Armed and Safe has an account of some of CNN’s past “reporting” in regards to so called assault weapons.
Category: Guns
Defense of Property, Round 2
We had a very good discussion in the last thread, where I responded to Jeff Soyer’s piece on castle doctrine. I wanted to continue with some further thoughts. One thing I don’t want to be misunderstood about is that I do not think it is immoral, nor is it illegal, to use physical force to protect or recover property. Pennsylvania law recognizes this. Pennsylvania law basically stipulates that you may use as much physical force as you require to recover or protect your property, or to remove a trespasser, but you may not use deadly force to do this. Even Texas law doesn’t give you as much leeway as many people believe. Under the Texas Penal Code Title 2, Chapter 9, Sec 42:
A person is justified in using deadly force against another to protect land or tangible, movable property:
(1) if he would be justified in using force against the other under Section 9.41; and
(2) when and to the degree he reasonably believes the deadly force is immediately necessary:
(A) to prevent the other’s imminent commission of arson, burglary, robbery, aggravated robbery, theft during the nighttime, or criminal mischief during the nighttime; or
(B) to prevent the other who is fleeing immediately after committing burglary, robbery, aggravated robbery, or theft during the nighttime from escaping with the property; and
(3) he reasonably believes that:
(A) the land or property cannot be protected or recovered by any other means; or
(B) the use of force other than deadly force to protect or recover the land or property would expose the actor or another to a substantial risk of death or serious bodily injury.
Texas allows probably as much leeway in defense of property as any state, but it still limits the circumstances under which it can be used, which is why most Texas lawyers advise against using deadly force to protect property.
But physical force can be hazardous, because it requires close contact with a criminal. Several people suggested getting into a tuffle with a criminal is a bad idea, and I agree with that, which I why I suggested that job is best left to the police. That doesn’t mean I think it’s immoral to use physical force against a thief, quite the contrary, I think society should encourage that. But I stand by my belief that using deadly force to prevent petty theft is immoral, because you’re ending a person’s life over someone stealing a small piece of yours. Even if physical force is a risk, consider that if you were to have a police officer handy, he would use physical force to recover your property and take the offender into custody. I don’t consider is proper to ask someone else to put himself at risk on your behalf, when you would not be willing to do so yourself in his absence. That doesn’t mean I think one is obligated to chase down and recover the property yourself, but if the property means that much to you, I think you’re obligated to behave the same way a police officer would, under the same circumstances (in return, I think the state is obligated to give you the same benefit of doubt they’d afford a police officer in handling the situation).
Others suggested that there’s not much other recourse when the police won’t do anything about petty crime. I don’t believe that citizens should do nothing in these circumstances, but I do believe that they must act within the law. The law allows actions, including physical force, to be taken to recover or protect property; to undo the wrong that was done to you, or prevent the wrong in the first place. It does not allow you to seek retribution. That is something only the state may do. While I very much believe in citizen action to prevent crime, I do believe the state needs to have a monopoly on retribution for crimes. To that end, I believe it’s morally and legally wrong to use deadly force to protect property, when lesser force will do. Deadly force is for protecting life and limb, which I think everyone needs to be prepared to do. But I also believe in being prepared to use physical force. Whether that’s carrying OC spray, taking a martial art, or what have you.
I will never speak against citizens acting within the law to protect their own persons, property, and interests, but I’m not ever going to become an advocate for vigilantism.
UPDATE: Ahab has more.
She’s Outta There!
Gun owners in Northern Virginia rejoice. It would appear that Democrat Chap Petersen has creamed Jeanmarie Devolites Davis.  Also, Ken Cuccinelli appears to have eeked out a win.
For the rest of us, it’s a nice middle finger to Bloomberg. So Jeanmarie, who’s endorsement do you think was worth more? Bloomy’s or NRA and VCDL? Chap Petersen would do well to remember who helped him get elected, and other squishy Republicans like Rudy Guiliani and Mitt Romney would do well to remember gun owners get particularly annoyed with Republicans who double cross them.
Holy Hazmat Batman
I just noticed there’s a hazmat fee for shipping powder and primers, that amounts to 40 dollars for them to be each shipped separate from Midway. I can drive to Cabela’s for cheaper than 40 dollars!
CNN Follows in CBS’s Footsteps
Looks like CNN is busy printing Brady Campaign lies about “assault weapons” once again.
He lays the blame squarely on lawmakers who allowed the assault weapons ban to expire in 2004.
Designed to be fired from the hip, assault rifles such as the AK-47 can spray at a rate of up to 600 rounds a minute in full automatic mode. It is the weapon of choice for guerillas and gangsters.
I mean, why even bother to fact check? John Timony also makes an appearance, once again.
Re-Enacting a Crime in New Jersey
“Technically anyone who carries an operable firearm without a carry permit at re-enactments is in violation of New Jersey gun law,” said Mueller, adding that the Wild West City case “is a perfect example of what could happen. It’s dangerous.”
During a dramatization at the Dodge City theme park on July 7, 2006, a bullet struck re-enactor Scott Harris, 37, in the forehead and caused severe brain damage. Harris is still recuperating from the injury.
It is generally illegal to carry a gun without a permit, although there is a laundry list of exceptions. Historical re-enactments and film, television or theatrical productions are not among those exceptions. Existing law has not been strictly enforced regarding re-enactments and entertainment productions, they said.
New Jersey already closed the “musket loophole” so it’s technically illegal to tool around an old battlefield re-enacting the Battle of Monmouth. Remember that guns are illegal in New Jersey. You can only possess them under certain enumerated exemptions, and re-enacting is not one of them.
Gun Show Misrepresentation
Aside from the fact that the Brady’s link to few verifiable facts in their latest tirade against gun shows, we can point out at least a few problems:
Remember: unregulated gun show sales are how Eric Harris and Dylan Kleybold got their guns before they murdered 12 and wounded 22 others at Columbine High School.
I know you guys aren’t going to believe this, but the Brady’s statement here is is completely misleading.
Several months before the Columbine massacre, the killers obtained firearms from two suppliers. The first was a 2-year-old Columbine graduate named Mark Manes (ironically, the son of a longtime Handgun Control, Inc., activist). Manes bought a pistol at a gun show and gave it to the two killers (who were under 18 at the time).
Colorado law prohibits giving handguns to juveniles, with certain exceptions, and Manes is currently serving time for this offense in a Colorado prison. The second supplier was an 18-year-old fellow student at Columbine, Robyn Anderson, who bought three long guns for the killers at a Denver-area gun show in December 1998.
Both Manes and Anderson were lawful gun purchasers and could legally have bought the guns from a firearms dealer at a gun store, a gun show, or anywhere else.
What the Brady’s want to do here is to villainize gun shows, which, because none of us can buy firearms over the Internet, are really the only way people can generally find what they are looking for without going to 20 different gun stores. At least 1/3rd of my collection was purchased at a gun show. The private sale issue has nothing to do with gun shows, and they know it.
… bought an arsenal of his own, “including a Sten submachine gun, a Ruger Mini-14 rifle, two pistols and a hunting rifle.â€
No one is buying off the books unregulated submachine guns anywhere and not violating some very serious federal laws. They know that too.
The Aging Shooting Sports
By all indications, the shooting sports are growing, with the exception of hunting, which has been in decline. But every time I go attend an event at my shooting club, I can’t help but wonder something: “Where the hell are all the young people?” Where are the guys in their 20s and 30s? If I go to a public range, I typically see a good mix of the young and the old. Same if I go to my local indoor range.
But all the club events I’ve gone to, it’s been like a geriatric festival. Are young people not into shotgun sports, silhouette or high power? What can we do to get young people more involved at the shooting sports and into shooting clubs?
I’m not sure I have the answer, but I suspect the reason is that the barrier to entry for a lot of these clubs is high. You typically have to know someone, and go through a process of being inducted into the club. I think if we’re to be evangelical in our enthusiasm for the shooting sports, we have to work on ways to lower barriers to entry.
I think our club actually does a pretty good job in this regard, and we’re not hurting for membership, but it’s discouraging to think that a lot of the shooting sports are aging, and young people don’t seem to be stepping up. I know the young shooters are out there, but I think a way must be found to bring them into the traditional shooting sports.
Fun Toys I Can’t Have
Traction Control has a cross between an American 180 and an AR-15, called the AM-15, that looks like a fun toy. Check out how long it can sustain fire on the video.
No Billed
Dave Hardy informs us that a 21 year old man in Richmond, who shot a fleeing armed robber, won’t be facing charges. The grand jury refused to hand down an indictment in the case. Said the prosecutor:
“When the adrenaline is pumping and you’re scared, you weigh fear differently than when you’re behind your desk,” he added.
Still, the prosecutor said he had no regrets about presenting the case.
“This is an indication that the system works,” he said.
Pennsylvania doesn’t use grand juries, except in cases where the crime spans more than one county. It bothers me our state is lacking this key check on governmental power. I agree with the prosecution that this is an indication that the system works; the grand jury did the right thing.
I think it’s worth it for me to put up another post tomorrow discussing the defense of property issue, as it generated some good comments, and I want to clarify a few things. I do believe crime victims should be given a wide benefit of doubt when it comes to defending themselves from criminal attacks. I’m glad the jury was understanding.