The Greatest Equalizer…

This is a little long, but read the whole thing. It is another example of “Why I Carry.”

I received a text from a relative the other night… this is what it said:So, I’m busy at the time at a business open house and on my way home I give the relative a call.

Background:

TMM For Scale…

Before I get into the details of the story, let me relate the following. This relative is 74 years old, under 5 foot, and has silver-gray hair and is a breast cancer survivor. From now on we will just refer to her as: “Short Lady with the Gray Hair” or SLwtGH for short.  She drives a retired police car we picked up used for a decent price after her previous car finally began to die after 23 years of use.

Story:

I call the SLwtGH and she informs me of the events from her day.  For whatever reason that morning she decided that she needed to carry Tweety, her revolver with her.  She headed into Tacoma to play bridge with some friends.  For those who aren’t familiar with the People’s Republic of Puget Sound, Tacoma isn’t exactly the friendliest depending on where you are, but this was going to be mid day and she would be traveling home by 1500 so it’s not like the animals would be prowling right?

She leaves her friend’s house and at about 1440 she turns left off of E 38th street and heads North on East Portland Ave.

The full frame of the incident. The distance from E38th to Fairbanks is .4 miles.

At the time she turned left she checked her rear view mirror and saw no one behind her, blind spot clear she moved from the left lane to the right lane.

At East Fairbanks she noticed two dark color vehicles approaching from the rear. She maintained speed at 40 thinking  this is nothing significant, other than traffic.

One vehicle rapidly speeds past, immediately pulls in front, rapidly stops forcing the SLwtGH to slam on her brakes. The second car blocks the drivers side preventing immediate egress from the area. The only exit is backwards or through the vehicles.

Three men get out of the vehicles. Two out of the vehicle directly in front. The third got out of the vehicle blocking the driver side. One has a revolver at his side, another has a knife, the third has a semi-automatic pistol. At this point the SLwtGH is dialing 911 and drawing her firearm. She places it in a retention position on her chest.  About midway through their approach of the vehicle the men stop their approach. They begin conversing, the words said are unknown.  At this same time the SLwtGH is relaying her location to dispatch.

Suddenly there is a siren and lights approaching from the east. The officers pull in front of the two black cars blocking any attempted egress and the officers exit the vehicle weapons drawn.  The officer and his partner in the first car immediately took control of the situation and put the individuals in custody. Two other cars arrived shortly after.

After the officers had placed the individuals in custody they approached the SLwtGH , asked to see her weapon and carry permit.  She was then informed they were well acquainted with subjects, she was absolutely justified and had nothing to worry about. They would be going away for an extended period on multiple warrants. She was thanked for maintaining poise and thoughtfulness.

She let the officers clear the scene and then she did so.

Major notes, the criminals were traveling in packs, attempted to attack what they thought they was a soft target. This event happened in broad daylight on a thoroughfare.

AAR and my takes:

Most likely this was an attempted car jacking. As the SLwtGH was driving a retired police car it is both hardened, as well as useful if you want to imitate being an officer to rob people.  Overall the event happened quickly, it was lucky there were officers in the immediate vicinity. The SLwtGH kept her cool and remained calm event though she was under stress.

In this incident all three elements for deadly force existed:

  1. Ability: They were armed and there was no question about them being so.
  2. Opportunity: Two of the individuals were armed with ranged weapons capable of piercing the windshield.
  3. Jeopardy: The men out numbered an elderly, short, woman, blocked her vehicle, were approaching it armed, with no legal reason to be doing so.

Alternative Weapons:

While giving a debrief she noted that even if she attempted to back up, she would have still had difficulty fleeing because of the distance required to get around them. I reminded her of two things.

  1. She was in a hardened vehicle that gives her an advantage others don’t have. She could have backed up enough to wedge through the two vehicles.
  2. Her vehicle has enough power and is reinforced on the front that she could have pushed that front car out-of-the-way.

Remember your vehicle is a weapon, don’t be afraid to use it as such.

It happens fast, remain calm:

This kicked off fairly fast, I’m impressed SLwtGH was able to get 911 on the horn and have her firearm ready to rock.

This was most likely because she did not sit in denial of the events happening in front of her. Many people when confronted will deny what’s going on, trying to rationalize that this isn’t really happening or that they’re being hyper critical and the danger they’re seeing isn’t really there.  Process your input and act on it, don’t deny what you’re seeing, don’t down play it. Let the data and events speak for itself. If new data says it’s not as dangerous, great, but don’t trying and play the hypotheticals as it is happening.

Her firearm made the difference.

The presence of her firearm interrupted their game plan. This was a defensive gun use, however statistically this wouldn’t be counted.  As a side note this makes for 5 defensive gun uses in my family, in all 5 instances there wasn’t a shot fired. They had their own preconceived notion of how this was going to go down. They figured it was a soft target and would need little effort other than intimidation. When they approached the vehicle, the firearm caused them to suddenly need to start working on a new game plan. I’ve seen this happen personally in another incident where the individual was armed.

If you find yourself in a similar situation that is the moment you need to capitalize on. What has happened is the initiative has flipped, they no longer have the edge of their plan. This is when you can either talk the person down, I did in one case, wait and see if they’re going to decide discretion is the better part of valor, as the SLwtGH did here.

Additional side note, if they are already committed to performing an act of violence in their plan such as shooting you, they will likely not freeze or stop. I suspect this is because mentally that haven’t counted on the escalation path and the probability of them not surviving the encounter. Someone already committed to the violent act will most likely not waver.

Final thoughts:

Sean’s notes on this are spot on. We’ve got yet another crap gun control initiative in this state being funded by Bloomberg and company. In two weeks time there were two defensive gun uses within my family.

The issue isn’t with firearms, it isn’t with law-abiding gun owners, it’s with the tolerant behavior surrounding violent crime. We’re restricting the rights of the innocent under the guise of stopping criminals, and then acting surprised criminals are becoming bolder, because they don’t care. In the end, criminals prey on the weak. Why are we wanting the people who’ve contributed to society and continue to do so turned into prey?

Final though, don’t tell me you want to ban firearms or otherwise disarm innocent people, I am sick of playing that game. The only way the SLGH had any chance there was a firearm. Even if they had just had clubs, she’s old, small, and out numbered. You’re a sick horrible person and honestly, the body count of innocent people being dead isn’t on us. We carry every day to protect ourselves and those we love. Just look at the pastor who stopped a car jacker when he was taking his 6th car after previously shooting numerous people.

So don’t you dare tell me blood is on our hands for supporting gun owners and law-abiding citizens. 5 defensive gun uses, not a single shot fired in any of them, and in the last one:

The Short Lady with the Grey Hair stared down a bunch of armed thugs to the point where they’re now sitting in jail.

How ready are you for when violence shows up unexpectedly? Remember it doesn’t call ahead, you’re not really going to get a warning until it happens. Are you ready to be like the Short Lady with the Gray Hair?

Saying Goodbye to a Friend…

Last Sunday was a sad day. On Facebook I had noted my good friend Ray Carter, aka GayCynic, aka Northwest Freethinker, had passed away. It created a large wake within the gun community spurring a few articles such as this one. Sadly this meant I was going to meet a handful of mutual online friends in meat-space for the first time as we said goodbye to another friend.

The good news was, Ray being Ray made the service a fun ride, having planned much of it in advance himself. Including 37 minutes of prelude music (iTunes link).

Ray's Playlist

Ray’s Playlist

Even to the point of writing his own naming in the service:

Raymond was by his own admission over-serious and more sensitive than was really in his own best interests. He was a recovering alcoholic, sober since 1996 with all the benefits and flaws that implies. He sought to be a good son, to accept his brother for who he was, and to be a good uncle and friend.

Ray was driven to activism by many things. His sense of obligation to those who went before, his fundamental opposition to injustice, his patriotism, his love for his fellow man and his belief that often the kindest and most moral thing a government can do is to leave individuals to work out their own destiny.

Ray considered his nieces a special blessing, and loved them every day of their lives. His favorite holiday was Christmas and he went over the top each year that he could, going wild with decorating and striving to uphold the family traditions. He enjoyed cooking, reading and bull sessions with friends.

His time with the Freedom Day Committee, culminating in co-chairing a Pride Parade was a proud memory that he always enjoyed sharing. He took even greater joy in his time working with the Second Amendment Foundation and for firearms rights, which he saw as just another side of the same issue – civil rights – with debatably saner players. Or at least differently nuts.

Ray came to Masonry later in life, following his father and grandfather into lodge membership. He found this an opportunity for service and as an immense comfort during the last years of his life. He requests that in lieu of flowers or other donations that word be made to the Masonic Scholarship Fund of Alki Lodge #152.The growth of the lodge and facilitating educational opportunities for today’s youth was critically important to him.

The support of the Second Amendment Foundation, his friends and colleagues there, and particularly the support and tolerance of Alan and Julie Gottlieb made possible a dignified and graceful passage and rose well above any reasonable expectation of an employer; they are to be commended for their efforts and Ray hopes they accept his deepest gratitude.

Ray asked that I make clear that this service celebrating his life celebrate ALL of his life – not just one part or another. He chose music, verses and asked for themes that reflected who he was – a decidedly out gay man, a pro-gun activist, a patriot, a “small l” libertarian, a supporter of LGBT rights, and all the other roles in his life. He admitted he cheated and threw in one or two songs that he loved just for the beauty of the songs and asked that all of us here forgive him his final whimsy.

I realize now after the service there was a LARGE number of people who for various reasons weren’t able to make it but wanted to be there. I hope this glimpse into the service will suffice and put a smile on your face like Ray would have wanted.

There was limited commentary while sitting in the church regarding stories about Ray. Well anyone that knows Ray knows exactly why that is, I can’t think of any stories that are “Sanctuary Appropriate”. I made sure the story of Ray and Linoge was given to everyone in the room.

The wife made Ray’s Rice Crispy treats:

Rice Krispy treats

Ray Carter

For a 9×13 pan

Ingredients

1 cup each sugar, peanut butter, and light corn syrup

1 16oz bag each chocolate chips and butterscotch chips

6 cups rice krispies (or cereal to be disposed of)

Directions

In double boiler, melt together until smooth, corn syrup and sugar.

Let come to bare boil, back off. Remove from heat.

Stir in peanut butter, blending thoroughly.

Pour blended mixture over bowl of 6c of rice krispies – mixing thoroughly.

Press into buttered 9×13 pan. Use care and/or a spoon.

Set aside.

Clean or retrieve 2nd double boiler.

Melt together butterscotch chips and chocolate chips, stirring until indistinguishably blended.

Pour over rice krispy mix as frosting, until covered from edge to edge.

Either let set, or to accelerate setting, place in fridge or (if in great hurry) freezer.

Using sturdy knife, cut in 1×1 squares (2×2 seem far more common though).

Consume and giggle.

She even made a sign for the closing quote:

Ray says, Consume and Giggle.

Ray says, Consume and Giggle.

At the end, Phil, Drang, Bradley, Link, Ry, Kyle, Dustin, my Mom, TMW, Harry, and I all headed down for BBQ and spent another couple hours chatting and telling stories.

A bunch of us chatting after everything was over.

A bunch of us chatting after everything was over.

It was a sad day but we all made the most of it. We’ll miss you Ray and so long my brother.

Quote of the Day – Gray P. (1/21/2015)

Someone kept saying that gay people can get away with more and it be viewed as a good thing politically.

One thing that these morons don’t understand is that the gay community has their Carnivale at the Pride Parades. Though it’s mostly normal and mostly worksafe, certain floats are risque to say the least.

What’s the difference? Those risque floats are in downtown Seattle, or even downtown Olympia, but it’s NOT AT THE STATE FREAKING CAPITOL DURING THE LEGISLATIVE SESSION.

When gay people and their allies lobbied, they were normal every day people. Even the ones who wore the freaky costumes every pride came out, properly dressed like normal people.

Why? Because their rights were at stake.

(emphasis mine)
Gray P. – Facebook thread
January 20, 2015


[Gray nailed that son of a bitch so hard I think the ball is no permanently in LEO. I’ve heard many people compare the two communities and while there is definitely room for comparison there are some statements made that don’t translate.

Having friends active in both communities is wonderfully educational. Doubly so if you’re going to try to learn from the other in methods to fight for liberty.

Perspective is always important, especially with regards to lessons already learned elsewhere. -B ]

Open Mouth Insert Hoof… Nick Hanauer

So I knew about this over the weekend and was marinating on it waiting to see what the other side bothers to do if anything regarding the events of last Friday.

While many may think I am talking about the school shooting in Marysville, I am not. Quite honestly I’m getting sick of people working to exploit tragedy for political gain. Which brings me to the events I am talking about…

nick-hanauer_tweet

To the right is a real screen shot from Nick Hanauer’s Facebook Friday while in the wake of tragedy.

Now many who read this blog are from outside of the state, are not fully familiar with the ongoing legal battle, much less exactly who Nick Hanauer is.

Who is Nick Hanauer?

Nick Hanauer is a leading I-594 proponent and heir to the Pacific Coast Feather Company. To say that Nick Hanauer has had his hand in the development of I-594 is to put it mildly as he had a significant role to play in funding the initiative from the start.

Not only does he fund the initiative but he is heavily involved in Washington Alliance for Gun Responsibility being their primary funder and founder.

WAGR…

Well after Friday it is obvious that WAGR is merely a xerox of every other gun control organization we have seen that is not about the things they claim but are really about exploiting tragedy for their own political gains.

Why has WAGR not immediately made a public announcement distancing itself from Nick Hanauer? Could it be because they love his money over their principles? Could it be because deep down they agree with Hanauer’s statement? Honestly I don’t think it could be put any better than a response I overheard at the fun show over the weekend:

What a ludicrous, insensitive and quite frankly, vile, comment!  I find it
offensive and morally reprehensible.  WAGR should publicly disassociate
itself from Nick Hanauer (and return the blood money they have received
from him)

That ladies and gentleman is the cold hard truth and the most basic demonstration of exactly what the other side is. They are so desperate for money that they are willing to swim with scum and villainy the likes of which would make most good-hearted people vomit.

We however will never see WAGR respond, much less distance itself from Hanauer, and never in a million years return his money. Our opponents are too desperate and honestly rely on tragedy to fuel their funding.

We hold events to raise money for charities outside the shooting sports not to mention charities within from time to time. Name one event organized by CSGV, WAGR, or the Brady Campaign where they were raising funds for anyone other than themselves. At Boomershoot we’re regularly raising money for Soldiers’ Angels.

So let me ask one real simple question, who do you really think is trying to make their communities better? The people screaming for more violence so they can capitalize on tragedy. We on the other hand get together for a weekend and say, “Hey lets help some other people while we’re at it.”

This is why we win…

Why We Win…

So if you are thinking about sending money to WAGR, you might want to think again and find a better choice.

Liars, Thieves, and Cheats

So I came in to work the show this morning and was informed of this insanity:

Screen Shot 2014-10-25 at 10.18.42 AM

It has been a good while since I’ve done a good fisking, shall we?

Myth #3 – Gifts of firearms are exempted. Nowhere in the text does it imply that all firearm gifts are exempted. To imply that anyone assumed that makes *them* look not too bright. Any responsible gun owner should WANT it to be known whether a specific gun was transferred to someone else or not. Why? Because while you may have given it to someone you “think” would never use it in the commission of a crime, the fact of the matter is, you don’t know. You couldn’t know. How many times do you see friends and family members shocked and incredulous over what the people they have known their whole lives end up doing? How many times do you hear interviews with family members who say “I just can’t believe he did it. He was always so easy going. I don’t understand where that came from.”? Do you really want to be the person who “gave” your gun to a would be assassin regardless of the fact that you think “they would never do that”?

Gifts are exempted in very limited circumstances. I can give a gift to my mother but not mother-in-law. There is no straight exemption of gifts and to claim otherwise is deceptive and misleading. Here is the exact wording on gifts:

  • (a) A transfer between immediate family members, which for this subsection shall be limited to spouses, domestic partners, parents, children, siblings, grandparents, grandchildren, nieces, nephews, first cousins, aunts, and uncles, that is a bona fide gift

If you were really about increasing the knowledge to prevent guns from falling into the wrong hands, why not a public background check number or an indicator that is printed on all drivers licenses. While that has other issues it’s certainly a fair cry better than the monstrosity you’re trying to sell.

Myth #6 (loaning a gun to a friend for repair) and Myth #8 handing a firearm off to a student…etc. Yeah, this is a real bummer because most people want to have friends and family fix their guns or teach them how to use them properly. Seriously? If you were a responsible gun owner, you SHOULD want these things done by a professional. Someone licensed to do so. Not uncle Joe.

Difference between an amateur and professional is whether or not you are paid and nothing more. I am an amateur radio operator and let me tell you, there is nothing amateur about us. I’ve had law enforcement park next to me because I will have comms when they don’t. I have the tools and training to change barrels and do other work on firearms however that is not my everyday job. So I should not be allowed to do work I enjoy for friends and family despite my training?

Further there is no exemption for “professionals” except for gunsmiths who have an FFL. Let me repeat, there is no exemption for certified trainers or at a professional training event. The only exemption that may help is as follows:

  • (f) The temporary transfer of a firearm (i) between spouses or domestic partners; (ii) if the temporary transfer occurs, and the firearm is kept at all times, at an established shooting range authorized by the governing body of the jurisdiction in which such range is located; (iii) if the temporary transfer occurs and the transferee’s possession of the firearm is exclusively at a lawful organized competition involving the use of a firearm, or while participating in or practicing for a performance by an organized group that uses firearms as a part of the performance; (iv) to a person who is under eighteen years of age for lawful hunting, sporting, or educational purposes while under the direct supervision and control of a responsible adult who is not prohibited from possessing firearms; or (v) while hunting if the hunting is legal in all places where the person to whom the firearm is transferred possesses the firearm and the person to whom the firearm is transferred has completed all training and holds all licenses or permits required for such hunting, provided that any temporary transfer allowed by this subsection is permitted only if the person to whom the firearm is transferred is not prohibited from possessing firearms under state or federal law; or

There is no definition of what an authorized range is. Also many loaner weapons used in firearms training are owned by the instructor and not the range. Further you will not there is no exemption for instructors handling firearms owned by students. The only other line that comes close is “practicing for a performance” but that pertains to drill teams, not training.

Not to mention that deep down is economic elitism and discrimination as you are require additional money to be spent when honestly they may know someone who is perfectly capable of fixing their firearm or offering training.

Myth #9 – I can loan a hunting rifle to a friend during hunting season. Again, nowhere in 594 does it state that.

You can only loan a rifle in a very specific set of circumstances:

  • (v) while hunting if the hunting is legal in all places where the person to whom the firearm is transferred possesses the firearm and the person to whom the firearm is transferred has completed all training and holds all licenses or permits required for such hunting, provided that any temporary transfer allowed by this subsection is permitted only if the person to whom the firearm is transferred is not prohibited from possessing firearms under state or federal law;

What this means is if you wander within 150 feet of a road, or cross a stream or any other area where hunting is not legal you are committing a misdemeanor the first time or a felony the second. It is only legal as long as you are in the hunting area. You better get the firearm back before you reach your truck.

Myth #10 – I keep a rifle in my truck and occasionally allow my daughter to drive this vehicle on our property – this can’t be a crime? All I can say is this…if you think it’s ok to drive around, unsupervised, with a weapon, then you really aren’t a responsible gun owner.

Myth #10: You have never lived in a rural area have you? I regularly drove around my friends rig with his rifle in the back while helping with their farmland. Under this it would be crime, not to mention I regularly drove around my uncles truck as a minor, with a rifle. Why would I have a rifle? To shoot coyotes and other predators that prey upon livestock. But such a well-rounded and educated person such as yourself knew that there are predators out there right? Because me trusting the person I’ve given the keys to my truck and is acting to protect my property is irresponsible? WTF?

So there, I have backed up my case by citing the initiative text and if you think I’m wrong, here’s a past supreme court justice from the state of Washington on the subject.

Maybe you should leave the interpretation of the law to professionals instead of amateurs.

And since you’re a “gun owner” I’m more than happy to meet up with you at West Coast armory so you can get some practice with your firearm, if it exists. I will pay your ammo and range fees, my treat.

Ladd Everitt – Safety for Gay Bashers!!!

I’ve said it before in a nice long post, if you don’t know why I get angry and will go into a rant like what is about to follow, go read the post.

So why a friend forwarded me this article this morning I didn’t think much of it, until I hit the end.

Ladd Everitt, communications director for the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence, said that hate crime is an issue our federal government has taken very seriously, pointing out the Hate Crimes Prevention Act passed by Congress and signed into law by President Obama in 2009. 

“The law contains explicit protections for members of the LGBT community,” he said. “If groups like Pink Pistols are feeling targeted or under threat, it might be from members of their own community in the pro-gun movement.”

Because people who are so willing to beat the crap out of someone over sexual orientation actually give a crap over some “hate crime” bill. Get real boy wonder. If felony assault or attempted murder charges don’t already phase someone the extra gravy of a “hate crime” charge isn’t going to matter.

Like a restraining order, a law merely a piece of paper and doesn’t physically stop anyone from doing anything. Know what works great to stop someone who hates your race, your sexual orientation, or any other thing about you from physically assaulting you?  A 230 grain hollo-point center of mass. Repeat application until said assailant has stopped his attack on you.

The idea that people who are active in this community, who most of which are devout in securing the civil rights of all, is just complete bull crap. The idea of telling someone who may very well be assaulted over their sexual orientation, “Don’t worry about it, there are hate laws in place. You may die but we’ll send him to prison” just makes me sick. If someone wants to take responsibility for their own self-defense who is that petty tyrant to chastise them, look down on them, or otherwise disparage them. Ladd is nothing more than a sniveling coward who preys upon those who fall victim to evil in this world. Ladd needs evil to triumph to continue his assault on the rights of innocent people, it’s why he is the most evil of evils.

Heaven forbid a person be allowed to choose to exercise their right of self-defense, to say no with such conviction no harm befalls them but hell rains down upon the aggressor.

Then again this is the same asshat that called Joe Huffman and me the most offensive.

Lastly I have numerous friends who are very out of the closet and very active within the community. I have yet to personally see an incident of bigotry against them by the community personally, much less anything even approaching what you claim.  Even then even after years in the community they’ve only run into one or two and they were quickly dealt with and everyone else around was equally pissed off at said individual.

Here’s a direct quote from one of them:

That sorta bigotry particularly offends me both as bigotry per se AND with its wild departure from reality – I have been largely open in the 2A community and with but one or two exceptions received naught but support…

So Ladd, do the world and go fornicate with a rusty chainsaw you bigoted ass. Because quite honestly the only way you can come to some off the deep end conclusion such as yours is if you yourself would try it.

The Worthlessness of Background Checks…

So this came across my inbox today via Sean and my immediate though was of I-594.

According to an Executive Summary “on the investigations the Oregon State Police (OSP) is conducting regarding denied firearm transactions through the Firearm Instant Check System (FICS) Unit”   of the 331 “denial” investigations only 8 people have been arrested. That’s a total of only 2.41% of the people denied!

And of course, there is no way of  knowing how many of the people taken into custody were arrested for actual offenses and how many were victims of the same sloppy record keeping that kept most of the other 97%  from completing transfers.

Honestly this is not surprising to anyone who is actually active in this community or works with the facts on the subject. Doubly entertaining is when you also consider that criminals need not take part in this system since that would require them to self incriminate.

I am one of those who has received a NICS denial, got a couple of them actually while the state took it’s time updating records associated with a felony charge. But I hear you cry, how do you know you were legal? Because the prosecutor who charged me ordered the firearm I was carrying the day of the wreck returned to me.

So let’s think about this, what does an overly broad definition of transfers, where any handling of a firearm can be classified as a transfer get the other side?

The answer is simple, it makes firearm ownership so dangerous and precarious that very few will want to exercise their rights. Further even fewer of those will be willing to risk felonies to educate others. Not to mention the costs of attempting to stay within the bounds of the law given transfer fees and the use tax involved.

Vote NO on I-594. Don’t let the 1% confuse you in to vacating your rights.

Quote of the Day – Lyle (5/12/2014)

To say that gun restrictions fail to reduce crime is a bit like saying that rape and robbery “fail to advance love and charity”.

LyleComment to Quote of the day—Chris and Jeff Knox
May 11th, 2014


[The thing is, many would find this a humorous joke. I can’t laugh through because honestly he nailed it.

I did see something else interesting last night on the news.  A man was eager to get people who lost family in the Oso mudslide in front of state legislators to push for more logging regulations. He even stated while we don’t have the facts currently, we do have emotional support and hopefully that should be enough for emergency measures.

Excuse me?  I swear people would rather live in a world governed by emotion instead of reason and logic.  They’d rather live by their feelings and intuition even if all facts, logic, and reason proved those things to be false.

Where did everyone go and how the hell can I get off the crazy train? -B]