What happens when a combat vet home on leave encounters a bank robber who then threatens the vet's kids? Typically, the robber gets the spank down, and that's what happened.
Army Staff Sargent Eddie Peoples stopped at a bank before taking his boys on a fishing trip where said thug was encountered. Thug was dumb enough to threaten the kids of a soldier who has probably cleared rooms in the bad areas of Baghdad and disarmed insurgents, meaning that a man with a fake pistol wasn't all that difficult to spank into submission. (Read the article for the detailed take down, as the thug certainly qualifies for a Darwin award for stupidity, only difference was he didn't die).
I'm sure somewhere, some sad panda pacifist is crying in their Wheaties thinking that this guy took a chance he didn't need to and that he could have been a statistic. It is just a shame he can't even be counted amongst the concealed carry permit holders in helping to thwart crimes in progress. Certainly Peoples' actions deserved a commendation from the police department, and not to detract from his bravery, but does the same thing happen for those who pack? I doubt it.
Showing posts with label Crime. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Crime. Show all posts
02 June 2011
New Meaning to Jailhouse Rock
Not that I ever want to be in jail, but if I was and I had my choice, I'd choose here.
That said...isn't cantina just another name for jail in Mexico? I mean
That said...isn't cantina just another name for jail in Mexico? I mean
31 May 2011
QOTD: Three to One is Bettin' Odds!
Other evidence also suggests that Hoven did “the right thing.” The National Crime Victimization Survey shows that defending oneself with a gun is by far the safest course of action when one is confronted by a robber. For example, people who protect themselves with a gun are injured in robberies about 8 percent of the time, but those who behave passively are injured by the criminals 24 percent of the time, a three times higher rate.From John Lott's latest on Big Government, we find that if you prefer to be a pascifist when it comes to being a vicitim of crime, you are three times more likely to be injured! I'll use a gun please! Then I'll bet on the poor suckers who chose not to heed the following...
22 January 2011
Ingenuity!
Why would anyone want to put coke in their gas tank when they can use this method of transporting drugs?
As the saying goes, "Ingenuity, is what gets the job done!" (Ok, well, maybe I just made that saying up). Whatever the saying is, when criminals are motivated to circumvent the law and law enforcement, they will become highly creative. After all, effective criminals are just untrained and uneducated lawyers without degrees. Or there is the capitalist view of crime, it's the ultimate form of free market capitalism (and probably the least regulated here in the US).
Now what does that say about justice and the war on drugs?
As the saying goes, "Ingenuity, is what gets the job done!" (Ok, well, maybe I just made that saying up). Whatever the saying is, when criminals are motivated to circumvent the law and law enforcement, they will become highly creative. After all, effective criminals are just untrained and uneducated lawyers without degrees. Or there is the capitalist view of crime, it's the ultimate form of free market capitalism (and probably the least regulated here in the US).
Now what does that say about justice and the war on drugs?
19 January 2011
Imagine That: IRA Makes Illegal Mortars & Weapons
Why do bans on weapons not make sense? Simple, because motivated people will simply make their own weapons. Or, in this instance, their own mortars and pipe bombs, both of which are not legal to be owned by citizens in Ireland. (Especially Irish Republican Army citizens).
This silly talk of banning standard capacity magazines is simply knee jerk reactionary lunacy. Perhaps our congresscritters can be busy solving things like, oh, budget problems?
This silly talk of banning standard capacity magazines is simply knee jerk reactionary lunacy. Perhaps our congresscritters can be busy solving things like, oh, budget problems?
14 January 2011
PJ Pants Thug's Newest Fassion Style
Apparently, the latest trend in armed robbery is to roll out of bed in your PJ Pants, and roll to the WaWa @ 0445. Note, this did NOT happen in NJ.
17 December 2010
Michael Bane on School Board Shooting
I obviously have no reason to reblog anything of Michael Bane's simply because he is so wide read, but I do feel a need to add an addendum to this post from Wednesday.
Michael and his colleagues made it quite apparent that the situation that occurred in the Florida school board meeting is a very real and very realizable for anyone. Unfortunately, as is discussed in the linked post, most states have felt the need to restrict "sensitive places" and carve out gun free niches in the purview of compelling interest. As illustrated this week, those gun free zones turn into "willing victim zones." Most of us in the gun blogging and pro-self defense community would agree that the best way to stop this attacker would have been to demand peaceful disarmament through compelling request (read good guy with a gun shouting for compliance) followed by superior firepower if the request was not honored. Unfortunately, that was a solution that could never manifest itself since the "rules" altered the game of the "gun fight."
Which leads to Michael's question posed: What do you we need to learn from this event? Unfortunately, the answers from the professionals leave a lot to be desired, simply because there is no clear cut answer. Every one of us can simply say the law needs to be changed. True. As the common sense world has shown, there is no such thing as a "gun free zone" when there is a bad guy with a gun meaning to cause good people harm. But what should the individual do to mitigate this problem? How should you or I prepare to deal with a potentially disastrous situation when we are forced to be unarmed?
I have noted before that, currently, I have the choice made for me on a statewide level since I am a Maryland resident. Permit Unobtainium is a serious problem where I reside. That said, several of us in the Maryland community have come across this theoretical question before. In Mr. Bane's post, I noted that several of the top tier trainers implied that they would consider disregarding the law and/or signs that create gun free zones. I can assume that the saying goes that it is better to be judged by twelve than carried by six. However, my libertarian mind works in mysterious ways; meaning, my rights stop at your door step. That applies to both "state" owned property and or private property and business that don't wish for you to be armed.
The biggest issue I take from some of the responses is this avocation for "bending" the rules. Considering there are varying degrees of punishment depending upon what state you are in, I don't know if I can agree with that assessment. My initial assessment of the Maryland Shooters thread with a "private gun free zone" was to ignore the sign, keep it concealed, and not get caught, thinking that the most that would happen would be a request to leave and or a potential trespass charge. In Virginia (where I carry the most) that would not be the case. Violation of a private property posting would result in the loss of the permit, and a potential weapons charge since a permit is no good where the permit is no good (sorry for the bad English). Further, as we learned this summer, that can compromise you when you end up the unwilling victim of bad police work and corporate policy.
Considering that there are a lot of issues that need to be worked out in a post-Heller/McDonald world, it is hard to completely agree with "bending the rules." If a permit violation were as cheap as a small civil fine and "don't do it again," I would completely agree with ignoring signs that create no gun zones. However, in states like Virginia, where the charge could be a high level misdemeanor that results in the loss of a permit as well as the potential to make me a prohibited person in the state of Maryland, the loss of the rights is my risk to the reward of remaining alive. Following the law should not allow someone to loose their life, but in the tyrant state, that's the rules as they have been carved out.
Currently, it is hard to feel completely unsafe in the United States. We are still extremely fortunate that crime has not degenerated into mass levels like seen in Mexico or even Argentina. That said, as the economy continues to degenerate, we will see the degenerates attempt to keep their money for nothing scheme alive. Desperate people will do desperate things, or as was illustrated in the Florida school board shooting, crazy people will do crazy things. Meaning? Be prepared!
Update: Fortunately, as I typed this, Michael Bane in his good ways, has an updated "what we've learned" post on how to deal with this type of threat. While the carry aspect of it does not fit in with the Maryland Permit Unobtainium, everything else in his latest post does. Some of his helpful tips are bulleted here in summary here:
Michael and his colleagues made it quite apparent that the situation that occurred in the Florida school board meeting is a very real and very realizable for anyone. Unfortunately, as is discussed in the linked post, most states have felt the need to restrict "sensitive places" and carve out gun free niches in the purview of compelling interest. As illustrated this week, those gun free zones turn into "willing victim zones." Most of us in the gun blogging and pro-self defense community would agree that the best way to stop this attacker would have been to demand peaceful disarmament through compelling request (read good guy with a gun shouting for compliance) followed by superior firepower if the request was not honored. Unfortunately, that was a solution that could never manifest itself since the "rules" altered the game of the "gun fight."
Which leads to Michael's question posed: What do you we need to learn from this event? Unfortunately, the answers from the professionals leave a lot to be desired, simply because there is no clear cut answer. Every one of us can simply say the law needs to be changed. True. As the common sense world has shown, there is no such thing as a "gun free zone" when there is a bad guy with a gun meaning to cause good people harm. But what should the individual do to mitigate this problem? How should you or I prepare to deal with a potentially disastrous situation when we are forced to be unarmed?
I have noted before that, currently, I have the choice made for me on a statewide level since I am a Maryland resident. Permit Unobtainium is a serious problem where I reside. That said, several of us in the Maryland community have come across this theoretical question before. In Mr. Bane's post, I noted that several of the top tier trainers implied that they would consider disregarding the law and/or signs that create gun free zones. I can assume that the saying goes that it is better to be judged by twelve than carried by six. However, my libertarian mind works in mysterious ways; meaning, my rights stop at your door step. That applies to both "state" owned property and or private property and business that don't wish for you to be armed.
The biggest issue I take from some of the responses is this avocation for "bending" the rules. Considering there are varying degrees of punishment depending upon what state you are in, I don't know if I can agree with that assessment. My initial assessment of the Maryland Shooters thread with a "private gun free zone" was to ignore the sign, keep it concealed, and not get caught, thinking that the most that would happen would be a request to leave and or a potential trespass charge. In Virginia (where I carry the most) that would not be the case. Violation of a private property posting would result in the loss of the permit, and a potential weapons charge since a permit is no good where the permit is no good (sorry for the bad English). Further, as we learned this summer, that can compromise you when you end up the unwilling victim of bad police work and corporate policy.
Considering that there are a lot of issues that need to be worked out in a post-Heller/McDonald world, it is hard to completely agree with "bending the rules." If a permit violation were as cheap as a small civil fine and "don't do it again," I would completely agree with ignoring signs that create no gun zones. However, in states like Virginia, where the charge could be a high level misdemeanor that results in the loss of a permit as well as the potential to make me a prohibited person in the state of Maryland, the loss of the rights is my risk to the reward of remaining alive. Following the law should not allow someone to loose their life, but in the tyrant state, that's the rules as they have been carved out.
Currently, it is hard to feel completely unsafe in the United States. We are still extremely fortunate that crime has not degenerated into mass levels like seen in Mexico or even Argentina. That said, as the economy continues to degenerate, we will see the degenerates attempt to keep their money for nothing scheme alive. Desperate people will do desperate things, or as was illustrated in the Florida school board shooting, crazy people will do crazy things. Meaning? Be prepared!
Update: Fortunately, as I typed this, Michael Bane in his good ways, has an updated "what we've learned" post on how to deal with this type of threat. While the carry aspect of it does not fit in with the Maryland Permit Unobtainium, everything else in his latest post does. Some of his helpful tips are bulleted here in summary here:
- Always be aware of your surroundings! ALWAYS!
- Stay in a conditioned yellow (or moderate awareness) until you are certain you are in a safe environment. Don't look at people, but look at actions, emotions, and the "tell" of someone meant to do yourself, your family, or others harm.
- When a bad situation does present itself, don't just react for the sake of reacting, but be calculated in how you react. Non-action is the worst and almost always results in death or harm. Do something, even if that something is wrong.
- Every time you enter a new room, assess the situation. Where are exits? Where is cover? (Adding my own here) Where is the best place to stay out of the mass rush? People get trampled when panic sets in and flight takes hold. Evading a gunman only to be crushed by the sheep won't bring you home safely.
- Read the others on both posts for a complete understanding of what professionals would do if in this kind of a situation.
04 December 2010
Cali to Release 40k Inmates; State Still Refuses to Alter Carry Laws
Q: What happens when some 40,000 prison inmates, some of which are the hardest of the hardened criminals are released all at once due to a court order of poor and inhumane conditions due to over crowding and lack of "mentally ill" treatment?
A: Unless you have one of the illusive and endangered species listed carry permits in Cali, you're Just Another Nameless Victim (JANV).
Well, that is the stage that has been set before SCOTUS, and it looks like they are ready to rule upon the Constitution, and not for the greater good in keeping criminals locked up and behind bars. Seems that even Justice Alito understands the consequences of the pending ruling.
A: Unless you have one of the illusive and endangered species listed carry permits in Cali, you're Just Another Nameless Victim (JANV).
Well, that is the stage that has been set before SCOTUS, and it looks like they are ready to rule upon the Constitution, and not for the greater good in keeping criminals locked up and behind bars. Seems that even Justice Alito understands the consequences of the pending ruling.
"If I were a citizen of California, I would be concerned about the release of 40,000 prisoners," said Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr., noting that the forced release of prisoners elsewhere has led to an increase in rapes, robberies and assaults.This means that average, law abiding citizens of the great state of California, will remain nearly defenseless as they roam the streets with the lowest of the low.
16 November 2010
B-More Seeking to Make Illegal Carry a Felony
Baltimore is undoubtedly one of the nastiest cities in the country as has been noted here before. So it should come as no surprise that Baltimore City Mayor, Stephanie Rawlings-Blake wants to make carrying a gun even more illegal than it currently is. While no one wants to see criminals with firearms, are we sure that this will even begin to deter the would-be thug from carrying a firearm without a permit? The whole definition of criminal is "does not follow the law, in letter or in spirit."
As Sebastian over at Snow Flakes In Hell noted, it would be nice to see reform to our handgun permit to wear or carry be enacted first rather than a token law change in an effort to put more criminals behind bars. Do not get me wrong, I think the idea is admirable, but those who know this state know that we should not hold our breaths for the MD legislature to change our carry laws until forced to do so. Additionally, I realize that Mayor Rawlings-Blake's "get tougher on criminals with stiffer penalities" is a good course of action, but it certainly is not an idea that will deter the worst of the harden criminals.
As I steal from fellow MD Shooters board member Patrick, we really need the SAF suit to play out in the courts. Through that arena, there will be lasting impact that politicians can't mess with, or at least that's the hope. Either way, just goes to show, that when there aren't enough criminals in the system, the police state will simply enact legislation to make more criminals.
As Sebastian over at Snow Flakes In Hell noted, it would be nice to see reform to our handgun permit to wear or carry be enacted first rather than a token law change in an effort to put more criminals behind bars. Do not get me wrong, I think the idea is admirable, but those who know this state know that we should not hold our breaths for the MD legislature to change our carry laws until forced to do so. Additionally, I realize that Mayor Rawlings-Blake's "get tougher on criminals with stiffer penalities" is a good course of action, but it certainly is not an idea that will deter the worst of the harden criminals.
As I steal from fellow MD Shooters board member Patrick, we really need the SAF suit to play out in the courts. Through that arena, there will be lasting impact that politicians can't mess with, or at least that's the hope. Either way, just goes to show, that when there aren't enough criminals in the system, the police state will simply enact legislation to make more criminals.
13 November 2010
Who Needs a Gun in Hazard County
Local news website has two stories of armed robbers that hit up a GameStop store in Harford County.
Thankfully no one was hurt, but the potential was there. Yet again, another reason why this state needs to lose it's case as the defendants in the SAF's lawsuit!
Thankfully no one was hurt, but the potential was there. Yet again, another reason why this state needs to lose it's case as the defendants in the SAF's lawsuit!
15 October 2010
Who Needs a Gun in Westminster, MD?
Even though the current Gov and some local County Execs have been saying crime is down, it still doesn't prevent crack heads from holding up pharmacies for their drugs and cash.
By definition of the Maryland Permit to Wear or Carry a handgun laws, the pharmacists could have obtained their permits for defense of their products and cash. Even though Investigative Voice has reported that no shots were fired and the suspect was apprehended pretty quickly, it still doesn't excuse the fact that people in this state must cower in fear of criminals who mean to do harm to others.
By definition of the Maryland Permit to Wear or Carry a handgun laws, the pharmacists could have obtained their permits for defense of their products and cash. Even though Investigative Voice has reported that no shots were fired and the suspect was apprehended pretty quickly, it still doesn't excuse the fact that people in this state must cower in fear of criminals who mean to do harm to others.
24 August 2010
MD.gov's No Need for CHP vs. FBI's No. 5
WE'RE NOT NUMBER 1! WE'RE NUMBER 5!
Well, maybe that's not so good, but hey, we disarm the Maryland public and allow them to be unwilling victims! That should serve for some good progressiveness, shouldn't it?
Well, my fellow Marylanders, not exactly. According to the Baltimore Business Journal's article, Baltimore's numbers are pretty bad. Far worse than that of comparable sized cities and even bigger cities. Baltimore's 238 murders in 2009 equates to a rate of 37.26 per 100,000 citizens. That's quite an ugly number. Numbers one through four in this category standout as the quintessential who's who of crime. New Orleans leads the way, with 51.72 murders per 100,000 residents, followed by Richmond, Calif., at 45.82 per 100,000, St. Louis at 40.26 per 100,000, and Detroit at 39.74 per 100,000.
Comparing Baltimore to bigger cities like NYC, DC, Philly and Boston, the results per 100,000 citizens are quite disturbing. With rates like 5.61, 23.85, 19.52, and 8.01, respectfully, Baltimore lags behind by far numbers. Worst still, is the fact that the city that breeds also makes two other top 20 crime lists for aggravated assault and robbery. That is a title that is bequeathed to just a total of six cities. Kudos Charm City!
Now, I'm sure the critics are saying that three of those cities (Philly excluded) do not allowed for concealed or open carry of firearms, but let us examine the facts closer. Baltimore is roughly 625,000 in population size, which is about the same as Washington, DC at approximately 600,000. DC also restricts it's citizens right to bear arms outside their homes. The caveat is that the District is the perfect social science experiment for testing what effect that legal guns, owned by law abiding citizens, have on crime rates. Our nation's Capital has seen a decline in crime in every category (except arson where there was an 8% increase from 51 to 55 per year) from the numbers in 2008. Now, some of that can be attributed to changes in the District's policing and enforcement, but no doubt the major social change that occurred was the finding that DC's private firearm ownership laws were unconstitutional. Criminals aren't dumb and they know that there is the chance their victims will be armed. Hence the reason the significant drops in every violent crime category.
Looking at every city in the nation that has populations between 599,000 and 700,000 citizens, we find some interesting things looking at the murder rates. Comparing cities in the states with concealed carry laws to those without, a significant trend is seen. There are 10 cities falling into this population category, and of those ten, six cities are in jurisdictions with concealed carry laws. Here are all the cities and their murder rates per 100,000 people.
The average of those cities that allow for CCW is a low 8.82 murders per 100,000 while those without are an astounding 20.26 murders per 100,000. Obviously, there is some ability of the statistical evidence to skew these data, so we'll also look at the median sample for argument's sake. For cities with CCW we get 14.95 per 100k and for those without it's 17.88 per 100k. Keep in mind, this is only a quick and dirty example and does not take into account any time series trends or even other rates of crime for forced rape, aggravated assault, or robbery. Our good friend John R. Lott has proven for the last decade that those categories are also dramatically affected by shall issue concealed carry laws.
Simply put, the stats don't lie. They aren't skewed as they come directly from the FBI, a non-partial source, and the results of this quick and dirty example can be replicated by anyone who's passed 8th grade algebra. The point of this exercise is simple, guns in the hands of law abiding citizens lower crime rates. It's been going on since the invention came into existence, and the inversely proportional trend will continue until the end of time or the firearm. Further, as us gun nuts know, we don't need statistics on our side to win the Constitutional argument, but these facts do help us win the culture war.
I wonder how the Owe'Malley and Dougy Gansler crowd will respond to these facts in the midst of their Second Amendment Foundation lawsuit? I'm sure they will conveniently "dispute" them. Perhaps someone can send these stats along to our good delegate that doesn't have a clue.
Source: FBI Crime Stats. Please note that the statistics used are the "preliminary" statistics, and are subject to some change.
Well, maybe that's not so good, but hey, we disarm the Maryland public and allow them to be unwilling victims! That should serve for some good progressiveness, shouldn't it?
Well, my fellow Marylanders, not exactly. According to the Baltimore Business Journal's article, Baltimore's numbers are pretty bad. Far worse than that of comparable sized cities and even bigger cities. Baltimore's 238 murders in 2009 equates to a rate of 37.26 per 100,000 citizens. That's quite an ugly number. Numbers one through four in this category standout as the quintessential who's who of crime. New Orleans leads the way, with 51.72 murders per 100,000 residents, followed by Richmond, Calif., at 45.82 per 100,000, St. Louis at 40.26 per 100,000, and Detroit at 39.74 per 100,000.
Comparing Baltimore to bigger cities like NYC, DC, Philly and Boston, the results per 100,000 citizens are quite disturbing. With rates like 5.61, 23.85, 19.52, and 8.01, respectfully, Baltimore lags behind by far numbers. Worst still, is the fact that the city that breeds also makes two other top 20 crime lists for aggravated assault and robbery. That is a title that is bequeathed to just a total of six cities. Kudos Charm City!
Now, I'm sure the critics are saying that three of those cities (Philly excluded) do not allowed for concealed or open carry of firearms, but let us examine the facts closer. Baltimore is roughly 625,000 in population size, which is about the same as Washington, DC at approximately 600,000. DC also restricts it's citizens right to bear arms outside their homes. The caveat is that the District is the perfect social science experiment for testing what effect that legal guns, owned by law abiding citizens, have on crime rates. Our nation's Capital has seen a decline in crime in every category (except arson where there was an 8% increase from 51 to 55 per year) from the numbers in 2008. Now, some of that can be attributed to changes in the District's policing and enforcement, but no doubt the major social change that occurred was the finding that DC's private firearm ownership laws were unconstitutional. Criminals aren't dumb and they know that there is the chance their victims will be armed. Hence the reason the significant drops in every violent crime category.
Looking at every city in the nation that has populations between 599,000 and 700,000 citizens, we find some interesting things looking at the murder rates. Comparing cities in the states with concealed carry laws to those without, a significant trend is seen. There are 10 cities falling into this population category, and of those ten, six cities are in jurisdictions with concealed carry laws. Here are all the cities and their murder rates per 100,000 people.
- Denver, CO: Pop 604,680; Rate of 5.13; CCW Allowed / Shall Issue
- Washington, DC: Pop 599,657; Rate of 23.85; CCW Not allowed
- Louisville Metro, KY: Pop 631,260; Rate of 9.82; CCW Allowed / Shall Issue
- Baltimore, MD: Pop 638,755; Rate of 37.26; CCW Heavily Restricted, effectively not allowed
- Boston, MA: Population 624,222; Rate of 8.01; CCW Heavily Restricted, effectively not allowed
- Memphis, TN: Population 667,421; Rate of 19.78; CCW Allowed / Shall Issue
- Nashville, TN: Population 610,176; Rate of 12.62; CCW Allowed / Shall Issue
- El Paso, TX: Population 618,812; Rate of 1.94; CCW Allowed / Shall Issue
- Seattle, WA: Population 602,531; Rate of 3.65; CCW Allowed / Shall Issue
- Milwaukee, WI: Population 604,673; Rate of 11.91; CCW Not allowed, Open Carry infringed
The average of those cities that allow for CCW is a low 8.82 murders per 100,000 while those without are an astounding 20.26 murders per 100,000. Obviously, there is some ability of the statistical evidence to skew these data, so we'll also look at the median sample for argument's sake. For cities with CCW we get 14.95 per 100k and for those without it's 17.88 per 100k. Keep in mind, this is only a quick and dirty example and does not take into account any time series trends or even other rates of crime for forced rape, aggravated assault, or robbery. Our good friend John R. Lott has proven for the last decade that those categories are also dramatically affected by shall issue concealed carry laws.
Simply put, the stats don't lie. They aren't skewed as they come directly from the FBI, a non-partial source, and the results of this quick and dirty example can be replicated by anyone who's passed 8th grade algebra. The point of this exercise is simple, guns in the hands of law abiding citizens lower crime rates. It's been going on since the invention came into existence, and the inversely proportional trend will continue until the end of time or the firearm. Further, as us gun nuts know, we don't need statistics on our side to win the Constitutional argument, but these facts do help us win the culture war.
I wonder how the Owe'Malley and Dougy Gansler crowd will respond to these facts in the midst of their Second Amendment Foundation lawsuit? I'm sure they will conveniently "dispute" them. Perhaps someone can send these stats along to our good delegate that doesn't have a clue.
Source: FBI Crime Stats. Please note that the statistics used are the "preliminary" statistics, and are subject to some change.
23 July 2010
UNPOSSIBLE DEPT: Darth Vader has a Gun Permit?
To steal a line from falnfenix, UNPOSSIBLE! Considering you have to go through a stringent, non-Constitutional litmus test to get a gun permit in NYC, there is no way that Darth Vader would have been able to obtain a gun permit. The police surely would have denied him on the spot knowing that his "non-moral" character and propensity for Jedi death grips from across the universe screams "murdering, empirical scum."
So, considering that, the UK Dailymail is reporting that Vader not only obtained his permit, but used it in a non-state sanctioned way when he robbed a bank on Long Island, it's safe to say that any moral upstanding citizen can now legally carry in NYC (or state), even ahead of the Second Amendment Foundation's lawsuit. What's next, Mayor Bloomberg allowing permits to be issued to some Tusken Raiders ahead of the local Star Trek convention? Perhaps we'll see them sniping the Trekkies from the top of the Empire State Building instead of swamp rats or pod racers from the top of Beggars Canyon.
So, considering that, the UK Dailymail is reporting that Vader not only obtained his permit, but used it in a non-state sanctioned way when he robbed a bank on Long Island, it's safe to say that any moral upstanding citizen can now legally carry in NYC (or state), even ahead of the Second Amendment Foundation's lawsuit. What's next, Mayor Bloomberg allowing permits to be issued to some Tusken Raiders ahead of the local Star Trek convention? Perhaps we'll see them sniping the Trekkies from the top of the Empire State Building instead of swamp rats or pod racers from the top of Beggars Canyon.
21 July 2010
Officers Admit Concealed Carry Makes Their Job Better
I'm sure that there is a collective "well DUH!" response from the concealed carry advocacy community. Now, it appears that this is also finally sinking in to the thick skulls of two states that do not allow any form of concealed carry.
From the Peoria PJ Star:
From the Peoria PJ Star:
During a recent 10-week stint at the FBI's National Academy, which brought 250 worldwide law-enforcement executives to Quantico, Va., Peoria Police Chief Steven Settingsgaard said, "Everyone I spoke to was in favor of concealed carry."Just going to show, that cops on the street, understand that citizens who are armed, make their jobs safer and easier!
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)