They Ban because they can.

A veto on firearms legalization in Minnesota has John Hinderaker pondering things.

I am writing this a few minutes after returning from a shooting range, which puts the politial debate over firecrackers and sparklers in an odd light. I went shooting today with my son, Ed Morrissey and his son, and Mitch Berg. We had five firearms among us–four semiautomatics and a revolver, a .22, a couple of 9 millimeters and a .38.

The five of us had a lot of fun. We fired off hundreds of rounds and, I think it is fair to say, were never in serious danger. But when I got home and read the news story about Governor Dayton vetoing the legalization of firecrackers, it made me wonder: if the nanny state thinks firecrackers are far too dangerous for citizens who must be utterly incompetent, then what must the nanny state make of Glocks, Rugers, Sig Sauers and Smith and Wessons? Is there any possible way the nanny state would allow its citizens to possess such weapons, if it had the option of banning them, as it bans firecrackers and, until recently, sparklers?

Emphasis added.

I will note that firearms are better suited to self defense than fireworks. But I somehow doubt the nanny state would approve of firearms over fireworks for that reason.

Though needs' got nothing to do with it.

This is similar to states that ban gravity knives, switchblades, and other "evil" knives but is perfectly fine with concealed carry.

Via Glenn Reynolds who notes this is a theme he's oft repeated.

Anti-Science Ignorant Rabble you say?

Hey remember when the Tea Party broke into a State-Funded Research lab and took it over in a thoughtless protest of the "theft" of taxpayer money and in doing so ruined years worth of experiments dedicated to feeding the poor and hungry?

Wait...

Well, Zombie has something like that: Occupy going after a farm and seizing the means of production.

The farm they seized was not a working farm per se, but rather a “research farm” for the University of California, near its Berkeley campus. The only difference between the way the farm used to be (prior to a week ago) and the way it is now is that the Occupiers have transformed what was essentially a well-maintained and important open-air laboratory into a disheveled and ultimately purposeless pretend-farm for trustafarian dropouts.

Extra bonus for paranoid conspiracy theories against genetically modified crops... which are not being researched at the protested laboratory farm.

So stupid, anti-science, and anti-evolution.

Go to the link to see photos of the preening stupidity.

The scientists themselves are for the most part royally pissed off at the Occupiers and some may have years of work ruined by the Occupiers’ juvenile prank.

Though some of their coworkers have a different view:

Some leftist U.C. professors are lecturing today at the farm to show their solidarity with the Occupiers (and to thoughtlessly reveal their antagonism against fellow faculty members whose research at the farm was interrupted/spoiled by the Occupation), including Laura Nader (Ralph Nader’s older sister, famous for helping to lead the field of anthropology toward self-critical Political Correctness); Gill Hart, a Gramscian anti-capitalist; and Paul Rabinow, a deconstructionist anthropologist. What do any of these professors know about farming, or plant biology? Nothing. But hey, they know about the significance of what it means to spout off a bunch of revolutionary socialist verbiage while absconding with stuff that isn’t yours. And that will make the Occupiers feel ever so snug in their smugness. Group hug!"

Who cares if you destroy your colleagues' laboratory by taking it over and planting your own nursery bought plants and building a tent city. Teaching a lesson to the man is more important than... teaching and research:

"Before the Occupation, the Gill Tract was an agricultural research farm where twenty-somethings getting their PhDs would work the fields to grow crops, as they researched biology or how to raise better, healthier plants. But now, after this incredible revolution by Occupy, the Gill Tract has been utterly transformed into a farm where twenty-somethings work the fields to grow crops. The only difference is that before, the farm served a scientific function to improve society, and was managed by experts and hard-working students doing meaningful research; but now, it’s run by a bunch of smug amateurs and dropouts who plant store-bought seedlings in the middle of what once was a controlled research environment.

There you have it, actual academic work and development that could help the hungry take a backseat to playing commune farm. More and more it seems that much of "higher" education is just a half decade of "young-world-changer" fantasy camp, all at the low low price of a few luxury cars.

And in comment to an Occupy sign of "Do Not Cross" following a sign of "Our Parking Lot":

Hypocrisy, thy name is Occupy. When society draws boundaries, builds fences, and makes rules, Occupy gets to violate them at will. But once they’ve seized control, Occupy immediately starts making new rules and new boundaries that everyone else is supposed to honor. Perhaps that’s the new Occupy motto: “Rules for thee, but not for me."

Rules are for the proles, not the vanguard of the Revolution.

A quick bit of advice...

If you're working a chronograph bring a pair of field glasses so you can get a reading without having to cross the line of fire. It'll save you a lot of time and hassle.

On a related note, the testing went well. I've still got to ponder the results some and think about my next loads.

Another sampler pack.

I became one of those shooters that brings a logbook to every range trip so gradually I hardly noticed it...

But it's vital for handloading, especially if you use a chronograph. I also can see the benefits for practicing and recording your own performance and any malfunctions. So it's a practice I recommend heartily.

I took my 255 grain castings from yesterday and made up four lots of five.

From left to right: Winchester Silvertips, Buffalo Bore Lead Round Nose Flat Top, Powerball, Federal round ball, hand cast 255 grain, and hand cast 230 grain. In background is a cylinder of more 255 bullets and 2 100 count red boxes of spare handloaded cartridges.

This was to fill out the matrix of two different overall cartridge lengths and two different powder grain loads. So when I'm at the range I'll be able to get velocities of each lot and should be able to separate the affect of each on that particular load.

(Okay technically I made up 3 of those lots today, as you can see in the picture I had some of the "baseline" configuration already made).

Overall length has an effect on the velocity of the bullet via two mechanisms. The deeper you seat the bullet the more force is required to remove it on ignition, also the deeper the seat the less initial volume there is within the case upon ignition. The question of how much seating depth effects velocity (and pressure) depends on a host of factors from case and bullet geometry, to case crimp style, to powder burn rate, to primer type. But at least with this particular load out I should be able to get something of an idea of the effect at work.

The effect of powder on velocity should be clear enough. Though again the effects are non-linear and there are considerable contributing and limiting factors. Also keep in mind all the redline limits on your load data and take care with your loads so you don't have something go wrong.

Also in a previous session, I sized some of my 230 grain castings and did them with the standard powder charge and overall length and will compare them to the unsized ones from a previous lot. This will tell how bullet diameter (0.452" versus 0.451") will affect velocity. Again for this particular load.

I'll note that my 230 grain castings don't need resizing to be assembled into a cartridge, but my 255 grain castings do. This is because the larger diameter profile on the 255 grain bullet actually prevents headspacing if not resized.

I also have some factory defensive loads to test. And some factory plinking loads to test for calibration and the effect of barrel length on velocity.

I should have realized what would happen when an engineer gets into handloading. And yes I realized that sample sizes of 5 are quite small, but this is just preliminary work.

At least Nixon didn't use his enemies list to gin up support

Here we go, Obama's blaming secretive oil billionaires and their stealth campaign against him.

Why yes... the President of the United States is openly engaged in conspiracy theories to blame his failures. Next he'll go after the hoarders and wreckers and Kulaks.

And now we have an enemies list and the president openly calling out people who dare to donate to a political rival of his. Using the power of the State to go after those that dare challenge his rule?

Lovely.

This should send a chill down everyone’s spine. Imagine having the most powerful man on Earth singling you out by name then slandering you for donating to his opponent’s campaign?

More here, specifically on how Obama has a websight that names names and builds a handy dandy list of enemies of the people. Again Nixon's list wasn't used as a way to encourage supporters to volunteer and line up and give him money.

While Obama today is speaking to troops in Ft. Stewart Georgia who defend our freedom from enemies abroad, the Commander in Chief himself is assaulting our electoral freedom directly from White House.

One can only imagine how much ink and bandwidth the media would have used to show outrage if in 2004 President George W. Bush’s campaign had a similar web site denigrating John Kerry’s major donors.

Like I said, start weeping for our nation.

It says a lot about the kind of man Obama and even more about the people who find this a persuasive argument.

Consider the kind of person that wants the President of the United States to go out on national television and name names with the intent to shame and put on notice people who dare to question him.

Consider the kind of person who sees this and applauds the president and thinks that Obama's the one being the hero and is the underdog in this situation.

The kind of person who does think it's wrong and immoral that people can do what they want with their money, even if it means giving it so someone who dares to defeat the president.

The kind of person who thinks this is Justice:

[18:49] <+THOTatWORK> oh no I had noting to do with the black panther visiting the donors of the republican nominee

From GBC. Hope and Change.

On a somewhat related note, the liberal flacks are trying to discredit Romney by saying that 1) Romney beleives in "an America driven by freedom" and 2) That such a view is radical and unworkable.

So there you have it, the technocratic, mandate loving, anti-gun, big goverment, Romney is far too much of a radical Wookie for the libs. Which says intersting things about their support for Obama, and that they think "This guy's for Freedom. Run!" is also fertile ground for mudslinging.

And it shows that they're out and out against liberty and freedom, seeing it as a threat to "responsible governance".

Hell, all the examples of "good governance" at the link are ones where the "nessecisty" to subvert the Constitution and limited goverment is proudly displayed. Not to mention the bloated fiscal mess the Great Society, the New Deal, Mecicare, Medicade, and the Stimulus have wrought.

Also one has to love a guy who breathlessly cheers Trustbusting and Too-big-to-Fail bailouts in the same sentance. I suppose industry dominating oligarcs are only bad when it's the wrong oligarcs in charge.

Which may explain the opposition to Romney: he's the wrong lizard.

Though at least Romney seems smart enough to not openly act like the Presidente of a People's Banana Republic.

"That theory, and many others, have enormous power and value because they have been validated by evidence...

Bill Whittle explains the dangers of love of theory and the importance of evidential validation:

That new pants feeling.

Is made even better when you realize that your pants make humorless scolds that want to take your freedoms away angry.

You see since the "secret" that Woolrich was making clothing designed for CCW came out. Many of the Antis have freaked out and demanded a boycott.

Secret is in quotes because it seems the antis didn't get angry until the New York Times did a, shockingly positive, profile of the garment line.

Well, we'll see how well the anti's boycott goes, I predict it'll be as much of a success as their Starbucks boycott.

Actually, I lie, I think it'll be worse, because I'm pretty neutral to Starbucks, but I really like these conceal carry pants (for one they've actually got reinforced seam stitching), and I bought more of these pants without knowing it got the antis angry.

And I know I'm not alone on that.

And as a bonus today is the last day for free shipping on Woolrich's site if you use the promo code: 4DAYFREE