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!
Roomie and I return from a short trip the other day, and were met by a cat outside the back gate. We already have a cat. She doesn’t play well with others. Or us.
HOWEVER, THIS new cat was friendly and welcomed affection. She appeared to be well cared for, and either had recently had surgery or given birth. (this due to the appearance of a floppy undercarriage.) We opted not to feed and water her, lest she stay and disrupt the ecosystem of our home.
AND, she’s more likely to go home if we don’t offer treats.
So much for THAT idea!
She’s been hanging around outside, making the inside cat VERY upset. There have been a few faux battles – save the Arcadia door glass in the way. Lots of yowling and hissing from the indoor car. And, the girl chihuahua treed her in the back yard, barking viciously the entire time. (As vicious as a chihuahua can be, under the circumstances.)
Roomie keeps making noises about getting a kitten. Considering the indoor car is clamoring for more attention and acting more lovable in the outdoor cats presence, this could happen.
If the girl chihuahua doesn’t stroke out, first. The boy chihuahua is just a big stupid lummox who doesn’t care as long as he gets food and attention.
For better or worse, the interloper stayed two days and then apparently went home.
h/t Warner Bros.
My favorite firearms photographer Oleg Volk, posted about these innovative laser devices for dry practice pistol training!
But with a BANG! BANG! (hopefully?)
(From Salem News)
Pat Kirby answered his country’s call to arms during the Vietnam War, serving multiple tours, suffering injuries, watching friends die. Today he has a letter from the VA telling him that because his wife takes care of their family finances, he is deemed “incompetent” and for this reason, he has to turn in his guns and relinquish his 2nd Amendment Rights, or face going to prison.
Gee, ya think this was the plan all along? To legislate, rule and bureaucratize things so that otherwise legitimate firearms owners are forced to simply give up their weapons?
Of course, if that doesn’t work, we’ll simply say he has PTSD and take them, anyway!
It’s for the children.
I had two thoughts on initially reading this. One – did Janelle do the Col. Cooper Family bookkeeping? and Two, how would HE have reacted to such a letter?
(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)
I always thought Christopher Lee the actor to be good at his craft, because he creeped me out! But blogger friend Borepatch linked the esteemable Mr. Lee to some amazing facts:
But his life is nothing short of astonishing. He witnessed the last execution via guillotine in France. He fought in the Winter War in Finland in 1939. He was in the SAS in North Africa during the War. He was cousin to Ian Fleming, who tried (and failed) to get him cast as Dr. No (he had to wait until Man With The Golden Gun to play a Bond villain).
And, at AGE 90, he’s doing symphotic metal!
You really should visit the link and see what he did and does!
More than just creepy – who knew?
While specifically aimed at Tucson’s gun ordinances, it would apply statewide:
HB 2517, approved Thursday by the House Judiciary Committee, would change all that.
It says any individual or organization whose membership is “adversely affected” by a law they believe is illegal can sue. Challengers who win are entitled to legal fees and damages up to $100,000.
The legislation also says the court can assess a civil penalty of up to $500,000 against any elected or appointed government official if a judge determines the violation of state pre-emption laws was “knowing and willful.”
And to make sure that resonates with city officials, HB 2517 forbids the city from reimbursing the council member or employee for that penalty. It even says the official has to bear his or her own legal fees.
Of course, while the committee has passed it, there’s still a long road to travel before the Governor signs it into law.
The Ninth Circuit’s decision in Peruta v. San Diego, released minutes ago, affirms the right of law-abiding citizens to carry handguns for lawful protection in public.
California law has a process for applying for a permit to carry a handgun for protection in public, with requirements for safety training, a background check, and so on. These requirements were not challenged. The statute also requires that the applicant have “good cause,” which was interpreted by San Diego County to mean that the applicant is faced with current specific threats. (Not all California counties have this narrow interpretation.) The Ninth Circuit, in a 2-1 opinion written by Judge O’Scannlain, ruled that Peruta was entitled to Summary Judgement, because the “good cause” provision violates the Second Amendment.
This certainly has ramifications for gun holders in “may issue” states such as NY and NJ. (BOTH STORIES
stolen courtesy of Alphecca)
With regard to both stories, it’s about f’n time!
h/t Jeff Soyer
The Tactical Shelf!
(If only I had the money!) it would go along with the gunsafe box spring and gunsafe desk I also don’t have!
Now if they only had one big enough for an M1 Garand and a 1911!?
h/t Theo Spark(FTC – As stated above, I cannot afford such largesse, nor has any been provided for me! I don’t have a POT – if you get my meaning. If I did, I would empty it on you. I’m jus’ sayin’!)
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)!
Stormbringer reminded us of a teacher of yore. We need more like her, today.
Meet Captain Nieves Fernandez, the only known Filipino female guerrilla leader and school teacher. When the Japanese came to take the children under her care she shot them. She didn’t hide in a closet, she didn’t put up a gun free zone sign, she shot them in the face with her latong (a home made shotgun).
Note she has an M1 carbine with a 15 round magazine – illegal in the Gun Control States of California and Massachusetts.
She then went on to kill over 200 Japanese soldiers during the war with a group of commandos and holds the distinction as the only female commander of a resistance group in the Philippines.
In this photo she is showing U.S. Army Private Andrew Lupiba how she used her bolo to silently kill Japanese sentries during the occupation of Leyte Island.
Can you imagine an American school teacher in the day & age having the chutzpah to pull off a class act like this?
h/t Theo Spark