Nine Cases where both Bear Spray and Firearms were used to Defend against Bear Attacks

Many places on the Internet continue to claim that bear spray is more effective at stopping bear attacks than firearms. There is no objective source for these claims. They are mostly based on a spurious comparison of the deterrent effects of bear spray on curious or food seeking bears compared to a selection of bear attacks where firearms were present, and sometimes used.  It is not a valid comparison.  Author Dave Smith explains the problem:

Efficacy of Firearms for Bear Deterrence in Alaska and Efficacy of Bear Deterrent Spray in Alaska were 2 halves of a straw man argument designed to prove bear spray was more effective than a gun. The bear spray study only included incidents when people sprayed bears; in 27% of the gun incidents, people did not have time to shoot. Just 10 of 72 bear spray incidents involved charging bears. About 60% of bear spray incidents involved agency personnel spraying habituated bears in national parks–when brown bears were sprayed, the sprayer had back-up, a colleague armed with a 12 ga. shotgun. The “methods” for the gun study said the authors analyzed “bear attacks.” When you compare the results of these 2 studies, bear spray proved far more effective than firearms. But you’ve got to be a totally unscrupulous, wildly unethical biologist to compare the results of these studies. It’s kind of like crashing a Toyota Tacoma head on into a wall at 100 mph, backing a Ford F150 into a a wall at 5 mph, and then claiming research proves Fords are safer than Toyotas.

During research to gather cases of bear attacks, I and associates have found nine cases where both firearms and spray were used to defend against bears, on the same bear.  Five of the cases involve handguns; three involve rifles. The firearm(s) is/are uncertain in one case, but probably involved a rifle or rifles.

The nine incidents we have found are arranged in chronological order. 

The first case occurred against a black bear in Colorado, in 2004. In this case, the spray is not identified, except that it was pepper spray.

1. 31 August, 2004, Colorado, Bear Charged  John Tiebohl, 9 mm, black bear

BACHELOR GULCH – The Aug. 31 shooting of a bear in Bachelor Gulch still echoes among residents in the upscale enclave.The Colorado Division of Wildlife continues to investigate the incident, in which homeowner John Tietbohl shot and wounded a bear outside his Daybreak Ridge home. Tietbohl told officers the bear had been trying to get into his home, then charged him as he was getting into his car that evening. Tietbohl, who had been carrying a 9-millimeter pistol as a sidearm to protect himself from the bear, shot and hit the animal, which left a trail of blood as it ran off.Earlier in the day, Bachelor Gulch security officers had repeatedly sprayed pepper spray at the bear near Tietbohl’s house, but the animal stayed around. The bear also reportedly slipped into Tietbohl’s garage in the days before it was shot.

 This is the only incident of the eight recorded where the bear spray and shooting were separated by a few hours.  The bear was not found after it was shot.

2. September, 2006, Alaska, bear spray and a .30-06 rifle.

A grizzly sow charged a couple armed with bear spray and a 30-06 rifle. The grizzly charged through the bear spray and was stopped with one shot from the .30-06, at a distance of eight feet. The aftermath was immediately captured on the following video.

September, 2006 Youtube Video  Brown Bear Charge on Montague Island, Alaska
Bear spray failed to stop sow grizzly. The bear was shot at eight feet after a full can of bear spray was emptied on the bear.

In this incident in Montana, one hunter used bear spray, the second used a .44 magnum.

 3 . 6 October, 2007 Montana: bear spray and  .44 Magnum

It attacked a pair of bow hunters early Saturday afternoon. One of them used bear pepper spray and halted a charge within nine feet, but the grizzly turned and charged a second time. That’s when the second hunter shot it twice with a .44 magnum pistol.(snip)

The first pistol shot entered the bear’s body just under the chin, traveled through the sternum and clipped the aorta, Sheppard said. The second hit the bear in the chest. Both likely would have been fatal.

4. 22 November, 2012, Wyoming, bear spray, two rifles used by father and two sons, grizzly bear

The bear charged the two and their father from 42 yards on Thanksgiving Day. First, the father fired bear spray at the animal. The sons opened fire when the bear was 10 feet away.

Three bullets — one to the back and two to the head — brought down the 534-pound male practically at the hunters' feet.

"The hunters were in the correct hunting area with appropriate hunting licenses," John Powell, a spokesman for the U.S. Attorney's Office in Cheyenne, said by email. "They immediately reported the incident and cooperated fully with the investigation by US Fish and Wildlife officers."

Grand Teton officials did not identify the hunters, but the Jackson Hole News & Guide previously identified them as David Trembly, 48, of Dubois, and his 20- and 17-year-old sons, who remain unidentified.

(snip)

All three hunters had ready access to bear spray. When the bear charged, David Trembly fired his spray while his sons raised their rifles and initially held fire. One of the hunters described he grizzly bear as moving "incredibly fast" and "like a cat," moving low to the ground and snapping branches as it charged, according to the release.

5. 26 July, 2014, Montana, bear spray and .357 magnum, From Misoulian.com: 

 Murphy, he said, did not fire his .357 revolver until the charging bear – a grizzly, Holden said DNA tests later confirmed – was 7 to 10 feet away, and not until bear spray discharged when the animal was 15 to 25 feet away failed to deter it.

Gun Watch Glacier Park .357 magnum, more details

6. 28 October, 2015, Montana, Bear Spray and .300 magnum Rifles, grizzly, West Yellowstone
  From gohunt.com:

“F***! No! Bear! No!” I screamed in terror as she started snapping her jaws and bounding towards my friends and me. Each snap sounded like an axe hitting concrete. I got behind my one friend who was armed and threw both my gun and my camera on the ground in panic after the bear spray. She was terrifying and extremely vocal, huffing and grunting. The person who had the bear spray shakily handed it to me without the safety on, ready to go.

I ran to my friend’s side to spray her, but, by then, it was too late: she had already bluff charged us once and was almost on top of us. My friend fired off a round and hit her right on the top of her shoulder, but she wasn't fazed. He fired two more shots as I was spraying, but the spray wouldn't go more than 10’ and, at this moment, she was at 15’.

The spray was out in what felt like just a couple of seconds and the wind had pushed it back into our faces. It burned my eyes, lips, and nose like hell. We were all coughing and wheezing immediately. My friend then grabbed my .300 Weatherby and started firing. After he emptied it we ran back into the trees and he handed it to me, screaming for more cartridges. I reloaded and put one more in her head. It was then deathly silent.

 The incident above is almost certainly the same as the 28 October incident mentioned in the USGS database on grizzly mortalities below.  The Bozeman Daily Chronicle mentions two attacks by grizzly bears where hunters used bear spray first, then firearms to stop the bear attacks. The second incident is listed below.

7. 15 November, 2015, Montana, bear spray and guns (probably rifles) From bozemandailychronicle.com:

 This incident comes on the heels of two other grizzly deaths in recent weeks, one in Gardiner and one in West Yellowstone. In both of those incidents, hunters reported shooting the animals after bear spray failed to stop them from charging.

In the USGS database of Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem 2015 known and probable Grizzly Bear Mortalities, there are two self defense shootings of grizzly bears that correspond to the attacks mentioned in the Boseman Daily Chronicle. One on October 28, 2015 and another on November 15, 2015. I believe the gohunt account above is the 28 October attack.  I have not been able to find more details of the 15 November attack.

8. 4 September, 2017, Montana, bear spray and .44 magnum 

Tom Sommers and his partner Dan were bow hunting for elk when they saw the bear about 30 feet away.  Dan put out a cloud of spray, but the bear charged through it.

Sommers was unable to get the safety off his spray can and dropped it as the bear closed with him. He then accessed a .44 magnum, but was unable to shoot before the bear swatted his hand down. As the bear attacked him, it stood on his hand/gun, so he could not shoot. Tom eventually was able to shoot, after his partner sprayed the bear from two feet away.  When he shot, he could not see because of the bear spray and blood.
From facebook.com:

(Tom Sommers) And partner Dan both pulled out pepper spray. Dan sprayed but Toms spray didn't work so bear came after Tom. Tom ran behind a tree, bear kept coming. apparently bear chased Tom around tree twice, Tom got his pistol out turned to shoot, bear knocked his hand down. Tom hit ground. bear bit through thigh then put toms head in his mouth. while head in mouth tom tried to shoot bear in neck but bear stepped on hand /gun. Tom said he could hear his skull cracking. thought that was it. Dan shot bear at 2 feet with pepper spray. that's all it took. bear ran off and tom shot at it but said he couldn't see anything from all the blood and pepper spray in his face. 4 hours later after several hours on back of mule he is alive and in hospital. great spirits. was laughing. hope I did his story justice.

More detail in Tom Sommers own words at a Field and Stream article 

More detail in a video, Sommers describes event and has video of scene

9. 6 October, 2017 Montana:  bear spray and  9mm, Grizzly, account from two sources, Todd Orr, and Eye-witness, Beaver Creek, MT.

I interviewed both sources. The attack was reported to Fish and Game, but was not published. Consistent incident recorded in USGS data base.

It was at the end of the day, and was getting dark. Two bow hunters, were returning from their bow hunt. They both had bear spray and pistols. They had agreed that if forced into defending themselves, one would use spray, the other would back up the spray with his pistol.

The grizzly bluff charged several times, blocking their return to camp.


Warning shots were fired in the air with a 9 mm pistol. The bear ran off, then came back. Bear spray was utilized but only extended 10 feet into a light head wind and did not reach the bear. The bear would not disengage. It kept coming back and getting closer. The aggressive bear was finally shot with the 9 mm pistol at close range. It ran off. The report was made to Fish and Wildlife, and the bear was found dead the next day. Eye-witness believes it was one shot to the chest of the bear.

These are all the cases I and associates have found where both bear spray and firearms were used. Tom Sommers is the only case where the firearms were of uncertain efficacy. The bear was moving away when the single shot was fired; Sommers was blinded by bear spray and blood. There are other cases where only bear spray was used when firearms were present. There are cases where only firearms were used when bear spray was present.  Those cases are not included in this article.

Readers are urged to read the cases and make up their own mind about the effectiveness of bear spray and firearms in defense against bear attacks.

One major advantage of firearms over bear spray is the bear is usually killed.  In six of the nine incidents above, the bear was killed.

Bears that attack humans should be killed. The bears that were killed were not able to attack other humans. They were no longer a threat. If bears are not killed during the attack, they often must be tracked down and killed at some expense and danger.

Both grizzly and black Bear populations are increasing in North America. Bear populations will continue to expand, utilizing human developed food sources, as long as humans allow them to expand.  The grizzly bear population in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem has continued to increase, even though about 5% of the grizzly population is killed in bear/human conflict every year.  Humans must kill bears to keep the bear population inside acceptable limits.

Bear attacks on humans are rare. They are so rare that if all bears that attack humans were killed during the attack, the number would be a small percentage of the number of bears that must be harvested to keep bear populations within acceptable bounds. It is better management if bears that attack humans are selected out of the bear population at the time of the attack.

Protecting human life from an attacking bear is a higher value than selling a bear permit to a hunter. Federal and state laws already acknowledge this fact.

Saving bear lives with bear spray is poor management.

Bear spray has benefits. It is useful to people who are afraid of firearms, or who do not wish to develop the modest skill necessary to use them to defend against bears.  Bear spray is useful where firearms are difficult to obtain, such as for American tourists in Canada. Bear spray does not present a lethal danger to bystanders, except as it may inhibit their own defenses, as it did with Tom Sommers.

These are reasonable reasons for people to chose bear spray over firearms for defense against bears.

In many instances, as illustrated in the examples listed above, firearms are far more effective than bear spray in stopping bear attacks.


©2019 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice and link are included.

Gun Watch

NC: Career Criminal Killed during Break-In

“Upon entry into the residence Rico Shelton was met by an individual who shot him, which ultimately resulted in his death,” the statement read.

Records with the North Carolina Department of Public Safety show that Shelton has been previously convicted of multiple felony counts of breaking and entering.
More Here

TN: Woman Fires Shotgun at Intruders

A woman told Henry County Sheriff’s deputies she fired a shotgun at would-be intruders Monday night at her home on Reynoldsburg Road south of Paris.

More Here

PA: Armed Samaritan Uses .45 Caliber Glock 30 to Counter Knife

The owner, Ken Gulick, told Blancarte to leave and he did, but Blancarte came back a few minutes later and began to be disruptive again, the police report said.

A bar patron, identified as Jeff Jones, began to escort Blancarte out of the bar, according to the complaint.

“Once outside, Blancarte pulled out and displayed a knife to Jones,” the complaint said. “Jones in turn responded by pulling out his firearm.”

A Tarentum officer said he saw Jones pointing a gun at Blancarte outside the bar when he arrived at the scene. Both men were handcuffed and placed in the back of separate police vehicles. Officers from Tarentum, Brackenridge and Harrison responded.
More Here

AZ: Homeowner Fires Shots a Burglary Suspects

Police say a homeowner fired shots a the vehicle of burglary suspects after getting home and finding a strange car in the the driveway near Drexel Road and Midvale Park Road. No one was hit by a bullet.
More Here

AZ: Armed Samaritan stops Attempted Kidnapping

According to Sgt. Tommy Thompson with Phoenix police, the suspect approached the girl from behind, grabbed her arm and pulled it behind her back and put his arm over her face while she was walking to school near 19th Avenue and Bell Road on April 3.

When the suspect started talking to the girl, a witness knocked him down and told him to leave the girl alone.

The witness then pointed a handgun at the suspect and told him to leave.
More Here

Book Review: The Thugs Or Phansigars of India by Sir William Henry Sleeman

The Thugs Or Phansigars of India, Comprising a History of the Rise and Progress of that Extraordinary Fraternity of Assassins; and a Description of the System which it Pursues, and of the Measures which Have Been Adopted by the Supreme Government of India for Its Suppression  Philadelphia, 1839  

 

 About 448 pages, at google.com.

In the fifteenth century, a cult of murder and robbery arose out of a synthesis of Islam and Hinduism. Cult members believed they were under the special protection and direction of the goddess Kali, and that being under the direction of Kali meant they had no choice but to obey, even if the directions were against prohibitions in the Koran.  The Cult of Thugee conveniently gave cult members an excuse and a reason to murder and rob vast numbers of innocent travelers.

For over three centuries the Cult of Thugee murdered and robbed with near immunity. Robbery was almost always a result of murder. Murder was almost always of people with no prior knowledge of the cult members. It has been estimated that two million people were murdered by cult members before the cult was irradicated by the British administration in India, from about 1828 to 1850.

Almost all of the people murdered by Thugee cult members were travelers far from home. Most of the people in India traveled on foot during this period. 

The Cult was discovered by the English in the 1820s, but it was not until about 1828 that the British administration in India came to understand the extent of the cult, and the need to devise a sub-continent wide, co-ordinated response.

Much of the book is from Sir William Henry Sleeman's interviews of Thugs who were captured and turned into cooperators with the English prosecutors rather than face death.  Many Thugs preffered to be executed rather than reveal the names of their fellow cult members.

Because Thugee operated in highly organized groups, there were multiple witnesses to multiple murders, making cross references of testimony form individual Thugs held appart, very  persuasive evidence. Physical evidence3 in terms of recovered bodies in mass graves at select campsites along the roads further confirmed the testimony of the Thug "approvers", as those who cooperated were called.

The book is broken into several sections.

 Pages 1- 227 cover a history of Thugee, some terms, and numerous recounting of some of the notorious murders and practices of the Thugee Cult, and the variations within the cult.

The style of the book is relatively unemotional, in a "just the facts" sort of fashion. The subject matter makes much of the work fascinating reading. The cataloging of Thug terms for their private, criminal use, and the numerous omens that guided the practice of their murderous cult are interesting, but can be skipped with little loss of cohesion.

The second part restarts page numbering at page 1. The first 35 pages, include another History of the Thugs or Phansigars by Sleeman it has many different details that the first part of the volumn. There is an extensive interview with numerous Thug prisoners, ending in 1839

Page 35  to page 112 is a glossary of Thug terms, with extensive explanations of omens and practices. While the glossary can be skipped, there is much interesting detail in it.

The last part of the book, from page 113 on to page 228,  consists of correspondence between then Captain Sleeman and Mr. Stockwell, that details trials of Thugs, and gives the detail used in the trials and gathering of evidence.  Numerous detailed accounts of the Thugs procedures for murdering their victims are recorded.

Numerous pieces of correspondence are included.

The details in this factual account of British administration in India contain numerous place names and dates that are necessary, but detract from easy reading.

A wonderful and labor intensive exercise would be to create maps on which all the place names, roads, rivers, villages and cities were accurately designated.

Such a map would add much to the reader's understanding.

The reading of "The Thugs" was worth while as a means of understanding human nature. The Thugs did not feel shame or regret or concern for their numerous victims. The thrill of the hunt and kill were so great, it was said that a Thug gave up Thugee only with great difficulty.  Murder and robbery were addictive.

I highly recommend this book to any student of history.

"Thug culture" has its etymological origins in the cult of Thugee, which used to exist in the Indian subcontinent. The Thugs did not value human life outside of their circle. Humans who were not Thugs were merely prey, to be murdered and robbed with efficiency, as a religious duty, and as sport. Thugs would attempt to befriend travelers until the most advantageous circumstance were arranged. Then they would murder whole groups with ruthless efficiency.

One of the great achievements of British rule in India was the eradication of  Thugee.

For those who wish to avoid several hundred pages of the original, a superb condensation of the work is available. 

How the British Broke the Thugs of India is only a few pages long. 

The condensed version should be required reading for every school child. 

 
©2019 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice and link are included.

Gun Watch

 

Speaker Pelosi Attempting to Expand number and Types of Prohibited Possessors

The Democrats in the House of Representatives are attempting to expand the number of classes of people prohibited from exercising Constitutionally protected Second Amendment rights. Those prohibitions have been added to H.R. 1585, a re-authorization of the Violence Against Women Act. The Act had not previously been used to restrict gun ownership. Speaker Nancy Pelosi has added the infringements to the current bill.

In 1968, the number of classes of prohibited possessors, those people who were not allowed to possess or own firearms, was greatly expanded.  Before 1968, the classes of people who could not possess firearms were decided by state law.

When the Gun Control Act of 1968 was passed, six categories of people who were not allowed to purchase firearms from federal dealers were created. The list included categories which did not exist in most states. The categories were these:

1. Not a legal resident of the State where the federal dealership is located

2. People under the age of 21 for handguns, and 18 for rifles and shotguns.

3. Convicted felons or those under indictment for a felony (a crime punishable by more than a year of imprisonment)

4. Fugitives from justice (fled from any State to avoid prosecution for a crime or to avoid giving testimony in any criminal proceeding)

5. Those adjudicated to be mentally defective or who has been involuntarily committed to a mental institution.

6. Unlawful user/addicted to a controlled substance

The last four categories were prohibited from possessing firearms. 

In 1987, Congress added four additional categories:

1. Illegal aliens

2. Persons Dishonorably discharged from the military

3.  Persons who have renounced U.S. Citizenship

4. People who are subject to a restraining order for domestic violence, harassment, or stalking (required a court hearing finding the person restrained was a threat)

In 1996, Congress added another category, people convicted of a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence.

In 2019, the Democrats in the House are seeking to expand the latest class, domestic violence, by changing it from intimate partner to include "dating partner" or "former dating partner".

They are also seeking to add another class of prohibited people. 

The additional class would be: those convicted of a "misdemeanor crime of stalking", which includes a "course of harassment, intimidation, or surveillance of another person.
 Stalking or harassment does not include any physical harm. The crime of stalking or harassment is relatively knew, with the first laws being enacted in California in 1990.

The crime is defined to include creation of either a reasonable fear of material harm or emotional distress to another person.

With zealous prosecutors, it would be possible for a person to be convicted of harassment for a series of tweets that caused "emotional distress". 

In many states, there is no right to trial by jury for misdemeanor offenses.

The general trend is easy to see. More and more classes of people who are prohibited from exercising their rights under the Second Amendment; less and less serious offenses are being used to take Second Amendment rights from people.

The expansion of the classes of prohibited persons and the expansion of offenses from felonies to misdemeanors results in a serious erosion of Second Amendment rights.

Several of the prohibited classes in existence have not been in existence for very long.

In the Supreme Court decision a controversial sentence is said to have been added at the instigation of Justice Stevens and the insistence of Justice Kennedy:

The Court’s opinion should not be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms.

 Most of the prohibited classes are not mentioned. Only  "felons and the mentally ill" are mentioned. It is uncertain if the Court would uphold challenges against the proliferation of prohibited classes. "Mentally ill" is far from clear. That prohibition is being challenged already, as are the prohibitions as applied to non-violent felonies.

The other classes are far from longstanding.

Second Amendment supporters would prefer to stop the current push by the Democrats to create expanded and new classes of prohibited possessors, rather than challenge the law in the Courts.

Another Justice appointed by President Trump could make a major difference in the restoration of Second Amendment rights.


 ©2019 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice and link are included.

Gun Watch

MO: 82-Year-Old Shoots Home Invasion Suspect after He Broke in

The confrontation began about 2:40 a.m. when police received a call of someone trying to break into the house in the 900 block of Laurel Street, which is in the West End neighborhood about six blocks north of the Delmar Loop.

By the time police arrived, the 82-year-old had already shot the alleged intruder. He and a 59-year-old man who also lives in the house told officers the invader had forced his way inside before the older man fired on him.
More Here

IL: Security Guard Draws Firearm on two Men who Attacked Him

It is unknown how the incident began but video shows the security officer working the McDonald’s at 10 E Chicago Avenue fighting with two men.

As customers look on, the security guard drew his weapon and the men backed off.
More Here

AL: Homeowner Shoots Burglary Suspect

Around 9:20 p.m., police responded to the 2800 block of Temple Crest Drive where they say a homeowner arrived to their house and found a burglary suspect inside.

There was an altercation and the homeowner shot the burglary suspect, according to Sgt. Johnny Williams. The burglary suspect suffered a non-life threatening injury. The homeowner did not suffer any injuries.
More Here

FL: Armed Samaritan Shoots Man who Attacked him with a Knife

LARGO, Fla. (WFLA) - Largo Police Department detectives are investigating after a good Samaritan found a man lying in the road and tried to help the man, but wound up shooting him when the man lunged at him with a knife.

More Here

Followup TN: Homicide at Apartment Complex rulled Justifed

A recent homicide has been ruled as justifiable, according to police.

According to police, the original shooting happened on the 6000 block of Mount Moriah last Friday.
More Here

Idaho Governor Brad Little Signs Constitutional Carry for 18-20-Year-Old Adults

On 2 April, 2019, Governor Brad Little signed H 206 into law.  The bill restores Constitutional Carry for adults aged 18-20 carrying concealed guns in the incorporated areas of the State of Idaho.

The bill, now law, becomes effective as of 1 July, 2019.

Idaho became a member of the Constitutional Carry club in 2016. Governor "Butch" Otter signed that law on March 26 of that year.

The new law is a small, incremental change that is mostly symbolic. Idaho has been a mostly Constitutional Carry state for most of the last 100 years.  There were restrictions that most people ignored most of the time. The purpose of the restrictions was more symbolic than functional.

The restrictions informed people that infringements on Second Amendment rights were permissible; they loudly said the Bill of Rights was subject to legislative approval.

As more infringements were called for and passed in more legislatures, the resistance by Second Amendment supporters grew and grew. They organized. They formed their own communications networks and their own media. They became a powerful force in most state legislatures.

While the national Second Amendment groups like the NRA and GOA and SAF help pass state legislation, it is state Second Amendment organizations that do the bulk of the work and hold the bulk of the power.

In Idaho, it is, the Idaho Second Amendment Alliance. They were the group that pushed and organized and strategized and voted and lobbied for years to pass Constitutional Carry in 2016. They learned the intricacies of the legislative process  and personal political details they never wanted to know.

Their desire to restore their rights overrode their lack of interest in politics. In politics, it is the people who show up who decide what happens. Idaho Second Amendment Alliance members showed up and made things happen.

Most of what remains of Second Amendment infringements in Idaho are cleanup from the passage of Constitutional Carry in 2016.

Governor Little re-tweeted the NRA tweet to take some credit for signing H206 into law. The bill was massively popular, passing the House 53-14 (3 legislators excused and not voting) and the Senate 28-7.

There is no picture of Governor Little signing the bill, or if their is,  it has not been posted to the  Governor's web page at this time. The signing was done on 2 April.

A picture of Governor Little signing H206 into law would remind people he is fullfilling his pledge to be a strong defender of the 2nd Amendment. From ontheissues.org:

As a lifetime member of the NRA, I am a strong defender of the 2nd Amendment. The 2nd Amendment in Idaho is a sacred trust guaranteed by our Constitution--a fundamental and irrevocable right. Not only are guns vital to our way of life, they are important to our economy.

Source: 2018 Idaho Gubernatorial website BradLittleForIdaho.com , Sep 1, 2017

HB 206 does not affect the existing shall issue concealed carry permit system.

Constitutional Carry is the state of firearms law when the Second Amendment, along with the entire Bill of Rights, was ratified in 1791. At that time, no permits were required for citizens to carry weapons openly or concealed.


©2019 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice and link are included.

Gun Watch

OK: 7-Year-Old Girl Attacked by 3 Dogs at Bus Stop, 2 Dogs Shot

At some point, Koch said a neighbor was able to pull the girl free. That's when he says another neighbor shot the dogs at the owner's request.

"The information we have indicates that the actual owner of the dogs told a neighbor to shoot the dogs," Koch said.

Koch says one of the dogs died at the scene, and the other dog was taken to animal control and later euthanized because of its injuries.

More Here

OK: Armed Woman Shoots Dog that Attacked her Pet

According to police, the woman was walking her dog when a larger dog approached and attacked the Chihuahua. The dog tore open the dogs back according to the woman, who then shot the other dog.

More Here

AZ: Intruder Shot after Illegally Entering Multiple Homes

A man in the home, described as in his 60s, yelled at Lewis to go away, then ran to his bedroom to grab a gun. While he did that, Lewis allegedly broke through the glass door and entered the residence. The man confronted Lewis and shot him in the arm, then retreated to a bathroom and called the police.
More Here

TX: Victim Disarms and Shoots at Robbery Suspect

Police say received multiple calls that shots were fired near the Quaker Square shopping center. When they arrived, they learned the incident started as a robbery. The suspect entered the store with a gun and demanded money. After a brief struggle, the victim was able to get the gun and fire it at the suspect.

More Here

Italy Enacts Castle Doctrine

Image from Swat Concepts

The Italian government has reformed their law on self defense law in the home. 

Italy's legislature has passed a law to follow the example of the United States, to restore the legitimacy of armed defense of the home.

The philosophy behind the old law dates back to the Fascist government of Benito Mussolini. The gun laws in Italy have become increasingly restrictive since 1931.

The new law is similar to what are called Castle Doctrine laws in the U.S.A. The vote in the Chamber of Deputies occurred on 3 March, 2019. The quote below incorrectly refers to "Stand Your Ground" laws. It should be referring to the Castle Doctrine.  From 7 March, 2019  dw.com:

The Chamber of Deputies, Italy's lower house of parliament, on Wednesday voted in favor of a draft law on self-defense in the home.

The bill specifies that "defense is always legitimate" in a person's home. It aims to protect a person who acts in self-defense in response to a perceived threat from an intruder.

Under current legislation, a person who harms an intruder, even in cases of self-defense, can be held responsible for damages.

The bill is reminiscent of US "stand your ground" laws , which often allow a person to use lethal force to defend themselves against an intruder on their property. In Germany, self-defense is vaguely defined, with the criminal code stating "a person who commits an act in self-defense does not act unlawfully."

On March 28, 2019, the Senate passed the Italian Castle Doctrine law.

From xinhuanet.com:

ROME, March 28 (Xinhua) -- Italy's Senate gave final green light to a new law on legitimate self-defense on Thursday.

Lawmakers in the upper house of parliament passed the law with a wide majority of 201 votes in favor, 38 against and 6 abstentions.

The bill was a flagship proposal of the right-wing League party led by Interior Minister Matteo Salvini, which forms Italy's coalition government with the Five Star Movement (M5S).

"From now on, there will be no more reimbursement for relatives of burglars. We are not going to distribute weapons, nor we legitimate any'Wild West', but we stand by the honest citizens," Salvini told local media in parliament, and wrote later on the League's official Facebook account.

"From now on, criminals are aware that being a robber in Italy will be more difficult and more dangerous," he added.

A similar bill had passed the Chamber of Deputies, 225 to 166 in 2017.  That bill did not pass the Senate.

The law has strong popular support, in part, because of a case where a restaurant owner had killed one of two home invaders that had broken into the family home/restaurant, while the owner was fighting with the intruders. The owner was being investigated on suspicion of voluntary manslaughter, with a 21 year mandatory sentence.

The case bears similarity to cases in the United Kingdom, such as the case of Reuben Gregory in England.

England is the modern source of Castle Doctrine law, which is based on the legal principle that a person's home is their castle, which may be defended against all intruders.   The legal principle is based on natural law.

In nature, territory is defended against intrusion. It is the basis of property rights. Virtually all animals and birds defend their territories.  Humans are no exception. The desire to defend ones home against invasion is a basic part of human nature. It is referenced in the bible, by Jesus, in Luke 11:21

“When a strong man, fully armed, guards his own house, his possessions are safe.

Lawyer Gerry Spence referred to that reality when talking to Tom Brokaw about his defense of Randy Weaver, in the famous Ruby Ridge killings. From The Death of Justice by Gerry Spence, page 48:

"That little bunny wouldn't hurt a flea. Not you, not me. But if you reach down into his hole and try to grab him by the ears and pull him out, he will bite you."

"Right," Brokaw says.

"And that's the way it was with Randy Weaver. Leave that rabbit alone and nothin' happens, to you, the feds, to anybody."

It is a deeply ingrained part of human nature that sees, feels, and understands the obvious rationality and justice of the defense of self and the home. Castle Doctrine law has its roots in human nature.

When governments seek to illegitimize armed defense of the home, they work directly against human nature.

A restoration of the right to defense of self and home is happening around the world. The new law in Italy is part of that restoration.

©2019 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice and link are included.

Gun Watch

Idaho Bill to Extend Constitutional Carry to 18-Year-Olds Goes to Governor Brad Little

Image credit Bradlittleforidaho.com


House Bill 206, designed to restore Second Amendment rights in Idaho to 18-20 year old adults in Idaho cities, has passed both the House and the Senate. I is on the way to Governor Brad Little for his signature.

Idaho belongs to the Constitutional Carry club. A person 21 or over can carry a gun throughout the state, openly or concealed, without a government permission slip.

Nor permit was required for citizens to carry weapons, concealed or openly, when the Bill of Rights, including the Second Amendment, was ratified in 1791.

But adults in Idaho, who are less than 21 years old, are forbidden from carrying concealed weapons inside of city or incorporated town limits.

 The same adults have always had the right to carry weapons openly in Idaho, including inside of cities or incorporated town limits. From Fox New (AP) in 2007:

POST FALLS, Idaho – Two home-schooled teenagers in this northern Idaho town say they are carrying loaded guns to the library, grocery store and other public areas for self-defense, as a crime deterrent, and to educate others about their rights.

Zach Doty, 18, carries a loaded Glock handgun on his hip. His 15-year-old brother, Steven, carries a .22-caliber rifle in a sling on his back.

Having accomplished the restoration of Constitutional Carry in Idaho, Second Amendment supporters are cleaning up existing infringements.

HB 206 simply changes the definition of those who are exempt from prosecution for carrying a concealed handgun from 21 years of age to 18 years of age.

The bill passed the House on 14 March, 2019, 53 yea, 14 nay, 3 absent or excused.

It passed the Senate on 27 March, 2019, 28 yea, 7 nay, no absent or excused members.

To obtain a permit, which is recognized by 37 states, people in Idaho are required to be 21 years of age or older.  The permits are recognized by Alabama, Arkansas, Colorado, Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Michigan, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, New Hampshire, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Vermont, Virginia, West Virginia, Wisconsin, and Wyoming.

Second Amendment supporters have organized. They have become a political force. They are restoring Second Amendment rights in the United States, incrementally. 16 states have restored Constitutional Carry. In those states, the struggle to restore Second Amendment rights has shifted to lesser infringements of the Second Amendment.

Second Amendment supporters may be satisfied when they no longer see infringements on Second Amendment rights.

They may not. Movements take on a life of their own. When a person believes that the right to arms is a natural right, they are likely to ask: Why can't I take my defensive firearm to Canada? Why can't I take it to Mexico?

There were times in the past when carrying arms into Mexico and Canada was common, and not a crime.

There will always be infringements on the right to bear arms in the world.



©2019 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice and link are included.

Gun Watch

TN: Shooting Death of Tristan Kinnes was Self Defense

JACKSON, Tenn. — A man who was injured in a Thursday morning shooting in east Jackson has died. Police have confirmed the shooting was in self-defense.
More Here

TX: Home Invasion Suspect was Shot by Armed Homeowner

After the woman confronted the man and began fighting with him, the suspect got past her and went inside to a bedroom, according to Salazar.

Salazar said a fight between the woman's husband and the man in the bedroom led to the man shooting the suspect. The man took off before deputies arrived at the home, he said.
More Here

Followup TX: Shooting Death of Kevin Battle by Mark Jabben goes to Grand Jury

“The detectives found that the victim and the suspect had been arguing for over a week, and that on the date of the shooting Jabben made a comment to the victim’s grandson,” Officer Jimmy Pollozani said in an email to the Fort Worth Star-Telegram. “Battle went to Jabben’s front door to confront Jabben about speaking to his grandson and a very brief argument ensued. Battle is believed to have attempted to enter into Jabben’s residence during the argument when Jabben fired three shots, striking Battle in the head.”

Police said on Friday that Battle was not armed.
More Here

NC: Police say James David Curie was Shot and Killed while Committing Armed Robbery

GREENSBORO — Police announced Friday that the person who shot and killed a 17-year-old Dudley High School senior last month did so in self-defense.

Greensboro Police spokesman Ron Glenn said Friday that investigators believe James David Currie was committing armed robbery when he was shot. Officers said they have no reason to believe the shooter, who has not been named, poses a threat to the community.
More Here

Trump to deliver keynote address at NRA annual meeting this month

President Donald Trump will deliver remarks to National Rifle Association (NRA) members this month at the pro-Second Amendment organization’s annual meetings and exhibits in Indianapolis.

The president is expected to deliver his third keynote address at the NRA Institute for Legislative Action (NRA-ILA) Leadership Forum on April 26 at the Indiana Convention Center—Lucas Oil Stadium.

“Donald Trump is the most enthusiastic supporter of the Second Amendment to occupy the Oval Office in our lifetimes. It is truly an honor to have President Trump address NRA members for the fifth consecutive year,” said Chris Cox, NRA-ILA Executive Director.

He added, “President Trump’s Supreme Court appointments ensure that the Second Amendment will be respected for generations to come. Our members are excited to hear him speak and thank him for his support for our Right to Keep and Bear Arms.”

Trump gained the support of the NRA during his 2016 run for the White House and promised to appoint judges with a strict constitutionalist view of the Second Amendment.

“I kept my promise, and now, with your help, our brand-new Justice—and he is really something very special—Neil Gorsuch, sits on the bench of the United States Supreme Court,” Trump said during his speech at the NRA meeting in 2017 in Georgia, immediately following his election to the presidency.

He went on to say later in his speech, “But you came through for me, and I am going to come through for you. I was proud to receive the NRA’s earliest endorsement in the history of the organization. And today, I am also proud to be the first sitting president to address the NRA Leadership Forum since our wonderful Ronald Reagan in 1983. And I want to thank each and every one of you, not only for your help electing true friends of the Second Amendment but for everything you do to defend our flag and our freedom.”

https://dailycaller.com/2019/04/05/donald-trump-address-nra-meeting/

New Zealand Pettition to Stop Rush to Extreme Gun Law: over 11,000 signatures in Hours

New Zealand gun owners are organizing and demanding due process in the governments response to the mass murder at the Christchurch mosques.  One of the largest New Zealand gun stores, Gun City, is leading the effort to slow down and let reason and logic prevail over agenda driven emotion.  Gun city has made a petition available to its subscribers.  Gun city asks for reasonable restraint.  From guncity.com:

The proposed firearms law changes affect all New Zealanders. We want Firearms Licence holders to be fairly and reasonably treated.

1. We need an independent inquiry into the shooter obtaining a Firearms Licence
2. We want an accurate description of the firearms which the Government proposes to change the law on
3. We need an immediate indication of how the value will be calculated and when payment will be received
4. Will compensation include accessories and ammunition for the gun?
5. Will compensation be limited to just the items surrendered, or will other compensation be made for things such as the following:

(a) Already booked travel for events with the surrendered items
(b) Loss of investment in production equipment and shooting facilities
(c) Loss of employment
(d) Loss of income.

6. To please allow a reasonable timeframe to effect any changes.

It is hard for anyone reading the above requests to see them as other than reasonable. New Zealand experienced the first mass shooting of political terrorism they have seen in over a hundred years of existence as an independent dominion.  The existing far-left government has rushed to use the crises to push through their political agenda. They insist on passing legislation during heated emotion; to pass restrictions they could never pass after measured reflection and reason. The New Zealand press is reporting the petition. From nzherald.co.nz:

In response, Gun City emailed its subscribers today and urged them to sign a petition to Parliament.

The petition, in the name of Hayden Livingstone, started on Monday and had 10,786 signatures by 5pm on Friday.

The petition requested "an in-depth public consultation period on changes to New Zealand firearms legislation, to ensure effective firearms legislation reform that does not unduly punish law-abiding firearms owners while maintaining assurances of public safety".

It called the Government's gun law reforms "ill-advised, partly due to the speed at which they have been implemented and also due to (understandable) emotionally driven public pressure".

New Zealand has an adult population (18 and over) of 3.78 million people. While the signatures were not formally controlled, they come from the subscription list of Gun City customers. Over 11,000 have signed the petition calling for measured restraint, reason, and common sense in the rush to pass the restrictive gun laws.  The equivalent number, in the U.S.A., would be 750,000 signatures.

One of the advantages of the U.S. Constitutional structure is to slow down the legislative process, to prevent the sort of emotional, passionate response the Left is pushing in New Zealand. From The Federalist no. 55, 13 February, 1788:

so there are particular moments in public affairs when the people, stimulated by some irregular passion, or some illicit advantage, or misled by the artful misrepresentations of interested men, may call for measures which they themselves will afterwards be the most ready to lament and condemn.

A few New Zealand gun owners surrendered their firearms voluntarily. Buzzfeed claimed that 37 firearms were turned in to police. That is equivalent to about 2,500 in the United States, or about what was turned in during the Phoenix gun "buyback" in 2013.  The Phoenix gunowners were paid a hundred dollars for their guns. A great many had inherited the guns. That seems the case in New Zealand as well.

New Zealand has a far higher percentage of gun owners than Australia has.

In a few weeks, the world will see if reason or politically manipulated emotion will prevail in New Zealand.


©2019 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice and link are included.

Gun Watch

CA: Gunfight, Drug Store Employee and Multiple Suspects, no Injuries

Stockton police say multiple suspects walked into the pharmacy, which had several people inside at the time. At some point, multiple gunshots were exchanged between the suspects and an armed employee.

More Here

OH: Ohio Resident Shoots Wild Pig that was Damaging Property

Because something has been damaging area properties, Guranino set up cameras. They caught images of the wild boars as they moved through the area.

Guranino and a neighbor, Roy Pratt, set up a station to watch for the animals this week and shot one of two they saw coming out from the edge of the woods about 8:30 p.m. on the first night.
More Here

MI: Neighbor Shoots Unrestrained, Aggressive German Shepard

When questioned by officers, the suspect said the dog was barking and acting “aggressive” toward him while he was outside getting firewood, and he claimed the dog has caused a number of issues over the years.

The owner said his dog normally doesn’t leave the property, but police reported pawprints in the neighbor’s driveway about 15 feet from the road.
More Here

Followup: AR: Charges dropped Against Woman who Shot, Killed Boyfriend

Resinos was arrested March 1 after she says her boyfriend became belligerent and hostile towards her. According to the affidavit, she asked him to leave or she would get her gun but that did not make Gettridge back off. When she returned with the gun things escalated.

According to Resinos' defense team, he backed her up against the bed and lunged at her, she then shot him in the chest.

"You have no duty to retreat from an attacker and that's what this case was about," says Jernigan.
More Here

Swat Team Takes Children from Home because of Political Liability

On 26 February, 2019, the Chandler Police SWAT team raided a home where the children were sick. The parents had not committed any crime, nor was any child in any substantial danger.  The raid itself created far more danger than the danger it was supposed to mitigate.

 It was a perfect storm of the conflict of rights and the Nanny State, parental responsibility and bureaucratic fear of liability.  In short, it resulted from the basic conflict in our society between those who insist on perfection, and reality.  It shows how creeping tyranny is advancing in society.

Link to video of raid on youtube 

Here is a summation of the events leading to the raid. The parents took a two-year-old child to the doctor on Monday, 25 February, 2019, because it had a fever of more than 100. Some accounts say it had a fever of 105. Others accounts are far less precise. It is not clear what the highest fever was. The doctor contacted other doctors, who recommended the child be taken to the emergency room. From azcentral.com:

The doctor contacted Banner physicians who recommended the child be “taken to the emergency room as soon as possible,” according to police records. The doctor told the mother that meningitis can be life-threatening and said the hospital would contact her when the mother arrived.

After they left the doctor's office, the child was laughing and playing with his siblings. The mother took the child’s temperature again. It was near normal.

Shortly after 6:30 p.m., the mother called the doctor and told her that her toddler no longer had a fever so she wasn’t taking him to the emergency room.

The mother also said she was worried about getting in trouble with DCS because her child did not have vaccinations.

You can see how the liability fears are stacking up here. The child had a fever. Some doctors say it should be checked out at the emergency room. If anyone in the bureaucratic system allows the child to stay at home, they risk losing their career and everything else if the child is seriously injured or dies.  On the other hand, if the physician calls the Department of Child Safety (DCS), his liability is gone. It is transferred to the bureaucracy.  There is *no* risk to the doctor for transferring his liability to the state.

I talked to a former DCS case worker. I was told that case workers do not generally make the decision to go to the police. That is done by a supervisor.  So there is another step, and another stack in the liability fear pile, from someone more removed from the case. If the case worker does not refer the case to a supervisor, they risk their job, everything, if the child dies. Then the supervisor faces the same risk.  So they refer the case to the police. If, as in this case, the parents don't want everyone rousted out at 10:30 p.m. on Monday, after everyone is in bed, for what they see as a non-existent problem, then the police ended up going with a SWAT team, and forcing their way in at 1 a.m. on Tuesday.

All of this could be short-cut if the parents obeyed the orders of what the various people in the bureaucracy ordered them to do. But the parents had information the officials did not have, and they refused to do what appeared stupid and unnecessary to them. They exercised their parental authority and rights.  They feared the DCS bureaucracy would take their children. Their fear appears to have been justified.

When the parents tried to assert their rights, the gloves come off and the police used force to make them comply.  It could have been avoided if the police were willing to believe the parents. Liability bias worked against that outcome. If the police accepted the parent's word, and something bad happened to the child, the police would be in trouble.

40 years ago, before we moved into liability insanity, it was the parents job to manage the risk. The parents are closest to the problem. If the child died, the liability would be on the parents, and it would mostly be a criminal liability.

That approach worked very well in Western Civilization. We have far less child mortality (once the child is born) than we had a hundred years ago. Parents have enormous incentives to take care of their children. But, and this is important: we can never achieve perfection.

Those promoting the Nanny State demand perfection.  It is their lever for more and more state power. They demand that no one ever get hurt. Proponents of state power, because of the utility to politicians of "its for the children!" especially demand that children never be hurt. This works especially well with women voters, especially single women voters. It ignores the danger and hurt that is done by the state, and state procedures, to children. It moves more and more power into state hands.  

Voting for something does not make it so.

Removing children from a home with intact biological parents often puts the children at risk at foster homes. My former DPS case worker source said they estimated the percentage of foster homes that appeared to be in the system primarily for the monetary rewards, at about 50%.

At each stage of he liability stack, the stack is biased toward state action and away from parental rights. Each official actor faces less liability from state action than they do from not taking state action.

Every step along the way is relatively small and incremental. The doctor called other doctors. They recommended a trip to the emergency room. When that did not happen, the doctor called Department of Child Safety. DCS called the police.  The police got a warrant. The police called out the SWAT team.

All of the state action is expensive. This is where the movement to state action fails. What the state does is orders of magnitude more expensive than what a parent does.

Contrary to what State promoters claim, resources are limited.

My former DCS source told me that case workers are enormously overburdened, because of the requirements of the bureaucracy.    The government simply cannot afford to have case workers take the place of parents.  Perhaps more clearly, all of society cannot afford to have the government take the place of parents.

This case is extraordinary and newsworthy because the parents' exercise of their parental rights collided with the state actors fear of liability, resulting in a dramatic video. The child was never in any real medical danger, making the state action appear harsh and unnecessary. In this case, it was harsh and unnecessary.

The case shows the power of recording police actions.  A functioning recording system is as powerful, in some ways, at protecting your rights, as a firearm is. The father had a shotgun by his bed. In this case, the video recording was a far more powerful tool to protect his rights.

As a society, we must accept that resources are limited, that parents are fundamentally closer to children than the state can be. Preventing SWAT raids at 1 a.m. to check on a child will depend on changing the liability stack, so that a better balance of risk and liability exist.

It will mean accepting the idea that perfection is impossible, and risk is always a reality.

For example, if the parent says the child is not at risk, a notification of civil and criminal liability might be made to transfer the liability from doctors, DCS, and police to the parents. Virtually every official phone call is recorded. There is no additional cost to this approach. There may be a slight additional risk to children. There might be slightly less risk to children. It is impossible to know.

We face a similar problem with Second Amendment rights. Those promoting state control, for their own purposes, demand perfection.  They demand zero risk, but ignore costs. They use the "its for the children!" argument to advance their agenda.

Voting for something does not make it so.

Perfection is not possible.

Resources are limited.

Acknowledging the reality of those three things goes a great way in defeating creeping tyranny.

©2019 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice and link are included.

Gun Watch

Update on OK: Domestic Defense, Father, Son, both Killed

UPDATE: Officials originally said the father allegedly killed the son. The Osage County Sheriff’s Office now says it started with an argument between the father and son when the son allegedly shot the father. That’s when another family member stepped in and allegedly shot the son.

More Here

OR: Armed Victim fires at Robby Suspect

The victim of an apparent robbery attempt outside a Portland convenience store chased the suspect and fired two shots at him before the other man got away, Portland police said Wednesday.
More Here

OK: Armed Homeowner Scares Off Burglars

BRISTOW, Oklahoma - The Creek County Sheriff's Office says a homeowner in Bristow scared off some burglars by firing a warning shot over their heads.

More Here

OK: Woman Shoots, Kills, Man who Attacked Her

Ritter said officers learned based on the store’s surveillance video footage that the woman and a friend were walking from a store to her apartment when the man attacked her, jumping on her back.

After a struggle, she shot him twice in the upper torso with her gun, according to a Tulsa Police Department news release.

Detectives interviewed the woman and released her pending further investigation, for it appears the shooting was in self-defense, the release states.
More Here

Houston No-Knock Raid where 2 Killed, 4 Police Wounded, Results in 4 Retirements so far

There are continued repercussions from the no-knock raid that resulted in the death of a middle aged couple in Houston, and the wounding of four police officers in the gunfight the raid engendered.  The raid happened on January 28, 2019. Four officers have retired as of 22 March, 2019.

Dennis Tuttle was a Navy veteran. His wife, Rhogena Nicholas, was a supporter of President Trump.  They had no criminal records. They were married for 20 years and lived in their modest home in Houston for the same 20 years.

The  police broke down their door and shot their dog. That seems to have started the gun battle. Dennis is said to have shot back, wounding the officer that shot his dog. The police claimed he was shooting a .357 magnum revolver, but no revolver was found at the scene.  It seems more likely he was shooting one of the two semi-auto hunting shotguns recovered at his home.

Police claim Rhogena attempted to take a shotgun from a wounded officer. She was shot and killed.  It is not clear if she ever touched the officer's shotgun. 

The early police reports claimed Dennis continued to fight, wounding three more officers.

The exact timing of events is uncertain, because no officers wore body cameras. Surveillance video from the house next door was confiscated by the police.

It has been claimed a small amount of marijuana and a tiny amount of cocaine was recovered at the house. No heroin was found, or any evidence of drug dealing.

As the investigation has continued, it was discovered the evidence used to justify the raid, had been falsified.


Reports from Houston reveal that four officers have retired in conjunction with the ongoing investigation. From chron.com on March 22, 2019:

Officer Gerald Goines retired Friday afternoon while under investigation following the Jan. 28 shooting deaths of two residents during a “no-knock raid” of a Pecan Park residence in south Houston. The Harris County District Attorney’s Office is reviewing more than 1,400 criminal cases that Goines worked on over the course of his 34-year career.

Goines was relieved of duty as questions mounted about his actions leading up to the drug raid, in which a team of undercover narcotics officers burst into a residence at 7815 Harding St. after obtaining a no-knock search warrant. A gun battle ensued that left homeowners Dennis Tuttle and Rhogena Nicholas dead. Goines was shot, as were three other officers, one of whom remains hospitalized.

All of the officers who have retired had more than 20 years with the Houston Police Department (HPD) as narcotics officers.

Officer Steven O. Bryant, was listed in the warrant, HPD narcotics investigator Gerald Goines, was the lead investigator in the case, and  two other unnamed HPD narcotics officers are reported to have retired as well.

Here is a reminder of how far the idea of innocent officers being ambushed by drug dealers was spread before it was shown to be false. From ktnv.com in Las Vegas, Nevada on January 28, 2019 (the head of the police union is Gamaldi, not Grimaldi or Grammas) :

The Houston Police Union did not hold back after the ambush-style attack.

"We are sick and tired of having targets on our back, we are sick and tired of having dirt bags trying to take our lives," said Joe Grimaldi, with the Houston Police Officers Union.

"We need to have stiffer penalties on people committing crime, there's no doubt about it," said Grammas.

Grammas said he would like to see mandatory death sentences for cop killers and additional officers on the street to begin to deter the violence facing officers.

There was no ambush. The police fired first. It was a no-knock raid based on false evidence.  There are many unanswered questions about who fired when and who hit who. The missing .357 magnum revolver remains a mystery. No handgun of any kind was recovered at the scene.

I have not heard any more statements from Joe Gamaldi, head of the Houston Police Officers Union, about the raid. Initially, he said this:  From abc13.com:

“Enough is enough. If you're the ones out there spreading the rhetoric that police officers are the enemy, well just know we've all got your number now,” Gamaldi said. “We're going to be keeping track on all of y'all, and we're going to make sure to hold you accountable every time you stir the pot on our police officers.”

That sounds a lot like a threat to anyone who dares to question the police narrative. Joe Gamaldi has been silent lately. 

The FBI is involved investigating this mess. There is a reasonable chance for reform, even though the FBI reputation has suffered greatly during the Mueller witch hunt.

The police Chief has drastically reduced no-knock raids. Hundreds of cases done by the narcotics officers involved are being reviewed. Some pending cases have had charges dropped.

One retired police officer (not involved with the Houston Police Department), told me if he were in any of those officers shoes, he would have retired if he could. It would make the pension much harder to take.

Texas has a pension forfeiture law.  It only applies to elected officials. It went into effect on 8 January, 2019.


©2019 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice and link are included.

Gun Watch

PA: 73-Year-Old Shoots, Kills Robbery Suspect

DUQUESNE, Pa. —

An alleged robber was shot and killed by a 73-year-old jitney driver he was robbing late Wednesday afternoon in Duquesne, police said.

Police arrived at the scene on Poplar Street, where they found a 33-year-old man with multiple gunshot wounds. He was pronounced dead at the scene.
More Here

OK: Caretaker Shoots, Wounds Suspected Burglar

"Everything is kind of murky at this point, but it appears the caretaker was checking on the property and surprised two burglars in the act," said Marshall County Sheriff Danny Cryer.

Cryer says the caretaker shot at the burglars, a man and a woman, hitting and injuring the woman.
More Here

AZ: Armed Homeowner Shoots Man, is Charged

After pointing a gun at the man, the homeowner escorted him and others from the property, according to police. The homeowner followed the man while police were called.

The man reportedly turned and charged the homeowner, who then shot the man, according to Lewis.
More Here

OH: Homeowner Disarms 1 of 3 Home Invaders, Drives Them off

When they were near the safe, the victim said he noticed a second suspect armed with a sledge hammer.

At that time, the victim grabbed the gun away from the suspect.

During the struggle, he was struck on the head with an unknown object and two suspects fled the home.

The third suspect fled after the resident fired a shot towards him.
More Here

NC: Unidentified Person Shoots, Wounds, Bank Robbery Suspect

The incident was reported around 4:45 p.m. at PNC Bank at 400 South Wall Street in downtown Benson, according to a news release from the town of Benson.

The masked suspect was shot before police arrived. He was transported to WakeMed in Raleigh to treat his injuries. No other injuries were reported, according to a press release just before 8 p.m.

It wasn't clear who shot the suspect.
More Here

Red Flags About 'Red Flag' Laws

"Red flag" laws have become all the rage these days among those who want to do something — anything — to stop "gun violence." Sometimes called Gun Violence Restraining Orders or Extreme Risk Protection Orders, these laws allow family, close friends, or coworkers to petition authorities to temporarily remove firearms from individuals they believe are a danger to themselves or others. Colorado is set to join the list of states enacting such laws.

If — and it's a big IF — due-process rights are protected, we and other conservatives have acknowledged that, in concept, the idea has some merit because of how many red flags mass murderers tend to display. As our own Robin Smith wrote last year, such orders "empower individuals closest to a potential threat to intervene rather than waiting on layers of systems that ... have failed." National Review's David French also argued last year, "The GVRO is consistent with and recognizes both the inherent right of self-defense and the inherent right of due process. It is not collective punishment. It is precisely targeted."

In other words, rather than banning entire classes of guns or infringing on the rights of all citizens, focusing attention at potentially dangerous individuals is preferable, right?

The trouble is leftists have a way of distorting reality. In practice, these laws — as even President Donald Trump foolishly insisted last year — "Take the guns first, go through due process second."

The National Rifle Association too was initially open to the concept of court orders with a high legal threshold for removal of firearms, but said of the Colorado legislation, "Unchallenged statements made by a petitioner before a judge ... would be sufficient for law enforcement to enter that person's home and confiscate their private property." Only after having their gun(s) confiscated would an individual be able to go to court and work to get them back. Think an aggrieved former lover won't be first in line to stick it to their ex?

That is not protecting due process; it's an outright attack on it, presuming guilt of someone who hasn't even been charged with a crime, and then enacting preemptive punishment. That's not the way to sensibly restrain people actually bent on doing harm.

In fact, some sheriffs are refusing to enforce such laws, adopting the "sanctuary" language of immigration law, but in this case to defend an actual constitutional right.

https://patriotpost.us/articles/62135-red-flags-about-red-flag-laws

On my Way Downunder: Slow Blogging today and Tomorrow

In a few hours, I will be in the air, bound for Sydney, Australia. This is my third trip.

Australia offers a wealth of stories for a Gun Blogger.  In New South Wales, the Shooters Fishers and Farmers Party looks as though it will be winning five or six seats in the State Parliament.

 If that happens, they will be in a balance of power position to have some of their legislative priorities enacted.

In the Parliamentary system in New South Wales, minor parties can be elected and have significant impact.

I expect they would chip away at the most extreme parts of NSW gun law.

For example, your guns can be confiscated and your gun license removed for life because one cartridge was found on the floor of your car or under a sofa in your house (unlocked).

They might act to remove the effective ban on using guns for self defense, with the penalty being the loss of your shooting license for life.

I hope to interview party leaders and members and get an idea of what they hope for.

The final election results will be known on April 12th.

I would love to see them pass a resolution to the effect that an Englishman's right to arms was made part of the Australian Constitution in 1901.  I can hope, but there is little chance of that.

I would like to see them make it a little easier for a U.S. citizen to be allowed to handle guns in Australia. I would gladly put up a $1,000 bond to show good faith in following their laws.

As it is, it is very difficult for anyone other than on a guided hunt under close supervision. That does not work well when you are staying in the country for months at a time.

I will be looking to observe some Australian hunters in action.

From my point of view, the laws in New South Wales were designed to be so onerous, as to gradually reduce the number of gun owners and shooters.

They have failed to do so. 

 ©2019 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice and link are included.

Gun Watch

Followup WV: Attempted Abduction was False Accusation

A mother is facing charges Tuesday, and all charges against a man from Egypt are expected to be dropped after the woman said she made the story up that the man tried to abduct her child at the Huntington Mall.

The woman reported the incident Monday evening at the mall and said she pulled out a gun to scare away the reported suspect. She recanted that story on Tuesday.
More Here

MS: Detectives say Laurel Shooting Was Self Defense

According to Cox, the shooter surrendered at the Laurel Police Department just a couple hours after the shooting. After interviewing witnesses and examining evidence, Cox said detectives determined the shooting was in self-defense.

The shooter was released after police discussed the incident with the district attorney’s office. Cox said the case will be sent to a grand jury for review.
More Here

Fl: Police rule Devone Duga Shooting, Killing of Furious Bernard Shell was Self Defense

HAINES CITY — The Haines City Police Department will not charge a man involved in a fatal shooting following a dispute Sunday.

In a news release, Police Chief Jim Elensky said no charges will be filed against 25-year-old Devonte Duga, who acted in self-defense in the shooting death of Furious Bernard Shell, 26, outside the Family Discount Supermarket.

More Here

AR: Man Justified in Shooting Killer Dogs

WESTTOWN – A man who shot his neighbor’s three boxer dogs to death was justified as they were attacking him after they killed several of his chickens, the humane law enforcement officer of the Hudson Valley SPCA said Sunday.
More Here

LA: More on Waffle House Robber Disarm

A Waffle House cashier turned the tables on a would-be robber who tried to holdup the Gentilly-area restaurant at gunpoint Thursday morning (March 24); now police are asking the public to help identify the suspect.

The attempted armed robbery occurred in a Waffle House located at 4601 Old Gentilly Road. A man entered the restaurant at about 5 a.m., handed the cashier a note demanding money and brandished a black revolver with brown grip plates, according to a NOPD news release.
More Here

New Zealand Censors Killer's Manifesto, Charges $102.20 for Copy

How vulnerable are the rights we hold dear? It appears they are extremely vulnerable. In New Zealand, most people believe they have freedom of the press. But the government classification office might view things a little differently.  After the mass murder at the mosques in Christchurch, the classification office made it illegal for people to view or distribute either the the video of the event or the manifesto put out by the killer, because it fomented potential violence. From classification office.gov:

A publication reportedly written by the terrorist behind the fatal attacks in Christchurch, has been officially classified as objectionable.

“Others have referred to this publication as a ‘manifesto’, but I consider it a crude booklet that promotes murder and terrorism. It is objectionable under New Zealand law,” says Chief Censor David Shanks.

The document, examined under the Films, Videos & Publications Classification Act 1993 (FVPCA), is deemed objectionable for a number of reasons.

“It promotes, encourages and justifies acts of murder and terrorist violence against identified groups of people, ” says Mr Shanks.

“It identifies specific places for potential attack in New Zealand, and refers to the means by which other types of attack may be carried out. It contains justifications for acts of tremendous cruelty, such as the deliberate killing of children.”

The government generously allows journalists and academics to apply to look at the document. All they need do is state their qualifications, intentions, reasons to read the document, and pay a non-refundable $102.20 fee.  Here is a Link to the form to request a copy.

You do not see any publication of protests for the ramming of the ban on most semi-autos through the parliament. There has been no debate. There are far more common documents that promote mass murder and terrorism. Here are a few:

The Koran.

The Communist Manifesto

The Unibomber Manifesto

The Turner Diaries

 We are fortunate in the United States that our Constitution forbids this sort of emotional, instant response to a single crises.   It is mass media controlled by a single overriding ideology, that makes the yellow journalism demand for action so effective and swift.  If there were an effective free press in New Zealand, at least one outlet would print the Manifesto.

There has been no questioning of the acts of one Mosque in Christchurch in the recruitment of members of Al Queda, as reported in 2014.  Maybe the members of the Mosque were innocent of extremism as they claim. It at least deserves mention.

There has been no context of the multiple mass murder of Christians by Muslims around the world, which is a far more common phenomena than the murder at the Christchurch (how ironic a name!) mosque.

Such discussion is not allowed by the media and government in New Zealand.  People are encouraged to print stories of "Islamophobia". They are officially forbidden from reading the Manifesto's claims of retaliatory vengence.

Why? Because it does not fit the narrative the Government of New Zealand, and other globalist governments around the world, want to promulgate.  In that narrative, Muslims must always be victims.

The killer is a political terrorist. So have been many others throughout history, with a great many on the left.

What we see in New Zealand is the official government censorship of political propaganda they disagree with, and protection of political propaganda they gree with. 

The First Amendment protects "objectionable speech" . Speech that is not "objectionable" needs no protection. 

The linkage of First and Second Amendment rights becomes ever more obvious.

©2019 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice and link are included.

Gun Watch 

FL: Gunfight, Victim Wounded, Suspect Killed

According to LCSO, Detectives found out the adult victim arranged to meet the buyer of an item he posted online. The adult made contact with two males and during the exchange, one of them pulled a gun and shot the adult. The adult victim also pulled a gun and shot one of the two males, who has been identified as Hixon.

Deputies found Hixon with life-threatening injuries, and he died at the scene. Deputies also found and arrested suspects Murassaint and Malbranche.
More Here

GA: Intoxicated Man Breaks into House, is Shot at, Missed

A Cartersville man narrowly escaped injury — or even death — when a female homeowner shot at him after he'd entered her locked sun room and began going through her possessions before being arrested by police March 25.

More Here

LA: Domestic Defense, Boyfriend that Broke in Shot in Leg

Baton Rouge Police Department spokesman Sgt. L'Jean McKneely said Freddie Davidson, 34, forced his way into his girlfriend's home and began assaulting her. Someone inside the apartment shot the man in the leg, McKneely said. It was not clear late Sunday whether the woman or someone else shot the intruder.
More Here

District Judge: CA Magazine Ban Violates Second Amendment: California cannot ban standard-capacity magazines that hold more than 10 rounds.

It’s not often that good news about the Second Amendment comes out of California, but that was the case Friday. U.S. District Judge Roger Benitez, a George W. Bush appointee, ruled that standard-capacity magazines will remain legal, at least for now. Buying and selling magazines holding more than 10 rounds has been against state law since 2000, but a 2016 law banned even possessing them. Benitez struck down the entire limitation.

Before we get to the merits of Benitez’s decision, we’ll make an important observation about news coverage. Don’t ever let the Leftmedia dictate gun terminology. That goes for anything from describing the parts of a gun to mislabeling AR-15s as “assault weapons” to calling murderous psychopaths “gunmen” so as to draw the attention to the tool.

In this case, so-called “high-capacity magazines” are actually standard capacity, and they were designed by gun manufacturers to fit particular guns out of the box. But USA Today, for example, began its coverage with the following summary: “High-capacity gun magazines will remain legal in California under a ruling Friday by a federal judge who cited home invasions where a woman used the extra bullets in her weapon to kill an attacker while in two other cases women without additional ammunition ran out of bullets.” What the paper means by “extra bullets” is that the woman’s weapon held the standard-capacity rounds of ammunition.

Now, to the ruling: Benitez rightly concluded that standard magazines are “arms” under the U.S. Constitution, and, thus, the California law “burdens the core of the Second Amendment by criminalizing the acquisition and possession of these magazines that are commonly held by law-abiding citizens for defense of self, home, and state.” He cited both legal and practical justifications, including the real-world self-defense cases USA Today highlighted.

What’s next? The case was already sent back to Benitez by the Ninth Circuit to further develop a ruling on the law, but now it will almost certainly return to the Second Amendment-hostile Ninth Circuit when the state appeals. President Donald Trump’s judicial appointments are more important all the time.

In any case, as Benitez said, the California law “turn[ed] the Constitution upside down,” but it all comes down to one simple thing: “Individual liberty and freedom are not outmoded concepts.” Even in California.

https://patriotpost.us/articles/62104-district-judge-ca-magazine-ban-violates-second-amendment

February 2019 NICS show unexpected Drop in Gun Sales

In the Trump era of the National Instant background Check System (NICS),  the number of NICS checks has remained high while the number of gun sales has trended downward. This has been called the "Trump Slump" in the firearms industry. In February of 2019, the Trump Slump dropped a bit more.

In February of 2019, the total NICS checks were 2,053,886. That is the lowest total NICS in February since 2015, when they were 1,859,584.  It is a twelve percent drop from the total NICS of 2018, which were 2,333,193.

NICS checks contain many more checks than just those for purchasing firearms. Many of them are for firearm permits and permit rechecks. 

The permit and permit rechecks for February, 2019 were 919,580.  The permit and permit rechecks for February 2018 were 1,021,431. Taking the permit and permit rechecks from the total NICS for February of 2019 gives us a figure of 1,134,306. The comparable figure for  February of 2018, is 1,311,762. That is a drop of 14% from the non-permits figure for 2018, and a drop of 10% for permit and permit rechecks in NICS.

With both checks for firearm sales and checks for permits and permits rechecks decreasing, the prospect for gun retailers, gun manufacturers, and ammunition retailers and manufacturers might appear disheartening.

But anti-Second Amendment politicians have come to the rescue, with a number of infringements put on the legislative burner. On February 27th, the House passed the most significant gun control measure in two decades, according to anti-Second Amendment advocates.

With the House passing infringements on the right to keep and bear arms, gun sales are likely to increase in March of 2019.  March tends to be a little higher than February for sales, but not by a great deal.  Last year, March was significantly lower in NICS background checks than February. But that is not the overall trend.  Of the last 11 years, seven have been higher in March, and four higher in February.

The March, 2019 numbers will tell us if consumers are concerned enough about the Democrat efforts to pass more gun control to change the Trump Slump into a Trump Bump.

Not all firearm sales are recorded in NICS checks. 25 states accept the NICS check done when permits are issued, instead of another NICS check done at the point of sale.

Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Georgia, Hawaii, Idaho, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Michigan, Mississippi, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, South Carolina, Texas, Utah, Washington, West Virginia, and Wyoming, are all states that accept a carry permit as a replacement for a NICS check.

The numbers of firearms in private hands in the United States continue to climb, in spite of lower sales in February of 2019. The lower NICS checks in February still equate to an increase in the private stock of firearms of over a million. Americans are buying a lot of firearms, even at a slightly lower pace.

By the calculations first pioneered by Newton and Zimring, then continued by Gary Kleck in Point Blank: Guns and Violence in America, published in 2005, there are now over 432 million privately owned firearms in the United States.

At the current rate of increase, the United States will reach 500 million privately owned firearms sometime in 2024.

©2019 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice and link are included.

Gun Watch

AZ: Crazed 18-Year-Old Shot, Wounded, After Repeated Warnings

One of those rocks broke a window in the door.

Deputies said the homeowner warned Hansen that he was armed and would shoot.

“The male subject appeared to be out of his mind and kept yelling for his girlfriend,” according to NCSO.

Deputies said the homeowner fired at Hansen when he opened the back door after reaching through the broken window to unlock it.
More Here

AZ: Armed Homeowner Shoots two Home Invaders, 1 Dead, 1 Wounded

According to Phoenix police, two men attempted to enter a home.

That's when the homeowner, who was armed, fired a weapon to stop the men from entering the home.

The man, later identified as 34-year-old Michael Ahumada was killed. A 33-year-old man was transported to a hospital, where he is listed in critical but stable condition.
More  Here

OK: Homeowner Cooperating with Police Investigation of Shooting

On arrival officers determined a disturbance between two people resulted in a shooting, The person that was shot died a short time later. The on-call public information officer for the police department says the homeowner was involved in the shooting and is cooperating with investigators.
More Here

Followup PA: Jabir Kennedy Found Not Guilty of All Charges in Shooting of Four

This case is unusual in the number of people who were shot. In other respects it is not uncommon. People defend themselves with guns, all over the country, every day, as read on Gun Watch.

So when the case reached its conclusion this month, there were no headlines for what turned out to be a rarity in the criminal justice system: an admitted gunman in a quadruple shooting acquitted by a jury of all charges.

Kennedy’s weeklong trial at the Criminal Justice Center, which ended March 15, focused not on Stand Your Ground or the Castle Doctrine, but instead on old-fashioned self-defense, his lawyer said.

More Here

LA: Waffle House Cashier Disarms Armed Robbery Suspect

The cashier disarmed the gunman, forcibly taking the pistol from him and driving him away. The suspect fled the restaurant on foot, with neither gun nor loot.

Police described the suspect as a light-skinned black male believed to be in his late 40s, about 5-foot-9 or 5-foot-10, with a large scar or burn mark along the left side of his face and possibly walking with a limp. At the time of the incident, he was wearing a gray and blue jacket, white undershirt, light colored pants and a blue New Orleans Pelicans cap.
More Here