In Virginia, where the open carry of firearms is legal and becoming more common, George Mason University gives students advice on what to do if they should see such firearms.

The Emergency Action Flyer (link in PDF) has a section on campus violence that tells students what to do if they see someone with any sort of weapon. It boils down to the following:

1 - If inside, run outside
2 - If outside, run inside
3 - Call the cops

If the cops have guns, I presume you repeat the whole process.

From VCDL Member Steve Oster:

On my way to the restrooms, I see these blue kiosks in the distance. As I approach, it becomes clear these are emergency call stations, complete with illuminated blue lights (to reassure you that it's just like having a police cruiser at your beck and call).

Imagine the relief would-be victims must feel, spying this beacon in the night! Fleeing to its safety, secure in the knowledge that rescue is at hand, if they can just outrun their attacker! "I'm saved! I'm saved!" they're thinking. Imagine their shock upon arriving at this totem pole of security with the following notice:

911 OUT OF ORDER

Please note that this is evidently not a recent, temporary interruption of service. That notice is attached with 4 sheet metal screws!

When seconds count... police are minutes away you're screwed.

In the gun rights for college students debate, anti-gun advocates fall prey to Ravenwood's Law.

The push to allow guns on campus rankles Garrett Evans, who was shot in both legs during the Virginia Tech rampage, and Omar Samaha, whose younger sister, Reema, was killed.

"Having guns in the classroom only makes things worse," says Evans, 31. He says the Virginia Tech gunman, Seung Hui Cho, walked into his German class and began shooting so quickly that no one would have had time to shoot back.

Samaha says guns on campus are a risk in an environment where young people drink and fight and are not always able to control their emotions.

"It's kind of a crazy notion to think about," he says. "It takes us back to the Wild, Wild West."

Yee haw!

A few days ago I read the shock and awe about the Russians having a handgun in space. Now Say Uncle thinks we are losing the space race.

Sounds reasonable to me. I mean, you never know when you'll encounter a moon monster or someone with space crazies.

Of course the anti-gunners are also genuinely shocked. I mean, a gun! GASP! Whatever the kerfuffle, I don't blame the Russkies one bit.

Remember that NASA bitch that got caught up in a love triange, went psycho, and drove 9 hours without peeing so she could terrorize her collegue? It seems to me that the Russian cosmonauts are perfectly justified in wanting a little home defense. Especially when NASA comes knocking for a visit.

I have long advocated that this article from the Independent Woman's Forum should be required reading of all women. I would add that this video should be also be a must see.

Philip Van Cleave tells you what the drive-by media won't:

A concealed handgun permit holder in Colorado has stopped a violent attack by a vicious criminal! She volunteered to work security at her church after a violent attack at another Colorado church earlier that day. Thankfully she did so, as she shot and killed a criminal who had opened fire in the church.

This is exactly what VCDL has been saying would happen if we get rid of gun free zones.

Had that permit holder not been armed because she was in a gun-free zone, how many innocent, irreplaceable lives would have been lost?

THIS is why we want to get rid of university gun bans.

THIS is why we want to get rid of the restaurant concealed carry ban.

THIS is why we want to get rid of the gun ban in the non-sterile area of airport terminals.

THIS is why we want to get rid of the gun ban for concealed handgun permit holders on K-12 school property.

Notice in the links below how the media, especially CNN, desperately want to make the CHP
holder an "authority" figure. (Heaven forbid that a regular citizen with a gun would save any lives.) The media did this by emphasizing that she was a "security guard" and saying that she has a "law enforcement background."

The pastor said in other interviews that she is a CHP holder and volunteered to guard the church.

The criminal had a gun, smoke grenade, and over 500 rounds of ammunition on him. He meant business and meant to slaughter as many people as he could.

Another tough lesson from D.C.: gun bans, "crime cameras", and police cannot prevent crime. Fox 5 reports:

Two men were shot in broad daylight Sunday afternoon in DC's Shaw neighborhood along busy 7th and O Streets in Northwest DC.

One man was shot in the chest but is expected to survive. The other was grazed by a bullet in the hand.

A DC Police Officer was less than a block away from the attack and another, off-duty officer happened to be close by.

There is a crime camera positioned close by and police hope that its pictures will help them catch the shooters. Police are on the lookout for a white car seen driving away from the scene.

Generally speaking, Northwest D.C. is considered the safest area of the city. Even so, crime is so bad in the Shaw neighborhood police were ordered months ago to patrol the area 24/7.

President Charles Steger
Virginia Tech
210 Burruss Hall (0131)
Blacksburg, VA 24061

Dear President Steger,

As an alumnus of Virginia Tech who provides annual financial support, I cannot tell you how distressing it is for me to read that Virginia Tech bans the lawful carry and possession of firearms. Someone who has put in the effort to train and apply for a Virginia Concealed Handgun Permit is not a threat to students, faculty, or the learning environment at Virginia Tech. In fact CHP holders are a lot less likely to commit crimes than the general population.

Likewise, by banning firearms you are setting up victim disarmament zones, whereby students are forced to choose between attending Virginia Tech and their personal safety. And by disarming law abiding citizens, you also make Virginia Tech responsible for student's safety. If a student who was prevented from protecting herself because of your reckless firearm ban were to become the victim of rape or violence, Virginia Tech could risk legal and financial liability. The policy also appears to violate Virginia preemption laws, which forbid local governments (and state and local entities) from passing more restrictive laws than the Commonwealth.

I urge you to rethink the position, and remove the ban.

Sincerely,

Steve Ravenwood '95

I mailed this letter to President Steger on April 14, 2005.

A lot of good it did her: Police: Slain woman had restraining order

That reminds me, it's been a while so here is my obligatory link to an article by the Independent Women's Forum on disarming women. This should be required reading for all women.

Like I said years ago, the article makes several key points:

• Less than 5% of 911 calls dispatched to police are early enough to actually prevent a crime.
  
• Police and government organizations have no legal obligation to protect you as an individual.
  
• Firearms proficiency can take only a few hours of practice.
  
• While martial arts training may "equalize" the disparity between a woman and an attacker, multiple attackers have an advantage.
  
• Firearms proficiency can make ANY woman strong enough to fend off attackers, regardless of their size or strength.
  
• In more than 92% of "defensive gun uses" simply brandishing a firearm, or firing a warning shot is enough.

Draconian gun control laws and mandatory waiting periods only serve to put law abiding citizens at risk. Forcing or encouraging women to rely on restraining orders and the 9-1-1 system as means of protection is not only foolhardy, it's dangerous. A lot of good a court order does when she's dead. Maybe they can paste it on her tombstone.

Besides, wearing a pistol makes you look thinner. Ladies, just ask any man, "Does this gun make me look fat?"

Is this just being cautious or an overreaction to an unverified threat?

Eight Montgomery County schools were in lock-down Wednesday morning after an unverified threat made at a school bus stop, a school spokeswoman said.

Montgomery County schools spokeswoman Kate Harrison said eight schools, including elementary and high schools, were placed on a "Code Blue" alert after the threat.

Code Blue means students must remain where they are in the school, Harrison said.

Since when did this become a good idea? When their safety is threatened the school's reaction is to make all the children stay where they are instead of seeking shelter.

It's a rabbit like response. If I don't move, he won't see me. And if a killer really were on the loose all they'd have to do is go room to room.

I've been saying for years that guns are a great equalizer. A 6' 2'' - 300-lb thug doesn't stand much of a chance against even the smallest victim if they are ready, willing, and able to use a gun for their personal protection.

In this case that small victim was a little old lady in a wheelchair, and she was packing some serious heat. Keep in mind that this happened in Manhattan, NYC an environment that is usually considered a "gun-free zone".

Margaret Johnson might have looked like an easy target.

But when a mugger tried to grab a chain off her neck Friday, the wheelchair-bound 56-year-old pulled out her licensed .357 pistol (sic) and shot him, police said.

Johnson said she was in Manhattan's Harlem neighborhood on her way to a shooting range when the man, identified by police as 45-year-old Deron Johnson, came up from behind and went for the chain.

"There's not much to it," she said in a brief interview. "Somebody tried to mug me, and I shot him."

Deron Johnson was taken to Harlem Hospital with a single bullet wound in the elbow, police said. He faces a robbery charge, said Lt. John Grimpel, a police spokesman.

Margaret Johnson, who lives in Harlem, has a permit for the weapon and does not face charges, Grimpel said. She also was taken to the hospital with minor injuries and later released.

Gun permits in New York City are extremely rare, especially for regular-joe citizens who live in Harlem. Permits are usually reserved for the well connected aristocracy like a congressman or celebrity.

To read about a little old lady, packing heat, on her way to a gun range, using a manly .357 to ward off an attacker. . .the only thing that could have made it better would be hauling the guy away in a body bag.

The increasing frequency of Washington DC's "crime emergencies" has alarmed city officials so much that they are taking action. Taking pages directly from the British playbook, Police Chief Ramsey plans to set up cameras to record the murders and rapes that occur daily in some D.C. neighborhoods.

As if to underscore the crime problem, which has been marked among juveniles, a man was killed yesterday at one of the [proposed camera] sites, and a 15-year-old was charged in the death. . .

Had the cameras been up, investigators could have checked whether the killing was recorded. Cameras will roll 24 hours a day but will not be monitored live.

So they aren't trying to prevent crime so much as make it easier for them to investigate the carnage afterward, which reiterates the whole problem of relying on police protection and the 9-1-1 emergency system. On average, police can only prevent crime 5% of the time. For the most part police investigate crimes after the fact and try to bring criminals to justice. That doesn't mean much to the victims.

That could be the morning headline if you follow Virginia Game Warden Sgt. Paul Atkins advice:

He said turning lights on can often scare a black bear away. In extreme cases, he suggested, residents could buy a paint-ball gun. The non-lethal sting of a paint-ball, he said, is enough to frighten black bears into running for cover. The guns are even issued to some animal control officers, he said.

Remind me never to work for animal control.

He added that state game wardens will come to remove the bear if it becomes a nuisance.

Armed with paint ball guns I presume.

As if you had to justify your right to carry a firearm for self defense, CNN reports:

A group of as many as 15 youths punched, kicked and jumped on McClain after he honked for them to move out of the street, witnesses said.

And yes, I do think that shooting a 14 to 16 year old "child" is justified under these circumstances. And you probably don't have to shoot too many of them before they think twice about thug violence.

Officer Patrick Hickey's experience shows just how dangerous it can be out there.

Authorities said Officer Patrick Hickey was checking license plates as part of a recent drug investigation when 33-year-old Stewart Jenkins asked him "What's up?"

"What's up?" Hickey said he responded.

After another exchange, Jenkins allegedly retorted: "I'll show you what's up!" and went inside a nearby house and emerged with a .38 caliber handgun, police said.

Presumably Hickey was in plain clothes and in a not-so-nice neighborhood. The bad guy backed down after Officer Hickey displayed his badge and pulled his own sidearm.

Authorities said Jenkins was wanted in Michigan, where he was on parole for assault.

Police said he was carrying $700 and a small amount of what they suspected was crack cocaine. A search of his house turned up $8,000 and 15 grams of suspected crack, authorities said.

It just goes to show you how a simple gesture or comment can put your life in danger.

From Ireland, comes this tale of woe about Barry Duggan, who suffered from a coma and was hospitalized for 25 days after being savagely attacked.

Mr Duggan was knocked to the ground and kicked on the head repeatedly. As a result he suffered severe brain and head injuries; he sustained a fractured skull as well as a broken jaw and eye socket. For five months after he was discharged from hospital he continued to require the support of a speech therapist, an occupational therapist and a physiotherapist.

Duggan's attackers plead guilty to the assault and were sentenced to three months.

Judge Donagh McDonagh actually imposed three-year sentences, but suspended two years and nine months on the basis that the pair had clean records and were unlikely to come to the attention of the gardai again. The judge added that he did not wish to "destroy young men's lives".

Well, that's a relief. Too bad he wasn't presiding over the case of 61-year old Padraig Nally. Nally was sentenced to 6 years in prison after he shot and killed John Ward.

During the trial it was claimed that Mr Ward entered Mr Nally's isolated home through a back door uninvited when the farmer was in an outhouse. Mr Nally fired a shotgun at Ward when he emerged, hitting him in the hip. He then beat him with a piece of wood about 20 times. When Ward tried to flee the area Nally reloaded the gun and shot him in the back, killing him.

Nally had no prior offenses and was not viewed as a danger to society. Granted he apparently followed Ward for a short distance as he was fleeing and shoot him in the back. But it's doubtful that Ward was just out for a midnight stroll like they're implying. After a LOT of searching, it was revealed that "Mr Ward had 12 previous convictions for burglary, possession of stolen goods and other offences, and had been facing charges of attacking garda officers with a slash hook at the time of his death."

Pirates boldly attacked a cruise ship off the coast of Africa. The ship was able to elude and outrun the pirates, but Publicola suggests an alternate defense: return fire.

Even with small arms (i.e. rifles) it could have been effective. Why?

"The British news agency Press Association said passengers awoke to the sound of gunfire as two 25-foot inflatable boats approached the liner."

Inflatable boats? I'll grant that some of the sturdier ones use multiple compartments of air filled cells & are quite seaworthy, but a clip from a Garand in each would have caused enough damage to slow them down if not sink them.

Even if they were using unsinkable Boston Whalers, active resistance is always preferred. Thugs prefer easy prey, and a hail of bullets might be enough to convince pirates to look elsewhere.

When I first saw the movie 'Panic Room', I thought the storyline was a big joke. The idea of having a fortress-like safe room in your home just seems dumb. But apparently panic rooms are becoming a big hit over in the U.K..

So far around 25 victims of domestic violence in Islington have had one of the re-inforced safe rooms fitted by security specialists.

If they fear they are about to be assaulted by their partner or ex, they can flee to the room, lock themselves in and then call the police.

The rooms - which cost up to �2,800 each - are fitted with dedicated emergency phone lines connected direct to the police. The solid wooden doors are often strengthened by metal doors and also fireproofed to protect against arson attacks.

The idea comes from the United States, where panic rooms have become popular with the rich and famous since the September 11 terror attacks and because of increasing levels of gun crime.

That's almost $5,000 USD, funded by U.K. taxpayers no doubt. An inexpensive shotgun, however, cost about $200 and would take about 1 or 2 days to learn how to use effectively. It also prevents recidivism.

Say what you want, but this guy's got cajones.

It looked like a crime scene, but no charges will be filed after Wayne Goldsberry killed a buck with his bare hands in his daughter's bedroom.

The engagement lasted an exhausting 40 minutes, but Goldsberry finally subdued the five-point whitetail deer that crashed through a bedroom window at his daughter's home Friday.

When it was over, blood splattered the walls and the deer lay on the bedroom floor, its neck broken.

The Dallas News reports that area police officers may no longer be required to respond to burglar alarms. Apparently a vast majority of the alarms are false, so as police budgets tighten look for this trend to grow. Earlier this year a Californian city did the same thing.

Police Chief David Kunkle and several City Council members are advocating "verified response" to keep police patrolling neighborhoods and responding to higher-priority calls. Almost all activated burglar alarms in Dallas are false, statistics indicate.

A verified-response system would most likely require security companies to determine whether an activated alarm was valid before officers were dispatched. That would probably cost the companies money, while Dallas saved money.

Keep in mind that police officers are not bound to serve and protect individuals, only the collective. Unfortunately they are only able to stop crime about 5% of the time, with the other 95% of their work consisting of investigating after the fact and filling out reports. The only one who can really look out for number one is you.

Hurricane Katrina's wake has a lot of people scrambling to put together an emergency preparedness kit. (Not me, of course, because I already have one.) But when the Arlington Police Chief was asked about personal protection, he stopped short of demonizing guns and instead stressed that it was a personal choice and that those that do opt to arm themselves practice good gun safety.

Arlington officials expressed caution as to whether local residents should have a weapon on hand to protect themselves.

Police Chief Douglas Scott declined to offer a recommendation one way or another, saying it was a choice each individual should be responsible for making.

"Lots of people absolutely don't feel comfortable owning a gun," Scott said. "Responsible gun owners might decide that they want a firearm to be a part of their emergency preparedness kit." [...]

"Our encouragement is always to take proper precautions, particularly around kids," Scott said.

This may not sound like much, but keep in mind that this is a huge step for Arlington, a deep blue county with a shaky record on gun freedom.

Gunner at No Quarters notes that when the shit hits the fan, a little gun nuttery suddenly doesn't seem so bad.

A lot of liberal anti-gunners have become pro-gun and are probably not happy with that fact.

You might note with all of the gun violence the Brady Center has not issues one single press release. Maybe even they see the people protecting themselves with firearms in the news and know they lost this battle. They would look pretty bad if they called for the disarming of all of New Orleans.

Actually, between the looters and people shooting at the rescue workers, I'm surprised they haven't called for more "disarmament".

Kevin Baker (via Doc Russia) noticed even more anti-gunners coming over to the dark side.

(James) Tilghman said he had been appalled by the violence in New Orleans and was concerned that some of it might spill over into his community with the arrival of more survivors. "I'm totally against guns, but I bought one this week," he said.

I noticed a similar phenomenon during the tsunami disaster, when a liberal friend of mine called me up to help him purchase his first handgun. He told me that he didn't think he'd ever buy a gun, until he saw that any random natural disaster can leave people fending for themselves.

But some people already knew that.

Another one from Kevin Baker (he's on a roll), from the NY Times, no less.

A woman is being stabbed to death by her ex-husband in the middle of a Wal-Mart store. A passerby - who routinely carries a gun for self defense - intervenes on her behalf and sends the ex-husband to meet his maker. The police say it's justified and a district attorney is reviewing the case but will not likely file charges. But the gun fearing wussies and anti-self-defense crowd is going nuts.

Kevin Baker points out that the moonbats are actually saying this guy had no right to intervene. He should have ignored the stabbing and minded his own business. Here's a sampling from the various wingnuts:

The shooting may have been justified but not killing the man because under the law, the penalty for stabbing your ex-wife is not death...

Absolutely no one here knows squat as to whether an innocent life was saved or not. Turns out, an innocent life was not saved (as defined under the law). Whether threatening with a knife (not a capital offense) or with a cannon...

This law stinks to start with, but what moron shoots to kill when a shot into the ceiling, or failing that, a shot to the foot would have likely stopped this situation...

This is what I like to call the short skirt syndrome. They have sypmathy for the rapist and blame the victim for wearing a short skirt. I'd have more respect for them if they didn't mince words and came right out and said "The bitch had it coming". That way we'd at least know where they're coming from.

If I had my way, "a restraining order would restore the basic firearms rights of anyone it protects. Once the judge signs off on it, it would become a defacto gun license for both purchasing and carrying. . .it would prevent the government from preventing you from protecting yourself. When the judge grants the restraining order, you should be able to purchase and carry a gun (should you choose to do so) without fear of prosecution from the state." -- Ravenwood, February 9, 2005.

"North Carolina lawmakers have approved a measure that would require courts to give battered spouses information on how to apply for a concealed weapon. The bill. . .would also add protective orders to the evidence a sheriff can consider when determining whether to issue an emergency permit to carry a concealed weapon. Normally, an applicant must wait 90 days for such a permit." -- Associated Press, August 18, 2005.

From the Washington and Lee University Off-Campus Housing Guide:

At night, if you think you hear someone breaking in, leave safely if you can, then call police. If you can't leave, lock yourself in a room with a phone and call police. If an intruder is in your room, pretend you are asleep. [Ed note: And if you're being raped, pretend you're enjoying it.]

NO NO NO! It is your duty to resist any and all attacks. You stand a much better chance doing everything you can to get away.

And of course whatever you do, don't buy a gun:

Guns are responsible for many accidental deaths in the home every year. Think carefully before buying a gun. If you do own one, learn how to store it and use it safely. Also check the provisions of your lease, because some landlords prohibit firearms.

Of all the places I've lived, I've never seen a landlord try to prohibit gun ownership. Even if it were legal, it would open the landlord up to all sorts of legal liability. If my landlord prevented me from defending myself and I was robbed, he'd be the first one sued.

As rape becomes more common in the Sudan, Secretary of State Rice is calling for a "public campaign against violence and the prosecution of rapists". But Countertop has a better, cheaper, and easier solution that's also guaranteed to cut down on recidivism.

That reminds me, it's been a while so here is my obligatory link to an article by the Independent Women's Forum on disarming women. This should be required reading for all women.

Like I said years ago, the article makes several key points:

• Less than 5% of 911 calls dispatched to police are early enough to actually prevent a crime.
  
• Police and government organizations have no legal obligation to protect you as an individual.
  
• Firearms proficiency can take only a few hours of practice.
  
• While martial arts training may "equalize" the disparity between a woman and an attacker, multiple attackers have an advantage.
  
• Firearms proficiency can make ANY woman strong enough to fend off attackers, regardless of their size or strength.
  
• In more than 92% of "defensive gun uses" simply brandishing a firearm, or firing a warning shot is enough.

Draconian gun control laws and mandatory waiting periods only serve to put law abiding citizens at risk. Forcing or encouraging women to rely on restraining orders and the 9-1-1 system as means of protection is not only foolhardy, it's dangerous. A lot of good a court order does when she's dead. Maybe they can paste it on her tombstone.

Besides, wearing a pistol makes you look thinner. Ladies, just ask any man, "Does this gun make me look fat?"

Leonard Gamage is 87-years old and a veteran of World War II. So when 20-year old James VanderVeen allegedly broke into his home, he relied on his trusty .22 caliber rifle to be his equalizer.

Gamage said as soon as the door was open a few inches, VanderVeen allegedly grabbed the screen door and stepped inside the home.

During the next 45 minutes, Gamage and VanderVeen scuffled twice. The second fight ended when Gamage managed to grab an old .22 caliber rifle from his gun rack.

Gamage said he fired a couple of warning shots, but when the suspect appeared determined to enter the house, Gamage shot the intruder in the left foot.

Gamage broke two rules; never fire warning shots, and never shoot to wound. Now, had Gamage let his Illinois mandated FOID card expire, he'd likely face a Class A misdemeanor charge and a stiff punishment for his unlicensed rifle. Of course other than being shot in the foot, the home invader got off easy.

In a negotiated plea VanderVeen was sentenced to 12 months court supervision and fined $100 plus court costs. If VanderVeen successfully serves the year of court supervision, the misdemeanor will be wiped from his record.

Next time aim for the chest, and shoot twice. (Maybe three times with that .22.)

Robert Birtwhistle is 84 years old. Back in February, 200-pound, 6-foot-1-inch James Rosebush allegedly broke into Birtwhistle's Mishawaka (IN) home and tried to attack him. Because Birtwhistle used a .32 caliber revolver to defend his own life, the 40-year old Rosebush will never see 41. It's a justifiable use of force if there ever was one.

But the local prosecutor is refusing to return Birtwhistle's revolver. Publicola reports that the Indiana DA has pretty much stolen the octogenarian's gun. (That's a man with eight arms for you people who went to public skool.)

84 year old man shoots a burglar. DA calls it justifiable homicide. That was February. They still have his gun. Wanna know the reasoning?

"Chief Deputy Prosecuting Attorney Frank Schaffer said Birtwhistle's revolver is part of a death investigation, and he'll never see it again.

'We keep weapons for evidence for our own records,' Schaffer said. 'You never know what's going to happen, so we keep it all."

Frank Schaffer. Worthwhile to remember his name, since it's not too often you run into a thief so proud of his work that he justifies it to the press. It's a wonder they didn't seize his house; after all that's where the incident happened.

I would suggest the old man complain about the theft to the proper authorities, but then the gun would be evidence in a criminal investigation and he'd be right back where he started.

Shootings are so rampant in "gun-free" Brazil that city officials have stopped enforcing traffic laws. They hope that if people can just zip through the city without stopping, they're less likely to be attacked.

Rio de Janeiro legislators voted to end enforcement of speed limits in parts of the crime-plagued city at night to try to cut down on attacks on slow-moving cars.

The city's legislative assembly passed a bill on Thursday to turn off cameras used to enforce speed limits of 40 kph (25 mph) in accident-prone points of the seaside city.

It was unclear whether Mayor Cesar Maia would approve the legislation, which is necessary for it to go into effect. He argues that most accidents occur during the night.

Many drivers already ignore traffic signals late at night for fear of being robbed or killed in a carjackings. The city has one of the world's highest murder rates.

If there weren't so much money in enforcement, I'd recommend that Washington D.C. take the same approach.

The courts have ruled time and time again that the police have absolutely no responsibility for your safety. In case you have forgotten, the Supreme Court gave us a reminder yesterday.

The Supreme Court ruled Monday that police cannot be sued for how they enforce restraining orders, ending a lawsuit by a Colorado woman who claimed police did not do enough to prevent her estranged husband from killing her three young daughters.

Jessica Gonzales did not have a constitutional right to police enforcement of the court order against her husband, the court said in a 7-2 opinion.

City governments had feared that if the court ruled the other way, it would unleash a potentially devastating flood of cases that could bankrupt municipal governments.

Keep this in mind the next time some gun grabber tells you to just call 9-1-1 instead of trying to defend yourself.

Here is an update on last week's story about that 14-year old who was shot and killed while trying to commit an armed robbery. The press is excusing his actions and blaming the robbery victim, because the kid's rifle was unloaded.

The teenage boy fatally shot June 12 in Richmond's East End apparently was not as dangerous as he looked to the man who killed him.

Law enforcement sources involved in the case said Rodvon Daymetric Brown, 14, was carrying an unloaded, .22-caliber rifle when he got off his bicycle and approached a 47-year-old man sitting in his car at 24th Street and Fairmount Avenue around 11:40 p.m.

An ammunition magazine from an AK-47, also unloaded, had been duct-taped to the barrel of the rifle, giving it more of an appearance as a deadly assault weapon, the sources said.

The man inside the car, however, had a loaded, 40 mm semiautomatic handgun.

Gotta get me one of those 40mm handguns that the press keeps talking about. I bet it could down an airplane.

Richmond are consulting with prosecutors on whether to charge the man in connection with the shooting, which is still under investigation.

Police said the man who fired the fatal shots did not flee the scene, but called 911 and waited for police and medical attention to arrive.

Brown was a seventh-grader at Chandler Middle School who lived with his aunt and siblings in the 1400 block of North 23rd Street, just around the corner from where he was fatally wounded.

Family members had said the boy left the house that night to ride his bike because it had been so hot inside. A family spokeswoman had said Brown had never been arrested and was not known by his aunt to carry a weapon.

But last night, a law enforcement source said Brown did, in fact, have a record of arrests as a juvenile. The source did not provide details on the record.

The press hasn't yet said just how they expect the robbery victim to know the gun wasn't loaded. But they seem to reject the rules of basic firearms safety, which say that you should treat every gun as if it were loaded until you can prove otherwise.

A 14-year old Richmond (VA) boy tried to rob a man with a gun, and ended up achieving room temperature. Rodvon Daymetric Brown, a seventh-grader at Chandler Middle School apparently used a gun to try to rob a 47-year old man. The man shot Brown in what police are already calling justified self defense. After defending himself, the would-be victim even waited at the scene for Police to arrive. Of course then there are those who would consider the robber to be the victim. (emphasis mine)

Brown's family has a hard time believing the teen was carrying a gun, said Alicia Rasin, a crime-victim's advocate who was consoling family members yesterday. He lived with his mother, an aunt and siblings in the 1400 block of North 23rd Street, right around the corner from where he was killed, Rasin said.

"They just cannot see him having a gun," Rasin said. . .

Grief counselors were made available yesterday to Brown's schoolmates at Chandler. The teen's guardian called the school yesterday morning to report that Brown "was shot and killed as he walked home along Fairmount Avenue," school spokeswoman Treeda Smith said in an advisory sent to Richmond School Board members.

"I'm sick and tired of saying I'm tired," Rasin said of Richmond's latest homicide. "I'm tired of saying, 'When is this going to be enough?'"

I wonder why there was no reaction from the teen's father.

Charles Hill notes that the over-reaction to Florida's self defense law seems a little bit racist.

Now I've always figured that the only good intruder is a dead intruder, and Oklahoma law tends to support this notion. I might have thought that Floridians would be happy about it, but apparently some of them aren't:

Chicago Alderman Dorothy Tillman, formerly of Pensacola, said the law will "lead to open war on black males."

"It's almost a way to eliminate people. Black men will be under the ground more than ever."

Okay, she's not all that Floridian. But what is she saying? Black males are more likely to be attackers or intruders or other nogoodniks than other people? Isn't that, um, sorta racist? And what were those other 100 people in this protest thinking?

Mr. Hill goes on to note that "if you've breached my threshold and thus qualified for a free rib-cage ventilation."

Detroit: Local Homeowner Shoots, Kills Intruder -- May 27, 2005.

San Diego: Pharmacy employee shoots, kills robber -- May 28, 2005.

Florida: 64-year-old widow fatally shoots intruder -- May 30, 2005.

Say Uncle has an update on Paper Protection Reform Act, not to be confused with Ravenwood's Law regarding Second Amendment debate and Wild West comparisons.

The Paper Protection Reform Act was written back in February, where I suggested that people receive restraining orders should also be permitted to carry a gun (regardless of conflicting state or local laws that deny that right).

Under this new Paper Protection Reform Act, a restraining order would restore the basic firearms rights of anyone it protects. Once the judge signs off on it, it would become a defacto gun license for both purchasing and carrying.

The Charlotte Observer reports that this bill came up recently in North Carolina.

The N.C. House is slated to hear a bill today that initially would have required sheriffs to concissue temporary ealed handgun permits to those who get protective court orders. It also would have required judges to tell domestic violence victims they could get the permits.

By "would have" they mean that the N.C. Sheriff's Ass. successfully pushed to have the provision removed. Allowing the sheep defend themselves is bad for the shepherd.

UPDATE: Changed proposal to Paper Protection Reform Act on 10/06/08 to eliminate confusion with Ravenwood's Law.

Anything worth shooting, is worth shooting twice. Ammo is cheap. Life is expensive.

Jackson (TN) Police Chief Rick Staples says that women are too stupid to learn to use guns. Instead of trying to protect themselves, they should travel in groups or rely on rape whistles to scare bad guys away. Oh he doesn't say that explicitly. Instead he portrays guns as complex technical devices that women are just too simple minded to learn how to use. He claims that protecting women is a (police) man's job.

"There are many ways for people to learn how to defend themselves, and you don't want to see anyone live in fear," he said. "We all have a right to protect ourselves ... but our jails are full of women who've killed a spouse, and they were unable to prove it was self-defense."

I had thought the burden of proof was on the prosecution. If I were on the jury, a history of domestic violence would be more than enough reasonable doubt.

Staples said that "deadly force, in any situation, should always be the absolute last resort."

To women who are living in an abusive relationship, or a relationship where they constantly fear the potential for abuse, Staples offers this advice: "The first thing they should do is flee ... separate from the other party, and use those instruments the justice system (orders of protection and restraining orders) and support organizations that have been set up ... use those organizations, such as WRAP, that are there to help you, advise you and shelter you. There's no shame in seeking that kind of help."

Ahh, paper protection. The cemetaries are full of women who had restraining orders "protecting" them from an abusive spouse. I hate to sound callous, but men who beat women are a pet peeve of mine. Any cowardly man who beats up a woman deserves to be shot.

[Madison County Sheriff David Woolfork] said it's the same as walking by yourself in public.

"You exercise good judgment," he said. "If the potential for violence is there, even if it's a minor encounter, make sure you report it to law enforcement and let them handle the matter."

Huh? I thought they only arrested people for actual or attempted crimes, not "potential" ones.

That said, "if a person has a history of being victimized by an abusive spouse or significant other, and who's taken the steps of separating themselves from that relationship, yet still lives in fear based on direct or indirect threats, then I can see how they would want to learn how to defend themselves."

So you should only arm yourself if your husband beats you repeatedly and then violates his restraining order.

The State Department of Safety requires an eight-hour course (four hours in the classroom, four hours on the firing range) to qualify for a handgun permit. But Woolfork said that, after that class, you can't put the training in the drawer with the gun and be able to draw it out at a moment's notice.

"All our officers have to go through training once a year - and our tactical officers train monthly," he said.

Staples adds, "you must also know and understand your equipment and treat it with respect. A high percentage of police officers have been killed (accidentally) by their own weapons, and these are individuals who are highly trained."

I don't want to tell the Chief of Police how to do his job, but if I had a high percentage of my officers kill themselves with their own firearms, I might consider having them train more than once a year.

Of course the problem with this kind of attitude is that it gets women killed. The police are only able to prevent crime about 5% of the time. The rest of the time they are investigating after the fact. This article by the Independent Women's Forum should be required reading off all women.

Twenty-five year old Clint O'Shields has assumed room temperature after attempting to rob an Alabama man at gunpoint.

A Chelsea man told friends and family he was turning his life around just days before he was shot to death while robbing a couple in their home.

Since this happened down South, O'Shields getaway driver (his wife) is charged with "one count of felony murder [because her husband was killed] and two counts of first-degree robbery". The homeowner will not be charged.

UPDATE: Steve Scudder sends a link to a story with a few more details. In a nutshell:
- It was 2 AM.
- The husband was tied up, wife held at gunpoint.
- The intruder was presumed to be chock full o' drugs.
- The husband freed himself, and then liberated his wife by perferating Mr. O'Shields.
- Shelby County D.A. Robby Owens had this to say: "If you're in your house, your own home, you're going to have a lot of freedom to protect yourself, especially your wife, your family and property"

The headline reads Man shot dead in Wyandanch. If you read the fine print though, you'll find out that the "man" who was shot dead was climbing through someone's window at 2:30 in the morning.

And of course since it happened in the People's Republic of New York, the householder is being charged with criminal possession of a firearm.

Two Georgia teenagers went into a store intending to rob it. Both left in body bags. What happened in between is quite compelling.

The cash register at Shoat's Grocery and Package Store in Oglethorpe County held just $300 Monday when the two teenagers walked in.

If they had been patient, the would-be robbers could have had it.

Gloria Turner and husband Bobby Doster were about to hand over money when one teenager forced a shootout. [...]

"I'd have given it to them. Our insurance would have covered it," said Gloria Turner, who has owned the store for eight years with her husband.

Turner, 56, was rearranging the store, in the tiny community of Hutchins, when the teenagers walked in Monday evening.

One was wearing a wig that partly covered his eyes, prompting Turner to quip, "Can you see to walk with that thing on?"

The teen mumbled something, she recalled. He ran past Turner and shoved her husband, Bobby "Shoats" Doster, against the bakery counter.

The second teen pulled a white skullcap over his face, pushed Turner to the cash register and demanded money.

"I was about to give it to them . . . when the first guy says, 'You're not moving fast enough,' and pulls out a gun," Turner said Tuesday.

The teen aimed the gun at her husband and fired. The bullet missed. His gun jammed.

That was enough for Doster, who pulled out a .380 from his pocket. At the same time, his wife grabbed the 9 mm she kept under under the counter.

Both began firing at the teenagers, who ran to the back of the store for cover. A full-fledged gunbattle erupted.

The teens crouched behind a meat counter. The one with the gun popped up every few seconds to fire another round.

The unarmed teen kept shouting, "Shoot them! Shoot them!" while tossing at the couple whatever items he could get his hands on, Turner said.

The exchange of gunfire lasted less than five minutes "but it felt like hours," Turner said.

She remembered firing with one hand and dialing 911 with the other.

Deputies arrived four minutes later to find the store littered with shell casings. Both teenagers lay sprawled on the floor - one shot several times, the other with a bullet in his chest, said Sheriff Mike Smith. Authorities withheld the identities of the teenagers until relatives could be notified. One was 17, the other 19, police said. Both were from Athens.

Turner and her husband will not be charged, Smith said.

"People have a right to protect their lives and their property," Smith said.

"We don't encourage them to take the law in their hands, but sometimes they are left with no other choice."

In other parts of the country, Turner and Doster would have been led away in handcuffs for having the nerve to defend their own lives. Thankfully some people still understand that the government is not responsible for our safety.

Because one boy was a juvenile, the names have not been released. But how long before someone surfaces to tell us what little angels these two were?

WTKR TV in Hampton Roads is reporting that a would be bad guy tried to rob a man in the parking lot of a local "gentleman's club". Unfortunately for the armed robber, the man had a Virginia concealed handgun permit and was packing heat as well.

In the parking lot behind the "Treasure Chest" nightclub on East Pembroke Avenue, police drew circles around empty shell casings, drawing the conclusion that 22-year old Tony Kensler, Jr. Newport News pulled-out a gun to rob a man, just to be surprised that his intended victim fought back.

That man had a permit for a concealed weapon, and he's the one who got off the shots, hitting Kensler in the arm, leg and chest. Police say it was self defense, and those who we spoke with agree. Sarah Daniel lives nearby, "I think he had every right to do what he did. If someone came up to me, I'd use any means of self defense that I had." Charli is an employee of the club, but wasn't working the night of the shooting. Still, she has an opinion, "I think the bad guys need to have something happen to them for a change, instead of always have some innocent person die."

Kensler, listed in fair condition at Riverside Regional Medical Center, is charged with possession of a firearm by a convicted felon and possession of crack cocaine.

It's not clear whether the victim, whose name is being withheld by the media, had been patronizing the strip club, but given that concealed handguns are illegal in places that serve alcohol I think he was probably just walking by.

But I have to assume that this bad guy was deliberately staking out a gentlemen's club because he knew that the people inside would be unarmed, and have lots of cash. What more could a burglar ask for?

Restraining orders, a/k/a paper protection, have never been very effective. Lets face it, if someone intends to do you harm, they aren't likely to obey a court order to stay away. But once again, the SCOTUS is set to rule on the role of government and their responsibility to protect individuals. (emphasis mine.)

The Supreme Court will decide whether local governments can be sued for failing to enforce restraining orders, using the case of a Colorado mother whose three daughters were killed by their father.

The Supreme Court handled a similar case in 1989, and ruled that public officials may not be sued when their alleged gross negligence permits a child to be abused by a parent. The 6-3 opinion was authored by Rehnquist.

The court said then that the government does not have a constitutional duty to protect people, including abused children, who are not in custody.

The courts have said time and time again that the government has no responsibility to protect you. If you call 9-1-1 and they don't show up; too bad. If you get a restraining order and they don't enforce it; tough luck. Which is why if you are really in danger, you are much better off fending for yourself (getting a gun and learning how to use it) than relying on the powers that be.

A Milwaukee woman owes her life and the life of her children to her willingness to defend herself. She didn't listen to those who say women shouldn't own guns. She didn't believe that putting your life in the hands of the failed 9-1-1 system should be your only option.

The complete story is below:

A Southside mother of two says she is lucky to be alive. This after an intruder she says attacked her back in July of this year returned to her home and tried to kill her. The woman heard someone downstairs and decided to get her gun and go downstairs to investigate. This is where the intruder attacked her with a broken piece of glass and threatened to kill her and her children. The woman says the man also used racial slurs. After a struggle the woman got the gun that had been knocked out of her hands and shot at the intruder who managed to escape.

They don't say just how this guy was able to slap the gun away from her. But she definitely needs some range time, and could use some practice holding onto her piece. Both hands. Firmly. Aim for center mass. Fire. Repeat at least once.

Kim du Toit tells the story of a man protecting his family.

Mr Caeiro claimed he was woken by his 28-year-old wife's screams at 2am on Saturday when the burglar came into their bedroom.

He said the 6ft tall intruder had pulled away their 14-month-old daughter's cot from the side of their bed causing the child to fall on the floor and cry.

Mr Caeiro said: "This man was kneeling at the side of my bed and started touching the legs of my wife.

"My wife woke up screaming and then I woke up. The man then ran downstairs and went out through the kitchen door."

Mr Caeiro, who is 5ft 6ins, rang 999 to report the break-in and was told by police that because the intruder was no-longer believed to be in the house they would be there in 15 to 30 minutes.

He said: "I looked out into my yard and saw a shadow. I was frightened and I grabbed the bread knife from a rack because my first thought was that I had to stop my family being harmed. I opened the back door ... then this man attacked me with a metal bar.

"He hit me on the shoulder and I was knocked back into the kitchen. The door opened and the man tried to come inside.

"I stabbed him in the leg and then we ended up fighting and I stabbed him in the chest.

"We fought for about a minute outside ... then he managed to break away and run down the alley at the back of my house."

The police finally showed up, and promptly arrested, guess who... Mr. Caeiro. That's right, this occured in the United Kingdom where self defense has been outlawed. Mr. Caeiro was supposed to pick his 14-month old baby up off the floor, gather the rest of his family, and cower in the closet until representatives of the government arrived. Since he opted to defend his family himself, Caeiro faces possible assault charges which will likely carry a more serious penalty than what the predator faces.

I can't speak for everyone, but most people I know would respond to someone tossing their baby onto the floor and fondling their wife's legs, with extreme prejudice. The pair of pliers and a blow torch type of prejudice.

The New York Times notes that the antiquated 9-1-1 system in New York City is putting New Yorkers at risk. Improving the system will take years and cost an estimated $1 Billion.

Dialing 911 in New York nowadays will get you a city worker using antiquated equipment in a surprisingly uncoordinated emergency response network. The nation's largest emergency call system is in fact downright quaint, complete with Fire Department dispatchers who don't even have caller ID. Add to that a turf-conscious and hidebound culture among emergency workers, and it's clearly time to hit the panic button on 911.

Keep in mind that government estimates are usually extremely optimistic, meaning "years" and "$1 Billion" is open to liberal interpretation.

Also keep in mind that gun ownership and self defense by law abiding citizens in New York City is strictly prohibited regulated. New York could improve public safety and pay for their 9-1-1 emergency system upgrades by switching from expensive heavily restrictive gun control laws to deregulated concealed carry. But they'd rather throw the unarmed sheep to the wolves than go back to the libertarian principles on which this nation was founded.

Firearms are the great equalizer. They put a diminutive woman or elderly man on equal footing against a younger, stronger, attacker. This was exactly the case for homeowner George L. Finch. Finch is 75 and suffers from Parkinson's disease. Had he been unarmed, he would have been at the mercy of Kevin L. Richardson, a homeless man who apparently broke into his house this weekend around 3 AM. But Finch retrieved his pistol (no mention of make or caliber) before going to investigate. When Richardson failed to leave as ordered, Finch got off a single shot, striking him in the leg.

Richardson ran out the same window [he came in] and fled a short way, collapsing on the sidewalk in the same block, according to the homicide report.

When police arrived, he was bleeding heavily. Medics transported Richardson to Wishard Memorial Hospital where he later died.

Sgt. Russell Burns said no charges will be filed in the case, which he described as a home invasion. Investigators concluded the shooting was justified, he said.

[obligatory claps and cheers]

I'm not doctor, but it sounds like Finch might have hit the femoral artery. Scratch that. He probably wouldn't have made it through the window, much less all the way to the hospital. Either way, running on the wound probably only hastened Richardson's demise.

Not bad shooting for an ailing 75 year old.

Reader Tom Scott thinks there must be something in the water up there in Alaska. A man who used lethal force to fend off a moose that was attacking him is taking a lot of heat from the local yokels. Mike Vogel was out skiing around when the moose attacked him. Having been attacked by a moose in the past, Vogel came prepared this time. He unilaterally used his .44 caliber pistol to initiate regime change on the offending creature, but his neighbors think that he should have tried 12 years of appeasement and UN-style sanctions first.

First up is Steve Ryan, who thinks that simply detouring around the moose would be sufficient. He claims to be able to ride circles around slow dimwitted mooses, and figures a guy on skis could easily do the same.

Next we have Theresa Philbrick, who thinks that Mr. Vogel should lose his concealed carry permit. I think Mr. Vogel would probably go along with that considering that since they switched to "Vermont-style" concealed carry, Alaska doesn't require a permit anymore.

Last but certainly not least, we have David Harnell. Harnell says that it's Vogel's own fault for putting himself in that situation in the first place. By taking a few modest precautionary steps, he could have easily avoided confrontation with the moose. Harnell suggests that skiers travel in large groups of friends, never take their dog out of the house, and carry an air horn and pepper spray instead of one of those evil, mind-affecting guns. Either that or, according to Harnell, he should simply move to moose-free Michigan.

Those are all good suggestions, but it seems to me that sitting down and talking with the moose would be the best option. Once you understand Bulwinkle, perhaps you can figure out why he hates us.

Concealed carry in Missouri is still in its infancy, but citizens are already using firearms to defend themselves.

Robbers pointed a gun at Bryan Rutherford and demanded that he hand over valuables from his pickup Tuesday evening in Lemay.

Rutherford didn't pull out cash or jewelry. He pulled out a .22-caliber pistol hidden in his vehicle and opened fire in what authorities believe is the first instance of self-defense with a concealed firearm since the Missouri Legislature loosened the state's gun laws.

The man holding what turned out to be a BB gun on Rutherford was hit several times in the torso before he and two accomplices fled. Three suspects were later captured and charged.

Whether Rutherford had obtained a concealed carry permit for his gun isn't known, but prosecutors have already said that he won't be charged. Three hits and the goon still ran away. Rutherford should consider upgrading to a larger caliber.

A 31 year old New York City woman, Giuseppina Guidici, had an abusive husband. After Guidici's husband "held up a gun and threatened to kill her father", she shot and killed him. Sounds like another case of a scumbag wife beater getting what he deserved, doesn't it? Well not in the liberal utopia that is New York, where the rights dead scumbags are cherished more than those of the law-abiding.

This week, Guidici was sentenced to five years probation for second-degree manslaughter, reports WINS (emphasis mine).

The Queens District Attorney said both the prosecution and defense agreed that Giuseppina Guidici, 31, suffered from battered woman's syndrome.

Guidici "had been repeatedly physically abused and threatened by her husband throughout their violent marriage," District Attorney Richard Brown said in a statement. Brown said sentencing her to jail time "would not have been in the best interest of the couple's only child."

So the prosecuting attorney agreed that she was repeatedly physically abused and suffered from emotional distress, and that putting her in jail would be a tragedy; yet he still brought a case against her. I guess he wants to send a message to people who dare to defend their life. (And don't give me this "he didn't have a choice" bull shit. Prosecutors always have a choice, no matter what the law says.)

Guidici should just count her lucky stars that she didn't live in Brooklyn, where prosecutor Charles Hynes claims, "If you get caught with a gun in Brooklyn, you're going to do jail time." No matter what the circumstances.

If you have blood pressure problems, you probably don't want to read this (this means you, Kim). A 71 year old Florida man has been jailed for using a firearm to stop an attack on his 63 year old friend. Not one, not two, but THREE men were beating a 63 year old man, when 71 year old Melvin Spaulding used his .22 caliber pistol to stop the melee. A 20 year old goblin was struck in the arm and hospitalized. (In a typical half-assed manner, the ages of the other two men were not reported.)

For defending his friend's life, Spaulding was arrested and is being held without bail. Pinellas County Sheriff's spokesman Tim Goodman had this to say about Mr. Spaulding:

"I'm sure he was concerned for his friend's safety...," Goodman said. "The use of a weapon to stop a confrontation is not the right way. He would have been better off calling 911."

AUGH! Goodman deserves a swift kick in the gonads. The idea that Spaulding is supposed to just hang around waiting for the coroner to arrive while his friend is beaten by THREE young street toughs is incomprehensible. Spaulding did the right thing in helping his friend, but because he didn't rely on the all-knowing, almighty government for protection, he's being held without bail. There is no word on whether or not Mr. Spaulding will be charged with attempted murder, but the AP does report that the 20 year old assailant was arrested on an unrelated battery charge from earlier that night.