Taking His Gun Control Act on the Road

Bloomberg, Gun Control Tour 2011 is beginning:

Displaying a tally of the number of Americans killed with guns since January’s Tucson, Ariz., shootings, the “National Drive to Fix Gun Checks” truck will spend two months driving across at least 25 states, Bloomberg said. That includes stops to meet with local leaders, law-enforcement officials and victims of gun violence — the first in Newark on Wednesday afternoon at the New Jersey Performing Arts Center, for an event hosted by Mayor Cory Booker.

This is one area local activists can really make a difference. Bloomberg needs to be relentlessly protested everywhere he stops. Do not let him own the field.

UPDATE: Commenters are pointing out there’s not exactly a clear schedule. This, of course, makes taking action difficult, which is why I would imagine they are making it up as they go.

Too Far?

Just when I thought it was safe to start feeling better about open carry, the ante gets upped. If some guy walks into a restaurant with an AR-15, I’m going to have my hand on my own pistol, figuring there’s a very strong likelihood I’m going to have to draw it in self-defense. Why? Because I can’t think of any reason a reasonable person is walking into a restaurant with an AR-15. Even if the guy with the AR is wearing a police uniform, I’d be quite nervous, because police don’t generally walk into restaurants carrying AR-15s unless serious trouble is afoot.

UPDATE: OTOH, if the folks who are engaging in attention seeking behavior now need to up the ante to rifles, because pistols just don’t grab attention like they used to, maybe there is something to the OC theory.

At Least It’s Not Gun Violence

Because according to our opponents, it’s not really as big a concern if it wasn’t a gun. Check out this story from the City of Brotherly Love, on what happened when a mother tried to take away her 16 year old son’s Playstation, “Kendall went into his sleeping mother’s bedroom, hit her 20 times with a claw hammer and ultimately killed her,” ultimately, they say, because the claw hammer didn’t quite finish the job so then, “he dragged her downstairs and tried to ‘cremate her’ in the kitchen oven. When that failed, he continued, he beat her in the head with a chair leg before dragging her body outside and hiding under debris in an alley behind the house.”

Thank God this juvenile did not have access to a firearm! Someone might have gotten hurt.

NRA News on the Ung Case

I’ll be appearing on NRA News tonight tomorrow night (Wednesday) during the 9:40 segment to talk about the Gerald Ung case. Sirius 144 for those of you with Satellite Radio.

UPDATE: It’ll be tomorrow night, Wednesday 2/16 at 9:40. Sorry for the confusion… I misread Cam’s e-mail.

A Toter’s Worst Nightmare

That’s about what I would describe what Gerald Ung went through. I think when a lot of folks imagine using a gun in self-defense, they think of the mugger, pistol in hand, neatly spread out on the sidewalk, with the police arriving knowing exactly who is the good guy and who is the bad guy. Real life is almost never that clear cut. Gerald Ung had a lot of things going against him. He carried a gun to go out drinking, and admittedly had a large quantity of alcohol. This is probably the biggest factor that could have played against him, to be honest. Because you presumably carry a firearm to use it in self-defense, it will greatly complicate your case to have to admit before a jury that you had been drinking excessively. The legal standard for use of deadly force is being in reasonable fear of great bodily injury or death, and you don’t want the jury to have any reason to believe your reasonable judgement was impaired.

He shot an unarmed man. Obviously this is legal under some circumstances, such as when there is a disparity of force (as there was in this case), but that always throws up a big question mark, and when facts are in dispute, and all parties in question were arguably drunk, a prosecutor might just decide to go ahead and let a jury sort all the facts out, especially if the DA has a disincentive towards exercising discretion not to prosecute, which brings up the next point.

Ung shot a man who’s family had political connections. DiDonato’s father is a prominent attorney in Philadelphia, and he’s the nephew of Michael Meehan, who is heads the GOP in Philadelphia, and I believe the entire Southeast. I seriously have to wonder if Ung had shot someone from a random gang of troublemakers from North Philly whether this would have ever gone to trial. Unfortunately for Ung, he didn’t. He shot a white middle class kid from the suburbs with a connected family.

But Ung did plenty of things right. When the altercation started, he began to walk away, only to be followed by DiDonato and his friends. He did not draw his firearm until they began to attack him. After drawing his firearm, he attempted to use physical force to keep DiDonato at bay. It’s only when DiDonato started to take him to the ground did he pull the trigger. What choice did he have at that point? What reasonable person would attack a man that had a gun drawn on him? What was going to become of Ung once DiDonato had him on the ground and possibly had his gun? I’m glad the jury did not demand Ung find out the answers to those questions.

The ADA’s assertion that he could have fired a warning shot, aimed for the legs, or could have crossed the street and called the police were almost laughable. First, I can promise you had Ung fired a warning shot, they would have prosecuted him for that too, given that discharging a firearm in city limits is a crime. Second, how could he have crossed the street when Kelly was covering Ung and his two friends’ flank? Could Joy Keh have also retreated with complete safety? Could his other male friend? The police took two minutes to arrive after the gunfire. How badly can a gang of five young, intoxicated athletes beat a guy for two minutes? And what could they do to the girl? Thirdly, how many of us have practiced carefully aiming shots while an attacker is in possession of our leg, with such great precision we do not hit our own leg in the process?

Ultimately, even though the jury was aware Ung had been drinking, even though they were aware that he regularly carried a pistol to bars, and even though he fired his pistol six times, they still found he acted in self-defense, and acquitted him of charges. This case does, however, show the risk inherent in using deadly force. That is a big reason I am a strong advocate of carrying less than lethal force in addition to lethal force. It gives you more options, and will ultimately make you look far more sympathetic to a prosecutor and jury if you had exhausted all reasonable options available to you before resorting to deadly force.

Also, and this has to be noted too, Ung carried a Kel-Tec P-3AT, a .380 caliber pocket pistol, as best I can tell from news accounts. DiDonato took six hits before he went down. Ung is damned lucky that was enough to convince DiDonato’s friends to stop attacking, because I’m willing to bet Ung emptied his magazine if he wasn’t in the habit of topping it off after jacking a round into the chamber. Pistols are poor fight stoppers. Pocket pistols are even poorer fight stoppers.

Ultimately it is a victory for all of us that Gerald Ung was acquitted. It makes the DA less likely to pursue another case in similar or more favorable circumstances for the defendant. Prosecutors live and die by their win percentages, so they don’t like to bring cases forward they know they are likely to lose. They lost this one. That’s going to sting. Hopefully they remember this, and don’t needlessly ruin lives, and waste taxpayer money, prosecuting more cases that are pretty clearly self-defense.

Jury to Ung: “Not Guilty”

See Above the Law for details as they come, but the Daily News is reporting an acquittal. I’ve often said we don’t have a justice system, we have a legal system. Well, sometimes it’s a justice system, and such was the case here. One of the great legal innovations of English Law was trial by jury, in which the people retain an important check on governmental power. It worked here. This case never should have been brought to trial, but it was, and the system worked. The only unfortunate thing is that Gerald Ung will now be helping make payments on Jack McMahon’s Porsche well into his 40s (I kid, I don’t even know if he has a Porsche, but Ung legal bills are going to be steep).

Ung will also likely need to defend against a civil case, which I’m sure his family will bring forward. It is very important that we pass Castle Doctrine quickly, so that Ung may have a chance of enjoying the civil immunities the bill brings. If you’d like to donate to his legal defense fund, you can find it here.

In the Jury’s Hands

About an hour ago, the jury started deliberations in the Gerald Ung case.

The jury of six men and six women began their review shortly before noon after receiving instructions in the law from Judge Glynnis Hill on the charges of attempted murder, aggravated assault and a gun charge.

I don’t even know what to think of this case anymore. When the prosecutor started advocating for warning shots in downtown Philly as a reasonable solution in the courtroom, it went beyond weird. It proves that there is no way for a lawful gun owner to win in that city while career violent criminals are allowed to roam the streets.