The personal thoughts and comments of Gene, "The Aggie."

Use any information found here at your own risk. I am not responsible for the consequences of your use, misuse or abuse, of this information. I do not advocate or condone violence except for lawful protection of life, liberty and, in very limited cases, property. Nothing included in this site is to be taken as legal advice.

"The Aggie" neither controls or
endorses the sites that Google displays in this ad bar.

'Gun-Free Zones' are only gun-free, until somebody brings a gun. - Unknown

Thursday, June 25, 2009

We have a New Church

H/T: Stand Firm in Faith

Yes, we have a NEW church committed to the faith once delivered to the saints.

Maybe now we can quit fighting over the bones of dead sin and get back to doing Jesus' work.

God Bless Ya'll !

Click Here for More Information

Employees' constitutional rights

H/T: World Net Daily

Once again Phil Elmore suggests we, the people, may be surrendering more than we think we are when we go to work for certain employers.

Check it out.

What do YOU think?

God Bless Ya'll !

Click Here for More Information

Smith & Wesson profit doubles, beats Street view

H/T: World Net Daily

We've been bettin on the WRONG horse!

S&W is winning! Once the poor, red-headed stepchild of the gun industry for 1) being owned by a foreign company and 2) selling out to the Clintonistas, S&W has evidently recovered from both liabilities.

Go buy another S&W for your "arsenal"!

Your Colts and Rugers are gettin' lonely. ;>)

God Bless Ya'll !

Click Here for More Information

Saturday, June 20, 2009

The Immorality of Laws Regulating Technology

H/T: World Net Daily

WND's Phil Elmore has some very good thoughts concerning freedom and technology.

The problem with laws governing every aspect of commerce in, use of and ownership rights to a given piece of technology – from your cars, to your software, to your guns, to your phone, to your pocketknives, to your Internet service – is that quite often these laws constraining possession and operation of consumer technology are unconstitutional and immoral.


In a free society, governments are instituted voluntarily among human beings for one reason: to protect individual rights.


What all bad laws governing technology have in common is that they treat us all as criminals before the fact. The standard of law in a free society should not be the lowest common denominator. Law must recognize individual rights if is to protect them. If it does not, it becomes little more than the threat of force. It becomes a gun in the hand of a tyrant whose motivation is only power.

(Emphasis in the original. Hyper-text links removed - Gene)

What do you think?

God Bless Ya'll !

Click Here for More Information

Wednesday, June 17, 2009

Shall-Issue Poll Followup


Frank Borelli, Editor-in-Chief, did a "Shall-Issue Poll Followup" article that contains some interesting info. Evidently there is a gap between what the MSM tells us the "chiefs" want and what the rank-n-file officers know.

I wonder why that may be?

Anybody want to hazard a guess?

God Bless Ya'll !

Click Here for More Information

The LO-ONG Ride Home


Steve Denney, Firearms Contributor, offers what I believe is excellent advice about choosing a personal defense tool - not just for the "little lady"!

This snippet is just part of why I believe this article is good:

One poor guy recently purchased a revolver for his wife, which she brought to a class. Its main virtue for the husband was that it was inexpensive. It was also cheap. It reminded me of a starter pistol that was capable of firing real ammunition. The double action trigger was so heavy that the lady could not pull it. We gave her a different gun to use and she did very well in the class. It must have been a long ride home for hubby, however.

I have NEVER done something THAT stupid.



God Bless Ya'll !

Click Here for More Information

O' Proposes Governmint-Funded "Salvation"!


These guys ought to write for BHO
WASHINGTON, D.C. -As part of a far-reaching restructuring of the United States of America, President Obama announced on Sunday that he is proposing government-funded salvation.

According to the president, "It just isn't right that some people are going to be saved while others aren't. We as a free society have the moral responsibility to see . . .

You may return to your regularyly scheduled worship activities.

God Bless Ya'll !

Click Here for More Information

Monday, June 15, 2009

Gadsden Flag - Correction

I greatly appreciate correspondent CindyW for her gracious note telling my ignorance was showing.

She wrote to correct my side-bar claim that the Gadsden flag is, or can be, currently flown on U.S. Naval vessels. She correctly noted:
You’re correct that the Gadsden Flag was first flown during the American Revolution. However, it isn’t flown on US Navy ships. The First Naval Jack is flown on the oldest ship in the fleet (the Kitty Hawk). After 911, all ships were authorized to fly it.

Like the Gadsden, it’s a “rattlesnake” flag, but looks like this:

On the 4th of July, we fly this one and about a dozen other historical flags from our house. We’ve become avid collectors!
In our apartment situation, "they" don't like the waving of flags around here. I think they're afraid some one may wave one of these and "upset" the indigenous population. Whatever that is!

Oh well, maybe we can establish a stand of flags at our son's domicile after a while.

Whatever our future holds, a big hat tip to CindyW for straightening me out! ;>)

God Bless Ya'll !

Click Here for More Information

Sunday, June 14, 2009

Last Tuesday

Last Tuesday was a HOOT!

I got to introduce a young lady to the joys of pistolcraft!

Her dad approached me in order to introduce her to his 9mm. At the appointed time and place (Shiloh Indoor Shooting Range) near us, in NW Houston, we gathered to do the deed.

First up, the young lady: Dad had taught her gun safety with a 20 gauge and they learned that shotgunning did not seem to be her cup of tea. Being the smart Aggie that he is, they moved on. She wanted to learn to handle his 9mm!

Knowing this beforehand, we went over Col. Cooper's Four Rules of Gun Safety. She already knew them pretty well. We covered them again. Then she and I talked about what she wanted to accomplish and then set out to do that.

We started with a .22LR Ruger semi-automatic that I enjoy. She's not the first to be introduced to her new best friend by way of this piece. We went through the components of the weapon, sight picture and then on to live-fire. She was initially on-target and pretty safe. We worked on that. She listened, reiterated to my satisfaction and then performed the safety steps to my satisfaction.

We took frequent short breaks so she didn't tire or get bored. Then we stepped up to a K-frame S&W in .357 Mag. No, I didn't let her try a full-house round! We used .38 Spcl range ammo. No problems. After 3-4 cylinders, we moved on.

I was not familiar with her Dad's 9mm so he showed us the features on it. The safety is "backwards". "Safe/Decock" is down. Oh well. A teaching opportunity. Know your weapon! They're all different! Always keep the muzzle pointed in a safe direction!


Dad had been shootin the 9mm while she and I were working up to it. Now I shot a couple of rounds - just for my own information, ya know! hehe

Then we let her try it. Result? Nice grin on her face. ;>)

Did I mention that she is 14?

Here is her list of accomplishments, as far as I know:
  • Started on the path to gun safety by Dad
  • Introduced to shotgunning. Does anyone want to try a home invasion? Not with those two around. I know, I know. Neither one is trained to "repel boarders". But they have started their path to increased knowledge.
  • Helped a bit further on that path by me.
  • She's now introduced to pistolering. Novice class. Raw. I do not trust her to walk behind me with a loaded gun in her hand - yet. She is on her way to that status.
One thing bothered me about this young lady. Every time I asked if she had any questions, she said "No". After a while, I understood. She was getting what I presented. She demonstrated that by her performance.

I'm proud of that young woman. I know her dad is.

God Bless Ya'll !

Click Here for More Information

Wednesday, June 03, 2009

'Jesus' T-shirt becomes factor in 'hate crimes' argument

H/T: WorldNetDaily

Did you see this article from WND? Or did you read it somewhere else? Not much chance if you're reading the MSM.

The Wearable Gospel!(tm)

If you're interested in flaunting your Christian and/or pro-life beliefs, check out our T-shirts, jewelry and accessories for challenging designs.

You, too, can create your own, so-called, "hate crime"!

There. I feel much better! I got THAT plug out of my system! :>)

God Bless Ya'll !

Click Here for More Information

Defensive Shooting & Handicaps

H/T: USCCA email, Fri 5/29/2009 10:12 AM

Knowing a little bit about this subject, I recommend it to my readers. Cody is right on.

"Defensive Shooting & Handicaps"

"...Can a man with only one hand with only two fingers and a thumb
on that hand be able to use a handgun for self-defense?..."

by Cody S. Alderson

At a combat shooting course I participated in many years ago, there was an attorney that was in charge of the qualifying test at the indoor range. Part of the qualifying at that time was to kneel and put hits on target. Some of the guys put a hand on the floor to help themselves up after firing from a kneeling position which upset the attorney to the point where he started yelling.

He was ranting about how much time would be lost in using a hand to help yourself up, and how it shouldn't be necessary for anyone to do that. I was a young fellow at the time, but not everyone there was. I understand the position that the attorney was taking as the instructor who would passing or failing the students, but it got me thinking about defensive shooters with handicaps.

That attorney all those years ago is correct in that we should all do our best to be physically fit, but in the real world we human beings come in all sizes and shapes with varying levels of physical abilities. I've heard well respected instructors who teach defensive shooting actually make remarks that could easily be interpreted as rude and disrespectful, especially to fat guys like me.

I certainly hope that the comments were made out of a desire to motivate me toward more exercise and healthier living, but I must also say that such an approach just doesn't work with civilians. Maybe it works in the military where the recruit is Government Issue, and is at the mercy of his or her superiors, but I don't see it having much of a positive effect on the office worker who might enjoy M&M's for a snack instead of carrot sticks.

Does that mean that fat folks or people with handicaps shouldn't be allowed to have a gun for self-defense? I don't think anyone in the gun community would even entertain such a thought. All citizens are under the guarantee of non-infringement that the Second Amendment promises. Criminals and the mentally incompetent don't count under that guarantee because we, as a society, have adjudicated them to have restricted rights to protect themselves and/or other members of society.

I meet all kinds of people who ask me about owning a gun and learning how to use it. I never pass judgment on an adult person's physical ability to use a gun for self-defense, and will try to work out a way for the person to become competent with a gun no matter what the physical handicap is. Admittedly there are some handicaps that make me currently incapable of offering any advice or instruction on how to competently use a gun, but there are many handicaps that are easy to work around.

An old man with a cane who can only get back up after falling by using something to grab onto is still a very viable candidate to be a competent civilian defensive operator. He just needs to train harder to stay upright while under attack and train to be able to fight with the gun while on the ground. If a thug whacks the old man with a bat and is preparing to wield a killing blow after the old man is on the ground, then grandpa needs to be able to get his gun out while on the ground and put holes in his attacker while on his back. If he stops his attacker with a couple of well-placed rounds from a .380 or a .45, then the police can help him up when they get there.

Okay, so that scenario could obviously go many different ways. Don't be over thinking the specific scenario right now. Rather, think of what even a severely handicapped person CAN DO instead of what he CAN'T DO. I've worked for several years with the developmentally disabled. I try to get them to DO things instead of DOING things for them. Of course they will not ever be gun owners because of the mental incompetency factor, but the ideology translates well over into the world of physical handicaps and defensive shooting.

If I saw a highly trained S.W.A.T officer having to use a hand on the ground just to be able to get up from being on his knees, I might think that he needs to either see a doctor about the knees or back issue, or maybe spend some time in the gym doing squats. If I see a fat guy like me at the gun range wearing a Hawaiian shirt, shooting from a kneeling position, and needing to use his hand for a bit of oomph to get up, it isn't a big deal at all.

Of course, both I and the dude in the Hawaiian shirt would be better at defending ourselves if we got in better shape. I'd be better at a lot of different things if I took more time with the subjects or issues. We read about incidents of crime every single day in the newspapers, and we hear about them constantly on TV. Still, I may live out my whole life and never need to draw my gun.

That being said, I want to promote a teaching ideology to all instructors. Don't scare away good citizens who need some encouragement as well as fundamentals to become competent concealed carry permit holders because you want all of your students to be trained like they are Special Forces Operatives. Instead, tailor the instruction to the student and encourage those who want to progress more by taking them to each successive level at their own pace.

I would like to see a few courses being promoted as specifically for those with health issues, and those with physical issues that need instruction adapted to their needs. Grandma with arthritis might not be able to handle the 1911, but she may be able to work a 20 Gauge with a vertical foregrip. Just an example to get the creative juices flowing.

Instructors should take a course at a community college about being an educator to students with physical handicaps. Or one could volunteer some time to assist those with handicaps to learn how they adapt products and methods to suit their own needs. So much insight could be gained by just observation.

Can a man with only one hand with only two fingers and a thumb on that hand be able to use a handgun for self-defense? If you are an instructor, then work out the answer in your head and with an unloaded gun. You might be surprised at the answer. What about a man who is blind in one eye? I have a friend who is blind in one eye. He drives and really likes to shoot Glocks.

I actually though[t] that driving would be way more difficult than shooting, due to depth perception issues. He has been blind in the one eye since birth so his brain wired itself a bit differently to compensate for the missing visual input. Someone that would suddenly lose sight in one eye as an adult would have a more difficult time learning to adapt, but it is by no means impossible.

Carrying a gun for self-defense need not be a tedious thing that we dread doing. Some instructors teach defensive shooting like it is a religion, and only their faithful end up sticking around to learn more. Then there is the opposite end of the spectrum, where training is too casual without any emphasis being put on the need for the student to take the instruction seriously to become competent. As it is in most things, there is a balance that can be reached.

I'm not a member of any S.W.A.T. Team. I'm just a guy who carries a permit and a gun in case someone is trying to maim or kill me. With it, I can at least have a hope of fighting back to save my life. I like potato chips, pasta, and fresh baked bread, but I can still run up a flight of stairs without dropping over dead. Now I'm not fit to take on Tito Ortiz or Mike Tyson with my bare hands and hope to win, but if a sociopath built like Tito or Mike suddenly wants to kill me, I bet my competency with my handgun would do okay at stopping him. And I'm glad I pursued becoming competent with a gun even though the attorney from that course so long ago made me wonder if I had what it takes to even begin to think I could defend myself.

It's ALL about using what you have, right now, right here! Your 600 Double Nitro in the trunk is useless if you're away from it. In my case, it's all about using the fingers God gave and not worrying about the thumbs he didn't! hehe

For those of you who have actually met me, you have my condolences! Othterwise, you may not know that I am a "disabled", or handicapped, man with asymmetrical deformities of both forearms, wrists and hands. That includes no thumbs. I never missed what I never really knew that I had.

The fact that I'm bald, overweight and an Aggie is also a cause for panic. ;>)

My point is this: As Cody Alderson points out, disability is mostly in the eye of the beholder, not necessarily the doer.

I've been blessed to meet severely handicapped people with the attitude that "there are a hundred things I can't do out of the ten thousand things a 'normal' human can do. Get outa my way so I can do what I can do." They've made me more "normal". More than a couple of them are/were ham radio operators I've been blessed to know. One, CharlieK, used to live in Shiner, Texas. I talked with him via radio for quite a while without knowing of his condition. Only when I arranged to go visit him did the subject come up. Another ham, MarkK (different family name) has kept me rooted in the "possible" instead of what I "can't" do. Then there was BuddyB, from Conroe, Texas, that stopped me from EVER wanting to whine about what I did, or didn't have, in the way of abilities. Then there's a friend of a ham friend whom we have had the pleaure of sharing meals together. Patricia probably could not physically handle a firearm, but her attitude suggests you'd better not get in her way! ;>)

Next time you meet a shooter, or potential shooter, with "disabilities", try standing to one side. Out of their line of fire.

A Personal Story:

After shooting with the Tactical Shooters, a competitive IDPA bunch, for two years or so, I had to leave the group for our own personal reasons unrelated to the group. On my last night, after the last shot of the last scenario was fired, I and VinneZ happened to be the last of the shooters to exit the range. Vinnie had been a friend and a mentor to me for most of the time I was with them. We stood around the parking lot cussin' and discussin' our good times together.

We somehow got around to reminiscing about my first visit with the Tactical Shooters and the guys true thoughts as to my potential.

VinnieZ related that as I came up to shoot my first scenario, some of the guys (there were no gals there that night) eased toward the exit. They weren't too sure whether I might drop the darn gun or "present it" for a negligent discharge - in their direction! Most were torn between staying around to watch what happened or finding bullet-stopping cover!

We all survived that night. And the nights together that followed.

God Bless Ya'll !

Click Here for More Information

Popular Posts