Thursday, January 18, 2018

Traction

It snowed in these parts recently. Of course, school was closed, there wasn't milk or bread to be found at the grocery store - not that I would have eaten it anyways, Etc.

One day, as I was out and about on my regular job, I came across a poor fellow who could not get his truck out of the parking lot. He would put it in reverse, move a couple of feet, and then the wheels would spin. After a couple of failed on his part, I realized I could help him.

** segue to memory sequence **
In the blizzard of 1993 comma after a while many people started to get out and about, even though all the snow and ice was not melted. As I lived in a hilly area of Chattanooga, TN, we saw many people get stuck at the bottom of a hill near our house. Since, on this part of the street, you had to go up a hill to go either way, these people would get stuck.

My dad proposed an ingenious way to help out, and have fun all at the same time. He, my brother, and I would take our sleds and sled down the hill. Then we would sit in the back of the person's truck - all three of us - and the combined weight over the wheels would give the vehicle enough traction to get up the hill. At the time, all three of us were over 200 pounds. Then we would slide down the hill again, and sit on another vehicle, and repeat the process. It was all the fun of sledding, without all the work of having to walk back up the hill.

And people were getting helped.
** end memory sequence **

I approached the poor fellow in his truck. He had his wife and small child with him. I suggested that I sit in the back end of his truck and that he would be able to get out of the parking lot. He seemed reluctant, but he also realized he had no other choice at this point in time. So I still don't has rear bumper, and lo and behold, he pulled right out.

He asked me how I knew how to do that. I told him it was an old Southerner's trick. He laughed, we waved, and he went on his way.


Wednesday, January 17, 2018

Divorce Quick Hitters

Recently saw some drama on social media about a pastor who was getting a divorce. The vast majority of the replies were support for this pastor, because pastors are no different than ordinary people. However, there were some who were holding this pastor to a standard that, frankly, is not possible to keep in modern America. So here are some quick hitters.

Marriage as defined by the modern US legal system and marriage as defined by the Bible are two totally separate entities.

According to the US legal system, any person can divorce their spouse, whether or not the spouse wants to be divorced.

When a man gets custody of the kids, it's an indicator that there's something major wrong with the woman. Women get custody of the vast majority of the time.

If you have to heavily edit a photo to prove a point, then it's an indicator that your point is completely invalid, and you know it.

Divorce is a communicable disease among women. If a happily married woman spends time around other women who are divorced recently, or are getting a divorce, then there's a good chance she will catch the disease. Don't be surprised if she is soon getting a divorce herself.

A woman who does not wish to see or speak with her own children, has renounced Womanhood altogether.

Let he who is without sin cast the first stone.


Tuesday, January 16, 2018

Basic And Advanced

 Some good quotes at this link. Among them,

“When people start talking about advanced techniques my eyes cross. There are no advanced techniques. There are fundamentals honed to perfection through conscious effort. Then there is the application of those fundamentals against ever increasing challenges.

...

The mechanics remain the same. We become advanced.

Sugar Ray Leonard’s jab wasn’t magically different. His ability to hit anyone he faced at a world class level with his jab was the difference between basic and advanced.

During his seminar JJ Machado taught us all the same guard recovery technique. A guard recovery technique I had been taught my first month of jiujitsu. His ability to apply that technique against the best grapplers in the world is the difference between basic and advanced.

The point is; there is no secret sauce aka advanced techniques. There is advanced application and there is only one way to get there. High level coaching, and practice.

...

There are four basic aspects to using a gun in the anti-personnel role:
1. You need to be able to hit what you need to hit, in order to elicit the desired response, as many times as you need to hit it, in order to elicit that response.
2. You need to be able to get the gun into the fight soon enough to make a difference.
3. You need to avoid shooting anyone or anything that is not doing anything that warrants shooting.
4. You need to be composed enough to make good, appropriately correct decisions, in order to achieve 1,2, and 3.

There are no secret squirrel techniques to running a gun.


Monday, January 15, 2018

Phases of Surrender

This article has some good quotes. Most notably,


Surrender is never, ever, an option.

The first phase of surrender is failing to be armed, trained and committed to fight. We are prepared to surrender when we are unprepared to resist.

The second phase of surrender is failing to be alert. You must see trouble coming in order to have time to respond. The warning may be less than one second but it will be there and it must be recognized and acted upon immediately.

The Third phase of surrender is giving up your weapons.

The last phase of surrender is up to the monsters who have taken control of your life and perhaps the lives of your loved ones. The last phase of surrender is out of your hands.


Thursday, January 11, 2018

Training vs Practice

Response - It's clear you're old school. That sort of activity with "biker gangs" pretty much fell off the map about 20 years ago.



Response - math really isn't your specialty. If you've trained three years, and your coach 5; then he had less training when he started coaching you than you do now.



Page 13 indicates you are wrong - the typical Marine of WWI did not train at distances of over 800 yards. Sure, some shots may have been made from that distance, but the training was conducted at 200, 300, and 600 yards.

The class you are referencing (without knowledge, clearly) uses an AR15 (with or without scope) at 25m - much like the US Army Alt-C qualification... except there's no 50m, 100m, 150m, 200m, or 250m scale targets.



I'd rather someone have a brief, 4 hour combat medical class than nothing at all. And if someone thinks they are a combat medic after 4 hours... well I have some beachfront property in Tennessee to sell them.

Oh, and one of the two combat medics you speak of taught the same class you're putting down.



People in many endeavors have ranks that share an amount of commonality to military ranks - airline pilots, TSA agents, police, firefighters, and the lost goes on. Even the Salvation Army has ranks. Also, here's a brief history lesson: the US militia first used military ranks when we fought the British. They used pretty much the same names for ranks as the British Army used. Then, when we formalized our Army, the ranks were borrowed again. 

Point is, stolen valor is a person claiming to have military rank (or other military credentials) that they did not earn. An organization awarding rank to its members is simply not the same. And you know that.




On the flip side, here are a few questions for you:
1. Have you ever attended a firearm training class?
2. Did you attend this or other firearms classes offered by this instructor?
3. Did you know,  "kernel" is part of popcorn, while a "Colonel" is a rank?
4. Why was it ok for this instructor to teach these same classes when he was with your group, but not now?
5. You want to know how I know your answer to #1 and #2? Here it is:
(Your coaches should have told you this)

Training vs. Practice...

Training:  Where a student is taught how to do something by an instructor.
Practice:  Where a student repeats what they’ve been trained to do until they can do it automatically, or without thought.


Monday, January 8, 2018

Military Always Knows Best (or Not)

This post and a class taught by a non infantry instructor motivated this post by a veteran:

The attitude of the modern militia seems to be quantity over quality. Let me explain, but first, get out your red ass salve, this is gonna hurt!!

Quantity over quality is great for WalMart, but for a militia it is a recipe for disaster. I'm not only talking about the people, but also the training. By admitting anyone, fat, old, cripple, young, able, experienced and inexperienced and letting them train as if they're going to fight is absurd. By putting substandard(physically and untrained) folks in with those physically able and trained, you'll end up getting both killed. I know some will argue that the III% were all farmers and bankers, etc. They were led by military men, men experienced in combat and trained to endure the hardships of combat. The III% also had no choice, the Colonies were ruled by the Brits and had no standing Army. Now, with all of the combat vets from Nam to now, there is a plethora of men and experience to draw from.

Most vets don't want to join a militia because of some of the reasons stated above. I won't take a class on Infantry tactics from a civilian that has no real world experience. Think about it, a guy gives a room clearing(CQB) class, but has NEVER CLEARED A ROOM FOR REAL IN HIS LIFE!!!! Would you take that class? There are subtle(and not so subtle) nuances to room and bldg clearing that can't be picked up in a YOUTUBE video or a book. Quality people giving quality classes make everyone better. Training CORRECTLY every week beats training INCORRECTLY everyday.

If you have 100 members and train every week, but you train bad habits in repetition, you will fail. I would rather have 25 members training in the fundamentals every week because they will become GREAT at what they do.

This picture was attached to it:







Well, as one who has trained with combat vets and other trainers, let me delve into this a bit further. While most vets who would teach these things may well know how to do them the Military way, there are some other issues here.

1. Many vets are not good teachers. It's ok, many non vets are not good teachers, either.  Folks like this lack lesson plans, lack direction, and lack a big picture view that allows them to only train what is needed, and discard what is irrelevant. Furthermore, the lack of big picture disallows the instructor here to focus on the most important skills most, and relegate less important skills to discussion or other dissemination. 

2. Just like non vets, some vets do not "play well with others." Meaning they may know their stuff. They may even be able to teach it. But they are always being anti-social to the detriment of the students.  For some reason, the patriot movement seems to see a higher percentage of these than the general population.  Maybe because some patriots will put up with it in an effort to learn from the vet.

3. Some vets get very jealous of anyone else teaching their stuff. Doesn't matter if it's being taught correctly. This is akin to the martial arts masters of old hiding their knowledge from students for varying reasons. 

4. The military way is not always the right way.


Here's a list of a few things Military folks agree make no sense.  However, when put to the test, Military tactics and techniques are not necessarily the best. They are certainly never the only way.  And as much as you are taught to believe in yourself and your team in the military... it can be hard to adjust to the fact that someone else might know more.  Particularly a civilian. 


Friday, January 5, 2018

If You Can, Teach!

Former Grunt - I will not take a class in any Infantry skills given by a non Combat Infantry member.


Greg Jackson is 0-1 in professional MMA. By the "logic" above, he should never coach any MMA athlete. Among his notable fighters are:
former UFC Light Heavyweight Champion Jon Jones;
former UFC Women's Bantamweight Champion Holly Holm;
UFC Lightweight and Welterweight contender Donald Cerrone; 
Keith Jardine;
former WEC Welterweight Champion and former UFC Interim Welterweight Champion Carlos Condit;
former King of Pancrase and former Strikeforce Welterweight Champion Nate Marquardt;
former Interim UFC Heavyweight Champion Shane Carwin; former UFC Heavyweight Champion Andrei Arlovski; 
former Strikeforce Lightweight Champion and World MMA Fight of the Year Award Winner Clay Guida; 
The Ultimate Fighter 1 winner (in winner the Middleweight bracket) Diego Sanchez.

Greg Jackson has coached many other successful athletes, but these are among the most notable. 


Thursday, January 4, 2018

Police Shoot Whom?

From  this article, whites are more likely to be shot by police than are minorities. 

What were they kneeling about in the NFL?

This phrase sums it up nicely:
... contrary to the controlled media’s lies, whites are more likely to be victims of police shootings in America, and that the higher nonwhite interaction rate with police is exclusively due to the fact that the nonwhites have a higher crime rate.

Wednesday, January 3, 2018

Political Fighting

Form a #cuckservative on social media:

As much as Matt Damon has been getting some (deserved) criticism for his comment about "why aren't we talking about the men who don't abuse women," it made me think about what I actually *do* post.

...[snip]...

Another dynamic is my status as a member of the US military; POTUS is my ultimate boss, and while we're not prohibited from frank discussion of policies, we aren't supposed to be blatantly disrespectful. I would so love for the vast majority of US citizens to post under those constraints; it's actually clarifying. Don't ridicule the person, ridicule the policy (if you can); otherwise, think about the policy more than the person.

Conservatives tried playing by these rules for years. #Libtards won because conservatives were constrained by self-imposed rules to which  #Libtards would never adhere.

2016 was the rise of the #AltRight - fighting back under the same rules.
2017 was the crushing victory after crushing victory for the Right.
2018 must be where the advantage is pressed and Dims lose even more seats.


Tuesday, January 2, 2018

Insubordination Fail

This story relayed to the blog by a reader prior to 2012, with the promise of a future publication date.


Setting: I was a manager for a well known staffing and placement firm. I'd been hired into a dumpster fire - among my first duties were hiring an almost entirely new staff. Also among my first duties was to stop the bleeding- the location's largest client was diminishing rapidly, and was nearly 90% of the revenue.

Within 6 months, all hires were made and revenue had bottomed out and started rebounding. Of course, that meant I had been selling... a lot. Also, call me Red Pilled before the term had its current meaning, I managed to get into it with an HR Nazi... who was a subordinate. Here's how it went down:

One of the relatively new hires was as a "staffing specialist." We will give her the fictional name, Susan. She was good enough at her job - caught on quickly, etc. Not very sales minded, but didn't push too hard against new sales, so there was that. On the looks scale, she was a solid 7.5, and she knew it. Of course, she was liberal minded [editor's note -  "Susan" attended anti-Trump inauguration protests... enough said].

I made a sale to yet another new client. The information and billing approval packet was sent in. Corporate always wanted certain information on all new clients, to make sure we were dealing with actual companies, etc. And then, out of the blue, there's an email chain from Susan to one of the approving managers, with my name cc'd:

Susan - I wanted to make you aware that this business is in a house.

Approving Manager - Yes, it's in the approval packet your manager submitted. The house is zoned commercial, owned by a commercial entity, and from the pictures, has been renovated to do business. There's no question it is not a dwelling.

Susan - Well, I just wanted you to know. We are not supposed to send temporary associates to someone's residence due to risks. So, even if approved, we may not be able to fill an order here.

Approving Manager - Whether you fill an order will be up to your manager. The place in question is perfectly acceptable, so the risks you mention are not present.

At this point, I return to the office after making several sales calls the day this email exchange started. This was prior to email being common on cell phones. I read the chain of emails. It's clear Susan wishes to undercut me to the approving manager. It's also clear it didn't work.

Me (to Susan only, not including the Approving Manager) via email - Susan, if you had issues with the place, then the correct procedure would have been to bring those issues to my attention. Furthermore, your tone could be interpreted as combative, of not downright insubordinate. You will refrain from emailing the Approval Manager or any other manager on this matter. If an order is placed, you will be expected to perform your assigned duties.

Susan was certainly upset, though she tried not to let it show. I thought that was the end of it. Until her 6 - month review. In fact, we went through her review, which was generally positive. She truly met or exceeded expectations in all categories. In fact, other than that one day, she had always been pleasant to work with. Not knowing anything beyond what's been written, it would appear to be a single shit-test, which was passed easily.

As with all reviews, once the supervisor has been through the categories and discussed performance in each, the employee is allowed general comments, questions, and concerns. At this point, Susan pardons herself, and comes back in with the District Manager (my boss, whose office happened to be located in our branch) in tow. She produced the email chain, printed out, giving copies to me and my boss.

Susan proceeds to have a near meltdown about that day, explaining how hard it was to work the rest of the day after being told she was being insubordinate. She also reiterated how passionate she was that this location was a residence, and not an actual place of business. And she wanted to know what the District Manager was going to do about it.

My reply was swift. I asked her to read the time my email was sent (4:56 pm). "Perhaps that did interfere with your ability to shut off your computer, gather your things, and walk to your car," I said. I then continued: "If you were so concerned about the location being a residence, you could have just stopped by and asked to take photographs. Surely the photos would have been enough evidence, one way or the other. And as for the claims of insubordinance, I just gave you a review of 'meets and occasionally exceeds expectations,' I'd prefer not to have to replace a solid Staffing Specialist, just because she had an email disagreement with the approval manager. I don't think he took your email as insubordinate, but he might have."

(Of course her email was insubordinate towards me, but by making it my "concern" that the insubordinance was directed toward the other manager, it took the focus off of me and put it on her. Classic reframing)

The District Manager agreed with each of my three points. Susan reiterated how emotional she had become that day, and the District Manager reiterated my point, again, that it was the end of the work day when she received it, and it couldn't have impeded her work very much.

I left the company not long after due to unrelated reasons (more money), but given your blog and it's attack on stupid stuff HR people do, I figured you'd like this one. Last I checked, "Susan" works in HR for a different entity. Terrorizing other men, no doubt.



Thank you, dear reader. Good story. One chock-full of good information.