New Covenant

Ever have one of those days?

Our Western custom of shaking hands is, indeed, a quirky one. When executed properly the act is, at best, a firm establishment of proper manners and, at worst, an excellent method of germ exchange. And then there are the various faux paus to deal with (ever been on the receiving end of a limp shaker? - ugh!). Worse yet, have you ever held your hand out only to suffer the degrading experience of being rejected?

Luckily, that only happens to rank amateurs...

My journey towards owning a firearm, vol. 1: Why?

"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."

Also known as the 2nd Amendment.

I've purchased a firearm - a semi-automatic handgun (to be specific, a Glock 22, .40 S&W caliber).

How did this happen?

There are many reasons for one to choose to own a firearm: Self-defense, the exercising of one's 2nd amendment right, insurance for potential times of civil unrest, pure enjoyment (as in target-shooting), hunting, etc. Yet, despite this, I've been surprised to find that my decision to arm myself has sparked a variety of responses from people with whom I am acquainted. Emotions ranging from joyful glee to tentative fright to that of sour judgment have been levied in my direction - all because of my desire to own, and use, a firearm.

I was quite unprepared for such disparate reactions. So, let me take a few posts explaining my journey towards owning a firearm.

First, why... Why own a firearm? Well, let's say that I've always been interested in firearms but, for various reasons, have never pursued said interest. Introvert that I am, I tend to not want to look like I don't know what I'm doing (in front of others) and, when dealing with firearms, one had very well know exactly what they are doing. While I could have certainly found ways to learn, whether it be through friends, or the classroom - I never made it happen. That changed recently, though, as I finally decided to get the education, knowledge, and training to be proficient in the handling of firearms. What was the catalyst? Middle age, perhaps. I've joked with more than one friend, that, given I now reside in middle age, I'm simply going through that so-called crisis in which men desperately need to hold on to and prove their manhood - typically via the acquisition of a convertible sports car. If that's the case, then at least my venture into the sport of shooting is much cheaper than that of purchasing Nissan's latest Z model!

However, it goes far beyond a mere desire to prove my manhood.

Rush.

Yes, shooting a firearm gives one quite the rush. The night I returned from taking a gun safety / practice class, my adrenaline was flowing and I couldn't wait until the time I would return to the shooting range for more - fun. Up until that class, I had never fired a pistol and had never fired a rifle with a caliber larger than .22LR. The night of my class, I fired a .40 S&W caliber semi-automatic handgun (an HK USP), and it was, literally, an amazing experience!

As I stepped into my shooting lane that night, our instructor had us - I was joined by about 5 other shooters - load one round of ammunition into the pistol's magazine. Upon his command we were to load our firearm, take aim, and fire at a paper target (ostensibly, a silhouette of a human being). The HK USP is an all steel gun, which means it's a bit heavy. This particular model had a serrated grip which seemed, to me, to be excessively rough. Gripping the gun in my right hand, I placed the magazine (with one round in it) into the magazine well. After the magazine clicked in I then pulled the slide back to engage the cartridge into the chamber. At that point, the gun was "live"... and deadly. My trigger finger, up to now, was not on the trigger as - per basic firearm safety rules - you do not put your finger on the trigger until you are about to fire. As I leveled the live handgun, pointing it towards the target, I placed my left (support) hand into position, against the open, left side of the pistol grip, wrapping my left hand fingers around my right (strong) hand. I then acquired my sight on the target, held my breath, and gently squeezed the trigger.

Many shooting instructors tell you that, as you squeeze the trigger, the actual firing of the gun should come as a surprise. Let me tell you, the first round I shot definitely came as a surprise. In all honesty, after the gun fired (loudly), and the recoil bounced back into my body, my initial thought was, "What on earth am I doing here? I'm in way over my head!" Our instructor then asked us to load our magazines with multiple cartridges and continue firing. I did so and found that, as each successive shot reverberated through the indoor range, I grew accustomed to the sound of the gun firing, to the shock of the firearm pushing back against both of my hands with the recoil lifting the barrel up, to the blast of hot gases venting out from the gun, to the sound of an expended shell casing bouncing onto the concrete floor, and to the distinctive smell of burned gunpowder. I became fascinated with acquiring the target in my sights, and then seeing how close the projectile, which I had sent flying, came to hitting my target. I marveled at the processes involved in taking dead aim onto a subject - the concentration - the discipline - the mechanics.

Is it wrong for me to enjoy shooting a firearm, a firearm which, if pointed and fired at a human being, would most likely kill them? I don't think so, and if you happen to think so, then I'd be interested in knowing what you think about the fact that multi-thousand pound vehicles are frequently seen being driven erratically about, at speeds upwards of 80 miles per hour? The kinetic energy stored up in a moving SUV is tremendous - and I shudder to think how casually such energy is wielded about, without the slightest regard to the potential impact to innocent human life.

Yet I traverse a tangent.

Having a rip-roaring fun time, though, was not the only impetus for my researching and entering the realm of gun ownership. Self-defense was another. We live in dangerous times (and not simply because Barack Obama was elected). I have a family to protect, and a firearm is one method with which I, and they, can be protected.

However, the very lethal nature of a firearm, combined with legal ramifications of using lethal force, make the use of such a methodology extremely complicated. 

And that's what I'll discuss in vol. 2 of this series - Having a pistol for self-defense.

- first image: my Glock 22; second image: results of my first night shooting, with the HK USP; all images © 2009 A. R. Lopez

I've quite had enough of this word

Alright, I'll admit that a few times, initially on, the word was semi-okay. But enough is enough. Stop telling me how either myself, my spouse, my children, my church, my school, or my fellow citizens can be EMPOWERED by doing whatever-the-latest-fashion-trend-psycho-analytical-methodology says I have to do.

Enough!

I'm empowering myself to rabidly resist any further attempts to empower my empowerment.

Why aren't Olympic events on TV?

Wouldn't it be nice to sit down to watch the Olympics and actually get to watch... the Olympics?

Maybe it's just me, but every time I decide to watch some of the 80,000+ hours of "coverage", I end up getting to find out trivial sidenotes of information (e.g., like the fact that Michael Phelps dog snores).

Please... can you guys just broadcast content and keep the fluff for the touchy-feely channel?

Donations for an Olympian

Okay, I know everyone is commenting on this photo-op of Dubya with Olympic Beach Volleyball athletes May and Walsh.

But the little-known story behind the story is that Walsh (# 1) is desperately short of money... so short, that she has had to resort to using swimsuits she wore when she was 14. Please, send in a donation to allow Walsh to purchase a swimsuit that fits her.

Canis Rattus, and noisy machinery

If you insist on keeping a dog-rat (Canis Rattus) animal as a pet, the least you could do is not take the poor creature to a country parade which features an assortment of antique and modern-day farm equipment, tractors, fire engines, etc., complete with the requisite decibel output they produce. Yes, the animal pictured below is bundled up in its owner's jacket - an attempt to alleviate the intense shivering (from fright) the animal was experiencing.

Overheard...

Overheard, from another table, during breakfast at a restaurant in Buellton, CA:

Woman 1:  If a Republican is elected President this next time, then I'm going to seriously think about emigrating somewhere.

Woman 2:  Oh, yes.

Meanwhile, I'm thinking: Please, oh please...

Pregnant Fashion

Is it just me or is anyone else a bit put-off by the (apparently) current style of tight, form-fitting maternity clothing? Whether at public events, work, or at church (on "worship-teams", no less), it seems that pregnant women must now wear clothing that outlines virtually every intricate contour of their bodies.

Do I really need to know that a senior manager at work has an outie belly-button?

From an introvert's point of view

From Introverted Church (thanks to Brian at A Small Faith) comes a link to an Introvert's Lexicon.

Being an introvert, I found the lexicon to be hilarious! Some of my favorites include:

Alone, adj.

• Extrovert's definition:  Lonely
• Introvert's definition:  Enjoying some peace and quiet.

Bored, adj.

• Extrovert's definition:  Not frantically busy.
• Introvert's definition:  Stuck making small talk, and unable to escape politely.

Home, n.

• Extrovert's definition:  A place to invite everybody you know.
• Introvert's definition:  A place to hide from everybody you know.

Shell, n.

• Extrovert's definition:  Something you find on the beach.
• Introvert's definition:  What people relentlessly nag you to come out of. Why do you have to leave it, if you're happy there? 

To go out, v. 

• Extrovert's definition: Requires at least two people, and the more the better. Constant chatter, loud music, sports, crowds, and food consumption are all fun components of going out.
• Introvert's definition: Can be done alone or with others. Enjoyable if there's some point to it; e.g., in order to see a band, a movie, a play, or perhaps to have a stimulating discussion with one or two close friends.

Amen! How many times have you introverts (out there) been dragged out of your shell and forced to go out, only to be bored crazy, and ending up wishing you were home... alone?

U2: A Celebration

A post at the Evangelical Outpost, last week, reminded me of a U2 video from way back in 1982. In, A Celebration, we see U2 when it had raw energy... when it was good.

Awesome riding

Awesome!

Male & Female traits: on-off switches vs. dimmer switches

In my recent debates, concerning traits of men vs. traits of women, I've run into what I think is a misconception about what I've been arguing. It seems to me that, once I've made the claim that men (or women) generally act in a certain manner, a counter-argument is presented that so-and-so does not act in such a manner, or that certain historical figures have not acted in such a manner and, as such, my claim is thereby invalidated. Perhaps I'm oversimplifying the counter-argument, but I think the gist of what I'm stating applies.

Yet I am not stating that there are not anomalous situations or persons, nor am I stating that, if one is a male (or female), one must act, or not act, in a certain manner. I am also not stating that males (or females) cannot ascertain or express themselves in the manners typically attributed to those of the opposite sex. In fact, I would argue that each sex has the responsibility to understand how the other thinks. (side note: Bonnie, you're claim that our attitudes towards male and female roles are culturally driven could itself be attributed to culture, could it not? In other words, how is it that you are able to analyze the situation supposedly from outside the realm in which you claim it was created?)

Be that as it may (and at the risk of riling up Sara & Bonnie), what follows is my pragmatic attempt at illustrating my argument:

Pictured below are an on-off switch and a dimmer switch. The on-off switch, when connected in an electrical circuit, either turns the apparatus (in this case, a light) on or turns it off. There is no in between. The dimmer switch, however, not only has the capacity to switch the apparatus on or off, but it can regulate the amount of electricity coursing through the apparatus. Hence, for a light, you can adjust the amount of light it emits by adjusting the dimmer switch.

Here is the analog I am arguing for: 

Men and women, as part of their physiological makeup, are not wired with on-off switches insomuch as they can only demonstrate one trait or the other. Such analysis does not comport with real life and, to reiterate, it is not what I am advocating (although it sometimes seems to be what I'm accused of advocating).

Men and women, while distinct in their gender, are still human beings, and our physiological makeup is akin to being wired with dimmer switches in that we have the ability to demonstrate varying degrees of what we typically describe as male or female traits. Keep in mind, however, that because we are distinct in gender, we will generally demonstrate characteristics, in varying degrees, according to said genders.

The mere fact that a woman can be pragmatic does not invalidate what I am proposing any more than the fact that a man can be understanding. I'm not stating that men or women must operate within absolutes (i.e., on-off switch), but that their tendencies demonstrate characteristics within general parameters (i.e., dimmer switch). As I've posited elsewhere, take a large sampling of males and I would bet that the overwhelming majority would tend towards the typical male characteristics (with the same result occurring on a large sampling of females).

Thus ends the Argument from Home Depot (a decidedly male bastion, btw).

I think, therefore IM

A primer for anyone, over the age of 40, on the manner in which one communicates, via text messaging. If you have any desire to communicate with anyone under the age of 25, it is essential that you learn the fine art of typing in an IM world (that would be - Instant Messaging). Here are a few essential tips:

1. Drop the uppercase alphas:  remember, this is instant messaging, so who has time to stretch their pinkies out to press that soon-to-be-retired "shift" key? and note that TYPING IN ALL CAPS is considered shouting.
2. Drop most, but not all, punctuation marks:  again dont forget that this is instant messaging and that your time is critical  are there exceptions?  yes usually question marks & many !!!!
3. Revert to an "illegitimate child"-ized version of shorthand:  u know ur goin to type fast when u cut out lots of leters cuz it makes it ez & ther arnt as many keys to hit
4. Learn, and use, codespeak:  brb = be right back, w/e = whatever, btw = by the way, ltr = later, ty = thank you, np = no problem, jk = just kidding
5. Learn, and use, the essential "lol":  Every so often, throw in the phrase "lol" in your message. It literally means "laughing out loud", and its incessantly repeated use is pretty much a requirement for anyone involved in IM'ing.
6. Emote:  Intersperse the optional emoticon characters, such as -   ;^)  8^)  :^0 
7. Intentionally misspell:  To emphasize the quick nature of text messaging, remember to misspell a few quick keystroke words. For instance, the becomes teh.
8. Brevity:  Lastly, keep your messaging conversations short.

if u master the ez rules listed ...lol... then ur on ur way to happy texting  btw u will say ty 2 me for sure ...lol...  do u understnad? GOT IT? ;^)  ...lol!!!

That's right, don't forget to "nuter" your pet

From ABC2 News...

Who we're stuck with, in the Republican Party

Okay, so it's barely February and the election isn't until November. That means we'll have to sit through another 9 months of endless political rhetoric, ALL of which is essentially useless blather because, as every true cynic knows, none of it will make ANY difference in the choices you and I have on election day.

Unless things change drastically, from what they are today, it's a two human race for both parties: Little John McCain vs. Rich Mitt Romney, and Annoying Hillary Clinton vs. Vacuous Barack Obama.

Now, while I have little affection for McCain or Romney, I have even less desire to see the position of POTUS go to every Socialist's dream, Hillary Clinton. Besides, can you imagine having to listen to her monotonous droning for at least the next 4 years? Turn up the iPod, man. But the most anxious people in D.C., right now, must be the Secret Service personnel tasked with guarding the President. I mean, these guys follow the President around everywhere he goes - oops - if Hillary gets in, then it's everywhere she goes. You understand? They've got to be with her - everywhere.

Then there's Obama. You've got to be kidding me - change out one letter and we've got people mistakenly calling him President Osama. And how old is the guy? 46? He's supposed to be bringing fresh energy to the political landscape; yet what is his marketing slogan? Stand for Change. Oh yeah... original.

And yet, how conservative are McCain and Romney, really?

Let's face it, as conservatives, we're stuck with either McCain or Romney. As such, I propose that a few of those political junkies out there (e.g., Joe Carter or Andrew Jackson), start up a new campaign of conservatives who are fed up with the direction the Republican Party has gone. We're here to let it be known that we're voting for McCain or Romney, but only because the alternatives are out of the question. Our motto? Stuck With McCain (or, Romney, as the case may be). Check it out, the domains are available:  http://www.StuckWithMcCain.com  or http://www.StuckWithRomney.com

Along the Stuck With McCain/Romney vein:

Mark Levin -

As for McCain "the straight-talker," how can anyone explain his abrupt about-face on two of his signature issues: immigration and tax cuts? As everyone knows, McCain led the battle not once but twice against the border-security-first approach to illegal immigration as co-author of the McCain-Kennedy bill. He disparaged the motives of the millions of people who objected to his legislation. He fought all amendments that would limit the general amnesty provisions of the bill. This controversy raged for weeks. Only now he says he’s gotten the message. Yet, when asked last night if he would sign the McCain-Kennedy bill as president, he dissembles, arguing that it’s a hypothetical question.

Bob Novak confirms McCain’s anti-Alito comment (Hot Air) -

On Monday, the day before the Florida primary, John Fund reported that John McCain had told a group of lawyers that while he would appoint a John Roberts to the SCOTUS, he might draw the line at appointing a Sam Alito because he “wore his conservatism on his sleeve.”

The GOP No Longer Represents Conservatives (Stones Cry Out) -

If the Republican Party continues on its current path it will nominate either John McCain or (given a Super Tuesday miracle) Mitt Romney, who are not bona fide conservatives. In doing so, the GOP will demonstrate that it no longer represents conservatives and has placed a higher value on winning an election than standing by its principles.

The Case Against Romney (Joe Carter)

The main reason I can't support Mitt Romney is because of John Kerry. I spent much of the 2004 election bashing Kerry for his political expediency. How then can I defend a candidate that is a bigger flip-flopper than Kerry? If he were a Democrat Mitt Romney would be excoriated for his lack of integrity.

Tammy Bruce might vote for Hillary over McCain

How Ron Paul lost my vote

So there I am, sitting in stop-and-go traffic, coming home from work tonight. As the traffic closes in on a walkway overpass, I see a U.S. flag being waved, back and forth, by someone over the freeway. Getting closer, I see that there are several banners posted, and that there's another person waving a placard.

Then, I'm close enough to read the placard the person is waiving... it says:

Ron Paul

Aaargh!

Our drive home was congested on account of some stunt pulled by a couple of Paulbots?! For crying out loud!

It's breakfast-burrito-time!

Dr. Melik: This morning for breakfast he requested something called "wheat germ, organic honey and tiger's milk."

Dr. Aragon: [chuckling] Oh, yes. Those are the charmed substances that some years ago were thought to contain life-preserving properties.

Dr. Melik: You mean there was no deep fat? No steak or cream pies or... hot fudge?

Dr. Aragon: Those were thought to be unhealthy... precisely the opposite of what we now know to be true.

Dr. Melik: Incredible.

- from the movie, Sleeper

 

From ScienceDaily, Surprise -- Cholesterol May Actually Pose Benefits, Study Shows,

If you’re worried about high cholesterol levels and keeping heart-healthy as you get older, don’t push aside bacon and eggs just yet. A new study says they might actually provide a benefit.

Confessions of a FredHead

Joe Carter lets loose and tells us what he really thinks in Romney Rising (Finally) Reflections on the MI Primary. With regards to my man Fred Thompson, Joe says,

In five days we can finally say goodbye to Fred Thompson. It can't come soon enough. I was one of the original "FredHeads" who eagerly waited (and waited…and waited…) for him to get in the race so that he could save us from Giuliani. Back in those humid days of summer we fantasized about how he would be the second coming of Reagan only to find he was third coming of Bob Dole. Soon after getting into the race it was clear that he was waiting for the day he could drop out.

Sigh. While I am one of the original "FredHeads" I think that Joe is, unfortunately, correct. Shucks, D.A. Arthur Branch - I mean - Former Senator Fred Thompson should have been able to cash in on his small-screen persona, but he didn't. Now, call me Tennessee naive, but couldn't everyone else see the strength of his Southern self-confidence? Unassuming as it was.

It's been about 45 years since John F. Kennedy demonstrated that the Imago Media could literally grant one the position of most powerful man on Earth. So, it's no wonder that the likes of Thompson, Huckabee, and Clinton must contend with every-hair-in-place Romney or media-messiah Obama.

I'm pretty simple in my approach to voting for POTUS: check the box in November, 2008. Sure, I'll make my call, come Primary day, but why the fuss at this point in time? I could read Reynolds' and Hewitt's endorsements of Romney, Joe's many analyses of Huckabee, etc. Or I could simply press "pause" and enjoy reading J.I. Packer's Knowing God. Easy choice (for me).

Yeah, Fred's my man... but his days are numbered. Giuliani? He's essentially Hillary in drag (and he's out of it, anyway). McCain? Too old (and short) and his temper is re-emerging. Huckabee? Sigh. Do we really want to have a "President Huckabee"? Ron Paul? Ron Paul?! Hillary? She's essentially Giuliani in a suit. Obama? The audacity of ignorance? For crying out loud, why not just fast forward and start building his presidential library?

So, am I left with Romney?

onthestyleoftextmessaging

wellitstimeforanotherpostinwhichirantabout howutterlystupiditisthewaypeoplemostlykids writenowadayslol:)brbokimbackimeanwhatteh youknowwhatimean?cuzimjustthinkinthatoh nevermindlolitsrelyamazingwhenustop& thnkaboutitbutiwonderiftheyeverstoptothink? yknow?lol!whyisitthattheyneveruseproper capsorpunctuation?exceptforquestionmarks sometimesonefriendofminesaysitscuz theydonthavetehtimetopunchouteveryletterlolyouve gottobekiddingmehowmuchtimedoesit reallysaveu?werebecominganationofidiotsitelluidiots

Restaurant wall wisdom

Sage advice on the restaurant wall...

The Filling Station, Orange, CA