Author Topic: The Unorganized Militia: Citizens defend themselves/others.  (Read 412987 times)

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 53343
    • View Profile
Olympic shot-putter killed
« Reply #100 on: September 01, 2009, 09:57:35 AM »
Olympic shot-putter David Laut is killed at his Oxnard home
The 1984 bronze medalist is shot after confronting prowlers outside his house in what police say is a good area of town.
 
Shot-putter David Laut takes the bronze medal at the 1984 Olympics in Los Angeles. After his glory days, he returned to Oxnard and taught in the local public schools. "He was a local boy who did well and came back to share his talents with the community," said neighbor Carter Laurie. (Tony Duffy / Getty Images)

 
By Catherine Saillant
 
August 29, 2009
E-mail Print Share  Text size

David Laut traveled the world as an Olympic shot-put medalist, but he never forgot his roots in Oxnard.

When his glory days ended, Laut -- who earned a bronze medal at the 1984 Olympics in Los Angeles -- bought a home in south Oxnard, taught in the local public schools and raised a son with his wife, Jane, his high school sweetheart.

About midnight Thursday, Laut, 52, stepped outside his home to confront prowlers and was gunned down, according to law enforcement officials and neighbors.

Police called to the scene found him lying in the side yard of his tidy beige-and-white stucco home, dead from multiple gunshot wounds. No arrests have been made and police have no suspects, said Oxnard Police Sgt. Ron Whitney.

The neighborhood of well-kept tract homes built in the 1980s is about two miles from the beach, and police rarely are called there for violent crime, Whitney said.

"I consider it a good area of town," the police sergeant said.

Neighbors and colleagues on Friday were reeling at the news that Laut, a 6-foot-3 "gentle giant," had been taken from them.

"It was an honor to know him," said Carter Laurie, Laut's next-door neighbor, wiping away tears. "He was a local boy who did well and came back to share his talents with the community."

Laurie said he had gone to bed early with a cold. But his wife heard three shots about midnight. The couple dismissed the disturbance as firecrackers until police arrived a few minutes later, Laurie said.

Laut had insisted that his wife stay inside while he checked on some noise in the yard, Laurie said he was told by Laut's mother-in-law.

Laut's wife "heard him say, 'What the hell are you doing here?' and then she heard 'bang, bang, bang,' " Laurie said.

Laut was athletic director at nearby Hueneme High School, a post he took a year ago, said Principal Adrian Palazuelos. Before that, he served for eight years as track coach at Hueneme High, and then left for one year to take a coaching job at a school in Ventura.

Laut's late father was a longtime science teacher at Hueneme High, Palazuelos said.

"His roots to south Oxnard and Hueneme go back fairly deep," Palazuelos said.

Laut had spent several hours on campus Thursday helping arrange sports physicals for students who would be starting classes next week, the principal said, adding that Laut was well liked by students and staff.

"He was a gentle giant, compassionate and student- focused," Palazuelos said. "And he was a competitor like no other."

Born in Ohio but reared in Ventura County, Laut played football, basketball and baseball at Santa Clara High School. But he excelled most at the shot put, winning two NCAA titles at UCLA.

He won a gold medal at the 1979 Pan American Games and picked up the bronze medal at the Coliseum.

Jim Kiefer, Laut's throwing coach at UCLA, called him a wonderful guy with a great sense of humor.

At one Pac-10 conference meet, Laut put the shot in the finals and walked out of the ring, thinking it was a poor effort. In fact, it was a winning distance, but he fouled by walking out of the ring. Kiefer warned him not to do that again.

"Then, he won the NCAA title and he ran over to me and he picked me up and had me over his head and I weighed 220 pounds. He just said, 'Wow,' " Kiefer recalled. "I remember what I said too. I said, 'Put me down.' "

Laut worked out every day in his garage, which he had converted into a gym, Laurie and other neighbors said. He was modest about his past sports accomplishments, said neighbor Chet Thomas.

"I never knew he was a medalist until somebody told me," Thomas said. "He never changed."

catherine.saillant @latimes.com

Times staff writer Bill Dwyre contributed to this report.

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 53343
    • View Profile
Jew Jitsu!
« Reply #101 on: September 11, 2009, 06:56:10 PM »

Body-by-Guinness

  • Guest
Samurai Sword Slays Intruder
« Reply #102 on: September 15, 2009, 08:38:19 AM »
www.baltimoresun.com/news/maryland/baltimore-city/bal-sword0915,0,4027961.story

baltimoresun.com

Hopkins student kills intruder with samurai sword, police say

Two laptops, PlayStation had been stolen from off-campus house Monday

By Liz F. Kay | liz.kay@baltsun.com

7:35 AM EDT, September 15, 2009

 
A Johns Hopkins University student armed with a samurai sword killed a man who broke into the garage of his off-campus residence early Tuesday, a Baltimore police spokesman said.

According to preliminary reports, a resident of the 300 block of E. University Parkway called police about a suspicious person, department spokesman Anthony Guglielmi said. An off-duty officer responded about 1:20 a.m. to the area with university security, according to Guglielmi. They heard shouts and screams from a neighboring house and found the suspected burglar suffering from a nearly severed hand and lacerations to his upper body, he said.

The suspect was pronounced dead at the scene.

The student told police that he heard a commotion in the house and went downstairs armed with a samurai sword, Guglielmi said. He saw the side door to the garage had been pried open and found a man inside, who lunged at the student.

Detectives were still interviewing the student and his three roommates Tuesday morning, Guglielmi said. Burglars had already stolen two laptops and a Sony PlayStation from the student's home Monday, according to Guglielmi.

Dennis O'Shea, a spokesman for Johns Hopkins, said all four residents of the house are undergraduate students at the university.

The suspected burglar, whose name was not released pending notification of next of kin, had prior convictions for breaking and entering and had just been released Saturday from a Baltimore County facility, Guglielmi said.

taoist-engineer

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 5
    • View Profile
Re: Citizens defend themselves/others.
« Reply #103 on: September 18, 2009, 05:26:23 PM »
 Canadian ‘Glambo’ in red dress KOs elite trooper in party brawl
By Gerry Bellett, Vancouver SunSeptember 17, 2009
 
VANCOUVER — A petite Vancouver woman is being sought by an English court after she wiped the floor with a collection of Britain’s premier soldiers — the Coldstream Guards — during a brawl at a Christmas party in the guardsmen’s barracks last December.

Ashley Wolfe, 24, was tried in absentia this week at Woolwich Magistrates Court in London after failing to appear on two charges of assault — one involving a soldier’s wife, the other a sergeant she knocked cold with one punch.

After finding her guilty the court issued an international warrant for her arrest.

Wolfe, who stands five foot three, was wearing what the British press described as a “striking red satin dress” to the party.

She was accused of telling her victims “don’t mess with me, I’m a Canadian boxer.”

The melee involving Wolfe — dubbed “Glambo” by the British press — has attracted international media coverage.

But just what happened in the barracks that night is open to debate.

Ashley and husband Bill — who had part of his nose bitten off in the fight — told the Vancouver Sun Thursday that the allegations against her were false.

In a telephone interview from Hungary, the couple said her lawyer had sought an adjournment to the trial because she was sick with the flu earlier this week and a doctor advised her not to travel.

However, the request was denied and the trial went on, resulting in a guilty verdict.

“We want that overturned,” said Bill. “Our lawyers are requesting a retrial.”

The Coldstream Guard says that during a drinking session, Ashley took exception to what she perceived to be gay embraces among some of the soldiers on the dance floor, particularly the actions of Lance-Sgt. Michael Fallows.

She told police that “all these guys were kissing and humping each other — basically having sex with their clothes on . . . I pushed them apart because they were clinging to each other and told them it wasn’t appropriate.”

She told them such behaviour “shouldn’t be allowed in the British Army.”

This led to a confrontation between her and a number of other soldiers during which she pushed over a sergeant, Damian Holland.

Holland’s wife Joanne then confronted Ashley and was punched in the face. Ashley is then said to have cold-cocked Fallows, who was knocked unconscious.

At that point a general melee broke out involving the two Canadians and a group of guardsmen.

That was the uncontested version given to the court.

However, the Wolfes say a group of six sergeants attempted to get Ashley to join them in a sexually suggestive mosh pit on the dance floor, which she rejected.

“It had nothing to do with me saying anything about gays. They were acting disgusting — perverted, humping each other and they wanted me to join in their little sex acts on the dance floor,” she said.

“I told them it was inappropriate and then this blond girl comes from nowhere and starts pushing me (she denies hitting the woman) and I got punched out by her husband,” said Ashley.

“Her husband was yelling at me ‘you f——g Yankee bitch’ and punches me so hard in the head I fall to the floor. This is what started the fight. I got blindsided a second time and then this Sgt. Fallows came at me aggressively and I took no chances and beat him to the punch.”

Bill, a former Canadian Army regimental sergeant major, said they tried to entice his wife into lewd behaviour and when she resisted they told her to “f— off.”

“I said ‘don’t talk to her like that’ and they said ‘f— off Yank’ and I told them we’re Canadians. After that I said to Ashley we’re going to leave,” he said.

“Then Holland comes right over the top of his wife and hits Ashley in the face. She fell to the ground and I screamed because I thought she was dead. That’s when the soldiers jumped me. Holland’s wife had pushed him out of the way and two women came to Ashley’s aid. She’s dazed and gets up from the floor and this other guy Fallows was going to hit her when she clocks him with a left hook.

“It was beautiful. Down he went, unconscious,” said Bill who then became embroiled with four soldiers and Holland, who he says bit off the end of his nose.

Vancouver Sun

With files from the Daily Telegraph

maija

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 299
    • View Profile
Re: Citizens defend themselves/others.
« Reply #104 on: September 23, 2009, 07:51:23 AM »
Customer tackles bank robber:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jiTc2iNrHrk
It will seem difficult at first, but everything is difficult at first.
Miyamoto Musashi.

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 53343
    • View Profile
Re: Citizens defend themselves/others.
« Reply #105 on: September 23, 2009, 08:50:46 AM »
 8-) 8-) 8-)

maija

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 299
    • View Profile
Re: Citizens defend themselves/others.
« Reply #106 on: October 09, 2009, 05:30:11 PM »
It will seem difficult at first, but everything is difficult at first.
Miyamoto Musashi.

maija

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 299
    • View Profile
Re: Citizens defend themselves/others.
« Reply #107 on: October 19, 2009, 09:51:09 AM »
VETERAN Melbourne defence lawyer Alex Lewenberg, who was viciously bashed this week by an intruder in his city apartment, has been in plenty of scraps - in and out of court.

As a kid in postwar Europe, the Russian-born Jew was forced to defend himself to survive in street fights, and learnt never to lie down.

He boxed as a 12-year-old in Poland, then fought in Czechoslovakia, Greece and Israel as a welterweight, a trade that ultimately helped finance his studies.
Alex Lewenberg, 68, was back at work a day after fighting off an intruder.

Alex Lewenberg, 68, was back at work a day after fighting off an intruder. Photo: Craig Abraham

In Melbourne over 40 years, he has built a reputation as a pugnacious and successful solicitor, who has tenaciously represented clients, from Billy ''The Texan'' Longley to Boris ''The Black Diamond'' Beljajev and anyone else seeking help.

He has also been stabbed, shot at and had his house bombed by the opposing sides in family law cases, was disqualified 20 years ago for professional misconduct and once was attacked in his office by a woman with a baseball bat.

Given his renowned resilience, recent matters have fallen like water off a rhino's back.

About 9am on Tuesday, Mr Lewenberg, now 68 and still no pushover, was attacked by a younger and fitter man who king-hit him with a fist fitted with a knuckle duster or weighted with rings in the fifth-floor kitchen. ''It was a beautiful right-cross from a short distance,'' Mr Lewenberg recounted yesterday to The Age, with knowledge not flippancy.

The blow smashed into the left side of his face, above his eye, but ''my boxing experience told me that if you are about to fall grab your opponent and hang on to him'', he said.

And hang on he did, but also landed blows in a bloody battle that lasted 20 minutes as the pair, locked together, wrestled across a polished black granite floor.

As Mr Lewenberg edged his attacker away from a row of knives towards a doorway and a lift, the man grabbed a sword from a standing suit of armour called Sir Dudley.

The pair burst through the door, the blade cutting Mr Lewenberg's arm, leg and body, then fell downstairs, and tumbling to the fourth floor.

With blood pouring from both men, the attacker bit Mr Lewenberg's ear. Then, after Mr Lewenberg grabbed his testicles, the man fled.

Back at work the day after, he suspects the attacker was not a local, while police, at this stage, believe it was not a ''disgruntled'' client.

Anyone with information can contact Crime Stoppers on 1800 333 000.

http://www.theage.com.au/national/lawyer-takes-out-thug-ballsandall-20091008-gp2a.html
It will seem difficult at first, but everything is difficult at first.
Miyamoto Musashi.

G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19025
    • View Profile

G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19025
    • View Profile

Jonobos

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 143
    • View Profile
Re: Citizens defend themselves/others.
« Reply #110 on: December 07, 2009, 05:53:34 PM »
Quote
Why it's better to live in a red state.

Not all of us "young liberals" are voting for gun bans... just so you know ;)
When life gives you lemons make lemonade
When life gives you hemlock, do NOT make hemlockade!

G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19025
    • View Profile
Re: Citizens defend themselves/others.
« Reply #111 on: December 07, 2009, 11:18:29 PM »
If you live in a blue state, the gun laws were voted into place long ago. Funny how crime has gotten worse with those laws in place.

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 53343
    • View Profile
Roger Huerta
« Reply #112 on: August 04, 2010, 07:29:05 PM »

Stickgrappler

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 501
  • "...grappling happens. It just does." - Top Dog
    • View Profile
    • Stickgrappler's Sojourn of Septillon Steps
Re: Roger Huerta
« Reply #113 on: August 05, 2010, 01:34:33 PM »
"A good stickgrappler has good stick skills, good grappling, and good stickgrappling and can keep track of all three simultaneously. This is a good trick and can be quite effective." - Marc "Crafty Dog" Denny

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 53343
    • View Profile
Re: Citizens defend themselves/others.
« Reply #114 on: August 06, 2010, 02:17:41 AM »
What is your legal reasoning there?

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 53343
    • View Profile
Zuchinni vs. bear
« Reply #115 on: September 23, 2010, 07:42:34 PM »
Montana woman fends off bear attack with zucchini
This image provided by the Missoula County Sheriff's Office shows the zucchini used by a Montana woman to fend off a bear attack Thursday Sept. 23, 2010 in Frenchtown, Mont. The woman was stirred after midnight by a tussle in the backyard of her home near Frenchtown, Missoula County Sheriff's Lt. Rich Maricelli said. She went to investigate and found a 200-pound black bear attacking one of her two dogs, a 12-year-old collie.
MATT VOLZ
From Associated Press
September 23, 2010 8:06 PM EDT

HELENA, Mont. (AP) — A Montana woman fended off a bear trying to muscle its way into her home Thursday by pelting the animal with a large piece of zucchini from her garden.

The woman suffered minor scratches and one of her dogs was wounded after tussling with the 200-pound bear.

The attack happened just after midnight when the woman let her three dogs into the backyard for their nighttime ritual before she headed to bed, Missoula County Sheriff's Lt. Rich Maricelli said. Authorities believe the black bear was just 25 yards away, eating apples from a tree.

Two of the dogs sensed the bear, began barking and ran away, Maricelli said. The third dog, a 12-year-old collie that wasn't very mobile, remained close to the woman as she stood in the doorway of the home near Frenchtown in western Montana.

Before she knew what was happening, the bear was on top of the dog and batting the collie back and forth, Maricelli said.

"She kicked the bear with her left leg as hard as she could, and she said she felt like she caught it pretty solidly under the chin," Maricelli said.

But as she kicked, the bruin swiped at her leg with its paw and ripped her jeans.

The bear then turned its full attention to the woman in the doorway. She retreated into the house and tried to close the door, but the bear stuck its head and part of a shoulder through the doorway.

The woman held onto the door with her right hand. With her left, she reached behind and grabbed a 14-inch zucchini that she had picked from her garden earlier and was sitting on the kitchen counter, Maricelli said.

She threw the vegetable. It bopped the bruin on the top of its head and the animal fled, Maricelli said.

The woman called for help from a relative staying with her. They found the collie outside, unable to move, and took it to a veterinarian.

The dog appeared to be fine on Thursday, but the vet was keeping it for observation, Maricelli said.

The woman did not need medical attention for the scratches on her leg, though she got a tetanus shot as a precaution, Maricelli said.

Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks officials set up a trap in an attempt to capture the bear, the agency said in a statement.

Besides the nearby fruit trees, there wasn't anything on the woman's property that would attract a bear into the backyard, like garbage or livestock feed, wildlife officials said.

Maricelli interviewed the woman, but said the sheriff's office was complying with her wish not to identify her.

"She was very, very shaken, and it kind of took the humor portion out of it for me," Maricelli said. "She said it had this horrific growl and was snarling.

"(But) she can see the humor in it, and she wanted the story put out so the local residents can take precautionary measures," he added.

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 53343
    • View Profile
How to recognize and fight a terrorist on a plane
« Reply #116 on: October 02, 2010, 01:16:23 PM »
How to Recognize and Fight a Terrorist on a Plane
by Randy Plante (more by this author)
Posted 01/05/2010 ET
Updated 01/05/2010 ET


The attempted bombing of Delta/Northwest 253 on Christmas Day was not the first from the Islamic terrorists nor will it be the last. Since I am a pilot, I have had people ask what can a passenger do onboard an airplane to help thwart a terrorist attack. Having personal experience with a few events myself, as well as reading articles and hearing stories from other crewmembers, I can give you some information which might assist you in dealing with a suspicious passenger or situation.

The first thing to realize is that there are a few different scenarios which the terrorists could be using on your particular flight. (Also realize that it could happen on any flight, not just one originating from a non U.S. location.) Options include testing TSA and law enforcement personnel, testing passengers and crewmembers, observation, dry run/practice, and actual execution of an attack. Of course it is hard to differentiate which scenario is playing out until after your flight lands, but it might assist you in recognizing the threat and knowing how serious your reaction should be if you know all of the options. In most of these instances, their job is to also scare you. Terrorists create terror. If you stop flying, they win. So be pro-active. Maybe something you do will cause them to call off the attack.

As a passenger you must be observant and vigilant. Most often someone notices some unusual activity or behavior. It doesn’t have to be just a person either. Suspicious bags, luggage, packages, notes, pillows, and electronic devices have been found on planes. One of the biggest advantages you have is the ability to profile. TSA refuses to do the obvious thanks to political correctness. Everyone knows who is committing these attacks -- Muslim, Middle-Eastern men between 18 and 40. Maybe al Qaeda is trying to recruit others than don’t fit this profile but it sure fits the mold right now.

Some things to look for: groups or pairs of men, a passenger talking to themselves, speaking Arabic, watching crewmembers (this is different than looking), staring at the cockpit door, long stays or multiple trips to the lavatory, reading a book but not turning any pages, nervousness, being unusual by trying to fit in, taking pictures/videos, not making eye contact. When you are at the boarding area and on the plane if you notice a suspicious passenger, look for others. How many? If it is one or two then they could be planning on bombing the aircraft or just making observations of crew procedures. 6 or more? Then this cell’s objective would be hijacking the plane by brute force. Also remember that there are sleepers that try to blend in with the other passengers and could be very hard to notice. A website reports a well-dressed man in custody that was also a passenger on Delta Flight 253. After an incident, your entire plane might be delayed for security and they will treat everyone as suspects. Also expect the government and airline to try to cover up parts or all of an event.

A recent example of a possible test occurred on Nov 17 with an Airtran flight from Atlanta to Houston. Eleven Muslim men got on the plane and caused a big disturbance and ended with passengers assisting the flight attendants in the commotion. TSA was called, they took the men off, talked to them, and put them back on. The crewmembers walked off the plane refusing to fly it, and then passengers walked off as well. The terrorists tested the TSA and passengers but probably also threatened lawsuits to the government and Airtran. This could be setting up a later mission with hopes the TSA and airline would be afraid to take them off the plane. Just like the Delta flight, the final layer of security, the crewmembers and passengers, are the ones who might have prevented an attack, nothing the government did was successful.

The best time to do something is prior to boarding and before the aircraft pushes back from the gate while the door is still open. This is when you have some control in the situation and easier for the captain to get involved. Before you board you can talk to a TSA employee or gate agent and explain your concerns. The gate agents are usually very busy and might give you the brush off. Talk to other passengers. While on the plane you will have to find a flight attendant, which could prove difficult because at times the boarding process can be quite chaotic. If one flight attendant seems to ignore you then talk to the other one. Maybe ask to see the captain. Write a note. If you are really scared, grab your bags, say you are sick, and get off the plane. Some crewmembers can be just as ignorant about the serious nature of the threat as our government officials. One time after a flight years ago a flight attendant asked me what the captain did about the suspicious passenger. She had called the cockpit inflight to report the behavior to the captain (since retired) and he neglected to tell me anything and did nothing.

While seated look for able-bodied men, military personnel, or deadheading crew to assist you. Maybe you notice a suspicious passenger but do not feel it warrants a visit with TSA/Flight Attendant or it happens inflight . Volunteer yourself or change seats on your own to sit next to or right behind any suspicious passengers. A recent crew moved a soldier to sit next to a nervous Middle-Eastern passenger before pushback. Once while I was deadheading in coach during a flight, the captain told the flight attendant to move me next to a suspicious passenger.

Once airborne there are limited options. Talking to the flight attendants and moving seats is basically all you can do. A divert takes time and would be a major emergency. On the flight I diverted for security issues we had an F-16 on our tail, ready to shoot us down if we didn’t immediately land.

If an actual attack occurs, then all bets are off. Take Action! DO NOT wait for crewmember instruction! This is a life or death situation. The terrorists will be hoping for the element of surprise. You will probably die anyways if the terrorists are successful so you might as well die giving them a fight. If it is a hijacking, block the aisles and do not let them get to the cockpit. For a bombing, jump on the passenger and separate him from the ignition source. For a suspicious package, box, etc. there is a place on the plane to move it to, but do not move it until necessary and with guidance from the crew.

The airlines are doing their best just to stay in business with the recession, bad weather, tough competition, and low fares. The employees are very frustrated with pay cuts, long hours, full planes, grumpy customers and poor morale. The commercial aviation system wasn’t designed to fight terrorists. And don’t necessarily blame the TSA and law enforcement agencies. They have some really hard working personnel trying to protect us. It is the policies implemented by people working in the U.S. government that is the problem, and amazing enough, it is the federal government that is required by law to defend us by the U.S. constitution. So what do they do? President Obama decides to take legal action against CIA employees for using special interrogation techniques to obtain information from terrorists to keep us safe. It was an obvious emotional, liberal, political decision. This will only make it much more difficult for the intelligence agencies to do their jobs and recruit/retain top talent, as well as lowering morale.

Another government employee, the DHS Secretary herself, said after the 12/25 attempted bombing, “the system worked” when it was obvious to the world that it did not. The news media gave President Bush an amazing amount of grief for not connecting the dots with 9/11. Regarding the underwear bomber on Flight 253; his father warned the government, was on a watch list, paid cash for his ticket, no passport, no luggage. A third grader could have connected these dots. The Republicans had to undo the laws and policies enacted by the Clinton Administration that impeded communication between intelligence and law enforcement agencies while President Bush implemented new ones to protect us after September 11. Now Democrats are acting like it is September 10 again.

Government by definition is a bureaucratic monopoly. It is managed by politicians and career bureaucrats. Slow, inefficient, unaccountable. Lots of finger pointing, blame games, commissions, hearings, conferences, meetings, and reports, but do you know anybody that got fired after 9/11, Fort Hood, or any other government blunder? Deja vous with this security lapse? It feels like we are on a team that wants to lose. And I don’t like being on a team that likes losing and neither does millions of people across the United States.

Unfortunately, until the Obama administration, Congress, and our government officials get serious with national security and the war on terrorism, then what we will lose is more of our freedoms and the lives of more American citizens.

Randy Plante is a former Air Force Captain and F-111 pilot. He flew a C-130 with the Air National Guard and served two tours in the Bosnian War. Currently Mr. Plante is a Captain with 19 years at a major airline.

======
Picture these guys shaved and in a suit, and ready to die as a part of killing you.  Are you ready?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JfQ1ps6QXog
« Last Edit: October 02, 2010, 01:24:54 PM by Crafty_Dog »

G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19025
    • View Profile
Re: Citizens defend themselves/others.
« Reply #117 on: October 02, 2010, 01:24:37 PM »
"TSA refuses to do the obvious thanks to political correctness."

**No, TSA refuses to do it because of the DOJ.**

GUIDANCE REGARDING THE USE OF RACE BY FEDERAL LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES

U.S. Department of Justice
Civil Rights Division

GUIDANCE REGARDING THE

USE OF RACE BY FEDERAL LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES

June 2003

INTRODUCTION AND EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

In his February 27, 2001, Address to a Joint Session of Congress, President George W. Bush declared that racial profiling is "wrong and we will end it in America." He directed the Attorney General to review the use by Federal law enforcement authorities of race as a factor in conducting stops, searches and other law enforcement investigative procedures. The Attorney General, in turn, instructed the Civil Rights Division to develop guidance for Federal officials to ensure an end to racial profiling in law enforcement.

"Racial profiling" at its core concerns the invidious use of race or ethnicity as a criterion in conducting stops, searches and other law enforcement investigative procedures. It is premised on the erroneous assumption that any particular individual of one race or ethnicity is more likely to engage in misconduct than any particular individual of another race or ethnicity.

Racial profiling in law enforcement is not merely wrong, but also ineffective. Race-based assumptions in law enforcement perpetuate negative racial stereotypes that are harmful to our rich and diverse democracy, and materially impair our efforts to maintain a fair and just society. (1)

The use of race as the basis for law enforcement decision-making clearly has a terrible cost, both to the individuals who suffer invidious discrimination and to the Nation, whose goal of "liberty and justice for all" recedes with every act of such discrimination. For this reason, this guidance in many cases imposes more restrictions on the consideration of race and ethnicity in Federal law enforcement than the Constitution requires. (2) This guidance prohibits racial profiling in law enforcement practices without hindering the important work of our Nation's public safety officials, particularly the intensified anti-terrorism efforts precipitated by the events of September 11, 2001.

I. Traditional Law Enforcement Activities. Two standards in combination should guide use by Federal law enforcement authorities of race or ethnicity in law enforcement activities:

    * In making routine or spontaneous law enforcement decisions, such as ordinary traffic stops, Federal law enforcement officers may not use race or ethnicity to any degree, except that officers may rely on race and ethnicity in a specific suspect description. This prohibition applies even where the use of race or ethnicity might otherwise be lawful.
    * In conducting activities in connection with a specific investigation, Federal law enforcement officers may consider race and ethnicity only to the extent that there is trustworthy information, relevant to the locality or time frame, that links persons of a particular race or ethnicity to an identified criminal incident, scheme, or organization. This standard applies even where the use of race or ethnicity might otherwise be lawful.

II. National Security and Border Integrity. The above standards do not affect current Federal policy with respect to law enforcement activities and other efforts to defend and safeguard against threats to national security or the integrity of the Nation's borders, (3) to which the following applies:

    * In investigating or preventing threats to national security or other catastrophic events (including the performance of duties related to air transportation security), or in enforcing laws protecting the integrity of the Nation's borders, Federal law enforcement officers may not consider race or ethnicity except to the extent permitted by the Constitution and laws of the United States.

Any questions arising under these standards should be directed to the Department of Justice.

prentice crawford

  • Guest
Pizza goes boom boom
« Reply #118 on: October 03, 2010, 11:18:47 AM »
Woof,
 Conceal Carry in action:

      www.thetimesnews.com/articles/robbers-37314-charlotte-shot.html

                        P.C.
« Last Edit: October 03, 2010, 01:33:33 PM by prentice crawford »

Kaju Dog

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 494
  • organ donor
    • View Profile
Re: Citizens defend themselves/others.
« Reply #119 on: October 03, 2010, 01:55:44 PM »
Woof,
 Conceal Carry in action:

      www.thetimesnews.com/articles/robbers-37314-charlotte-shot.html

Good story...  IMHO CCW's permits are something that those with clean records and especially prior LEO or related training should be automatic.

Even the playing field.

                        P.C.
V/r,

Kaju Dog
dw.kajupit@gmail.com

prentice crawford

  • Guest
Re: Citizens defend themselves/others.
« Reply #120 on: October 03, 2010, 02:24:06 PM »
Woof,
 The shame is that the guy will more than likely get fired by Pizza Hut.
                          P.C.

JDN

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 2004
    • View Profile
Re: Citizens defend themselves/others.
« Reply #121 on: October 04, 2010, 12:11:25 PM »
Personally, I'm in favor of concealed carry.

But, this employee should be fired.  Company Policy is very clear.  The increased corporate
liability of someone innocent getting hurt by a company employee with a gun is too great.

Scurvy Dog

  • Frequent Poster
  • **
  • Posts: 64
    • View Profile
Re: Citizens defend themselves/others.
« Reply #122 on: October 04, 2010, 07:55:05 PM »
Well, even if he gets fired at least he's alive. In the end, that's all that matters.  :evil:

G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19025
    • View Profile
Re: Citizens defend themselves/others.
« Reply #123 on: October 06, 2010, 06:19:05 AM »
I would tend to think that a business that forbids it's employees from using lawful self defense would then take on liability for any victimization they might suffer as the result of the policy. I'm not aware of any caselaw to that effect, however.

prentice crawford

  • Guest
Re: Citizens defend themselves/others.
« Reply #124 on: October 06, 2010, 07:16:26 AM »
Woof,
 If a company takes away a person's right to keep and bear arms and his right to life, liberty and pursuit of happiness along with his right to self defence, then they should be liable if their policy results in the death or injury of one of their employees. But I'm with this guy; better to be fired than dead.
                                  P.C.

JDN

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 2004
    • View Profile
Re: Citizens defend themselves/others.
« Reply #125 on: October 06, 2010, 07:40:01 AM »
As Scurvy said, "Well, even if he gets fired at least he's alive. In the end, that's all that matters."
And Rarick said, it does sound like a "clear case of self defense".

I agree with these statements. 

But, he should definitely get fired.  The companies first responsibility is to the company.  And company policy was clear.

Let's look at a bank robber.  Should the teller's be armed and start shooting inside the bank? 
If innocents get shot - who is liable?
If the teller shoots a coworker - who is liable? 
(Heck even if there is no bank robbery co workers sometimes shoot each other and if their employer
allowed weapons at work - who is liable?)
If a bullet goes through the wall/window and someone dies - who is liable?

As for case law, I doubt if you will find any criticizing an employer for forbidding employees to have guns at work, but you will
find lot's of case law and judgment awards against companies where an employee's action with a weapon accidentally injured
an innocent third party.

G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19025
    • View Profile
Victor Perez: Hero
« Reply #126 on: October 06, 2010, 07:27:12 PM »
http://www.examiner.com/sf-in-san-francisco/hero-victor-perez-saved-kidnapped-girl-from-gregorio-gonzalez-fresno-police-say

Hero Victor Perez saved kidnapped girl from Gregorio Gonzalez, Fresno Police said

Fresno, California, police say an alert and courageous man, Victor Perez, rescued an 8-year-old girl Tuesday morning after she was kidnapped the night before.

Police say the suspect, Gregorio Gonzalez, 24, kidnapped and molested the little girl. They say he was a gang member.

The girl was held captive for 12-hours before she was rescued.

Police showed surveillance video of Gonzalez’s truck on the media and that ultimately led to his capture and the girl’s rescue.

Perez recognized the truck from news reports and used his own car to cut off Gonzalez. Perez told KFSN-TV that it took him four tries before he was able to stop the truck

Perez said,  "At first, I didn't know if it was him or not but when he took off, I kept up with him and I cut him off three times until I caught up with him here. And I told him, that ain't your little girl man."

Gonzalez pushed the girl out of his truck and took off, Perez said. He called police while he stayed with the girl. About 40 minutes later, the California Highway Patrol later spotted the Gonzalez’s truck and arrested him without incident.

Fresno police say that in about 90% of similar cases, children are killed by their kidnappers within 24 hours.

Dog Howie

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 75
  • Unexpected Anomolies
    • View Profile
    • My Duncan RiZe MySpace page
Re: Citizens defend themselves/others.
« Reply #127 on: October 13, 2010, 01:14:15 AM »
Guns in the work place? Not in mine. I run a small business and take the safety of the work environment very seriously. I have been in business for many decades and have seen time and time again pressured employees get to some point if temper loss. I am referring not only to "minimum wage" level employees but also "career" level employees making salaries that would dwarf most of ours. Employees get angry sometimes like when they butt heads with a fellow worker, when their pride is injured because of (even legit) criticism or if they need to be terminated. There is an incredible amount if genetic-based emotion that often displays during a termination or when an employee even thinks/feels their job is being threatened.... their jobs represent their ability to support their lives. These emotions very often defy logic.

One if the benefits of real contact fighting like we do at a Dog Brothers Gathering is that our emotions and our adrendline respond to the fight as if it were a real life or death confrontation even tho intellectually we know our opponent us not intending on killing us. There is a similar phenomena that happens when an employee is, for example, inside a termination process; even tho their lives and family are not really being physically  threatened they FEEL and often ACT exactly like that. Same happens sometimes when they find themselves working with a more talented co-worker and their competitive genetics cause them to feel threatened.

The truth is that the intensity of hardly any if these "feelings" are justified but, again,  bodies can respond in ways that are unpredictable ESPECIALLY BECAUSE IMHO, people are rarely trained in understanding the adrendline state.

Weapons and employees are an EXTREMELY bad idea. The average American employee is unfamiliar with most any bladed weapon or side arm or whatever and therefore are naturally fearful of them because they are what they appear to be... dangerous. Just because a lot of us have training surrounding weapons or are simply exposed and accustomed to some doesn't
Mean the average Joe or Jane is.
« Last Edit: October 13, 2010, 01:19:02 AM by Dog Howie »

Dog Howie

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 75
  • Unexpected Anomolies
    • View Profile
    • My Duncan RiZe MySpace page
Re: Citizens defend themselves/others.
« Reply #128 on: October 13, 2010, 01:32:07 AM »
Any company that says that they would rather have you die than open them up to liability, is a company with hostile work environment policies...........
As a clarification, if you are using the phrase "hostile work environment" to underscore your point then I follow you. However the legal definition and even the intent if the regulations surrounding a hostile work environment have nothing to do the matters of this discussion but are intended, in most situations, to address racial and gender related issues. Thus IMHO, use of the phrase outside of the legislative/legal intent of it dilutes the understanding of the language.

prentice crawford

  • Guest
Re: Citizens defend themselves/others.
« Reply #129 on: December 12, 2010, 10:37:47 AM »
Woof,
 
 www.chicagobreakingnews.com/2010/12/customer-shoots-kills-robber-at-la-tan.html

 Sometimes the tables get turned but wouldn't it be better if the customer already had his own gun? The customer didn't have a choice in this case because it happened in gun ban crazy Chicago. He's not going to be charged because he did act in selfdefense even though the guy he shot and killed was unarmed but that's because the gun he used was the robbers gun. Had he used his own gun even if the robber still had his, he would probably be charged with murder. This is how upside down thinking gun haters operate. It makes no sense at all. Well meaning and not so well meaning idiots pass gun bans to keep guns out of the hands of criminals. Criminals have guns because they ignore gun bans (go figure, they're criminals), lawabiding citizens don't have guns because they obey the bans (go figure, they're lawabiding), and when a defenseless lawabiding unarmed citizen is attacked they have to risk just standing there and being shot or take the attackers gun away, if they manage to do this, then and only then is it O.K. that they have a gun and use it to defend themselves with. Let's just all go and bang our heads against a wall. The fact that this criminal was so use to people not fighting back that he thought he could take his gun back, shows the level of safety that criminals in these gun ban or as I like to call them 'criminal protection zones', feel.  :-P
                                                                P.C.
« Last Edit: December 12, 2010, 10:55:44 AM by prentice crawford »

G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19025
    • View Profile
Re: Citizens defend themselves/others.
« Reply #130 on: December 12, 2010, 10:49:02 AM »
The left doesn't care about what actually works to reduce crime, the gun laws make them feel good. That's what is important to them.

prentice crawford

  • Guest
Re: Citizens defend themselves/others.
« Reply #131 on: December 16, 2010, 08:57:59 AM »
Woof,
 What ya frying granny?

 www.msnbc.msn.com/id/40685243/ns/us_news_weird_news/?gt1=43001

                           P.C.

prentice crawford

  • Guest
Re: Citizens defend themselves/others.
« Reply #132 on: December 17, 2010, 04:03:09 AM »
Woof,
 Three on one and one wins!

 www.msnbc.msn.com/id/40713870/ns/us_news-crime_and_courts
                                   P.C.

Scurvy Dog

  • Frequent Poster
  • **
  • Posts: 64
    • View Profile
Re: Citizens defend themselves/others.
« Reply #133 on: December 17, 2010, 12:52:30 PM »
 :-D

I was just watching the same thing.
http://abclocal.go.com/ktrk/story?section=news/local&id=7848006

Hope the guy is ok.

G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19025
    • View Profile
Re: Citizens defend themselves/others.
« Reply #134 on: December 17, 2010, 01:03:46 PM »
Got to love a state where CCW is available and self defense is readily recognized. I hope this guy recovers quickly.

prentice crawford

  • Guest
Re: Citizens defend themselves/others.
« Reply #135 on: January 10, 2011, 08:52:08 AM »
Woof,
 The media isn't covering it but one of the guys that tackled the AZ shooter was armed and said he was inside the Safeway when he heard the gunfire. He took the safety off his weapon and went outside and got to the guy just as he ran out of ammo and instead of shooting him he just grabbed him along with another guy. So much for the smear the Left puts on concealed carry people as being vigilantes.
                                  P.C.

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 53343
    • View Profile
Re: Citizens defend themselves/others.
« Reply #136 on: January 10, 2011, 09:15:15 AM »
Good news-- you have a citation on that so I can play it forward?

prentice crawford

  • Guest
Re: Citizens defend themselves/others.
« Reply #137 on: January 10, 2011, 09:29:41 AM »
Woof,
 It was on Fox News channel and I have looked for it being mention anywhere else and it has not been reported on. :x And I'll correct myself that the guy was in the near by Walgreens not Safeway and add that he saw the shooter's weapon's slide was locked back and went for the tackle.
                                P.C.
« Last Edit: January 10, 2011, 09:36:38 AM by prentice crawford »

prentice crawford

  • Guest
Media Blackout of Conceal Carry Hero
« Reply #138 on: January 10, 2011, 09:43:45 AM »
Woof,
 An update, the other guy that help bring the shooter down was retired military...

         www.wnep.com/wnep-schyl-man-tackled-az-gunman-schuylkill-ties,0,7811918.story

                                        P.C.
« Last Edit: January 10, 2011, 09:49:54 AM by prentice crawford »

prentice crawford

  • Guest
Armed Citizen
« Reply #139 on: January 11, 2011, 07:14:06 AM »
Woof,
 Here is the guy that was packing... scroll down to the interview with the title, One of the men who subdued Longhner had a gun, and he was ready to use it.

 http://www.foxnewsinsider.com/author/fox-and-friends/

 Note that when he came up to the scene it wasn't the shooter that had the gun anymore but he didn't know that and seeing the gun was empty grabbed that guy first. This shows even better judgement and control on his part in that he didn't inadvertently shoot a innocent man with the gun. I think if he had been there when the shooting first started and hadn't been shot himself at the first, he may have prevented some of the deaths but not all. I still think it speaks very highly as to how responsible he was as a conceal carry citizen.

                                 P.C.
« Last Edit: January 11, 2011, 07:31:15 AM by prentice crawford »

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 53343
    • View Profile
Re: Citizens defend themselves/others.
« Reply #140 on: January 11, 2011, 08:06:40 AM »
Yes, very sound work by this man.

I loved the slack-jaw response of the blondie when he answered in the affirmative about having a gun with him and being ready to use it.

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 53343
    • View Profile
POTH on the killer
« Reply #141 on: January 12, 2011, 02:19:17 AM »
TUCSON — The police were sent to the home where Jared L. Loughner lived with his family on more than one occasion before the attack here on Saturday that left a congresswoman fighting for her life and six others dead, the Pima County Sheriff’s Department said on Tuesday.

A spokesman, Jason Ogan, said the details of the calls were being reviewed by legal counsel and would be released as soon as the review was complete. He said he did not know what the calls were about — they could possibly have been minor, even trivial matters — or whether they involved Jared Loughner or another member of the household.

A friend of Mr. Loughner’s also said in an interview on Tuesday that Mr. Loughner, 22, was skilled with a gun — as early as high school — and had talked about a philosophy of fostering chaos.

The news of police involvement with the Loughners suggests that county sheriff’s deputies were at least familiar with the family, even if the reason for their visits was unclear as of Tuesday night.

The account by Mr. Loughner’s friend, a rare extended interview with someone close to Mr. Loughner in recent years, added some details to the emerging portrait of the suspect and his family.

“He was a nihilist and loves causing chaos, and that is probably why he did the shooting, along with the fact he was sick in the head,” said Zane Gutierrez, 21, who was living in a trailer outside Tucson and met Mr. Loughner sometimes to shoot at cans for target practice.

The Loughner family released a statement on Tuesday, its first since the attacks, expressing — in a six-line document handed to reporters outside their house — sorrow for the losses experienced by the victims and their families.

“It may not make any difference, but we wish that we could change the heinous events of Saturday,” the statement said. “There are no words that can possibly express how we feel. We wish that there were, so we could make you feel better.”

The new details from Mr. Gutierrez about Mr. Loughner — including his philosophy of anarchy and his expertise with a handgun, suggest that the earliest signs of behavior that may have ultimately led to the attacks started several years ago.

Mr. Gutierrez said his friend had become obsessed with the meaning of dreams and their importance. He talked about reading Friedrich Nietzsche’s book “The Will To Power” and embraced ideas about the corrosive, destructive effects of nihilism — a belief in nothing. And every day, his friend said, Mr. Loughner would get up and write in his dream journal, recording the world he experienced in sleep and its possible meanings.

“Jared felt nothing existed but his subconscious,” Mr. Gutierrez said. “The dream world was what was real to Jared, not the day-to-day of our lives.”

And that dream world, his friend said, could be downright strange.

“He would ask me constantly, ‘Do you see that blue tree over there?’ He would admit to seeing the sky as orange and the grass as blue,” Mr. Gutierrez said. “Normal people don’t talk about that stuff.”

He added that Mr. Loughner “used the word hollow to describe how fake the real world was to him.”

As his behavior grew more puzzling to his friends, he was getting better with a pistol. Starting in high school, Mr. Loughner honed his marksmanship with a 9-millimeter pistol, the same caliber weapon used in the attack Saturday, until he became proficient at handling the weapon and firing it quickly.

“If he had a gun pointed at me, there is nothing I could do because he would make it count,” Mr. Gutierrez said. “He was quick.”

He also said that Mr. Loughner had increasing trouble interacting in social settings — during one party, for instance, Mr. Loughner retreated upstairs alone to a room and was found reading a dictionary.

Jared Loughner’s retreat — whether into the desert with his gun, or into the recesses of his dreams — coincided with a broader retreat by the Loughner family that left them increasingly isolated from their community, neighbors said.

===========

 



His father, Randy, once more of a presence in their mostly working-class neighborhood in northwest Tucson as he went off to work as a carpet-layer and pool-deck installer, became a silent and often sullen presence.

One neighbor, George Gayan, who said he had known the family for 30 years, described a kind of a gradual “pulling back” by the family.
“People do this for different reasons,” said Mr. Gayan, 82. “I don’t know why.”

Some years ago, Randy Loughner built a wall to shield the side porch of the family’s home. Because of his often bellicose attitude, neighbors sometimes kept their distance.

Leslie Cooper owns the house next door, where her son and his family live. She recounted a time when her grandchildren would not chase after a ball that landed in the Loughners’ backyard.

“They had to buy a new one,” said Ms. Cooper, who was told of the incident by her son. “I’d tell my son, those are not normal people over there — there’s a reason why they stick to themselves,” she said, adding that she had warned him to steer clear of Randy Loughner.

“I said, be careful around that guy — don’t get him angry,” she added.

Other people in the neighborhood, though, said they saw glimpses of compassion in the Loughner family, and an ability to reach out to others, sometimes unexpectedly.

Richard Mckinley, 41, whose mother lives down the street from the Loughners, said his mother appreciated how Randy and Amy Loughner were among the first people to visit when her husband died two years ago.

“They were some of the first people to pay respects,” he said.

In contrast to the reputation of his father, Jared Loughner’s mother, Amy, is considered pleasant but reserved by those who know her.

She commuted about an hour each day to her job managing Agua Caliente Park, an area of spring-fed ponds surrounded by giant palm trees in the desert on the outskirts of Tucson. The impeccably maintained park was quiet Tuesday, but for the chirping of the dozens of species of birds that call it home and the occasional crunch of a birder’s hiking boots along the trails.

Donna DeHaan, a former board member of the nonprofit group that helps support the park, said Ms. Loughner was a reliable manager with a good background in environmental issues. Ms. DeHaan said she never spoke about her family but was always pleasant, if a tad quiet and shy.

Mr. Gutierrez said he sensed very little communication within the family when he was among them.

“Every time I met his parents they were kind of quiet and estranged,” he said. Jared Loughner did not complain about his parents, Mr. Gutierrez said, and seemed to simply accept the lack of interaction as a fact of life.

“Jared really did not talk to his parents or talk about them,” Mr. Gutierrez said. “I felt they were not really good reaching out and he was not good at reaching out to his parents.”

After his arrest for possession of drug paraphernalia in 2007, Mr. Loughner was ordered to attend a diversion program run by the county attorney’s office. The chief deputy county attorney, Amelia Craig Cramer, said the program is intended for first-time offenders who have no history of violence or serious mental illness.

Mr. Loughner was referred to an approved drug education program, and completed the required sessions in 30 days.

But the program is primarily educational, Ms. Cramer said, focused on “the dangers of drugs and the dangers of substance abuse,” rather than the kind of in-depth counseling that friends, including Mr. Gutierrez, strongly felt that Mr. Loughner needed.

“It got worse over time,” Mr. Gutierrez said. He said he stopped talking to Mr. Loughner last March, when their interactions grew increasingly unpredictable and troubling.

“He would call me at 2 a.m. and asked, ‘Are you hanging out in front of my house, stalking me?’ He started to get really paranoid, and said he did not want to see us anymore and did not trust us,” Mr. Gutierrez said, referring to himself and another friend. “He thought we were plotting to kill him or steal his car.”

prentice crawford

  • Guest
Re: Citizens defend themselves/others.
« Reply #142 on: January 12, 2011, 08:03:22 AM »
Woof,
 Sounds to me like the Sheriff wasn't very proactive in heading this guy off, he could have on a number of contacts with Jared, had him held for a 72 hour mental evaluation under AZ law. Jared's mother worked for the local government there, I wonder if the Sheriff just let things go because of that. The AP has revealed that the Sheriff has been the source of the leaked writtings found at the Loungher's home. To date those snippets are: I planned ahead, My assassination, Giffords, and the latest one Die B....
 It seems to me that he is intentionally putting this out to prop up his assertions that Jared was acting out of political hate whipped up by political rhetoric from the Right. I find it to reprehensible and appalling that a law enforcement official would leak evidence that could harm the case against this man just to support his personal political agenda of smearing the Right, especially a case that may involve the death penally.
                                               P.C.

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 13726
    • View Profile
Re: Citizens defend themselves/others.
« Reply #143 on: January 12, 2011, 10:09:35 AM »
P.C. wrote: " Sounds to me like the Sheriff wasn't very proactive in heading this guy off, he could have on a number of contacts with Jared, had him held for a 72 hour mental evaluation under AZ law."

I was carefully trying to think of what in gun law could or should have stopped this pyscho's purchase without destroying everyone else's rights.  But first you would have to mark this sick man with a searchable record of what he had become.  A background check wouldn't pick anything up if his friends, family, teachers and even the sheriff all had looked the other way.

I drove a bipolar woman against her will to the emergency room during an episode.  She thought she was going to see her doctor, but he had said to take her to the emergency room.  The doctor there heard and ignored my concerns, declared her no threat, prescribed her a narcotic and she was back in the same emergency room the next day this time with the 72 hour hold followed with criminal charges for killing someone with her car.  For about 3/4 of a second I gave that same doctor an icy stare I think he will remember. 

A slippery slope but somewhere we need to look into what your rights are or are not, as people around you see your grip on reality deteriorating.

The Tao

  • Guest
Re: Citizens defend themselves/others.
« Reply #144 on: January 12, 2011, 10:25:30 AM »
A slippery slope but somewhere we need to look into what your rights are or are not, as people around you see your grip on reality deteriorating.

Life will never be safe. We all have people around us every day, that could hurt us, criminals, loners with nothing to lose, or people that are just angry and crazy. We will never stop them because we can't arrest people preemptively. To do so would result in a police state resembling the Cheka. This is why it is so important that we all remain capable of defending ourselves. For thousands of years, we all are ultimately responsible for our own safety.

G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19025
    • View Profile
Re: Citizens defend themselves/others.
« Reply #145 on: January 13, 2011, 04:49:06 PM »
PC,

The Pima county Sheriff is a douche.

Doug,

The federal law says if you are adjudicated mentally defective (ill), then you will be denied by Instacheck. If you have some degree of mental illness, but have not gone before a judge, then there is no legal reason to deny the purchase. To place a person on a 72 hr. psych hold, a peace officer or medical professional (in general, in most all states) must reasonably believe that the person is a threat to self or others or is gravely disabled, unable to care for themselves. You must be able to articulate why you believe this to be the case. You face both civil and criminal liability for seizing a person and not having a judge finding the seizure reasonable. To be adjudicated, after the 72 hr. hold, the shrink must go before a judge and have the judge sign off on an involuntary commitment to a psych facility. Now, keep in mind that a career psych patient that always voluntarily committed themselves to inpatient treatment wouldn't have the paper trail to prevent them from being able to purchase a firearm.

Z,

Yup.

The Tao

  • Guest
Re: Citizens defend themselves/others.
« Reply #146 on: January 13, 2011, 05:13:59 PM »
Now, keep in mind that a career psych patient that always voluntarily committed themselves to inpatient treatment wouldn't have the paper trail to prevent them from being able to purchase a firearm.


That's odd. It was my understanding that the DOJ had access to any records, both criminal and psychiatric, that would preclude any ineligible person from having a firearm; meaning that obviously criminal records are turned over to NCIC and I'm reasonably certain that involuntary hold records are as well. Is the hang up the lack of law mandating that private sector psychiatrists are not required to break their patient's confidentiality in much the same way lawyers are barred from doing such?

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 13726
    • View Profile
Re: Citizens defend themselves/others.
« Reply #147 on: January 13, 2011, 05:35:48 PM »
GM, I agree.  What I am getting at is that process needs to be possible and needs to be utilized.  These people need at some point to be identified and marked, as sufficient information emergess,  so they will fail the instacheck.  It isn't happening so we are bound to repeat this and lose rights ourselves.  Everyone who came in contact with him seemed to know of his mental health deterioration.  Like getting your elderly parents at some point to quit driving, there needs to be a mechanism that is used. In child protection we have what we call mandatory reporters. The doctor, teacher etc. are required to report possible evidence.  Very soon I think there will be bills floated in her name like we had with the Brady bill, further restricting rights of law abiding citizens. Maybe it will be forced tests for all in Obamacare with results in your government issued, embedded chip :-( if we don't quickly think of a better way.  Zen wrote: "we all are ultimately responsible for our own safety".  Please tell that to the 11 month old daughter I left out of the story, twice sent by separate ambulance to the emergency room in negligent crashes; the fatality was a woman properly standing in a median crosswalk.  After conviction for child endangerment and vehicular homocide and real time served,she is again driving and 'no threat', with no oversight.  Hopefully unarmed.

From the other posts I think we are looking in the same direction but need answers.  There is a privacy issue and a liberty issue competing with a public safety issue.

G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19025
    • View Profile
Re: Citizens defend themselves/others.
« Reply #148 on: January 13, 2011, 05:41:53 PM »
As I understand, unless there is a legal proceeding where a person is committed to a psych facility against their will, there is no disqualification from purchase/possession of a firearm. DOJ would have no way of knowing about anything else.

G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19025
    • View Profile
Re: Citizens defend themselves/others.
« Reply #149 on: January 13, 2011, 05:48:06 PM »
Doug,

There is no easy answer. In the old days, state mental hospitals housed lots of seriously mentally ill people. They also housed people that might be eccentric or non-conformist or otherwise not deserving of being deprived of personal freedoms.

Now, even the seriously mentally ill get stabilized on meds and kicked out the door. Few mentally ill in the US stay in psych facilities long term, unless they have the financial ability to pay for long term inpatient care.

Keep in mind that lots of guns in the US trade hands while never getting near a licensed dealer with instacheck.