“V” Is For Victory: The Smith & Wesson Victory Model Revolver

H/T American Rifleman.

victory.jpg

The Smith & Wesson “Victory Model“ was chambered in .38 Spl. and had a 4″ barrel as made under a World War II U.S. Navy contract. It is seen here being fired by Navy cadets. 

In mid-1940, when it was becoming increasingly likely that the United States would be drawn into the war raging in Europe, the U.S. Navy, along with all branches of our armed forces, was evaluating the projected demand for arms. The standard handgun for the Navy at the time was the M1911A1 .45 ACP pistol. It became pretty obvious that the demand for these pistols would soon overwhelm the available supply, particularly since the Army and Marines would also be clamoring for handguns when war began.

The Navy adopted a policy of equipping its personnel with as many M1911A1 pistols as possible and obtaining a secondary source of handguns for “less critical requirements.” It was determined that the most suitable gun for this purpose was the Smith & Wesson Military & Police .38 Spl. revolver with a 4″ barrel. The M&P was Smith & Wesson’s “K-frame Military & Police” revolver which had proven to be popular in the civilian marketplace prior to the war.

This course of action was related in the Ordnance Dept. document “Project Supporting Paper; Miscellaneous Pistols and Revolvers”: “In addition to the M1917 revolvers … sizeable numbers of various other revolvers and pistols were procured by Ordnance. The United States Navy, unable to obtain the standardized M1911A1 Pistol, placed contracts directly with Smith & Wesson for the Caliber .38 Special, Military and Police Model Revolver.“

lanyard ring, “V”-prefix, 158-gr. jacketed bullets(l.) Victory Model revolvers are distinguished by a lanyard ring and their “V”-prefix serial numbers stamped into the butt’s bottom. (r.) This original 50-count box of .38 Spl. ammunition, featuring 158-gr. jacketed bullets, was made by Remington for issue with Victory Model revolvers.


Although the U.S. Navy specified that the revolvers made under its contract be chambered for the .38 Spl. cartridge (technically, the .38 S&W Spl.), the British government also ordered large numbers of similar sixguns from Smith & Wesson chambered for another cartridge, the “.38-200”—which was essentially the .38 S&W cartridge with a 200-gr. lead bullet. This was later changed to a 175-gr. jacketed bullet.

The .38 S&W and .38 Spl. cartridges are sometimes confused, but they are two different chamberings and are not interchangeable; the .38 S&W is shorter and has a slightly larger diameter than the .38 Spl. As related in an Ordnance Dept. document: “From October 1941 to March 1945, Smith & Wesson produced the Caliber .38-200 Revolver for the British Army. This weapon was almost identical to the U.S. Navy’s Caliber .38 Special Revolver except for caliber and barrel length. The British revolver has a 5″ barrel, while the U.S. Navy used the 4-inch.”

While most of the S&W .38-200 revolvers did have 5″ barrels, some were made in 4″ and 6″ lengths as well. The 5″ barrel was made standard after April 10, 1942. Ordnance records indicate that a total of 590,305 of the .38-200 revolvers were manufactured by Smith & Wesson between October 1941 and March 1945, which was significantly more than the number of S&W .38 Spl. revolvers produced during the war. 

Although the majority of S&W .38-200 revolvers were made under British contract and sent to Great Britain, some were also used by the U.S. military, chiefly for security purposes and for arming allies, such as resistance fighters. As discussed in Charles W. Pate’s excellent book, U.S. Handguns of World War II—The Secondary Pistols And Revolvers: “It is not a generally known fact, but the U.S. Army also used these arms (S&W .38-200 revolvers), though on a very limited basis.

There are a few documented cases of U.S. Army issue in the continental United States, primarily for guard purposes, and more substantial numbers were used in combat theaters. Several .38-200 serial numbers were found in OSS [Office of Strategic Services] hand receipt records of overseas units. But the revolver’s association with the OSS was primarily in that organization’s role in supplying resistance forces. Many thousands of .38-200 S&Ws were channeled through the OSS. In addition, it was the OSS that requested development of U.S. jacketed ammunition for the revolver.

“Clearly, the .38-200 S&W made a significant contribution to the war effort, especially with our allies. But with the end of the war drawing near and with the need for additional handguns lessening, the remaining .38-200 contracts were cancelled during the first quarter of 1945. Most components still in production were diverted to use in the .38 Special Victory Model, and surplus components in a finished state that were not interchangeable with the .38 Special, such as cylinders and barrels, were shipped to field service depots.

“After the war, thousands of the revolvers remained in the U.S. Army inventory as a regularly stocked item, but again, not for general U.S. issue. The primary use of these revolvers continued to be for arming foreign military and security personnel.”U.S. Navy pilot Lt. James Pope, shown here aboard the U.S.S. Yorktown in October 1943 (l.), had a Victory Model revolver in the shoulder holster on his left side. This “Property of U.S. Navy” marking on the side of a Victory Model revolver (above) has been enhanced with red ink, which was often the case.


Smith & Wesson U.S. Navy .38 Spl. Victory Model Revolver

While all of the .38 revolvers made by Smith & Wesson during World War II were dubbed “Victory Model,” the term as generally used today refers to the .38 Spl. 4″-barreled revolvers as made under U.S. Navy and U.S. Ordnance Dept. contracts. The Navy initially bypassed the standard procurement procedure of ordering its small arms under the auspices of the U.S. Army Ordnance Dept. and issued production contracts directly to Smith & Wesson. This course of action, however, soon resulted in problems, and Ordnance eventually got involved. As reported in the above-referenced “Project Supporting Paper; Miscellaneous Pistols and Revolvers”:

“The contracts at Smith & Wesson for Caliber .38 Special Revolvers were taken over by Ordnance, ASF (Army Service Force) in early 1942. Under Navy contracts, no inspector was stationed at the plant, and quality of revolvers suffered as a result. The Resident Inspector of Ordnance at Smith & Wesson worked under the handicap of having no drawings or gages with which to conduct a thorough inspection. The manufacturer had no complete set of drawings for the revolver so Ordnance inspection consisted of a visual and manual examination, function, proof and target firing. During the early production, as much as 30% of a day’s production was rejected for various defects.”

With the increased oversight by Ordnance, including more stringent inspection standards, the quality of the Smith & Wesson .38 revolvers continued to improve. The .38 Spl. revolvers built under Navy contract had 4″ barrels and the standard finish was Parkerizing. The serial number, having a “V” (Victory) prefix, was stamped on the butt. A lanyard ring was also attached to the butt. Some early production .38 Spl. Victory Model revolvers were not stamped with Navy markings at the factory.

In most cases, these guns were subsequently stamped “Property of U.S. Navy” on the left side of the frame. As production continued, the Navy markings were factory-applied to the topstrap above the cylinder. Approximately 65,000 Victory Model revolvers were purchased by the Navy directly from Smith & Wesson. After Army Ordnance took over procurement, the marking was changed to “U.S. Property G.H.D.” The “G.H.D.” marking signified U.S. Army Col. (later Brig. Gen.) Guy H. Drewry, head of the Springfield Ordnance District (SOD) in which Smith & Wesson was located.

Drewry’s initials will be found on other types of arms made in the SOD, including Winchester M1 Garand rifles, M1 carbines and military shotguns. It is sometimes believed that such initials represent the person who actually inspected the guns, but that was not the case. Rather, it indicates that the arms were inspected by Ordnance personnel operating under Col. Drewry’s authority. 

S&W Victory Model revolverA S&W Victory Model revolver is shown next to a World War II U.S. Navy shoulder holster (above) with cartridge loops on the strap. Note the markings applied to the topstrap of a Victory Model revolver manufactured under U.S. Navy contract (right).


The standard ammunition procured for issue with the .38 Spl. Victory Model revolvers was manufactured by the Remington Arms Co. The cartridges had 158-gr. steel-jacketed bullets, and the cases were head-stamped “REM UMC 38 SPL.” Standard commercial .38 Spl. ammunition with lead bullets could not be utilized in overseas combat zones due to provisions of the Hague Convention, thus the necessity for the steel-jacketed bullets. The cartridges were packed in green, commercial-style, 50-round cardboard cartons with lot numbers in the 5,000 range. There was also a limited quantity of .38 Spl. tracer cartridges produced during the war intended for signaling purposes.

Initially, the Navy restricted issuance of the M1911A1 .45 ACP pistols to overseas combat zones and used the .38-cal. revolvers for stateside Navy and Coast Guard personnel. Part of the reason for this policy was to mitigate the logistical problems inherent to having handguns chambered for two different cartridges in oversea theaters. Nonetheless, it didn’t take long for the impracticality of this policy to become apparent.

The lighter .38 revolver was actually preferred over the heavier .45 pistol by many Navy and Marine Corps aviators. By mid-1944, the Navy reversed its original policy and began to issue M1911A1 .45 pistols to some non-combatant personnel, such as guards aboard merchant vessels so that the .38 revolvers they would ordinarily be armed with could be available to flight crews.

The U.S. Navy and Marine Corps aviators generally carried their Victory Model .38 revolvers in a leather shoulder holster, often with web loops sewn onto the strap to hold extra cartridges. A leather hip holster was also made for these revolvers, but the shoulder holster was generally preferred by pilots due to space constraints in the cramped cockpits. The hip holsters were used more often by security personnel, but period photos show some flyers with their Victory Model revolvers in hip holsters.

While the U.S. Navy was the primary user of the S&W .38 Spl. Victory Model revolvers, Ordnance records indicate that some of the guns were also purchased by the U.S. Army and the Office of Strategic Services (OSS). As was the case with the S&W .38-200 revolvers previously discussed, the majority of these .38 Spl. revolvers were undoubtedly used for arming foreign security personnel and, in the case of the OSS, irregular military units.

However, some of the revolvers were utilized overseas by American combat troops, including U.S. Marines. As stated in R.G. Rosenquist’s Our Kind Of War, Illustrated Saga Of The U.S. Marine Raiders: “The M1911A1 .45 automatic pistol was the standard issue sidearm, but also plenty of .38 caliber Smith & Wesson ‘Victory Model’ revolvers saw action.” There are a number of contemporary accounts of .38-cal. revolvers being used in combat during World War II by American troops. Often the exact model is not mentioned, but, based on the numbers made and wide issuance, the odds are that most were the S&W .38 Spl. Victory Model.

For example, Marine Raider R.G. “Rudy” Rosenquist carried a .38 revolver, quite likely a S&W Victory model, and found it to be a literal life-saver during fierce fighting on Guam when he was bayoneted by a Japanese soldier: “[A]s the enemy soldier … stepped over him, Rudy reached up and grasped the man’s canteen strap and was yanked to his feet. The Japanese tore loose and rushed on. Now a second enemy soldier came running, and Rudy took a bayonet wound in the stomach. By this time, he had got out a .38 pistol, which he emptied into the man, who fell back upon the Marine at the machine gun … .”

As the S&W Victory Model .38 revolver was becoming a commonly issued sidearm, a problem arose that caused a temporary halt in the procurement of the guns. As discussed in an Ordnance Dept. document: “The death of a sailor, resulting from dropping a loaded Smith & Wesson, Caliber .38 Special Revolver prompted a test by the Navy Department to determine (the) effectiveness of the Smith & Wesson Hammer Block. Results of the test showed the Hammer Block to be unsatisfactory. This test was confirmed by a more carefully conducted test at Springfield Armory, authorized by Office, Chief of Ordnance.

Work was commenced immediately by Ordnance and Smith & Wesson to develop an improved Hammer Block capable of preventing discharge even if the revolver fell several feet, striking on the Hammer. This was desired because of the possibility of a seaman dropping a revolver from one deck of a ship to a lower deck. Deliveries of revolvers equipped with the present improved Hammer Block commenced in early 1945. The improved Hammer Blocks are vastly superior to the old type, samples tested having withstood 90-foot lbs. impact without firing.”

The death of the sailor due the S&W Victory Model’s flawed hammer block design resulted in the U.S. Navy requesting that Colt .38 revolvers be supplied for future requirements instead of the Smith & Wesson revolvers. However, it was reported that “ … improved quality and the quick development of a new hammer block convinced the Navy to stay with the S&W revolvers.”Smith & Wesson advertisementThis Smith & Wesson advertisement touts its Victory models and promotes the guns for plant defense by guards. It states that the revolver was adopted in 1942 as “ … the official sidearm for all U.S. Navy Flying Personnel, and is widely used by U.S. Marine Corps Flyers, the U.S. Coast Guard and in the Merchant Marine.” The gun was marketed for S&W via the Defense Supplies Corp.


Victory Model Revolvers With 2″ Barrels

While the vast majority of the S&W .38 Spl. Victory Model revolvers had 4″ barrels, there was also a little-known variant that was otherwise identical except for having a 2″ barrel. The revolvers were the subject of a May 10, 1944, letter from Stuart K. Barnes, vice president of Defense Supplies Corp., to Capt. F.M. Volberg, Small Arms Branch, Chief of Ordnance:

“[W]e have received advice from Smith & Wesson, Incorporated that they are prepared to produce a limited number of 2″ barrel .38 caliber Special revolvers without impairing their production schedule.

“The War Production Board, under the date May 8, 1944, has given approval for the production by Smith & Wesson of 500 .38 caliber Special 2″ barrel revolvers in order to supply essential non-military users. Therefore, it would be appreciated if permission would be granted for the production of 500 2″ barrel revolvers in lieu of 500 4″ barrel revolvers on subject contract at the earliest convenience and placed in the stock of Defense Supplies Corporation at Smith & Wesson Incorporated.

“These 500 revolvers would not be additional to the contract of the 35,000 4″ barrel .38 caliber revolvers, and would not constitute an increase in cost to Ordnance and this Corporation.”

According to factory records, the 500 Victory Model 2″-barrel revolvers were shipped to the Office of Strategic Services on Aug. 22, 1944. It has been reported that some were utilized by couriers, intelligence personnel and other individuals needing a handgun that was a bit more concealable than the standard 4″-barrel revolver. The only martial marking typically applied was a small “flaming bomb” insignia on the top of the frame.

S&W Victory Model with 2" barrelThe U.S. military “flaming bomb” insignia was applied to this S&W Victory Model with 2″ barrel.


It is easy to identify a genuine 2″-barrel Victory Model revolver from a 4″ revolver that subsequently had the barrel shortened. If a barrel was cut down from 4″ to 2″, a portion of the lettering on the barrel would be missing and a replacement front sight would be required, sure indication the gun had been modified. There was a well-made leather shoulder holster fabricated specifically for these 2″ Victory Model revolvers that had “US” embossed on the front. This would be suggestive that some were indeed used by U.S. military personnel. Original examples of these revolvers are quite uncommon today.

The S&W Victory Model revolver’s role in World War II is sometimes minimized or given little more than a cursory mention. Production of the Smith & Wesson .38 Spl. Victory Model revolver under U.S. government contracts (DSC, Navy and Ordnance) between 1941 and 1945 totalled the not-insignificant sum of 352,315 guns. While it wasn’t employed as extensively as was the M1911A1 pistol, it accompanied many U.S. Navy and Marine Corps aviators during the pivotal battles of the Pacific Theater. Its contributions to the war effort should not be overlooked.

Even though none were manufactured under government contract after 1945, the Victory Model revolver’s legacy extended well beyond World War II. It continued to be issued to some Navy and Marine Corps aircrews during the Korean and Vietnam wars and beyond. Uncle Sam certainly got his money’s worth from the Victory Model!

How to Maintain Pistol Marksmanship During the Ammo Shortage

H/T Shooting Illustrated.

With an appropriate target, a shot timer, your EDC handgun and a mere 10 rounds of ammunition, you can regularly practice and hone your shooting skills to maintain readiness, even in the midst of an ammo shortage.

With ammunition expensive and hard to come by, making every shot count has never been more important. When I began writing this column, the emphasis was on drills using less than a box of ammunition; now I think it prudent to suggest drills requiring an even smaller number of rounds.

While I described the Gunsite School Drill in a column several years ago, I think now is a good time to look at it again. Why? Because it is an excellent Skills Check and only requires 10 rounds of ammunition. It’s the sort of drill you can run from time to time to check your skill level and with ammunition prices and scarcity being what they are, it’s an economical drill.  I often use it when testing new pistols to find out if the sights, trigger and gun, in general, are working for me.

The School Drill, while seemingly simple, involves complex skills performed in short time periods. Drawing from the holster, aligning the sights, focusing on the front sight and pressing the trigger without disturbing the sights are some of them—and all necessary—if you’re to be successful. Speed is of the essence with 1.5-second shots into a head-shot zone about the size of a 3×5-inch card being the starting point.

We shoot the School Drill from the holster, but if you are not confident in quickly drawing the pistol or you’re shooting on a range where it isn’t allowed, it can be run from a low-ready, muzzle-depressed starting position.

You’ll need an Option or silhouette target, 10 rounds of ammunition and a shooting partner to time you.

Here’s the drill:

3 yards
One round to the head-scoring zone in 1.5 seconds. Repeat. Total: two rounds

3 yards
Two rounds to the center-scoring zone in 1.5 seconds. Total: two rounds

7 yards
Two rounds to the center-scoring zone in 1.5 seconds. Total: two rounds

10 yards
Two rounds to the center-scoring zone in 2 seconds.Total: two rounds

15 yards
Two rounds to the center-scoring zone, fired from kneeling, starting from standing, in 3.5 seconds. Total: two rounds

If you score the head- and center-scoring rings as five points, the possible score is 50. Hits on the silhouette but outside the scoring zones are good for two points. Shots off the target or not within the time limits are awarded zero points. Perfect scores are, well, perfect. Scores in the 40s are very good.

Want to attend the Gunsite Defensive Pistol 250 class and hope to receive an Expert rating? If you’re in one of my classes you need to shoot a perfect School Drill, among other things. You can practice this five times with one box of ammunition. I assure you, it’s a good investment.

Getting serious about crime

H/T Alachua Chronicle.

Too many DemocRat controlled cities are too soft on crime and criminals.

The past few weeks have seen a typical display of just how formulaic and predictable our local elected officials are as they echo national talking points while trying to micromanage our lives, threaten gun rights, and in general treat us like incompetent rubes who couldn’t exist on our own without their guiding wisdom. They made big claims about wanting to deal with violent crime but presented no actual solutions.

On July 12, Gainesville City Commissioner David Arreola recommended using American Rescue Plan money to fund a Department of Youth Services. You can find this quote at the 1:02:00 mark in the video or search the transcript for the tenth instance of “arreola”:

“We’ve had a lot of violence. Teenagers involved in that violence. We had a mass shooting at the American Legion, and it was gang-related violence as well. Someone lost their life. I really, really care deeply about including — I feel like it’s an emergency. I feel like all across the nation, it isn’t just Gainesville, all across the nation we’re seeing increases in violent crime that’s been reflective of the stress, the psychological damage this last year has done to us as human beings”

The irony that most of the psychological damage was probably caused by arbitrary lockdowns by power-hungry politicians was lost on Arreola.

The next day, County Commissioner Anna Prizzia was on the same script. She nearly sobbed, “We’ve got young people as young as my daughter getting access to guns and shooting at each other… if they don’t have anything to do, they are going to find something to do.” (Search this transcript for “gun violence” to find her remarks.)

The sheer ignorance of these commissioners never ceases to amaze anyone who bothers to listen to their dangerous ramblings. Their ideas are nothing new and have already failed at other times and in other places. 

Midnight basketball was started in the mid-1980s, became part of President George H.W. Bush’s “thousand points of light,” and was instituted in President Bill Clinton’s 1994 Crime Bill… the same bill that NPR calls a “Terrible Mistake.” At its peak, the midnight basketball program involved over 10,000 men in 50 cities, but “the statistics didn’t bear out the effectiveness,” according to Joan Niesen. Not surprisingly, failed programs are frequently resurrected, and midnight basketball is no different. Since 2019, programs have been started in CaliforniaConnecticutOhioSouth Dakota, and Wisconsin. It will not be a surprise when Arreola’s Department of Youth Services starts up our own midnight basketball league.

Why the sudden push for government to play parent to young criminals and would-be criminals? The City’s original plan to solve gun violence was simply to pass more stringent gun laws. Our commissioners want to mirror laws in places like New York City, Washington, D.C., and Chicago. However, preventing legal ownership of scary-looking rifles and large capacity magazines will do nothing to prevent crime and would violate Florida law. Arreola is one of four commissioners who are personally suing the state over its preemption of local firearms regulation (790.33). They never bother to say how additional laws will reduce gun violence, but these policies are guaranteed to violate Second Amendment rights for law-abiding citizens. 

A quick glance at Florida Statues, Title XLVI, Chapter 790, reveals over a dozen laws related to weapons and firearms. Here’s a short list:

  • 790.01 Unlicensed carrying of concealed weapons or concealed firearms
  • 790.07 Persons engaged in criminal offense, having weapons
  • 790.10 Improper exhibition of dangerous weapons or firearms
  • 790.115 Possessing or discharging weapons or firearms at a school-sponsored event or on school property prohibited; penalties; exceptions
  • 790.15 Discharging firearm in public or on residential property
  • 790.151 Using firearm while under the influence of alcoholic beverages, chemical substances, or controlled substances; penalties
  • 790.16 Discharging machine guns; penalty
  • 790.169 Juvenile offenders; release of names and addresses
  • 790.17 Furnishing weapons to minors under 18 years of age or persons of unsound mind and furnishing firearms to minors under 18 years of age prohibited
  • 790.19 Shooting into or throwing deadly missiles into dwellings, public or private buildings, occupied or not occupied; vessels, aircraft, buses, railroad cars, streetcars, or other vehicles
  • 790.23 Felons and delinquents; possession of firearms, ammunition, or electronic weapons or devices unlawful
  • 790.233 Possession of firearm or ammunition prohibited when person is subject to an injunction against committing acts of domestic violence, stalking, or cyberstalking
  • 790.235 Possession of firearm or ammunition by violent career criminal unlawful
  • 790.27 Alteration or removal of firearm serial number or possession, sale, or delivery of firearm with serial number altered or removed prohibited

Note that Prizzia’s concern is already addressed by Statute 790.17, which makes it a crime to provide a firearm to a minor without parent or guardian approval. It’s a third degree felony, punishable by up to five years in prison or a $5,000 fine. There are also statutes making it illegal to discharge a firearm in public or to use a firearm in the commission of another crime (like shooting someone), but maybe we need another one specifically for young daughters.

There’s renewed political interest in gun violence because Gainesville just had drive-by shootings on July 18 and July 19. The perpetrators already broke several laws, so an additional law preventing specific types of weapons won’t make a difference. More gun laws would be as productive at stopping drive-by shootings as a law preventing certain types of vehicles.

Without being able to take the simple (but illegal) path of new gun regulations, the commissioners want to be seen as doing something to reduce violent crime. While Alachua County and Gainesville aren’t facing major crime waves like Chicago or Detroit, our crime rate here is above state levels and growing faster.

Based on the most recent Florida Department of Law Enforcement annual report, total crime was down by 14.1% statewide, but only down 3.3% in Alachua County. Our crime rate per 100,000 population is nearly 50% higher than the state level (3,208 vs. 2,152). Worse, violent crime (murder, rape, robbery, and aggravated assault) was up 14.7%  in Alachua County, compared to only 2.3% statewide. Rapes were the only violent crime that decreased from 2019 to 2020 in Alachua County. Here’s how the other crimes changed from 2019 to 2020 in Alachua County and Florida:

A majority of the crime problem comes from a very small minority of the population. Based on the Alachua County Jail booking logs, 2,729 unique individuals have been booked so far this year (as of July 16). That’s just 1% of the population, and the 80-20 rule generally applies for the real “bad apples” in that group: roughly 1 in 5 were booked more than once so far this year, roughly 1 in 5 were booked with 3 or more charges, and just over 1 in 5 were booked with violent offenses. 

Stopping violent crime is not rocket science. The simple solution is more police, not less. Steven Mello from Princeton University looked at hiring grants from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act Community Oriented Policing Services and found “large and statistically significant effects of police on robbery, larceny, and auto theft.” 

The opposite is also true: less police and weak enforcement leads to more crime. Barry Latzer, professor of criminal justice at City University of New York and author of The Rise and Fall of Violent Crime in America, wrote: “When police, courts, jails and prisons are unable to cope with crime, their failures serve as an incentive to increased lawbreaking.” He cites a study that found half of released federal prisoners are rearrested within 21 months of discharge.

Earlier this month, Mayor Lauren Poe said, “You know, we laid out a challenge about five years ago to find a way to arrest fewer people.” That’s practically a confession of at least one reason for our increased crime rates.

Rather than pushing national talking points on crime (gun control, diversion programsprisoner releases, youth activities, etc.), our commissioners should find ways to get more police on the streets. They should also push the state attorney to be more aggressive with repeat offenders and encourage our state legislature to toughen laws on criminals, not focus on new restrictions for law-abiding citizens.

Simple changes to existing criminal statutes would probably have a bigger impact on violent crime by keeping criminals off the streets rather than banning certain types of weapons, which only affects law-abiding citizens. For example, Statute 790.07 says the display, threat, use, or attempted use of a weapon to commit a felony or while under indictment is a third degree felony.  (In that statute, “weapon” is defined as “any dirk, knife, metallic knuckles, slungshot, billie, tear gas gun, chemical weapon or device, or other deadly weapon except a firearm or a common pocketknife, plastic knife, or blunt-bladed table knife.”) It’s a second degree felony to do the same with a firearm, but the “or while under indictment” language is conspicuously missing for firearms. Using the same language for firearms as weapons seems like an easy fix to crack down on gun violence.

Another easy fix: Statute 790.169 allows the release of the name and address of minors convicted of any offense involving the possession or use of a firearm. If juvenile crime is a problem and we don’t want juveniles using guns, how about automatically charging them as adults if they use a firearm? 

Probably the best way to reduce gun violence is to directly punish the people who have illegal guns. Statute 790.27 makes it a first degree misdemeanor to knowingly sell, deliver, or possess a firearm with an altered or removed serial number. That should be increased to a third degree felony, the same penalty as the act of altering or removing the serial number. The charge should also apply to anyone in possession of a stolen firearm. These laws would punish criminals with illegal guns and not affect law-abiding gun owners.

Crime was also increasing two years ago when Alachua County was pushing to avoid arresting non-violent drug users (in the name of equity). The Alachua County Sheriff at the time, Sadie Darnell, said she was in favor of second chances “but not about 4th, 5th, or 6th chances.”

It’s one thing to give second chances to non-violent drug users. It’s another to let repeat violent offenders roam the streets to inflict harm on more victims. That’s why Governor DeSantis vetoed Senator Keith Perry’s bill to expunge all juvenile records, not just first-time misdemeanors. A juvenile who commits a misdemeanor (with no additional offenses) deserves a second chance. That’s the current law. Why should juveniles with multiple misdemeanors or a violent felony have records expunged? 

Sentencing guidelines are found in Statute 775.082 for prison terms and 775.083 for fines. More stringent guidelines for habitual offenders are outlined in Statute 775.084, which is a long, rambling, incoherent mess (over 3,200 words and prints over 5 pages). It has different requirements for “habitual felony offender,” “habitual violent felony offender,” “three-time violent felony offender,” and “violent career criminal.” Expunging juvenile records makes it even harder to identify habitual offenders and career criminals.

This all brings us to the best way to prevent violent crime: No bail for repeat violent offenders. Blaze Media writer Daniel Horowitz has published numerous columns on the problems with the “criminal justice reform” agenda, which he calls “the jailbreak movement.” Since 2018, Horowitz has been warning about the consequences of jailbreak and says we have an under-incarceration problem. Each week Horowitz discusses stories about violent criminals who are released with little or no bail and go on to commit additional violent felonies.

A particularly horrific example of the dangers of violent criminals let out with no bail is the death of Michelle Cummings, who was visiting Annapolis, MD, on June 29 to see her son’s induction at the Naval Academy. She was killed by an errant bullet fired at a rival gang by Angelo Reno Harrod. Harrod had eight convictions between 2010 and 2018, including robbery and assault with a deadly weapon (pistol whipping a driver over a $2 fare). He was charged twice this year (February 10 and April 12) for gun crimes and was released on home detention awaiting trial.

Extreme examples like this haven’t happened in Alachua County (that we know of), but we’ve had 30 people arrested four or more times already in 2021. Two-thirds of those had at least one violent offense or weapons charge, including two for kidnapping and one for murder. However, it’s difficult to tell from the booking logs whether these repeated offenses were committed after release or were additional charges while they were being held. 

This is not a debate about whether jails are meant to be rehabilitative or punitive. They are meant to lock up people who endanger the lives and property of others. There is no excuse for violent offenders to be free to commit more crimes while awaiting trial.

Just last week, Horowitz said, “The purpose of a government… first and foremost, is to protect us from bad people so that we don’t have a dog-eat-dog world where the strongest and most evil and violent succeed. But instead that’s the one thing our government won’t do.” 

Our local officials are more interested in preventing urban sprawl and giving rights to rivers than in fulfilling government’s basic job to protect life, liberty, and property. When they talk about preventing violent crime, we should be wary of their actual motives because they’ve shown no serious attempt to deal with crime.

Creme Brulee History and Recipe

H/T gourmet.lovetoknow.com

After reading this article I want to try some Creme Brulee.

The history of crème brûlée is complicated and hotly debated. Chefs in England, Spain and France all claim they created the first version of this delicious dessert. Food historians note that custards were popular in the Middle Ages, and recipes for custards circulated widely through Europe. So it’s almost impossible to find the first recipe for this dessert. The question is: who was the first to caramelize the sugar on top of custard and to serve it as a dessert?

England’s Contribution to Crème Brûlée History

Lore says that sometime during the 17th century, a young college student supposedly presented the kitchen staff with a new recipe: a creamy unsweetened custard with a caramelized sugar topping. But this new dessert was spurned by the staff until the student became a fellow. With his credibility established, others in the kitchen took interest in his creation. It was named “Trinity Burnt Cream,” and its popularity grew.

While it cannot be proved that Trinity College in Cambridge actually invented the sublime treat which they also note as unlikely, their version of crème brûlée is a staple on their menu. The kitchen staff has an iron with the college crest that is used for making the burnt topping.

Brits vehemently deny that Trinity Brunt Cream and crème brûlée are even the same dish. While the French version is very sweet, British Trinity Cream is unsweetened, and the sugar topping is thicker and crustier.

Crema Catalana: Spain’s Claim to Crème Brûlée

The Spanish claim their version of crema catalana is the true predecessor of crème brûlée. However, creama catalana is not baked in a water bath, or bain marie, as crème brûlée is. Crema catalana is served on Saint Joseph’s Day (March 19th).

French Crème Brûlée Recipe

Most people assume that crème brûlée is a French dish. After all, the name is French. However, the name crème brûlée didn’t become popular until the 19th century. Crème brûlée is probably just another version of a custard recipe that was passed around through the Middle Ages.

The French version of this dessert is baked in a pan of water and is chilled for several hours. The custard is sprinkled with sugar and then caramelized with a kitchen blow torch and served quickly, so the contrast between smooth and cold custard and crunchy and hot topping is preserved.

Recipe by Linda Johnson Larsen

Ingredients

  • 5 egg yolks
  • 1 whole egg
  • 2 cups heavy whipping cream
  • 1/2 cup granulated sugar
  • 2 teaspoons vanilla
  • Pinch salt
  • 1/4 cup granulated sugar

Instructions

  1. Burning sugar on creme brulee

    Preheat the oven to 350°F.

  2. Butter 4 (6 ounce) ramekins or oven proof custard cups with unsalted butter and set aside.
  3. In a large bowl, beat the egg yolks with the whole egg until smooth.
  4. Stir in the cream.
  5. Strain this mixture through a sieve into another clean large bowl.
  6. Stir in 1/2 cup sugar, vanilla, and salt with a wire whisk until the sugar dissolves.
  7. Pour the mixture into the prepared ramekins.
  8. Place the ramekins into a 9″ x 13″ glass baking dish.
  9. Carefully pour boiling water around the ramekins, being careful not to get any water into the custard.
  10. Bake the custard for 30 to 40 minutes or until the custard is just set.
  11. Carefully remove the ramekins from the pan and set on a wire rack. Let cool for 30 minutes, then cover and refrigerate the custards for at least 4 hours.
  12. When you’re ready to serve, take the ramekins out of the fridge and place them on a heatproof surface.
  13. Uncover and sprinkle each custard evenly with 1 tablespoon sugar. Using a kitchen torch, brown the sugar, moving the torch evenly over the top of each custard. Be careful not to burn the sugar.
  14. Serve immediately. Each diner uses a spoon to break the hard sugar top and enjoy the custard and crisp topping together.

Serves 4

Variations and Tips

In many ways, crème brûlée is a timeless and classic recipe. From its predecessor of the sweet custards of the Middle Ages, to the variations of today, this popular dessert can be modified in many ways.

Flavoring the Custard

Some versions of this dish are very sweet, and some are more savory. The French tend to add a lot of sugar to the custard while other versions require a flavoring of vanilla. However, there are a variety of variations on custard flavoring:

  • Zest of orange or lemon is a popular variation, usually added to a sweeter custard.
  • Vanilla bean, cocoa, or even coconut extract are used in some recipes.
  • Fresh fruit is a sometimes welcome addition to this dish. Raspberries or blueberries are delicious with the rich custard.
  • Liqueurs can be added. Add 1 to 2 tablespoons of Grand Marnier, Amaretto, Kahlua, or Irish Cream to the custard before baking.
  • Bittersweet grated chocolate is sometimes sprinkled on top of the custard before the sugar topping is added.

Topping Variations

The basic definition of a crème brûlée is a smooth and creamy custard topped with caramelized sugar. However, the type of sugar or other topping used, and the way it is caramelized can vary.

  • Sometimes liquor is adding to the topping and lit on fire for a dramatic presentation.
  • You can place the custards on a baking sheet and broil the sugar topping for a few minutes instead of using a blow torch.
  • You can use brown sugar in place of the granulated sugar for the topping.

Origins Aside, This Is a Classic Dish

The world may never know who invented crème brûlée or where it came from. However, everyone can agree that this delectable dessert deserves a place in cookbooks around the world. Serve it at your next dinner party. It’s the perfect make-ahead dessert!

People Aren’t Watching The Woke Olympics

H/T Town Hall.

I hope the woke Olympics is a money losing preposition for NBC.

I’ve never been the biggest fan of the Olympics. Sure, there are some events I do enjoy – a lot of the track and field events, gymnastics, swimming – but just about the only thing I’m less interested in than the summer Olympics is the winter Olympics (with the exception of hockey). Still, I paid attention and watched…in the past. This year holds no interest for me. 

It’s not because I’ve lost interest in the events I used to enjoy, nor is it that I’m disinterested in the weird events late night Olympics coverage offers. And it’s not that I don’t have the national pride I used to have, it’s that the athletes don’t.

I know that’s not true for all athletes, or even most, but one skunk ruins an entire garden party. And there will be a lot of skunks at this Olympics.

I don’t want to watch because I know there will be a woke-off between many of the medal winners, a secondary contest to be the most obnoxious left-wing d-bag who gets the most media attention. With NBC broadcasting the games, there really couldn’t be any other way.

The first person to raise a fist, take a knee, or turn their back on the flag during a medal ceremony will become an obsession for NBC, then the rest of the media. Then it’s game on as the rest of the media scrambles to book that person too. After that, every little social justice warrior wannabe in the games will start protesting, trying to outdo whatever was done before.

 

Since winning a medal is too rare, and there’s far too much attention and money in making a spectacle of themselves in the name of some leftist cause, the protests will begin to infiltrate the games themselves, not just the ceremonies. Everything will become the pregame of women’s soccer, which is why I’m actively hoping they lose another game and don’t make the medal round. 

I don’t like rooting against my country’s team, nor do I revel in actively avoiding watching as much as possible. I’d much rather have casual indifference than the passionate indifference currently ruling my viewing habits. But this is the world the left has created, one in which everything is political because politics has been made into everything.

I feel badly for the Olympians who simply want to represent our country and do their best, those who compete in sports where no sponsor dollars will ever make it to. They are the ones being hurt long term, and they are the only ones who are seemingly keeping the Olympic Spirit alive. It’s always the normal people who suffer when liberals get their way.

So why would I watch that? Why would anyone watch that? It’s the professionalization of the college campus, and NBC is excited to broadcast it to the world. I sure as hell don’t want to watch that. 

That NBC is getting horrible ratings from the start is a great feeling, at least to me. The opening ceremony got the lowest TV ratings in 33 years, and I’d bet dollars to donuts it’s for the very reason I’ve laid out here. 

That this could hurt NBC and its parent company, the equally despicable Comcast, is an added bonus. The fortune they laid out for the broadcast rights not coming back, having to refund some planned outlays or advertisers pulling their spots because the network isn’t meeting their performance guarantees would be hilarious and glorious. 

I still want the United States to win, and I’ll catch highlights online and even a couple of events on TV, but I will make a point of none of it. I won’t search to see when events I’m interested in are on or make any attempt to see them live. I could not care less. 

Liberals, who started with this garbage long before the Olympics began, have been waiting for this moment since last year. That extra anticipation caused by the pandemic delay has only made things worse. I don’t want to watch, and I hope each and every one of those athletes who’ve promised to “speak out” lose. I don’t care what their cause is, I couldn’t give less of a damn what they care about, if they can’t rise to the occasion and put country first, and not be left-wing jackals for 5 minutes in their miserable lives, I hope they lose and never get the chance in the first place.

Four Biggest Reasons NOT, to Carry a Revolver ~ VIDEO

H/T AmmoLand.

U.S.A. -(AmmoLand.com)- Before I begin to pontificate on why revolvers suck, let me substantiate my claims why adding that I both own several wheel-guns, and have carried them for nearly a decade.

 

You Carry Revolvers But Hate Them?

Yes and no. I certainly don’t hate revolvers, but I’m acutely aware of both their benefits and shortcomings. See, like everything in life, there’s no free lunch – and revolvers are no exception. Because revolvers are a great tool in very specific roles, but their often-vaunted title of ‘ideal first carry gun for new shooters’ is at best, questionable.

One of the biggest advantages of revolvers is their ability to chamber incredibly powerful magnum rounds. IMG Jim Grant

Why? Well, there’s a myriad of reasons, but first, let’s go into why a shooter would pick a revolver in the first place.

4 Reasons Revolvers Don’t Suck

  1. Versatility – If a shooter wants a robust firearm capable of firing any load hot enough to launch a round past the muzzle, the revolver is king – full stop. Much like the pump-action shotgun, revolvers don’t care if their ammo is loaded towards the top or bottom of SAAMI specs. Because the shooter themselves work the action, their rounds don’t have to be loaded within set specs to cycle the action. In the simplest terms, this means a shooter can load up a cylinder of super-mild .38 special rounds, or hard-hitting hard-cast 158gr .357 Magnum rounds in the same gun without worrying about reliability.
  2. Power – Additionally, revolvers are capable of firing more powerful rounds than semi-automatic firearms relative to their size. With our current technology, no compact auto-loader can be chambered in anything approaching the muzzle-energy of a J-frame .357 Magnum snub-gun. This isn’t an issue of metallurgy, but geometry and physics. Magnum calibers are simply too physically large to fit in the magazine of a handgun that would still be small enough to reasonably conceal. Moreover, big-bore hunting revolvers in massive calibers like 454 Casull are capable of producing rifle-like levels of ballistic energy in a relatively small package.
  3. Accuracy – Another boon of wheel-guns is their accuracy. Since the barrel is fixed, revolvers tend to be more accurate than automatics of the same size. Though since we’re talking primarily about concealed carry, the benefits of this are negligible since our targets tend to be fairly close.
  4. Durability – Lastly, revolvers are generally more durable than auto-loaders. Since their only moving component is the cylinder – which is surrounded by a robust frame – it’s much more difficult to damage a revolver in a way that affects its functionality. And if we’re talking about concealed carry guns, most snub-nosed revolvers utilize a simple notch for a rear sight that’s integral to the frame and either a pinned and dovetailed front sight post, or a blade permanently affixed to the barrel. In practical terms, this means it’s vastly more difficult to damage the sights to the point where they aren’t zeroed properly.

     

    SW-442 Jim Grant
    Although snub-nosed revolvers like this SW 442 are limited in capacity, they’re very reliable and easy to conceal. IMG Jim Grant

But wait, you might be asking, these features all sound awesome. Would these reasons alone make a revolver ideal for concealed carry?

Yes – in the right hands, but also no, because the sacrifices made by carrying a revolver don’t always outweigh the benefits of an auto-loader.

SIG P365xl Streamlight Shield RMSC Jim Grant 01
Revolvers are a hard sell against modern conceal carry offerings like this SIG P365 equipped with Shield sight and Streamlight tactical light. IMG Jim Grant

4 Reasons You Shouldn’t Carry a Revolver

  1. Capacity – I’m going to address the big one first. With the proliferation of reliable, ultra-compact pistols in 9mm feeding from ever-increasing capacity magazines, the five and six-round snub nose revolver is at a serious disadvantage. Yes, I’m aware that according to FBI statistics, the average number of rounds fired in a defensive scenario is a scant two, but there are several things wrong with using that stat to pick a defensive weapon. First off, you’re not Dirty Harry. A stone-cold bad-ass keeping your cool like there’s ice in your veins in a potentially deadly encounter with a bad guy. You’re likely scared out of your mind with adrenaline coursing through your veins. Unless you train every single day, you’re not going to be likely to place your rounds perfectly on target. But even if you are, bullets and physics are strange and your attacker might be hopped up on enough stimulants to fight through pain and blood loss until they lose consciousness. Finally, what if you’re firing more than one assailant? Do you really want to be restricted in your firearm’s capacity? In all of these scenarios, the increased capacity of a semi-automatic firearm is objectively superior.
  2. Ease of Use – This was a major selling-point of six-guns in the past to inexperienced, or physically weaker shooters. To fire a revolver, a shooter simply pulls the trigger. When the trigger goes, ‘click’ instead of ‘boom’ they open the cylinder, eject the spend casings, put fresh rounds in, close the cylinder and start pulling the trigger again. But with the advent of firearms like the S&W EZ9 Pistol, #ad racking the slide of an automatic requires substantially less strength. Yes, it will require a little more training, but since few of these compact auto-loaders feature a manual safety lever, shooters simply need to aim and squeeze the trigger to dispense high-speed lead. But most of all, these diminutive auto-loaders don’t suffer from the long, often-heavy DAO triggers that purpose-built hammerless snubs do. So while they might be a little more difficult to load, their better triggers promote more accurate shooting, which in turn leads to stopping a dangerous threat sooner.
  3. Speed – While reloading a revolver can be done fairly quickly (or extremely quickly by professionals) for everyone else who doesn’t have 10,000+ hours of training on a revolver, inserting a fresh magazine is roughly four times faster and delivers nearly twice as many rounds in the process. Before you jump on me about speed-strips, speed-loaders, or moon-clips, even these don’t mitigate the difference in speed of simply inserting a new magazine.
  4. Recoil – A More accurate header would be Recoil-to-Power-Ratio, but brevity is the soul of wit, and it doesn’t roll off the tongue the same way. But I digress, semi-automatic firearms have less felt recoil than revolvers of comparable size firing rounds of equivalent ballistic energy. This is true primarily for two major reasons. The first is the fact that an automatic firearm siphons some of the expanding gas of the detonating round to propel the slide rearward. This spring-loaded slide dampens some of the recoil impulses before they impart on the shooter’s hand. The second reason is due to a revolver’s relatively high bore axis. This is a consequence of a revolver’s fundamental design and requires a fairly in-depth explanation to fully understand. But suffice to say, semi-automatic pistols align the recoil impulse better with the shooter’s wrist and arm, giving it less leverage against your wrist, making the recoil feel less substantial.
The Ruger MAX-9 Pistol is another example of a pistol that is eclipsing the snub-nosed revolver. IMG Jim Grant

Verdict – Do Revolvers Suck?

In general, no, revolvers don’t suck. But they are definitely a second-rate choice in my opinion for a concealed carry pistol. With so many affordable, reliable 9mm compact handguns on the market today, there’s basically no compelling reason to pick a wheel gun for concealed carry. That said if you want a potent reliable hunting option, or simply a big-bore blaster strapped to your hip in case of wild boar or bears, the revolver is tough to top. But for the foreseeable future, I’ll keep my revolvers in the safe, and my SIG P365 handgun in my waistband when venturing out.

 

MoH Recipient Singlehandedly Destroyed A Tiger Tank And Captured 17 Germans

R.I.P.  Van Thomas Barfoot A true hero.

Van T. Barfoot was a true war hero, whose exploits saved many of his comrades’ lives and even those of the enemies he captured. He continued on in the military after WWII and eventually fought in both the Korean War and the Vietnam War, retiring at the rank of colonel. For his extraordinary acts of valor during WWII, he was awarded the Medal of Honor, the United States’ highest award.

 

Barfoot was born as Van Thurman Barfoot on the 15th of June 1919 in Edinburg, Mississippi. He would later change his name to Van Thomas Barfoot. Raised on a farm alongside eight siblings, Barfoot’s beginnings were rather humble.

As his grandmother was Choctaw (a Native American people), he was eligible to join the nation, but his parents did not enroll him.

Barfoot’s early military career

A lifelong patriot, Barfoot enlisted into the U.S. Army in 1940, before the U.S. had even entered the war, and before conscription began. He completed his training and first served in the 1st Infantry Division. By the time the Japanese attack Pearl Harbor in December of 1941, Barfoot had already reached the rank of sergeant.

Lt. Van Thomas Barfoot (right) bafter being awarded the Medal of Honor by Lt. General Alexander Patch on 22 September 1944 in Epinal, France
Barfoot poses after having been awarded the Medal of Honor. (Photo Credit: U.S. Army)

He was moved to the Amphibious Force Atlantic Fleet in Quantico, Virginia, until 1943, when the unit was decommissioned. Barfoot was then transferred to the 157th Infantry Regiment, 45th Infantry Division.

Barfoot and the 45th Infantry Division were shipped to Europe in June of 1943 and began preparations for the invasion of Sicily. The division was part of the spearhead in the assault on the island, supported by the 505th Parachute Regiment. Around this time, Adolf Hitler decided to reduce activities at the Battle of Kursk in part to divert forces to reinforce Italy.

By early August, the 45th Infantry Division was withdrawn from frontline duties for rest, having fought valiantly through Sicily. In September 1943, the 45th Infantry Division was involved in Operation Avalanche, the invasion of Salerno, Italy. After Salerno, they once again fought a tough, slow, and difficult fight at Anzio.

Here, Barfoot would display immense feats of courage and bravery.

Barfoot’s Medal of Honor

After he and his comrades reached the Italian town of Carano, they set up defenses. While he was here, Barfoot had patrolled the area to assess German lines and their defenses. Soon after, he and his unit were involved in an attack against the German lines.

Barfoot (bottom left) poses with six other Medal of Honor recipients in 2008.
Barfoot (bottom left) poses with six other Medal of Honor recipients in 2008. (Photo Credit: U.S. Navy)

Barfoot, who knew the area and its defenses well thanks to his patrols, requested to lead his own squad into battle. Aware of a minefield ahead, Barfoot proceeded alone. He crawled past the minefield and up to a German machine-gun position, which he attacked with a hand grenade.

According to Barfoot’s Medal of Honor citation, he “crawled to the proximity of one machine-gun nest and made a direct hit on it with a hand grenade, killing two and wounding three Germans.”

After this he made his way to a second machine gun, which he also attacked, killing two with his Thompson submachine gun and capturing a further three. The next machine gun nest surrendered to Barfoot immediately, as well as other enemy troops nearby.

“Members of another enemy machinegun crew then abandoned their position and gave themselves up to Sgt. Barfoot. Leaving the prisoners for his support squad to pick up, he proceeded to mop up positions in the immediate area, capturing more prisoners and bringing his total count to 17.”

In these actions, he captured 17 and killed eight of his enemy.

A while later on the same day, after Barfoot had regrouped with his men, the Germans launched a counterattack aided by fearsome Tiger I tanks.

His citation said: “Securing a bazooka, Sgt. Barfoot took up an exposed position directly in front of three advancing Mark VI tanks. From a distance of 75 yards his first shot destroyed the track of the leading tank, effectively disabling it, while the other two changed direction toward the flank. As the crew of the disabled tank dismounted, Sgt. Barfoot killed three of them with his tommy gun.”

As if this weren’t enough, Barfoot then ran behind enemy lines and disabled an enemy field gun with explosives. On his way back, the exhausted Barfoot encountered two severely wounded comrades. He helped them both back to his position, which was 1,700 feet away.

For these actions, Barfoot was awarded the Medal of Honor in a ceremony held in France, with his fellow soldiers in attendance.

After WWII

After fighting through the Korean War and Vietnam War, Barfoot returned home and moved to Virginia, where he would live a relatively quiet life.

WWII veteran and Congressional Medal of Honor recipient Van Barfoot is greeted by a soldier as he heads to Soldier Field for the opening ceremony for the Medal of Honor Society Convention September 15, 2009
Van Barfoot is greeted by a soldier as he heads to Soldier Field for the opening ceremony for the Medal of Honor Society Convention September 15, 2009. (Photo Credit: Scott Olson/Getty Images)

He sprung into the media in 2009 when the homeowners’ association (HOA) where he lived ordered him to remove a 21-foot flagpole he used to fly the American flag from. The HOA threatened to take Barfoot to court if their order was not obeyed.

The situation went viral on news outlets and across social media, with large numbers of people outraged by the demands. After a huge amount of backlash, the HOA dropped their order, settling the dispute.

The Medal of Honor recipient died in 2012 after a fall in his home in Henrico County, Virginia. He was aged 92.

McDonald’s Free Fry Refills Are Their Best-Kept Secret

H/T Mental Floss.

The next time I am at Mickey D’s I will give this a try.

McDonald’s denies the existence of an official secret menu, but some locations do offer special ordering hacks to customers in the know. TikTok user Orlando Johnson highlighted one of the fast food chain’s best-kept secrets in a recent video. As Newsweek reports, your order of French fries from McDonald’s may come with a free refill: All you have to do is ask for it.

In the video, posted under the username itsosoprodigy, a customer is delighted when a McDonald’s worker agrees to fill his empty fry carton free of charge. Many users shared similar experiences in the comments, but it’s unclear whether the complimentary refills are an official policy.

While some commenters claimed that the practice is standard across the company, others say it depends on who’s working behind the counter. McDonald’s restaurants cook more fries than they can serve on any given day, and some workers may be happy to make sure they don’t go to waste. The hack is also worth trying at different chains. Determined to test if the hack was a fluke, Johnson tried the same order at Raising Cane’s Chicken Fingers and Wendy’s. Free fry refills were provided at both restaurants.

Asking for a fry refill is a lot less complicated than many of the unofficial McDonald’s orders purported online. Some secret menu items customers have ordered from the fast food chain include a grilled cheese sandwich, an eight-patty “Monster Mac,” and a “Land, Sea, and Air Burger” with a beef patty, chicken patty, and fish filet. Like the free fries, these items aren’t advertised by the company, so while you can try ordering them, don’t argue with the cashier if they give you a confused stare in response.

[h/t Newsweek]

Does Pasadena Police Chief Not Know What Straw Buys Are?

H/T Bearing Arms.

The Police Chief of Pasadena needs to read up on straw purchases and what constitutes a straw buy.

Right now, a lot of the Second Amendment news out there revolves around the Biden administration’s focus on straw buys. The administration has said they’re cracking down on these kinds of gun sales.

However, after a news story earlier today, I’m left wondering just how many people even understand what a straw buy actually is.

After all, it seems the police chief in Pasadena doesn’t.

Violent crime is down in the city this year, according to Pasadena police Chief John Perez, but the alarming number of guns seized to-date by officers has caught the attention of local leaders, who asked to see a more detailed report on the matter.

“Many of these guns are what you would consider registered to somebody. The track record of these guns are very interesting because of straw purchases, which means people sell them to one another without any legal process,” Perez said.

Uh, no. That’s not what the term “straw purchase” means. Those may be illegal gun sales in states with universal background checks, but they’re not straw buys.

A straw purchase is when someone buys a firearm for another who generally cannot purchase a gun for themselves. This is an act that’s illegal in all 50 states and all U.S. territories.

Buying and selling of firearms without undergoing a background check is something else entirely, and you’d think a police chief in a city of over 140,000 people would understand this.

If he doesn’t, then just who in the hell does?

It’s especially frustrating because he follows up with this:

“So, there are many times that the weapons are in fact missing from people’s homes, and when we contact them, they didn’t know they were stolen or they were unreported in burglaries,” Perez said. “It runs the gamut in different categories.”

If they’re stolen guns, then they can’t be the result of a straw buy. He clearly seems to grasp that many of these guns are stolen firearms. That’s an important point that we need to see discussed more, especially by law enforcement.

But it doesn’t help if a police chief of a decent size city muddies the issue by simply not understanding what we’re talking about here.

Of course, this makes me wonder how much of this push by the Biden administration is because they don’t understand what a straw buy is or not. Granted, this is President Joe Biden we’re talking about here. I’m not sure he knows what day of the week it is, much less what a straw buy is or isn’t.

Still, that might explain the push to combat something that accounts for only a small number of firearms used in criminal acts.

After all, there’s not much else that explains this odd focus on straw purchases all of a sudden.

Of course, the question then becomes just how many police chiefs in the country also aren’t aware of what a straw buy is. Maybe that’s why there are so few prosecutions for these things?

If I didn’t have enough reasons to weep for our nation’s future, this would be enough.

 

Several Injured At Party Shooting… In The UK

H/T Bearing Arms.

Gun control in the UK like here in the United States is a major failure.

Liberals here and in the UK are too stupid to understand that gun control laws do not and will not stop punks from getting a gun was as the law biding UK and US citizens are ones that get hurt and killed because of gun control laws.

It seems like pretty much any Monday over the last year will feature at least one report of a shooting at some party somewhere in the United States. Parties seem to have become a favorite target of gang members and really anyone else who is holding a grudge.

Incidents like those prompt many gun control advocates to step up their efforts. They want more stringent gun control and these shootings are why. After all, in their minds, with sufficient gun control, these kinds of things will come to an end, right?

Well, here we are. It’s another Monday, and I’m about to share a story about a shooting. Only this one doesn’t advance the gun control narrative.

Multiple people have been hospitalised following shooting at an engagement party in inner-city Manchester.

Greater Manchester Police (GMP) reported “a number of people presenting themselves at hospital with apparent gunshot wounds” shortly after 1 a.m. on Sunday following an incident in the Longsight area of the multicultural city.

“Four people attended hospital in total, one man aged 54 is being treated for serious injuries to his arm and another 48-year-old man is in a serious condition and has undergone surgery,” the force confirmed in an official statement.

“A 27-year-old woman and a 16-year-old girl were also injured, it is unclear whether this is a result of a gunshot, debris from the discharge or from the disturbance at the scene,” they added, noting that another 16-year-old has been discharged from hospital.

While details of the incident are still emerging, GMP have disclosed that “It appears the group had been at an engagement party at an address on Birch Hall Lane in Longsight where a large amount of people had gathered,” and that it seems that “at some point, shortly before 1 a.m. an altercation took place, possibly in the garden, and it’s been reported five gun shots were fired.”

The force also “received a report of a car on its roof on Thoresway Road, Longsight” shortly before 2 a.m. but is yet to establish a definitive link between this discovery and the shooting.

Now, let’s remember that the UK has some pretty strict gun control laws in place. Private ownership of firearms exists, but might as well not considering all the rules revolving around having them. No one has ready access to a firearm lawfully, which is precisely what gun control activists seem to want here in the United States.

Fat lot of good it did, too.

See, what people need to understand is that gun control laws don’t disarm criminals. It never has. They’re going to get firearms no matter what you try, as evidenced by what just happened in this instance. Someone got a gun and had it on their person for whatever reason. It’s highly unlikely they did so lawfully since that kind of thing just doesn’t happen in the UK.

Now, people were shot and no one had any opportunity to defend themselves. It remains to be seen whether they’d have been able to anyway, but they were denied the opportunity to even try.

That’s where UK-style gun control will take us. It won’t stop shootings. It’ll just make damn sure the only people bleeding are those targeted by the criminals. It doesn’t stop bad guys, it stops anyone they cross from being able to fight back.

England has pretty much every advantage you can name. They’re an island without easy access to most other nations. The borders they share are part of the same united kingdom with basically the same laws. Access to the island is relatively limited with only one real tunnel between them and the mainland. Even there, other nations have similar gun laws which are enforced as well as any government can.

If they can’t keep guns out, what makes you think we’d be able to do it with a porous southern border that has allowed drugs and people to flow across for decades?

No, if this shooting does anything, it should tell people just how gun control simply doesn’t work as advertised.