Isn’t it wonderful when the family of a dead alleged criminal arrives to tell us how there wasn’t really a home invasion?
Somehow, the homeowner didn’t see it that way:
Authorities on Monday said Ronald Green, 66, was watching TV when he was startled by the sound of his front door flying open.
Ramon R. Matlock entered the home, and Green ran to a bedroom to retrieve a revolver, authorities said.
Matlock swung at Green, and Green fired a shot into Matlock’s chest and another into his lower back, authorities said.
Authorities said Matlock ran out the door, but only got as far as the front yard. The Omaha Fire Department pronounced Matlock dead at the scene.
His family claims that perhaps the teen had been drinking and was confused, and thought he was at his aunt’s house. Presumably, crashing in through doors and taking a swing at those inside after they’ve retreated to their bedrooms is just how Ramon greeted people.
The district attorney said that Ramon was known in the neighborhood… and not for his hugs. He ruled Ramon’s entry a home invasion, and his swing at the homeowner a deadly force attack justifying the use of deadly force.
No charges will be filed.
Another example of wasted youth.
I did some incredibly stupid stuff in my youth, and as my Dad used to say, I’m not young, anymore. But, it never occurred to me to get drunk, kick in someone’s door and take a swing at a 66 year-old man!
I was more into whining I had no date for Saturday night. And the only time I kicked in a door was when I locked myself out of my own bedroom at my college roommates house.
h/t Bob Owens, Robert McDonald
“The Second Amendment does not apply to schools.”
Director Of Government Relations at Boise State University
February 28, 2014
Testimony before Idaho House State Affairs Committee
I don’t know which is worse; The blanket WRONG statement by a governmental education bureaucrat, or the fact he IS said government education bureaucrat!!
I DO like Joe Huffman’s response to his statement, though:
“That’s odd. My copy of the Bill of Rights doesn’t have an exclusion for schools. If Mr. Newcomb’s does then that must mean he shouldn’t have a problem with him being convicted without a trial as long as it is done on school property.”
Rights are Rights! When will the Left (who constantly trumpets the First Amendment in defense of radical Islamists, fascists and pedophiles) get that?
You can’t have it both ways!
And when is the Left going to get the concept that you ban guns in schools – you create massive targets-of-opportunity – school shootings occur…AND HOW IS THE PROBLEM SOLVED?
They call guys with guns to stop the problem! Q.E.D.
Or just in need of further education?
Sarah Shahi plays Sameen Shaw in the CBS drama “Person of Interest” and has also appeared in shows like “Fairly Legal” and “The L Word.” The 34 year old Texan native is descended from Persian royalty, an ex-Dallas cheerleader and a pretty good shot, too. The married mom of a three year old son spoke to FOX411 about the show, being a cheerleader and gun ownership. (…)
(…)If you own a gun you need to educate yourself. It can’t fall into the wrong hands. There should be mental checks. More background checks go into adopting a dog then someone walking into a store and being able to buy a gun. I think that’s not right. (Fox 411)
Obviously, she needs to be educated at the very least. I love the show Person of Interest. And her’s is an interesting character. But comments as above show a lack of knowledge of the issues. Of course, they don’t interview and quote unknown, anonymous, disabled, old man bloggers. Just beautiful people.
AND, she already HAS her gun!
h/t Maddened Fowl
Connecticut has an “assault weapon” problem.
Politicians rammed through a law demanding that citizens register scary-looking firearms and standard capacity magazines, and the citizenry overwhelmingly responded by being “militantly sedentary.”
Gun owners sat on their butts and refused to register either arms or magazines, all but daring the state to do anything about it.
Of the estimated 375,000-400,000 firearms deemed “assault weapons” by the state, more than 325,000 remain undocumented. Only about 50,000 were registered for future confiscation.
The requirement to register standard capacity magazines was laughed at even louder by the citizenry; just 38,000 (less than 2 percent) of an estimated 2 million standard capacity magazines holding greater than ten rounds of ammunition were registered with the state. (Bearingarms.com)
Lagniappe’s Lair (Murphy’s Law) posted about one of his favorite eateries posting a ‘no open carry of weapons’ sign.
Regarding the restaurant’s decision to limit the patronage of their establishment, and his decision to not eat there, henceforth.
One of his commenters, Papa Bear, posted the following:
Huh, I wonder what would happen if I owned a business and posted a sign “No openly gay or closet individuals allowed”?
An interesting twist on the rights of business to refuse service, and the rights of individuals to be let alone with their proclivities. Got me thinking of this flap on AZ Governor Jan Brewer’s desk, the ‘right to refuse service’ bill – which the media is soundly trouncing, lest she sign it.
I still believe in the businesses right to refuse service, and the individual’s right to vote with their feet, and take their stomachs and money elsewhere.
Of course, as another of Murphy’s commenters said (in part):
They do have that right, and they are allowed to make that business decision. We, however, also have a right to take our business there or elsewhere. Well, we did until Obamacare came about, anyhow.
As my dear departed Father used to say, “ANOTHER country heard from!”
Is this Republic’s goal to support the rights of individuals, or is this democracy’s goal to enforce the will of the majority, ignoring minority rights. Or the will of the elite?
I fear that decision has already been made…
THIS JUST IN. ARIZONA GOVERNOR JAN BREWER VETOED THE BILL. Was it her choice as governor, or ‘the will of the
vocal ‘majority’? Who knows?
Kevin Baker brings us the news…
News out of L.A. last week:
Eight Los Angeles police officers who opened fire on two women delivering newspapers in a pickup truck during the hunt for Christopher Dorner violated the LAPD’s policy on using deadly force, the department’s oversight body found Tuesday.
In making its ruling, the Police Commission followed the recommendation of LAPD Chief Charlie Beck, who faulted the officers for jumping to the conclusion that Dorner was in the truck. Beck said the officers compounded their mistake by shooting in one another’s direction with an unrestrained barrage of gunfire.
Reports made public Tuesday offered new details of the hours that led up to the shooting and how it erupted into a wild, one-sided firefight in which the officers fired shotguns and handguns more than 100 times. One woman was shot twice in the back; her daughter received superficial wounds.
A panel of high-ranking police officials that reviewed the shooting urged Beck to clear the officers of wrongdoing, according to several sources who requested anonymity because they were not authorized to speak publicly about the case.
Violated policy. POLICY. How about LAW? Common sense? Decency?
So, thirty days without donuts, or do they get a six-week paid vacation (suspension with pay)?
For those who don’t remember, L.A.P.D. has a history of being full of corrupt, mob-ridden, political creatures. Chief Parker decided to take the Hollywood approach, and use P.R. to shine the agencies image. TV shows like Dragnet and Adam-12 were the result.
All this while the Hat Squad was operating behind the scenes.
For Hollywood’s take on this, go watch Mullholland Falls and L.A. Confidential.
Rollo Tomasi, indeed!
(Courtesy of The Armed Lutheran)
Last week I responded to a fan who wrote me asking for advice on how to convince his anti-gun wife to allow him to buy and carry a handgun. This week I got similar questions from a fan who is debating whether to carry concealed: is anywhere safe?
I find it difficult to justify carrying around a weapon at all times. True, I understand that crime can happen anywhere, but to be honest, it would be difficult to justify carrying around a gun to a place where no crime has happened, ever. Do you honestly think that you’re going to need your firearm to protect your family if you’re out in ‘safe‘ areas?”
The blanket assertion that no crime has happened, ever, is far fetched. But, lets accept the hypothetical. Let’s assume that no crimes have ever occurred in your house. Fine. Do you intend to ever leave your house? If your neighborhood is crime-free, that’s wonderful. Mine is too. Do you every leave the neighborhood to get gas for your car or to get groceries or to go shopping? Unless you are completely self-sufficient, home-schooling your kids, growing your own food, sewing your own clothing, you probably need to leave the house and your neighborhood from time to time. And I guarantee that the places you go are not “safe.”
Do you then limit your excursions outside the home to places where crimes have never been committed. I’m not sure how you determine that, unless you scour through police reports for every place you go, before you go there. Crimes happen everywhere, every day. Just because it hasn’t happened yet doesn’t mean it won’t.
Let’s look at this another way. I’ve never had a house fire, my home has never burned. Yet I keep a fire extinguisher in my house. How can I justify the expense of having multiple fire extinguishers in a place where no fire has happened, ever? My kids have never drowned in my swimming pool. Neither have I. Nor has my wife. Yet I paid for swimming lessons for my kids. How could I justify the expense of private swimming lessons? My car has never broken down in a snow storm like the one that hit Atlanta recently, leaving thousands of people stranded. Yet I keep a “get home bag” in both of my cars. How can I justify the expense of those supplies when I have never been stranded, ever.
Nobody had ever driven a truck into the Luby’s Cafeteria in Killeen, Texas, before George Hennard did it on October 16, 1991. He then proceeded to shoot 50 people, killing 23. Ask Suzanna Hupp how it felt to watch her parents shot to death, while her pistol was locked away in her car. If only she had been allowed to carry it, maybe something could have been done to stop the slaughter. That event sparked the passage of Texas’ shall-issue concealed carry law in 1995.
Ask Amanda Collins, about how it felt to be unable to defend herself at the University of Nevada when she was raped at gunpoint on campus, in a so-called “gun free zone.”
Ask Holly Adams, whose daughter died in the Virginia Tech massacre, how she feels.
How many people — lying in pools of their own blood, suffering through the indignity of rape or torture, hiding in a closet from an active shooter, breathing their final breaths — thought to themselves “I can’t believe this is happening to me?” How many people do you see at night on TV, interviewed after some horrific crime, telling reporters that they just can’t believe it happened in their neighborhood.
When asked why people decide to buy or carry a gun, they give a variety of answers. Some decide to do it in response to a crime. They’ve been attacked or had an incident which left them feeling vulnerable, like the incidents I recounted in my previous post. Some do it because they live or work in a crime-ridden area. Most do it to be prepared, so that IF something happens, they won’t be defenseless. It’s not paranoid to want to be prepared for the worst.
You are ultimately responsible for your own protection. The Supreme Court has ruled that police have no duty to protect you. So, when something bad happens, would you rather have the means to defend yourself and your family or would you leave it to the police? If you choose the latter, that’s fine. Just realize that calling 9-1-1 means someone else with a gun will come to your rescue, but will most likely show up in time to question witnesses, gather evidence, and draw a chalk line around your carcass.
The bottom line, though, is that nowhere is safe. Deranged lunatics have proven time and time again, that everywhere is safe until it’s not. Luby’s Cafeteria. Sandy Hook Elementary School. The Aurora theater. Columbine High School. Virginia Tech. Northern Illinois University. Santana High School. Bath Township. Dunblane. University of Texas. University of Nevada. Fort Hood. All of these places, and thousands of others were thought to be safe until someone made them hunting grounds for violent criminals.
“Safe areas,” “Safe Zones,” “Gun Free Zones,” simply do not exist. The safety you think exists is a facade and ignoring the realities of the world doesn’t make you safer. It leaves you vulnerable. Evil exists. And it doesn’t look like a gun. It looks like Dylan Kliebold. Charles Manson. Jared Laughner. James Holmes. George Hennard. Jeffrey Dahmer. Adam Lanza. Andrew Kehoe. Charles Whitman. Thomas Hamilton. Seung-Hui Cho. Evil looks like man. And it’s not deterred by signs or laws.
So, do I honestly think I am going to need my firearm to protect my family? I pray that I never do. But I’m not so naive as to think that I never will. (The Armed Lutheran)
Keads wrote on FB regarding a potential student, whose wife did not want a gun in the house, wanting his tutelege. The prospective student thought one hour of training might suffice!
I was reminded both of potential shooting students, and of private investigation clients.
I had shooting students who didn’t think their spouse would let them purchase a firearm. And those who already had a number of them, and also bad habits that needed unravelling. Many of my students were gratis, as I felt it was my duty to teach (and, at the time I could afford to do it that way!)
But, when I was a private investigator (cue walking bass music here) I was trying to eke out a living, and as such was not always as discriminatory as I would have liked. When the phone bill’s due, and you promised the wife the PI biz would float on it’s own, you took whatever came your way.
Ah, there’s the rub!
Fortunately, Keads had other information come his way. Like the potential student thought ONE HOUR of instruction would be sufficient to complete his training – thus his decision was made for him. Sorry, Charlie! (I suspect there’s a liability component here, as well.)
Sadly, when it came to P.I. clients, I pretty much was a slave to the almighty dollar. Was I an expert in electronic debugging? No, but I was able to borrow the equipment and comport myself well enough to make a few dollars – carefully explaining I was only as good as the equipment was.
Fortunately, that wasn’t my P.I. bread-and-butter. Those were locating persons (usually skip-traces) and domestic cases. At least locations were for insurance adjusters, which meant repeat business. Domestics? Hardly. Cheated on wives and girlfriends are tough to get money from.
I would think shooting students who messed up would have a liability component, as well!
Watch your back, Jack (or Jane)!
And this woman is a United States Senator!
AND, a gun owner and a CCW holder in California!
Can you say idiot and hypocrite? I knew you could.
h/t John Bradley, Doomsday Economy
Check out this chart. All of the numbers are adjusted for inflation.
It compares the kickoff of LBJ’s War On Poverty income stats to those of 2009. (And yeah, the Evil 1% somehow started doing a lot better in 2009 when Obama got elected. I wish I had those numbers on here.)
Everyone is doing better than they were. Granted, they would be doing better if LBJ had never been born, because trillions and trillions were wasted on redundant government programs rather than productive industry and services.
But seriously…. are the numbers on that chart something to get worked up over?
Go here to read the article from which these stats came.
Let’s move on.
Do you earn more than $34,000 per year?
Then you are in the Evil 1%. Yes. If you pull in 34K, you are in the top 1% of earners in the world. (The Whited Sepulcher)
I’m on medical disability and bring in way less than that.