SC: Gunfight in Tiger Mart, Clerk Wounded

"They came up with a gun," the 911 caller said. "And he ... come behind the counter with a gun, and he start shooting.”

A bullet hit the employee in the upper right thigh, the police said.

Saned Damrah, the injured worker, then fired a round back with his .38-caliber Taurus revolver, the report explained. That sent the robbers scattering.
More Here

Followup CO: Prosecution Centered on if 3:30 a.m. Intrusion was legal or not

Kirsten Djuric suffered six gunshot wounds from an AR-15 weapon fired by McCoy around 3:30 a.m. after she allegedly broke into McCoy’s home. The two were boyfriend and girlfriend and had been arguing via text messages and phone calls preceding the incident.

The hearing held Thursday centered on whether or not McCoy’s home door was locked when the incident occurred.

The district attorney’s office has contended, based on investigation by police detectives, that illegal entry was made into McCoy’s house by Djuric and a male she was with that allowed him to claim the protection of C.R.S. 18-1-704.5, use of deadly physical force against an intruder, which is commonly known as the Make-My-Day law.

 More Here

AK: Alaskan Man Holds Drunk Teen Intruder at Gunpoint

KETCHIKAN, Alaska (AP) — Prosecutors in Ketchikan will consider charges against a 19-year-old man who broke into an occupied home to get out of the cold.

Troopers shortly after 3 a.m. Wednesday took a 911 call from a resident along the North Tongass Highway reporting that an unknown man had broken his kitchen window and was inside the home.

The homeowner held the man at gunpoint until troopers arrived.
More Here

CA: Murder Trial to start in "Warning Shot" Killing

At a preliminary hearing in January 2016, the judge said the first shot was a warning; the second shot was fired at Pacheco as he was leaving the property.

McAllister has argued that his client thought he had fired the second shot above Pacheco, and his intent was only to scare Pacheco.

Boyer remains in custody at the county jail.

Read more here: http://www.modbee.com/news/local/crime/article126377784.html#storylink=cpy

More Here

AZ: Wounded Robber says "They are Just Supposed to Hand Over the Money!"

Court records show that a male teen robbed one store and tried to rob another when he was confronted by an armed clerk who shot him in the arm.

(snip)

Police contacted him there and the suspect was taken to the hospital for a gunshot wound to his arm. It was there, police say, that he admitted to the robberies. He allegedly told police that he targeted gas stations because "they are supposed to just hand over the money and not try to stop anyone."
More Here

MS: Woman Shoots at Man who Attempted Break-in

JACKSON, Miss. —

A Jackson woman said she shot several times at a man who tried to break into her house Thursday morning.

Tonya Brooks said she heard a strange noise around 3:30 a.m. coming from outside her house on Telfair Place.

Brooks said a man was using a crow bar to try and break into a storage room.

That’s when she said she grabbed her gun, and the man took off.
More Here

AZ: Several Good Samaritans Helped Wounded AZ Trooper

Image from 12news.com

It was not just one good Samaritan that helped the wounded Arizona State Trooper.  We now know that there were at least three good Samaritans. The first was the man who was headed to California with his wife when he saw the Trooper, Edward Anderson, with an attacker on top of him, pounding Anderson's head into the pavement, Trayvon Martin style.

His ability to quickly assess the situation and take action is somewhat remarkable. The event occurred at milepost 89 on I-10, at about 4:30 a.m. There are no street lights in this remote area.  That is when the Trooper was shot from ambush.

The Trooper, Anderson, had probably left his headlights and emergency lights on as he put out flares to secure the scene of a rollover accident. There was a full Moon, well above the horizon to the West Northwest. Those lights, and the headlights from the good Samaritan's car, were all the lighting there was.

 The good Samaritan had to be observant enough to see the attack ongoing, and quick witted enough to stop his car and run back to determine the correct action to take.  He then procured his own firearm, ordered the attacker to cease, and when the order was ignored, shot the attacker to stop the attack.

Several people have speculated that the firearm was locked up because the Samaritan was traveling to California, where firearms in cars are required to be locked up and unloaded.

Then he tried to call 911, but he could not get through from this remote location. He flagged down another good Samaritan. That man, Brian Schober, had previous EMT service in Alaska and was on his way to work in Yuma, over a hundred miles away.  He saw that the phone did not work, picked up the Troopers radio, and used it to call for help.

While this was happening, a third good Samaritan had stopped, retrieved the first aid kit from the Trooper's vehicle, and was applying first aid to the wounded. From 12news.com:

Schober noticed another witness on scene trying to call 911, but couldn’t get through so that’s when he decided to use the trooper’s radio.

“I used the officer’s hand radio and called dispatch to request a helicopter for first aid and backup,” he said. “She asked for confirmation... who was shot?”

Schober told the dispatcher the trooper and suspect both sustained gunshot wounds. Schober says the suspect was lying about two feet away from the trooper.

Schober praised the first good Samaritan responder, and said that he overheard him interacting with the first responding officer.

Schober heard the good Samaritan let the officer know where his weapon was. While they waited for medical responders to arrive.

"We tried to comfort him," he said. "Another witness had gotten a first aid kit out of the officer’s car and started first aid until the medics arrived.”

A TV journalist  for 12 News, Charly Edsitty, interviewed a "Law Enforcement Expert" who says that we are likely to see more of this sort of situation, and more cases where armed citizens defend themselves as well.  The expert tells her, on the video, that "I don't know what angle you could look at this and say 'Oh, that citizen shouldn't have done it."

Whether for completeness, or maybe just her journalistic playbook from Baylor University, Charly contacted the Maricopa County Attorney's office and asked them if they plan to charge the good Samaritan with something. From 12news.com:

"I reached out to the Maricopa County Attorney's Office to see if they plan to move forward with any charges against this citizen, and they said right now it is too soon for them to comment."

It seems a bit strange that the question would be asked, just after the expert interviewed explained to her why it would not happen.

©2017 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice is included.

Link to Gun Watch

MO: Armed Victim Shoots Himself in Leg

The motorist said a person who had a sign and appeared to be homeless approached his vehicle. The victim pulled out his wallet to give the man some money but the pedestrian reached into the vehicle and tried to take the motorist’s wallet.

The men struggled over the wallet. The victim grabbed his pistol. He accidentally shot himself in the leg during the struggle. The pedestrian ran away.

Read more here: http://www.kansascity.com/news/local/crime/article126089399.html#storylink=cpy

More Here

MO: Armed Homeowner Confronts Agressive Theives, Shoots One

INDEPENDENCE, Mo. -- A man accused of trying to break into a truck is in the hospital Thursday morning after the truck's owner shot him.

Independence police say around 4:30 a.m. at least two people drove up to a truck parked on the side of Hawthorne Street off Blue Ridge Boulevard.

As one of the suspects tried to break into it, police say the homeowner heard what was going on and came outside with a gun.

Police say the homeowner confronted the thieves and shot one suspect in the shoulder.
More Here

AZ: Armed Woman Drives off Intruder with Gunfire

The incident happened just before 2 a.m. on Wednesday in the area of 35th Avenue and Baseline Road.

Police say a woman woke up to the sound of a man breaking into the back window of her home. The woman grabbed a gun and fired in the direction of the man attempting to gain entry.

It does not appear the suspect was hit by the gunfire, and the suspect fled the scene. It was not immediately known if the suspect left the area on foot or in a vehicle.


More Here

PA: Armed Victim Shoots man who Assaulted Him

OLNEY (WPVI) -- A man who was assaulted leaving a Chinese take-out restaurant turned the tables and shot his attacker in Philadelphia's Olney neighborhood, police say.

The shots rang out just before 11:30 p.m. Tuesday near Fifth and West Rockland streets in Olney.

A customer leaving a take-out restaurant was punched in the face by a would-be robber.
More Here

Peruta Team Asking Supreme Court to Hear Appeal to the Case on Bearing Arms Ouside the Home

Edward Peruta and his fellow plaintiffs have decided to have their council petition the Supreme Court to hear an appeal to the last Ninth Circuit decision in The Peruta case.

Edward Peruta applied to the San Diego County Sheriff for a permit to carry concealed. The Sheriff refused to grant him a permit. Peruta's case was wrapped in with another case making its way through the courts, with other plaintiffs. The plaintiffs were ruled against in the district court and appealed to the Ninth Circuit.

The Ninth Circuit ruled that County Sheriffs could not use their discretion to arbitrarily deny concealed carry permits, because California had outlawed most open carry; therefore the Sheriff could not arbitrarily deny carry outside the home to the general population.

After a change in the leadership of the Ninth Circuit, the Ninth decided to set aside the decision of the three judge panel, and hear the appeal en banc. In the en banc decision, the Ninth ignored the ban on open carry and concluded that it was constitutional for sheriffs to use discretion to deny concealed carry permits.  The orders and opinions at the Ninth Circuit are available here.

The legal team of C.D. Michel and Associates has filed a Petition For Writ of Certiorari to the United States Supreme Court. The question filed is whether, when open carry is prohibited, can county sheriffs ban most people from obtaining a concealed carry permit, when they have the option to grant those permits? Here is the question as given in the petition:

QUESTION PRESENTED

Under California law, openly carrying a handgun outside the home is generally prohibited, but concealed carry is permissible with a license. While an applicant must demonstrate “good cause” to obtain a concealed-carry license, county sheriffs can—and many do—interpret “good cause” to include a desire to carry a handgun for self-defense. The San Diego County Sheriff takes a different, and much more restrictive, approach, defining “good cause” to require a particularized need for self-defense that differentiates the applicant from the ordinary citizen. The majority of a three-judge panel held the Sheriff’s policy unconstitutional, concluding that ordinary, law-abiding citizens may not be deprived of the ability to obtain concealed-carry licenses for self-defense when state law already prohibits open carry. But the majority of an en banc panel reached the opposite conclusion, holding that the Sheriff may deny concealed-carry licenses on any terms he chooses because there is no independent constitutional right to concealed carry. In reaching that conclusion, the Ninth Circuit added to the sharp division among the lower courts over whether the Second Amendment allows ordinary, law-abiding citizens to be deprived of all means of carrying a handgun for self-defense.

The question presented is: 

 

Whether the Second Amendment entitles ordinary, law-abiding citizens to carry handguns outside the home for self-defense in some manner, including concealed carry when open carry is forbidden by state law.

 The Supreme Court hears only a small percentage of cases that petition to have their case heard. This case may be "ripe" with a split in the Circuits; that is simply speculation. Whether a replacement for Justice Scalia will be appointed to the court in time to hear the case is also uncertain.

©2017 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice is included.

Link to Gun Watch

 

 

Constitutional Provision for Right to Arms Likely for Iowa

Iowa is one of only six states that does not have some sort of protection of the right to keep and bear arms in the state Constitution. The other five states are California, New York, New Jersey, Maryland, and Minnesota. One of the reasons for this lack is the difficult process that a state constitutional amendment has to undergo to be passed in Iowa.  First, the amendment must be passed by the General Assembly. Then an election must occur. Then the amendment must be passed a second time. Finally, the amendment is to be presented to the people, who can vote it up or down in the next election.

The process is nearly identical to the one used in Wisconsin. Wisconsin residents and legislators went through the process in the 1990's resulting in the passage of Wisconsin's strong State Constitutional protection in 1998 with 74% of the vote.

Iowa's senate is starting the process with JR2. Update. Here is the wording of the proposed amendment.

Right to acquire, keep, possess, transport, carry, transfer,  and use arms. 

SEC. 1A. The right of an individual to acquire, keep, possess, transport, carry, transfer, and use arms to defend life and liberty and for all other legitimate purposes is fundamental and shall not be infringed upon or denied. Mandatory licensing, registration, or special taxation as a condition of the exercise of this right is prohibited, and any other restriction shall be subject to strict scrutiny.

The difficult part in passing these constitutional protections is to get them past the legislative leadership. Republicans hold majorities in both houses of the Iowa legislature for the first time in 20 years.

Now that the Republicans hold the leadership positions, they are starting to process for the constitutional protection of the right to arms. From desmoinesregister.com:

Among those is a proposed amendment to the state constitution protecting Iowans' right to "acquire, keep, possess, transport, carry, transfer and use" firearms to "defend life and liberty and for all other legitimate purposes." It also would prohibit mandatory licensing, registration or special taxation of those actions.

Senate Judiciary Chairman Brad Zaun, R-Urbandale, said the bill — co-sponsored by each of the Senate's 29 Republicans — is intended to be a statement about the caucus' priorities.

"I’m getting a lot of emails from a lot of people that say, 'Hey, you Republicans are in control, and we expect big things from you,'" he said.

Because the resolution would amend the state constitution, it would have to be approved by the current General Assembly and again after new members are voted into office in 2018. Then the language would be put on the next general election ballot for voter approval in 2020.

Republicans will need to hold on to power through the next election cycle, and then present the amendment to the people two years later.

JR2 mentions "Arms" not "Firearms", to correct the Des Moines Register.  The actual amendment has not yet been finalized.

The Iowa State Seal says "OUR LIBERTIES WE PRIZE AND OUR RIGHTS WE WILL MAINTAIN". Time for Iowans to live up to their slogan.

©2017 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice is included.

Link to Gun Watch

FL: Tallahassee Mayor Claims Power to ignore State Law

Mayor Gillum Image from Youtube

In Florida, the State government has chosen to protect residents rights to keep and bear arms by restricting the actions that local governments can take.  This is call preemption, and it means that only the State can pass laws restriction the carry, possession, and use of guns.  It insures that the laws regarding guns and firearms use are uniform across the state. People exercising their right to keep and carry weapons will not have to guess about whether they are violating an obscure local ordinance when they cross some unmarked local boundary. Every state has some form of firearms preemption law on the books. Some are more protective than others.

Many Florida local governments chose to ignore the law. They kept illegal ordinances on the books, and even threatened prosecution of individuals, although the ordinances themselves were illegitimate.

The Florida legislature responded by providing penalties for individuals in local governments who chose to ignore and violate the preemption law. From citylab.com:

The mayor refers to the law as “super-preemption.” Like state preemption laws across the country, including North Carolina’s notorious H.B. 2, Florida’s firearms statute forbids city or county governments from passing certain local policies—in this case, laws regulating the sale or use of firearms. But Florida’s law goes much further: It opens up local government officials to lawsuits, penalties, fees, and even removal from office for even attempting to pass a bill contravening state law.

Recently, the city of Tallahassee was sued to remove laws that violate the preemption ordinance from their books.  It is a remedy the preemption law provides to bring cities that openly defy the law into compliance.  Mayor Gillum has chosen to openly defy the preemption statute and challenge it in court. Mayor Gillum is a rising star in the Democrat party.  He spoke at the Democrat national convention.

From wfsu.org:

The first district court of appeals must consider whether the city went afoul of the law when it left a pair of provisions regulating gun use on the books. Eric Friday, general counsel for the gun rights organization Florida Carry says the law is clear.

“These officials took swore an oath and took a job to follow the laws of Florida and the’ve chosen not to do so. They have chosen, or they have stated here, that they want to continue to regulate fire arms whether the legislature tells them they can or cannot,” Friday says.

But city attorneys argue the state’s preemption law violates city commissioners’ rights under the state constitution. Lauren Lennon says that’s because it violates the commissioners’ legislative immunity by carrying penalties and fines, even allowing them to be personally sued based on how they vote.

It is the duty of state legislators to keep local officials in check. Local governments are creatures of the State. States are independent of the Federal government because of the structure of the Constitution, where the checks and balances in the power structure are defined. States have some powers, but not unlimited. The federal government has some powers, but not unlimited. Individuals have rights, but not unlimited. Local governments are creatures of the State.

Elected officials do not have immunity to violate peoples rights. That principle has been well established in federal law, in Title 18, U.S.C., Section 242. From justice.gov:

TITLE 18, U.S.C., SECTION 242

Whoever, under color of any law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom, willfully subjects any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States, ... shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both; and if bodily injury results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include the use, attempted use, or threatened use of a dangerous weapon, explosives, or fire, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and if death results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include kidnaping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, shall be fined under this title, or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death.

In the Florida pre-emption case, the State of Florida is saying that local officials do not have the authority to vote to violate individual rights, and that they can be held to account if they do so.  Voting to put someone's rights in danger is a little different than arresting someone for exercising their rights. It is the predicate act to doing so.

It may be a few months before the case is decided in the courts.

©2016 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice is included.

Link to Gun Watch

Al: Man Shoots Burglary Suspect, Suspect Identified as his Grandson

Jerry Casson, 75, shot 32-year-old Justin Casson in the chest while the younger man was trying to enter his residence, according to a press release.


The incident occurred about 10:40 p.m. Tuesday in the 500 block of Crawfish Lane. According to the sheriff's office, the burglary suspect lives in the same area.
More Here

GA: Gun Store Owner wins Gunfight on Camera

An armed robber was killed on camera as he tried to hold up a gun store by its 64-year-old owner.

Surveillance footage at Dixie Gun and Pawn in Mableton, Georgia, showed the moment the would-be criminal and an accomplice stormed into the store dressed in ski masks.

They aimed their guns towards an employee who held his hands up in a plea for mercy before store owner Jimmy Groover opened fire.

The 64-year-old grandfather reached for his own gun and shot one of the robbers dead while the other ran for his life.

More Here including video

CT: Man who shot Aggressive Thief Charged with Assault

After checking the crock pot, Berry looked out the window and saw a man breaking into Berry’s work van parked on the street, police said. A car that Berry didn’t recognize was parked in the driveway.

Police said Berry told them he grabbed his .38-caliber handgun, which he has a permit to use, and ran outside. Berry said the burglar, who was carrying Berry’s tool box, turned toward him in a threatening manner, so Berry fired four shots at him.
More Here

WI: Concealed Carry Permits top 320,000 at end of 2016

Wisconsin topped 320,000 concealed carry permits by the end of December, 2016.  As of January 7th, 2017, there were 321,200 active permits. 3,218 new permits were added in December, according to a Wisconsin Department of Justice source. Some permits are expiring, so the rate of increase of active permits has slowed.

There were 315,263 active permits at the end of September, 2016.

Wisconsin has one of the best and most easily accessible shall issue concealed carry permit systems in the nation.  No fingerprints or picture is required. The permit fee is $40, and the training requirement is easily met in a number of ways.

There has been almost no abuse of the permits by permit holders. Permit holders in general are some of the most law abiding people in the United States, with crime rates far lower than police officers.

Only one Wisconsin permit holder has been convicted of an unjustified homicide.  That was a man who claimed self defense.  The jury disagreed and convicted him of manslaughter. With the one unjustified homicide, Wisconsin permit holders have a lower homicide rate than Japan.

The world rate for homicides is 7.6 per 100,000.  The U.S. rate was 4.5 per 100,000 for 2014.  The Wisconsin rate was 2.9 per 100,000.  Japan's rate was .3 per 100,000, still three times higher than the rate for Wisconsin Concealed Permit holders.

The fly in the lovely picture of Wisconsin concealed carry permits is that they are only available to Wisconsin residents.  Most states allow non-residents to obtain permits. Florida and Utah have made a mini-industry of the practice. If only 100,000 people in the rest of the United States applied for a Wisconsin permit, over 4 million dollars would pour into Wisconsin Department of Justice coffers.

The Wisconsin permit would be popular for all the reasons stated above.  Utah charges $37 for a resident permit, and an addition $10 for a non-resident permit. If Wisconsin did the same, it would bring in another million to the State.  Utah has 424,325 non-resident permits and 228,395 resident permits as of June 30, 2016.  It is likely that Wisconsin could top those figures, making the 5 million dollars for the State DOJ an annual increase.

Wisconsin permits can be applied for online.

©2016 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice is included.

Link to Gun Watch

Armed Man Saves Wounded AZ State Trooper

 Image from azcapitoltimes.com

About 4:30 a.m. on Thursday, January 12th, 2017, an Arizona State Trooper was shot while investigating a rollover accident.  The officer was then further attacked. The accident was on a remote section of I-10 about 50 miles west of Phoenix, on the westbound side of the freeway. The officer was being beaten when a man, driving with his family, stopped to help. From ktar.com:

The officer was shot in the shoulder. His injuries were serious but not life threatening. He had been investigating a rollover accident just before shots were fired at him around 4:30 a.m., he told fellow officers.

“I don’t know that my trooper would be alive without his assistance,” Department of Public Safety Director Col. Frank Milstead said of driver’s intervention.

The driver, whose name has not been released, was in the car with his family. He pulled over after seeing the fight.

He asked the officer if he needed help and when the officer said yes, ran back to his car and retrieved a weapon.

The family man drew his weapon and demanded the attacker stop. When that didn’t happen, he fired and hit the man multiple times.

 The area is remote, but there is often considerable traffic. I-10 is a major artery between Phoenix and Los Angeles.  There are no street lights in the area.  Sunrise would not be for another three hours. The attacker died from his wounds, as did a woman who was involved in the rollover wreck.


 ©2016 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice is included.

Link to Gun Watch

Pew Poll: Urban Officers favor People's Right to Arms

Pew Research has released a poll taken in the middle of 2016. Note that the Orlando night club massacre and the massive media hype calling for a ban on "assault weapons" occurred one third of the way through the survey period for police.  The shooting of five police officers in Dallas, with a rifle occurred half way through the survey period.

The public survey was conducted two months after the Orlando Pulse shooting, at the height of the establishment media demonization of "assault weapons", and one month after the shooting of five officers in Dallas. 

The poll is more correctly a poll of urban police officers than of all police officers.  Rural and small town police officers were excluded from the poll. Those officers make up 37% of the officers in police and sheriff's departments in the country. Even the urban officers strongly favored the right to arms. From pewsocialtrends.org:

Police officers are considerably more likely than the general public to say it is more important to protect the rights of Americans to own guns than it is to control gun ownership (74% of officers vs. 53% of the public).

Both urban police and the public expressed support of a national database to track gun sales.  Precisely what is meant by that is left to the readers imagination. The public portion of this poll was taken at the height of establishment media propaganda for more restrictions on guns after the Orlando Pulse shooting.

A majority of police and a larger share of the public also support the creation of a federal database to track gun sales (61% and 71%, respectively).

There is an enormous split between urban police attitudes about banning "assault style" (whatever that means) weapons, and the public attitude. Again, these surveys were taken, for the most part, shortly after the Orlando Pulse shooting.

However, the consensus on guns vanishes when the focus turns to assault-style weapons. About two-thirds of Americans (64%) but only about a third of police (32%) favor outlawing assault weapons.

This is not surprising. Urban police almost never encounter semi-automatic rifles in the course of their duties. They know that overall, rifles, such as the many AR15 variants and various AK type variants, are extremely rare in crime. Many officers, even urban officers, are familiar with these type of rifles and have qualified with them.

That cannot be said for the general public. The public survey was taken exclusively after the Orlando Pulse massacre and the media driven propaganda aimed at banning "assault weapons".

After the Orlando shooting the term "assault weapon" was conflated with AR and AK variants. This is why Pew asked about "assault-style" weapons rather than "assault weapons" or "assault rifles". "Assault weapons" is a specific legal term that includes many handguns and shotguns, including most magazines used by police in their handguns. "Assault rifles" is a specific technical term that excludes nearly all AR and AK variants in the United States.  "Assault style" is vague enough to include the rifle used in the Orlando shooting.

If we have discovered anything about attitudes toward the Second Amendment and public ownership of firearms, it is that there is an enormous gulf between rural and small town America and urban America. Yet, the sample was deliberately and heavily weighted toward large, urban police  and sheriff's departments, ignoring officers in small town and rural departments. From pewsocialtrends.org:

The main survey is an online poll of a nationally representative sample of 7,917 officers working in 54 police and sheriff’s departments with 100 or more sworn officers. (Some 63% of all sworn officers work in departments of this size.)

The first sentence in the quote above is not true. The survey is *not* a nationally representative sample. The survey ignored rural and small town America, where about 37% of American police officers(pdf) live and work. It heavily weighted the poll toward large urban departments where about 25% of American police officers live. Included in the poll, but given less representation, were urban police officers in cities of 100,000 to 500,000.

The sample was taken from the largest 5% of police and sheriff's departments. Of approximately 15,400 departments, half have less than 10 officers.

The departments sampled averaged over 1,000 officers per department.

According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics (pdf 2013 data), there are only 49 departments in the entire United States that have more than 1,000 sworn officers. 

It is easy to understand why small departments were not sampled. It is simply harder to do. Instead of obtaining cooperation with one police chief, cooperation with 20 is required.  This selection bias skews the sample significantly.

It is almost certain the percentage of police with positive attitudes toward the Second Amendment would have been higher if rural and small town America officers had been included in the sample.

©2016 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice and link are included.

Link to Gun Watch