The M1911 .45 caliber was (and remains) one of the finest handguns ever designed, produced, and carried. The problem for most folks firing a 1911 isn’t the firearm or the .45 caliber round - it's training.
Wednesday, December 29, 2021
My Thoughts on the .45 caliber Model 1911 Handgun
Tuesday, November 16, 2021
Words Matter
Words such as “slow” and “massive” are relative. The difference in muzzle velocity between a 9mm, .40, and .45 is a few hundred FPS. While a .45 round can be traveling as “slowly” as 850 FPS, it’s still fast enough to arrive at a target within handgun range far more quickly than any living target can move to avoid impact.
As far as impact energy being “massive” — the assertion suffers from three problems:
1) No handgun round imparts “massive” energy. Even the stupid calibers (e.g. .50) barely exert enough force to move a grown adult (the full force of any bullet is transmitted to the shooter as recoil. A gun you can hold and fire in one hand). While it might hurt your hands, it’s not as “massive” a force as being struck by a 10 lb sledge swung by gorilla.
2) “Impact energy” isn’t what slows or stops a person or animal. Rather, it’s the amount of damage imparted to an essential component of movement, thought, and/or will. Movement can be degraded by damage to bone, nerves, or muscle. Thought can be degraded by damage to the central nervous system. The Will can be degraded as the recipient of the bullet reconsiders the action that resulted in a bullet impact.
3) Handgun bullets are small — they penetrate and pass through muscle and/or organs, and are sometimes stopped by or shatter bones. The “impact” is a small part of the equation of damage and incapacitation. If we could design a handgun that fired the head of a ten-pound sledgehammer at Gorilla-capable velocity, we would be carrying those. But the size of the magazine would make the handgun unwieldy and inconvenient. So we carry little guns with little projectiles because they have proven reasonably effective at slowing and sometimes stopping threats. Line up all the popular handgun rounds according to size and you will see there’s not much difference.
Monday, July 26, 2021
A (very late) Review of Master and Commander: The Far Side of the World
Devoted readers of the Aubrey-Maturin series by Patrick O'Brien (“The canon” written by “POB” for those in the club) have read (and listened to Patrick Tull read) the entire 21-book series several times. Given Hollywood’s record of Disneyfying beloved novels, one can be excused for being less than enthusiastic about a film.
Thus, like every other POB aficionado, I approached Master and Commander: The Far Side of the World with trepidation. What film could convey even a hint of the rich depths of the novels? How many "screen adaptations" have fallen short by trivializing the characters, or oversimplifying the relationships, situations, and resolutions?
First, it’s important to understand that while the setting of the canon is the Royal Navy in the Napoleonic era, the human condition is the true subject. O'Brien charts Aubrey and Maturin's lives through the vagaries of fortune, friendships, difficult families, poverty and wealth, honor and shame, success and failure. The relationship between Captain Jack Aubrey and Doctor Stephen Maturin remains the core of the work and is what makes the books so compelling.
Second, novels are meant to be read, and the reader must create in his or her mind the circumstances, the tone of voice, the time of day, and all the other factors that come to mind as we read. Very often the author will use vague yet evocative language. Maturin’s love interest Diana is often described as “dashing” – which may evoke a very particular physical presence in one reader and not another. And so, each reader brings a host of memories that are either confirmed in film or –- more likely – contradicted. This is no way to make friends.
The first time I watched I was happily surprised by the way actors Russel Crowe and Paul Bettany portrayed Jack and Stephen. While Bettany does not look Spanish and doesn’t sound Irish, is not “slight” or have "reptilian eyes,” his mannerisms and deep well of inner life and competence are apparent. Other roles are also somewhat miscast, such as Bonden (who O'Brien described a strapping bare-knuckle prizefighter), yet others seem spot-on (Killick, Aubrey’s perpetually put-out foremast jack steward). But Crowe is absolutely convincing as Lucky Jack and commands the screen as Jack commanded a quarterdeck.
The storyline is a rather simple chase using vignettes culled from plots across several books. (Master and Commander was the first book of the series, early in Jack’s career when he was not yet a Captain and did not yet have Surprise). Nevertheless, the care and dedication to the accuracy of the period were apparent from the opening montage. Every scene is perfectly framed. There is no sequence that seems out of place, awkward, or gratuitous. Even the hard, grizzled, superstitious seamen display moments of tenderness, solicitude, and grace.
On each successive viewing, I do less comparing and more appreciating. Peter Weir’s film artfully conveys the spirit of the books while avoiding any single book. The film ignores Jack and Stephen’s life ashore, espionage, romance and dalliances, rambunctious family, scheming admirals, political intrigue, churlish mother-in-law, dashing Diana, the horrible old Leopard, and the murderous Dutch 74 Waakzaamheid. We readers know the tapestry of situations and relationships, failures and triumphs behind the characters portrayed on film, and nothing the actors do contradicts our consciousness of these old friends. Nothing they do or say is anomalous to the people we have come to know.
And that may be the film’s greatest achievement. For while the film is masterfully shot with convincing action scenes and perfect framing; directed so that the actor’s glance speaks volumes; edited so that every ambient sound supports the narrative; scored masterfully using both period and modern music to lovingly capture the mood. The film’s greatest accomplishment is what it does not do: it never panders, and it never breaks the trust of the loyal fan of the best historical novels yet written.
Tuesday, April 27, 2021
"What should I do...?"
"What should I do if I catch an intruder in my house and am holding him at gunpoint?"
This is a question every gun owner should think about and plan ahead of time. Because if you don't, you will be so amped on adrenaline you will likely make a mistake.
If you are alone you will have your hands full, but the best advice is to have the perpetrator face away from you (on his face hands behind his back) while you make the 911 call on speakerphone. Tell the operator your location, what is happening, and what you’re wearing (“I’m a male, 45, 6′, average build, wearing a blue bathrobe. I have a shotgun pointed at the intruder’s head — he’s laying on the floor in front of me.”) This will help responding officers.
Unfortunately, 911 operators are trained to extract as much information from you as possible during the call. However, your first priority is keeping the intruder covered! DO NOT be distracted by this call!
Once you provide the basic information, put down the phone (still on speaker), and remind the perp that you have a shotgun pointed directly at the back of his head. Remind him that any moves will be taken as aggression and that you fear for your life. Tell him you will shoot him if he moves (It’s fine to say this several times).
Do not debate, argue, negotiate, talk with the intruder. You aren’t a psychologist, priest, lawyer, or buddy. Ignore the crying, pleas of innocence, promises to never be bad again — the rest of the schtick. Too late.
Think like a soldier: you are holding a prisoner until relieved.
The responding officers will know that you are holding the perp at gunpoint. Once you see flashing lights stay on task. Wait until you are instructed by the responding officers before setting the shotgun on safe and relinquishing control (keep in mind they may approach from behind or through a window — don’t turn to face them — keep your focus where it needs to be — on the perpetrator.)
Once you are relieved, do NOT engage with lengthy descriptions with the responding officers. Immediately point out any evidence (such as broken glass where the perp broke in, a dropped tire iron or knife, whatever) and witnesses. Then say “I plan to be as helpful as possible but any further conversations will be in the presence of my attorney.”
Now it’s time to ignore the “You have nothing to worry about…” talk from the cops. You have no idea who the perp is or who his attorney might be, so don’t gamble your freedom and finances on the word of a cop who just wants to write up a report and end his shift. Any further discussion needs to be met with a firm but polite, “I’m happy to help in any way, but I will not talk about this except in the presence of my attorney.”
Is this a lot to think about and remember? Yes, yes it is. This is why you need to think very carefully about what you will do if you ever find yourself in this situation. If you don’t, it’s likely you’ll make a mistake that can cost you your freedom, your fortune, or your life.
Friday, February 5, 2021
History Lessons
This should be expected from dimwitted, reactionary, and context-free minds.
In other words – it’s work.
Tuesday, November 24, 2020
The Tragedy of the Silent Church
The church* is under assault, yet remains silent. The prevailing mode seems to be "stay out of sight" and hope for the best.
The church in America (and throughout the Western world) is facing direct challenges to its most basic ministries. While health risks are widely recognized, less visible -- and in the long term, more deadly risks -- are threats to the teaching and disciple-making efforts of the church.
The lack of exposure to regular teaching, the increased tolerance for missing church activities, the move to parachurch online sources, the lack of continuity, and breaking bonds that encourage disciple-making are threats that show no sign of abating anytime soon.
The longer shutdown orders last the more likely fissures will arise between those that differ on the mitigations, the mandates, and the efficacy of government dictates (especially when so many outspoken politicians have been caught contradicting their official decrees).
Some may choose to break fellowship to attend other churches that more closely aligned with their understanding of the severity of the threat posed by the virus. While this may seem a less than compelling reason to leave, it must be considered, because the underlying assumptions are not trivial: Does the church answer to the state when the state's directives contradict the clear teaching of scripture? Do we believe God is still in control during a pandemic? Do we place fellowship and ministry high enough to risk exposure to this disease? Are those who cannot wear a mask de facto less loving, concerned, or "spiritual?" What of the tens of thousands of elderly and ill who have been isolated for months? What about the grieving families who are forbidden from seeing loved ones left to die alone? Can weddings and funerals and special events such as Easter, Christmas, and Thanksgiving be postponed or even canceled indefinitely?
![]() |
Alone: No Visitors, No Advocates |
Despite these valid concerns, many Christians have appealed to Romans 13:1-2 to buttress the argument that Christians must abide by all government decrees:
13:1 Let everyone be subject to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God. 2 Consequently, whoever rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves.
The current lockdowns, constraints, limits, and marginalization of anyone who does not subscribe fully to unproven mitigation strategies raises anew the paradox of the relationship of church and individual believers to the state.
![]() |
Re-Open Protests |
The church has wrestled with this relationship since Pentecost. Peter and John were arrested because the Jewish authorities were “greatly disturbed because they were teaching the people and proclaiming in Jesus the resurrection from the dead.”
This was not mere squabble over religion — this was a significant social, economic, and political challenge to the status quo. This “new teaching” threatened the temple economy and the uneasy tolerance of Rome, challenged the established social order, pit the educated against the uneducated, suborned tradition, and exposed the injustice of a system under which Jesus had been tried and convicted:
Acts 4: 18 And when they had summoned them, they commanded them not to speak or teach at all in the name of Jesus. 19 But Peter and John answered and said to them, “Whether it is right in the sight of God to give heed to you rather than to God, you be the judge; 20 for we cannot stop speaking about what we have seen and heard.” 21 When they had threatened them further, they let them go (finding no basis on which to punish them) on account of the people, because they were all glorifying God for what had happened;
In many regions of the world today Christianity is an
oppressed minority. In those areas, the relationship is clearly delineated,
making the choice simple: survive. In most of the West, churches are still open,
and Christians gather and practice the norms, traditions, and rites of the
faith.
![]() |
Mass Arrest of Christians in China |
Augustine described this relationship in his City of God, where he described differing domains of interest. Sometimes those domains overlap: an example would be the state’s interest in buildings that meet certain standards of access and safety. In other areas the domains are clearly separate: the pastor preaches the truth of the Word no matter the “officially acceptable guidance” from the state.
Thus, it is clear that There will be tension between the commands of the state and the mission of the church.
Further, various levels of government have issued contradictory mandates. Recently several counties determined to open ahead of the state governor’s timetables. The Federal government defers on some topics to the states but contradicts state guidance on others. A clear example of inconsistency is the mandatory mask rules imposed by many states. The CDC’s guidance reads: “CDC recommends wearing cloth face coverings in public settings where other social distancing measures are difficult to maintain...” Yet the Pennsylvania Department of Health has decreed masks are required.[1]
![]() |
"Wear a Mask! (Except when you don't need to)" |
What is the message if we disregard a law? (We’ll concede for sake of argument that the orders have been deemed “lawful” by the state). Proponents of a “quiet witness” approach will argue that it is our duty to obey the government (Titus 3:1), that governments are ordained by God (Romans 13:1) and upholds the good of all (1 Pet. 2:14), and that Christians should respect and honor those in authority (Romans 13:4). Further, we are commanded “...to aspire to live quietly, and to mind your own affairs, and to work with your hands, as we instructed you...” (1 Thessalonians 4:11).
![]() |
Peter before the Sanhedrin |
These verses are aspirational, but not necessarily normative. Jesus, Peter, Paul, and others contradicted edicts when the state overstepped its bounds.
Contradiction to illegal orders has been an essential component
of Christian witness. In fact, this principle has carried through to most western legal systems, reinforced by Principal 4 of the Nuremberg Trials:
"The fact that a person acted pursuant to order of his Government or of a superior does not relieve him from responsibility under international law, provided a moral choice was in fact possible to him."
The appeal that "I was simply following orders" is rejected. Any agent of the state who carries out illegal orders is guilty of a crime.
Thus the principle of conscience is invoked as an axiom of law: recall Hus before the Council of Constance, Luther before the Diet of Worms, Wilberforce and the Slave trade, Marin Luther King against separate but equal, and the March for Life protests against abortion.
In each case Christian-molded conscience rejected authority and appealed to a higher law.
Confrontation has been a critical element of the salt and light aspect of Christian testimony since the beginning.
![]() |
Martin Luther at the Diet of Worms, April 17, 1521: "I can not and will not recant anything, since it is unsafe and dangerous to do anything against the conscience." |
Christians have been at the forefront of many changes to society, culture, and laws. These changes include the establishment of hospitals, orphanages, and universities; the promotion of art, literature, and music academies; outlawing infanticide, pedophilia, child abandonment, and abortion; instituting humane prison reforms; granting property rights and suffrage to women; banning polygamy; advancing universal education; abolishing slavery, and the insistence that every person is equal before the law and before God. In every case, these efforts were opposed by some elements of the established order.
![]() |
William Wilberforce, British Prime Minister, Abolished Slavery |
The promotion of justice, the sanctity of life, the individual as an image of God, the defense of the oppressed all reflect the Christian understanding of the Gospel. The history of the relationship between church and state in the west ranges from tolerance to symbiosis to adversarial.
It is certainly within the realm of Christian testimony to
challenge infringements on religious freedom.[2] This confrontation need
not be acrimonious, but it must be unambiguous. As citizens of the United
States we can appeal to the law in the same way Paul was able to appeal to Caesar
as a citizen of Rome. There is no guarantee the appeal will be successful, but
it must always be an option lest it becomes meaningless.
*"Church" here being defined as the church universal of all those who confess that Jesus Christ is God in the flesh.
[1] “Cloth face coverings
fashioned from household items or made at home from common materials at low
cost can be used as an additional, voluntary public health measure.” https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/prevent-getting-sick/cloth-face-cover.html
[2] The US Constitution is
unequivocal: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of
religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of
speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and
to petition the government for a redress of grievances.” The Pennsylvania
Constitution is equally clear in Section 3: “All men have a natural and indefeasible
right to worship Almighty God according to the dictates of their own
consciences; no man can of right be compelled to attend, erect or support any
place of worship, or to maintain any ministry against his consent; no human
authority can, in any case whatever, control or interfere with the rights of
conscience, and no preference shall ever be given by law to any religious
establishments or modes of worship.”
Saturday, May 23, 2020
COVID-19: The Church Between Wonks and a Hard Place
NOTE: On Friday, May 22, The Centers for Disease Control issued Interim Guidance for Communities of Faith (link: https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/php/faith-based.html)
Churches should read the entire document, including these lines: “CDC offers these suggestions for faith communities to consider and accept, reject, or modify, consistent with their own faith traditions, in the course of preparing to reconvene for in-person gatherings while still working to prevent the spread of COVID-19. This guidance is not intended to infringe on rights protected by the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution or any other federal law, including the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993 (RFRA).”
Nothing in this essay contradicts any of the guidelines issued. In fact, the CDC’s guidance confirms my reasonable conclusions and recommendations.
What’s at Risk?
Risk Assessment Process
Mission and Goals
Activities Support the Mission
Threats
COVID-19 Risk Assessment
Probability
Threats and Harm
Ministries
Vulnerabilities
Variables
Assets
Capabilities and Constraints
Mitigation Strategies
Other Threats: Online Communications
- · The chairman of the board of the Jelly Belly company donated $5,000 to an organization that provided therapy to children struggling with sexual identity. For this he was widely condemned and Jelly Belly subject to boycotts.
- · The founder of clothing chain Urban Outfitters donated $13,150 to former Senator Rick Santorum’s presidential campaign. For this he was widely condemned and Urban Outfitters subject to boycotts.
- · The Journal News published the names and addresses of everyone with a gun permit in two New York counties. Several other web sites and news publishers followed suit.
- · A student’s parent complained of finding pictures of a Georgia public school teacher drinking wine on her personal Facebook page. School administration said the images “promoted alcohol use.” The teacher was forced to resign.
- · In May, 2020, the San Antonio city council unanimously passed a resolution that makes terms such as “Chinese virus,” “Kung Flu,” or “Wuhan virus” a hate crime. Anyone writing using these terms on a Facebook, Twitter, or Instagram post is subject to prosecution under Federal Hate Crime laws.
- · A paper published in the International Journal of Work Innovation warned: "Job seekers should be aware that their future employers are closely observing their Facebook profiles in search of a window into their personality...Though this practice raises many ethical issues, it is an emerging phenomenon that is not slowing."
Summary
Challenge: Relationship to Government
Recommendations
COVID-19 risk mitigations:
Teaching and disciple-making and Fellowship risk mitigations
Church witness risk mitigations
The Assertion that Firearms are designed to kill
A common "talking point" circulating in the "gun control" debate is: "Firearms are designed to kill." I have s...
![](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEggMz2gYoXVH2W5EjW4gDCb4U-ZOJJqZU2REBU16IeyhCHe6htSxCd2AxD-XAk5RdQpxpUv7neAXT8zl4H8iacbe0Dx1JgZzLHjAhcKhH8BgbmAVj_p-gduI1_XYAy0zikTZkOd-k3_nfTdUHkvNeOnKYgA-ysaUH2hKkaSYPEKOet-FaAs2hRfs9tz_Q/s1600/M1IP%20Abrams.jpg)
-
RE: HR 550, which authorized "IMMUNIZATION INFORMATION SYSTEM DATA MODERNIZATION AND EXPANSION." Thank you for your reply via emai...
-
A common "talking point" circulating in the "gun control" debate is: "Firearms are designed to kill." I have s...
-
I've been carrying a Walther PPS for deep concealment the past two years, alternating with a S&W M&P Compact. Both are fine s...