Thursday, October 17, 2019

Oklahoma Lawsuit shows logical flaws in Gun Control Assumptions

The coming implementation of Constitutional Carry in Oklahoma has served to emphasize the logical flaws in the arguments of those opposed.

Constitutional Carry is the removal of restrictions on the carry of handguns in most public places. It restores the state of the law to a close approximation of the law as it existed when the Constitution was signed or the Bill of Rights ratified. At that time, no permits were required to carry handguns either concealed or openly.

The restoration of Constitutional Carry is scheduled to go into effect in Oklahoma on 1 November, 2019.

Constitutional Carry has been restored in 14 other states over the last 16 years. Vermont has always had Constitutional Carry.  There has not been an increase in homicide or violent crime in the states that have restored Constitutional Carry.

The opponents of Constitutional Carry in Oklahoma  filed a lawsuit against the implementation of the law. The lawsuit claims the law violated the Oklahoma Constitutional requirement for each law to address a single subject.  Second Amendment supporters have characterized the lawsuit as a "Hail Mary" pass, unlikely to succeed.

The lawsuit includes allegations that Constitutional Carry in Oklahoma would be dangerous.

Constitutional issues are not about policy differences, or they should not be. Policy issues are to be decided in the legislative process. Courts are not supposed to be super-legislators.

Here is a summation of the policy arguments made by those opposed to Constitutional Carry in Oklahoma.  From
The suit alleges that states which enacted permitless carry laws have seen “a significant increase in firearm-related deaths.”

Kay Malan of Bixby is a volunteer with Moms Demand Action.

“When you remove the basic training requirements for the handling of a firearm and also remove the requirement to have a fingerprint and background check in your state, that is leaving it open for guns to fall into the hands of the wrong people,” she said. “As it is, we have a gun violence problem. Part of the gun violence problem is fueled by people who get guns illegally.

“All this will do is make it even easier for them.”
On the surface, this appears to contradict the statement that homicide or violent crime has not increased in states where Constitutional Carry has been restored.

There is no contradiction. It is clever sophistry of those opposing Constitutional Carry. Those opposing Constitutional Carry do *not* say homicide or violent crime increased. They say:

 "states which enacted permitless carry laws have seen “a significant increase in firearm-related deaths.”
There is no contradiction:  "firearm related deaths" includes suicides. Over the last 20 years, the number of suicides and the suicide rate in the United States have soared. While the percentage of suicides committed with guns has fallen, the increase in the overall suicide rate has been enough so the number of people committing suicide with guns has increased, and increased enough to override the reduction in homicide with guns. 

Thus "firearm related deaths" have risen in states where Constitutional Carry has been restored, because the number of suicides committed with firearms has increased along with the overall suicide numbers. From 1999 to 2014, the number of suicides increased 46%, while homicides decreased 6%. Suicide with firearms are two thirds of all "firearms related deaths".

It is hard to see how Constitutional Carry is related to an increase in suicide, especially as the percentage of suicides committed with firearms has dropped, even though the absolute numbers have increased. Suicides have risen all over the United States.

The next bit of sophistry is the conflation of the legal ability to carry a firearm with the legal ability to possess a firearm. The Oklahoma Constitutional Carry law does not change who is legally allowed to possess firearms.
 “When you remove the basic training requirements for the handling of a firearm and also remove the requirement to have a fingerprint and background check in your state, that is leaving it open for guns to fall into the hands of the wrong people,”
How does that work? The legal requirements for possession will not have changed. There have not been, and are not, any requirements for training to possess a firearm in Oklahoma. No fingerprint checks are required to possess a firearm in Oklahoma. The requirements for background checks to purchase firearms will not have changed.

The only changes will be about carrying firearms, not possessing them.  If a person is not able to legally possess a firearm, they will continue to be unable to legally carry firearms.

One of the most basic claims of those who want a disarmed population, is that legal gun ownership has an effect on illegal gun ownership. It sounds reasonable, as an abstract theory.
“As it is, we have a gun violence problem. Part of the gun violence problem is fueled by people who get guns illegally.

“All this will do is make it even easier for them.”
The term "gun violence" is an Orwellian propaganda term. It is used to conflate several different things; suicide, homicide, justifiable homicide, homicide by police, and fatal firearms accidents, all together. All those things have different causes and dynamics. The purpose of the term "gun violence" is to conflate them and focus on the gun, thus implying the solution to all of them is more legal restrictions on gun ownership and use. It is not true. All of those things require  be different strategies to have a significant effect. Concentrating on guns does not solve those issues. It very likely removes emphasis from policies that can have a real effect.

It is far from clear that more legal guns result in more illegal guns, or that more illegal guns result in more criminal violence.   The number of guns involved in violent crime in any given year is a minuscule percentage of guns in the United States. Even if each gun used in violent crime were used only once, that would be about 300,000 guns involved in violent crime in a year. There are over 400 million guns in the United States, or about 1,330 legal guns  for each violent crime committed with a gun each year.

But criminals use guns to commit more than one crime; guns are commonly traded, rented, and borrowed among criminals. It is more likely one gun is used for 10 crimes in a given year, before it is confiscated. That would mean there are 13,300 legal guns for each gun used in a violent crime each year.  In the United States, illegal guns are a minuscule percentage of legal guns.

Nor are criminals limited to obtaining guns from the legal stock. In places where legal guns are hard to obtain, criminals make their own guns. A recent report out of California claimed that homemade guns accounted for 30% of guns confiscated there. In some countries, the percentage is higher.

Guns are essentially 15th century technology, and are easily made in small workshops.

When we look at legally owned guns, illegally owned guns, and homicide rates in China, India, Brazil, and the United States, there is no correlation between numbers of legal guns, numbers of illegal guns, and homicide rates. All four countries are large, diverse, multi ethnic entities.

In Brazil, over 50% of the guns in society are illegally owned. Brazil has a homicide rate about six times that of the United States.

Many of those who wish the population disarmed operate from a simplistic, childish perspective.

The thinking is something like this:

People with guns do bad things.

If there were no guns, people could not do bad things with guns.

Make the guns go away, and the bad things will not happen.

How many times have you heard "If there were no guns..."?

Making guns hard to legally own and use does not reduce the homicide rate. It does not reduce the number of guns owned illegally. It creates incentives for illegal gun manufacture and a black market in guns and ammunition.

The hard evidence, from 160 years of highly restrictive gun control laws, is they do not affect the murder rate or the number or rate of illegally owned guns. Governments have not been able to confiscate illegally owned guns faster than people are able to make, buy, steal or smuggle guns to add to the illegal stockpile.

If facts supported the arguments of those who wish the population disarmed, they would not be forced to mislead.

 ©2019 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice and link are included.

Gun Watch

AZ: Armed Woman Shoots, Kills two Intruders, Police Investigate

Police say the call came in at 3:45 a.m. A woman called 911 and said she heard noises coming from her backyard, in the 4700 block of East Duncan Street, near Grant and Swan.

She found two men trying to break in and confronted them. She shot both of them. Police say 18-year-old Corey Teixeira died at the scene. 18-year-old Ali Mohamed died later at the hospital.
More Here

NV: Ex Shot by New Boyfriend as He Attempted Break-In

Las Vegas police believe a man was acting in self-defense Monday night when he shot his girlfriend’s ex-boyfriend inside an east Las Vegas apartment.

About 7:15 p.m., a woman and her boyfriend were inside an apartment on the 1400 block of North Sandhill Road when the woman’s former boyfriend tried to kick the door in, prompting the current boyfriend to open fire, according to Metropolitan Police Department Lt. David Gordon.
More Here

NC: Gunfight, Employee Shoots Back at Robbery Suspect

Investigators learned that an attempted robber tried to get into the business, but, when they were not allowed to get in, the robber pulled out a gun and allegedly shot into the business.

An employee fired back. Deputies do not know if the robber was hit.
More Here

Wednesday, October 16, 2019

BATFE Drops 80% Receiver Case in California; Fears Precedent

In 2014, Joseph Roh had a business that dealt in firearms parts. As part of the business, he facilitated the production of lower receivers for AR-15 type firearms, from 80% receivers, in California. In the business, he or his employees would set up the 80% receiver in a Computer Numerical Control (CNC) milling machine. Then, they required the customer to "push the green button". ATF believed this made the business one that was manufacturing firearms without a license. Roh was arrested in 2014. From
Through his business, ROHG Industries in La Habra, Roh allegedly started with unfinished lower receivers for AR-15-style firearms. A lower receiver is the frame of a completed firearm that holds the trigger and hammer. An unfinished lower receiver, when machined further, constitutes a firearm. Roh and his employees would finish the lower receivers by machining the devices with a computer-numerically-controlled—or CNC—machine and drill presses that Roh maintained at the La Habra warehouse.

Roh attempted to avoid the licensing requirement by requiring that each customer play a token role in the manufacturing process, which often meant merely pushing a button on a CNC machine, while company employees did the vast majority of the work.

While the sale of unfinished lower receivers is not regulated, the manufacture and sale of completed lower receivers—which are considered firearms under federal law—requires a proper license.

Additionally, Roh would, if the customer wanted, assemble the rest of the firearm by adding an upper receiver, a barrel, and other necessary parts to the lower receiver. Roh has agreed to surrender tomorrow and be arraigned on the indictment tomorrow afternoon in United States District Court.
 Joseph Roh had assets. He hired a competent attorney,  Gregory Nicolaysen. reports Nicolaysen grilled ATF officials on what the definition of a firearm is, according to their regulations.

The judge ruled ATF had not followed proper procedures when they created the regulations, and the definition of what was a firearm was unconstitutionally vague.

According to, ATF officials agreed to a plea deal to stop the judges ruling from having any legal effect. A plea deal would not require the judge to make a ruling; the tentative ruling would not become a part of the case. From
At issue in Roh’s case was whether the law could fairly be interpreted to apply to just the lower receiver of the AR-15, as the ATF has been doing for decades.

To rule otherwise “would sweep aside more than 50 years of the ATF’s regulation of AR-15s and other semiautomatic firearms,” prosecutors wrote prior to the judge’s order.

Federal law enforcement officials — and members of Congress — have been on notice about a potential problem with the language in federal gun law as applied to AR-15s since at least 2016.

In July of that year, prosecutors in Northern California abandoned a case against a convicted felon named Alejandro Jimenez after a judge found that the AR-15 lower receiver he was accused of purchasing in an ATF undercover sting did not meet the definition of a receiver under the law.

The ruling and subsequent dismissal drew little notice but prompted a letter to Congress from then-US Attorney General Loretta Lynch. She advised lawmakers that the judge’s decision was not suitable for appeal and that if ATF officials believed the definition should be changed, they should pursue regulatory or administrative action.
ATF's sloppy rule making and lack of oversight may be catching up to them. While they avoided a legally binding ruling in this case, the facts are now widely known. Any attorney or person charged with illegally making an AR-15 would be justified in using the same defense used by Joseph Roh.

The ruling is *not* about the Second Amendment, nor is it about the right to make your own firearms, which logically is part of the Second Amendment. It is about ATF's sloppy procedures and vague rulings which have not been subject to proper oversight.

This ruling will have little effect on gun owners, at least immediately. However, there are numerous other rulings that may be subject to the same analysis and scrutiny.

I suspect ongoing court cases about what constitutes a suppressor are incentivizing the ATF to be cautious in prosecuting people on dubious "silencer" cases.

Whether the Gun Control Act of 1968 had a positive or negative effect on crime is controversial.
Immediately after the law was passed, crime and murder rates skyrocketed. In 1968 the murder rate was 7.3 per 100,000 population and rising.  In 1980 it peaked at 10.1.  The murder rate  did not come down to 1968 levels  until 1997 (6.8 per 100,000 population) in the United States. By that time the concealed carry revolution was well underway.

There are over 400 million firearms in private hands in the United States. Prior to 1968, there was very little regulation of firearms. People could order semi-automatic anti-tank guns and anti-aircraft guns and ammunition through the mail.

 Link to

Only one crime was recorded with these weapons; a pair of them were stolen from a dealer and used to blast a hole in a vault. No one was injured in the crime.

There is no serious evidence gun control laws impact the crime rate. Crime rates in Europe were not affected when European countries enacted their gun control laws.

If the Gun Control Act of 1968 were repealed today, the crime rate would  not be affected a measurable amount.

Gun control laws have always been more about political control than about public safety.

©2019 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice is included.

Link to Gun Watch

Followup OH: Robber Shot by Armed Victim had Robbed Couple Earlier

According to a police report that was taken four miles away in Akron, 22-year-old Jontae Alexander tried to rob a man on Rhodes Avenue, about an hour after the couple called for help.

But in the second case, the 27-year-old victim Alexander allegedly went after was also armed.

When police arrived, he told officers he shot Alexander, but before he died, Alexander shot back, hitting him in the arm and his side.

Akron police told 19 News they’d been working with Barberton police to determine if Alexander is the same man who robbed the couple.

More Here

Followup MN: Man Justified in Shooting of 15-Year-Old Gang Suspect

The man ran away from them “as fast as he could for as long as he could,” but they were gaining on him, said his attorney, Tim Webb.

“It was clearly a case of self defense,” Webb said recently. “He felt he had no options and he was scared for his life.”

The man, who has a permit to carry a handgun, fired and shot a 15-year-old in the chin.
More Here

Tuesday, October 15, 2019

Alaskans Stop Grizzly Charge with Glock 10mm On Elmendorf-Richardson

Grizzly Bear that charged, brought down at 10 feet with a 10mm in Alaska

On 19 September, 2018, Jimmy Cox used his Glock model 20 10mm to stop the charging grizzly boar pictured, at 10 feet. The incident leading to the dramatic events occurred the previous evening.

On the evening of  18 September, 2018, Anthony Reyna was happy and excited. He and his friend, Gary, were hunting moose on Joint Base Elmendort-Richardson north of and sharing a boundary with Anchorage, Alaska.  Tony had drawn a moose tag for a bow hunt. He was using a 60 lb PSE® ThunderBoltTM compound bow. He has owned the bow since he was a teenager. They set up and started moose calling about 6 p.m. After 40 minutes, they heard a bull moving in.

Tony was able to take a shot as the bull moved 20 yards out. The bull turned at the last moment; the arrow glanced off a rib. It did not spook the bull, but the bull moved off 200 yards. Tony stalked it to 24 yards, and put an arrow through both lungs. This time the bull ran. As they tracked the bull, the blood trail ran out with the daylight. It wasn't safe to search in the dark. They decided to come back the next morning.

arrow used on moose

At 08:30 the next morning, Tony was back with his friends Jimmy Cox and Ron Sheldon. It was cool, cloudy, and calm. They found the end of the blood trail.  Jimmy Cox had the lead with a Glock 20 10mm in a Blackhawk Serpa holster on his right hip. Jimmy is right handed. The three friends are experienced combat veterans.  They decided to do a grid search in the direction the blood trail was leading. Ron went up a hill to help guide the search from an elevated perspective.

The area is heavily wooded in black spruce and birch, some aspen, with plenty of undergrowth and downed trees.

Tony and Jimmy head out. They hear crows about 50 yards away. Jimmy says: "That's where your moose is".

As they approached the area where they heard the crows, the birds kick up. Less than a second later, they hear the roar, directly ahead. From 10 yards away, a large grizzly is charging them full out.

Jimmy is in the lead, about five feet ahead of Tony. He has time for a startled "F*ck Bear!" as he draws the Glock from the Serpa. He has trained and practiced. The draw is smooth and fast from a retention holster. As the bear bounds over the downed spruce, Jimmy double taps, two shots, one to the chest, one to the head.  The bear crashes down, 10 feet from Jimmy, dead right there (drt). It is over in a couple of seconds.

The bear is a big boar. The friends call Fish and Game on base to report the self defense killing. Mark, with Fish and Game, shows up. He has no issues with the shooting. He estimates the bear at 800-850 lbs. It squares at 7 1/2 feet.

Close-up of Grizzly Boar

They are instructed to go to Anchorage the next day to fill out the required paperwork, the Defense of Life and Property (DLP) report. They are already busy on the hard work of skinning the bear and dressing out the moose. The moose had been buried by the bear, and had its ear and genitals ripped off.

The meat was judged salvageable.  Fortunately, a co-worker was able to get his truck within 100 yards of the scene, minimizing pack out time. Tony is able to get back home, get the meat through initial processing and stored by 9:30 p.m. It has been a long 30 hours.

Ron Sheldon, Anthony Reyna, Jimmy Cox

Jimmy's Glock was loaded with 200 grain HSN bear loads. The first shot took the bear in the chest. It penetrated the right lung, through the chest cavity, and broke the spine. As the bear dropped, the second round caught it in the head. Neither round exited the bears body. The friends could not follow the second round wound channel, because the head, skin, and paws had to be turned in. Because the bear dropped nearly instantaneously, Tony believes the second bullet hit the brain or top of the spinal column.

Image from Brownell's

Tony credits training and practice drawing to developing the muscle memory to make the needed shots. He says they give you the confidence you need when you need it.  He says Jimmy was the right man in the right place. Tony says the 10mm Glock is getting hard to find in Alaska, as they are sought after as bear defense guns.

Another poster, LJ Miller, on facebook, suggested it was the same bear he had problems with one year before, in the same area, September of 2017. He and his partner went to some trouble to avoid shooting the grizzly, which harassed them while they were packing out a quartered moose. It is fortunate Jimmy was there, was well practiced with his Glock, and in the lead.  It could easily have been a tragedy.

This use of a pistol to defend against bear attack was not reported in the news. Without diligent searching, no one but the participants would know about it. If you know of a defensive pistol use against bears, please contact us. We include every use where a pistol can be reasonably documented as being fired in defense against a bear, in our database. An email sent to Ammoland will be forwarded to me.
©2019 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice is included.

Link to Gun Watch

Followup AL: Marcus Jermaine Weakley found to be Justified in Shooting Death of Patton Shipley

The shooting took place at a popular Florence hang-out in the west Florence area. Patton Shipley, 42, died from gun injuries and a second man was shot but survived.

Circuit judge Will Powell stated in the order of dismissal, Marcus Weakley was justified when using deadly physical force when he shot and killed Patton Shipley in June of 2018.
More Here

NY: Employee Uses Licensed Gun to Stop Robbery Attempt, Wounds Suspect

Police say the 34-year-old employee pulled out a gun and fired at the attempted robber multiple times, hitting him.

Officials tell News 12 that the firearm the employee used was his licensed gun. The suspect was taken to St. Barnabas Hospital in critical but stable condition.
More Here

VA: Xavier Slayton Shot Breaking into Mother's Home in Long Island

While at the scene, investigators learned that Slayton had broken into his mother's home and was shot by a 17-year-old relative. Warrants have been obtained for Slayton on the charge of breaking and entering with intent to commit murder, a class three felony.

Charges were not filed for the juvenile involved, and his name is being withheld. The case is still under investigation.
More Here

These Gun Owners Were Able to Confront Criminals in September

Sept. 1, San Antonio, Texas: A young woman shot and injured a man who was trying to break into her home through a back window at 2 a.m., police said. The man later was determined to be the woman’s ex-boyfriend, though she did not know who the intruder was at the time she fired.

Sept. 3, Houston: After a woman parked her vehicle outside her home in the early hours of the morning, two men approached the driver’s side window and attempted to rob her. The woman drew her firearm from her purse and fired two rounds at the men, who ran away, police said. One would-be robber was wounded in the process and later was charged with aggravated robbery. The woman told local reporters: “I got the gun for that purpose, but I never thought I would really have to use it. . . . I saved my own life.”

Sept. 8, Virginia Beach, Virginia: A Florida man was shot and paralyzed by his stepdaughter after he broke into his estranged wife’s Virginia home and assaulted both the wife and stepdaughter with a wrench. Investigators said they later found garbage bags, zip ties, duct tape, and various weapons in the man’s car, along with a journal detailing his plans to kill his wife.

Sept. 9, Sisters, Oregon: When an unknown man broke into the back door of a residence, the homeowner grabbed his rifle and confronted the intruder, forcing him to flee without firing a single round, police said. The intruder then went to a neighboring home, where that homeowner called 911 and told the intruder to leave. The intruder returned to the first home and this time, the homeowner held him at gunpoint until police arrived.

Sept. 11, Cherokee County, Georgia: A homeowner used her firearm to defend herself against a man who started banging on her doors and windows. The homeowner did not know the man and yelled at him to leave, and he temporarily retreated. The man returned and became even more aggressive, threatening to kill the homeowner, who had armed herself with a firearm. When the man began to approach the homeowner, she shot and killed him, police said.

Sept. 16, Providence, Rhode Island: A man was smoking outside his home when someone approached, held a gun to the man’s head, and demanded everything in his pockets. The robber then forced the man into the apartment, where they fought. The man was able to reach his own gun and shoot the robber, who later was arrested after seeking treatment for his wounds, police said. Despite the state’s strict gun laws (it has a “B+” rating from the Giffords gun control group), a neighbor told reporters that these types of crimes were common in the area and that his family had been victimized several times as well.

Sept. 19, Atlanta: Three masked teens approached residents outside their home before one teen opened fire on the residents with a handgun. One resident used his AR-15 to return fire in self-defense, firing numerous rounds and killing all three assailants, police said. The residents were unharmed.

Sept. 19, Miami-Dade County, Florida: A lunch break for an armed Good Samaritan took a heroic turn when she intervened to stop a brutal robbery and assault occurring outside a Popeyes restaurant. The woman fired her handgun at an assailant as he pummeled a bleeding and helpless victim lying on the concrete, police said. The rounds missed the assailant, but the shots were enough to make him run away. The woman told reporters this was the first time she had fired her gun outside a gun range, and that although it was “an intense moment,” she just “had to stop” the assailant. “I just had to save the guy’s life,” she said. “That’s all I did was try to save someone’s life.” Police later arrested the assailant.

Sept. 22, Salina, Kansas: A father and daughter held a man at gunpoint after he kicked in their door in a home invasion. The man initially told the father that he was running away from someone, but the father yelled for his daughter to bring his gun after it became clear the man was trying to lock them all in the house, police said. The family had prepared for emergency situations like this one and were able to detain the man until police could take him into custody.

Sept. 26, Redding, California: A holder of a concealed carry permit helped intervene in a kidnapping after it became clear to him that another customer at a gas station was holding a woman against her will. Earlier in the evening, the man had assaulted the woman’s sister before forcing the woman into his car and driving off, police said. The permit holder noticed the woman was in distress, confronted the man, and held him at gunpoint until law enforcement arrived.

As these examples show, the first line of defense against crime are those on the scene when crime occurs. Despite our deep respect for law enforcement, police officers are not always there when crimes occur. They respond to calls of those who are already in peril, or to a crime scene after the offense has occurred.

Monday, October 14, 2019

Detailed Report: Grizzly Bear Attack in Montana Stopped with 9mm Pistols

Donivan Campbell's severe wound from bear attack

On 16 September, 2019, Chris Gregersen and Donivan Campbell were bow hunting elk in Montana, in the Gravelly Mountains, when they were attacked by a grizzly bear. They had gone out for an afternoon hunt, had hunted up  a steep drainage, climbed the opposite slope, and had been calling for elk on the opposite side of the ridge with a bugle call.

They were returning to their truck and camp. They stopped calling on the top of the ridge, crested the ridge, and were on a steep downward slope, moving toward the creek at the bottom, on an old game trail. There was no cell service in the area.

The weather was clear, in the 50s, with a slight breeze. 

It was 6:30 p.m. The sun was low in the sky. They wanted to get back before dark.

In addition to their archery equipment, both men had 9 mm pistols. Chris Gregersen had a Glock 43. Donivan Campbell had a Sig Sauer P320. Both pistols were loaded with full metal jacketed (FMJ) cartridges.

Chris said he carried the Glock 43, because it was small enough to be carried every day. 

Both men are professional biologists, with degrees in wildlife ecology, working in their chosen field.  They are familiar with bears and bear behavior. They live and work in Washington State.  They are both longtime hunters and fishermen. They are proficient woodsmen.

Donivan (face-paint, left) and Chris  after successful turkey hunt

The way back to the truck was north, down slope, through the timber and up the other side.  They were in thick timber of mature lodgepole pine with some spruce, and patches of brush and blowdowns. In the picture, the attack occurred across the creek and up slope in the timber in the upper right.

Attack occurred in dense timber across the creek and up slope

As they crossed a small bench, they heard an animal jump up, downwind, in the brush to their left (West). It was close, within 20 yards. Their first thought was: elk!  As they turned to look, the grizzly bear erupted from the brush, charging at them, woofing and breathing heavily, only feet away. Chris ran and jumped downhill. Donivan attempted to dodge uphill, but the bear veered and grabbed him by the thigh, shaking him like a dog shaking a rat. The initial attack happened in seconds.

Chris said, even if he had a deterrent in hand, he would not have been able to deploy it fast enough.

Chris had just landed when he heard Donivan scream. He immediately drew his pistol and ran uphill toward Donivan and the bear.  The bear had shaken Donivan again.  Donivan was on his belly, the bear holding him down by standing on his back.  The bear had let go of Donivan's leg and was attempting to bite Donivan's  head. Donivan had both hands behind his head, trying to protect his neck. His thumbs were in the bear's mouth, trying to hold the bears teeth away from his head. He could feel the bear's teeth on his hands. To this point, the action had taken about fifteen seconds.

The attack was aggressive, fast, violent. Chris could see the bear going for Donivan's head, when he shot.

Chris said he had no choice. He had to fire. If he did not fire, Donivan would be killed or injured more severely. He had run to within 15 feet of the bear and Donivan, the bear facing away from him, on top of Donivan. He took a snap sight picture and fired at the bear's rear. It was probably 16 seconds into the attack.  The point of aim was the bear's hind quarters. There was no other choice.  The bear and Donivan were upslope with brush on either side. There was no time to flank the bear, on a steep hill side, with considerable brush, when fractions of a second could make the difference between life and death.   Chris had a clear shot. He has considerable experience shooting under stress while hunting. He says he has "shot a lot".  He had a brief worry about hitting his friend, so he had to do it right.  

Chris believes he hit the bear in one of the hind quarters, from the rear. The searchers reported finding a little blood, but it might have been Donivan's.  From the rear, a 9mm FMJ would be unlikely to reach the bears vitals, or penetrate far enough to reach Donivan. On a large bear, with lots of fat in the fall, a significant blood trail was unlikely.

Gregersen's Glock 43 and ammunition

Chris expected the bear to turn on him. At the shot, the bear leapt away from Donivan and disappeared into a thick wall of brush only 5 feet away.  The bear could not have acted faster to a cloud of bear spray.

Chris did not know if Donivan was alive or dead. Donivan drew his Sig Sauer as soon as the bear jumped off him.  As Chris approached Donivan, he saw his friend was alive and armed. They immediately heard the griz coming back from about 30 yards out. As a snap plan, Donivan agreed to fire to deter the bear, with Chris in reserve to fire as soon as he saw it. The friends are yelling at the bear. As it gets to within 5 yards, still unseen, Donivan fires two shots into the brush, toward the bear. The bear stops, starts walking away, retreats perhaps 20 yards.

The friends hear the bear charge a third time. Donivan fires another shot at the noise as the bear closes to about 10 yards, still without being seen, hidden by  the thick brush. Indexing on the sound, they had a good idea of where it was. The bear stops, and the friends hear it slowly walking in the brush, then slowly walking away.  They hear the sounds of the bear's retreat fade. The only clear shot fired at the bear, was the first one fired by Chris, it was  effective in stopping the attack, driving the bear off of Donivan and giving him the opportunity to draw his Sig.

Chris emphasized bear spray would not have been effective. The spray would have been directed at the bear's backside. If the spray had reached the bear's head, it would have disabled Donivan as well. When the bear charged again, bear spray would have been unlikely to reach the bear through the heavy cover.

Chris believed the sound of the shots and the yelling stopped the second and third charges. He thinks all three shots fired by Donivan missed the bear. It could not be seen. Donivan was on the ground, firing at the noise of the bear crashing through brush at them. There was a lot of brush.

Chris checked his friend's wounds. The bear had torn up Donivan's thigh with  six lacerations, ripped into severe wounds at the bear shook Donivan.  One of them was large enough for the doctor at the hospital to put his entire hand inside while cleaning it out.

There wasn't any arterial bleeding. The emergency "first aid" kit was useless, designed for minor cuts and insect bites. The friends improvised bandages using game bags and t-shirts. Chris improvised crutches from trekking poles.  They believed they could be attacked again at any time, as had happened in several other cases, with Todd Orr being the classic example. Chris kept his Glock in hand and put Donivan's Sig in his pants pocket. He reloaded his Glock 43 with a spare magazine.  Donivan would have both hands full staying upright and moving back toward the road.

The sun was nearly down, with deep shadows across the valley. They had to make it down to the creek, and across it, a three-quarter mile hike. Then there was an uphill climb to the road and the truck. At the camp was a 4-wheeler, five miles away.

Chris cleared a trail for Donivan, helped him over logs, and provided security as they hobbled their way, as fast as they could, toward the road, the truck, and safety.

Once they got to the other side of the creek, they were able to make it to an area of sagebrush.  Donivan was spent. The two decided, rather than risk further injury by carrying Donivan, Chris would go and get the 4-wheeler at the camp. Chris returned Donivan's Sig P320 9 mm, and left him in a relatively open area, covered with clothes, in a defensive position. The sun was below the horizon.

Chris ran upslope for a quarter mile to the truck. He drove five miles back to the camp, returned with the 4-wheeler, found a way down slope with the vehicle, and loaded Donivan on it. Donivan had his headlight out and turned on.  The evening sky glow was fading.  As they headed up slope in the 4-wheeler, it was dark. 

On the road, they headed back toward camp. Part way there, they were able to flag down someone to go and call 911 from a local cabin with a land line. The call started an ambulance on the way up.  They loaded Donivan into the truck and started down the mountain. Just as they reached cell phone service, 40 miles from the attack site, they met the ambulance coming up. The ambulance took Donivan to the hospital.

Donivan's injuries after some suturing

A search party with a big crew and helicopter were organized to look for the bear.

Based on descriptions, the bear was a mature, dominant boar.  One of the searchers told Chris the chances of two dominant bears this close together is very low.  Chris was told the bear was likely hit. This might cause it to den up to recover, or to leave the area. If not hit, denning or leaving would be less likely, for such a territorial, mature boar.

One of the first responders recommended quick clot, a wound dressing, and a tourniquet as a kit to cover most serious wounds. A warden suggested more power and a large magazine capacity gave a better chance of hitting the central nervous system. He recommended the Glock 20 in 10mm.

Chris believes it was probably the same bear. He thinks the bear spray used in the attack 11 hours and less than a mile away, likely aggravated the second attack.

Chris Gregersen has purchased a Glock 20.  Chris purchased a quick clot kit for future hunts.

Donivan Cambell is recovering. It will be months before he can hunt again. Donivan's wife is expecting their first child. Fortunately, the bear attack did not sever any arteries. A gofundme account has been set up for his expenses.

Chris says bears are highly individualistic. There are aggressive bears, and mellow bears. Without legal hunting for bears, aggressive bears tend to be taken out when, or after they attack. With a legal hunt, bears that did not fear humans would be more likely to be harvested before they attack a human.

Chris Gregersen says they did not expect to be attacked. They believed if they acted properly, they would be safe. Now, he knows there are bears in the woods who will attack and kill you simply for being there. If it could happen to them, he says, it could happen to anyone.

©2019 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice and link are included.

Gun Watch

FL: Disarm, Victim takes gun, Shoota, Kills, Suspect

WEST PALM BEACH — An alleged robber was fatally shot with their own firearm Saturday night in West Palm Beach after two victims fought back and gained control of the gun, according to preliminary findings by city police.
More Here

TX: Armed Neighbor and Homeowner Shoot at Oncoming Vehicle

The homeowner came back outside and met with his neighbor, who was now outside, armed with a firearm, as well. The homeowner was explaining the incident to his neighbor as he was still on the phone with 911.

According to law enforcement, at this time, the suspect vehicle approached both of them at a high rate of speed and with its lights off and both the homeowner and the neighbor felt their lives were in danger as the vehicle approached. The homeowner fired several rounds toward the vehicle and the neighbor fired at least once. The vehicle was struck with the and swerved off the road into the homeowner’s yard. The vehicle then crossed the road and drove into a wooded area. All of the occupants then ran from the vehicle and into the woods.
More Here

FL: Armed Witness Stops Domestic Dispute

HIALEAH, Fla. - Police are investigating after an armed witness intervened in a domestic dispute at a Hialeah apartment complex.

More Here

LA: Violent Boyfrined of Granddaughter Shot in Groin by Grandfather

A Bridge City man shot his granddaughter’s boyfriend in the groin with a shotgun after the boyfriend forced his way into a house and violently beat the man, authorities said.

More Here

Sunday, October 13, 2019

Oklahoma Representative Files Lawsuit Against Constitutional Carry

On 7 October, 2019, Representative Jason Lowe, D-Oklahoma City, filed a lawsuit to stop the implementation of Constitutional Carry in Oklahoma. The law is scheduled to go into effect on 1 November, 2019.  He and four other plaintiffs have asked for an injunction to stop the law from going into effect while their case is litigated. From
The law will allow most people in Oklahoma 21 and older to carry a gun without a permit.

On Monday, state Rep. Jason Lowe filed a lawsuit at the Oklahoma County District Court, asking for a judge to stop the permitless carry law. He argued that the law is unconstitutional and called it a dangerous law.

"We're gonna continue to fight. We're gonna continue to push," said Lowe, D-Oklahoma City. "We believe this law is dangerous, and we believe the citizens in the state of Oklahoma agree with us."
This is the latest attempt by Lowe and others to derail Constitutional Carry.

On 27 February, 2019, Governor Kevin Stitt signed House Bill 2597, Constitutional Carry, into law. The bill had passed the Senate 40 to 6, with 2 excused, on the same day.

Two weeks earlier, the bill had passed the House, 70 to 30, with 1 excused.

In 2018, Constitutional Carry had passed the legislature with large margins. Governor Mary Fallin vetoed the bill on 11 May, 2018. 

Earlier this year, 2019, a veto referendum was attempted by Representative Lowe and others. It required 59,320 signatures. It failed with 37,057 valid signatures. Lowe had claimed the effort had collected over 59,000 signatures, then later said his information was wrong.

The effort was filed on 12 August, only two weeks before the deadline for signatures to be turned in. It could have been filed anytime after the legislature adjourned on 24 May, leading to speculation about why it was filed at at such a late date.

It is unclear where funding for the signature gathering for the referendum came from. The effort was closely associated with Moms Demand Action, a group that recieves considerable funding from billionaire Michael Bloomberg.

Referendums such as the one attempted typically cost about $100,000.

Don Spencer, President of OK2A, says Representative Lowe could not say where the money for the lawsuit was coming from. Spencer says he talked to the Attorney General who told him "He would be on this like a chicken on a June-bug."

The claim made by Representative Lowe is the bill violated the single topic rule.

Don Spencer characterized the lawsuit as a "Hail Mary pass".

Oklahoma is the 15th state to restore Constitutional Carry in the United States. Vermont has had Constitutional Carry for the entire existence of the state, and has not had to restore it. The movement to restore Constitutional Carry has been passed in those 15 states during the last 17 years, with nine states passing Constitutional Carry in the last five years.

Constitutional Carry is the right to carry a loaded handgun in most public spaces, concealed or openly. It is the state of law that existed when the Constitution was written and when the Bill of Rights was ratified.

 ©2019 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice is included.

Link to Gun Watch

FL: Homeowner Holds Burglar for Police

Deputies say the homeowner grabbed his gun and found Scott inside the garage and ordered him to stay still. The homeowner asked Scott what he was doing and Scott pointed to a pile of wood he had been taking from the garage and placing outside, according to the report.
More Here

TX: Carry Permit Holders Hold Stabbing Suspect for Police

ANDREWS, Texas — An Andrews woman was stabbed Tuesday evening during a dispute in the Andrews Post Office parking lot on N. Main.

Police said two men with licensed handguns held a male suspect until police arrived.
More Here

Followup PA: Shellhammer found not Guilty in Self Defense Trial

Shellhammer testified he made it to the front door, but it was locked and they cornered him and punched him.

He said that is when Hendrich told French to grab his gun, so he had to fire.

During cross-examination, the prosecutor asked, "You pulled a gun on an unarmed man?" and Shellhammer said, "I pulled a gun on two aggressive people who had me scared."
More Here

CA: Off Duty Deputy Shoots, Kills Intruder in his Home

Johnson says the deputy used his service weapon to shoot and kill the suspect but did call 911 first. CBS13 spoke with the deputy off-camera, he said he’s shaken up and was scared for his family.

Neighbors say intruders there are rare.

“Hopefully it won’t happen anymore, it is kind of worrisome,” said Cooke.

Sheriff’s deputies responded to the home after the shooting, where they pronounced the alleged intruder dead at the scene. The identity of the alleged intruder has not yet been released.
More Here

Saturday, October 12, 2019

NICS Checks Continue High in August and September of 2019

The National Instant background Check System, (NICS) hit record high levels in August, 2019, for both total numbers and numbers of estimated sales after carry permit and permit rechecks were subtracted.

In September, 2019, while the totals remain at record levels, the estimated sales fell to 88% of the record set in 2016.

In August, after permit and permit rechecks are subtracted from the total NICS checks, 1,239,014 remain. In 2016, following the same procedure, there were 1,229,022. The 2019 number is about 10,000 more than the record set in 2016.

These numbers are not precise numbers of sales, for several reasons.

The numbers of NICS checks done for carry permits and carry permit rechecks have risen to over half of all NICS checks in recent years. People with carry permits can purchase firearms, using their permit as the background check (the permit already had a check done when it was issued) in 25 states. The total numbers are skewed by Illinois and Kentucky, which do hundreds of thousands of permit rechecks every month.

If a person is purchasing more than one firearm at a time, up to four can be purchased with a single NICS check. A friend of mine just purchased four semi-automatic rifles for his daughters to learn to shoot on.  Those four will count for one check. His daughters will be given a rifle as they show responsibility and proficiency.

There are significant numbers of  pre-owned firearms that are traded in at gun shops or at gun shows. Those firearms require a NICS check when they are resold. They do not increase the number of privately owned firearms in the country, but they count as a NICS check.

The strong increase in NICS checks is almost certainly tied to the Democrats pushing for more infringements on the Second Amendment, along with President Trump making ambiguous noises to string them along, and several weak-kneed Republicans who are attempting to curry favor with the media.

Presidential Candidate Beto O'Rourke bumped the numbers in September with his talk of confiscation of modern sporting rifles, in spite of their minimal use in homicides.

The nation has been at a fairly consistent plateau, or new normal since 2012. It appears a significant number of new gun owners were created during the first term of the President Obama regime. The nearly eight years of firearm sales since have shown fairly consistent numbers.

Prices are still good for AR-15 rifles, AR-15 part kits, and materials to make your own receivers. There is a move in several states to ban the kits and tools used to make your own guns. It seems blatantly unconstitutional, but the Supreme Court has been avoiding the issue for some years now.

We may see a difference next week, when the court should announce whether it will hold the latest Second Amendment case, NYSR&PA v NYC, moot, after NY City changed their law in a desperate move to stop the Court from considering the case.

The impeachment circus happening in the House of Representatives is likely to keep sales up in October. It appears President Trump's first term will exceed the firearms sales generated by President Obama in his first term.

President Obama's title as the greatest gun salesman in history may be in jeopardy.

©2019 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice and link are included.

Gun Watch

AL: Gun fight on Video, no one hit in Beauty Supply Shootout

The holdup happened shortly after 6:30 p.m. Wednesday at C & C Beauty Supply at 136 Sixth Ave. S.W. Sgt. Johnny Williams said the suspects, both brandishing weapons, approached the clerk and demanded money from the cash register.

The store owner, Williams said, began to fire at the suspects, and the suspects returned fire. No one was injured.
More Here

MS: Family finds Woman in Home, Holds Her at Gunpoint for Police

According to sheriff’s office reports, deputies received a 911 call about 11:30 p.m. Sunday from a man who said he and his family came home and found a woman in their home in the 6000 block of Indiana Avenue. The man held the woman at gunpoint until deputies arrived and took McCormick into custody.
More Here

KY: Man gets into Argument, returns, Breaks in, is Shot

“We’re still not sure of the details of the argument, but that appears to be what led to all of this,” Steger said. “From what we’ve gathered, the guy that got shot got into some kind of argument. Then a short time after that, he went over to the house where the person he had argued with lives and forced his way in. That’s when someone inside grabbed a shotgun and fired at him, hitting him in the upper right leg.

More Here

SC: Victim is Shot Performing Disarm, Robber Shot; both Die

Hagge says 14-year-old Eisa Shourpaje tried to rob 25-year-old Dashawn Bowens after seeing Bowens take out a large amount of cash at the register at the Valero gas station.

Hagge said at a Thursday news conference Shourpaje shot Bowens in the neck, then Bowens managed to get the gun and shoot the teen in the head.
More Here

Friday, October 11, 2019

Washington State University: Catch 22, No Guns for You

WSU Bryan Hall WSU 

To those who wish the population disarmed, gun laws do not need to make sense, be reasonable, efficient, or effective. Any reduction in the number of legal gun owners, guns, or use of guns is seen as positive.

It is why this bit of insanity at Washington State University (WSU) is unlikely to be addressed. Washington State University is primarily in the Southeast corner of Washington state, located at Pullman, Washington. It is an agricultural and rural area. Guns are popular. Even so, WSU has a very restrictive gun policy. From
WAC 504-26-213 Firearms and dangerous weapons

No student may carry, possess, or use any firearm, explosive (including fireworks), dangerous chemical, or any dangerous weapon on university property or in university-approved housing. Airsoft guns and other items that shoot projectiles are not permitted in university-approved housing. Students wishing to maintain a firearm on campus for hunting or sporting activities must store the firearm with the Washington State University department of public safety
The Washington State University police maintained an area for students to store their firearms, where the students could check out and check back in their firearms, as desired, for gun related activities. It was popular enough the WSU police are reported to have designed a portion of their new building to be used for this purpose. The WSU police moved into their new headquarters in 2016.

Then Washington State passed the controversial I-639 referendum. The referendum calls for universal background checks. The WSU police read the referendum, and interpreted it to mean they could not return a student's firearm to them, unless a background check and a mental health check were done beforehand, every time the firearm was returned. From
The way the law is written, WSU police say they’d have to conduct a background check every time a student checked out their gun, which would take several days. They’d also have to do a “mental health check” and send letters to mental health facilities to make sure the student is allowed to have a firearm.

That forced campus police to ax the program, due to the strain long wait times would impose on the system.
In effect, the combination of the University policy and the referendum mean the students have no way to legally possess firearms on campus. Critics of the WSU police policy say the police did not need to interpret the referendum this way. 

In I-639, there are several exemptions to the mandatory background check transfer law. One of them is for law enforcement agencies, on page 20, section (4) (e).  From
(e) Any law enforcement or corrections agency and, to the extent the person is acting within the course and scope of his or her employment or official duties, any law enforcement or corrections officer, United States marshal, member of the armed forces of the United States or the national guard, or federal official;
It appears to be straightforward. An employee of the WSU police would be acting in the scope of their official duties when they would check guns in or out. Perhaps the WSU police are afraid of liability or lawsuit.  I-639 is 30 pages long. There is a fair amount of micromanaging in it.

The people who are deliberately unarmed do not care they destroyed a multi-decadal tradition at WSU. They do not care they made the exercise of Second Amendment rights extremely difficult for students at WSU. Both of those things would be seen as positives by many people who wish Americans to be unarmed. After all, *they* are happy to go through life unarmed; why should anyone else (other than government agents) be allowed to be armed?

These sort of consequences are what the people who planned and executed the I-639 strike against the exercise of Second Amendment rights desire and hope for. They want firearms ownership and use to be so tightly regulated and controlled that legal use is logistically difficult and legally dangerous.

I witnessed this sort of thing in Australian states. As the gun culture in Australia attempts to reform some of the most onerous, irrational, and bizarre parts of the 1996 gun law, they are met by determined resistance in the media and by fanatical anti-gun lobbyists.

Those who want the people unarmed claim any reform would lead to blood in the streets. This sets the stage for the next failure. Then they push for more draconian provisions.

The leaders of those who wish for a disarmed society, do not see gun ownership as legitimate. They do not see armed self defense as legitimate. They do not see the Second Amendment as legitimate. They have shown the desire and the capability of lying, repeatedly, to achieve their political ends.

They wish to move society from the founding principle of law, where "Whatever is not forbidden, is allowed" to "Whatever is not allowed, is forbidden", which is where much of Europe operates.  It is what all the talk of "need" is about.

Government, deciding who "needs" what, is a Marxist concept. It is profoundly alien to the structure of the United States.

No government official should ever tell you what you need. Citizens should tell government officials what the government "needs".

Because of technological changes, referendums, intended to give the people power over politicians, have become methods for billionaires to restructure society to their whims. Billionaires work with their allies in the media, restructuring society in the way they wish it to be. It is essential Progressivism in action.

I-639 is being challenged in court. It was struck down, once, before the voting. It may be struck down again.

©2019 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice and link are included.

Gun Watch

OH: Dollar General Clerk Shoots, Kills Armed Robber

A Dollar General clerk fatally shot an armed robber who demanded cash, Dayton police Sgt. Thomas Schloss said.

More Here

Followup CO: Uber Driver Michael Hancock found Not Guilty in Shooting Death of Hyun Soo Kim

DENVER -- A jury on Thursday found Uber driver Michael Hancock not guilty of murder in last year's fatal shooting of a passenger while driving on Interstate 25 in Denver.

Jurors sided with Hancock, 31, who argued that he was defending himself against passenger Hyun Soo Kim.
More Here

TX: Armed Fort Worth Homeowner holds Suspect for Police

A 53-year-old armed homeowner caught a suspected burglar early Wednesday after hearing someone breaking into his truck near his Fort Worth home, police said.

The homeowner held the suspect at gunpoint until patrol officers arrived.

More Here

Supreme Court Denies Mootness for NYSR&P case: Oral Arguments 2 December, 2019

The Supreme Court has denied the Suggestion of Mootness in the New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v. New York City this morning, 7 October, 2019. The Court will hear oral arguments on 2 December, 2019, eight weeks from now. From
The Respondent's Suggestion of Mootness is denied. The question of mootness will be subject to further consideration at oral argument, and the parties should be prepared to discuss it.
The NYSR&P case is the first major Second Amendment case the Court has agreed to hear in nine years. There have been a couple of cases around the edges, and Caetano was significant. But there has not been a case to rein in the flood of lower court rulings that, in effect, made the Second Amendment into a second class right.

Those rulings, in effect, hold there is no right to commercial or private sale of arms; that common rifles can be banned; that magazines can be banned, that accessories can be banned, and the types of firearms can be banned to a designated number of models. 

Four justices on the court have been unhappy with the results, notably Clarence Thomas, Antony Scalia before he died, Neil Gorsuch, and Brett Kavanaugh.  It is not clear where Chief Justice Roberts or Justice Alito stand.

Four justices; Ginsburg, Sotomeyer, Breyer, and Kagan, have been hostile to the Second Amendment.

The Caetano decision was a unanimous decision which clarified the Second Amendment applied to all bearable arms, even if they had been invented recently.

Many have speculated that Justice Kennedy's lukewarm support for the Second Amendment was the reason for this lack of action. Neither the Originalists (Thomas, Scalia, Alito, and Roberts) or the "Living Document" group (Ginsburg, Sotomeyer, Breyer, and Kagan) knew which way Kennedy would topple, leading to a deadlock.

Justice Kennedy has retired, replaced by Justice Kavanaugh. Justice Scalia died, and was replaced by Justice Gorsuch.

The new court appears to have an Originalist majority for the first time in 70 years.

The court has agreed to hear the NYSR&P case. They have refused to drop it on grounds of mootness. The case is about the ability to take arms outside of the home, but could cover a great deal more.

Several other cases are in the wings involving magazines, semi-automatic rifles, and licensed "may issue" carry permits.

Those who wish us disarmed are not happy with this result. They thought they had solved the problem with the election of Hillary Clinton, who would appoint more "Living Document" justices, and rule the Second Amendment into oblivion.

That did not happen. We see the frustration, the angst, the anger and rage, every day, directed at President Trump.

After oral arguments are heard on 2 December, 2019, it will be some time before the opinion is released. It could be as late as the first week in July, 2020.

I suspect a strong opinion, but the court is not easily predicted. Much horsetrading is involved. That is how the Heller decision contained the ambivalent language about "long standing" laws, according to deceased Justice Stevens, who detested the Second Amendment.  From the
Stevens previously has called for repeal of the Second Amendment or a clarification saying it applies only to people serving in militias.

In the book, Stevens said he had hoped to persuade Justices Anthony M. Kennedy and Clarence Thomas to agree with him that the amendment was intended to prevent disarmament of state militias. He circulated his dissent emphasizing historical texts supporting his view in hopes it would prove persuasive.

His only success, he said, was in getting Kennedy to persuade Justice Antonin Scalia to include language limiting the reach of his majority decision in Heller.
With activist "living document" justices such as Stevens on the Court, it is understandable why the National Rifle Association was opposed to bringing Heller to the Court at all.

That is in the past. How much current justices will uphold the clear language of the Second Amendment, in NYSP&RA will be found when they publish the decision, several months in the future, just in time for the 2020 elections.

©2019 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice and link are included.

Gun Watch

Thursday, October 10, 2019

PA: Man with Carry Permit Stops Robbery, Kills 1 of Several Suspects

YEADON, Pa. (CBS) — Police say a group plotted to set up and rob a young man of expensive hair extensions, but they didn’t count on the man being licensed to carry. Police now need your help to find the dangerous people involved.

More Here

Followup NJ: Adrian Kramer Murder Charges Dismissed in Shooting of Stepfather

NEWARK - The state has dismissed murder charges against Reynoldsburg teen Adrian Kramer after they say two expert witnesses determined Kramer was acting in self-defense when he shot his step-father.

More Here

KY: Disarm, Clerk Grabs Gun, Robbery Suspect Runs

When the woman threw the money on the counter, the robber put his gun down as he moved to put the money in a plastic bag. That's when the clerk grabbed the gun and pointed it at the robber. Police said the man eventually fled in a dark-colored car. Investigators found the shirt and hat on McBride Lane near the hotel.

More Here

TX: Disabled Veteran in Port Arthur Shoots Man in Road Rage Incident

Witnesses said the homeowner was in a vehicle with his family, traveling home. The homeowner’s daughter was driving and approached an SUV on Highland. The Port Arthur man was driving the SUV and swerving in and out of his lane of traffic. The homeowner advised his daughter to pass the vehicle when the Port Arthur man sped after them following them to their home. The Port Arthur man exited his vehicle and approached the family. The disabled man told his family to put their heads down while he retrieved a handgun from his vehicle. The disabled man advised he feared for his family’s safety and shot the Port Arthur man.

More Here

Wednesday, October 09, 2019

GA: Robbery Suspect Shot, Killed by Armed Homeowner

The GBI later said the homeowner confronted the three alleged robbers and shot one of them.

On Friday, two of the suspects – 19-year-old Ulysses McMillan and LaKyle Harris, were charged with aggravated assault and attempted armed robbery.

The teen who was shot, 16-year-old Santana Joyner, died around 2 p.m. Saturday at Memorial Health Hospital in Savannah.

More Here

WA: Armed Homeowner Resists Crime Spree, Home Invader had AK47 Clone

The ordeal began around 3 a.m. Tuesday when Elma police were sent to the 1700 block of West Main Street for a report of a burglary in progress and that their front door had been kicked in. As police and deputies raced to that scene, officers were called to a second home in the 100 block of North 9th Street for a report of a second burglary. That homeowner said the burglar had kicked his door in, and after arming himself, found the suspect pointing an AK-47 at him, police said.

More Here

OH: Gunfight, Robbery Suspect Killed, Armed Victim Wounded

The other man, 27, had non-life threatening gun wounds to an arm and torso, police said.

The man told police he was walking on Rhodes when Alexander brandished a gun and demanded money.

The man told police that the attempted robber became distracted and at that time the victim pulled out his own gun and shot Alexander, who then returned fire.
More Here

Supreme Court Announcement on Mootness of NYSR&P Second Amendment Case likely on 7 October

On 1 October, 2019, the Supreme Court held a conference. One of the items to be decided was whether the Court would hear the Second Amendment case of NY STATE RIFLE & PISTOL V. NEW YORK, NY.

The Supreme Court had already granted Cert (agreed to hear the case). But the City of New York, fearing a poor outcome, had minimally changed the regulation, and lobbied the State of New York legislature to minimally change the law. Then the counsel for the City filed a petition with the Supreme Court, claiming the case was moot, there was no longer any valid reason to pursue the lawsuit.

The plaintiffs disagreed. They argued the changes were minimal and done to evade adhering to the Second Amendment.

The Supreme Court web site shows the  New York case as being scheduled for oral arguments on 2 December, 2019.  This may simply be part of the Court's administrative procedures. The court is the smallest of the three branches of the federal government. It is jealous of its power. The court guards its inner workings from the public view.

There are several cases important to the Second Amendment working their way toward a Supreme Court decision. Many of the lower courts have been hostile to restoring Second Amendment rights.

The lower courts have refused to protect the right to keep and bear arms outside the home.

The lower courts have refused to protect the right to keep and bear commonly owned rifles, magazines, and accessories.

The lower courts have refused to protect the commercial sale of arms, and the private sale of arms.

The lower courts have done this with sophistry and the changing of definitions to prevent the exercise of Second Amendment rights.

Many believe the Supreme Court did not accept these cases, because neither the originalists and textualists on the Supreme Court (Thomas, Scalia, Alito, and Roberts) or the "living document" progressives (Ginsburg, Breyer, Sotomayor, and Kagan) could depend on what the swing vote, Justice Kennedy, would do. So, they mostly did nothing for ten years.

Justice Kennedy has been replaced by Justice Kavanagh.  With Justice Gorsuch replacing Justice Scallia, the originalists and textualists should have a working majority.  Justice Roberts appears to be stepping into Justice Kennedy's role as a swing vote, but the swing has moved a bit toward originalist thinking. 

Other cases likely to come up, depending on what happens with the New York Case, are Rogers v. Grewal,  Cheeseman v. Polillo, and Remington v. Soto.

Remington is about the protections afforded by the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, the PLCAA. Remington is scheduled for the conference on 11 October; the Court may decide to hear the case at that conference.

Rogers is about the carry of arms outside the home in New Jersey, as is Cheesman, but from a bit different angle.

Cheesman is scheduled for the 18 October, 2019 Supreme Court conference, which will likely determine if the court will decide to hear the case.

Some writers believe the Democrats have pushed the Court too hard, with barely disguised threats to pack the court.

The odds are we will know if the Court will hear oral arguments in the NY STATE RIFLE & PISTOL V. NEW YORK, NY. case Monday morning, the 7th of October, 2019.

It is difficult to know what the Supreme Court will do, particularly in Second Amendment cases.

©2019 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice and link are included.

Gun Watch

Tuesday, October 08, 2019

MO: Armed Samaritan aids Deputy During Fight

The deputy realized Bailey had a knife in his hand. The other people in the vehicle tried to help the deputy and were able to get the knife away from Bailey after a short time.

Additionally, an armed citizen arrived during the incident and helped the deputy.

The news release also noted Bailey reached for the deputy's handgun multiple times during the struggle.

More Here

VA: 83-Year-Old Arrested for Shooting, Victim Fired Back

During the dispute, Barb fired a shotgun at the victims, striking both of them.

The male victim returned three shots from a pistol, but all missed Barb.
More Here

MT: Mountain Lion Shot, Killed after Killing Goat

HAMILTON — A homeowner in the Bitterroot shot and killed a mountain lion after it returned to the property.

The Ravalli County Sheriff's Office reports the incident happened in the Avista Loop area of Hamilton after the animal had killed a goat and then returned to the carcass on Saturday morning.
More Here

Monday, October 07, 2019

HI: 54-Year-Old man Shoots, Kills Knife-man

HONOLULU (KHON2) — A man was shot to death in Ewa Beach on Friday, October 5, around 9 p.m.

According to the Honolulu Police Department, the 37-year-old victim was on the suspect’s property with a knife when the suspect opened his front door and shot him.
More Here

NC: Gunfight at Party when Man was asked to Leave

Williams said a man was asked to leave the party and that’s when he fired a gun.

He added someone returned fire.
More Here

TN: Bear would not Scare, or Retreat, Killed by Dog Owner

LOUISVILLE, Tenn. — Wildlife officers said a Blount County man shot and killed a black bear that was threatening a dog.

Daniel Blankenship told a wildlife officer that the bear showed no fear of humans. He said he fired a warning shot, but instead of scaring the bear away, it came closer. After that, he fatally shot the bear.

More Here

Sunday, October 06, 2019

The Logical Fraud Conflating "Gun Deaths" with Public Safety

Vox recently published an article by German Lopez that makes a logical error. The article conflates an increase in "gun deaths" with a decrease in public safety. The jump is made from an article published last year, in 2018, where the Rand Corporation published a chart based on a number of different and dubious studies on "gun deaths". From the previous article:
But there were some things that could be gleaned from the available evidence. While RAND as a nonpartisan group avoided any sweeping policy conclusions in its analysis, its review does seem to point in a direction, based on my own reading: More permissive gun policies lead to more gun deaths, while more restrictive policies lead to fewer gun deaths. Coupled with other evidence in this area, that supports the idea that more guns lead to more gun deaths. 
The key way the Rand compilation of studies is biased is by the focus on “gun deaths”. The major bone of contention in restrictions on gun ownership and use is *not* gun deaths. It is, first, a philosophical determination of political power;  secondarily, a question of practical effect, primarily about whether other methods will be substituted for guns in crime and suicide.  A major part of that equation is whether guns have significant benefits for defense, which has little to do with how many people are killed.

The claim is made that Rand is "non-partisan".  The unstated assumption, made by Rand, and by Lopez, is that microscale pragmatism is the lens by which governmental decisions should be made. They implicitly reject the argument that political power grows out of the barrel of a gun. That is a partisan assumption. They ignore Constitutional questions. That is a partisan approach. Rand is one of the think tanks that has prospered as the nation came under the sway of the Mediacracy. It has a vested interest in pushing increased regulatory schemes.  It assumes the regulatory state is benevolent.

Even with the assumption of a benevolent state, if you ban guns, and "gun deaths" decrease, but overall homicide and suicide rates are not effected, you have not accomplished anything to reduce homicide or suicide.  You have increased restrictions on ordinary citizens.

Focusing only on "gun deaths" is intellectually dishonest.

I have not read all of the studies. I have read most of the Australian studies and looked at some of the raw data. The articles' contention, that over all homicides and suicides were decreased by the gun laws in Australia, is false.

Most of the studies acknowledge there was little change. Suicides went up for a few years, driven by other methods. Homicide, followed the same trend line it previously had.

The research on Australian gun law is mixed, with significant variation in quality.

I only know of two studies  about firearms accidents and concealed carry law. One study was national, about fatalities. The nationwide study done by Lott and Mustard in 1997, looking at unintentional deaths, was inconclusive. The other study only looked at one state, Arizona, and only from 1988 to 2003 It is unknown why the study, which was done in 2013, cut the date for the Arizona study off at 2003. The study only looked at unintentional firearm injuries, not at unintentional firearm deaths. It included adults over the age of 18 who were not legally capable of obtaining concealed carry licenses. There are many other candidates for minor variations in accident rates.

To claim there is a correlation with increased concealed carry and increased firearms injuries sounds plausible; it is not supported by fact. If it were, we should see a measurable increase in fatal firearms accidents over the last 20 years. We do not.  The number of concealed carry permit holders has increased from 2.7 million in 1999 to over 17.25 million a year ago.

During the same period, fatal firearms accidents have decreased from 824 to 486, with the rate decreasing from .29 per 100,000 population in 1999 to .15 per 100,000 population, in 2018, almost in half.  There may be other factors, but if the legal carry of guns increases firearms accidents, it is an exceedingly small amount, which is beyond measurement.

Concealed carry might decrease accidents. It is easy to create hypotheticals; carrying a defensive firearm may keep it under the control of an adult, for example, rather than leave it at home to be stolen. Carrying a firearm may increase training and awareness of firearms safety. These are unknowable imponderables that are difficult to measure. People with concealed carry permits are extremely law-abiding, several times less likely to commit crimes than police.

Part of the problem with these studies is the bias inherent in the language used to ask the question.

"Gun violence" is a propaganda term used to link five separate phenomena involving guns, all together, and claiming all the problems can be solved by infringements on the Second Amendment.

The proponents of the term link suicides, non-justifiable homicides, justifiable homicides,homicides by police, and firearms accidents all together under the "gun violence" banner.  These are separate phenomena with separate causes and dynamics.

There is no serious reason to believe suicides will decrease in any significant amount if private sales are outlawed by "Universal Background Checks". Most suicides are by older white men who have owned guns for decades. Numerous other methods exist. In Australia, suicides went up after the extreme gun restrictions were put in place. Different methods, particularly hanging and single car fatalities were used.

There has been no reduction in overall homicides when the access to guns was made much more difficult.  One study, in a medical journal, claimed that homicides have increased with "stand your ground" law in Florida. Half of the increase was from recorded justified homicides. The study used justified homicide data from a law enforcement data base, then compared it to total homicides from a medical data base. Any homicide not recorded as justified was assumed to be non-justifed. If you infer problems with conflating different data sets, you are correct.

Two other studies, in Arizona and Texas, showed no effect.

Overall effects are small, involving a few homicides or suicides or accidents out of hundreds or thousands. It is difficult to differentiate differences in reporting from differences in fact. This allows result oriented researchers to pick through the data to find results to reinforce their ideological point. It need not be a conscious decision. Selection bias and the confirmation bias are well known.

There is no strong evidence one way or another, which magnifies bias effects.

One of the problems is, to find evidence, the researchers are reduced to using complex models to eliminate the effect of other relationships. The selection of baselines, timing, and factors to be considered are all subject to selection bias and fiddling.  This is easiest done for studies limited in time and space. The more limited the study in time and space, the more potential for biased results. The most credible studies are those involving national, detailed data, over long time lines.

Studies are notorious for selection bias in international comparisons. They choose some subjective criteria, such as "developed' or "rich" countries while ignoring demographic differences among populations. If you see a study that only compares England and Sweden, but leaves out Brazil and Russia, you know you are seeing bias. All international studies are suspect, because of definitional difficulties. 

It is not hard to understand that academics, especially in the medical field, have biases against gun ownership.

There is a general bias against gun ownership in most of the medical journal studies I have read.

There seems to be less in the criminological journals.

In determining positives and negatives of gun ownership, there are many imponderables and value judgments. The rule of law, and the supremacy of the Constitution, are seldom mentioned by those who want the population disarmed.

If you believe firearms are useful for defense of self, others, and the common polity, there are studies that agree with you. 

If you believe firearms have no legitimate purposes, there are studies promoting your view. No regulation or ban will be considered extreme or irrational.

People familiar with firearms tend to fall into the first camp. Those without firearms knowledge tend to fall into the second. 

These are two competing world views. Power brokers can always find an expert to support the policy decision they wish to make.

Historically, those with arms have ruled those without.

©2019 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice and link are included.

Gun Watch