SHTFriday: the Zika Virus

Are you worried because the media is suddenly talking about a virus you never heard about until now? Don't panic. I break it down for you and explain why Zika isn't that big of a deal.

The Privilege We Don't Talk About

These days, everyone likes to talk about race, gender, sexuality, and sometimes religion, if it's the right religion. Entire worldviews and ideologies exist around these factors, and people build their entire identities around the circumstances of their birth. Circumstances that are built entirely on chance and often do play a part in the way your life plays out, but these very self-same people generally tend to ignore the elephant in the room.

The very well-off, well dressed, upper-class elephant.

The elephant with multiple degrees, a trust fund, and paid speaking positions.

The elephant that makes daily stops at Starbucks to micro-blog on their Macbook Air about injustice.

Maybe it's just the reformed Marxist in me, but nothing irritates me more than seeing someone who genuinely, in their heart of hearts, feels that they're a victim of the world lecturing someone in a rougher place than they are. I can't help but feel that regardless of race, gender, whatever factor, that someone who has just stepped off the stage of the Sydney Opera House from a lecture where they earned enough to buy one or two reliable used cars shouldn't be lecturing someone in rural Appalachia regarding their place of power in the socioeconomic structure of systems.

So let's talk about Roxanne Gay. Who, according to her twitter feed 24 hours ago, will be lecturing at Missouri State University. Who, according to her twitter feed 15 hours ago, complained about a $400 suitcase that can charge her iPhone and weigh itself, just doesn't work. For comparison, last time I flew anywhere, my company paid for it, and I had just my carry-on in a $20 bag I bought from Target. But I don't want to weigh myself, who debated going to the doctor last week for a stomach ache that I thought might be my appendix (it wasn't - don't eat gluten-free pizza) against someone who has had her own TED talk. I want to talk about perspective.

Fight.. the.. system? 

Screencap for convenience. Link for veracity. The person behind the counter at McDonalds is making, in about six months, what you make for a speaking appearance, I'd wager. If not less. This person who asked you "boy or girl" might have a boy or girl of their own, who they're worried they won't be able to feed, and are just hoping the glint in your eye doesn't mean you're about to ask for the manager. This person that you're explaining how damaging enforcing the gender binary to doesn't even have an ounce of power or privilege that you have, where you can go on a national speaking stage and explain your ideas to modest crowds of people. She can't even take the words that you've spoken to her, verbatim, to her manager and have him pass it up the chain. because it won't matter. "Girl or boy" isn't something that the counter employees at McDonalds have any influence at all over. At best, all you've done is waste her time. At worst, you've impacted her productivity and inconvenienced the people behind you in line, and that's not going to cost you anything. 

Fortunately, there's a little bit of a silver lining to this story. After publicly and proudly tweeting (again, on a public platform), she was quite handily told how completely out of touch and lacking perspective she was, and did her best at apologizing. Of course, between the initial tweet and the 'apology' were quite vitriolic statements thrown at people who were being everything from supportive but critical to straight-up assholes, but progress is progress.

But this is the crux of what bothers me about identity ideologies: They're mainly made up of people who make a living out of them. I'm not paid to write these posts; I write them because these are things that I enjoy or things that I feel. I don't have a trust fund; I have a real life job somewhere that I don't mention that takes up entirely too many hours of my week to pay my bills so that I can keep myself distracted with video games or action figures, and I'm thankful that I have a job. Some people don't.

And some people have a job they hate, that pays them sweet fuck-all, and still have to deal with people who have no sense of perspective or empathy for someone that's struggling because they don't look like them or think like them. 

Traveller Tuesday: Missiles

Ah, missiles. Possibly the greatest fly in my particular Traveller ointment, missiles have always given me trouble: they're expensive, they're easy to shoot down, and they take a long time to get to their targets. Why would anyone use them?

Thankfully, 2e has addressed that somewhat by doubling the damage of basic (now called "standard") missiles to 4d6, and making nukes truly scary at 6d6. This answers the above question with "Because they have more bang than energy weapons; the payoff for the wait is increased damage."

Of course, the missiles still need to GET there first, which is still a problem with the current system. This is a problem I hope to fix.

As of this post, I am adhering to neither 1e nor 2e; instead, I am cherry-picking the best from each. You may consider this "1.5e" or, if you're feeling puckish, "Pe" (for Palette edition).

*Cue chainsaw noises*

My use of Traveller setting and dress falls under
fair use guidelines for both Mongoose and Far Future Enterprises.

Targeting
From a game standpoint, missiles have three guidance types:

• Internal - These missiles home in on targets via onboard sensors. The actual type of sensors doesn't really matter; what matters is that, once launched, they can independently seek and destroy their target without further guidance from the mothership. These are typically known as "Smart" missiles. 
• External -  These missiles follow directions given after launch. Usually this is in the form of a laser or other form of EM radiation painting the target craft, but others (such as torpedoes) can be controlled by a comm laser in a high-tech version of "wire guided". These missiles can be given new directions after launch. 
• Ballistic - These are classic "dumbfire" rockets which travel along a set trajectory until they either hit something and explode, or run out of fuel and explode. Unlike the others, they cannot be jammed because there is no guidance system to jam. 

It is worth noting that missiles built to military specifications can fulfill any of these roles. Before launch, the gunner chooses which targeting system the missile will use, if any. Missiles which are launched "dumb" cannot be affected by electronic warfare.

Chaff, as detailed in last week's post on Sand, affects internally guided missiles. Externally guided missiles are also affected, but can be redirected if the gunner shifts the painting laser to an unblocked target (or directs the torpedoes to divert around the sand)*. Chaff has no effect on ballistic guidance. 

* There ought to be rules regarding when it's too late to shift targets, and how far away the new target can be. Sadly, I don't have a good answer for that now. At this time I am relying upon GM discretion to decide what is fair and what is not; hopefully this can be codified in the future.  

To-Hit Mechanics

• Ballistic: The gunner rolls Turret or Capital Weapons. 8+ means the missiles hit, but if the target spends thrust to evade then the missiles will miss. This can be used as a great way to bleed off thrust from a fleeing ship that doesn't have the ability to shoot down multiple inbound missiles. 
• Externally Guided: Do not roll for to-hit at launch. Instead, wait until the turn the missiles will impact, and then consult this chart from first edition:
  
  Note that any ship with a reflec coating will reflect a painting laser with more intensity, and so missiles will more easily home in on it. A reflec coating gives +2 to hit with external guidance missiles. 
• Internally Guided: The gunner does not need to make a to-hit roll. Instead, on the turn of impact the missile makes its own to-hit roll. This is a base 8+, modified by the difference between the TL of the missile (or its launcher, if higher) and the TL of the target (use sensor TL if uncertain). This means that lower TL missiles will have a penalty to hit higher TL targets, and vice versa. 

Electronic Warfare
Smart missiles are exactly that. If they have been spoofed off their target as a result of EW, a roll of 8+ means they have re-acquired their target and may make another attack roll so long as they have sufficient thrust. The TL modifiers above also apply to this roll.

Externally Guided missiles are vulnerable to being thrown off-course. It is plausible to assume that some facets of EW involve blinding missile receptors with comm lasers and/or fooling a missile into thinking that another missile is its target via painting laser.

Dumb missiles are immune to EW and must be shot down or evaded.

Universal To-Hit Modifiers

• Missiles launched at Adjacent range are effectively dumbfire and only do 2d6 impact damage, as their warheads have not reached the minimum safe distance (1 km) to arm. 
• Close range launches are +4 to hit. 
• Short range launches are +2 to hit. 
• Medium range launches are considered default (+0).
• Long range launches are -2 to hit.
• Very Long range launches are -4 to hit. 
• Distant range launches are -6 to hit.  
• For every missile in the salvo that is not stopped by EW or Point Defense, +1 to hit.

Variable Thrust

All milspec missiles and torpedoes have the "variable thrust" feature. What this means is that they do not have to go at their full speed when launched-- they can be programmed to fly at a slower rate, or to delay full thrust for a period after launch.

This is a useful tool for navies because it allows a ship to create larger barrages. For example, a 10G missile will reach a stationary target at Long range in 4 turns, and a 12G missile will reach a stationary target at Long range in 3 turns. A military vessel with a missile bay could launch its first salvo at 10G and its second at 12, with both salvos reaching the target at approximately the same time. This turns 2 salvos of 12 into a single salvo of 24 -- much harder to shoot down, and more dangerous when it hits!

Monday Gunday Product Reviews: Laserlyte Red Center Mass Laser vs. LaserMax Micro II G

Once again I have a head-to-head pistol laser comparison, this time between LaserLyte and LaserMax. These lasers were tested on my mother's Kel-Tec PMR-30. This is because 1) she's wanted a pistol laser for a long time now, and 2) it's the only pistol in the house with an accessory rail.

Disclaimer 1: I have a friendly relationship with the various LaserMax representatives. I try to review things objectively, but it's possible bias might creep in, so please consider my review with that in mind.

Disclaimer 2: I have favorably reviewed products from both companies in the past. I genuinely like both companies and the products they make.

Disclaimer 3: People are inevitably going to ask "Erin, why didn't you review a non-Center Mass laser from LaserLyte, or the red Micro 2? Isn't that like comparing apples to oranges" and my response is "I reviewed what I was given. They send a green, I review green; I get a CML, I review a CML." I have tried to review them both on their merits as pistol lasers, while pointing out that each have less expensive alternatives.

Price
The LaserLyte Red Center Mass Laser retails for $164.95, but is available at Amazon for $99.95.

However, if you don't want the Center Mass effect and just want a single laser, you can get the LaserLyte SCV4 from Amazon for $64.99. They both have central dots for point of impact; the more expensive CML has a ring of 8 other lasers around it.

The LaserMax Micro II G retails for $199, but is available at Amazon for $167.23. The LaserLyte comes out looking better in this regard, but notice that I'm comparing a red laser to a green laser.

LaserMax also makes a red version of the Micro 2, which is exactly the same other than beam color. It sells for its MSRP of $119 at Amazon.

Winner: LaserLyte, but not by much
(see below). 

Battery
The Red CML takes three 357 silver oxide batteries, with a life of 2.5 hours constant-on and 5 hours of life on pulse. The Micro II G needs only one lithium battery, with a life of "over an hour" for green and "4+ hours" for red. 

Given that the Micro 2 Red uses the exact same battery as the green, you get nearly twice as much life as the red center mass laser for a difference of $20 -- and that's constant-on time, not pulse time. (You can make the Micro 2 pulse as well by turning it on and then pressing and holding the switch for 5 seconds. Pulse life for green is still "over an hour", although I would think it would last somewhat longer than on constant; red on pulse extends its life to 4.5 hours.)

The Micro 2's battery is easier to replace, as well: the cover is a spring-loaded lid that just pops open and snaps closed, as opposed to a circular plug that must be unscrewed with a coin or screwdriver (but don't use too large a coin, or you'll hit the mounting rail). 

Both lasers come with auto-off features: the CML after 6 minutes, the Micro 2 (both versions) after 10. This helps to prevent battery drain after accidental activation. 

It's worth noting that both lasers come with batteries included, which is a nice touch. 

Winner: LaserMax, but also not by much.

At this point we have "cheaper price and annoying battery installation" vs. "more expensive but easier to replace, and if you use the red Micro 2 you get better battery life."

Installation
Both slip onto an accessory rail and install quickly. The Micro 2 uses a flathead screw, while the Center Mass Laser uses a hex wrench (which is included in the package). The instructions for mounting and using both are clear.

Winner: a tie.

Adjustability
Both come with a tiny hex key for adjustment, which is a good thing because the CML key is so tiny I don't have one in any of sets. The Micro 2 uses a 0.05" key which I happen to have in my set of Stanley hex wrenches.

Both sets of adjustment screws suffer from what I call "gummy screw syndrome", where the screws just move the laser without giving you any feedback like MOA clicks. I realize this is standard among laser sights, but it's still annoying to me. However, the Micro 2's screws are just slightly tighter than that of the CML, meaning I felt like I had more precision when dialing it in.

Winner: Lasermax, but just barely. 

This is because their screws were slightly better and because they used a wrench size I own. That's important, because we all know how easy it is to lose teeny-tiny hex keys. 

Operation

Both lasers have ambidextrous controls, which is great as I'm a rightie and my mom (whose gun the lasers were on) is a leftie. I preferred the controls of the Micro 2, as they are switches on either side of the casing; mom preferred the rear pushbutton controls of the CML. I believe that makes control placement a matter of personal preference. 

Winner: another tie. 

Performance
This is the part you've all been waiting for.

Micro 2

After I dialed the sight in as best I could, this is what I achieved at 25 feet, unsupported. The first three are in a nice stitch across the X, and the other 17 are kind sloppy because I'm not an experienced shooter and my hand gets tired. You'll note that all but two are 9-ring or better.

[It is worth noting that time passed between these two shooting situations, as .22 WMR became hard to come by for a while. This explains the differences in targets, and possibly an improvement in my shooting. Ammunition was the same, however.]

Red Center Mass Laser

I had significant problems sighting this laser in at 25 feet; all of my shots were dropping about 3 inches low, no matter how I adjusted the laser. (I didn't photograph the original target that's full of low holes, but if you want to see it let me know.)

I am willing to state for the record that the problem in zeroing it may have been me, since the procedure for both is the same. I'm not sure why it gave me trouble; it simply did.

After about 50 rounds of this I gave up and moved the target to 10 feet, the minimum distance the range allowed. I figured this would probably be the range that my mother would be engaging a bad guy in a self-defense situation*.

*Yes, I know all about the Tueller drill. Mom is old, carries in a purse, and doesn't practice her draw stroke. I can't change any of these factors. 

The first five shots in the head are me using the fiber-optic sights. This was to prove that the gun itself was accurate and that I could shoot worth a damn. (Why add a laser, then? I hear you ask. Well, just because I can shoot better with the iron sights doesn't mean my mother can, and I was doing this for her carry piece. She has trouble with sights in general.)

The three shots in the chest are from me zeroing the sight. The high one is before laser adjustment; the middle one is after. The bottom one is from when I went "Okay, I have this zeroed, let's move it back some" and I moved it to about 18 feet out. Those extra eight feet caused a drop of one inch.

Now, I'm not saying it's the laser's fault; it might be my fault as I don't claim to be anything more than an enthusiastic amateur when it comes to shooting guns. But that was the point where I went "Clearly my shots are dropping for some reason, so let's just go back to mom's likely engagement distance and try it out."  That resulted in the cluster of shots around the thorax.

Why the thorax? Because 1) it was a place I hadn't yet shot, and 2) I was thinking of the "White Triangle of Death". You see, if shots are going to fall 1-3 inches at 25 feet, then let's aim at the thorax; if they hit there it's good, but if they drop then they're still within the center of mass.

I do think it's weird that I shot better without the laser than with it, though.

Winner: Depends on who you ask.

Mom really, really likes the big red Center Mass ring that the LaserLyte puts out. She has terrible vision -- has astigmatism, wears trifocals, and had cataract surgery recently -- and so the big pattern of the CML is a draw for her, despite the fact that for me it yielded less precise results.

I prefer the LaserMax Micro 2, because I found it easier to turn on, easier to adjust, and had better accuracy with it.

But Erin! If this laser is for your mother's pistol, 

why hasn't she shot with it?

That's an excellent question, and it deserves an equally good answer. Sadly, I can't give you one. Mom is full of good intentions but can never quite find the time to go shooting with me; first she had neck surgery, and then cataract surgery, and then it was the holidays, and then it was cleaning up after the holidays. At this point, I frankly don't know if she's just reluctant to go because she's afraid to find out she's lost a lot of progress, or if she just can't find the time to go, or if it's something else entirely.

But I'm a dutiful daughter, so if she wants me to install the laser she wants, I install it. I can't physically drag her to the range to get her to practice with it.

Which One Should You Get?
Again, it depends. If you asked me this question in conversation I'd answer with questions of my own: Who is it for? What is their skill level? Is this for target practice or self-defense?

These are both fine lasers, and if you get the red versions the prices are comparable once you factor in battery life. If you like the one dot, get the Micro 2; if you like the big Center Mass Ring, then by all means get the one from LaserLyte. I prefer the one I'm more accurate with (obviously), but if you have poor vision then the CML is clearly a better choice.

The biggest difference is the red vs. green. The green Micro 2 is $30 more expensive than the red, and you get increased daytime visibility in exchange for a greatly reduced battery life. There was no real way for me to compare the red Center Mass Laser against the green, because the green CML (see my earlier review here) is far too large to mount on a pistol. For a long gun, size won't matter much, but again the price issue comes up:  $99.95 for red vs the now-current $147.48 Amazon price.

TL;DR version:  Unless you absolutely need the green, get the red version of whichever model suits you best.

Obligatory FTC Disclaimer:  I genuinely like both products. Both were given to me for free for reviewing purposes. I was not paid to give a good review. Go away and fight some real crime. 

Possibly the Tightest Group I Have Ever Shot

I took my mom's PMR-30 to the range to test out the red Center Mass Laser on her pistol. I don't have time to write a full post tonight, so this is basically a teaser until I can write tomorrow. 

Shot with iron (well, fiber-optic) sights at 10-12 feet. I actually shot better with them than with the laser. Weird, right?

Gun Blog Variety Podcast #75

http://tinyurl.com/nmwoenx

Despite having almost no voice left after a week of coughing, Sean has dragged himself to the computer and done the podcast with Adam. Just because he can't talk doesn't mean he won't talk.

• Erin Palette, having talked last week about barter, this week talks trade goods.
• By taking US Navy hostages, Iran seems to want to complete the comparison between President Obama and President Carter. But this time Iran let them go. I ask Nicki Kenyon if that's a Win or a Fail for our foreign policy.
• Barron B give us his thoughts on New York's attempt to ban smart phone encryption
• And in his extended series on Obama's disastrous CNN Town Hall, Weer'd enters the second week with "The Lies, Part 2."

Thanks for downloading, listening, and subscribing. Please like and share The GunBlog VarietyCast on Facebook, and if you use iTunes, give us a review!

Listen to the podcast here.

Read the show notes here.

A special thanks both to Firearms Policy Coalition for their support and to our sponsor, Law of Self Defense. Use discount code "Variety" at checkout and get 10% off.

SHTFriday: Law of Self Defense Seminar

Over at Blue Collar Prepping, I review a seminar that I took last weekend. If you carry a gun, you need to attend one for your state.