Dr. at Airport with AR15 Cleared: Police said "see if they're willing to be a victim."

A few months ago, Dr. Steinmetz decided to make a political statement by carrying a slung AR15 type rifle at the Phoenix Airport.  Enforcers at the Airport decided that they would punish his statement.  Because of surveillance video, it became clear that Dr. Steinmetz had not broken any law.   Instead, it was likely that the police had broken the law with false arrest.

This did not put Dr. Steinmetz in the clear.  Prosecutors have extremely strong immunity.   They can make your life miserable for months and years, and not face any consequences, especially if they have the backing of the old media.    A Phoenix TV Anchor said that it would be justified to shoot rifle carriers.  County Attorney Bill Montgomery was in a fairly tight spot.   There were no real crimes that he could charge Dr. Steinmetz with, but the powers that be in Phoenix wanted some sort of punishment.   It took months to work out a deal.  Virtually no punishment for the Dr., but perhaps more importantly, no punishment for the Prosecutor, either, or the police, that they admit to.  County Attourney Bill Montgomery is quoted in azcentral.com:

 "I watched the videotape," Montgomery told reporters during a scheduled biweekly news conference. "I watched people grab their children and walk the other way to get away from him, and if his powers of observation are that weak, he should probably lock his weapons up in a gun safe and hide the key and forget where it is."

I talked to Dr. Steinmetz, and he says that the actions noted by County Attorney Bill Montgomery did not occur until after six police officers started to follow him:

"I think six police officers, walking down, like that, following me, draws a lot of attention.  At this point they (visitors) started doing the things that Bill Montgomery describes."

Shortly later, one of the officers, Dr. Steinmetz says, asked, rather sarcastically,

Do you mind if we hang with you, to protect your rights, and all?

Dr. Steinmetz then found a place to sit down, with plenty of room for the six officers.  The officers remained standing and started discussing how they might arrest the Doctor. According to Dr. Steinmetz, one of them said:

"Go and check with those people over there, and see if they're willing to be a victim."

Less than a minute after that, Dr. Steinmetz was arrested. The complete statements of the "victims" have not been released to the public.

Dr. Steinmetz does not admit to any wrong doing, but will donate $500 to  the Salado Sportsman's Club.  He also agreed not to openly carry in area airports for two years.   He may still legally carry a concealed firearm.  From courierpostonline.com:

Marc Victor, Steinmetz's lawyer, said the county attorney's decision validated his client's actions and proved that he never broke the law.

"To charge him with a crime when he didn't commit a crime would be outrageous," Victor said. "And so it's a fair and reasonable result because it doesn't put any kind of requirements that are onerous on my client."

Victor said airport surveillance video shows that Steinmetz was carrying his gun peacefully and legally.

Here is an article with a link to the video showing that Dr. Steinmetz did not point his rifle at anyone, as was first reported.

It is bad that someone who did no harm and violated no laws, can still be put under pressure by a prosecutor.   In this case, the harm is relatively small.    I give the good Doctor some credit.   He made his point and came away without serious harm.   He has a great deal to lose.   I am not so impressed with the airport security, who seem intent on showing "who is in charge".   I would have liked to see some serious retraining required.

Dr. Steinmetz says that no civil suits are pending at this time.

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

Reese Family Sentencing

In a stunning blow to the federal government’s case against the Reese family in the New Deal case, Judge Robert Brack imposed the following sentence:

• Time Served
• 3 years supervised release
• $100 fine per count of conviction
• Random drug testing
• DNA samples
• Refrain from alcohol use or possession of alcohol
• Random home/vehicle search
• No gun ownership

He informed them they have the right to appeal his sentence.

The government had originally sought the maximum sentence of five years each for Rick and Terri Reese, plus an additional few years for testifying in their own defense at trial, which was considered by the government to be “obstruction of justice”.  The government conceded they could not seek more than the max of five years.  The government also sought to have Ryin Reese received the maximum sentence of five years.

Rick and Ryin served 17 months in prison and were released when Judge Brack ordered a new trial after information came out that the government failed to inform the judge, and hence the jury, that a key witness in the case, Deputy Alan Batts, had been the subject of an investigation concerning allegations of corruption for nearly a decade.  Batts was never charged with any crime.

Terri Reese served 7 months and was released on bond early to help defense attorneys prepare for trial.

Over forty family, friends and supporters packed nearly the entire courtroom gallery to listen to arguments from the prosecution on why the Reeses should receive the maximum sentence.  Defense attorneys argued to have the charges reduced to a misdemeanor claiming that Congress wrote statutes that apply to FFLs, Federal Firearms Licensees, making violations of Form 4473 a misdemeanor.  The government claimed they have the option to prosecute under either felony or misdemeanor statutes.

Curiously, AUSA Maria Armijo repeated a number of times during the proceedings that the government was not on trial today and that the government should not be punished – presumably by having the judge impose a lower sentence than the maximum penalty.  Nothing was found in the pleadings reviewed that would explain why she might think the government was on trial today.

Ultimately, Judge Brack agreed with the prosecution that it is the prosecutor’s option on whether to charge FFLs under either a felony statute or a misdemeanor statute.  He was not swayed by the novel defense arguments that defendants have the right to choose which statutes to be sentenced under.

AUSA Armijo attempted to have Judge Brack ignore the many character letters he had received in support of the Reeses.  Family and friends pointed out how the Reeses were, she informed, and did not address their actions during the case.   She also argued that the judge should consider all of the behavior associated with the 26 counts the Reeses were acquitted of when imposing a sentence.

In essence, this observer felt that AUSA Armijo was arguing that the government knows that the Reeses were guilty of all counts charged, and that the judge should ignore the legal system that our country was founded on -  a system where the jury is the finder of fact – not the government or the judge.  The effect of this line of argument makes the prosecution the policeman, prosecutor, jury and judge.  To a certain degree, the government is used to this result when they pressure defendants into pleading guilty or plea bargaining a reduced sentence in exchange for snitching on someone else.  Guilty pleas avoid trials, and therefore avoid exposing any deficiencies in the evidence against defendants.  Plea bargaining also skews statistics towards high conviction rates.

Fortunately, Judge Brack decided that in this case the circumstances favored time served.  He noted the Reeses had been law abiding citizens all of their lives.  They had operated New Deal for many years without incident and had been long time residents.  They are a close family, and the case had served them a heavy toll.  Their business has been destroyed, and their property subjected to forfeiture.  He reiterated a statement from a prior proceeding:  the Reeses are not a danger to the public.

The defense had asked the judge to consider a downward variance to to time served if the judge did not sentence them under the misdemeanor statutes.  In this case, Judge Brack explained, the downward variance to the sentencing is appropriate.

Rick Reese, the owner of New Deal Shooting Sports in Deming, NM was convicted of one count of a Form 4473 paperwork violation.  His wife, Terri Reese, was convict one count of a Form 4473 paperwork violation.  Ryin Reese was convicted of two counts of Form 4473 paperwork violations.  The Reese family (including their youngest son Remington) was originally charged with 30 federal counts, including international gun smuggling, international money laundering, conspiracy in addition to the paperwork violations.  Judge Brack threw out the money laundering charge during trial based on no evidence presented during trial.  The jury acquitted them of the conspiracy and gun smuggling charges.  Remington was acquitted on all counts.

In the immediate aftermath of Brian Terry’s murder, the Fast and Furious case in Arizona, the Columbus case in New Mexico, and Agent Zapata’s murder in Texas, the government proceeded to spend millions and millions of taxpayer dollars investigating and prosecuting the Reeses.  Some two hundred agents raided their home and business properties over a one week period the week of their arrests.  The government seized most of their valuable property and is attempting to keep it all in a civil forfeiture case.

Ironically, AUSA Maria Armijo characterized the Reeses as “greedy” for selling their firearms for a profit.

Prior to Judge Brack pronouncing the sentence, each of the Reese attorneys spoke about their clients and positive things the judge should consider when deciding their sentence.  AUSA Armijo continued to reiterate examples of behavior associated with counts of acquittal.  Defense attorney Cory Harbour-Valdez also made a point by point comparison of the differences between Ian Garland, the FFL in the Columbus case, and the Reese family.  The most notable difference was that Garland had pled guilty to selling 193 firearms to cartel smugglers, whereas the Reeses pled not guilty and their case involved at the most 35 firearms.

Rick, Terri and Ryin, dressed smartly in business suits, addressed Judge Brack.  None of them admitted guilt for the counts of conviction, although Judge Brack did attempt to solicit admissions of guilt and remorse.  Rick admitted that he should have realized that there was a problem with Jose Roman, however, he simply didn’t realize there was a problem.  He also pointed out that he had been selling firearms on the border for 25 years without problems.  The only firearms that he is aware that have turned up at Mexican crime scenes were the ones purchased by Penny Torres.

Now that sentencing is over, if there are no more appeals or motions in the criminal case, the government will start the scheduling process in the civil case.  Should the government win the civil forfeiture case, each law enforcement agency involved will divvy up the proceeds of the Reese’s property and one or more individual law enforcement officers will receive individual bonuses.

It is not known if the outcome of the criminal case will affect the civil forfeiture case.  That case is expected to be scheduled sometime before the summer 2015.

Pretty much across the board, family, friends and supporters of the Reeses believe that the Reeses were targeted as a scapegoat, as a diversion away from the government scandals related to Fast and Furious which involved thousands of firearms walked to the Mexican cartel, and the Columbus case, which involved hundreds of firearms. Those Columbus case firearms are also believed to have been walked to the Mexican cartel since the ATF and Border Patrol stopped the  main straw purchaser/smuggler at the beginning of 2010 in a vehicle that contained firearms purchased by both Fast & Furious subjects and multiple straw purchasers in the Columbus case.  Some of those firearms turned up at Mexican crime scenes shortly after the stop in Palomas, Mexico.

Not including the firearms purchased in the undercover sting, the Reese case involved approximately 35 firearms – all purchased by straw purchaser Penny Torres and her brother.  Torres admitted on the witness stand that the Reeses had no knowledge they were straw purchasing on behalf of cartel member Jose Roman.
The government claimed the Reeses are the ones to blame for the deaths in Mexico.
Stay tuned.

 Source

Latest 3D Printed Hybrid Design: Cartridge/barrel Integration

Image by Michael Crumbling




The latest 3D printed hybrid uses an old but useful concept: pre-loaded interchangeable chambers/barrels/cartridges.   The cartridge itself has sufficient strength to contain the pressures necessary for propelling a projectile, and is sufficiently long enough to result in a velocity that is useful.

Michael Crumling has created a relatively small round, the .314 Atlas, to demonstrate the concept as used with a 3D printed mechanism.   Here is a video link showing his system being fired:

Link to video at Wired

The extractor groove is likely included to make priming the cartridges easy.

I have thought of this concept myself and it has considerable possibilities for hybrid designs.   Designers need not be limited to a relatively anemic .314 ball projectiles, or to primer activated systems.   The system could easily use percussion caps or electrical ignition.    A simple electrical ignition system could use model airplane engine glow plugs.

As Michael has noted, such cartridges could easily be used in a revolver.   I mentioned such a concept with the hybrid Imura revolver.

You do not need to machine the chamber/barrel/cartridges from scratch.  You could much more easily use common water pipe as the basis for the cartridge, using common taps and drills and commercially available plugs to create the chamber/cartridges.  and have a more practical and powerful system.   Nominal 1/4 inch Schedule 40 pipe has an interior diameter of .364, a very useable caliber.   Nominal 3/8" Schedule pipe has an ID of .493, a nice round ball pistol size.   Nominal 1/2" schedule 40 has an ID of .622, almost exactly 20 gauge.    Mare the cartridge 3.5 inches long, and you would have two inches of usable barrel.  Each chamber/cartridge would then be smaller than a magnum 12 gauge cartridge.

As with Michael's concept, the 3D printer need only supply a usable handle and a firing mechanism.   Even a single barrel/shot design is useful for self defense.  Such designs were used by European armies for centuries.  Add the quick reload possibility of a few spare barrels/cartridges, and the concept is quite practical.   Single shot designs are common in India's black market pistols.

We will likely see more hybrid concepts surface with time and experience.

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

Vermont man Found not guilty in Shooting; Initial Report Inaccurate

Trader Fred's of Thetford, Vermont

On the first of November, a jury in Vermont found Thomas Berecz not guilty on  all counts.  He had been charged with aggravated assault, a felony, and two misdemeanor counts of reckless endangerment.   The jury took about three hours to make their finding.  The trial concerned events that had happened over four years ago.   To show how initial reporting can be very wrong, consider this report from 2010:    From ourherald.com: 16 Sept, 2010

State Police investigated and said that Fred Berecz, 62, and his son Thomas, 41, fired at the Jetta and its two passengers as it passed near Trader Fred’s, a business owned by Berecz.

The Jetta, it was reported, suffered a tire blowout and shattered windows, with multiple bullet holes elsewhere in the vehicle. James Moses Jr., 21, of Thetford was struck by a shotgun pellet in his leg. His cousin, Kyle Moses, 22, of White River Junction, was not hurt.

Police said that the Berecz father and son used both a 30-30 rifle and a .38 pistol.

 Now consider the police report from the previous day.   From Vermont State Police  Headquarters, 15 Sept, 2010:

The following subjects have been identified as having been involved in this matter:

James Moses Jr., age 23 of Thetford and Kyle Moses, age 22 of White River Jct. were the occupants of the vehicle that arrived at the residence of Fred Berecz, age 62 of Thetford. Fred Berecz's son, Thomas Berecz, age 41, of Thetford was also present at his father's house at the time of the incident.

Initial investigation is showing that there has been past tension between the factions named above. James Moses Jr. and Kyle Moses drove onto the property of the Berecz residence and stopped their car near the attached garage of the residence. Both Thomas and Fred Berecz were outside the residence having seen the vehicle approach. Thomas Berecz fired a 30-30 rifle at the vehicle, Fred Berecz fired a .38 pistol at the vehicle. Both Fred and Thomas Berecz reported that they believed that shots had been fired from the vehicle. Initial investigation has not shown that neither James Moses or Kyle Moses fired a weapon or had possession of a weapon. The vehicle driven by Kyle Moses, a 2001 Volkswagen Jetta, was hit multiple times by gunshots.

The processing of the scene at the Berecz residence and the Volkswagen Jetta has been completed. The case is being forwarded to the Orange County State's Attorney's Office for review.

Sgt. Tara Thomas

Public Information Officer

Vermont State Police - Headquarters

 I do not know where the initial reporter found the information reported, but it differs from the police report in numerous significant ways.   There is a world of difference between people firing at a vehicle passing by on the street, and firing at a vehicle that comes onto their property and stops.   The Berecz always maintained that the Moses had fired at them from the Jetta, and that they were acting in self defense.  The initial police report from 14 September reflects that fact.

On 09/14/10, Troopers from the Bradford and Royalton barracks responded to a report of a shooting at 4470 Vermont Route 132 in the town of Thetford. Initial reports were that subjects in a vehicle at this location and subjects in a residence at this location had exchanged gunfire.

More than four years later, a jury found the Berecz' story credible enough to find Thomas not guilty of all charges.   From vnews.com:  4 November, 2014

The defense argued that the total number of bullets fired that night couldn’t have come just from Fred Berecz’s revolver and Thomas Berecz’s rifle. Fred Berecz accepted a plea agreement in 2012, in which he pleaded no contest to a charge of reckless endangerment and served 30 days on a work crew.

The defense said the guns together could have fired nine shots, and that given the brevity of the gunfire — less than 10 seconds — there was no time to reload. The defense said more than nine bullet impacts were found at the scene that night and that the additional shots had to have been fired from the vehicle, which was occupied by James Moses Jr., who suffered a leg wound, and his cousin, Kyle Moses, who was unharmed.

 Over the last four years, the older Berecz accepted a plea deal to take 30 days in jail on a reckless endangerment charge.   A judge refused a similar plea deal for  Thomas, which lead to the jury trial.  It is easy to understand the intense pressure to "cop a plea" even if you believe you are innocent.   30 days in jail on a misdemeanor charge vs potential years in jail and a felony conviction.

I was not there that night in September of 2010, when gun fire broke out.   The Berecz had feared the Moses boys and had asked a court to intervene, prior to the shooting.   The Vetta was searched miles from the scene of the shooting.  Later, one prosecutor refused to work with the Moses.

Kelly, the Washington County State’s Attorney, took over the prosecution in 2011 when Orange County State’s Attorney Will Porter withdrew from the case, citing an “irretrievable breakdown in relations” with the victims.

The stark differences in the initial media report compared to the police report serves as a reminder to be skeptical of early reports.  

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

TN: Real .45 vs 9mm; Homeowner Wins Gunfight

Metro police said the homeowner complied, but the gunman demanded more. The homeowner said as the gunman was “dealing with the wife,” he left the room and retrieved a .45 caliber pistol.

The gunman then allegedly raised his 9 millimeter pistol toward the homeowner, who opened fire.

More Here

Open Carry is Coming to Texas: Governor Elect Abbot to Keep Promise

Both Governor candidates in Texas endorsed the concept of legal open carry of modern pistols.   The open carry of long guns is protected by the Texas Constitution, and the open carry of antique pistols is allowed under current Texas law.   The conventional wisdom is that once elected, candidates avoid campaign promises.   Governor elect Abbot did not back away from his promise on open carry.  From dailytexanonline.com:

Abbott also said if legislation allowing firearms to be carried openly in public came to him, he would sign it into law.

“If open carry is good enough for Massachusetts, it's good enough for the state of Texas,” Abbott said.

 Opponents of open carry were weakened by the Texas legislative elections.  Wendy Davis' seat went to a Tea Party conservative, Konni Burton.     The new Texas state senator is an open carry supporter.   Dan Patrick, the new Lt. Governor, which is a powerful position in Texas government, says that he will fight for open carry on his campaign web page.

The prohibition of open carry of modern handguns is a historical anomaly in Texas.  Governor elect Abbot referred to it by mentioning that open carry is legal in even most states that are less supportive of the second amendment.

The major question is: will the open carry bill be a licensed open carry, or a constitutional open carry, with no permit required, as exists in most other states.?

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

Alabama Amendment 3 Passes with 72 Percent of the Vote

One of the constitutional amendments up for a vote in 2014 was Amendment 3 in Alabama.  The amendment was intended to strengthen the already strong protection of the right to keep and bear arms in the Alabama Constitution.   The wording to be replaced seems clear:

Text of Section 26:
Right to Bear Arms

“	That every citizen has a right to bear arms in defense of himself and the state.[1][2]

But courts in some states have claimed that the right to bear arms in defense of self was, in fact quite limited, either to location, such as only in the home, or to circumstances, such as only when under immediate identifiable threat.   Other courts have said that such language is subject to low standards of judicial review, such as rational basis, or intermediate scrutiny, which allow legislatures to infringe on and limit rights that courts have deemed to be less than fundamental.

To prevent such judicial downgrading of what most Alabamians considered to be  a clear and fundamental right, Amendment 3 was designed to change the State Constitution to direct courts to treat the right as fundamental and to apply strict scrutiny as the correct judicial standard.

Opponents of the issue stated that the language was already clear, and that applying current judicial verbiage only opened the door to weakening of constitutional protections in the future.   Here is the wording of Amendment 3:

"(a) That every Every citizen has a fundamental right to bear arms in defense of himself or herself and the state. Any restriction on this right shall be subject to strict scrutiny.

(b) No citizen shall be compelled by any international treaty or international law to take an action that prohibits, limits, or otherwise interferes with his or her fundamental right to keep and bear arms in defense of himself or herself and the state, if such treaty or law, or its adoption, violates the United States Constitution."^[4]

Alabama voters overwhelmingly accepted the intent to box in the judiciary with the language of Amendment 3.   It passed with over 72% of the vote.  With 98% of the precincts reporting, it had 72.5% of the vote.   The exact number will be available in a day or two.

Alabama follows on the heels of a Missouri amendment that passed with 61 percent of the vote, which continued the trend of Kansas and  Louisiana.   The Louisiana measure passed with 74% of the vote; the Kansas amendment passed with 88% .  Wisconsin was the last state to add an amendment, instead of strengthening an existing one.  The Wisconsin amendment passed in 1998 with 74% of the vote.    It is clear that legislators are listening to grassroots support of these efforts.

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

David Codrea: Document dump shows State had a hand in 'Fast and Furious' redactions

With the Senate in Republican hands, maybe this investgation can finally hold people accountable.

With the media and engaged citizens focused on critical mid-term elections, the Department of Justice turned over 64,000 pages of documents related to Operation Fast and Furious that it had previously claimed executive privilege for, the House Committee on Oversight and Government Responsibility announced Tuesday. Per the committee release, the production of the documents, compelled by court order, is further evidence the administration had no legitimate reasons for withholding them in the first place consistent with the purposes behind executive privilege, and their withholding was part of a continued effort to avoid disclosures “that embarrass or otherwise implicate senior Obama Administration officials.”

More Here 

Dave Workman: Billionaire-backed gun control measure wins in Washington

Evergreen State gun control proponents are celebrating passage of the billionaire-backed Initiative 594 while gun rights advocates supporting rival Initiative 591 are wondering what comes next as Tuesday night ballot returns point to a loss for their measure.

At the headquarters of the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms, grassroots activists are taking some consolation in the change of power in Washington, D.C., and what appears to be continued Republican control of the State Senate, and the fact that I-591 won in a majority of the state's counties. But now the test will be whether the new law will be enforced, or whether it will be unenforceable, as many in law enforcement have contended. While Second Amendment activists were disappointed, gun prohibitionists were partying.

More Here

LA:Attacker takes Gun, Shoots, Misses, uses Car

Suspected Attacker

 Sometimes a victim manages to take a gun from an attacker.   Less often, an attacker takes a gun from the victim.   In this case, the attacker took the gun, tried to shoot the victim, but missed.  It started when the aggressor attacked a neighbor.   From thenewsstar.com:

According to the police report, Smith began banging the victim’s head on the concrete saying repeatedly, “I’m going to kill you.” The victim reported losing consciousness as Smith gained his keys.

The second victim grabbed his pistol, and drove across the street to aid his neighbor.  The area is fairly rural, so the houses are not close. 

Victim two said when he feared Smith was killing the first victim, he pointed the gun at Smith and demanded he get on the ground.

Smith reportedly attacked victim two, knocking him to the ground kicking and hitting him. Smith eventually took the gun away from victim two. According to the police report, Smith pointed the gun at victim two’s head and pulled the trigger, but the bullet missed him. He repeatedly told victim two that he was going to kill him.

Another source reports that the attacker tried to shoot again, but the gun would not fire.  The attacker then takes victim two's car, drives over victim two, then backs over him again, and then goes after victim two's wife, who is monitoring events from across the street.    The wife dodges into the carport before the car strikes her but is still run over.   The attacker then runs off into the woods.  

View of scene from above

This appears to be a case of misapplication of Tuco's rule:  When you have to shoot, shoot, don't talk!   When the brain is engaged in talking, there is a transition period to make the decision to shoot.   In this case, it was disastrous.  It can be overcome with practice.   It is also helpful to have armed backup.  

Another lesson is that even if an attacker gets your gun, it is not the end of the fight.  He may not know how to use it.   He may miss.     The literature has many examples where aggressors were incompetent with grabbed guns.

The suspect was captured shortly after, but a lot of damage had been done.  Victim number two had to be airlifted to another hospital and remains there as of the last report that I found.


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

TX: Homeowner Shoots at Burglar

GALVESTON — A Galveston homeowner fired a shot from a 9 mm pistol in response to a home invasion just past midnight Monday, police reported. 

More Here

MT:Grizzly Shooting Justified

THOMPSON FALLS – No charges will be filed against a deer hunter who said he shot a grizzly bear to death in self-defense in the Lower Thompson River area on Oct. 26.

Warden Capt. Lee Anderson of Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks commended the unidentified man for contacting the agency quickly after the shooting.

More Here

OR: Man Uses Gunfire to Chase off Intruder

Officers responded to the 4800 block of Northeast 106th Avenue around 11:08 p.m. on a report that a man entered a mobile home where he was confronted by the owner who had a handgun. The man fled the mobile home, and the resident fired the gun, police said.

More Here

I voted. With a "Gun Guy" hat

I did not have an NRA hat, so I used the Gun Guy hat that I was given at the Shot Show.   No one blinked or so much as suggested that it was inappropriate.   Of course, this was Arizona.

If I-594 wins in Washington, we will see an assualt on our rights here by billionaires working hard to buy an election by misinforming low information voters.

I have seen it happen before.   If people do not know much about an issue, they can easily be swayed by slick ads.

The old media has been a powerful force in moving the country toward the "progressive" goal of an all powerful government.

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

Great video on 22 shot rifle from 200 Years ago, with speedloaders

H/T to mynameisfoxtrot.com.   Source

TheGunwire.com Reported Down and Dead

I have followed and used TheGunWire.com for a good while.  It has been a great resource for gun related stories.   They seemed to be doing well.  They had lots of ads, the site was very busy.  

But, I know nothing about how the site was run, who ran it, or how many people were involved.  I am sad to see it go.     I have not seen any updating of the site for over a month. Here is confirmation from TheHighRoad.org.  Bshepherd writes:

I sent them a message on Facebook. They said they are done! Don't know what happened. 

Tcruse writes:

 I have used thegunfeed.com as a replacement for a source of gun news. It is almost the same but is not as polished as thegunwire was. Sorry to see it go, you would think that the revenue would be such that another group would want to pay to take over the site.

Here is a link to thegunfeed.com

Full disclosure.   Thegunfeed.com regularly carries Gun Watch articles.

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

MI: School Advocating SWATting as Policy?

In Michigan, it is legal for people who have a concealed carry permit to openly carry firearms on school grounds and into schools.   It is illegal for them to carry concealed firearms on  school grounds or into schools.   Some second amendment supporters have exercised their rights by carrying their personal defensive firearms openly while picking up their children or visiting schools for other reasons. 

Banning guns from schools is a relatively recent  phenomena.  The idea started being pushed about 1990.   There was never any validity to it as a safety measure.   Mass shootings in schools have only gone up since the federal law was passed.   What is clear is that this is an  attempt to delegitimize gun ownership and second amendment rights in the eyes of children and society as a whole.   It is primarily an indoctrination measure, and as George Orwell noted, a primary virtue of party operatives is the ability to effectively lie to themselves.

The Huron Valley Schools have a parent who is exercising his second amendment rights while visiting his child's school.   The school administration has said that they will call 911 and go into lockdown when he legally open carries on school grounds.

This comes very close to SWATting.   The school administration knows  the parent involved.   They know that what he is doing is legal.   Yet they insist on calling 911 and going into emergency procedures, including lockdown, when he exercises his rights.   I suspect that they would not do so if a person wearing a uniform and a gun came on school grounds.  Police commit more crimes than people with concealed carry permits.  To show the cognitive dissonance involved, when they call  911, they are asking that people with guns come on school grounds.   From wxyz.com:

The district will now discuss its options at a school board meeting Monday night. For now, Huron Valley Schools say any instance of open carry will implement its emergency procedures, which includes calling 911, and having an officer approval the entry of the individual with the firearm

“What we would do is we would apply our emergency procedures in the instance that someone chooses to open carry," said Kim Root, Director Of Community Relations for Huron Valley Schools. "For example whenever someone chooses to open carry on school grounds, we would apply our emergency procedures which would include going on lockdown.”

This is equivalent to a two year old throwing a tantrum when they do not get their way.   What should happen is for the legislature to eliminate the ban on guns in schools.    When we did not have the ban, we had fewer problems.

Banning guns in schools does not make students safer.   It only teaches them to disrespect the  rule of law and the Constitution.

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

Dozens of Black Market Pistols Made in small shops in India

Here is a fantastic article from the firearmsblog:

Homemade firearms have long featured strongly in Indian criminology. Known locally as Kattas or tamanchas, these crude handmade pistols account for up to 30% of firearms related crime. According to the National Crime Records Bureau, their use is continuing an upward trend with around 75% of gun homicides in the capital being carried out using homemade weapons. Almost all examples are smooth bore, sometimes utilizing a sanitation pipe or automobile steering shaft as a barrel. As well as 12 gauge, many are notably chambered in the 8x50mm mannlicher /.315 bore and British .303, both very common cartridges in the region. The designs themselves are typically influenced by old British flare pistol patents, such as the Webley MKIII.

In India, acquiring a legally owned and licenced pistol can cost up to 63,000 INR, assuming you can convince the police of your need to possess one. This being far beyond what the average individual can afford, the alternative cheap and disposable country made pistol costs between merely 500 and 1500 INR – the obvious choice for many.

More here, many wonderful pictures

Woman Planted Pistol in Child's Backpack, then Called School

Hodges

I suspect this sort of activity has been common in the war on drugs.   But this is the first case that I have heard where it has been documented that a gun was planted on a child so as to get them in trouble with school authorities.   It would of course, be even easier to do so with a few cartridges, and much less traceable.   From yourhoustonnews.com:

A 28-year-old woman was sentenced Thursday to three years in prison for planting a pistol in a child’s backpack and anonymously reporting him to the school.

Heather Hodges was the live in girlfriend of the boys father.   The boy is 13, and suspected that Hodges had planted the gun in his backpack.    Fortunately, one investigator believed him.   From Investigator Mike Price:

“He was so consistent with his story and he came across so sincere, not just emotionally, but how he just stayed with his story and would not waver from it, that my position was that there’s something to this. I was the lone wolf at that point.”

It is a good thing that Ms. Hodges was discovered and prosecuted.   Perhaps it will act as a deterrent to others.    Serious investigative work was involved.  The "anonymous" call was recorded and the voice compared to Hodges.   Her car was placed at the location the call was made from.    Eventually, she confessed. 

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

Guns Banned in Yellowstone Park Restrooms for "National Security" Reasons

 The above sign was reported outside public restrooms in Yellowstone Park, by stephenwright.com.

In 2005-7, intense lobbying by grassroots activists resulted in a move to change National Park Service (NPS) regulations so that state rules for concealed carry permits would apply in the National Parks.   The push for a rule change became strong enough that the NRA became involved.   It appeared that the new rule would go through in the last days of the Bush administration.   But the disarmists in the government pushed the bureaucrats in the National Park Service to keep extending the rule making period.   The second amendment supporters had played by the rules to make the change happen.   All participants understood that the rule would be changed.   Instead, the change was killed just after the 2008 election.

A majority of Senators had pushed for it, and they were not happy.    Shortly after the election of Barack Obama, the majority of Senators, pushed by Senator Coburn, and lobbied by the NRA and others, essentially said, alright, if you want to play, we can play.   Instead of a rule change by the NPS, they pushed an amendment to a credit card bill that Obama wanted.  

The amendment went quite a bit further than the rule change that had originally been lobbied for.   It simply took discretion away from the NPS, and said that state rules applied to carry of firearms in the National Parks.  Not just for concealed carry permit holders, but all state carry rules.  Obama wanted the credit card bill badly.   He signed it, and it became law.   The first rollback of disarmist regulations in National Parks was a big one. 

I recently was reading the Intermountain Region Gun Regulation for the National Park Service.   When the legislation was passed, an oversight was that the law did not roll back a general prohibition on the carry of arms into "federal facilities", which applied to federal offices.  This allowed the NPS to regulate the carry of firearms within federal "facilities" enclosed in National Parks. 

The Park Service has used this oversight to ban the carry of guns in most National Park buildings, including restrooms in Yellowstone!  I was surprised to see the reason given in the Intermountain regulations.    Apparently, your ability to carry a personal firearm into a National Park restroom is considered a matter of national security.   Here is the quote from the IMR NPS pdf.

•     For national security reasons, guns cannot be
carried into federal facilities within national
parks. Notice of this rule will be clearly
displayed outside all federal facilities. If
you are unsure if a park building is a federal
facility, look for a sign or ask a park ranger.

Perhaps with time, the number of "facilities" that ban personal firearms in the parks will decrease.   I doubt that the Senate meant for people with personal pistols to be forced to pee behind a tree.   When President Nixon used the "National Security" all purpose excuse, people laughed.   I think it is far funnier when applied to the National Park Service.     Yes, it sure is a matter of National Security when a person can legally carry their defensive firearm on one side of an unlocked, unsecured restroom door, but not do so legally on the other side!

When unelected bureaucrats dig in their heels, this is the kind of stupidity that results.


What is a disarmist?


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

Black Gun Club Open Carry in Dallas

A good thing.   I hope they do not follow the example of the original Black Panthers, who became a corrupt criminal syndicate, as shown in David Horowitz' book, Radical Son.

In Texas, the Huey P. Newton Gun Club are following in the footsteps of Newton, who was a law major, striving to stay within the bounds of legality. Though the historical Black Panthers had a notable slip-up which led to then Governor Ronald Reagan signing the Mulford Act which prohibited carrying loaded guns in public space. The goal of the Panthers, as they explained it, was to assert the rights of the people to defend themselves against corrupt police, within the bounds of the law. The Huey P. Newton Gun Club says that’s exactly what they are doing today with their open carry protests.

More Here

MO: CCW Holder wins Gunfight

The owner, who has a concealed carry permit, was able to get to his own gun and exchanged shots with the 28-year-old suspect. Both robbers fled. The 28-year old collapsed outside of the pizza place. He had been shot in the leg and buttocks. He was later taken to a hospital and listed in stable condition.

The other man got away, possibly in a maroon minivan. The owner believes he also shot this suspect, but there is no evidence that he was hit.

More Here

CO: Woman Shoots Intruder who would not stop

"She was upset that she had to kill someone to protect herself," said Orist.

Orist said the man initially tried to get in through the back door. When he was unsuccessful, Orist said he broke a window with a brick and tried to climb in.

"She warned him that she had a gun and to go away but he, I don't know, for whatever reason, he kept coming, and she shot a warning shot into the wall and he kept coming so she had to shoot him twice," said Orist.

More Here

Guns and Accidents Data 2011 NSSF

Source

What Happened at the Gun Turn In (Buyback) in New Orleans?

Guns procured for a similar amount at a Phoenix, AZ, event on 4 May of 2013

Most gun turn in events are political theater, designed to gather publicity, denigrate the ownership of guns, and promote the idea that guns have no legitimate utility.  For this reason, publicity is highly sought, pictures of guns turned in are prominently splashed across friendly media, and separate news "events" are created when guns are destroyed. 

All of this is pretty much standard practice by  those who conduct the political theater known by the propaganda term "buy back".   You would think it would be even more true when someone is actively promoting a "buy back" as art.

But something different went on in New Orleans on 25 October, 2014, at a heavily promoted, private, "buy back" event.   $100,000 was donated to "buy back" guns in urban New Orleans, as part of an art event.   Supposedly, several hundred guns were turned in to be destroyed in a short three hours.   But, I have not seen a single picture of these turned in guns, read a single interview of a person turning in a gun, or found a single sentence explaining just how many guns were turned in.

Maybe this information is out there, and someone with better search engine skills than I can find it.   If you do, please send me a link.   Here is the closest description of the event that I have found, from the Advocate:

“It raises awareness. We’ve really tried hard to give people a safe place to make change without punishment,” Kaechele said as she perused the hundreds of guns that had piled up in the buyback part of the exhibit. After being displayed briefly, they were placed in garbage cans and rolled out the back door to be destroyed. “It’s an opportunity to trade killing for opportunity, and for the youth to find their voice,” she said.

There are many stories promoting the project, where Kirsha Kaechele is given $100,000 to create a private gun turn in event by her husband, David Walsh, described as an Australian professional gambler.   The couple was married in March of this year.   I wrote about the event as a possible source for good, inexpensive guns for private buyers.

Stories celebrating the project's success, the numbers of guns collected, obligatory photographs of barrels of single shot shotguns, the odd AK-47 clone or SKS, or a table full of old pistols?  None that I have found. 

If any readers attended the event, I would love to hear a first person account.  The silence in the old media makes me curious as to what went on.   I wonder if the $100,000 donation gained David Walsh any tax benefit?

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

Four Bear Shooting Incidents in Montana

In the past week, four bears were shot in claimed bear attacks in Montana.   There are few details at this time.  The black bear shooting has been ruled self defense, while the three grizzly shootings are still under investigation.  It does not appear that any of the shooters were hurt, so all four gun uses appear to have been effective.  No bear spray was reported used at this time.  

In this article, the grizzly shooting is still under investigation, while the black bear shooting has been ruled self defense.

The grizzly was shot and killed in a remote area south of the Ruby Reservoir on Monday, the same day a female black bear was killed by a hunter near Silver Star.

(snip) 

 Authorities determined the hunter who shot the black bear acted defensively. He reported the bear's cubs were in a tree and that she charged him.

In the next reported shooting, the bear ran after being shot, but was found later, dead.

 GREAT FALLS (AP) — State wildlife officials say a grizzly bear wounded by an elk hunter in the Badger-Two Medicine area southeast of Glacier National Park was found dead about 150 yards from where it was shot and about the same distance from a moose carcass.

A third grizzly defensive shooting occurred northeast of Thompson Falls.  The shooting is still under investigation:

KALISPELL (AP) — State wildlife officials are investigating a report that someone shot a male grizzly bear in self-defense.

Fish, Wildlife and Parks officials say the bear was shot in the Lower Thompson River area northeast of Thompson Falls on Oct. 26. The person who shot the grizzly reported the shooting.

Because of the ongoing investigations, we have few details at this time.  Four defensive bear shootings in a week is the most that I have ever heard reported from one state.  Two of the shootings, one grizzly and the black bear, involved sows with cubs.  There may be more defensive shootings in Alaska, but if there are, they are not reported.


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

I-594 similar to start of UK Firearms Control

Guns Hidden from British Government, found and confiscated

 An important part of British gun control is to make it illegal for anyone to obtain a gun without government permission.  This did not happen all at once.  Airguns and shotguns were exempt under the system for almost 50 years.  The requirement in I-594 for government permission before a firearm may be acquired, is similar to the start of the British system.   The British system was made incrementally more and more restrictive over the years.   It has never been shown to be effective in reducing crime.

This summation of the UK gun control system was researched and written for the British Parliament about the year 2000.  In the UK system, the police have almost complete discretion.   That is not yet the case in most of the United States.  From publications.parliament.uk:

FIREARMS CONTROL IN THE UK—ESSENTIALS OF THE SYSTEM   73.  The basis of the system is the Firearm Certificate issued at the discretion of the police. Firearms and ammunition may not be purchased or acquired lawfully without the authority of a firearm certificate. Issue is dependent upon the police being satisfied that the applicant is a fit person to have possession of a firearm and that he has established a good reason for that possession in respect of each firearm he wishes to possess. The certificate lists each firearm possessed or authorised to be possessed, identified by calibre, type, maker's name and serial number. Ammunition holdings are specified by calibre[109] and quantity; maxima are specified for quantities which may be possessed and purchased or acquired at any one time.

  74.  Transactions, identifying the transferor, his authority to possess the items transferred and the nature and date of the transaction are entered on the certificate by the transferor.

  75.  The firearm certificate, which today costs £56, remains valid for five years unless revoked; it is a personal document which identifies the holder by name, address and a photograph certified by a third party. Certificate renewal requires a process similar to that of application. Both application and renewal require the completion of an application form (upon which the applicant identifies two referees), followed by interview and checks upon the applicant by the police (which take into account the comments of the applicant's referees)—which include one or more home visits when the applicant's provisions for the safe keeping of firearms and ammunition will be reviewed. The police may revoke the authorities granted by a certificate at any time; appeal against such a decision by the police may be made to the Crown Court.

  76.  The administration of the control system is based in three stages. The purpose of the first is to determine whether one who wishes to own a firearm (at one time a right in common law, but now probably lapsed) should be denied on specified grounds;[110] the second stage establishes the parameters within which the certificate holder may exercise the authority granted him; the third is a matter of maintaining a record of transactions set by those parameters. 

Firearms registration in England and Wales was never about controlling crime, and it was never effective for that purpose.   The purpose, from the start, was to enable confiscation of the firearms when the government decided to do so.  It is worth noting that the English constitutional right to keep and bear arms is mentioned "at one time a right in common law, but now probably lapsed".   That is clearly the direction that disarmists in the United States have in mind for the second amendment.

Gun Registration and Confiscation in England and Wales.

Definition of a disarmist

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

TX: Homeowner Shoots, Kills, Intruder

"Walked into the kitchen with his gun and observed a man inside his house," said HPD Homicide Sgt. A. Semmelrock.

The owner shot the intruder "an unknown number of times," according to police. When the shooting ended, the man who had burst through the window lay dead on the kitchen floor. The homeowner's sister said the intruder left her brother no choice.

More Here

David Workman: Is Seattle Times ‘truth needle’ report an ‘October surprise?

Today’s Seattle Times carries a fairly detailed, cover-lots-of-bases story about Initiative 591 that asserts in the headline that an advertisement for the measure “misrepresents law enforcement.”

The Seattle Times recommended a “No” vote on I-591 back on July 5, while endorsing rival Initiative 594, the 18-page gun control measure. Today’s story on the I-591 campaign claim that I-591 is supported by law enforcement in the form of two major organizations, the Washington Council of Police and Sheriffs (WACOPS) and Washington State Law Enforcement Firearms Instructors Association (WSLEFIA) is dubbed “half true” by the newspaper’s “Truth Needle.”
A considerable number of Times readers seem to suggest this story just might meet the definition of a political tactic long known as an “October Surprise.” According to a definition at Wikipedia, “In American political jargon, an October surprise is a news event deliberately created to influence the outcome of an election…the term ‘October surprise’ has been used preemptively during campaign season by partisans of one side to discredit late-campaign news by the other side.” This is the last day of October.

The election is five days away, and ballots are already being filled out and mailed. However, some observers have suggested there will be a late dump of mail-in ballots over the weekend, and especially on Monday and even Tuesday.

More Here

David Codrea: Lawsuit challenges federal machine gun ban

A complaint for declarative and injunctive relief was filed Thursday in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas Dallas Division. Plaintiff Jay Aubrey Isaac Hollis, acting individually and as trustee of a revocable living trust, is suing Attorney General Eric H. Holder, Jr. and Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives Director B. Todd Jones in their official capacities for administering, executing and enforcing “statutory and regulatory provisions [that] generally act as an unlawful de facto ban on the transfer or possession of a machine gun manufactured after May 19, 1986.
“By imposing such a ban on an entire class of weapons, the statutes and regulations exceed the power of the United States,” the complaint states. It makes its case by citing violations of Article I of the United States Constitution, the Second, Ninth and Tenth Amendments, and “principles of federalism and dual sovereignty.
 
“[B]y arbitrarily ‘disapproving’ an already approved Form 1, Defendants’ actions violate Plaintiff’s Fifth Amendment right to due process and is an unjust taking; and violate the Equal Protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment,” the complaint continues. “Plaintiff seeks declaratory and injunctive relief against ... unconstitutional provisions ... declaring the ban on machine guns unconstitutional ... and declaratory and injunctive relief prohibiting Defendants from unjustly taking property without Due Process.

“In the alternative, Plaintiff seeks declaratory and injunctive relief finding that [United States Code] does not prohibit an unincorporated trust from manufacturing or possessing a machinegun manufactured after May 19, 1986 and/or that the Defendants lack the authority and are thus prohibited from revoking or denying the validity of Plaintiff’s approved tax stamp,” the complaint declares. Costs of the suit, attorney fees and “[a]ny other further relief as the Court deems just and appropriate” are also being sought.

More Here

SC: Homeowner Shoots Tire, Property Recovered, Arrest made

According to investigators, witnesses said that two white males were discovered removing property from the attached garage of the victim. The victim homeowner confronted the suspects and discharged a firearm striking the right front tire of the grey Ford Taurus vehicle in which the suspects were attempting to flee.

One suspect was apprehended on foot near the scene. The suspect vehicle was recovered a short time later with a flat right front tire near Ebenezer Road and West Sumter Street. Property of the victim was also located in the vehicle. 

More Here

FL: Tire Iron? v. Gun

The reporting is suspect here.  A commenter writes that Agriel was 47, not 67.  Hardly anyone carries tire irons anymore, more likely, it was a lug wrench.

According to officials, a verbal dispute broke out between Agriel and 48-year-old Eric Harris. The dispute escalated and Agriel tried to assault Harris with a tire iron. Harris pulled out a firearm allegedly in self defense, police said, and shot Agriel. Police said Harris called police and remained on the scene.

More Here

UT: Man Shoots Pit Bull that bit him, wife

The man was washing his truck near 200 W. 1060 South when his neighbor’s pit bull got out of its kennel and bit his foot, said police Lt. Craig Martinez. The man told his wife to get his gun and call the police, Martinez said.

More Here

Disarmenter or Disarmist?

I have recently started using the term "disarmenter".   It was derived from a combination of disarm and demented.

Tomkat, on freerepublic, suggested that the term disarmist was less clumsy and easier to use.   Which  do you think would be the better term?

dis·arm·en·ter (ds-ärmn-tr)  alt.  dis·arm·ist     (ds-ärmst)
n.

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

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

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

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

States Constitutions without an explicit Right to Keep and Bear Arms

There are six states that have constitutions that do not explicitly protect the right of the people to keep and bear arms.   The last state to add such a protection was Wisconsin, in 1998.   The last stage of the process to amend the state constitution was a referendum.   It passed with 74% of the vote.

 The six states that do not have state constitutional protection are listed below.   It is not surprising that these states are some of the least supportive of gun ownership and the second amendment. 

New York:  Dominated by New York City, New York has often taken the lead in introducing and passing extremely restrictive gun laws.   The first significant one was in 1911, the infamous Sullivan Act, designed to protect organized crime.  The latest is the so called "Safe Act" passed with out debate in the middle of the night.  New York is ranked 50 by Guns & Ammo (G&A) and A-  on the Brady score card.

New Jersey:  New Jersey gun law starts with the premise that everything to do with guns is illegal.   The state then tells you under what very restrictive conditions you may own, shoot, transport, or for a tiny number of mostly judges and retired police officers, carry a gun. New Jersey is ranked 49th by G&A,  A- on the Brady score card.

California:  California has a history of gun laws designed to keep minorities disarmed.  California is the only state in recent years to mostly ban the open carry of firearms.  California is ranked 47th by G&A, A- by the Brady center

Maryland: One of the few remaining "may issue" states, Maryland's gun laws are some of the most restrictive in the nation.  Maryland is ranked 43 by G&A,  A-  on the Brady score card,

Minnesota:  Minnesota gun law could be far worse.  Its gun laws are above the bottom 20%.  The state has a well organized state level of second amendment supporters.   Minnesota is ranked 39 by G&A and C on the Brady score card.

Iowa:  While Iowa is a middle of the road state on firearms restrictions, it was one of the last ones to pass shall issue legislation.  Iowa is ranked 38 by G&A, and C- on the Brady score card.

It is clear that state constitutions offer some protection for your rights.  Several ballot measures this year are meant to strengthen a states constitutional protections.    Most recent of these to pass was in Missouri.   Alabama's amendment 3 will be on the ballot in a few days.  

G&A ratings here, 2014:

Brady ratings here, 2013:


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

California Concealed Carry Law has Racist Origins

 

Source of image 

The Ku Klux Klan in a parade in Anaheim, California, in 1924, the same year California's CCW law passed, with the purpose of disarming Latino and Chinese legal residents. California's CCW system is still regulated under this law.


The following article appeared in the San Francisco Chronicle on July 15th, 1923, page 3, column 1.

It mentions that California's CCW (Concealed Carry Weapon) law was passed specifically to prevent Chinese, Latinos and legal immigrants (non-naturalized permanent residents) from being armed.

Note that this was from a time in California in which Hispanics were segregated into separate public schools.

NEW FIREARMS LAW EFFECTIVE ON AUGUST 7
Existing Licenses Inoperative After Dec. 31 1924; Uniform System
IS AIMED AT LAWLESS
Possible Unconstitutionality of Clause Provided for in Drafting

Stringent regulations against carrying concealed firearms or explosives, and prohibition against possession of other deadly weapons become effective on August 7, under the Hawes bill signed by Governor Richardson.

The new measure will install a uniform licensing system for carrying concealed weapons. Licenses now in existence will become inoperative December 31, 1924.
O. K. URGED

ACT EXPLAINED

Possible unconstitutionality of the provision against possession of weapons by non-naturalized residents was admitted in McKissick's letter to the Governor urging signing of the bill, but he pointed out that if this clause should be held invalid the rest of the act will not be affected and that if it can be sustained that it will have a "salutary effect in checking tong wars among the Chinese and vendettas among our people who are of Latin descent."

The provision for additional sentences where weapons are used in committing a felony is one with a sliding scale. The first time the added penalty is from five to ten years; the second from ten to fifteen; the third from 15 to 25 years, and only on the fourth offense it is possible to add more than 25 years to the sentence imposed for the crime itself.

California's CCW law is one of the last Jim Crow laws still in force in the United States. It is well-documented that the purpose of California's CCW law was to keep legal residents of Latin origin from being able to defend themselves, and it dates from an era when Latino students were segregated in schools as a matter of policy.  

 


A clearer image of the article can be viewed at the link below:

 www.hoffmang.com/firearms/AB263-Hawes-1923.pdf  


 This article was originally posted on CaliforniaCCW forum, but it does not appear to exist anymore.  As I was credited with finding the San Francisco Chronicle Article, I wanted this article to stay alive.  I had trouble finding it, but finally found a copy at Transsylvania Phoenix, posted in 2008.   The pictures were no longer present, so I made an image of the original Chronicle article, and the KKK parade picture.   I also edited the wording and put the pictures in a different order.

 Dean Weingarten

Update: link to original article on freerepublic from 2008

Felons and Guns in Minnesota

A recent report on how judges sentence felons who are convicted of gun crimes in Minnesota reveals some information that is not obvious.    KSTP spent weeks analysing more than 1,800 cases involving crimes with guns and felons in possession of guns in Minnesota.   They found that in many of the situations, no jail time was added because of the gun offense.   One case is presented, which one might assume, would be one of the most egregious.   The suspect, August Fleming, was charged with second degree assault and with being a felon in possession of a firearm.    It is clear that the reporter expects us to be outraged by the judges actions.   When I read the particulars, I initially felt sympathy for the felon.   Surveillance video captured the entire action, so there was no dispute about the facts of the case.   From kstp.com:

Surveillance cameras captured what happened, a pick-up basketball game had turned violent. One man approached August Fleming, who was 20 years old at the time, threatened him with a knife, and cut his cheek. A friend then brought Fleming a backpack. Fleming pulled out a gun and opened fire, pulling the trigger at least six times. One frame of video captured the flash of gunfire.

 Later, the article reveals an important detail:

And he only used the gun when it was presented to him "in the heat of the moment" by a so-called friend -- and at a time (the original assailant) had not ceased his pursuit of Mr. Fleming.

When I researched the case a bit more, I found that once Fleming had the gun in his possession, his assailant turned and ran, and Fleming ran after him, firing repeatedly.   This does much to explain his sentence.  From hennepinattorney.org:

Fleming retreated and was nearly off the basketball court when a friend approached with a backpack. Fleming reached in the backpack, pulled out a gun, and ran after the man who slashed him, firing repeatedly, according to the complaint and the surveillance video. No one was struck by the bullets.

When he was 17, Fleming was adjudicated delinquent in juvenile court for helping a friend steal a handgun from a sporting goods store. As a result, he was prohibited from ever owning or even handling a gun.

A man was later charged with second degree assault for stabbing Fleming in the face.  Fleming is a big man, 6-4 tall, and was a high school varsity basketball player.  It is unknown how large the man with the knife was, or what precipitated his attack. 


I discovered more arrests of August Latimothy Fleming.  Later charges include assault, weapons charges, and possession of a controlled substance.   My sympathy evaporated.  



It appears the the rest of society is better off with Mr. Fleming in prison.


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

UT: Shooting of Aizenberg Ruled Self Defense

LEEDS – The Washington County Attorney’s Office will not prosecute a man who fatally shot Stephen Aizenberg in Leeds in July, ruling the shooting to be self defense, lead prosecutor Ryan Shaum said Thursday.

More Here

Fl: Homeowner Drives off Invaders with Gunfire (rifle)

JACKSONVILLE, Fla. -
A man was shot several times by a homeowner after he tried to break into a Brentwood home early Friday morning, according to the Jacksonville Sheriff's Office.

(snip)


JSO said a total of four people were in the car and suspected of being involved in the attempted robbery. Only one of the suspects was shot.

Police said the homeowner shot at the suspects with a rifle, hitting one of the suspects several times.

More Here

GA: Attempted Carjack Victim Wins Gunfight

ATLANTA — Police say a man shot at three men who tried to rob him in southwest Atlanta.

The victim and the suspect engaged in a shootout near the intersection of Fair and Peters streets.

Atlanta police say three men tried to rob a woman and a man who were standing near a Range Rover on Fair Street.

According to investigators, the suspects had intentions on carjacking the victim at gunpoint. But the suspects did not realize one of their victims also had a gun.

More Here

MS: 81-Year-Old Shoots Suspected Intruder

The Vicksburg Police Department says a woman repeatedly tried to gain entry into an 82-year-old man's home.

(snip)

Wilson, who is a retired Vicksburg Military Park worker said he was robbed earlier this year by another woman who delivered meals to his home. He said Robinson knows her and thought she victimize him as well.

(snip)

 Robinson's boyfriend, Carl Marshall, 55, is also in custody. He is charged with home invasion.

More Here