Tag: Gun Rights

F.Y.I. For Carry Permit Holders in Ramsey County

It appears that sheriff Bob Fletch of Ramsey County is rummaging through carry permit holder data to mine out addresses. He sent invitations to those in the country with carry permits for a fund raiser he was throwing. This potentially violates the law and certainly violates the trust of privacy between carry permit holders and the Ramsey Country Sheriff’s Office. Anyways the news bullitin is here.

I’m not sure if this is an actual violation of the law as I’m not very good at reading legalese but it certainly is a violation of confidentiality you expect from a sheriff’s office. If you’re a carry permit holder in Ramsey County and you received the invitation you should do some complaining.

Now That’s Just Funny

Two days ago I posted some stuff about a violent anti-gunner. Well I’ve learned some new things courtesy of Gun Nuts Media. First the violent coward was Rob Russell who ran for a seat in the House of Representatives. He lost, for reasons obvious to those who read what he stated.

Well the guys at Gun Nuts Media also found his blog. But it’s gone now; deleted by the author. I’m guessing it was due to people posting on his blog informing him that it’s not a good idea to make threats of violence against individuals, even if it’s on the Internet. I’m glad to see Mr. Russell listened to that advice and shut down his blog before he made any further threats that could land him in legal water.

I also want to mention that anybody who has be threatened by Mr. Russell should contact the authorities. After all you don’t want to wait for him to show up at your home and “punch your fucking face in.”

Update 2010-01-13 16:33: Walls of the City has screen captures and links to Google caches of the offending material. The post also helpfully lists the laws violated by Mr. Russell. The fact that the Internet is forever is proven once again. Reasoned discourse at its finest.

Talk About Low as You Go

Via Gun Nuts Media we get some of the lowest of the low from a “respected news source.” In this case we have an editorial writer comparing those of us with handgun carry permits to sex offenders:

Say, for example, you want to find out whether there are any convicted child molesters living in your neighborhood. You have young children, and like any good parent, you look up the information on available Web sites. Your research uncovers several living in your neighborhood. If you want to know whether they have permits to carry a gun, you can get that information. This bill, however, would prohibit that information from being made known.

Let’s step back a minute. First of all if a person is in a sex offender registry they have most likely committed a felony meaning they won’t be in the carry permit holder database. Second the implications of comparing law abiding citizens with clean records to child molesters is sickening. Just think about that for a minute. They are implying that those of us who hold permits to carry handguns are in the same class as those who have molested a child. A child molester is one of the most hated people in the country, they don’t even have a good life expectancy in prison because the prisoners hate them.

Of course the news paper wasn’t satisfied with just doing that. Let’s throw in the possibility of racism:

It also will be nearly impossible to find out whether police or other members are denying permits to legitimate applicants, maybe because of race or names that might denote a Muslim background, for example.

Oh OK I guess having a database of permit holders is OK because it will help fight racism. That makes so much sense. Except it doesn’t. This pretty much states that if you support keeping the names of those with carry permits secret you’re racist. At the moment that’s the gold card for those who don’t agree with you, accuse them of racism.

Let’s look at what the actual problems with publishing these names are. First and foremost there are people out there who obtain a carry permit for protection against a known potential threat. Often time these permit holders want their address kept secret so the potential threat can’t find them. Likewise many permit holders carry concealed because they don’t want people knowing they have a gun. See it’s a lot easier to survive a self defense situation if you have the element of surprise. It takes time, however brief, to for the human brain to deal with surprising criteria and that time could save your life. On the other hand if a criminal were targeting you or your family they would likely check to see if you had a carry permit and adjust their tactics as necessary. I’ll not even get into the whole shit storm of marketing people using the database as a mailing list.

Finally the author states the following:

As for allowing journalists access to generalized data: That information is useless. About all that could be gleaned is how many permits were issued and in what city or county — maybe.

Obviously the author doesn’t understand the wonderful world of data mining. A surprising amount of information can be derived from a little amount of data. From a person’s address you can theorize, quite accurately, their wealth (If they life in a upper class neighborhood for instance), the potential of having a family (A larger home often implies family versus an apartment), the car they drive (Parked out front often), and the hours they keep (Through observing their house and watching the times they come and go). This is just the icing on the cake obviously.

But the author obviously has a disconnection from reality as he thinks carry permit holders are in the same class of concern as sex offenders.

The bottom line is the anti-gun crowd love this database because it discriminates against gun owners gives reason for people to not obtain a carry permit (Personal information being published). An open database of carry permit holders has nothing to do with public safety and everything to do with social control.

Impossible Shooting in Japan

This is impossible. There was a shooting in Japan. How can this be? They have some of the strictest gun control laws on the books combined with a police state. It’s also like the anti-gunners are wrong or something. From the story:

At least two people have been killed and two others injured when a gunman opened fire at a bar in western Japan, officials say.

Well I guess we’re back to the real world again where gun control doesn’t prevent violence. Instead criminals will get firearms and those who are disarmed due to obedience of the law will simply find themselves as targets unable to defend themselves. Haven’t there been enough examples of gun control failures to show it doesn’t work yet? Oh and to make a point:

Police are investigating the gunman’s motive. Shootings are rare in Japan, where there are tough gun control laws.

Such attacks are often linked to gangsters known in Japan as yakuza.

Yes shootings are rare in the police state of Japan but those that do occur are linked to *gasp* criminals! I’m noticing a pattern here.

Beautifully Put Post About Felons and Guns

I have to give Robb Allen some serious props here. He wrote a great post about felons and gun ownership. Much like myself he opposes stripping a person of their second amendment rights just because their a felon. Not because he wants to see felons with guns but because felonies are a joke now, not limited to serious crimes.

As I’ve stated before I’m a fan of you do the crime you do the time. Once you’ve done the time that’s it, your punishment should be over. With that said if you’ve done a seriously horrible crime you should received an equally horrible punishment. In other words if you murdered several people in cold blood you shouldn’t be seeing the light of day again. On the other hand if you wrote a bad check over $500.00 you shouldn’t have your rights stripped from you.

If somebody is perceived as a danger to society to such an extent it is desire to bar that person from obtaining weapons, why is that person out of prison?

Those Progressives Sure Are a Violent Bunch

For all the claims of loving peace and hating violence those progressives (Not to be confused with liberals.) sure like their violence. Walls of the City shows us what one of these progressives had to say about carry permits:

You, however, have demonstrated considerable irresponsibility in your arguments and in your personal attacks on this blogger, who also happens to be my wife. Send me your home address and I’ll come to your house and punch your fucking face in. Unless you are a pussy who can’t fight without a gun in his hand.

Yes apparently this particular progressive seems to find guns a pussy’s weapon. But if you’re not a pussy he’s willing to come to your home and punch you in the face. My question is why is he only willing to come over to somebody’s home and punch the person in the face if that person doesn’t have a gun? Oh wait I remember now because violent attackers don’t like armed resistance. I want to thank the person who made that comment for reaffirming two things. Progressives are violent and why I own guns.

Never Let a Crisis Go to Waste

Apparently that’s also Bloomberg’s motto. His group Mayors Against Illegal Guns has ever so graciously “released” their Blueprint document that anybody following gun blogs has already read through. As Snowflakes in Hell states:

How nice of him. I guess since we already made it public, he can pretend like transparency was his plan all along.

Smooth one there Bloomy, take the problem of somebody obtaining that document and turn it into a an opportunity.

Two Schools of Carry Permit Holders

In the world of carry there are always two or more schools of thought on each subject. Right now I want to talk about the two schools of though pertaining to the potential court case after a self defense shooting. It seems to me not enough people take this into consideration. Everybody can talk ages about what type of ammunition is best, what is the best carry gun, what is the best holster, but very seldom do I hear a conversation about what are the best practices to avoid getting yourself thrown in jail afterwards.

The two schools of thought are generally those who believe worrying about a court case isn’t something you should waste time at. The idea is in a self defense situation you do anything you have to do in order to preserve you life regardless of the legalities and potential court case afterwards. The other school of thought is to based almost everything you do on what would reflect best in a court case.

I’m certainly of the second school of thought. I avoid carrying reloaded ammunition because a lawyer could jump on that, I don’t make any non-factory approved trigger modifications to a carry gun, etc. So I’m going to talk a little bit about such things and why I think what I think.

First of all let’s talk about carrying reloaded ammunition. I’ve not heard of a court case where somebody has been nailed to the wall for carrying reloaded ammunition but it certainly is something that could be used. The idea is a prosecutor could say you intended to kill your target by loading specially craft ammunition that exceed the performance capabilities of commercial ammunition. It’s stupid but then again prosecutors live to my the jury feel resent towards the accused. The best defense you can have is ask what you local police department use and use it. At least that way if the persecutor asks you why you carry what you carry you can clearly state because that’s what the police department carries. More or less carrying commercial self defense ammunition is an easy way to avoid a potential avenue of attack.

Next up trigger. This argument has been used before in court to prosecute people. See many people like to do trigger work on their guns to make the trigger lighter. This is especially common when the person learned to shoot on a single action platform like the 1911 where the trigger weight is very light. There is nothing wrong with wanting a lighter trigger, unless you’re sitting in court. Prosecutors love to nail people to the wall for whatever they can get. They might not be able to say you murdered a person but they certainly can say you made a mistake and get you with a manslaughter charge. The mistake? Accidentally pulling the trigger. In a stress situation fine motor skills go out the door. You become less aware of things. The prosecutor’s idea here is that your trigger was so light that you pulled it without realizing it while aiming at the attacker, thus firing accidentally. To further add frustration to the case the prosecutor can bring in an engineer from the pistol manufacturer who will state they advise against having such a light trigger. For instance Glock clearly states that their 3.5 pound connector is for competition and target use only (Although I think they make an exception if you pair it with a NY1 spring). The only trigger modification you should make to a carry gun are ones approved by the factory for defensive uses. Likewise if you carry a revolver carry one that is double action online. You don’t want to allow the prosecutor to claim you pulled the hammer back setting the stage for a negligent shooting.

Next potential legal battlefield you could be facing is around your caliber. A poor Arizona man was nailed this way because he was carrying a 10mm. The charge was crap but the prosecutor was able to connivence the jury the accused intended to kill and that is the only reason he carried such a powerful round. My advice to to carry a round that some police department has issue. 9mm, .40 S&W, .45 Auto, .38 Special, .357 magnum, and .357 SIG would all be safe choices.

What else do you have to watch out for? What you post online. Make no mistake nothing you post online is private. A smart prosecution team will do searches on your names and try to find websites you visit and post on. If they find a Facebook posting made by you stating something like, “I plan to kill anybody who attacks me” rest assured they will use it against you. Be careful with your words online. What you may think is harmless could come back and bite you in the ass later. Never advocate violence against somebody. If somebody asks for ideas on the best caliber to kill an attacker don’t post a reply. Make it clear that in a self defense situation you want to stop the attacker, not kill them. Just remember there is nothing confidential on the Internet.

A way to help yourself out in court is how you hand a self defense situation. Don’t risk your life for this but if there is any possibility loudly (Yelling voice here) tell your attacker to back off. Why? Because this way you will most likely attract the gaze of anybody around which means witnesses. The more witnesses your have the better in this case. They can come before the court and say you told the attacker to back off, drop their weapon, get away, whatever. In other words you attempted to resolve the situation without resorting to legal force. This is just something to help you out.

Finally have the name and number of a lawyer who has knowledge in the field of self defense shooting. Of course establish a dialog with the lawyer first so they know who you are. Not knowing who to call after a self defense situation is not a good thing. You should know who you are going to call beforehand.

So don’t just plan for a self defense situation, also plan for the aftermath. The court case could very well be worse than the self defense situation itself if you get tossed in prison for the remainder of your life.