Wednesday, November 30, 2022

Restraining Order Ban on Second Amendment: Decision Appealled to Fifth Circuit

On November 15, 2022, the United States Attorney in the Western District of Texas, Ashley C. Hoff, filed a Notice of Appeal to the United States District Court fro the Western District of Texas, Pecos Division in the case of USA v. Perez-Gallan. 

Previously, on November 10, 2022, Judge David Counts had issued a Memorandum Opinion dismissing the indictment as to Litsson Antonio Perez-Gallan as invalid because it was unconstitutional under the United States Supreme Court decision in NYR&PA v. Bruen decision, which restored Second Amendment rights and restored the Second Amendment as a full fledged member of the Bill of Rights, not a second class right. 

Judge Counts found the part of the controversial  Lautenberg Amendment, passed in 1996, which prohibits a person who is under a restraining order for domestic violence from possessing a firearm or ammunition, 18 U.S.C. §922(g)(8), to be unconstitutional.

The wording of 18 U.S.C. §922(g)(8) is this:

(g) It shall be unlawful for any person-

(8) who is subject to a court order that-

(A) was issued after a hearing of which such person received actual notice, and at which such person had an opportunity to participate; 

(B) restrains such person from harassing, stalking, or threatening an intimate partner of such person or child of such intimate partner or person, or engaging in other conduct that would place an intimate partner in reasonable fear of bodily injury to the partner or child; and 

(C)(i) includes a finding that such person represents a credible threat to the physical safety of such intimate partner or child; or (ii) by its terms explicitly prohibits the use, attempted use, or threatened use of physical force against such intimate partner or child that would reasonably be expected to cause bodily injury;

Not only did Judge Counts find 18 U.S.C. §922(g)(8) to be unconstitutional, but he ordered Litsson Antonio Perez-Gallan to be released from confinement on November 15, 2022.  To the credit of the United States Attorney, they did not oppose the motion to release Perez-Gallan, because there were no longer any indictments against him.

The United States Attorney then appealed the case to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals. From the Notice of Appeal



       Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3731, the United States of America hereby gives notice that

it appeals the district court’s November 10, 2022, Order granting the Defendant’s motion

to dismiss the indictment (Doc. No. 55) to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth


                                                 Respectfully submitted,

                                                 ASHLEY C. HOFF
                                                 UNITED STATES ATTORNEY



The Biden Administration has been put in a bit of a quandary by the Constitution and Judge Counts. 

The guidance on how to restore the protections of the right to keep and bear arms in the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, written by Judge Clarence Thomas, in the Bruen decision, is clear.

If there is no historical record of widespread and sustained, culturally accepted, restrictions on the right to keep and bear arms, primarily from the time of the ratification of the Second Amendment in 1791, and to a lesser extent, when the Fourteenth Amendment was ratified in 1868, infringements on the right to keep and bear arms are unconstitutional.

A ban on the right to possess firearms and ammunition is a direct infringement of the right to keep and bear arms. There is no historical record of destroying the exercise of this right because of a mere restraining order, before any conviction.

If the Biden Administration chose not to appeal this decision to the Fifth Circuit, cases such as those of Litsson Antonio Perez-Gallan would be seen as losers. 

There has been considerable pressure in the dominant leftist media to label the decision to restore fundamental constitutional rights as somehow being anti-woman. The dominant media has framed the narrative as an issue of safety of domestic abuse victims.  From UPI:

The effort in Texas to expand protections for domestic abuse victims from gun violence has long faced obstacles. A small number of communities in the state have established programs to transfer firearms from people under a protective order to law enforcement, but these resource-intensive programs depend on federal and state laws that ban these individuals from possessing guns.

Thus, the Biden administration is under pressure from the dominant leftist media to "do something" about the decision.

Appealing the decision makes it likely the Fifth Circuit will uphold the decision of the lower court. Then the Biden Administration would be pressured to appeal it to the Supreme Court, where they would likely lose again.

The Fifth Circuit, in 2020, upheld the § 922(g)(8) prohibition, but only under the now discredited "two step" process and under discredited "intermediate scrutiny".

The advantage of the appeal for the Biden Administration is it kicks the can down the road. The Biden administration may well be out of office before this case is decided at the Fifth Circuit, and very likely will be out of office if the case goes to the Supreme Court.

This is a very simple case. It is a good test of the will of the Courts to restore Second Amendment rights under the Bruen decision.

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

Gun Watch



TN: Jackson "Road Rage" Shooting was Self Defense

On Monday, the department stated that 29-year-old John Eric Henderson, Jr. was shot by another person on November 23 near Old Humboldt Road near Jeremiah Drive.

Police say through video “that captured elements” of the incident, it was found that the shooting was self-defense.


More Here

Tuesday, November 29, 2022

NY: General Ban on Carry for Private Property Declared Unconstitutional

On September 13, 2022, Brett Christian, the Firearms Policy Coalition, the Second Amendment Foundation, and others filed suit against the "emergency" measure pushed through the New York State legislature by Governor Hochul, in defiance of the long awaited decision in NYSR&PA v Bruen.

The Bruen decision clarified the Heller and McDonald decisions, partially restoring the right to bear arms.  The right has been incrementally infringed on for more than a hundred years, primarily under the "Progressive" political philosophy., along with its ideological breathern, the "Jim Crow" laws and Black Codes.

The Christian v. Nigrelli case, as it came to be known, pointed out the Hochel "emergency" statute violated the protections of the Second Amendment when it made all private property into "sensitive places" except where the property owners made an effort to extract themselves. From the complaint:

The [Supreme] Court also explained what courts and States could not do. In Bruen, New York attempted to characterize its pre-Bruen ban of public carry as merely a “sensitive place” restriction. Id. at 2133–34. There, the State attempted to define “sensitive places” as “all places where people typically congregate and where law-enforcement and other public-safety professionals are presumptively available.” Id. (internal quotation marks omitted). The Supreme Court rejected New York’s capacious designation of sensitive places. “[E]xpanding the category of ‘sensitive places’ simply to all places of public congregation that are not isolated from law enforcement defines the category of ‘sensitive places’ far too broadly.” Id. (emphasis added). Under Bruen, the designation of “sensitive places” cannot be used to “in effect exempt cities from the Second Amendment” or “eviscerate the general right to publicly carry arms for self-defense.” Id. at 2134. Instead, the only permissible “sensitive places” are those with a “historical basis.” Id.

On November 22, 2022, eleven weeks after the case was filed, Judge John L. Sinata, Jr. posted a decision and order on the request for a preliminary injunction.

The decision struck down the private property ban on carry.

Preliminary injunctions are granted when the Plaintiffs are likely to succeed on the merits, irreparable harm would result without the injunction, and the public interest would be served.

Any time interval of infringing on fundamental, Constitutionally enumerated rights is considered to be irreparable harm.

The decision and order found the ban on carrying on private property, without the express consent of the property owner, was unconstitutional. From the decision:

Another one of New York’s new restrictions imposed in the immediate
aftermath of the Supreme Court's Bruen decision is the private property exclusion. That new provision makes it a felony for a license holder to possess a firearm on all private property, unless the relevant property holders actually permit such possession with a sign or by express consent. 

The Supreme Court’s cases addressing the individual’s right to keep and bear arms—from Heller and McDonald to its June 2022 decision in Bruen—dictate that New York’s private property exclusion is equally unconstitutional. Regulation in this area is permissible only if the government demonstrates that the current enactment is consistent with the Nation’s historical tradition of sufficiently analogous regulations.

Property owners indeed have the right to exclude. But the state may not unilaterally exercise that right and, thereby, interfere with the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding citizens who seek to carry for self-defense outside of their own homes. Thus, the motion for a preliminary injunction enjoining Defendants’ enforcement of this private property exclusion is granted.

Judge Sinatra refused to grant a three day stay on the decision, pending appeal.

The State of New York, in the person of the controversial Attorney General, Letitia James, is appealing the decision to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit.

Other courts in New York have been striking down the numerous unconstitutional infringements put forward by Governor Hochul's "emergency" legislation.

The question appears to be: what will be left, if anything, after the courts are done striking down all the overreaching parts?

We will not know, in detail, until an appeal reaches the Supreme Court is decided, and published.


Early indications are not much of substance will be left of Hochul's Folly, if anything.

Control of the House of Representatives has shifted to the Republicans in the mid-term elections.

It appears, for two years, the Democratic party scheme to pack the Supreme Court with Progressive (Leftist) justices will be thwarted.

The Supreme Court, in Bruen, has rendered a clear decision and guidance on how courts are to restore Second Amendment rights.

Those rights have been incrementally infringed on for over a hundred years.

Several lower courts have shown a willingness to uphold the guidance of the Supreme Court in Bruen. --

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

Gun Watch






TX: Gunfight in Midland, Man Wounds Luis Miguel Espinoza Galindo in Self Defense

While responding to the scene, officers were notified of a gunshot victim with non-life-threatening injuries at Midland Memorial Hospital, identified as 21-year-old Luis Miguel Espinoza Galindo. During the investigation, it was discovered that Galindo fired his gun at two males, one of which returned fire in self-defense, striking Galindo.

More Here

Federal Law Banning Gun Possession because of Restraining Order is Unconstitutional under the Second Amendment


Federal District Judge David  Counts in the Western District of Texas has ruled the controversial federal law banning gun possession by a person who has been served with a restraining order for domestic violence, is unconstitutional under the Second Amendment.

The statute in question is 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(8). This statute makes it a crime to possess a firearm if the person is subject to a court issued restraining order about domestic violence.  The maximum term of imprisonment for violation of the statue is up to 10 years in prison. The actual wording of 18 U.S.C. §922(g)(8) is this:

(g) It shall be unlawful for any person-

(8) who is subject to a court order that-

(A) was issued after a hearing of which such person received actual notice, and at which such person had an opportunity to participate; 

(B) restrains such person from harassing, stalking, or threatening an intimate partner of such person or child of such intimate partner or person, or engaging in other conduct that would place an intimate partner in reasonable fear of bodily injury to the partner or child; and 

(C)(i) includes a finding that such person represents a credible threat to the physical safety of such intimate partner or child; or (ii) by its terms explicitly prohibits the use, attempted use, or threatened use of physical force against such intimate partner or child that would reasonably be expected to cause bodily injury;

The person subject to a restraining order alone has not been convicted of any crime.

Restraining orders do not have the protections afforded suspects in an actual trial.  Restraining orders have historically been obtained from judges with little effort.

A restraining order does not show the person restrained is guilty of domestic violence. 

A restraining order shows a judge was willing to accommodate a person who claimed they feared domestic violence, by restraining the accused person from harrassing, threatening, or stalking the person or persons.

Judge Counts, in his opinion, starts with a description of the state of Second Amendment law today: From the opinion:

Before Bruen, the Second Amendment looked like an abandoned cabin in the woods. A knot of vines, weeds, and roots, left unkempt for decades, crawling up the cabin’s sides as if pulling it under the earth. Firearm regulations are that overgrowth. Starting with the Federal Firearms Act in 1938, laws were passed with little—if any—consideration given to their constitutionality. That is, until the Supreme Court intervened in Bruen.

Several appellate courts have upheld the restraining order ban before the Supreme Court decision in Bruen. Those courts used the discredited "collective rights" approach to the Second Amenment.

Judge Counts suggests the entire ban on the possession of firearms by people convicted of domestic violence may be unconstitutional. However, he stops short of that conclusion, ruling only on the precise case before him:

is banning possession of firearms, because of a restraining order showing fear of domestic violence, constitutionally allowed under the Second Amendment?

Judge Counts finds the obvious:

The State has not shown any historical precedent for removing the right to keep and bear arms because of a restraining order for domestic violence. 

Judge Counts concludes with this:

That said, this Court embraces Bruen’s charge. Thus, after sifting through the history above, this Court finds that the Government did not prove that §922(g)(8) aligns with this Nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation and declines the Government’s invitation to insert its own public policy concerns rather than following Bruen. As a result, the Court holds that § 922(g)(8) is unconstitutional under Bruen’s framework.

Before and after the passage of the controversial Lautenberg Amendment in 1996, many commentators noted several constitutional problems with the law.

  • It was the first time a fundamental constitutional right could be removed for a misdemeanor;
  • It was the first time a fundamental constitutional right could be removed for a restraining order;
  • The amendment punished people for past behavior, thus, it was an ex-post-facto law.

When courts were presented with these arguments, the counterarguments were:

  • The Second Amendment is not an individual right;
  • People are not being punished for past acts, but acts in the present; if they possess firearms in the present, they are violating the law (this presumes removing a constitutional right is not punishment)

Judge Counts opinion sweeps away those excuses. As Bruen shows the Second Amendment to be a fundamental right on par with the First Amendment, those arguments no longer apply.

The Supreme Court has held a person whose constitutional rights are violated, even for a moment, suffers irreparable harm.

The current argument in support historical analogs for removing the right to keep and bear arms from those convicted of domestic violence is: an act of violence is similar to other acts of violence which are used to remove the right to keep and bear arms for felonies.


This correspondent has seen the Lautenberg Amendment, especially the restraining order section, used as a cudgel by attorneys in many cases.

Often, its use has little to do with actual domestic violence.

It is used to punish those accused with little or no evidence.

It is used in divorce cases, custody cases, even in contrived "domestic violence" cases.

The purpose is to dishearten the accused and to make it more difficult to muster the resources for an effective defense.

Many attorneys, in divorce cases, insist that a request for a restraining order be filed, in order to take the case.

Removal of fundamental constitutional rights for a mere restraining order is an outrage to the Constitution and the rule of law.

Domestic homicides were on a steep downward trend before the Lautenberg Amendment was passed.

After it was passed, the number of domestic homicides leveled off.  (FBI -UCR)


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

Gun Watch

Monday, November 28, 2022

Bear Attack Stopped by Man with Knife, Tarzan Style, 2006

 Tom Tilley and Sam, after Ontario Bear Attack


On July 20, 2006, Tom Tilley of Waterloo, Ontario, Canada was on a canoeing trip with his dog, Sam. A predatory black bear stalked them during a portage.

Sam, a American Stratfordshire, warned Tom of the bears presence. As the bear closed in, Tom's dog Sam interposed himself between the bear and Tom. When the bear attacked Sam, Tom leaped on the bear's back, Tarzan style, and killed the bear, using a  hunting knife with a six inch blade.

Wawa is a township not far from Lake Superior, about 400 miles north and west of Waterloo. It is about a 600 mile trip by car.

Buck Knife 119 (there are several variations of the 119, mostly in handle material)

Kanawa is the screen name Tom uses on the conservative discussion website, freerepublic. His fight with the bear is discussed and detailed there.

The night before the fight with the bear, in his trip journal, Tom wrote:

"Finding it quite easy to wear knife on belt"

The Buck 119 has a siix inch blade.

Tom considered a longer blade, but wanted it to be easy to carry.

It was on the fourth day of a planned 12 day trip when the attack occurred near Abby Lake.

Tom and his dog, Sam, were on their third trip across the portage when the bear stalked them.

A portage is a trail used by canoeists to move from one body of water to another.

The bear appeared and Tom waved his arms and shouted. The bear moved off the trail, into the woods. Then it suddenly reappeared, blocking Tom's route back.  Tom had already drawn his Buck knife, as a precaution.

Sam moved from behind Tom to between Tom and the bear.

The bear approached the pair, then pounced on Sam, grabbing him by the back.

Tilley ran behind the bear, jumped on its back, and started stabbing it with his Buck knife. He said the first stab sank the blade to the hilt in the bear's neck. After the first few stabs, the bear weakened considerably. Tom Tilley continued to stab the bear until he was sure it was dead.

During the investigation of the incident, the 200 lb bear was found to be ten years old and underweight.

Tom found reason to carry a fixed blade when he read the story of Jacqueline Perry, who was killed by a bear while her husband attempted to defend her with a Swiss Army Knife. From The Record, recorded on

Perry's husband attempted to fend off the animal with a Swiss Army Knife -- the only weapon he had.

"When I read the report about her death, it really hit home to me that these things are possible," Tilley said.

"I owe her husband a real debt of gratitude because if I hadn't
heard her story and got that knife, I wouldn't be telling this story."

The July, 2006 canoe trip was the first time Tom had carried the Buck knife into the wilderness.

Tom's dog, Sam, eventually recovered from the bear bite.  Tom said because Sam was a little on the chubby side, the layer of fat under the skin kept the bear from breaking Sam's back.

Nine years later, in 2015, Tom celebrated Sam's 14th birthday with a box of biscuits and a new bowl.

Sam died in July of 2017, as he could no longer walk and had no appetite. (post 1008 of freepublic thread).

In Canada, it is very difficult to obtain a permit to carry a pistol in the wilderness.  Long guns are easier to obtain, but are more cumbersome to carry.

There are plenty of black bears in North America. The population has to be managed, to keep bears from inflicting significant damage on human crops, livestock, and, occasionally, humans.

The few bears which are killed as they present direct threats to humans are a tiny fraction of the overall black bear population.  They are a small fraction of the number of bears which must be harvested by hunting.

The numbers are so small, if all of them are killed, the numbers will have no measurable effect on bear population numbers.


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

Gun Watch



MO: No Charges for Man who Fataly Shot Man Trying to Force Entry to Home

The Leavenworth County Attorney declined to file charges against a man who fatally shot an intruder allegedly trying to force his way into the resident’s home, according to a letter released Wednesday. “There is no way to show that the resident’s intent was anything more than trying to deter someone, who had just gone through his vehicle, from attempting to violently enter his home in the middle of the night and that he felt that his life was at risk,” Leavenworth County Attorney Todd Thompson wrote in the letter. “Due to all of this, we do not believe we legally and ethically can file charges.”

More Here

Saturday, November 26, 2022

IL: 23-Year-Old Armed Chicago Woman Shoots Car-Jack Suspect

CHICAGO — A woman shot a man in the head, who was attempting to get in her car, early Wednesday morning on the South Side — according to Chicago police.

Just before 2:10 a.m., police said four male suspects exited a black sedan in the 1300 block of East 89th Street and one of them attempted to open another vehicle armed with a handgun.

The driver, a 23-year-old woman and valid concealed carry holder, fired a shot striking the man in the head. Police said she then fled from her vehicle on foot and was shot in the left arm.

More Here

Friday, November 25, 2022

FL: Domestic Defense? Four men Brawl, Son Shoots, Kills Father

ST. LUCIE COUNTY — The shooting death of a boat shop owner will not lead to criminal charges for his former father-in-law, who claimed self defense in a four-man family brawl outside Specialized Marine Services on March 1.

David Silva Jr., 64, of Port St. Lucie, told detectives he shot Joseph Warren Tenore, 39, twice after the man armed himself with a metal pipe and began striking his son, Joseph Bernard Tenore, 21, outside the business at 4675 N. U.S. 1.


More Here

Thursday, November 24, 2022

Wyoming Dentist Uses 10mm to stop Grizzly Attack, Wounds self in Leg


On October, 21, 2022, Wyoming dentist, Dr. Lee Francis, 65 years old, was hunting elk with his 40-year-old son, in the area near Rock Creek, in the Sawtooth Mountains, east of Bondurant, Wyoming.

In this video from KSAL-TV, he gives an interview and explains what happened.

Dr. Francis is an avid hunter and outdoorsman. He successfully collected a large grizzly bear with bow and arrow in 2013, during a hunt, perhaps in Alaska or Canada.


Image of archery bear from facebook.

Several attempts to contact Dr. Francis have been unsuccessful.

Dr. Francis had separated from his son when he unintentionally stepped in front of the entrance to a bear den. He saw the fresh dirt, had drawn his Glock 10mm, chambered a round, and was backing away when the bear charged at him out of the den from 10 feet away.

The best interview about the encounter appears to have been in an article at  The article says Dr. Francis used 130 grain hardcast bullets in his 10mm Glock.

“He came right at me, and he came on full blast,” the elder Francis said. 

Counting the cartridge already in the chamber, he had 14 rounds loaded with 130 grain hard cast bullets in his Glock. 

“I just remember shooting three or for times, right before he hit me,” he said. “Then I went down on my back.”


Hard cast bullets will punch through a bruin’s body, instead of
rapidly expanding and expending their energy in massive, shallow wounds
the way that hollow point bullets do, he said. 

“Hollow points are meant for stopping people, not bears,” he said,
adding that it was also fortunate for him that his weapon was loaded
with hard cast bullets. 

“A hit from a hollow point would have probably just exploded my whole foot,” he said. 

He also said he favors the high-capacity, semi-automatic Glock over magnum revolvers.

130 grain hardcast bullets for a 10mm would be unusual. Perhaps it is a typo or misreading of notes, where another weight of bullet was intended.  Buffalo Bore has a 220 grain hardcast bullets loaded for bear in the 10mm.

Dr. Francis was attempting to fend of the bear with his feet when he accidentally wounded himself.

In the over 123 documented cases where pistols were fired in defense against bears, this correspondent recalls only two where the person firing the pistol wounded themselves.

Coincidentally, both were with 10mm pistols.  Both happened as the defender fell on their back and attempted to fend off the bear with their feet.

The first case was with Kim Woodman who had to shoot a grizzly sow at bad breath distance in 2016. Kim was backing away from the bear when he tripped and went over backwards. He continued to fire, and shot the tip off of the middle toe of his left foot as he shot the bear and attempted to block it with his foot at the same time.

Peace officers train to be able to back up without falling, and failing that, to avoid shooting their legs or feet if they fall backward.

Those techniques can be handy for people who carry pistols as a potential defense against bears. Here is one video on shooting while moving.  Here is one for shooting from your back.  The important thing to practice is not to point the muzzle at your own body, obviously a more difficult task in the middle of a fight for your life.

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

Gun Watch



CA: Domestic Defense, Estranged Husband Shot, Killed

A man died Sunday in what Dublin police are describing as a “self-defense shooting.”

Officers responded around 4 p.m. on Sunday afternoon to the SoFi Dublin apartment homes on the 7100 block of San Ramon Road near Dublin Boulevard and found a man, identified as an “estranged husband,” fatally shot at the scene, Dublin police said in a news release.

More Here

'WA: Domestic Defense in Rainer? 39 Year-Old man Shot Breaking into Ex-Girfriend's Apartment

A 39-year-old man was shot and wounded Sunday morning after he broke into an ex-girlfriend’s Rainier Beach apartment and opened fire with a handgun.

Around 10:30 AM, the suspect kicked in the door of an apartment in the 9400 block of Rainier Avenue South and opened fire. A 19-year-old man in the apartment then returned fire, striking the suspect multiple times. 

Medics transported the suspect to Harborview Medical Center for treatment. He is currently being held under hospital guard and investigators plan to book him into the King County Jail.

More Here

Wednesday, November 23, 2022

Second Amendment Serial Number Case Appealed to Fourth Circuit


The ground-breaking case of USA v. Randy Price has been appealed to the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals. The notice of appeal was filed on October 24, 2022. The appointment of a federal public defender was made on October 26, 2022.

The Fourth Circuit appointed the Federal Defender for the Southern District of West Virginia to represent Randy Price in this case.

Presumably, this is the same attorney who represented Price in the District Court, Wesley P. Page, Federal Public Defender s/Lex  A Coleman, WV Bar No. 10484.

The case was discussed  in a previous article on AmmoLand.

The potential for strengthening Second Amendment Protections in this case are notable and important. 

This case has few implications for criminal action in the United States. 

The law found unconsitutional in this case, 18 U.S.C. §§ 922(k), was not formed until 1990. It is late law, constitutionally, and has no significant historical precedence. 

The suspect in this case, Randy Price, may not be the person most sympathetic. Price is a convicted felon. He is prohibited from possessing firearms, by federal law.

The District Judge, Joseph R. Goodwin, found the arguments to declare the law prohibiting possession of a firearms whose serial number had been removed, to be unconstitutional, persuasive, given the guidance of the Bruen decision on the Second Amendment by the Supreme Court.

Judge Goodwin found the prohibition of a felon possessing firearms to be constitutional, under the Bruen decision.

Under this decision, a felon is barred from legally possessing firearms under federal law.  

People who may legally posses a firearm may not be prosecuted for possessing a firearm which has had the serial number altered or removed.

Federal law forbids the creation of a federal registration system.

No such rule or regulation prescribed after the date of the enactment of the Firearms Owners’ Protection Act may require that records required to be maintained under this chapter or any portion of the contents of such records, be recorded at or transferred to a facility owned, managed, or controlled by the United States or any State or any political subdivision thereof, nor that any system of registration of firearms, firearms owners, or firearms transactions or dispositions be established. Nothing in this section expands or restricts the Secretary’s [Attorney General’s] authority to inquire into the disposition of any firearm in the course of a criminal investigation.

Eight states forbid state level registration systems.

State registration systems are constitutional latecomers.

If the decision showing 18 U.S.C. §§ 922(k) is upheld. The ability of state and federal governments to use registration systems as a means of disarming the public, will be rendered toothless.

The reason universal gun registration is so dangerous that it is forbidden in federal law, is gun registration is gun confiscation, without the general pain and expense of door to door searches and confiscations required before registration systems were conceived.

If there is a general gun registrations scheme in existence, such as exists in Australia, and many European countries, all legal guns must be registered; any gun not registered is illegal. 

When a government decides to confiscates, whether individually or wholesale, it need only demand the guns which are registered, be turned in on pain of punishment. Punishment in a modern state can consist of anything from cancellation of drivers licenses, freezing of bank accounts, to turning off power and water services. This is much easier and less dangerous than house to house searches.

This becomes moot without serial numbers to connect an individual to an individual gun.

The United States has done well without a general registration system. Registration systems have virtually no effect on violent crime. They cost considerable police resources. They primarily victimize law abiding gun owners. Many such schemes attempt to pass most of the costs of the system to those who choose to exercise the right protected by the Second Amendment. Those costs, by their nature, suppress the legitimate use of Second Amendment rights.

It will be interesting to see if deep thinkers and Second Amendment strategists will be filing Amicus briefs in favor of upholding Judge Goodwin's decision.

Attorneys from the NRA, SAF, GOA, Calguns, and other state groups, should all be looking at this case closely.

If law abiding people cannot be prosecuted for possession of a firearm from which the serial number has been removed, the entire scheme of national gun registration falls apart.


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

Gun Watch



MI: Domestic Defense? EastPointe Son Kills Mother's Boyfriend, Father of 10 Children

Police say they believe a 15-year-old boy pulled the trigger, killing his mother's boyfriend during a fight Wednesday in Eastpointe.

Just before 10 p.m., the boy's mother called 911 and said her boyfriend had jumped on her at her home in the 18000 block of Holland Street.


More Here




PA: PHiladelphia Robbery suspect shot multiple times by Store Manager

PHILADELPHIA (CBS) -- A 26-year-old man was shot seven times by the manager of a dollar store he attempted to rob in the Castor section of Northeast Philadelphia on Sunday, police say. The shooting happened on 6900 block of Bustleton Avenue at the Grace Dollar Store at around 4:15 p.m.

More Here

Monday, November 21, 2022

OH: Shooting of Suspect who stole Catalytic Converter was Probably Self Defense

The Montgomery County Prosecutor’s Office will determine whether the shooting of a man accused of trying to steal a catalytic converter Friday afternoon in Harrison Twp. is a self-defense case, a local attorney said Friday night.

“The law of stand your ground applies, the question is whether the facts meet the law,” the attorney, Dennis Lieberman, told News Center 7′s Brandon Lewis.

According to the preliminary investigation, the suspected thief was shot after attacking the owner of the vehicle, who called 9-1-1 to report that someone was trying to steal his catalytic converter.

Sheriff Rob Streck told News Center 7, “When he [the caller] confronted that individual, he told him to stop, he was going to call police. He had the phone in his hand, was trying to call 9-1-1. He was approached and attacked by the suspect . . . . There was a gunshot where the suspect was shot in the leg.”


More Here

Sunday, November 20, 2022

TX: Domestic Defense? Step Son Shoots Step Dad

SAN ANTONIO — A woman's son shot his step-dad after the man allegedly assaulted her, San Antonio police said. One of the bullets also went into a neighbor's home.

The shooting happened around 11:45 p.m. on Thursday at a home in the 1000 block of Center Street on the city's east side.

Police said an argument took place between the husband and wife. At some point, the woman's son reportedly saw the man assault her.


More Here

Saturday, November 19, 2022

FL: Domestic Defense? Woman Shoots Father of her Child

He said he believes a custody battle prompted the woman to shoot her child’s father.

“I’m hoping that he’s going to survive this come out of this okay, and I’m hoping he gets some justice,” said Kern.

However, TV 20 spoke to other neighbors who said they believe the woman was confronting her child’s father about possible abuse.

“He goes to do his normal thing of grabbing her by the throat and I think he did and bringing her down which he usually does... and mom has a pistol in her jacket and shoots him,” said Kent DuBuose, neighbor.


More Here

Friday, November 18, 2022

TX: Robert Soliz found Not Guilty in Shooting Death of Off Duty Officer, Sean Rios

According to HPD, on Nov. 9, 2020, Rios and Soliz were both traveling along the North Freeway around 1:30 p.m. when they got into some sort of altercation.

The two men engaged in a gun battle, police said, and Rios was shot.

The officer ran into the lobby of the Taj Inn & Suites, where he collapsed and died. A hotel employee called for help.

Rios was heading to work a shift at Bush Intercontinental Airport the day of the shooting. He was 47 years old.

Soliz was 24 years old at the time.

More Here

Thursday, November 17, 2022

Korean Convict Kills Policeman with Homemade, Multi-barreled, Muzzleloader Pistol

Multi-barreled, homemade matchlock or "cigarette" pistols used in attack on Korean Policeman

On 19 October, 2016, a 46 year old suspect with the surname of Seong started attacking people. He had various weapons, including homemade guns, a bomb, a hammer, and knives. He was wearing an electronic tracking device on his ankle. From Korea JoongAng Daily:

An ex-convict went on a shooting spree in northern Seoul’s Gangbuk District Wednesday night using a gun he manufactured himself, fatally shooting a police officer before he was apprehended.

The ex-convict was wearing a type of bullet-proof vest and helmet and had with him 16 more homemade guns, a bomb and seven knives.

The suspect, a 46-year-old surnamed Seong, was wearing an electronic tracking device on his ankle when he started attacking people near Opaesan Tunnel in Beon-dong. He had a record of prison sentences for sexual assaults.

Seong allegedly shot a passerby with a homemade gun and missed him, although another passerby was hit. Seong then bludgeoned the first passerby with a hammer.


While this event occurred six years ago, it is worth recording as another murder with a homemade gun. It is possible the assassin of former Prime Minister Abe knew of this murder.

Another report says the suspect had six guns.

The killer is reported to have made a bomb as well. He was wearing a "bulletproof" vest used in paintball games. The  vest was said to be effective in stopping three police bullets. He was also wearing a helmet, origin not stated.

The article from Korea does not show how the propellant for the homemade guns was ignited. The article explains the mechanism as a simple matchlock, or perhaps a sophisticated hand-canon, which were ignited by a similar method.

Modern materials make such firearms easy to produce at home. They are the simplest type of firearm, except they are multi-barreled. The earliest hand cannon were single shots. An easy upgrade is to use electrical ignition, such as was used in the homemade double barreled pistol used to assassinate former prime minister Abe in Japan in July of this year.

One of the 17 homemade guns confiscated from the suspect in this case appears to have six or seven barrels. The pistol in the top right appears to have three barrels. If the average number of barrels per gun was four, the suspect would have had nearly 70 shots readily available. No 3D printer or programmable milling machine was necessary. All the work appears to have been done while wearing an electronic tracking device on his ankle.

The pistols are similar in design to the "cigarette guns" observed in an Australian Infantry museum a few years ago. Those guns were also multibarreled. They were captured in East Timor.

Three barreled "cigarette gun captured by Australian forces in East Timor

This three barreled "cigarette" gun has a more refined grip, and was produced using a welder. Note the three touchholes near the breach. The trigger appears to be for show only. Propellant was said to be ground matchheads.

Similar guns were and may still be made in the Phillipines and known as "cigarette" guns or paltiks.

Assuming the lumber used in the Korean pistols is close to the American standard of 1 1/2 inches on a side, the bore of the homemade Korean guns appears to be about nine or ten millimeters.

One shot from such a gun is said to have penetrated the Korean police officers shoulder from the side and damaged both lungs, killing him.

Matchlocks may be primitive, but they are deadly. The Spanish Conquistadores conquered empires with them.


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

Gun Watch

OK: Domestic Defense? Homeowner Shoots, Kills man who Broke into Home

“Our officers received a call of a domestic disturbance at 3015 Westbrook, in which a subject had broken into the home,” said Lt. Gillian O’Brien with the Chickasha Police Department. “As the subject made entry into the home, the homeowner opened fire right away.”

“I mean, it was pop, pop, pop, pop, pop, pop, pop, pop, pop, pop. I mean, just, you know, as quick as someone could squeeze the trigger,” added Brandon Bowman who lives next door. “I mean, it happened so fast… I walked outside and could smell gunpowder right away.”

More Here

Wednesday, November 16, 2022

Dangerous use of Serial Numbers found Unconstitutional


The most dangerous use of a serial number on a firearm is as a registration number. In effect, gun registration is gun confiscation. It was not the intent for which serial numbers were made. They were originally created as a way to track firearms with production changes and as a way for government arsenals to track production and military use of weapons.  

A federal court recently held a federal law, passed in 1990, which makes possession of firearm with a removed serial (registration) number illegal, is unconstitutional.

This is an important decision. It has relatively minor effects, at this time. The law was a step toward universal firearms registration.

Finding the law unconstitutional subverts the push for government control over firearms. 

If a person cannot be punished for the mere possession of a firearm from which a serial number has been removed, the entire scheme for government control over legally owned firearms falls apart.  

There cannot be effective gun registration, if a person cannot be punished for possessing a gun which has had the serial number removed.

The legal ability to possess firearms without serial numbers buttresses the deterrent effect of an armed population.

If government agents demand a person turn in a firearm which is registered to them, they can remain silent. 

If the firearm appears at some later date, and the serial number has been removed, it becomes difficult to connect the firearm to the person it was registered to.

It becomes difficult to punish a person for an act someone else commits with a firearm originally purchased by them.

A unique serial number is key to efforts to register and control firearms by the administrative state. Nelson T. "Pete" Shields, of Handgun Control, inc. laid out the plan in 1976

 “We’ll take one step at a time, and the first is necessarily – given the political realities – very modest.  We’ll have to start working again to strengthen the law, and then again to strengthen the next law and again and again.  Our ultimate goal, total control of handguns, is going to take time.  The first problem is to slow down production and sales.  Next is to get registration.  The final problem is to make possession of all handguns and ammunition (with a few exceptions) totally illegal.”

When people may not be punished for the possession of a firearm whose serial number has been removed, the plan falls apart.

Serial numbers were not required on most firearms, by the government, until 1968. They were required on National Firearms Act weapons, as a means of registration of machine guns, short barreled rifles, short barrled shotguns, and silencers in 1938. 

The registration of firearms is almost never used to solve violent crimes. The large costs of firearms registration make for a very large cost to benefit ratio. 

The major purpose of gun registration is to enable the confiscation of firearms when the government desires to do so.

Serial numbers were first used on US military weapons in 1865. They were first used on Winchester rifles in 1866.

Serial numbers were first used as a tool of oppression in 1893.

Florida enacted a stature which required the recording of a repeating rifle's serial number (later to include pistols) with the county commissioners, in 1893.  While the wording of the act is somewhat ambiguous, the title makes plain the purpose was to regulate the carrying of firearms.

1893 Fla. Laws 71-72, An Act to Regulate the Carrying of Firearms, chap. 4147, §§ 1-4.

The history of the Florida law implies it was meant to apply to black people, and not to white people.  The surety required ($100 in 1893, about $3,000 in 2020 dollars) immediately placed the permit beyond the capability of people with modest incomes. About fifty years later, a judge said the law was never meant to be used against white people, and he had never heard of a case where a white person was prosecuted under the 1893 law. From Watson v. Stone:

I know something of the history of this legislation. The original Act of 1893 was passed when there was a great influx of negro laborers in this State drawn here for the purpose of working in turpentine and lumber camps. The same condition existed when the Act was amended in 1901 and the Act was passed for the purpose of disarming the negro laborers and to thereby reduce the unlawful homicides that were prevalent in turpentine and saw-mill camps and to give the white citizens in sparsely settled areas a better feeling of security. The statute was never intended to be applied to the white population and in practice has never been so applied. We have no statistics available, but it is a safe guess to assume that more than 80% of the white men living in the rural sections of Florida have violated this statute. It is also a safe guess to say that not more than 5% of the men in Florida who own pistols and repeating rifles have ever applied to the Board of County Commissioners for a permit to have the same in their possession and there has never been, within my knowledge, any effort to enforce the provisions of this statute as to white people, because it has been generally conceded to be in contravention to the Constitution and non-enforceable if contested.

It should be noted the serial number, as such, appears to have had little to do with the actual, discriminatory enforcement of the law in Florida. It wasn't until the infamous New York Sullivan law, recently found to be unconstitutional, that the attempt was made to use serial numbers to oppress people. 

The Sullivan law eventually tied a specific firearm to a specific person on a broad scale. Other states, particularly in the Northeast, followed suit. The state of New York under the prodding of the organized crime boss, Big Tim Sullivan, pushed the registration of guns well ahead of most of Europe.  

In Europe, registration of firearms appears to be an artifact created after World War I. In Germany registration of firearms was installed after 1919 as part of the requirement of the Treaty of Versailles. England had no registration of firearms until the1920 Firearms Act. Italy installed registration of firearms under Mussolini with the 1931 Public Safety Act. France installed general firearms registration from 1935 to 1939.

Most of these measures were touted as public safety measures. 

In the case of England, research done by Joyce Lee Malcomb (US) and Chief Inspector Colin Greenwood (at Cambridge) showed fear of an armed population drove the legislation. The crime rate, at the time, was extraordinarily low. The purpose of the registration was to allow the government, in times of doubt, to disarm its percieved enemies and arm its perceived friends.  From Guns and Violence, the English Experience, page 162:

Second, the Firearms Act of 1920, which took away the traditional right of individuals to be armed, was not passed to reduce or prevent armed crime or gun accidents.  It was passed because the government was afraid of rebellion and keen to control access to guns.

Chief Inspector Colin Greenwood found the same result. 

World War I caused immense turmoil in Europe. Along with many other problems, it may be rightly blamed for the rise of gun registration there. 

Before the use of serial numbers, disarming of the population had to rely on brute force and physical searches for weapons. 

In England, before the English Bill of Rights, in 1660, by the dubious method of royal proclamation, gunsmiths were once required to keep lists of people they sold firearms to. 

Such lists were not registration of firearms, because they did not tie a particular gun to a particular  individual.  The adoption of the English Bill of Rights in 1689 was partly in response to this sort of action. 

The requirement to keep lists by royal declaration was "a device of uncertain legal status" according to Malcolmb. The proclamation was issued in December of 1660.  From Malcolmb: 

With this police apparatus in place, the King turned to the royal proclamation, a device of uncertain legal status, to tighten arms control. In September, 1660, he issued a proclamation forbidding footmen to wear swords or to carry other weapons in London.[87] In December another proclamation expressed alarm that many "formerly cashiered Officers and Soldiers, and other dissolute and disaffected persons do daily resort to this City."[88] All such soldiers and others "that cannot give a good Account for their being here" were to leave London within two days and remain at least twenty miles away indefinitely.[89] At the same time the royal government launched a campaign to control firearms at the source. Gunsmiths were ordered to produce a record of all weapons they had manufactured over the past six months together with a list of their purchasers.[90] In future they were commanded to report every Saturday night to the ordnance office the number of guns made and sold that week.[91] Carriers throughout the kingdom were required (p.300)to obtain a license if they wished to transport guns, and all importation of firearms was banned.[92]

It was less than a month later that King Charles II ordered a general disarmament of those considered his enemies:

The timing of the Fifth Monarchist uprising was especially opportune, for it occurred the very day the last regiments of the Commonwealth army were due to be disbanded. In response to this visible danger, these regiments were retained and twelve more companies were recruited to form the nucleus of a royalist army.[95] The militia and volunteers throughout the realm were ordered to carry out a general disarmament of everyone of doubtful loyalty.[96] By January 8, 1661, two days after the Venner uprising, Northamptonshire lieutenants reported that all men of known "evill Principles" had been disarmed and secured "so as we have not left them in any ways of power to attempt a breach of the peace."[97]

Registration with serial numbers allows governments to circumvent the difficult and dangerous task of physically searching for firearms. 

The government can simply demand the weapons tied by registration be turned in. If they are not available, various forms of coercion can be applied.  State agents need never approach a persons home. 

Disarmament is seldom general. There are always exceptions for agents and friends of those in power. Hitler disarmed Jews and others he deemed "enemies of the state" using local registration lists. Dictators always make exceptions for those who they believe can be relied on to support them.

The firearms owners Protection Act, passed in 1986, prevents the establishment of a national firearms registry.  From

Amends the rulemaking authority of the Secretary to provide that no regulation may require: (1) the transfer of records required under this Act to a facility owned, managed, or controlled by the United States or any State; or (2) the establishment of any system of registration of firearms, firearm owners, or firearm transactions.

While those who want a disarmed population can initiate house to house searches to disarm people, as was done by tyrants in the past, doing so in the United States, under the Constitution, is very difficult

Holding laws which make the possession of firearms which have the serial number removed illegal, to be unconstitutional, puts teeth in the current laws against gun registration. 

It makes the disarmament of the people incrementally, over a long period of time, very difficult. 

It is a significant part of restoring the limitations on government power required by the Constitution.

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

Gun Watch

GA: Domestic Defense, Son Shoots Father who shot Him and his Mother (disarm)

WEST POINT, Ga. (WTVM) - A West Point son and daughter are released from jail after police find the deadly shooting of their father to be in self-defense.

According to the West Point police, on Nov. 12, at about 9:15 p.m., officers responded to West Point Depot regarding multiple people being shot. When officers arrived at the scene, three people were found suffering from gunshot wounds, two males and one female.

53-year-old Tarrance Holloway, Sr. died as a result of his injuries.

During an investigation into the shooting, it was discovered that Holloway, Sr. brought a gun into the West Point Depot and shot his son, Tarrance Holloway, Jr., from a previous dispute.

More Here

GA: Armed Samaritan stops Severe Beating of Child.

"The screaming kept getting louder and louder and that didn't sit right with us. My first instinct was to grab my gun and go get that kid out the woods", says Willis.

Once in the woods, Willis says he realized the danger the child was in.

"By the time I came around the corner he was on top of him choking him choking him and at that point I just put my gun up and held him at gun point and grabbed the kid", says Willis

Willis was one of the several people that were there to help rescue the kid until police arrived.

More Here

Tuesday, November 15, 2022

Polar Bear Attack Stopped with .500 Magnum

 Image from wikimedia naturepics online, 2010


 On March 5 of 2005, two people were attacked by a polar bear at the remote area of Kapp Lee, Edgeøya, in the Svalbard archipelago.  

The .500 Smith & Wesson revolver had been on the market for just over two years. 

The person responsible for security had one of the big revolvers on his person.

The story was uncovered as part of a Freedom of Information Act (FOID) request by AmmoLand. Names of the individuals involved were redacted. The account is a translation with some grammatical and spelling errors. What follows is the account, edited for readability. The names Paul and Sally have been substituted for the  redacted names. 

This is what happened.

Paul, Sally and two more people were airlifted from Longyearbyen to Kapp Lee, Edgeøya and landed at 2.21PM. The helicopter took off to fly the two other people a bit further away to install a digital camera to take pictures of Storfjorden.

Paul was responsible for the security of the research and security against polar bears. 

He was very experienced with polar bears. He had numerous encounters, but had never had to kill a bear.  Paul and Sally had a dog with them, for additional protection against polar bears. 

As the helicopter took off, Paul  loaded their two weapons.  He loaded the 30-06 rifle magazine with four cartridges. Then he loaded the handgun with 5 rounds in the magazine (cal. 50) and took out the flare pistol.  

(The handgun magazine almost certainly refers to the revolver cylinder, because of translation effects).

Paul had the handgun and the flare pistol. Paul and Sally both took bags/cases/material and went directly to the middle one of the 3 cabins of the station. There had been one trip there before them.  Some material was left by the door.  They dug away parts of the snowdrift in front of the door. Some of the cases were placed close to the snowdrift. Then they started the work of taking off the window shutters. 


A cabin at Kapp Lee, Edgeøya, image by China Crisis, taken August 2, 2012.

Paul had to be inside the cabin to take off the shutters. As they were doing this chore, Paul noted the dog had taken a stand, looking north of the cabin. 

Paul saw a polar bear coming at a constant pace along the beach towards the cabins. 

He yelled that there was a polar bear and went immediately to the cabin door and met Sally. 

He loaded the signal pistol with a red signal flare. From earlier experience he has found that red flares are just as efficient as bangers to scare bears since the red flares are red and visible the whole way, compared to the bangers that are not visible before they explode. 

Paul fired two red signal flares towards the bear with no apparent effect. 

The first flare was fired in front of the bear 73 meters away. The 2nd flare was fired  at 54 meters away. The bear continued towards them. Paul loaded and prepared to fire a flare/banger as the bear closed to 25 meters away. 

He saw the bear was too close. The flare would explode behind the bear. He fired it towards the ground in front of the bear. The flare bounced over the bear and exploded behind it. The bear did not react. 

Sally was standing besides Paul with the rifle. Paul took the rifle and chambered a round. He fired 2 warning shots right after one another as the bear closed to about 11 meters, over the bears head. 

The bear did not react to the warning shots. It continued in a quick, constant pace towards them. 

After the second warning shot Paul gave Sally the rifle and commanded her into the cabin. 

He went to the door, but noted the only the light was from the open door.  There was a lot of equipment in front of the door. Sally had managed to jump over the equipment. Paul turned around and tried to close the door. 

Snow made it impossible to close the door completely. 

The bear was very close. Paul used the handgun to shoot two warning shots, in the air, over the bear. The dog was barking at the bear at the same time.

The bear did not stop or react to the shots or the dog. 

Paul felt that the bear would get into the cabin if he did not shoot it. 

He had trouble closing the door, did not know how to lock it, and did not know the inside of the cabin. 

In far less time than it takes to tell it, Paul yelled "Damnit I'm shooting", and fired one shot at the bear, now only 1.4 meters (five feet) away. 

He tried to aim at the heart/lung areas, but was not sure where he hit, other than that it was to the right side of the neck, from the front, toward the back of the bear. 

The bear turned immediately and ran away. The bear collapsed 48 meters from where Paul stood.

Paul heard the sound of the helicopter coming back.  He wanted to alert the Governor. 

He signaled to the helicopter. The pilots stopped the machine. Paul went up to the bear with a bamboo stick and poked it on the eyelids. It did not react and Paul understood that the bear was dead.


Five feet is far too close to wait for a polar bear, who shows no hesitation, to close with you.  

Svalbard regulations govern the minimum energy of handgun cartridges used for protection from polar bears. Maximum loaded .41 magnum and above can qualify.


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

Gun Watch





WA: Armed Samaritan rescues Woman from Pimp

“H.A. felt safer in the middle of a busy highway, practically naked, at night than being within arm’s reach of the defendant,” Gauen wrote. “Surveillance video from a nearby business has corroborated H.A.’s account of what happened.”

The ride-share driver stopped and told H.A. to get in his van. Burt pursued them, shooting at the van, Gauen wrote. The ride-share driver was also armed and fired back over several blocks until he was able to get onto Interstate 5 and meet police at a gas station. No one appears to have been struck by the bullets, but the van’s windshield was riddled with holes.

Police arrested Burt as he was leaving the rental home with the other women, the documents said. He faces charges that include human trafficking, promoting prostitution, assault and drive-by shooting, but given the “expansive reach of the defendant’s egregious behavior,” additional charges are likely, Gauen wrote.

More Here

TX: Suspected Intruder shot by San Antonio Homeowner

The shooting happened around 6 p.m. Saturday in the 200 block of Hazel Street.

Police said the homeowner, a man in his early 20s, went to the back door of his home to confront a possible intruder.

The homeowner found the alleged intruder, a man in his mid-30s, near the back door and fired two gunshots, striking him in the chest, SAPD said.

More Here

Monday, November 14, 2022

Black Bear Attack in Alaska Park Stopped with .40 Smith & Wesson Pistol

The bear who attacked the Bates family was a sow about 20 years old, estimated at 350 lbs. It was starving, with nothing in the stomach but parasites.

The attack occurred as the Bates family, Weatherly Bates, her husband, their 12-year-old son, Rockwell, their 10-year-old daughter Vera, and two family dogs, on leashes, were hiking on the Glacier Moraine Trail in Kachemak Bay State park.

Weatherly Bates had a .40 caliber S&W in her backpack.

The bear came at them, at about 3 p.m., on October 12, 2020,  even though they yelled at it and bunched together.

Weatherly Bates explains what happened:

"It did attack. It was a predatory bear.

That year we had a lot of problems. The bears were starving. There was, like, no berries.

We were hiking and we noticed there was a bear spray cap on the ground.

A couple of minutes later a bear came up behind us. 

I tried to yell and scare it away, but it kept coming. 

I did have a gun in my backpack, so I started backing up to my husband.

Weatherly's husband accessed the pistol from her back pack.

Weatherly continues:

I could tell this bear wasn't stopping. 

Our dog got in between the bear and our son. She didn't even bark at it.

It tackled her and started biting her head. 

We let our other dog go, he was on a leash. 

He started biting the bear. We think that is what saved our female German Shepard.

My husband had to grab the bear and get it so he could dispatch it without shooting our dog.

He shot it point blank in the spine. It took two shots before it let go.

Then he shot it about five more times."

Weatherly said about two weeks previously, a biologist had been waking in the park with her dogs. She had pepper sprayed the bear at that time.

Weatherly said:  "When we put it down, it smelled like heavy pepper spray. " 

Weatherly said it was the same bear which attacked them. Its head was down, its eyes locked on them.

The bear was a 20 year old sow full of parasites. She was starving, and had worn teeth.


The old sow's teeth were worn, but capable of inflicting deadly damage.

Weatherly said the attack happened fairly quickly. The bear came on at a brisk walk, not a charge. Her husband bruised his shins as he fought with the bear to move it, so he could shoot, without endangering their dog, Sally.

Her son, 12 year old Rockwell Bates, had a .22 rifle for hunting spruce grouse.

The bear was killed before Rockwell could bring the rifle into play, which would have required a precise shot.

This shows another advantage of a handgun for defense; it is easy to maneuver in close quarters, with one hand.

The pistol used in this case was a .40 caliber Smith & Wesson model SW40F, loaded with Federal hollowpoint ammunition.

Weatherly believes if they had holstered pistols when the attack occurred, they could have prevented the damage to their dog.

Weatherly says the family does a lot of hiking. They now carry a 12 gauge, and pistols in chest holsters.

Weatherly now carries a Colt .45 semi-automatic pistol in a chest holster.

The bear was reported to the authorities and a Defense of Life and Property (DLP) form was filled out.

The Bates family obtained the help of friends to remove the bear from the park.

Weatherly believed the bear was desperate for food. She said dozens of bears had come into Halibut Cove searching for food because of the failed berry crop, and wildfires, in 2020. She reported many other bears were shot and killed in their community.

Sally, the German Shepherd, had puncture wounds, and had to get massive amounts of antibiotics, but she recovered.

Weatherly was kind enough to give this correspondent leads on another couple of bear attacks in the area, which were stopped with pistol fire.

It remains to be seen if those attacks can be documented.

The attack on was also covered by as reported on October 15, 2020.

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

Gun Watch

KS: Police Indicate Shooting may have been Self Defense

SHAWNEE COUNTY—Law enforcement authorities are investigating a fatal shooting. 

Just after 5:30 p.m. Friday, police were dispatched to 29th and Villa West Drive in Topeka in reference to a disturbance, according to Lt. Donna Eubanks.

Upon arrival officers located a man with a life-threatening gunshot wound. American Medical Response transported the man to a local hospital, where the he was later pronounced deceased.

More Here

IL: Chicago, Permit Holder Shoots Robbery Suspect

CHICAGO (WLS) -- One person was killed and another was very critically injured in a shooting during an attempted robbery at a South Shore grocery store, which involved a concealed carry license holder.

Chicago police said the incident happened around 6:20 p.m. in the 2600-block of East 73rd Street.

According to CPD, a man walked into the store and pulled out a gun to start a robbery. A Good Samaritan who CPD said has valid FOID and CCL cards also pulled out a gun and shot the would-be robber.

More Here

TX: Home Invasion Suspect Shot Accomplice, before being shot.

KATY, Texas (KTRK) -- A home invasion suspect was shot and killed inside a Katy home overnight, and deputies believe he accidently shot his own accomplice before his death.

Just before 11:30 p.m. Thursday, deputies with the Harris County Sheriff's Office responded to a home invasion in the 3200 block of Windmoor Drive.

There were three people inside the home at the time -- a mother and her two adult sons.

More Here

Sunday, November 13, 2022

NICS for October, 2022 Third Highest, Gun Sales Fourth Highest on Record


The National Instant background Check System (NICS) numbers for October, 2022, are the third highest on record. The gun sales recorded by NICS for October, 2022 are the fourth highest on record.

This shows the trend of gun sales is softening a bit. If potential gun buyers perceive greater stability in national and international affairs, if potential gun purchasers perceive the threat of gun restrictions to have decreased because of the election and Supreme Court and lower court restrictions, sales will likely decrease.

The number of NICS checks in October 2022, were down by 6 percent from October of 2021.  The estimated total gun sales are down by 12 percent from October of 2021.

Before "shall issue" carry permits became the norm in the vast majority of states, there was a moderately consistent relationship between NICS background checks and gun sales.

With the proliferation of shall issue permits, and the popularity of those permits, the correlation between NICS checks and gun sales has become inconsistent and uncertain.

The number of NICS checks depends on the number of gun carry permits. In some states, such as Illinois and Kentucky, checks involved with permits are many times the number of checks involved with gun sales.

In Illinois, for example, in October of 2022, there were 369,511 NICS background checks for gun permits. There were about 33,318 NICS checks for gun sales.  There were 11 times as many checks for permits than there were for gun sales.

In 25 states, some, often most, permits allow people to purchase guns from federal dealers without an additional NICS check.

Illinois is not one of those states.

Using the carry permit to purchase firearms is simpler, faster, and easier
than accessing the NICS system by telephone and dealing with an FBI

As political uncertainty and racial division were ramped up by Barack
Obama and other Democrats for the last 14 years, people have been
purchasing guns in record number.

The gun sales and gun importation/export data become available one to two years after the exports/sales are made.

This is the data which has been most consistent in estimating the number of private firearms in the United States.

When the ATF data is examined two years after gun sales are made, it appears the increase in the private stock in the USA is about 87% of the gun sales. This can be explained by sales of used firearms.

Adding in October 2022 gun sales, with a correction factor of .87, shows an estimated 485.7 million privately owned firearms in the United States as of the end of October, 2022. It is possible,in some segments of the firearms purchaser population, demand is becoming saturated.

It is possible inflation, with increased fuel and food prices, has left less discretionary  income available for the purchase of firearms and ammunition.

If the Republicans gain control of the House of Representatives, which seems likely, gun sales may drop, and gun prices with them, as threats of greater political restrictions recede.

We are seeing a drop in price for popular models, and some common types of ammunition.

November and December are traditionally high months for gun sales, due to hunting seasons and Christmas.

2022 will likely end with 488 million guns in private hands.

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

Gun Watch

AZ: Shooting at Circle K, Clerk Claims Self Defense

Phoenix police are investigating a shooting that occurred early Thursday morning at a Circle K near 35th Avenue and Greenway.

Officers responded to the area just before 2:00 a.m. after receiving calls about a shooting, Phoenix police spokesperson Sgt. Melissa Soliz said in a statement. 

When police arrived, they found a man with a gunshot wound. 

According to the statement, preliminary information indicates that the man who was shot and the store's clerk got in some form of fight that ended in the clerk firing a gun at the man.

More Here

Saturday, November 12, 2022

New York Court Strikes Down many of Governor Hochel's "Emergency" 2A Infringements

On November 7, 2022, one day prior to the mid-term elections, Judge Glenn T. Suddaby issued his decision about a preliminary injunction in the Antonyuk v. Hochul case. The case challenged the carry law of New York, passed as an emergency measure in response to the Bruen decision by the Supreme Court of the United States. This decision is relatively quick, as court decisions go. The case was filed on September 22, 2022, as the second attempt by the plaintiff to challenge the law.

Judge Suddaby's order for a preliminary injunction is a significant win for those who support the rights protected by the Second Amendment.

The preliminary injunction refines the list from the previous Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) by Suddaby, published on October 6. Some changes were made.

The preliminary injunction, issued on 7 November is more detailed. It goes into effect immediately. Barring reversal by an appeals court, it will not change until the case is concluded.

In dealing with the long list of "sensitive places", Judge Suddaby found the plaintiffs did not have standing for several. The places for which the plaintiffs lack standing were not considered in the preliminary injunction. They may be argued in another case. The ban on carry in these places continues pending the litigation. They are:

p. 24: “[A]ny place owned or under the control of federal, state or local government, for the purpose of government administration, including courts.” 

p. 35  libraries

p. 45 -47:  “[T]he location of any program ... that provides services to children, youth, ... any legally exempt childcare provider ...”

p. 47-48:  summer camp

p. 50:  “[T]he location of any program ... regulated, ... operated, or funded by the office for people with developmental disabilities”

p. 50-51  “[T]he location of any program ... regulated, ... operated, or funded by [the] office of addiction services and supports”

p. 51-52:  “[T]he location of any program ... regulated, ... operated, or funded by the office of mental health”

p. 52:  “[T]he location of any program ... regulated, ... operated, or funded by the office of temporary and disability assistance”

p. 53 - 54:  “[H]omeless shelters, ... family shelters, ... domestic violence shelters, and emergency shelters”

p. 54-55:  “[R]esidential settings licensed, certified, regulated, funded, or operated by the department of health” 

p. 55-57, other than "school districts": “[A]ny building or grounds... of any educational institutions, colleges ... , school districts ... , private schools ...”

P. 57-63 the paragraph considered is:

[A]ny place, conveyance, or vehicle used for public transportation or public transit, subway cars, train cars, buses, ferries, railroad, omnibus, marine or aviation transportation; or any facility used for or in connection with service in the transportation of passengers, airports, train stations, subway and rail stations, and bus terminals ...

Judge Suddaby  includes buses (or vans), "aviation transport" and "airports" but leaves the rest intact for lack of standing,

Several "sensitive places" have standing to be challenged in the bill. Judge Suddaby's preliminary prohibits enforcement in these areas, pending the litigation. Those areas, where carry with a permit will be considered legal are:

[A]ny location providing . . . behavioral health, or chemical dependance care or services” “[A]ny place of worship or religious observation”

public parks, and zoos

“[A]viation transportation,” “airports” and “buses (if following federal law)

“[A]ny establishment issued a license for on premise consumption pursuant to article four, four-A, five, or six of the alcoholic beverage control law where alcohol is consumed” 

“[T]heaters,” “conference centers,” and “banquet halls”“[A]ny gathering of individuals to collectively express their constitutional rights to protest or assemble” 

Prohibition in “Restricted Locations (essentially all private property, without express signage allowing the carry of arms)

These "sensitive" areas, where standing was found, are allowed to remain, pending the litigation:

[P]ublic playgrounds 

“[N]ursery schools [ and preschools”

In the preliminary injunction, these application requirements are struck down, pending the litigation:

Good moral character requirement

List of family and cohabitants

List Social Media Accounts for the past three years

“Such Other Information Required by the Licensing Officer that is Reasonably Necessary and Related to the Review of the Licensing Application- enforcement not allowed pending the litigation

These application requirements are allowed to remain pending the litigation:

Four character references

Eighteen Hours of Firearm Training

In-Person Meeting (the in-person meeting finding was reversed from the TRO)

The preliminary injunction is a significant blow to the emergency statute signed by Governor Hochul. The long list of "sensitive places" without standing will not be considered in this case, and are likely to be subjects of another lawsuit.

Those "sensitive places" and application requirements which are allowed to continue, are still subject to argumentation during the case.

Opinion: This correspondent believes the list of "sensitive places" (gun free zones) which are ruled to be unconstitutional, will grow.



NM: Alaska Ski Legend, Dean Cummings, Found Not Guilty after Two Years in Jail

A New Mexico jury found Alaska heli-skiing pioneer Dean Cummings not guilty of murder this week in a 2020 shooting in which Cummings claimed self-defense.

Cummings, the former World Extreme Skiing Champion behind the now-defunct Valdez-based H2O Guides, walked out of jail a short time after the verdict Tuesday, a free man for the first time in more than two years, his attorney Nicole Moss said.

More Here