[HCP renewal time]

I renewed mine in person at the driver's testing center in Rockwood.  The new card arrived in my mailbox within two or three weeks.

[Received a Heart Warming Gift Today]

Wow.  Great memories and a really nice looking rifle.

[Some Recent Leather Work.]

Looks good and the double mag pouch is really nice.

[Not my best work but...]

20 hours ago, res308 said:

Now THAT is some remarkable ingenuity right there. Good thinking. I don't believe that would have ever occurred to me.

Thanks.  I have another idea for doing a ferro rod holder on a leather sheath that I think might be even easier and look better but I want to try it to see if it works before I talk about it too much.

[Post the last firearm related thing you bought!]

A 100 round box of Winchester Super X - last weekend at Walmart, believe it or not.

The last big acquisition was trading my ATI officer size 1911 that I never could get to function correctly with JHP for a four inch Taurus Tracker in .44 Magnum.  The 1911 was a really nice looking pistol while the Tracker has this not very attractive, flat black finish (I think Taurus calls it 'blued' but it doesn't look like any bluing I have seen.)  Unlike the ATI, however, I haven't had any failures to feed with the revolver yet

[Not my best work but...]

Thanks, gentlemen, for the kind words.

[Not my best work but...]

23 hours ago, res308 said:

I meant to ask you about the ferro rod holder. Did you do the fold over and splice into the welt. It looks like you were able to get the dimensions closer than I did. I wound up thinning the leather loop strip out too much and there's a dip in the leather where the loop is. From what I can see, you had a better result. 

Permission to steal the fatwood idea?  Well, I did!  It wasn't my original idea.  Lots of folks on YouTube, etc. do that.  Some folks even go so far as to have a pretty nicely carved/sculpted look to theirs but I figure being there is a chance I might take scrapings or slivers off for tinder I didn't see bothering with all that.  Many folks leave them rough, too.  I have also seen some really nice handles made of bone, antler and so on.  I have a large ferro rod/magnesium rod combo with an (elk?) antler handle that someone got me as a gift a few years back.  It looks great and even without using the magnesium that rod throws some super hot sparks that will ignite tinder the Coghlan's one wouldn't dream of lighting but it is too big and bulky to put on a sheath.  The coolest looking ones are when the grips on the knife and the handle on the ferro rod are made from the same material (sometimes even pieces of the same antler, etc.)

For the rod loop I did fold over and splice into the welt but I came up with a different way of doing it.  This actually was an original idea in that I haven't seen it done elsewhere although I would be surprised if someone else hasn't done it.  I was concerned, as I was using the same leather (i.e. same thickness) for the sheath, welt and loop that where the loop went into the welt would be way too thick.  To remedy that I cut a 'tab' out of the center of one edge and cut two 'tabs' off of the outsides of the other edge so that when folded over the tabs lined up leaving enough material to splice into the welt while leaving only one thickness of leather to be spliced in.  It is a little hard to explain so I scribbled out a quick illustration for you:

[Spotted a moose]

I was in western Nebraska yesterday, just a little south of Scottsbluff. I didn't realize there were moose in the area, from a distance I thought it was a loose horse.

But then you realized it wasn't a loose horse.  It was a loose moose.  (Somebody had to take advantage of that rhyme!)

Great pictures.  Be careful.  I hear that hitting those things can really mess up a car (and the driver/passengers for that matter.)

[Not my best work but...]

...it will work.  I like my Ontario RAT 5 pretty well.  I don't like the oversized, behemoth of a tacticool nylon sheath that came with it all that much.  I think that maybe Ontario makes one sheath to go with several, different knives of different lengths.  Along those lines, I decided to try making a leather sheath for it.  Leather work is just one of my hobbies and I just make things for myself or to give to family/friends.  Having not made that many knife sheaths and having not made a sheath or gun holster for a couple of years I realized during this process how many previously learned things I had forgotten.  Also, this is the first time I have really tried adding a welt.  I don't usually need them for the type of pistol holsters I have made and have even made a knife sheath or two that didn't need them (until the last one I made that, as it turns out, did need one - meaning that I sliced the sheath with the knife.)  This is also the first time I have tried adding a ferro rod holder to a leather sheath (I have done them with a couple of kydex sheaths - one that I made for my Mora and one to fit the factory sheath for a Gerber - Bear Grylls paracord handled knife.)  The result of doing these new things for the first time as well as forgetting some of the things I should have known to do (until it was too late) is that this isn't as cosmetically nice as it could have been.  Still, it works great and I like it a whole lot better than the factory sheath.  I do kind of like the pouch on the factory sheath but didn't want the added bulk on this, particular one.  The ferro rod is just a Coughland's rod from Academy.  I put a fatwood handle on it after the factory handle came off.

It has a little retention without the snap strap.  Not a lot - it will fall out if I shake the sheath but will stay in if I just hold it upside down (I use a combination of shoe polish and regular leather dyes on many of mine and that is what is still on my hands in the picture - I had just finished the sheath):

Here it is with the original sheath:

And this one kind of shows how much too big the original is and how much closer in size the one I made is:

 

The funny thing is that, because of the mistakes I made, I think the sheath kind of looks like I have been carrying it for years even though it was still part of a big piece of raw leather a little more than twelve hours before these pictures were taken.  I wish I had not made the mistakes but must admit that I am kind of a fan of the 'worn in' look.  Also, I decided to rivet the snap strap to the sheath instead of sewing it down so that the strap could move around a little and so I can reverse the snap position in case I decide I want to do so.

[Conceal Carry options in Canda]

"Mah raccoon will whoop yer ass!  We didn't name him Rocky for nothin'!"

Actually, having found video footage, it kind of looks like the man is trying to make sure the baby raccoon doesn't accidentally get jostled/hurt/loose in all the excitement.  The 'attack coon' angle is much funnier, though.  I imagine an adult raccoon really could do some damage but could they be trained to attack on command?.  Of course there is still the question of why he had a baby raccoon in his sweatshirt inside McDonald's.  Then, again, I guess there is an obvious answer.  Canada. 

[Looks like a new LCP!]

I like the sights.  I don't like that it is striker fired.  I will never carry a striker fired pistol and that goes double for a pocket pistol.  But that is just me - I know a lot of folks like them.

[Ruger did it! American Compact]

On 10/07/2016 at 7:32 PM, Steelharp said:

Considering that's happened so many times, and had to be "gotten over"... yeah. Unless it's SO close that a lawsuit occurs, it's pretty much a dead issue. I would think if this was really close, there would be legal implications.

We did get one in today. It feels great in the hand; no idea about shooting it,so I have no comment on Ray Z's observation.

People asked George Kelgren why he didn't patent the P3AT design (and other innovative Kel Tec designs) so he could take legal action in cases like the LCP.  His answer was that all a patent does is give license to sue and that the reality was that the money needed to take on a big company like Ruger - and their lawyers - would pretty much ruin a smaller outfit like Kel Tec even if Kel Tec won the case.

[Here's anuther'n]

Those look really good.  Myself, I don't mind the learning process.  In fact, I kind of like it.  It is all the wasted $$$ in materials, all the time spent for naught and the frustration of making something that doesn't work that annoys me.  What's that?  Those things are part of the learning process, sometimes?  Well, crap!

I have a knife that I made using a Russell-Green River blade that I ordered online.  I customized the blade a little, put wood grips on it and was really pleased with how it turned out.  I had some nice, thin leather that made a really nice, 'sleeve' type sheath for it (the type where retention comes from a big part of the handle sliding down into the sheath along with the blade.)  I wet formed it and it looked great.  Probably the best looking knife sheath I had made to that point.  The problem was that I didn't put a welt in it and the leather was very thin so after the first time or two of drawing and resheathing the razor sharp blade it sliced right through the top part of the sheath.

[Couple of blades from my friend's forge]

There are many things I wish I could do.  Forging various items - with knives and tomahawk heads chief among them - is high on that list.

[Ruger did it! American Compact]

On 10/1/2016 at 9:49 AM, Steelharp said:

By that logic, every 1911 manufactured is a Colt "copy." Get over it.

I don't think there are many manufacturers of 1911s claiming that the pistols they build are an 'all new, innovative design' like Ruger did when, for instance, they copied Kel Tec's P3AT and acted as if the Little Copied Pistol was an 'all new design that started from a blank sheet of paper.'  I mean, they were going so far as to claim they had invented something brand new that was going to 'revolutionize' personal handgun carry and even got many of the gun rags to go along with the lie.  Most gun designs are, in one way or another, derivative of others.  That is to be expected.  It is directly ripping off another company's design and then claiming that they, Ruger, came up with the design from scratch that is annoying.  Ruger builds good firearms and I am a fan of some of those firearms but when they insult gun buyer's intelligence with such obvious lies then it makes you kind of wonder what kind of company they are running.

Think of it this way:  if you knew that musician A composed an original piece of music and later heard musician B performing or having recorded that piece of music, maybe with one or two minor changes that didn't really make it significantly different from musician A's version, and musician B was presenting it as their original work, not a cover of musician A or even a 're-imagining' of musician A then should people who know what musician B has done not be annoyed?  Should they simply 'get over it'?

[Charlotte "victims" gun IDed]

On 10/4/2016 at 1:42 PM, 56FordGuy said:

I'm not anti-laws. I'm anti laws that create criminals out of people who are not harming others. That is not freedom. I would rather live in a world where every dolt and doofus can carry a handgun without a permit than have to jump through hoops to prove to the government that I'm good enough to exercise the rights already guaranteed me by the constitution. 

I think that the Thomas Jefferson test should be applied to all laws and any laws which do not pass that test should be null and void.  The test to which I am referring has to do with a quote from Jefferson on religion:

The legitimate powers of government extend to such acts only as are injurious to others. But it does me no injury for my neighbour to say there are twenty gods, or no god. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg. ...

Unfortunately, there are too many people in our society that seem to believe that someone simply doing something that they do not like or agree with 'picks their pocket or breaks their leg.'

[Charlotte "victims" gun IDed]

5 hours ago, n0rlf said:

I don't drink enough to make a dent in any liqour cabinet. But I do enjoy a cold beer once in a while. (My wife is into beer making so we get some good ones), I am a Jack Daniels fan and do enjoy a drink every few weeks or so. As for bacon, well, after my heart attack the wife outlawed bacon in the house. She does let me have it once in a great while. (She loves me). I would eat bacon by the side if I could.   I love Sweet Tea, but as I am diabetic that is also off the list.    So a diet Coke with a little Gentlemen Jack seems to be my go to. I used to enjoy a good old scotch but not so much anymore. Maybe once we get our house finished up in the mountains I can relax by a fire again and imbibe.

 

Well, now that the thread is officially derailed (probably played out then derailed):

To me, Splenda (unlike the pink stuff or even Equal) is just as good as sugar in tea with the bonus that Splenda melts easier if the tea is cold.   If I drink Gentleman Jack I prefer it just over ice.  Of course, when available I prefer Coke Zero over Diet Coke by leaps and bounds.  Once I found out the difference I realized why.  Remember New Coke?  Well, Diet Coke is actually based on the New Coke formula (and so is a 'diet' version of New Coke.)  Coke Zero is based on the Classic Coke formula (and so is a 'diet' version of Classic Coke.)

[...]

On 9/30/2016 at 3:46 PM, bud said:

I assumed there's not a whole lot  they could change  on the local level with regards to gun laws. It's just a little disconcerting to see the topic broached when we know any discussion is only going to revolve around and effect legal carriers of firearms.

 I'm expecting a substantial (25-50%) property tax increase in the next couple of years to help fund more officers on the street, among other things on Barry's agenda

The really worrisome thing is that when places like Nashville, Memphis, etc. start really whining then they can screw up things for the entirety of the state.  I suspect that is especially true of Nashville where many of the legislators probably live and certainly where the legislative bodies meet.  Just as many people say that New York City screws up the entire state of New York, cities like Los Angeles and San Francisco screw up all of California and increasingly liberal, large cities in other traditionally pro-gun states have started screwing up the entirety of those states I would hate to see one or two cities in Tennessee screw  things up for all of us.

[Way to go Obama]

16 hours ago, mikegideon said:

Only thing he's good at

That's not fair.  I believe that he has also done a hell of a job helping to set race relations back by decades.

[A little bushcraft blade headed to a new home....]

Good lord!  I tend to like big blades but that may be your most beautiful creation yet!  Calling that 'a little bushcraft blade' is about like calling The Last Supper 'a little sketch of some dudes eating dinner.'

[Charlotte "victims" gun IDed]

On 9/30/2016 at 5:49 PM, gregintenn said:

O.k. I'll play along. I'll preface this for the few who don't already know that I don't care for law enforcement personnel. That being said, In your mind, when the police see this thug smoking a doobie and holding a gun, what the hell would you expect them to do?

I think you must have missed my subsequent post where I stated:

"As I said, I am not necessarily supporting the dead dude.  I was simply wondering about the justification for initiating contact.  If, indeed, he was seen rolling a joint and if somehow the observer could tell that it was, indeed, a joint and not a hand-rolled tobacco cigarette and he was, indeed, observed with a gun then absolutely that justified initiating contact.  At that point, not dropping the firearm justified the shooting.  If that is/was the case then I agree - move along, nothing to see, here."

My questions were:

Given that the police could not possibly have known that the individual was a felon nor that he was having 'mental issues' at the time of contact - meaning that his being a felon or having mental problems could have had no bearing at the time,

1. Did the police know, before initiating contact, that it was a joint he was smoking and not a completely legal tobacco cigarette?

2. Did the police know, before initiating contact, that he had a gun?

3. If the answer to #1 and #2 were 'no' then what was the justification for initiating contact in the first place?

As Omega indicated that another article stated that the police (somehow) did know these things before initiating contact I agreed that there was nothing really questionable about the actions taken by the officers.

I simply never take anything police say at face value.  This is not because of some 'unfounded' hatred of police.  This is due to experiences I have had.  Yes, I - who have no police record, have never smoked pot (no, seriously) and have never been in any legal trouble beyond one or two traffic violations have been unjustly pulled over and treated like a low-life criminal by police on more than one occasion in more than one jurisdiction. 

1. One evening, after dark, a cop rode a few feet from my bumper with his bright lights on.  This made it difficult for me to see and created an unsafe driving situation.  When I swerved a little - because I couldn't see - he pulled me over, "because you were swerving a little back there."  He then proceeded to say to my friend who was in the vehicle with me (who has also never been in any kind of trouble,) "Didn't I arrest you last week?"  He had nothing with which to charge us and had to let us go (and obviously wasn't happy about it.)

2. A few years later a different cop also rode just off of my rear bumper causing the same situation and pulled me over for the same bs reason.  His first words to me were, "Didn't I give you a ticket two nights ago?"  My response, "Well, that would have been kind of hard seeing as how I am just returning home from a cruise and I was on a Caribbean Island two nights ago."  He had nothing with which to charge me and had to let me go (and obviously wasn't happy about it.)

3. When I attended UTK and lived at my grandmother's on East Fifth through the week a cop pulled me over. He claimed he was pulling me over because I had a tail light out.  Curiously, he did not issue a citation or even a warning to fix any, such light and it never came up again after he mentioned it initially.  I checked when I got home - as suspected, I did not have a tail light out.   He had no legal reason to cite for pulling me over and his real reason was to ask, "What are you doing in this neighborhood?"  Yes, I have been pulled over for driving while white.

I won't drag this on by citing at least two, other similar instances when I have been pulled over literally for nothing with the only 'probable cause' being things that the cop purposefully created or just flat made up.  Suffice it to say that at this point in my life whenever I hear of a police run in where the probable cause sounds a bit suspicious I don't simply and immediately assume that was how things really happened.  Some cops do lie.  I've experienced it.  Strangely, the two times I have been pulled over and given a ticket for speeding (and I admittedly was) those officers were professional and courteous.  In other words, I came away from interactions when I actually received a ticket with a more positive perception of police than in the multiple occasions when I was pulled over and didn't receive a citation (because they had no justifiable reason to pull me over in the first place, much less cite me for anything.)

[Triple play!]

This picture was taken on a road near where I live.  I drive to and from work on this road pretty much every day of the week and also drive it on most weekends.  I have seen these little guys (or gals?) on multiple occasions over the past, couple of months but this was the first chance I had to get a picture of them (could see them from far enough away as to not spook them and no vehicles behind me.)  The first time I saw them I believe that they were literally (and I am not a person who says 'literally' when I really mean 'figuratively' - I mean 'literally') only a day or two old.  They were, of course, in full spots at the time and, being triplets, were pretty tiny.  Now they each only have a few spots left, mostly on hind quarters.  The mama was with them - she was on around the curve.  We see sets of twins pretty much every year over on the other side of the bluff but this is the first set of triplets I believe I have ever seen.  With the coyotes, etc. we have out there I think it is pretty amazing that the doe was able to keep all three of them alive to this point, especially as she isn't all that big a girl, herself.  She is pretty small for an adult doe.  I figure that now they have a pretty good chance of making it to adulthood.  She must be a danged good mama!

 

[.357 Fever! What to buy next?]

1 hour ago, FortKnox said:

Well from personally experience a Ruger LCR or SP101. 

Since he already has that snubbie Smith I think he needs a longer barreled model.  I say a GP100.

[Charlotte "victims" gun IDed]

10 minutes ago, Omega said:

You guys need to read the stories in the links.  He was seen rolling a blunt, given a pass then he was observed with a gun.  That alone with no other facts is enough to make contact.  The fact that he was a felon in possession of a gun is probably the reason he did not comply with the LEOs, that and the fact that he MAY of had some mental defect.  He could have been a minister or priest under the initial reason for the contact and I would of still supported LEO making contact and reacting in the same way if said minister/priest acted in the same manner.  You guys are just making things difficult by trying to make this into something which it is not.  Just like the rioters, you guys are picking the wrong case/individual to try and support.  There are plenty of cases where LEO is either totally in the wrong, or just made bad choices, this is just not one of those cases.

As I said, I am not necessarily supporting the dead dude.  I was simply wondering about the justification for initiating contact.  If, indeed, he was seen rolling a joint and if somehow the observer could tell that it was, indeed, a joint and not a hand-rolled tobacco cigarette and he was, indeed, observed with a gun then absolutely that justified initiating contact.  At that point, not dropping the firearm justified the shooting.  If that is/was the case then I agree - move along, nothing to see, here.

[Charlotte "victims" gun IDed]

1 hour ago, bersaguy said:

It turns out there were several reasons the man should not have even posessed a weapon. He was according to his with suffering a mental condition, He was a felon that spent time in Texas prison for shooting someone there. He was using illegal drugs at the time. He refused to follow direct orders from law enforcemnt officers. If I had all that going against me and I did what he did and me being white I would have expected them to shoot me too..............jmho

Again, devil's advocate:

1. Did the police know at the time they initiated contact that he was suffering from a mental condition and, therefore, shouldn't have a firearm?

2. DId the police know at the time they initiated contact that he was a felon in possession of a firearm?  For that matter, did they even know at the time they initiated contact that he had a firearm on him at all?

3. Did the police know at the time they initiated contact that he was using illegal drugs?  I have been in close proximity to people smoking pot outside and can say that a single joint isn't always all that easy to smell outside from several feet away.

4. Yes, once he was told to drop the gun he should have done so.  However, as I think 56FordGuy was saying, what justification - what 'probable cause' - did they have for initiating contact in the first place?  If officers had not initiated contact they would never have gotten to the point of ordering him to drop the firearm to begin with.

I say, again, that I am not defending the guy who was shot nor am I deriding the officers.  I am simply saying that the first 3 issues listed are known only after the fact.  Therefore, those issues are justification in hindsight which may not have existed at the time when officers first initiated contact.  Further, until contact was initiated the fourth issue didn't exist, either.  Therefore, none of those issues can be cited as justification for initiating contact to begin with.

This is not about cop bashing.  Some may call it 'Monday Morning Quarterbacking' but it is no more MMQ than using facts that the officers likely did not know at the time to justify the incident after the fact.

I will say that, knowing these things after the fact, I am kind of ticked off.  I am ticked that a mentally disturbed, pot smoking felon had a Colt Mustang - a gun I would very much like to own.  I hope this isn't a department that will give that poor, innocent pistol the death penalty (destruction) once it is no longer needed as evidence.