Belize: Robber Shot Dead by Intended Victim

Authorities on the island of Ambergris Caye are investigating a burglary and an attempted robbery that resulted in a man being shot and killed. The victim has been identified as 24 year old Michael Wallace, unemployed of a San Juan address in San Pedro Town. Preliminary police report indicates that Wallace was one of three persons that attempted to rob a fellow islander when he was shot and killed.

The Sun Newspaper reported that according to the Officer in Charge of the Coastal Executive Unit and the San Pedro Police Formation Superintendent of Police Luis Castellanos, the incident happened sometime after 10:30pm on Sunday January 19th with a robbery attempt. 24-year old Kirian Azueta, an accountant of Marina Drive reported to police that while he was going into his residence three people approached him as he got out of his golf cart to open his gate. They held him up at gun point and in the process one of the robbers fired a shot at him. Azueta then took out his licensed gun and returned fire. 

More Here

IN:Homeowner Shoots Intruder west of MLK

INDIANAPOLIS - Metro Police are investigating an apparent home invasion and shooting on West 34th Street near Crown Hill Cemetery.

Police said a man tried to break into the home just west of MLK around 2:45 a.m. Thursday. He and the homeowner got into a scuffle, and the intruder was shot in the foot and the leg.

More Here

A Punch to the Head is Potential Deadly Force

If you watch television and the movies, you might get the impression that a punch to the head is no big deal.  That is not true.  A punch to the head is a very serious attack.  It can disable.   It can maim.  It can kill.  The head is a vulnerable target, which is why an attacker aims for it.  I first became aware of  the deadly potential of one punch to the head in the 1970's, from a long forgotten news story.   Later, the son of a close friend killed a man with one punch.  He was eventually found not guilty of manslaughter, but only after a long and expensive legal fight.

We owe a debt of gratitude to Steve Kokette of Madison, Wisconsin for producing One Punch Homicide, which documents the surprising numbers of one punch homicides that occur in the United States and around the world.  From simple Internet searches, he has compiled a list of 114 one punch homicides in the United States.  I am sure that the list is far from complete.

Everyone understands that a punch is more likely to knock you out rather than kill you.   But there is little practical difference for someone who is intent on defending themselves.   Once you are knocked out, you are at the mercy of your attacker.   They then have the choice of killing or maiming you at their leisure.  From onepunchhomicide.com:

Prosecuting Attorney Dan Satterberg of King County, which includes Seattle, Washington, says King County has four to six one punch homicides every year. If King County's one punch homicide rate is average for the U.S., which is impossible to tell because no one in the U.S., including the FBI, keeps statistics on the subject, then the U.S. has between 500 and 1,000 one punch homicides every year. Although this isn't a huge number, it has other implications. Most single punches don't result in a death, but for every death by one punch, how many other people experience serious injuries, including brain damage, because of one punch - 10, 20, 50, 100, or more?

 Here is a well known case of one fatal punch from July of this year (2014):

LIVONIA, Mich. (AP) — A well-respected veteran soccer referee’s life was cut short by a punch delivered during a Detroit-area men’s league game.

John Bieniewicz, 44, died on July 1, two days after a player struck him at a community park in Livonia.

The standard for the use of deadly force is that you reasonably believe that you are defending yourself from force that can kill or severely injure you.   Once you know that a punch can kill or severely injure you, you can explain to a jury why, as a reasonable person, you were forced to threaten or use deadly force to defend yourself or others.

You do not have to allow yourself to be beaten before you defend yourself with deadly force; but you have to be able to reasonably explain why you understood that you were under the threat of potentially deadly force.


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

Dave Workman: Edmonds shooting ignites hot debate

Being drunk is no excuse.  People tend to do dangerous and stupid things when drunk.  

Did an Edmonds mother use good sense and act in self-defense when, early Thanksgiving morning, she shot and seriously wounded a stranger who was trying to force his way into her home, where her husband and children, and another youngster were sleeping?

Reader comments at the Seattle Times are split — not evenly, by any stretch — with some people critical of the shooting and others insisting the woman had every right to fire. According to KOMO, where more than 500 comments have been posted, the alleged intruder is 22-year-old Nelson Patrone, and apparently he had been drinking Wednesday night. The story has gained nationwide attention.

Published reports suggest the man apparently mistakenly believed friends still lived in the home, but the current family has been there for some time. He knocked loudly on the door at about 3:15 a.m. The woman called 911 and armed herself. When she opened the door and did not recognize the man, she apparently tried to close the door and he apparently tried to push his way in.

More Here

ESS Crossbow Suppressor 2X Review (Ballistic Sunglasses), Shooting and Motorcycles

I do not write reviews, generally.  It has to be a product that I am going to use.  I needed a good set of sunglasses for shooting and motorcycle riding.

I came across the ESS display at the 2014 Shot Show.  They had several of their products that had withstood being hit with number 6 shot at 10 yards.  This is a standard test required for them to be issued as military gear.

 

These dimples on the glasses are from number six shot.  It did not penetrate.  ESS calls their products eyeshields, and that is a better description than sun glasses, but I think of them as ballistic sunglasses, even though they come in clear lenses as well.

From my time in Army research, I knew that eye injuries were a disproportionate source of casualties in combat.  Ballistic goggles in combat save eyes and lives, and I am glad to see ESS doing their part.  I was attracted to the ESS products for a couple of civilian reasons.   Their Suppressor frames  were designed to be worn under ear muffs, always a problem with conventional glasses; and they looked to work very well under a helmet.

I ride a motorcycle from Arizona to Texas and Wisconsin, and I had not found a satisfactory pair of sunglasses.  I use the "all the gear, all the time", riding philosophy, so protective glasses under the helmet are necessary.   If the ESS could withstand birdshot at 10 yards, It would withstand a bumblebee at 70 mph.

The ESS products have the additional benefit of being scratch resistant on the outside and fog resistant on the inside of the lenses.

I remarked that the product looked interesting.  I was not wrangling for a set, but the ESS representative said to send her an email, and she would send me one. 

I picked out a set from the ESS site.  I wanted both clear and colored lenses, to meet my motorcycle needs.   Colored for bright sunlight, clear for twilight, overcast and at night.   I picked the ESS Suppressor 2x.  It is a very nice set, with two lenses, a Suppressor frame,  a Crossbow frame, a nice case, a microfiber pouch for the glasses, and a retainer strap.   Here is a link to a video that describes the set well.  I did not bother to look at the price.  The set retails for a little less than $100, quite a bit more than I usually paid for throwaway sunglasses.   An obligation is assumed when a writer accepts such a gift.   Now I had to write a review.

E

ESS Crossbow Suppressor eyeshields.

My problem with sunglasses is that I tend to misplace, break, generally abuse, and lose them.   I have treated them as disposable items, so having a really nice pair was a new experience for me.   This also meant that I had numerous inexpensive sets to try a shotgun on.   I used number six shot from 10 yards.  We know the ESS lenses can take that abuse, so I did not shoot them.   If you want to verify that ESS can withstand birdshot, here is a video with Chris Cheng shooting them.



I shot three pair of old sunglasses that I had lying about.   It devastated them.   All the lenses were holed. I included a set of the Harbor Freight safety glasses (second from the top).  They are probably of polycarbonate, and withstood two rounds of number six shot.

The Harbor Freight safety glasses do not work well for everyday wear.  They are not sunglasses, and they scratch easily.   A couple of months in a motorcycle jacket pocket, in the original plastic wrapper (never opened), and they were scuffed so badly as to be unusable.  Keep them in the shop and they do their job there competently.

The three pairs of inexpensive sunglasses with their shattered lenses made me think that the ESS eyeshields might be worth the price.  I started wearing them all the time.   I fully expected to lose them; it is my normal experience with sunglasses.



But something remarkable happened.   Because the ESS eyeshields were pricey, even though I had not paid for them, I took better care of them.   I made it a habit to check on them.  In Yuma, I wear sunglasses nearly all the time.  After six months of near constant wear and about six thousand miles of motorcycle travel, I still have the ESS eyeshields.

They work great under ear muffs.   I appreciate that!  They are also the best glasses that I have found for wear under a motorcycle helmet.  One of their great advantages is that I can put them on and take them off while wearing a full face helmet and gloves, with one hand.

 

The rest of the kit is nice, but I found that I did not use it much.  The soft pouch for the glasses is good, but, on a motorcycle trip, you are limited for space, so the larger case did not travel with me.  If I had it to do again, I would get two suppressor frames, one clear, one smoke or copper.    I found the suppressor frames worked fine for daily wear, but the crossbow frames are not designed for under muffs or a helmet.  Maybe ESS could offer a motorcycle kit with two Suppressors, and no case or retainer strap.

I liked the idea of the retainer strap, but it is impractical on a full face helmet.  The glasses must be put on after the helmet; so I did not use it.   The hardened exterior surface worked.  No scratches after six months!   The anti-fog coating seemed to help, but that is from subjective observations over six months of use, not testing against other lenses.

The glasses worked well with this helmet too, but I used the white helmet for my travels. 

I will likely buy another suppressor frame to go with the one I have, or maybe I can trade the Crossbow frame straight up for one.    I would not have thought I would recommend expensive sunglasses.   But experience has proven that my initial prejudice was wrong.   You do get what you pay for, and these high quality glasses have convinced me that they are worth while.  The price for a single pair is not bad at all.

I would recommend that you shop around.   Maybe there is a good black Friday deal on the Suppressors.

Amazon has them for $34.59.
 

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

AZ: Homeowner Shoots, Kills Intruder in Struggle after Breakin

Glendale Police Sgt. David Vidaure said the 51-year-old homeowner confronted 23-year-old Benny Garcia as he was trying to get in.

Vidaure said a fight ensued and the homeowner shot Garcia who was later pronounced dead at a local hospital.

More Here

OK: Woman Drives off Intruders, but Shoots her own Hand during Struggle

According to TPD Sgt. Dedlorn Sanders, while the suspects began gathering up the woman's belongings, she produced a gun to defend herself. Sanders said the male suspect tried to wrangle the gun away from her, and she accidentally shot herself in the hand during the struggle.

More Here

Oathkeepers Protect Ferguson

Sltoday.com has an article showing oathkeepers protecting Ferguson from looting and arson.   While the article starts out calling the volunteer security forces "mysterious", puts Oathkeepers in quotes, and quotes "protesters" who accused the volunteers of being KKK, the article changed tone to one of gratitude from residents in the last half.  From stltoday.com:

In operation since Tuesday, group volunteers say they are confident they have helped protect property and lives since they arrived. The group said they are willing to stay as long as it takes.

Their only requirement to help is rooftop access.

Victor Clark, a dentist at Ferguson Dental on South Florissant Road, said he was happy to have their free assistance. He wants to reopen soon. On Monday, rioters shattered the front door and window, stole dental needles and anesthetic.

Then Oath Keepers showed up out of the blue. “We gave them our keys,” he said. “We didn’t know that much about them, but we got a feeling of trust. You have to do something to protect our building.”

 It is hard to argue that modern sporting arms such as the AR15 have no utility in self defense when facing mobs of arsonists and looters such as roamed the streets of Ferguson.  

The piles of rubble and burnt out shells of buildings, formerly housing businesses not connected with the Michael Brown case, are mute testimony to the necessity of citizens being able to defend themselves and their property. 

The article mentions that the National Guard was unable to protect property and prevent the mob violence.

“But when Monday rolled around and they didn’t park the National Guard at these businesses, that’s when we said we have got to do something.

“Historically, the government almost always fails to protect people,” he added.

While I do not expect the acts of altruism and community service by the Oathkeepers to get much play in the old media, the word is getting out.

An article in The Blaze noted the spontaneous formation of mini-militias in Ferguson to protect their own.   This is what normally happens, in a society that understands the rule of law, if it is not prevented by a centralized government. 

Most people are not violent and murderous thugs.   Most people know that mindless destruction makes everyone poorer.    The protection of the ability to defend persons and property from mindless mobs is one of the reasons the second amendment was added to the Constitution.

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

Poll: Does the 2nd Amendment Cover Stun Guns?

There is an interesting court case proceeding in Massachusetts.  A homeless woman was given a stun gun for defensive purposes.  She used it to defend herself against domestic abuse.  She was arrested for shoplifting, and the police found the stun gun, which is banned in Massachusetts, one of only five states to do so.   In her defense, her public defender is claiming her second amendment rights cover the stun gun.

In Michigan,the state supreme court ruled that stun guns are protected by the second amendment.   One of the arguments of the prosecutor in Massachusetts seems to be that there is no right to self defense outside of the home.  From uppermichiganssource.com:

In a legal brief, prosecutors argue that the Second Amendment does not establish a constitutional right to own a stun gun and that two pivotal U.S. Supreme Court decisions that upheld the right to own a firearm for self-defense inside homes did not automatically grant that right outside the home.

An online poll asks a simple question:

Do you think stun guns should be covered under the second amendment?

Yes is at  80%; No is at  20%.

Here is a link to the poll.   It is at the bottom of the article.

An important question before the court is if being without a home deprives a person of their constitutional right to keep and bear arms.   Numerous courts have already ruled that being homeless may not deprive a person of the right to vote.

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

TX: Shooting was Self Defense

NOLANVILLE (November 26, 2014) A shooting early Wednesday after a night of drinking and dominoes at a rural home outside of Belton that left a 47-year-old man dead was evidently self-defense, authorities say.

More Here

IN: No Charges for Homeowner Who shot Knife Weilding Attacker

Detective Craig Starr says 61-year-old Terah Frost fatally shot Grimes after finding his 59-year-old brother, Barry Frost, fighting downstairs with Grimes, who was wearing a mask and was armed with a knife.

Police say Grimes had no known connection to the Frost family

More Here

WA: Armed Mother Shoots Intruder while Family Sleeps

The homeowner, a 33 year-old woman, had armed herself as she heard the suspect repeatedly pounding on the front door, police said. As the homeowner came to the front door, the suspect, a 22 year-old man unknown to the residents, started to force his way inside the house.

The homeowner and suspect struggled at the front door, police said, and then the homeowner reportedly fired one shot, striking the suspect in the abdomen, police said.

More here

SC: Property Owner Shoots Suspected Metal Thief

The sheriff’s office said the owner went to call police on Smith, when Smith dove into his truck and grabbed what appeared to be a gun case. The owner then shot Smith in the arm.

But there was no gun inside the case—only a needle, spoon, and syringe.

"Well, he had to protect himself and he didn't know what the guy was reaching for. It's hard to say what you'll do till’ you're in that situation," Morgan said.

More Here

OR: Homeowner Shoots at Thief who Struck him with Vehicle

"There were three wheels left, and I told Brad to get his gun and not to go to work because I knew (the thief) was coming back," said Tina Russell, Brad Russell's wife.

Tina Russell was apparently right. Police said Bradley Russell saw the same Forerunner driving past about 15 minutes later.

He stopped into the street, pointed the shotgun at the vehicle and yelled for the driver to stop. Instead, the driver tried to go around Bradley Russell, and the vehicle struck him in the knee.

Bradley Russell fired one shot at the Forerunner, hitting the rear and driver's side, the Sheriff's Office said.

More Here

Two Florida State Students were Prevented by Law from Stopping School Shooting

According to Students for Concealed Carry (SCC) at Florida State, two students present at the shooting that occurred on 20 November could have stopped the shooting but were disarmed by the current Florida law.

One of the students was wounded during the shooting.   Nathan Scott is a member of SCC at FSU.  In spite of his wound, he was able to warn other students about the shooter.   The other student was a U.S. infantry combat veteran who says he had a clear shot at the shooter.  From the facebook page of SSC at FSU:

This is highlighted by two FSU students, one of whom was a US Army Infantry combat veteran and had a clear shot at the shooter, the other is gunshot victime Nathan Scott who is a member of Students for Concealed Carry at FSU who was able to go and warn other students about the shooter despite his injury.  Both of these individuals, in spite of having the training and skills necessary to end the shooting, were powerless to prevent it due to Florida's laws.

 This helps explain why the poll taken in Florida after the shooting was so completely onesided.   It was 15-1 in favor of more freedom on campus. 

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

AZ: Open Carry on the Mountain

Earlier this week, I climbed a mountain.  It is a locally popular way for people  to get some exercise and a nice view.  As usual, I was openly carrying a Glock 17.  I carry primarily for political purposes, so I wore a "Gun Guy" hat given to me by Dan Baum at the Shot Show a couple of years ago.  Another reason is that it can get windy on the mountain, and I have had broader brimmed hats blown off.

As I arrived at the top, a pair of young ladies asked me to take their picture, to commemorate their climb, and likely spread the event about on facebook, twitter, and other social media.  I had just received a phone call, so I excused myself to my brother on the other end, and attended to the ladies needs.

I took their picture with their phone, and told them that I was a blogger who wrote about guns.   The immediate response was noteworthy: Awesome! and Cool!   Then one said that the first time she had shot a gun was in Arizona, but that she was from Pennsylvania.   It is a little known fact that Yuma's population triples in the wintertime with winter visitors and tourists. 

I mentioned that Pennsylvania had fairly decent gun laws as well; open carry without any license and an easy to obtain concealed carry permit, for example.  She said well, yes, but it just does not compare to Arizona.

I gave the beaming young women copies of my card, with which  they seemed well pleased; bid them goodbye, and started down the mountain.  Now, of course, I wish that I had taken their picture with *my* camera!

It says a great deal about the growth of the gun culture, when pretty young ladies, out to obtain some exercise, fresh air, and nice views, see an older gun blogger as a positive and noteworthy figure. 

Perhaps the ladies were merely being polite, but their enthusiasm was contagious.   They did not appear to be competitive shooters, but they were enthusiastic about the idea of shooting, and of having the right to do so.

I suspect that we will attract more of them to Arizona, and grow more in Pennsylvania.  It seems to be happening.   Women are the fastest growing group of competitive shooters and concealed carry permit holders.

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

FL: Remarkable Poll in Favor of Campus Carry 15-1

The article with this poll was first published on Friday afternoon a week ago, 21 November, 2014, the day after the shooting at Florida State University (FSU).   I wrote about it the next day.   At that time the ratio of second amendment supporters to disarmists was a very high 12 to 1. On Saturday morning, about 6 a.m. the total number of votes cast were 2740.   As you can see from the screenshot, today, 28 November about 10 a.m., the number has increased to 4,330, and the ratio has increase from 12 to 1 to an astonishing 15-1!   The poll below is closer to what we commonly see.  It was done in a Michigan publication.

Most second amendment related polls result in ratios from 3-10 to 1.  The result of this poll falls well within the "normal" range, at 4-1.

Online polls essentially measure an "intensity ratio".  That is, the ratio of those who are motivated enough to answer an online poll, one way or another.   Why is the ratio in the Michigan poll so much lower than that in the Florida poll?

Both polls address second amendment related issues, but the questions asked are much different, and the responses offered are significantly different as well.

The question in the Michigan poll is a simple emotional one about "feelings".  It is not a policy decision.  It does not ask anything about law or firearms policy.   It only lists two responses, yes and no.  In the Michigan article preceding the poll, significantly more space is devoted to people who "feel" uncomfortable with a Realtor carrying a gun than people who approve of such action.

In the Florida Poll, the question is all about policy and logic, not about emotion.   The article preceding the poll gives information about the policy decisions.  Most space is given to the attorney for Florida Carry, who outlines the arguments for student carry, while the opposition arguments are given a fraction of the space.   The respondents can choose between four policy decisions.

Even given the disparity of the space given to opposition arguments, the 15-1 ratio stands out.  Does this tell us anything useful?

First, a disclaimer.   We do not know what audience this poll reached.  It is not a scientific poll.   It is simply a rough measure of intensity.   But taking that into account, the lesson that I gather from the above is that the arguments made in favor of second amendment solutions are highly persuasive, if they are heard.   It reinforces what I have observed for several decades.  When second amendment supporters are able to get their message to the public, they win.

Definition of  disarmist 

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

Australia:Narooma HuntFest: battleground over gun culture

The gun culture debate ignited again this week with the Eurobodalla Shire Council voting to allow the sale of firearms at next year's Narooma HuntFest. Hunters say they are responsible people engaged in a sport that's highly regulated. They say a Green agenda is driving opposition to HuntFest. Opponents of HuntFest say they are concerned about the growth of a gun culture in Australia.

The first HuntFest, held over the June long weekend this year, had been approved to operate as a showcase for firearms, information on hunting, and a photographic event.

Huntfest organisers had since applied to Council to support an amendment to the festival's Firearms Permit that would allow the sale of firearms the next festival.

The application was passed this week (25 November) by a majority of five to two.

Eurobodalla Shire Council Deputy Mayor Rob Pollock told ABC Local Radio that "The five [Councillors] that voted for it I think feel very strongly that it was a Council facility involved in legal activity and all the safeguards and necessary permits had been retained and regarded."

Cr Pollack pointed to regulations that control the sale and purchase of firearms in New South Wales.

"It's not like you just roll up with your Bankcard or your Mastercard and say 'look I'll have that rifle over there' and then you walk out with it in a brown paper bag under your arm," he said.

"There are strict procedures regarding licensing, regarding sale, regarding when that particular delivery etc can take place. None of the retail sales if they do occur will actually happen within the opening hours of the HuntFest situation."

HuntFest organisers estimate the festival to have attracted about 2300 people and $900,000.

A talkback caller to ABC Local Radio, Peter, who said he had been at the Council meeting, said, "What Council has now done is it has enabled the increase of the availability of guns into the community. It's quite extraordinary."
More Here

CA: AG Kamala Harris Requests en banc Review of the Denial of her Request to Intervene in Peruta

On November 26, Kamala Harris, the AG of California, filed a request for an en banc review of the decision on 12 November to deny her request to intervene in the case.  From campaign-archive1.com  (Michel & Associates):

The AG’s latest request to the court comes after the court denied the AG’s and several gun ban advocacy groups’ requests to join the case once they learned Sheriff Gore had decided not to appeal the case any further.  The anti-gun rights groups have also filed a similar request for en banc review of the Ninth Circuit's denial of their requests to intervene in the case.

 This is another move by the AG to fight Peruta at every possible turn.  I have read the Order Denying Motions to Intervene.  Like the rest of the Peruta decisions, the order is clear and logical.  But then, I am not a lawyer. 

It is easy to see why the disarmists are desperate to stop implementation of Peruta.   Once Peruta is implemented, hundreds of thousands of California shall issue permits will be issued.   Once that many voters, (because virtually every permit holder is a reliable voter) have permits, there is no putting the shall issue genie back in the bottle.

California is the last hope for disarmists to achieve a sort of stalemate for the implementation of the second amendment.  If they lose Peruta, California and Hawaii are lost.  Once California and Hawaii are lost, only a tiny remnant of "may issue" states remain on the East coast, surrounding New York, where the entire sham of modern "may issue" started with the infamous Sullivan law; a law that was designed to protect organized crime.

In that situation, national reciprocity will become a fact, if it has not already.  It is hard to believe that the citizens of New York will be reconciled to a situation where everyone in the nation who wishes to, will be able to exercise their second amendment rights in New York, *except* for citizens of New York and the other five states in the North East coastal cluster.

I think Peruta will stand.   The logic is clear, the facts are clear, the Constitution is clear.  Much of rural California is already effectively shall issue.

But ideologues on the left seems to hate the idea of armed citizens to its core, even though that hatred is irrational and is an enormous political liability.

  Definition of  disarmist 

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

FL: Marissa Alexander Agrees to Plea Deal

(Reuters) - A north Florida woman facing a retrial on charges of aggravated assault after she said she fired a warning shot at her abusive husband agreed on Monday to plead guilty after her sentence was dramatically reduced.

The case of Marissa Alexander, 34, helped inspire a new state law making a warning shot legal in some circumstances, although it was not known if that influenced the plea deal.

More Here