Racism: an Issue Whose Time Needs to Pass

Racism, and by extension discrimination, is based on the idea that decisions and actions will be taken with regard to someone’s ethnic lineage. If one makes any judgement based solely on one’s skin color, the distinction becomes even more extreme. For instance, "Italians make good food and Germans make good cars," is racist, it’s even discriminatory, but it’s not a negative and there is fairly ample evidence to support each contention. However, if I say, "Italians don’t know how to make anything that doesn’t break," it’s now discriminatory in a negative way no matter what one says about Ducatis and Fiats.

To take it further, "white men can’t jump, and so they will be banned from the NBA" is an example of extreme racism and discrimination. All the statements preceding that one could be said to be one’s opinion. But, when it comes to barring someone from an activity because of their ethnicity, then it becomes a legal issue.

If a child is barred from attending a particular school, eating in a particular restaurant, or drinking from a particular water fountain, it is racism at it’s worst. If the power stopping her is a private individual, that person can and will be tried, convicted, and spitted for depriving the child of her civil rights. If the power stopping her is the government, then the child will be condemned as being racist herself and standing in the way of decades of civil rights activism.

Say what? Does that make any sense?

Well, it does to some. The Supreme Court overturned forced racial diversity in a brilliant and stunning exhibition of common sense. Of course, the person being denied entry to a school in this case was white and wanted to go to the school near her home. The school board said, "no way, we have enough white students."

The stated goal of the old civil rights movement was to stop the negative discrimination that was stacking the deck against so many people. If that is the case, then when society comes to a point where race isn’t a consideration, everyone should be happy. Right? Obviously not. People are calling this recent decision discriminatory and pushing us back to the days of segregation.

Brown vs. Board of Education, cited by both the consensus and opposing members of the court, dictated that schools could not make decisions on where to put a student based on the student’s skin color. That was a great decision. Sadly, this is not what people took away from that ruling.

Now, "civil rights" activists are horrified by the most recent SCOTUS decision. Why? Why if the idea of racial parity is the ideal would anyone who says they are concerned about civil rights want a policy based on race to stand? The answer is simple and one of the oldest in the history of the world: because they have a power base that needs the status quo to continue.

Many of the most vocal minority rights leaders would be out of work if race stopped being an issue. The end result of what they really want is not an end to discrimination but to replace negative discrimination with positive discrimination, aka preferential treatment.

I’m no fool. Negative racism towards blacks (and it’s "black," not "African-American," the same way I’m "white," not "European-American," and first and above all we are "Americans") still exists in this country. It’s a terrible thing and should be stomped out wherever it is found. However, two wrongs don’t make a right and if we are going to strive for a higher ideal, we need to live it. Race shouldn’t be a factor for anyone and if the law is to recognize that, it must recognize that across the board. In fact, it shouldn’t even have to recognize anything, race simply needs to become a non-issue and it won’t if official policies are based on it.

Want to help the poor? Then help the poor. Want to help AIDS victims? Then help AIDS victims. In reality, there will be problems that are defined by racial lines, but they are not as prolific as we make them out to be and often the division is one created by those special interest groups who gain power and notoriety by doing so. But, in cases which must be addressed as a racial group, do so in the same way any other group would be addressed, be they unwed mothers, the homeless, unemployed military veterans, and other such groups having a difficult time. Don't do it by punishing or making policies which affect other racial groups.

I can’t say this enough. Two wrongs don’t make a right. To continue racism in any form is to hurt society and plays only to those with vested interests. When a black presidential candidate complains about racism, I have to ask myself just how much racism can there be? when many polls show that same black candidate in the lead.

Reject all racismand in any form you find it, unless of course you are shopping for a nice car or looking for a good plate of baked ziti.

Shades of Tammany Hall

As the baby boom generation ages, it’s been interesting to watch the slow shift in beliefs touted as gospel by The Left. In the 1960’s and 1070’s, it was about freedom and individual expression. Now, how ironic is it that, the hue and cry is for more government and lamenting the rise of true individual expression.

This was driven home to me by two discussions in as many days.

The first was on a local radio program. The host and guests were lamenting term limitations and the fall of the old-boys’ network in the Arizona state legislature. Was this on the conservative talk radio that Hillary Clinton wants to impose limits upon? No, this was on local NPR affiliate KJZZ, broadcast from the campus of the Arizona State University in Tempe.

Two former state-level politicians were telling the world how sad it is that members of our legislature don’t spend their first few terms mute, literally not allowed to introduce any measures and rarely allowed to join in debate. In the "good old days," you had to earn the right to represent the people who elected you, and you had to get your campaign money through one man. Sure, it was bad if you were at odds with that powerful figure, but, really, that was your own fault, wasn’t it? It made things soooo much easier and efficient. To add insult to injury, freshmen senators now have the audacity to think that they are an equal of the majority leader because their votes carry the same weight. Yes, those halcyon days of yore were so much better. New members of the club could be ushered in to all the secrets of the inner workings, shown the path to life long political power, and the establishment had continuity and a sure hold on the legal process in Arizona.

The second discussion was a BBC podcast where a Silicon Valley pariah was claiming free content on the internet is destroying society. Why anyone could publish anything! This is having the terrible consequence of destroying the "legitimate" media. And, it undermines traditional education where students are spoon fed selected facts by the government system. Who is there to censor and decide what the public sees and reads? Why, the society is going to crumble because we will be unable to distinguish fact from lie if anyone can say anything. At it’s core, says this expert, is the lack of money. No money is being exchanged for information and this upsets the dynamic in an unacceptable way. I can’t help but wonder if he was recently turned down from a job with a newspaper. It never occurred to him or the interviewer that maybe the public is tired of the left wing slant and selective culling of the news by the major media outlets, so that we gladly adopt new sources of information.

What happened to the idea of the freedom of expression, once held so dear? What happened to the values of a free market? What happened to the idea that a free flow of ideas is healthy for government, society, and commerce? What happened to over throwing the man and power to the people?

While the party line has changed over the years, both of these articles find themselves still firmly planted in the fields of current Liberal thought. Rather than the old Liberal "I just want to be free," it’s the now, "the public is too stupid to take care of themselves, and an intelligent person such as myself has to tell those poor sods up from down."

It’s this basic distrust of the average person that fuels the Ruling Elite mentality of the Left. They are distrustful and scared of what a society unfettered by an "enlightened", stranglehold rule might get up to. I can understand that to a bit. After all, the old saying goes, "an individual person is smart, but the general public is stupid."

But so what? In this great experiment in democracy, the common man eventually finds his feet no matter how fast the waters of change are flowing. And, 99 out of 100 times, they find not only solid ground, but profitable, solid ground long before the government or educational institutions are even aware there is a flood. In doing so, the common man pays the taxes that allow the Liberal Elite to gripe about how stupid the common man is.

Times may change, and those who feel they are being denied their place in a structure they are used to are going to be spitting out sour grapes. That’s fine. Change brings opportunity and our modern age is constantly bringing more voice and influence to the average, stupid, common man like myself. If someone is afraid of that, then maybe they have something to be afraid of.

Constitutional Erosion and the Second Amendment: Why America Should Care

Anyone giving this page even the most cursory glance will see that firearms hold a significant interest to me. Some of you are understand that, some don't. But, even if you aren't a gun owner, I'd ask you to read this particular post. And, if you are a gun owner, I still think you will find something in this one to think about and talk about with friends and family.

In future posts we'll cover some of the more pointed issues about gun control. However, I'd like to take a different tack today, one that affects all Americans - liberal, conservative, even the ambivalent. It has to do with the course we set for ourselves and our country.

For years, the gun culture has warned about marginalizing the Second Amendment. I'm not going to go into Constitutional scholarship, but a bit of background is important for a person to understand what is at stake and why non-gun owners need to care about this issue.

The Second Amendment says:

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

The anti-gun crowd, including the the ACLU, talks about the right to arm ourselves as a collective right. That means it belongs to society as a whole, specifically the government, not an individual. They cite a few Supreme Court decisions from the 1800's and one from the early 1900's to support that position. During that time frame, the entire Bill of Rights was viewed as recognizing collective rights, with the individual states having power to regulate such things as freedom of speech and of the press.

Today, we have correctly gone back to the original intent of the founding fathers and the idea of inalienable, individual rights. Even the typically liberal law journals have been forced to recognize that when "the people" is referred to, it identifies the private citizen. In "The Embarrassing Second Amendment," Sanford Levinson, a Harvard law professor, detailed this for the Yale Law Review.

That's a quick background and, like I said, we'll go into the agonizing details of Constitutional Law at another point in time. Even if you don't completely agree with the individual rights interpretation of the "the right to keep and bear arms," I'll ask you to admit that the Second Amendment is part of the Bill of Rights and has never been rescinded.

When we ignore entire segments of the Constitution, and individual and civil rights by extension, we begin down a slippery slope. What happens when we allow one part, any part, of the Constitution, to be ignored, is that we accept the idea that our laws and rights are amorphous, changeable by the government and public opinion. Of course, the entire idea of the Constitution is to protect society from that very thing.

We live in a society with two very distinct evils in our midst: a government hungry for more power and a growing population who wish to abrogate the responsibilities of adulthood. That means there are fewer and fewer challenges from the people when rights are infringed.

I vote Republican. I admit that. It's not that I have any love for the Republican party, but it's that the Democrats scare the beejeebers out of me with their desire for a nanny state. Sadly, the Republicans no longer stand for individual rights, either.

Alright, am I am alarmist?, I mean, the government needs to be allowed some regulation such as interstate commerce. Yes, but, let's look at some big and small things happening in our country today. We have Hillary Clinton's "village" to raise children. That's not a nice "community" thing where someone watches your kid while you run to the store. She means that the government knows better than you do about what your child needs to learn and who they should be, and that they have the right to enforce their will over your very own children. She has said exactly that. We have Rudy Giuliani who, as Mayer of New York City, used his prosecutor's background to "creatively" interpret laws in ways they weren't meant to be used but which allowed him to go after the people and groups he wanted to affect. He even brags about such issues in his book Leadership. People accepted it because they liked the result, but was it the right thing to do? Shouldn't he have gone through the proper process to pass actual laws doing what he wanted?

Agree or disagree, this is a problem. We complain about The Patriot Act, but we cower and cringe when it comes to defending ourselves. Just the other night, I was dumbfounded when a news anchor talked about a recent murder, "but the good thing is that a witness called 911 so quickly that the police found the suspect before he could get away." Geez how good was that for the victim? Wouldn't it have been better if the witness stopped the murder? Is our response to a random killing to pick up a telephone? It is because we have been led to believe that it's the government's job to protect us.

We often hear about police chiefs saying, "yes, fighting back saved a person this time, but they shouldn't have taken the law into their own hands." I have a huge problem with this on many levels. For one, self-defense is not vigilantism. Two, in a government for the people and by the people, the law is inherently in our hands to begin with. Vigilantism is wrong because it denies a person due process under the law, not because citizens want a wrongdoer off the streets.

How is a society supposed to maintain individual rights when we ask the the government to do for us what we won't do for ourselves? You say, "that's dramatic, of course we need the police!" I never said we didn't. But, I point out that societies collapse slowly, not in a dramatic parking lot attack. If we won't take charge of our lives at the dramatic moments, we are going to have a difficult time with those things that bring about doom through slow erosion.

The answer, of course, is our Constitution. It's the document that has made our country unique in all of history. Even when it was first drafted, it was something very special, unique in putting the person before the state. Today, John Edwards talks of a politician's "followers," not supporters, not constituents, but "followers," sheep following obediently behind their master.

If we are to keep the Constitution meaningful, then all of it has to be meaningful or it is doomed. Divided we will surely fall. And that is really the point here: if you believe in one part of it, you need to believe in all of it. We can't pick and choose for all of society and for the generations who follow us. We must hold our government to the letter of the law and the intent of the Constitution. If you even for a moment believe the Second Amendment supports an individual right when it says "the people," or if you even slightly believe it just might, maybe mean the individual, then it has to be part of the bundle of rights which we stand together to defend. If you believe that the issue needs to be decided by the courts, then it needs your support until due process has had it's day.

History is not over and attacks on our rights continue. Don't like the Patriot Act, don't like McCain/Feingold, don't like wire taps, don't like people being quarantened without even having a judge review the facts, don't like Guitmo, don't like anything you feel infringes on civil rights? The cure for ambivalence is in the individual caring and taking part in the process. And the tool to use and the shield behind which to withstand the assaults on our rights is the Constitution.

Let no child be thrown out of the lifeboat. Those journalists who feel their First Amendment rights are being trampled supported the trampling of the Second Amendment. Those churches who supported gun control due to (erroneous, IMHO) pacifist beliefs have seen their First Amendment rights severely limited. Those same groups such as the ACLU who supported the collective/"only government should have guns" position now can't understand how we got to the point where we have government invading our privacy electronically and literally having men in black masks and toting machine guns kicking down our doors with little cause or provocation.

It goes beyond the straight Constitutional issues as applied to institutions such as the press and church and it goes beyond issues such those with which the ACLU concerns itself. We see the results and consequences everyday when small, well funded special interest groups are allowed free sway to reinterpret a document labored over by the men who fought to make America free. Parents who saw guns as instruments capable only of evil have seen their children murdered in the classroom, unarmed teachers having no way to fight back. City councils who wanted easy answers for inner-city crime and directed their police forces to focus on gun confiscation and gun buy back programs have seen their crime rates sky rocket while those cities and states which enacted right to carry laws have seen their crime rates plummet.

The McCain/Feingold Campaign Reform Act took away the First Amendment rights of all groups, groups formed because individuals of like minds had no way for their voice to be heard otherwise. Agree with their voices or not, they do have a Constitutional right to free speech. Now, that right is no longer recognized. In the meantime, wealthy millionaires such as George Soros can still be heard and have the financial means to plaster the media with their own views. I can hear the Left cheering. But, it goes the other way, too. The NAACP is now limited in what they are allowed to promote, and people like Rupert Murdoch, the owner of Fox News, can say whatever he wants, too. Disturbingly, the cry seems to be that limits should be put on the Big Money, which is what McCain/Feingold said it was to do. There seems to be no outrage over the limitation on the Little Guy's First Amendment rights.

Just as with the "war on drugs," the "war on terrorism" has seen a large escalation in governmental power. The Patriot Act was hated by many, but it still passed. Wire tapping without court order, something done by every president, not just Bush, went into overdrive. We know that terrorists use our loopholes to hide from the government, but, as Benjamin Franklin said, "They who would give up an essential liberty for temporary security, deserve neither liberty or security." Or, as I tend to less eloquently put it, "it's all fun and games until it ends up on your doorstep."

If you don't want to see your rights taken away, then you need to make sure no one else has their rights taken away. The fight over gun control and the Second Amendment is where the most vicious fighting for the integrity of the Constitution is taking place. The tip of the spear is the National Rifle Association. They never say everyone must own a gun, but they unwaveringly say the Constitution can not be bargained away or it's the beginning of the end. Many non-hunters buy a hunting license each year because they support the game and fish departments of their state in conservation and recognize that such departments get a huge part of their funding through the sale of hunting and fishing licenses. Likewise, many non-gun owners pay the $35/year for an NRA membership because they recognize the Second Amendment as the focus of the attacks which, if successful, will mark the beginning of the end for the document which has made America unique in the history of the world.

If you are a gun owner and you don't have an NRA membership, you are letting the rest of us do the heavy lifting for you while you reap the rewards. If you aren't a gun owner but have a heart felt desire to see America continue on as one in which we celebrate individual rights, I would encourage your to consider the annual membership fees to the NRA as a small price to pay in order to back the one organization doing the most to support the Constitution. At the very least, be aware of the gun control debate and what is at stake so that you can respond and support the idea that the Constitution was meant for the people, not the government, when attacks on individual rights are made.

If you won't do it for everyone, one day you will find the issues you care about under assault, and who will be left to stand by you?

This idea was captured so well by Pastor Martin Miemoller in his poem, "First they came..."

They came first for the Communists,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Communist.

Then they came for the Jews,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew.

Then they came for the trade unionists,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a trade unionist.

Then they came for the Catholics,
and I didn't speak up because I was a Protestant.

Then they came for me,
and by that time no one was left to speak up.

Motorcycles: A Primer, Part II

In the Part I, we looked at the basic controls of a motorcycle, safety gear, and being a passenger. Now, let's take a look at what to think about when it comes time to buy your own bike.

Safety cannot be over emphasized. Before we get into the fun stuff of looking at different bikes, let's remember that when things go bad at 60mph, the body is going to be punished. Motorcycles aren't cars. When you lose attention here or find yourself beyond the limits of your skill or machine, the price is far greater than simply tapping the breaks or steering into the spin. Make a mistake here and the odds of going down are much greater than those of a mistake causing you to wreck an automobile. Keep sober, keep alert, and realize that you are taking part in a sport defined by managed risk. The greater benefits are directly a result of those things that make the activity a greater risk. If you walk up to a bike and your little voice says, “not today,” walk away and do something else that day.The other thing we have to address is training. Simply put, get some. The Motorcycle Safety Foundation puts on weekend classes all over the country. They are well worth the cost. Second, realize that learning and becoming skilled on a bike isn't something you are going to learn in a weekend and a few months of practice like you did driving a car. There are so many variables involved that you will be adding to your skill level over the years. Don't get frustrated early on if you can't do something, and don't get overly cocky thinking you know everything after a weekend class.

Alright, there's no sense beating those drums anymore. You either get it and respect the damage asphalt can do to skin and what a Peterbuilt can do to your skull or you don't. Let's get to the fun stuff.

You've got some safety gear, you've taken your course, and you have a wad of cash just burning a hole in your pocket. You want a bike so bad you can taste it. But, you don't want to buy the “wrong” bike and you want to get your money's worth. The question always asked is, “what bike should I buy?”Honda Gold Wing, no doubt, anything else would be stupid. Actually, it's that answer that is stupid (I jest, I do like the Gold Wing, but someone shoot me if I ever put a trailer on a motorcycle). It's stupid because there is no one answer to “what bike?” It all depends on your size, age, maturity, amount of money to spend, confidence level, and what you want to do with it.

When you start talking to people about specific motorcycles, you will hear them throw descriptive numbers about. “I had a 250,” “that was a fast 750,” “I rode a 1200 across country.” What they are referring to is the engine size which is calculated by the combined cubic centimeters displaced by the pistons. That leaves a lot of details on the table, but engine size is much more significant in a lightweight vehicle such as a bike than they are in a passenger car. The reference will give you a basic idea about the size, weight, and power of the bike in question. This system is a throwback to the days when there weren't different styles of motorcycles, there were just motorcycles and the habit has remained.
Today, there are all dirt bikes, street bikes, and bikes that blur the lines between the two. For the sake of this article, and because it's what I know, we'll assume you want to ride on the street. With street bikes, there are basic types such as cruisers (Harley-style), sport bikes (the fastest and best handling), tour bikes (carry what you and your gear for days at a time), standards (basic bike – motor, two wheels), and dual sports (the mix of a street bike and off-road bikes). Of course, there are blends and hybrids and all sort of bikes to do things you have probably never even considered.

Buying a bike is a very personal thing that is as much a mix of heart and desire as it is mind and logic. If you want a particular bike, dream about it, can't think of anything else while you are at work, you're probably going to be fairly happy with it. There are a few different approaches to finding that steel vixen that will insist on finding a home in your garage.

There is a very common train of thought that says buy something used and small, learn on it for six months or a year, and sell it when your skills outgrow it. A lot of people have gone that route and have been very happy to do so. Many beginning riders will lay down their first bike, so why abuse a new bike and throw money on something you are going to scuff up? And, after all the lust, desire, and training, you might spend three months dodging Volvos, cleaning bugs off your helmet, and getting rained on and say to yourself “nope, this isn't for me after all.” If you find yourself at all hesitant, buying the cheap, used, small bike saves you from investing too much money on something you won't end up using.

If that sounds like an approach that works for you, a few bikes over the years are constant standouts in this category. The Honda Rebel 250 looks like a Harley that got hit by a shrink ray. The things run forever and you will probably be able to sell it for what you have into it. It is lightweight and easy for almost anyone to sit on and put their feet flat on the ground. Where the Rebel is a cruiser, the Yamaha TW200 is an odd little dual purpose bike. It sits low and has a very reliable motor; it's big balloon type tires roll over anything, and are great little bikes for exploring a campground or your neighborhood.
Moving up in size, the Suzuki GS500F is a great commuter for those wanting a big more punch than a 250cc will deliver. The same can be said of it's major competition, the Kawasaki Ning 500R (formerly the EX500). Both wear the clothes of a sport bike but are really standards – just good, solid bikes that will take the day to day grind.Really, any of the smaller Japanese bikes should be fairly inexpensive and will suit you well for learning. Stay bellow a 500cc motor and your insurance should stay at paltry levels. Keep that same 500cc ceiling and you can be sure to not have too much engine.

In the mid-size cruiser segment, the Star V-Stars by Yamaha are very popular – reliable, look good, sit low, and have a no-maintenance shaft drive. You rarely see the “cool” people talking about them on different forums, but you see a heck of a lot of the bikes during morning rush hour and in parking lots everywhere. The guys who actually use their bikes seem to like them a lot and the Star branded bikes are probably behind only BMW & Harley-Davidson for the number of die hard fanatics who don't want to ride anything else. The endorsement of the road speaks more loudly than anything in print – including my thoughts here – ever should.Is there such a thing as “too much engine?” You wouldn't think so unless you have ridden the crop of modern sport bikes. If there's one thing I will recommend the new bike buyer, it's to NOT buy a hyper-performance sport bike. Don't get me wrong, I think a person should buy what they like, but I encourage those with the go-fast bug to learn a bit before completely giving in to their speed lust. Most people think that a sport bike is the two-wheeled equivalent of a sports car. To a point that is true, but it doesn't tell the entire story. While a sports car is fast and “sporty,” it's a far cry from a race car. That isn't the way it works in the motorcycle world. The sport bike sitting on the dealer's showroom floor today is a true race bike and not very different from what the top riders were using on the track a few years ago. The power of those bikes is simply unreal. The bikes that aren't of the race bike family are sometimes left out because even racers don't use engines that big. Think of them as your very own cruise missile on wheels. Even the small 600cc sport bikes will blow the mirrors off my 1,450cc Harley. And that is why the old way of referring to bikes by engine displacement can be deceptive.This doesn't mean the person who wants to go out and carve the corners is caught in a Catch 22 of “I have to learn before I can do, but how can I learn if I never do?” There are plenty of bikes that combine more than enough horsepower in packages that are friendly and handle well. The shining example in this category is the Suzuki SV650S (the "S" is for the fairing, there is a "naked" model, too.) It's mid-size, v-twin motor pushes the bike along with a predictable power curve not nearly as sensitive as a high-strung repli-racer. Along the same lines but with a four cylinder mill, the Yamaha FZ6 is sometimes referred to as a sport bike, sometimes as a “standard with a fairing” (one of those hybrids, again) and is nothing but loved by it's owners.In this mid-sized engine group is one of my favorite bikes, the Kawasaki KLR650. It's cheap, it's ugly, it's slow, it's reliable, and you can ride around the world on it. A “thumper,” or single cylinder motor, this bike has been around since the 1980's and received it's first significant, evolutionary (but not revolutionary) make over as an early release 2008. This bike is not for someone who wants to look good going down the road, it's for those who want to go down any road they look. The over sized gas tank and fuel sipping habits let a rider cover a lot of remote country between fill-ups. You just have to respect a bike like that. We started with the idea of “small, used, and cheap” and have moved up the ladder to mid-sized bikes for people who want a bit more power. By no means have we covered the entire gambit, but we've given a good bit of info to think about and a few bikes to Google in order to see how they hit your fancy. Size, the engine and physical dimension of the bike, will be a factor, but you won't know if you and the bike fit each other until you get into a showroom and sit on it. Don't be surprised if the dealer won't let you go for a test ride. Would you let a rank beginner ride your bike?

Bikes are more maintenance intensive than the hands-off cars we are used to today. Some people get worked up over one type of widget being more reliable or requiring less maintenance than some other type of widget. My advice at this stage is to ignore all of that. If you stay away from the high-strung sport bikes and anything Italian, maintenance won't be bad and you'll figure it out for whatever you get. Once you have more experience, you can decide what you are willing to do and what you'd rather not have to mess with.

If you are an older rider entering the sport or feel you have the maturity to control your throttle hand, I would still recommend against jumping right onto a hard core sport bike. Riding one safely goes beyond maturity and self-control. They require a large dose of experience to keep from getting in over your head. But, if you want that Honda Gold Wing so you and your wife can take off for a month and see the country, then don't feel as if you should stop yourself (just promise me you won't pull a trailer.) Lusted after that big Harley since your uncle had one? Knock yourself out. Just remember, these are bigger investments and bigger bikes - they are easier to drop and more expensive to fix than that used, small, beater bike. If money isn't an object, then don't worry about it, and we should really get to know each other better.

In the end, you have to like and want what you buy for it to be worth your money. Decide what you think you are going to want to do, look at the bikes that will do it, cross reference with your budget, and take to the open road. This is a sport about emotion and desire. If you deny yourself those basic elements, then you're shorting yourself before you even hit the starter button on your new bike.

What do I wish I had known when I started? I wish I had known how great it would be so that I could have started even earlier. Now get out there and ride!

Harley-Davidson Road Glide

This is my ride, the Harley-Davidson FLTRI Road Glide.

People react differently to Harleys – they either love 'em or hate 'em. I admit, I used to be in the latter category. Prior to purchasing my Road Glide, BMW held my interest, mostly due to their legendary reliability.

But, in the late 1990's and early 2000's, things in the motorcycle world shifted. BMW decided to reinvent themselves as an upper-end boutique shop. Along with that seemed to come a new attitude, and the internet was filled with previously unheard of problems and a German attitude towards customer service. Who says the Nazi party is dead? At the same time, the Harley Twin Cam engine was establishing itself as a major step forward in both reliability and durability from the Evolution, which was pretty good in it's own right.

After getting ignored about ten times to often and fighting with their service department, when it came time to replace my BMW GS, I decided to see what all this Harley hullabaloo was about. I am a big guy and I like to do long miles and travel on my bikes. Harley has a few distinctly different lines, but I knew I wanted one of their touring models. These models are often called “baggers” because of their factory hard saddlebags (properly termed “panniers,” but get an American to use that word.)

I had done an Iron Butt Association ride on an Electra Glide and found that I really enjoyed the strum of the American V-twin motor on those long, dusty, desert byways. H-D has three basic tourers – the Electra Glide that uses a “bat wing” fairing mounted to the handlebars, the Road King that uses a simple windshield mounted to the handlebars, and the Road Glide that uses a fairing mounted right o the frame. I'd found Electra Glides to get a loose at the higher speeds - which makes sense when you think you have barn door strapped right to the forks. In theory, the Road Glide wouldn't have those problems. In fact, the frame mounted fairing not only put the wind pressure right to th frame, it actually would help protect the top of the forks and the handlebars from buffeting wind.

Also, the touring models have an extra heavy duty frame and transmission meant for wracking up the miles. What you trade off in light weight and handling, you make up for in load capacity and longevity. If I want to go fast, I'll take a car. When I want to experience the road, I'll take a bike. The bagger trade off was more than worth it to me.

So, I went out in search of a sierra red Road Glide, found it, bought it, and now I'm a Harley die-hard like so many other people. I don't like the “lifestyle” when it's all about black leather fringe and bar hopping. I love these bikes despite the lifestyle that so many others buy into. The bikes are solid and built with a level of durability that no one else matches. The components are of the highest quality and Japanese and even BMW items seem downright flimsy and hobbled together after being used to the way a Harley is built. They are slow, they are over priced, but they have fixed their reliability issues long ago.

And, now we come back to that element of riding that is so essential and yet so inexplicable, that certain something about going down the road on a bike that speaks to you that is the essence of what motorcycling is. For me, the Big Twin Harleys have it like no other bike around. They are raw and surly, elemental and American, and if anything made of chrome can be spiritual, it's a Harley-Davidson.

Colt Python

Photo by Ken Lunde

The last time we looked at a gun on these pages, it was all about function. This time, we're going to look at the Colt Python, a revolver that is all about essence.

Built on the old .41 frame, Colt wanted to create the ultimate .357 magnum revolver, undoubtedly spurred on by the affluence and excitement of post-WWII America. They slicked up their tried and true action, put on a swanky full-underlug barrel with a ventilated sight rib and a legend was born.

The Python is notable for is excellent finish with a deep "royal blue" being the most common. It was also made with a bright nickel finish and later in stainless steel. People rave about the action of the Python as well. It is roller-bearing smooth with just the slightest hint of stack at the end of the double-action pull. Single action is crisp and light and darned near perfect.

Over the years it was made with 2", 4", 6", and 8" barrels to serve a variety of needs. The 4" and 6" are the most common. The barrels have a decreasing radius bore which means it's smaller at the muzzle than at the throat. The difference is very slight, but it is why Pythons are so amazingly accurate and why they often exhibit no loss in accuracy if the barrel is accidentally ringed due to a squib load.

The 2" went after the self-defense/plainclothes police crowd and competed against the 2.5" Smith & Wesson Model 19. The 8" version was built with an eye towards the hunting crowd. The problem is that with a gun as pretty and as costly as a Python, few people were inclined to submit their guns to the riggers of daily carry or the game field.

There are also questions about the Python's suitability as a piece of life-saving gear. All machines have a weakness and the one with the Python is a Catch 22. That action which I raved about is fairly weak. Something as minor as a drop onto a table top can knock it out of time. Because the secret to the precision and beauty of the Python is handfitting, a gunsmith can't simply drop a few new parts in and expect minor fitting. For example, most 'smiths have set prices for Smith and Wesson and Ruger repair work. It's not uncommon to see Pythons listed as "by the hour" because they could be working on that beast for quite some time in order to get it's delicate parts moving properly.

Now, for range use, light duty carry (not uniformed police or a ranch hand's pistol - both situations which tend to bang guns and see lots of abuse), and home defense, I wouldn't hesitate. And, since the 2" offering is so darned cool, I'd just have to carry it sometimes, provided I ever find one at a decent price. If you find a used one, make sure you check the timing. You do this by cocking the hammer with one hand while putting slight pressure on the cylinder with your other hand. Then, pull the trigger and let the hammer down slowly while feeling for the cylinder to lock into place. Colts don't reach full-lock up until the trigger is pulled, so it's easy to think one is out of time when it is actually just fine.

In the end, the Python is an elegant revolver, a product of the progressive engineering minds of 1950's America. It ceased to be a regular production item some time ago, but it will occasionally pop back up as a Custom Shot offering. As we progress farther and farther from hand work, tools like the Python become less common. They are never cheap but for the true handgunner and fine weapons connoisseur they are worth every penny.

Photo from ColtForum.com

Motorcycles: A Primer, Part I

I've had a surprising number of people tell me, "oh, I love bikes, don't tell anyone. I don't know anything about them, but they're cool."

Why, yes, they are.

As this blog is supposed to include bikes amongst it's many sundries, there doesn't seem to be a better place start the subject than at the beginning. This is going to be phrased with women in mind, but it applies to any neophyte. In this first installment we'll deal with the location of the basic controls because everyone wants to know what all that stuff is the operator is doing and we'll look at what the passenger needs to know. The next installment will get down to brass tacks of swinging a leg over your own ride.

People love bikes for all sorts of reasons and few can easily be put into words. When a rider tries to tell the world what it's like to ride, we tend to use an absurd level of adjectives and ten-dollar words, making the mistake in believing that the appearance of poetry will lend an air of credibility. I can tell you things I like about riding - the elemental machine with only what is needed to move down the road, the intimacy with the environment, and the unfettered feeling that comes from removing yourself from the steel and glass confines of the automobile. I can even tell you things I feel when I'm on my bike - the falling away of the world's worries, the clean focus of the mind, and the wonder of experiencing every nuance of the world through which I move.

Still, there is much more to it than that. Rather than waste space with flowery language, let us leave it at this: a day on a motorcycle is something you should try at least once in your life.

Affluent as America is, we are blessed with our motorcycles being used primarily for recreation. Prior to WWII, our bikes were often used as a means of cheap transportation. Today, that still goes for much of the world. Even in the States, people who own cars often choose to ride their bikes to work, enjoying a morning wake-me-up ride, sipping gas (40mpg is common), using the HOV lane, and parking in all sorts of spots you never could with a car.

So what should you, the uninitiated, know about bikes so that you don't feel like a complete outsider? Bikes are laid out in a fairly standard manner. The rider sits behind the handlebars and uses all four limbs to control the bike. The right hand twits the grip which is the throttle - the bike's "gas pedal." That's how you "go."

The right hand also squeezes a lever, activating the front brakes. Unlike a car that works front and rear brakes with the push of a single pedal, the majority of motorcycles have split brake systems. There are reasons for this - cheap to manufacture and a skilled rider can manipulate the brakes differently at different times depending on what he/she wants to do. That brings up the question of where the rear brake is. It's the pedal in front of the right foot peg and is pressed down just like in a car. The front brake has up to 80% of a bike's stopping power, so learning how to use it properly is very important. That's how you "stop."


What is the left side doing through all of this? Well, very few motorcycles have been made with automatic transmissions. Most have a manual, the equivalent to a "stick" in a car. The left hand pulls in a lever that activates the clutch, and the left foot works the gear shift lever. Unlike a car, a bike's shift lever only goes up and down and moves progressively through the gears. The pattern is described as starting from neutral, "1 Down, 4 up" (for a 5 speed), with one position changed for each press or lift of the gear shift. Neutral is found by going all the way down to 1st and gently lifting up. If you lift up too hard it will go right into 2nd.

Wait, we aren't done yet! Each thumb works a series of buttons: the starter, a kill switch for stopping the engine, turn signals, horn, and headlight dimmer switch.

I know, it all sounds terribly complicated, but it's not. It just takes some practice and patience. Have you seen the ratty old biker cruising down the highway? He can do all of that stone drunk. And if he can do it, then you will have no problem once you get on a bike and get a bit of training.

Most women will first experience motorcycles as a passenger. So, be a good passenger. Don't shift around in your saddle, don't stand up, don't make sudden movements, don't try to jump off if you think the bike is going to crash - you just aren't used to how a bike handles and making such movements could cause a crash. If the rider is going fast, hold onto them and look to the outside of the turns. This will help to keep the center of gravity as close to the track of the wheels as possible. Looking to the inside of a turn can make you lean over and that can over balance a bike that is near it's limits.

That's the scary stuff about being a passenger and I think guys trying to be macho and showing off has caused many women to dislike motorcycles. So, go with someone you trust, ask them to take it easy, pick a bike with a back rest if it makes you more comfortable, and relax and enjoy the ride.

Safety gear - you dress for the crash, not the ride. Pop quiz: what is the most important piece of safety gear? Nope, not a helmet. The correct answer is eye protection. Think of what the windshield on your car looks like and then think of your eyes. Lack of proper eye protection can actually lead to an accident, so it's most important.

For myself, boots (protects your feet and easily broken ankles), jeans (not as good as leather for abrasion, but decent at around town speeds), gloves (your hands WILL go out in a wreck, and the metal on a bike can be very hot), a long sleeve shirt (not as good as a jacket, but it gets to be 120 degrees here), and a DOT certified full-face helmet (a German study showed that 25% of all head injuries happened to the lower face, an area the half-helmets do not protect, and there will be a sticker showing if it meets DOT standards.) Most often a jacket will go along with all of that.

Living in the desert, I often encounter the attitude of "oh, I can't wear long sleeves or a jacket in this heat!" Do you ever wonder why the old cowboys and Arabs always covered up? It slows down the rate of dehydration and keeps the sun off the skin. You might think you are hot, but your core will stay cool much longer than if you wear less. Modern perforated jackets really leave no reason to ride with only a shirt no matter how hot it gets.

When picking safety gear, buy motorcycle specific items. A fashion weight leather jacket from Nordstroms or gardening gloves will come apart in a crash. And, fit is everything. Wind buffets anything that is loose. You want as snug a helmet as you can stand to wear for a day and you want your jacket and jeans to fit close - not supermodel tight, but without too much extra fabric.

Ok, you know not to move around a lot, you've picked out someone you trust to give you a ride, you are dressed like the true road warrior you are, the next thing to do is swing a leg over and go!

Riding passenger is a scary thing, but you'll soon relax. Pick a time when the traffic is low and go out into the country. Enjoy the new found feel of moving through the landscape instead of by it. Savor the sensation of knowing every smell, the feel of humidity on your skin as you ride past a recently irrigated field, the shifting temperatures as you go down into a dip and up out of a river bottom.

Hey, that other biker just waved, what's up with that? It's the brotherhood of the road. They recognized you as someone who was willing to break from the status quo and take part in a very special way of experiencing life. Most motorcyclists will wave regardless of the type or brand you are riding. The majority of us know it's not what you ride, it's that you ride. The rest is all about personal taste and expression, and isn't that one of the things that attracted you to motorcycles in the first place?

In Part II, we'll talk about being the rider, what you need to know to get started on your own bike, things to consider when picking out a bike, and probably even a few of those "I wish I had known that when I started" items.

*photos from www.harley-davidson.com, except the last which is from www.bmwmotorcycles.com

Cold War II, Are We About to Go Again?

I was listening to the NPR Technology podcast the other day and heard some interesting news coming out of Estonia.

Supposedly, Estonia has become a leader in computer technology. Yes, that is surprising. But, that’s not the news.

No, the news is that they took down an old Soviet-era war memorial from a square in one of their towns. This upset the Russians and the two countries have been spatting back and forth. Suddenly, Estonia has come under cyber attack. This "denial of services" attack has been aimed at government institutions and before it knocked everything out, the Estonians were able to trace the start of it back to Russia and "various government institutions in Russia."

Russia’s response? "Prove it."

Ah, as if we needed more proof that Putin is a KGB thug in president’s clothing.

Estonia is a NATO country and has requested and received a NATO cyber security team who is in country tying to get everything back on line. The between the lines is that it knocked out Estonia’s entire air defense system. NATO has said they are going to make cyber attacks a priority, but this is the first test of that policy.

So, what will happen? Estonia says that a cyber attack on a country’s defense grid should be treated the same as a physical attack. No loss of life, but if you can’t defend yourself, you can’t defend yourself and one doesn’t accidentally launch a cyber attack (now, whatever you do, don’t press the flashing, red button….)

Yes, it’s been almost a hundred years since WWI, but a person does wonder what the implication of enough saber rattling in eastern Europe will be. Obviously, Estonia can’t take on Russia. Would Russia do more than attack their computers? If so (and the answer is “yes,” what is the world going to do? No one has implied that this particular event is leading us full-steam into a war, and I don’t think it is. But, if Russia’s hand isn’t slapped over this, how far will they try to extend it the next time and the time after that?

And, is this yet another in a growing list of Russia moving aggressively outside their own borders? The smoking gun points to the Russians on a number of poisonings over the last few years, now this, what haven’t we heard about?

I thought I heard someplace that Estonia has some oil, too. Hmmmm, Putin and oil, we know how that book reads.

On top of this, and on top of Bush feeling the need to remind Putin the Cold War is over, the man being groomed to be Putin's replacement is Sergei Ivanov. If elected, he will carry on with Putin's policies. The BBC casts Ivanov as a member of the old, Cold War era and first met Putin as part of Russia's intelligence (KGB) community where he worked for over twenty years. The Carnegie Center calls him one of the “Russian hawks” and doesn't like being asked questions in English.

Is this a new, aggressive turn by the former CCCP? Let us recall Putin going out of his way eight years ago to tell the USA that he would not hesitate to use nuclear weapons first if he felt the need.

WWI had it's encore, as did the Gulf War. Those are the big ones that come to mind, but we are still living with a Korea split by a DMZ and plenty of other conflicts that come back for a second act. Will we add the Cold War to the growing list? History tells us that if an enemy is not completely and utterly vanquished that there is a good chance that a country can find itself fighting the same war multiple times.

Lenin's own writings talked about what to do if a communist country finds themselves broke. The government fakes a change, keeps their head down, and when the country is solvent once more to re-establish the communist regime. For the workers, of course. Estimated time of such a turnaround was given as ten to fifteen years. Of course, that was a hundred years ago and economics are a bit more complex now and it takes more money to run a military for a major country. You can't just get away with handing a rifle to every three peasants anymore. You need tanks, planes, submarines, nuclear war heads, computers..... you get the idea.

Did Reagan win the Cold War? I think he could have if we had followed through and secretly hunted down the ruling members of Russia's Communist Party. The fact is that we never even learned the identities of all the men sitting on the Supreme Soviet – the core power players during the Iron Curtain days. If we have learned, we never released the information and did a good job of keeping it secret.

Tensions over oil, terrorism, and selling of nuclear secrets grow everyday. Russia is facing huge problems with a diminishing population and a government who can't take care of everything like they did under communism but which is unable to let go enough for anyone other than the criminals to found thriving businesses.

Mark Steyn predicts that Russian will hit a critical point in the next ten years in which the temptation to use their muscle to solve their problems could well be overwhelming. With a man like Putin at the helm and grooming a man like Ivanov to continue on with businesses as usual, it becomes less and less likely that we will be able to avoid a revival of the Cold War in at least one form or another. If it doesn't come to an outright arms race, it seems almost inevitable that we will mutually agree to resume our Mexican standoff while competing for oil and fighting proxy wars with countries like Iran.

There are many chess pieces in play right now, far too many to predict with any accuracy what the end game will look like. A smart motorcyclist “dresses for crash” and we would do well to quietly prepare ourselves to deal with an angry and aggressive Russia at some point in the near (ten years +/-) future.

Editing

I see I need to pay more attention to editing my posts. Ok, I simply need to start editing my posts. I have a bad habit of typing and posting without re-reading the piece. I'll work on this - if the typos are driving you half as crazy as they do me, then we both have a problem. It's late, but I promise to correct the typos in the existing posts after I get some sleep and do a better job of using my virtual red pen on future posts.

Thanks for the patience as I grow into blogger mode.

Immigration

Due to the recent demise of the Kennedy/McCain Immigration Bill, I wanted to put a few thoughts together about our current problem with illegal immigration.

I had written a long, drawn out statement, but I deleted it. I was just recovering lots of ground, so why go through all of that again.

A few points:

1)READ “Mexifornia” by Victor Davis Hanson (no relation, link to the right). For those of you unfamiliar with VDH, he has a very unique perspective on this issue. He is a Professor in the University of California and teaches Classics. He also is a farmer in California's central valley area and works the small family farm he grew up on. His mind is sharp, he works and lives in an area heavily affected by this issue, and he has a very deep understanding for how America has changed in the last fifty years. Lest someone think I'm pointing you to a Limbaugh-esque tirade, VDH is a Democrat, though of the old school and not the current liberal ruling elite mentality. He offers some wonderful insight and it's not a blame/deport them all fest, not in the least.

2)This border wall issue. When someone says “build a wall” I know they have never been on the border. I live in Arizona and started exploring the border country when I was attending the University of Arizona in Tucson. I'm telling you that no one is going to seal either border – north or south. It's too large, too remote, and too wild. To build a fence is a waste of money that can be better spent elsewhere. It's going to cost a fortune, be ugly in a beautiful part of this nation, and do absolutely nothing for our security. In fact, it will diminish it because it's a fell good measure that will incline people to relax.

3)This isn't a racial issue no matter what Geraldo Rivera says. It's an issue encompassing a racial class, but it's not racial at it's core. People are upset about it because there is chaos and no accountability. We see hospital bills left unpaid to the point places such as Brownsville, Texas, has considered closing their hospital. Maybe they have, I only heard they were thinking of it. Talk to anyone in the medical field in any border state and the problem is huge.

4)Like it or not, this entire thing is going to end up with amnesty. We might as well face it, swallow the pill, install a guest worker program, and get on with business.

5)The only way it's going to stop under the current laws is by closing down the small business owners who would hire Americans if Americans were willing to work those sorts of jobs. I know people in both the construction and restaurant businesses, and they simply can't find willing Americans. Our unemployment is less than 4.5%. The large corporations can afford to pay the fines and fight in court while still being an active, thriving business. We need the workers. If we have a guest worker program, at least they can be taxed and tracked. And, most of the illegal workers are very hard workers. I was on a job site one time where a demolition crew was working. Those guys worked so hard I felt like a slacker for only doing 80 hours a week (then, no more hours like that for me anymore.)

6)We need to stop catering to the illegals, allowing them to function without becoming Americans by nature and attitude, citizenship can come once they prove themselves. This is heart of the issue as the years go by. We don't raise our own kids to be proud of their heritage, it's going to be impossible to instill a patriotic attitude in new immigrants. This one is all on us, folks. We have to demand more of our youth and a whole lot more of our schools.

7)English has to be the language of choice. If you don't speak it, you will get no where. Spanish services will do to the Hispanic population what welfare has done to the blacks – created a low economic comfort zone that affectively keeps them always at the poor end of our society. We have to stop doing such things.

8)No matter what we do, we cannot ignore the legal immigrants. These people follow all our laws, come here to better themselves, and we make them go through an overly complicated process that is frustrating, takes years, and costs thousands of dollars in legal fees. That is unacceptable to say the least.

9)Yes, entering the USA illegally is a crime – hence the “illegal” moniker. But, there is a difference between a guy coming north to find work hard at a better life and the scumbag pusher and thief who is a leach on society. We can't use the same paint brush on all “criminals.” Once we realize that, amnesty is easier to accept.

10)This is a hot button issue. Everywhere I go, this is the issue that gets people worked up. The politicians don't want to touch it because they don't want to lose the Hispanic vote. Well, only citizens can vote, and lot of the Hispanics who are citizens have lived here all their lives and feel like victims, too.

11)We have to demand more of Mexico so that a better economy is possible, enticing fewer people to come north. Right now it's businesses as usual with graft and corruption and keeping huge amounts of money in the hands of a few families. They need to let go of the reigns and pass laws making it easy to open a business. The free market will take it from there.

Those are a few of my talking points on this issue. I live in a border state and a lot of the talk I hear coming from the east and from those who never leave the urban area of Phoenix is unrealistic. I say we make an arbitrary date, say January 1, 2006. Prove you were in the country then and everyone gets a free pass – legal gets their citizenship, illegal gets a guest worker pass. All business register their guest workers, and then it's a whole lot easier to weed out the bad apples and figure out who is causing problems.

There is obviously more to this issue, but that's a good place to start.

Glock 17

I'm a gun snob, so it might seem odd that my current carry pistol is a Glock 17. Glocks are ugly, have awful triggers, and just lack a certain panache. Let's face it, "elegance" is not the first word that comes to mind when you look at a Glock.

Ok, so why carry it? I could ramble, but let's make this easy - you can shoot it really fast out of the holster and maintain great combat accuracy. I'm a sucker for a low bore axis mated with a consitant trigger. The trigger manages to be spongy and crunchy all at once, but it's consistent.

Try to beat a Glock up. The famous Tenifer finish is actually under the black phosphate surface treatment. I wish I could get this same finish on all of my social guns. It doesn't reflect and it never, ever rusts. If you get it to rust, my hat is off to you. My sweat could be marketed as an industrial solvent and I've carried a number of Glocks in the AZ heat and I've never had a speck of rust. Blood, salt water, sweat nothing affects it.

Not only doesn't it rust, it just never breaks. The abuse that these things will take is legendary. You really can throw them across a parking lot, toss them out of helicopter, run over them with a truck and other showman stunts. In other words, it will withstand abuse that your body won't. In more practical terms, they run no matter how much you abuse them. Fill 'em with sand, they run. Dunk 'em in mud, they run. Forget to lube 'em, and it's probably going to run if you have hot enough ammo. Just imagine how reliable it is if you take care of it properly. And, you do take care of your life saving emergency gear properly right?

Ok, everything breaks, so a word of caution. The rumors of Glocks going kaboom are based in fact though I think the hysteria is way over done. Again, without getting technical, just run factory, jacketed ammo and you will never have a problem. Don't sweat buying a used one. Scrub the chamber out well before shooting it, again, use only factory, jacketed ammo and you will be fine. You say you reload? Hey, it's your ammo and your gun, knock yourself out. I've known plenty of Glocks that run tens of thousands of handloads without a problem. But, you are increasing your risk. For my money, Wal-Mart 100 round packs are cheap enough that I'm not going to tempt fate even while practicing.

If everything breaks, and everything does, what are the Glock's weak points? The three most common parts to break are the trigger return spring, the extractor, and extractor spring. All are cheap parts, all last far more than the average person is going to shoot, and they are all easy to swap out. If you can do basic home repair, you can replace those parts. Of course, you void any warranty and you have to do it right. If you do it wrong, don't go looking to point the finger anywhere but at yourself. A gunsmith is going to charge you for an hour's worth of labor to do ten minutes worth of work, but if you are at all hesitant or unsure, consider it an investment in your peace of mind.

Ok, that says a lot about Glocks, but what about the Glock 17? Why did I choose it? After carrying a Glock 23, a 19, and a 35, I've settle on the 17. As common and popular as Glocks are in other calibers, I think the 9mm is their most reliable system (quick tip: guns are usually the most reliable and handle best chambered for the cartridge around which they were designed.) Out of all the 9mm Glock models, the 17 simply fits my hand the best. I most often recommend the Glock 19 to people, as it's a superb design and it's shorter frame is a bit more comfortable to most people. But, not for me. My hands are moderately large and I like the full frame of the 17.

So far, it's box stock and I could leave it be for years and never have an issue. I'm leaving the internals on this one stock because stock is always the most reliable. If your pistol requires gunsmithing to be made carry worthy, you may wish to consider a different design. Hey, look at that, I just got the 1911 guys foaming at the mouth. I love the 1911 and owned, well, let's just say I've owned a LOT of them, but it's a complete bill of goods that it's acceptable to need a "reliability package" on a brand new gun.

I stay away from the +2 magazine base plates. Again, stock is the most reliable. The magazine spring was designed to push up seventeen cartridges and can have an issue if it's asked to work over a longer distance. You might never have a problem, but wouldn't it suck if you were in a fight for your life and your gun malfunctioned because you wanted to be able to shoot two more rounds after going through eighteen shots (17+1 in the chamber.)

The Glock 17 pictured is my personal carry gun and sits alongside a Comp-Tac Gurkha holster, which I'll review after I use it some more.

Eighteen rounds of Federal 9BP hollow points in an utterly reliable and deadly fast package. You can sweat on it, you can bleed on it, you can abuse it, and it just keeps on working. Kind of hard to not love that, even if it is one ugly gun.

Bush, Putin, and the Chinese

Bush sent a memo to Putin saying the Cold War is over. This in response to the Russian response of the US putting up a missile defense system in eastern Europe.

Now, this reminds me of a few other axioms:
If you declare a cease-fire, make sure the enemy agrees.
If one side thinks they are in a religious war, it's a religious war.

If Putin doesn't think the Cold War is over, maybe we shouldn't be telling him it is, maybe we should be paying attention and consider the possibility that hostilities are ramping back up.

Re. Russia as a buffer against China: Some think that rather than bicker, Russia will enter a cooperative agreement with China, allowing China to develop the oil fields in Siberia and then splitting the proceeds.

Whoever pointed out that a great deal of the Cold War st reign was due to the Russian mind being a mix of west and east was right on the money. Now, take that a step further - if we couldn't get inside the heads of the Russians or find a common ground, how well is all of this going to work in dealing with the Chinese?

It's why politics without commerce is doomed. Money is a universal language and the businesses will find a way to make it work. Then, they will make sure their governments do what it takes to keep the money flowing.

If the money is flowing between Russia and China, then those bonds are the ones that will grow.

Of course, none of this takes into account the mega-egos involved and the difficulty that free enterprise has in influencing the Russian market. I'm not too worried about the Chinese market. They are one of the largest consumers of BMW 7-series for crying out loud.

It's 102 Degrees, we have a good computer, a lot of ammo...hit it!

Like every blog, it's about my observations on life, an open diary to the world, my way of saying "how cool, check this out" or opening a window and saying "we're mad as hell, and we're not going to take it anymore!" I anticipate much more cool stuff than mad stuff, though the 2008 elections are coming up. I told the Fred Thompson's people I'd be happy to put up signs, so we'll see where that leads us.

There's going to be lots of gun stuff on here. Why? Because this is a place for Americans and all free people to celebrate the single most important instrument in achieving, defending, and holding that freedom. And, guns are cool - see, some cool stuff.

There's also going to be a lot of bike stuff. That is bike as in motorcycle, not bicycle. Bicycles are cool, but I get out of breath getting up for another donut, so no bicycles. Obviously there SHOULD be bicycles, but that's going to have to wait. Lots of stuff about motorcycles, though. I love cars and trucks, but there is no better way to travel than on two wheels - with an engine. All motorcycles are good motorcycles. I ride a Harley, but that doesn't mean you have to and it doesn't mean I'm in the dark about how some people think Harleys are overpriced, unreliable pieces of rolling art. My response is yes, no, and yes.

Ok, books. Lots of books. I might even make a list of recommended reading for those who are so inclined. It's going to look very smart, the titles I put on there. Don't let it fool you, I love a good bit of mindless entertainment and sometimes you can even have depth and entertainment all in one.

So, right, if you are a gun toatin', flag wavin', hard ridin', bibliophile, you are probably going to feel right at home here. If you aren't, I hope you feel like you are sitting on your crazy brother's couch listening to his friends talk. It's safe, it's comfy, and it's fun even if you don't know what is going on.

I will be holding myself to the rigid schedule of posting whenever the heck I feel like it, so check back whenever the heck you feel like it.

Now to get this show officially on the road!

The Spent Brass Political Manifesto, Draft 1

Politics, for good or ill, it stirs the blood and incites emotion like few other issues will. We find ourself in a wasteland, a nation divided between two self-serving factions. Outside of our own borders things are even worse. You know it is bad when France is the only country in recent memory to show some backbone and elect a man who might - might - bring about positive change.

This isn't going to be another cry for "moderation" or "the middle" or even "compromise." We've seen that doesn't work. As I write this the Kennedy/McCain Immigration bill appears to be dead. For all of it's faults, when was the last time you saw Republicans and Democrats working together? Oh, yes, when they were rallying in protest to the FBI raid on Rep. Jefferson's office.

Let's face it, when the modern politician crosses the isle, it simply means that he or she has found an issue on the other side from which they believe they will personally benefit.

"Well, David, if moderation isn't the key and partisan politics hasn't gotten us anywhere, what is the answer?"

History. History is the answer.

We needn't break new ground to find the answer to today's problems, we simply need look back and figure out when things were running more smoothly, pin point it, and figure out what they were doing then that we aren't doing now. Now, let's not be infected by the Bug of Nostalgia Any review of American History shows plenty of greed, avarice, and division. Still, there was something more going on.

We can look at many issues - the bizarre and prevalent attitude that risk is bad, the ambivalence of the electorate, the guilt of being American, the surrender of adult responsibilities to the State, the protection of ego at all costs, the belief that self-esteem is something which can be given or taught, the right to not be offended, submission as a response to aggression, and a whole host of other unfounded, foolish, and self-destructive practices.

We can look at all of those thing, but we don't need to that is akin to treating symptoms and saying, "the cough is killing you, here's some Vick's 44." No, it's the pneumonia that is killing the patient, so let's look at some of the root causes and points of similarity that today's problems have.

This blog, amongst the millions out there, will probably never be read by more than a few friends and maybe the family member who gives it a glance out of politeness. That's fine. Change starts at home.

Wait! Stop! Hold the presses!

This isn't about change, it's the change that has caused many of the problems. Let's say that tradition starts at home.

The past didn't do everything perfectly and those who say "I was born 100 years too late" are ignoring the wonders of modern medicine, transportation, a global economy, and, for the other desert dwellers out there, air conditioning!

Let's work at clinging to what was good, toss out the bad, adapt when something new comes along that is an improvement - new can be very good, just look at civil rights and conservation movements - and be willing to have our voice heard. As weak as that voice may be, someone needs to stand up to the Paris Hilton, "it depends on what your definition of the word 'is' is," zombie, pop culture, digital clock, welfare situation we have today. Let's talk to our friends, co-workers, church members, PTA/NEA group, whatever, and let's stand up for some good, traditional American values where you got smacked on the back of the head and given detention if you didn't say the Pledge of Allegiance.

Can I get an Amen!

That's the general, very general, direction that this blog will be headed in. I'm hoping it will be done as a "leading by example" sort of way and not a "tear someone else apart today" kind of way. Let's call it the difference between the best commentator on TV and radio today, Judge Andrew Napolitano, and that venomous piece of trash Michael Savage who makes all conservatives look bad. In fact, let's avoid the "c" word as much as possible. We are Constitutionalists (that's "C" vs. "c"), traditionalists, and freedom loving Americans. Political party allegiance plays no part in this as both can lay claim to those values in part and both are guilty of trampling them while wearing golf spikes. The later being far more common than the former.

I'd encourage you to look at each situation and think, "how would my great grandfather handles this?" Assuming your great grandfather wasn't a serial killer, I imagine that he would deal with things in a more decisive, pragmatic, and respectful way that we have learned. My grandmother had an 8th grade education, her brothers and sisters not much more, and they were the most gracious, intelligent, insightful, and classy generation a person could hope to meet.

Where did we go wrong? I have a few ideas, ones I'll share as this blog develops. For now, a bit of soul searching is in order, as well as taking a broad look at history. Soul searching, history, and pancakes. It's Sunday morning, so I'm off to find some good pancakes!