Thursday, September 13, 2012

VA-ALERT: VCDL Update 9/13/12

Not yet a VCDL member? Join VCDL at:
VCDL's meeting schedule:
Abbreviations used in VA-ALERT:

1. Reminder: VCDL Supper Meeting in Christiansburg on September 17 - RSVPs needed
2. Readers comment on recent VA-Alert updates
3. Pizza delivery driver disarms bike-riding robber in Barton Heights
4. Employees get firearm training after multiple robberies
5. New Va. Law Makes it Easier to Get a Gun
6. Ani-gun propaganda in a college textbook
7. Thoughts about eyesight
8. Detroit woman CHP shoots back at would-be carjackers
9. GOP set to ok most pro-gun platform ever
10. What the left won't tell you about the boom in U.S. gun sales
11. Breaking down gun violence: No 'simple formula'
12. Top two cities with strict gun control laws experience mass shootings
13. LTE: A misfire by New York police
14. CHP holder saves police officer's life in Louisiana
15. Ballistics show all 9 wounded outside Empire State Building were shot by police
16. Bad tactics and socialism
17. Anti-gunners skipping the important facts, naturally
18. Who needs a gun in a New Jersey supermarket?
20. In Memoriam: A video of Jim Mullins in action [VIDEO]
21. Robbers follow Walmart shoppers home
22. Deaf preschooler asked to change the sign for his name - looks like a gun
23. Editorial: New man on campus, armed
24. LAPD probes alleged sale of guns by SWAT officers
25. Overreacting Washington police officer points shotgun at open carrier [VIDEO]
26. Gun store owner opens fire on 3 burglars after they drove van through wall
27. CHP holder shoots Dollar General robber in Florida

1. Reminder: VCDL Supper Meeting in Christiansburg on September 17 - RSVPs needed

If you are coming, be sure to RSVP!

VCDL will again have a meeting and supper on Monday, September 17 at:

Phone: 540-381-7878

Fellowship starts at 6 PM, food will be served at 7 PM. BUFFET COST $12.00, price to include drinks (soft drinks, tea and such)--and tips.


* I-81 to EXIT 118 B (VA Tech exit) to 460 Bypass
* Take the "Christiansburg" exit; then immediately take the "Downtown" exit
* Turn LEFT at the traffic light onto CAMBRIA ST
* Restaurant is on the LEFT a few blocks down the street.

This event is open to the public. AMELIA's is known for their fine food and great service! We respectfully request an RSVP to include numbers in your party, so the proper amount of food may be prepared, and seating can be prepared. Speaker to be announced.


2. Readers comment on recent VA-Alert updates

On Amtrak --

Bill Johnson sent me this in an email:

Feedback to item number 11 about guns on Amtrak's Auto Train: my family has used the auto train from a number of years traveling both North and South out of Virginia. I believe it was last year the policy was changed relating to weapons (handguns) while riding the train and I believe that Gus may have been given less than stellar answers to his questions. I road the train twice this year and the only restrictions I got was that the weapon had to be unloaded and securely locked in the vehicle during the ride. On our last run both my son and I were observed by Amtrak personnel unloading and securing our weapons during the turnover process at the station.

I personally have talked to Amtrak police (for lack of a better phrase) and was given the procedures I just described. Shortly after the policy change took place, I also contacted Amtrak and was given the procedures I just described. Prior to the change Amtrak was clear about weapons, but with no security inspection conducted during the turnover process, even their police admitted it was hard to stop or find a person transporting a weapon.

I'm not sure if this helps or hurts but at least it's information provided by a member that uses the Amtrak service frequently


On self defense --

Daniel L. Hawes, Esq. emailed me this:

-- as to that "I feared for my life" comment -- "fear" is not part of the defense, the defender's emotional state has nothing to do with anything. All that counts is that he had reason to think he was about to suffer serious bodily injury. I tell people not to say anything at all except, "I want my lawyer." Once they say anything beyond that, they've opened the door to further inquiry, and the adrenaline will turn just about anyone into Chatty Cathy. Better to spend one or two nights in jail than twenty years.


On experience with Chesterfield PD --

Clayton Rhoades emailed me this:

Concerning story # 5, I thought I'd share a brief account of my positive interactions with some Chesterfield professionals last week.

While in Chesterfield last week, I witnessed a jogger hit by a mini-van. I believe I may have been the only witness. I worked to make sure the driver stopped (no problem there), was calling 9-1-1 and was also checking on the victim. Both victim and driver were pretty dazed. By this time some other vehicles had started to stop. Through all of this, I was aware that I was open carrying and was hoping I didn't run into any problems with all these folks stopping (i.e., anti-gunners freaking out that "man with gun" was present). The more people who stopped to help (or gawk), the harder it was to tell who actually was the bad driver and who was the friendly witness, so I was a little nervous about some character calling 9-1-1 reporting that a guy with a gun just hit a girl.

I was on the phone with 9-1-1 and knew the fire squad, ambulance and police were on the way. The fire squad and ambulance arrived first and went straight to the victim so I got out of the way. The Chesterfield police were quickly on the scene and I introduced myself as a witness and spoke with a police officer for about 10 to 15 minutes. I trust he noticed I was open carrying. Not one problem, not one question, only professionalism.

I haven't had that many interactions with law enforcement but luckily every experience I've had in Virginia remains positive.

3. Pizza delivery driver disarms bike-riding robber in Barton Heights

Board Member Dale Welch emailed me this:



UPDATE: Pizza delivery driver disarms bike-riding robber in Barton Heights
August 30, 2012

RICHMOND, Va. -- An armed robber on a bicycle messed with the wrong food delivery worker in North Richmond.

Richmond police Capt. Angela Greene said officers were looking today for a bike-riding robber who was disarmed by a pizza delivery driver in the Barton Heights neighborhood Wednesday night.

Greene said the attempted robbery occurred about 10:40 p.m. in the 100 block of Poe Street, where the driver had just delivered a pizza to a residence when he was confronted by a male who was riding a bicycle and brandishing a handgun.

Greene said the delivery driver struggled with the suspect and disarmed him before running away and calling police.

Although the delivery driver was not injured in the struggle, police do not recommend fighting with armed robbers. [PVC: Agreed! Wrestling matches are not a good idea. That's why I carry a gun.]

The suspect was described as a black male last seen wearing a red hat and dark clothing.

4. Employees get firearm training after multiple robberies

VCDL member and firearms instructor Jim Reynolds trains a store's employees for carry at work.

Jay Minsky emailed me this:


Employees get firearm training after multiple robberies
by Angela Pellerano
August 22, 2012

RICHMOND, Va. (WTVR) – The owner of Cary Street Mini Mart, located at the corner of Randolph Street and West Cary Street, says he's had enough.

He's had two robberies in three and a half years.

The latest one occurred Sunday, around 8:30 p.m., when an unarmed man wearing a paper bag over his head demanded money from the store clerk.

"We got to put a stop to it," Elias Haddad, store owner, said.

Haddad is taking matters into his own hands and having his two employees trained to fire a gun.

"We have that right to carry guns so, I want them to use it," Haddad said.

"The phrase is 'It's better to have and not need it, than to need it and not have it'," said instructor, James Reynolds. He runs Proactive Shooters, LLC in Richmond.

Reynolds will be training Haddad's two employees in the classroom and also with live fire training.

This, he says, is how to fire a gun in close proximity:

"Take [your left arm], and bring it up [and across] the upper chest. That's going to protect your lungs and heart – your vital organs against any kind of weapon they have. But, at the same time you`ll be able to fire from your holster [with your right hand] and shoot from the hip," he said.

Haddad hopes the gun training will make his employees feel safe, and keep criminals out of this business. He said that his employees feel safer having a firearm around.

"And I'm personally going to take them to the range, and I'm personally going to watch them for a while before they can handle a gun," said Haddad. "I have the liability after all," he said.

Richmond Police have not caught the suspect from Sunday's robbery.

5. New Va. Law Makes it Easier to Get a Gun

Actually the title for this story is wrong. It should have been "New Va. Law Makes It Easier To Get a Concealed Handgun Permit." The process for getting a gun hasn't changed.

The reporter really doesn't understand the subject she is writing on at all. She thinks that a CHP is required to buy a gun and that confusion leads to a disjointed story.

Board Member Bruce Jackson emailed me this:



New Va. Law Makes it Easier to Get a Gun
by Carmen Chau
August 28, 2012

WINCHESTER, VA - For those wanting to carry a concealed weapon in the state of Virginia, a change in the code makes obtaining a permit a little easier.

A requirement that applicants submit fingerprints has been lifted. The change went into effect July 1st. Now authorities will process the application with only documentation.

"We have to depend now on picture identification to start the process and with the possibility of folks having really good counterfeit documents, it certainly makes the process a little bit less secure," says Anthony Roper, a Clarke County Sheriff. [PVC: Only 30% of localities ever fingerprinted for CHPs and none of those that didn't, including gigantic Fairfax County, were having problems.]

Local governments must follow the bill passed by the Virginia general assembly. Clarke County has now modified its requirements to reflect those enacted by state government.

While the fingerprinting requirement has been lifted a 45-day waiting period still must be met prior to issuing a concealed carry permit. [PVC: WHAT waiting period? There is no waiting period. There is simply the time it takes to process the application. It can vary from 10 days up to 45 days.]

Bill Randolph owns firearms, ammunition and weapon accessories and is well aware of the necessary steps before letting anyone walk out his door with a gun. [PVC: Now we are jumping back from CHPs to buying a gun - my head is spinning!]

"Virginia requires that you provide your driver's license, and another form of identification with the same physical address that is on your driver's license and the address has to be current," says Randolph," owner of Stonewall Firearms, Inc.

While the change may make it a bit more difficult for law enforcement officials to determine a person's real identity, Randolph still feels strongly in a gun owner's safety.

"Safety, safety, safety. You know, if you're a first time owner, or whether you're a long-time gun owner, always remember your safety rules, provide safe gun storage, you know, a lot of common sense needs to go along with owning a firearm," he adds.

6. Ani-gun propaganda in a college textbook

A VCDL member, who I've decided not to identify, emailed me this. I flagged the key lines with some asterisks (********):


The following, offensive, anti-gun statement is taken from my required textbook for PED 116 at Northern Virginia Community College. This course is required for every degree. This institution is one of the largest on the area and surely not the only one to use this textbook.

The textbook is "Fit & Well Alternate Edition: Core Concepts and Labs in Physical Fitness and Wellness Loose Leaf Edition, 10th Edition" By:
Thomas D. Fahey
California State University, Chico
Paul M. Insel
Stanford University
Walton T. Roth
Stanford University

Published by McGraw Hill

Here is the quote:

"Warning Signs of Violence
Violence is never acceptable. The following behaviors over a period of time suggest the potential for violence:
* A history of making threats and engaging in aggressive behavior
* Drug or alcohol abuse
* Gang membership
* Access to or fascination with weapons ****** [PVC: I sure hope no police are taking a course at college. They have access to all kinds of weapons.]
* Feelings of rejection or aloneness; the feeling of constantly being disrespected; victimization by bullies
* Withdrawal from usual activities and friends; poor school performance
* Failure to acknowledge the rights of others ****** [PVC: Huh? I thought that not acknowledging the right to self-defense with a weapon is one of the principle items on this list? Sounds like the book's authors are dangerous based on their own standards!]

The following are immediate warning signs of violence:
* Daily loss of temper or frequent physical Fighting
* Significant vandalism or property damage
* Increased risk-taking behavior; increased drug or alcohol abuse
* Threats or detailed plans to commit acts of violence -- Pleasure in hurting animals
* The presence of weapons ******** [PVC: Talk about being prejudiced and bigoted! That massive brush stroke catches everyone from police to military to anyone who believes in their Second Amendment rights and calls them all dangerous. How shameful and disgusting.]

Don't spend time with someone who shows these warning signs of violence. Don't carry a weapon or resort to violence to protect yourself. Ask someone in authority or an experienced professional for help." [PVC: Looks like the authors think students are far better off dead than able to defend themselves. These guys must have got their college degrees out of a cereal box. No one who really understands the real world would believe that only the authorities can save you.]

I think an email to the publishers regarding this content is in order.

7. Thoughts about eyesight

John Pepper emailed me this:


Those who wear glasses as necessary to clearly define pistol sights should consider that circumstance may arise when their glasses are not on and they may have to shoot right now without they benefit of eyeglasses. They should consider working this into their practice drills for the experience. Recall that if one only talks about it or thinks about it but does not practice it, then it is not really put in place.

On many of my practice drills I leave the eyeglasses off. The front sight looks like a fuzzy blob with rear sight about the same. If you have not done this you will be surprised at how well you will do. Not quite as well as with eyeglasses on, but almost.

The important factor is to have the front sight a brilliant color or stand out as the pistol is brought up to alignment. This works for quick defensive shooting. Even in the fuzzy, blurred condition one can create the fast "Flash Sight" picture well enough for centering on target. This has worked in the field on sudden live targets of opportunity in short seconds quite well. On several past occasions while woodchuck hunting, with my rifle not handy or in some cases, unloaded in vehicle, i've had a sudden close appearance of woodchuck. It is usually a two-way surprise with only seconds to do anything but draw my sidearm. And in spite of having my glasses off, the flash of a colored front sight on the woodchuck (running by now) was enough for a successful kill. Ranges varied from about 5 yards to 30 yards. Several one shot kills with the most being three shots (and one hit). Even though the sights were not defined, the blur of color fell into the rear sight notch well enough for this quick reaction shooting. Time varied from about 2 seconds to 4 seconds until the action was over. I enjoy these close, surprise, quick action kills more than a carefully calculated 200 or 300 yard rifle kill on an unsuspecting feeding woodchuck, which more resembles an execution. [PVC: I'm not so sure I agree with calling it an execution. It still takes a careful aim, a well aligned scope, and good breath and trigger control to hit a chuck, who can move at any second, at those distances.]

Work this into your practice drills.

I have found with contrasting front sight color, that even in dim light with eyeglasses off, close targets can be effectively engaged in a short time.

8. Detroit woman CHP shoots back at would-be carjackers

Deborah Jane Anderson emailed me this:


I agree with her assessment that she and the others with her would be dead if she hadn't shot back at the perpetrators. It was a blessing that she was a Michigan CPL holder and that she was able to thwart the crime in progress. Although it's sad that the woman got hurt badly during the carjacking attempt,and that her car got shot up enough to render it undrivable, but this statement by her says it all: ""I'm alive. That's what's most important, and God is good." Amen to that!


Deborah Jane


Detroit woman shoots back at would-be carjackers - Vehicle riddled with bullet holes, woman shot after carjacking attempt in Detroit
August 27, 2012

DETROIT - A Detroit woman targeted by would-be carjackers surprised them by shooting back at them.

Alaina, who asked only to be identified by her first name, said she walked out of a store at Plymouth Road and Myers Road earlier this month and was confronted by two men. One of them started shooting in an attempt to rob Alaina and steal her sport utility vehicle.

Alaina was shot and wounded. Her vehicle was hit several times, but she has a concealed pistol permit and she returned fire.

"They shot me, they shot me with an AK, they shot me. I'm a CPL license holder and I shot back and I don't know if I hit the guys or not," she said.

Alaina's left hand was hit. She may never be able to use it again. She still believes she did the right thing in returning fire.

"If I didn't, I believe they would have shot us dead instead of shooting and running. So I am glad that I did have my weapon," Alaina said.

Alaina must work to recover from her wounds. She has had to leave her job as a waitress and still care for her three young children. Her SUV was badly damaged by the gunfire and it cannot be driven.

Still, Alaina said things could have been much worse.

"I'm alive. That's what's most important, and God is good."

9. GOP set to ok most pro-gun platform ever

Too bad the Party can ignore the platform in practice, but the platform stands in stark contrast to the Democrat Party platform on guns.

That platform is a monstrosity pushed by Diane Feinstein. The Democrats are probably going to pay a steep price for that platform at the polls this November.

Dean Marky emailed me this:



GOP set to OK most pro-gun platform ever
by Paul Bedard
August 27, 2012

TAMPA, Fla. - Delegates to the Republican National Convention on Tuesday will approve the most pro-gun platform ever, staking out support for national concealed carry reciprocity and opposing domestic restrictions on ammunition and United Nations interference in gun sales.

"It's probably the most supportive and detailed on Second Amendment issues ever," said a gun-rights advocate who attended the GOP platform committee meetings last week.

Besides giving the National Rifle Association and other Second Amendment groups victories on their issues, the platform is also a slap at several Obama initiatives, including the Fast & Furious scandal, his administration's consideration of a ban on high-capacity bullet magazines and talk of reviving the assault weapons ban and negotiations in the United Nations over a treaty to regulate small arms sales.

Leading the changes from prior GOP platforms was a sentence backing the use of deadly force for self-defense. The added sentence reads: "We acknowledge, support and defend law-abiding citizens' God-given right of self-defense."

Also added was language opposing restrictions on ammo purchases and supporting the right of those with state-issued concealed carry permits to cross state lines.

In the section calling on Americans to handle guns safely, the GOP platform adds: "this also includes the right to obtain and store ammunition without registration. We support the fundamental right to self-defense wherever a law-abiding citizen has a legal right to be, and we support federal legislation that would expand the exercise of that right by allowing those with state-issued carry permits to carry firearms in any state that issues such permits to its own residents."

The GOP took advantage in their platform to slap Attorney General Eric Holder and his refusal to dish out more documents on the Fast & Furious gun scandal on the border with Mexico which prompted the U.S. House to rebuke him.

In that section of the platform, delegates added, "We condemn the reckless actions associated with the operation known as 'Fast and Furious,' conducted by the Department of Justice, which resulted in the murder of a U.S. Border Patrol agent and others on both sides of the border. We applaud Members of the U.S. House of Representatives in holding the administration's attorney general in contempt of Congress for his refusal to cooperate with their investigation into that debacle. We oppose the improper collection of firearms sales information in the four southern border states, which was imposed without congressional authority."

And the post-Batman shooting in Colorado, which has prompted a renewed interest in gun control and reviving the Clinton-era assault weapons ban, played a role in strengthening the GOP's opposition to a gun ban. The language added reads, "We oppose legislation that is intended to restrict our Second Amendment rights by limiting the capacity of clips or magazines, or otherwise revising the ill-considered Clinton gun ban."

10. What the left won't tell you about the boom in U.S. gun sales

Larry Korn emailed me this:



What The Left Won't Tell You About The Boom In U.S. Gun Sales
by Frank Miniter
August 23, 2012

As gun sales surged in early 2009 the going joke among employees of gun manufacturers was that President Barack Obama was the "greatest gun salesman of all time." The trouble with this backhanded complement, however, is Left-leaning news outlets have since used it to avoid something that really scares them.

As ABC put it, Americans are buying more Glocks and Berettas simply because they fear "a second Obama administration might restrict gun ownership." Their reporting conveniently stops right there.

Before getting into why, I should note they're partly right. For example, in December 2011 there was a record number of background checks (1,410,937) called into the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS). According to the National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF) this was an increase of 24.5 percent over December 2010. (For those who don't know, NICS was started in late 1998 to instantly determine whether a prospective buyer is eligible to purchase firearms or explosives. Not every NICS check results in a sale. A small percentage of people are denied for various reasons (keeping criminals from buying firearms is why we have this system), some simply decide not to purchase the gun and so on. So NICS checks statistics are like exit-poll data, they're a pretty good indicator, but have margins of error.)

Now though the December 2011 number was a record there were actually slightly less, but still over 1.5 million NICS checks, in November of 2011. The only other November to break 1.5 million NICS checks was November of 2008—when President Obama won the presidency.

But the thing is the surge is gun sales didn't begin in 2008. Over the last 10 years (from 2002 to 2011) there has been a 54.1 percent rise in the number of NICS checks and the increase hasn't all taken place since 2008. In 2005 there were 8,952,945 NICS checks. In 2006 the number topped 10 million. In 2007 NICS checks pushed passed 11 million. In 2008 NICS checks passed 12 million, and then hit the 14 million mark in 2009. They increased slightly (4 percent) through 2011.

So attributing this entire trend to President Obama's anti-gun reputation is disingenuous, yet many in the media like this explanation because by saying the increase in gun sales is only about President Obama they can then write the whole thing off as a simple-minded fear from those who "cling to guns and religion."

To understand what's really going on, let's start with some sales figures.

Last January Steve Sanetti, president of the National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF), told me, "The $4.1 billion shooting industry has been growing in an otherwise anemic economy. We're grateful and proud that our industry has helped maintain jobs from the manufacturer through retail levels during these difficult economic times."

He had good reason to be pleased. In general, firearms manufacturers have been beating the downturn. In one example, last March Sturm, Ruger & Company, Inc. (which trades on the New York Stock Exchange as "RGR") completed the fourth and final quarter of its "1.2 Million Gun Challenge to Benefit the NRA." During this yearlong challenge, Ruger donated a total of $1,254,000 to the NRA as it built and shipped more than one million firearms.

Smith & Wesson Holding Corp. (NASDAQ: SWHC) saw its fiscal year sales surge 20 percent in 2012. Many makers of handguns and "black guns" (what the Left calls "assault rifles" but the NSSF calls "modern sporting rifles") also did very well. For example, the number of U.S. semi-automatic pistols produced (imported and exported) was in the 900,000-range from 1998 to 2000, but then fell to a low of 626,836 in 2001. Since then, this category has risen nearly every year. In 2009, some 1,868,268 pistols were imported or exported by U.S. manufacturers, according to Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (BATFE) data.

So why did overall gun sales begin going up well before President Obama was elected? The answer is in the way American's view guns. In 1959 some 60 percent of the American public favored handgun bans, according to Gallup, whereas today 73 percent oppose such bans and only 26 percent want bans on handguns.

Other Gallup polls are even more interesting. The number of women gun owners in America has gone up from 13 percent in 2005 to 23 percent today. Also, the number of Democratic households with firearms in their homes skyrocketed from 30 percent in 2009 to 40 percent today.

What has been happening is that the NRA, the NSSF and other gun-rights groups have been busy fighting for Second Amendment rights, advocating for participation in the shooting sports, instructing people how to shoot and store firearms safely, working with police officers and the military and doing a myriad of other things. The NRA has also been lobbying, defending the Second Amendment in courtrooms all over the country and growing its membership. As a result, they've attracted more Americans to the shooting sports, made the shooting sports safer and helped more people learn to shoot and to defend themselves.

You can see this reflected in the number of concealed-carry permits. From the mid-1980s to today America has become a mostly "shall-issue" nation with regards to concealed-carry permits. (Shall-issue laws typically prevent local governments from arbitrarily refusing to give permits.) Today 41 states have right-to-carry laws and 38 states have "shall-issue" laws. In fact, a total of 49 states have laws that, to varying degrees, solidify citizens' right to carry certain concealed firearms in public, either without a permit or after obtaining a permit. Only Illinois is without such a provision.

To visualize what a big change this has been, simply log on to Wikipedia. Now Wikipedia can't always be trusted as a fact-based source, but search under the entry "concealed carry in the U.S." and you'll find a color-coded map of the U.S. changing year-by-year from 1986 to today. Over those years the color changes show the spread of shall-issue laws. Nationally, the NSSF estimates there are 6.8 million concealed-carry holders today. This is up from about one million in the mid-1980s.

All of this pro-gun legislation has not only added to freedom, personal protection and a whole lot of fun at ranges across America, but has also grown the numbers of gun owners and increased the sales of firearms.

Now The History Channel's "Top Shots" and Discovery Channel's "Sons of Guns" are showcasing how much fun the shooting sports can be.

The Boy Scouts of America reported that the number of "shotgun shooting" merit badges increased 27.8 percent from 1999 to 2010. The NSSF's "female-participation" statistics in the shooting sports show that from 2002 to 2010 an estimated 30.2 percent more women are now shooting shotguns. The number of hunters actually increased nationally by 9 percent from 2006 to 2011 according to a preliminary report by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. And active-shooting sports, such as 3-Gun and sporting clays, have taken off.

There are many other categories and statistics showing the tidal shift in gun ownership beneath this current wave of sales, all of which are related to legislative successes that freed up Second Amendment rights, judicial victories and a popular shift in the way American's view guns. With all of this going on it's a shame so many in the media are ignoring or cynically simplifying the movement behind gun sales. It's just more convenient for them to say the surge in gun sales is only about fear of new gun-control legislation.

Though I don't want to discount the fear. After all, when the Supreme Court twice comes within one vote of ruling that the Second Amendment of the U.S. Bill of Rights isn't an individual right, Americans have a right to be concerned. When an incumbent president seeking a second term has already put two people on the nine-member Supreme Court who would vote away this basic human freedom, they have the right to be fearful. And when you realize that, if reelected, that incumbent president would have a good chance of getting a few more Supreme Court picks, and so could reshape the high court for decades, people have a right to be motivated to buy firearms now.

11. Breaking down gun violence: No 'simple formula'

James Durso emailed me this:



Breaking Down Gun Violence: No 'Simple Formula'
by NPR Staff
August 12, 2012

In 1990, 78 percent of Americans supported tougher restrictions on gun sales, according to a Gallup poll. A decade later, that number fell to 44 percent.

Part of the reason has to do with how the debate has been framed: one between those who want to ban all guns and those who want to protect the right to own them.

The reality is far more complex. Private gun ownership is a fact of life in the U.S. The country tops the charts worldwide in terms of civilian gun ownership. A 2007 study from the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime [PDF] reported there were 270 million private firearms in the U.S.

The question is how to keep them away from people who perpetrate crimes like the recent shootings in Aurora, Colo., and in Oak Creek, Wis. That's the tricky part — partially because getting a gun in the U.S. can be fairly easy.

Purchasing Guns

At the Blue Ridge Arsenal in Virginia, sales rep Mark Warner says the process can take only about 25 minutes. You pick any gun, fill out a form and wait for approval.

"If you're a law-abiding citizen and you don't have a criminal record and the computer likes you in Richmond, you're done in 15-25 minutes," he says.

And that's if you buy it in a shop.

Dan Gross, president of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, says 40 percent of legally sold guns are sold without a background check. That 40 percent includes the guns sold at gun shows or through classified ads, where legal loopholes don't require background checks. [PVC: I have no idea where they came up the statistic that 40% of gun sales are private.]

"Every day in our nation, 32 Americans are killed by guns," Gross says.

He argues that a few simple changes — tighter background checks, a ban on certain types of weapons — could all make the difference.

12. Top two cities with strict gun control laws experience mass shootings

Paul Burgener emailed me this:



Top Two Cities With Strict Gun Control Laws Experience Mass Shootings
by Tim Brown
August 24, 2012

Chicago and New York City have some of the strictest guns laws in the nation and both are led by liberals who want more gun control laws imposed on their people. Both have also been involved in mass shootings in the past twenty-four hours.

The Empire State Building was the site of a mass shooting today by alleged shooter, 53-year-old Jeffrey Johnson. Johnson had been fired from Hazan Imports, just around the corner from the scene of the shooting, two years ago.

The New York Post reports,

He returned there today with the gun and waited for his victim, a former co-worker identified as 41-year-old Steve Ercolino.

After fatally shooting Ercolino in the head, he walked down 33rd Street with the gun concealed and was confronted by a pair of construction workers who gave chase, said Kelly.

At that point, cops on anti-terror patrol drew their weapons on Johnson and he opened fire.

"The guy has his gun out and is trying to shoot police officers," Bloomberg said.

The cops unleashed a torrent of shots, cutting down the suspect and possibly hitting some of the nine innocent bystanders who were caught in the mayhem.

It's good the cops got the bad guy. The sad part is that apparently they shot innocent people in the process. The other sad part is that Mr. Ercolino did not have a gun to protect himself from such aggression.

First, I hope the police that stopped Johnson in his tracks will also be held accountable for those they shot. After all, as citizens we are told that if we have to use our gun to protect ourselves or someone else, we are also responsible for people downrange. The same should apply to the police. They are not above the law.

Second, this is a city in which Mayor Michael Bloomberg has strict gun laws and wants even more. Recently, just after the shooting in Aurora, Colorado, Bloomberg basically said he wanted police to go on strike until people demanded tougher legislation on guns from their representatives and he did this so "officers could go home to their families." Well Mr. Mayor, it seems several citizens have a legitimate complaint against you and your officers. Apparently they hit several citizens with gun fire. Are we to expect that Mayor Bloomberg will cover for the officers or apply the same logic to them? I'm guessing the former will be in order.

While two men were killed in New York City, the shooter and his victim, the rest are expected to survive. However, what's even more ironic is in Chicago, Illinois nineteen people were shot last night. During a thirty minute period 13 people in the shooting were wounded. Did you get that? Thirty minutes went by while the shooter kept on shooting. The Chicago Tribune reports,

The overnight shootings peaked between 9:15 p.m. and 9:45 p.m. That's when eight people, many of them teens, were shot at 79th Street and Essex Avenue about 9:30 p.m.

Then two men were wounded in the Ida B. Wells / Darrow Homes complex at about 9:25 p.m., police said. The men, 27 and 33, were shot in the 600 block of East 37th Street and taken to the University of Chicago Hospitals, police said. The younger man was shot in the head and the other in the right arm, Gaines said.

Around the same time, two other men were wounded in the arms in a drive-by shooting in the 2900 block of West 39th Place in the Brighton Park neighborhood.

About 15 minutes later, a 24-year-old man was shot in the leg and taken to Jackson Park Hospital from the 7200 block of South Jeffery Boulevard, Gaines said. He was treated and released. The man told police he was talking on his phone when he heard a single shot and realized he was wounded.

Earlier Thursday evening, four men were wounded in a shooting in the Little Village neighborhood about 5:20 p.m. Thursday, police said.

Now both of these cities are led by liberals who don't hold to American Constitutional or biblical values. No doubt they will be calling for even more gun control, despite the fact that such legislation is doing absolutely nothing to stop these things in their cities.

What these cities need to do is step up and tell their representatives to get rid of such intrusive laws on their Second Amendment rights and people begin to get educated on guns and learn to use them, carry them and defend themselves. When that happens and the public becomes aware that people are in fact carrying their own weapons, we will begin to see less and less of this senseless shooting. Until then, expect more of the same, especially running up to this year's election.

My fellow Americans, carry your weapons with you. Carry them all the time. Carry them wherever you go and by all means, carry several.

13. LTE: A misfire by New York police

Member Marvin Shoaf had this LTE printed in the Washington Post:


LTE: A misfire by New York police
by Marvin Shoaf
August 29, 2012

It was with astonishment, disbelief and disgust that I read a report that the nine bystanders shot near the Empire State Building were hit not by the gunman whom police were confronting but by police ["9 hurt near N.Y. landmark were hit by police gunfire," news article, Aug. 26].

I taught marksmanship and firearm safety for more than 30 years, certifying more than 2,000 students. Among the paramount points that I stressed were that the shooter should be sure of the target and know what was behind the target and where the rounds would go, should he or she miss.

For two supposedly trained police officers, sworn to protect and serve, to adopt what was apparently a spray-and-pray method on a crowded street is a disgrace to every law enforcement officer in the country. Had someone other than law enforcement officers perpetrated such carelessness, there would have been front-page articles calling for gun control.

14. CHP holder saves police officer's life in Louisiana

I'm sure any of you would have done the same.

Matthew Cyr posted this:



Bystander Fired Deadly Shot, Not Officer
by Jim Shannon

There were two big developments Monday in the case of a motorist who was shot and killed along Greenwell Springs Road Friday after a fight with a police officer. Investigators say an autopsy shows the deadly bullet was fired by a bystander, not the officer. Police also announced that no charges would be filed in the case, either against the police officer involved or the bystander who fired the fatal shot into the head of George Temple.

East Baton Rouge Sheriff's spokesman Greg Phares says Officer Brian Harrision was escorting a funeral procession Friday when he pulled Temple over and wrote him a ticket for breaking into the procession. According to Phares, that's when Temple attacked Harrison. Police say Perry Stevens was walking outside of the Auto Zone on Greenwell Springs Road when he heard Harrison yelling for help. Harrison was reportedly on his back with Temple on top of him. That's when Stevens went to his car and grabbed his .45 caliber pistol.

According to Col. Greg Phares, "[Mr. Stevens] orders Mr. Temple to stop and get off the officer. The verbal commands are ignored and Mr. Stevens fires four shots, all of which struck Mr. Temple."

Perry Stevens fired four shots into Temple's torso. Officer Harrison had already fired one shot into Temple's abdomen. With Temple still struggling with the officer, Perry continued to advance toward the scuffle.

"He again orders Mr. Temple to stop what he was doing and get off the officer. Those commands are ignored and he fires a fifth shot and that hits his head. The incident is over with, and as you know, Mr. Temple is dead."

Police are calling the shooting death justified. Perry Stevens has a permit to carry a concealed weapon. Col. Phares would not give out any more details relating to the shooting. Both Phares and Baton Rouge Police Chief Jeff LeDuff stopped short of crediting Stevens with saving the officer's life. LeDuff says the entire incident is unfortunate.

"I spoke with his father at the scene briefly," said LeDuff. "I think this is a tragic situation all around."

9 News is told George Temple has a criminal record, and Officer Harrison was involved in a shooting while employed as a prison guard in East Baton Rouge Parish, where he was suspended for three days back in 1995.

15. Ballistics show all 9 wounded outside Empire State Building were shot by police

Mike McCord emailed me this:



NYPD: Ballistics show all 9 wounded outside Empire State Building were shot by police
by Associated Press
August 24, 2012

NEW YORK — All nine people injured during a dramatic confrontation between police and a gunman outside the Empire State Building were wounded by gunfire from the two officers, police said Saturday, citing ballistics evidence.

The veteran patrolmen who opened fire on the suit-clad gunman, Jeffrey Johnson, had only an instant to react when he whirled around and pointed a .45-caliber pistol at them as they approached him from behind on a busy sidewalk.

Officer Craig Matthews shot seven times, and Officer Robert Sinishtaj fired nine times, police said. Neither had ever fired their weapons before on a patrol.

The volley of gunfire felled Johnson in just a few seconds and left nine other people bleeding on the sidewalk.

In the initial chaos Friday, it wasn't clear whether Johnson or the officers were responsible for the trail of the wounded, but based on ballistic and other evidence, "it appears that all nine of the victims were struck either by fragments or by bullets fired by police," Police Commissioner Raymond Kelly told reporters Saturday at a community event in Harlem.

Police officials have said the officers appeared to have no choice but to shoot Johnson, whose body had 10 bullet wounds in the chest, arms and legs.

The officers confronted Johnson as he walked, casually, down the street after gunning down a former co-worker on the sidewalk outside the office they once shared. The shooting happened at 9 a.m., as the neighborhood bustled with people arriving for work.

The gunman and his victim, Steve Ercolino, had a history of workplace squabbles before Johnson was laid off from their company, Hazan Import Corp., a year ago. At one point, the two men had grappled physically in an elevator.

John Koch, the property manager at the office building where the men worked, said security camera footage showed the two pushing and shoving. The tussle ended when Ercolino, a much larger man, pinned Johnson against the wall of the elevator by the throat, Koch said. Ercolino let him go after a few moments, and the two men went their separate ways.

"They didn't like each other," Koch said.

After shooting Ercolino, Johnson, an eccentric T-shirt designer and avid bird-watcher who wore a suit every day, even when photographing hawks in Central Park, walked away as if nothing had happened.

Alerted by a construction worker, officers Matthews and Sinishtaj gave chase as Johnson rounded a corner and walked along Fifth Avenue in front of the landmark skyscraper.

A security videotape from the scene shows several civilians — including three sitting on a bench only a few feet away — scattering as the officers opened fire.

Police have determined that three people were struck by whole bullets — two of which were removed from victims at the hospital — and the rest were grazed "by fragments of some sort," Kelly said.

Two women with leg wounds and a man with a wound to his buttocks required surgery and remained hospitalized Saturday. They were listed in stable condition.

Both Matthews, 39, and Sinishtaj, 40, joined the nation's largest police department 15 years ago.

Matthews had drawn attention this year by suing the New York Police Department, accusing his superiors of unfairly punishing him for not meeting arrest quotas. A judge threw out the complaint.

The union representing the two officers didn't immediately respond to a message left seeking comment.

The shooting didn't deter tourists from flocking to the Empire State Building as usual on Saturday.

Patricia Flynn, 57, a retired schoolteacher, visited the building's peak with her elderly mother, who once worked in the skyscraper as a secretary.

"But I didn't tell her what happened," said Flynn, adding that her mother was unaware of Friday's shooting. "And she really enjoyed the view."

A group of 31 tourists from France held a meeting Friday night at their nearby hotel to decide whether to cancel their planned Empire State Building visit.

"We were scared, and we thought it was a risk," said Catherine Krukar, 38, a teacher.

But in the end, they went ahead with the visit, she said after descending from the observation tower,

"We know it can happen anywhere, and we wanted to see the Empire State Building," Krukar said. "It was beautiful!"

16. Bad tactics and socialism

Gregg Leonard emailed me this:


Here is a link to a very good analysis of the events in NYC. This blogger is a former cop and he tends to talk about many gun rights issues that are making the news. I find that this blog is one of the most insightful on many levels. Hope you find it of interest.


NYC: Bad Tactics and Socialism
by Mike McDaniel
August 25, 2012

It is just too many guns in the streets' he said, adding: 'We are the only developed country in the world with this problem. NYC Mayor Michael Bloomberg

Gun control, as an integral part of leftist/socialist/communist doctrine shares with those destructive and dehumanizing philosophies, one inescapable reality: it can never be falsified. When socialism and its related or component parts fail as they inevitably must, the fault is never socialism, for socialism can never be wrong. The only fault must be that socialism does not exist everywhere, or that insufficient socialism has been imposed, or that it has not been fully implemented and with sufficient socialist fervor. For these reasons is utopia—paradise on Earth—unattainable.

The events of August 24, 2012 near the Empire State Building have now been sorted out. According to Fox News:

NEW YORK – All nine people wounded during a dramatic confrontation between police and a gunman outside the Empire State Building were struck by bullets fired by the two officers, police said Saturday, citing ballistics evidence.

The veteran patrolmen who opened fire on the suit-wearing gunman, Jeffrey Johnson, had only an instant to react when he whirled and pointed a .45-caliber pistol as they approached him from behind on a busy sidewalk.

Officer Craig Matthews shot seven times. Officer Robert Sinishtaj fired nine times, police said. Neither had ever fired their weapons before on a patrol.

The volley of gunfire felled Johnson in just a few seconds and left nine other people bleeding on the sidewalk…

Police have determined that three people were struck by whole bullets — two of which were removed from victims at the hospital — and the rest were grazed 'by fragments of some sort.'

It was not a mass shooting after all, just a pre-meditated murder enacted on a sidewalk in broad daylight. New York Mayor Bloomberg's anti-gun mania is well known, and in a bizarre bit of irony, only a half hour before the shooting, he was on local radio demanding ever more stringent gun control, not just for NYC, but everywhere. Another bit of irony is New York state—and NYC in particular—have among the most onerous and restrictive gun laws in the nation. NYC's laws are almost certainly unconstitutional in many ways.

New York is one of the few states that has a "may issue" concealed carry law. In other words, no one in New York has a right to carry a concealed weapon—or to carry openly for that matter—and all permits are issued at the whim of government functionaries. In NYC, concealed carry permits are possible, but in practice, issued only to the wealthy or politically connected. One must have a permit merely to have a firearm in their home or business, and the application fee—non-refundable of course—is $340.00. This does not include a fingerprinting fee of from $94.25 to $105.25. All other applicable regulations are clearly designed to make it so difficult to exercise ones rights under the Second Amendment as to cause most people to abandon the attempt.

In other words, NYC is essential an anti-freedom paradise for gun control fanatics, yet Mayor Bloomberg is not satisfied because the law-abiding have not been completely disarmed and/or jailed for attempting to exercise Second Amendment rights.

Even in such an anti-gun people's paradise, shootings still occur, yet anti-gun policy cannot possibly have failed. The shooting must be attributable to the fact that other states allow people to observe the Second Amendment and there are "…too many guns in the streets." Only when perfect socialism—no gun ownership by the law abiding—exists, can utopia exist. NYC's near-utopia just isn't enough.

There exists another issue plainly illustrated by this shooting: poor police training and marksmanship. A security camera happened to record the confrontation between the killer—who would want his name to be mentioned here—and the two NYPD officers that shot him—and nine bystanders.

Notice that there was a large concrete planter between the gunman and the two officers, and one behind him. Some news stories have suggested that the officers had no cover and had to simply start shooting in the middle of a crowd of bystanders. The security video makes plain that this is not the case and the officers used poor tactics.

Consider these issues:

(1) Both officers approach the shooter, who is walking down the sidewalk at the curb, bunched together and from his left/rear. They do not try to flank and contain the shooter.

(2) The officers appear to be fixated on the shooter and appear to have little situational awareness, particularly no awareness of available cover or of the surrounding crowd. For instance, there are three people seated on a bench immediately behind the shooter and directly in the officer's line of fire.

(3) Glancing behind him, the shooter spots the fast approaching officers, pulls his handgun from his briefcase, turns and points it at the officers. This obviously catches them by surprise.

(4) The closest officer, who appears to be left-handed, draws and begins to shoot in what appears to be a sort of Weaver position while simultaneously slowly shuffling to his right (toward the curb) and cover, but the shooter is down and out of the fight before he can ever actually use that cover. His engagement range appears to be about eight feet.

(5) The lagging officer engages from what appears to be 15 feet, but he draws and while crouching and clumsily side stepping to his left (away from the curb) fires one handed. As he side steps, he also steps backward, away from the shooter and any cover. In fact, his actions place bystanders—all of whom are running and ducking for their lives—directly in his line of fire. His final rounds would have been fired from as much as 20 feet.

(6) When the shooter is clearly down and out, the officers do not take time to scan their surroundings to be certain there are no additional threats. In fact, the closest officer immediately starts transmitting on his radio.

Most people assume the police are good and cool shots. They're used to seeing TV and movie cops take down suspects with single shots from great ranges with perfect precision and coolness. In reality, most police officers are not good shots, and under the stress of deadly force confrontations, have abysmal hit/miss records. In this case, the two officers fired 16 rounds. They did hit the shooter but as Fox News reports:

The volley of gunfire felled Johnson in just a few seconds and left nine other people bleeding on the sidewalk.

In the initial chaos Friday, it wasn't clear whether Johnson or the officers were responsible for the trail of wounded, but based on ballistic and other evidence, 'it appears that all nine of the victims were struck either by fragments or by bullets fired by police,' Police Commissioner Raymond Kelly told reporters on Saturday at a community event in Harlem.

He reiterated that the officers appeared to have no choice but to shoot Johnson, whose body had 10 bullets wounds in the chest, arms and legs.

'I believe it was handled well,' Kelly said.

The distance in this case varied from about eight to twenty feet, but the police generally shoot poorly even at gunfight-in-a-telephone-booth ranges. There are many cases on record of cops and bad guys emptying their weapons at each other at point blank range without scoring a single hit.

Keeping in mind that it is easy to Monday morning quarterback such things, there are a number of simple ways this situation could have been handled better:

(1) Rather than immediately running up behind the shooter, the officers could have remained out of sight while keeping the shooter in view and used their radios to prepare officers in the shooter's line of travel. This would have allowed them to better use cover and to choose the time and place of the confrontation to maximize the chances of catching the shooter unaware and to minimize the danger to bystanders. Even though the shooter had just shot and killed a man, he was doing nothing but walking away from the scene of the crime. It was not necessary to immediately confront him in an uncontrolled manner while surrounded by innocents.

(2) The officers—particularly the one who shot with only one hand while crab-walking to the left and backward—engaged in panic shooting, firing until the man dropped and was obviously incapacitated. They made a number of dangerous shooting mistakes:

When caught in the open, there are two choices: run for cover and then engage the shooter, or stand and immediately engage the shooter. Either shoot well and accurately or move, but not both. Virtually no one can shoot accurately while moving, and TV tactics of firing rounds off blindly to "keep his head down," absolutely do not apply in the real world, particularly when innocents surround the area of the confrontation. Police officers (and citizens) are absolutely responsible for each and every round they fire.

Shooting one handed while moving is a particularly bad idea. In any panic shooting situation, officers tend to place only a fraction of the rounds fired on target because they are jerking the trigger—which tends to make rounds hit low—they aren't watching their sights at all (they're fixated on the target, or perhaps just his gun), and with their gun up and in front of their face, they can't see what the suspect is doing, if their rounds have been effective, or if they are having the desired effect.

Under virtually any circumstance, officers must adopt a solid Weaver stance and fire no more than two rounds to center mass, then immediately drop to low ready to assess the effectiveness of their fire. This takes only fractions of a second, but prevents panic firing as in this case. If this rational and professional procedure were followed, no more than four rounds would likely have been fired and all four would have been much more likely to have effectively hit and immediately stopped the shooter rather than bystanders.

It is little wonder nine people were hit by bullets or fragments. It now appears that the shooter did not fire a single round at the officers or bystanders, and Mr. Kelly thinks it was handled well. Due to their uncoordinated tactics and panicky shooting, I suspect that at least some of the officer's bullets ricocheted off the planter behind the shooter and surely, off the sidewalk, producing the fragments that hit bystanders.

There is legal precedence for officers shooting in the middle of crowds. There are cases where officers accidently shooting innocents is legally justified because the danger to those innocents was greater than the danger posed by the officers trying to end that initial danger. A mass- shooting situation where a gunman is blazing away at a surrounding crowd is a classic case. Officers opening fire in that kind of situation are more likely to end the imminent danger; it is worth the risk to the public for them to fire. This was not such a case. The officers provoked an uncontrolled confrontation when the suspect was not posing any immediate danger to the public, but was merely walking away, his gun in his briefcase.

I've little doubt that some will think I'm being too hard on the officers. After all, it was a very stressful situation. Indeed it was, but it was made more stressful by the officers themselves who, rather than controlling events to the greatest degree possible, allowed events to control them. Do we not expect police officers to be able to correctly and safely handle stressful situations? Do we not expect them to use their weapons only when absolutely necessary? Do we not expect them to be aware of their surroundings and to avoid shooting innocents? Do we not expect them to be able to shoot accurately when under stress? Do we not expect them to use only the minimum number of rounds necessary to eliminate the threat rather than wildly banging away in a blind panic?

If we do not expect all of this of them, how—other than wearing a uniform—do they differ from any untrained, inexperienced citizen?

Police officers are, in many respects, the product of their training. There is a famous old maxim: "train like you want to fight, because you'll fight as you've trained." The security video reveals either two officers who have not been properly trained in tactics and shooting under stress, or officers who, having received sufficient and continuously updated training, did not use it. In a virulently anti-gun city, one might be forgiven for thinking that proper and continuous firearm training for even police officers might be a low priority.

So in one of America's most anti-gun cities, despite some of the most draconian gun laws, a shooting somehow took place. This, of course, cannot speak to the futility of New York's gun laws—which affect only the law-abiding—but must be the result of the fact that NYC's draconian socialism is not uniformly applied to the entire nation, for gun control can never be wrong or ineffective.

Perhaps I'm too cynical in believing that Mayor Bloomberg will never allow the necessity of proper and effective police training to overshadow his never-ending crusade to quash the Second Amendment. Perhaps I'm wrong in thinking that politics will keep the NYPD from viewing the same security camera footage I saw and coming to conclusions that will improve training and keep officers from panicky fire into crowds. More likely, the officers will be declared heroes, and Mayor Bloomberg's disarmament crusade will continue.

For you see, socialism can never be falsified.

17. Anti-gunners skipping the important facts, naturally

Dave Workman emailed me this:



Anti-gunners skipping the important facts, naturally
by Dave Workman
August 26, 2012

In their zeal to exploit Friday's shooting near the Empire State Building in New York City, anti-gunners are deliberately overlooking some facts and adding their own agenda items instead.

Kudos to the Seattle Times for not picking up on the rhetoric in its selection of stories about the incident to publish. Then, again, one might wonder if the Times is just playing down the event because the "mass shooting" that had initially been reported now has been revealed to have been caused by police gunfire, not dead gunman Jeffrey T. Johnson.

His pistol was an old Star .45-caliber semi-auto, a gun that by no stretch of anyone's imagination — with the exception of the Violence Policy Center — meets the definition of "assault" anything. One glance at the VPC's statement about the shooting cements that organization's lack of credibility, because it contains this gem:

"Today's shooter reportedly used a 45 caliber handgun to end the life of a former co-worker, offering yet another example of how the ready availability of semiautomatic handguns that can be equipped with high-capacity ammunition magazines destroy lives and make everyone less safe."—Violence Policy Center

18. Who needs a gun in a New Jersey supermarket?

Walter Jackson emailed me this:



Ex-Marine Guns Down Co-Workers at Supermarket
Friday, 31 Aug 2012 01:36 PM

A New Jersey supermarket employee wearing military clothing opened fire at the closed store early Friday as a dozen or more co-workers worked inside, killing two of them and himself, a prosecutor said.

A law enforcement official identified the shooter as an ex-Marine who was discharged two years ago.

The 23-year-old man left his shift at a Pathmark store in Old Bridge Township around 3:30 a.m. and returned a half-hour later with a handgun and an AK-47 assault rifle, Middlesex County Prosecutor Bruce Kaplan said.

About 12 to 14 workers were in the store, he said. The man fired at least 16 rounds from the rifle at the first workers he saw, killing an 18-year-old woman and a 24-year-old man as other workers hid, Kaplan said.

"I do not believe that they were specifically targeted. I believe everybody in the store was a target," said Kaplan.

The gunman then killed himself, said Kaplan.

He did not release the name of the suspect, but a law enforcement official briefed on the investigation identified him as Terence Tyler, an ex-Marine who was discharged in 2010. The official spoke to The Associated Press on condition of anonymity because his agency is not in charge of the investigation.

Tyler, an infantryman, never served overseas, said Marine spokeswoman Capt. Kendra Motz. She wouldn't comment on the circumstances of his discharge. Tyler's home of record was Brooklyn.

John Niccollai, president of a foodworkers union that represents some store employees, said Pathmark officials and employees told him the gunman wore military clothing and had just punched out for the night before coming back into the store and opening fire.

Many of the employees escaped gunfire, Niccollai said, when an assistant manager, "who I would view as a hero," helped many workers to get out of the store through the back door.

Kaplan and police walked through the shooting scene at the supermarket Friday morning, with two long windows in the front completely shot through. Police kept onlookers away; a number of vehicles were in the parking lot outside, along with police cars.

The store and its parking lot were closed. Pathmark officials had no immediate comment.

Old Bridge is a bedroom community of about 65,000 just across the Raritan Bay from New York City's Staten Island borough.

New Jersey Transit closed its nearby park-and-ride lot for bus passengers and told riders that they could park in other park-and-ride lots or could ride a rail line.

19. CHP holder saves the life of a woman being stabbed outside a school

Member Paul Henick emailed me this:



According to the anti's Gun Free Zones, Self Defense
by Robb Allen
August 30, 2012

This never happens:


Bonham Academy on St. Mary's Street. Teresa Barron, 38, had just dropped off her child at the school when the child's father showed up, and the two got into an argument. The child's father, 38-year-old Roberto Barron allegedly then stabbed the woman several times in the upper body and neck area.

Police say a bystander who happened to be a concealed handgun license holder pulled his weapon and ordered Barron to drop the knife. Barron surrendered and was taken into custody by the bystander and a school district officer.


Luckily, this happened outside the school. Otherwise, Stabby McStabbykins would have never been confronted by the armed citizen.

You see, people intent on harming others don't care about things like 'No Guns' signs, and those who are the type to abide by them are the ones you don't need to worry about. Instead, anti-gun people prefer laws that result in more dead children and people just so they can assuage their bigotry.

I know when I drop my girls off, I have to stay in the car. When I'm helping out with a classroom activity or show up for a presentation or whatnot (I like to be active in my girls' educations), I am required by law to disarm, and yet *I* am the exact type of person you need armed in situations like this.

So, to the few anti's who read my blog, why should I – Robb Allen, former Marine, father of two children, pillar of the community (I don't even have a speeding ticket to my name) – be forced to disarm before walking over an imaginary line? Remember, I can legally carry around the same kids in the parking lot, at the playgrounds, at the little league games, etc. I am no threat to them in those places, why do you think I'm a threat in a school? Not someone else, me. Personally?

Because when you 'support' these laws, you support them against me. Not some nebulous 'bad guy', but me. So, man up and tell me to my face why I should be disarmed.

20. In Memoriam: A video of Jim Mullins in action [VIDEO]

Some video of my, then, counterpart, Jim Mullins of the West Virginia Citizens Defense League at a local government meeting. JIm, who had moved to Virginia recently, passed away a couple of weeks ago. Some memory-lane video for those who might have known him.

EM Ian Branson thoughtfully emailed me this:



21. Robbers follow Walmart shoppers home

Something similar was happening here in Chesterfield about 7 years ago, as I recall.

Deborah Anderson emailed me this:


This news story is about an armed robbery that took in Douglas County GA, and it serves as yet another example of why you'd better be prepared to be armed and ready to defend yourself, if you can. Georgia is a state that does allow folks to legally exercise their 2nd Amendment rights, and while the news article didn't state whether or not either of the two victims was armed, I tend to think that they weren't. Even if they weren't armed this time, though, hopefully they be willing and able do things differently in the future.

According to video footage, apparently a group of three "bad guys" stalked two female shoppers at a Walmart in Georgia, then followed the shoppers home and robbed them at gunpoint when they arrived back at their house. Although the victims were robbed (that's the bad part), thankfully they weren't injured or killed as a result (that's the good part).

But, there's also the ridiculous part in this whole news article. As a result of this incident, officials from that Walmart store have since announced that they've increased security in their parking lot. Oh really? Just exactly what good does increasing security in the parking lot do for any Walmart shoppers, if they're going to be held up when they get back to their own homes? Heck, I'd go so far as to say that even if Walmart (or any other entity, for that matter) hired enough security guards to be able to accompany each and every single individual home that still wouldn't solve the problem -- and possibly not even if each and every security guard was armed.

I believe that a false sense of security is quite pervasive throughout our society at large, and I further believe that it's statements/slogans in the vein of "we provide round-the-clock security" or "we've increased security" or "there's safety in numbers" (among others) which have helped to lead so many into buying into the big lie that you can rely on others to rise up to your defense. Quite to the contrary, the truth of the matter is that tragedy after tragedy has shown how easy it can be for just one armed "bad guy" to take down a whole lot of victims in a really short period of time (especially unarmed victims), regardless of how large a group there was -- and not even in the case of having security guards and/or police officers in very close proximity to the scene of a tragic event. All the more reason why we need to be armed, ready and able to defend ourselves, just in case we suddenly find ourselves in the midst of a "bad guy" situation.


Robbers follow Walmart shoppers home
by Paul Yates
August 17, 2012

DOUGLAS COUNTY, Ga. - The Douglas County Sheriff's Office says a group of robbers stalked shoppers at a Walmart and then followed them home.

A 55-year-old mother and her 32-year-old daughter went to the store on Thornton Road late Monday to buy groceries late one night. Authorities say that surveillance footage shows three men spot the woman in the checkout line and follow them out to the parking lot.

The two women were accosted at gunpoint a short time later after arriving back at their house.

One man demanded the contents of the women's pockets, according to Douglas County Sheriff's investigator Trent Wilson. She didn't have anything in her pocket, so the man then took a purse and left the house.

The victims were not injured.

Authorities said they were concerned about the aggressive use of a gun. They believe the men may have been involved in other crimes.

Security has been increased at the parking lot.

Anyone with information on the case is urged to contact the Douglas County Sheriff's Office.

22. Deaf preschooler asked to change the sign for his name - looks like a gun

In a recent article, the school system has finally backed down.

Greg Trojan emailed me this:


Phillip - One for the books on just how insane the antis are. While my psychiatric training as a Paramedic is somewhat limited, in my estimation the school officials are the ones that need a 30-day hold.


Grand Island Preschooler Asked to Change the Sign for His Name in School
by Steve Ross
August 24, 2012

Hunter Spanjer says his name with a certain special hand gesture, but at just three and a half years old, he may have to change it.

Petition letter on addressed to GIPS asking officials to let Hunter Spanjer keep his sign name.

"He's deaf, and his name sign, they say, is a violation of their weapons policy," explained Hunter's father, Brian Spanjer.

Grand Island's "Weapons in Schools" Board Policy 8470 forbids "any instrument...that looks like a weapon," But a three year-old's hands?

"Anybody that I have talked to thinks this is absolutely ridiculous. This is not threatening in any way," said Hunter's grandmother Janet Logue.

"It's a symbol. It's an actual sign, a registered sign, through S.E.E.," Brian Spanjer said.

S.E.E. stands for Signing Exact English, Hunter's sign language. Hunter's name gesture is modified with crossed-fingers to show it is uniquely his own.

"We are working with the parents to come to the best solution we can for the child," said Jack Sheard, Grand Island Public Schools spokesperson.

That's just about all GIPS officials will say for now.

Meantime, Hunter's parents say that by Monday, lawyers from the National Association of the Deaf are likely to weigh in for Hunter's right to sign his own name.

Despite whatever rules and regulations may exist, some Grand Islanders we spoke with said they don't think it's right to make a three year-old change the way he says his name.

"It's his name. It's not like he's going to bring a gun to school when he's three years old," commented Dana Schwieger.

"I find it very difficult to believe that the sign language that shows his name resembles a gun in any way would even enter a child's mind," Grand Island resident Fredda Bartenbach reflected.

But for now, that's a discussion between the Spanjers and Grand Island Public Schools officials.

23. Editorial: New man on campus, armed

In this editorial by an anti-liberty newspaper, gun control laws are "sensible," while concealed carry laws are "irresponsible." Gun owners don't carry guns, they "tote" them. And people like you and I are the blood-thirsty "gun lobby."

If anyone is irresponsible, it's the pen-toters at the New York Times! ;-)

Jackie Blundell emailed me this:



New Man on Campus, Armed
August 28, 2012

For more than 30 years, the University of Colorado has enforced a sensible policy banning guns from its campuses. The ban worked well until March, when the State Supreme Court agreed with a student's complaint that it violated a state law allowing citizens with "concealed-carry" permits to carry guns in public places.

This has left the university resorting to a new twist on its in loco parentis responsibilities — designating segregated housing this fall for students with gun permits. Gun-toting students 21 or older will be assigned to special housing on the Boulder and Colorado Springs campuses, where they must have safes to store their weapons when they are not carrying them. Or they can check them with the local police, Dodge City style. They will not be able to live in dormitories with younger students, but they will be allowed to carry their weapons around to classes or anywhere else, except to certain sports and cultural events.

This is true for students at all other public campuses in the state. No one knows how many might go packing in college halls, though estimates run into the hundreds.

The new dorm arrangements would not have been necessary if the State Legislature had not caved to the gun lobby and passed the irresponsible concealed-carry law in 2003. Similar laws are now in effect in 35 states. But the law seems particularly threatening in Colorado, which has had more than its share of shooting horrors, most recently the massacre in Aurora last month where 12 were killed and 58 wounded by James Holmes, who had been a graduate student at the University of Colorado, Denver.

Colorado citizens as a whole do not seem in thrall to the gun lobby. In a state referendum in 2000, 70 percent of voters approved closing the notorious gun-show loophole that permitted unrestricted gun sales beyond the reach of state registration. Would that the Legislature had exercised the same good sense and spared the public the threat of concealed weapons.

24. LAPD probes alleged sale of guns by SWAT officers

I'm glad that California citizens can legally purchase some of the types of guns they really want and not have to choose only from a rather bland list of guns on a roster. What is unfortunate is that the state has created an artificially closed-market where some guns are priced exorbitantly. But with a large profit incentive, police officers in their spare time are making otherwise prohibited guns available to Californians.

I would love to have been a fly on the wall when the California antis got wind of this one! I'll bet they ignore it, because otherwise they'll have to go after police owning and selling guns off duty. Most of the antis think that even the police shouldn't have guns (ala England), but are careful not to say so publicly. At least not yet. But if the antis ever reverse our gains against gun control, you can bet that off-duty police will end up on the gun-control chopping block. They pulled that in Texas for a couple of years in the mid-1970s for reserve officers and there have been some localities around the country that discouraged their officers from carrying off-duty.

Member Jay Minsky emailed me this:


Abuses of purchase programs can affect whether gun manufacturers continue to offer great purchasing deals by giving professional discounts to active duty law enforcement and military personnel.

California has a "roster" of handguns that are approved for import to the state via the usual FFL dealer inventory. Those handguns can be sold to mere California citizens. Handguns that do not make the roster are legal in California I am told, however they can be brought into the state via a FFL and sold from their inventory to only certain exempted people, such as police. If already in state and owned by an exempted person, it can be sold to mere citizens via what's called a "Private Party Transfer" (PPT for short). A PPT is not a "private sale" as most in free states know it, a PPT must go through an FFL.

This creates a closed market and greater demand for "off roster" handguns in California with significantly higher prices.


LAPD probes alleged sale of guns by SWAT officers
August 25, 2012

LOS ANGELES (AP) — The Los Angeles Police Department is investigating allegations that SWAT officers bought specially-made handguns and resold them at a significant profit.

It is the department's second probe since 2010 into the whereabouts of the .45-caliber guns, which featured an 'LAPD SWAT' insignia, the Los Angeles Times ( reported. An initial investigation was deemed "deficient" in a report by Inspector General Alex Bustamante.

Investigators want to know how many officers were involved, the number of guns sold and when the sales were carried out. The allegations, if proven, could be a violation of federal firearm statutes and city ethics rules.

The Times said suspicion about the guns first arose in 2010, when a firearms inventory was ordered at the LAPD's Metropolitan Division, which includes SWAT.

The officer who carried out the count found that SWAT members had purchased up to 324 pistols from the gun manufacturer Kimber and were "possibly reselling them to third parties for large profits," Bustamante wrote in his report.

Kimber sold the guns to SWAT members for about $600 each — a steep discount from their resale value of between $1,600 and $3,500, the report said.

During the inventory, the officer also discovered that two companies not affiliated with the LAPD — Cinema Weaponry and Lucas Ranch Gun Sales — were involved in the transactions with Kimber. Unbeknownst to the gun manufacturer, Cinema Weaponry was involved in the purchase of the handguns, while Lucas Ranch Gun Sales was charging fees "for facilitating the transfer of the pistols from Kimber to officers," the Times said.

Jim Manhire, who owns Lucas Ranch, told the newspaper that the SWAT officers relied on him, as a registered gun dealer, to complete the state and federal registration process that must be done for all weapons. The firearms, he said, were purchased by the officers directly from Kimber and shipped from the manufacturer to Manhire. After he had registered the weapons, the officers picked them up, Manhire said.

Manhire could not recall how many officers had him register guns and was unaware whether the officers then resold the weapons. He denied that he was paid to register the guns, saying that he only received reimbursement from the officers for registration fees charged by authorities.

Cinema Weaponry is owned by Michael Papac, according to the state's business registry. Papac's name does not appear on LAPD employee rosters. He did not return calls from the Times seeking comment.

The LAPD's investigation is expected to be completed in about a month, Bustamante wrote in his report, which will be presented to the LA Police Commission on Tuesday.

25. Overreacting Washington police officer points shotgun at open carrier [VIDEO]

Matthew Carroll shared this:

From youtube:

Published on May 10, 2012 by usmcbess

Was burning some time on a walk in Washington. As usual I was openly carrying my Springfield Armory XD(M) .40 compact in my Blackhawk level III Serpa duty holster. I had a scary encounter with a state patrolman named Gibson. I know this is a passionate subject but please keep the comments profanity free!

26. Gun store owner opens fire on 3 burglars after they drove van through wall

Charles Losik emailed me this:



by Jason Howerton
August 29, 2012

The owner of the Guns and Ammo Gunsmith store in North Augusta, S.C. thought he was going to die tragically. Three men had driven a van into his store, executing what they hoped would be a quick "smash-and-grab" robbery.

Instead, they met owner Stephen Bayezes, who opened fire on the three intruders after the commotion set off an alarm, hitting each one at least once. He says he is not proud of what he was forced to do, but added sometimes "you've got to." The incident occurred on Aug. 9, but the owner says a set of tire marks on the store's floor and an unfinished wall are daily reminders of the night that he almost lost his life.

"It's a haunting thought. It literally is a haunting thought when you see the tire tracks, you hear the tires," Bayezes told WRDW-TV. "Everybody assures you that you just did what you had to do to protect your family. They say it'll heal over time, but when does time go away? It's something that nobody ever wants to do."

But he says he had no choice after he heard one of the robbers shout, "Shoot the mother f******!," followed by the sound of a gun cocking. "I mean, they would've shot me. In my mind, with no reservation. If that firearm had been loaded, I might've been a statistic."

With his fight-or-flight reflexes in full gear, Bayezes started shooting, striking all three men, killing one while the surviving two escaped. WRDW does not reveal the exact type of firearm the store owner used.

So, what happened to the two suspects? WRDW explains:

The Aiken County Sheriff's Office says Eddie Stewart and Franklin Robinson will be charged with burglary 1st, grand larceny and possession of a weapon during the commission of a violent crime. Both suspects are still in the hospital and will be taken into custody once they are released.

The Aiken County coroner says the third suspect, 20-year-old K'Raven Goodwin of Eastover, S.C., died from multiple gunshot wounds on Thursday morning.

The whole altercation took but one minute, he said. The burglars escaped with roughly 50 guns that night, however all of them have been returned safely.

"Is this something you ever wanna do in your life?" he asked. "No. Something you have to do? If you're forced to it, you've got to."

And even though he bested the would-be robbers, Bayezes still has nightmares about the horrifying incident.

"Two nights ago I thought I was getting shot by one of these perpetrators," he explained. "Woke up in a cold sweat. I mean I seen the bullet come out of the gun and shoot me. It's a nightmare."

To make sure he is always prepared for future burglary attempts, Bayezes said he has improved his security system — and we already know he has plenty of guns at Guns and Ammo Gunsmith.

"We're trying to protect everything again to try and stop this," he said. "We've enhanced security more, added more cameras, everything else you can do to the place. I mean, it's a fortress. How much more do you have to do to it to protect your livelihood?"

27. CHP holder shoots Dollar General robber in Florida


Update: Dollar General robbery suspect charged with murder
by Andrew Greenstein, Stephanie Brown, Rich Jones
August 28, 2012

JACKSONVILLE, Fla. — We've learned the identity of the man shot and killed while he was trying to rob a Dollar General Monday night.

The Jacksonville Sheriff's Office says a customer at the store on Dunn Avenue shot 22 year-old Rakeem Odoms three times when Odoms refused to hand over his gun.

Odom's partner, 19 year-old Aundre Campbell, fled the scene and has since been caught by police.

He faces a felony murder charge for Odom's death because it happened while he was committing a crime.

The 57-year-old grandfather who shot Odoms was doing some late-night shopping at the Dollar General store on Dunn Avenue when all of the sudden, two men stormed in and tried robbing it.

The shopper has a concealed weapons permit, and Lt. Rob Schoonover with the Jacksonville Sheriff's Office says the man wasted no time springing into action.

"There was a citizen who had a concealed firearms permit that was inside the store as a customer," says Lt. Schoonover. "He fired at the suspect, striking him and killing him."

Police have not released the name of the shooter and, as of right now, he is not facing charges.

VA-ALERT is a project of the Virginia Citizens Defense League, Inc.
(VCDL). VCDL is an all-volunteer, non-partisan grassroots organization
dedicated to defending the human rights of all Virginians. The Right to
Keep and Bear Arms is a fundamental human right.

VCDL web page: []
IMPORTANT: It is our intention to honor all "remove" requests promptly.
To unsubscribe from this list, or change the email address where you
receive messages, please go to: []

Modify Your Subscription:
Powered by Listbox:

No comments:

Post a Comment