A Good Guy With An Ugly Black Gun And A 30 Round Magazine

Liberal hamsters love to amuse themselves by saying that there’s no civilian use for guns with 30 round magazines.

Which might be true, if you could guarantee all attackers were solo and not very persistent.

But in North Houston, three attackers fired over 40 shots at a homeowner…

…who returned fire with an AR15, killing two of the dirtballs and wounding the third in what police are calling a case of self-defense:

Wounded, the three thugs exited the vehicle and continued the pitched firefight on foot. The homeowner who is an avid marksman continued returning fire hitting all three, stopping them before they could reach his property.

One of the men was immediately killed at the scene, while the others were rushed to the hospital. A second shooter was pronounced dead on arrival at the hospital, while the third is in critical condition battling for his life.

According to news reporters, aside from being an excellent marksman the Texas homeowner is licensed to carry a concealed weapon, and goes to the shooting range regularly and practices his skills with his AR-15, the weapon he usually has by his side when sitting on his porch late at night.

Instant gun experts babble that “assault rifles” are “designed to kill as many people as fast as possible”.  It’s poppycock, of course; they’re designed to not run out of bullets before your attacker runs out of attacks.

Mission Accomplished.

“The Government Is Not Coming For Your Guns”

Unless they want to.

U.S. Virgin Islands Gov. Kenneth Mapp signed an emergency order allowing the seizure of private guns, ammunition, explosives and property the National Guard may need to respond to Hurricane Irma.
Do You Think This Emergency Order Is Unconstitutional?
Mapp signed the order Monday in preparation for Hurricane Irma. The order allows the Adjutant General of the Virgin Islands to seize private property they believe necessary to protect the islands, subject to approval by the territory’s Justice Department.

I’m feeling pretty good about supporting the 2015 bill that bars the Minnesota state government from doing any such thing.

A Good, Very Cool-Under-Pressure Guy With A Gun

In the past couple weeks, we discussed the shooting at the Verizon store in Inver Grove Heights, where a good guy with a gun took a scumbag off the streets (for a couple years, anyway.

We’ve talked in this blog a zillion times about the four criteria one needs to satisfy to use lethal force in self-defense.  This may be the best definition of “reasonable, immediate fear of death or great bodily harm” I’ve seen:

The moment of truth inside the store for the employee, according to charges against Mays, came when the “defendant pointed a gun at [the victim’s] head and told [the clerk], ‘Make it easy on me.’ ”

With the gun still trained on his head and believing he was about to be shot, the clerk “pulled his gun from his waistband and fired what he believed to be three shots.” Mays was hit twice by gunfire and survived.

No doubt to continue the process of turning his life around that he was on and that we’d most assuredly have been hearing about had he died.

The shots sent the accomplice fleeing in a minivan, which was recovered Monday by police in St. Paul and will be searched for evidence later this week.

Police Lt. Joshua Otis said authorities are not disclosing the identity of the clerk for his safety because the other suspect remains a fugitive.

Anyway – salute, Mr. Anonymous Good Guy With A Gun!

The Marquis Of Queensbury Has Left The Building

Grandfather of teens who killed after breaking into a man’s house, threatening his life and health, complains that the homeowner had an “unfair advantage” in the three-on-one fight because he had an AR15:

They got into a confrontation with the man who owned the home. Moments later the homeowner’s son emerged with an AR-15 and killed all three criminals.

Now the grandfather of one of the criminals is saying it wasn’t fair that the homeowner had an AR-15.

He says that it gave the homeowner an unfair advantage.

Oh, no.  One middle-class schlub has an advantage over three thugs who came equipped to deal him a three-on-one beatdown.   How horrible.

That is, of course, the point behind “assault weapons”; to not run out of bullets before your enemy runs out of attacks.

(Disclaimer for the record:  I would never shoot a human, even in self-defense, and I’d never own a gun, because they terrify me).

A Good Judge With A Gun

A judge in Steubenville, PA was ambushed outside a courthouse – and returned fire:

[Jefferson County Common Pleas Judge Joseph ] Bruzzese was shot in an ambush-style attack outside the Jefferson County Courthouse on his way into his office Monday morning.

County officials said the courthouse, which was closed today as the investigation progresses, will remain closed Tuesday.

Mavromatis said the family of the shooter, who was shot and killed by a probation officer who happened upon the exchange of gunfire between the shooter and the judge, has been notified.

The shiooter was counting on the judge being a helpless victim.

It’s so fun when they’re wrong.  Not for them, of course.

Factoid To Remember

Fqctoid to remember the next time the Victim Disarmament / Safe Criminals movement starts jabbering about the “Gun Lobby”:

Contrary to the ignorant assumptions that inform our political discourse, the NRA is a relatively small spender when it comes to campaign donations and lobbying, being at the moment the 460th-largest campaign donor and the 156th-highest-spending lobbyist.

Use it in good health.

Bring On The Horseshoes

Joe Doakes from Como Park emails:

Liberals say the Second Amendment doesn’t protect my right to have military-grade weapons to resist my own government.  They say America should be more like Sweden.

Sweden – where widespread availability of hand grenades resulted in a 550% increase in people throwing hand grenades at government targets.  Jiminy Cricket – who knew Swedes were such violent domestic terrorists in their own country?  And why now, all of the sudden?

The latest attack was in Malmo, Sweden.  Hmmmm, Malmo, Malmo . . . why is that name familiar?

Joe Doakes

Grenades don’t kill people.  People with violence on their mind and grenades do.

Represent!

Joe Doakes from Como Park emails:

 

Texas woman shoots dead an armed home invader.  A private citizen using a pistol for self-defense?  That’s gonna mess up Penigma’s narrative, right there.

I think it was more Dog Gone’s narrative, although they shared some elements.

At any rate – Ms. Gone’s narrative has been moot for quite some time. here in MN and elsewhere.   She’s not here to defend herself – but that’s her fault.

No mention of a medal.  Surely some group should give her a medal?

“We, the members of the Podunk Booster Club, honor Mrs. Dorothy Smith for her courageous actions defending her home and her neighborhood, awarding her this Marksman Medal, a check for $357 which is her favorite caliber, and we invite her to ride in our car in the next parade.”

With a photo in the newspaper of her wearing the medal holding the enormous cardboard check, that could be a great PR move in certain areas of the state.

Joe Doakes

I like it.

Blowback

The Minnesota Gun Owners Caucus has responded to “Protect” MN’s slanderous Facebook post yesterday:

On Wednesday August 9th, local gun control activist group Protect Minnesota published a statement on their Facebook page implying that the Minnesota Gun Owners Caucus has information on the attack at the Dar Al Farooq Mosque, and was withholding that information from the Federal Bureau of Investigation.

“We are outraged by these libelous, defamatory, and false accusations made by Protect Minnesota, “ said Bryan Strawser, Chair, Minnesota Gun Owners Caucus. “Our organization is committed to the defense of civil rights. This statement and its implications are baseless and offensive. Needless to say, we have no information on this tragic attack.”

“It’s truly unfortunate that at a time when we should be pulling together as a community to condemn terror, Protect Minnesota has chosen to engage in accusations that have no basis in fact and will only serve to distract investigators from swiftly bringing the perpetrator of this heinous act to justice.”

“Sadly, this approach has become the norm under their current leadership, “ added Rob Doar, Vice President & Political Director. “We always welcome thoughtful conversation on policy issues with any organization. Engaging in false accusations and misinformation following an incident of this magnitude is abhorrent. I sincerely hope that Protect Minnesota will cease this behavior and elevate their level of discourse.”

“We demand an immediate public retraction of these false assertions,” added Strawser.

Doar’s aside about “current leadership” is important:  while Heather Martens was a doddering incompetent, Nancy Nord Bence is a smug, passive-aggressive, entitled incompetent.

UPDATE:  No apology, naturally – but they’re trying to stuff their slander down the memory hole:

Well, aren’t they just a bunch  of profiles in courage?

They know their audience is neither curious nor critical enough to bother with the details.  But Nancy Nord Bence’s oompa-loompas are getting lazier and more reckless as they move out toward the extreme.  It’s eventually gonna cost ’em.

It’s already cost them their credibility.

Lie First, Lie Always: Slander

We’ve been pointing out for years – correctly – that “Protect” Minnesota has never, not once, made a single statement that is simultaneously original, substantial and true.

But today, the’ve slid over the line into slander.

“We hope that groups like Minnesota Gun Rights, Minnesota Gun Owners Caucus and Gun Owners Civil Rights Alliance can provide good information to the FBI to find and arrest the people responsible” for the Dar Al Farook firebombing?

Even by Nancy Nord Bence’s, er, casual standards of honesty and integrity, this is – pardon the middle-English – chickenshit.

And in a jiust world, it’d be actionable.  Let’s review from a couple years ago; Defmation – Libel and Slander – are when Party A says something about Party B that:

  • Is untrue
  • Can damage Party B’s livelihood and reputation in the community
  • If Party B is a public figure (and the three groups that Nord Bence slandered certainly are),  it can be shown that Party A acted with a malicious disregard for fact.

“P”M’s claim that any Minnesota 2nd Amendment group knows who bombed Dar Al Farook is certainly untrue.  Accusations of abetting terrorism are certainly damaging to a community non-profit group.  And given Nancy Nord Bence and her associates’ long record of scabrous attacks on GOCRA and MNGOC, malice isn’t a huge stretch.

If the gun groups want to sue, I’ll set up a kickstarter to raise funds.

PS to lawyers in the audience:  Yep.  I know.  Negligence is a defense against the “Malicious Intent” element.  It says something that “P”M’s big defense in this case is “We’re too stupid and morally bankrupt to know any better”.  God bless America.

Felonious Sematics

Joe Doakes from Como Park emails:

Minnesota Court of Appeals decides that having a loaded pistol in the center console of the car is not “carrying a pistol.”  The word “carrying” requires a connection between the pistol and your clothes or some part of your body.

Except . . . that means a person doesn’t need a permit to carry to drive around with a loaded pistol in the center console.  That’s plainly not what the legislature intended when it set up the background check with training and proficiency requirements for pistol carriers.

The rule for transporting firearms has been ‘unloaded, in a case, in the trunk’ for as long as I can remember.  Transporting a loaded pistol out of the case required a permit to carry.  But reading this opinion – even if I DO have a permit to carry, but my loaded pistol is in the center console, then it’s not touching my body so I’m not “carrying” so my permit doesn’t cover that activity.  Suddenly, that has become illegal transportation of a loaded gun outside the case, regardless of having a permit to carry.

This decision, and the prior “carry” decision (State v. Larson), show that the Court of Appeals has a problem.  Either (1) they don’t understand the permit to carry law so they interpret it incorrectly; or (2) they understand perfectly what was intended but hate the idea of armed citizens, so they’re intentionally twisting the law to fit their own agenda.

Either way, the Legislature needs to fix the statute by defining the word “carry.”

Joe Doakes

As the decision shows us, it’s long overdue.

A Good Guy With A Gun: “Heroic Actions Of Self-Defense”

Henco has affirmed that a Minnetonka man shot an attacker / stalker in self defense, and all but carried him down Excelsior Boulevard on their shouders:

Following the strong recommendation of investigators, the Hennepin County attorney’s office said this week that 65-year-old James LaCount, of Minnetonka, will not be prosecuted for fatally shooting Thomas Luetzow on June 23 at the Public Mini Storage in the 2800 block of Hedberg Drive.

LaCount “described elements consistent with heroic actions of self-defense” when he shot the 58-year-old Luetzow with a facility employee close by, police Sgt. Troy Denneson wrote in a summary of his department’s 20-page report submitted to prosecutors. “Physical evidence and eyewitness recollections appear to confirm LaCount’s explanation of events.”

Given that it took place in Henco, that’s bureaucratic shorthant for “Mr. LaCount’s actions were pure as the driven snow”.

He was one of the good guys:

The retired refrigeration technician also credited his being able to legally carry a gun in public with sparing him more serious injury, or worse.

“If I hadn’t had [the gun], I’d probably be dead now,” he said. “It’s that simple.”

It absolutely is.

Minnesota put its permit-to-carry law on the books in 2003, but not until after substantial public debate about whether the streets would become more dangerous.

“Substantial” meaning “A lot of it”, not “of intellectual heft”.

And after the Castile incident, the LaCount episode shows a very different result when interacting with the police:

Police Chief Scott Boerboom also credited an exhausted and bloodied LaCount with properly interacting with officers as soon as they arrived on the chaotic scene in order to help them properly assess the situation.

“From the onset, when we approached Mr. LaCount, he immediately said it was self-defense and he had a permit to carry,” Boerboom said. “He wanted to make sure, and it helped us initially get an idea about what was going on here.”

The case file also disclosed that LaCount, weakened from abdominal surgery, was sitting down and leaning against a vehicle when police arrived. He also made sure to not have his handgun on him, leaving it on the ground for officers to recover.

That’s another good Minnesotan with a gun alive today.

Wes Skogland?  You’re still a lying sack of garbage.

Mr. LaCount has been added to my “Good Minnesotan with a Gun” archives.  It’s up to six justifiable homicides now – and that doesn’t include who episodes from the late ’00s that involved bouncers shooting lethally-aggressive patrons (if you can find the link, shoot it over to me…)

When I Think Back On All The Crap…

Joe Doeakes from Como Park emails:

A Wisconsin legislator wants schools to offer an elective class on safety.  Liberals are losing their minds.

Schools already offer classes in how to safely have sex, take drugs, drink alcohol, interact with Strangers.  This bill expands the list to firearms.  What’s the problem?

I cannot recall the last time I attempted to extract a cube root or diagram a sentence, but I cooked my own breakfast and drove to work this morning.  Life skills are the subjects every kid must learn to survive in America today and that includes how to safely interact with the 300 million firearms in this country, but who’s teaching them if not the schools?  Parents?  Liberals insist they’re not competent to teach anything else so why would we let them handle the truly dangerous subject?

Odd how education is offensive and shouldn’t be funded when it’s a conservative item.  Liberals would be happy to fund the condom to put over the end of the barrel, they have no qualms about funding forced indoctrination into gender weirdness, but understanding how a firearm works and being taught to always treat it as dangerous is a bad thing.

I guess Liberals prefer to have the kids learn on the streets or in back-alley shops that use clothes hangers for cleaning rods.

Joe Doakes

What – “gun safety groups” objecting to gun safety classes?

Why, it’s almost like every word that escapes their clenched throats is a lie or something.

R E S P E C T. Find Out What It Means To Me.

2/3 of Ameirca’s firearm fatalities involve suicide.

Half of America’s suicides involve firearms.

Suicide is generally a matter of available means – and so gun suicides tend to be concentrated in rural areas.  The victims are generally older, frequently socially isolated, often depressed, frequently ill.

In short, they’re the sort of people a lot of coastal progressives want to see killing themselves off.

But for people with working senses of humanity, regardless of politics, suicide prevention is an important thing.

A study has shown that suicide prevention presented in a way that respects gun owners’ beliefs, values, worldview and culture is much more effective at getting across to people than – this  may come as a shock – studies that insult the audience and assault their beliefs.

Which almost seems to strike the researchers as a surprise:

“There is robust knowledge and wisdom about solutions to gun violence which exists within communities that have high levels of gun ownership and gun violence,” Marino said. “Our findings firmly assert that the solutions to gun violence in America might be best explored by linking scientific investigations with community knowledge.”

Hard to believe, isn’t it?

We, The People

To:  “David Smalley”
From:  Mitch Berg, irascible peasant
Re:  Your article on, ahem, “Patheos”.

Mr. Smalley,

I”m not going to bother dispensing with the bulk of your “seminar caller”-stule, utterly and intensely illogical assault on “gun culture”.

But there is one line that I want to call out, by way of accelerating its demise from conversations among the smart people.  It’s this oldie-but-goodie:

So even today, with the 2nd Amendment in full effect, we don’t have the rights to be “armed as well as our government.”
Secondly, what if you were? I could hand you 50 M-16s, give you 1000 illegal bombs, steal you a couple of tanks, and smuggle in some bazookas, and even let you fully train 500 of your closest friends.
If the government wants your shit, they’re going to take it.
You still wouldn’t be a match for even a single battalion of the United States Marine Corps. Not to mention the Air Force, Army, Navy, National Guard, Secret Service, FBI, CIA, and Seals.
So stop acting like your little AR-15 is going to stop tyranny.

This makes perfect sense, Mr. “Smalley”, since as we know the military – especially the “combat arms” people – infantry, armor, artillery, combat engineers and cavalry,, as well as special forces – are drawn from families with two parents who have masters degrees in poli sci from Oberlin, work for social justice non-profits, shop at Whole Foods, drive Subarus, listen to NPR and practice vegan lifestyles.

Right?

Wrong.

The families – fathers, mothers, brothers, sisters, nephews, nieces, cousins – of those soldiers, sailors, airmen and Marines, and generally by extension those troops themselves – are drawn from the caste of our society that owns guns, for ideological as much as practical reasons.

It’s culturally almost impossible to separate the “gun culture” and our military.  :

Your little cultural genocide tale  only exists in lefty fantasy.

That is all.

Parenthetical Note

In the wake of passing registration and magazine limits during the orgy of victim-disarmament legislation in 2013, Baltimore’s crime rate has steadily risen, and stands at twice Chicago’s catastrophic rate.

But when they finally “debate” a measure that can actually work – mandatory sentences for using guns in a crime –suddenly there’s an animated, even violent, debate?

When California secedes, maybe they can take everything on the east coast from DC through Massachusetts, too…

Four Out Of Five Maoists Say The Great Leap Forward Was, In Fact, A Great Leap Forward

A group of university professors “studied” “gun violence” “groups” and “found” that they were “really pretty moderate”:

The researchers spent two years studying national and regional gun violence prevention groups and concluded they are motivated to reduce death and injury by firearms, but that they want to do so while reserving the right to own guns, said Aimee Huff, assistant business professor, and Michelle Barnhart, associate marketing professor.

And one of the conclusions?

This philosophy has allowed gun violence prevention groups to gain ground on both the legislative level and in public opinion, the researchers hypothesized.

It probably has – in places like Connecticut and California, where victim disarmament groups actually are closer to the center…

When We Say The Roots Of “Gun Control” Are Racist…

…we aren’t just referring to its historical roots, the attempts to disarm blacks after the Civil War and the urban riots of the sixties.

Los Angeles – which still has the “discretionary issue” system Minnesota ditched in 2003 – gives fewer permits to blacks, Latinos and women.

Gotta show ’em who’s boss.

When government controls who has the right to be a citizen rather than a subject, then everyone’s a subject.

Raising The Discourse

The “Coalition to Stop Gun VIolence” has never been one of the marquee criminal-safety organizations – they’ve been especially eclipsed in recent years by Michael Bloomberg’s “Everytown” chain of McGunControl groups.  Like “Protect” Minnesota, they are largely sponsored by the Joyce Foundation.  Like “Protect” Minnesota, they have never said an original, substantial, true thing about guns or gun owners.

And lately, it seems, playing second banana has not setting too well with ’em.

This is their latest release:

This is today’s “Gun Violence” “Gun Safety” “Gun Control” “Criminal Safety” movement.

If Lott does in fact decide to sue the CSGV for defamation – and it’d seem he has a case, here – I’ll be running a fundraiser.

Lie First, Lie Always: They Think You’re Stupid

Further evidence of the statement “”Protect” Minnesota has never – not once – made a statement that was simultaneously substantial, original and true” came to us yesterday in the form of a press release from their “Research Director”, the onimatopaiec Richard Gigler.

Gigler is reading the same numbers I related to you a couple weeks ago, showing that crime has dropped sharply across Minnesota in the last year.

But the takeaway from any given type of evidence depends on a lot of things; in this case, whether one is inept at statistics, or one represents a group that pathologically lies about gun owners and knows their audience isn’t smart enough to know they’re being lied to.

In this case, as “evidence” that “more guns don’t mean more safety”, Gigler notes that the percentage of homicides committed by guns “…rose by 1%”   Of course, they didn’t; they rose by two thirds of a percent, and even that is a statistical anomaly caused by the drop in overall homicides, not a hike in gun homicides (which, as we noted, dropped 23% in the past year!).

But the lie-via-incompetence is worse than that – because the number of homicides dropped, and the percentage of homicides involving a gun “rose” as a fluke of statistical background noise…

…as the number of guns in law-abiding civilians hands rose sharply, and the number of carry permittees hit record numbers.

Meaning that the percentage of guns used in crimes dropped.

Again.

Why do you suppose it is that “Protect” Minnesota can’t tell the truth?

Sandbagged?

Joe Doakes from Como Park emails:

You figure that if you are forced to shoot somebody and you’re up-front with the cops, the prosecutor will see that you’re a Good Guy and will drop the charges, right?   You can’t imagine the prosecutor will twist your words and play dirty tricks to cheat you out of your rights, all in a blind effort to appease a mob.  That wouldn’t happen in Minnesota, right?

“In the hour-long interview with Minnesota Bureau of Criminal Apprehension (BCA) investigators, Yanez repeatedly used the pronoun “it” instead of “gun” or “firearm.” Prosecutors told jurors that the language proves Yanez never saw a gun. However, prosecutors never played the video during its case, thinking it more strategic to introduce the footage last Friday during the defense’s case. It is common practice to play a defendant’s interview with investigators during the state’s case.

“The rules of evidence clearly allow for the statement’s admission into evidence during cross examination,” said a written statement issued … by the Ramsey County attorney’s office. “Strategically, we felt the statement would be best used for impeachment purposes on cross examination when the defendant took the stand in his own defense.”

But the move backfired [at trial] when Ramsey County District Judge William H. Leary III criticized the prosecution’s timing and refused to allow the video. Defense attorney Thomas Kelly objected to the prosecution’s effort, calling it an “improper impeachment” of Yanez and asserting that the state allegedly withheld the video in order to compel Yanez’s testimony.”

Twisting words.  Dirty tricks.  Mob waiting outside.

Here’s the really fascinating question: is this merely local politicians and bureacrats doing their best to achieve justice, but their best isn’t very good?   Or is this part of a concerted effort at all levels to make gun ownership not only onerous, but even dangerous, for law-abiding citizens?  Defend yourself and we’ll bury you, to make sure nobody else defends themselves.

Joe Doakes

That’s the problem; when people stop trusting the “Justice” system, every manner of conspiracy becomes perfectly plausible.