Conceal Carry Permit

On Sunday, I took a class at Gander Mountain to obtain my conceal carry permit in MN. I learned a few things as well.

1. You're only as good as how much you practice
One guy in class had a Springfield XD, with lots of accessories. A large case, four large magazines, an attachable flashlight, a holster for his gun and his magazines, and one or two other items. He also was probably the worst shot in the class. At 15 feet, he missed the target 6 out of 30 times. Another guy in class used an old Colt revolver. A gun his dad bought many years ago. His shot groups were just fine.

2. I can take a gun to school.
It just has to remain in my trunk, that way my gun will be safe.

3. Dry firing a gun is ok.
I have been told many times to never dry fire a gun, since that is bad for the gun. Well, now I am told (by a former LA police officer and Army Vet) that dry firing is good cheap practice for gaining familiarity with the gun and to train proper muscle memory. Doing three clearance checks before dry firing was emphasized.

4. Don't buy ammo at L and M if you are in a hurry.
They have cheap ammo, but it can also take a few hours to find someone that is able to help you.

5. I am leaning towards a double action pistol instead of a revolver as a carry weapon.
The Ruger (why does spell check think Ruger is not a word?) LCP seems a little too small to me. Maybe the new SR9 compact? Although I have heard in MT that some people like to go jogging with something like this strapped on.

Neon Horse

So, do you like rock music from the 70's to 80's?
Glam Rock?
AC/DC?
David Bowie?
But what if you want to listen to something that is Christian?
If that is the case, I have the band for you.
Check out Neon Horse.
They are different. Very good, but different.
Great music to listen to when stealing neighborhood signs, or when changing letters on other neighborhood signs.

A Shofar and a Llama?

Click on this link.
Now scroll to the bottom of the page.
See the red slider that moves the page left and right?
Move it all the way to the right.
What do you see?

Red Green gets a job with NASA

So, NASA wanted to find out if there is any water on the moon.

Did they send a manned mission? Nope.

Did they send a rover like the Mars Mission? Nope.


They took an empty rocket hull, pointed it at the moon, then sent it at full speed into the moon. Just in case that was not enough, shortly after the first impact they sent a satellite behind it to also crash into the moon.


Ideally the resulting plume of moon dust could then be studied and scientists could possibly find a trace of water.


So, with all the expertise, knowledge, and technology at the disposal of NASA they basically come up with a plan that sounds like a Red Green idea. Literally. I am positive part of the satellite is (or at this point was) held together by duct tape, fishing line, and bungee cords.

Oh, and it cost 79 million dollars, if you were wondering. Just think of that next April 15.
Where did your tax money go?

Towards crashing space junk into the moon!

Kardelen is eaten by a horse!

Just kidding.

The government stole my ipod

According to the US government, my family is in poverty. We make less than the poverty limit for a family of four. I think our breakfast this morning would prove otherwise.

We had oatmeal for breakfast. Everyone in the family eats it a little differently. The youngest likes cinnamon sugar and butter. The oldest likes peanut butter, cinnamon sugar, and brown sugar in hers. Mom likes walnuts and chokecherry syrup. I had peanut butter and brown sugar. Picture a table with all that food on it. Does that sound like a table in an impoverished household

My point? If this is poverty, I think the rest of the world would like to be impoverished the way we are in America. The World Bank figures that 1.4 billion people worldwide live on $1.25 or less a day. Based on taxes last year, we were nearly 40 times that limit.

I think that we are blessed.

Here is a random video.

The Nature Biscuit Bible

Here is a quote from Archbishop Desmond Tutu to a forward to a new translation of the Bible:

"His (Jesus) supreme work is to reconcile us to God and to one another, and indeed, to reconcile all of us to God's creation. It is possible to have a new kind of world, a world where there will be more compassion, more gentleness, more caring, more laughter, more joy for all of God's creation, because that is God's creation. And God says, "Help me, help me, help me realize my dream."

This is from the Green Bible, an NRSV translation that places text of scripture that are of importance to the environmental crisis in green (of course).  For those that are interested, the NRSV comes from the KJV.  The KJV begat the American Standard Version, which begat the Revised Standard Version, which begat the New Revised Standard Version. 

So, what passages are in green you wonder?  I am glad you asked.  Here is a selection that I found skimming this Bible.

Genesis 1, 2:1-12.  This is an interesting selection.  Genesis 2:11-12 mentions the river Pishon and the land around it.  It is in green.  The next verse the river Gihon, and is not in green. Are some rivers more green than others?  Ah well, moving on.

Daniel 2:22  
"He reveals deep and hidden things, He knows what is in the darkness, and light dwells with Him."

I am not sure what about this verse is "green". Any ideas?

Matthew 4:4

"But He answered 'It is written, one does not live on bread alone, but by every word that comes for the mouth of God.'"

Green?  I guess.

2nd Corinthians 2:17

"For we are not, like so many, peddlers of God's word, but as men of sincerity, as commissioned by God, in the sight of God we speak in Christ."

A good verse.  I have no problems with it, but how is it green?  

I could go on. My point is that this version of the Bible is being published to push an environmental agenda. No surprise there, and I doubt that the publisher and editor would disagree. Is this really going to change the debate on environmentalism?  Printing a Bible on recycled paper with soy ink (maybe the Matthew 4 passage can be interpreted by us as actually eating the Bible?) may make a few people feel good about making a difference, but that is all it will do. Including an essay in the Bible entitled "Jesus is coming--Plant a Tree!" may make Al Gore smile, but does it make any difference to supposed anthropogenic global warming?

No.  

In the preface to the Green Bible, it describes how passages were chosen.  One of the reasons is 

"How all the elements of creation-land, water, air, plants, animals, humans-are interdependent."

Is that statement true? No.  The sun, center of our solar system, is not interdependent on humans.  Yet it most certainly is part of creation.  Or maybe they are just referring to creation here on earth?  Even then the statement does not work. While human beings are certainly dependent on water for life, water is not dependent on us to exist. For items to be interdepentent they would need to depend on each other, yet water and humans do not seem to. Humans can affect water quality, but the water still exists.  It is still water.  Without water, humans do not exist. That seems to be a very odd form of interdependence.  A casual read of Genesis would seem to indicate that water and humans were not created in a manner that would cause both to mutually depend on each other.  In fact, water seems to be around before humans. Yet if we are mutally dependent on each other, how did that happen? 

I could continue but you get the point. Christians should care about the environment. That is a given.  But the priorities and philosophy behind much of the work of this Bible do not appear to be consistent or factual.  Skip this Bible and simply enjoy God's creation, instead of reading why you should feel guilty for destroying it.