Onward, ever onward

I had more energy than expected this morning.

usual PT, pull ups (5 sets of 10..easier than expected)
bench press: so-so: 10 x 135, 5 x 185, 6 x 175, decline: 10 x 160, incline: 10 x 135
goblet squats: 10 x 45, 10 x 45, 10 x 50, 10 x 60 (latter two: “to the bench”)
military: 10 x 50 standing, 15 x 50 seated, supported, 10 x 45
rows (single arm) 10 x 50, 10 x 50, 10 x 60
abs: twist crunch (50, 24), yoga leg lifts (2 sets of 10), moving bridge (rest), boat (30 seconds), headstand
plank: 2:15 (not that bad), side planks
AMT: 2 miles (easy..23:xx)

That’s enough for today.

Heel: not 100 percent but I am starting to forget about it more and more.

March 5, 2018 Posted by | weight training | , | Leave a comment

Teenagers, assault style weapons and survivalist literature

All of this debate about assault weapons (such as the AR-15) reminded me of this survivalist book that I once read. Oh, it was years ago; I may have paid a dollar for it or so.
The book was about surviving a nuclear attack by the then Soviet union.

The book included a chapter of how to arm yourself and protect your supplies from others who are trying to rob you of them. In that chapter, the author discussed weapons.
Since I’ve probably thrown away that book a long time ago, I can’t quote it directly. But I remember the argument.

He was explaining why you wanted to get a civilian edition of a military rifle. He explained that hunting weapons were not designed to handle higher capacity magazines nor designed to be fire a lot of bullets quickly without jamming. A hunting weapon can almost be thought of as a piece of sporting equipment and trying to defend your home from attackers with a hunting rifle would be akin to committing a “noisy suicide”.

So, you really needed a military style rifle; one that could fire many bullets quickly, not jam, and cause death or gruesome wounds. And make no mistake; an AR-15 is basically a military rifle without the “automatic” capacity.

It IS a fundamentally different type of rifle than other rifles, no matter how many ignorant memes the gun nutters put out.

Now, of course, the vast majority of gun deaths are not from mass shootings nor are they from assault rifles. If past experience is a guide, an assault weapons ban would not reduce crime nor make much of a dent in overall gun deaths. But there is evidence that mass shootings go down and that IS a benefit.

But what about other guns? Yes, handguns kill more people and yes, hunting rifles and shotguns can be used to kill. But these other guns have other mainstream uses (sports, hunting, self defense) and these military style weapons do not.

So what about “those teenagers”? Here, the tone of the discussion disgusts me. Yes, the teens who were actually in the schools during the mass shootings *should* be listened to. But, on the other hand, they are not policy experts and policy should be crafted in consultation with experts who use data, science, etc.

And about those who talk about “determined teenagers”: undoubtedly SOME of them are (e. g. those directly affected). But it is my educated guess that the vast majority are not and I question their staying power when the issue starts to fade and the work becomes mundane and tedious. Color me skeptical.

March 5, 2018 Posted by | politics/social, social/political | , | Leave a comment