CA: 93-Year-Old Homeowner Shoots Intruder

MORENO VALLEY, Calif. (KABC) -- A 93-year-old homeowner took matters into his own hands when he shot and critically injured a suspect who authorities say broke into the home in Moreno Valley.

The incident happened in the 24300 block of Eucalyptus Avenue around 12:30 a.m. on Wednesday, according to the Riverside County Sheriff's Department. When deputies arrived, they found one person with a gunshot wound.

More Here

Followup CA: Muni Shooting Was Self Defense, Defender Charged with Gun Crime

SAN FRANCISCO - A man who shot and killed a passenger on a San Francisco subway commuter train will be charged with gun crimes but not homicide in what was "clearly" a case of self-defense after he was attacked with a knife, his attorney said Monday.

More Here

GA: Manager not able to Stop Shooting of Subway Employees

"He decided to escalate the situation and from there — that's when all hell broke loose," Glenn said.

Glenn said the injured employee's 5-year-old son was inside the store when the shooting started.

Glenn said the manager on duty returned fire at the suspect, but wasn't able to hit him.

More Here

OH: No Charges for Woman who Shot, Killed Rayshown Calloway

CLEVELAND, Ohio (WOIO) - Cuyahoga County prosecutors ruled the 22-year-old woman who shot and killed a man inside a car near the MetroHealth Medical Center this past April committed the shooting in self-defense.

Cleveland police said Rayshown Calloway, 25, of Cleveland, was found dead just before 2 p.m. on April 12 inside a car parked on MetroHealth Drive and Scranton Road.

More Here

TX: Security Guard Charged After Shooting Woman who Drove into Crowd

A security guard is facing charges after a fatal shooting outside a Dallas strip club overnight Friday.

A woman was killed when two security guards opened fire on her vehicle as she reportedly drove into a crowd after the club had closed early Saturday morning.

According to a statement from XTC Cabaret, one of the guards was hit by the woman and pinned between her car and another vehicle.

More Here

AZ: Two Home Invaders Shot, Killed, Investigations ongoing

A Phoenix, Arizona homeowner shot and killed two men who were attempting to break into the home Saturday morning, police said, according to reports.

When police arrived before 8 a.m. in response to several 911 calls, officers found the two alleged intruders on the ground in front of the home.

"Witnesses told the officers the shooter was inside the home next to where the men were lying," Sgt. Philip Krynsky told FOX 10 Phoenix.

More Here

TN: Mentally Disturbed Man Attempts Disarm, is Killed

Jonathan Distefano, 41, died in the shooting at a Mapco on the 4300 block of Harding Pike, according to police. Distefano was reportedly experiencing a mental health crisis at the time of the shooting and had physically engaged the clerk.

The shooting occurred after Distefano was reportedly being driven by family to a hospital for treatment of a mental health episode, according to the initial investigation.

Distefano got out of the vehicle and got into traffic and wound up on top of a moving car before rolling off, police said.

Then Distefano went to the nearby Mapco where the clerk was on a break inside his vehicle in the parking lot.

More Here

TX: Employee Shoots Suspect During Robbery Attempt

Police said the suspect went into a Suit Mart store and attempted to shoplift some jeans. 

Shortly thereafter, police said, the suspect walked into Carters Country, walked behind the register, and stole some money out of the register.

At that point, police said an employee of the store confronted the suspect, fired two times and struck the suspect, causing him to run out and collapse in the parking lot.

More Here

Cheap Gun Opportunity in Forth Worth?

A gun turn-in event is scheduled for June 27, 28, 29, and 30th, which is Monday through Thursday, from 9 a.m. to 4 p.m.  It is an unusual approach, during working hours. Most of these events are scheduled for weekends.

The event called by the Orwellian term "buy back" (police cannot "buy back" items which they have never owned), is scheduled to be held at the Northwest Division. The address is 4651 N. Main St. $100 gift cards will be given out for firearms turned in. There are few firearms worth less than $100 on the open market. 

 Fort Worth Police Station at 4651 N Main Street

A year previously, a similar program had people turn in 250 firearms in the City of DeSoto, Texas. DeSoto is on the south edge of the Dallas/Fort Worth metroplex.  A quick look at the firearms turned in at DeSoto reveals a number of decent shotguns and rifles, and some interesting antiques.

The Dallas/Fort Worth area is in the middle of gun country, so the potential pool of people who have inherited guns, know nothing about them, and who want to turn them in to police, is potentially large.  This group exists.  They are not willing to take the extra time to obtain more at a gun show or with a private sale. There will be a few ideologically driven types who will not take cash, but they are a small minority.

Working against this potential is the cost of driving to the police area. Private sales are not banned in Texas. I expect a significant number of private purchasers to show up, in order to scoop up whatever bargains are brought in.

These programs are almost always underfunded, with gift cards running out in the first few hours. After that, people wishing to get rid of guns will be more willing to accept private offers.

Texas became a Constitutional Carry state in 2021. No permit is needed to openly or concealed carry a firearm in most public spaces. No one is required to have a license to purchase or sell a gun to another private person in Texas. A concealed handgun license (CHL) may help persuade an individual that a purchaser is not a felon, and not prohibited from purchasing firearms.

With inflation at 40 year highs, the incentive to obtain a little money for a firearm which is neither appreciated not desired, could lead to some seriously undervalued guns being offered for a mere hundred dollars. 

As with any such project, it makes sense to be prepared, to check out the area and determine what parking may be available. Signs need to be prepared. Police at these events have sometimes attempted to intimidate private buyers from offering cash for guns. 

Most private purchasers know their rights and are not intimidated. Having the abililty to record the event with audio and video recording can reduce police intimidation. Many police officers will not agree with the "guns are bad" assumption of the event.  Still pictures are useful to document the guns saved from purposeless destruction. 

Private purchasers at these events destroy the propaganda purpose of the "buy back". The purpose is to send the message "Guns Bad. Turn them in to the Police." 

Private purchasers send the opposite message: "Guns Good. I pay cash."

©2022 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice and link are included.

Gun Watch

MO: No Charges for Franklin County Man who Shot 27-Year-Old

UNION, Mo. – No criminal charges will be filed from a recent shooting investigation in Union after the Franklin County Prosecutor deemed self-defense in the case.

More Here

Man who Defended Against Minneapolis Police Settles for 1.5 million

Jaleel Stallings mug shot after arrest and beating.

On May 30, 2020, at about 11 PM, during the George Floyd riots, Jaleel Stallings fired in the direction of people in an unmarked van who had fired at him.  They said nothing before opening fire. Jaleel felt a round hit him before he fired back.  They turned out to be police, who were shooting rubber bullets.

When Jaleel realized they were police, he stopped firing, very quickly, and surrendered. He had fired less than five shots. The shooting was over in seconds. Jaleel was severely beaten, even though he did not resist.

Because of video evidence, he was acquitted in a jury trial. Now, two years later, he settled for 1.5 million and lawyers fees. He has stated he is happy with the settlement, but would have liked to see some consequences for the officers involved. In the settlement, the city of Minneapolis did not admit any wrongdoing. From  fox9.com:

 "I'm extremely satisfied and grateful for that but I’m disappointed because my purpose in filing a civil lawsuit was never money," added Stallings. "I want justice and I wanted accountability."

Jaleel has moved to Texas, to avoid possible retaliation. He intends to change his career from truck driver to activist. Police who ride around in unmarked vehicles, and shoot rubber bullets at people, unannounced, should be subject to disciplinary action, and possibly civil suit, if not criminal penalties. From mprnews.org:

From his new home in Texas, Stallings said now that his criminal and civil cases are behind him, he’s making the transition from being a commercial truck driver to full-time activism with the hope that his experience will help change the culture of law enforcement.

Jaleel Stallings opined he would like to work with gun rights groups to help change police culture. From minnesotareformer.com:

Stallings said he’d like to bring people together — from police to gun rights groups — to talk about how to improve policing culture. He thinks the funds to settle his lawsuit should come from police pockets, rather than taxpayers.

“The work’s not done,” Stallings said.

Commentary:

In discussions of police misconduct in the gun culture, a theme repeatedly heard, is that police should be held accountable when they violate the Constitution, the law, or police regulations. Jaleel agrees with this. It is not clear if Jaleel intends to produce income with his activism.  Most activism costs money, unless a sugar daddy like Michael Bloomberg is supporting it.

There are reforms which many police departments could benefit from.  Respect for Constitutional rights of citizens, and stepping back from the concept that it is the police against the citizens would be good things. Police in major cities have often acted in racist ways. When the police and citizens have mutual respect, crime rates plummet. Mutual respect can be earned.

Body cameras and ubiquitous surveillance cameras are making it  difficult to act badly as police in a public place. Digital recorders and video cameras are as important to securing freedom as pistols and rifles.

We need to guard against the use of video clips to create public witch hunts, as well. It is profoundly important that we support the rule of law and due process.

Jaleel is already a member of the gun culture. He chose a Mini Draco as his self defense gun, and had an active Minnesota carry permit.  Jaleel has no criminal record.  This correspondent would like to hear more from him.

 

©2022 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice and link are included.

Gun Watch

CT: Homeowner Defends against 2 Teen Intruders, Shoots, Kills, Both

EAST HARTFORD, Connecticut – Two teens are dead after they forced their way into a home last week in East Hartford, Connecticut.

Police identified the intruders as 16-year-old Isaiah Jose Lopez of Hartford and 15-year-old Isaiah Miguel Nevarez of Meriden.

According to the Hartford Courant, the two allegedly entered the home and physically attacked the resident who had a handgun and shot them both, police said Friday. The handgun is legally registered to the resident, police said.

More Here

Everytown calls for Censorship on how to work on firearms

This correspondent has repeatedly written the First and Second Amendments of the US Constitution are intertwined and support each other. A power-craving government cannot effectively keep a population disarmed unless it censors information on how to make and use arms.

Billionaire Bloomberg supported Everytown for Gun Safety understands they cannot disarm the population, as long as people are free to transmit information on how to make, modify, and use firearms.

Their solution is clear. Forbid the knowledge of how to make, repair, and use firearms. From everytownsupportfund.org:

Based on our review of the writings by the shooter in the Buffalo mass shooting, it appears that he honed his knowledge of firearms and firearm modifications on YouTube. Just days before his attack, posts attributed to the shooter on Discord read, "I've just been sitting around watching youtube and shit for the last few days. I think this is the closest I'll ever be to being ready. I literally can't wait another week to do this."

Technology platforms, such as YouTube, have a responsibility to users and the public-at-large to insure that posts do not incite violence or promote extremist content.

This correspondent, contrary to what Everytown posits, claims Technology platforms, such as YouTube, have a responsibility to users to protect and support their First Amendment rights of free expression.

Everytown admits they request that videos on how to modify guns be taken down. They say they have requested YouTube take down videos on how to make guns (which they call "ghost guns").

YouTube has policies which censor some content on how to make or modify some guns and accessories.  From nbcnews.com:

YouTube’s firearms policy says users can’t post videos that show how to install certain gun accessories, including high-capacity magazines. In a statement on Friday, the company said the videos that the suspect allegedly used to modify his rifle don’t violate those policies.

It is more dangerous to peoples' freedom to control the information they are allowed, than to control their access to arms. Both are important. If the control over information is extensive enough, people will never attempt to use the arms they may have; they will consider themselves in the best of all possible situations, no matter how badly they are abused. This is the warning of George Orwell's novel, 1984. It is even more difficult for the people to rise up if the abuse is carefully contrived and increasingly applied over generations, allowing the population to become accustomed to it.

Fortunately, the oligopoly of Big Tech control over information appears to be on the edge of collapse. Alternative platforms dedicated to free speech, such as Truth Social and Rumble, are becoming popular. Elon Musk may reform Twitter, from a means of directing cancel culture against its victims to a world-wide sanctuary for free speech.

In a famous case, the US government gave up attempts to restrict the publication of how to build a hydrogen bomb. The First Amendment clearly protects publication of technology which is already in the public sphere.

What Everytown seeks to do is to convince the distributors of information to censor information it deems to be dangerous.

Everytown is unlikely to succeed.

In the Fifth Circuit, Defense Distributed's lawsuit against New Jersey's AG, Gurbir Grewal, was allowed to continue, on the grounds that Grewal violated Defense Distributed's First Amendment rights when when he threatened to prosecute them for publishing computer code on how to print firearms parts.

It would be a short step for the newly proposed Bureau of Disinformation to censor information they deem "dangerous" to the public.

Unless the Progressive left succeeds in its Supreme Court packing scheme, it is unlikely the Supreme Court would allow such an egregious violation of the First Amendment, when the inevitable court challenge is effectuated.

Everytown seems to agree with this quote, attributed to Stalin, but disputed:

  Ideas are more powerful than guns. We would not let our enemies have guns, why should we let them have ideas?

One of the most important effects of the Right to Keep and Bear Arms, in the Second Amendment of the US Constitution, is the physical embodiment and clear demonstration the power of the government has limits. There are things it is not allowed to do, by law. An openly armed man, in public, is a clear and present demonstration of a Constitutional limit on government.

Progressives hate the idea of limits on government with a passion. It is part of Progressive DNA.

Thomas Jefferson, the third president of the United States, had a view the opposite of Stalin's supposed quote. In a private letter, shortly before becoming president, he wrote this:

 "for I have sworn upon the altar of god eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man."1

It is clear those who wish for a disarmed public are closer to Stalin's philosophy than  to Thomas Jefferson's.

©2022 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice and link are included.

Gun Watch

 

FL: Possible Defense Shooting under Investigation in Clearwater, Woman Shot man

CLEARWATER, Fla. (WFLA) — A Clearwater woman shot a man who attacked her in her bedroom Tuesday morning, according to police.

A CPD release said officers responded to the shooting on Flagler Drive at 8:49 a.m. after the woman called 911.

Officers said the woman woke up to find Justin William Wright, 26, in her bedroom before he attacked her. Police said he lived on the same road as the victim.

More Here

Two Female Geologists, Two Bears, One Gun

Image by Troy Nemitz, with permission.

On August 13, 1977, Cynthia Dusel-Bacon was working for her third summer as a geologist for the Alaskan branch of the United States Geological Survey.  She was 30 years old, in excellent physical condition. She was field mapping, doing helicopter assisted traverses of the Big Delta quadrangle. She had a geologists hammer, a walkie-talkie radio, and a rucksack with lunch, which she also used to stow rock samples she collected.

The project chief believed "guns added more danger to an encounter than they would prevent". Her views became policy on the project. 

Cynthia later said, in a taped interview for Larry Kanuit: "She had therefore strongly discouraged us from carrying any kind of a firearm."

Cynthia had been dropped off by helicopter.  She was hiking along a narrow path on a ridge a few miles from the Salcha River, about 60 miles Southeast of Fairbanks, Alaska. A "small black bear" startled her with a crash in the brush. It appeared to her, staring at her, from about 10 feet away. She yelled at it. She pounded a rock with her hammer to make noise. The bear was not intimidated.  Cynthia took a step back, which was also higher on the rock.

The bear was not intimidated. It moved out of her sight, then struck her from behind and knocked her down. She had been told playing dead was the best strategy, so she did. The bear proceeded to drag her for nearly half an hour. During that time, her right arm was disabled as the bear tore and chewed on it. She was able to get her radio out of her pocket with her left arm and signal for help. 

The bear managed to eat and destroy much of both her arms before help arrived. She did not resist the bear.  If she had a firearm, she could easily have shot the bear. At 10 feet, standing still, even a small pistol could have worked. From Craig Medred:

Dusel-Bacon said the bear that stalked her also provided an ample opportunity to kill it, but she had no weapon.

It was a typical predatory attack by a black bear.  A bear, believed to have been the culprit, was later shot. It was a 175 lb sow.  It was not lactating. No one saw any cubs.

After Cynthia's attack, the Geological Survey offered training with firearms to people who worked in wild areas.  

The second incident involved Marti Miller.

Marti Miller was working for the Geological Survey as a cook when she met Cynthia, two years before Cynthia was attacked. They had become close friends. Marti visited Cynthia in the hospital, and was well aware of the details of the predatory attack.

In 1981, Marti joined the Geological Survey full time, after she finished her college degrees. She had her own encounter with a predatory black bear after she became a project leader, sometime before 1995. In January of 1995 she was interviewed by Larry Kaniut, the well known author of Alaskan bear books.

Marti Miller's experience was similar to Cynthia's in many ways. One difference was she was the project leader when her event happened. She was dropped off by helicopter in a very wild area, to work on a geological survey.  

The incident happened about 30 miles south of Aniak, Alaska. Miller was dropped off in the morning, to gather samples. After taking some samples on a ridge, she found a patch of ripe blueberries in the bottom of a draw she was crossing. She stopped and ate some for a few minutes. They were plump and especially sweet. She climbed back up the ridge on the other side, a hundred feet above the brush line, and looked back, about 9:30 a.m. She saw the black bear where she had been dropped off. She noticed it was following her trail, about a quarter mile back. She became more concerned when it continued to follow her through the blueberry patch, instead of stopping to eat blueberries. 

In her 30 lb pack were lunch, some of the samples she had taken, some spare clothes, spare ammunition, and spare sample bags.  She had a .30-06 rifle in the left side ski carrier, held butt up, and a radio in an outside pocket of the pack. She was carrying her survey map and a rock hammer. She took out the radio and tried to reach the pilot of the helicopter.  They had done a radio check shortly after she was dropped off. She could not make contact.

As her apprehension increased, she left her pack, took the rifle and radio, and hiked another 200 feet up the ridge to gain elevation and see what the bear did next. The bear followed her trail up the ridge. At the pack, it stopped for a moment, looked at her, then quickly moved to her right, out of sight. 

Marti remembered the bear which had attacked Cynthia had moved around and behind her before the ambush attack.

In the recounting of her incident, Marti casually mentioned another bear, the previous summer, had used the same technique to stalk her and three of her associates, all together. 

Marti decided to climb fast to get above the bear, to a place where she could see it approaching her.  She chambered a round in her rifle.  When she had gained elevation and space, she tried the radio again. Still no contact.  Then she saw the bear again. She moved directly upslope of the bear, and in her best command voice, yelled: "Get outta here!" 

The bear was about 100 feet away. It looked at her, and purposefully started walking toward her. When it was 70 feet away, she fired, aiming at the bear's nose. The 180 grain Nosler bullet broke the bear's neck, killing it instantly.

She remembered thinking, a bit surprised: "This thing worked." 

She fired another shot into the bear, then missed two more as she approached it for a closer look and the adrenaline shaking set in.

The bear was the first animal she had ever killed.  It was a 175 lb sow in good condition. It was about 10:00 a.m.

When she reported the incident to the authorities, the officer suggested she put it on her hunting license (she routinely purchased a hunting license as a precaution). If she had done so, she would not have been required to fill out a defense of life and property report. She could not legally hunt that day, because she had flown in a helicopter, a quirk of Alaska hunting regulations.

A significant amount of defensive bear shootings are recorded as hunting kills.

Cynthia's and Marti's accounts were recorded in Larry Kaniut's popular series of books on bear incidents. Cynthia's story is on pages 113 - 123 in Alaska Bear Tales. Marti Miller's story is on pages 58-69 of Some Bears Kill. 

The events involving Cynthia and Marti happened before the popularization of bear spray. In June of 2017, a woman biologist, Erin Johnson, was killed by a predatory black bear near the Pogo mine.  From Craig Medred:

Trainor didn’t sense the bear until it was within 10 feet, and she had no time to react. Murphy thinks her backpack, which the bear chewed on, might have saved her. With Trainor down, the bear moved on to Johnson as Trainor struggled to get a can of bear spray out of a holster on the pack’s waist band.

She succeeded in doing that, but the spray was of limited use, Murphy said.

“Ellen was able to spray the bear twice,” Murphy said, “but the bear came back….We’re trying to understand this.”

There has been some past research indicating that black bears can rather quickly recover from being sprayed.

As more field experience has been gained with bear spray, more incidents have revealed its limitations. It appears to work better with curious bears in parks than with aggressive bears in wilderness.

There are large and growing populations of black bears in North America.  Using firearms to stop the few aggressive bears who boldly approach people has no significant effect on bear populations, except to remove those with excessively aggressive genes.

Bear populations must be managed. Defensive shooting of bears is a tiny subset of the number of bears which must be killed each year.  

Bear spray can be a useful tool, in certain circumstances. 

One of the advantages of using firearms as a defensive tool against bears is that problem bears are killed, and cease to be problems. 

They do not come back for persistent attacks after being killed.

 

©2022 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice and link are included.

Gun Watch

IA: Armed Victim Shoots, Wounds Woman who Attacked Her

A legally armed woman in a Des Moine, Iowa, grocery store shot another woman who violently attacked her Sunday morning, police say. 

"This was something spontaneous that unfortunately happened in that grocery store where a lot of people were grocery shopping this morning," said Sgt. Paul Parizek of the Des Moines Police Department said of the Sunday incident, according to KCCI.

More Here

OR: Man Arrested for Shooting person Breaking into his Vehicle

 

PORTLAND, Ore. (KOIN) — A 33-year-old man was arrested after he shot a person trying to break into his vehicle and damaging it with a shovel in Vancouver on Tuesday, authorities said.

Vancouver police said the man shot was rushed to the hospital with critical injuries.

At 1:52 a.m. Jacob Cantrell reportedly called 911 to report the shooting in his driveway on SE 148th Avenue.

 

More Here

MO: Man Shot for Intruding into an Occupied Tent

The shooting happened around 4:37 a.m. near O’Fallon Street and Lewis Street. Police said they found Steven Weinhardt, 36, shot and killed in a tent.

Reports say a homeless man shot Weinhardt because he entered his tent. After being questioned by police, the suspect was released.

More Here

AZ: Domestic Defense, Girlfriend Shoots Boyfriend who is Attacking Her

PHOENIX — Phoenix police say a man is dead after being shot by his girlfriend, following an apparent domestic dispute.

A resident tells us she heard a harrowing cry for help just a few feet away from her home.

"Somebody help me, please; somebody help me, please. Help. Help," says a witness at Dimension on 27^th Avenue.

The witness wanted to remain anonymous but told us she instructed her roommate to call 911, while she continued watching from her window.

"Pretty husky. He was reaching down over her - bam, bam. All I saw was the right hand; he was wailing on her," says the witness.

More Here

UT: Home Invasion Disarm, 1 Homeowner wounded, 1 Invader Killed, 2 Wounded.

SALT LAKE CITY — Four people have been charged in connection with a chaotic incident in which police say they attempted to commit a home invasion robbery that ended in an exchange of gunfire and one of the intruders being killed.

More Here

IL: Burglary Victim Holds Burglar at Gunpoint for Police

The Lake County Sheriff’s Office responded around 12:10 a.m. Thursday to the 25800 block of West Marquette Drive in Ingleside for a burglary in progress.

Lake County Sheriff’s Office Deputy Chief Christopher Covelli said responding sheriff’s deputies were informed the victim was holding the burglar at gunpoint.

More Here

IN: Homeowner who Fired "Warning Shot" and Killed Burgler Found Justified

The homeowner saw hands lifting the window and the document states she fired her handgun at the window as a “warning shot.” After calling 911, an officer responded and found Davis lying on the ground a few feet from the window.

Officers also found there was finger or handprints on at least four of the windows. Under one window, the document states there was a cinderblock placed seemingly to be used as a stool to look inside. Shoeprints by the window and around the home matched Davis’ shoes.

The document states Davis had a backpack with various items including a stolen laptop. Toxicology tests found Davis’ blood indicated the presence of designer opioids and fentanyl. Police do not know why Davis was trying to break into the home.

More Here

Vermont Governor Signs law Removing Ban on Supressors for Hunting

Map from the American Suppressor Association

On June 1, 2022, S. 281, was signed by Republican Governor Phil Scott of Vermont. An amendment, removing the ban on the use of suppressors for hunting in Vermont, was passed as part of the bill, which regulated the of hunting coyotes with dogs,

The bill passed  the Vermont House on May 4, 2022. The vote was 89 for, 49 against. At that time the bill only contained the regulation of coyote hunting with dogs. The final legislation was a compromise on hunting regulation of coyotes and the use of suppressors for hunting.

The amendment to remove the ban on hunting with suppressors was added on 10 May, 2022. From the American Suppressor Association:

MONTPELIER, VERMONT – Today, Governor Phil Scott (R-VT) signed S. 281 into law, making Vermont the 41st state to allow the use of suppressors while hunting. The ASA-backed pro-suppressor provision of the bill, championed by Representatives Pat Brennan (R-Chittenden-9-2) and George Till (D-Chittenden-3), was amended into the legislation during the floor debate in the House of Representatives on May 10th. It passed the Senate as amended the very next day. The new law, which carries a two-year sunset provision, will take effect on July 1st.

The bill passed the Vermont Senate on a voice vote on 11 May, 2022.

The original bill was an attempt to make hunting coyotes with dogs illegal in Vermont. As part of the compromises made in passing the bill, regulations on hunting coyotes with dogs were required, and the ban on hunting with suppressors was lifted.

The bill will take effect on July 1, 2022. With the reform, Vermont becomes the 41st state to restore the legal ability to hunt with suppressors/silencers.

A sunset clause was included in the bill so that all provisions will expire on July 1, 2024.

The suppressor reform was not mentioned in the Vermont Public Radio paragraph about the bill's passage.

The importance of passing the bill is: There will be two years without a ban on the use of suppressors in hunting in Vermont.

Supporters will be able to show two years without problems. This is what has happened in other states.

Use of suppressors while hunting is common in Europe, Africa, and New Zealand.

Supporters of European style gun regulation fall silent about the widespread use of suppressors in Europe.

The only state which allows widespread ownership of suppressors, but does not allow their use in hunting, is Connecticut.

Eight states continue the irrational ban on the ownership and use of suppressors/silencers/gun mufflers.

They are the usual suspects; states which have infringed on Second Amendment rights for decades: California, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Massachusetts, New York, New Jersey,  and Rhode Island.

Of the six states which do not have a state protection for the right to keep and bear arms in their state constitution, four are on this list.

Iowa will almost certainly add an right to keep and bear arms to its constitution in 2022.

The hearing protection act, which would have removed suppressors from the bizarre regulatory and tax regime of the National Firearms Act, was primarily prevented from passing in 2017, by House Speaker Paul Ryan.

Prediction:

As the use of silencers becomes legal, accepted, and common across the nation,  they will be accepted into the states which currently infringe on Second Amendment rights.

©2022 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice and link are included.

Gun Watch

PA: Armed Samaritan Fired at Man who Shot Woman in Walmart Parking Lot

A New York City man accused of shooting a woman in a Walmart parking lot in Pennsylvania encountered return fire by another person who was legally carrying a gun, a district attorney has revealed. 

Christopher Carmona is facing charges including attempted homicide, aggravated assault with a deadly weapon and possession of a prohibited firearm following the June 1 incident in Pittston Township, outside of Scranton, according to WNEP.

More Here

TX: Armed Robbery Suspect Shot, Wounded by Armed Victim

At 4:11 p.m. the suspect came up behind two people who were walking through a parking lot at 3400 Palm Way, which is in The Domain shopping center, according to an arrest affidavit. The victims told police he had a black shirt wrapped around his face and pointed a gun at the two as he took a shopping bag and a backpack from one of them.

The suspect started getting into a car and pointed a gun at one of the victims who was yelling and walking toward him, the other pulled out a concealed pistol and shot the suspect.

More Here

The Senate "Outline" on Gun Control, June 12, 2022

On June 12, 2022, a group of 10 Republican and 10 Democrat senators agreed on an "outline" on a proposed gun control bill. 

Significantly, 10 Republicans are needed to overcome the filibuster in the Senate, if all 50 Democrats join to pass a particular bill.

Few details have been seen about the "outline". 

The details are critical. 

Broad "outlines" are not legislation, and have no force of law.

Senator Murphy of Connecticut appears to be the prime mover on this push. He is quoted by voanews.

He said the agreement would provide unspecified “major funding to help states pass and implement crisis intervention orders (red-flag laws) that will allow law enforcement to temporarily take dangerous weapons away from people who pose a danger to others or themselves.”

Murphy said there would be “billions in new funding for mental health and school safety, including money for the national build-out of community mental health clinics.” He said the legislation would “close the ‘boyfriend loophole,’ so that no domestic abuser — a spouse or a serious dating partner — can buy a gun if they are convicted of abuse against their partner.”

He said the legislation would include a prohibition against people buying guns for others and enhance background checks for gun buyers under 21. Both the Buffalo and Uvalde mass shootings were carried out by 18-year-olds.

In addition, Murphy said the law, if approved by Congress, would clarify “who needs to register as a licensed gun dealer, to make sure all truly commercial sellers are doing background checks.” 

Red-flag laws do not appear to produce measurable results. They can be very effective at undercutting fundamental Constitutional rights.  The wording used in this reporting, does not bode well:

will allow law enforcement to temporarily take dangerous weapons away from people 

Once taken, it can be very difficult to regain possession of firearms from "law enforcement". All weapons are "dangerous". All people are potentially dangerous. 

Temporarily often becomes indefinite, which often becomes permanent.

What is a "boyfriend loophole"?  It is not a legal term, but rather Orwellian propaganda meant to deceive. There is no "boyfriend loophole" in federal law. 

The term is meant as a way to expand the prohibited status of people who commit domestic violence, to people who are in casual relationships. It is a way of expanding the list of people prohibited from exercising their Second Amendment rights. 

Misdemeanors are inherently less serious than felonies. The details here are important, and unspecified so far.

Prohibition against a person buying guns for others.

There is already a prohibition against people purchasing guns for others in federal law. Watch for this to be expanded so than no one is allowed to buy a firearm for anyone else. This may be a way to push for a ban on private sales.

Enhanced background checks for those under 21. Almost certainly unconstitutional, this appears to be a waiting period measure. Watch for this to be used as justification to ban private sales.

Clarification of who is a gun dealer.  This is a double edged sword. A clear definition of what constitutes "doing business" has been sought for decades. It seems unlikely a good definition can come from this administration. Watch for a definition where it is hard to obtain a Federal Firearms License, but easy to be prosecuted for not having one. 

The Senators who signed on to this "outline" are, from the Epoch Times (Phone numbers have been added):

Republicans who signed on.

Linsey Graham, South Carolina 202-224-5972

Mitt Romney, Utah 202-224-5251

John Cornyn, Texas 202-224-2934

Thom Tillis, North Carolina 202-224-6342

Richard Burr, North Carolina 202-224-3154

Roy Blunt, Missouri  202-224-5721

Bill Cassidy, Louisiana 202-224-5824

Susan Collins, Maine 202-224-2523

Rob Portman, Ohio 202-224-3353

Pat Toomey, Pennsylvania 202-224-4254

The Democrats who signed on are:

Chris Murphy, Connecticut 202-224-4041

Richard Blumenthal, Connecticut 202-224-2823

Corey Booker, New Jersey 202-224-3224

Kyrsten Sinema, Arizona 202-224-4521

Mark Kelly, Arizona 202-224-2235

Chris Coons, Delaware 202-224-5042

Martin Heinrich, New Mexico 202-224-5521

Joe Manchin, West Virginia 202-224-3954

Debbie Stabenow, Michigan 202-224-4822

Senate Majority leader, Chuck Schumer, is pressing for a vote as soon as possible, before people are able to understand what is in the bill. 

Crises legislation is a hallmark of bad legislation. 

It is legislation which cannot be passed when subjected to rational thought and debate. 

Senators listen to input. It may not sway their vote, but it may make them less enthusiastic.  

©2022 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice and link are included.

Gun Watch

 

 

 

CA: Security Guard Shoots Man who Swung metal object

STOCKTON (CBS13) – An investigation is underway after a security guard in Stockton shot a man on Monday.

Stockton police say the incident happened a little after 7:30 p.m. near Pershing Avenue and Rosemarie Lane.

Exactly what led up to the incident is unclear, but the security guard reported that a 34-year-old man had allegedly swung a metal object – prompting the guard to fire one shot.

 

More Here

MS: Domestic Defense? Brother shot, killed.

Deputies arrived on scene to Javonta Marshall, 27 and his sister. They had a domestic dispute and she was assaulted by Marshall police said.

Police found Marshall in the back seat of the vehicle unresponsive with a gunshot wound.

Marshall was dead when paramedics arrived police said.

There was another male in the vehicle, who was identified as an off-duty police officer.

 

More Here

Regret for Being Right: Terror and the Supreme Court

On December 11, 2020, I warned the Supreme Court, if they gave in to extortionate threats, they would get more of them, with worse to come.

My words seem prophetic now. I would have preferred to be wrong.

This correspondent was only applying the lessons of recent history. From the 2020 article, 17 months ago:

The terrorists have marked 5 or 6 members of the Supreme Court as enemies of the people.

Those justices are: Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh, Amy Barrett, and, less likely, Chief Justice John Roberts.

The first five of those justices have been subject to death threats for following the Constitution. They have been characterized by the Left as being evil people, on national television, by national leaders on the Left.

The groups who made those threats are the same groups who would credibly threaten to burn the justices’ houses. They are *not* going to be placated by candidate Biden taking power.

They will be emboldened.

The Justices of the Supreme Court are now protected at the will of the Leftist political machine in charge of the Executive branch. From my 2020 essay:

When you acquiesce to extortion, you invite more extortion. When you acquiesce to physical threats, you invite greater physical threats.

The physical power which now protects Supreme Court Justices will be diminished if they empower the machine which threatens them. It seems unlikely, by feeding the crowd of political zombies, they will be the last eaten.

I wrote very similar things have happened in the last couple of hundred years:

It is what happened in the French revolution, in Bolshevik Russia, in Nazi Germany, in China, Vietnam, Cambodia, Laos, Cuba, Nicaragua, Venezuela, Japan before WWII, many South American countries after breeches in the rule of law, and Mexico, as the rule of law is lost, and the rule of force commenced.

The difference is, at present, the Supreme Court can preserve and
extend its power by enforcing the Constitution. It can make its
independence and physical security greater, by supporting the
organization which has supported that independence.

The Supreme Court failed to take that opportunity. There is still a chance. The Left's hold on power is not secure. They may hesitate to destroy the Court all at once. The Court has an opportunity to rally its supporters who want the Constitution enforced. Its ability to do so will likely be lost if it gives in to the extortion of the Left at this time.

To borrow Thomas Paine's words, and apply it to the Supreme Court:

When will they be stronger? 

If they cannot resist the Left and its push for unlimited government power, now, when will they be able to do so?

What can be done?

The justices need to know there is support for the Constitution. They need to know there is support for upholding the rule of law.

They need to know most of the people want the Supreme Court to do the right thing and enforce the Constitution as written.

Justice Kavanaugh has had a credible threat on his life. The person who threatened him wanted the court to uphold the controversial Roe v Wade decision, and to invalidate Second Amendment rights. From kxl.com:

Roske told police he was upset by a leaked draft opinion suggesting the Supreme Court is about to overrule Roe v. Wade, the landmark abortion case. He also said he was upset over the school massacre in Uvalde, Texas, and believed Kavanaugh would vote to loosen gun control laws, the affidavit said.

The Biden administration aligned media is not particularly concerned.

The Senate passed a bill for increased security for Supreme Court justices. Nancy Pelosi, Democrat Speaker of the House, is holding up the bill. Perhaps she will wait until the decisions are released. That might "send a message".

The Biden administration continues to support "demonstrations" at Justices homes, even though such demonstrations are against federal law.

We will know if the Court has surrendered to the radical left if the decision on the Mississippi abortion case supports Roe v Wade, and the decision on the New York Rifle & Pistol Association case v Bruen does not support the right to bear arms.

Leftist activist are planning to block the entrances to the Supreme Court on June 13, 2022, in a bid to force the decision they want on the Mississippi abortion case.

Both decisions are due within a month.

©2022 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice and link are included.

Gun Watch 

 

 

TN: Domestic Defense? Man Killed, Woman in Custody.

A female suspect is also said to have been taken into custody at the scene.

Police say they are now investigating this as a possible self-defense shooting following a domestic incident between the 47-year-old man and the 48-year-old woman.

More Here

IA: Homeowner Shoots Intruder Breaking into Home

An Iowa homeowner reached for his gun after being woken by strange noises in the middle of the night Thursday, after which he allegedly saw an intruder break through a window at his home southwest of Casey, which is very close to Interstate 80 — and shot the intruder multiple times.

More Here

TX: Longview Man Shot Dead in Bullard Home

CHEROKEE COUNTY, Texas (KLTV) - A Longview man was shot dead Sunday evening at the home of a Bullard man.

According to a report by the Cherokee County Sheriff’s Office, deputies were dispatched to a residence in the 8000 block of Farm to Market Road 855 in response to a call that an individual died of apparent gunshot wounds. Upon arrival, deputies found that Tommy Peeler, 69, of Longview man dead from apparent gunshot wounds. Deputies then detained two individuals, Stephen Driskell, 54, of Bullard, and Sue Peeler, 64, of Bullard. 

 

More Here

H.R.2377 Federal Red Flag law Proposed by Democrats in House

 From congress.gov

On April 8, 2021, Representative MCBath sponsored  H.R. 2377, a federal bill to authorize extreme risk prevention orders, or "red flag" law. 

Using the recent mass murders in Buffalo, New York and Uvalde, Texas, as an emotional springboard to push passage of the law, Nancy Pelosi has pushed through passage in the House of Representatives, today, 9 April, 2022. The vote was 224 to 202.  

The most recent and comprehensive study on the Red Flag law in California showed no measurable effect on assault or fatal violence against others or self, for an intensely covered four year period, 2016 to 2019.

The Congressional Budget Office description of the bill is sparse. From cbo.gov:

H.R. 2377 would allow family members and law enforcement officials to file petitions in federal courts requesting extreme risk protection orders (ERPOs) for the removal of firearms from people who are believed to present an extreme risk of harm to themselves or others. The bill would require the U.S. Marshals Service (USMS) to serve federal ERPOs, remove firearms if so ordered, and store firearms until a hearing can be held to determine whether the firearms should be returned to or kept from the respondent for a specific period.

 

The timing required is extremely fast, giving the judge little ability to determine how credible the alleged threats are. With the supposed dire consequences for failing to grant a petition, it seems very few would be denied. 

Ex parte means the accused is not present. From the bill:

 “(c) Ex parte orders.—

“(1) TIMING.—

“(A) IN GENERAL.—Except as provided in subparagraph (B), a court that receives a petition for an ex parte Federal order under subsection (b) shall grant or deny the petition on the date on which the petition is submitted.

(B) is for late submissions, which must be issued the next day.  The "evidence" includes "hearsay" evidence from third parties:

 “(2) EVIDENCE REQUIRED.—Before issuing an ex parte Federal order, a court shall require that the petitioner for such order submit a signed affidavit, sworn to before the court, that—

“(A) explains why such petitioner believes that the Federal order respondent poses a risk of imminent personal injury to self or another individual, by purchasing, possessing, or receiving a firearm or ammunition; and

“(B) describes the interactions and conversations of the petitioner with—

“(i) the respondent; or

“(ii) another individual, if such petitioner believes that information obtained from that individual is credible and reliable.

The "factors to consider" by the judge are problematic. Here is the list:

(e) Factors to consider.—In determining whether to issue a Federal extreme risk protection order, a court—

“(1) shall consider factors including—

“(A) a recent threat or act of violence by the respondent directed toward another individual;

“(B) a recent threat or act of violence by the respondent directed toward self;

“(C) a recent act of cruelty to an animal by the respondent;

and

“(D) evidence of ongoing abuse of a controlled substance or alcohol by the respondent that has led to a threat or act of violence directed to self or another individual;

and

“(2) may consider other factors, including—

“(A) the reckless use, display, or brandishing of a firearm by the respondent;

“(B) a history of violence or attempted violence by the respondent against another individual;

“(C) evidence of an explicit or implicit threat made by the person through any medium that demonstrate that the person poses a risk of personal injury to self or another individual.

The last case, (C) is particularly worrisome. 

How many people "talk big" on the Internet or on the telephone? The law is full of potential for abuse. A DC police officer, telling a judge about Internet correspondence in Idaho, might easily find a DC judge to "Red Flag" hundreds of people in Idaho, which he has never had personal interaction with. 

The judge only needs to find "probably cause". If the petition is granted (at this point there has been no evidence presented by the accused. They do not even know the procedure is ongoing.) 

Then all Firearms and ammunition and any permit, such as a concealed carry permit must be immediately surrendered to the US Marshals or to other law enforcement personnel authorized by the US Marshals, or sold through a Federal Firearms Dealer. 

There is no option to have a third party hold the firearms.  

The list of those who can ask for these orders is long, and includes large numbers of people who may have a reason to use them to extract revenge.  They include:

“(A) parent, spouse, sibling, or child related by blood, marriage, or adoption to the respondent;

“(B) dating partner of the respondent;

“(C) individual who has a child in common with the respondent, regardless of whether the individual has—

“(i) been married to the respondent; or

“(ii) lived together with the respondent at any time;

“(D) individual who resides or has resided with the respondent during the past year;

“(E) domestic partner of the respondent;

“(F) individual who has a legal parent-child relationship with the respondent, including a stepparent-stepchild and grandparent-grandchild relationship; and

“(G) individual who is acting or has acted as the legal guardian of the respondent;

The bill allows any law enforcement officer to file such an petition. The officer only needs to believe the information they received is "credible and reliable".  If the information is turns out to be false, there is no penalty for the person who filed the petition, if they reasonably believed the information received was "credible and reliable". 

The ex parte order does not require a hearing for the accused individual. A hearing must be held within 14 days, or when an ex parte order is petitioned to be made into a long term order, up to 180 days.  A hearing is required for a long term order.

The penalty for false or frivolous petitions exists, but accusations would be very difficult to prove.

“(i) Penalty for false reporting or frivolous petitions.—An individual who knowingly submits materially false information to the court in a petition for a Federal extreme risk protection order under this section, or who knowingly files such a petition that is frivolous, unreasonable, or without foundation, shall be fined not more than $5,000, or imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both, except to the extent that a greater sentence is otherwise provided by any other provision of law, as the court deems necessary to deter such abuse of process.

 "Knowingly submits" and "materially false information" are open to interpretation. They may be difficult to prove.  If an email says: "Time to water the Liberty Tree", the phrase may be interpreted by some judges to meet all the requirements to issue one of these ex parte orders.

The person submitting the petition does not have to prove the target has any firearms, or what such firearms might be. 

If granted, the order requires surrender of all firearms and ammunition, immediately.  (Repetition intentional)

In this correspondent's view, the bill is blatantly unconstitutional under the Second Amendment, the Fourteenth Amendment, the Tenth Amendment, and, probably others. 

Several states have passed legislation specifically to prevent such abuse of federal power.

As of this writing, the bill passed the house mere hours ago. It seems unlikely to pass the Senate, where 60 votes would be needed to overcome the filibuster. 

There are squishy Republicans who might feel pressured enough by the Media to vote for this bill. The usual suspects would be:

 Senators Mitt Romney (R-UT), Susan Collins (R-ME), and Lisa Murkowski (R-AK).

Possible additions would be: 

 Bill Cassidy (R-LA), John Cornyn (R-TX), Lindsey Graham (R-SC)

However, Senator Murphy (D-CT) is quoted in CNN as being against a federal Red Flag law: 

 "I think there has been some lingering confusion," Murphy said. "Past proposals have suggested a federal red flag law. I've actually never thought that was a good idea. I don't think you want law enforcement to have to go into the federal courts to take, temporarily, firearms away from a dangerous individual. So we have to clean up some of the confusion around what we are proposing."

Analysis:

At this point, passage of either or both Second Amendment infringing bills (H.R. 7910 and H.R. 2377) passed by the House seem unlikely to pass in the Senate.  

With a budding totalitarian administration in the White House, what seems unlikely becomes more common every day. 

©2022 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice and link are included.

Gun Watch

 

 

 

OR: Bly Mountain Self-Defense Case under Investigation

KLAMATH FALLS, Ore. - At approximately 8:45 AM on Sunday, June 12, 2022, Klamath County Sheriff’s Office deputies along with personnel from Klamath County Fire District 5 and Bonanza Ambulance Service, were dispatched to the 5900 block of Flamingo Dr in the Bly Mountain area east of Bonanza, on a report from an individual that he’d shot someone in self-defense. 

Fire personnel were first to reach the scene and began life-saving efforts on Kyle Alan Majestic Sr., 34, of the Bly Mountain area who succumbed to his injuries. Deputies questioned the responsible individual, who alleged that Majestic came at him swinging a dangerous weapon. 

More Here

TX: Woman Shoots Intruder in her Anahuac Home

A 43-year-old Oak Island woman allegedly broke into a home in Anahuac and assaulted the residents there before being shot by the homeowner’s adult son early Wednesday morning.

More Here

Quick look at H.R.7910, Passed by the House on June 8, 2022

 

 

On Wednesday, June 8, 2022, the House of Representatives passed H.R. 7910, euphemistically titled "Protecting Our Kids Act", 223 for to 204 against. The bill was passed primarily along party lines with Democrats voting for it and Republicans voting against it.

The bill is a collection of long-standing Progressive efforts to restrict American people from having access to some of the most popular rifles and shotguns in the country. 

As has become the norm, Progressives are using a rare, emotional event to push sweeping legislation across the finish line, which could not be done through reasoned debate.

This is precisely the opposite of how legislative decisions should be made. It maximizes the power of the Media to control legislation through emotional manipulation.  The Congressional Budget Office lists the primary effects of the legislation. From the Congressional Budget Office (cbo.com):

H.R. 7910 would change federal gun laws by creating new federal crimes and expanding federal firearms regulations. Specifically, the bill would:

• Raise the purchasing age for semiautomatic rifles from 18 to 21;
• Ban the import, sale, manufacture, transfer, and possession of large-capacity ammunition feeding devices;
• Establish new federal crimes for gun trafficking and straw purchases;
• Require gun owners to meet residential gun storage requirements and establish criminal penalties for violating those requirements;
• Require registration of existing bump-stock-type devices under the National Firearms Act and bar the manufacture, sale, or possession of new bump-stock-type devices for civilian use; and
• Change the definition of “ghost gun” and require background checks on all firearm sales.

Having quickly read the bill, this correspondent notes the bill also raises the purchasing age for semi-auto shotguns. The broad language of the bill would have far reaching effects. From the bill: 

 “(B) any semiautomatic centerfire rifle or semiautomatic centerfire shotgun that has, or has the capacity to accept, an ammunition feeding device with a capacity exceeding 5 rounds, to any individual who the licensee knows or has reasonable cause to believe has not attained 21 years of age and is not a qualified individual; or

The bill would grandfather in existing "large-capacity" ammunition feeding devices.  This shows how ineffective this measure would be. There are hundreds of millions of magazines with capacity of more than five rounds existing in the United States. 

In the "gun trafficking section, the bill bans the gift of firearms between anyone but closely related family members.  

The bill would require all firearms, except those legally in existence prior to 1968, to have a government mandated serial number. Privately made firearms which do not have government approved serial numbers would become contraband.

The bill places "bump stocks" broadly defined, into the same category as National Firearms Act items such as machineguns, short barreled rifles and shotguns, and silencers. 

The sale of all firearms would require approval through the government before being consummated, essentially eliminating the private sale of firearms.  As all firearms other than those manufactured before December, 1968, which were not required to have serial numbers, would be required to have a government approved serial number installed, this creates a potential registration system.

There are some less prominent parts of the bill. It creates a fund for "buy-backs" of ammunition feeding devices. "Buy back" is an Orwellian term. Most of those items were never owned by the government to begin with, so they cannot be "bought back". 

The bill expands the definition of an "undetectable firearm" to any "major component" which is "undetectable" by the previous standards, and exempts government agents from penalties for possession of "undetectable firearms". This may effectively outlaw composite receivers and may outlaw some carbon fiber barrels with a liner.

The bill mandates "safe storage" of firearms in homes where anyone under the age of 18 is living. 

Commentary: 

The overall thrust of the bill is to put the federal government firmly in control of the ownership and sale of firearms in the United States, effectively nullifying the Second Amendment. 

The bill seems unlikely to pass the Senate. The votes of 60 senators would be required to overcome the Senate filibuster rule. 

The danger is some Republicans would cave to the Media pressure to "do something", which always seems to move toward total government control.

©2022 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice and link are included.

Gun Watch

SC: Dead Suspect Appears to have been shot by Homeowner

 

We’re told the coroner’s office and deputies were called to a home on Beacon Light Road in Spartanburg just after midnight. Upon arrival, officials noticed a man lying inside the home.

According to deputies, the suspect appears to have been shot by the homeowner while he was in the process of robbing the house.

 

 More Here

No Effect from "Red Flag" law in California JAMA study

On April 5, 2022, the JAMA (Journal of the American Medical Association) Netw Open published a study attempting to find a reduction in firearms fatal and non-fatal injuries associated with a very aggressive implementation of a "Red Flag" law, also known as a gun violence restraining order or GVRO, in San Diego County, California. 

The results surprised and appear to have shocked them. No statistical association existed, although the data was the most comprehensive to date, and the study was designed to find such an association. 

No such association existed.

The study was funded by various contributions from philanthropic and government sources.  Dr. Garen Wintemute, is the most well known of the authors. It appears most of the analysis was done by Dr. Veronica A. Pear. 

Author Contributions: Dr Pear had full access to all of the data in the study and takes responsibility for the integrity of the data and the accuracy of the data analysis.

It is clear the authors expected to find a statistically significant drop in fatal and non-fatal firearm injuries, both from assault and self harm. If there were an association, this study had the best chance to find it.  From the abstract:

Key Points

Question  Has implementation of the gun violence restraining order law, beginning in 2016, been associated with a reduction in firearm assault or firearm self-harm in San Diego County, California?

Findings  In this cross-sectional study, the gun violence restraining order law was not significantly associated with a reduction in firearm violence of any kind during its first 4 years of implementation, 2016 to 2019.

Meaning  These results suggest that gun violence restraining order implementation did not reduce population-level rates of firearm violence in San Diego County, but future studies should investigate whether there were individual-level benefits to those directly affected.

This correspondent applauds Dr. Pear and her associates for publishing this null result. It shows integrity on their part. 

Analysis: 

There was no examination of the costs of the legislation, which can be significant. JAMA consistently ignores costs of legislation.

Hundreds of people were stigmatized by the Red Flag laws. Many likely lost jobs. Increased depression and loss of trust in the legal system and the rule of law were likely results. The financial cost was likely substantial.

At the minimum, a correlation with the law and reduced firearm injuries and fatalities, has to be shown, or there is no reasonable reason for the law to exist.

There was no correlation.  

Our government was not designed to be run by technocratic "experts".  Experts can be found to provide reasons for any desired policy. The COVID years show we are continually lied to by "experts" "for our own good". 

This means we are lied to by experts for their own reasons.

Public trust in government "experts" has dropped to historically low levels. 

The philosophy of limiting government power is showing its merit.

Many excuses were given as to why no correlation was discovered. 

The usual refrain was brought out. Give us more money and have us do more studies.

The cynical side of this correspondent whispers, if your grant funding depends on finding a correlation, a correlation will be found. 

A recent editorial in JAMA Newt  Open fairly drips with condensation for those who oppose unlimited government power.  JAMA is a quintessential Progressive organization. It sees government action as only in one direction - to do good things. Of course, only Progressives are allowed to define what is good, what is truth, and what is not either good or true.  

The editorial acknowledges the large number of GVROs in San Diego county were driven by "the enthusiasm of the local city attorney," which shows the policy was driven by one person's emotion, ambition, and bias.

Governments and the leadership of JAMA are not made of angels. 

They are humans. Humans are fallible. Humans are swayed by ambition, pride, power, money, and peer group bias.

The Constitution limits government for broad reasons of human nature. By the nature of limited government, some approaches are taken off the table. 

Violating due process is one of the approaches which is supposed to be off the table. 

This study shows any gains from this approach are immeasurably small, if they exist at all.  It is equally possible red flag laws do more harm than good.

Even pure, limited view pragmatism cannot justify this law.

More deference to due process of law should be required, when the law involves the exercise of a fundamental Constitutional right.

The red flag or GVPO laws are invitations for abuse. The courts, thus far, have claimed there is no violation of due process, if Second Amendment rights have only been removed for a year.

Progressives have never valued due process or limited government. Because the Second Amendment limits what governments are allowed to do, antipathy to the Second Amendment is in Progressive DNA. 

This correspondent expects more court cases.  

©2022 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice and link are included.

Gun Watch

OH: Man Justified on Self Defense Convicted for Additional Shots Fired

TOLEDO, Ohio (AP) — A man acquitted last month on grounds of self-defense in the shooting death of a University of Toledo football player after a fight at a Toledo pizza restaurant nearly two years ago has been sentenced to nine to 12 years for three extra shots he fired.

More Here

Wisconsin Supreme Court: Disorderly Conduct is not Domestic Violence

 

In November of 1993, Daniel Doubek was convicted of disorderly conduct in Door County, Wisconsin. There are no existing records of the case, according to the initial brief, other than he was convicted.

 It has been reported Doubek was issued a Wisconsin Concealed Carry permit in 2016. In 2019, Wisconsin revoked the permit, claiming Doubek was ineligible because of the 1993 disorderly conduct conviction, which the Wisconsin DOJ claimed met the federal standard for a domestic violence conviction.

The Wausau Pilot contends there are court records claiming Doubek broke into his estranged wife's trailer in 1993, waiving a board and shouting threats. Those may have been claimed; however Doubek was not charged with or convicted of domestic violence. He was convicted of disorderly conduct. In the brief by Doubek's lawyer, it becomes clear the claims of violence come from a charging document, not from a conviction document. From the brief:

For example, DOJ draws most of its “brute facts” from the charging document. DOJ draws them, however, not from the description of the crime in terms of the elements, but from a narrative that follows, which essentially consists of a regurgitation of a police report from the Door County Sheriff. These facts simply cannot be used.

The Supreme Court of the United States has set a precedent for these sort of cases. What matters is what the person is convicted of, not what they were charged with, or even what actually happened. Using that standard, the Wisconsin Supreme Court found the Wisconsin DOJ had improperly revoked Doubek's Concealed Carry permit. From the court decision: 

Wisconsin law provides that an individual who is prohibited from possessing a firearm under federal law may not hold a license to carry a concealed weapon (CCW license). Federal law, in turn, prohibits firearm possession for anyone who has been convicted of a "misdemeanor crime of domestic violence" under state or federal law. In this case, we address whether a conviction for disorderly conduct under Wis. Stat. § 947.01(1) (2019-20)1 qualifies as a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence. We hold that disorderly conduct is not a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence under federal law, and therefore does not disqualify a person from holding a CCW license.

This makes perfect sense, if we are to be a nation ruled by law, and not by men (or women). 

The Lautenberg Amendment was passed in 1996, three years after Doubek's conviction. Courts have ruled the Lautenberg Amendment is not an Ex Post Facto law, because the penalty is for actions which occur after the law was passed.  Many have argued the restriction of Second Amendment rights is a punishment in itself. 

The Lautenberg Amendment has not resulted in lower rates of intimate partner homicides.  

From 1976 to 1996, the number of intimate partner homicides decreased significantly, particularly among black males and black females. From 1997 to 2019, the numbers have remained flat at about 1300 per year, which would result in a slight decline in rates, given an increasing population. During the same period, the overall homicide rates decreased dramatically until about 2014, then started rising. 

In 1976, the percent of intimate partner homicides committed with firearms was 71%.

In 1996, the percent of intimate partner homicides committed with firearms was 61% . 

In 2013, the percent of intimate partner homicides committed with firearms was 50%.

This correspondent has not found rates beyond 2013.

At the same time, the number of firearms in the United States more than doubled.  1976 140 million (218.4 mil population) .64 per capita to 2013  363 million (316 million) 1.15 per capita.

©2022 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice and link are included.

Gun Watch

AZ: Citizen Stop Crime near Encanto and 83rd Ave

PHOENIX - A suspect has been hospitalized after reportedly being shot during an attempted carjacking in west Phoenix.

Phoenix Police say the incident happened on June 8 near 83rd Avenue and Encanto Boulevard.

More Here

Armed Robbery of "Open" Rifle Carrier, Gunfight, Robber Shot

 

On May 27, 2022, at Clay's Wellston Food Market in Missouri, next to the Illinois border on the east side of St. Louis, a man "openly carrying" an AR15 type rifle, under a jacket, with a "gun sleeve" on the rifle, was accosted by an armed man who approached him from behind and demanded the rifle and the jacket. From ksdk.com:

Major Ron Martin with the North County Police Cooperative spoke to 5 On Your Side after the shooting. He said that moments before the shooting, a customer with a rifle had entered the grocery store.

Martin said the patron was "open carrying" the rifle in a gun sleeve underneath an article of clothing and did not threaten anyone while inside the store.

The robbery did not go well for the robber, who turned out to be a career criminal. It seems the owner of the rifle objected to the theft. Strenuously. With gunfire. From fox2now.com:

According to court documents obtained by FOX2, surveillance footage captured Booker putting a gun to the head of the rifle-toting individual before he took the AR-15 and a jacket. The footage also showed him wielding a pistol he possessed, in addition to the stolen AR-15 rifle while several others were present.

Police say the victim of the stolen rifle fired shots at Booker, who was struck multiple times. That victim left the scene, but police believe another man returned moments later and also shot the man who took the rifle.

Officers found Booker laying in front of the store with several gunshot wounds. He was treated for his injuries at a hospital. Authorities served a warrant for Booker’s arrest on Tuesday. Booker is scheduled for an arraignment hearing in the case for June 6. 

Fox2now.com reported Brooker is identified as a felon by Missouri court records, and has a long criminal rap sheet.

Unfortunately this correspondent has not been able to locate a video of the event. By the description, there are several ways an AR15 type rifle could be both "underneath an article of clothing" and "in a gun sleeve", and described as "open carry". Neither of the options are common ways to "open carry". To this correspondent, they appear uninspired attempts at clumsy concealment. As Missouri has Constitutional Carry, it does not matter very much in the eyes of the law.

A gun sleeve is a less used term for a gun case or gun sock.  There are many ways an AR15 rifle might be carried "in a gun sleeve" and "under an article of clothing".

Here are a couple of pictures of how it might have been done, as considered by this correspondent: 

 

Two of many possibilities of carrying an AR15 in a "gun sleeve" "under an article of clothing"

 

One article reported the victim retrieved the rifle and left with it; another said the second man who shot Brooker took the rifle with him. Neither of the men who shot the robber appears to have been wounded, but two bystanders where hit with stray bullets. From insider.com:  

The victim fled with his rifle while the accused robber, who had been shot several times, remained on the scene. A third man then also shot him, police said.

Clay's Wellston Market has been reported as a hotspot for crime, serious trouble and drug dealing. A police officer was killed there on June 23 of 2019.  From ksdk.com:

In fact, Martin said officers have received more than 1,200 calls for service to the location in the last year and a half.

"Disturbances, property damage, bad checks, shots heard, stolen vehicle, 911 hang up," Martin said as he read through a list of police logs from November 2017 to July 2019.

The offenses during that time, he said, range from quality of life crimes like panhandling and intoxicated subjects to violent felonies like shootings and fighting.

"If you pull up the Missouri criminal code, I can tell you every crime listed in there has probably happened at this location," Martin said.

On June 23, the problem hit close to home.

That's the day Martin's coworker and brother in blue, Officer Michael Langsdorf, was shot and killed in the line of duty. 

Bad things happen in criminal hotspots. Even there, criminals refrain from murder when a threat of death will do, and there are numerous witnesses. It did not work out well for Mr. Brooker. Confronting an armed man, and threatening them with death, is a very high risk scenario. If criminals or other predators misjudge such risks, they do not last long.

If we are able to see the video, we can make a better determination of how the rifle was carried and what happened. 

©2022 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice and link are included.

Gun Watch

Juror Perspective from the Kyle Rittenhouse Trial in Kenosha

Kenosha Judge Bruce Schroeder (Photo by Kevin Mathewson, Kenosha County Eye)

The trial of Kyle Rittenhouse was covered extensively on AmmoLand by this correspondent. During coverage, Kevin Mathesin of the Kenosha County Eye provided wonderful insight.  Six months after the trial, Mathesin interviewed one of the jurors who was on the Rittenhose Jury.

As many may remember, the jury found Kyle Rittenhouse not guilty on all counts, because he was acting in justified self defense. Judge Schroeder had ruled the weapons charge was not valid.  The result was expected for those who had followed the case. Many attorneys believed the prosecution should never have brought charges at all. The numerous videos of the action where Kyle defended himself, were unambiguous. 

Keven Mathesin has graciously allowed this correspondent to use his article at AmmoLand.  The insight shows the basic structure of the jury system works as it should, when populated by people who believe in doing the correct thing with honor. Quotes from the Kenosha County Eye are in italics. From the Eye:

A woman over 50 who served as a juror in the Kyle Rittenhouse case spoke exclusively to Kenosha County Eye Monday night. We will call her Kimberly. Kimberly came across as genuine and kind. She kept all of her answers to our questions very positive. Kimberly told KCE many times times how proud she was of her fellow jurors. “I am very proud of our work. Justice prevailed.”

“Judge Schroeder told us to put away everything we’ve heard and read about the case and decide only based on the evidence seen in court. I thought long and hard about that, and I was able to do it., with honor,” Kimberly said confidently. This was Kimberly’s first ever time serving on a jury and she remembers hearing the same from many of the other jurors as well.

Kimberly didn’t have anything negative to say about any of the lawyers from either side. She did, however tell us that she thought Judge Bruce Schroeder got an “A+” for his overseeing of the case. During the long trial, which Kimberly described as “intense”, Kimberly wanted to act with honor and deliver the right verdict.

Many observers were concerned about how long the jury took to reach a decision. This correspondent wrote, at the time, the jury instructions were long and complicated, and could take some time for the jury to figure out and understand. Kimberly confirms the observation. 

When asked about the length of deliberations, Kimberly told us that the jury “went through the thirty-some pages of jury instructions sentence by sentence and every piece of evidence with a fine toothed comb. Every time you watch a video again, you see something new.”

During the trial, many people suspected one or more jurors were holding out for a conviction of some kind. The juror Kimberly, implies such was not the case. Rather, the case was very complicated with numerous charges and the extremely complex jury instructions. Kimberly says the jury was 100% confident in the decision.

“In my opinion, every member of the jury, all 12 of us were 100% confident in our decision.” said Kimberly. Now that 6 months have passed since the trial started, Kimberly still stands by the jury’s verdict, saying “This case renewed my faith in the Judicial System. When followed properly, [the Judicial System] makes me proud to live in this country.”

Kimberly also debunked the idea that jurors were concerned about meals, or of the jury hearing shouting in the courtroom: 

Kimberly assured us that the rumor of the Jury waiting for the pizza on the final day of deliberations was just a coincidence. “I didn’t even remember the last meal we ate together, but they fed us well.” Another rumor that Kimberly was able to squash is that the jury heard Schroeder’s multiple admonishments of the prosecution. “Even in the library, we didn’t hear anything in the court room, even when we stopped chatting. We didn’t hear any yelling, ever”

In this day of cancel culture, Kimberly showed courage in granting an interview, even anonymously. Everyone can profit by the information she offers as to what happened in the Kenosha jury room. From the Eye: 

Kimberly’s generous decision to grant us an interview is appreciated and her attitude can be summed up as positive and optimistic. She said many times how proud she was of the 12 jurors that decided the fate of Rittenhouse. “He’s a young man with his whole life ahead of him and I wish him luck.” she said.

Opinion:

The safeguard of the jury system depends on jurors such as Kimberly, who take their duty seriously.  This correspondent believes all jurors should be educated about jury duty, with its responsibilities and powers, long before they are selected to be on a jury. The public schools have failed to do so. The Fully Informed Jury Association is a good resource for education on the power and responsibilities of juries.

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

Gun Watch