Category: Carrying / Self-Defense

Rightwingprof provides this handy link. It ranks states according to percentage of population with carry licenses.  One surprise is how far down on the list Texas is.  You’d think they’d be higher, but they are beat by many other states.

I chalk it up to how restrictive their carry laws are, and the expense involved getting licensed.   I’d be willing to bet that many Texans carry illegally.

Earlier today I posted about the young man who was shot by the shooter in Idaho. I had presumed the man saw the shooter nearby his house, grabbed his pistol, and tried to take a shot at him. This post by Joe Huffman indicates that he did exactly what I advised not doing in my post yesterday, and went looking for the shooter. Apparently, he as not alone in this:

Another citizen became involved at the scene, Moscow Police Chief Dan Weaver said. The man, who had a handgun and a semi-automatic weapon in his car, was stopped by police as he drove through the crime scene.

Weaver said police initially mistook the man for a shooter and brought him to the police station in handcuffs to be interviewed.

The chief said he was concerned that the two men got themselves involved, especially with law enforcement already at the scene.

A good rule of thumb would be, if you aren’t close enough to the shooter to be able to engage him immediately, then you’re not doing anyone any favors by getting involved. Definitely, once the police arrive, it’s their situation. Uniforms are an important safety feature here, which is why police wear them. If you’re not wearing one, you don’t have any business being at the scene.

I am a big believer in an active citizenry, and I do think the citizen has a role to play in a situation like this, but that role involves keeping himself, his family, and his immediate vicinity safe from the shooter. Bringing someone to justice, that not our job, it’s the reason we hire police officers.

I have to tell you folks, I admire the hell out of anyone who has the guts to put himself in the line of fire.

On the positive side, if you can call it that, we found out who the wounded citizen is. He is a mechanical engineering student here at UI, and when he heard gunshots he grabbed his “semi-automatic .45 pistol” and ran outside to try to help. He didn’t get a chance to return fire before he was wounded. That story alone almost brings tears to my eyes. There are many who might call him stupid, or emboldened by his firearm and a fool for putting his life in danger. I call him heroic. He had absolutely no obligation to do what he did, but as a concerned citizen he ran into danger instead of away from it. I can’t help but compare that behavior to the images we saw of cops at Virginia Tech, hiding behind cars and trees as 32 people died. Same goes for officers Newbill, Shield and Jordon, who all perceived a threat and ran to do their duty instead of worrying about their own safety.

I’m in total agreement. I also think the media are shits for failing to recognize people like this for the deeds they have done. But folks, when there’s an active shooter in your neighborhood, don’t go grabbing the pistol. Grab yourself a rifle. I think somewhere there’s a rule in gun fighting that goes “Bring a rifle. Bring 5 friends with rifles.” This is especially true when going up against someone else armed with a rifle. If you have a pistol, he’s going to be able to reach out a lot farther than you can, and you’ll be relying on him not seeing you in order to get close enough. If you don’t have a rifle, it’s time to get one. You can get an old surplus SKS for under 200 bucks. It’s a great investment, and they shoot reasonably well.

Hat Tip: SayUncle

From a, “there ought to be a law” perspective, I have no problems with what these two kids are doing. But, no matter how old or young you are, I don’t think I can universally say that slinging a rifle around with you is a good idea. Context matters.

If I see someone come into a mall, our roughly similar public place, with a rifle slung, I’m probably going to do a double take, and, to be honest, even if I don’t call the police, I wouldn’t blame anyone who did. I’m very certainly going to keep a very close eye on that person while they are in my immediate vicinity and prepare myself for the possibility I might have to draw on this person. Why? Because context matters, and around here, people don’t go walking around with slung rifles in public places. That’s not oppression, that’s just how it is. What I wouldn’t think twice about seeing on the hiking trail, or along a road, if I see in a populated public area, it’s going to elicit an entirely different response.

I’m not saying open carry should be illegal. I think everyone has as a right to bear arms in whatever way they see fit. But I have to agree with this guy, at least in part:

He said that just because the Dotys are carrying guns in public doesn’t mean they’re not responsible with them, but questioned the need to carry them in town even though it was legal.

“My advice for them is the same as it is with adults — yes it’s your right and yes it’s legal, but why draw unnecessary attention to yourself just because you can?”

I don’t really agree with him in regards to the need, but do as far as drawing unnecessary attention to oneself. I’ve never been a big advocate of open carry for this reason. Some will argue the educational aspects of it, but personally, I don’t think it’s changing anyone’s minds, or really successfully communicating gun rights messages. People either a) assume you’re a cop, or b) get the willies. In the case of slung rifles in populated areas, I’m not entirely sure I’d say someone who had reaction b) would be entirely off base.

Joe Huffman asks, in regards to the recent shooting in his home town:

There is the issue of urban response and combat tactics, which leave me curious. The guy apparently was shooting at anything that moved. He was on a hilltop surrounded by mostly residential streets and a high school, but also surrounded on two sides by solid buildings. What do you do? That’s my question, and I don’t have a good answer, mainly because I have no exact details and maybe never will have them. IF (if) there is guy in a parking lot firing shots at everything around him (was he maneuvering? was he behind cover? we don’t know) he might be a fairly easy target for someone intent on stopping him. Certainly a SWAT team arriving hours later was in this case of no use.

If it was my neighborhood, and there was a guy in the area shooting at anything that moved, I’d return fire if I had a clear shot, but I’m not going to go roaming around the neighborhood looking for him.

As soon as I knew the guy was in the area shooting, I’d load the AR-15, and call the police. After the police were called I’d check my immediate vicinity (basically my own property, plus up and down the street) and see if I could spot the shooter. If I can identify him, and have a clear shot, I’ll take it. I am fairly confident in my ability to hit a man sized target out to 100 yards with an iron sighted AR-15. If I couldn’t easily identify the location of the shooter as being in my vicinity, I’d retreat into the house, find cover someplace where I can still see what’s going on, and keep an eye out for the shooter until the police arrived.

I don’t think it’s a wise idea to be running around the neighborhood with a loaded rifle out in the open. There’s a non-trivial chance you’ll be mistaken by police, or another one of your neighbors, for the active shooter. I think in this situation, the best thing to do is to defend your vicinity. If the shooter comes into your vicinity, carefully aimed return fire is the way to go.

Leave tracking the guy down to the guys wearing a uniform and body armor. I don’t think you have any duty to go seeking out an active shooter that’s not in your immediate vicinity. Presumably, your neighbors have all taken care of their own defense. If they haven’t, it sucks to be them. Toting firearms is about defending yourself, and those immediately in your presence. It’s best to leave the offensive action to the professionals.

There was a time when I thought that it might actually be nice if Pennsylvania passed a training requirement so that we could get expanded reciprocity with other states.  I heard from people that our lack of training requirement was a real impediment to signing with states that had “substitutively similar” language in their reciprocity statues.

I don’t think that anymore.   Pennsylvania has done pretty well in signing reciprocity agreements in the past few years with other states.  While we’re still lacking some key ones I’d like to see, like Colorado, West Virginia, and Delaware, it’s a much better state of affairs then it used to be.

Today we have reciprocity agreements with:

1. New Hampshire
2. Virginia
3. North Carolina
4. Georgia
5. Florida
6. Michigan
7. Kentucky
8. Tennessee
9. Missouri
10. Oklahoma
11. Texas
12. Wyoming
13. South Dakota
14. Alaska

In addition, our LTC is recognized by:

1. Montana
2. Idaho
3. Utah
4. Indiana

This is quite an improvement over several years ago, and I hope it will keep improving.   Tom Corbett’s office deserves kudos for working hard on getting so many new agreements.  Hopefully in a few years we’ll be pretty close to universal reciprocity among states, despite boneheaded actions like we saw from the politicians in Colorado earlier in the week.

Dr. Helen is talking about the issue of stress police officers are put under, especially in the wake of justified use of deadly force:

Notice that the incident itself is not what makes the officer guilty and stressed, it is the media and public making their lives miserable. If even police officers are made to feel guilty for protecting the lives of citizens by our “don’t defend yourself or anyone else” culture and media, I can’t imagine how civilians who had to use force are made to feel after an incident in which they had to protect themselves or others. The article goes on to look at why officers are afraid to ask for psychological help, but maybe the real question is: “why is the officer treated as a pariah instead of a hero for protecting others from mayhem?” For if they were treated as a hero, or at least with some respect for doing their job, then maybe, they could resolve the shooting incident a whole lot faster or on their own without professional help.

In training, they always teach you that if you’re involved in a justifiable shooting, that you should expect to be arrested, and treated like a common criminal who has done something horribly wrong.  In the case of a civilian shooter, administrative leave would be a picnic in comparison to having to fork over your life savings to pay for a lawyer to make your defense.  The lawyer who addressed the class for the training I did spoke of a recent case where he defended a police officer in a justifiable shooting.  The defense costs went well into six figures.  Police officers generally get their defense paid for.  Civilians don’t.

There is a perception among many people that no violence is justified, and who look down upon people who prepare for it.  It’s not right, but it’s something we have to live with.  I’ve always thought it odd that some police officers have problems with civilians carrying firearms for personal protection.  The root cause of the problem is that few people have had to consider the circumstances that would surround having to use deadly force in self-defense, and even fewer have actually had training in it.  I would be a police officer’s best friend on a jury in a legitimate shooting situation, because I’ve had to consider doing it myself, and I suspect most of the rest of us who have would also be similarly sympathetic.

At Lancaster Online:

Surprise. In Pennsylvania and 43 other states, any law-abiding resident 18 and older can carry a loaded handgun on his hip in plain view to shopping malls, restaurants and on strolls down the street. No permits required, no questions asked. You thought you needed a permit for that? Nope, only if you conceal the gun.

I’ve never seen anyone open carrying in this area. I’ve seen it a few times in other parts of the state, but it’s not common. This surprised me: “He’s never been stopped and questioned by a cop.” I would imagine this means he’s never tried to open carry in Philadelphia, where I’m pretty sure the police would have a lot of questions.

I do not open carry in populated areas, only while hiking, but I support everyone’s right to do it. I am somewhat skeptical of this though:

The group sells a t-shirt that says, “Oops, my civil rights are showing.” Seeing people carrying guns in a nonconfrontational way gets people to recognize the practice as legal and encourages them “to think about the liberty and foundation aspects of our country,” Pierce says.

I think most people either a) don’t notice, or b) assume the person is a police officer. I’m not sure that people open carrying is really going to do much to make the public think about liberty and our country.

They did it in Virginia a few months ago, now they are doing it in Tennessee now too.

It’s all the rage in journalism. To publish concealed weapons license holders so that gun thieves know exactly where to go! Oh, same with estranged ex’s and various other people that license holders might not want finding them.

Folks in Pennsylvania can rest assured I’ve not yet found any county sheriff who would turn this kind of data over to reporters.

UPDATE: More from Michael Bane