Bullets raining from the sky (long)

[AJ]

>From an article in the Caspar (WY) StarTribune.net -- am I wrong in
thinking this is not a good idea?

AJ

New weapon in the sky
By CHRISTOPHER SMITH
Associated Press writer

BOISE, Idaho -- Idaho's congressional delegation and the administration
of Gov. Dirk Kempthorne spent the past two years convincing the Federal
Aviation Administration to give ranchers permits to shoot coyotes and
other wild predators while flying overhead in powered parachutes and
ultralight flying machines.

After initially refusing to allow the state to issue aerial gunning
permits for experimental aircraft operated by non-certified pilots, FAA
Administrator Marion Blakey relented last spring and agreed to come up
with "the most appropriate means of accommodation," according to
correspondence obtained by The Associated Press under the Freedom of
Information Act.

The FAA is now allowing Idaho to issue permits to ranchers for aerial
shooting of predators to protect livestock if their vehicle qualifies
as a "light sport aircraft" under new FAA regulations. The new category
has spawned a squadron of unconventional flying craft known as "aerial
ATVs."

"These are the newest, hottest things for ranchers," said Allen
Kenitzer, a spokesman for the FAA in Renton, Wash. "This is something
people out West really wanted, to be able to use these aircraft out in
the middle of nowhere to do the things they need to do."

But wildlife activists say the use of kit-built and experimental flying
contraptions for airborne attacks on wild animals is dangerous and
absurd.

"I'm covering my eyes and laughing," said Wendy Keefover-Ring of
Boulder, Colo., coordinator of a national coalition of environmental
groups that wants to end aerial gunning of wildlife. "It's unsafe even
when you are in a plane that has a stronger engine than these
ultralights have."

State law authorizes the Idaho Department of Agriculture to issue
permits for people to "shoot, capture, harass or kill" wildlife that is
threatening livestock while the person is airborne in an aircraft. The
practice did not get FAA scrutiny until 2003, when a southeastern Idaho
rancher was cited by the FAA for illegally using his powered parachute
-- a cage-like cockpit with a motorcyle-size engine and propeller
suspended from a parachute -- to shoot coyotes.

The federal agency determined that because ultralight craft could only
be flown for sport and recreation. Using them for livestock protection
or to collect a bounty on predators was prohibited.

"It was animal rights people who turned him in," said Eulalie Langford,
a former state legislator from Montpelier who took up the fight on
behalf of the rancher, whose name was not released by the FAA. "Baby
lambs have rights too, and I told our officials that people might be
getting a lot of sport and recreation out of shooting these coyotes
that were eating their lambs."

In April 2003, the state formally asked for a waiver to allow the use
of powered parachutes in airborne predator control.

"As technology has improved, it has become apparent that powered
parachutes are an ideal vehicle for airborne predator control," wrote
Stanley Boyd, a lobbyist for woolgrowers, elk breeders and cattle
ranchers who heads the Idaho Animal Damage Control Board.

The application was denied, prompting Idaho's all-Republican
congressional delegation to write an appeal to FAA Administrator Marion
Blakey.

"It is important to note that these activities occur in the vast open
spaces of rural Idaho and pose no real threat to human safety," Sens.
Larry Craig and Mike Crapo, along with Reps. Mike Simpson and C.L.
"Butch" Otter wrote in the September 2004 letter.

After several months of investigation and negotiation, Blakey
responded, writing that FAA "does not want to unduly restrict these
activities, but only wants to ensure they are conducted safely and in
appropriately certificated aircraft."

The solution came with the creation of the new light sport aircraft
category and new sport pilot certificate issued by FAA. Under the new
rule, lighter-than-air balloons, gliders, airships, flying trikes,
gyroplanes, powered parachutes and other ultralights that meet certain
weight, speed and capacity standards can be certified and receive a
tail number just like a full-size private airplane. The test required
for a light sport aircraft pilot's certificate is not as extensive as a
traditional pilot's license.

"Now, ranchers can take eight hours of instruction, pay a small
certification fee and then just take a felt pen to write your 'N'
number on the side of your craft and bingo, you're legal," Boyd said in
an interview. "We didn't issue any permits for ultralights this past
year, but ranchers are just learning this is available to them."

Keefover-Ring, who tracks aerial gunning accidents for the conservation
group Sinapu, said although she has never seen a report of an
ultralight crashing while aerial gunning, her group has records dating
back to 1989 of 24 crashes of standard airplanes or helicopters during
airborne predator flights that killed 32 people.

"There is so little margin for error when you are flying 10 feet off
the ground shooting a gun at a moving target," she said.

But Langford maintains the ultralights are safer than standard
airplanes for picking off coyotes, foxes and other livestock predators.

"Airplanes, even small planes, can travel over 100 miles an hour, while
these aerial ATVs move along about the speed that a coyote can run,"
she said. "If there's a mountain coming up, you have plenty of time to
see it and take evasive action."

[Bob Noel]

In article om>,
"AJ" > wrote:

> "I'm covering my eyes and laughing," said Wendy Keefover-Ring of
> Boulder, Colo., coordinator of a national coalition of environmental
> groups that wants to end aerial gunning of wildlife. "It's unsafe even
> when you are in a plane that has a stronger engine than these
> ultralights have."

so what qualifies Wendy to assess the safety of anything related
to aviation?

--
Bob Noel
Looking for a sig the
lawyers will hate

[AJ]

I'm not sure what engine strength has to do with it, if anything at
all. My concern is having someone shooting down from a plane. Just
seems like a scenario ripe for disaster to me.

AJ

[muff528]

Just wondering what the "strength" of an a/c engine has to do with safety
in this context?!?

More seriously though ----Looks like the all the ingredients are in place
for
a tragic showdown between the airborne varmint hunters and the
eco-terrorists.
(by "eco-terrorist" I am NOT referring to responsible people who are
dedicated
to lawful stewardship and environmental policies which are based on sound
science. I am referring to the people who have already used terrorist
tactics
such as booby-traps, explosives, etc. to attempt to achieve their
objectives.)
(by "varmint hunters" I am referring to people who hunt varmints) :-)

TP

"Bob Noel" > wrote in message
...
> In article om>,
> "AJ" > wrote:
>
>> "I'm covering my eyes and laughing," said Wendy Keefover-Ring of
>> Boulder, Colo., coordinator of a national coalition of environmental
>> groups that wants to end aerial gunning of wildlife. "It's unsafe even
>> when you are in a plane that has a stronger engine than these
>> ultralights have."
>
> so what qualifies Wendy to assess the safety of anything related
> to aviation?
>
> --
> Bob Noel
> Looking for a sig the
> lawyers will hate
>

[Jim Macklin]

It has been long practice from J3 to Super Cub, just open
the door and shoot at a 45 degree angle, the prop doesn't
like buckshot.

We need these on the Mexican border to shoot coyotes.


--
James H. Macklin
ATP,CFI,A&P

--
The people think the Constitution protects their rights;
But government sees it as an obstacle to be overcome.
some support
http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/secondamendment2.htm
See http://www.fija.org/ more about your rights and duties.


"AJ" > wrote in message
oups.com...
| I'm not sure what engine strength has to do with it, if
anything at
| all. My concern is having someone shooting down from a
plane. Just
| seems like a scenario ripe for disaster to me.
|
| AJ
|

[Frank Ch. Eigler]

"AJ" > writes:

> [...] My concern is having someone shooting down from a plane.
> Just seems like a scenario ripe for disaster to me.

Well, it's not like they would do this in a crowded urban environment.
Has someone here done this kind of work? Can you describe how you
avoid disaster?

- FChE

[Peter Duniho]

"AJ" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> I'm not sure what engine strength has to do with it, if anything at
> all. My concern is having someone shooting down from a plane. Just
> seems like a scenario ripe for disaster to me.

I dunno. Depending on the altitude (presumably very low, otherwise actually
hitting a predator is unlikely), it may be safer than shooting from the
ground (for any reason), in that there is a very nice backstop close to the
shooter. Shooting from the ground the bullet can travel MUCH farther than
intended.

Assuming this isn't expanded to hunting in general, it's probably not that
big of a deal.

I could be wrong. But on the face of it, I don't see anything that greatly
worries me. I'll just stop running with the packs of wolves and coyotes in
Idaho, and hopefully that'll keep me out of anyone's gunsight. :)

Note that the article has a variety of inaccuracies, including the
implication that one can get an Sport Pilot Certificate in only 8 hours.

Pete

[Icebound]

"AJ" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> I'm not sure what engine strength has to do with it, if anything at
> all. My concern is having someone shooting down from a plane. Just
> seems like a scenario ripe for disaster to me.
>


They have been doing it for years.

This topic comes up from time to time, and for me it always recalls this
particular report:

http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief2.asp?ev_id=20020328X00418&ntsbno=SEA02LA058&akey=1

[Judah]

"AJ" > wrote in news:1145811157.351516.309610
@t31g2000cwb.googlegroups.com:

> I'm not sure what engine strength has to do with it, if anything at
> all. My concern is having someone shooting down from a plane. Just
> seems like a scenario ripe for disaster to me.
>
> AJ
>


I think the engine power concept is that people are flying 10' off the
ground and might hit a mountain. In Wendy's mind, a more powerful
engine might prevet such an accident. In reality, the whole argument is
non-sequiter, and if she were really worried about safety, she would
ask for a law requiring the pilot and the gunner be two separate
people.

I despise self-serving beauracrats who try to pass laws because they
are "so concerned about people killing themselves," when really they
just
have their own agenda to fill... I'm surprised she hasn't gotten PETA
involved.

I'm also not sure what disaster you are concerned with having people
shoot down from a plane. Out here in the NYC area, there are CONSTANTLY
shots fired from moving vehicles in area that are much more heavily
populated than Idaho, and you only hear about accidents two or three
times a year!

My guess is that even Idaho coyotes don't hang out in the heavily
populated areas... And it is probably easier to confuse a coyote with a
human from 50 yards on the ground through the tall grass than it is
from 50 yards in the air with a clear view.

What I find most interesting is that presumably, based on the state
law, if the pilots said they were just out hunting, as opposed to
saying they were protecting their chickens from the coyotes there would
be no question that the purpose of the flight was for
Sport/Recreation...

[Flyingmonk]

Now, wouldn't these guys be on or over their OWN land? Why would they
NEED permission to carry weapons or shoot from it on/over their own
land? Especially if they are in a powered parachute or ultralights,
which are not regulated.

The Monk


AJ wrote:
> >From an article in the Caspar (WY) StarTribune.net -- am I wrong in
> thinking this is not a good idea?
>
> AJ
>
> New weapon in the sky
> By CHRISTOPHER SMITH
> Associated Press writer
>
> BOISE, Idaho -- Idaho's congressional delegation and the administration
> of Gov. Dirk Kempthorne spent the past two years convincing the Federal
> Aviation Administration to give ranchers permits to shoot coyotes and
> other wild predators while flying overhead in powered parachutes and
> ultralight flying machines.
>
> After initially refusing to allow the state to issue aerial gunning
> permits for experimental aircraft operated by non-certified pilots, FAA
> Administrator Marion Blakey relented last spring and agreed to come up
> with "the most appropriate means of accommodation," according to
> correspondence obtained by The Associated Press under the Freedom of
> Information Act.
>
> The FAA is now allowing Idaho to issue permits to ranchers for aerial
> shooting of predators to protect livestock if their vehicle qualifies
> as a "light sport aircraft" under new FAA regulations. The new category
> has spawned a squadron of unconventional flying craft known as "aerial
> ATVs."
>
> "These are the newest, hottest things for ranchers," said Allen
> Kenitzer, a spokesman for the FAA in Renton, Wash. "This is something
> people out West really wanted, to be able to use these aircraft out in
> the middle of nowhere to do the things they need to do."
>
> But wildlife activists say the use of kit-built and experimental flying
> contraptions for airborne attacks on wild animals is dangerous and
> absurd.
>
> "I'm covering my eyes and laughing," said Wendy Keefover-Ring of
> Boulder, Colo., coordinator of a national coalition of environmental
> groups that wants to end aerial gunning of wildlife. "It's unsafe even
> when you are in a plane that has a stronger engine than these
> ultralights have."
>
> State law authorizes the Idaho Department of Agriculture to issue
> permits for people to "shoot, capture, harass or kill" wildlife that is
> threatening livestock while the person is airborne in an aircraft. The
> practice did not get FAA scrutiny until 2003, when a southeastern Idaho
> rancher was cited by the FAA for illegally using his powered parachute
> -- a cage-like cockpit with a motorcyle-size engine and propeller
> suspended from a parachute -- to shoot coyotes.
>
> The federal agency determined that because ultralight craft could only
> be flown for sport and recreation. Using them for livestock protection
> or to collect a bounty on predators was prohibited.
>
> "It was animal rights people who turned him in," said Eulalie Langford,
> a former state legislator from Montpelier who took up the fight on
> behalf of the rancher, whose name was not released by the FAA. "Baby
> lambs have rights too, and I told our officials that people might be
> getting a lot of sport and recreation out of shooting these coyotes
> that were eating their lambs."
>
> In April 2003, the state formally asked for a waiver to allow the use
> of powered parachutes in airborne predator control.
>
> "As technology has improved, it has become apparent that powered
> parachutes are an ideal vehicle for airborne predator control," wrote
> Stanley Boyd, a lobbyist for woolgrowers, elk breeders and cattle
> ranchers who heads the Idaho Animal Damage Control Board.
>
> The application was denied, prompting Idaho's all-Republican
> congressional delegation to write an appeal to FAA Administrator Marion
> Blakey.
>
> "It is important to note that these activities occur in the vast open
> spaces of rural Idaho and pose no real threat to human safety," Sens.
> Larry Craig and Mike Crapo, along with Reps. Mike Simpson and C.L.
> "Butch" Otter wrote in the September 2004 letter.
>
> After several months of investigation and negotiation, Blakey
> responded, writing that FAA "does not want to unduly restrict these
> activities, but only wants to ensure they are conducted safely and in
> appropriately certificated aircraft."
>
> The solution came with the creation of the new light sport aircraft
> category and new sport pilot certificate issued by FAA. Under the new
> rule, lighter-than-air balloons, gliders, airships, flying trikes,
> gyroplanes, powered parachutes and other ultralights that meet certain
> weight, speed and capacity standards can be certified and receive a
> tail number just like a full-size private airplane. The test required
> for a light sport aircraft pilot's certificate is not as extensive as a
> traditional pilot's license.
>
> "Now, ranchers can take eight hours of instruction, pay a small
> certification fee and then just take a felt pen to write your 'N'
> number on the side of your craft and bingo, you're legal," Boyd said in
> an interview. "We didn't issue any permits for ultralights this past
> year, but ranchers are just learning this is available to them."
>
> Keefover-Ring, who tracks aerial gunning accidents for the conservation
> group Sinapu, said although she has never seen a report of an
> ultralight crashing while aerial gunning, her group has records dating
> back to 1989 of 24 crashes of standard airplanes or helicopters during
> airborne predator flights that killed 32 people.
>
> "There is so little margin for error when you are flying 10 feet off
> the ground shooting a gun at a moving target," she said.
>
> But Langford maintains the ultralights are safer than standard
> airplanes for picking off coyotes, foxes and other livestock predators.
>
> "Airplanes, even small planes, can travel over 100 miles an hour, while
> these aerial ATVs move along about the speed that a coyote can run,"
> she said. "If there's a mountain coming up, you have plenty of time to
> see it and take evasive action."

[Newps]

Bob Noel wrote:
> In article om>,
> "AJ" > wrote:
>
>
>>"I'm covering my eyes and laughing," said Wendy Keefover-Ring of
>>Boulder, Colo., coordinator of a national coalition of environmental
>>groups that wants to end aerial gunning of wildlife. "It's unsafe even
>>when you are in a plane that has a stronger engine than these
>>ultralights have."
>
>
> so what qualifies Wendy to assess the safety of anything related
> to aviation?

Anybody with a hyphenated last name is not to be taken serious.

[Grumman-581]

"Bob Noel" > wrote in message
...
> so what qualifies Wendy to assess the safety of anything related
> to aviation?

She's an "air head"?

[Jim Macklin]

State and federal game-animal control laws.



"Flyingmonk" > wrote in message
oups.com...
| Now, wouldn't these guys be on or over their OWN land?
Why would they
| NEED permission to carry weapons or shoot from it on/over
their own
| land? Especially if they are in a powered parachute or
ultralights,
| which are not regulated.
|
| The Monk
|
|
| AJ wrote:
| > >From an article in the Caspar (WY) StarTribune.net --
am I wrong in
| > thinking this is not a good idea?
| >
| > AJ
| >
| > New weapon in the sky
| > By CHRISTOPHER SMITH
| > Associated Press writer
| >
| > BOISE, Idaho -- Idaho's congressional delegation and the
administration
| > of Gov. Dirk Kempthorne spent the past two years
convincing the Federal
| > Aviation Administration to give ranchers permits to
shoot coyotes and
| > other wild predators while flying overhead in powered
parachutes and
| > ultralight flying machines.
| >
| > After initially refusing to allow the state to issue
aerial gunning
| > permits for experimental aircraft operated by
non-certified pilots, FAA
| > Administrator Marion Blakey relented last spring and
agreed to come up
| > with "the most appropriate means of accommodation,"
according to
| > correspondence obtained by The Associated Press under
the Freedom of
| > Information Act.
| >
| > The FAA is now allowing Idaho to issue permits to
ranchers for aerial
| > shooting of predators to protect livestock if their
vehicle qualifies
| > as a "light sport aircraft" under new FAA regulations.
The new category
| > has spawned a squadron of unconventional flying craft
known as "aerial
| > ATVs."
| >
| > "These are the newest, hottest things for ranchers,"
said Allen
| > Kenitzer, a spokesman for the FAA in Renton, Wash. "This
is something
| > people out West really wanted, to be able to use these
aircraft out in
| > the middle of nowhere to do the things they need to do."
| >
| > But wildlife activists say the use of kit-built and
experimental flying
| > contraptions for airborne attacks on wild animals is
dangerous and
| > absurd.
| >
| > "I'm covering my eyes and laughing," said Wendy
Keefover-Ring of
| > Boulder, Colo., coordinator of a national coalition of
environmental
| > groups that wants to end aerial gunning of wildlife.
"It's unsafe even
| > when you are in a plane that has a stronger engine than
these
| > ultralights have."
| >
| > State law authorizes the Idaho Department of Agriculture
to issue
| > permits for people to "shoot, capture, harass or kill"
wildlife that is
| > threatening livestock while the person is airborne in an
aircraft. The
| > practice did not get FAA scrutiny until 2003, when a
southeastern Idaho
| > rancher was cited by the FAA for illegally using his
powered parachute
| > -- a cage-like cockpit with a motorcyle-size engine and
propeller
| > suspended from a parachute -- to shoot coyotes.
| >
| > The federal agency determined that because ultralight
craft could only
| > be flown for sport and recreation. Using them for
livestock protection
| > or to collect a bounty on predators was prohibited.
| >
| > "It was animal rights people who turned him in," said
Eulalie Langford,
| > a former state legislator from Montpelier who took up
the fight on
| > behalf of the rancher, whose name was not released by
the FAA. "Baby
| > lambs have rights too, and I told our officials that
people might be
| > getting a lot of sport and recreation out of shooting
these coyotes
| > that were eating their lambs."
| >
| > In April 2003, the state formally asked for a waiver to
allow the use
| > of powered parachutes in airborne predator control.
| >
| > "As technology has improved, it has become apparent that
powered
| > parachutes are an ideal vehicle for airborne predator
control," wrote
| > Stanley Boyd, a lobbyist for woolgrowers, elk breeders
and cattle
| > ranchers who heads the Idaho Animal Damage Control
Board.
| >
| > The application was denied, prompting Idaho's
all-Republican
| > congressional delegation to write an appeal to FAA
Administrator Marion
| > Blakey.
| >
| > "It is important to note that these activities occur in
the vast open
| > spaces of rural Idaho and pose no real threat to human
safety," Sens.
| > Larry Craig and Mike Crapo, along with Reps. Mike
Simpson and C.L.
| > "Butch" Otter wrote in the September 2004 letter.
| >
| > After several months of investigation and negotiation,
Blakey
| > responded, writing that FAA "does not want to unduly
restrict these
| > activities, but only wants to ensure they are conducted
safely and in
| > appropriately certificated aircraft."
| >
| > The solution came with the creation of the new light
sport aircraft
| > category and new sport pilot certificate issued by FAA.
Under the new
| > rule, lighter-than-air balloons, gliders, airships,
flying trikes,
| > gyroplanes, powered parachutes and other ultralights
that meet certain
| > weight, speed and capacity standards can be certified
and receive a
| > tail number just like a full-size private airplane. The
test required
| > for a light sport aircraft pilot's certificate is not as
extensive as a
| > traditional pilot's license.
| >
| > "Now, ranchers can take eight hours of instruction, pay
a small
| > certification fee and then just take a felt pen to write
your 'N'
| > number on the side of your craft and bingo, you're
legal," Boyd said in
| > an interview. "We didn't issue any permits for
ultralights this past
| > year, but ranchers are just learning this is available
to them."
| >
| > Keefover-Ring, who tracks aerial gunning accidents for
the conservation
| > group Sinapu, said although she has never seen a report
of an
| > ultralight crashing while aerial gunning, her group has
records dating
| > back to 1989 of 24 crashes of standard airplanes or
helicopters during
| > airborne predator flights that killed 32 people.
| >
| > "There is so little margin for error when you are flying
10 feet off
| > the ground shooting a gun at a moving target," she said.
| >
| > But Langford maintains the ultralights are safer than
standard
| > airplanes for picking off coyotes, foxes and other
livestock predators.
| >
| > "Airplanes, even small planes, can travel over 100 miles
an hour, while
| > these aerial ATVs move along about the speed that a
coyote can run,"
| > she said. "If there's a mountain coming up, you have
plenty of time to
| > see it and take evasive action."
|

[Matt Barrow]

"Bob Noel" > wrote in message
...
> In article om>,
> "AJ" > wrote:
>
>> "I'm covering my eyes and laughing," said Wendy Keefover-Ring of
>> Boulder, Colo., coordinator of a national coalition of environmental
>> groups that wants to end aerial gunning of wildlife. "It's unsafe even
>> when you are in a plane that has a stronger engine than these
>> ultralights have."
>
> so what qualifies Wendy to assess the safety of anything related
> to aviation?

She's evidently one of the "Annoited" as Tom Sowell puts it.

[Matt Barrow]

"Jim Macklin" > wrote in message
news:7ZO2g.6583$ZW3.5691@dukeread04...
> It has been long practice from J3 to Super Cub, just open
> the door and shoot at a 45 degree angle, the prop doesn't
> like buckshot.
>
> We need these on the Mexican border to shoot coyotes.
>
Two legged or four?

[Newps]

Jim Macklin wrote:

> State and federal game-animal control laws.

That's not it. Coyotes are not protected. They are classified as
pests. There are no seasons, bag limits or any other restrictions. You
may shoot them with any gun that is legal to own. You may herd them
with airplanes and use radios to talk with people on the ground. Out
here in the West the USDA uses helicopters and Cubs to shoot coyotes.

[Jim Macklin]

optional, wondered how long before somebody caught the
double meaning.



"Matt Barrow" > wrote in message
...
|
| "Jim Macklin" > wrote
in message
| news:7ZO2g.6583$ZW3.5691@dukeread04...
| > It has been long practice from J3 to Super Cub, just
open
| > the door and shoot at a 45 degree angle, the prop
doesn't
| > like buckshot.
| >
| > We need these on the Mexican border to shoot coyotes.
| >
| Two legged or four?
|
|

[Jim Macklin]

varies by state to state.


"Newps" > wrote in message
. ..
|
|
| Jim Macklin wrote:
|
| > State and federal game-animal control laws.
|
| That's not it. Coyotes are not protected. They are
classified as
| pests. There are no seasons, bag limits or any other
restrictions. You
| may shoot them with any gun that is legal to own. You may
herd them
| with airplanes and use radios to talk with people on the
ground. Out
| here in the West the USDA uses helicopters and Cubs to
shoot coyotes.
|
|

[[email protected]]

I see no problem with this... I live in Boise Idaho, and there is a lot
of wide open land around here. Ranchers flying over their own ranges
in powered parachutes popping coyotes is not a big deal. You can fly a
powered parachute hands off by leaning your body anyway... that leaves
two hands free to aim your 0.223 (favorite ranch rifle)

PETA folks can whine all they want...

[Flyingmonk]

> that leaves two hands free to aim your 0.223 (favorite ranch rifle)

You must be talking 'bout the Ruger Mini14, had one once, loved it.

The Monk

[Jay Beckman]

"Matt Barrow" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Jim Macklin" > wrote in message
> news:7ZO2g.6583$ZW3.5691@dukeread04...
>> It has been long practice from J3 to Super Cub, just open
>> the door and shoot at a 45 degree angle, the prop doesn't
>> like buckshot.
>>
>> We need these on the Mexican border to shoot coyotes.
>>
> Two legged or four?

Yes...

Jay B

[Jim Macklin]

AR or Ruger?


--
James H. Macklin
ATP,CFI,A&P

--
The people think the Constitution protects their rights;
But government sees it as an obstacle to be overcome.
some support
http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/secondamendment2.htm
See http://www.fija.org/ more about your rights and duties.


> wrote in message
oups.com...
|I see no problem with this... I live in Boise Idaho, and
there is a lot
| of wide open land around here. Ranchers flying over their
own ranges
| in powered parachutes popping coyotes is not a big deal.
You can fly a
| powered parachute hands off by leaning your body anyway...
that leaves
| two hands free to aim your 0.223 (favorite ranch rifle)
|
| PETA folks can whine all they want...
|

[Grumman-581]

> wrote in message
oups.com...
> I see no problem with this... I live in Boise Idaho, and there is a lot
> of wide open land around here. Ranchers flying over their own ranges
> in powered parachutes popping coyotes is not a big deal. You can fly a
> powered parachute hands off by leaning your body anyway... that leaves
> two hands free to aim your 0.223 (favorite ranch rifle)

I'm not sure that it is all that wise to shoot a rifle that ejects spent
shells while in an aircraft (and I'm using that term loosely) that has a
pusher prop *right* behind you?

[Grumman-581]

"Flyingmonk" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> Now, wouldn't these guys be on or over their OWN land? Why would they
> NEED permission to carry weapons or shoot from it on/over their own
> land? Especially if they are in a powered parachute or ultralights,
> which are not regulated.

Because, as much as we would like to think otherwise, we don't live in a
*free* country... Look at Waco... The kooks were minding their own business
up until the government decided that it wanted to exterminate their religion
and get some PR points for the upcoming Brady Crap Legislation...

[John T]

It varies state to state. In WI, you can't hunt by air.

[Matt Barrow]

"Grumman-581" > wrote in message
...
> > wrote in message
> oups.com...
>> I see no problem with this... I live in Boise Idaho, and there is a lot
>> of wide open land around here. Ranchers flying over their own ranges
>> in powered parachutes popping coyotes is not a big deal. You can fly a
>> powered parachute hands off by leaning your body anyway... that leaves
>> two hands free to aim your 0.223 (favorite ranch rifle)
>
> I'm not sure that it is all that wise to shoot a rifle that ejects spent
> shells while in an aircraft (and I'm using that term loosely) that has a
> pusher prop *right* behind you?
>
Brass catcher.

[Newps]

You can't hunt by air here in Montana either but blasting coyotes is not
hunting, therefore the hunting laws do not apply.



John T wrote:
> It varies state to state. In WI, you can't hunt by air.
>

[Jim Macklin]

They sell shell-catchers, a bag and attachment.



"Grumman-581" > wrote
in message ...
| > wrote in message
|
oups.com...
| > I see no problem with this... I live in Boise Idaho, and
there is a lot
| > of wide open land around here. Ranchers flying over
their own ranges
| > in powered parachutes popping coyotes is not a big deal.
You can fly a
| > powered parachute hands off by leaning your body
anyway... that leaves
| > two hands free to aim your 0.223 (favorite ranch rifle)
|
| I'm not sure that it is all that wise to shoot a rifle
that ejects spent
| shells while in an aircraft (and I'm using that term
loosely) that has a
| pusher prop *right* behind you?
|
|

[Matt Barrow]

"Newps" > wrote in message
...
> You can't hunt by air here in Montana either but blasting coyotes is not
> hunting, therefore the hunting laws do not apply.
>

Colorado, too; it's not hunting, it's "Pest Control".

Try taking deer or elk from the air and DW will shove a SAM up your butt.

[Grumman-581]

"Matt Barrow" > wrote in message
...
> Brass catcher.

I've seen them advertised, but never used one since I don't reload... Are
they 100% successful?

I would hazard to guess a 12-gauge might be more appropriate when shooting
from a low and slow air vehicle like that though...

[Montblack]

("Newps" wrote)
> You can't hunt by air here in Montana either but blasting coyotes is not
> hunting, therefore the hunting laws do not apply.


[NEWPS - e-mail me off group please. Thanks]

And now, back to our story...

Pilot gets low and slow and ends up in the trees - broken leg. Nobody knows
he went up to hunt coyote this day. Our hunter fashions a splint out of
aluminum plane pieces (or wood) and attempts to hobble out of the woods (his
rifle was barrel bent in the crash - useless except as a crutch), back down
the valley to the families secluded, high pasture, ranch house.

Problem now, aside from the broken leg, the coming of night and the season's
first snowstorm brewing to the west - he's not alone up on the mountainside.

"Wilderness Prey"
By: Montblack
Forward by: Jack London and Stephen King
Title by: John Sandford
Publisher: Penguin Books


Montblack
at
visi
..
com

[Newps]

Grumman-581 wrote:
> "Matt Barrow" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>>Brass catcher.
>
>
> I've seen them advertised, but never used one since I don't reload... Are
> they 100% successful?
>
> I would hazard to guess a 12-gauge might be more appropriate when shooting
> from a low and slow air vehicle like that though...

Right, nobody uses a rifle to hunt from the air. They all use shotguns.

[Jim Logajan]

Newps > wrote:
> Grumman-581 wrote:
>> I would hazard to guess a 12-gauge might be more appropriate when
>> shooting from a low and slow air vehicle like that though...
>
> Right, nobody uses a rifle to hunt from the air. They all use
> shotguns.

Wouldn't the shooter need to be within about 150 feet to kill something
like a coyote with a shotgun? I wouldn't think flying low and slow while
trying to shoot a moving target with a shotgun is worth the risk, given
the minimal reward.

Even if the coyote is stationary, the shooter presumably wouldn't be.

[Grumman-581]

"Jim Logajan" > wrote in message
.. .
> Wouldn't the shooter need to be within about 150 feet to kill something
> like a coyote with a shotgun? I wouldn't think flying low and slow while
> trying to shoot a moving target with a shotgun is worth the risk, given
> the minimal reward.
>
> Even if the coyote is stationary, the shooter presumably wouldn't be.

Well, at altitude with a rifle, the target is still moving relative to you,
but is relatively smaller, so you have to be more accurate on your shot... I
would think that it would be easier with a shotgun -- perhaps loaded with
buck shot...

[Morgans]

"Jim Logajan" > wrote

> Wouldn't the shooter need to be within about 150 feet to kill something
> like a coyote with a shotgun? I wouldn't think flying low and slow while
> trying to shoot a moving target with a shotgun is worth the risk, given
> the minimal reward.

I would think your favorite assault rifle, with a full auto "modification"
paired up with a real big clip would work the best. It would take some of
the skill out of it, but it would be "a ton o' fun!"
--
Jim in NC

[Richard]

Montblack wrote:
> ("Newps" wrote)
>> You can't hunt by air here in Montana either but blasting coyotes is
>> not hunting, therefore the hunting laws do not apply.
>
>
> [NEWPS - e-mail me off group please. Thanks]
>
> And now, back to our story...
>
> Pilot gets low and slow and ends up in the trees - broken leg. Nobody
> knows he went up to hunt coyote this day. Our hunter fashions a splint
> out of aluminum plane pieces (or wood) and attempts to hobble out of the
> woods (his rifle was barrel bent in the crash - useless except as a
> crutch), back down the valley to the families secluded, high pasture,
> ranch house.
>
> Problem now, aside from the broken leg, the coming of night and the
> season's first snowstorm brewing to the west - he's not alone up on the
> mountainside.
>
> "Wilderness Prey"
> By: Montblack
> Forward by: Jack London and Stephen King
> Title by: John Sandford
> Publisher: Penguin Books
>
>
> Montblack
> at
> visi
> .
> com

If he doesn't carry a pistol in at least a .357 calibre on that mission
I can only hope he dies without reproducing.

But that's just my opinion.

And I'm from Texas.

Richard

[Jim Macklin]

The BATFE would take a dim view of those modifications.


--
The people think the Constitution protects their rights;
But government sees it as an obstacle to be overcome.
some support
http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/secondamendment2.htm
See http://www.fija.org/ more about your rights and duties.


"Morgans" > wrote in message
...
|
| "Jim Logajan" > wrote
|
| > Wouldn't the shooter need to be within about 150 feet to
kill something
| > like a coyote with a shotgun? I wouldn't think flying
low and slow while
| > trying to shoot a moving target with a shotgun is
worth the risk, given
| > the minimal reward.
|
| I would think your favorite assault rifle, with a full
auto "modification"
| paired up with a real big clip would work the best. It
would take some of
| the skill out of it, but it would be "a ton o' fun!"
| --
| Jim in NC
|
|

[Grumman-581]

"Jim Macklin" > wrote in message
news:_nm3g.8069$ZW3.4800@dukeread04...
> The BATFE would take a dim view of those modifications.

**** the BATF... What part of SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED do they not understand?

[Jim Macklin]

Did not say I agreed with the 1934, 1938 or 1968 laws, as
amended, but those laws are on the books and the BATFE
agents will do nasty things, like kill you.


--
The people think the Constitution protects their rights;
But government sees it as an obstacle to be overcome.
some support
http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/secondamendment2.htm
See http://www.fija.org/ more about your rights and duties.


"Grumman-581" > wrote
in message
...
| "Jim Macklin" > wrote
in message
| news:_nm3g.8069$ZW3.4800@dukeread04...
| > The BATFE would take a dim view of those modifications.
|
| **** the BATF... What part of SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED do
they not understand?
|
|

[Gig 601XL Builder]

"Grumman-581" > wrote in message
...
> "Matt Barrow" > wrote in message
> ...
>> Brass catcher.
>
> I've seen them advertised, but never used one since I don't reload... Are
> they 100% successful?
>

Here's one that I have used and has probably caught 10,000 rounds of my
brass out of an AR-15 without a problem.

http://www.bushmaster.com/shopping/accessories/el-ar-002.asp


The nice thing about this one is it doesn't have a bag to swing around.

[Newps]

Jim Logajan wrote:

> Newps > wrote:
>
>>Grumman-581 wrote:
>>
>>>I would hazard to guess a 12-gauge might be more appropriate when
>>>shooting from a low and slow air vehicle like that though...
>>
>>Right, nobody uses a rifle to hunt from the air. They all use
>>shotguns.
>
>
> Wouldn't the shooter need to be within about 150 feet to kill something
> like a coyote with a shotgun? I wouldn't think flying low and slow while
> trying to shoot a moving target with a shotgun is worth the risk, given
> the minimal reward.
>
> Even if the coyote is stationary, the shooter presumably wouldn't be.


The guys I have seen do this have no problem getting within 50 feet of
the coyote.

[Matt Barrow]

"Grumman-581" > wrote in message
...
> "Matt Barrow" > wrote in message
> ...
>> Brass catcher.
>
> I've seen them advertised, but never used one since I don't reload... Are
> they 100% successful?

I haven't used one, but at a shotgun club here, the lazy guys use them on
their autos to avoid bending over 250 times to pick up their empties (if
they reload).

> I would hazard to guess a 12-gauge might be more appropriate when shooting
> from a low and slow air vehicle like that though...

A 12ga is only good for about 50 yards at most, so you better get pretty
close. At that, it would be intersting to see how a liot handles the recoil
while controlling the airplane.

I would imagine a CAR-15 or Ruger Mini-14 is used quite a bit.

We get a few cyotes on our property occasionally, but if you take about 5-10
of them out, the rest usually vacate the area for several months.


--
Matt
---------------------
Matthew W. Barrow
Site-Fill Homes, LLC.
Montrose, CO

[Matt Barrow]

"Montblack" > wrote in message
...
> ("Newps" wrote)
>> You can't hunt by air here in Montana either but blasting coyotes is not
>> hunting, therefore the hunting laws do not apply.
>
>
> [NEWPS - e-mail me off group please. Thanks]
>
> And now, back to our story...
>
> Pilot gets low and slow and ends up in the trees - broken leg. Nobody
> knows he went up to hunt coyote this day. Our hunter fashions a splint out
> of aluminum plane pieces (or wood) and attempts to hobble out of the woods
> (his rifle was barrel bent in the crash - useless except as a crutch),
> back down the valley to the families secluded, high pasture, ranch house.
>
> Problem now, aside from the broken leg, the coming of night and the
> season's first snowstorm brewing to the west - he's not alone up on the
> mountainside.
>
> "Wilderness Prey"
> By: Montblack
> Forward by: Jack London

He got better?

> and Stephen King

[Matt Barrow]

"Richard" > wrote in message
...
> Montblack wrote:
>> ("Newps" wrote)
>>> You can't hunt by air here in Montana either but blasting coyotes is not
>>> hunting, therefore the hunting laws do not apply.
>>
>>
>> [NEWPS - e-mail me off group please. Thanks]
>>
>> And now, back to our story...
>>
>> Pilot gets low and slow and ends up in the trees - broken leg. Nobody
>> knows he went up to hunt coyote this day. Our hunter fashions a splint
>> out of aluminum plane pieces (or wood) and attempts to hobble out of the
>> woods (his rifle was barrel bent in the crash - useless except as a
>> crutch), back down the valley to the families secluded, high pasture,
>> ranch house.
>>
>> Problem now, aside from the broken leg, the coming of night and the
>> season's first snowstorm brewing to the west - he's not alone up on the
>> mountainside.
>>
>> "Wilderness Prey"
>> By: Montblack
>> Forward by: Jack London and Stephen King
>> Title by: John Sandford
>> Publisher: Penguin Books
>>
>>
>> Montblack
>> at
>> visi
>> .
>> com
>
> If he doesn't carry a pistol in at least a .357 calibre on that mission I
> can only hope he dies without reproducing.
>
> But that's just my opinion.
>
> And I'm from Texas.

I'm from Colorado and my survival kit in the baggage compartment has a 4"
S&W Model 66 in stainless and 25 rounds of HydraShok and 25 rounds of
shotcaps.

--
Matt
---------------------
Matthew W. Barrow
Site-Fill Homes, LLC.
Montrose, CO

[Montblack]

("Matt Barrow" wrote)
>> "Wilderness Prey"
>> By: Montblack
>> Forward by: Jack London
>
> He got better?
>
>> and Stephen King


Which one, Jack London or Stephen King? <g>


Montblack

[Newps]

Matt Barrow wrote:

>
>
> A 12ga is only good for about 50 yards at most, so you better get pretty
> close.



It is not a goal of coyote hunters to kill cleanly with one shot. If
you simply wound the animal and he slinks off and dies that is good enough.



At that, it would be intersting to see how a liot handles the recoil
> while controlling the airplane.

He doesn't. The shooter sits in the back.


>
> I would imagine a CAR-15 or Ruger Mini-14 is used quite a bit.

Only by the idiots. A shotgun is the way to go.

[Matt Barrow]

"Grumman-581" > wrote in message
...
> "Jim Macklin" > wrote in message
> news:_nm3g.8069$ZW3.4800@dukeread04...
>> The BATFE would take a dim view of those modifications.
>
> **** the BATF... What part of SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED do they not
> understand?
>

The same part of that and every other article and amendment the Congress has
been ignoring since the 19th century.

[Matt Barrow]

"Newps" > wrote in message
. ..
>
>
> At that, it would be intersting to see how a liot handles the recoil
>> while controlling the airplane.
>
> He doesn't. The shooter sits in the back.
>

Of an ultralight or powered parachute (the OP's vehilce of choice)?
>
>>
>> I would imagine a CAR-15 or Ruger Mini-14 is used quite a bit.
>
> Only by the idiots. A shotgun is the way to go.

Why? 20 or so years ago they used helicopters or aircraft and Winchester
rifles.

[Flyingmonk]

More likely the Ruger Jim. The Mini14 is often refered to as "the
ranch rifle".

The Monk

Jim Macklin wrote:
> AR or Ruger?
>
>
> --
> James H. Macklin
> ATP,CFI,A&P
>
> --
> The people think the Constitution protects their rights;
> But government sees it as an obstacle to be overcome.
> some support
> http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/secondamendment2.htm
> See http://www.fija.org/ more about your rights and duties.
>
>
> > wrote in message
> oups.com...
> |I see no problem with this... I live in Boise Idaho, and
> there is a lot
> | of wide open land around here. Ranchers flying over their
> own ranges
> | in powered parachutes popping coyotes is not a big deal.
> You can fly a
> | powered parachute hands off by leaning your body anyway...
> that leaves
> | two hands free to aim your 0.223 (favorite ranch rifle)
> |
> | PETA folks can whine all they want...
> |

[Gig 601XL Builder]

Actually the "Ranch Rifle" was a particular model of the Mini-14. It
basically was a Mini-14 that was modified by the factory for use with a
scope. Came out is the early '80s I think.


"Flyingmonk" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> More likely the Ruger Jim. The Mini14 is often refered to as "the
> ranch rifle".
>
> The Monk

[Jim Macklin]

For bears, a few solids will penetrate more to the vitals
and can also be used for small game without as much meat
damage. If I was going to pick a handgun for my survival
gun, I'd probably either use a Ruger Bearcat and carry a
couple hundred rounds of 22 LR or I'd try the Ruger Alaskan
480 Ruger if I was in bear country and I'd have a better
shotload in the .475 bore and a real stopper in the big
bore. But if I ever flew to Canada, I'd have to switch to a
rifle, since the Canadians have really bad gun laws.


--
James H. Macklin
ATP,CFI,A&P

--
The people think the Constitution protects their rights;
But government sees it as an obstacle to be overcome.
some support
http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/secondamendment2.htm
See http://www.fija.org/ more about your rights and duties.


"Matt Barrow" > wrote in message
...
|
| "Richard" > wrote in message
| ...
| > Montblack wrote:
| >> ("Newps" wrote)
| >>> You can't hunt by air here in Montana either but
blasting coyotes is not
| >>> hunting, therefore the hunting laws do not apply.
| >>
| snip

| > But that's just my opinion.
| >
| > And I'm from Texas.
|
| I'm from Colorado and my survival kit in the baggage
compartment has a 4"
| S&W Model 66 in stainless and 25 rounds of HydraShok and
25 rounds of
| shotcaps.
|
| --
| Matt
| ---------------------
| Matthew W. Barrow
| Site-Fill Homes, LLC.
| Montrose, CO
|
|

[Jim Macklin]

--
The people think the Constitution protects their rights;
But government sees it as an obstacle to be overcome.
some support
http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/secondamendment2.htm
See http://www.fija.org/ more about your rights and duties.


"Matt Barrow" > wrote in message
...
|
| "Grumman-581" >
wrote in message
| ...
| > "Jim Macklin" >
wrote in message
| > news:_nm3g.8069$ZW3.4800@dukeread04...
| >> The BATFE would take a dim view of those modifications.
| >
| > **** the BATF... What part of SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED do
they not
| > understand?
| >
|
| The same part of that and every other article and
amendment the Congress has
| been ignoring since the 19th century.
|
|

[Jim Macklin]

Yes, I know, but the real ranchers call any gun they always
have on the tractor or in the truck their ranch rifle.
Often a Marlin 336 or Winchester 94. Oh, to have enough
money to buy a few hundred gins just so I could have the
perfect shooter for every situation.


--
The people think the Constitution protects their rights;
But government sees it as an obstacle to be overcome.
some support
http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/secondamendment2.htm
See http://www.fija.org/ more about your rights and duties.


"Flyingmonk" > wrote in message
oups.com...
| More likely the Ruger Jim. The Mini14 is often refered to
as "the
| ranch rifle".
|
| The Monk
|
| Jim Macklin wrote:
| > AR or Ruger?
| >
| >
| > --
| > James H. Macklin
| > ATP,CFI,A&P
| >
| > --
| > The people think the Constitution protects their rights;
| > But government sees it as an obstacle to be overcome.
| > some support
| > http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/secondamendment2.htm
| > See http://www.fija.org/ more about your rights and
duties.
| >
| >
| > > wrote in message
| >
oups.com...
| > |I see no problem with this... I live in Boise Idaho,
and
| > there is a lot
| > | of wide open land around here. Ranchers flying over
their
| > own ranges
| > | in powered parachutes popping coyotes is not a big
deal.
| > You can fly a
| > | powered parachute hands off by leaning your body
anyway...
| > that leaves
| > | two hands free to aim your 0.223 (favorite ranch
rifle)
| > |
| > | PETA folks can whine all they want...
| > |
|

[Jim Macklin]

You see a lot of Ruger Mini-14 types on TV, they appeared on
the A-Team because they cost half the price of a Colt AR 15.
Ruger P85 pistols also appear in many TV shows because they
cost less.

Ruger builds good guns, too bad Bill Ruger folded on the
magazine capacity bs, they quit selling 20 round Mini-14
magazines to civilians [they were in the price list at $8
back in the days] and Bill Ruger Sr. said "ban overt 15
rounds" and that acceptance "proved" that some number of
bullets in a magazine was evil, so they passed the 10 round
ban.

--
The people think the Constitution protects their rights;
But government sees it as an obstacle to be overcome.
some support
http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/secondamendment2.htm
See http://www.fija.org/ more about your rights and duties.


"Gig 601XL Builder" <wrDOTgiaconaATcox.net> wrote in message
...
| Actually the "Ranch Rifle" was a particular model of the
Mini-14. It
| basically was a Mini-14 that was modified by the factory
for use with a
| scope. Came out is the early '80s I think.
|
|
| "Flyingmonk" > wrote in message
|
oups.com...
| > More likely the Ruger Jim. The Mini14 is often refered
to as "the
| > ranch rifle".
| >
| > The Monk
|
|

[Grumman-581]

"Jim Macklin" > wrote in message
news:bDP3g.10242$ZW3.6399@dukeread04...
> Ruger builds good guns, too bad Bill Ruger folded on the
> magazine capacity bs, they quit selling 20 round Mini-14
> magazines to civilians [they were in the price list at $8
> back in the days] and Bill Ruger Sr. said "ban overt 15
> rounds" and that acceptance "proved" that some number of
> bullets in a magazine was evil, so they passed the 10 round
> ban.

I've got a few 30-round mags for my Mini-14... Never know when one might
have the BATF/FBI knocking at one's door because they don't like your
religion or whatever... It happened in Waco, it can happen elsewhere...

[Jim Macklin]

I bought a Mini 14 back in 1976 [stamped on the side."Made
in the 200th year of American Freedom" Ruger actually sold
20 round magazines for $8. I gave that rifle to my eldest
son after he turned 21 or so. He has all those very
reliable Ruger mags. Also had some after-market 20 and 30
round mags, but they did have some feeding problems.

If I ever again have the money to buy guns again, there are
several 223 and 30 Russian rifles that are on my list.

Waco was a tragedy, it looked like the BATF was making a
COPS show with all the troops in the camera. It wasn't a
well planned raid if the Davidians were expected to be
dangerous. And if they weren't dangerous, why the raid? I
think they wanted a movie to show Congress why they needed
more money. After the BATF started the shooting, they had
to kill as many as possible and burn the evidence. Would
have been better if they had just let the Sheriff or Rangers
walk in and if Koresh was a child molester, try him for
that. But Janet Reno had her tanks.


--
The people think the Constitution protects their rights;
But government sees it as an obstacle to be overcome.
some support
http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/secondamendment2.htm
See http://www.fija.org/ more about your rights and duties.


"Grumman-581" > wrote
in message ...
| "Jim Macklin" > wrote
in message
| news:bDP3g.10242$ZW3.6399@dukeread04...
| > Ruger builds good guns, too bad Bill Ruger folded on the
| > magazine capacity bs, they quit selling 20 round Mini-14
| > magazines to civilians [they were in the price list at
$8
| > back in the days] and Bill Ruger Sr. said "ban overt 15
| > rounds" and that acceptance "proved" that some number of
| > bullets in a magazine was evil, so they passed the 10
round
| > ban.
|
| I've got a few 30-round mags for my Mini-14... Never know
when one might
| have the BATF/FBI knocking at one's door because they
don't like your
| religion or whatever... It happened in Waco, it can happen
elsewhere...
|
|

[Grumman-581]

"Jim Macklin" > wrote in message
news:cYZ3g.10297$ZW3.1757@dukeread04...
> Waco was a tragedy, it looked like the BATF was making a
> COPS show with all the troops in the camera. It wasn't a
> well planned raid if the Davidians were expected to be
> dangerous. And if they weren't dangerous, why the raid? I
> think they wanted a movie to show Congress why they needed
> more money. After the BATF started the shooting, they had
> to kill as many as possible and burn the evidence. Would
> have been better if they had just let the Sheriff or Rangers
> walk in and if Koresh was a child molester, try him for
> that. But Janet Reno had her tanks.

Yeah, they could have had the local Sheriff arrest him while he was out
jogging in the morning, but noooooo, they had to provoke a confrontational
situation... Let's see... You got a group of people who believe that the
world is going to end and be taken over by some sort of ultra-repressive
government... Well, why don't we all dress up in black clothes and attack
them... Hell, they'll give up, right? <snicker> Yeah, Koresh was a kook,
but so are many of the religious fanatics... As religious kooks went, he was
actually one of the more harmless ones...

[karl gruber]

I bought a Ruger "77" in 220 Swift that same year, with the same
inscription.

Karl
It has been in my Cessna for the news group cops!


"Jim Macklin" > wrote in message
news:cYZ3g.10297$ZW3.1757@dukeread04...
>I bought a Mini 14 back in 1976 [stamped on the side."Made
> in the 200th year of American Freedom" Ruger actually sold
> 20 round magazines for $8. I gave that rifle to my eldest
> son after he turned 21 or so. He has all those very
> reliable Ruger mags. Also had some after-market 20 and 30
> round mags, but they did have some feeding problems.
>
> If I ever again have the money to buy guns again, there are
> several 223 and 30 Russian rifles that are on my list.
>
> Waco was a tragedy, it looked like the BATF was making a
> COPS show with all the troops in the camera. It wasn't a
> well planned raid if the Davidians were expected to be
> dangerous. And if they weren't dangerous, why the raid? I
> think they wanted a movie to show Congress why they needed
> more money. After the BATF started the shooting, they had
> to kill as many as possible and burn the evidence. Would
> have been better if they had just let the Sheriff or Rangers
> walk in and if Koresh was a child molester, try him for
> that. But Janet Reno had her tanks.
>
>
> --
> The people think the Constitution protects their rights;
> But government sees it as an obstacle to be overcome.
> some support
> http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/secondamendment2.htm
> See http://www.fija.org/ more about your rights and duties.
>
>
> "Grumman-581" > wrote
> in message ...
> | "Jim Macklin" > wrote
> in message
> | news:bDP3g.10242$ZW3.6399@dukeread04...
> | > Ruger builds good guns, too bad Bill Ruger folded on the
> | > magazine capacity bs, they quit selling 20 round Mini-14
> | > magazines to civilians [they were in the price list at
> $8
> | > back in the days] and Bill Ruger Sr. said "ban overt 15
> | > rounds" and that acceptance "proved" that some number of
> | > bullets in a magazine was evil, so they passed the 10
> round
> | > ban.
> |
> | I've got a few 30-round mags for my Mini-14... Never know
> when one might
> | have the BATF/FBI knocking at one's door because they
> don't like your
> | religion or whatever... It happened in Waco, it can happen
> elsewhere...
> |
> |
>
>

[Jim Macklin]

Hitler had his SS and Gestapo, USA has the BATF, civil
rights often don't matter.


--
The people think the Constitution protects their rights;
But government sees it as an obstacle to be overcome.
some support
http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/secondamendment2.htm
See http://www.fija.org/ more about your rights and duties.


"Grumman-581" > wrote
in message
...
| "Jim Macklin" > wrote
in message
| news:cYZ3g.10297$ZW3.1757@dukeread04...
| > Waco was a tragedy, it looked like the BATF was making a
| > COPS show with all the troops in the camera. It wasn't
a
| > well planned raid if the Davidians were expected to be
| > dangerous. And if they weren't dangerous, why the raid?
I
| > think they wanted a movie to show Congress why they
needed
| > more money. After the BATF started the shooting, they
had
| > to kill as many as possible and burn the evidence.
Would
| > have been better if they had just let the Sheriff or
Rangers
| > walk in and if Koresh was a child molester, try him for
| > that. But Janet Reno had her tanks.
|
| Yeah, they could have had the local Sheriff arrest him
while he was out
| jogging in the morning, but noooooo, they had to provoke a
confrontational
| situation... Let's see... You got a group of people who
believe that the
| world is going to end and be taken over by some sort of
ultra-repressive
| government... Well, why don't we all dress up in black
clothes and attack
| them... Hell, they'll give up, right? <snicker> Yeah,
Koresh was a kook,
| but so are many of the religious fanatics... As religious
kooks went, he was
| actually one of the more harmless ones...
|
|

[Jim Macklin]

Ruger roll marked all their guns that way in 1976.


"karl gruber" > wrote in message
...
|I bought a Ruger "77" in 220 Swift that same year, with the
same
| inscription.
|
| Karl
| It has been in my Cessna for the news group cops!
|
|
| "Jim Macklin" > wrote
in message
| news:cYZ3g.10297$ZW3.1757@dukeread04...
| >I bought a Mini 14 back in 1976 [stamped on the
side."Made
| > in the 200th year of American Freedom" Ruger actually
sold
| > 20 round magazines for $8. I gave that rifle to my
eldest
| > son after he turned 21 or so. He has all those very
| > reliable Ruger mags. Also had some after-market 20 and
30
| > round mags, but they did have some feeding problems.
| >
| > If I ever again have the money to buy guns again, there
are
| > several 223 and 30 Russian rifles that are on my list.
| >
| > Waco was a tragedy, it looked like the BATF was making a
| > COPS show with all the troops in the camera. It wasn't
a
| > well planned raid if the Davidians were expected to be
| > dangerous. And if they weren't dangerous, why the raid?
I
| > think they wanted a movie to show Congress why they
needed
| > more money. After the BATF started the shooting, they
had
| > to kill as many as possible and burn the evidence.
Would
| > have been better if they had just let the Sheriff or
Rangers
| > walk in and if Koresh was a child molester, try him for
| > that. But Janet Reno had her tanks.
| >
| >
| > --
| > The people think the Constitution protects their rights;
| > But government sees it as an obstacle to be overcome.
| > some support
| > http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/secondamendment2.htm
| > See http://www.fija.org/ more about your rights and
duties.
| >
| >
| > "Grumman-581" >
wrote
| > in message
...
| > | "Jim Macklin" >
wrote
| > in message
| > | news:bDP3g.10242$ZW3.6399@dukeread04...
| > | > Ruger builds good guns, too bad Bill Ruger folded on
the
| > | > magazine capacity bs, they quit selling 20 round
Mini-14
| > | > magazines to civilians [they were in the price list
at
| > $8
| > | > back in the days] and Bill Ruger Sr. said "ban overt
15
| > | > rounds" and that acceptance "proved" that some
number of
| > | > bullets in a magazine was evil, so they passed the
10
| > round
| > | > ban.
| > |
| > | I've got a few 30-round mags for my Mini-14... Never
know
| > when one might
| > | have the BATF/FBI knocking at one's door because they
| > don't like your
| > | religion or whatever... It happened in Waco, it can
happen
| > elsewhere...
| > |
| > |
| >
| >
|
|

[LWG]

Yes, and they went to the US military to help them with their little
going-away party for Koresh. They needed a compliant little snake in the
army. They found Wesley Clark. Boy, did his career skyrocket after that.
Reno and Clinton may have been abominations, but if you were their whore,
they paid well.

"Grumman-581" > wrote in message
...
> "Jim Macklin" > wrote in message
> news:cYZ3g.10297$ZW3.1757@dukeread04...
>> Waco was a tragedy, it looked like the BATF was making a
>> COPS show with all the troops in the camera. It wasn't a
>> well planned raid if the Davidians were expected to be
>> dangerous. And if they weren't dangerous, why the raid? I
>> think they wanted a movie to show Congress why they needed
>> more money. After the BATF started the shooting, they had
>> to kill as many as possible and burn the evidence. Would
>> have been better if they had just let the Sheriff or Rangers
>> walk in and if Koresh was a child molester, try him for
>> that. But Janet Reno had her tanks.
>
> Yeah, they could have had the local Sheriff arrest him while he was out
> jogging in the morning, but noooooo, they had to provoke a confrontational
> situation... Let's see... You got a group of people who believe that the
> world is going to end and be taken over by some sort of ultra-repressive
> government... Well, why don't we all dress up in black clothes and attack
> them... Hell, they'll give up, right? <snicker> Yeah, Koresh was a kook,
> but so are many of the religious fanatics... As religious kooks went, he
> was
> actually one of the more harmless ones...
>
>

[Jim Macklin]

Here is one from a long time ago, and don't forget the FBI
sniper in Idaho was also at Waco.


Fact Sheet: HR 666 In June of 1971, four BATF officers burst
into the home of Ken Ballew. The tragic events which
followed show clearly how renegade officers will always try
....
www.gunowners.org/fs9506.htm - 26k - Cached - Similar
pages


BATF: July 19, 1995 If you are able, list for them some of
the victims of BATF abuse: the women and children in Waco,
Harry and Theresa Lamplugh of Pennsylvania, Ken Ballew of
....
www.gunowners.org/ba9502.htm - 4k - Cached - Similar
pages


Class of 1974 BRUCE BARTON BAILEY · MARK WARREN BAKER ·
RICHARD FULTON BALLARD · WILLIAM W. BALLEW ... ARTHUR
MAURICE HERRMANN (deceased). KEN CARLYLE HICKS ...
wardbook.west-point.org/display_grad.cgi?class_id=1974
- 153k - Cached - Similar pages


[PDF] NEWSLETTER File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat - View as
HTML
Our friend Ken Ballew is having serious health
problems. .. Bill Haney had cataract surgery on August 12th,
and is doing fine. Inside:. 2 Board Report ...
web.utk.edu/~tprather/FoothillsTractorClub/
newsletter/Vol11No08_Aug2003.pdf - Similar pages


'Not As Powerful As Many Might As First Believe', By Vin
Suprynowicz Go do a little reading about the raid that
crippled Air Force veteran Ken Ballew in Silver Spring,
Maryland, and how ATF agents went outside after they shot
....
www.ncc-1776.org/tle1996/le961105.html - 19k -
Cached - Similar pages


--
The people think the Constitution protects their
rights;
But government sees it as an obstacle to be overcome.
some support
http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/secondamendment2.htm
See http://www.fija.org/ more about your rights and
duties.




"LWG" > wrote in message
...
| Yes, and they went to the US military to help them with
their little
| going-away party for Koresh. They needed a compliant
little snake in the
| army. They found Wesley Clark. Boy, did his career
skyrocket after that.
| Reno and Clinton may have been abominations, but if you
were their whore,
| they paid well.
|
| "Grumman-581" >
wrote in message
| ...
| > "Jim Macklin" >
wrote in message
| > news:cYZ3g.10297$ZW3.1757@dukeread04...
| >> Waco was a tragedy, it looked like the BATF was making
a
| >> COPS show with all the troops in the camera. It wasn't
a
| >> well planned raid if the Davidians were expected to be
| >> dangerous. And if they weren't dangerous, why the
raid? I
| >> think they wanted a movie to show Congress why they
needed
| >> more money. After the BATF started the shooting, they
had
| >> to kill as many as possible and burn the evidence.
Would
| >> have been better if they had just let the Sheriff or
Rangers
| >> walk in and if Koresh was a child molester, try him for
| >> that. But Janet Reno had her tanks.
| >
| > Yeah, they could have had the local Sheriff arrest him
while he was out
| > jogging in the morning, but noooooo, they had to provoke
a confrontational
| > situation... Let's see... You got a group of people who
believe that the
| > world is going to end and be taken over by some sort of
ultra-repressive
| > government... Well, why don't we all dress up in black
clothes and attack
| > them... Hell, they'll give up, right? <snicker> Yeah,
Koresh was a kook,
| > but so are many of the religious fanatics... As
religious kooks went, he
| > was
| > actually one of the more harmless ones...
| >
| >
|
|

[Matt Barrow]

"karl gruber" > wrote in message
...
>I bought a Ruger "77" in 220 Swift that same year, with the same
>inscription.
>

Funny...my 10-22 (which I still have and my kids all learned with) says
"Made in the 200th Year of American Liberty" (not "Freedom")


> Karl
> It has been in my Cessna for the news group cops!
>
>
> "Jim Macklin" > wrote in message
> news:cYZ3g.10297$ZW3.1757@dukeread04...
>>I bought a Mini 14 back in 1976 [stamped on the side."Made
>> in the 200th year of American Freedom"

[Matt Barrow]

"LWG" > wrote in message
...
> Yes, and they went to the US military to help them with their little
> going-away party for Koresh. They needed a compliant little snake in the
> army. They found Wesley Clark. Boy, did his career skyrocket after that.
> Reno and Clinton may have been abominations, but if you were their whore,
> they paid well.

Like Mary McCarthy?

"Equally interesting is her meteoric rise within the intelligence community.
According to her bio, she joined the CIA as an analyst in 1984. Within seven
years, she had rise to a Deputy NIO position, and reached full NIO status by
1994. To reach that level, she literally catapulted over dozens of more
senior officers--and I'm guessing that her political connections didn't
hurt. By comparison, I know a current NIO, with a resume and academic
credentials more impressive than Ms. McCarthy's, who reached the position
after more than 20 years of extraordinarily distinguished service.
McCarthy's rapid advancement speaks volumes about how the Clinton
Administration did business, and sheds new light on the intelligence
failures that set the stage for 9-11. We can only wonder how many other
political hacks climbed the intel food chain under Clinton--and remain in
place to this day. "

NOTE: An NIO is the military equivalent of a four-star general.
http://formerspook.blogspot.com/2006/04/leaker.html

[Jim Macklin]

I haven't had that rifle for at least a decade, you're
correct, LIBERTY.


--
James H. Macklin
ATP,CFI,A&P

--
The people think the Constitution protects their rights;
But government sees it as an obstacle to be overcome.
some support
http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/secondamendment2.htm
See http://www.fija.org/ more about your rights and duties.


"Matt Barrow" > wrote in message
...
|
| "karl gruber" > wrote in message
| ...
| >I bought a Ruger "77" in 220 Swift that same year, with
the same
| >inscription.
| >
|
| Funny...my 10-22 (which I still have and my kids all
learned with) says
| "Made in the 200th Year of American Liberty" (not
"Freedom")
|
|
| > Karl
| > It has been in my Cessna for the news group cops!
| >
| >
| > "Jim Macklin" >
wrote in message
| > news:cYZ3g.10297$ZW3.1757@dukeread04...
| >>I bought a Mini 14 back in 1976 [stamped on the
side."Made
| >> in the 200th year of American Freedom"
|
|

[JJS]

"Newps" > wrote in message . ..
>
>
> Matt Barrow wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> A 12ga is only good for about 50 yards at most, so you better get pretty close.
>
>
>
> It is not a goal of coyote hunters to kill cleanly with one shot. If you simply wound the animal and he slinks off
> and dies that is good enough.
>
>
>
> At that, it would be intersting to see how a liot handles the recoil
>> while controlling the airplane.
>
> He doesn't. The shooter sits in the back.
>
>
>>
>> I would imagine a CAR-15 or Ruger Mini-14 is used quite a bit.
>
> Only by the idiots. A shotgun is the way to go.
>
>

News you've obviously never hunted coyotes for the hides. And Matt, you've most likely never shot coyotes with a 3
1/2 inch Mossberg Ulti-Mag with 4 buck. I've killed "song dogs beyond 50 yards" calling them in with turkey calls.
The 22-250 Ackley is my weapon of choice for long range predator hunting. The bullet leaves a vapor trail on a humid
morning. A 4200 fps screamer.

Joe Schneider
Ruger Mini 14 Ranch rifle with legal 30 round clip
Bennelli and Mossberg 3 1/2 inch 12 gauges
Savage 22-250 Ackley Improved 110 V
Remington 22-250 varmit special
Thompsom Center Contender with a variety of barrels including 22 hornet.... need I go on?
Oh and a Cherokee 140



----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

[Matt Barrow]

"JJS" <jschneider@remove socks cebridge.net> wrote in message
...
>
> "Newps" > wrote in message
> . ..
>>
>>
>> Matt Barrow wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> A 12ga is only good for about 50 yards at most, so you better get pretty
>>> close.
>>
>>
>>
>> It is not a goal of coyote hunters to kill cleanly with one shot. If you
>> simply wound the animal and he slinks off and dies that is good enough.
>>
>>
>>
>> At that, it would be intersting to see how a liot handles the recoil
>>> while controlling the airplane.
>>
>> He doesn't. The shooter sits in the back.
>>
>>
>>>
>>> I would imagine a CAR-15 or Ruger Mini-14 is used quite a bit.
>>
>> Only by the idiots. A shotgun is the way to go.
>>
>>
>
> News you've obviously never hunted coyotes for the hides. And Matt,
> you've most likely never shot coyotes with a 3 1/2 inch Mossberg Ulti-Mag
> with 4 buck. I've killed "song dogs beyond 50 yards" calling them in with
> turkey calls.

Not from an ultralight aircraft, no. Too, virtually all of my shotgun
hunting is upland, not waterfowl.

> The 22-250 Ackley is my weapon of choice for long range predator hunting.
> The bullet leaves a vapor trail on a humid morning. A 4200 fps screamer.

I have used a .25-06 in a heavy barrel Win M70 (pre-64) using 87gr Sierras,
and have nailed several at approximately 600 yards.

>
> Joe Schneider
> Ruger Mini 14 Ranch rifle with legal 30 round clip
> Bennelli and Mossberg 3 1/2 inch 12 gauges
> Savage 22-250 Ackley Improved 110 V
> Remington 22-250 varmit special
> Thompsom Center Contender with a variety of barrels including 22
> hornet.... need I go on?
> Oh and a Cherokee 140

My .22-250 at present is a Savage M12-VSS with a Leupold Vari-X III
6.5-20x50mm LR Target which was tweaked by a local smithy. It's the only
vaminter I still have.


--
Matt
---------------------
Matthew W. Barrow
Site-Fill Homes, LLC.
Montrose, CO

[karl gruber]

You are undoubtedly correct. I haven't touched that rife in about a decade!

Karl
"Curator"


"Matt Barrow" > wrote in message
...
>
>>
>
> Funny...my 10-22 (which I still have and my kids all learned with) says
> "Made in the 200th Year of American Liberty" (not "Freedom")
>

[Chris W]

Icebound wrote:

>They have been doing it for years.
>
>This topic comes up from time to time, and for me it always recalls this
>particular report:
>
>http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief2.asp?ev_id=20020328X00418&ntsbno=SEA02LA058&akey=1
>
>
>
Put a gun in the hand of a careless or stupid person and something will
eventually go wrong. Airplane or no airplane.

--
Chris W
KE5GIX

Gift Giving Made Easy
Get the gifts you want &
give the gifts they want
One stop wish list for any gift,
from anywhere, for any occasion!
http://thewishzone.com

[JJS]

snip
>
> My .22-250 at present is a Savage M12-VSS with a Leupold Vari-X III 6.5-20x50mm LR Target which was tweaked by a
> local smithy. It's the only vaminter I still have.
>
>
> --
> Matt
> ---------------------
> Matthew W. Barrow
> Site-Fill Homes, LLC.
> Montrose, CO
Hey, That's what I have on the Ackley Improved!
600 yds. is very impressive with any combo.

Joe Schneider
N8437R




----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

[Matt Barrow]

"JJS" <jschneider@remove socks cebridge.net> wrote in message
...
> snip
>>
>> My .22-250 at present is a Savage M12-VSS with a Leupold Vari-X III
>> 6.5-20x50mm LR Target which was tweaked by a local smithy. It's the only
>> vaminter I still have.
>>
>>
> Hey, That's what I have on the Ackley Improved!
> 600 yds. is very impressive with any combo.

I've nailed coyotes with it at 600, but my son has taken prairie dogs at
that range. He uses Sierra 77gr HPBT Matchkings and completely reworks the
cases.

I watched him through a 40X spotting scope and could barely make out the dog
standing in the burrow. He shot it in the ass and it cartwheeled in the air.

He's off in the Navy now, and he was the only kid who enjoyed varminting. I
miss that.


--
Matt
---------------------
Matthew W. Barrow
Site-Fill Homes, LLC.
Montrose, CO

[Jim Macklin]

If he's in the Navy SEALS he is still shooting varmints at
long range. Tell him good luck and thanks.


--
James H. Macklin
ATP,CFI,A&P

--
The people think the Constitution protects their rights;
But government sees it as an obstacle to be overcome.
some support
http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/secondamendment2.htm
See http://www.fija.org/ more about your rights and duties.


"Matt Barrow" > wrote in message
...
|
| "JJS" <jschneider@remove socks cebridge.net> wrote in
message
| ...
| > snip
| >>
| >> My .22-250 at present is a Savage M12-VSS with a
Leupold Vari-X III
| >> 6.5-20x50mm LR Target which was tweaked by a local
smithy. It's the only
| >> vaminter I still have.
| >>
| >>
| > Hey, That's what I have on the Ackley Improved!
| > 600 yds. is very impressive with any combo.
|
| I've nailed coyotes with it at 600, but my son has taken
prairie dogs at
| that range. He uses Sierra 77gr HPBT Matchkings and
completely reworks the
| cases.
|
| I watched him through a 40X spotting scope and could
barely make out the dog
| standing in the burrow. He shot it in the ass and it
cartwheeled in the air.
|
| He's off in the Navy now, and he was the only kid who
enjoyed varminting. I
| miss that.
|
|
| --
| Matt
| ---------------------
| Matthew W. Barrow
| Site-Fill Homes, LLC.
| Montrose, CO
|
|

[Matt Barrow]

"Jim Macklin" > wrote in message
news:DOL4g.12903$ZW3.9374@dukeread04...
> If he's in the Navy SEALS he is still shooting varmints at
> long range. Tell him good luck and thanks.

No, Chemical Engineer, (LT(jg) ) in Virginia.

He went to college on a shooting scholarship. When I picked him up for
Spring break one year, I chatted with his coach (1968 Bronze Olympic medal,
23 years USAF shooting instructor). He said he'd seldom seen anyone hold a
rifle so rock steady.

I hold it more like Barney Fife.

> |
> | I watched him through a 40X spotting scope and could
> barely make out the dog
> | standing in the burrow. He shot it in the ass and it
> cartwheeled in the air.
> |
> | He's off in the Navy now, and he was the only kid who
> enjoyed varminting. I
> | miss that.

[Jim Macklin]

The one sport in which men and women compete directly, NCAA
shooting. But PC is making colleges drop the shooting
sports. I'm waiting for the day the President goes to Camp
Perry again, I think TR was the last, maybe Ike went.


"Matt Barrow" > wrote in message
...
|
| "Jim Macklin" > wrote
in message
| news:DOL4g.12903$ZW3.9374@dukeread04...
| > If he's in the Navy SEALS he is still shooting varmints
at
| > long range. Tell him good luck and thanks.
|
| No, Chemical Engineer, (LT(jg) ) in Virginia.
|
| He went to college on a shooting scholarship. When I
picked him up for
| Spring break one year, I chatted with his coach (1968
Bronze Olympic medal,
| 23 years USAF shooting instructor). He said he'd seldom
seen anyone hold a
| rifle so rock steady.
|
| I hold it more like Barney Fife.
|
| > |
| > | I watched him through a 40X spotting scope and could
| > barely make out the dog
| > | standing in the burrow. He shot it in the ass and it
| > cartwheeled in the air.
| > |
| > | He's off in the Navy now, and he was the only kid who
| > enjoyed varminting. I
| > | miss that.
|
|

[LWG]

Exxxacccctly! The only war the CIA can or is willing to fight is the one
against the current administration. Does it amaze you that Sandy Pants
Berger can walk out of the National Archives with papers (probably bearing
hand-written notations from Able Danger sources) and everyone, including
federal judges, just giggle like school girls?

"Matt Barrow" > wrote in message
...
>
> "LWG" > wrote in message
> ...
>> Yes, and they went to the US military to help them with their little
>> going-away party for Koresh. They needed a compliant little snake in the
>> army. They found Wesley Clark. Boy, did his career skyrocket after
>> that. Reno and Clinton may have been abominations, but if you were their
>> whore, they paid well.
>
> Like Mary McCarthy?
>
> "Equally interesting is her meteoric rise within the intelligence
> community. According to her bio, she joined the CIA as an analyst in 1984.
> Within seven years, she had rise to a Deputy NIO position, and reached
> full NIO status by 1994. To reach that level, she literally catapulted
> over dozens of more senior officers--and I'm guessing that her political
> connections didn't hurt. By comparison, I know a current NIO, with a
> resume and academic credentials more impressive than Ms. McCarthy's, who
> reached the position after more than 20 years of extraordinarily
> distinguished service. McCarthy's rapid advancement speaks volumes about
> how the Clinton Administration did business, and sheds new light on the
> intelligence failures that set the stage for 9-11. We can only wonder how
> many other political hacks climbed the intel food chain under Clinton--and
> remain in place to this day. "
>
> NOTE: An NIO is the military equivalent of a four-star general.
> http://formerspook.blogspot.com/2006/04/leaker.html
>
>