Back in the day, back before divorce number one, I used to collect high end watches. Gone. All gone. Sitting on my wrist: a Seiko chronograph. Which I love. A horological passion most millennials mistake for something sex industry related or dismiss with a casual wave of their smartphone. In 31-year-old Nathan Ruest’s everydaycarry.com pocket dump above . . .
The man’s displaying a carbon fiber-faced Movado Gravity watch. It’s a bastardization of the original Movado Museum watch (sigh) but I applaud the everyday carry guy for wearing it.
The way I look at it, the ability to tell the time, discreetly, at a glance, can come in handy before, during and after a defensive gun use.
That’s a funny noise. What time is it? How long have I been waiting for the police? Sir, what time did the attack start? Like that.
Keep in mind that it’s almost impossible to measure time during a defensive gun use adrenaline dump. Time slows down. Time speeds up.
By the same token, it’s exceedingly difficult to get out your phone quickly and efficiently and read the teeny tiny little digital time display when your heart starts beating like a big brass band.
Got watch? Which one?
Current one is a Lumi Nox.
I also collect watches. Seiko, Casio, Rolex…
That reminds me, I need to send my Seiko in to get fixed.
Well I hope the child survives his head injuries, God bless him. Hopefully the wrist injury will not affect the girls ability to pursue her dreams. And hopefully the precious child that committed the shooting can get some real help to resolve her internal conflicts. …. Ive got go take a big “pocket dump”now.
Howdy very cool site!! Guy .. Excellent .. Superb ..
I’ll bookmark your site and take the feeds also? I’m satisfied
to seek out a lot of helpful information right here within the post, we need work out extra techniques in this regard, thank you for sharing.
. . . . .
7.5 Swiss – not exactly obscure but not a Wally World or even Academy Sports round
7.62 x 25 pistol – same as above
.25 acp – getting hard to find as nobody makes these mouse guns any more. I have a set of dies but the round is so tiny that my old arthritic hands can’t handle the bullets or brass. I’ve got an old Beretta 21A that I bought as a hide out gun when I got into law enforcement 27 years ago and its kind of fun to shoot but factory ammo is getting pretty rare.
38 rimfire? 300blk and 7.62×25 but i don’t really think they’re obscure.
Citizen ECO-drive titanium, best watch I’ve ever owned. No battery replacement, keeps perfect time, lightweight, tough as nails and hands and numbers that glow all night.
.338 Federal in an AR rifle. After building the rifle, it was difficult to find quality hunting ammo. However, recently Federal decided to manufacture Vital Shok again more than a year they told me they would be manufacturing the bullets.
.303 in a 1948 Indian made Lee Enfield No.1 Mk III. I paid $62. It was completely covered in cosmoline. I took it to car wash, degreased it, then took it apart and degreased again. I was able to 1/4 silhouette at 200m without adjusting the sights with cheap Pakistani ammo.
Made it to 1:32. I’m out.
The way the bun lifts his arms up and pivots back and forth while blathering reminds me of David Byrne in the Talking Heads vid Once In A Lifetime.
Be good for people who get made in french cupcake shops.
As to argument 1: makes a cautionary point worth considering but then makes an inferential conclusion that the instant case implies same true for aggregation. Cites to irrelevant, less worthy points, to abstract straw man cartoonish view of negating position. Is logical error per se. Threat level calculation is not derived for any specific person directly inferred by aggregate statistical math, widely applied, and based upon samples of variables not carefully collected, very geographically and otherwise generalized. Bad statics hygiene. Cannot use the sample statistic generalized for 300 million or more population, and unknown sample size in sample statistic or by what means collected, or why and which functional confidence interval is used, and also mathematically, probability is a unit of area, an individualist al point on a line, or a line intersecting any individual point, by definition, has area =0. So the lesson is, don’t cite statistical generality and ten expect it to controllingly apply upon an instant case, or individual, each reader in your audience, mathematically, is an independ not event. So you ruined a thoughtful comment by citing to nonsense and garbage.
Argument 2: Multiple fallacies. 1. You have no knowledge of any specific reader in your audience nor his or her ability to, likelihood of, etc., practice useful and adequate firearm tactics and safety hygiene. Assertions made without evidence fail. 2. Your subjective observation, or lack of, a set of population not to your awareness practicing those skills, is not any form of persuasive reason nor proof that they do not, or that others do not, it is facially a non sequitor and advances no useful idea. Does damage writer’s credibility, but otherwise adds nothing. To suggest a choice to carry should as policy or value imply a choice of reasonable care, upkeep’s, education,tactics, safety, is a perfectly good point. It is not however manifestly anything near persuasive or logical inference, a reason not to carry, as presented.
Argument 3: This is the worst one offered. Would you then to be consistent forbid people addicted to drugs, or gambling, from advising others avoid the the quicksand they now are in, before it becomes a much harder thing to resist? They are by your standard manifest hypocrites, no?
Consider also obvious rebuttal. A sane person in fear of reality reasonably believed that dangerous and unqualified people are everywhere with guns, hence the strong policy opposition to unregulated firearms, this person is not breaching his logical suppositions by being cautiously armed himself in a world where he perceives a need for political action to solve a problem of too many guns too easily had by parties too unsafe, this person can with no hypocrisy, have the view that he too must be armed because of this danger perceived, and will happily surrender his weapon when controls he wishes exist and relieve his perception of danger, only then would he be hypocritical by continuing to keep is gun, when he no longer perceived a danger.
Your flawed notions of math and logic notwithstanding, I will at least say you likely brought your arguments in good faith. But without any opinion needed, just logic, your arguments fail as presented.
I’ve been mugged twice in the last two years. I’m from the prairies in Canada, so I don’t have the option of carrying a firearm, knife, taser or spray. The first time were 3 kids with bear spray, didn’t have much of value that wasn’t insured so i gave them my stuff and we all walked away, all they wanted was an old phone and 10 bucks in my wallet. Second time, i was mugged by 5 Indian Posse gangbangers taking a shortcut home from the bar, moderately intoxicated. One with a visible gun in his waistband, one with a machete, two in a getaway vehicle that pulled up and one behind me.
The thing that pisses me off is the attitude that “if you take my course” or “if you’re trained enough” you will kill/win vs. all the bad guys and walk away the hero. I don’t give a shit if it was any V.C. or MOH recipient in that alley instead of me, if he was unarmed like me (lawfully I must be), 4v1 against at least one gun and one knife? Those are odds you don’t gamble on. Even if i could carry those odds are still dog-shitty.
A martial arts instructor I once knew near DC once told the story of how his son, who was very proficient as well, had been mugged by three guys in some nasty part of town. With his impressive martial arts skills he knocked two guys out before the third pulled the gun out of his pocket and shot the victim dead.
There’s a reason people carry guns and it’s because they work.
I don’t understand this paragraph AT ALL.
“‘The Illinois Supreme Court took another bite out of the state’s gun laws on Thursday, ruling that a provision barring firearms near public parks is unconstitutional.’ That’s not how I’d characterize the Court’s decision — striking down an impractical and unconstitutional law — but you know, chicagotribune.com.”
The first paragraph in the Court’s decision phrased the issue as follows:
“At issue in this appeal is the constitutionality of section 24-1(a)(4), (c)(1.5) of the unlawful use of a weapon (UUW) statute (720 ILCS 5/24-1(a)(4), (c)(1.5) (West 2012)), which, in pertinent part, prohibits an individual from carrying or possessing a firearm within 1000 feet of a public park.”
At paragraph 66, the Court concludes:
“Accordingly, we hold that possessing a firearm within 1000 feet of a public park in violation of section 24-1(a)(4), (c)(1.5) of the UUW statute is facially unconstitutional.”
Maybe I’m simply not understanding your first paragraph, but it appears to me that the Chicago Tribune got it right. The fact that the Court declared the statute facially unconstitutional is actually great news. A finding that the statute was “impractical” due to either vagueness or ambiguity would open the doors for the legislature to simply rephrase the statute. The Court basically slammed that door closed, which is a huge victory for Illinois citizens who value their civil right to carry a firearm for self defense.
How about actually reading and quoting the decision rather than taking the easy way out by quoting and attacking how another journalist characterized the decision? When we get a victory, TTAG should embrace it. You might even be the one that gets quoted and linked-to if you take the higher ground. No one is going to link to this story, which is cumbersome to read and devoid of any real thought or analysis.
For anyone interested, the decision is Illinois v. Chairez, 2018 IL 121417. The full opinion is available at https://cases.justia.com/illinois/supreme-court/2018-121417.pdf?ts=1517499137
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3HR9vqx9oTQ
well, “No-Go” figure.
Nothing is more depressing than artificial distressing. And…that price is out of control for a plastic gun that worked fine to begin with. Two thumbs down, and a foot.