Poco Loco wrote:
On Sat, 18 Oct 2014 21:43:25 -0400, Wayne.B
wrote:

On Sat, 18 Oct 2014 21:31:04 -0400, Poco Loco
wrote:

On Sat, 18 Oct 2014 20:04:38 -0400, Wayne.B
wrote:

On Sat, 18 Oct 2014 18:36:52 -0400, Poco Loco
wrote:


Virtually all of the serious target shooters that I know use a scope.
At 100 yards it is difficult just getting on the paper consistently
without one. With a good rifle, good scope and good ammo, you can
shoot 1 inch groups inside the 10 ring.

I would most likely never be a *serious* target shooter. My eyes
aren't good enough for that. I go to the range only because I enjoy
shooting. I haven't really shot a rifle since early Army days with the
M-14. I was very good with it.

In Vietnam I fired the M-16 only a few times. More or less for
familiarization. My First Sergeant and I would go out to the local
laterite pit and practiced on beer cans.

===

A good scope can compensate for just about everything except cataracts
or macular degeneration. Just turn the focus ring until everything is
sharp. Cataracts can be fixed with surgery of course.

This is the one I use on my customized Ruger 10/22 for CMP competiton
at 50 yards:

http://www.amazon.com/Monarch-Riflescope-4-16x42SF-Matte-BDC/dp/B000OZU92K

I used two other scopes prior to the Nikon until I found one I liked.
The others both had excessive parallax error. From the prone position
I can now shoot 97s and 98s with 30 or 40% in the "X" ring.

I've got a cataract in my right eye. Also, I'm right handed, and don't
want to learn to shoot a rifle left handed.

When I get the right eye operated on, it's my understanding I have to
choose between near and far vision. Which would be best for shooting?
Now I'm using my right eye, but the front sight is pretty blurry,
along with the target. However, with a handgun I can switch to my left
eye without much problem.

===

If you don't mind wearing reading glasses I'd probably go for distance
vision. A decent scope can be dialed in for either however.

I'll still have to wear glasses. And I'll have pretty good distance
vision with the left eye. I guess the question comes down to which is
more important to see clearly (without the scope) - the front sight or
the target. Right now they're both blurry, but not bad I can't hit the
target. I do better with my left eye however.

You want distance. When they did my right eye, was what I went for. Now
only need the glasses for reading. Left eye cataract is getting worse.
Will look in to that problem tomorrow at eye doc appointment. Wife has
distance on one eye and her contact on other eye is for close work. I
think would confuse me, but she had same for years with just contacts.

On Sun, 19 Oct 2014 12:46:27 -0500, Califbill
wrote:

Poco Loco wrote:
On Sat, 18 Oct 2014 21:43:25 -0400, Wayne.B
wrote:

On Sat, 18 Oct 2014 21:31:04 -0400, Poco Loco
wrote:

On Sat, 18 Oct 2014 20:04:38 -0400, Wayne.B
wrote:

On Sat, 18 Oct 2014 18:36:52 -0400, Poco Loco
wrote:


Virtually all of the serious target shooters that I know use a scope.
At 100 yards it is difficult just getting on the paper consistently
without one. With a good rifle, good scope and good ammo, you can
shoot 1 inch groups inside the 10 ring.

I would most likely never be a *serious* target shooter. My eyes
aren't good enough for that. I go to the range only because I enjoy
shooting. I haven't really shot a rifle since early Army days with the
M-14. I was very good with it.

In Vietnam I fired the M-16 only a few times. More or less for
familiarization. My First Sergeant and I would go out to the local
laterite pit and practiced on beer cans.

===

A good scope can compensate for just about everything except cataracts
or macular degeneration. Just turn the focus ring until everything is
sharp. Cataracts can be fixed with surgery of course.

This is the one I use on my customized Ruger 10/22 for CMP competiton
at 50 yards:

http://www.amazon.com/Monarch-Riflescope-4-16x42SF-Matte-BDC/dp/B000OZU92K

I used two other scopes prior to the Nikon until I found one I liked.
The others both had excessive parallax error. From the prone position
I can now shoot 97s and 98s with 30 or 40% in the "X" ring.

I've got a cataract in my right eye. Also, I'm right handed, and don't
want to learn to shoot a rifle left handed.

When I get the right eye operated on, it's my understanding I have to
choose between near and far vision. Which would be best for shooting?
Now I'm using my right eye, but the front sight is pretty blurry,
along with the target. However, with a handgun I can switch to my left
eye without much problem.

===

If you don't mind wearing reading glasses I'd probably go for distance
vision. A decent scope can be dialed in for either however.

I'll still have to wear glasses. And I'll have pretty good distance
vision with the left eye. I guess the question comes down to which is
more important to see clearly (without the scope) - the front sight or
the target. Right now they're both blurry, but not bad I can't hit the
target. I do better with my left eye however.

You want distance. When they did my right eye, was what I went for. Now
only need the glasses for reading. Left eye cataract is getting worse.
Will look in to that problem tomorrow at eye doc appointment. Wife has
distance on one eye and her contact on other eye is for close work. I
think would confuse me, but she had same for years with just contacts.

My doc says the cataract is not bad enough to operate yet. I'll still
need glasses though, as the left eye is blurry both near and far. Ah,
the joys of becoming senile!

On 10/19/2014 2:13 PM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Sun, 19 Oct 2014 12:46:27 -0500, Califbill
wrote:

Poco Loco wrote:
On Sat, 18 Oct 2014 21:43:25 -0400, Wayne.B
wrote:

On Sat, 18 Oct 2014 21:31:04 -0400, Poco Loco
wrote:

On Sat, 18 Oct 2014 20:04:38 -0400, Wayne.B
wrote:

On Sat, 18 Oct 2014 18:36:52 -0400, Poco Loco
wrote:


Virtually all of the serious target shooters that I know use a scope.
At 100 yards it is difficult just getting on the paper consistently
without one. With a good rifle, good scope and good ammo, you can
shoot 1 inch groups inside the 10 ring.

I would most likely never be a *serious* target shooter. My eyes
aren't good enough for that. I go to the range only because I enjoy
shooting. I haven't really shot a rifle since early Army days with the
M-14. I was very good with it.

In Vietnam I fired the M-16 only a few times. More or less for
familiarization. My First Sergeant and I would go out to the local
laterite pit and practiced on beer cans.

===

A good scope can compensate for just about everything except cataracts
or macular degeneration. Just turn the focus ring until everything is
sharp. Cataracts can be fixed with surgery of course.

This is the one I use on my customized Ruger 10/22 for CMP competiton
at 50 yards:

http://www.amazon.com/Monarch-Riflescope-4-16x42SF-Matte-BDC/dp/B000OZU92K

I used two other scopes prior to the Nikon until I found one I liked.
The others both had excessive parallax error. From the prone position
I can now shoot 97s and 98s with 30 or 40% in the "X" ring.

I've got a cataract in my right eye. Also, I'm right handed, and don't
want to learn to shoot a rifle left handed.

When I get the right eye operated on, it's my understanding I have to
choose between near and far vision. Which would be best for shooting?
Now I'm using my right eye, but the front sight is pretty blurry,
along with the target. However, with a handgun I can switch to my left
eye without much problem.

===

If you don't mind wearing reading glasses I'd probably go for distance
vision. A decent scope can be dialed in for either however.

I'll still have to wear glasses. And I'll have pretty good distance
vision with the left eye. I guess the question comes down to which is
more important to see clearly (without the scope) - the front sight or
the target. Right now they're both blurry, but not bad I can't hit the
target. I do better with my left eye however.

You want distance. When they did my right eye, was what I went for. Now
only need the glasses for reading. Left eye cataract is getting worse.
Will look in to that problem tomorrow at eye doc appointment. Wife has
distance on one eye and her contact on other eye is for close work. I
think would confuse me, but she had same for years with just contacts.

My doc says the cataract is not bad enough to operate yet. I'll still
need glasses though, as the left eye is blurry both near and far. Ah,
the joys of becoming senile!



I was very surprised when I had my eye sight tested a year ago. I've
always had good vision but sometimes have a tough time when tired
focusing close up which is very typical for most of us old farts.

The last test (after the infection in my left eye due to shingles had
cleared up) was 20/20 right eye and 20/15 left eye.

Today is my 65th birthday. Big year. Medicare, senior citizen
discounts and high dose flu shots. :-)

On 10/19/14 2:24 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 10/19/2014 2:13 PM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Sun, 19 Oct 2014 12:46:27 -0500, Califbill
wrote:

Poco Loco wrote:
On Sat, 18 Oct 2014 21:43:25 -0400, Wayne.B
wrote:

On Sat, 18 Oct 2014 21:31:04 -0400, Poco Loco
wrote:

On Sat, 18 Oct 2014 20:04:38 -0400, Wayne.B
wrote:

On Sat, 18 Oct 2014 18:36:52 -0400, Poco Loco
wrote:


Virtually all of the serious target shooters that I know use a
scope.
At 100 yards it is difficult just getting on the paper
consistently
without one. With a good rifle, good scope and good ammo, you can
shoot 1 inch groups inside the 10 ring.

I would most likely never be a *serious* target shooter. My eyes
aren't good enough for that. I go to the range only because I enjoy
shooting. I haven't really shot a rifle since early Army days
with the
M-14. I was very good with it.

In Vietnam I fired the M-16 only a few times. More or less for
familiarization. My First Sergeant and I would go out to the local
laterite pit and practiced on beer cans.

===

A good scope can compensate for just about everything except
cataracts
or macular degeneration. Just turn the focus ring until
everything is
sharp. Cataracts can be fixed with surgery of course.

This is the one I use on my customized Ruger 10/22 for CMP
competiton
at 50 yards:

http://www.amazon.com/Monarch-Riflescope-4-16x42SF-Matte-BDC/dp/B000OZU92K


I used two other scopes prior to the Nikon until I found one I
liked.
The others both had excessive parallax error. From the prone
position
I can now shoot 97s and 98s with 30 or 40% in the "X" ring.

I've got a cataract in my right eye. Also, I'm right handed, and
don't
want to learn to shoot a rifle left handed.

When I get the right eye operated on, it's my understanding I have to
choose between near and far vision. Which would be best for shooting?
Now I'm using my right eye, but the front sight is pretty blurry,
along with the target. However, with a handgun I can switch to my
left
eye without much problem.

===

If you don't mind wearing reading glasses I'd probably go for distance
vision. A decent scope can be dialed in for either however.

I'll still have to wear glasses. And I'll have pretty good distance
vision with the left eye. I guess the question comes down to which is
more important to see clearly (without the scope) - the front sight or
the target. Right now they're both blurry, but not bad I can't hit the
target. I do better with my left eye however.

You want distance. When they did my right eye, was what I went for.
Now
only need the glasses for reading. Left eye cataract is getting worse.
Will look in to that problem tomorrow at eye doc appointment. Wife has
distance on one eye and her contact on other eye is for close work. I
think would confuse me, but she had same for years with just contacts.

My doc says the cataract is not bad enough to operate yet. I'll still
need glasses though, as the left eye is blurry both near and far. Ah,
the joys of becoming senile!



I was very surprised when I had my eye sight tested a year ago. I've
always had good vision but sometimes have a tough time when tired
focusing close up which is very typical for most of us old farts.

The last test (after the infection in my left eye due to shingles had
cleared up) was 20/20 right eye and 20/15 left eye.

Today is my 65th birthday. Big year. Medicare, senior citizen
discounts and high dose flu shots. :-)




Happy Birthday, old fart. Hope you and yours enjoy many more in decent
health.



--
The new GOP credo:

Hate the people who are being oppressed,
love the people who are doing the oppressing.

On 10/19/2014 2:30 PM, F*O*A*D wrote:
On 10/19/14 2:24 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 10/19/2014 2:13 PM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Sun, 19 Oct 2014 12:46:27 -0500, Califbill
wrote:

Poco Loco wrote:
On Sat, 18 Oct 2014 21:43:25 -0400, Wayne.B
wrote:

On Sat, 18 Oct 2014 21:31:04 -0400, Poco Loco
wrote:

On Sat, 18 Oct 2014 20:04:38 -0400, Wayne.B
wrote:

On Sat, 18 Oct 2014 18:36:52 -0400, Poco Loco

wrote:


Virtually all of the serious target shooters that I know use a
scope.
At 100 yards it is difficult just getting on the paper
consistently
without one. With a good rifle, good scope and good ammo, you
can
shoot 1 inch groups inside the 10 ring.

I would most likely never be a *serious* target shooter. My eyes
aren't good enough for that. I go to the range only because I
enjoy
shooting. I haven't really shot a rifle since early Army days
with the
M-14. I was very good with it.

In Vietnam I fired the M-16 only a few times. More or less for
familiarization. My First Sergeant and I would go out to the local
laterite pit and practiced on beer cans.

===

A good scope can compensate for just about everything except
cataracts
or macular degeneration. Just turn the focus ring until
everything is
sharp. Cataracts can be fixed with surgery of course.

This is the one I use on my customized Ruger 10/22 for CMP
competiton
at 50 yards:

http://www.amazon.com/Monarch-Riflescope-4-16x42SF-Matte-BDC/dp/B000OZU92K



I used two other scopes prior to the Nikon until I found one I
liked.
The others both had excessive parallax error. From the prone
position
I can now shoot 97s and 98s with 30 or 40% in the "X" ring.

I've got a cataract in my right eye. Also, I'm right handed, and
don't
want to learn to shoot a rifle left handed.

When I get the right eye operated on, it's my understanding I
have to
choose between near and far vision. Which would be best for
shooting?
Now I'm using my right eye, but the front sight is pretty blurry,
along with the target. However, with a handgun I can switch to my
left
eye without much problem.

===

If you don't mind wearing reading glasses I'd probably go for
distance
vision. A decent scope can be dialed in for either however.

I'll still have to wear glasses. And I'll have pretty good distance
vision with the left eye. I guess the question comes down to which is
more important to see clearly (without the scope) - the front sight or
the target. Right now they're both blurry, but not bad I can't hit the
target. I do better with my left eye however.

You want distance. When they did my right eye, was what I went for.
Now
only need the glasses for reading. Left eye cataract is getting worse.
Will look in to that problem tomorrow at eye doc appointment. Wife has
distance on one eye and her contact on other eye is for close work. I
think would confuse me, but she had same for years with just contacts.

My doc says the cataract is not bad enough to operate yet. I'll still
need glasses though, as the left eye is blurry both near and far. Ah,
the joys of becoming senile!



I was very surprised when I had my eye sight tested a year ago. I've
always had good vision but sometimes have a tough time when tired
focusing close up which is very typical for most of us old farts.

The last test (after the infection in my left eye due to shingles had
cleared up) was 20/20 right eye and 20/15 left eye.

Today is my 65th birthday. Big year. Medicare, senior citizen
discounts and high dose flu shots. :-)




Happy Birthday, old fart. Hope you and yours enjoy many more in decent
health.




Thanks. Me too. My goal is to stay healthy and strong enough to enjoy
having another boat somewhere south. It means buying another house as
well but I don't want to do that until we have a firm commitment on the
sale of the one we have now. I had figured that if it didn't sell by
September, the number of potential buyers would drop off but I've been
surprised. We've had more activity on it in the last four weeks than we
had all summer. Something may pop.

On Sun, 19 Oct 2014 14:24:49 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 10/19/2014 2:13 PM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Sun, 19 Oct 2014 12:46:27 -0500, Califbill
wrote:

Poco Loco wrote:
On Sat, 18 Oct 2014 21:43:25 -0400, Wayne.B
wrote:

On Sat, 18 Oct 2014 21:31:04 -0400, Poco Loco
wrote:

On Sat, 18 Oct 2014 20:04:38 -0400, Wayne.B
wrote:

On Sat, 18 Oct 2014 18:36:52 -0400, Poco Loco
wrote:


Virtually all of the serious target shooters that I know use a scope.
At 100 yards it is difficult just getting on the paper consistently
without one. With a good rifle, good scope and good ammo, you can
shoot 1 inch groups inside the 10 ring.

I would most likely never be a *serious* target shooter. My eyes
aren't good enough for that. I go to the range only because I enjoy
shooting. I haven't really shot a rifle since early Army days with the
M-14. I was very good with it.

In Vietnam I fired the M-16 only a few times. More or less for
familiarization. My First Sergeant and I would go out to the local
laterite pit and practiced on beer cans.

===

A good scope can compensate for just about everything except cataracts
or macular degeneration. Just turn the focus ring until everything is
sharp. Cataracts can be fixed with surgery of course.

This is the one I use on my customized Ruger 10/22 for CMP competiton
at 50 yards:

http://www.amazon.com/Monarch-Riflescope-4-16x42SF-Matte-BDC/dp/B000OZU92K

I used two other scopes prior to the Nikon until I found one I liked.
The others both had excessive parallax error. From the prone position
I can now shoot 97s and 98s with 30 or 40% in the "X" ring.

I've got a cataract in my right eye. Also, I'm right handed, and don't
want to learn to shoot a rifle left handed.

When I get the right eye operated on, it's my understanding I have to
choose between near and far vision. Which would be best for shooting?
Now I'm using my right eye, but the front sight is pretty blurry,
along with the target. However, with a handgun I can switch to my left
eye without much problem.

===

If you don't mind wearing reading glasses I'd probably go for distance
vision. A decent scope can be dialed in for either however.

I'll still have to wear glasses. And I'll have pretty good distance
vision with the left eye. I guess the question comes down to which is
more important to see clearly (without the scope) - the front sight or
the target. Right now they're both blurry, but not bad I can't hit the
target. I do better with my left eye however.

You want distance. When they did my right eye, was what I went for. Now
only need the glasses for reading. Left eye cataract is getting worse.
Will look in to that problem tomorrow at eye doc appointment. Wife has
distance on one eye and her contact on other eye is for close work. I
think would confuse me, but she had same for years with just contacts.

My doc says the cataract is not bad enough to operate yet. I'll still
need glasses though, as the left eye is blurry both near and far. Ah,
the joys of becoming senile!



I was very surprised when I had my eye sight tested a year ago. I've
always had good vision but sometimes have a tough time when tired
focusing close up which is very typical for most of us old farts.

The last test (after the infection in my left eye due to shingles had
cleared up) was 20/20 right eye and 20/15 left eye.

Today is my 65th birthday. Big year. Medicare, senior citizen
discounts and high dose flu shots. :-)


And it's all up hill from there!

Luddite says...


"Today is my 65th birthday. *Big year. *Medicare, senior citizen
discounts and high dose flu shots. *:-) "


Congratulations on reaching your 'golden years'
I did so in August.
Now that my prednisone dosage is down to about a quarter of what I was taking back in April, the PMR symptoms are coming back.
Specialist says some pain is to be expected as it's better to try and get off the steroids.
Easy for her to say.

Oct
On Sun, 19 Oct 2014 13:06:44 -0700 (PDT), True North
wrote:

Now that my prednisone dosage is down to about a quarter of what I was taking back in April, the PMR symptoms are coming back.
Specialist says some pain is to be expected as it's better to try and get off the steroids.

" That prednisone is a miracle drug but it kills your liver.
I took one "dose pack" and stopped. Reading the label is a real eye
opener "

It also can elevate your blood sugar if you're not carefull.

On 10/20/2014 8:31 AM, True North wrote:

Oct
On Sun, 19 Oct 2014 13:06:44 -0700 (PDT), True North
wrote:

Now that my prednisone dosage is down to about a quarter of what I was taking back in April, the PMR symptoms are coming back.
Specialist says some pain is to be expected as it's better to try and get off the steroids.

" That prednisone is a miracle drug but it kills your liver.
I took one "dose pack" and stopped. Reading the label is a real eye
opener "

It also can elevate your blood sugar if you're not carefull.


Were you careful, dummy? I'd be more worried about your rotting liver.

True North wrote:
Oct
On Sun, 19 Oct 2014 13:06:44 -0700 (PDT), True North
wrote:

Now that my prednisone dosage is down to about a quarter of what I was
taking back in April, the PMR symptoms are coming back.
Specialist says some pain is to be expected as it's better to try and
get off the steroids.

" That prednisone is a miracle drug but it kills your liver.
I took one "dose pack" and stopped. Reading the label is a real eye
opener "

It also can elevate your blood sugar if you're not carefull.

How does the Prednisone play with your cirrhosis?