Guns by Stephen King

In case you haven't noticed, I like firearms a lot.  I like their shape, their engineering, the variety, the culture, the practice, and the focus it requires to get the perfect shot.  Obviously, I'm a fan of the Second Amendment that allows me own these firearms.  However, that doesn't mean I'm totally against gun regulation or controls.

I also read a lot and I'm a huge fan of Stephen King, so when he came out with a Kindle Short called "Guns", I picked up a copy.

"Guns" by Stephen King on Amazon

This is an extended essay on Stephen King's opinion on gun violence and gun control.  It's a no BS take that doesn't pull punches toward any group or party, he pretty much mocks everyone involved and all of the politicians.  He also discusses politics in general and American culture.  I would call it a page-turner but I'm not sure that term really applies to an essay.  Lets just say it was a quick and interesting read.  His wit keeps it rolling along well.  I think it's worth a read, whatever your opinion on gun control (Hint: King is for it).

SPOILER ALERT

In the end he agrees with a lot of the President's proposed legislation.  Universal background checks, limits magazines to 10 rounds, and ban "assault" rifles.  He backs it with studies and examples.

While I don't agree with some of his points, and I don't necessarily agree with the conclusions he draws from his examples (granted, I'm fairly biased), it is an interesting read.  It is at times funny, thoughtful, respectful, or even sadly retrospective.  It is as well written as all of King's works.

If you are a fan of gun control, or King, or just looking for an interesting read, you should check out "Guns".


Now a couple of thoughts in response to to his conclusions:

The two points that I disagree with are the ones on magazine restrictions and the ban on "assault" style rifles (and the misuse of the term "assault" drives me nuts these days.  They mean 'military style' semi-auto rifle, not one with selective fire).

First, the magazine restriction is a hindrance to legal firearm owners and does nothing to limit illegal use.  Look at two guys with Glock pistols, one trying to kill the other.  The legal owner has 10 rounds (or 7 if you are in New York) and the illegal owner has the 15 round magazine that gun originally came with (or an after market 33 round mag).  Or what if two (or more) criminals break into your house, you're ability to defend yourself is hampered against those that don't follow the law.  Another point, many "restricted" magazines are standard magazines with a block installed that limits the capacity.  A criminal can simply take the block out to go back to the larger capacity.  On the other hand, it's harder to justify the 30+ round magazines that are available for some rifles (unless preparing for the Zombie Apocalypse).

I totally agree with the universal background check and closing the gun show loop hole.  Those decrease the likelihood of criminals and crazies buying guns.  I'm also OK with waiting periods, as frustrating as they are, because that would force any emotions to cool.  Those are two concessions that I think gun owners should make because they could actually make a difference.

As for the "assault" rifle ban, it would block the most popular rifle in America, the AR-15.  Banning a certain weapon will only mean that other weapons get used by criminals and crazies.  I think a better option would be to make legal gun owners liable for their fire arm, how it's stored and used.  Or require fire arms to be locked up (you could exempt one or two for home defense when the owner is home), or require specific security measures for specific fire arms.  After all, the owner goes through the back ground check, their family, friends, or robbers don't.  I think that would drastically limit access by those that couldn't pass a check.

As a legal gun owner I have no empathy toward anyone owning, carrying, obtaining, or using firearms illegally.  I absolutely support logical gun control that limits the illegal use of firearms.  It's just too bad that so many of the proposed restrictions do more to restrict legal owners than the criminals.

More Knives and Throwing Some of Them

If you've read a few posts, you know I'm a bit of a knife freak.  Seriously, I need to start making my own knives, I spend way too much money looking for the perfect ones.

Here's a few of my newest purchases, all pretty nice and none of them were over $35:

Left to Right: BladesUSA Throwing Set, Kershaw, Buck ErgoHunter and another Buck

The BladesUSA throwing set I picked up on Amazon for about eight bucks.  I just wanted something to play around with without blowing too much money.  They are about perfect for a starter throwing knife, cheap, and they seem to throw halfway decently.  Downsides?  They are a little light, which is good and bad.  They don't penetrate very well so you have to have a decent throw for them to stick in the target.  As you can guess, the sheath they come with is very cheap but seems to hold all three knives pretty well.  They probably won't last long, but for eight bucks, I'm not complaining.

The two Buck knives here really impressed me with the feel of their grip.  Both were thick, heavy duty rubber.  They feel great in the hand and definitely won't slip, even when wet.  This first one, the ErgoHunter is designed for right handed use.  In the right hand it is amazingly comfortable.  I guess that means if you're left handed it won't feel right.  There is also a weird patch of "rough" metal near the base of the blade.  I'm not sure if that's for fire starting or what, but it looks odd.  Doesn't seem to affect functionality though.  The blade is an interesting shape and would probably work well as a skinning knife or for general camp use.

I couldn't find the name of this model on the Buck website.  I got it at Cabela's and it's probably my all time favorite general purpose knife.  Great blade thickness, it has the same material as the ErgoHunter for the handle but is a much more ambidextrous grip.  This is also the knife that was borrowed from me during the Hog hunt to knife one of the hogs.  Not to get into too much detail but lets say it was extremely effective.  This is my go-to knife for camping and anything outdoors.  Not too shabby for $20.  If anyone knows which one this is, let me know, I'd love to order another couple of these guys.

Like the previous Buck knife, I couldn't find this Kershaw model on their website.  This is a really nice little knife, the kind of thing that would have been perfect for Boyscout camp when my hands were a little smaller.  Now, I generally prefer something with a more sizable handle for easier use.  Nice steel, good thickness, definitely a quality knife, just wish it had a different handle.  It also came with a nice, if not fancy, leather sheath, which is a definite plus in my book.  More on this knife later.

As usual, I'm very critical of knife sheaths.  Most manufacturers tend to skimp when it comes to how the knife is carried.  However, I'm pleased to say that both Bucks and the Kershaw came with very durable, practical, if not particularly pretty sheaths.  All hold the knives securely, will fit comfortably on a belt, and yet easily release the knife when needed.  The Buck sheaths are some kind of thick canvas fabric with formed plastic sleeves for the actual blade inside.  My only complaint would be that sometimes the blades rattle against the plastic when moving around.  The Kershaw, as mentioned earlier, has an effective, all leather sheath.

Now for the fun part.

I recently purchased the Gil Hibbens book on knife throwing (also from Amazon, purchased at the same time as the BladesUSA throwing set).  Well, it's more of a pamphlet than a book, but it had a couple interesting passages and a few good tips.  I would consider it a pretty basic introduction to the concepts of knife throwing, if you already know the basics than I would recommend getting something a little more indepth.  I had purchased the above BladesUSA throwing knives so that I wouldn't ding up any of my nicer knives learning to throw them around.

One of the things in the pamphlet that caught my eye was when the author mentioned that lots of knives can be used for throwing.  I had always thought that a knife needed to have some special balance or something, but I guess it doesn't need to be that specific.  He had lots of examples, many of which I never would have considered throwing...  folding knives, fighting knives (Kabar, who woulda thought?), hunting knives, etc.  So, of course, I got out my extensive collection of knives and tried throwing them all.  Bwuuuuhuuuhahahahaaa!!!  I was surprised at how many of them actually worked pretty well.

Yes, that's the Kershaw stuck in the zombie's neck.  I told you I would mention it again.  Obviously, the knives designed for throwing were the easiest, but the Kershaw threw as well or better than the BladesUSA.  Neither Buck did too bad, which surprised me because they have such large handles.  Kind of fun throwing a knife that heavy into a faux Zombie.  Almost makes me feel sorry for him.  Almost.  The Kershaw seriously impressed me though, it might not be my favorite camp knife but it's definitely my favorite throwing knife.

For survival purposes, I'm not entirely sure how practical it is to throw one of your primary tools.  In most situations it would make far more sense to make a throwing stick or something similar.  However, if you ever thought it might be fun to throw around your knives... you're right.  It's a ****ing blast!  You definitely need the zombie target though, it just adds the right ambiance.

Best Zombie Rifle Ever?

So, I was reading this good Zombie novel, "Still Alive..." by A. C. Thorne.

"Still Alive..." by A.C. Thorne

I love a good Zombie book and "Still Alive..." is definitely one of the better ones.  There are a couple of sappy chapters but overall it's one of my current favorites.  It's one of the few zombie books with a strong female main character (written by a woman, I'm thinking), that is action packed, surprising, and very well written.  Several times it caused flash backs to the novel "I am Legend" by Richard Matheson, a classic, which I'm sure was intended by the author.  Over all "Still Alive..." is a very good read and I hope that the series continues soon.

One of the things that caught my attention in the book is the main character's main weapon.  She stumbles onto a "tactical" .22lr semi auto rifle and uses it very effectively.  From the description in the book I'm thinking it was an AR style .22lr, like the Smith and Wesson M&P-15/22.  At one point she is critical of another survivor that didn't make it, who used larger calibers.  She thought that the semi-auto .22lr with hi-cap magazines was far more effective than a hunting style rifle in a larger caliber.  Able to shoot rapidly, can carry lots of ammo, low recoil, accurate, and with high capacity...

Ok, interesting idea... normally I would have forgotten about it and moved on, however, a buddy of mine had just purchased an M&P-15/22 ($500) and was taking it to the range this weekend.  I invited myself along to see if maybe it might actually be the perfect zombie killing rifle.

A couple of things I should mention first; I'm not a fan of semi-auto in general (they just aren't as much fun at the range), I'm not a fan of "Black Rifles" (I don't like the look of military-style rifles), and the idea of having an AR in the .22lr caliber seemed really idiotic.  If you're getting an AR, why not go for a real one in 5.56?   Or, If you want a semi-auto .22lr, why not get a 10/22?  Cheaper and less ugly.  But I decided to try it out and make an attempt at keeping an open mind.

I had a f***ing blast.

I had so much fun that the M&P-15/22 is now high on my wish list.  Seriously, I want one.  Bad.

My buddy had no idea what he was buying, he just thought it would be fun toy.  So, before we went to the range I helped him get the sights set up, got the rifle cleaned, and range ready.  It was incredibly easy to clean, easy to set up, came with nice iron sights (it has a two size flip-up ghost-ring sight, easily adjustable).  It was mostly plastic, extremely light weight, and I was a little worried how it would hold up at the range.

There was no reason to worry, this thing was a freakin' tank.  After I got it sighted in, this thing was a tack driver out to 100 yards.  That would have been cool, but what amazed me was how light the kick was, which meant extremely fast follow up shots.  I mean, keep both eyes open and you could acquire targets, fire, and be back on target in a fraction of a second.  It cycled flawlessly (only one misfeed, which I think was probably a fluke) over 300 rounds.

We were at the silhouette range and the semi-auto was addictive.  There were two lines, 50 yards and another at 100 yards.  The iron silhouettes were about 1ft by 1ft.  At 50 yards I could hit the targets faster than 1 per second, going down the line either direction.  And it's so quiet, so quick handling, so little recoil, it almost feels like it's a toy.

Bang, Ping, Bang, Ping, Bang, Ping, Bang, Ping... as fast as you could acquire the target and pull the trigger.  It was almost video game easy, too easy.  Reload the magazine, back to work.

I thought a .22lr AR was stupid, but even if you just look at the cost vs range time ratio it's worth picking up.  I typically spent at least $50 in ammo for some decent time at the range.  I mean, cheap pistol rounds are 25-35 cents, most rifle rounds are between 50 cents and a dollar.  .308 for my Scout Rifle is almost a dollar a round.  Rifle shooting gets expensive fast.

However, you can buy 500 rounds .22lr for 20 bucks.  You just can't beat .22lr for cost and weight.  It's easy on the wallet, easy to stockpile, and you can easily carry hundreds of rounds.  Maybe you want to train, get used to an AR, or a cheap plinker for the range, or have a fun rifle for the youngsters, then this would be a fairly inexpensive way to do it.  Or maybe you should keep one in the closet, just in case there is a zombie apocalypse.

This rifle is so easy to use, so accurate, so simple, that it is freakin' awesome.  Defend against zombies, fun at the range, easy to use... this thing is awesome.

I've seen a lot of arguments about whether the .22lr is powerful enough to take down zombies.  The round is so small and low powered that it really limits the ability to get through a skull.  I'm not a ballistics or forensic expert, but I'll give a quick opinion on it.  .22lr in a pistol would probably be effective out to 20-30 feet, depending on your accuracy (any further than that and I think you'd have to be an exceptionally accurate shot).  Out of a rifle though, I think you could extend that range out to around 50 yards, again depending on your accuracy.  Accuracy is such a huge factor because the .22lr is such a small round it's far more susceptible than other rounds to glance off the skull rather than punching through.  The shot would need to be a direct, straight-on shot.

I hesitated to think that a .22lr would be a good zombie killer, with accuracy and speed being so vitally important.  However, this M&P-15/22 has me seriously considering it.  I think you'd be hard pressed to find a rifle that can shoot as quickly and accurately.

So, I think I'm going to have to pick up one for myself.  It'll be cheap fun at the range and when the zombie apocalypse happens I'll let you know how effective it is.  Now I just need to talk Hornady into making these in .22lr...

Almost My New Favorite Rifle: Auto-Ordinance M1 Carbine

In general I'm not a fan of semi-auto rifles and pistols.  There's nothing wrong with them, there really isn't, I just think firearms that require more interaction are more fun to shoot.

Take a single action revolver, in my opinion is a whole lot more fun at the range than most other pistols.  It makes you slow down, put a little more time, energy, and thought into shooting.  To me, that's more fun.  It also makes me more accurate since I'm not just throwing rounds down range, each shot is a very deliberate process... not just pulling a trigger.

I think that's probably the same with rifles, that the reason bolt action rifles are widely considered more accurate is because it forces the shooter to slow down.  I also think that the lower the capacity, the more careful the shooter.  If you only have five rounds you make them count, if you have twenty than you are more likely to shoot first and question later.  More input from the shooter and fewer round capacity means slowing down, there is more of a process between each shot being fired, and ultimately I think that makes a shooter more accurate.

However, the firearms that I like to shoot have their limitations.  For most people a single action revolver  doesn't make a lot of sense for self defense compared to even a modest semi auto.  Semi autos usually have larger capacity, quicker follow up shots, and faster reloading.  So, obviously semi-autos have a place, I just never really enjoyed shooting them very much.

All that said, I decided I wanted to add a semi-auto rifle to my growing collection.  I really like the collection I've got going and decided to continue adding variety.

So, of all of the times to go to the gun store looking for a semi-auto rifle, this was probably the absolute worst time to go.  I wasn't looking for an AR-15 or AK, I was thinking maybe a Ruger Mini-14, but quite literally the three stores I went to were cleared out of any semi-auto rifle over a 22lr.  I would have been good with getting a 22lr semi-auto but they were all AR variants (I'm not a fan), or 10/22s in garish colors (I mean that literally, there were greens and purples left).

Then, at the last store I went to I saw something interesting.  Just like the others, the semi-auto shelves were bare... this one had one last rifle.  I'd never seen anything like it and asked if I could check it out.  It came with a folding stock and had a beautiful wood forestock and handle.  It almost looked like an old version of the AK but was obviously a smaller caliber.

Turns out it was an M1 Carbine, a WWII replica of a paratrooper's rifle built by Auto-Ordinance and Kahr.  I'd heard of the Garand, but never the M1 "carbine" before.  I did a little research and realized that I really should have heard of it before, it's a pretty cool rifle with a very cool history.  Check it out yourself, if you need more info there are many, many M1 carbine fan sites out there.

The more I looked at it, the cooler it seemed.

The 30 carbine ammo is not a particularly good round for hunting or survival scenarios (it's actually called ".30 carbine" and you're not likely to find it laying around).  The round looks like a skinnier version of the .357 and hasn't been common for decades.  It's also pretty similar balistically to the .357 out of a rifle.  It's a little weak for a rifle round, only really usable out to around 150 yards, and it was mostly issued to support troops in WWII.

.38sp vs .30 carbine

.38sp vs .30 carbine

Despite being less common, because of it's small size it's cheaper than a lot of rifle ammunition, about $25 for a box of 50.  Almost the equivalent of most pistol amunitions.

I decided to go for it, the rifle was just quirky enough that it caught my interest.  I like getting those looks of "WTF is that?" when I uncase my rifle at the range.  This rifle would be a unique addition to my collection AND it was semi-auto.  Score one for the weirdo.

Then comes the real question, how did it do at the range?

First time out?  I don't think I hit the target.  It took some cycling to get it running smoothly, the first few times it was pretty rough.  It also had an issue with feeding the last round in the mag.  I think that was stiff springs in the mags, which should break in, causing the last round to get stuck half way inserted.  Otherwise, it was a blast to shoot.  This thing kicks about the same as a .38sp out of a lever gun, which is hardly more than a .22lr.  I think I was grinning ear to ear with each shot, it was just a blast to shoot.

I looked it up later and accuracy problems are a pretty common with these rifles the first time out.  Out of manufacturing they leave the front site too tall.  This is also had a non-adjustable flip-up rear sight, one for 100 yards and the other for 200.  I'm going to have to do some playing to get it up to the accuracy I would expect.  The only other complaint that I had is that the rifle isn't actually "blued", it's painted and scratches fairly easily.

But man, is this a cool carbine.  It's pretty, I love all the wood.  It's easy to disassemble and clean.  It barely kicks, and it's fun to shoot.  It's a unique addition to most anyone's collection.  Even with the few small issues I had, this rifle is quickly creeping toward the title of "Favorite Rifle".  It makes it me smile everytime I shoot it.

For all you survivalist types, this is probably the lightest rifle I've ever held.  You pick up my rifle case and it feels empty.  Seriously, the whole rifle weighs in around 5lbs.  This paratrooper folding rifle, you cold sling it over your shoulder and forget about it until you need it.  The ammo isn't common, but it is fairly light and inexpensive compared to actual "rifle" rounds.  Besides, with how light the rifle is you could compensate by carrying more ammo.

At $990 dollars it isn't the cheapest rifle, but for that price I can put up with the few complaints I've got (they're all easily fixed).  I'm definitely looking forward to getting the sights adjusted and having some fun throwing lead the next time I head to the range.

 And I found out that Ruger makes a Blackhawk single action revolver in .30 carbine.  Apparently, it's very, very loud and intimidating.

Ruger Blackhawk .30 carbine

Muhuhahahahahaaaa!


EDIT (02-10-2013): I love my M1 carbine.  I love the history, the looks, and how it shoots.  However, the rear sight drives me bonkers.  It comes with a non-adjustable flip sight, one for 100 yards, one for 200 yards, in a dove tail joint.  On mine, it was really off to the left.  To "adjust" this sight you need the proper vice/tool, or a hammer, punch, and patience.  I ordered an adjustable sight for it, tried a dozen times to replace the flip sight... and broke down and ordered the proper removal tool.  These typically go for $150, the cheapest I could find was with Sarco for $70 (E-Sarco Inc).  It's been frustrating, especially since I'm probably only going to use it once.  So, great rifle, just keep that rear sight in mind.  On a plus note, the original M1 needed to have the front sight ground down in the field, whereas the front sight on my replica seems spot on.

Couple more book reviews

I love survivalist/prepper/zombie books, I've mentioned that before.  Since my last book review post I've read a few good books, so I figured it was time to share again.

• Apocalypse Law 1-3, John Grit.  A devastating plague wipes out a large portion of the world's population.  Nate Williams, a decorated war vet, must keep his son safe as the world around him and his remote farm gets worse and worse.  There are some good survival tips for those planning on home steading, the main character lives on a farm and does his best to keep it going to feed his son.  There is also a lot of combat, which keeps the tension and excitement up.  The third book finishes nicely but left it open to a fourth book.   I really liked these books and hope that the John Grit keeps putting them out (he has a couple of short fiction books that are also worth a read, especially Fierce Blood).
• Joshua, John Wilson.  The economy collapses and leads to a rapid deterioration of society.  In this bad situation a young man stumbles upon a two year old boy, Joshua.  He decides to take care of the boy, despite how difficult that makes his own situation.  This is now one of my all-time favorite survival books.  Seriously, it's that good.  It's extremely well written, interesting, and with enough emotional themes to surprise and entrance even the most hardened survivalist.  The only thing that really bothered me about this story was how the main character is never named, he's just "the man", and how we know next to nothing about him.  It takes half the book to even find out what his profession was before SHTF (despite the frequent mentioning of "his training").  Honestly though, I think the author did this deliberately, taking attention away from the man to put it on the relationship with Joshua.  While mildly annoying, it does not detract much from this otherwise awesome book.
• Path of Survival (Passion Killers, Blood Beyond the Abyss, A Dark Wind of Vengeance), David Maudlin.  During a terrible economic down turn, two hurricanes strike, and a terrorist attack damages the world's supply of oil, causing a rapid collapse of societies across the world.  These books are about several different people and their different paths to the relative 'safety' of the mountains.  There are lots of characters with intertwined story lines, a good mix of family values, action, survival, and the different ways that people deal with these stressful situations.  These are light, easy reads that are entertaining, with enough action to keep everyone on the edge of their seats.  I hope the author keeps this series going.

Those are a few of my recent reads that were good enough to pass on as recommendations.  These are all available in the kindle store and are relatively inexpensive.  Any of these would make a good addition to your reading list.

Movie Review: Red Dawn Remake

I don't normally do movie reviews, but there was so much hoopla around this one that I figured I would put in my two cents.

The first and most important thing I have to say is that if you are a big fan of the original and want a tribute movie, this movie isn't for you.  However, if you like modern action movies than you'll probably get a kick out of it.  It keeps some of the themes and ideas from the original movie but puts a new, modern, spin on the classic.  This movie is big action, over the top, lots of explosions... not real big on plot or dialogue.  So, yeah, it's another hollywood action movie.  Think "Transformers" with teenagers instead of robots.

Overall, I enjoyed the movie.  I knew it wasn't going to be as good as the original, but it was entertaining in a cheesy, explosive kind of way.

Alright, here are a few things I picked up watching the movie.  Here's a couple things that bugged me, later on I'll list a few things I liked.

I'm going to try not to spoil it too much, but if you're seeing it soon you might want to skip this:

• There were a couple things that bugged me when it came to the time line.  There is absolutely no sense of the time that passes between the start and finish of the movie.  Is it two weeks or two months or two years?  There is a training montage, a la "Rocky" style, where the kids go from ordinary to trained killers.  Did that take two weeks or two months?  Then, when they pick up new people there is no apparent break-in period, they seemlessly join the experienced Wolverines.
• Chris Hemsworth is too tall.  Yeah, I said it.  He's like two feet taller than everyone else in the movie.  Most people probably didn't notice or care, but he looks like a giant in several scenes.
• Hemsworth's character gets shot too many times.  Like most modern action movies, the main character shakes off the same damage that drops his enemies in their tracks.
• In the beginning, their old Dodge truck is apparently invincible.  It soaks up a TON of damage and keeps ticking, despite the fact that it destroys military grade trucks when it rams them.
• At one point they jump from one building to the roof of another, about two stories down from their window.  Who does that and doesn't break anything major?  Why would you even try it?
• At one point, the Daryl character is aiming his AK-47 at some enemies on a podium with his flip-up scope cover down.  I probably wouldn't have noticed this but they kept going to a close up of his face behind the scope, cover clearly down, multiple times.
• Most movies I don't notice the musical score, but every time there was a speaking moment the music was really obvious.  Music during an action scene?  Cool.  But when there's an inspirational speech  with loud, inspirational music... it's just over the top.  Every time something was going on, it was obvious by the music what we were supposed to "feel".  Loud sad music?  I guess it's a sad scene.  Maybe the director didn't think the actors could pull off the scenes and over did the music to compensate.
• The lack of opposing military technology.  They partially cover this by saying that there is an EMP style weapon that was used, so maybe that played a part in limiting the Korean's technological capabilities.  However, when everything else seems to be working; tanks, phones, trucks, aircraft... it's hard to believe that the Koreans didn't have any tech advantages up their sleeve.  Mostly there was the obvious lack of air support, especially ones with with infrared cameras.  Granted, when the Wolverines were in town than infrared wouldn't have been very useful, but when they were being hunted in the wilderness (the Koreans used dogs) one high altitude plane/helo/UAV with infrared cameras would have ended the Wolverine's streak really quickly.  Hell, one satellite and they could have tracked the Wolverines without ever tipping them off.  There was none of that.  
• There was no examination or character development on the Korean side.  They were all pretty generic bad guys.  That's kind of expected in most big budget hollywood action movies, they don't want you to feel bad when the bad guys get torn up with .50 cal fire, or exploded.  However, it would have added some depth to the movie if there had been a bad guy glancing at a picture of his girl friend thousands of miles away, or one who felt bad about invading another country, something.

Ok, there were some good points too:

• I liked that none of the main characters were perfect.  In fact, the main characters weren't even all that likeable.  It wasn't a case of hollywood creating the 'perfect' good guy with no character flaws, these characters all made mistakes, had temper tantrums, and were honestly annoying at times.  Those traits made the movie better than most modern action movies.
• The actors were all pretty good.  I mean, there isn't a heavy acting burden in modern action flicks, but they got the job done without being distracting.  It was all pretty straight forward.  I was honestly surprised that Hemsworth did so well, he had probably the most nuanced role and played it well.
• There's lots of action.  LOTS.  They rush through the non-action scenes, which might bother some people (ie. the training montage), but the action scenes were exciting and frequent.
• There were some tribute moments where they directly or indirectly tipped their hat to the original.  I'm sure you'll recognize them when you see them (if it's been a while, it might not be a bad idea to watch the original before you see the remake just so you can appreciate them).
• It puts a modern spin on Red Dawn: one of the main characters is an Iraq war vet (gives the whole teenagers successfully fighting trained soldiers slightly more credibility), it does a decent version of modern guerilla warfare, and it has far more urban combat than the original (I consider that points toward realism since so much of the population lives in cities these days).  It stuck to the ideas and themes while managing to update the time frame.
• It has a couple good twists, if you're expecting it to strictly follow the original storyline you will be in for a few surprises.
• I liked the how the movies ends.  It felt like it wrapped up well and I liked the last scenes (the music was annoying, but I already mentioned that).  Die hard fans of the original will probably hate this ending since it's wrapped up with a pretty bow compared to the original, but I've already said that you have to go into this one with an open mind.  The original will always be a classic, this movie won't be, but it does have some good moments on it's own.

So, if you managed your way through all of that, it was a decent movie as long as you weren't expecting the original.  There were a couple of things I didn't like, but I could say that about any movie these days.  On it's own Red Dawn was entertaining in a big budget hollywood kind of way.  If you liked movies like Transformers and GI Joe (the style, not the quality), fast paced, lots of action, and explosions, than you'll probably get a kick out of the new Red Dawn.