greater government centralization and power. The call for “social justice” is often joined by a condemnation of capitalism and a plea for socialism. The left’s tendency for totalitarianism is seen in the increased control of thought and speech, for example, in universities’ “diversity and inclusion” apparatus, including “bias detection” committees and re-education committees, a la Communist China.

       The great success of “woke social justice” ideology can be attributed in part to the capture of America’s education system by grievance partisanship. From the grievance fields of women’s studies, black studies, indigenous studies, Chicano studies, etc., “woke” ideology and virtue signaling spread rapidly to anthropology, sociology, political science, English, and other “humanistic” disciplines, social work, and education. From radical “social justice education faculties, “woke” feminist, anti-American teachers spread across the land to shape the minds of America’s children. But no one was quicker to adopt grievance “social justice” than university administrators, who have hired thousands of “diversity and inclusion officers,” including at the highest levels of administration for salaries up to half a million dollars a year, to police thoughts and speech among students and faculty. A sideline is enforcing Obama administration Title IX demands that they persecute male students that any female complains about. With their “social justice” police force in place, administrators have gone on to establish racial segregation in housing, eating facilities, and university salaries, and well as to admit, fund, hire and promote on the basis of sex, gender, race, and ethnicity. Every American criterion of merit, universal values, democracy, and due process has been thrown out by just about every university administration.

       Thus, in order to advance partisan interests, feminist and minority activists have distorted facts of history and sociology to portray America as a wicked and evil country. At the same time, educationalists have striven to divide Americans according to sex, race, sexual preference, and ethnicity, while canceling the rights of members of the American majority.

But even as the Ctr-Left more tightly squeezes its fist, the more dissenters are squeezed out between its fingers, and this is apparent in the phenomena--and, perhaps, new paradigm--sometimes termed the "Alt-Right."

    The Alt-Right has been demonized by the Left as "racists" and "bigots" because they recognize it as a legitimate counter-culture force, and want to place it beyond the pall so that it won't be the subject of legitimate study or interest. But the Left's efforts have only had mixed success because, as a cultural phenomena, there is no specific leader or certain set of beliefs. I have referred to it previously as "evidence based politics" because of the general Alt-Right belief in "truth" as obtained by rigorous scientific evidence and/or past experience. The latter characteristic is what casts the Alt-Right as a form of conservatism, although it has nothing to do with the modern Conservatism Inc. of Rockefeller or Buckley.

    One of the first serious attempts to understand the Alt-Right was Allum Bokhari's and Milo Yiannopoulos's article, "An Establishment Conservative’s Guide To The Alt-Right." The pair dismissed the connection to Neo-Nazism, noting that one of the characteristics of the Alt-Right was its intellectualism: "The alternative right are a much smarter group of people — which perhaps suggests why the Left hates them so much. They’re dangerously bright."

The origins of the alternative right can be found in thinkers as diverse as Oswald Spengler, H.L Mencken, Julius Evola, Sam Francis, and the paleoconservative movement that rallied around the presidential campaigns of Pat Buchanan. The French New Right also serve as a source of inspiration for many leaders of the alt-right.

But, perhaps not unsurprisingly, the Alt-Right is also associated with the "[t]he so-called online 'manosphere,' the nemeses of left-wing feminism," and Red-Pilled philosophy. But Yiannopoulos was demonized and demonitized (the same thing in these days of social media), and since then, no serious attempt by the broader media to objectively report on the Alt-Right has been attempted. Until recently, that is.

    In August 2019, The Claremont Review of Books published an article by Michael Anton with the title, "ARE THE KIDS AL(T)RIGHT?". Anton's focus was the book, Bronze Age Mindset ("BAM") by an author calling him or herself “Bronze Age Pervert” ("BAP"). As Anton observes:

Self-published in June 2018, BAM quickly cracked the top 150 on Amazon—not, mind you, in some category within Amazon but on the site as a whole. This for a book with no publisher and no publicist, whose author is not even known. 

Anton gives a lengthy review of the book which I won't repeat or even attempt to summarize here. I would recommend that you read the review. But some of his concluding thoughts are worth repeating:

      The reason this book is important is because it speaks directly to a youthful dissatisfaction (especially among white males) with equality as propagandized and imposed in our day: a hectoring, vindictive, resentful, levelling, hypocritical equality that punishes excellence and publicly denies all difference while at the same time elevating and enriching a decadent, incompetent, and corrupt elite.

      BAP would say—indeed does say—that this is where the logic of equality inherently and inevitably leads. He even goes so far as to deny that the American Founders meant a word of their rhetoric. I think this is impossible to sustain as a historical matter, but on the larger philosophical question it is possible that the founders meant every word but were still wrong. It’s fair to say, however, that BAP’s followers take for granted that the idea of equality is false. They even have a derisive term for it: “equalism.” They dismiss the language of the founders, of rights, of the American political tradition as “Enlightenment,” which—rest assured—they don’t mean as a compliment.

     And I have more bad news for my fellow conservatives: the talented kids who’ve found this book aren’t listening to us. It doesn’t matter whether they aren’t listening because they found the book, or they found the book because they aren’t listening. The fact remains that all our earnest explanations of the true meaning of equality, how it comports with nature, how it can answer their dissatisfactions, and how it’s been corrupted—none of that has made a dent.

      This—of course—doesn’t mean that we should abandon our understanding. Truth is truth, and if we’re right, we’re right. But it does mean that we need to acknowledge a serious rhetorical deficiency that we’ve not even begun to learn how to overcome. In the spiritual war for the hearts and minds of the disaffected youth on the right, conservatism is losing. BAPism is winning.

   In an interesting course of action, BAP has publish a response to the review. If you want the highlights, read "Bronze Age Pervert: Response To Michael Anton" at Malcolm Pollack's site, but the whole of BAP's response is published at The American Mind under the title, "America’s Delusional Elite Is Done." Again, you need to read Anton's review to get the most out of BAP's response.

   I'm not going to try and provide a full summary of BAP's response (you can read Pollack's post if you want a summary) nor reproduce his article. But here are a few of the important point. First, BAP asserts that:

What you are witnessing, I would like to tell the readers of Claremont, is the unraveling of the postwar American regime—or what is mendaciously called by its toadies the “liberal world order”—in a way that is far more thorough than the disturbances of the 1960’s, and with consequences that will be far more dire.

He also notes that:

The “altright” doesn’t exist and has nothing to do with the media representations of it—really attempts to redefine it and control it—as a form of “white nationalism,” “skinheads,” the various public figures they’ve tried to anoint as its leaders (only to make them ridiculous and tear them down), or even—and here is what is crucial to understand—just “white males” or the just “right wing.” The same phenomenon is taking place on the left, and there is much more crossover than older people realize: there is much more involvement also by nonwhite youth and particularly by Latino, Asian, and multiracial youth in this phenomenon than people want to admit. I’m not saying this to run away from a charge of “racism,” but to try to show you that you can’t, and won’t be able to, contain what is happening now by typecasting it as an “angry young white male” thing. That is wishful thinking on your part, if you believe it.

And this makes sense if you have ever followed the discussions from Red Pilled sites. Rather, BAP explains:

What is going on now is a widespread rejection of the ruling authorities and their beliefs, on the part primarily, but not only, of the American youth at large. This is similar to the rejection of communism by dissidents and youth in the Soviet bloc in the 1970’s and 80’s, and driven by similar causes.

For instance, BAP writes, "The anti-male and anti-White rhetoric of the new left is extreme. The racial attacks on whites in particular approaches exterminationist propaganda seen only in, e.g., the Hutu against the Tutsi in 1990’s Rwanda." And he gives numerous examples. And this is also where he damns the main stream Conservatives:

Whether out of loyalty to the generally leftist social sphere in which the conservative intellectual establishment lives, or out of simple fear, mainstream and traditional conservatives have completely discredited themselves by failing to oppose the violent racial hatred and other forms of unprecedented insanity coming from the new left. I haven’t even yet touched the conservative powerlessness when it came to stopping the destruction of the family; or the new push for the sexualization and grooming of children on behalf of transsexualism and other supposed “sexual identities.” This one crucial matter extends the appeal of the “frog people” far beyond that of any one racial or ethnic group.

And worship of the God of GDP isn't cutting it either.

Many seem to think that success for example in a white collar job is the key to solving this problem of discontent with the new American regime. But strangely enough today it is the large corporations, Big Tech, high finance and other white collar institutions that promote the most restrictive and aggressive leftism. 

 He continues:

       The problem Anton or other conservatives must face isn’t that my audience, or the “youth” in question doesn’t accept the principles of the American Founding, but that the left and thereby a large part of the establishment rejected these principles long ago. The left has been saying exactly what they plan to do for decades. They want to destroy your country, instill a death wish in the white population, set majorities against market-dominant minorities, atomize everyone: the British plan in Malaysia and a few other places but now applied domestically within a country. 

      But the conservatives didn’t do anything, or anything effective, to counter the left—this is the problem. Many conservatives would rather blame people who point out the left’s explicit intentions. If Hillary Clinton says that Merkel is her role model a year after Merkel made the youth of Germany a minority in their own country, and if we point this out and support any candidate who might prevent this unprecedented madness, it is mainstream conservatives who call us Nazis and worse simply for pointing out the left’s stated goals. 

     I would be ready to concede that I wouldn’t have an audience, or a much smaller one, if this was the America of the Founding or even that of the 1980’s. Your problem isn’t my audience, but that your analysis and words and ideas are so far from reality that you don’t even see the reasons why I have this audience in the first place. 

     The left completely abandoned Americanism in the 1960’s; at this point they’ve also abandoned biological reality. Vitalism is all that is left against their demented biological Leninism. Encouraging health, normality, and physical nobility against their celebration of deformity, obesity, and sexual catamitism must be one of the basic functions of conservatism in our time. It is one of the reasons my message is powerful among many who are fed up with the left’s gospel of wretchedness: what is your plan to take that on?

Related Posts:

• "Reject Passivity"
• "Secret Combinations"
• "Micah 5:8 and Civil War"
• "Book Review: The Devil's Pleasure Palace by Michael Walsh"

They Never Thought Hillary Would Lose

The Bookworm Room blog has a good article discussing how the Deep State bureaucrats are getting more careless in their lies as they begin to panic over the investigation on how the Russian Collusion tale got started. And he provides a succinct summary of how we got to where we are:

      Here’s what really happened: The Department of Homeland Security and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence issued a joint statement saying they were confident that the attacks on the DNC and other sites came from Russia. It was an official statement from the top of a combination of 16 agencies (plus the DNI). These 16 agencies are:

• Air Force Intelligence
• Army Intelligence
• CIA
• Coast Guard Intelligence
• Defense Intelligence Agency
• Office of Intelligence and Counter Intelligence for Energy Affairs
• Office of Intelligence and Analysis
• Bureau of Intelligence and Research
• Office of Terrorism and Financial Intelligence out of the Treasure Department
• Office of National Security Intelligence
• The Intelligence Branch of the Justice Department
• The Marine Corps Intelligence Activity
• The National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency
• National Reconnaissance Office
• The National Security Agency/Central Security Service
• Office of Naval Intelligence

No one can tell me that the Coast Guard or the Navy or the National Reconnaissance Office or the National Geospatial Intelligence Agency were looking into the hacked DNC server. And, indeed, you don’t have to try spinning those lies to me.

      That’s because we know what happened. The FBI showed up at the DNC and asked to look at the hacked server. The DNC refused, telling the FBI that a private company called Crowdstrike had looked at the server and fingered Russia — and that the FBI would have to live with that. The FBI, usually so zealous about protecting its territory, meekly acquiesced.

       Crowdstrike, of course, has Ukraine ties, which is why President Trump, when talking to Zelenskyy, the new President of Ukraine, about the incredibly corrupt administration before Zelenksyy came on board, asked for Ukraine to look into Crowdstrike to help determine its connection to the claimed Russian collusion issue that roiled the Dems for three years. In other words, Trump is doing the work the FBI never did but lied about, and that the intelligence community lied about, and that Hillary then exaggerated and lied about, and that Wendy Sherman now lies about.

Oh, and he predicts that Michelle Obama will likely be the "white knight" that will ultimately run against President Trump.

Surviving Civil Unrest

As The End of the American Dream blog notes, there is a lot of civil unrest going on all around the world, including in Chile, Spain, the UK, Hong Kong, Lebanon. And, the author warns, the United States could be next:

      The impeachment process is bringing a focal point to the deep anger that has been building on both sides of the political spectrum for many years.  Now that this process has begun, there is no going back, and both sides believe that there is only one result that will bring justice.

      For the left, any result that does not remove Donald Trump from office will be a bitter disappointment.  The Democrats in the House of Representatives are going to draft articles of impeachment, and they believe that they already have the votes they need to send those articles of impeachment to the U.S. Senate.

      If the Republican-controlled Senate does not vote to convict Trump and remove him from office, this will greatly upset the left, and could result in an explosion of anger in our city streets.

      On the other hand, if the Republican-controlled Senate does vote to convict Trump and remove him from office, tens of millions of hardcore Trump supporters are going to be absolutely livid.  There would be an explosion of righteous anger on the right, and it would almost certainly spill into our city streets.

    The riots and protests in Chile are interesting because they have apparently been violent and extensive, but I've seen very little coverage in the U.S. media. Organic Prepper has published a guest post by J. G. Martinez D. discussing the situation in Chile. He notes that the level of violence and the organization of the protesters is immense, stating: "Someone is organizing those vagrants. There is someone behind providing drugs. Weapons. Someone telling when to attack what. This is not a spontaneous protest." He describes the general situation as far as what utilities are down, the disruptions to travel, and so on. And he offers some advice:

Dear fellows, the wisest action is to hunker down with your gas masks (if you live in downtown of a city being looted), close your windows, and avoid to be in the streets for a few days. Vinegar is a good antidote for tear gas, but surely you knew that already.

• Turn on your HAM radios and start making contacts with your network to monitor the scope of the situation in other areas. (You should already have that network organized)
• Keep your tanks as full as you can afford. Charge everything you need for long term bugging in to your credit cards. No need to max them out, just to rush the stuff you could need.
• Pack some gear and supplies, ready to get out of dodge.
• If you have to bug out by car, try to not to rush. Use the radio or cellphone, if you can, to monitor if your route is safe.
• Timing is key. Identify bottlenecks where the possibility of authorities checkpoints is higher, and try to look for alternate routes.

Before finishing this article, I stood astonished watching some news about how things are getting stirred…in Panama.

Because of these events, the Organic Prepper has another article on prepping for civil unrest entitled, "How to Survive Riots and Civil Unrest." It has some ideas on recognizing the pattern of civil unrest and how it develops in order to predict when it might be time to get out of Dodge or hunker down. As the author states, the primary rule is to not be there when a riot or protest breaks out, and don't be poking around when and where the police may be looking to bash some heads. Read the whole thing, as they say.

Some Guns Are Better for Bear Defense Than Others

It seems to be well established that shot placement is generally more important than power, especially with handguns. But power is something to consider. The FBI testing protocol for terminal ballistics calls for 14.0-16.0 inches of penetration into gelatin blocks to be ideal (with at least 12 inches on the minimum side and no more than 18 inches on the maximum side). Big animals--particularly with thick hides or heavy, thick bones--require more oomph. That is why handguns intended for use against dangerous animals will generally be large caliber, magnums, shooting hard cast bullets to maximize penetration, and not 9 mm or .40 S&W using standard hollow-points.

    This seems to be amply illustrated by a story related by Ammo Land on the "Details of .22 Pistol Defense Failure against Polar Bear in Norway." This particular incident occurred in 1995. Passengers from a ship had debarked onto the ice to engage in some sight seeing. They carried a flare pistol and a .22 semi-automatic pistol for self-defense. When they were an hour's march from the ship, they encountered an aggressive bear, which attacked the party.

The bear was distracted neither by warning shot nor flare and attacked one of the party. As he did so, he was shot, from a range of only 15m and turned against the man who had fired at him. This man tossed the gun to the first, who shot again. The process was repeated, with first one man being attacked and then the other. By the time the pistol was emptied and a knife drawn, one man was dead and another badly injured. The survivors retreated to the ship.

 The ship's captain subsequently shot and killed the bear using a high-power rifle. Upon inspection, it was found that three .22 rounds had struck the bear in the head, but none had entered the cranium. The author suggests that none of the shots had entered the cranium because a bear's head is large, but its cranium (that is, the portion enclosing the brain) is relatively small--that is, it was a matter of accuracy. But I don't believe that the account meant to use the term "cranium" in such a narrow manner; it can also be used to refer to the skull generally. Thus, this incident seems to indicate no penetration of the skull.

    Striking the vitals means not only requires that the round hits the right spot, but that it actually penetrates to the vitals.

TGIF: New Weekend Knowledge Dump ...

... from Active Response Training. Lots of great links as always. Some of the topics covered are: the top three questions used by criminals to distract you or move into your personal space and how to answer the questions; whether (or more accurately, when) to use an open hand or clenched fist when striking someone; a look at the link between homicide and gun ownership (a topic I've researched before with the result that there is no correlation, and that is also the conclusion of this author); and an article on how you are the key to changing your  life for the better (something I obviously need to take to heart). And a lot more.

Woodpile Report: "Food As A Weapon"

This week's Woodpile Report has some lengthy commentary on the history of food being used as a weapon of war and political oppression, and warns about the same possibility should a civil war break out in the United States. An excerpt:

     The ruling class already treats middle America as this century's Untermensch. Nothing is off the table in a civil war. Seizing the nation's food would be an obvious move. Expect them to deploy troops to secure big ag and the necessary transportation facilities, destroy anyone who got in their way and terrorize potential troublemakers. But there's a limit to even the deep state's resources. Prudent survivalists in the far hills wouldn't warrant their attention, they'd be more likely to trade shots with desperados than find themselves in a firefight with regular forces.

     Food is the indispensable survival prep. At minimum this means a secure long-term stash of high calorie food sufficient to outlast the initial violence and privation without relying on resupply. Call it a year, maybe two.

He has some advice and words of caution for anyone planning on more than a family sized prepper group or enclave. Read the whole thing.

Deep State Recast As Heroes

It wasn't that long ago that the idea of the Deep State was considered a right-wing conspiracy, and anyone that believed in it was a paranoid nutjob. Now, according to Michelle Cottle, in her role as a member of The New York Times editorial board:

President Trump is right: The deep state is alive and well. But it is not the sinister, antidemocratic cabal of his fever dreams. It is, rather, a collection of patriotic public servants — career diplomats, scientists, intelligence officers and others — who, from within the bowels of this corrupt and corrupting administration, have somehow remembered that their duty is to protect the interests, not of a particular leader, but of the American people.

John Daniel Davidson, writing at The Federalist, takes umbrage at Cottle's characterization:

      Simply put, the American people never asked these public servants to protect their interests. In fact, a great many Americans who elected Trump did so specifically because they were fed up with unelected bureaucrats acting like unaccountable rulers—rather like a deep state, actually.

      More to the point, “protecting the interests of the American people” isn’t the job of these public servants. They have other, rather specific jobs. The job of career officials in the intelligence agencies, for example, is to provide the White House with intelligence relevant to national security. That’s it. They have no other role to play in public life, and for good reason. Appointed and unelected officials are supposed to serve those who were put in office by the people, from whom elected officials derive their authority. That’s how a republic is supposed to work.

      But lately it seems our unelected officials think of themselves less as public servants and more as a Praetorian Guard. ...

      The idea that these people are pure-hearted patriots is laughable. On the contrary, there’s plenty of reason to suspect that what Comey and the others were up to was a coordinated, premeditated effort to remove a duly elected president whom they despised. There’s likewise plenty of reason to believe the impeachment effort directed by Schiff is simply an extension of this same ploy under a new pretext. The Mueller probe didn’t work out for them, so now we have an anonymous whistleblower complaint and secret testimony from a different set of unelected career bureaucrats who might well have similarly biased motives for cooperating with impeachment investigators.

      More disturbing, as I noted the other day, is that high-ranking military commanders also appear to be part of this Deep State. Angelo Codevilla rightfully chastises retired Admiral William McRaven for his recent op-ed at The New York Times and McRaven's claim to holding the moral high ground:

    ...consider a few of these notions of “good and right.” Following rules and the chain of command is high among them, especially for the military. Officers are supposed to obey superiors. That authority flows from the president. Why? Because only the president is elected by the whole people, and because the Constitution, which they are sworn to “uphold and defend,” says so. If officers cannot abide superiors, they are supposed to resign their commissions.

      But McRaven and a host of senior officers do not resign. They subvert.

      The Constitution prescribes all manner of procedures by which any and all who dissent from the president can counter him, including legislation, overriding vetoes, and impeachment. But McRaven’s essay merely, and dishonestly, adds to the united ruling class’s effort to attack Donald Trump outside of these constitutional procedures by feeding the media’s production of innuendos.

* * *

     Even as McRaven brays for removing the president, he pretends solicitude for “the republic.” But remember: the American republic is founded on the will of the people, expressed by elections. The foremost thing to keep in mind about what is happening in Washington is that it is, above all, an attempt to subordinate the will of the people, expressed in elections, to the will of the ruling class, expressed through its control of social and political institutions.

 Codevilla seems to be of the same assessment as me: "At the very least, McRaven called for impeachment ahead of an election, or perhaps for a coup, and pretended to do so on the military’s behalf. In fact, his was just one more voice from an establishment that has squandered the public’s trust, senses that it can no longer win elections honestly, and is pulling out all the stops."

     A writer going under the pseudonym Adam Selene writes about McRaven and retired General James Mattis in American Greatness, and contends that their views are part of "the anti-republican nature common to the modern military officer." He continues:

       It should be obvious to everyone by now that these military men are, in fact, representative of the “nonpartisan, patriotic professionals” in government, and that their nonpartisanship means “agreeable to the Left,” their patriotism includes more love for foreign peoples than for their own country and countrymen, and their professionalism includes hardly any competence at all. It should be manifest that those who choose to fight and kill for money and a career are not necessarily the noble men we pretend they are, and that they can just as easily be guided by self-interest and the interest of their faction, the military-intelligence-industrial-academic-political complex, as any other bureaucrat. That this faction is part of a larger D.C. establishment faction should also be obvious. 

      They are not just now turning toward praetorianism; they are the Praetorian Guard’s front rank. They are not just now behaving like a junta; they think they are one. 

       In fact, there is nothing republican about those in the upper echelons of our modern military, and their anti-republican nature should be plain to see. And it should not really surprise us. We created a military power greater than any in human history, with more money, more people, and more raw power than anyone has ever seen, and we lavish praise on it and worship its members as if they are infallible. This is a recipe for a ruling faction if ever there was one. 

      Perhaps we should revisit the warnings from America’s Founders about the dangers of standing armies and professional soldiers to republican government.

 Herschel Smith of the Captain's Journal has similar views that are worth your time to read.

Firearms Muse and Views

My bookmarks and in-box have filled with too many news items on firearms and self-protection for me to blog about each in depth. So here are a list of some items you might want to check out:

• "Police: Man accused of shooting unarmed burglar is charged with murder"--WLWT5. A store clerk has been charged with murder after shooting a fleeing burglar in the back with an illegally sawed-off shotgun. Three big "no-no's" here: (1) most jurisdictions do not allow the use of lethal force just to protect property; (2) if a criminal is fleeing, he probably doesn't pose a risk of imminent harm, so don't shoot fleeing criminals; and (3) don't use illegal NFA items for self-defense.
• "Connecticut Cop Who Shot at Unarmed Couple in Car Charged With Felony Assault, Reckless Endangerment"--The Truth About Guns. Watch the embedded videos from the officer's body cam and a surveillance camera. It appears to me that the officer may have seen a reflection from a watch band and thought it was a firearm. 
• A day to live in infamy: "This Day in History: Gun Control Act of 1968 Signed into Law"--Ammo Land. On October 22, 1968, LBJ signed the Gun Control Act of 1968 into law. The author explains:

More specifically, it led to the rise of the Federal Firearms License for dealers and manufacturers of firearms, banned mail-order firearm sales, required serial numbers on all guns, and prohibited interstate handgun sales. The law also required that all newly manufactured firearms produced by licensed manufacturers in the US, as well as those imported into the country, bear a serial number. Firearms made prior to passage of the Gun Control Act and firearms manufactured by non-FFLs remain exempt from the serial number requirement. This is why many guns from the first half of the 20th century don't have serial numbers. It's also why Federal law does not prohibit a person from creating a firearm for their own use from one of the many 80% products on the market today.

• "NRA Board Member and New York State Rifle & Pistol Association Head Wants End to Homemade Guns"--The Truth About Guns. The NRA should rename itself the "National Expensive Sporting Rifles and Shotguns Association" so there is no mistaking its true interests. NRA board member Tom King says that the exemption from the serial numbering requirement was only to "provide a way for competition shooters to make a custom-fitted firearm," and that these firearms should be required to have serial numbers, and the building of "80%" guns should be prohibited. "It appears what was meant to be something for competitive shooters and serious shooters to build their own unique firearm may be turning into a criminal enterprise," King said.
• "Completed DIY .22 Revolver Project"--Impro Guns. Not too bad looking.
• "Revolutionary Rimfire: 3D Printed Receiver For Ruger 10/22 Style Rifles"--The Firearm Blog.

Surprisingly the receiver held up well, more than that, accuracy and precision was on a par with the metal receivers. I have printed the barrel bore a little bit smaller, heated up the barrel and pushed it by hand into the bore, so the bore had exactly the dimension of the barrel and the fit was ridiculous tight. I was very pleased with the result, because it was done with 0 effort, and it is for sure the main reason why this rifle shoots so well.

• "Mental Rehearsal: Firearms Training Without Gun or Ammo"--Guns America. From the article:

     ... allow me to introduce you to a non-secret that athletes and sports psychologists have known for some years: mental rehearsal.

      For the last 30 years, sports psychologists have adopted mental rehearsal as a means of enhancing performance for athletes. This same technique can also be used to perfect shooting skills — especially point shooting, where the body uses only gross motor skills.

     Mental rehearsal can be defined as the mental rehearsal of a skill without physical movement. It activates a network of neural programs that would normally entail the actual physiological responses, meaning you are actually strengthening the neural pathways required for that skill. This might be considered as “soft-wiring” the brain. Also, by mentally practicing, you become more familiar with each specific action required to perform a skill.

Read the whole thing. Also, check out the articles at Marcus Wynne's blog.

• "The Supreme Combat Tool"--Small Wars Journal. Your intellect. 
• "Fingernail Polish On Guns: Pure Vanity, Or Mildly Useful?"--The Firearm Blog. Years ago, I bought some paint specifically sold for coloring sights on a firearm, and applied it to the front sight blade of my .38 snub-nose. With just regular carry in a pocket holster, it wore off (basically, peeled off) within a couple weeks. I then bought a less than $2 bottle of nail polish and have never had to reapply it or touch it up.
• "Understanding Holster Retention Methods"--Range 365. Ever wonder what a manufacturer means by a Level 1, 2, or 3 retention? This article explains.
• "Firearms For Freedom and Forage-Part 4, Hunting Handguns"--Mason Dixon Tactical. The author's viewpoint is not handguns for hunting, per se. That is, these are not handguns for going handgun hunting without a rifle. Rather, this is his reasoning and selection of handguns to accompany him into the woods for camping/hiking, or as a fall back when hunting, and ammo choices. Spoiler: his two handguns he chose are a .22 revolver and a .44 Magnum, both with 4-inch barrels. While the .357 is a great choice for self-defense, he did not believe it sufficient for protection against a bear or other large animal.
• "Grizzly Bear Attack In Montana Stopped With 9mm Pistols"--The Captain's Journal. Note that the two men were using FMJ ammo which would have greatly improved penetration over a standard self-defense round.
• "Defense in Depth"--Tactical Professor. The author discusses better methods for storing a firearm in a car than simply putting in your glove box or locking it in the trunk, and discusses being discrete in putting your firearm in a safe location in your vehicle. Why? Because you may be carrying and then have to disarm yourself before entering a nonpermissive environment.
• "Wadcutters For Self Defense"--Revolver Guy. A discussion of why wadcutters are viable self-defense options for snub-nose revolvers.
• "AR-15 .22LR Conversion Kit: Worth It?"--Beans, Bullets, Bandages & You. The biggest problem with conversion kits versus a dedicated upper or even a purpose built .22 AR, according to the author, is the tight twist (1:7 or 1:8) of most AR rifles, versus 1:16 which is typical for .22 LR. Your accuracy is degraded and leading can be a problem. I think it would be more viable if you had a 1:12 twist AR. The main advantage is the cost--it is simply cheaper to run .22 LR for plinking. 
• "HUNTING WITH THE 7.62×39"--The Mag Life. This article discusses the pro's of using a 7.62x39 as a short range deer rifle. But note that the author is using Hornady SST ammunition for his hunting. Terminal Ballistics Research has a lengthy article on the 7.62x39 and hunting, and notes the following about standard soft-point hunting ammunition:

Loaded with soft point (expanding) bullets, the 7.62x39 produces somewhat better performance [than FMJ] but due to a combination of low muzzle velocities and low BC’s, bullet expansion is limited, the cartridge quickly losing the ability to create disproportionate to caliber wounding. At around 100 yards, width of wounding begins to taper dramatically. At around 200 yards, most soft point bullets have lost the ability to create fast killing wounds. Beyond 200 yards, retained energy is extremely low along with excessive wind drift. As suggested, the 7.62x39 is best suited to the hunting of lighter medium game at close ranges.

• "Why I have Laser Sights on All My Carry Guns"--Range 365. Small size makes lasers a viable option for everyday carry, according to the author, and comes with the advantages of easy sight acquisition. While he raises some good points, one thing he mentions that I would be cautious about is using a laser to obtain compliance--i.e., shining the dot on a person or in front of a person with the expectation that it will scare them into stopping their aggression. He writes:

     My law enforcement friends tell me that a laser sight is a great addition to their duty guns for the compliance issue alone. They say it makes a huge difference in getting the message across to the bad guys and actually reduces the number of shootings.

     I know some military folks who were working roadblocks during the hostilities in the Middle East. Compliance was low and even when they showed their firearms many tried to run the roadblocks.

    When they added laser sights to their firearms the compliance rate went up dramatically. The folks didn’t seem to fear the firearms, but they had respect for the laser sights.

I have two concerns with this tactic: First, if you are shining a laser on someone--meaning that you have your gun out and pointed at them--it may be too late for compliance. Second, you can't rely on an aggressor to see the dot and understand what it means, particularly if they are excited or are impaired due to using drugs or alcohol. As a private citizen, you aren't manning a check point or trying to apprehend criminals.

• "M1A SHOOT OFF – 6.5 CREEDMOOR VS 308"--Mason Dixon Tactical. I've been reading quite a few .308 versus 6.5 Creedmoor articles recently, and the general takeaway I'm getting is that if you already have a .308, great; if you are trying to decide between the two, the 6.5 Creedmore is the way to go: better accuracy, as good or better terminal performance (particularly at range), and less recoil.
• "The Rimfire Report: .22LR Shotshells – Are they worth it?"--The Firearm Blog. They are good for what they were intended: to shoot small pests (mice, rats, snakes) at distances of around 5 feet.
• "Unseen in the Best Places: Belly Guns and Hide Outs for Low Profile Carry"--Guns America. Some tips on concealed carry, including off body carry. The author also notes:

There is a tactical advantage to concealment. I don’t want to be perceived as a threat by bystanders as a courtesy. I don’t want evildoers to know I am armed until I am prepared to act. They may launch a pre-emptive attack and catch me off guard. I want to remain the un-noticed grey man and evaluate my options.

•  "Concealed Carry Tips: What’s Hurting Your Holster Draw?"--Ammo Land. Basically, your shirt can get in the way with a good holster draw. As the author discusses, the further around your waist that you put your pistol (e.g. 5 o'clock), the harder it is to pull your shirt up to expose the weapon. My experience is that a longer pistol also makes it harder to draw a firearm from under a shirt because you have to pull the shirt up farther to allow the firearm to clear the holster but without getting tangled in the shirt: a Glock 26 or 19 is going to work a lot better than a Glock 34, for instance.

M.D. Creekmore: "Surviving a Winter Power Outage – How to Stay Warm"

M.D. Creekmore has a timely article on "Surviving a Winter Power Outage – How to Stay Warm". (H/t Instapundit). He discusses various options for keeping warm, from wearing warm clothing at home, to preparing an "emergency igloo" under your dining room table or in a small room, to looking at heating alternatives like wood or propane.

     I have just a few point to add to his article. First, I highly recommend that you get hold of a copy of Cody Lundin's book, When All Hell Breaks Loose, which I consider to be one of the best--perhaps the best--book on surviving a natural disaster, grid down, situation. He has an excellent discussion of staying warm and heating, including tips for those that haven't had the space and/or money to invest in other preparations. Amazon has the book available new for just over $18, but there are used copies available for much less.

    Second, for those that don't have the option of outfitting their house with a propane system and/or wood heating, another option to look at is kerosene heaters. Back in my university days, my wife and I lived for a few years in Moscow, Idaho, in an apartment that used electrical baseboard heating. As poor college students, we didn't really have the money to run the baseboard heating all of the time, at least not high enough to maintain comfortable temperatures. Hearkening back to the time I lived in Japan, where much of the heating during the winter was with kerosene heaters, my wife and I purchased a larger kerosene heater (the round ones designed to set up in the middle of room), found a local source for kerosene where we could get it from a pump (much cheaper than purchasing in sealed containers), and used it for our primary heating source during the winters. With a ceiling fan set at low to circulate the air, it did a very good job of keeping our townhouse style apartment warm.

    We kept the heater even after moving, and have used it for emergency heating on more than one occasion. Even with now having a carousel fireplace (which is almost as efficient as a good wood stove), if the power goes out, you can get the kerosene heater going temporarily while you get the fire lit and going in your fireplace/wood stove. And kerosene stores quite well, and is even available in sealed 5 gallon drums.

    Third, I would emphasize the old saying, "if your feet are cold, put on a hat." You lose a disproportionate amount of heat through your head, and so in many instances wearing a wool or insulated cap or hat can do more to help you feel comfortable than adding extra layers of sweaters or coats.

 Other Posts:

• "Building a Fire" (discussing some tips for building a fire in a fireplace)
• "Burning Mixed Wood" (using different woods at different stages of starting a fire, initial heating of a structure, and maintaining heat)

More on the Battle of Culiacán

This is a follow up on my post about a battle between the Mexican military and the Sinaloa cartel that occurred last week.  Claire Berlinski has published an article by an anonymous contributor entitled "On Mexican State Collapse: a Guest Post by El Anti-Pozolero" that provides some more detail about the battle and some commentary on its implications for Mexico and the United States.

      First, about the battle:

     ... the Mexican military captured not one but two of El Chapo’s sons in the heart of Culiacán, the Sinaloan capital. One son freed himself—which is to say his entourage and retainers at hand overpowered and killed the soldiers at hand—and then, in a decisive riposte, seized the entire city center of Culiacán to compel the liberation of his brother. 

       The forces that emerged were in the literal sense awesome and awful. Heavy weaponry that would be familiar on any Iraqi, Syrian, or Yemeni battlefield was brought to bear. More and worse: custom-built armored vehicles, designed and built to make a Sahel-warfare technical look like an amateur’s weekend kit job, were rolled out for their combat debut. Most critically, all this hardware was manned by men with qualities the Mexican Army largely lacks: training, tactical proficiency, and motivation. 

      Then the coup de grace: as the Chapo sons’ forces engaged in direct combat with their own national military, kill squads went into action across Culiacán, slaughtering the families of soldiers engaged in the streets. 

      Cowed and overmatched—most crucially in the moral arena—the hapless band of soldiers still holding the second son finally received word from Mexico City, direct from President AMLO himself: surrender. Surrender and release the prisoner. 

      The obvious implication from all of this is that it demonstrates that the national government does not exercise control over all of its territory. As the author observes, "This is not a mafia-type problem, nor one comprehensible within the framework of law enforcement and crime. This is something very much like an insurgency now...." He/she adds:

      This is important because Americans have not had to think seriously about this for nearly a century: there is a place on the map marked Mexico, but much of it is governed by something other than the Mexican state. That’s been true for years. 

     The Battle of Culiacán, government surrender and all, made it open and explicit. 

     What happens now, barring an exceedingly unlikely discovery of spine and competence by the government in Mexico City, is more and worse. The country is on a trajectory toward warlordism reminiscent of, say, 1930s China or its own 1910s. Some of those warlords will be the cartels. Some of them will be virtuous local forces genuinely on the side of order and justice—for example the autodefensa citizen militias of Michoacán. Some of them will be the official state, grasping for what it can. Some of them, given sufficient time, will be autonomous or even secessionist movements: look to Chiapas, Morelia, et al., for that. 

    There are other implications for the United States, should the lawlessness in cartel territories continue to grow. I've noted several times before in this blog that the United States has been in a low grade conflict with Mexico almost since Mexico's inception as an independent country. Cross border raids by bandits and revolutionaries was a normal feature of the 19th and early 20th Centuries. The United States as well as the border states have sent troops and/or law enforcement across the border into Mexico at times. The author of the article cited above warns:

       A century of relative peace along our southern border has left us complacent. We haven’t seriously thought about what it might mean if a nation of one hundred twenty million people with thousands of miles of land and coastal access to the United States went into collapse. We still tell ourselves a series of falsehoods about Mexico: that the immigration problem is about immigration, that the crime problem is about crime, that the Mexican state is the solution and not the problem, that they can handle their own affairs, that light-armor forces can overrun Culiacán and it isn’t our problem. 

      From Culiacán, Sinaloa, to Nogales, Arizona, is one day’s drive. 

* * *

     Mexico is not an enemy state, and the Mexicans are not an enemy people. Yet as Mexico falls apart, we need to ask ourselves questions normally reserved for objectively hostile nations. There is a war underway. It won’t stop at the border. 

A Monday Medley of Videos (10/21/2019)

"Personal Protection: Double Action Revolvers Part 3 (Ammo Capacity)"--Paul Harrell (39 min.)

Harrell notes that you will be able to solve most problems with 6 rounds or less, but not always. He also a good point about high-capacity handguns, which is the (legal) danger of emptying the magazine after a perpetrator ceases being a threat. 

"Cops Are Outnumbered & Get Over Their Heads - Lucky People Did Not Fight Back"--Think Like A Cop (13 min.). A reminder that our law enforcement officers often find themselves in serious danger. In this case, a couple officers entered a building to make an arrest, and the occupants and their friends lock the outside doors and try to free the man being arrested.

"Innocent Couple Lose Their Lives In Robbery"--Active Self Protection (13 min.)

I guess this is another example of "only professionals should have guns," as the "professionals" kill two innocent bystanders and then kick the crap out of a third innocent bystander. 

"NY State Plastic Knife Ban"--Cold Steel (11 min.)

This video is mostly a look at some of the polymer knives sold by Cold Steel and goes over the pros (including the idea of hanging one in your shower with light weight fishing line) and cons, but it does mention that the State of New York has enacted a new law banning the sale, purchase or possession of knives that are undetectable by a metal detector. The law takes affect on November 1, 2019. You can read the press release from the New York Governor's Office here.  

"COSMIC DISASTER | Introduction"--Suspicious Observers (4 min.)

I think that what he describes would match some of the natural disasters predicted in Chapter 8 of Revelation after the 7th seal is opened, so its worth considering. (See also my post, "Plasma Discharges and Ancient Iconography").

"Top 5 Climate Shockers Since 2017"--Suspicious Observers (3-1/2 min.)

A brief summary of some key climate research that is inconvenient for the Extinction Rebellion folks and their related ilk.

"Is Venus' Atmosphere Being Altered by Life?"-- John Michael Godier (7 min.)

"China's Generation ZEN - The Blackest Pill of All"--Black Pigeon Speaks (14 min.)

"The Battle of Castle Itter - US & German Troops Join Forces to Fight the SS"--Mark Felton Productions (11 min.)

"USA enters WW2 in 1940?! - WW2 - 060 - October 19, 1940"--World War Two (13 min.)