----------------------------------------------------------------------
Not yet a VCDL member? Join VCDL at: http://www.vcdl.org/join
----------------------------------------------------------------------
VCDL's meeting schedule: http://www.vcdl.org/meetings
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Abbreviations used in VA-ALERT: http://www.vcdl.org/help/abbr.html
----------------------------------------------------------------------
1. VCDL pre-Lobby Day dinner meeting in Richmond on Sunday, Jan. 18th - RSVPs needed
2. Arsenal Attorneys to provide 100 free coffees on Lobby Day
3. A new video of VCDL's Lobby Day is being done this year and YOU can be part of it!
4. Another Virginia candidate learns that ignoring gun owners can cost you an election
5. Adios to TWO congressional anti-gunners!
6. Number of machine guns registered in Virginia
7. Kroger continues to stand tall on honoring the rights of Americans, MDA gets quiet
8. Henrico 11-year-old brings prank gum to school, accused of having a weapon.
9. ATF releases 14 point clarification on 80% lowers
10. FBI report confirms crime fell while gun sales soared in 2013
11. Obama orders 'mental-health' testing for schoolkids
12. [MD] Maryland teen planned to kill parents, classmates with stolen guns, court documents say
13. Most Americans say yes to guns
14. [GA] Who needs a gun at Kroger?
15. [NY] Sorry your family member just died. Give us his guns. Now
16. [MD] Senior Maryland ex-state trooper claims O'Malley silenced him on guns
17. [OH] Concealed carrying mom opens fire on man who shot her 13-year-old son in public [VIDEO]
18. [GA] Man describes protecting his family from home invaders [VIDEO]
19. [DC] Emily Miller- 2nd amendment heroine [VIDEO]
20. [TX] The school where teachers are armed [VIDEO]
21. [TX] 'Moms Demand Action' anti-gun group opposing open carry in Texas
22. [IN] 'Swatters' take false police reports to extreme
23. [OH] Dayton-area Walmart shooting: Was an innocent man SWATted to Death?
24. [TX] Man faces five years in Federal prison in 'Swatting' case
**************************************************
1. VCDL pre-Lobby Day dinner meeting in Richmond on Sunday, Jan. 18th - RSVPs needed
**************************************************
VCDL is going to have a pre-Lobby Day dinner meeting in Richmond on Sunday, January 18th at 7 PM at the Crowne Plaza Richmond hotel.
http://www.crowneplaza.com/hotels/us/en ... oteldetail
It will be a buffet-style dinner in a room that will hold 50 people. It is a private room, so we will be able to also have a short meeting dealing with Lobby Day and I will go over the key bills that VCDL wants to push.
VCDL is asking for an $18 donation for the dinner to help defray the cost - which is $35 per person.
I need a firm count on how many of you want to attend.
If you plan to attend, please reply to this email and let me know your name and the number in your party.
We will collect the $18 at the event. You can pay with either a check or cash. If cash, please bring exact change unless you are donating the extra from a larger bill
David Codrea, who is one of the speakers at the Lobby Day rally, plans on attending the dinner, so this would be a great chance to meet him.
**************************************************
2. Arsenal Attorneys to provide 100 free coffees on Lobby Day
**************************************************
Arsenal Attorneys have arranged for refreshments to be served during VCDL lobby day, Monday January 19.
Alchemy Coffee will position their award-winning espresso trailer across the street from the General Assembly Building starting from 7:30 am until 12:15 pm.
They will offer coffee, espresso drinks, tea, pastries, and more.
That morning, Matthew Bergstrom from Arsenal Attorneys will hand out 100 coupons each for a free 8 oz. coffee. With caffeine and the warmer weather forecasted, it should be a great day for our meetings and rally!
**************************************************
3. A new video of VCDL's Lobby Day is being done this year and YOU can be part of it!
**************************************************
From member Ken Van Wyk:
Many of you no doubt remember the "And I Carry" video that Matt Gottshalk and I did in 2014. Well, we're going to be at Lobby Day on the 19th of this month working on two new videos for VCDL.
The first one is going to be an updated VCDL Lobby Day video. With some high profile speakers already lined up, this should be a great way to get VCDL some positive exposure.
The second one is going to be a short "And I Carry" collage of video clips, and I'd like to extend this invitation to ALL OF YOU to participate. What I have in mind is a very short blurb from everyone who is present at Lobby Day. Something like, "I'm a patriotic Virginian and I carry". The video will then pan to your (lawful!) firearm that you're carrying. We'll edit the final result down to a rapid fire (no pun intended) collage of our smiling faces and shining firearms.
I hope you'll all consider participating in either or both videos. Several of you had agreed to be in the "iCarry" video, but we weren't able to make it happen due to timing or other logistics. Well, here's your chance to be in a video and help put the best light on us carrying Virginians!
If you are willing to help, please email me at: ken at vanwyk dot org so I can include you on the list. Once you're on the list, you'll be receiving further instructions from me regarding when/where to meet up for filming during Lobby Day.
**************************************************
4. Another Virginia candidate learns that ignoring gun owners can cost you an election
**************************************************
Well, Republican candidate Craig Paisot refused to answer his VCDL survey, even though he was approached by many gun owners about doing so, and lost by a mere 324 votes.
**************************************************
5. Adios to TWO congressional anti-gunners!
**************************************************
Carolyn McCarthy of New York is now gone from Congress and Senator Barbara Boxer is not going to run for re-election! My birthday presents arrived a month early this year!
Here is an article on Ms. McCarthy:
http://www.guns.com/2015/01/07/gun-lady ... acy-video/
or
http://tinyurl.com/lfygwd4
**************************************************
6. Number of machine guns registered in Virginia
**************************************************
VCDL Board member Dale Welch did a Freedom of Information Act inquiry to the Virginia State Police on how many machine guns are in the Virginia Machine Gun Registry. The response:
Dear Mr. Welch,
This information is provided pursuant to your request under the provisions of the Virginia Freedom of Information Act.
As of this date, the total number of machine guns registered with this Agency is 10,265.
Sincerely,
Donna K. Tate, Manager
Firearms Transaction Center
Department of State Police
**************************************************
7. Kroger continues to stand tall on honoring the rights of Americans, MDA gets quiet
**************************************************
http://therighttobear.com/kroger-refuse ... last-word/
or
http://tinyurl.com/ld36f66
Kroger Refuses to Cave to Anti-Gun Group – and Its Customers Have the Last Word
The grocery chain, Kroger, has been standing firm in the face of relentless pressure from an anti-gun group. The organization Moms Demand Action has insisted Kroger ban law-abiding citizens from openly carrying firearms in its stores. Kroger refused to comply with the group’s demands, and its customers appear to be supporting its position. Kroger’s net earnings for the quarter ending November 8, 2014 are up 21 percent over last year. Supermarket News reported Kroger earned $362 million for the quarter.
Breitbart News reported that the Moms Demand Kroger campaign began on August 18, 2014. That same day, Kroger subsidiary grocer Fred Meyer refused to change Kroger’s policies. Less than two weeks later, Kroger announced it would also not be changing its policies. Both organizations reiterated it would comply with all applicable state and local laws.
In September 2014, Moms Demand founder Shannon Watts issued an attack on Kroger for banning skateboards, but not guns. The following month a Moms Demand Action chapter based in Kentucky issued an appeal to Kroger shareholders to support a gun ban. Shareholders did not comply.
In an acceleration of its campaign, Moms Demand Action then targeted Kroger subsidiary Harris Teeter. Harris Teeter also refused to alter its policy.
Moms Demand Action has made the Kroger campaign a priority. Its website features contact information for executives as well as the following statement:
"A grocery store is one of the last places we should expect to see someone openly carrying a loaded weapon. But Kroger, the largest grocery chain in the country, has policies that allow customers to openly carry guns in its stores – where moms and their kids shop every day.
"Numerous shootings and gun rallies have taken place at Kroger brand stores in recent years. The company policies that have enabled this to happen are not in line with its core values, which include creating a 'safe and secure workplace and shopping environment.'
"Most states have weak gun laws that let people openly carry guns even if they haven’t had a background check or training. Private businesses like Kroger have the responsibility to protect their customers when the law won’t."
While anti-gun groups like this one pretend they are riding a momentum of public opinion, the reality is apparent. Kroger’s customers have spoken, and the response is loud and clear.
**************************************************
8. Henrico 11-year-old brings prank gum to school, accused of having a weapon.
**************************************************
Member Clayton Rhoades emailed me this:
More insanity out of our schools.
From www.nbc12.com: http://tinyurl.com/k7tm95u
http://www.nbc12.com/story/27349091/hen ... ing-weapon
Henrico 11-year-old brings prank gum to school, accused of having'weapon
by Chris Thomas
November 10, 2014
RICHMOND, VA (WWBT) - You have heard of a stun-gun, but how about "shocking-gum?" An 11-year-old Henrico student was suspended from Hungary Creek Middle School. He was accused of bringing a "stun weapon" to school.
The 11-year-old Henrico boy brought the gum that can be found at area novelty stores to school. He was accused of having a stun weapon and suspended from school. We took the gum to the folks at Bob Moates Sport Shop.
"I wouldn't want to depend on that for protection," said store manager David Hancock. "There is no way you can call that a weapon. I think people have gone absolutely insane in the administration of these kind of policies."
The gum package does note: "This is not a toy and should not be used on people who are pregnant or who have heart problems."
"It tingles maybe," said Hancock. "But is certainly not doing any damage like say a 5 million volt stun-gun would do."
This all comes as no surprise to the people at the Legal Aid Justice Center
"Locally in Henrico there have been individuals who are really looking at school discipline and trying to move from zero tolerance policies to policies that make common sense," said Jeree Thomas with the Legal Aid Justice Center.
Legal aid is working with the school system to bring new language to the code of conduct.
"Very clear language that suspensions should be used as a last resort," said Thomas. "We want to use evidence-based interventions."
Thomas urges parents who have questions about suspensions and your options to review the Helping You Help Your Child legal aid document.
Henrico School leaders released the following statement:
The safety of our students and staff is our highest priority. Unfortunately, student privacy laws prevent us from making further comment. Please consider that to examine the situation only from the perspective of a single person, without considering others that were involved, would create an incomplete and inaccurate version of events.
**************************************************
9. ATF releases 14 point clarification on 80% lowers
**************************************************
Member Walter Jackson emailed me this:
From gunssavelives.net: http://tinyurl.com/kkatuwd
http://gunssavelives.net/blog/gun-laws/ ... 80-lowers/
ATF Releases 14 point clarification on 80% lowers
by Dan Cannon
November 11, 2014
Eighty percent lowers, they’re the talk of the gun industry right now.
The concept is simple enough – an AR-15 receiver that is only 80% finished is not legally considered a firearm. That means (in most states) that anyone can purchase one just as easily as you can purchase any other chunk of metal and finalize the machining to turn it into a functioning firearm for personal use only.
However, as we’ve seen in the past, some sellers have found themselves in hot water because what they thought was an 80% lower turned out to be a firearm by ATF standards. Well, the ATF decided to help prevent that from happening again. The agency has released a 14 point bulletin clarifying what is and is not considered a firearm and reminding people that 80% lowers are in fact legal.
Here are a few highlights:
1. Is ATF aware of the receiver blanks, commonly referred to as 80% receivers?
ATF routinely collaborates with the firearms industry and law enforcement to monitor new technologies and current manufacturing trends that could potentially impact the safety of the public.
2. What is an “80%” or “unfinished” receiver?
“80% receiver,” “80% finished,” “80% complete,” “unfinished receiver” are all terms referring to an item that some may believe has not yet reached a stage of manufacture that meets the definition of firearm frame or receiver found in the Gun Control Act of 1968 (GCA). These are not statutory terms or terms ATF employs or endorses.
3. Are “80%” or “unfinished” receivers illegal?
Receiver blanks that do not meet the definition of a “firearm” are not subject to regulation under the GCA. The ATF has long held that items such as receiver blanks, “castings” or “machined bodies” in which the fire-control cavity area is completely solid and un-machined have not reached the “stage of manufacture” which would result in the classification of a firearm per the GCA.
**************************************************
10. FBI report confirms crime fell while gun sales soared in 2013
**************************************************
Member Walter Jackson emailed me this:
From www.breitbart.com: http://tinyurl.com/lojdx85
http://www.breitbart.com/big-government ... d-in-2013/
FBI report confirms crime fell while gun purchases soard in 2013
by AWR Hawkins
November 10, 2014
As gun sales soared in 2013–with the number of background checks for gun sales breaking records–the FBI reports that violent crime fell sharply below 2012 figures, and property crime rates fell sharply too.
On January 6, Breitbart News reported there were 21,093,273 background checks for firearm purchasers conducted in America in 2013. And while this number of background checks represented a record, we explained then that the number of guns sold could be many times higher. That is because background checks are done on gun purchasers, not on the number of guns being purchased.
For instance, if everyone who went through a background check then purchased three guns, the number of guns sold in the retail market alone would have been 63,279,819. That’s not even counting the number sold privately.
And what happened as all these guns came into private hands? Violent crime and property crime fell.
According to an FBI report released on November 10: “violent crimes in 2013 decreased 4.4 percent when compared with 2012 figures, and the estimated number of property crimes decreased 4.1 percent [as well].”
These record gun sales and the subsequent reduction in crime square perfectly with a Congressional Research Service report covered by Breitbart News on December 4, 2013. That study showed that the number of privately owned firearms in America increased from 192 million in 1994 to 310 million in 2009. At the same time, “firearm-related murder and non-negligent homicide” fell from 6.6 per 100,000 Americans in 1993 to 3.6 per 100,000 in 2000.
The bottom line: more guns equals less crime.
**************************************************
11. Obama orders 'mental-health' testing for schoolkids
**************************************************
Member Craig Smith emailed me this:
From wnd.com: http://tinyurl.com/mskjzzt
http://mobile.wnd.com/2014/11/schools-t ... eds-money/
Obama orders 'mental-health' testing for schoolkids
by Leo Hohmann
November 8, 2014
Using “gun violence” as its cover, the Obama administration has quietly unleashed a cache of federal dollars that will be used for testing students for signs of mental health issues in K-12 schools.
Critics say personal information scooped up in the screenings will be logged into databases that will follow the child throughout his or her academic career and beyond.
Public schools, which have increasingly taken on aspects of psychiatric clinics in recent years, will get infused with more than $150 million in federal grants to further this agenda under the auspices of Obama’s 2013 executive action titled “Now is the Time to Do Something About Gun Violence.”
Obama took the action following the Sandy Hook, Connecticut, school shooting, putting Vice President Joe Biden in charge of a task force on “gun violence.”
These are the goals that came out of Biden’s task force:
• Strengthen the background check system for gun sales [PVC: Waste of time. Background checks don't stop criminals from getting guns.]
• Require background checks for all gun sales [PVC: See previous statement.]
• Pass a new, stronger ban on assault weapons [PVC: A truly minuscule number of crimes are committed with semi-automatic rifles.]
• Limit ammunition magazines to 10 rounds [PVC: It's the 11th round that turns people in to murdering lunatics.]
• Finish the job of getting armor-piercing bullets off the streets [PVC: And these have been used in a crime when exactly?]
• Give law enforcement additional tools to prevent and prosecute gun crime [PVC: "Tools" for the police are code words for taking away more of our liberty.]
• End the freeze on gun violence research [PVC: Can't have propaganda without lots of phony research.]
• Make our schools safer with new resource officers and counselors, better emergency response plans and more nurturing school climates [PVC: More nurturing - like not going berserk when a kid brings prank gum to school?]
• Ensure quality coverage of mental health treatment, particularly for young people.
The last two measures are where the mental health screenings for students come into play.
On Sept. 22, Department of Health and Human Services Secretary Sylvia M. Burwell announced $99 million in new federal grants to school districts for mental health services. The money will be used “to train new mental health providers, help teachers and others recognize mental health issues in youth and connect them to help and increase access to mental health services for young people.”
On Sept. 23, the U.S. Department of Education announced another $70 million in “School Climate Transformation grants.” More than half of the money “will be used to develop, enhance, or expand systems of support for implementing evidence-based, multi-tiered behavioral frameworks for improving behavioral outcomes and learning conditions.”
The goals of such measures include “connecting[ing] children, youths, and families to appropriate services and supports,” and increasing “measures of and the ability to respond to mental health issues among school-aged youth.”
Both HHS and DOE cited Obama’s “Now is the Time” declaration as the basis for the new programs.
“The administration is committed to increasing access to mental health services to protect the health of children and communities,” Burwell said.
Of the DOE’s $70 million package, $13 million is allocated to aiding school districts in creating “high-quality school emergency plans.” Another $14 million goes toward “Project Prevent grants” for violence-plagued schools to “be used for school-based counseling services, or referrals to community-based counseling services for assistance in coping with trauma or anxiety.”
Such designs hint at broader motives and agendas, reports Professor James F. Tracy in an article for Global Research:
“1) the federal government’s continued aggressive transformation of the healthcare system; and 2) psychiatry and drug manufacturers’ shared mission to persuade an increasing segment of the national and global population that it has one or more undiagnosed mental or emotional ‘disorders’ that require analysis and treatment.
Introducing psychiatric explanations and methodologies into school environments guarantees a growing customer base for the psychiatric profession and pharmaceutical industry. Alongside government’s increasing control of healthcare, the technocratic surveillance and management of everyday thought and behavior is likewise emerging as part of what is deceptively termed ‘wellness.’
In reality such efforts ensure an ever-expanding bureaucracy, handsomely line the pockets of a select few, and further normalize a culture of learned helplessness and control within an environment that already privileges conformity as a matter of routine.”
A very dangerous trend
Jane Robbins, senior fellow at the American Principles Project in Washington, D.C., said the federal government’s interest in testing students, not only for academic knowledge but for psychological and behavioral traits, has been a problem for many years.
“Never let a good crisis (a school shooting) go to waste, right?” Robbins told WND via email. “This appears to be part of the broader goal of focusing education less on academic knowledge and more on students’ feelings, mindsets, attitudes, etc. — so-called social and emotional learning (SEL).”
She said Education Secretary Arne Duncan is a “huge proponent of having schools and teachers focus on these kinds of things, which they are not trained for and which are only tangentially related to academic achievement.”
“It’s a very dangerous trend,” Robbins said.
The problem is even more concerning in light of recent attempts to create state databases of student information, which will eventually be linked together as part of the DOE’s plans for a nationwide database.
Rhode Island is linking DNA collection on newborns to its education database, meaning each child will be tracked from birth to college graduation and beyond.
Also concerning to privacy rights advocates is that the state is taking the DNA collections from babies without parental consent.
In most states, parents may request a screening exemption, but only for religious reasons. In Nebraska and West Virginia, parents may not refuse screening.
$50 million from feds for DNA grabs
So far, Rhode Island appears to be the only state connecting a child’s DNA to his state education record, Robbins said. But in return for federal funds, a number of states plan to link children’s health data with their student records, she noted.
In 2011, Rhode Island received a $50 million Race to the Top Early Learning grant from the U.S. departments of Education, and Health and Human Services.
In their grant application, the Rhode Island Department of Education said it would link the state’s newborn DNA database, KIDSNET, to the state’s K-12 school database.
Anita Hoge, an education consultant and expert on the student assessment industry, says the move to incorporate federally funded mental health screening into local schools is disconcerting.
“This is much worse than most people believe,” Hoge said in an email. “First of all, schools will apply for partial hospitalization licenses so they can bill Medicaid for wrap-around mental health services. Then outside people have access to the students. But, it is going to start at birth with the DNA collection too. So, there are lists of what is considered an ‘at risk’ child. And it will conform to the subjective observations of both teachers and professional psychologists and psychiatrists.”
Hoge said similar measures were proposed during the Clinton administration when the merits of “Hillarycare” – Clinton’s version of national healthcare – were being debated.
George W. Bush named his mental health screening initiative The Freedom Initiative, which WND reported on in 2004.
Marti Oakley, a radio host and author of the blog the “PPJ Gazette,” took up the issue of school mental-health screenings in July when she issued this scathing report:
The active attack on public education through the Common Core curriculum has now taken one giant step forward as Minnesota and other states passed aggressive mental health laws directed at our children. Several additional public schools in the state will now have [mental health] clinics on site as the programs become established; clinics that will be used to aggressively label the greatest number of children possible as having one or more mental disorders. Tied to these bills are massive government subsidies and other targeted funding.
In other words, our children will be traded for dollars regardless of the lifelong damage that will be the result from the assessment of fictional mental disorders; an assessment which will follow them for the rest of their lives whether real or just imagined by a mental health provider. Many will become dependent on the highly addictive psychotropic drugs known as neuroleptics and will suffer from a myriad of adverse side effects.
Minnesota was among the first states to jump headlong into the psychological training and testing of kids.
“Under five-year grant contracts with the department, 36 mental health organizations will provide school-linked mental health services to approximately 35,000 students in more than 800 schools across 257 school districts and 82 counties by 2018,” according to a release by the Minnesota Department of Human Services. “More than half of those students will receive mental health services for the first time.”
Oakley asks: “Why does that statement make me cringe? Maybe it’s the unfettered access to more than 35,000 students and the ensuing data mining that will also be relentlessly conducted and stored in permanent lifetime files for easy access by insurance companies, federal and state agencies and eventual employers.”
**************************************************
12. [MD] Maryland teen planned to kill parents, classmates with stolen guns, court documents say
**************************************************
And since schools in Maryland are dangerous "gun-free zones," the little monster could have certainly killed a lot of people. Of course, Virginia is no better. We are trying again this year to allow for lawful concealed carry in schools.
Member Walter Jackson emailed me this:
From www.foxnews.com: http://tinyurl.com/n8jfxg9
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2014/11/06/ma ... gun-court/
Maryland teen planned to kill parents, classmates with stolen gun, court documents say
Associated Press
November 6, 2014
MONKTON, Md. – A Maryland teenager told police he planned to use a stolen handgun to kill his parents, then drive to his high school and kill students and teachers as revenge for years of bullying he suffered, according to court documents released Wednesday.
Sash Alexander Nemphos, 16, of Monkton, is charged as an adult, Baltimore County Police said in a tweet. The charges include possession of a destructive device, having a dangerous weapon on school property and theft, according to the probable cause documents.
Nemphos was confronted Saturday by police over thefts from a car and business, including a handgun. After asking him about the stolen gun several times, the 10th-grader, who officers said was clearly intoxicated, told police he was going to take the gun, drive to his school Monday, shoot the school officer, and then take the officer's gun to "kill as many teachers and students as he could."
The documents say the teen also said he had made several bombs to blow up George Washington Carver Center for Arts and Technology.
Police recovered from his home a handgun, three crude, homemade explosives, a suicide note, and a journal with all his plans, the probable cause documents said. He was arrested at his home.
Nemphos told officers he had intended to go through with his plan on Halloween and had taken the gun in his backpack to school. But he had forgotten the bombs so he aborted his plan, he said. He also said he was too drunk to carry out the plan, the documents said.
He said he was going to try again Monday and would stay sober to do it, the documents said.
Nemphos told police he had been bullied for years and has told teachers, but nothing was ever done.
A woman who answered the phone at Nemphos' address hung up when asked about the case.
**************************************************
13. Most Americans say yes to guns
**************************************************
Member Billy Huckleberry emailed me this:
From wallstcheatsheet.com: http://tinyurl.com/k43egna
http://wallstcheatsheet.com/business/mo ... ?a=viewall
Most Americans say 'yes' to guns
by Erika Rawes
December 02, 2014
Guns are a major source of controversy. There are the gun enthusiasts and other citizens who feel they have the right to protect themselves and their homes with firearms. Then, there are those who feel owning firearms only increases the likelihood that violence (purposeful and accidental) will result.
Gallup recently conducted a survey on guns, and what Americans think of them. The results of the poll showed that shockingly, 63% of Americans think having a gun in the home makes the home safer. On the other side of the coin, only 30% of Americans say they feel guns make homes more dangerous, and around 6% say “it depends.”
The results of the 2014 Gallup survey on guns were significantly different from survey results in the year 2000, when the opinion was reversed. Back in 2000, only 35% of respondents said they felt guns made homes safer, and the majority — 51% — felt guns made for a more dangerous home. You can see how the public’s opinion has changed over the past 15 years.
What’s changed?
While there is no way of knowing for sure why the view on guns has changed so dramatically over the past 15 years, if we think back over the past decade and a half, the change in views makes sense. The 2000 poll was conducted only about a year after a tragic school shooting in 1999, which sparked a gun control debate.
Other events, like the war on terrorism, tragedies that received heavy media coverage, and elections may have also changed the public view on guns and gun safety.
Demographics make a difference
The results of the Gallup poll also conveyed a large difference in views between different genders, races, political parties, and geographic regions. Overall, 42% of survey respondents report having a gun in their home. Males are more likely than females to own guns (47% vs. 38%) and Republicans are much more likely to own guns than Democrats (55% vs. 43%). Of the four geographic regions — north, south, east, and west — the south is the most likely to own guns, with the majority (51%) of southern respondents reporting they have guns in their homes.
Weighing a few of the pros and cons
Guns are big business. The industry employs people, generates revenue, and brings in tax dollars. The National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF) estimates that nearly 250,000 jobs have been created by or are related to the sporting arms industry and employees pay around $5.2 billion in state and federal taxes. “These are good jobs,” says an NSSF publication, “paying an average of $47,709.”
For a person who has no intention of doing anything wrong or illegal with a firearm and only intends on using it for sport or to protect their property, it may be difficult for them to understand the other side. And that makes perfect sense.
On the other side of the coin, the same industry that’s making money for our economy is costing it money, as well. Related expenses, like court costs and the cost of accidents are higher because of gun crimes and the misuse of guns. According to a recent report by the Urban Institute, the hospital costs related to gun violence total $500 million each year. And, with those visiting hospitals often being on some sort of assistance (or they are uninsured), taxpayers end up incurring these costs.
Guns are also different from other weapons (like pocket knives) in that their only purpose is to destroy a target and they have no other true use. Therefore, unless a person hunts or goes to the range and practices, they don’t have much (or any) experience with guns. A lot of people have never even seen one, let alone know how to use it. So, though some people can safely handle a firearm, not everyone can, and though many people use and store them responsibly, some people use guns to commit horrendous acts, and others don’t lock them up properly and safely away from minors.
These are just a few of the many points each side of the gun debate have brought to the table. What do you think about guns? Do they make homes safer, or more dangerous?
**************************************************
14. [GA] Who needs a gun at Kroger?
**************************************************
Member Rollin Reisinger emailed me this:
From www.wsbtv.com: http://tinyurl.com/nehnabo
http://www.wsbtv.com/news/news/local/po ... oce/nh5Yd/
Police search for three men who shot man getting groceries
November 11, 2014
Police are looking for three men they say jumped another outside of a grocery store in Fulton County and then shot him in the stomach after the scuffle.
Investigators said Daniel McHugh, 48, was just out shopping for groceries at the Kroger on Old National Highway when he caught the attention of three males who approached him and shot him with hardly any words exchanged.
Channel 2’s Carl Willis talked to McHugh’s roommates who say they hadn't seen him and had no idea what happened to him last Thursday until Willis told them.
"This is a great shock. He's a mild-mannered kind of guy," said roommate Rob Rogers. "Paul said if he didn't hear from him in 18 hours he was going to file a missing persons report."
Instead McHugh has been at Grady Memorial Hospital recovering from being shot in the stomach.
Police told Willis that the incident looks like it was a crime of opportunity.
"It appeared that he was just a victim shopping at the grocery store. There was only a matter of seconds prior to the shot being fired," said Detective Melissa Parker with the Fulton County Police Department.
Police believe it was an attempted robbery that escalated to an aggravated assault. They say the shooters ran past a Pizza Hut and possibly into a nearby apartment complex.
"We are interviewing several witnesses and we do have several leads, however, we are hoping to hear from the public," Parker said.
Meanwhile, the victim's friends are just happy that he's still alive after the sudden and violent encounter.
"I guess he was just caught unaware. You know, he was just going to shop, you're not expecting anything like that," Rogers said.
**************************************************
15. [NY] Sorry your family member just died. Give us his guns. Now.
**************************************************
Anyone doubt that registration leads to confiscation? New York is proof yet again.
Member Sue Ward emailed me this:
From bearingarms.com: http://tinyurl.com/pgh3ktc
http://bearingarms.com/buffalo-stampede ... -guns-now/
Buffalo stampeded: Sorry your family member just died. Give us his guns. Now.
by Bob Owens
November 13, 2014
New York’s anti-gun insanity is getting even more paranoid and inappropriate, with the Buffalo Police now scanning the obituaries and looking for an opportunity to bully the families of the recently departed.
Buffalo Police say they’re determined to get more guns off the streets and now they’re checking to see whether pistol permit holders have passed away and what happened to their gun or guns.
During a press conference last week regarding weapons brought in illegally from Pennsylvania, police officials told reporters their biggest problem with weapons in crimes seems to involve guns that are stolen in burglaries from homes.
They feel that, in some cases, families are holding on to weapons even after the person who bought them originally has died.
So now they’re actually looking for those situations.
“We recently started a program where we’re cross referencing all the pistol permit holders with the death records, and we’re sending people out to collect the guns whenever possible so that they don’t end up in the wrong hands,” said Police Commissioner Daniel Derrenda [sic].” Because at times they lay out there and the family is not aware of them and they end up just out on the street.”
I’m quite tempted to mock the pure and unfiltered bovine excrement pouring forth from the mouth of Daniel Derenda, but if I did then I’d be undercutting the disgust I feel for the actions of the Buffalo PD, and the lies that Derenda is willing to vomit forth in order to bully grieving families.
What the Buffalo PD is hoping to accomplish is blindingly obvious. They’re going to use the relative’s pistol permit as the proverbial camel’s nose under the tent to get at every firearm they can, hoping to remove all the firearms from the home while the family is at their most vulnerable.
While a family is still reeling from the loss of a beloved mother, father, brother, son, or sister, uniformed officers from the Buffalo Police Department are going to show up at their doors and attempt to bully the family into surrendering their recently deceased relative’s firearms… all of them, if they can.
The handgun on the pistol permit is an excuse, but the officers will obviously try to convince the grieving family that they should surrender all of the other firearms belonging to the decedent as well.
The Buffalo PD try to get family’s to turn over what may very well be heirlooms, without allowing the family to pass them along to other family members who might appreciate them.
This is a despicable and heartless practice, and should be ended immediately.
**************************************************
16. [MD] Senior Maryland ex-state trooper claims O'Malley silenced him on guns.
**************************************************
An anti-gunner trying to keep the truth hidden? Oh, say it ain't so.
From www.foxnews.com: http://tinyurl.com/l3sazax
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/11 ... ed-him-on/
Senior Maryland ex-state trooper clains O'Malley administration silenced him on gun control law
by Guy Leonard
November 12, 2014
Jack McCauley enjoyed a fast-rising career in the Maryland State Police, starting out on the street and then moving on to gangs, drugs and murders. He went all the way to the top post in the firearms licensing division -- until, he claims, political pressure over the state's high-profile gun control push drove him out.
He was barred from criticizing the policy, he says, and was told from on high that the reason for the sweeping law, which critics say tramples Second Amendment rights, was simple: "It is just votes."
McCauley has since retired over that episode. In an interview with FoxNews.com, he described his frustration and accused Democratic Gov. Martin O'Malley's administration of misleading the public.
"My goal is to educate the public, because the mainstream media and the governor's office are intentionally lying to people," McCauley told FoxNews.com.
The Firearms Safety Act of 2013 -- one of the major gun control laws to pass in the wake of the Newtown, Conn., mass shooting -- bans dozens of assault weapons; earlier this year, it survived a court challenge, which McCauley was involved in. As O'Malley prepares to leave office, and potentially eyes a 2016 White House run, the law stands as one of his signature policies -- even though some gun rights advocates want Republican Larry Hogan, who beat O'Malley's deputy Anthony Brown in an upset election last week, to upend it when he takes office.
The flashpoint incident for McCauley took place in March 28 of last year. At the time, the O'Malley administration was putting on its full court press to ban numerous types of assault weapons and high-capacity magazines and require special training and fingerprinting to buy a handgun in the wake of the Newtown shooting which took the lives of 20 school children and six adults.
McCauley says, and has sworn in an affidavit in federal court for the unsuccessful suit seeking to invalidate the law, that he was told by the administration not to answer questions from lawmakers about the law's effectiveness in curbing gun crime or stopping mass shootings.
According to his affidavit from this spring's court case, the retired trooper was asked during a State House Judiciary subcommittee hearing, where he was called to testify, if the ban would have an effect on crime in Maryland.
"As I began to respond, I was commanded by Shanetta Paskel, the Deputy Legislative Officer for the Office of Governor Martin O'Malley, not to answer the delegate's question," McCauley said in court papers.
The trooper said he acquiesced to her request because he believed she was his superior in the administration. But, had he been able to answer, he said he would have told the delegate that the banned firearms are almost never used in crimes in the state -- less than 5 percent involve them -- and that it would have no effect on mass shootings since stricter mental health protections were more important.
"Immediately following the end of the meeting ... Ms. Paskel explained why she ordered me not to answer, saying that the act was 'not about policy; it is just [about] votes,'" McCauley's testimony reads.
McCauley's rap on the law is that it amounts to a needless regulation that doesn't do much anyway.
A great many military-style assault weapons indeed are banned by the law. But certain versions of the AR-15, the bugaboo of many anti-gun groups, are still legal to buy and even manufacture in Maryland, often just because the barrel is of a heavier configuration.
Even if he believes it is watered down, McCauley doesn't support the ban. "It's an inconvenience regulation for gun owners," said McCauley. "It's a right, and I believe it's in our Constitution."
He decided to retire after growing disenchanted.
"I'm a police officer who was sworn to uphold the Constitution," McCauley said. "I had no idea how badly we were trampling people's rights."
Gun owners in Maryland largely had been resigned after the law passed, but the issue did re-emerge in the recent gubernatorial election. Hogan had said he would not try to repeal many of the laws that made it through the 2013 legislature, focusing instead on hammering the administration over its heavy taxation policies and the state's anemic economy. But candidates like Steve Waugh, who successfully ran for a state Senate seat, say they already have come up with a plan to repeal the law and hope Hogan will support it. Hogan is only the third Republican governor in the state in half a century.
Supporters, though, have touted the law as critical to reducing gun violence and herald the policy as a model for other states.
"In the post-Newtown era, the state of Maryland has provided a model for common-sense gun violence prevention legislation to take illegal guns off our streets through fingerprint licensing of handgun purchasers, ban military-style assault weapons and limit magazine capacity to 10 rounds," Vincent DeMarco, president of Marylanders To Prevent Gun Violence, said after the law passed in 2013.
Amid speculation about whether the law will come back into the legislative crosshairs, McCauley does not completely fault the O'Malley administration on its crime-fighting strategy. Indeed, he praises it for supporting the creation of warrant squads that have proven effective in getting violent repeat offenders off the street, but says in strategy meetings with administration officials the emphasis was always on gun seizures.
McCauley recalled one instance in which he had to authorize the seizure of 50 guns from a man with no violent crime record but whose alcohol citations while driving labeled him a habitual drunkard, disqualifying him from owning guns in Maryland. By contrast, he recalled an instance when he confiscated just two guns from a pair of murder suspects in Prince George's County who were later sentenced to hefty prison terms on drug charges. Those gun seizures were scrutinized.
"My guys were questioned that month for having only two gun seizures, but just the month before they were praised for the 50 guns seized," McCauley said.
Like traffic tickets or any other crime and infraction stat, it was all about the numbers.
"If my numbers went down, I was in the hot-seat," McCauley said. "Martin O'Malley has done some great things for crime reduction, but this [the assault weapons ban] is not one of them."
Representatives for the O'Malley administration did not return phone calls seeking comment for this article.
**************************************************
17. [OH] Concealed carrying mom opens fire on man who shot her 13-year-old son in public [VIDEO]
**************************************************
Member Walter Jackson emailed me this:
From gunssavelives.net: http://tinyurl.com/njdjult
http://gunssavelives.net/self-defense/v ... in-public/
Concealed Carrying mom opens fire on man who shot her 13 year old son in public
by Dan Cannon
November 11, 2014
I’m sure we’ll find out that there is more to this story in the near future. However, it seems to be a clear cut defensive gun use at its core.
A mother and 13 year old son were out shopping when a man walked up to them and opened fire on her son, striking him twice in the feet.
The mother then drew her concealed handgun and opened fire on the shooter and one other suspect, causing them to flee.
According to a local Fox affiliate, the mother knew the attackers:
The mom, who doesn’t want to be identified, said she immediately recognized one of the suspects Kevin Hayden, when he walked up to Wilson Market Sunday. She says Hayden and his friends have been harassing her for years, after breaking into her home.
She says she was so concerned, she went and got a conceal carry license this fall.
Both suspects were caught and Hayden is being held on a quarter million dollar bond.
This incident is the one of the most common types of defensive gun uses. That is, one in which no one was killed. Despite this being one of the most common types of defensive gun uses, these incidents are often not included in statistics about defensive gun uses. Many of these statistics and studies focus solely on justifiable homicides, which represent only a fraction of total defensive gun uses.
**************************************************
18. [GA] Man describes protecting his family from home invaders [VIDEO]
**************************************************
I suggest having a gun very handy when at home. Odds are you won't ever need it, but if you do, things could happen so fast that you simply won't have time to fetch that gun from even an adjoining room. In this case FOUR masked men kicked in the front door.
From www.wsbtv.com: http://tinyurl.com/k9sebjl
http://www.wsbtv.com/news/news/local/po ... ner/nh4Ny/
November 10, 2014
ATLANTA — A homeowner said a man attempting to rob his home shot himself after kicking in the front door.
Suze and Jarabi Sadler told Channel 2’s Tyisha Fernandes four masked people broke in through their front door on Celebration Court around 8 p.m. Sunday.
“He was like, ‘Everybody on the floor.’ So we all sat down, and my husband is like, ‘Just don’t hurt the kids. Just don’t hurt us,” said Suze Sadler.
The Sadlers' 1- and 2-year-old children, as well as their grandmother and an adult cousin were also inside the home.
"We were caught off guard. We were in the basement and they came in without us knowing," Jabari Sadler said. "You hear stuff like this happening on TV all the time and in movies, but you never actually think it's going to happen to you."
Sadler's wife, Suze, said a man with a gun got control of most of the family downstairs, but while three other robbers were upstairs taking TVs and phones, her mother-in-law was on the third floor calling 911 while hiding under a bed with her infant grandson.
Jarabi Sadler said he knew he had to react quickly when the intruders put their hands on his wife.
“When he started pulling her clothes down, that’s when I lost it, and that’s when I attacked the guy,” said Jarabi Sadler. “Something just takes over you and you just go into survival mode at that point.”
Jarabi Sadler said he was waiting for the right moment to attack the intruders.
“While they were doing all that shuffling, I realized he wasn’t holding the gun firmly. He wasn’t holding it strong. So I was waiting for a time when I could attack,” Jarabi Sadler said.
Jarabi said the gun went off when he tried to get the gun out of the man’s hand. The bullet went through the man’s leg and left a hole in the bathroom door.
“I’m holding the gun like this, punching him in the face, kneeing him as much as I could. And he’s like, ‘OK. I’ll go. I’ll go. Just give me my gun.’ And I’m like, ‘No.'"
The alleged gunman ran out through the front door, ending up in a neighbor’s yard asking for help. Police identified the suspect as 18-year-old David Wilson. Now, they're looking for his accomplices. They're described as two men and a woman who drove off in a dark colored Chevy Impala.
No one inside the home was hurt.
**************************************************
19. [DC] Emily Miller- 2nd amendment heroine [VIDEO]
**************************************************
From www.myfoxdc.com: http://tinyurl.com/ojth2eh
http://www.myfoxdc.com/story/27347523/e ... rry-permit
How to get a gun carry permit in DC
by Emily Miller, FOX 5 Chief Investigative Reporter
November 10, 2014
WASHINGTON - I am a registered gun owner, but I feel that I'm in more danger on the streets of Washington, D.C. than inside my home. So when D.C. recently passed a new law allowing for some rights to carry a gun outside the home, I decided to apply for a permit. I quickly found that it is still impossible to exercise my Second Amendment right to bear arms.
Until July, Washington, D.C. was the only place in the country did not allow for any right to carry a gun outside the home. A federal district court judge ruled in the Palmer case that the total ban was unconstitutional.
The D.C. attorney general said last week that the city will appeal the ruling. While the issue goes through the courts, the Metropolitan Police Department has started giving out applications, so I went to the firearms registration office to start the process.
Milton Agurs, a civilian police department employee was at the front desk. I told him why I was there.
“You need to meet two criteria,” Agurs explained. “First that your life is in danger, your family or your property, or you have the type of business you carry large sums of money, jewelry. Under those circumstances, you can get a carry permit in DC.”
“To prove my life is in danger?” I asked. “Obviously there is a rising crime rate and a high rate of murders and sexual assaults in D.C. -- is that enough to say I want this for self-defense?”
“You have to prove you need concealed carry as opposed to just wanting one,” he replied.
Prove a need for a constitutional right? That's what D.C.'s new law says.
The application that Agurs gave me said that living and working in a high crime city is not enough to get a carry permit. I read further down where it says that it has to be “a special danger to your life."
What's the difference between a regular danger -- like getting raped and murdered on the street --- and a special danger? You have to prove you are being targeted.
“Do I have to give evidence?” I asked.
“Yes ma'am,” said Agurs.
“I was a victim of a home invasion. And I've gotten a threat against me. Do I just give the police records?” I asked.
“Yes, ma'am,” he said.
I asked Agurs who will decide whether or not my self-defense needs are special?
That's something the chief of police will do,” he said, referring to Chief Cathy Lanier. “But you'll have your reasons why you feel like you need it.”
“The chief of police personally will decide whether or not I get a carry permit?” I asked.
“You know it usually works-- it's going to be her or someone on her staff,” he said.
Proving a “need” is just one part of the carry permit application. You have to do 16 hours of classroom training, plus two hours at the range.
“Where do I go to do that?” I asked Agurs.
“Unfortunately, I think they are still setting up the classes,” he replied.
There's the rub. The city isn't actually abiding by the court decision. No one can apply for a carry permit because the police haven't certified any trainers for the mandatory classes. That might be partly because D.C. charges trainers $400 to be certified.
In contrast, Virginia accepts any class that is certified by the NRA. And there's no minimum time requirement for training.
So I asked Agurs: "The Second Amendment right to bear arms just doesn't fully apply here?"
"I believe when the Second Amendment was written, that was more or less for when the British were coming."
When the British were coming? The Bill of Rights is no longer relevant?
Well, I spoke with Alan Gura, the lawyer for the plaintiffs in the Palmer case. He said that the city's new carry permit law is unconstitutional and does not adhere to the court ruling. Gura has filed a request for a permanent injunction, which a district court judge will hear on Nov. 20.
So I can't go any further in the application process until the police certify someone to teach the 18 hours of classes. The police gun registration office told me to keep calling to find out when that happens.
**************************************************
20. [TX] The school where teachers are armed [VIDEO]
**************************************************
From www.msn.com: http://tinyurl.com/ltyxa2r
http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/the-sc ... vi-AA7viTk
The school where teachers are armed
CNN
November 10, 2014
In this north Texas school, some of the teachers carry concealsed weapons.
**************************************************
21. [TX] 'Moms Demand Action' anti-gun group opposing open carry in Texas
**************************************************
Moms Demand Action show yet again (and again, and again), that they are nothing but a gun-control group that will back anything that restricts the right of good people to own and carry firearms for self-defense.
Member Walter Jackson emailed me this:
We need more elected officals like Greg Abbott.
From www.breitbart.com: http://tinyurl.com/p5rwhzu
http://www.breitbart.com/texas/2014/11/ ... -in-texas/
'Moms demand action' anti-gun group opposing open carry in Texas
by Sarah Rumpf
November 7, 2014
AUSTIN, Texas -- When Governor-elect Greg Abbott announced his transition plans on Wednesday, he also reaffirmed his support for open carry in response to a reporter's question, expressly stating that "if an open carry bill is passed by the House and Senate, and arrives at my desk, I will sign it into law." Now, an anti-gun group has declared opposition to open carry in Texas, reports Fox 7 Austin.
In reaffirming his support for open carry, Abbott had pointed to other states that have less restrictive laws than Texas on this issue. "Texas, as I understand it. is one of only about 7 or so states in the United States of America that does not have open carry," said Abbott. "If open carry is good enough for Massachusetts, it's good enough for the state of Texas."
While pro-gun rights groups cheered Abbott's announcement, not everyone was happy. The anti-gun group Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America denounced the idea of expanding open carry to Texas. One activist with the group, Claire Elizabeth, spoke to Fox 7 Austin in a phone interview and claimed that Massachusetts had better background checks than Texas. Elizabeth also complained that people could open carry guns and not know how to use them.
These claims were met with derision by Land Commissioner Jerry Patterson, who told Fox 7 Austin that the Moms Demand Action group "don't really know what they're talking about," pointing out that Elizabeth was mistaken that all gun sales in Massachusetts required background checks -- sales between private citizens do not -- while all commercial gun sellers in Texas do have to complete background checks. Overall, Patterson characterized the open carry debate as a liberty issue, saying that the open carry of guns was not inherently a good thing or a bad thing. "There is no reason to restrict liberty in any way if exercising that liberty is not hurtful. Open carry is not hurtful," he said.
When Patterson was a State Senator, he authored and passed the bill that would become Texas' concealed handgun law. Firearms homicides in Texas decreased by about forty percent after the law was passed. Arguably, this reduction was part of a national decrease in crime rates, but the "bloodbath in the streets" and "Wild West shoot-outs" that gun control advocates had ominously predicted would result from allowing concealed carry in Texas did not come to pass.
Moms Demand Action made headlines earlier this year with former New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg, himself a vocal supporter of gun control, donated $50 million to a joint project with Moms Demand Action and Mayors Against Illegal Guns. After Wendy Davis failed to win an election after her filibuster branded her as pro-choice in pro-life Texas, Moms Demand Action faces a similarly uphill battle in this conservative state.
As for Abbott, he is unlikely to be intimidated by the online media campaigns waged by Moms Demand Action. Staunchly in favor of gun rights, Abbott made headlines in January 2013 when he bought ads in Manhattan and Albany papers urging New York gun owners to move to Texas after the state passed a new gun control law. The ads also touted Texas' low taxes, with one ad's message saying, "WANTED: LAW ABIDING NEW YORK GUN OWNERS LOOKING FOR LOWER TAXES AND GREATER OPPORTUNITY."
**************************************************
22. [IN] 'Swatters' take false police reports to extreme
**************************************************
From www.washingtontimes.com: http://tinyurl.com/knnmtcp
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/201 ... #pagebreak
'Swatters' take false police reports to extreme
by Marisa Kwiatkowski, Associated Press
March 2, 2014
CARMEL, Ind. (AP) - It was like a bad dream for Hannah Chiasson.
The 22-year-old nursing student stood outside her family’s Carmel home, staring in shock at an army of police officers in black vests pointing “big guns” at her, her father and her friend. A spotlight shone on her family’s house.
“I asked, ‘Why are you pointing guns at me?’” she recalled. “‘Why are you doing this?’”
Police didn’t answer, she told The Indianapolis Star (http://indy.st/1mD2qlU ). They handcuffed her, her father and her roommate, tears streaming down her face. Police forced the two women to walk down the street to an ambulance - barefoot and still in their pajamas.
Chiasson’s mother, Louisa Chiasson, was on her way home but had to turn around. Police had cordoned off her neighborhood. She drove to another neighborhood entrance, but it also was blocked. An officer asked her which house she lived in, then explained the situation.
We got a report of a shooting, the officer said. Your husband, daughter and her friend are safe.
Safe, but shaken up. The Chiasson family and Hannah’s friend, who lives there, had been “swatted.”
Like others around the country, the Chiassons were victims of a false report, one so extreme it requires a massive police response, often a special weapons and tactics, or SWAT, team. Whether reporting mass murders or hostage situations, “swatters” sometimes use technology that makes it look as if their calls originated at their victims’ homes.
The pranks traumatize residents and, in at least one instance, resulted in an officer being injured. And with multiple officers responding, they are costly to the public and draw resources from legitimate police work.
It’s hard to tell if swatting is on the rise. According to a search of Google trends, Web interest in the term increased last year, but that could be partly due to media interest.
Many celebrities - including Tom Cruise, Ashton Kutcher, Rihanna and Justin Timberlake - have been targeted during the last few years, according to media reports. Other incidents have been reported in Colorado, Delaware and elsewhere. California adopted an anti-swatting measure last year.
Local police officials say it has been rare in central Indiana. An official with the Indianapolis Metropolitan Police Department said IMPD has never responded to such a call. Carmel police said the hoax call involving the Chiassons was only their second.
In Zionsville, multiple law enforcement agencies responded Feb. 16 to a purported hostage situation.
A caller told a 911 dispatcher he wanted police to deliver $100,000 in a clear plastic bag. “I have five hostages at my house at this moment. I have two AR-52s, AK-47s and C-4 (explosives) all around my house,” he said, giving the address of a house in Zionsville.
The man gave police 45 minutes to deliver the money.
Officers from Zionsville, Whitestown and the Boone County Sheriff’s Department rushed to a quiet suburban neighborhood east of Michigan Road. Zionsville policeCapt. Doug Gauthier said five officers surrounded the home and peered in the windows to assess the situation. Fifteen other officers were on their way.
Officers didn’t see anything unusual, so they asked a dispatcher to call the home and tell the residents to come outside. Then the officers heard fireworks, which they believed were gunshots.
The homeowner refused to come out. He told the dispatcher he and his family were being harassed by “two people from a Skype relationship gone bad.” When told that shots were fired, he said “that’s not true.”
A police video obtained by The Star showed officers holding assault rifles, with at least one aiming an assault rifle over the top of a car. One of them shouted, “Zionsville Police Department!”
The dispatcher told the homeowner to come out with his hands where police could see them.
Because of a rash of calls they received earlier that evening, the homeowner didn’t trust that the dispatcher was who she said she was.
“I don’t feel safe right now is what I’m telling you,” the reluctant homeowner said.
The dispatcher told the homeowner that officers didn’t feel safe, either. She told him to hang up and call 911.
Meanwhile, officers were losing patience. “Tell him we have four heavily armed police officers in front of his house,” one of the officers told the dispatcher.
“Open the door,” one officer shouted, “or I’m going to bust the door down.”
After calling 911 and talking to the same dispatcher, the homeowner agreed to come outside. He opened the door, arms outstretched.
“Seeing an assault rifle is an intimidating thing,” he later told The Star.
The Star agreed not to use the homeowner’s name because he feared for his family’s safety. He said two people had called their house more than 20 times in the hour and a half leading up to the 911 call, threatening to “swat” them.
He said his 14-year-old son recognized the voices from his time spent playing the computer game Minecraft.
There were eight people in the house when police arrived - including the man on the phone, his wife, their three teenage sons and three of their sons’ friends. They all were required to step outside.
When police entered the home, the phone rang and a deputy sheriff spoke with the alleged pranksters. “If we find you tonight,” the deputy said, “you’re going to jail.”
Gauthier, the Zionsville police captain, said the situation put the family, officers and public in danger.
One of the officers could have gotten into an accident while rushing to the scene. Or, someone could have been injured or killed during the tense situation at the home. Also, officers who respond to such pranks are unavailable for other police work.
“Obviously, it could’ve been a serious situation,” Gauthier said. “It was dangerous all the way around. … Thank goodness it turned out the way it did.”
The homeowner said he is working with an FBI contact to pursue those who made the false report. False informing is a criminal offense in Indiana.
Eugene Spafford, executive director of the Center for Education and Research in Information Assurance and Security at Purdue University, said law enforcement usually can trace who actually made the call.
But he said it doesn’t require advanced expertise or special equipment to alter a phone number.
Last year, a 12-year-old was sentenced to two years in juvenile detention after admitting he swatted Kutcher and Justin Bieber’s homes, according to media reports.
Spafford said people engage in swatting for many reasons, including revenge, to annoy or for fun.
In 2004, a 14-year-old boy swatted a Colorado family after a girl in the home, whom he met in an online chat room, refused to have phone sex with him. The boy, Matthew Weigman, was sentenced in 2009 to more than 11 years in federal prison for a swatting conspiracy that had been going on for years, according to the FBI.
But police don’t have the luxury of judging the veracity of a call in an emergency situation. Carmel police Lt. Joe Bickel said officers are trained to respond to every call as though it is real.
“You don’t want to let your guard down or be less tactical in a situation where you have to be,” he said.
The recent swatting incident in Carmel resembled some others elsewhere in the country in at least one respect. Bickel said someone contacted 911 through a system that turns typed messages into voice messages.
The caller claimed she was high, had killed her husband and son, and shot her daughter, who was “bleeding out as we speak.” She said she had a shotgun in hand and would kill anyone who came to the house.
Nine police officers arrived at the Carmel home, with more officers and paramedics on the way.
After police evacuated the house and determined the call was a hoax, they released the Chiassons and Hannah’s friend, apologized and explained what happened. Like the Zionsville family, Hannah Chiasson said she understands the situation police were in.
“If that was a real emergency, I wouldn’t have wanted them to have responded any differently,” she said. “I’d rather be uncomfortable, a little freaked out for a while.”
Bickel said police still are investigating the situation and haven’t determined a motive.
“This is more than a joke, in so many ways,” Louisa Chiasson said tearfully. “There are so many lives put at risk when somebody does something like that. They have to understand that it isn’t a joke. … There’s a lot of guns there. Something goes wrong, something goes off. You don’t want to be in that situation unless you really, really have to be.”
**************************************************
23. [OH] Dayton-area Walmart shooting: Was an innocent man SWATted to Death?
**************************************************
From bearingarms.com: http://tinyurl.com/p2lwkk2
http://bearingarms.com/dayton-walmart-s ... ted-death/
Dayton-area Walmart Shooting: Was an innocent man SWATted to death?
by Bob Owens
August 7, 2014
These facts we know to be true:
John Crawford III was shot and killed Tuesday night by Beavercreek, Ohio police officers in a Walmart.
Crawford was holding either an airsoft (6mm plastic projectile) or BB/pellet (4.5mm/.177-caliber metal projectile) rifle sold by Walmart that he picked up in the store.
Crawford was on the phone when he was shot.
Crawford did not have a criminal record.
From there, the tale of what happened next diverges significantly depending upon the perspective of who is telling the story.
LeeCee Johnson, who claims that she is the mother of Crawford’s children, says that Mr. Crawford was on the phone with her when he was shot. What she heard suggests that he was gunned down with little warning.
LeeCee Johnson, who said she is the mother of Crawford’s children, said she was on a cell phone call with Crawford when he was shot by officers. She said Crawford went to the area to visit family members.
“We was just talking. He said he was at the video games playing videos and he went over there by the toy section where the toy guns were. And the next thing I know, he said ‘It’s not real,’ and the police start shooting and they said ‘Get on the ground,’ but he was already on the ground because they had shot him,” she said, adding: “And I could hear him just crying and screaming. I feel like they shot him down like he was not even human.”
According to Ms. Johnson’s point-of-view as the person on the other end of the phone, it sounded to her as if Crawford was unaware that others may have considered him a threat. She claims that she heard him address someone and say “it’s not real,” at which point he was shot and then someone (presumably police officers) yell at him to “get on the ground,” after he’d already been shot.
If this point of view is remotely true, it appears that Mr. Crawford was on the phone focused on his conversation with Ms. Johnson and completely unaware of how he was viewed by others as a threat. It also appears he was slow in responding to the police, or that they opened fire on him before he had a chance to process what was going on and respond to police commands.
Two shoppers who followed Mr. Crawford through the store—and who called 911 to report him—offer a very different perspective than that of Ms. Johnson:
April and Ronald Ritchie, in an interview Wednesday night with News Center 7’s Jessica Heffner and Dayton Daily News Staff Writer Kelli Wynn, said they were in the hardware department when they saw a man leaving an aisle and walk past them with the rifle pointed toward the sky.
“He got on his cell phone right after he walked past me,” April Ritchie said. Ritchie was on her cell phone, talking with her mother. She had broken an ankle and was riding a scooter.
“Guy. Gun. Hold on,” April Ritchie recalled telling her mother.
They followed the man at a safe distance and Ronald Ritchie, a former Marine, called 911 at 8:21 p.m.
“Anytime I saw people walking his way, I would get their attention,” April Ritchie said, waving her hands for the reporters to demonstrate what she did. She said at one point, a family was standing next to the man with the rifle, but didn’t notice the rifle. The man turned to look at them with a stare she described as if he was telling them, “don’t come near me.”
He was holding a cellphone between his left ear and left shoulder while messing with the rifle, she said. “He just kept messing with it and I heard a clicking,” she said.
Ronald Ritche said the man “was just waving it at children and people. Items…. I couldn’t hear anything that he was saying. I’m thinking that he is either going to rob the place or he’s there to shoot somebody else.” The man looked kind of serious, Ronald Ritchie said. “He didn’t really want to be looked at and when people did look at him, he was pointing the gun at them. He was pointing at people. Children walking by.”
Ronald Ritchie said the man wasn’t pointing the weapon at people as if he was going to shoot, but rather waving it in their direction as a threat.
The couple didn’t know Beavercreek police had arrived until they saw four or five officers appear in the Pets section, where the man with the rifle was standing.
“I heard, ‘put it down, put it down,’ ” April Ritchie said. “I heard two shots after I saw him turn. He still had the weapon in his hand.”
The Ritchies said the man fell backward when he was hit by the gunfire, but got back up and went toward the officer who shot him. That officer then tackled the man. Officers then handcuffed him and turned him on his back, Ronald Ritchie said.
To hear the perspective of the Ritchies, they were the reluctant heroes trailing a madman with a rifle who called 911 and prevented something bad from happening.
What I find troubling about their account is the apparent indifference of others in the store who encountered Mr. Crawford before he was shot. In the Ritchies account, the other customers did not act as if Mr. Crawford was a threat. They apparently didn’t see the rifle, or if they did, they had the ability to tell it was an airsoft rifle and not a real firearm. As for the Ritchies insistence that Crawford was waving the rifle at people, I have to wonder if that was merely an erroneous conclusion they drew based upon the scenario they created in their own heads.
What really matters, of course, is what happened when the Beavercreek Police arrived. Ms. Johnson insists that Mr. Crawford told someone—presumably the responding officers—that the rifle wasn’t real. She says that she then heard gunshots, and then orders from police to drop the rifle. The Ritchies suggest that Mr. Crawford turned upon hearing the police, and then police shot him as he still held the toy rifle.
One way or the other, the police gunned down a man who was not a threat to anyone. Whether they committed a crime in taking Mr. Crawford’s life remains to be seen. I suspect that they did not, but an Ohio Bureau of Investigation inquiry and prosecutor will ultimately be in charge of making that determination.
* * *
My fear upon hearing both of these perspectives is that the Ritchies created a situation where a harmless man with no ill intentions was, in effect, SWATted to death.
“SWATting” is the intentional practice of calling 911 and reporting someone committing a violent crime, in order to create an overwhelming police response (such as a SWAT team, which is how the term came about). We’ve discussed SWATting previously at Bearing Arms after radical left-wing talk show host Mike Malloy announced his intentions to SWAT open carriers in hopes of getting them shot:
I guess what I’ll do if I’m ever in that situation and I see one of these half-witted yahoos walking in with a weapon, high-caliber rifle like that, I’ll just put on a berserk act. I will just start screaming Gun! Gun! Gun! Watch out, everybody hit the deck! Guns! Guns! Everybody! And then dial 911 and I will say, shots fired, which will bring every g**-damned cop within 15 miles. And then the half-wits with the long guns are going to panic and they’re going to run out of the store and if that rifle isn’t shouldered properly, the cop is going to take a look at that and put a bullet right in their forehead.
It is my fear that Mr. & Mrs. Ritchie may have profiled Mr. Crawford—a man without a criminal record—based upon his race and age, bizarrely assuming that a man armed with a real firearm would be waltzing through Walmart without anyone else calling police.
Ronald Ritchie said of Mr. Crawford, “I’m thinking that he is either going to rob the place or he’s there to shoot somebody else,” and called 911 when no one else apparently found Mr. Crawford to be a threat.
As a result of his phone call and the actions of responding police, three small children will now grow up without a father.
Was it worth it?
Update: The law enforcement agency involved in the shooting was the Beavercreek Police Department. Beavercreek is a suburb of Dayton. We’ve updated the references in the story from Dayton to Beavercreek.
Update: Authorities have confirmed that Mr. Crawford was holding a Crosman Mk-177, a pump-action BB-gun that bears a vague resemblance to the FN SCAR. One of the officers involved in the incident was involved in a fatal shooting in 2010 that was ruled justified at the time.
**************************************************
24. [TX] Man faces five years in Federal prison in 'Swatting' case
**************************************************
From www.fbi.gov: http://tinyurl.com/pl8cwdb
http://www.fbi.gov/dallas/press-release ... tting-case
Man faces five years in Federal prison in 'Swatting' case
U.S. Attorney's Office Northern District of Texas
July 29, 2014
DALLAS—Jason Allen Neff, 33, pleaded guilty today to federal charges in a “swatting” case, announced U.S. Attorney Sarah R. Saldaña of the Northern District of Texas. Swatting refers to falsely reporting an emergency to a police department to cause a Special Weapons and Tactics (SWAT) response to a physical address, or making a false report to elicit an emergency response by other first responders to a specific physical address.
Neff, also known as “Crazy J,” is from Omaha, Nebraska, although he was living in Jackson, Missouri when he was arrested. Neff pleaded guilty to one count of aiding and abetting the conspiracy to use access devices to modify telecommunications instruments and to make unauthorized access to protected telecommunications computers and one count of obstruction by retaliating against a witness, victim or informant. If the Court accepts the terms of the plea agreement, the parties have agreed that a specific sentence of 60 months in federal prison is the appropriate sentence for the obstruction conviction, and it should run concurrently to any sentence imposed for the other count of conviction. Neff, who remains in custody, is scheduled to be sentenced on December 1, 2014, by U.S. District Judge Sam A. Lindsay.
According to documents filed in the case, Neff, along with previously charged and convicted co-conspirators Guadalupe Martinez, Stuart Rosoff, Jason Trowbridge, Chad Ward, Matthew Weigman, Angela Roberson and others (Martinez sentenced in March 2008 to 30 months; Rosoff sentenced in May 2008 to 60 months; Trowbridge sentenced in May 2008 to 60 months; Ward sentenced in May 2008 to 60 months; Weigman sentenced in June 2009 to 135 months; and Roberson sentenced in July 2008 to 30 months) were members of, and participated in, telephone chat/party lines in which they made, or facilitated the making of, swatting 911 calls. They concealed the true caller ID and made false reports of violent crimes to elicit a police SWAT response to the targeted members of the telephone chat/party line, their family members, and associated persons.
Neff participated in multiple telephone party line chat groups (party lines) that conspirators and thousands of other callers frequented. Participants in these party lines generally used pseudonyms or nicknames to protect their identities, and they would often be rude and obnoxious to antagonize other party line participants, other conspirators and their families.
Neff, along with Martinez, Rosoff and Weigman, according to the indictment, were “phone phreakers,” using social engineering or subterfuge to acquire sensitive information from telephone service providers. That sensitive information enabled them to exploit telephone network computer service by obtaining subscriber information; altering billing information and service plans; redirecting, changing service charges, and discontinuing telephone service; monitoring or taping telephone lines; and obtaining telephone company security policies and procedures.
In May 2006, Neff obtained publicly available voter information about another party line member and provided it to co-conspirator Roberson so she could repeat the information in the party line. Neff knew the information could be used for harassment.
A few days later, Neff obtained identifying information about another party line member with whom co-conspirator Roberson was upset. Neff listened in on a three-way phone call made from a private room on the party line where co-conspirator Rosoff used information that Roberson provided in order to social engineer an SBC employee and obtain the caller’s current phone number and address. That information was verified and used to prompt a neighbor of the caller to respond to a false request for assistance.
In January 2007, Neff confronted a party line member, “SP,” about her providing misleading and inaccurate information to the FBI regarding his ownership of a party-line related website, which he did not own, and his being a member of the group that had previously swatted her. Neff threatened her on the party line, stating, “snitches get stitches.” Neff made the threats to intimidate SP and to retaliate against her for providing information about him to the FBI.
The FBI investigated the case. Assistant U.S. Attorney C.S. Heath is in charge of the prosecution.
***************************************************************************
VA-ALERT is a project of the Virginia Citizens Defense League, Inc.
(VCDL). VCDL is an all-volunteer, non-partisan grassroots organization
dedicated to defending the human rights of all Virginians. The Right to
Keep and Bear Arms is a fundamental human right.
VCDL web page: http://www.vcdl.org [http://www.vcdl.org/]
VA-ALERT: VCDL Update 1/11/15
Moderator: Taggure
Forum rules
Only VCDL VA Alerts and associated calendar entries are to be posted here. You may reply to the threads here, but please do not start a new one without moderator approval.
Only VCDL VA Alerts and associated calendar entries are to be posted here. You may reply to the threads here, but please do not start a new one without moderator approval.
-
OakRidgeStars
- VGOF Gold Supporter
- Posts: 14108
- Joined: Sun, 22 Mar 2009 10:13:20