Episode-1889- Listener Feedback for 10-24-16 — 38 Comments

  1. “What do I think about all the saber rattling over Syria with Russia”

    Let me guess …

    Jack, “just another way for TPTB to take more of our rights, blah, blah blah.”

    Ther eIs just saved 20 mins of my life.

  2. The reason they have training TQ’s is becuase you cannot inspect the TQ’s (Specifically the CAT’s where there is a sleeve around the tightening strap) and if you are using it for training you might tear the fabric after repeated uses and if you cant inspect the inner liner then it could fail when you need it most. Which is what happened to the Marines when they first started issuing TQ’s, they trained with the ones they carried and then when they deployed and needed them the TQ’s were failing. If you get a TQ you can inspect such as the new TCCC standard TQ you can use it for training and then inspect it and carry it for day to day use.

    • I agree with this. I was a corpsman and the TQs I had for training were far away from the “real” ones

        • The only place I’ve really seem training TQs for sale are for training companies or departments. Not saying you can’t find them, I’m saying the manufacturer. Basically not for the individual who’ll use it once or twice, but it’s gonna be used a hundred times in a year at training courses. That’s where you’ll see windlasses or catches snap off from extreme use.

        • Actually I get it for military use thinking further now.

          Soldiers and Marines lose shit, when they do they pick up unsecured shit to replace their lost shit with. Better to have a “procured item” when inspected than to have no item when inspected. By making the trainers blue you close that loop hole.

          Bob loses his TQ, he is about to be in an inspection so he grabs one from the training area (just to borrow it of course) he is going to buy a new one to replace his lost one on pay day. Pay day comes, Bob gets drunk and says next pay day, Bob gets deployed. Nuff said, I get it now for the military.

  3. You didn’t point out the instances where rank order voting would make a difference. For example:

    1. Johnson
    2. Trump
    3. Stein
    4. Clinton

    Here people could vote their conscience without risking the spoiler effect. But really, this is a bad example since all these candidates are flawed for one reason or another.

    Look at the ’92 election, Perot was seen as a spoiler by a lot of people. Rank order would have assured that the president elected was actually the choice of the majority of voters.

    Nader was almost certainly the spoiler in the 2000 election. With rank order Gore would have won Florida and perhaps we don’t invade Iraq.

    Think of what would have happened in the republican primary if rank order voting was available. 55% of voters in the primary wanted someone other than Trump. Rank order would have almost certainly elected a candidate with broader overall appeal and that person would mop the floor against Hillary. Yes, the 2 party system is regrettably here to stay, but a non- first past the post system like rank order would reward candidates within the republican and democratic parties that have broader appeal, hopefully lowering the political divisiveness in our country.

  4. That first bit reminded me of a son who by the time he was in high school, he had certain teachers/classes which he did not respect. He always managed to get a 70 (69% wasn’t passing) in those classes, not doing 1 more thing than he had to. Not sure how he was able to work so hard at getting those exact 70’s. (He was bored and it really annoyed those teachers who know he could be getting all A’s if he wanted)
    I remembering saying but it does effect your high school record. He didn’t care, I didn’t argue, and he still got scholarships and ended up with a masters.

    He also earned his own money to pay his own lunches, bought his own clothes, gas and other expenses throughout high school and helped with his younger siblings.

    • Sounds a lot like me. FWIW making his teachers crazy was likely one of the few things he enjoyed in school. I remember looking at some and just thinking God I am so much smarter than you will ever be, why the hell do I have to listen to you.

      This was not youthful arrogance, I didn’t mean about life and the world, I meant about the subject they were teaching.

      For instance I knew that every English teacher I had was above my knowledge of grammar, I just didn’t give a shit. I was happy to concede they knew something I didn’t but as long as I could communicate that was good enough. If I ever wished to write a book, that is what editors are for.

      But my history teachers, my science teachers, economics, these people were a joke. 15 years of teaching the same shit and they barely knew it cold, move 1% beyond what their lesson plan said, clueless. Hell read a chapter of the text book that wasn’t in the lesson plan and you knew shit they didn’t, their own 10 year old text books!

    • He also changed the title and the first paragraph of some English/history papers and turned it in (don’t remember which). He said that teacher never read what students wrote, just decided what grade a student was and gave them that grade on each and every paper so why should he bother writing something which would never be read. He tested his theory and he was right.

      He created a back door in the school’s computer system so he and friends could play online games from sites which the school thought they had blocked. (computer science was one of the 70% classes) We should count that as real life experience as he makes very good money today hacking into his employer’s website and telling them how to make it more secure, training others in the field for the same company, recruiting new talent.

  5. JACK!!!!

    Please know as a lefty I do not need a lefty for anything other than a bullpup… but if you have the use of a bull-pup its a design flaw to eject into your mouth. Bullpups are good for CQB and if you can’t shoot from both shoulders then they bullpup should not be bought.

    Lefty bolts I have never seen or used, all machine guns/m2/M240/M249s all have no issues with brass getting in your face. The main issue I have lefty VS righty is with a revolver.

    • If you are a lefty shooting a right-handed bolt action the movements are awkward, but you are doing them with your most dextrous hand. If you are right handed and shooting with the left hand and trying to fight the awkwardness of shooting wrong-handed and using an awkward rifle the awkwardness is multiplied, not added together. Believe me on that one.

    • Jack, I just had a chance to listen to your full reply to my shooting question. Thank you for your thoughts. As you mentioned I had pretty much resigned myself to shooting lefty but I am a little concerned about how well I will be able to do it. Your idea of playing dexterity games with my left hand is a great idea that I can do while I watch the computer at work. About half of my day these days is spend monitoring our process, so I can spend time using my hand and getting some dexterity drills in. I had not really considered getting a lefty bolt action, but I am a handloader that enjoys squeezing the best accuracy out of a rifle so this may really be the way to go. I know that I am really lucky as the surgery gives me enough vision so that I have good depth perception and I can read with the right eye, it just takes some effort. If this had happened as little as 15 years ago, I would be blind in this eye, instead of impaired. That is a big difference.

  6. I had the pleasure of visiting Iceland about 3 months ago as the first part of our summer travels. Compared to the average American, the locals we talked to (both native-born and immigrants) generally seemed to possess greater awareness of world issues and capacity for critical thinking, and were generally friendly and considerate (even during the times when we disagreed with each other on the subject at hand). I was there for less than a week so my experience might not be representative of most Icelandic citizens, but at least from what little I saw I expect Iceland might do a better job with direct democracy than most countries.

    As for the tensions with Russia, my view is somewhere in between. I do think that the current hype and lack of pragmatic diplomacy is beyond appalling, and even if neither side has the desire or intention to start a nuclear conflict, pulling this kind of shit where it becomes even a 5% probability that events spin out of control leading to a nuclear exchange is insanely irresponsible. Yet I also feel at least a portion of the aggressive posturing is for election purposes to deflect attention and provoke fear to emphasize the need for a ‘strong and experienced’ (i.e. war-hawkish) president to be tough on the world stage. And because much of the US populace has been so long exposed to being sold fear in the media, they have to increase the ‘dose’ to get the same reaction as before. So I expect the aggressiveness will subside to a slow and steady simmer post-election, but it won’t go away. Russia is too useful as a boogeyman for the US gov’t to stop the current policy…. it means more juicy defense and intelligence community contracts (both here and selling to our ‘allies’), a convenient bad guy for the State to ‘protect’ us from, and a scapegoat to point at when the next major economic leg-down occurs. I’m more concerned about the mid-term future, where I see the most probable outcome at present being the US and Russia (possibly China too) escalating things to a large number of drawn out wars fighting against each others’ proxies. I suspect they will even see it as a way to alleviate the growing automation predicament… any feasible automation solution for many ground combat roles are probably still a couple decades away, if not more.
    (Just for the record I don’t feel Putin is blameless in this either… for now at least he just happens to be a more sensible and rational sociopath than the sociopaths in US gov’t we Americans suffer with)

    • My knowledge of Iceland is really limited to 1986 and one young man I was in High School with for a semester as he was an exchange student. And yet I reach very similar conclusions. I felt like this kid (then 16) spoke more intelligently than many adults I knew.

  7. Icelandic internet polls to set policy

    My thoughts are that to make this anarchy they would have to write into law an option on each policy issue stating something to the affect of “do what you want but I don’t want this so leave me out of it”

  8. Hey Jack,

    Would you share the name/author of that global warming book you mentioned in the podcast?



  9. Until I get a “NONE OF THE ABOVE” option on the ballot, I’ll continue voting for the lesser of two evils. Anarchism, or not voting, gets you nothing (well, it does, a bigger boot on your neck if everyone would derelicts his right to vote) . It does not exist, it hasn’t exited ever. It’s just a romanticized dream that exists in places where the vast majority of people vote to keep a democracy however imperfect it is.

    Take that Jack!

    • Do you know how ridiculous that sounds to anyone who can do say 4th grade math?

      Your vote Jose will get you as much nothing as my non vote will get me. You are free to vote, I’d defend your right to do it, but if you think it matters you are simply so emotional as to refuse to use the logic in your God given brain.

      Trump will win Texas, if you vote he will, if you don’t he still will, it will NOT MATTER, you are more likely to trip and break your neck and kill yourself than to matter in any Federal election.

      How do I know that? Because math that is why. To tell people every vote counts is one of the most insulting things you can say to an intelligent person. And the sad thing is in their hearts most people know the truth, they just can’t reach acceptance. By the way you are solidly locked in the anger stage.

    • Let me add the entire “it has never existed argument” is simply a denial of facts. Humans have existed for far longer as anarchists than they have as statists. To infer otherwise is to ignore anthropology.

    • There are 90,922 drops of water in a gallon. A 1,500 gallon tank contains 136 million drops of water. Do you believe that a 1,500 gallon tank can be filled one drop at a time? One hundred thirty million people will vote this presidential election. And just like the drops of water that eventually fill the tank, each individual vote will eventually tally-up to determine the next president.

      Call it rigged, gerrymandered, electoral college whatever, in the end votes matter. That’s the nature of the system we live in. It’s that simple.

      People in groups have always voted one way or another, a grunt, a nod of the head, a show of hands, yay or nay, a ballot, or, as in your case, even silence is consent.

      That’s the system we have, and I don’t see how not voting will change it for the better.

        • lll also say I didn’t say not voting would acomplish a thing, I only contend the same for voting. Hence I do not spend my time doing foolish things that don’t acomplish anything.

          It isn’t not voting that gets things done, it is what one does with ones time, talent and energy when one stops paying attention to the nonsense that has no effect.

          And once again you have proven you do not know what anarchy is.

  10. To the lady with her kids who asked about blueberries.

    I live in North GA which is known to be a blueberry growing heaven because of our acidic soil.

    I planted three this yr. 2 in the ground and 1 into a self-watering container that Jack has the plans for on the MSB page.

    By far, FAR, the self watering container is dominating the others. Not even close. One in the ground is dead. The other is staying alive but barely. The self watering container is just kicking butts and taking names.

    If I were you, I’d absolutely follow Jack’s advice and use containers for your blueberries. Next yr, I’m going to do a whole bunch more.

  11. As far as using a pond to run an AP system. Yes it will work. An AP system with very few fish is way more stable than a heavily stocked system. And it depends on the “what” you want to grow. I’ve been playing with my “living river” AP systems for a few years now. See South Sound Aquaponics on facebook.

    Love the show! Thanks for all you do.

    • Sorry Brian but this is where a person uses the phrase “it works” without knowing what “works” means.

      Sure you can use pond water in a system that looks like aquaponics to grow stuff. And then you will have to come up with a fertilizer to keep it growing well. It isn’t aquaponics it is irrigation at that point.

      Aquaponics uses the fish waste to grow plants and the plants to filter and clean fish waste. Both sides have to be sufficient for the other.

  12. One possible piece of optical technology that may be of assistance to the caller-shooter with the dominant eye, vision issues. The Bindon Aiming Concept “technology” offer by Trijicon company in some of their optics, specificly the ACOG series of gun sights in my mind may be just what the caller needs to remain a right hand side shooter.

    • ‘Bindon aiming concept
      Several ACOG models are designed to be used with the “Bindon Aiming Concept”, an aiming technique developed by Trijicon founder and optical designer Glyn Bindon. The technique is essentially using the illuminated part of the reticle and its focusing rear eyepiece as a collimator sight. A collimator sight is a type of optical sight that allows the user looking into it to see an illuminated aiming point aligned with the device the sight is attached-to, regardless of eye position (with little parallax). Collimator sights are ‘blind’ sights; that is, they are used with both eyes open while one looks into the sight…). The user does not actually look through the sight but instead keeps the collimated (infinity) image of the illuminated part of the reticle in focus with the dominant eye while the other eye views the entire field of view to acquire the target. In this both-eyes-open technique the brain superimposes the aiming reticle on the target. An added part of the technique is to shift focus after acquisition to the dominant eye/telescopic image for more accurate shooting. This overcomes the problem of centering or acquiring fast traversing targets common with all telescopic sights. Only certain models of the ACOG are designed with bright enough daylight-lit fiber optic or battery-powered LED reticles that facilitate this technique.” – From two Wikipedia articles, most prominently: