Let’s Talk About Timing

This comment, one of many like it, regarding the Michael Brown shooting in Ferguson Mo. really shows that the writers spend way too much watching television legal dramas and cop shows.

The fact that the Ferguson Police didn’t release a police report until weeks after the incident, which was full of redactions, and under pressure from the Department of Justice leaves a bad taste in everyone’s mouth.

 

 

I will be one of the first people to get onto police departments about releasing information; all too often they decide what the people ‘needs to know’ instead of freely releasing information. But in this case I really don’t think the criticism is warranted.
Turn it around — let’s say it was Michael Brown under suspicion of murder; how many people would want information released the next day, eh?

Part of the blame for this is the unfair consideration given to the timing of an officer making a statement. Many jurisdictions allow an officer 2 or 3 days to make an official statement. Somehow I just don’t see those same officers giving you or I that much time before we wandered in to make an official statement. Nor do we get to review the official videos, transcripts, etc before making our statements.

That said –  is it fair to take 7 days to release a police report on the shooting? Absolutely. Make sure you get the facts straight, make sure the information hasn’t been misunderstood (Can anyone say NBC and “effing coon”?) — this goes for both sides of the equation. I don’t want the police casting blame on someone who doesn’t deserve it and I don’t want the police being tried in the press — by the government statements at least. We can’t stop the race-baiters and media outlets from doing that but we can control what the government does.

We have enough reasons for criticizing the government; let’s not make up more especially when it just stirs people up with imagined slights.

Please join the discussion.

 

 

 

 

Still Less Than A CHL

Mike Norman, opinion writer at the Star-Telegram, is whining about the Voter ID law. If anyone has been following the law in the media, you know it has been a confusing tale. One court strikes it down, another re-instates it. It’s been going back and forth at the legal equivalent of a ping pong match.

In fact, U.S. District Judge Nelva Gonzales Ramos of Corpus Christi found the requirements “draconian” and ruled last week that the voter ID law passed by the Legislature in 2011 discriminated against African-American and Hispanic voters.

And, according to the evidence in a nine-day trial, that’s what the Legislature wanted.

The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals brushed those findings aside — didn’t even address them — on Tuesday in ruling that because voting is just days away, the state should be allowed to enforce its voter ID rules as planned.

And to be frank, I am very conflicted on whether or not I want the courts to strike this down.
Oh, don’t get me wrong. I think having to show ID is a good idea. This is a right that only exists because a person is a member of the polity; so showing proof of that is not violating a fundamental right.

Where I get my confusion is how we, gun owners and pro-rights supporters, could use the case.

 

It’s not hard to get the proper ID, proponents say. But evidence showed that for hundreds of thousands of Texans — disproportionately, African-Americans and Hispanics who are poor — it is difficult.

For them, the travel time to the nearest Department of Public Safety office to get a free ID card is 90 minutes or more. When they get there, they must have the proper documentation, which typically includes a certified copy of their birth certificate.

If they were born in Texas and can make an in-person visit to the proper records office and know how to ask for it, they can get a birth certificate for the cut rate of $2 or $3.

If they need to get it by mail, need to correct errors in their certificate, were not registered at birth or need a certificate from another state, the cost is at least $22 or as much as $47.

Those costs led the judge to declare the new voter ID law an unconstitutional poll tax, although that was not the primary focus of the trial.

Emphasis mine in the above paragraph. I looked up Taxi cab rates in the Dallas Fort Worth area and assumed about 60 miles travel in 90 minutes round trip. At $2.25 for initial charge and $1.80 per mile; that works out to about $110. Add in the $3 charge in person cost to get a Birth Certificate and round up to about $115 dollars.

Still less than the basic costs of a Concealed Handgun License at $140. Plus the $10 for the fingerprints, something the Voter ID does not require. Plus the $10 or so for Photos. Plus the $35 to $150 dollars for the class, Plus the $5 Proficiency Test fee. Even if we double the costs for the taxi instead of bus fare or getting a friend to take the person to get their birth certificate — it still is less burdensome than getting a Concealed Handgun License. And let’s not forget that each and every applicant for a CHL has to have a valid form of photo identification already !!!!!!

 

In fact, U.S. District Judge Nelva Gonzales Ramos of Corpus Christi found the requirements “draconian” and ruled last week that the voter ID law passed by the Legislature in 2011 discriminated against African-American and Hispanic voters.

Hence my dilemma. If it is based on cost and burden; it should be clear that having to get a license to carry in public would have a greater impact on African-American and Hispanic voters. But of course that assume the judge trying the case would apply the law in a logical, rational and consistent basis. Most of the time I haven’t seen that happen when we are talking about restrictions on 2nd Amendment issues.

 

I think that the legislation will get around, eventually, to making Open Carry legal with a license. Then it is a short stride from there (huge hurdle but small step) to Constitutional Carry. So I’m not putting too much hope on the courts forcing the Legislation to act.

So how do the 3 or 4 people still reading this feel? Should we require a photo id for voting? Do you support the courts striking down or keeping the Voter ID law?

But Remember “Gun Death” Is THE METRIC

for the anti-rights cultists like Moms Demanding Attention or Bloomberg’s Illegal Mayors Against Guns.

The over-prescribing of painkillers is fuelling nearly 17,000 annual deaths from overdoses in the United States as well as a rise in heroin use, according to a study released by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention on Thursday.

The CDC reviewed 2010-2012 mortality data from 28 states to measure rising fatal heroin overdose rates and determine how the increases were tied to prescription painkillers.

The study found that the death rate from heroin overdoses doubled during that two-year span to from 1 to 2.1 deaths per 100,000 people, while deaths from prescription opioid drugs overdoses declined from 6 to 5.6 deaths per 100,000.

17,000 annual deaths is about the same as firearm related suicides and about double the number of firearm related homicides– but as friend Weer’d Beard says ‘Hey, but only “gun Deaths” count!

The Homicide rate is 4.7 per 100,000 people. If the antis were really interested in saving lives; I would suggest they start focusing on this. Of course we know that isn’t their goal.

 

Importance of Communicating

Wow…..this video is a little tough to watch because it a.) shows the shooting, b.) shows a cop who shots very quickly and c.) illustrates the dangers we face, especially those of us who carry.

 

.

.

First, I’m not saying the victim, the driver, did anything wrong. Definitely could have, should have done one very important thing much better — communicate to the officer. Letting the officer know “My license is in my wallet which is on the seat/in the console/etc” might have prevented this. NOT saying he is at fault though.

 

I understand how much stress is involved in being a cop; I want to make the process as stress free as possible so I don’t make any sudden moves. I try not to do anything that could be misinterpreted and IF I think there is a chance, I’m going to inform the officer before hand. Yes, I’m speaking from experience. I have something of a lead foot; been stopped several times for speed violations. Deserved them so I’m not complaining. I just recognize especially as someone with a Concealed Handgun License the factors involved in a traffic stop. I think people can get conflicted by the “don’t say anything to the cops” mentality and the desire not to give too much information to the police. I don’t advocate saying anything to the police other than what you are doing or better – what you are going to do before you do it.
Don’t explain anything you don’t have to, don’t volunteer information unrelated to the exact action you are doing or need to explain regarding the interaction.

I really believe this video is a great anecdote that shows how too many officers view the people they are sworn to protect — as enemies out to kill them. Not every person they encounter is out to kill them. This guy was just following the command as fast as he could. Instead of interpreting that behavior as it was; the officer saw it completely differently. I’ve talked about this often enough here, I don’t think I need to dwell on it too much more.

It happens and will continue to happen until we make departments and officers change.

 

Please join the discussion.

 

Why Carry At Kroger?

Because crime can happen even there.

.

.
A 25-year-old man said he was attacked by the group as he walked to his car. Two Kroger employees, 17 and 18, ran to help the man. Both were repeatedly hit in the head and face.

The teens told police pumpkins “in excess of 20 pounds” were thrown on their heads while they were on the ground.

Police say both teens lost consciousness.

Eventually, a security guard stopped the attack.

So Shannon Watts until human nature evolves to such a point where attacks like this don’t happen; please stop trying to restrict our right to protect ourselves, eh.

Contrast that attack with this one from Wisconsin where a violent gang of teens encountered someone carrying a concealed firearm.

 

.

.

Never forget that Moms Demanding Action want every single one of us to be unarmed when faced with similar situations.

 

Please join the discussion.

Question for the Antis — What Should She Have Done?

Darn — the 911 call starts off in auto-play. Didn’t realize it when I snagged it.

 

Please look below the fold for a (hopefully) interesting Defensive Gun Use — and a question that I’m still waiting for the antis to answer.

 

Continue Reading

Judge and Jury Apparently

I knew the anti-rights cultists would push the idea that every gun owner is a criminal in disguise  ”  I’ll tell you why.  All a “law abiding citizen” really is, is a previously unconvicted felon waiting to commit his first crime”. but sometimes you think they would give a person the benefit of the doubt.

Joan Peterson Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence board Member, co-president of the Northland Chapter of the Brady Campaign, President of  Minnesota Million Moms March, Spokesperson for Protect Minnesota ; aka Japete doesn’t seem to want to cut Will Hayden any slack though.

Under the category of- “you can’t make this stuff up” comes yet another “good guy with a gun” doing something so heinous that he was arrested. This gun guy has been raping his young daughter for years. Stories like this should alarm us all. This man is not a “good guy with a gun” though he has been posing as one. Disgusting to say the least. From the article:

No mention that it is just an accusation at this stage. That no evidence has been heard, no defense presented — nope this “gun guy has been raping” — and “this many is not a ‘good guy with a gun’  – she’s already made up her mind regardless of the facts.

Now I don’t know if he is guilty or not; until the trial is over he has the presumption of innocence or at least should.

This is really indicative of the gun grabber mentality; mere accusation, any reason is sufficient to smear someone they disagree with.

Nor are they too concerned with the accuracy either

School is starting all over the country. Let’s talk about arming teachers. Texas passed a law after the Sandy Hook shooting allowing teachers to carry guns in schools.

Texas state law did change recently but it was a specific law the “School Marshal” program.

But for a very long time; it has been legal for staff, teachers, or other to be armed on school property.

Sec. 46.03. PLACES WEAPONS PROHIBITED. (a) A person commits an offense if the person intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly possesses or goes with a firearm, illegal knife, club, or prohibited weapon listed in Section 46.05(a):

(1) on the physical premises of a school or educational institution, any grounds or building on which an activity sponsored by a school or educational institution is being conducted, or a passenger transportation vehicle of a school or educational institution, whether the school or educational institution is public or private, unless pursuant to written regulations or written authorization of the institution; (empahsis mine – Bob S.)

Harrold Independent School, for example, has authorized employees to be armed since 2007. Hardly a case of Texas changing the law after Sandy Hook. Guess Joan is too busy to figure out such details, eh. That law has been in place, as near as I can tell, since 1974.  2 decades prior to the passage of Concealed Carry. So why doesn’t Joan Peterson want to focus on the recent law? To hide the fact that decades of experience have taught us trusting the people in schools with firearms hasn’t been a problem.

 

Really makes me wonder why the antis can’t seem to get the facts straight. Maybe they don’t want to — maybe they think their goal is too important to risk telling the truth. In which case, I ask — can we trust them when they say they only want ‘reasonable restrictions”?

Please join the discussion.