Tag: self-defense

KevinLeave a comment

Mugged by Reality.

Back four years ago when I started this blog, I posted the two-part essay Is the Government Responsible for Your Protection? It was a piece I had originally written and posted in the Gun Dungeon of DemocraticUnderground.com. Needless to say, it got some interesting responses from the denizens there. Via David Hardy we have fascinating case study of what it takes to turn an opponent of concealed-carry into a supporter – that of Ohio State Rep. Michael DeBose.

Here’s his story, as told by the Cleveland Plain Dealer:

Run-in changes lawmaker’s stance

Tuesday, May 15, 2007
Phillip Morris

It’s funny how a gun can in stantly change your perspec tive on things, make you wish you could rewrite history.

State Rep. Michael DeBose, a southside Cleveland Democrat, discovered this lesson the night of May 1, when he thought he was going to die. That’s the night he wished he had that gun vote back.

DeBose, who had just returned from Columbus, where he had spent the day in committee hearings, decided to take a short walk up Holly Hill, the street where he has lived with his wife for the past 27 years.

It was late, but DeBose, 51, was restless. The ordained Baptist minister knew his Lee-Harvard neighborhood was changing, but he wasn’t scared. The idle, young men who sometimes hang out on his and adjacent streets didn’t threaten him.

He is a big man and, besides, he had run the same streets before he found Jesus – and a wife. That night, he just needed a walk.

The loud muffler on a car that slowly passed as he was finishing the walk caught his attention, though. When the car stopped directly in front of his house – three houses from where he stood – he knew there was going to be a problem.

“There was a tall one and a short one,” DeBose said, sipping on a McDonald’s milkshake and recounting the experience Friday.

“The tall one reached in his pocket and pulled out a silver gun. And they both started running towards me.”

“At first I just backed up, but then I turned around and started running and screaming.”

“When I started running, the short boy stopped chasing and went back to the car. But the tall boy with the gun kept following me. I ran to the corner house and started banging on Mrs. Jones’ door.”

It was at that point that the would-be robbers realized that their prey wasn’t worth the trouble. Besides, Cheryl, DeBose’s wife, and a daughter had heard his screams and had raced out to investigate. Other porch lights began to flicker on.

The loud muffler sped off, and DeBose started rethinking his gun vote.

DeBose twice voted against a measure to allow Ohioans to carry concealed weapons. It became law in 2004.

DeBose voted his conscience. He feared that CCW permits would lead to a massive influx of new guns in the streets and a jump in gun violence. He feared that Cleveland would become the O.K. Corral, patrolled by legions of freshly minted permit holders.

“I was wrong,” he said Friday.

“I’m going to get a permit and so is my wife.

“I’ve changed my mind. You need a way to protect yourself and your family.

“I don’t want to hurt anyone. But I never again want to be in the position where I’m approached by someone with a gun and I don’t have one.”

DeBose said he knows that a gun doesn’t solve Cleveland’s violence problem; it’s merely a street equalizer.

“There are too many people who are just evil and mean-spirited. They will hurt you for no reason. If more people were packing guns, it might serve as a deterrent.

“But there obviously are far deeper problems that we need to address,” he added, as he suddenly seemed to realize he sounded like a gun enthusiast.

They say the definition of a conservative is a liberal who has been mugged. DeBose’s CCW application will bear some witness to that notion.

At the end of Part 2 of Is the Government Responsible… I concluded:

(The) majority is largely unaware that they are the ones responsible for their own safety. They depend on the police almost exclusively for their safety and protection from crime. In their fear of violence, they fear the other “herbivores” with guns, too. They do so because some gun owners are idiots, but mostly because they’re told that guns are the cause of crime, and they don’t know any better. They don’t accept that general citizens who are willing to resist crime are an asset, not a liability to society.

So what am I advocating? I am advocating educating the citizens of our society as to their rights and attendant duties. That way they can make educated decisions as to their own protection, and that of their fellow citizens. Then if they decide that, for them, actively opposing crime is not an option, they won’t be so eager to deny the means to those who decide it’s the moral thing to do.

In other words, I trust my fellow-man to make the right decision if given all the information.

Representative DeBose just got his PhD in the rights and duties of self-defense.

Too bad it required very nearly being the victim of a violent crime, but that’s often what it takes. Or worse.

Hopefully he’ll feel some shame for the fact that he twice voted to deny to his constituents what he will now be exercising himself.

No, Violent but Protective

KevinLeave a comment

So much to blog about, but there was a very interesting piece over at Say Uncle about ass-whuppin’. (Note to Uncle: Turn in your Southern Boy card. An ass-whippin’ is what your momma gave you for misbehavin’, followed by another when your daddy got home. An ass-whuppin’ is what you get in a fight if you come out the loser.) Read the whole thing and the comments, but the heart of the piece is this:

The man I worked with was a licensed social worker with a graduate degree and before that he was a drill sergeant. No, really. One day, I said to him: What’s wrong with kids these days? They’re too quick to shoot each other or stab each other or club each other from behind. He says, and I am not making this up, that: Kids today are afraid to take an ass-whippin’.
He went on to say that, in his day and mine, if two teenage boys had a conflict, they’d meet on the playground after school and settle it. He’s right, we did. But no one ever got killed. No one ever went to the ER. We had black-eyes and were sore but we got over it pretty quickly. Then, the next day, we were friends again. Now, he says, kids are afraid of that. They don’t want to fight, because they’re scared of a little ass-whippin’. They’d rather attempt to kill someone than get their ass handed to them.

In a conversation with a co-worker several years ago, he related that when he was growing up you fought with your fists – no kicking. (Kicking was girlish.) Then kicking was OK. Then kicking when the other guy was down. Then using sticks or clubs. Then knives. Then guns.

He stopped fighting when they went to knives.

Commenter Ken noted:

I think he’s not exactly wrong but not quite right either. I don’t think it’s being afraid of an ass-whippin’ as such (hell, I was afraid of that too) but it’s a result of the whole “violence is BAD BAD BAD ALWAYS ALWAYS ALWAYS” mentality forced on kids today, often to the point that self defense is punished (can you say “zero tolerance”?)

In the old days, as noted, boys would often just pair off, fight, and be done. Also, if there was a bully, the victims could team up and take care of it, and be done.

But if no distinction whatsoever is made between degrees of violence, or the ends to which it is put, then there is no reason for an adolescent to draw a distinction between “fighting back” and murder. Both are equally condemned, so why take half measures? (My emphasis.)

I’ve written on this topic before, in “(I)t’s most important that all potential victims be as dangerous as they can.” What Ken is illustrating is the social philosophy that cannot distinguish between “violent and predatory” and “violent but protective,” and it’s a philosophy most emphatically in evidence on the campuses of our primary schools – where even Dodgeball is banned because it’s violent and somebody might get hurt. While I’ll agree that there’s a growing number of younger kids who are willing to use lethal violence, I think that this is only part of the problem. Another problem for is the number of our yoots who grow up in a protective bubble, essentially never suffering any significant injury – certainly not one at the hands of another. From that Arizona Republic piece:

Kids often get hurt playing tag, said Sharon Roland, the nurse at Jack L. Kuban School in southwest Phoenix and vice president of the School Nurses Organization of Arizona.

They split their chins, scrape their noses and graze their knees, the expected injuries of childhood. But they also knock out teeth and fracture bones.

E’Lisa Harrison’s son, Grant, was 8 when he was pushed and fell during a game of tag at Kyrene de la Estrella Elementary School in Phoenix. It was an accident, but Grant spent weeks with a cast on his arm, missing out on a season of baseball.

While growing up, my sister broke her wrist. My brother broke an ankle and a collar bone in separate incidents. I broke a toe. Hovever I cracked my head a number of times (requiring stitches – which may explain my current personality), and even did a serious face-plant on the sidewalk once. Most of the kids I grew up with got injured – from cuts requiring stitches to one that was hospitalized after being hit by a car. We were active – and we learned that stupid hurts, pain is temporary, and chicks dig scars. I don’t think a lot of our yoots learn much of that today.

Part of that learning leads to empathy – you know what it feels like to be significantly physically injured. It’s a short leap to transferring that to someone else – and staying your hand, or intervening in a violent situation. But if you have no personal experience with pain, inflicting it on others would seem to me to be easier.

I last fought when I was about 10 or 11 years old. Neither one of us was noticeably injured. We were best friends before the fight, and we were best friends again afterward. (Well, within a couple of weeks.) But prior to that, I knew what being hurt was. I didn’t try to gouge out his eyes or kick him in the crotch, and he returned the favor. No knives, no clubs, no guns – though both he and I had fathers who owned firearms, and we both knew where they and the ammo were: in bedroom closets, unlocked and accessible.

In Potential Victims I quoted Grim from Grim’s Hall:

Very nearly all the violence that plagues, rather than protects, society is the work of young males between the ages of fourteen and thirty. A substantial amount of the violence that protects rather than plagues society is performed by other members of the same group. The reasons for this predisposition are generally rooted in biology, which is to say that they are not going anywhere, in spite of the current fashion that suggests doping half the young with Ritalin.

The question is how to move these young men from the first group (violent and predatory) into the second (violent, but protective). This is to ask: what is the difference between a street gang and the Marine Corps, or a thug and a policeman? In every case, we see that the good youths are guided and disciplined by old men.

Absolutely. Case in point, my father-in-law and my wife’s nephew. He’s a very small boy for his age, and he gets bullied in school. My FIL advised him to fight back, and if set upon by someone much bigger, gather his friends and take on the bully as a group. My wife, who has worked in the public education sector explained to her father that his advice was no longer acceptable. A fight in school no longer involves the principal and a few days suspension – the police are called and even children are taken away in handcuffs these days.

It’s insane. And it’s the end product of this kind of thinking:

Barry Says:

I’m a follower of the “violence never solved anything” school of thought as a general rule. I don’t necessarily think two kids squaring off in the schoolyard is a productive way to end an argument, either in the short term of the long term. There must be more civilized ways to resolve conflict that let kids release steam but do it in ways that don’t involve anger and aggression toward each other.

And Ken responded:

But for Barry’s comment: I realize I didn’t express it very clearly, but I don’t (and I don’t think others did either) mean to imply that kids should ever have solved arguments that way. Violence is neither useful nor productive for solving disagreements, though one might make a case for minor fights being an outlet (I don’t, but it’s not implausible). But bullies are not typically deterred by nice talk alone, and certainly are not deterred by victims that don’t fight back.

No, bullies aren’t deterred by victims who don’t fight back.

Which negates the hypothesis that “violence never solved anything.” Violence does solve things, and it solves them pretty thorougly in many cases. Attempting to suppress violence in a population due to a philosophy that “violence never solved anything” and “violence is BAD BAD BAD ALWAYS ALWAYS ALWAYS” has led the UK to be the most violent industrialized nation in Europe – because the bullies are not confronted. Violence in defense of self or others is a corollary of the fundamental human right, and it is RIGHT RIGHT RIGHT ALWAYS ALWAYS ALWAYS. It is “Violent but PROTECTIVE,” and as a culture we’ve lost sight of that to a large extent – and we’re brainwashing our children with it more and more with each successive generation, leaving them defenseless against those who would do them violence.

Update: I have an earlier post along these same lines, too, I just discovered. Read the comments.

The Journey Down the Path of Compelled Helplessness

KevinLeave a comment

The title of this post is from a comment left at On Being Down and Defenseless in Britain over on The Gates of Vienna. The latest outrage from Old Blighty?

Jump up and down and shout to beat street crime

 Witnesses to violent street crime should try to ‘distract’ attackers by honking their car horns or even ‘jumping up and down’. That’s according to Labour’s Police Minister.

 The extraordinary remarks by Tony McNulty prompted an immediate, angry response from law and order experts, who described him as ‘irresponsible’.

 The standard police advice to people who witness violent behaviour is that they should not get involved and immediately call 999.

 But in an interview with the BBC’s Jeremy Vine, Mr McNulty said concerned citizens should ‘try some distractive activities’ instead.

Absolutely. Fucking. Amazing. This is the Monty-Pythonesque “You’re Not Qualified” mentality brought to its highest lowest form. Citizens shouldn’t get involved – even to the point of simply making noise. If this doesn’t define “compelled helplessness,” I don’t know what would. I’m reminded of an old post by Dave Kopel at The Corner where a University student told of her introduction to acceptable victim behavior while staying in England:

(The officer) instructed us on how to properly be a victim. If we were attacked, we were to assume a defensive posture, such as raising our hands to block an attack. The reason was (and she spelled it out in no uncertain terms) that if a witness saw the incident and we were to attempt to defend ourselves by fighting back, the witness would be unable to tell who the agressor was. However, if we rolled up in a ball, it would be quite clear who the victim was.

In other words, assume a fetal position. How appropriate.

The Minister, who is the deputy to Home Secretary John Reid, suggested that ‘simply shouting’ at would-be muggers or ‘blowing your horn’ at them could act as a deterrent. And he said that people who witness an attack in the street should ‘jump up and down’ while waiting for the police to arrive.

His comments come during a deepening crisis in the Home Office and follow new figures showing a sharp rise in violent crime.

Right. Would that be the report indicating that recorded violent crime is down, or the official crime survey report that indicates that violent crime is up? Because, you know, I’m confused. Of course, it’s fairly easy to reduce “recorded” violent crime. Just don’t record them, you see!

The interview with Mr McNulty is part of a Panorama special being screened tomorrow evening which examines the crisis of anti-social behaviour sweeping Britain’s streets.

Law and order campaigners warned that anyone following the Minister’s advice to ‘distract’ robbers could be putting themselves at serious risk.

Which is why “it’s most important that all potential victims be as dangerous as they can.” Instead, the UK emotionally and legally neuters its populace via an official but unwritten policy of compelled helplessness.

Street criminals routinely carry knives or even guns and there have been a growing number of incidents in which so-called onlookers who intervene have also themselves been attacked.

Because the criminals know they have little to nothing to fear from an unarmed populace unsure of what they can legally do to defend themselves or others, and the police are too overwhelmed to intervene. Besides, they’re too busy running the “Big Brother” video cameras.

The remarks add to the already confusing and sometimes contradictory messages sent out to concerned citizens.

In some cases police publicly praise so-called ‘have-a-go heroes’. But in other situations, people taking the law into their own hands have become police suspects while the original perpetrator has walked free.

Even honking a car horn, as Mr McNulty suggests, can backfire. A motorist who sounded his at a pedestrian who stepped out in front of his car was recently fined by police for ‘excessive’ use of the instrument.

Sweet bleeding jeebus. I rest my case.

Serving police officer Norman Brennan, director of the Victims of Crime Trust, called the Minister’s remarks ‘irresponsible’, adding: “Tony McNulty needs to get into the real world. Only then will he realise how ridiculous these remarks sound. The public are not going to jump up and down – they are going to be scared witless.”

Only because you and those like you made them that way. Once upon a time, England was populated by a people with pride and a sense of right and wrong. Apparently between the losses of WWI, WWII, and the increasing control of their everyday lives by a Socialist government, the population has been domesticated. It’s sad, really.

For the Tories, Shadow Police Reform Minister Nick Herbert said: “Jumping up and down and waving your hands in the air in a hopeless manner does seem to be the standard Home Office response to problems these days. The public need some consistent guidance about what they should do in these circumstances.”

Figures out this month showed a two per cent rise in crime over the past year to a total of 2.44 million incidents, with gun crime soaring by ten per cent. And there was a 46 per cent surge in householders suffering the terror of being robbed at gunpoint in their home.

Isn’t England the sterling example that the gun control organizations point to as the pinnacle of achievment? Weren’t handguns banned there, oh, about 1996? Banned not as in “you can’t have any more,” but as in “turn them all in”? Aren’t all other guns there supposedly strictly controlled? Licensing? Check. Registration? Check. “Safe Storage?” Check. No “gun show loopholes,” no “assault weapons,” no “Saturday Night Specials,” no “Pocket Rockets”? Check. Isn’t England an island – without the excuse that neighboring countries don’t share its strict gun control laws? Check.

So, instead they smuggle Uzis in via truck.

Economics 101. Supply will meet demand.

The statistics come against a backdrop of a growing crisis in the Home Office, with Mr Reid admitting he and his ministerial team had failed to make the Home Office ‘fit for purpose’. Mr McNulty was reshuffled from immigration to his current brief last May after the scandal over foreign criminals being allowed to walk free without even being considered for deportation.

Sounds like catch-and-release is popular on that side of the pond as well.

But, as the man in charge of law and order, the 48-year-old MP for Harrow East has continued to be dogged by controversy.

He was recently blamed by the Tories for another furore, this time involving Britons who committed sex crimes abroad being allowed to return home and work with children.

Of course. It’s not like he’s in danger of losing his job or anything. He’s from the government, and he’s there to help you. Good and hard.

Extract from the full Panorama interview

Jeremy Vine: “You see a young man looking aggressive, shouting at an old woman. What do you do? Do you retreat and ring the police?’

Tony McNulty: “I think you should in the first instance. It may well be simply shouting at them, blowing your horn or whatever else deters them and they go away.”

Jeremy Vine: “He’s now hitting her and the police haven’t come. What do you do then?’

Tony McNulty: “The same, the same, you must always…”

Jeremy Vine: “Still wait?’

Tony McNulty: “Get back to the police, try some distractive activities.”

Jeremy Vine: “What? Jump up and down?’

Tony McNulty: “Sometimes that may well work.”

At least he wasn’t advocating curling up into a fetal position. How about grabbing something heavy and beating the sonofabitch into unconsciousness? Would that be excessive?

Edited to add: If you want your blood pressure to spike even further, read up on some other recent outrages carried out by the UK government as chronicled by Irons in the Fire. Read down to the updates. Stow all breakables out of reach first.

KevinLeave a comment

“Maybe America still has a lot to learn from England and her villages.”

We have, but it’s not the lesson I think you mean.

I recently received a comment on a post I wrote back in April of 2005, It’s a Cheap Shot, I Know… That was another piece about the flawed idea that laws that disarm the law-abiding populace somehow make that populace safer. Well, the comment I received was quite indignant:

I’m from Abigail’s village and I think she would be horrified that you are trying to advocate carrying arms after what happened to her.

Too bad.

The person the police arrested and released wasn’t the person responsible for the attack – the person responsible for the attack was someone who lated committed suicide in Scotland. He had a reputation for hunting in the woods (armed) and had allegedly a reputation for drinking and drug taking. The guy was deeply messed up but his actions were beyond comprehension, horrific and completely sick.

And the law did a marvelous job of disarming him did it?

Our village and community were in a state of shock along with the rest of our nation. We stood shoulder to sholuder(sic) and all of us sent our prayers for Abigail and her family. I think your use of this terrible horific attack as a justification for encouraging people to carry more weapons in public is also – frankly sick.

And you’re entitled to your opinion. But standing shoulder-to-shoulder and praying didn’t prevent the vicious attack upon her, did it? She and her baby son were alone with a knife-weilding nut. No cops, and no other defenders. Had he wished, her attacker could have bashed both their heads in with a handy rock.

So what’s your point?

How could you pretend to care about Abigail and the people of my village and country when you advocate the carrying of weapons.

Normally that sentence would end with a question mark, but we both know it’s rhetorical. Honestly, I don’t care about Abigale and the people of your village specifically, but I do care about Albion as a whole since it’s the nation that gave birth to the one in which I now live. As Kim du Toit put it:

I could fill these pages with news of similar atrocities happening anywhere in the world—the British Disease is by no means confined to Britain, as witnessed by car-burning being the recreational favorite of French teenagers—but, if I may be frank, I don’t give a rat’s ass what happens to France, to the French, or to any other country in the world for that matter.

But I care, deeply, about what’s happening in Britain nowadays, and if it seems any other way to my Brit Friends and Readers, then I humbly beg your forgiveness.

Continuing:

So please get your facts correct about this case and don’t you dare use this awful incident to promote the carrying of weapons again.

And you plan to stop me… how?

Maybe America still has a lot to learn from England and her villages.

Indeed. We’re learning quite well. Which is why we have “shall-issue” concealed-carry laws in 37 states and unrestricted concealed-carry in two more.

We’ve learned. And we’re still learning.

Abigail herself and her familly have handled this appauling attack with such dignity and courage that they know what courage is and what it means.

People who carry weapons like you will never have an ounce of the courage that she has.

As I noted in my original reply to the anonymous poster, I might not have the courage Ms. Witchalls has had to exhibit in her struggle to recover from her wounds, but Dan McKown has, and he carries a weapon, thus definitively disproving that particular accusation.

I came across a piece at The Ten Ring, Mugging as Amusement. It’s about the trial of the people responsible for another assault on a young woman, Nicole duFresne, in New York City – another “disarmed victim zone.” Nicole died. She was brave, too. I’m sure her friends and family stood “shoulder to shoulder” and prayed for her, as well.

But Denise references this little tidbit from the story:

The group then rode the subway to Brooklyn, where they menaced a girl at the Broadway Junction station and a man who scared them away by reaching into his jacket as if he were carrying a gun.

Imagine that! Someone who was carrying a weapon (or faked it well) and avoided becoming a victim!

What a coward!

Well, that’s the logic my anonymous commenter uses, anyway.

Perhaps England and her villages have some lessons to learn from America? (And that’s not a rhetorical question.

KevinLeave a comment

Our “Friends” in the Media Strike Again.

For your inspection (h/t: AR15.com):

Intruder fatally shot

Fatality third in Escambia since ‘Stand Your Ground’ law passed

Law enforcement and attorneys say the local nurse who fatally shot an intruder at her Navy Point home Saturday would have been protected by state law before the “Stand Your Ground” law passed.

Then why mention the “Stand Your Ground” law at all? But wait, it gets better!

Rhonda Eubanks, 57, a Baptist Hospital nurse, was alone at her home on the 100 block of N.W. Gilliland Road, in a neighborhood southwest of Sunset Avenue, Sgt. Mike Ward said Tuesday.

Now that we’ve identified and given the location and employer of the shooter…

The woman used a .38-caliber handgun to shoot Vincent Demond Wesley, 29, of Pensacola, in the head as he charged toward her, Ward said. Investigators have no evidence that Eubanks had any formal training in shooting a firearm.

Doesn’t look like she needed any “formal training” does it? But wait – it’s coming…

Assistant State Attorney David Rimmer was at the scene Saturday and saw the location of the body of the intruder, Vincent Demond Wesley, 29, of Pensacola.

“Preliminarily, it looks like a justifiable shooting,” he said. “He was laying face-down, under the carport, only a few feet from her door.

“His head was closest to the door.”

Early evidence indicates that he was shot in the head approaching the woman’s front door, Rimmer said.

The woman was alone at her home — a mauve-shuttered house with a manicured lawn

Now anyone looking for revenge can identify the right house in that “neighborhood Southwest of Sunset Avenue in the 100 block of N.W. Gilliland Rd. – look for the mauve shutters…” But remember – she does head shots.

— about 7:45 p.m. Saturday when Wesley twice tried to enter her house, Escambia deputies said.

By the second attempt, she was armed and ready.

“It’s pretty crazy,” said Sgt. Mike Ward, a Sheriff’s Office spokesman. “(She) shot and killed the intruder.”

Deputies are not releasing the woman’s name in order to protect her.

But the PRESS IS! AND they’re giving her address, place of work, and description of her HOME! It’s apparently the PUBLIC’S RIGHT TO KNOW!

However, through neighborhood interviews, investigators have pieced together a series of events that ended with Wesley’s death outside the house on the 100 block of N.W. Gilliland Road near Jardine Road. The neighborhood is southwest of Sunset Avenue.

Just in case you MISSED THE ADDRESS THE FIRST TIME!

Starting about 7:30 p.m. Saturday, Wesley argued with someone whom investigators and neighbors could not identify.

Neighbor Debbie Palmer, 27, said she heard a gunshot as she was eating spaghetti at her neighbor’s apartment on Jardine Road, which is next door to Wesley’s apartment.

Before the gunfire, she heard someone beating on the shared wall and throwing items.

About 7:45 p.m., Wesley entered the backyard of the N.W. Gilliland Road home, deputies said in a report.

Wesley attempted to enter the home, startling the woman. Then he left and attempted to carjack a vehicle driving past the house, the report stated.

Neighbors confirmed that scenario, saying Wesley attempted to steal several empty vehicles before the attempted carjacking.

“I believe he got what he had coming to him,” Palmer said. “He had no right to steal anybody’s vehicle or anything.”

When the carjacking didn’t work, Wesley returned to the Gilliland Road home and began charging at the woman, who had retrieved a firearm, the sheriff’s report stated.

Fearing for her safety, the woman shot him dead.

The shooting death is the third of this type in Escambia County since the “Stand Your Ground” law was passed Oct. 1, Ward said.

The Florida statute — the first of its kind in the United States — allows the use of deadly force when a person reasonably believes it’s necessary to prevent the commission of a “forcible felony.”

Uh, “first of its kind?” Hardly. It’s not even the most recent.

Richard Piovesan, 44, of Pensacola died in a shooting on Oct. 12, which was 11 days after the law passed. He was shot following an argument with a neighbor over money and a piece of wood.

Tyrone Fyoungious Preyer, 29, of Pensacola died in March by gunfire as he broke into an occupied home.

The most recent event has at least one neighbor thinking about protecting himself.

Since March, Charles Robbins, 50, has resided across the street from Saturday’s shooting.

So now you know where HE lives…

“I’ve been considering buying a gun ever since I moved here,” Robbins said. “This kind of tilts it in that direction. I’ve had my eye on a .45 (caliber handgun) in a pawn shop.”

Get the pistol, Mr. Robbins. Everyone who reads the paper now knows where you live and that you’re unarmed.

Read the comments. Some are excellent.

And remember: This would never happen in England. Ms. Eubanks would be sitting in a cell right now. Or more likely would be the victim of a violent crime, instead.

If you have anything to say to the “reporter” her email address is [email protected]
The dead perp:

DC Number: 312116
Name: WESLEY, VINCENT D
Race: BLACK
Sex: MALE
Hair Color: BLACK
Eye Color: BROWN
Height: 5’07”
Weight: 171 lbs.
Birth Date: 11/01/1976
Release Facility: OKALOOSA C.I.
Custody: MEDIUM
Release Date: 04/02/2006

Offense Date Offense Sentence Date County Case No. Community Supervision Length
11/29/1993 AGG BATTERY/W/DEADLY WEAPON 04/13/1994 ESCAMBIA 9305667 0Y 12M 0D
0Y 18M 0D
11/29/1993 GRAND THEFT,$300 LESS &20,000 04/13/1994 ESCAMBIA 9305667 0Y 12M 0D
11/29/1993 GRAND THEFT,$300 LESS &20,000 04/13/1994 ESCAMBIA 9305667 0Y 18M 0D
11/29/1993 RESISTING OFFICER W/VIOLEN. 04/13/1994 ESCAMBIA 9305667 0Y 12M 0D

A choir boy he was not.

KevinLeave a comment

Another “Gullible Gunner”?

Long-time readers know about the months-long exchange between me and Australian blogger Tim Lambert over the topic of self-defense in the UK. His position is that self-defense is perfectly legal – though there might be a bit of a “chilling effect” on its practice – due, he says, to “gullible gunners” like me who blow news stories out of proportion. My position is that self-defense is legally on the books, but any citizen who actually tries it puts his freedom and fortune into the hands of the Law because the Crown Prosecution Service will most probably charge that citizen for violating some statute or six.

Case in point (h/t KeepandBearArms.com), 64 year-old Diane Bond:

Brave grandma arrested after standing up to yobs

By IAN DRURY, Daily Mail
22:00pm 4th August 2006

After months of being taunted by a gang of yobs, grandmother Diane Bond finally stood up to them when she was abused while walking her pet dog. During a torrent of foul-mouthed abuse, the frail 64-year-old prodded the teenager ringleader gently in the stomach when he urged her to “Hit me, if you dare”.

Obviously the teenaged “yob” doesn’t fear the law much.

Moments later, the 5ft 1ins pensioner found herself flat on her back and nursing a broken arm after the 15-year-old boy, who was 7 inches taller, pushed her to the ground. But to add insult to injury, police officers arrested her for assaulting a child after his mother moaned he had been attacked.

And there’s another reason for his behavior.

Now Mrs Bond must report to a police station 30 miles from her home in Llandrindod Wells, Powys, Wales, at the end of the month to find out if she will be charged. Last night the retired lab technician spoke of her distress. “I am in shock and very, very teary,” she said.

“I have never been in any trouble before. I just want to enjoy my evenings walking my dog in peace. I am being treated like a criminal because a gang of yobs have nothing better to do than pick on an old lady.”

Buck up, Mrs. Bond. You’re not alone!*

Residents of her quiet street have complained to the police and council for several months about youths causing anti-social behaviour. In the latest letter to Powys County Council in June, residents said they had suffered an “endless stream” of damage to property and cars, intimidation, vandalism, noise and rubbish being hurled into gardens by up to 30 youths aged 11 to 17.

Well, I’m sure the local constabulary has handed out a number of ASBOs – “Anti-social behavior orders” – to the misguided yoots. What else can they do?

Signed by 35 fed-up people, it added: “Collectively, we are sick and tired of the situation and our frustration is now close to boiling over.”

They’d best be careful! That kind of wording could be considered a threat of premeditated assault!

Things finally came to a head when Mrs Bond, who has two children and five grandchildren, took her terrier Hettie for a walk on parkland near her home. She said a group of about 20 teenagers were loitering on the grass. Three others were standing on a path, deliberately blocking her way.

“As I approached they started shouting abuse at me,” she said. “They were taunting me and crowding round me and I was quite frightened because they are big kids.

“After a while one of them, whose name is Billy, spread his arms out wide to show his stomach, and said, Come on, old lady, hit me, if you dare.”

“I gave him three prods, almost like playful punches, not hard at all, and next thing I knew I was lying on the ground and I had broken my arm. One youth said I had been pushed.

“I went back home, shaking and crying.”

Yet she was the one arrested (since, being a law-abiding citizen, she wouldn’t resist and probably doesn’t even know a lawyer, much less retain one…)

Soon after, two police officers knocked on Mrs Bond’s door and arrested her on suspicion of assaulting a minor. “It seemed the lad had told his mum what had happened and she had immediately lodged a complaint of assault,” she said.

Mrs Bond, who lives alone, was cautioned and interviewed for nearly three hours by police officers before she was released on bail at about 1.30am.

Let’s do the math: Carry the one… They arrested her at about 10:30 PM! It couldn’t wait until the following morning? She was going to skip the country overnight to avoid prosecution? And bail? I’m curious as to just how much this flight-risk had to shell out to get out of the slammer!

She has now made a counter-allegation to the police of assault against the youth. But she added: “This sends out the message that if you stand up for yourself, if you try to take action to stop anti-social behaviour, you are likely to end up being arrested.”

Yes. That’s EXACTLY what it does. And it’s meant to. And that’s the point I’ve been making all along.

Earlier this year, Prime Minister Tony Blair said communities had to stand up to yobs in the fight against nuisance behaviour. Mrs Bond’s neighbour Steve Simmons, who co-ordinates the Nelson Street – An End To Anti-Social Behaviour campaign group, said: “Diane is a reasonable law-abiding citizen and she has been treated like a criminal for standing up to yobs when the authorities would not.

“It is bewildering. The Government says communities should look after themselves and take a stance against anti-social behaviour. But when we do try to take action, what is the first thing that happens? The blame is put on us.”

Noticed that, did you? Once the government has seized the monopoly on the legitimate use of force, it will not surrender that monopoly willingly. What’s bewildering about that?

In May, grandmother Brenda Robinson, 66, of Bournemouth, spent a night in a police cell after being arrested for alleged assault when she gave a rowdy youth a “clip round the ear”.

That used to be known as “administering disclipline,” but no longer. Add Mrs. Robinson to the list, then. She’s in good company, too.

She acted after being abused, pushed and threatened with a plank of wood. Roger Williams, Liberal Democrat MP for Brecon and Radnorshire, said: “I would have expected the police to have acted slightly more proportionately than arresting Mrs Bond over this.

“It must have been a frightening situation for an elderly lady to be confronted by a gang of yobs, especially in an area with a history of anti-social behaviour, without the police compounding the problem.”

Gee, ya THINK?

Chief Inspector Steve Hughson, of Dyfed-Powys Police, said: “We are aware of the problems in Nelson Street and associated anti-social behaviour.

“Recent patrols in the area by the neighbourhood policing team have greatly reduced incidents of crime and anti social behaviour, to the extent that positive comments have been received by local residents.

If you interpret “About bloody time!” as a “positive comment.”

“Therefore patrols will continue.”

Until the media pressure is off.

The force declined to comment on Mrs Bond’s arrest.

I bet they did.

*Mrs. Bond is in the company of fine people like Mrs. Robinson, mentioned above, and also:

Maureen Jennings, 50, of Manchester.

Martin James, 64, late of Birmingham.

Bill Clifford, 77, late of Hampshire.

David Benton, 44, of Moorby

Linda Walker, 47, of Greater Manchester

Yes, they’re all just “gullible gunners” like me.

Proportionality

KevinLeave a comment

OK, I do have something to say about the current Israel-Hezbolla conflict.

Today Glenn Reynolds has one of his typical posts, this one discussing the topic of “proportionality” on the part of Israel. He quotes law professor Kenneth Anderson:

Legal scholars who want to focus on the UN Charter as the sole source of legal authority for the use of force – and hence see any armed action by a party as having to be ‘proportionate’ pending some (typically mythological) intervention by the Security Council – tend to underplay that the Charter does not remove the customary law of self-defense, which does not require a “proportionate” response once belligerency is underway.

Obviously Professor Anderson doesn’t live in England. “Proportionality” is imbedded in their self-defense law – at least when they want it to be. In England, the mere intention to cause harm is an imprisonable offence. Said Judge Shirley Anwyl at the sentencing of Brett Osborne for stabbing Wayne Halling:

“By your plea you have accepted that you intended real serious injury. Your use of violence was not wholly unpremeditated in that you did equip yourself with at least one knife.”

Mr. Halling, hopped to the eyeballs on cocaine, and bleeding profusely from numerous cuts resulting from his smashing windows, had forced his way into Mr. Osborne’s home, where Mr. Osborne had several houseguests, including a pregnant woman whom Mr. Halling apparently mistook for his estranged girlfriend. Mr. Osborne, in fear for his safety and that of his guests, picked up a steak knife and stabbed Mr. Halling with it.

This was, apparently, “not proportional.” Judge Anwyl stated that she accepted that Halling could have been perceived to be “dangerous to others,” but:

With hindsight it is clear that Halling was presenting no real danger to anyone but himself.

I am reminded here of Col. Jeff Cooper’s famous response concerning aggression by attackers:

One bleeding-heart type asked me in a recent interview if I did not agree that “violence begets violence.” I told him that it is my earnest endeavor to see that it does. I would like very much to ensure—and in some cases I have—that any man who offers violence to his fellow citizen begets a whole lot more in return than he can enjoy.

There’s nothing “proportional” in that.

Nor should there be. Neither Israel nor Brett Osborne should be criticized for acting appropriately.

Child Abuse!

KevinLeave a comment

(Via Zendo Deb):

12 Year Old Points Gun at Burglars; Group Takes Off

July 11, 2006 08:58 AM
An accused group of thugs were thwarted by a 12-year old with a gun. It happened in Greenville (SC) when police say five masked men stormed into a house and started beating up the child’s father.

FOX Carolina’s Jamie Guirola reports, Try and picture it. A 12 year old walks into the living room, sees his mother frantically protecting the baby, and several strangers attacking his father. The 12 year old rushes out of the living room, but comes back pointing a gun at the five suspects. As of Monday night, all but one are in jail.

These are the alleged home invaders without their masks. The youngest barely seventeen, the oldest just 20. George Dickert didn’t have time to think about their ages when he tells us they broke into his home and tried to rob his family.

George Dickert/Victim: “F*$# you! That’s what I was thinking.”

Sunday night, George says, one of the suspects in the group followed him into his house after he smoked a cigarette. He tells us the man pulled out a gun, threatening him. When George reached for a different gun in self-defense, a fight broke out.

George: “I work five days a week and my wife works six days a week. We’re an honest couple. We do what we have to do to make a living and some idiot decided he wanted what I had.”

When the struggle started, police say, two other men came into the house and started beating on George. That’s when George’s 12 year old son made the move credited with scaring the accused thugs out of the house, and stopping the burglary without even firing the gun.’

Or having it taken away from him! Imagine that!

George: “He did what he had to do to protect his family last night. And a 12 year old child should never have to go through that. Even if he does know what to do, he should not have to do that.”

Police later found these four near George’s home sweating and breathing heavily. Something George hopes they’ll do again if they’re convicted and sentenced to the max.

George: “…And I will press and push and do whatever it takes to make sure every individual in it gets it.”

Police aren’t releasing details about the fifth person they’re looking for. George says he has five guns in the house. His taught his son how to use each of them.

Good for him. And he’s right, his son should not have had to do what he did, but I’m glad he was able. Of course the Brady Bunch probably considers teaching his boy about guns to be a form of child abuse they’d like to see ended. After all, twelve year old boys aren’t supposed to possess firearms. Or airguns. Or rubber band guns.

As far as I’m aware, in the UK – gun control utopia, according to the gun grabbers gun control proponents er, gun safety organizations – it’s illegal for a child to have access to a gun. “Safe storage” and all, you know. In England Mr. Dickert would be looking at jail time, his collection of five firearms would already have been confiscated, and his license to own them would have been revoked.

It’s simple “common sense” legislation like this that they want to force down our throats here.

Now, on a different topic, let me illustrate “media bias.” This was a Fox News story. It’s from a decent sized city – Greenville SC has a population of about 56,000. Myrtle Beach, SC has about four times the population. The George Dickert story has one (1) hit on Google – apparently the local Fox News affiliate is the only source to have posted it to the web. Granted, it’s only been one day.

On July 7, a 12 year old boy in Myrtle Beach shot his 10 year old best friend with a .22 rifle, apparently with intent. He’s been charged with murder. Google has links to ten (10) stories on the incident. One is from a paper in North Carolina, one from Florida and one from Pennsylvania. All of the papers in question belong to The McClatchy Company, which owns five (5) newspapers in South Carolina: The State, The Sun News, The Herald, The Beaufort Gazette, and The Island Packet. The story was on Page 1 below the fold in today’s Sun News. They own papers in fifteen (15) other states. Do you think they’ll pick up the story of George Dickert’s son and spread it around the East coast?

Nah, me either.

Do you think the story of Zachary Haymon will be one told by the Brady Bunch?

I’ll be watching.

Another Armed Citizen Resists

KevinLeave a comment

New (to me) blog discovery Pink Flamingo Bar and Grill that I pointed to Friday has a link to another outstanding story of armed self-defense:

Senior with pacemaker fights off intruders

Fight, die or give in.

Faced with those choices, a 61-year-old West Bloomfield man parried away a shotgun barrel as it fired, forcing a buckshot load of lead over his shoulder. The township man then drew his own handgun and shot an intruder inside his garage in the 4800 block of Trailview at 3 a.m. July 4.

“I love this guy,” said West Bloomfield Lt. Tim Diamond. “He made a move on the gun with his arm in a sling. That’s a guy with cojones.”

Apparently Lt. Diamond hasn’t gotten the “I’m the only one professional enough” memo.

The resident’s arm was in a sling because a pacemaker was installed in his chest the week before. Despite all that, his bullet struck the intruder. But the resident, who owns a bar in Detroit, soon found out there were actually three would-be robbers waiting for him when he returned home from work. A struggle ensued with the resident trying to fend off two of the intruders. The suspects eventually got control of both the handgun and the shotgun.

Yes, the defender had his gun wrestled from him. But…

“It was a calamity of errors,” said Diamond. “There could have been two people killed.”

Shot and bleeding profusely, one suspect needed medical attention fast so all three fled taking the guns with them.

They ran off. Empty-handed. After one had been wounded.

Would they have done that had he not resisted? Or would he now be dead?

Two men dropped off a man with a bullet wound at the emergency room of Providence Hospital in Southfield later that morning.

Coincidentally, a West Bloomfield police officer was sitting in the same emergency room. The attempted robbery victim complained of chest pains and also suffered a cut finger so police took him to Providence. The resident identified a man walking into the emergency room as the same person who tried to rob him a short time before.

“Providence Hospital” eh? Aptly named.

Police weren’t able to question the suspect as medical staff whisked him off for several hours of emergency surgery. His family hired an attorney by the time the anesthesia wore off and police didn’t interview him that day.

Why am I not surprised? I’m sure this will be another incident of where an innocent yoot “didn’t deserve” to get shot – he was making such progress at “getting his life back together.” Or something. Everyone will be shocked, shocked to learn that he could be involved in something like an armed robbery! Despite a rap sheet as long as his arm.

Police later identified additional suspects through hospital videotapes and telephone records. Arrested and arraigned in connection with the crime were:

– Eric Lewis, 17, of Detroit, who was arraigned in his hospital bed Thursday on four felony charges including assault with intent to rob while armed and assault with intent to murder. Both charges carry possible life sentences. A magistrate set bond at $250,000 and Lewis is still in the hospital under police guard.

Another “child shooting victim” statistic for the Brady Bunch! Mr. Lewis is still a minor!

It’s all the gun’s fault.

– James Gipson, 17, of Southfield was charged with assault with intent to rob while armed. Gipson was arraigned in 48th District Court Thursday and bond was set at $250,000.

Ditto. It’s a wonder the eeeevil gun didn’t shoot him too!

Police have identified and are looking for a third suspect. Both stood mute at arraignment and not guilty pleas were entered. Both face preliminary exams later this month.

Diamond said the township resident did not know Lewis nor Gipson. Investigators don’t believe it was a random robbery attempt, however.

“They were waiting for him to come from home,” said Diamond. “It was planned all the way.” Not so much as a penny was stolen.

And nobody died. Least of all, the intended victim.

And that’s the way it ought to be.

Michigan’s “Castle Doctrine” bill has been sent to the Governor to be signed. Without it, the resident would be required to retreat, rather than defend. (How is a 61 year-old man with recent pacemaker surgery supposed to retreat from three healthy young men intent on robbing him?) As it stands, since the bill was not law at the time of the incident, he runs the risk of a civil suit for shooting that poor, innocent yoot.

Michigan has had “shall-issue” concealed-carry legislation on the books for just over six years now. The Brady Bunch objected to Michigan’s adopting “shall-issue” law, but six years onward, “this insult to caring Michigan citizens” hasn’t been unnoticed (by the criminals), and it hasn’t been forgotten by the citizens who availed themselves of it.

Three years into the program, even the police admitted that things hadn’t changed much:

Three years ago, a heated debate was raging about Michigan’s plan to make it easier to get concealed weapons permits.

One side said more guns would make society safer from violent crime while the other said making concealed weapons permits easier to obtain was surely a recipe for disaster.
Three years later, neither prediction has come true.
Law enforcement officers and local officials say Michigan’s streets are no safer – or more dangerous – than they were three years ago when the law went into effect. But there have been no major incidents involving people with the permits. No accidental discharges. No murders. No anarchy.
“It’s basically been a big ho-hum,” said Joe Oberlee, who teaches a firearms class required of those seeking the permits. “The state has sure collected a lot of extra money, though.”

And what politician doesn’t like that? Things hadn’t changed much, but for those who had jumped through the hoops and gotten a permit, and then had need of it, things have changed a lot. Three years further on, and a 61 year-old man gets to use his handgun to defend himself, rather than being another chalk outline and crime statistic.

I’m on “Vacation”

KevinLeave a comment

Which means that for the next couple of weeks I’ll be ripping out my kitchen and painting the inside of my entire house.

Oh. Joy.

There is good news out there, though. He-who-shall-not-be-named reports that Brit Nicky Samengo-Turner, who was arrested on after a random stop-and-search for having a Swiss-army knife and a collapsable baton locked in his briefcase in his car, has been acquitted on the charges of carrying A) a lockback knife and B) an “offensive weapon” in public. He was arrested on Nov. 3 of last year, and it caused some stir in the blogosphere at the time, though I don’t think I wrote about it here. I’m still looking (in vain) for a news piece on the story (somehow I doubt the medja in Old Blighty will find that story particularly compelling), but I’m glad to know that Mr. Samengo-Turner won’t be serving any time for his “offence.” Just paying through the nose for legal fees. All I’ve found is this little blurb in the Telegraph‘s “Business Diary”:

Guilty of not paying attention to handbags

Common sense has prevailed after former banker Nicky Samengo-Turner was cleared of wrong-doing by a jury yesterday. He had been arrested last November under anti-terror legislation for having a pen-knife in his car. During a break from the procedings, his wife’s handbag was snatched in a coffee shop 100 yards from the court. He claims the police have yet to take “much of an interest” in the incident.

Here in Tucson I carry a wickedly sharp Spyderco lockback knife in my pocket, a Leatherman Wave multi-tool on my belt (which has two locking blades, each over 3″ long), and a 9mm Makarov in the glovebox of my truck. None of these are “offensive” weapons. But in England they’d each get me thrown in the slammer.

Remember: “Violent and predatory” vs. “Violent but protective.”

In England, all they see is “violent.”

Except, perhaps, for Mr. Samengo-Turner’s jury. Good on ‘ya, mates.