Self Defense – Page 14 – A Geek With Guns

Watch the Gun Control Advocates Jump for Joy

Opponents of Minnesota’s carry laws have been jumping up and down with joy over the news that a permit holder was robbed with his own firearm:

Police said an adult male was walking home in the area when a man, later identified as Merriweather, was walking the other way and suddenly slammed the victim into a parked car.

The victim hurt his arm and wasn’t able to defend himself. Merriweather allegedly searched the victim, eventually finding a pistol, and put it to the victim’s head while demanding valuables. The victim lost the gun and his wallet during the attack, police said.

A minor detail should jump out at anybody reading this article, the victim was incapacitated and thus unable to defend himself. The attacker was searching the victim when he found his firearm, then put the firearm to the victim’s head. It seems to me that the victim wasn’t robbed with his own gun, he was already being robbed before the attacker even came across the firearm. As it’s being reported you would think the attacker was able to wrestle away the victim’s firearm and decided, after gaining control of the weapon, to rob the victim. What actually happened is the victim would have been robbed either way, the attacker had already incapacitated the victim before he came across the firearm.

Either way, opponents of carry laws are absolutely ecstatic. The only way they could be happier is if the attacker and executed the victim because then the headline would read, “Carry permit holder murdered with own gun.” To them it’s irrelevant that it’s taken almost a decade for this to finally happen or that it’s the only case out of 100,000 permit holders. They’re just happy that their claim, “If you carry a gun it’s just going to be taken from you!” finally has some form of validation, no matter how weak it is.

What this story does demonstrate is that firearms aren’t magical talismen. The mere act of carrying one won’t protect you if you’re taken out of the fight before you can utilize it. It won’t stop somebody from blindsiding you, nor will be prevent you from being incapacitated. It’s merely a tool that increases the amount of force you can use to protect yourself.

According to Gun Control Advocates this Doesn’t Happen

A man with a carry permit in Utah managed to subdue a violent individual who had stabbed two bystanders:

A man stabbed two people at the Smith’s Marketplace grocery store in downtown Salt Lake City before being subdued by a bystander.

[…]

Police say a bystander with a concealed carry permit witnessed the attack and stepped in to keep it from escalating.

“(The bystander) was suspicious of what might be going on, and when he saw the stabbing, he just drew his pistol and challenged the individual,” which caused the alleged attacker to lie down on the ground, said Salt Lake City Police Lt. Brian Purvis.

By the time police officers arrived on the scene, the man was subdued and is now in custody.

According to gun control advocates this kind of situation should never happen. First they believe those of us who carry firearms are bloody thirsty monsters who are merely looking for an excuse to murder. In reality most of us are actually very peaceful and prefer to avoid violence. In this case a man carrying a gun was able to defuse the situation without the need for actually violence, presentation of the firearm alone was enough to make the stabber think twice about continuing his violent endeavor.

Second, proponents of gun control say only the police are qualified to carry firearm. What happens when the police aren’t there? The story doesn’t say how long it took for police to arrive but it was long enough for two people to get stabbed and another person to intervene and defuse the situation. Had that permit holder not been at the store it’s likely more people would have been stabbed. When a situation involving violence arises the most critical thing to be done is ending the situation as quickly as possible. The longer a violent individual is allowed to continue the more victims he or she can rack up.

Disarming individuals only makes it easier for the bad guys to reign supreme.

Give Them What They Want and They’ll Go Away

We hear advocates of gun control constantly repeat variations of the phrase “If you just give them what they want they’ll go away.” What happens when they want your life? From what I can tell about this recent murder in North Minneapolis that was the case:

A food delivery to a neighbor three blocks away turned deadly for Jody Lynmarvin Patzner Jr., 22, on Monday night when three boys confronted him as he biked on Fremont Avenue in north Minneapolis, according to family members and a witness.

The boys yelled at him that they wanted his bike, then shot at him twice, running away as Patzner continued to bike for 30 feet before collapsing on the sidewalk. He died moments later in the 3500 block of Fremont Avenue N. as neighbors along the street tried to help, according to a witness.

Three people approached Patzner, demanded his bike, shot him dead, and didn’t even take his bike. To me that shows this case had nothing to do with Patzner’s bike, the three punks were probably just looking for somebody to murder that night. From what the story states I must say Patzner did the right thing, unfortunately the right thing doesn’t always save you life:

A neighbor who said she witnessed the attack said the three assailants were walking on the east side of the street when they confronted Patzner, who was biking past.

“They was harassing him and stuff,” said the woman, who asked not to be identified for fear of retaliation. “He didn’t give them no feedback or nothing.”

“They said ‘Give me your bike … give me your bike …’ Pop! Pop!”

The assailants ran off as Patzner biked on, passing the witness before collapsing.

When the three punks began harassing Patzner he ignored them and continued on his way. In a situation like this I must say I’d have likely taken the same course of action. When you’re on a bike you’re far more mobile than persons on foot so if a situation looks bad it’s best to ride away as fast as you can.

The value of running is a topic often overlooked when discussing self-defense. A fight always carries the risk of bodily harm or death, so it is in your best interest to avoid fights whenever possible. Often it is not possible but if you’re in a position to be far more mobile than a potential attacker, whether by car or bike, it makes sense to run. I bring this up because several people have commented to me that this cased is why everybody should carry a gun.

While carrying a gun is a great way to increase your chances of survive an encounter with a violent attacker it’s not a magic talisman. Realistically, were Patzner armed, he would have had to come to a complete stop and dismount his bike in order to draw a weapon. In that span of time he could have easily been murdered by his assailants. Although I don’t like to speculate on self-defense situations as they’re are too many variables to know what the right course of action would be, I find myself thinking I would have taken the same course of action as Patzner were I in his position but armed. On a bike you have movement and it’s always best to be moving when in a self-defense situation unless you have appropriate cover available. Moving targets are harder to his but a target on a bike coming to a complete stop is an much easier target. The path a stopping bike follows is fairly predictable, usually it’s straight forward until the bike has come to a complete stop. Because of the ease of predicting the path a stopping cyclist will follow it’s easier to gun them down than if they keep moving, especially if they move erratically.

Unfortunately I don’t know if there was a way for Patzner to escape his fate that night, the situation just seems entirely bad. Had he stopped his attackers would likely have killed and moving away didn’t save his life either. From the details provided in the story I don’t believe being armed would have helped in either, the assailants had the element of surprise and motive to kill. Situations like this are important for those of us who carry to consider, because we may very well be in a situation where using our firearm may not be the best option available.

But Remember, Guns are Bad News for Women

Linoge over at Walls of the City likes to point out the absurdity of the common anti-gunner myth that guns are bad news for women. Chalk another one up to those bad news tools for women:

An armed 16 year old entered a FL convenience store, demanded money and began firing at the female clerk. The clerk is a concealed weapons permit holder and drew a gun carried on her person. The clerk fired at least one shot at the suspect, hitting him. The would be robber later died from his injuries. More info in the video below.

And there was also another recent story that demonstrates the dangers firearms hold for women:

“First he tried to grab it, but I jerked it away and fired,” she said. “So I really didn’t have time to aim.”

She said one of the men said, “Oh, hell no,” and they took off running up North Shamrock Street.

[…]

She said, “Every woman needs to get a concealed weapons permit and carry a gun, because it hadn’t been for that, I wouldn’t be here.”

So much for criminals taking her gun and using it against her. I’m glad enough stories like these finally being reported for the average person to see how full of it anti-gunners are.

You Can’t Rely on the Police

Those of us in the gun rights community say it time and time again; you simply can’t rely on the police. While a violent burglar is kicking down your door the police are outside setting up a perimeter :

The incident unfolded at about 11:40 p.m. in the 300 block of SE Fifth Street, as deputies responded to a report of someone roaming around the neighborhood acting strangely and banging on the walls and doors of homes.

As officers searched the neighborhood for the suspect, they heard a loud crash at a home down the street, said Cindy West of the King County Sheriff’s Office. At the same time, they received a 911 call from the owner of the home saying that someone had broken in.

As deputies set up a perimeter around the home, they heard loud noises coming from inside. Deputies then received a second 911 call from the homeowner saying that he had shot the intruder.

A lot of good that perimeter did. Let this be a lesson to people, even when the police do manage to arrive before your untimely demise they’ll be too busy dicking around to actually come in and help you. Stories like this demonstrate the fact that police are merely the cleanup crew, they exist to find the guy who killed you. Of course finding the guy who killed you is pretty pointless when you’re, you know, dead. Thankfully the homeowner in this story had a means of self-defense at hand otherwise he’d likely be another homicide statistic.

The Flawed Sheep, Sheepdog, or Wolf Analogy

Are you a sheep or a sheepdog? It’s a question periodically asked by advocates of self-defense that tries to shove the person being questioned into a false dichotomy, either you’re a helpless sheep that simply follows the flock or you’re a brave sheepdog who guard the vulnerable sheep from the wolves.

In one of the more annoying advertisement e-mails I received it stated:

Christopher – you are it. You are the country’s last line of defense. The minute-man…. the sheep dog.

[…]

This guy completely understands sheepdogs like you and I.

I’m not a bloody sheepdog. The sheep, sheepdog, or wolf analogy pisses me off because it exists mainly to boost the egos of those who carry firearms. Instead of merely being a man who happens to carry a firearm one can now think, “I’m a sheepdog, the protector of the sheep, I am what lies between the average man and evil doers in our society, I am Batman!” Using the analogy seems rather mastubatory to me, a way of making one’s self feel good.

Since I refuse to adopt the sheepdog nomenclature I must be either a sheep or a wolf, right? Wrong. I’m a human being, but if we’re going to use animal analogies I’ll take a page from the Free State Project and use the porcupine as my totem animal. Porcupines are great, they walk around foraging for food, and avoid starting shit with other animals. So long as you don’t attack a porcupine you’ll be OK but if you fuck with a porcupine you’re going to get a face full of wrath filled quills.

The most important part of self-defense is mental. Even if you have a quality firearm with the skill to utilize it you’re likely to lose if you’re not in the game mentally. Thinking of yourself as a sheepdog put you in, what I believe to be, a bad mental state. Instead of merely being out to protect you and yours you’re now assuming responsibility for others. Putting yourself in harms way is the opposite of self-defense and I believe it to be poor form to adopt an attitude of being a guardian to everybody else. Don’t be the sheepdog, be the porcupine.

Reasons to Carry a Gun

Why do I carry a gun? Because 20 to 1 odds aren’t good and the police are often useless even if they’re already at the scene:

A trio of cyclists were biking down Nicollet Mall about 7:45 p.m. when a group of men at a bus stop suddenly approached them and started throwing punches. One of the bikers was left with a broken jaw; another was beaten but sustained less serious injuries.

The incident happened right in front of Minneapolis police, who chased the 15 to 20 suspects and ended up arresting one adult and several juveniles. It was the fifth “flash mob”-style attack since the beginning of February.

Even the most well training martial artist is going to find themselves in a bad situation when facing 20 angry attackers. Make no mistake, getting mobbed by 20 people is life threatening. In such a situation your only hope of self-defense really becomes a firearm. I almost always have a firearm on me, even when I’m riding my mountain bike. You never know what kind of danger you might be facing from wild animals to a gang of assholes. What’s even more worrisome is the incident mentioned in the story is the sixth such case since February:

• Feb. 3: 9:25 p.m. at 7th Street and Nicollet Mall. Several suspects, one displaying a handgun, assault a group of five young men, ages 18 to 19. No serious injuries or arrests.

• Feb. 20: 2:22 a.m. at 119 N. 4th St. Six to seven young men, one with a handgun, threaten and then assault a 28-year-old St. Paul man, taking his cellphone and leaving him with face and torso injuries that did not require hospitalization. No immediate arrests.

• Feb. 25: 2 a.m. at 413 Nicollet Mall. Suspects assault two men, ages 22 and 25. Neither victim required hospitalization. No immediate arrests.

• March 11: 8 p.m. at 6th Street and Nicollet Mall. Four men, ages 21 to 30, attacked. Two bikes stolen; one recovered. No hospitalization or arrests.

• March 17: 11:45 p.m. at 90 S. 7th St. Two men, ages 23 and 27, are attacked. The younger man is seriously injured and admitted to intensive care at Hennepin County Medical Center.

It seems mob violence is getting more common, something not too surprising in harsh economic times. Another thing to note is that the first two listed incidents involved a member of the attacking mob being armed. When people ask, “Why do you need to carry a gun?” you can answer them with stories like this. A firearm can tip the scales more towards your favor and they give you an option to defend yourself against an otherwise superior attacker (or attackers as the case may be).

Police Surveillance Video of Zimmerman

Well this video doesn’t help Zimmerman’s self-defense claim nor grant much believability to the police report:

A police surveillance video taken the night that Trayvon Martin was shot dead shows no blood or bruises on George Zimmerman, the neighborhood watch captain who says he shot Martin after he was punched in the nose, knocked down and had his head slammed into the ground.

The surveillance video, which was obtained exclusively by ABC News, shows Zimmerman arriving in a police cruiser. As he exits the car, his hands are cuffed behind his back. Zimmerman is frisked and then led down a series of hallways, still cuffed.

Zimmerman, 28, is wearing a red and black fleece and his face and head are cleanly shaven. He appears well built, hardly the portly young man depicted in a 2005 mug shot that until a two days ago was the single image the media had of Zimmerman.

The initial police report noted that Zimmerman was bleeding from the back of the head and nose, and after medical attention it was decided that he was in good enough condition to travel in a police cruiser to the Sanford, Fla., police station for questioning.

His lawyer later insisted that Zimmerman’s nose had been broken in his scuffle with 17-year-old Martin.

You can watch the video here. I do want to say ABC news could have found a better place to drop it’s “ABC New Exclusive” banner as it obscures the video of Zimmerman’s head for much of the video. Either way the video shows no sign of injury on Zimmerman brining the claim that Martin knocked Zimmerman on his back and began pummeling his face in question.

The grand jury hearing is going to be interesting. As of right now we have evidence flying back and forth that supports and opposes Zimmerman’s claim and may even uncover an attempt by the police department to cover up a crime. Either way we won’t know until next month when the grand jury has access to all the available evidence and makes a decision on whether or not Zimmerman will be tried.

Never Ending Punishment

A phrase that used to be common in my area was, if you do the crime you do the time. Two things were implied by this saying: a person convicted of a crime would be punished and once the guilty person served their time they would be free to rejoin society as their debt had been paid. Unfortunately the last part isn’t recognized in our culture, especially if you’ve been charged with a felony.

I’ve been an outspoken critic of the law prohibiting all felons from owning firearms. What ground exists for banning a person charged with tax evasion from owning a firearm? None as far as I’m concerned. Yet in this country if you’re charged with a felony your life is suddenly worth less than other people’s. In fact your life is worth so little that it becomes a crime to defend yourself:

Anthony Robinson, 19, allegedly was trying to break into Wright’s home in the 6400 block of South Morgan Street to steal liquor about 6:30 a.m. Monday when Wright shot him in the leg, police said.

Wright was charged with unlawful use of a weapon, a felony, police said.

Robinson, of the 6600 block of South Wood, was charged with burglary. He appeared in bond court wearing a blue hospital gown that he held closed with one hand. Authorities said Wright had shot him in the ankle.

Court records showed Wright pleaded guilty to a 1990 theft charge and served two years on probation, and then served another 2-1/2 years on probation for a 1994 charge of unlawful use of a weapon.

Wright took measures to defend himself but, because he pleaded guilty to theft in 1990, will likely spend time in a cage for having the audacity to value his life over a person breaking into his home. This kind of thing is ridiculous. After ~22 years Wright is still being punished for his crime. ~22 years for pleading guilty to theft. Not only that but the state has also said that his life is now without value simply because he pleaded guilty to an act of theft.

How is tossing somebody convicted of theft in a cage for two and a half years and prohibiting him from defending his life in the futre justice? He should have been made to repay what he stole (I’d actually say he should be forced to repay double what he stole) and all costs of recovery and nothing more. Our so-called justice system does many things, but delivering justice isn’t one of them.

A Case for Stand Your Ground Law

With the imminent hearing on HR 1467, the bill that would bring “stand your ground” to Minnesota, tomorrow I think we need an example of how important such legislation is. For an example we need look no further than Iowa:

One couldn’t blame him. Lewis had just finished 112 days in jail because he didn’t have the cash to make bail. When jurors finally freed him on Feb. 9, Lewis walked out homeless, unemployed and minus most of his possessions.

[…]

Ludwick, a former soldier and convicted felon, was driving four people home from a Halloween party. Documents say Ludwick slowed; Lewis passed him. Ludwick sped up, and the cars raced down 11th Street until they came to Regency Woods. They collided when Lewis, in front and on the right, started to turn left.

Lewis said Ludwick and a passenger, Justin Lossner, got out of the Taurus and began punching the Mustang’s windows.

They backed off when Lewis pulled out his .380-caliber pistol. But they came back.

Lewis said he was outside his car, evaluating its damage, when he caught Ludwick and Lossner trying to sneak up on him from two different directions.

The recording of a 911 call made by Lewis begins with Lewis yelling at the two to “just stay where you are. Get back! Get back! I’m going to start shooting!”

There are exchanges of profanities while Lewis explains the situation to a police dispatcher. Then, “Get away from me. Get away from me!” And a bang.

You read that correctly, Mr. Lewis was found innocent of any crime was greeted with a loss of his property and months of his lives stolen as he rotted in prison awaiting his trial. What’s most egregious about this story is the fact that Mr. Lewis would have been legally protected from all of this if Iowa had a stand your ground law as it gives the defender the benefit of the doubt. Without such legislation the state gets to assume guilt until innocence is proven, and in such cases those forced into a self-defense situation may lose everything even if a jury acquits them.

As I stated yesterday the other problem when a stand your ground law isn’t on the books is the fact that any action taken in self-defense can be argued to be “unreasonable.” One person looking at Mr. Lewis’s situation may claim his use of a firearm wasn’t reasonable because his attackers were, apparently, unarmed. Another person would point out the fact that Mr. Lewis was outnumbered, a fact that makes a self-defense situation far more dangerous. Mr. Lewis had every right to be where he was and therefore should have the right to defend himself at that location. Stand your ground laws benefit those who find themselves having to defend themselves against initiators of violence.

I have further commentary about this story that I’ll post up tomorrow. Considering that the “stand your ground” bill is being debated tomorrow I wanted to get this out so people could read it and understand the importance that this law holds.