JAB

Yep. I actually put some herbs/spices that I have used in home-made chicken noodle soup that I have canned, before, in the broth. It will have plenty of flavor without needing to add any more seasoning. In fact, I had a little left after canning and ended up cooking some rice in it. The rice absorbed all of the liquid, was perfectly cooked and was delicious. In a pinch, a person could just heat the canned broth, toss in some rice or noodles and have a pretty decent soup. Of course, adding carrots, celery and more chicken along with the rice or noodles would only make it that much better. I forgot to say that a good bit of the sliced pork and ribs (what I didn't share with family/friends) came to work with me today and went in the work fridge to be my lunch for most of the week. I ate sliced pork sandwiches today but for the days I have the ribs I also brought a jar of the corn I canned about this time last year: I know that some folks are leery of home-canned goods after about a year but I once canned some Brunswick stew that was just as good when I ate the last jar two years later as it was the day I canned it.

Last Friday, I started with these: and these: and after applying eight hours worth of smoke and heat to the ribs and seventeen hours worth of smoke and heat to the pork butts, I ended up with these: and these: I also smoked about seven large, bone-in and skin on chicken breasts but who wants to see pictures of boring, old yard bird (okay, so I didn't get any pictures of the chicken.) I pulled a good bit of the pork for a specific application I had in mind: but also sliced part of it as I actually prefer sliced pork barbecue to pulled: So, what was this 'specific application' I had in mind for the pulled pork? Well, I'll give you a hint. It involved this piece of equipment (an old warhorse which belonged to my late grandmother, has been in use probably as long as I have been alive and now belongs to me): Yep, I canned some of the smoked pork. I used a slightly thinned-down version (thinned it partly with orange juice) of my home-made barbecue sauce for the liquid to add to the jars. I used pint jars and ended up getting eight jars. In the oncoming weeks, I will see how well it works out and if I end up liking the finished product I might do more in the future. While I was at it, I also canned four jars of smoked chicken. After pulling/shredding the chicken I used the bones and skin to make a broth which I then used as the liquid in the jars for canning the chicken. I then ended up canning five jars of broth with just 'bits' of chicken. In a few weeks, I will begin using these items to see how well it worked out. I suspect the chicken will yield the absolute best (and most versatile) results and that I will likely be doing more chicken in the future - probably the next time I find chicken breasts on sale at a great price. Below is a picture showing example jars of each. The pork is on the left, the chicken in the middle and the broth with 'bits' of chicken on the right. I had just finished up when I took the pic - the broth (the last thing I canned) was literally still bubbling a little inside the jar where it hadn't quite stopped 'boiling' yet.

    Looking at it from a different perspective, I say bring on the roving gang bangers and escaped convicts.  After all, I'll need to restock my meat supplies somehow.   Seriously, though, with my mom as a neighbor on one side and my sister, her husband and kids on the other I don't worry too much about being caught 'alone' in an emergency.

  Or maybe pick up a pair of these from Walmart for about 18 bucks (for the pair) - if they would work for the intended application:   http://www.walmart.com/ip/Transom-Tie-Down-Strap-2-Width-Quick-Release-Buckle-4-Ft.-Length/11071278   Or, depending on how the vehicle is set up, maybe a pair of these for about twenty bucks:   http://www.walmart.com/ip/COD-Paddlesports-LLC-15-Feet-Tie-Down-Straps/23895139   I've bought a couple of these, before.  In fact, one recently got drafted to be part of a jury-rigged 'sling' for a single shot 20 gauge that doesn't have swivel mounts (and I didn't want to add any.)  Depending on setup, they might serve the purpose just as well, too.   http://www.walmart.com/ip/Outdoor-Products-Lashing-Strap-6/17017885

I only have one bolt action shotgun. It is a Sears model that I bought used for less than $100 about three years ago so definitely not a 'high end' shotgun. Mine is a 20 gauge and has the (factory?) adjustable choke on it. I have read mixed opinions on adjustable chokes but I think that this one actually works, at least to a degree. I don't use mine a lot but when I have I enjoyed shooting it. It is surprisingly light weight for a 'repeater' yet the recoil is pretty mild, to me. With mine, I do have to be careful to operate the bolt 'smoothly' but it is possible to do it both quickly and smoothly. With practice, I think it is just as quick to operate as a pump. That said, it does only hold three shells - and that is with one in the chamber. Here is my bolt shotgun pictured with a Stevens 94C 20 gauge single shot. I bought them both at the same time (which is why they are pictured together.) These are the first and only 20 gauge shotguns I have ever owned. Here is a close-up of the adjustable choke:

  Nah, for the antis and the political types that is thinking too small when it comes to trampling on liberty.   If I were on the 'evil' side of things, I wouldn't ban powder - just regulate and tax the heck out of it.  Also might consider requiring a special 'license' to purchase smokeless powder - and (such as is the case with CCR licenses if I understand things correctly) make it a condition of getting such a license that the holder will allow authorities to 'inspect' their 'storage facilities' (i.e. search their house) immediately on demand at any time, no warrant needed.   I think that Obama et. al. know full well that people who handload are not likely to be criminals, etc.  However, handloading is one indication that the person is a serious gun owner and, by extension, serious about Second Amendment rights (not that non-handloaders aren't, just that doing so is one, possible indicator.)  There wouldn't be any, real 'win' to banning powder but getting law abiding Second Amendment advocates to voluntarily sign away their protections against unreasonable search and seizure (giving government authorities a 'license to harass') would be a 'win' for them.

I don't know if it is just a 'bad batch' of ammo.  After the last ammo shortage, I determined to build a little on hand supply of 9mm.  Because it was easy and inexpensive to get, I did so by buying a box or two at a time from Walmart which generally meant buying the Federal stuff (50 round boxes.)  I have two P95s and the only time either of them has ever jammed was when I was shooting some of that Federal ammo from one of them.  Now, granted the gun was a little dirty but I have ran them dirty, before without issue.  I cleaned and lubed it well and tried again with a few, different brands/types and still had a few jamming problems - but only with the Federal ammo, not with any other ammo.  I truly believe that the Federal ammo was underpowered.  Being that it is highly unlikely (probably nearly impossible) that the ammo you were shooting and the ammo I have were from the same batch, I'm thinking that maybe Federal ball (practice) ammo is just generally too weak to cycle the P95.   In fact, I am glad you posted this because I was having some lingering doubts that it might be a problem with the pistol.  Being that your results are similar to mine, I am now even more convinced that it was the ammo and that this, particular type of Federal ammo is not a good choice for the P95, in general. 

NAA, no doubt. Sure there is a little difference in the shape/style but there have been 2 shot 'Derringer' style guns for years but the minis still sell hand over fist. One reason I prefer the .22 WMR mini over a centerfire in the niche for which I use the NAA is the lessened recoil of the mini while still maintaining a small package. I have a Kel Tec P3AT that works well for a deep concealed primary, sometimes, but I do not like it as a BUG. If I carry a BUG it is carried to be easily accessible to my off hand. To me, that means if I am using the BUG then my strong hand is either occupied or incapacitated. I can fire the P3AT one handed with my weak hand but it jumps around a bit and I always have to adjust my grip quite a bit after each shot. I doubt my 642 (my go-to for a primary pocket gun) would be any better. With the mini, however - especially with the oversized rubber grips I put on it - such concerns are kept to a minimum. I will say that ammo selection is imperative with these little dudes. Mine is the 1 5/8 inch model (I have only the Magnum cylinder) and I have very informally (water jug) 'tested' several different ammo brands/types from it. I was honestly a bit disappointed in the Hornady Critical Defense version. The Speer Gold Dot version, while not as accurate from a few yards out as some others, performed wonderfully, appeared to 'dump' more energy, expanded perfectly all while giving decent penetration. Strangely, the ugly, cheap WInchester Dynapoint load (which is a bit 'downloaded' compared to other WMR loads to more closely mimic the old WRF load) gave the best penetration of anything I tested. Some pics so it really happened: This was the first jug in the line for the Gold Dot test. I know it doesn't really compare to human flesh but I was impressed by how much it split the jug open - hence my comment about how it appears to 'dump' a good bit of energy. Compare that to the Critical Defense which 'expanded' poorly (if you even consider that to really be expansion) and didn't penetrate any better than, if as well as, the Gold Dot: The Critical Defense did well out of the 6 inch barrel of my Heritage Rough Rider. It expanded as expected and penetrated as well as (maybe slightly better than) the Gold Dot from that platform. I just believe, from my informal results, that the Gold Dot is more optimized for snubbie/truly short barrels. Oh, and the Dynapoint: Penetrated five one-gallon jugs filled with water and made a hole in the sixth. None too shabby for any handgun, especially a tiny rimfire, IMO. Of course, there was no, real expansion - maybe just a little deforming of the bullet. I have to wonder if being a slightly heavier bullet (45 grains) along with not expanding helped penetration. I will say that there didn't appear to have been any 'tumbling' as the Dynapoint seemed to have taken an almost laser-straight path through the jugs. I was a lot more accurate with the Dynapoint from seven yards out firing weak hand only than with the Gold Dot, though (the Gold Dot was responsible for the target in the top pic): Thinking that a heavier bullet might be better, I had high hopes for the Federal Game-Shok (50 grain) round. I guess it is just too heavy (or maybe long, etc.) for such a short barrel, though, because it gave such a 'rainbow' trajectory that it came out near the bottom of the first jug and barely clipped the bottom edge of the second. The accuracy issue caused me to go back and forth on carrying the Gold Dot in the NAA but I finally came to the conclusion that even seven yards is probably a lot further than I would be using the mini 'for real'. After some deliberation, I currently have the mini loaded up with Gold Dot. Now, for the bonus round. I have also tested WMR shotshells from the mini using a rolled up piece of newspaper to simulate a no-legged threat in order to find out just how much perforating potential there is. The pics show the results of a single shot from about five feet away with the newspaper lying on the ground: In case it isn't obvious, yes, I am a fan of the NAA (within certain usage parameters.) In fact, I am actually a fan of the .22 WMR, in general.

  We all have our lines in the sand.  Mine is at the door to my home.  I am not running away from a threat of lethal violence inside my own home.  Instead, I will take whatever action necessary to stop the threat.  If the sight of me with a shotgun does that without me having to fire the shotgun then that is great.  If not then I will take further action.  If I 'give ground' within my home it will only be to reach a better position from which to defend myself and my home.  I will not choose to retreat inside my home.  The law does not require it, morality does not require it and I will not do it.

Okay, now that is funny.

  If Adam and Eve were the 'only' people God ever created and all people on Earth are their descendents then when Cain was banished and went to live in Nod, where did all the other people come from?   Genesis 4:17 says, "And Cain knew his wife, and she conceived and bore Enoch."   So, who was Cain's wife?  Did she leave with him when he was banished?  If so, as a daughter of Adam and Eve, then she would have also been one of his sisters.   Genesis 4:18 and 4:19 go on to say,   "To Enoch was born Irad; and Irad begot Mehujael, and Mehujael begot Methushael, and Methushael begot Lamech.   Then Lamech took for himself two wives: the name of one was Adah, and the second was Zillah."   Wow.  There sure was a whole lot of knowing and begotting going on for these folks to all have been the children of Adam and Eve as they would have been brothers and sisters if that were the case.  Further, there sure seemed to be plenty of women to go around among all these guys for Cain to have been banished alone into the wilderness - even if he brought a wife with him.   So, who were all those people that Cain met, lived with and with whom his family interbred?  They obviously already had language and a society and that society obviously had plenty of people - enough, at least, to populate a city (by the fact that Cain founded a city and named it after his son.)  Those people are never accounted for in the Christian creation myth.  Further, their existence pretty much negates the belief that Adam and Eve were the first humans or, at the time, the only humans.

Maybe those grips are just an attempt to try and drum up support for concealed carry in San Francisco.

  Same here.  When I let my dog out, I even lock the door afterwards even though I know I'll be coming back in just a few minutes to let her back in.   Which brings up another point.  My dog isn't a big dog but she also isn't 'small' - probably about forty to fifty pounds of mostly muscle, I guess you would say 'medium' - but being part hound her bark is loud even for her size.  In fact, she has two barks - a puppyish 'throw the ball, again' bark and a serious bark that says, "I'm gonna eat your soul!"  The latter gets used on varmints as well as strange people that she thinks are getting too close to our yard/home.  She lives inside with me and that is the bark she would be using if someone were attempting a home invasion.  Further, I would consider her barking to be plenty of 'verbal (or at least auditory) warning'.  If they are willing to come through a locked door despite her barking then I truly doubt that me crying out, "Go away, you bad ol' man." is going to make any difference.  If her barking deters them and I don't have to shoot, great.  If not, I'm not giving them an opportunity to shoot me.

A few months back I saw some 16 gauge shells for sale at the Walmart in Clinton (I am not in that location very often so I don't know if they regularly stock it or if they just happened to have some that day.)  They were stacked above the reloading/ammo cabinet that is a little off to the side of the counter.  I do not recall having seen 16 gauge at any, other Walmart.

I have actually thought of some even more 'scary' ideas based on this technology but I'm saving them for when I finally get off my (figurative) butt and do some more fiction writing.

  Maybe but do you think the grip angle would change every time a pretty girl walked by?  Talk about printing!

  Or, from another point of view, maybe genetics simply isn't as 'exact' a science as we have been lead to believe.

Man, they all look like great pups but I have a feeling that the little black one in the second picture down is going to have the biggest personality.  Just look at the intelligence and mischief that are already evident in its eye.   That is the one I'd want if I could take one.  I can't, however, as I already have a dog and one is the limit, for me.  Besides, she'd probably kick me and the new pup both out.

  Well, some level of interbreeding is pretty much a given.  What I should have said was the debate over whether or not there was significant interbreeding to say that Neanderthals contributed significantly to modern human populations.  Some folks still say, "No," while others have found both genetic and morphological evidence (by using evolved, physical traits that are 'neutral' - i.e. not of a type that can be explained by evolutionary parallelisms - particularly between modern human populations in Indonesia, etc. and 'Neanderthal' type populations such as Java man as well as European populations and European Neanderthals which support the claim that Neanderthals did contribute significant amounts of genetic material to modern, human populations - especially in Europe.

Okay, the thread title is a little tongue in cheek but not entirely.  It seems that some scientists are claiming to have found a way for one person to control another person's body by linking the two individual's brains via a computer.  They are calling it a 'mind meld'.  I call it 'seeds of the zombie apocalypse'.   http://now.msn.com/human-mind-control-could-be-soon-a-reality?ocid=ansnowex   Sure, it might seem a little far fetched, now but think of the potential, future applications - both good and bad.   Need to send people in to a dangerous environment (say an accident site with high radiation levels) where a robot may not have the manual dexterity to take care of the task?  Well, take corpses, install things like pacemakers and other 'life support' type equipment to keep their circulatory system functioning, lungs working and so on (keeping their bodies technically 'alive' even though the person is dead) wire their brain for wireless Internet access, strap a camera to their head and allow a living expert to control the body remotely so that only the remotely-controlled corpse is actually exposed to danger.   Of course, the military potential of such a capability would be obvious - as well as the possiblity that an increasingly militarized police force could make use of it.   Or maybe even go the full-on cyborg route.  Use the corpses of recently deceased donors, integrate the aforementioned 'life support' equipment along with the equipment needed to interface with the brain into an armored, cybernetic 'suit' and you'll have an unfeeling, uncaring, unthinking zombie 'Terminator' (or Robocop) that can be remotely controlled by anyone with the right equipment.  Heck, someone with the right training might be able to control two or three at the same time.   Now think if terrorists or similarly unbalanced people got ahold of that technology.   Like I said, a bit far fetched but it is an interesting mental/imaginative exercise to think about the potential for advances in such technology in the future.

  To me, standing one's ground and defending one's life from someone who breaks into one's home rather than retreating is not "acting like LE or Military".  It is acting like a human being who has the right, both legally (at least in TN) and, I believe, morally to do so.    Going 'looking' for criminals is acting like LE.  Chasing after someone who is fleeing after attempting to break into your home is acting like LE.  Standing your ground rather than running away when your home is being invaded and, by extension, your life is being threatened is not behaving like LE.

  Yum.  Just...yum.

  And that a store that will sell at more reasonable prices is able to pick up their inventory dirt cheap.

  Actually, you don't even have to go that far back.  The earliest, known modern humans originated in North Africa, likely sometime around 200k years ago, long after the break up of Pangaea.  Whether or not they replaced or interbred with archaic humans (such as Neanderthals) is still a matter of debate (I come down on the side of 'interbred with') but the North African origin of modern humans is pretty well accepted.  Remember, though, that not everyone from Africa is Negroid.  North Africans ('Arabs') are Caucasoid.  In other words, the earliest known modern humans were Caucasians.   Whenever I hear/read about so-called 'African'-Americans, I think not only of the fact that not all Africans are Negroid but also about Alex Haley's account of going to the African village that he believed to be the home of his ancestors.  One thing that struck him was how light-skinned he was in comparison to the dark-skinned 'natives'.   Oh, and in Stastical Anthropology (yeah, it is just about as boring as it sounds with the exception of a few, interesting high points) someone came up with an equation to figure just how 'related' the entire human population of the earth is.  One thing they took into account is that for every, living person there must be two (biological) parents, four (biological) grandparents, eight (biological) great grandparents and so on.  Eventually, you have too many people to account for there being very many 'separate' lineages in the human population.  Keeping in mind that I am pretty terrible at mathematics so cannot explain in more detail, the final outcome of the equation was that every, single human being currently on the planet is related to every, other human being currently on the planet at the level of at least fiftieth cousin.  That means everyone living in East Tennessee, everyone living in Tokyo and everyone living in the Sudan.  People whose families have lived in the same region for generations or who trace their origins to the same areas are likely much more closely related.

  I would not be too worried about a DA, etc. seeing the above statement because I believe that it explains why I would be in fear of death or serious, bodily harm.  The link I posted would, hopefully, provide real world evidence of an actual incident (one of many, lately) to support why I believe, as I do, that home invaders enter a home having accepted that they will likely have to injure/kill the residents to get what they want and demonstrate why my fear is a 'reasonable' one.   Of course, that is just me and my way of thinking.  I am neither a lawyer nor a self defense expert - just a guy who doesn't want to be killed by a home invader.