2011 – Page 143 – Shall Not Be Questioned

More on Bean Bags

Looks like the Department of Homeland Security is responding that border officers also have plenty of lethal firepower available to them:

“When the suspected aliens did not drop their weapons, two Border Patrol Agents deployed ‘less than lethal’ bean bags at the suspected aliens,” Hunter wrote. “At this time, at least one of the suspected aliens fired at the Border Patrol Agents,” striking Terry, Hunter wrote.

The question would be what are the protocols? To me, once the officers noticed that the suspects were carrying rifles, bean bags should have been off the table. No one carries a rifle unless they are anticipating trouble. At that point, they should have been ready to return rifle fire as soon as they announced police presence to the suspects. That they were not is either a problem with training or protocol. Simply saying they had lethal options available to them tells us nothing of what they were trained to do in this situation. That’s the question that needs to be answered.

Gun Show Non-Loophole

I was concerned when I saw the headline here, but it was a legal sale through an FFL. If this says anything about what our gun policy should be, I don’t know what that is. I would expect our opponents to try to exploit this, because he could have purchased this in a private sale, after all.

Don’t Take Beanbags to a Gunfight

Congressman Ted Poe is questioning the border patrol policy that helped lead to the death of Agent Terry.

Freebie Friday – Leather Goods

It’s not really free, but I got a shareable coupon code from J.W. Hulme today for anyone who might be able to put it to good use. Use the purchase code luck1876 to get $50 off any purchase of $250+.

A few years ago, I bought Sebastian a shell pouch for use when he was shooting trap. It’s beautiful leather, and when I noticed a minor error, the customer service was amazing. They have gun cases, shell bags, and dog collars for all of your sporting needs. They also have luggage (including a carry-on I would love), handbags, and gift items. In the event you’ve been looking for some higher-end quality gifts, I figured I’d give a chance for people to save some money.

ATF Has Some Competition

The Mayor of a New Mexico town, and his police chief, have been indicted on charges of illegally trafficking firearms to Mexico.

Gun Owners Stereotypes

From Cracked.com.

Pay Toilets on Airlines

From my FlightAware newsletter, comes this amusing story. This took some planning, and a huge pair of brass balls. You can imagine the types of people who fly with millions of dollars in cash in their luggage. This guy is probably very lucky the police caught him first.

New Language

I can indeed find some new language in this year’s castle doctrine, as opposed to last year, but so far I don’t see anything that should give us cause to withdraw support for the bill or seriously worry ourselves:

(2.3) Â An actor who is not engaged in a criminalÂ activity, WHO IS NOT IN ILLEGAL POSSESSION OF A FIREARM andÂ who is attacked in any place where the actor would have aÂ duty to retreat under paragraph (2)(ii), has no duty toÂ retreat and has the right to stand his ground and use force,Â including deadly force, if:

The section in all caps is new. For most of us who are carrying firearms legally, this isn’t an issue.

(2.4) Â THE EXCEPTION TO THE DUTY TO RETREAT SET FORTH UNDER PARAGRAPH (2.3) DOES NOT APPLY IF THE PERSON AGAINST WHOM THE FORCE IS USED IS A PEACE OFFICER ACTING IN THE PERFORMANCE OF HIS OFFICIAL DUTIES AND THE ACTOR USING FORCE KNEW OR REASONABLY SHOULD HAVE KNOWN THAT THE PERSON WAS A PEACE OFFICER.

This is new in this section. Without context it’s hard to explain, but I will try. In last year’s bill, you could not use the presumption set fourth that deadly force is justified against someone unlawfully and forcefully entering your home if that person was a peace officer performing his official duties. In a way it’s kind of redundant, because presumably a peace officer is lawfully entering a home, and if a peace officer were unlawfully entering a home, then that wouldn’t be part of his official duties, would it? This years bill adds that same provision to anywhere you have a legal right to be. My opinion is this is a feel good provision. Obviously a peace officer who’s in the process of, say, unlawfully raping a woman, isn’t “acting in the performance of his official duties.”

(d) Â Definition.–As used in this section, the term “criminal activity” means conduct which is a misdemeanor or felony, is not justifiable under this chapter and is ~~the proximate cause of~~ RELATED TO the confrontation between an actor and the person against whom force is used.

You can see where last year’s language was struck and replaced with the language in caps. This is probably the language being talked about by the DA’s association. My guess is they were concerned about the burden of proving proximate cause, rather than just having to prove a relationship between the crime and the need to use deadly force, which is a clearer standard. I don’t seriously object to this change.

The rest of the bill is identical to last years, including the civil immunity provisions. My feeling is the changes promoted by the DA’s association are relatively minor and are a reasonable concession if in return they drop their opposition to the bill. The DA’s association no doubt came to the table because they realized something was likely going to pass this session, and decided it was better to get some minor concessions than continuing to tilt at windmills.

That has probably been why this bill has moved so quickly and been voted on so overwhelmingly. Without the DA association’s objections to ride on, opponents of Castle Doctrine don’t have much political cover for their opposition, so they caved. I think the changes outlined were small concessions to make in order to get this bill to move quickly and get cleanly through the legislature.

DA’s Association on Castle Doctrine

Looks like the DA’s association has softened their opposition, but the reason is worrisome:

Now, Marsico says the DAâ€™s Association is working with, and not against, Republican lawmakers, in an effort to change the billâ€™s language. New language the group helped craft would only eliminate the duty to retreat before firing if the other person is armed. â€œIt also provides that the individual who wants to avail themselves of the expanded doctrine cannot be engaged in any criminal activity,â€ he said. â€œAnd prior versions of the legislation put the onus on the prosecution to prove there was no criminal activity. Weâ€™ve removed that with the current amendment.â€Â He outlined one more change: â€œThe other thing in the current amendment does is that it provides that if someoneâ€™s going to claim the expanded stand your ground doctrine, and they use a firearm in defending themselves, then they have to be legally in possession of that firearm. So weâ€™ve tightened the law a lot.â€

I will do my best to look into this, but this could be cause for concern. I need to look at this year’s and last year’s bills side by side, but I’m pretty sure most of what they are speaking of here is already a feature of last year’s bill, IIRC.

Mega Earthquake

Hits Japan. This hits close to me because our major partner, that we’ve worked with now for a number of years, is a Japanese company, fortunately located farther away from the earthquake epicenter than most other Japanese cities, and well out of the range of tsunamis. We’re trying to get in contact to make sure everyone over there is OK. Also of concern is Bitter’s grandmother in Honolulu, though the Pacific Tsunami Warning Center isn’t expecting anything major.