Guns – Page 524 – Shall Not Be Questioned

Swiss Keep Shooting, But For How Much Longer?

Swissinfo.ch notes that this vote was about national identity:

â€œA gun in the cellar has become a metaphor for a traditional, well-fortified and independent Switzerland,â€ said the St Galler Tagblatt, adding that an â€œexcellent marketing machineâ€ had stylised the gun debate as a question of national good or evil.

The Basler Zeitung agreed that the image of a â€œfortified Switzerlandâ€ had been evoked explicitly. â€œThe vote wasnâ€™t about having a weapon in your cupboard, but about Swiss identity as such,â€ it said.

Zurichâ€™s Tages-Anzeiger agreed. â€œFor broad sections of the population it was a question of national identity, of defending freedom and self-determination and of the fight against the nanny stateâ€.

Despite vast differences between the shooting culture in the United States and that in Switzerland, I believe we fight for the same reasons. These argument would be familiar to Americans (poster says “A monopoly on guns for criminals?”). This debate has never really had anything to do with guns themselves, except to our opponents. The question is, how long are the Swiss going to hold out?

Polling shows there was a generational gap in the voting. The Swiss shooting culture is linked very heavily to their militia system. Their militia system is something many younger Swiss, who have grown up in a much safer Europe than their parents and grandparents, believe is an anachronism. They may be willing to vote for heavier gun restrictions if they believe it will convince their fellow countrymen to abandon the militia system.

Such a move was not be so bad in this country, where the tradition of gun ownership outlasted our militia system falling into disuse. But would the Swiss shooting culture be able to survive the death of the militia system, as Switzerland also looks toward greater integration with the European Community? I have my doubts. Having a generation gap is never a good thing, and extricating the Swiss gun culture from their militia system might have to come sooner or later, if they are to preserve at least a semblance of their traditions.

Point-Counterpoint

Evan Nappen and Bryan Miller go head to head in the Asbury Park Press.

An Alarming Trend

Apparently more people legally acquiring firearms and enjoying the shooting sports is a cause for alarm across the pond. The Horror! Even children are joining in, apparently. Clearly something must be done.

James D’Cruz Dismissed from Case

He moved to Florida with his family, which pulls him off the case. He will be replaced by others. I guess he can return to being able to dress up for Halloween and quote books and movies without the Brady Campaign and CSGV shopping his Facebook entries around to the media.

Another Wisconsin Concealed Carry Case Tossed

They are quickly approaching Vermont carry judicially. I suspect Wisconsin is going to get fixed one way or another. All of these have been “as applied” though, so no court has yet tossed the entire concealed carry statute. A legislative fix is still preferable.

Important Gun Rights Bills Up in Florida

Robb Allen has the details, and is asking people to e-mail the committee members if you live in the Gunshine State:

In 1987, open carry was outlawed primarily because of the predictions of wild west shootouts, blood in the streets, gun battles over parking spaces, and normally law abiding people indiscriminately becoming homicidal maniacs. The main opponent of open carry was Janet Reno, then assistant state attorney. She was able to rally support from a vocal group of police administrators with the doom and gloom scenarios. Amazingly enough, the exact same arguments were heard against “shall-issue” concealed carry. Twenty-four years later, and none of the rampant bloodshed predictions about concealed carry have come true.

They are engaging in an effort to overturn the ban on carrying openly. Currently concealment in Florida isn’t a personal choice, it’s required by law.

Weak Case For High Capacity Magazines?

I guess the Steven Hunter op-ed hurt more than I realized, otherwise Josh Horwtiz wouldn’t have felt the need to respond to it. Our opponents need to explain the historical prevalence of magazines holding more than ten rounds, going all the way back to the Henry Rifle. They need to explain it since the bill they are currently pushing in Congress would see every historic Henry Rifle in this country destroyed within a generation.

More on Ung Defense

The Philadelphia Inquirer has their report on the Ung testimony. They note:

Keh said she approached the scaffolding as DiDonato’s friend Andrew DiLoreto was doing pull-ups. Keh said she tried to do a pull-up and was distracted by a loud argument.

She said she turned to see one of DiDonato’s group – she could not remember who – legs apart, hands gesturing to his crotch, yelling, “Well, come on!”

“What did you say?” was Ung’s reply, Keh said.

The Inquirer notes that we still don’t have any testimony that sheds light on what started it, but my guess would be DiDonato and his buddies started making rude gestures to Keh, which Ung took great exception to. Standing up for reasonable standards of public behavior is not invitation to a beating.

The Swiss Reject Stronger Gun Control

The referendum today would have been the beginning of the end of the Swiss shooting culture had it passed. Fortunately, they rejected it. The Swiss will still be able to keep army guns in the home. The vote was 56 against. But they will definitely, try again, I think:

The result is a blow for supporters – a broad coalition of NGOs, trade unions, churches, pacifists and centre-left parties.

But Alliance F, a leading women’s organization behind the vote, said progress had been made and the campaign had sensitised society to the gun control issue.

The “no” committee and Swiss army officers society welcomed the failure of the initiative, saying the people would not allow themselves to be disarmed.Â It was a clear vote for the army and protection, they said.

They will be back. You can bet on it.

Ung’s Friends Testify

It is unfortunate, or perhaps fortunate, that the media has lost interest in reporting this case, but Phillylacrosse.com is still on it. We now have testimony from Ung’s friends, who were with him that day:

â€œMy attention was on Eddie,â€ Afsarmanesctehrar testified. â€œIt was going fast and out of control. I had a feeling he was coming at us. Just my personal feeling

â€œI was really scared. At the last moment there was no way we could stop these kids from coming.â€

I have to hand it to both attorneys if they correctly pronounced that name every time :) More important I think is the testimony of the girlfriend that was with Ung.

Another defense witness, Joy Keh, who was with Ung and Afsarmanesctehrar, called DiDonato and his friends â€œa bloodthirsty gang.â€

She said she was extremely fearful because â€œthe white hat guy (Kelly) was about to sucker-punch Geraldâ€™s blind side. I blocked him. They were screaming and being aggressive; they wouldnâ€™t stop.

I heard (Kelly) scream, Iâ€™ll kill you; youâ€™re dead.â€ Then she testified she screamed back, â€œStop, youâ€™re a good person!â€ She claimed he rushed them again.

I seem to recall that one of DiDonato’s friend testified that she was flirting with them. Id like to know what kind of flirting makes a girl fearful. As far as I’m concerned Gerald Ung should walk, just based on this. You have five drunk, beefy athletic young men against two smaller guys and a girl, and the group of five have said “I’ll kill you; you’re dead?” What are the elements of a strong case for self-defense?

Ability? This means that the attackers have the means to inflict grave bodily injury or harm. Five guys that big can kill with their fists and feet, and more importantly can prevent flight.
Opportunity? Opportunity means they are in a position to inflict such force. They were in the process of rushing Ung. Ung was armed. He stupidly had told them so. Once the gun came out, he was charged by one of the parties. The party did not break the attack once the gun was displayed.
Jeopardy? This means that the attackers were acting in a manner where a reasonable person might assume they have intent to inflict grave bodily injury or harm. You have that right here: “I’ll kill you; you’re dead.” I’m not going to demand Ung find out whether they are kidding or not, especially when they do not break off the attack when the party being attacked is known to be armed.

I don’t think Ung had a choice if he didn’t want to end up in the hospital at the least. Maybe he did make a crack that provoked the five young men. That was his mistake. But that’s not an invitation to beat someone. The only thing left is whether he violated a duty to retreat. Ung was in the process of retreating when it escalated to physical violence. By the time he was being physically attacked, the girl was engaged with the guy in the white hat, and Ung was engaged with three other men. The law requires that all members of the party be capable of retreating to complete safety.

If Ung is found guilty, I’ll read the transcripts before I render final judgement. Some key bit of information might be missing from this testimony, and we only have bits and pieces. But from what I see here if he is found guilty it’ll be one travesty of justice. The others will be that DiDonato and his friends haven’t been charged with simple assault yet.