Saturday, October 25, 2014

GA: Fight or Die



When confronted by an armed criminal, common advice for an armed citizen has been to evaluate the threat.   If it is perceived that minimal risk will be involved with complying with the criminal, such as giving them money, a cell phone, or other items, it may be the least risky to comply.   The evaluation is often stated something like this:  Does it appear that your assailant is going to seriously harm or kill you, or do you believe that they will simply leave?   If you believe that they are going to attempt to kill you in any case, then pick your best chance of resistance.

Sometimes the choice is stark.    In Georgia, the clerk, Ticas, could not comply.  From nothwestgeorgianews.com:

Ticas told officers that two black men wearing masks had walked into the store. One of them held up the customers in the back at the game machines and the other pointed a gun at Ticas and demanded money.

Ticas gave him money but was unable to comply with the next order, to open the safe.

“He stated the male told him if he did not get the safe open he was going to die,” the report said.

Ticas managed to get a gun from the counter and began to fire, striking one of the men police later identified as Wood.
During the ensuing gunfight, two customers were hit, one in an arm, the other in the abdomen by a bullet that penetrated a wall. The one robber, Wood, was hit in the head and required emergency surgery.  Ticas was not injured, and it is likely that the other robber will be apprehended.  

While two innocent people were wounded in this incident, it is impossible to know if they would have been shot if there were no resistance.  Armed resistance increases the cost of armed robbery.    To paraphrase John Lott; More Resistance, Less Crime.


 ©2014 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice is included.
Link to Gun Watch

FL: Woman Shoots at Intruder

"That's what I did, I got my gun and I chased him through the house and he went out the back door and as soon as he hit the steps I shot at him," said Adams.

More Here

CA: Homeowner Disarms Intruder, then Shoots Him

Sacramento County Sheriffs deputies say the man pulled out a gun when the homeowner confronted him. At that point, deputies say, the two wrestled over the weapon, and the homeowner was able to get the gun and shot the man.

More Here

CA: Homeowner Shoots Intruder



Once on the scene, the male homeowner told deputies he had shot a male intruder who “ran at” him when confronted. The owner says he shot the the intruder in the leg and the man ran out of the home. The homeowner told deputies he had the gun because of a previous burglary on his property.

More Here

Studends may Pose with Guns: Breaking, Water is Wet



A media source in Omaha is breaking a story.   Students can pose with guns for their senior portraits.

The school board members did not think this was a controversial decision, along with 90 percent of the American public.   They voted for it 6-0.   I am surprised that it even came up for a vote.

Perhaps I should not be, in our ever increasingly politically correct public schools, where nearly all initiative and responsibility have been taken from school boards and teachers by teachers unions and federal and state regulations.   Administrators are terrified to make any decision that might run against the policy desires of the old media.

It is a sign of the times that nearly half of the schools in the area have banned such photographs in craven subservience to political pressures.    From omaha.com:
A district official said a check with a number of Nebraska districts found that about half of them allowed such photos.
 It shows how far the "progressives" have dominated the old media that school boards even considered such a ban.

©2014 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice is included.
Link to Gun Watch

CT: Woman Holds Dog Rapist at Gunpoint

WATERBURY — Alice Woodruff said the minutes that ticked by as she held the naked stranger at gunpoint in her backyard Tuesday morning were filled with sheer terror.

Only moments before, the man had raped her pit bull, Layla-Ali, as the dog was chained to her back porch in the city’s Bunker Hill neighborhood, she and police say. When she disrupted the attack, the man, who is suspected to be suffering from mental health issues, told her he was the anti-Christ, she said. “I was screaming and demanding for him to get off my dog. And he said, ‘She’s mine and we’re going to die here today together,’” she said. “I said, ‘I don’t know what your plans are, but I’m not dying today. You’re going to jail, but stay away from my dog.’” The fear was insurmountable, she said.


Source

More Here

Jaylen Ray Fryberg is Identified as Marysville High School Shooter



The school shooter in Washington State has been identified as  Jaylen Fryberg.    It appears that the shooting was a domestic, as he struggled with a recent breakup with his girlfriend.   He was 14 years old, a hunter and a member of the  Tulapip Tribe.  

The tweets put out by him indicate emotional trauma over the breakup, even though he was voted homecoming king just a week ago, on October 17th.  He was also a member of the football team.

The attack was not random, but was aimed at specific people.  From heavy.com:
According to student witnesses, he walked up to a specific table in the cafeteria before opening fire. Jordan Luton told CNN, “They were his friends, so it wasn’t just random.” The horrific shooting began just after 10 a.m. After attacking the students, Fryberg turned the gun on himself and committed suicide.
It is difficult to say what effect this will have on the initiative battle in Washington State.   On the one hand, the shooter was already prohibited from having a handgun, so the proposed initiatives would have had no effect.  On the other hand, those pushing initiative I-594 have always relied heavily on emotional, rather than rational support for the gun control measure.   This shooting is likely to raise the emotional level in the state.

©2014 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice is included.
Link to Gun Watch

What Gun Did the Ottawa Terrorist Use?


This twitter post showed Zehaf-Bibeau with what appears to be a Winchester lever action rifle.    At first, it was unclear if this were the same firearm that he used to shoot Cpl. Cirillo.  

The BBC quickly came up with an identification of the firearm used - a Winchester lever action shotgun!  From the BBC:
He said police were trying to piece together how Zehaf-Bibeau acquired a Winchester lever-action shotgun, as he was banned from owning firearms due to his criminal convictions.
 Then the Ottawa Sun took a shot at the subject.  From the Ottawa Sun:
Police still don't know how he got his hands on the Winchester 3030 pump-action rifle he used to gun down Cpl. Cirillo at the War Memorial.
The National Post finally got it right.  From the Nationalpost.com:
 At a Thursday press conference, RCMP commissioner Bob Paulson confirmed that Zehaf-Bibeau had carried out the shootings with a Winchester 30-30 lever action rifle, a quintessentially Canadian bush gun that is not normally the first choice of would-be terrorists.
Here is a clearer picture of the model of rifle used.  This is a Winchester model 94, made prior to 1964, in caliber 30-30.


I would be remiss not to mention a source form the United States.  From wyomingnews.com:
Police said he was armed with a lever-action Winchester rifle, an old-fashioned, relatively slow-firing weapon.
The 30-30 was considered a powerful and quick firing rifle in its day.   President Teddy Roosevelt was rather impressed with it.

 He acquired an 1894 similar to all his other rifles in extras and embellishments and used it on an antelope hunt. His "little .30" as he called it, was able to knock down a good sized antelope at a distance of more than 180 yds. After witnessing the fantastic shot and the irrefutable and immediate results, his guide said that the gun was just "aces" in his book.

©2014 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice is included.
Link to Gun Watch

FL: 500 lb Bear Shot in Home


Black bears are large, potentially dangerous animals.  A retired wildlife officer was forced to shoot one in his Florida home on 22 October, in Lake County.



The bear broke though a window and entered the home.   When the man yelled at it, it turned and came toward him.  That is when he fired, at a distance that he estimated at 10 feet.


From wftv.com:

“I was very scared. I figured when I yelled it would take off, but it didn’t. It just looked right at me and started coming toward the window, where I was at, so that’s when I fired,” Peters said.

The bear was a very large black bear, weighing 500 lbs.


When officers dragged the bear from the house, it left a large blood trail.






The area where the bear was shot was trashed.

©2014 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice is included.
Link to Gun Watch

Friday, October 24, 2014

AL: Homeowner Shoots Suspected Burglar and Vehicle

BIRMINGHAM, Alabama -- Birmingham police are investigating after a homeowner shot at burglars this morning and possibly injured one.

The resident, Arthur Williams, said one of the two burglars ran off clutching his chest after he fired at them with a .22 rifle. A second burglar fled in a white SUV, Williams said. The incident happened about 8:30 a.m. in the 200 block of 61st Street South.

More Here

KY: Reverend Fires Warning Shot to Motivate Departure of Intruder


"He was 50 to 60 yards from the step, and I fired way off in the opposite direction into the ground," said Rev. James. "That was my way of motivating him to leave."

Then firing a second shot, he says the man quickly disappeared over the hill behind his home. And since nothing was stolen from his home, James considers himself lucky.

More Here

SC: Man Shoots at Suspected Arsonist

A resident of the home and complainant said a noise awoke him and he saw flames through his bedroom window, so he ran outside with his gun.

According to the report, the victim saw a male running from the area where the fire was, and the suspect got into a parked brown pickup truck.

As the suspect was driving away, he swerved as if he was trying to hit the victim, and the victim fired one round, which he thinks hit the passenger side of the truck, the report said.

More Here

GA:Homeowner Wins Gunfight in Driveway

DEKALB COUNTY, Ga. —
A shootout in a DeKalb County neighborhood left a robbery suspect dead overnight.

Police said a homeowner was also shot, but is expected to survive. Investigators believe it may be a case of self-defense.

More Here

OH: Suspect Shot by Lease Holder

A person accused of breaking into property in Springfield Township was shot early Wednesday, according to police.

More Here

CA:Woman Assaulted, Shoots Man



Authorities are investigating the shooting death of a Shelter Cove man reportedly killed by a woman after he assaulted her and his girlfriend at his residence on the 200 block of Olson Road Sunday morning, according to a press release from the Humboldt County Sheriff's Office.

(snip)

"It appears to be self-defense, however ultimately that is up to the Humboldt County District Attorney's Office," Knight said.

More Here

WV:Robber, Clerk Exchange Shots

The store owner told me that the suspect and his worker each fired one shot. Police have not confirmed this yet, because their having audio trouble with the surveillance video.

More Here

FL:Father Wins Gunfight with Intruder

"The burglar fired a shot and the homeowner returned fire, striking and killing the intruder," said Wendy Rose, a spokesperson for the Sarasota County Sheriff's Office. "Apparently the homeowner has been the victim of burglary recently so he was on alert, he was on edge, and as soon as he heard glass breaking he armed himself to protect himself and his 11-year-old child who was in the home."

More Here

Official autopsy shows Michael Brown had close-range wound to his hand, marijuana in system


ST. LOUIS COUNTY:  The official autopsy on Michael Brown shows that he was shot in the hand at close range, according to an analysis of the findings by two experts not involved directly in the case.  The accompanying toxicology report shows he had been using marijuana.

Those documents, prepared by the St. Louis County medical examiner and obtained by the Post-Dispatch, provide the most detailed description to date of the wounds Brown sustained in a confrontation Aug. 9 with Ferguson police Officer Darren Wilson.

A source with knowledge of Wilson’s statements said the officer had told investigators that Brown had struggled for Wilson’s pistol inside a police SUV and that Wilson had fired the gun twice, hitting Brown once in the hand. Later, Wilson fired additional shots that killed Brown and ignited a national controversy.

The St. Louis medical examiner, Dr. Michael Graham, who is not part of the official investigation, reviewed the autopsy report for the newspaper. He said Tuesday that it “does support that there was a significant altercation at the car.”

Graham said the examination indicated a shot traveled from the tip of Brown’s right thumb toward his wrist. The official report notes an absence of stippling, powder burns around a wound that indicate a shot fired at relatively short range.  But Graham said, “Sometimes when it’s really close, such as within an inch or so, there is no stipple, just smoke.”

The report on a supplemental microscopic exam of tissue from the thumb wound showed foreign matter “consistent with products that are discharged from the barrel of a firearm.”

Dr. Judy Melinek, a forensic pathologist in San Francisco, said the autopsy “supports the fact that this guy is reaching for the gun, if he has gunpowder particulate material in the wound.” She added, “If he has his hand near the gun when it goes off, he’s going for the officer’s gun.”

Sources told the Post-Dispatch that Brown’s blood had been found on Wilson’s gun.

Melinek also said the autopsy did not support witnesses who have claimed Brown was shot while running away from Wilson, or with his hands up.  She said Brown was facing Wilson when Brown took a shot to the forehead, two shots to the chest and a shot to the upper right arm. The wound to the top of Brown’s head would indicate he was falling forward or in a lunging position toward the shooter; the shot was instantly fatal.

A sixth shot that hit the forearm traveled from the back of the arm to the inner arm, which means Brown’s palms could not have been facing Wilson, as some witnesses have said, Melinek said. That trajectory shows Brown probably was not taking a standard surrender position with arms above the shoulders and palms out when he was hit, she said....

The county and private autopsies agree on the number and location of the wounds.

The official autopsy also confirmed that tissue from Brown was found on the exterior of the driver’s side of Wilson’s vehicle.

“Someone got an injury that tore off skin and left it on the car,” Graham said. “That fits with everything else that came out. There’s blood in the car, now skin on the car, that shows something happened right there.”

The toxicology test, performed by a St. Louis University laboratory, revealed tetrahydrocannabinol, THC for short, in Brown’s blood and urine.

SOURCE


Dana Loesch explains



Story here

Cheap Gun Opportunity, New Orleans, 25 October, 2014

 

Long Guns Recently Turned In at Phoenix event in May, 2013

The New Orleans Jefferson Parish and Kirsha Kaechelel, will be hosting a gun turn in event on 25 October, 2014. While these events are commonly labeled with the propaganda term "buyback" the guns were never owned by the people attempting to buy them.

The event will be held at The Embassy located  at  1200 Franklin Avenue, between the hours of 9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m.

It appears that they will be giving out cash.   $75 will be given to those who turn in a handgun, $200 will be given to those who turn in "Assault Rifles" (no definition given).  I did not see the price for ordinary rifles and shotguns.

A "progressive" "artist"  states upfront that the purpose is a political message:
"The project itself is basically an anti-gun violence message," Lozano said. 
Nola.com writes a pretty balanced article about the "buy back".   It quotes Steve Levitt:
 Steve Levitt, an economist and co-author of the Freakonomics books, once called gun buybacks the most "ineffectual public policies that have ever been invented in the history of mankind."
 A particularly ironic note is that Kaechele's husband is coming up with the $100,000 for this bit of political theater, but she still owes over $33,000 in back taxes.  It is not unusual for people to abandon properties in overtaxed, Democrate run cities.   But the people who still live in New Orleans have mixed feelings about giving this "progressive" artist a pass.
It's certainly an uncomfortable place she has put herself in. On the one hand, the lifeisart installations seem quite beautiful. On the other hand, it feels like New Orleans was just a convenient place for artists to get that 'third world vibe'. It's some form of poverty tourism/exploitation. These are people's homes, afterall.
Still, her wealthy husband's money might create some opportunities to buy some nice firearms relatively cheaply.   If anyone attends, I would love to have a report.

Across the country, communities, police departments and churches are sponsoring gun turn-ins to get "guns off the street". At many of these events, private buyers are showing up, offering cash for the more valuable guns. These private additions to the public turn-in are effective, no doubt, in getting more guns off the street, because they add to the resources that are available to those who want to get rid of guns for something of value, be it a grocery card or a number of twenty dollar bills.

You can help make the turn-in in your area more effective by standing on the curve with your "Cash for Guns" sign, or at a folding table, willing to offer more than the gift card for firearms that are more valuable. It would be best if numerous private parties were available, as more good guns could then be transferred into responsible hands.

This action serves many useful purposes. It stretches the turn-in budget so that more guns can be taken off the street. It helps keep fearful widows from being defrauded of most of the market value of the gun they are turning in. It prevents valuable assets from being destroyed by bureaucratic inflexibility. It is a win-win-win situation.

It also dispels the pernicious message that guns are bad and should be destroyed.

Link to article with numerous examples of private sales at gun turn in events
 
Link to most recent article about private buyers at Detroit event

Link to Phoenix Article: pictures of private buyers


©2014 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice is included.
Link to Gun Watch

What Pistol did Sergeant at Arms Kevin Vickers use?

Smith & Wesson 5946


I would give long odds that it was a Smith and Wesson 5946 in 9mm.   They come with 15 round magazines.   I doubt that the RCMP used the politically correct 10 rounders.



The 3953, above, is also issued, but it is more likely he had the 5946.

The picture is from a discussion of the RCMP pistols on defensivecarry.com.

Another source confirms that the Smith is the choice of the RCMP.  From Silvercore Firerams Training, BC(pdf):
Smith & Wesson 5946 - The Side Arm of the RCMP
Manufactured 1990 - 1999 A double-action-only (DAO) variant of the 5906, this can be visually distinguished from other models by the complete lack of decocker levers. Note that the hole is still there, and is just plugged, so it is hard to tell on a right side shot. The slide is also slightly longer at the back, almost concealing the rounded-off hammer, and the frame matches this contour. Issued at one time to numerous law enforcement agencies, notably the NYPD (not exclusively) and the RCMP.
If you look at the screen shot below, you can see the characteristic outline with the ejection port and the tell tale stainless finish.



Here is a link to the video of Sergeant at Arms Kevin Vickers shortly after the shooting.  He is the larger gentleman with a pistol in his right hand, white hair, and an ID around his neck, in a suit, as shown above.  Below is a screen shot that captures the pistol from the rear.   You can make out the black grips, another confirmation of the 5946 Smith.



Here is Sergeant at Arms Kevin Vickers getting a standing ovation in the House.


Sergeant at Arms, Kevin Vickers.



©2014 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice is included.
Link to Gun Watch

SAF Challenges Illinois Resrictive Residency Requirements

BELLEVUE, WA – The Second Amendment Foundation today filed a lawsuit in federal district court in Illinois, challenging that state’s concealed carry statute that restricts otherwise qualified non-residents the rights and privileges of carrying concealed firearms based solely on their state of residence.

Joining SAF in this legal action are the Illinois State Rifle Association, Illinois Carry, Inc., and ten individual plaintiffs, all residing in other states and who are licensed to carry in those states. Under the restrictive Illinois statute, only residents from states with “substantially similar” requirements to obtain a carry license are allowed to apply for non-resident licenses.

Only four states currently qualify under that provision. They are Hawaii, New Mexico, South Carolina and Virginia. None of the individual plaintiffs reside in those states.

According to SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan Gottlieb, this situation is not simply unfair, it is untenable and we believe unconstitutional.

“Our plaintiffs have qualified for carry permits or licenses in their own states,” Gottlieb said, “which means they have gone through background checks and other requirements that show they are responsible, law-abiding citizens. Yet, because of the current Illinois statute, their self-defense rights are suspended immediately after they cross the Illinois state line.”

Named as defendants in the lawsuit are Attorney General Lisa Madigan, Illinois State Police Director Hiram Grau and Jessica Trame, bureau chief of the State Police Firearms Service Bureau. Plaintiffs are represented by attorney David Sigale of Glen Ellyn, Ill.

“This lawsuit,” said Sigale, “is brought because it is unfair that otherwise qualified people from states outside Illinois, who work and travel in Illinois are barred from obtaining means to defend themselves in public solely based on their state of residence. We expect to correct that.”

“We’re asking the federal court for a declaratory judgment on equal protection and due process constitutional grounds,” Gottlieb stated. “It makes no sense at all for Illinois to enforce such a narrowly-defined law that seems to recognize the rights of some non-residents, while dismissing the rights of most other non-residents. We can’t allow that kind of discriminatory situation to stand.”

NC: In Gunfight, Grandfather stops Rape of Granddaughter




It is difficult to measure the positive effects of one man's courage in a desperate situation.   In this event, the home was invaded by three armed men.   One man used a pretense of asking for water to get the door unlocked; then all three forced their way inside.  Two wore masks.    All three were armed with guns, make and model unknown.

They demanded that the homeowner, 67-year-old grandfather, Kenneth Byrd, his wife, 65-year-old Judy, and their 19-year-old granddaughter open a safe.  All three members of the Byrd family were badly beaten.  Then they started to rape the granddaughter, or at least they tried.      From fayobserver.com:
 LUMBERTON - A Lumberton man traded gunfire with three men who forced their way into his home, robbed the family, tried to rape his granddaughter and stole his car Monday, Robeson County authorities said.
Kenneth Byrd accessed a gun and engaged in a close quarters gunfight.   He shot all three invaders.   According to neighbors, Byrd was hit three times in the arm, four times in the leg, and once in the chest.   All of the invaders were hit.   Byrd then managed to get across the street to summon help.   The neighbor had to call the ambulance twice.   The Sheriff deputies arrived first.

The invaders fled, stealing Byrd's Cadillac in the process.   Judy and the granddaughter were not hit.  Kenneth was taken to the local hospital and airlifted to another for treatment.

Jamie Faison

One of the invaders did not do as well. Jamie Faison was found dead in the Cadillac, six miles away.  The two other suspects, Brandon Carver Stephens and Jamar Hawkins, showed up at another hospital with gunshot wounds and were also airlifted for emergency surgery. All three were suspected of multiple other home invasions.



One neighbor thinks the home was targeted because of the Byrd's medical conditions and access to prescription pills.   Another neighbor indicated that Byrd had let it be known that he kept large amounts of cash in the house.  A third neighbor said that Brandon Stephens knew the Byrds.

It is clear that Jaime Faison will not be invading homes in the future, and that the other two are likely to be locked up for a considerable period.  Kenneth Byrd was listed in serious condition as of Tuesday.   The home invasion happened on Monday, the 20th of October.

At least one rape was averted.   It seems likely that the invaders would not wish to leave witnesses.   As all three of the Byrd family have survived we cannot know for certain.  Another uncertainty is the number of violent crimes that were prevented because Kenneth Byrd was willing to fight.   It is likely a large number.

The neighbors are proud of Kenneth Byrd, as noted in the Robesonian:
Pittman said it was just like Byrd’s character to “take care of himself, take care of everything in the house, then get across the street” for help.

“The old man showed me,” he said. “I’m proud of him.”
Letting outsiders know that you keep large amounts of cash at home is a bad idea.   You cannot control where that information goes.   In this case, it may not have been the information about the cash; the invaders might have been after drugs, or it might have been a combination of things.   The granddaughter might have been targeted as well.

This event reinforces the idea that it is reasonable to carry at home, especially when you answer the door.   A stand off barrier, to allow homeowners to see visitors from a distance, has considerable merit.  The porch shown in the picture looks as if it could have been converted for such use, but was not.

©2014 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice is included.
Link to Gun Watch

Thursday, October 23, 2014

FL: Defender wins Gunfight in Alley


Gunfire erupted Monday morning in an alley behind a row of North Miami Beach homes and ended with one man hospitalized with three gunshot wounds, to the stomach, buttocks and head.

But police believe the man shot actually started the shooting, targeting his victim as he was returning home and parking his car after dropping his girlfriend off at work. That man was not injured.

More Here

Read more here: http://www.miamiherald.com/news/local/crime/article3098300.html#storylink=cpy

NM: Clerk Shot Robbery Suspect

Fearing for his life, a clerk shot at two robbery suspects at a South Valley store on Monday night, according to the Bernalillo County Sheriff's Department.

One of the suspects died as result, but the clerk is not facing any charges at this time. According to Sgt. Aaron Williamson, the other suspect, 20-year-old Ruben Lucero, has been charged with an open count of murder.

More Here

NM: Woman Shoots at Burglar who Stole her Phone


In this case, the woman got the license number of the car.  She did not hit the vehicle with any of the five shots.

The woman said she didn't believe him and took out her phone to dial 911. Saenz allegedly grabbed the woman's phone and then fled.

He found himself dodging bullets when the 71-year-old took out a .38 caliber revolver and shot at Saenz as he drove off. Five shots were fired, but none struck the vehicle.

(snip)

 A search of Saenz's home produced the stolen cell phone in his bedroom. He has been charged with one count of robbery, a third degree felony, for taking the woman's phone.

More Here

Illustrated Guide to Gun Control


Source hsgca.net  and Lawdogfiles Here

PA House Moves to Spank Scofflaw Governments, Concurs with HB80 (preemption enforcement)




Every one of the 50 states has some kind of firearms preemption law.   This makes perfect sense, as otherwise each town, county, and local government could enact a local ordinance to invalidate your right to keep and bear arms.   You could easily be placed in jail for an inadvertent violation of an ordiance that you never knew existed, just because you crossed an invisible political boundary.

Pennsylvania has such a law, and it is a well thought out example.  There is only one problem; the means to enforce it is weak.   To prevent local governments form flouting the rule of law, Pennsylvania has passed a simple revision:  If a local government violates the law, they can be sued, and they have to pay the legal fees of the other side if they lose.     Once the suit has been filed, they cannot simply revoke the law and walk away, smug in knowing that they cost those attempting to enforce their rights, and did not have to pay anything.  It is a trick that has been used successfully in Pennsylvania, but it seems that it is headed for the dust bin of history.   HB80 started out as HB 2011.  It passed the House on 6 October, 143 to 54.    It went on to the Senate as HB1243.   In what has become a common legislative maneuver, it passed the Senate 36-14, on 16 October.    The vote was originally reported as 32-16, then later revised to 34-14


Because of the amendment maneuver,  HB80 had to have a concurrence vote in the House.   On 20 October, it passed,  138 to 56.    It has been signed in the Senate, and now goes to Governor Corbett. 

Governor Corbett has said that he will sign the bill

©2014 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice is included.
Link to Gun Watch

The Good Old Days (when guns were less lethal)



There were anti-aircraft cannons and ammunition for sale through the mail back then as well.  I  remember buying my first pistol, a Colt Woodsman, across state lines without paperwork,  for cash, just before the Gun Control Act of 1968 went into effect, at age 17.  It was all legal, and the crime rate was lower than it is now, even after it has dropped by half in the last 20 years.

 ©2014 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice is included.
Link to Gun Watch

Is Strict Scrutiny Really a Trojan Horse to Defeat the RKBA?


I don't understand the opposition to the ballot measure for Amendment 3 in Alabama, which would direct judges in the state to apply strict scrutiny to cases where the state's compelling interest is opposed to the individual and fundamental right to keep and bear arms.

For example, the Bama Carry organization, both at the state level and local chapters, have had officers tell their members to vote NO on Amendment 3. Ol' Backwoods heard this personally at the Bama Carry Rivers Region chapter meeting this past Monday in Elmore County.

Why? Is strict scrutiny really such a Trojan Horse that it will bring the loss of our right to keep and bear arms?


More Here

Dave Workman: I-591 Backers Press Charges in Yard Sign Theft

A former city councilwoman takes a yard sign, and may face repercussions.  Dave does his usual good job.

A former Bellevue city councilwoman who supports gun control Initiative 594, and donated to that campaign, could face a misdemeanor charge for removing at least one and possibly two yard signs promoting rival Initiative 591, after two gun rights organizations decided to press charges, Examiner confirmed today.

Former councilwoman Margot Blacker acknowledged in a telephone interview with Examiner that she removed a “Yes on 591” sign, and apparently “picked up” a second sign that she claimed had been blown over. A Bellevue police officer returned both signs to the I-591 campaign after contacting Blacker.

More Here

Dave Workman: Seattl3e Times Plays Politics with Ferguson Story

Dave does a good job exposing the agenda in the Seattle Times story.  

Saturday morning’s on-line Seattle Times carried a report gleaned from the New York Times that offers some details about Ferguson, Mo., police officer Darren Wilson’s account of the Aug. 9 shooting in which he fatally shot Michael Brown, touching off days of racial unrest and protests that continue now.

Some details, but not all, if one compares the edited Seattle version to what the “Gray Lady” detailed in its far lengthier account; details that make a considerable difference in determining whether the teen was shot dead in cold blood, or whether there was a life-or-death struggle that demanded a lethal act. KIRO Eyewitness News also has reported on the current situation.

More Here

MI: Gun Beats Knife in Flint

FLINT, MI -- A robbery didn't go quite the way one suspect planned when the intended target ended up holding him at gunpoint until police arrived.

More Here

Wednesday, October 22, 2014

Open Carry at the San Simon Rest Stop


On my way back to Yuma, I switched from concealed carry (open carry of modern handguns is illegal in Texas) to open carry.   Just past the New Mexico border, in Arizona, is the San Simon rest stop, at exit 388 on I-10.   I have been to this rest stop many times.   The Rest Area Guide is old and weatherbeaten.    There is no prohibition on the carry of arms, because of open carry activists actions at the Sacaton rest stop in 1998.   No one had a problem with me having a pistol in the rest area.  A friendly truck driver was happy to take my picture.

I noticed a number of collared doves at the rest stop.   They are an invasive species.   There is no limit on taking them in Arizona.


This one sat, unconcerned, just a few feet from my truck.

In spite of the doves, the rest area is not always a peaceful place.   This stop has special significance to me because of what happened to one of my students there.

He had driven a long ways, coming from New Mexico, and was very tired.   Open carry was the only way to legally carry in New Mexico and Arizona at the time.  He was openly carrying in a shoulder holster.

Just as he got out of the car, another vehicle abruptly stopped behind his car, blocking him in the parking space.   Two men quickly exited the vehicle, the passenger rapidly moving to flank him on the passenger side of my student's car, the driver getting out of the car and starting to move toward him.

The passenger flanking him saw the student's holstered firearm, yelled "Gun!", slammed to a halt, and ran back to the car.  The driver jumped back into the vehicle, the passenger entered with considerable rapidity, and the vehicle screeched off and away.

My student said that it happened so quickly, that he did not even realize that he was under threat until the pair started to retreat.  His fatigue had slowed his perceptions and reactions considerably.

A number of assaults and murders have happened at Arizona rest areas.   It did not happen this time.   This time the mere presence of a firearm stopped the assault cold.

Peaceful people do not block your exit and rapidly approach you from two directions.  Peaceful people do not yell "Gun!"  and retreat as fast as they can.

I firmly believe that his open carry stopped an assault that day, through tactical deterrence.

©2014 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice is included.
Link to Gun Watch

OK: Homeowner fires at Intruders




TULSA, Okla. —

A midtown homeowner took matters into his own hands Sunday morning, after he woke up to suspected thieves in his house.

(snip)

The neighbor didn’t want to share her name, but she said she’s glad her neighbor protected himself and his stuff.

More Here

FL: Motorcycle Chase ends in Shooting

What startled Osowiecki was the end of a nearly 1/4-mile chase where a motorcycle shop owner shot one of two suspects who had just stolen two of his motorcycles at about 3:30 a.m., according to the Palm Beach County Sheriff's Office.

More Here

OR:Warning Shot Brings Help


Devon Woltring
I am not a fan of warning shots.   The bullet has to go somewhere;  in densely populated areas, there is a chance that an innocent person could be injured.   Still, I run across stories where warning shots seem to have "worked".  That is, the warning shot seems to have accomplished some good purpose, whether to defuse the situation without anyone being killed or wounded, or, as in this case, to bring help.

The suspect above is accused of stealing money from a resident, then returning to attack a resident of the home involved.  From kgw.com:
"The resident was armed with a 9 mm handgun, and the two struggled over the weapon," Sytsma said. The suspect then assaulted a guest in the home.

The resident fired a warning shot and a neighbor then intervened, dragging the suspect from the home and detaining him until police arrived.
"Warning shots" were often used prior to the late 1970's.   They went out of favor with the liability and litigation explosion that was occurring at the time, and with better communications and higher concerns over police responsibility.  During the same period, the courts neutered many of the "fleeing felon" statutes on the books.  

In most situations resolution without anyone being killed or wounded is better than the alternative.   I do not know the details involved in the altercation mentioned in the news article, but I suspect that the armed homeowner was pleased that he did not wound or kill anyone.  

We would have  to follow the career of Devon Woltring through any legal action, and for the rest of his life, to have an understanding if he will contribute to society, or at least not be a detriment.  By 21, peoples personalities are pretty well formed, and hard to alter.  Maybe this experience will be a "road to Damascus" moment, and he will come to Jesus.  The odds are against him.

©2014 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice is included.
Link to Gun Watch


Tuesday, October 21, 2014

Police South of the Border are Often Disarmed



I do not know where the above picture was taken.   I recall that I saw many empty holsters on police in Panama at shift change.   The practice was that the police did not keep a pistol with them; they were issued one at work, and turned it in at the end of the shift.  I vaguely recall seeing a banana or plantain in a couple of them.

I understand that Mexican police generally keep their firearms with them, but several other countries in Central and South America have the same policy as I saw in Panama.   Police in Panama might not take kindly to having their picture taken.   One of my friends sketched the local palace guard during the Noriega regime, and ended up in a Panamanian jail for a week before we could get him out.

I am curious if this practice is seen much in Europe, Asia, or Africa.  

I much prefer the American practice of the police having their own personal arms.   It is likely to increase their proficiency.    Many stalwart defenders of second amendment rights have been police, or spent a career as police.    They are a valuable part of the gun culture in the United States.

©2014 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice is included.
Link to Gun Watch

Monday, October 20, 2014

NY: Intruder Killed by Homeowner

Lt. Frank DiPrimo says the intruder was killed by the homeowner who is claiming self defense.

NE: Intruder Shot During

An armed man who allegedly broke into a Bellevue apartment was shot and killed Saturday night.

Police say one of the occupants of the apartment near East 19th Avenue and Main Street confronted 21-year-old Tyrell Dalia of Omaha, who was holding a handgun, and shot him just before 9 p.m.

More Here

CT: Man Shoots Neighbors Violent Boyfriend

Getting into the middle of a domestic problem is always dangerous.   

Their young son then went upstairs and knocked on the neighbor's door, saying that his father was assaulting his mother. When the neighbor walked downstairs, he saw Torres' girlfriend run outside. The neighbor then confronted Torres, who tried to grab the boy, according to police.

The neighbor said he ordered Torres to get on the ground, but Torres charged him, police said. The neighbor then fired his registered handgun.

More Here

Did the University of Idaho just push for "Swatting" of Legal Gun Carriers?

Matt Dorschel, on the left



Last Wednesday, 15 October, the University of Idaho held a forum on "guns on campus".   The main presenter was Matt Dorschel, university executive director for public safety and security.  While the forum attracted only a few students and faculty, the policy presented was radical.   From the Lewiston Tribune (pdf):
Dorschel said any firearm sighting is grounds to call 911 even if a person is not purposely showing their weapon. He said firearm holders have a responsibility to conceal their weapons and they are violating the university's policy if they don't. 
Despite this strict interpretation of the concealed carry law, it is unclear what the repercussions might be if a carrier can prove they have a concealed carry permit and were not intentionally showing the firearm. Aside from being asked to conceal or remove the weapon, Nelson said it's unlikely there would be any further punishment in these minor situations.
On 11 September, Dorschel said essentially the same thing.  From the uiargonaut.com:
Nelson said faculty should contact police even if they see a firearm for a brief moment.
“We will not question a decision to call 911,” he said.
 This is very close to "swatting" people who are carrying firearms, if someone notices them for any reason.  The article says that this is a "strict" interpretation of the law.   It goes far beyond that.   Nothing in the law that I read indicates that individuals with the enhanced permit have to conceal their firearms.   The enhanced permit merely allows them to carry concealed weapons.   It does not *require* them to carry concealed weapons.   Idaho law does not prohibit the open carry of firearms, although the law allows open carry of firearms to be regulated on a college campus for people who do not have the enhanced concealed carry permit.  The wording of the law which restricts the authority of public colleges and universities is clear:
(2)  Notwithstanding any other provision of state law, this authority shall not extend to regulating or prohibiting the otherwise lawful possession, carrying or transporting of firearms or ammunition by persons licensed under section 18-3302H or 18-3302K, Idaho Code.
Neither 18-3302H or 18-3302K, referenced above, requires that holders of these permits always carry all of their weapons concealed.   That would be absurd.  It would mean that they could never carry a rifle or shotgun, even while hunting.  It would mean that they would be *more* restricted than people with ordinary permits or without permits at all, because they would not be allowed to carry weapons openly.   From  the Idaho Constitution:
Idaho Constitution Article I, Section 11
The people have the right to keep and bear arms, which right shall not be abridged; but this provision shall not prevent the passage of laws to govern the carrying of weapons concealed on the person nor prevent passage of legislation providing minimum sentences for crimes committed while in possession of a firearm, nor prevent the passage of legislation providing penalties for the possession of firearms by a convicted felon, nor prevent the passage of any legislation punishing the use of a firearm. No law shall impose licensure, registration or special taxation on the ownership or possession of firearms or ammunition. Nor shall any law permit the confiscation of firearms, except those actually used in the commission of a felony.
The state constitution seems quite clear; open carry of firearms shall not be abridged, but the carry of weapons concealed on the person may be regulated by law.

Nonetheless, the UI policy maintains that the law specifically allows the University to prohibit the open carry of firearms on campus.  From uidaho.edu:
Q 14. Does the new statute prohibit open carry of firearms on University property?
A - Yes. The law specifically allows the University to continue to prohibit open carry of firearms on University property. Open carry of firearms on University property is a violation of the Board of Regents and University policy.
However, the Q & A document never cites any applicable law that grants them the authority to ban the open carry of firearms by people with enhanced permits; they repeatedly only state that it is University policy.   

People who go to the trouble of obtaining an enhanced permit are extremely law abiding.   They do not seek out trouble, but go to considerable lengths to avoid it.   Otherwise they would not go to all the effort to obtain an enhanced permit.   The permit is available to those from out of state, but the intricacies of the requirements effectively mean that you have to go to Idaho to obtain the permit if you are not a retired law enforcement officer.  

Chances of someone challenging the absurd UI interpretation of the law are small.   It is unlikely that a retired, black, female, FBI agent will stroll through the UI campus with an obviously unloaded hunting shotgun over her shoulder.  Still, I think a YouTube video of such an event would be a hit.

Rights not exercised are rights lost.   Perhaps an alumni of UI would perform this act of strong, symbolic, political speech to show that the disarmenters* and hoplophobes among UI officials are all bluff.

*dis·arm·en·ter (ds-ärmn-tr)
n.

1. A political operative who works to disarm political opposition through the use of irrational and/or emotional arguments.

2. A person who believes that disarming citizens will reduce crime or unjustified violence, in spite of contrary evidence or facts.

3. A person who wishes to disarm others because they do not trust themselves to bear arms responsibly.

 ©2014 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice is included.
Link to Gun Watch

What is a Disarmenter?




dis·arm·en·ter (ds-ärmn-tr)
n.

1. A political operative who works to disarm political opposition through the use of irrational and/or emotional arguments.

2. A person who believes that disarming citizens will reduce crime or unjustified violence, in spite of contrary evidence or facts.

3. A person who wishes to disarm others because they do not trust themselves to bear arms responsibly.

I have long considered various descriptions of people who push to disarm others, in spite of facts, logic, and historical evidence.  Several titles have been used; none have been completely satisfactory.  To be useful, the nomenclature cannot be so long as to be unwieldy.   It has to be easily understood.   It makes no sense to allow those who use irrational arguments to define the language.  Some candidates have been:

Anti-gun proponents, anti-second amendment proponents, those who push for citizen disarmament, those who want to disarm their political opponents, nanny statists, statists, fascists, gun controllers, gun grabbers, and control freaks.   They are all less than satisfactory.

An alternative might be disarmenter.   It succinctly captures the intent, disarmament, with the irrationality, demented.  As a single word, it is easier to use than a phrase, such as "proponents of citizen disarmament".

Senator Dianne  Feinstein, pictured above, fits the first of the proposed definitions, and may fit the second.    As she carried a gun for self protection, at least for a period of time, the third definition does not seem appropriate.


©2014 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice is included.
Link to Gun Watch

Sunday, October 19, 2014

PA:Barbershop Shooter Acquitted, Case in Shirt Pocket



A jury recently found Albert Dudley not guilty of aggravated assault, simple assault, reckless endangerment, and possessing an instrument of crime.

In 2012, Dudley become involved in an altercation with another barber at the shop where he worked.   Dudley had a concealed carry permit, and during the altercation, his firearm was fired, striking his opponent.  Versions of the event vary considerably.   From the article about the arrest:
Later, Dudley gave investigators a written statement saying he had been at work when the victim arrived, appearing intoxicated. He claimed the other man became physically aggressive during the argument.  
Originally, the suspect stated that during the tussle his gun fired accidentally while in the holster but changed his account several times, according to the criminal complaint. Dudley also said the victim took the gun from the holster and gained control of the weapon, but eventually the suspect regained control of the gun.

While gripping the firearm from the top, the gun fired as the victim backed Dudley into a wall, the gunman said.

At the trial,  Dudley took the stand and told this account:
On Thursday before closing arguments, Dudley took the stand and told the court the victim attacked him and he never meant for anyone to get shot on the day of the fight. He said the victim, whose name is being withheld by The Times Herald, was drunk started the fight. He further testified the man tried to grab his gun and in the struggle of getting his gun back, the gun went off. Dudley said once he realized the gun went off he offered to drive the victim to the hospital, but an ambulance and the police had already been called.
 Given the variation in accounts, and the potential attempt to alter a crime scene (Dudley was found with an empty case in his shirt pocket), I can see why the prosecutors decided to go forward to a jury trial.  Do not alter a crime scene.   It makes you appear guilty.

I have had shell caseings end up in my shirt pockets, so it can happen without evil intent.   Apparently the jury thought so as well.   The prosecutor was gracious at the end of the trial.    
Prosecuting attorney Rebecca Strubel said she respected the jury’s verdict, but did not comment any further.

©2014 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice is included.
Link to Gun Watch


Gun Free Zone by Heisenburgerking



Source

D.C. Second Amendment Case Moves Forward



In July of 2014, the ban on carrying guns outside the home in the District of Columbia was struck down as violating the second amendment of the Constitution.   The judge granted a stay to the District government. 

In September, the District government passed emergency legislation that it claimed would meet Judge Scullin's requirements for a constitutional law.   The law contained numerous absurd restrictions.   On 2 October, Alan Gura filed a motion asking that the court block the implementation of the emergency law.  From wamu.org:
In a blistering court filing, attorney Alan Gura argues that the Council's bill — which limits concealed carry permits to residents who can prove they face a personal threat and restricts where they can travel with their handguns — does not meet the requirements of the late-July ruling in which Judge Frederick Scullin said the city's ban on carrying guns was unconstitutional. 

"The Court's order specifically instructed, in accordance with Supreme Court precedent, that the right to carry handguns is rooted in a constitutional self-defense interest. Yet [D.C. officials] have replaced their 'no permits are available' handgun carry regime with 'no permits are available merely for self-defense, and not unless we think, in our complete discretion, that it's a good idea,'" he wrote.
Judge Scullin heard the District governments arguments that he reconsider his ruling on October 17.    He denied that request.  From washingtoncitypaper.com:
A District lawyer argued, in part, that the second amendment just guarantees the right to own a gun, not to carry that gun in public. Ultimately, according to the Legal Times, the judge called the District's arguments "somewhat disingenuous" and questioned whether the lawyers had thoroughly read through his decision.
A response to Alan Gura's motion is expected next week.   The stay originally granted by Judge Scullin ends on 22 October.   If Judge Scullin rules that the emergency legislation is unconstitutional, the District of Columbia may once again enjoy the rights protected by the second amendment.

Alan Gura

Courts tend to move deliberately, so it is possible that Judge Scullin will grant more time for the D.C. government to present their case.  He has already granted them 90 days. 

His original ruling was very clear, however, and the emergency legislation does not meet his requirements, as I read them.   The next few days could be interesting.


©2014 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice is included.
Link to Gun Watch

David Codrea: House Committees question FDIC on Operation Choke Point political pressure

Darrell Issa, Chair of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, and Jim Jordan, Chair of the Economic Growth, Job Creation and Regulatory Affairs Subcommittee, launched a probe Thursday after uncovering evidence the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation pressured banks to terminate accounts with disfavored businesses. Information was requested from Federal Reserve Chair Janet Yellen and Comptroller of the Currency Thomas Curry, a Friday committee press release reports. The purpose of the inquiry is to determine actions by federal banking regulators in the multiple federal agency Operation Choke Point initiative.

More here at Gun Rights Examiner

TX:Homeowner Shoots Suspect



The owner told police he heard something, went to investigate, saw a man in his SUV and then fired shots. He said he did not know if he hit the man.

Not long after, a man covered in blood began knocking on doors of homes a few blocks away.

(snip)

Police said the homeowner was within his right to defend his himself and his home.

 More Here





FL:Home Invasion Shooting Ruled Justified


Investigators say White forced himself into the home against the homeowner's will and said he wanted to "shoot up" the house.

Detectives say the homeowner then fatally shot White, who was armed.

(snip)

The case is closed and no charges will be filed against the homeowner.

More Here

FL: Woman Arrested for Protecting Children from Water Moccasin



Who would have thought that it would be illegal to defend children from a venomous snake?  This is where the insanity of extreme gun restrictions have brought us.   In Florida, a mother was at a school event during a football practice session.  A water moccasin was discovered on the practice field, but attempts to kill it with sticks were not successful.  From newsherald.com:
April Dawn DeMarco, 30, was arrested for discharging a .380-caliber handgun on the practice football field of Bay High School, 300 E. 15th St., during practice last week for the local Pop Warner football team. Demarco apparently borrowed the pistol from Miren Gregory, 31, to protect nearby children after a group of parents found a water moccasin on the field, police reported.

Coaches and parents told the children to get out of the area after finding the moccasin. Gregory told DeMarco she had a concealed carry permit and a handgun after some of the coaches tried to kill the snake by hitting it with sticks.
Snakes can be difficult to kill with a stick, if there are obstacles nearby.  As this was a football practice field, the snake may have been hiding under equipment on the field.  From personal experience, I can say that a firearm is often the only means to stop the threat from a venomous snake that is in a semi-concealed position.   You do not want the snake to escape from view and remain in an area frequented by children.   It is like allowing a living land mine on the school grounds.

Here is where the law gets crazy.  Even if a person has a concealed carry permit, it is illegal to possess a firearm on school grounds during a school related event.   The penalty is a misdemeanor.  From statute 790.06(12):
(d) Any person who knowingly and willfully violates any provision of this subsection commits a misdemeanor of the second degree,
It is illegal to discharge a firearm on school grounds, but  there is an exception for using a firearm in defense of self or others.  From statute 790.115 2.(d)
(d) A person who discharges any weapon or firearm while in violation of paragraph (a), unless discharged for lawful defense of himself or herself or another or for a lawful purpose, commits a felony of the second degree,
If I were Dawn DeMarco's attorney, I would certainly be pleading that this was a clear case of defense of others.   It does not matter that Dawn missed the snake with the borrowed firearm.
One parent forewarned the women that having a firearm on school grounds was against the law when DeMarco said, “I will take the blame,” the parent told police.


This might be a good test case for reform of the silly gun free school zone law in Florida.   Even the federal gun free school zone law has an exception for those with concealed carry permits.

The person that Dawn DeMarco borrowed the pistol from was also arrested.   It is unknown if she had a concealed carry permit.

Gun free school zone laws have been a disaster from the beginning.  It is time to stop the idiocy.

©2014 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice is included.
Link to Gun Watch

Update:  Miren Gregory had the pistol and a concealed carry permit.   It is not known of Dawn DeMarco  had a concealed carry permit.

Saturday, October 18, 2014

Gun Free Zone Signs Stopping Criminals

One of several on a theme that I want to have at hand.

How does Banning Citizen Carry of Guns in Kroeger's Stop Armed Robbery?


Bank Robber in a Kroeger's

On freerepublic.com, a discussion about the Moms Demand Action push for a gun ban following an armed robbery of a bank inside of a Kroeger's, brought this commonly expressed question.  This one was from rktman:
"Uh, how would this have stopped the robbery again? Please 'splain that to us."
I will explain it.  MDA is playing a very long game.   In order to be effective, they have to reduce the number of guns in society by large, large, amounts.  They have to avoid considering any benefits gained from gun ownership.  Here is how I believe they think it will work:

1.  Bully retail establishments into banning the carry of guns in their stores, as a step to make guns illegitimate in society, as the combination of trial lawyers, legislators, and the old media have done with cigarettes.

2.  Keep incrementally banning guns everywhere possible to make guns more and more socially unacceptable, and legally difficult to own, in order to reduce the number of legal gun owners.

3.  When the number of legal gun owners are reduced sufficiently, ban the legal ownership of guns, except in extremely restricted circumstances.  Think Japan and the U.K.

4.  Gradually, through incremental gun confiscation, "buy backs", increasingly draconian restrictions on ownership and use, perhaps over a couple of generations, reduce the number of guns legitimately owned by 99 percent.

5.   This will start to reduce the number of guns used criminally by some amount, it does not matter how little.   As soon as the number of gun owners and/or guns start to drop, immediately claim credit for any crime reduction, even if the trends started long before your legislation and are not backed up by facts.

6.   Keep up the pressure, and eventually, after several decades, we will have less crimes committed with guns.   This is sure to happen, because even though crime has not been reduced elsewhere when guns were banned or restricted, we have a much larger number of crimes committed with guns than the UK or Japan.  Brazil, South Africa, Mexico, and Jamaica do not count because they are not the UK or Japan.

7.  An increase in crime by other means does not matter.   The goal is to reduce the number of crimes with guns, so only statistics involving guns matter.    It does not matter if overall homicides increase, if they are not committed with guns.   We can always turn our efforts to banning knives, as they have in the U.K.

8.  We know that governments will be beneficent all along the way, because no western democracy has ever been overthrown in the last 75 years.   Argentina, Venezuela, Mexico and Ukraine or other examples do not count, because they were not really western Democracies.   We know this because they were overthrown, invaded or became failed states, so they never were real Western democracies.  Blame their problems on the second amendment or on western democracies. 

9.   The efforts to reduce gun violence will not be rendered useless by 3D printing, smuggling, home made guns, or other technologies.  This is because we will define "gun violence" as violence with guns that were once in legal channels.   If a gun was produced illegitimately, we cannot be blamed.  We will also do everything we can to reduce access to those technologies that can be used to produce guns by anyone outside of governments.  

So you see, sometime in the far, far distant future, after the Constitution has been completely trashed, and the U.S. is a Utopian socialist state like the UK, we will have reduced armed robberies committed with guns by some amount.

This general program seemed to be working until about 1994, except, of course, the crime rate kept increasing with more restrictions on guns.   About 1994 "gun control" peaked, as did the levels of violent crime.  The electorate rebelled against the Clinton gun ban.  Second amendment supporters made serious gains from 1994 through 2013.  The rate of "gun violence" and overall violent crime fell in half.

I do not believe that the disarmenters have sufficient media control to pull off the above program, as illustrated by the failure of the Obama push for more gun control.   We are in the process of seeing  if a combination of old media push and new "progressive" billionaire money can do the trick.

A serious challenge exists in the tens of millions of dollars that are being thrown into initiative processes such as the Washington state initiative I-594.    If the disarmenters fail there, after spending 10 times as much as second amendment supporters, they may fall back for another 20 years.

©2014 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice is included.
Link to Gun Watch