Crisco As Moisturizer

What is a combat shooting technique?

Part One:

is the solution that we intend to implement to survive a confrontation, in which we are usually the victim and are within the law, and the aggressor, as well take the initiative, is in breach of the same with their action.
The technique is based on the principle that a person should act in a great emotional pressure. Therefore act automatically, without thinking, quickly and accurately.
A person in this situation (under pressure), it is expected that quickly drew his gun, pointing in the direction of the aggressor and quickly press the shutter, with his eyes focused on the perpetrator and not the view.
in combat firing, the effectiveness is distributed as follows, 85% of a good shot is worth the shot, the remaining 15% is subject to such factors as the choice of weapons, ammunition, shooting conditions (uneven ground nocturnal, under pressure ... etc.).
guns having large numbers of parts and insurance are good candidates to suffer the same amount of damage or placed "accidental insurance." We must start from the premise that insurance is too insecure Thus, the handling of the weapon should be simplified to the maximum. The slide stop is useless and dangerous, but instead will use the slide, we will roll it three times, so solve all the problems of the gun, but two nail extractor (the extractor claw itself is damaged, we can hit the slide against the ground and then shoot the ammunition we have in the room) and striker (firing pin itself is damaged impossible to trigger).
To combat firing simplified weapon and its use is essential, as such weapons remove or buy uninsured fin hammer or charger, so it will discard bag and quick delivery.
The weapon is worn on the waist, tucked in and fastened by the belt, which will be operational by simply pulling the slide, and in case of jam, we'll just pull the slide three times to solve the problem .
The best ammunition, without doubt, the 9 mm caliber


to neutralize an opponent three times the trigger guard on the target, rather than the two that were made so far, and guarantee that a shot At least reach the target or bequeath the three, a shock effect (but reached a critical point mortal) devastating.

The ability to shoot with both hands removes the choice to carry the weapon to the left or DRCH, or being hit by not knowing how to shoot with your other hand.
The bullet chamber is discarded because unintended accidents outweigh the advantages. The charger will be changing in a guard position, knees, this method is known as tactical magazine changes.

For a good shooting technique:


1. Brandishing the gun: This is built deeply into the palm of the hand, closes the thumb and contracts on the three fingers, clutching tightly. The gun should get so that is a continuation of the arm.

2. Pressure on the trigger, will be made by the middle of the upper phalanx of the index finger. The pressure should be smooth, without using excessive force and making sure that the other fingers are immobile.

3. Shooting position: The body facing the target, 50-60 cm legs spread, knees slightly bent and forward, feet parallel to the target, the back leaning forward slightly, head up and focused vision on target. Important factors

Combat Shooting:

• Weapon.

• Ammunition fired the gun.

• Site where the weapon holder. The cover

• System use.


a) Technique: Posture

b) Tactics: Knowing when to do things. Ejplo; Changing boots, cars, tickets ... etc.



Arms Revolver:



Reliable-Speed \u200b\u200b(Escorts shot with 0.30 sec.).

Advantages:

• Low possibility of interruption.

• Faster to open fire on him first shot.

• Less mechanisms.

• More size options in the same caliber.

Disadvantages:

• Less ammo capacity.

• Less accurate rapid fire.

• Ammunition Reloading slower.

• Increased thickness of the weapon. _____________________________________________________________________________________


Pistol





mechanical cycle (operation that takes the runner to go back and forth, 0.08 sec.)

Advantages:

• Increased ammo capacity ..

• Greater accuracy in shooting fast. • Reloading ammo faster.

• Reduced thickness of the weapon.

Disadvantages:

• Increased attention to cleaning. • Mechanisms complex
..
• Increased risk of interruption.
• Slower to resume fire.

best gun to work:
1. Simplicity
2. Few pieces.
3. To exchange pieces (same brand and model).
4. Reliability.
5.
size 6. Coordinates of the weapon. Mechanisms

gun safety: Security

fin, works by blocking the firing pin. It is not practical in combat. May cause disruptions to mount the gun.

• Insurance charger, auto insurance can not fire the weapon if the charger is not in place. It is not effective in combat, not to shoot the gun with only one bullet in the chamber without having the charger into. You can only shoot with the magazine inserted.

• Insurance grip, is placed in the back of the head, you can not fire if the gun is not well grasped. I personally do not like the gun has such insurance is not effective and may be harmful in a combat situation.

• Automatic needle Insurance acts upon the tooth of the hammer engages the sear retaining it. Is most effective for combat shooting. Does not fire if the gun is dropped.

• trigger lock, this is placed behind or beside the trigger. In reaction is the most reliable.

• Transport insurance, you can mount the gun but not firing.
desamartllado
• Insurance, if control falls not firing.

System Types:

• Broudin System.

The barrel and slide move together by a chain.

responsibility effecting movement called bolted forward.

• Broudim system improved.

The cannon moves with the slide back to a point where the slide is lonely and engages the barrel through the pins. This system has no chain, the cap is replaced by a chain attached to the barrel compact. The bolted is made through pins.

• Walter Systems.

The barrel is fixed to the frame, only the slider moves, the bolted is linear, which is transmitted in the reliability of the shot.

Source: Scribd.

Women Have Chikan In Bus

Legalizing drugs?




Everyone accepts that it is good, desirable, necessary, healthy ... reduce drug use. That may be the only point at which all agencies, nations, and experts agree. And yet we must accept that humans have consumed, consume and consume drugs forever. It is inherent to our nature. Therefore, periodically reopening the debate over its legalization, which seems as endless as the habit of eating.


may also contribute to this lack of clarity of the debate, motivated by the frequent confusion between the different concepts involved in the term 'legalization'. For most people, legalization is presented as a discussion of 'yes' or 'no' all or nothing, black or white, when in fact it has many variations and nuances. On the other hand, almost all positions and decisions are based more on opinions and theories on sound scientific facts, since there are few rigorous studies, reliable and comprehensive report on the social, health and legal legalize drugs.

saw the picture, I intend to try to clarify the conceptual debate, so that readers can at least know about what they have to say no, obviously you have to say: this is a thing of everyone.

Well, for this, I think that should be clarified at least the following:

1. Liberalizing: You authorize the sale and consumption of any drug without any restrictions. This almost does not happen with any drug, except with caffeine and some natural sedatives such as valerian, etc. Virtually no country or social or health agency support it. Public opinion, reflected in numerous surveys, neither endorse. Opinions aside, what is known is that liberalization is a drug to increase their consumption, which, regardless of the socio-political-legal you may have, always generates an increase in risk and vulnerable populations, and more complications and social and health costs.

2. Legalize: Means authorize the use of certain drugs for legitimate and ethical, such as research, health, palliative or preventive. For example, derivatives of marijuana for cancer problems, the morphine for heroin dependence, etc. There are many countries and agencies that have adopted such measures, provided in the context of health and social programs regulated and controlled. The scientific community, particularly experts in abuse, defending relying on advances in explanatory models of addiction, such as 'dual diagnosis' or self-medication. Widespread legalization of all drugs 'illegal', even for lawful purposes and ethical, is not supported by any country or scientific or medical.

3. Or decriminalize decriminalize: Refers to the 'no penalty' -No-felony drug use. This refers only to personal use, individual and personal of an illegal drug, and excludes the production, possession, distribution, marketing and distributing them. It is a measure taken by some countries for some drugs, such as Spain, Portugal or Italy. Still, virtually worldwide, possession and consumption of illegal drugs is considered an administrative offense may be punished and fined, as a traffic violation, "although it often tends not to apply such measures. There is no consensus between countries, agencies, experts and public opinion on the adequacy and effectiveness of this measure to reduce consumption and the risks associated with it.

4. Regularization: the first involves legalizing and then authorize and control the use of certain substances. Think of the snuff: the legal use and liberalized, there has been regulated and restricted use in most developed countries. Or in marijuana and its derivatives, whose trading has been legalized and regularized in the Netherlands. It is a measure taken to control the use of drugs that were already legal, alcohol, snuff-socio-medical purposes. It has widespread support from social-health experts, but there are many discrepancies between countries and states, nor public opinion is unanimous regard.

And even could consider other issues that complicate the debate more so as to tax the consumption of drugs, the official list of substances considered drugs, the distinction between legal and health for each of the measures , etc.

Ultimately, it is obvious that raising the debate in terms of 'legal' or 'illegal' is not rigorous, not realistic or useful. Now, everyone agrees that this debate is necessary to do something to change and improve the situation because the police measures, political, legal, social or health taken so far have failed to reduce consumption or control its negative effects ... that you are always welcome, and I mean it from daily clinical experience, it's bad, very bad, getting worse, especially for the weak and vulnerable groups such as young people.

Published: The Mundo.es

Whippets How Bad Are They For You

Nobel leaders also criticized those who voted "very bad" Marcola

Cities

Nobel leaders also criticized those who voted "very bad"

Mario Vargas Llosa. In his speech he defended the culture and sharply criticized Hugo Chavez and Evo Morales said that Argentina is "a country indecipherable" warned about drug trafficking and corruption

Download MP3 Audio File

PUNTA DEL ESTE of the issues addressed by the Peruvian writer in his speech for the financial group Julius Baer, \u200b\u200bwho was credited-with humor-"influence" before the Swedish Academy to give him the Nobel Prize for Literature.

"A wayward citizenry is a citizenry that is very difficult to be deceived and duped by any of the manifestations of power. From the point of view of democracy, we spread the culture, a critical spirit. A society develops extraordinarily when citizens are educated, "he said, before an audience of entrepreneurs and executives, and almost any figure of the Uruguayan government. The centerpiece of his speech was Latin America: "Making the addition and subtraction, the Latin American situation today seems positive and much better than the old," he said.

criticized, yes, hard at some leaders, like Hugo Chavez and Evo Morales, who he said are leading democracies "on and caricatures." But blaming the voters: "What happened (to the Venezuelan people) to vote for a commander who had rebelled against a constitutional government and against the rule of law?" He asked.

"In our countries, unfortunately, there is a deep authoritarian culture that comes from far away and that is something we to recognize and overcome it if we beat him, "he said. In Venezuela called it" a catastrophic situation "and said Bolivia's Evo Morales is systematically destroying" the country.

These would be the "subtraction", including Moreover, the situation in Nicaragua that "can hardly be called democracy"

Among the "sums", said "there is a very interesting and novel phenomenon from the past, we have a left and right, who believe in the democracy, at least act as if they believe in it. (...) This is an extraordinary transformation. There are wide areas of the left today are a guarantee of democracy and also a democratic right, which no longer believes that the military must solve the political problems of the country, but defending the rule of law, defend the democratic institutions, and are leading their countries growth rates very remarkable.

Among the key issues to improve the situation in the countries of the region stressed that it is imperative to point to corruption - "Nothing demoralizes both society" - the need to change the pattern of repression by an expensive preventive to stop the economic boom of the drug, and the imperative of "spreading the property if we democracies have really strong. "

After the conference, reiterated Argentina's something about that on other occasions, that it was" a country indecipherable "did not understand how a people that had men and Domingo Faustino Sarmiento and Juan Bautista Alberdi-the latter for him "one of the most important thinkers of Latin America - could elect a government as he has." It's gibberish: do not quite understand how they vote this way and when my friends try to explain Argentine, confuse me more. "Cristina Fernández's government" still can not strengthen its institutions as other countries have done Latin America, Brazil, Uruguay and Chile ", told El Pais.

also said that Brazil was wrong to try a parallel negotiation with Iran over its nuclear program developed by the Islamic regime and that those mistakes are. The Islamic fundamentalism is, for Vargas Llosa, the main enemy of democracy in the world.

URUGUAY.

"I have a very positive concept of democracy in Uruguay. I think it is a reality and I checked. That speaks well of Uruguayan society and certainly hope that this democracy will become stronger every day, "said Mario Vargas Llosa in El Pais after being decorated by the Circle Uruguay Press of the prize "Jose Enrique Rodo" 2011.

homage. "I am very grateful for this generous recognition that make me Uruguayan journalists. I receive with the modesty of the case and as a term of rigorous honesty, of those virtues that are fundamental to a free press to do its work. I very touched to be a prize that has to do with the craft of journalism, I have practiced since I was very young, almost a child. He was 16 when I climbed the steps and the very old newspaper La Crónica de Lima to make my first weapons journalist, and since then I have never ceased this wonderful profession, to which I must have been delicious experiences to better understand my country, to better understand human life and that many of them have been raw material for my work as a writer of fiction, "he said in accepting the award Rodo.

Vargas Llosa was also honored by the city of Punta del Este and received from Mayor Martin Laventure the distinction of distinguished visitors.

"This award makes me a symbolic citizen of this beautiful city, a Uruguayan town, of course, but also American and cosmopolitan. Few cities in the world can boast of having a diverse population, to gather men and women from geographies and cultures so different ", and added with a smile, before 60 people:" No wonder the place could not be more beautiful. "

Although since winning the Nobel Prize for his book is loaded with awards, honors and tributes, Mario Vargas Llosa told El Pais always make time to write. "My hours of work are defending tooth and nail. Is it organizes my life, which gives me a sense, so my work is still always come first, "he said.

" The overwhelming impression "of the 1966 Uruguay

RM Uruguay: theaters, the experience of seeing for the first time the shed, the impression I got reading the Uruguayan press, well written and diagrammed, and the importance they had in the pages of newspapers and weekly cultural activities " he said. He said "Monegal Emir Rodríguez, Angel Rama, Benedetti, Vilariño Idea, which I discovered as a great poet and I met very briefly. They were years in which Uruguay was a example, and was the exception to the rule: an enclave of democracy, freedom, cultural life, for all of Latin America. "

" I could not talk "

Acting Minister of Education and Culture, Mary Simon, retired annoying act in which Vargas Llosa was honored. "Do not let me talk," said Simon as he left the room Caribbean Conrad minutes before the end of the event. Simon was the only member of the Executive Branch who attended to join the Circle recognition for the press and the local municipality.

phrases

conference "Democracy allows people to choose, but that does not mean that people sometimes choose not bad, and sometimes very bad."

"We have some left accepting the market that accept fiscal discipline, encouraging investment, instead of populist recipe practice in development, open their borders, they want to export. "

" The big problem we Latin Americans to effectively combat corruption is the indifference to the law. "

" If we do not stop to drug trafficking is likely to end democracy and begin to emerge narco-states ".

" The great paradox is In many countries public education is in the hands of left-wing unions conspire against all measures intended precisely to enhance performance education ".

Read the full conference here

El Pais Digital