Does LEOSA apply to Irish Officers?

At about 5:40 a.m. on Tuesday, the 27th of January, a vacationing police officer from Limerick, Ireland, was shot during an armed robbery in New Orleans.  Ireland has a low crime rate, much like most areas in the United States outside of the urban cores.   New Orleans' crime rate is much higher than most of the rest of the United States, so Hanrahan may be forgiven his apparent naiveté in the situation.  

Hanrahan met a man who said he knew where they could get a drink at that time of the morning.  He went with a man he did not know, to an unknown destination, and stopped along the way to take $200 out of an ATM machine.  From nola.com:

Stopping first at an ATM, where Hanrahan withdrew $200, the pair walked to the 2200 block of New Orleans Street. There, according to police, a second man approached Hanrahan and demanded he hand over cash. When Hanrahan refused, police said the man produced a gun and shot Hanrahan twice. The two suspects rifled through Hanrahan's pockets and took the $200 before running from the area, police said.

A vacationing American police officer would have been able to be legally armed in that situation, under the Law Enforcement Officers Safety Act (LEOSA).  

Would the Irish police officer who was shot have been covered under LEOSA as well?   The law is not entirely clear, and has never been tested in court on the subject.  The law applies to a "qualified law enforcement officer".  In the original version of the law, the standards were these:

`(c) As used in this section, the term `qualified law enforcement officer' means an employee of a governmental agency who--

`(1) is authorized by law to engage in or supervise the prevention, detection, investigation, or prosecution of, or the incarceration of any person for, any violation of law, and has statutory powers of arrest;

`(2) is authorized by the agency to carry a firearm;

`(3) is not the subject of any disciplinary action by the agency;

`(4) meets standards, if any, established by the agency which require the employee to regularly qualify in the use of a firearm;

`(5) is not under the influence of alcohol or another intoxicating or hallucinatory drug or substance; and

`(6) is not prohibited by Federal law from receiving a firearm.

The above definition does not say that the agency has to be a U.S. governmental agency, and courts have ruled in favor of a broad interpretation of the definition.  In 2007, two different courts held that Coast Guard boarding officers were covered under the law.    One of them, Reserve Petty Officer Jose Diaz, won a settlement of $44,000 from the City of San Fernando, California for false arrest.   LEOSA has been amended twice, in 2010 and in 2013, both acts broadening the definitions of people who are explicitly covered by the law.  The amendment in 2013 changed (1) above to this:

(1) is authorized by law to engage in or supervise the prevention, detection, investigation, or prosecution of, or the incarceration of any person for, any violation of law, and has statutory powers of arrest, or apprehension under section 807(b) of title 10, United States Code (article 7(b) of the Uniform Code of Military Justice);

It is clear that the last phrase was added to the list of possible qualifications, and does not require those previously qualified to also have powers of apprehension under section 807(b).  The legislative history shows that adding military personnel with apprehension powers was the purpose of the law, not restricting those previously qualified.

So, would a foreign police officer qualify?  They might, depending on the court.  

Clearly, they are an employee of a government agency.  The law does not specify that it must be a U.S. government agency, though of course, that could be argued as the intended purpose.

They would have to be authorized by their agency to carry a firearm.   Most Irish gardai are not so authorized, but a few are.  It is not known if Garda Hanrahan was one of the select few, but it seems unlikely.

Finally, the officer would have to meet requirement (6):

(6) is not prohibited by Federal law from receiving a firearm.

This would be a little harder for a foreign officer, but can be overcome with a little preparation.  Legal visiting aliens who have a legitimate hunting license or are a member of a club that engages in shooting competitions, can legally receive and possess firearms in the United States. 

All of the above might be considered fanciful speculation, but consider that the Courts have held that if a person is convicted of a felony in a foreign court, they lose their second amendment rights in the United States.  The court ruled that the law did not specify that the felony had to occur under United States law, only that it was a felony.  

Such an interpretation would likely be cited in any court case in which a foreign police officer attempted to use LEOSA as a defense.

As an interesting aside, the composite picture of one of the suspects in the Hanrahan shooting looks very much like the one of a suspect in the self defense shooting case involving Billy Gregory.   Both cases occurred reasonably close to the French Quarter of New Orleans, separated by less than three days.

Composite pictures of the two suspects in the shooting of Brian Hanrahan, which occurred on January 27th.

Composite picture of the suspected confederate of Nicholas Temper, Temper was shot by Musician Billy Gregory in what the NOPD has called a self defense shooting, on January 30th.

©2015 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice is included.
Link to Gun Watch

FL: Intruder Shot Dead in Leesburg

Steven Ricker has been in and out of jail 11 times since 2006.   At about 4:30 a.m. on Thursday, 1 February, he was shot and killed.  The Leesburg resident who shot him says that Ricker was attempting to force his way into his family's apartment.  The manager of the apartment complex says that Ricker had banged on his door first, and that he appeared to be high and searching for drugs.  The manager thought Ricker had left, until he heard the gunshot.

 Video at the link.

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

LA: Homeowner and Burglar exchange Gunfire

Off duty officers are just another armed citizen.  This one was in his home when the event occured.

According to police, the burglar attempted to break into the home, but was stopped by the officer. As the officer went to take the burglar into custody, the burglar shot at the officer, who returned fire. The suspect fled to a vehicle waiting nearby. The driver of the car and the burglar quickly drove away, traveling south on Highway 1.




More Here

SD: Gun law Reform Bill Introduced

A gun law reform bill, HB1116, has been introduced into the South Dakota house.  The bill has 28 co-sponsors.  The house has 70 members, 58 of which are Republicans, and 12 Democrats.   36 votes will be needed to pass the bill.   In the Senate, there are 27 Republicans and 8 Democrats, a bit tighter ratio.   The South Dakota Governor is Dennis Daugaard, who has been in office since 2011.  

Governor Daugaard vetoed a constitutional carry bill in 2012, citing concerns of law enforcement officials.   From the argusleader.com:

Gov. Dennis Daugaard vetoed a bill Friday that would have allowed any resident 18 and older with a valid state drivers’ license to carry a concealed handgun without having to obtain a permit.

In his veto address of the proposal, Daugaard said the state’s permitting laws are already “fair and reasonable.”

“Each year, locally elected sheriffs deny permits, in most cases because the applicant has a serious criminal history,” Daugaard wrote in his veto message. “Under this bill, those who are prohibited from carrying a concealed weapon would no longer be informed of that fact. Understandably, law enforcement officials from across South Dakota have objected to this bill.”

In 2013, Governor Daugaard signed a bill that specifically allowed school districts to determine if teacher would be armed in their schools, with the permission of local law enforcement.   He also signed a bill to increase the number of years that the concealed carry weapon permit was valid, from four years to five.

HB1116 cleans up language in the current statutes, removes references that require guns that are carried without a permit to be unloaded, and makes certain that people from other states, who have concealed carry permits, will be able to carry in South Dakota, if they follow South Dakota law.  From the bill:

Section 8. That § 23-7-7.4 be amended to read as follows:
    23-7-7.4. Any valid permit to carry a concealed pistol, issued to a nonresident of South Dakota, is valid in South Dakota according to the terms of its issuance in the state of its issue, but only to the extent that the terms of issuance comply with any appropriate South Dakota statute or promulgated rule. However, if the holder of such a nonresident permit to carry a concealed pistol becomes, at any time, a legal resident of South Dakota, the provisions of this section no longer apply.

The bill would strike the language that would render an out-of-state permit invalid when the holder of the permit became a legal resident of South Dakota.

Another part of the bill seems to recognize carry without a permit.   It states:

The availability of a permit to carry a concealed pistol pursuant to the provisions of this chapter may not be construed to impose a general prohibition on the carrying of a pistol without such permit or the recognition of out-of-state permits to carry a pistol openly or concealed and loaded or unloaded.

 There may be other statutes that impose limitations on carry outside  of the concealed carry law.  No legal analysis of the bill was found.

The bill seems to have a good chance of passage in the House and Senate, but it is unclear whether Governor Daugaard will sign it.

©2015 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice is included.
Link to Gun Watch

NC:Suspect Detained at gun Point

On Monday afternoon, John Painter called the McDowell County Sheriff's Office to say he had the suspect detained at gun point. Deputies say they don't get this kind of call very often, but Painter said he'd do it again if he had to even though it's not something he ever wanted to do.

(snip) Richelle Bailey is the McDowell County Sheriff PIO


Bailey said the number of concealed carry permits are on the rise, so home invaders should think twice.

More Here

LA: Musician Beaten after Self Defense shooting; Beware Accomplices

Billy Gregory is a successful musician and vocalist in New Orleans.  The NOPD is saying that early Friday morning, about 1:15 a.m., the 30th of January, the musician shot a man outside of a night club:  From wgno.com:

The NOPD is backing a musician`s claim that he shot a man outside a Marigny nightclub in self-defense.

It appears that a 'gutter punk' accosted Gregory.  He drew a legally carried pistol and fired one shot to the chest of one of the 'gutter punks', Nicholas Temper, 23 years of age.  Temper collapsed in a nearby bar after 911 was called.   Temper was helped to the bar by at least two others, according to a witness.

 Other reports say Temper's girlfriend complimented Gregory on his outfit, after which Temper escalated the conflict:

The police report says that 23-year-old Nicholas Temper threatened to commit bodily harm on the 64-year-old musician and take his guitar.

“He said something and the kid got jealous. Got mouthy with Billy,” says Walt.

Fearing for his safety, police say the musician took out a pistol and shot Temper once in the chest.

One commenter at nola.com speculates that it was a set up:

Sounds like a set-up to me: girlfriend distracts mark, boyfriend feigns anger over girlfriend to engage mark, rob mark with cowardly friends as back-up.  In this case, the mark had a CCP and was armed.  A bullet to the chest disrupted the set-up.  Looks like the cowardly friends are lucky they don't have lead trinkets in their bodies as well.

It is unclear how much time elapsed after the initial shooting, before Gregory was attacked again by two assailants.  I suspect that they caught him by surprise, because there are no reports of additional shots.    Numerous police came to the scene for the shooting and 911 call.

Witnesses say other gutter punks followed the Gregory and beat him up.

One suspect was arrested for helping with the assault.

One more suspect remains at large.

Gregory did not escape unharmed.  One assailant admitted to holding down Gregory while another beat and kicked him.   From nola.com:

 Following the shooting, police said Temper's friends attacked the shooter, knocking him to the ground while punching and kicking him. Police said the man sustained several abrasions to his head and arms.

This explains the comment from Gregory's friend Walt, who is a doorman at BMC:

   “I couldn’t figure out why it was one shot fired, and they all weren’t dead.”

"gutter punks" near the crime scene. 
Violent crimes are commonly committed with accomplices.  I believe the number is above 50%.  Usually, they run off when a gun is pulled and/or a shot is fired.  It is important to be aware of the possibility of a retaliatory attack and not become complacent because the immediate threat has been dealt with.  We do not have Billy Gregory's side of what happened, but he was probably blind sided and knocked down before he was aware that he was again under attack.  I suspect that it happened before the police arrived, but not by much, as they arrested one suspect. 

In an urban environment, it is especially difficult to keep track of all the possible threats, and to maintain distance.    We may never know exactly what happened.  Fortunately, the attack did not seem to cause severe injury or death to Gregory.   Very likely he was able to protect his head from some of the kicks and punches.    Punching and kicking to the head can easily kill or severely injure a person.    Presumably, he could not draw his firearm because he was being held.

The police showed one of their fairly effective roles: be a backup force so that aggressors only have a limited time to carry out their attacks. 

I do not know how long Mr.  Gregory was being kicked and punched, but something or someone cause the assailants to stop. 

Watch for accomplices, watch your back, get to someplace safe.


©2015 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice is included.
Link to Gun Watch

TN: CCW Holder stops Violence in Road Rage Beating

In the ensuing altercation, the man said the other driver began punching him in the face. He said that he struck back, but that the other man wrestled him to the ground and continued striking him in the face.

At that point, he said he noticed that another man, a 24-year-old Maryville man, had gotten out of his vehicle, which was also idling in the line of traffic at the light. The onlooker told the dark-complected man to stop hitting the alleged victim, witnesses said.

(snip)

When that didn’t happen, the third man produced a .40-caliber Firestorm handgun. He later admitted to police that he pointed the gun at the attacker because he feared for the safety of the victim.

The man in the Nissan fled the scene. Several witnesses essentially corroborated the victim’s story, including the wife of the 24-year-old man with the gun. She told police that she was also armed, and that she had her weapon at the ready, fearing for the safety of her husband and the victim.

More Here

FL: Armed Man Stops Car Theft

Investigators said two suspects tried to steal the victim’s car in front of his home on Strasberg Trail near state roads 408 and 436 just before 4 a.m. Friday.

The victim woke up and grabbed his gun, then ran outside and fired a shot. The suspects fled on S.R. 436, police said.

More Here

NH: Constitutional Carry Introduced

Constitutional carry has been introduced in New Hampshire by Jeb Bradley(r).  David Boutin and J.R. Hoell are cosponsors.   The bill number is SB116, and is being followed at the nhliberty.org site.  Here is the analysis if the bill:

This bill:
I. Increases the length of time for which a license to carry a pistol or revolver is valid.
II. Allows a person to carry a loaded, concealed pistol or revolver without a license unless such person is otherwise prohibited by New Hampshire statute.
III. Requires the director of the division of state police to negotiate and enter into agreements with other jurisdictions to recognize in those jurisdictions the validity of the license to carry issued in this state.
IV. Repeals the requirement to obtain a license to carry a concealed pistol or revolver.

In 2011, constitutional carry, in the form of HB330, passed the house 244 to 109.   Then the NRA representative started bad mouthing the bill.   It was put on hold.  The weaker NRA bill also was put on hold.  Neither passed.   From pgnh.org:

 John Hohenwarter, the NRA representative, worked hard to cause HB330 to be held.  The main reason is he has a four page amendment (the different version) he does not want to debate in public.  He has told Bob Clegg, the President of Pro-Gun New Hampshire (and former NH Senate Majority Leader), that NH is one of those states too stupid to deal with its own legislation, and has stated he will continue to interfere politically until NH accepts his amendment and does so without public hearings in the House or the Senate. Mr. Clegg intends on meeting him head on all year until the bill is released.  As a life member of NRA he also intends on speaking out against NRA's spokesperson, because if NH caves in to this kind of treatment it won't be long before every representative of NRA is as anti-constitution-carry as John Hohenwarter.

This is an excerpt of the defense of the actions in New Hampshire in 2011 by the NRA-ILA:

Unfortunately, H.B. 330, while well-intentioned, was poorly drafted. In its current form, the bill falls short of good firearms policy. Changes and clarifications are necessary to not only strengthen its provisions, but also to prevent serious, unintended legal consequences.

As passed in the New Hampshire House of Representatives, H.B. 330 would create legitimate concerns about the carrying of concealed loaded handguns in public by minors. While the bill would not protect the carrying of firearms by minors, it would not actually prohibit it either. This is a key distinction, as under current law, minors are essentially prohibited from carrying concealed loaded handguns in public by the licensing requirement, which would be repealed if H.B. 330 were enacted.

Even more problematic, H.B. 330 would preempt prosecution for the carrying of a firearm in any situation that is not specifically excluded in the bill itself. This includes such instances as:

A search of NRA field representatives shows Brian Smith as the field rep for Maine, Vermont and New Hampshire at this time.

I would have thought the best strategy would have been to pass it, even if some parts might be questionable.  They could always be fixed later.   There is a momentum to a bill's passage, and it appears that the NRA rep managed to stop the momentum cold.   This year, New Hampshire has another Democrat Governor, Maggie Hassan, who is careful not to mention that she is a long term committed Democrat in her Governor's web site.

Constitutional carry has expanded to five or six states, depending on how you count.  Some count Montana, others do not.   Several states have passed a bill, some have been vetoed by hostile governors.

Constitutional carry in New Hampshire seemed like a shoo-in, even past a governor's veto, in 2011.  It will be interesting to see what happens this year.


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

David Codrea: Revoked judgment in Dobyns case reveals further government misconduct

Starting out quoting Shakespeare and ending up citing Kafka, Judge Francis M. Allegra’s conclusions about ATF conduct that led him to rule in favor of retired agent Jay Dobyns in a breach of covenant suit are scathingly revealed in his previously sealed opinion. That judgment was revoked after Allegra learned of “fraud upon the court” considerations, this column reported Sunday.

Leading his opinion with a verse from Othello, Allegra pointedly let the government defendants he ruled against know he considered them to have robbed Dobyns of his “good name.” Concluding his opinion with a reference comparing Dobyns’ ordeal to that imposed by the ‘totalitarian state” in “The Trial,” and calling it “Kafkaesque,” Allegra further observed that the conduct of "certain ATF officials ... bears little resemblance to the lofty sayings carved into the facades of the Department of Justice.” He was referring to “words now carved into the office rotunda of the Attorney General” that “The United States wins its point whenever justice is done its citizens in the courts.”

“Based on the breach of the covenant, the court finds that plaintiff [Dobyns] is entitled to damages in the amount of $173,000,” Allegra ordered in the opinion he has since revoked in order to pursue an investigation into further government misconduct. “The court concludes that defendant [ATF] is entitled to – nothing.”

Contained between such surprisingly literary judicial bookends is much “legalese,” and much “backstory” that in many cases reads more like a novel than like a record of dry facts. It's almost surreal when figures from Operation Fast and Furious appear in this account, and they act in character consistent with how they established themselves in that story. This time, with additional “cast members” (and the legal document at times reads just like a script), the technique of “slow walking” (as in deliberately dragging their feet investigating the arson of Dobyns’ home) brings to mind another “walking” technique employed by ATF in that other installment of the bureau’s directed misadventures.

Also contained in the narrative is the judge’s unequivocal opinion that Dobyns was not only clearly exonerated for the fire that destroyed his home – a smear intended to cast his character and motives into doubt – but that ATF officials knew he was innocent, and behaved in a manner that was “reprehensible” and actually “compounded the potential harm that might have befallen the Dobyns family." And testimony presented later in the opinion further revealed that reopening the arson case was discouraged by ATF’s Chief Counsel’s Office because it “would damage [the] civil case.”

More Here

Does Marin Prosecutor Beberian have an Unhealthy Obsession with Guns?

More evidence has surfaced that California's Marin County Prosecutor, Ed Berberian, has a bias, perhaps even an obsession, against gun owners and self defense.  Six months ago Dr. James Simon defended himself and his wife of 38 years from an aggressive driver who followed him to his home, drove his Mercedes part way into the Simon's garage to prevent the door from closing, and persisted in invading the home after two warning shots were fired.   Doctor Simon shot the man and called the police.

Berberian prosecuted anyway.  He has a history of aggressively prosecuting self defense cases, especially those who use guns, according to commenters from Marin County.   From marinij.com:

In the other case I mention, a person was arrested after shooting a knife- wielding attacker who had broken into the victim's house through the window while the victim was on the phone with the 911 dispatcher. The victim had never committed a crime in their life and had a restraining order against the attacker. The victim had called the police many times about the attacker. The attacker got in through the broken window, lunged at the victim to wrest the gun away and was shot and killed. The victim was charged with murder by our Marin DA but the judge threw out the charge, so the DA is now pursuing manslaughter charges against the victim. The victim is still in jail after many months, awaiting trial, cannot afford the bail amount. I read in the IJ that the DA will push for 21 years prison time, because he used a gun. 21 years for defending yourself in your own home against an armed intruder while you are on the phone to 911? REALLY?!

The evidence in the case involving Dr. Simon was so one sided, that the judge dismissed it at a preliminary hearing.  Berberian did not like the result, and said so in public:

“I’m very disappointed in the ruling. I think it sends the wrong message to the community. Since I have been DA, I have been extremely sensitive to the issue of gun violence. I don’t want that in our community. We have to have some community standards,” Berberian said.

Dr. Simon has an extensive gun collection of over 50 firearms, mostly WWII collectibles and hunting guns.  Such a collection could be worth tens of thousands of dollars.  All of the guns were registered and legal under California's highly restrictive gun laws.  Given Berberian's obsession with "gun violence", the possession of over 50 guns might subject Dr. Simon to more prosecutorial attention than otherwise.   Berberian has gone so far as to encourage families to get rid of toy guns.  From marinij.com:

Berberian is joining forces with the Center for Domestic Peace and Ben & Jerry's Ice Cream to encourage families to get rid of toy guns and violent video games.

Berberian has pushed for legislation making it a crime to possess a toy gun that does not have an orange or red tip on the muzzle.  From contrcostatimes.com:

Frustrated by the situation, Berberian called Assemblyman Marc Levine to see if there is a way to introduce legislation making it a misdemeanor offense to possess an altered toy gun.

Berberian pushed for symbolic gun "buy back" turn-in programs that criminologists have repeatedly said have no measurable effect.   Economist Steven D. Levitt of "Freakonomics" fame agrees that they are not effective in fighting crime.  But they make strident political theater, screaming out the message: Guns Are Bad.  Turn Them In!   From nbcbayarea.com:

A second gun buyback event is scheduled for Monday at the Mill Valley Police Department, but Berberian said people surrendering guns there will be told they won't receive any money. The buyback is scheduled for 11 a.m. to 3 p.m..

Berberian decided to act on his disappointment with the judges ruling in Dr. Simon's case.  He convened a grand jury, and Dr. Simon faces another indictment before another judge today, 30 January.    Berberian is personally prosecuting the case.  From sfgate.com:

The case is being prosecuted personally by District Attorney Ed Berberian.
Prosecutors whose cases are dismissed at preliminary hearings can refile charges or take evidence to grand juries without violating defendants’ double-jeopardy rights, said legal analyst Steve Clark, a former Santa Clara County prosecutor who now works as a defense attorney.

“He gets one more bite at the apple,” Clark said.

But Clark added, “The question becomes, why are they doing it? Is it vindictive prosecution, that you’re sort of piling on a case that shouldn’t be done, or is there new or different information?”

Marin County has a low crime rate, so perhaps DA Berberian has a lot of time on his hands.  Time he can use to push prosecutions of upstanding elderly doctors who defend their families.    After all, it is not his money.  And maybe, just maybe, he will be able to destroy a doctor's life and 50 some collectible guns.  He has to send a "message".  After all, its "for the children".    No matter how many innocent lives have to be destroyed. 

©2015 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice is included.
Link to Gun Watch

FL: Home Invader Shot by Man Protecting Family

Police said the resident, Jimmy Soto, 28, armed himself with a 9mm handgun and partially opened the door.

According to police, Ricker tried to pull the door open and force his way inside.

(snip)

"He was looking for drugs when he came to my house," Stinson said. "I'm sure the (the resident) had to defend himself because the dude was trying to break in. It's scary. It happens everywhere but you don't expect it to happen that close to home."

Other residents said they believe Soto had no choice but to open fire.

More Here

TX:Gunfight with Home Invaders

A woman who works on the lot said three or four armed men wearing masks yelled at the homeowner to get on the ground. The homeowner ended up exchanging gunfire with them.

“He grabbed his own weapon for self defense and he started shooting at them because they started shooting at him too,” the woman said.

More Here

MI: Detroit: 74-Year-Old Shoots 19-Year-Old White Home Invader

"As he walked through the home, the home invader confronted him with the gun. He shot the home invader and the home invader died here on scene," Coombs said.

Neighbors know the 74-year-old man as "Larry." They say he legally carries a gun and they know he would defend his home.

More Here

TX:Retired man and Robber gunfight, both hit

HOUSTON (KTRK) --

A retired deputy was injured during a gunfight with a robber inside a fast food restaurant in east Houston.

(snip)

The robbed fled the scene, but police believe he was also shot because he left a blood trail behind.

More Here

Gun range owner bans Muslims, claims business booming

  "An Arkansas gun range owner says she saw business explode after she banned Muslims from the premises. Jan Morgan, the owner of the The Gun Cave Indoor Firing Range in Hot Springs National Park, issued the ban in the fall of 2014. According to her website janmorganmedia.com, Morgan has read the Qur'an and did not like what she saw. Sun News interviewed Morgan and found out that business is booming since she pulled the trigger on the ban."

http://www.calgarysun.com/2015/01/29/gun-range-owner-bans-muslims-claims-business-booming

TX: Patrick Continues Support for Open Carry

Lt. Governor Dan Patrick was quoted as saying that open carry bills might not come up for a vote this session on Tuesday.  From dallasnews.com:

 “Open carry is important, but I don’t think there is support in the Legislature to pass it,” Patrick said. “The votes have not been there.”

 Wednesday he reiterated his support for that legislation.  From texastribune.org:

After noting that he had referred a bill to committee allowing concealed weapons to be carried on university campuses by those with appropriate licenses, Patrick said in a statement, "Now that [Senate Bill] 11 has support and is moving towards passage we can focus on other Second Amendment issues, including open carry, which I have consistently supported."

It does not appear to me that Patrick is actually waffling here.  What I suspect is that this controversy was ginned up by the more leftist media in Texas, attempting to derail pro-second amendment legislation.  Patrick made the initial remarks to Texas Tribune editor in Chief, Evan Smith.  Smith is an Austin Texas transplant from New York, who founded and runs the Texas Tribune, a decidedly left of center publication.  From chron.com:

When Smith pressed the Houston Republican whether he would be a “yea” or “nay” vote for open carry if he was still a senator, Patrick deflected, saying, “I don’t have a vote anymore.”
“That’s not an answer,” Smith shot back, to which Patrick finally responded, “If I was going to vote against it, then as lieutenant governor I would hold the bill. I just said I’m going to let the bill move, OK?”
Patrick, who co-sponsored legislation in 2013 to legalize concealed carry on college campuses, also said he thinks the votes are there this year to allow gun toting at universities. On Monday, a campus carry bill filed boasted a super-majority of 19 co-sponsors, the exact number needed to pass the bill out of the Senate under new rules the chamber passed last week.

If open carry is to pass in Texas, open carry advocates will have to convince 19 Texas Senators that they have more clout than leftwing Texas media does.  That is the power structure that the senators will be looking at.

Do they face the ire of thousands of dedicated activists who have vowed to primary those who vote against the bill?   Or do they face the opposition of leftwing media who have held disproportionate power in Texas for a significant time?   The defeat of Governor candidate Wendy Davis, her willingness to support open carry, and the large majorities of Republicans in the House and Senate appear on the open carry supporters side.

There is no credible public policy position against open carry, as it is in effect in 44 states without problems.   The ban of open carry of handguns in Texas (open carry of long guns is protected by the Texas constitution) is a relic of the reconstruction government.

I wrote the above words before I found Dan Patrick's tweet here

  Dan Patrick        ✔ @DanPatrick

It's typical of the media looking to build wedges among conservatives, to take words out of context. More : https://www.facebook.com/dan.patrick.texas/posts/10152543325461836 …

Then I found this statement at the facebook page above:

There were inaccurate reports in the media and across the Internet yesterday regarding my comments concerning Open Carry legislation. Despite reports to the contrary, I have never changed my position on the issue. I remain a steadfast supporter of the second amendment and Open Carry legislation.

As is typical of the media looking to build wedges among conservatives, many stories took words out of context. I did not say the bill was dead but suggested instead that, because the votes were not there (at this time), it had not risen to a level of priority....at this point. That is far different than saying an issue is not a priority, it just means work still needs to be done.

It is clear that the activists are finding out who really opposes them.  From the facebook page comments:

 Sarah Mass Lefever Figured lamestream media had something to do with this mess.. keep up the good fight. . Would love to volunteer for you!

 Jarrad Mears Dan,

I've been hating on you a little hard but I do know how the media can twist words. Get this done and make it happen. A lot of people are stirred up and really pissed off. All I can say is prove yourself and we'll follow. If you don't then you know how that story will end.

Pat Davis Pearson Fight for us sir, and we will fight for you. I expect to see this bill come up for vote.

 ©2015 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice is included.
Link to Gun Watch

OH: Evidence Supports Self Defense Claim

At the same time, the alleged robbery victim contacted Columbus police and admitted he shot Mullins. He told officers that he shot him in self-defense after Mullins attempted to rob him at gunpoint.

Police say evidence indicates Mullins was attempting to rob the man when he was killed. So far, charges have not been filed against that shooter.

More Here

TX: Robbers Run in, Robbers run out. Nothing taken

In this unusual case in Texas, four robbers run in, then they run out.  In a store full of expensive jewelry, they take nothing.  There is video at the link.
As the four left the store, Parker said, the jeweler who was forced to the ground grabbed his gun and shot at the robbers. She said the robbers shot back at least twice hitting her store.

Police said the robbers took off in a stolen van that was found just down the street. Nothing was taken from the store. No one was hurt. She added security and hopes to keep this from happening again.

More Here

Restoration of Second Amendment on Corps Land Proposed by Senator from Idaho

Idaho Senator Mike Crapo has introduced legislation(pdf) to remove federal infringments on second amendment rights from lands controlled by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps). From the press release:

The bill seeks to make firearm regulations consistent across federal lands by allowing law-abiding citizens to carry firearms on U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) property. Under current law, a person may carry a concealed weapon in a National Park or Refuge as long as individuals comply with the firearm laws of the park’s home state. However, the same rights are not extended to Americans who hunt, camp or fish on land owned by the Corps, effectively denying them of their Second Amendment freedoms guaranteed under the Constitution when on Corps lands. 

 This legislation has been introduced for the last three sessions of Congress but has been bottled up by Harry Reid in the Senate and the Obama administration.  Perhaps the administration should have agreed to the legislative compromise before the ban was challenged in court.   Now the Corps is faced with a court decision citing Peruta in the Ninth Circuit, that declares that carry outside of the home is a constitutional right.

On 10 January, 2014, Judge B. Lynn Winmill of the United States District Court for the District of Idaho, issued a preliminary injunction against the Army Corps of Engineers to prevent enforcement of the Corps' rules banning guns on the properties that it manages.   Here is a link to the ruling itself (pdf).

The press release continues:

“Not only does this policy discourage use of the 11.7 million acres, 460 lakes and almost 500 recreational areas that are owned or managed by the Corps, but, more importantly, it infringes on Americans’ Second Amendment rights,” said Crapo. “The rights of lawful gun owners do not stop at arbitrary boundaries, and this legislation will ensure those rights are protected by bringing consistency to the current conflicting myriad of firearm regulations imposed across public lands.” 

Specifically, Crapo’s legislation would clarify that federal regulations should not forbid the possession of firearms on Army Crops projects and lands, as long as the firearm possession complies with state laws. Additionally, it would ensure that Corps policy is consistent with the policy already in effect at National Parks or Refuges. 

 In June of 2014, a lawsuit was filed in Georgia asking for an injunction against enforcement of the Corps' ban in that state.   The  judge there ignored the second amendment implications, ruling that all of Corps lands were "sensitive", like a school or government building.

Summary judgment in favor of second amendment rights was granted in the Idaho case on October 13, 2014.  Here is a link to the rulilng(pdf).

Now that Harry Reid is not controlling the Senate, able to block reforms, the bill has a good chance of passage.   President Obama might sign it if it is attached to legislation that he wants to see passed, as he did with the reform that removed most federal infringements on second amendment rights in national parks and refuges.

When the national park legislation was passed, an unfortunate oversight left a provision in that the law for a general prohibition on the carry of arms into "federal facilities", which applied to federal offices.  This allowed the National Park Service (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 this time, the oversight that allowed recalcitrant NPS bureaucrats to ban guns in park bathrooms will be corrected.   I doubt that the Senate meant for people with personal pistols to be forced to pee behind a tree.

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